Article on workers quitting during the pandemic

[Opti]

I kind of hate articles like this, as he only uses one human as an example, and they are a major exception to what is happening. However, some of his conclusions and other stats may be worthwhile. Thoughts?


www.msn.com/en-us/money/careersandeducation/we-re-like-rats-in-a-cage-sick-and-tired-of-their-jobs-american-workers-strive-to-regain-their-agency-their-time-and-their-sanity/ar-AAUd377?ocid=msedgntp


DISPATCHES FROM A PANDEMIC

Work, how many ways do I loathe thee?



This is a question being asked by employees who have either quit their jobs or displayed a reluctance to rejoin the workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other people love their job — or like it, at the very least — and are seeking a more flexible work life where they can spend more time with family.

With office space lying empty — or vastly underused — across the country, millions of Americans are left with the bare bones of their work, a kettle and a Zoom screen if they’re lucky. And they’re also left with questions: What do I get from my job? Who am I without it? Is it worth it? What else is out there waiting for me?

The risk of exposure to COVID-19 is one salient and ever-present factor in people choosing to work but — as Stephen Crain’s story shows — there are a myriad other reasons underpinning the so-called Great Resignation, and not all of them involve bored, unhappy or even aggrieved workers.



The “quit rate” fell slightly in December to 4.3 million, dropping 161,000 quits from the previous month, but the rate was little changed at 2.9%. Quits are typically voluntary separations initiated by the employee and serve as a measure of workers’ willingness or ability to leave jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

There is, perhaps, no greater motivator than a global pandemic — aside from a war — to remind people that life is short.

[Tiny]

The article seems to be aimed at employers and the reasons employees may be looking for a new job:

In an effort to cast more light on worker sentiment, Gallup asked more than 13,000 U.S. employees what was most important to them when deciding whether to accept a new job. Respondents listed six factors, said Ben Wigert, the director of research and strategy for Gallup’s workplace management practice.

A significant rise in income or benefits was the No. 1 reason, followed by greater work-life balance and better personal wellbeing, the ability to do what they do best, greater stability and job security, COVID-19 vaccination policies that align with their beliefs, and the organization’s diversity and inclusivity of all types of people.

“Compensation is naturally intertwined with development, growth, reward and recognition,” Wigert said. “And we have all had a crash course in the importance of wellbeing in our work and home lives.” In fact, a separate report released this week said 1 in 4 people who considered quitting cited their mental health as the reason.

I think the Pandemic effected different age groups differently when it comes to "work".

I think the Pandemic might be a boon for anyone who started their working career during the Great Recession (or after it) in that they can finally have a greater choice of better paying jobs (ie Move Up the payscale). If they hadn't made the jump to a better paying "career" type job before the pandemic - now may be the time. With WFH - I'm guessing it's much easier to relocate for a job... you can keep your current job (WFH) and get yourself moved to your new area and look for a job there. (I suspect quite a few of the people I work with have done this - some have already moved to other States where my employer has a presence. I don't think they will be transferring to a position in those offices.... )

For older workers: The pandemic has been effecting us for 24 months. I see an estimate that 10,000 boomers per day turn 65. And that by 2030 all boomers will be 65 or older. I know not everyone works until they are 65... just that there are currently a lot of late 50 somethings looking ahead to "retirement" .   

I'm guessing there are a lot of Americans in their 50's (early to late) - who have become empty nesters, or have lost parents, or who have 'paid off the mortgage' or some other mile stone that indicates to them a "new phase of life" - I'm guessing many of those 50 something's had the opportunity to re-evaluate their finances and financial goals - as they were pushed out of avoidance mode (the old "I'm not gonna look at my situation - I "KNOW" I will have to work until I'm in my 60's - so that's the plan)

I know quite a few people who were offered early retirement packages and they took them - in droves - OK, some of their "jobs" literally went away as the industries have changed... so no one was moved into their position or hired to take their place. But that doesn't mean that jobs in other areas weren't created (to handle the change in were workers are needed).

I know quite a few mid to late 50's couples who, because of the pandemic, have realized that they can reach their financial goals with just one spouse working a full time job with benefits. The kids are fresh out of the nest, the house is paid for, and it's looking like working a couple more years will let them fully "retire" either at or a bit before they are 60.

I'm guessing the droves of "older workers" leaving the work force is what is creating the need for "additional" workers - As people move up into the positions that open up when an "old person" leaves - that means a lower level job opened up (or maybe multiple lower level jobs opened up).

I'm thinking this is why there are such high "quit" numbers - people aren't leaving the work force - they are moving to a better (for them) job.


There's also that "idea" that floats around fairly often that American workers will have more than one "career" over the course of their lifetime.  That during different phases of their work live they will most likely change "career paths"   and I'm guessing lots of older workers are discovering that they can indeed make that kind of a change... and are doing so. 

[djAdvocate]

it is a lot of issues.
fundamentally, trading time for money is the devil's bargain.
you only do it if you have to.
if you are a bitcoin billionaire, you will wisely never work another day in our life.
unless you can find work that is meaningful to you, and gives you a sense of purpose.
most work is the opposite.
it makes you feel small and insignificant.

[Opti]

As someone who did not have the option to work from home, I think better off peeps overestimate the number of workers who do.


www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/09/work-from-home-numbers/620107/

Updated on September 22 at 12:30 p.m. ET



About six months ago, a colleague asked me to guess what percentage of Americans were still working from home. I was still spending eight hours a day making calls just a few feet from my fridge. So were most of my friends. Maybe 40 percent? I guessed. I was off by half. Twenty-one percent of employed Americans were still teleworking as of March 2021; the other 79 percent were leaving their home like the old days.


It's no longer 2020, but here's a snapshot from June 2020. Odds are the bulk of those unemployed were from places where it was in person work such as retail and food establishments.

news.stanford.edu/2020/06/29/snapshot-new-working-home-economy/#:~:text=We%20see%20an%20incredible%2042%20percent%20of%20the,workers%20%E2%80%93%20are%20working%20on%20their%20business%20premises.

We see an incredible 42 percent of the U.S. labor force now working from home full-time. About another 33 percent are not working – a testament to the savage impact of the lockdown recession. And the remaining 26 percent – mostly essential service workers – are working on their business premises. So, by sheer numbers, the U.S. is a working-from-home economy. Almost twice as many employees are working from home as at work.

[wvugurl26]

I think it's very industry based. If you worked in an office setting before and didn't interact with customers in person, its likely you can work from home. Real estate, utilities, etc all add up.

[djAdvocate]

i heard a survey on the radio (sorry, but because it was radio, i can't source it) that said that only THREE PERCENT of office workers wanted to return to work full time IN THE OFFICE.

take a minute to absorb that.
and short investments that are based on office space rental.
they are going to have a rough go of it.

[Opti]

Feb 27, 2022 13:41:04 GMT -5 wvugurl26 said:

I think it's very industry based. If you worked in an office setting before and didn't interact with customers in person, its likely you can work from home. Real estate, utilities, etc all add up.

I agree. No matter what though there need to be warehouses, workers for those warehouses and transport. Most of the medical field needs to be in person although tele-medicine can be useful and existed years before the pandemic. In person employment went up in some categories - food delivery services and those who pick grocery or Amazon orders. And as a former IT person, there are data centers and the people that must caretake them in person. Some tech services that do not return to in person may lose market share. While I have enjoyed the online Apple classes and one Zoom class I took, buying devices and learning how to use them does not work well in online classes of 80 plus people.

If you can easily work from home, you employer can easily put the money saved to high-speed networks to cheaper labor out of the country. India and Ireland were big choices for IT, not sure if they still are. And we all have probably spoken to people in call centers located in the Philippines and India. Hopefully US govt jobs are safe from that, but I have a feeling some are not.

[Tiny]

Feb 27, 2022 13:31:00 GMT -5 Opti said:

As someone who did not have the option to work from home, I think better off peeps overestimate the number of workers who do.

I agree that the number is over estimated... not everyone works at a desk and computer screen all day every day.   Not everyone works/lives in a densely populated urban area.    It isn't so much about "better off" which I assume means higher paying work - it's more about what work one actually does.   

From the article: 

Twenty-one percent of employed Americans were still teleworking as of March 2021; the other 79 percent were leaving their home like the old days.

That 21% sounds kind of a reasonable estimate - that would be the "back office" people who work with a phone and/or a computer.   

I know my perspective is skewed. I am 1 of over 1000 employees working in my employers office building. Pre pandemic there were over 100 workers on my floor. 2 other floors have about the same density (a few less than 100 people) and then the other floors have more "offices" than cubes and fewer people per floor.

My employer did publish some numbers - at the beginning of the pandemic about 10% of employees were in the office. it then rose to about 30% and has remained steady. We had about 3 weeks of "back to the office" in October of 2021 when there were more people in the office but then we all got sent home again in November (due to Omicron). We're back in the office "2 days a week" now. I think there's about 30% to 40% of employees who more or less need to be in the office 5 days a week the rest are on some sort of work from home schedule.

That's the thing about WFH - it might not be 5 days a week. We've got a 2 days in the office requirement - which may change to 1 day a week or 1 day every other week. The thing to realize is that not everyone will be on that schedule. It will be by job/type of work. Some functions really do need to be in the office (to keep everything running smoothly).

I've spent most of my career working for MegaCorp employers. I know my perspective skewed. My family and friends tend to work for employers with fewer than 100 employees. I went to the "dark side" early in my career and joined corporate America.

[Tiny]

Feb 27, 2022 13:58:33 GMT -5 Opti said:

Feb 27, 2022 13:41:04 GMT -5 wvugurl26 said:

I think it's very industry based. If you worked in an office setting before and didn't interact with customers in person, its likely you can work from home. Real estate, utilities, etc all add up.

I agree. No matter what though there need to be warehouses, workers for those warehouses and transport. Most of the medical field needs to be in person although tele-medicine can be useful and existed years before the pandemic. In person employment went up in some categories - food delivery services and those who pick grocery or Amazon orders. And as a former IT person, there are data centers and the people that must caretake them in person. Some tech services that do not return to in person may lose market share. While I have enjoyed the online Apple classes and one Zoom class I took, buying devices and learning how to use them does not work well in online classes of 80 plus people.

If you can easily work from home, you employer can easily put the money saved to high-speed networks to cheaper labor out of the country. India and Ireland were big choices for IT, not sure if they still are. And we all have probably spoken to people in call centers located in the Philippines and India. Hopefully US govt jobs are safe from that, but I have a feeling some are not. 

As for IT people (coders, DBAs, help desk/support) that could work from home - I doubt these would be outsourced to India or Ireland for non-MegaCorp employers. I can't see that being very cost effective. I think for non-megacorp employers - it would be "back office" jobs that could be WFH a few days or more per week - the person who's taking calls and scheduling appointments (if they haven't gone to an automated system), accounting, payroll, some office management duties.

The big issue is SECURITY and Confidentiality. You have employees accessing employer, or employee, or customer/client info on a screen at home. And maybe paper reports or other employer specific hardcopy stuff. Not everyone has a "perfect" home life.

[Tiny]

I'm not sure what will happen with office space - especially in Big Cities. There's some "prestige" to having an address in a Big City - so I don't think employers who are located in Cities (or Downtowns) will totally abandon their space.

For Mega Corps:
I pre pandemic my floor was "reconfigured" to have fewer conference rooms (and a weird large open area that's like a living room/kitchen area that few people actually use for much more than to "pass thru" it... ) and more people working on our floor. When the density went up - people started to quietly complain - there were no conference rooms, no place to go to get away from people on the floor. We got chastised for "meeting" or hanging out in the living room/kitchen area because it upped the noise level for the offices that were near it and it looked like people weren't working.

A lot of people started using the Office Building's lounge (1/2 a floor of open space with tables and chairs distributed across the space) to get away from their desk or to hold a meeting when no conference room space was available.

I'm guessing that if fewer corporate workers are in the "office" employers will maintain the floor space - and being in the office will be nicer as there will be lower density of people (even if you have a smaller cube or office - and there are lots of empty cubes/offices when you are in the office).

What's going to need to be resolved for Mega Corps - will be having meetings via zoom/webex/teams/whatever - when you are sitting in a cube... there is NO PRIVACY and noise/voices carry across the cube farms. It's highly likely that going forward meetings will NOT take place with the majority of people in a conference room and a few people on "the call" via phone or zoom/etc. Everyone on the call will be on it from where ever they happen to be sitting - be it in their office or cubicle or someplace outside the office.

[wvugurl26]

We are getting rid of some offices and redoing others as leases come up. My office currently has private offices along the perimeter and cubes in the middle. We have one conference room shared among 4 different groups. Booking could be challenging. The general practice for meetings that were smaller was to meet in the manager or director's office. For those that didn't follow that, it was distracting to the rest of us. And let's not go there about using speaker phone. We did not have phone compatible headsets.

I've heard the new layout has fewer private offices and more conference rooms, breakout rooms and call rooms. Our return to the office is slated for mid August and will be one day per week during a six month trial.

There was a pre-pandemic policy that you had to be in the office 3 days a week or more to have dedicated space. It never got enforced because we couldn't hire. I expect no changes will be made until after the trial period. Most people I know plan to do a massive clean out once we return. If we haven't used it in 2+ years, is it really needed? Obviously there are the record keeping requirements but outside of that and my continuing education records, I plan on dumping most of it.

We wouldn't give up the HQ DC address but we are closing many others. In some of the high rent areas, the offices are not in the safest areas. I could see closing those and moving to safer neighborhoods. If we need less space, we can afford higher rent.

[teen persuasion]

Feb 27, 2022 12:34:40 GMT -5 Tiny said:

The article seems to be aimed at employers and the reasons employees may be looking for a new job:

In an effort to cast more light on worker sentiment, Gallup asked more than 13,000 U.S. employees what was most important to them when deciding whether to accept a new job. Respondents listed six factors, said Ben Wigert, the director of research and strategy for Gallup’s workplace management practice.

A significant rise in income or benefits was the No. 1 reason, followed by greater work-life balance and better personal wellbeing, the ability to do what they do best, greater stability and job security, COVID-19 vaccination policies that align with their beliefs, and the organization’s diversity and inclusivity of all types of people.

“Compensation is naturally intertwined with development, growth, reward and recognition,” Wigert said. “And we have all had a crash course in the importance of wellbeing in our work and home lives.” In fact, a separate report released this week said 1 in 4 people who considered quitting cited their mental health as the reason.

I think the Pandemic effected different age groups differently when it comes to "work".

I think the Pandemic might be a boon for anyone who started their working career during the Great Recession (or after it) in that they can finally have a greater choice of better paying jobs (ie Move Up the payscale). If they hadn't made the jump to a better paying "career" type job before the pandemic - now may be the time. With WFH - I'm guessing it's much easier to relocate for a job... you can keep your current job (WFH) and get yourself moved to your new area and look for a job there. (I suspect quite a few of the people I work with have done this - some have already moved to other States where my employer has a presence. I don't think they will be transferring to a position in those offices.... )

For older workers: The pandemic has been effecting us for 24 months. I see an estimate that 10,000 boomers per day turn 65. And that by 2030 all boomers will be 65 or older. I know not everyone works until they are 65... just that there are currently a lot of late 50 somethings looking ahead to "retirement" .   

I'm guessing there are a lot of Americans in their 50's (early to late) - who have become empty nesters, or have lost parents, or who have 'paid off the mortgage' or some other mile stone that indicates to them a "new phase of life" - I'm guessing many of those 50 something's had the opportunity to re-evaluate their finances and financial goals - as they were pushed out of avoidance mode (the old "I'm not gonna look at my situation - I "KNOW" I will have to work until I'm in my 60's - so that's the plan)

I know quite a few people who were offered early retirement packages and they took them - in droves - OK, some of their "jobs" literally went away as the industries have changed... so no one was moved into their position or hired to take their place. But that doesn't mean that jobs in other areas weren't created (to handle the change in were workers are needed).

I know quite a few mid to late 50's couples who, because of the pandemic, have realized that they can reach their financial goals with just one spouse working a full time job with benefits. The kids are fresh out of the nest, the house is paid for, and it's looking like working a couple more years will let them fully "retire" either at or a bit before they are 60.

I'm guessing the droves of "older workers" leaving the work force is what is creating the need for "additional" workers - As people move up into the positions that open up when an "old person" leaves - that means a lower level job opened up (or maybe multiple lower level jobs opened up).

I'm thinking this is why there are such high "quit" numbers - people aren't leaving the work force - they are moving to a better (for them) job.


There's also that "idea" that floats around fairly often that American workers will have more than one "career" over the course of their lifetime.  That during different phases of their work live they will most likely change "career paths"   and I'm guessing lots of older workers are discovering that they can indeed make that kind of a change... and are doing so. 

People swap careers every few years, now.

DH seemed to change direction  every 3 years, except once he got into teaching.  But even then, he got burnt out and needed a break after 12 years, so left teaching for 3 years, missed it, returned for 3 more years teaching.  But over time he worked in banking, printing, Wal-Mart, teaching English, NTSB.

DS2 is getting itchy feet and bored because he's optimized everything he could at his latest employer, so he's quit to train in coding.  But he's worked in furniture design, pipe organ rehab/building, teaching music, factory work, and container printing/fabrication, so far.  He's 28.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

The average time in a job now is 4 years.

There is no upward mobility anymore and with most companies giving out at most 3% COL raises there is no way that staying for decades is going to keep up with inflation.

So to grow you're likely looking at having to switch employers.   One of the things that did not impress me here was how much they bragged about people being a "lifer".  That is NOT something you advertise to someone my age because you just told me that there is zero chance of me ever getting out of this position which also translates into zero chances of me increasing my salary in any significant fashion.  I'd have to wait for someone to die or retire.  It also signals you aren't able to attract new/young talent which likely means the company itself is stuck in its ways and isn't evolving either.

Ain't nobody got time for that!  

While I know people who've been with one employer, advanced through the ranks and retired with their gold watch that isn't the norm anymore, it never really was.  It probably worked when your job was unionized and had a pension along with SS that paid you comfortably till the end of your days.   I have to fund my own damn retirement. 1.999% raises aren't going to get me there.

While I'm still in science I've already changed focus four times.  Possibly soon to be a 5th time.

I don't live to work but neither do I want to stagnate then hope that when I reach retirement I live long enough to enjoy it.  If I am going to be expected to spend close to 4 decades or more working I'd at least like to evolve, grow and not feel like I am going to die of boredom for the duration of it.

[andi9899]

Lifers aren't really a thing anymore. There are a few still hanging on that refuse to retire. People are now looking to better their situation and more often than not that means switching employers.

I was just telling T2 that I don't think I'll have an in person job again. I'm perfectly capable of doing what I need to do from home.

[Lizard Queen]

Lots of younger people also means the pay scale is likely lower, and/or job demands are higher. I finally got in a place with a higher pay scale (for most), and I hope to stay here until I retire now. I really don't see anything comparable out there for me. There are a lot of lifers because of that, along with the pension that was phased out years ago.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Mar 1, 2022 9:48:59 GMT -5 Lizard Queen said:

Lots of younger people also means the pay scale is likely lower, and/or job demands are higher. I finally got in a place with a higher pay scale (for most), and I hope to stay here until I retire now. I really don't see anything comparable out there for me. There are a lot of lifers because of that, along with the pension that was phased out years ago.

Well there is a ton of young people which like you said indicates possible lower salary and this is likely an entry level type situation or extremely high burn out.

And there is people who have been here so long and held the job so long we're still ordering things using actual index cards because figuring out software is too hard. And the company allows it because they are also dinosaurs who can't bring themselves into the 21st century. 

Then when that person retires they can't figure out why nobody stays in the job very long.  

I work for the latter. 

Now the company I am looking at the person I talked to has been there 18 years but has moved around/changed titles in that time.  I found her on LinkedIn and reviewed her job history.  So while she is a "lifer" it appears this company does allow for movement/growth over time.  I'm not going to be twiddling my thumbs waiting for someone to die.  It also means they are regularly bringing in fresh talent/perspective because someone now has to fill the position left behind.

I guess I should have said that a company being full of lifers isn't automatically a red flag but it is one that at my current stage in life gives me pause. 

It was not the HR person's intent here but her bragging about it made it clear that my current job was going to be a stop gap that in about 5 years I'd need to look at moving on. If they want to KEEP new talent as their lifers age out they are going to have to seriously adjust their message.