There are changes underway in the American workplace. Technology is advancing at an epic pace. See Robot in the News (October 2021). The pandemic is impacting how people work, where they work, and more. See Who is Doing the Work (January 2021). For months, there have been news stories about the propensity to retire. Old people are leaving the workforce at a rapid pace, and for a variety of reasons according to National Public Radio (NPR) This is a blog about workers' compensation, and without workers, that concept is difficult to frame.
It is not just retirement though. There is a tendency right now for people to feel overwhelmed and put upon. They are reportedly quitting jobs. The effect is a stress on those who do recruiting and hiring, as well as those who toil on to get the work done with absent former co-workers. According to the USA Today, this is creating a "vicious cycle" and challenging workplaces. It refers to our time as the "Great Resignation." The result is that the American labor market is currently confronted with one of the most challenging labor shortages in history.
The pandemic has led to people wishing to telecommute or to be otherwise accommodated. This has come from a variety of perspectives: protecting personal health, caring for family members, accommodating the schedules of kids as they strive with remote education, infection, recovery, and more. Some have perceived employers as less-than-sympathetic and they have sought new employment. In August 2021, "4.3 million Americans resigned." That is a notable number. Some are leaving to pursue a passion (life is too short). Some are just seeking more money. Some are escaping irascible supervisors or bosses who are simply a little "too extra."
The USA Today explains that some left for greener pastures. This might mean a better working environment, telecommuting, flexible hours, better pay, more concise work responsibilities, and more. Such a departure from any organization can create a cascade of change. People are traditionally asked to step in and to cover work. In the most simplified scenario, a company hires 4 people to put product on the store shelves. They work 8 hours each night, five nights per week, and they can accomplish the stocking task. If one quits, her/his departure results in: (1) hiring a new worker, or (2) stocking less shelves, or (3) pushing the remaining three workers to move faster, take less breaks, or (4) shifting one of the cashiers to stocking, (5) the manager staying after work to finish the task, or (6) extending the three workers' shift with overtime. The seventh choice, just don't stock the shelves, is not really an option that pleases the customer.
Each of these presents challenges. They raise costs (overtime), diminish the efficacy of other services (shifting a cashier means less cashiers and longer store lines/wait times - customers do not like lines), and pressure management to hire and train. The replacement of workers strains the human resource department also with advertising, interviewing, onboarding, and more. The overtime solution impacts the bottom line and store profitability. Management is often evaluated on its ability to function without the costs of overtime. And, the overtime impacts that remaining three workers. Initially, they may be thrilled to get the overtime work. But, being driven to overperform persistently can be stressful. The four stockers needed 160 hours (4 times 40) to keep the store functional. Now three need to perform 160 hours of work and that is 53 hours each. Short-term, "show me the money," but long-term 53-hour weeks may wear on life.
Another solution, noted only peripherally in the USA column is technology. One employer noted how the purchase of some new software softened the impact on the remaining staff. That type of reaction will perhaps solve the crisis, or militate impact. However, that shift to software, robotics, and other technology will likely be permanent. Those jobs replaced by the tech are unlikely to ever return. The technology will never get sick, never need time off for vacation, and require less ongoing management. There is a huge drive to technology and AI right now. Evidence suggests a huge investment in technology during this pandemic. What will that mean to "entry-level" staff, our processes for onboarding, training, and promoting from within?
USA Today says that the volume of resignations is causing people to more broadly notice the challenge of doing the work of more people. And, among management that work is being undertaken without the financial benefit of overtime pay. It is simply more work, frustration, and stress. The only corresponding benefit is that the manager can retain her/his job. But, that may lead an otherwise happy manager to seek work elsewhere. Does management want to work with a company that ignores staff issues and thus increases responsibility, or with a company that reacts to this situation and incentivizes staff to remain and thrive?
The reaction is said to be the same among the workers who are being asked to cover the workload, even with overtime. The USA Today says "Many of those more loyal staffers are bolting, too." It cites examples of employees becoming overloaded and stressed. They feel that the work has become too much, without commensurate changes in earnings or other benefits, and in some instances is "not even appreciated.” How much does a little appreciation cost? I constantly ask supervisors and managers: "who have you said 'thank you' to today?" Are you expressing gratitude and providing encouragement, or do you expect the money and benefits to just be enough? Trust me, the money is never enough. Make people know you value them.
Those underappreciated are joining the ranks of the departed. The frustration over workload as people resign is leading more employees to resign. Staff is feeling overworked and underappreciated and the effect is a cascade of employer reactions, further resignations, more employer reactions, and a diminution of effectiveness as greater volumes of management time are devoted to the challenges of staff recruitment/replacement and less time is focused on delivering the company product or service. Some fear that there is a coming wave of management departure and cascading effects.
There is discussion of the who in this USA Today analysis. The Boomers are not mentioned, as described in the NPR piece noted above. But, USA Today says that "Millennials and Gen Z workers have even more severe cases of wanderlust." It has long been noted anecdotally that these generations are perceived as less likely to stick with an employer or even a career path. Managers have lamented these perceptions for years. But, currently, the article notes that "64% (of these generations are) wondering whether they’re paid enough, and about half thinking of leaving."
There is "burnout," simmering resentment, frustration, and more. The impact on management is emphasized, as is the reaction of some companies to increase pay or provide bonuses to spur retention. How about a 10% pay increase and "bonuses of $100 for each month" the employee stays? That may work well with retaining staff at company X, but let's face it, that may exacerbate challenges down the street at company Y as employees see that greener grass and leave to work for company X. In other words, those employers doing nothing to react in this time may see more departures and challenges. X may thrive and Y may become a memory.
In the end, “People are stressed.” They are leaving for greener pastures and the vacancies they leave behind are causing stress, reaction, and likely more departures. Smart management is understanding that keeping an employee is usually cheaper and easier than finding and training a new one. she says. The others are drifting forward without proactive employee pay, benefits, scheduling and other accommodations. It is intriguing to see the impacts and reactions. And, in the overwork, the tired, and the frustration, it is likely we will see more injury, more significant injury, and struggles with return to work.
