The Great Resignation, Reshuffle or Regret? Is the Grass Truly Greener on the Other Side for Generation Leave?
Author: Jade Nie | People & Culture Officer 2022
A Friday evening, 5:18pm. My phone chimes as I prepare my dinner that night. It’s a message from Mum, raving about her recent job interviewee for her store – a small gifts and homewares business. She’s ecstatic to introduce them to the team and begin their onboarding process. There’s a sigh of relief that is well needed following an extensive recruitment process and weeks spent struggling to fill rosters as her current employees move on to other prospects. The same Friday evening, 7:45pm. Another chime sounds as I finish off my dinner. Her stellar employee-to-be had decided to go forward with another opportunity, turning down their offer. The meal is unfulfilling, and the plate is empty. Her search must resume.
It’s the breakup text burdening numerous industries across Australia with the Australian Bureau of Statistics stating 31 percent of hiring businesses citing difficulties finding workers in the month of June 2022. The most frequently reported reason for such difficulty? A lack of applicants. The numbers are representing the familiar trend felt in the US labour force as droves of employees quit their jobs at record numbers. This trend, however, is no arbitrary occurrence, in fact it’s a phenomenon that has earned itself the title to multitudes of headlines: The Great Resignation.
“The Great Resignation is coming”
– Anthony Klotz, May 2021
Klotz, a Psychologist and Business Administration Professor of Texas A&M, first coins the title of the Great Resignation just as the U.S. Labour Department reported a record 3.9 million Americans who voluntarily quit their jobs in the month of April 2021 alone. It’s the highest number since the government began its data collection two decades ago; doubling in number from the previous year. With a reported record high resignation rate of 2.8 percent in April 2021, this mass exit in jobs cannot be perceived to be wavering as it remains at 2.8 percent in May of 2022; a year since Klotz’ prognosis. There are four reasons as to why Klotz said: “The Great Resignation is coming” in an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek in May of last year:
1. “PENT-UP” RESIGNATIONS
In an environment fogged by uncertainty and sweeping layoffs across industries, workers were reliant on job stability, many choosing to hold-off from their plans to resign at the height of the pandemic’s threat. An accumulation of resignations withheld across this time now reveal themselves upon the reopening of economies.
2. BURNOUT
A widespread sentiment of burnout loomed over people across the pandemic, most unforgettably endured by front-line workers. Clouded by the turmoil of illness, death and higher work-related stress brought on by the pandemic Klotz names employee burnout as a “a predictor of turnover” and a contending reason for resignations “across the board” for the US workforce.
3. RE-DEFINING IDENTITY AND VALUES
The onset of the pandemic found people shifting their values surrounding their work-life balance. A collective re-evaluation of what a healthy work-life balance should look like or epiphanies of personal identity and lifestyle choices amid the commotion of the pandemic are what Klotz believes to be driving forces for the wave of resignations hitting the US.
4. THE TEMPORARY? HYBRID WORKPLACE
The introduction of a hybrid work routine by many companies introduced remote work to their employees as means to preventing the spread of COVID-19. However, as time wore on and people continued to work remotely, many are now hesitant to depart from this restructured work style. Workers are now resigning as their companies push them to return to the office.
Is Gen Z Being Picky or Simply Demanding Better from their Bosses?
Millennials and Gen Z are found to be at the forefront of this movement. Young employees are not only resigning; they’re rethinking their circumstances, repositioning themselves for new and better job opportunities, relocating their skills and talent elsewhere and headlines are calling it “The Great Reshuffle” of the workforce. Australia has recently recorded the highest annual job turnover rate since 2012 with the Australian Bureau of Statistics revealing 9.5% of employees had changed their jobs in the year preceding February 2022. It’s a mirrored development to the US with an Adobe survey in 2021 revealing 56% of Gen Z workers planned to switch jobs in the following year.
This job switch can be attributed to a myriad of reasons. Consulting firm McKinsey labels uncaring leaders, unsustainable performance expectations and lack of career development and advancement as prevalent motives for job switchers. But the motives and demands of our generation are being lost in a discourse of painting younger workers as lazy, unmotivated, and entitled. The recent “quiet quitting” trend rocking social media platforms and subreddit threads has young workers removing themselves from the hustle culture mentality of the workplace and instead performing only within their job descriptions. So, is that lazy and entitled, or is it just setting healthy boundaries in the workplace? Why has it become the employee’s responsibility to set these boundaries anyway?
Employees faced a large understanding of dispensability; overcompensating in workload for firms who were quick to furlough or lay off employees across the pandemic, thus, the McKinsey survey result comes as no surprise. So, those on the search for jobs are leveraging for better flexibility, compensation, benefits, and interpersonal factors such as job progression and workplace culture. Job searchers have the upper hand in this market and it’s making their employers rethink their strategies of attracting and retain their staff.
The Great Reinvention: Inciting Change in the Workplace
Is the ‘9-5’ becoming an archaic pastime in the Office?
Klotz’ fourth and final point rings loud amidst the recent fiasco surrounding the latest return to office memo sent out to Tesla employees on May 31st earlier this year by CEO Elon Musk, demanding a minimum of 40 hours a week of in-office work from his staff or their subsequent resignation. Musk’s memo faced heavy backlash from employees, many dubbing his demands to be out-of-touch and controlling. As companies emerge post-pandemic, a jarring disconnect between the goals of firms and the values of their employees bares itself ugly.
Tesla isn’t alone in their full return-to-office demands as many companies follow suit. But their efforts are hitting brick walls and hitting them hard. Employees and employers are in a stalemate as people hold off on leaving the autonomy of remote work and it’s not just in the US either. An article from The Atlantic released survey data of 10,000 knowledge workers which found return to office numbers to be 28 percent in Australia and only 26 percent in the UK.
As young employees seek more flexible work options, hybrid work models are a rising value for Gen Z and millennial job searchers. McKinsey researchers found over 75 percent of survey respondents preferred the hybrid work model, a jump from a previous 45 percent pre-pandemic. Workers between 18-34 were found to be 59 percent more likely to walk away from their employment should hybrid work be taken away from them. The flexibilities of remote work and answering work calls from the comfort of your couch is a sweet taste that many workers aren’t quite ready to cut. But is the virtual and out-of-office workplace answering all our problems?
The introduction of hybrid work models as a permanent structure to businesses leaves diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in a fog of debate. There are pros and there are cons. Ultimately, it reduces barriers that comes with on-site work participation such as eliminating difficult commutes to work or even allowing workers affected by disability to reach the workplace in a way they otherwise could not have. It’s a push towards positive change in employee autonomy, but workplaces are diverse, and a diverse workforce means a diverse range of employee needs and circumstances. Simply instating remote work may cause further exclusion for marginalised groups. Whilst working mothers now have opportunity to stay home and care for their children, are they now expected to juggle childcare and work responsibilities all at once? Is this taking away from their chances to progress further in the workplace? Many marginalised groups already struggle with equitable working conditions such as equal access to opportunities and resources in the workplace. Hybrid work models might just only set them back further.
Yes, offices are growing out of the 9-5 work structure but that isn’t to say that hybrid work doesn’t come without its flaws. In a world where employees have the upper hand, are our generation’s bids for better treatment in the workplace setting ourselves up for failure? Or is it our employer’s responsibility to finally hear that the workplace isn’t simply a “one-size-fits-all”?