SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Workers are choosing to leave their jobs at the fastest rate since the internet boom 17 years ago and getting rewarded for it with bigger paychecks and/or more satisfying work.
Labor Department data show that 3.4 million Americans quit their jobs in April, near a 2001 peak and twice the 1.7 million who were laid off from jobs in April.
Job-hopping is happening across industries including retail, food service and construction, a sign of broad-based labor-market dynamism.
Workers have been made more confident by a strong economy and historically low unemployment, at 3.8% in May, the lowest since 2000. Ms. Enoch started getting interview opportunities the same day she began sending out applications online.
The trend could stoke broader wage growth and improve worker productivity, which have been sluggish in the past decade. Workers tend to get their biggest wage increases when they move from one job to another. Job-switchers saw roughly 30% larger annual pay increases in May than those who stayed put over the past 12 months, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
[...] The resurgence of job-hopping is particularly helpful for younger workers looking for footholds to launch their careers, said Erika McEntarfer, an economist at the Census Bureau. About 6.5% of workers under age 35 changed jobs in the first quarter of last year, versus 3.1% of those ages 35 to 54, according to census data.
"The people who are changing jobs, they skew young and they skew being placed in what you might call bad jobs, where the average pay is quite low relative to other jobs in the economy," Ms. McEntarfer said. Job-hopping could lead them into higher-paying industries, she said.
Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-this-economy-quitters-are-winning-1530702001
(Score: 5, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday July 06 2018, @04:50PM (9 children)
Given how difficult it is to find truly good help, you'll never catch me taking that approach. If they're worth hiring, they won't take long to train if you need them to have new skills. If they take a long time to learn anything new, they weren't worth hiring in the first place because things change and you have to plan on changing with them. Ditto pay and raises. Pay them well for the area/position and make sure they get a raise every year that at the very least covers inflation (preferably more because they've acquired valuable experience in the position during the past year).
I find a good rule of thumb is if you keep an employee less than three years, you weren't paying them enough and if you keep them more than seven you were paying too much. That's in general. There are circumstances where you do not want to let a good employee get away from you ever if you can help it and there are circumstances where keeping someone beyond a year doesn't make sense.
I know my haters are going to be surprised by this attitude but that's only because they know fuck all about running a business. Knowing the value of what you have is a key component of being good at capitalism, be it your own value as an employee or the value of your employees.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06 2018, @05:46PM
*crickets*
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday July 06 2018, @06:23PM (1 child)
My situation does not fit the job hopping model. At the annual Holiday (eg, "Christmas") party they fly us from all over the US and Canada to a single location. Last December I was recognized for 35 years service. I came as part of an acquisition a dozen years ago. Even before acquisition, at the small business I was part of, my bosses liked me for years and I had a fairly senior position, a lot of trust, and the open ear of the owner. I started when I was wet behind the ears, just out of school. I didn't have any plan to stay forever, but it just worked out that way. I liked the people I worked with. I liked the product and the long term stability prospect of the business. And boy was it ever stable. I liked the tech I worked with, and believe me in several decades it has changed completely several times. Each time I had a huge hand in the planing and implementation. The most recent after the acquisition.
I've had insultant jobs come my way, that I didn't go looking for, and I'm not on social media or job hunting sites.
I could change jobs. But why would I want to? It seems -- to me -- in my situation, that I would only change jobs if something were to go very badly wrong.
There is no longer any "small business owner". But I have the ear and respect of managers several levels up to and including an EVP.
The only constant is change.
I'm happy and easy to please. My only major goals are to learn new tech always and to get modded funny.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday July 06 2018, @06:32PM
I will add something that I left out. I got out of school. Didn't have a job. Worked a crap summer job for a bit. Went to regular church on Wednesday evening. Big storm. Few people attending. Had a small circle prayer meeting. Someone prayed for me to get my real job. Within the week I had the job I have never left. The manager of the crap summer job, who I was in favor with, had no problem with the fact that I suddenly had a professional job and had to leave suddenly.
Young people won't believe you if you say you used to get Netflix by US Postal Mail.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06 2018, @09:03PM (5 children)
Buzzard may be interested to know that what he is describing is part of Marx's Theory of Surplus Value. [google.com]
"They won't pay me what I'm worth" is something you will hear repeatedly from people who are employees (non-owners being exploited by Capitalists).
A Capitalist CAN'T pay you what you're worth.
If he did, Capitalism would stop working.
In order for him to pay you $7.25/hr, you have to produce more than $7.25/hr worth of goods|services.
The Capitalist's existence depends on his being able to keep the surplus (and the greater the surplus, the richer the already-rich guy gets).
Now, if you remove from the picture any non-workers (e.g. absentee stockholders; unnecessary layers of management; hired-in boards of directors) and make sure that ONLY The Workers are owners of the operation and ONLY The Workers receive a portion of the profits, then there's more money available for The Workers.
That's called a worker-owned cooperative.
It's also called Socialism.
It's an ownership model that stands in contrast to Capitalism.
Oh, and with The Workers being the owners and making the decisions about how the operation is run, there's no bullshit trickling down[1] from a class of managers|a class idle absentee owners.
[1] The only kind of stuff that ever trickles down.
We covered a portion of this in a previous story.
Swedish Worker Cooperative Software Development Company Has No Boss [soylentnews.org]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06 2018, @10:12PM (3 children)
There are many worker owned companies under capitalism. Why aren't there more?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06 2018, @10:56PM (2 children)
Here's your chance to name ONE such company which has owners who are ONLY The Workers.
(One that does -not- have absentee stockholders who are -not- part of the production process and who -won't- send all the jobs to another country if it will increase profits.)
N.B. A company such as that is Socialist.
It is NOT an ESOP such as Publix Markets or Dunn-Edwards Paints.
Your understanding of "Capitalism" is extremely weak.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 07 2018, @03:04AM (1 child)
Many law or medical practices are like that. Car shops, small businesses, too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 07 2018, @04:08AM
ALL of The Workers at those place are NOT owners of the business.
...and certainly NOT -equal- owners (NOT 1 person==1 vote).
N.B. I already mentioned ESOPs, where the actual owners (non-worker majority shareholders) can sell the company to an entity in another city or another state or another country who then choses to replace all of The Workers.
Capitalism sucks.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday July 07 2018, @06:50AM
Beg to differ. Physically making a thing is not remotely all that goes into said thing's cost or value. You simply have massive envy issues and no clue about business.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.