Source: Theresa Agovino, SHRM, February 23, 2019
….Employee retention has taken on a new significance amid one of the tightest labor markets in the past 50 years. In January, the unemployment rate stood at 4 percent. The robust job market has given employees the confidence to seek new opportunities, while employers are wrestling with rising compensation and heated competition for new hires, both salaried and hourly. ….
…. The business ramifications are enormous. Each employee departure costs about one-third of that worker’s annual earnings, including expenses such as recruiter fees, temporary replacement workers and lost productivity, according to the Work Institute. ….
…. To engender loyalty, companies are trying every tactic, from raising salaries to bolstering benefits to offering more training and education. That last category is becoming critical: Inadequate career development is the leading reason people leave their jobs, the institute reports, with 21 percent of those interviewed citing it as the driving factor. Those employees expressed frustration with the lack of growth, development opportunities and advancement in their jobs. ….
Source: Daniel L. Morrell, Kristie A. Abston, Compensation & Benefits Review, OnlineFirst, Published January 7, 2019
From the abstract:
Millennials are currently the largest generation at work and will reach an estimated 75% of the labor force by 2025. Studies have shown that millennials hold slightly different attitudes toward work when compared with previous generations. They more readily change jobs and are generally less committed to their organizations, with an estimated 66% of millennial employees planning to leave their current company within 5 years. These differences in work values necessitate changes in current approaches to compensation and benefit packages that would better align with these changing values. The goal of this article is to review recent empirical data on Millennials as compared with previous generations and then offer suggestions for what changes might improve retention.
Source: Meghna Sabharwal, Helisse Levine, Maria D’Agostino, Tiffany Nguyen, Advance Articles, The American Review of Public Administration, First Published December 12, 2018
From the abstract:
The federal government lags behind in progressive civil rights policies in regard to universal workplace antidiscrimination laws for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans. The slow progress matters to inclusionary workplace practices and the theory and practice of public administration generally, as recognition of LGBT rights and protection are constitutive of representative bureaucracy and promoting social equity. This study examines the turnover intention rates of self-identified LGBT employees in the U.S. federal government. Using the Office of Personnel Management’s inclusion quotient (IQ), and 2015 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), we identify links in the relationships between workplace inclusion and turnover outcomes among LGBT individuals. We also examine the impact of agency type on LGBT turnover rates based on Lowi’s agency classification type. Key findings suggest that LGBT employees express higher turnover intentions than those that identify as heterosexuals/straight, and LGBT employees who perceive their agencies as redistributive or communal are less likely to experience turnover intentions. However, an open and supportive workplace environment had a positive impact on turnover, suggesting that to implement effective structural change in an organization’s culture of inclusion, public sector managers must do more than merely “talk the talk.” This finding is also suggestive of LGBT employees’ desire to avoid the stigma of being LGBT and hide their identities. Institutions must heed the invisible and visible identities of their employees to be truly inclusive. Workplace practices that acknowledge the invisible and visible identities of their employees are a positive step toward real workplace inclusion.
Source: Francis A Mamo, Rachel Cortez, Gregory W. Lipitz, Alexandra S. Parker, Moody’s, Sector Comment, November 28, 2018
On 26 November, General Motors Company (Baa3 stable) announced it will halt production at four US manufacturing plants as soon as March 2019. The closures are credit negative for several local governments in Ohio (Aa1 stable), Michigan (Aa1 stable) and Maryland (Aaa stable).
Collectively, the four plants employ more than 3,800 people and had a 2017 payroll of $480 million (see exhibit 1). All of the closures are credit negative for the affected local governments, but closure of the Lordstown plant in Warren, Ohio (Baa1 negative) will have a pronounced negative effect on Trumbull County’s (Aa3) employment base….
Source: Keely Jones Stater, Mark Stater, The American Review of Public Administration, Advance Access, First Published November 27, 2018
From the abstract:
This article uses the General Social Survey (GSS) to compare the effects of “social” work rewards on job satisfaction and turnover intent for nonprofit, public, and for-profit workers. Drawing on properties of the nonprofit sector, we hypothesize that social rewards should be more prevalent in nonprofit workplaces and have a larger impact on job decisions for nonprofit than for government and for-profit workers. Consistent with this, we find that social rewards are perceived as more prevalent in nonprofit organizations. In addition, having helpful coworkers and having a supervisor who cares about one’s welfare have larger effects on job satisfaction for nonprofit workers than for workers in the other two sectors, and having a helpful supervisor discourages turnover intent to a larger extent in the nonprofit sector than in the for-profit and public sectors. Overall, however, we find that differences in the magnitude of impact of social rewards by sector are less pronounced than theory would suggest.
Source: Anaïs Thibault Landry, Allan Schweyer, Ashley Whillans, Compensation & Benefits Review, OnlineFirst, First Published October 31, 2018
From the abstract:
Given the struggle that many organizations face hiring and retaining talent in today’s tight labor market, it is critical to understand how to effectively reward employees. To address this question, we review relevant evidence that explains the importance of workplace rewards and recognition. Based on a review and synthesis of the current literature, we make the case that organizations should move beyond salary and traditional cash rewards to place greater emphasis on nonpecuniary, tangible and intangible rewards and recognition initiatives. We further highlight the importance of aligning rewards with universal psychological needs. Finally, we discuss the need to conduct more research to understand when and for whom cash and noncash rewards increase intrinsic motivation, organizational commitment and optimal functioning in order to improve the design and implementation of existing reward programs.
Source: Eric G. Kirby, Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, Vol. 41 No. 1, 2018
From the abstract:
Hospice care has significantly changed over the past 40 years. The industry has seen a growth in utilization rates, an increase in insurance coverage, and changing governmental funding. To reduce the significant risk of employee turnover, hospice care organizations have responded to these pressures. This study examines whether nursing turnover is affected as organizations respond to environmental pressures for increased patient-centered care (PCC). Does the use of patient-centered approaches to meeting client needs reduce turnover in the nursing staff? Using hierarchical regression to analyze organizational, market, and personnel data from 695 hospices across the United States, this study finds innovative PCC practices are significantly related to reduced nursing turnover.
Source: Katharine O. Strunk, Dan Goldhaber, David S. Knight, Nate Brown, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Early View, First published: July 5, 2018
From the abstract:
Few studies examine employee responses to layoff‐induced unemployment risk; none that we know of quantify the impact of job insecurity on individual employee productivity. Using data from the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and Washington State during the Great Recession, we provide the first evidence about the impact of the layoff process on teacher productivity. In both sites we find that teachers impacted by the layoff process are less productive than those who do not face layoff‐induced job threat. LAUSD teachers who are laid off and then rehired to return to the district are less productive in the two years following the layoff. Washington teachers who are given a reduction‐in‐force (RIF) notice and are then not laid off have reduced effectiveness in the year of the RIF. We argue that these results are likely driven by impacts of the layoff process on teachers’ job commitment and present evidence to rule out alternate explanations.
Source: Maureen Minehan, Employment Alert, Volume 35, Issue 11, May 29, 2018
More employees than ever view job hopping as a good idea, according to new research from global staffing firm Robert Half. Sixty-four percent of the professionals they surveyed said changing roles every few years can be beneficial to their careers, a 22% increase since 2014.
Higher salaries are seen as the biggest perk of job hopping, followed by gaining new skills and moving up the career ladder faster. While employees under the age of 35 are the most likely to see job hopping as a sound strategy (75%), a majority of employees aged 35-54 (59%) and workers aged 55 and older (51%) or older also view it as beneficial. ….
While investing in employees’ growth and making your company a great place to work are good steps to take, a number of employees will still seek new opportunities. In those cases, employers will have to decide whether to make a counteroffer in hopes of retaining them or wish the employees well and let them go. ….
Source: Laura D. Quinby, Geoffrey T. Sanzenbacher, and Jean-Pierre Aubry, ons for the 2014 improvements, according to their, Issue Brief, April 9, 2018
State and local data from 2005 to 2014 show the impact pension cuts have on the ability of governments to recruit, retain, and retire talented employees.
One of the central findings is that, especially for new hires, the implementation of pension reform hampered governments’ ability to attract new employees. This is important to note in an environment where governments are experiencing increases in retirements and are competing for talent at a time when unemployment rates, especially for those with college degrees, are relatively low.