The Great Resignation1 (ресИгнэйшон):

How employers drove2 workers to quit

Since the pandemic, employees are leaving the workforce3 or

switching jobs in droves4. For many, employers have played
a big part in why they're walking away.

W
When the pandemic began, Melissa Villareal (вилареАль) was teaching
history to middle schoolers5 at a private school in a wealthy California
neighborhood. It was a job and a field she loved. Now, just over a year later,
she’s left teaching entirely (интАйли), to work in industrial design at a large
beauty company.

People like Villareal are leaving their jobs – or thinking about it – in droves 4. A
Microsoft survey of more than 30,000 global workers showed that 41% of
workers were considering quitting or changing professions this year, and
a study from HR software company Personio (пЭсонио) of workers in the UK
and Ireland showed 38% of those surveyed planned to quit in the next six
months to a year. In the US alone, April saw more than four million
people quit their jobs, according to a summary from the Department of
Labor – the biggest spike6 (спайк) on record.

There are a number of reasons people are seeking 7 a change, in what some
economists have dubbed8 the ‘Great Resignation1’. For some workers, the
pandemic precipitated9 a shift10 in priorities, encouraging them to pursue11
(пэсью) a ‘dream job’, or transition12 to being a stay-at-home parent. But for
many, many others, the decision to leave came as a result of the way their
employer treated13 them during the pandemic. 

That was the case for Villareal, who found herself back in the classroom after
only a short closure14. (In the US, private schools, governed by different rules,
were able to return to in-person15 learning much sooner than public schools.)
Villareal was uncomfortable about her safety, and saw her stress and
workload16 spike6 when she was juggling17 both in-person15 and remote
learners concurrently18(конкарэнтли). She felt her concerns19 (консёрнс)
weren’t being addressed, or even heard.

Ultimately20, Villareal decided she’d rather quit and start over in a totally new
industry than remain in a job where she felt she was being under-valued 21 and
unheard. It was a tough choice, she says, because “there’s guilt 22 as a
teacher. You don’t want to leave the students”. Still, Villareal continues, “it
became so clear that this isn’t about my health, the health of the kids or the
mental wellbeing23 of anybody. It’s a business and it’s about money. The
pandemic ripped that veil from my eyes24.”
Story continues below

A predictable25 response

Foremost26, workers are taking decisions to leave based on how their

employers treated13 them – or didn’t treat them – during the pandemic.
Ultimately20, workers stayed at companies that offered support, and darted 27
from those that didn’t.

Workers who, pre-pandemic, may already been teetering on the edge 28 of

quitting companies with existing poor company culture saw themselves
pushed to a breaking point29. That’s because, as evidenced30 by a recent
Stanford study, many of these companies with bad environments doubled-
down31 on decisions that didn’t support workers, such as layoffs 32 (while,
conversely33 (конвЁрсли), companies that had good culture tended to treat
employees well). This drove out34 already disgruntled35 (дисгрАнтлд) workers
who survived36 the layoffs32, but could plainly37 see they were working in
unsupportive38 environments.

And although workers have always cared about the environments in which
they work, the pandemic added an entirely new dimension 39: an increased
willingness40 to act, says Alison Omens, chief strategy officer of JUST Capital,
the research firm that collected much of the data for the study.

“Our data over the years has always shown that the thing people care about
most is how companies treat their employees,” says Omens. That’s measured
by multiple41 metrics, she adds, including wages, benefits and security 42,
opportunities for advancement43, safety and commitment to equity44.
The early days of the pandemic reminded us that people
are not machines – Alison Omens
In the wake45 of the pandemic, “the intensity46 has increased in terms of that
expectation47; people are expecting more from companies. The early days of
the pandemic reminded us that people are not machines”, says Omens. “If
you’re worried about your kids, about your health, financial insecurity 42 and
covering your bills48, and all the things that come with being human, you’re
less likely to be productive. And we were all worried about those things.”

Workers expected their employers to make moves to help alleviate 49

(аливиэйт), or at least acknowledge50, those concerns19 – and companies that
failed to do so have suffered51. The Personio study also showed that more
than half of the respondents who were planning to quit wanted to do so
because of a reduction52 in benefits, a worsening53 (ворсенинг) work-life
balance or a toxic54 workplace culture.
“For almost everyone,” says Ross Seychell, chief people officer at Personio,
“the pandemic put an acute55 focus on… how has this company I’ve given a
lot to handled56 me or my health or happiness during this time?” Seychell says
many workers considering that question are finding a lack of satisfying 57
answers. “I’m hearing it a lot: ‘I’m going to go somewhere I’m valued’.” 

An across-the-board exodus58 (экрос-зе-боард эксЭдэс)

The mass departure59 is happening at all levels of work, and is especially

evident60 in service and retail61 jobs.

“Many of the stories have tended62 to focus on white collar jobs63, but the
biggest trends are really around traditionally low-wage roles and essential
workers,” says Omens. “That’s a really interesting element of this.”

In fact, the American retail61 sector has seen more recent resignations1 than
any other industry. Just fewer than 650,000 retail workers quit in the month
of April alone, according to data from the Labor Department. 
Throughout64 the pandemic, essential workers – often in lower paid positions
– have borne the brunt65 of employers’ decisions. Many were working longer
hours on smaller staffs, in positions that required interaction with the public
with little to no safety measures put in place by the company and, at least in
the US, no guarantee of paid sick leave66. It quickly burnt workers out.

Now, major retailers are scrambling67 to fill open positions, and finding it
difficult to get enough new, willing40 workers in the door68. Companies
including Target and Best Buy have raised wages, while McDonald’s and
Amazon are offering hiring bonuses ranging from $200 to $1,000. Still, a
survey by executive search firm Korn Ferry found that 94% of retailers are
having trouble filling empty 69 roles.

Part of the problem, says Omens, is that while financial incentives70

(инсентИвс) are a start, a major shift10 in priorities means it’s not just about
the money. Many retail61 and service workers are departing59 in favour71 of
entry-level positions elsewhere – in warehouses 72 or offices, for instance –
that actually pay less, but offer more benefits, upward 73 mobility (моубилити)
and compassion74. With employers across the board58 looking for new hires,
many have found it’s easy to find another job and make the transition 75.

“We ask people would they take a pay cut 76 to work for a company that
aligns77 with their values,” she adds, “and across the board 58, people say yes.”

A lasting 78 change? 

Could this Great Resignation1 bring about meaningful, long-term79 change to

workplace culture and the way companies invest in their employees?

Omens believes the answer is yes. The change was happening before the
pandemic, she says, with a “real increase in what people are looking for in
terms of their expectations47 of CEOs and companies”.
Just fewer than 650,000 American retail workers quit in
the month of April alone
And the pandemic shifted10 that existing feeling into overdrive80 – even in the
first few weeks. In late March 2020, billionaire entrepreneur and investor Mark
Cuban appeared on a CNBC special titled Markets in Turmoil (тЁмоил) 81,
and warned companies not to force employees back to work too soon.
“How companies respond to that very question is going to define their brand
for decades,” he said. “If you rushed 82 in and somebody got sick, you were
that company. If you didn’t take care of your employees or stakeholders and
put them first, you were that company.” For many employees, cautioned 83
Cuban, “that’s going to be unforgiveable 84”.

Now, says Seychell, that’s proving true. For both people inside companies as
well as those just entering the job market, how a company treated its people
over the last year and a half will determine the course of the future.

It’s become compulsory85 (компАлсори) for companies to make serious

investments in their employees’ wages, opportunities, and overall wellbeing 23,
if they weren’t doing so already, says Seychell, if for no other reason than it’s
simply good for business.

“When there’s a lot of people moving, that costs companies in terms of

turnover86 and lost productivity,” he says. “It takes six to nine months to
onboard87 someone to be fully effective. Companies that lose a lot of their
workforce are going to struggle88 with this over the next 12 to 16 months, and
maybe much longer. Companies that don’t invest in their people will fall
behind.”