The Edelmann blog highlights a New York Times article analyzing the affect of vacation time (or lack of) on employee engagement and turnover within the younger generation of workers (not quite phrased that way of course).
Many young people in the workplace are finding that quitting their job is becoming the satisfying new alternative to the standard, entry-level benefit for vacation. As they found out, the two weeks allowed to most young employees is barely enough time to visit their parents for Christmas, go to a friend’s wedding and take a long weekend.
“Normal life,” Mr. Aikin said, “maintaining relationships with people who don’t live nearby, requires at least two weeks of your life a year.”
For others like him, the solution is simple: Stop jockeying with senior employees for the prime vacation weeks. Quit and start again — but first, get away. ((Bahney, Anna, June 8, 2006. “A Life Between Jobs”, The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com on June 9, 2006.))
During the time I’ve spent writing about talent, talent shortages, and employee engagement, I believe I’ve clearly highlighted the younger generation of talent as a focus for future development. There are a couple of problems I see from the NY Times article.
- Younger employees are quitting jobs and finding new ones just so they can have more time off.
- If they value the current job so little, the organizations haven’t done anything solid to engage them.
- As systematicHR has stated previously, the younger working generation seems to value current time off more highly than future growth.
“Gen-X’ers have demographics working for them: there aren’t a lot of them,” said Judith Gerberg, who has run her own career counseling company in Manhattan since 1985. That’s particularly true as baby boomers begin to retire…
So quitting is not such a big deal, as surveys show. While overall worker loyalty has improved slightly in recent years, young people are still highly mobile. According to a 2005 survey by Walker Information, which conducts research on customer and employee loyalty, 50 percent of employees 18 to 24, and 39 percent of employees 25 to 29, reported having a neutral or negative attitude about the employer and did not plan to stay. The study terms this group “high risk.” ((Ibid))
It begs the question of employers, if we project talent aquisition costs over the next 10 years (assuming costs will rise) and if we also look at the cost of developing the next generation of leaders, doesn’t the cost of an extra week of vacation seem like a paltry amount? Or “perhaps the real solution is a continued move toward “work/life flexibility,” where companies realize that the days of the 9-to-5 workday are gone and provide employees with corresponding flexible hours and working arrangements.” ((Hannegan, Christopher, June 8, 2006. “Impact of Paltry Vacations on Younger Workers.” Retrieved from http://www.edelman.com on June 8, 2006.)) I’m not entirely sure I agree with this, at least not in the younger formative years of an employee’s career. I’m fully in favor of mid-career professionals having more freedom to work outside the office., but to develop talent, younger workers need to be around those mentors and leaders who can shape their careers and professional personalities.
5 responses to “To Engage Employees, Let Them Go”
To Engage Employees, Let Them Go July 10, 2006 on 2:00 am | by Systematic HR The Edelmann blog highlights a New York Times article analyzing the affect of vacation time (or lack of) on employee engagement and turnover within the younger generation of workers (not quite phrased that
I think a lot has to do with the burdens of family and not being settled into a career. If your in an entry level position there is no financial burden as you can get another entry level position down the street. The only way you get STUCK into a job is if you cant leave because all your alternatves pay substantuially less.
Manager Assistant, you’re right to a point. You have to understand the the characteristic makeup of the next generation (Millennials) is far different than the constructs of Gen X’ers and Baby Boomers when they were at the same stage in life. Baby Boomers and Gen X’ers were shaped by somewhat harder times than that of Millennial’s. Thus, when a good thing came along they were more apt to stay put. However, with Millennial’s being raised in an era of economic growth, technological advancements and an otherwise easier way of life, their magnetic attraction to stay at one place is just not there.
As this is a technology blog, I’ll relate this to technology. Both of you make excellent points. If we look at how younger people view the owrld, their relationships, and how they work, there is so much willingness to adapt and transition that instability is almost a part of their lives. I love the comparison against baby boomers and understanding the environment that shaped them. I think we’re going through a similar time now with amazing technological changes that will effect the next generation of workers.
[…] systematicHR – Human Resources Strategy and Human Resources Technology » To Engage Employees, Let Them Go Talent management, engagement and the generations (tags: talent-management engagement generations lifestyle) […]