I’m younger. I don’t have a pension. I’m here because the job makes financial sense for my role. Call that “market-based” if you want. But if a better opportunity comes along, I’m gone.
Most of the employees around me everyday are much closer to retirement than I am. Some are already beyond the Rule of 75. If a voluntary package comes along, they’ll likely take it. If not, they can afford to wait it out.
The irony is that the current strategy is pushing out the very people the company should be trying hardest to keep.
As the job market improves, us younger employees with transferable skills will have more options. Five-day RTO, presence reports, and constant uncertainty make it easier to say yes to those opportunities.
Replacing us won’t be cheap, and it won’t be quick. Hiring costs are higher, onboarding takes time, and it can take years before a new employee reaches full productivity. Then, if the culture hasn’t changed, they’ll leave too.
The solutions is straightforward - - Offer a voluntary separation package to employees who are already considering retirement instead of waiting for attrition.
Return to a 2–3 day hybrid schedule to improve recruiting and retention. If leadership insists on five-day RTO, then compensation will have to become much more competitive.
Hold individuals accountable for performance. If someone isn’t doing the job, manage that directly. Don’t build policies around the assumption that everyone needs to be treated the same because a few people aren’t performing.
The company talks a lot about being “market-based”… The labor market is about to remind them what that actually means.