The Youth Change Jobs Part 1

Not long ago we discussed the idea of employee loyalty, with particular emphasis on the idea that even though the economy is still struggling, people are still leaving jobs at an alarming high rate, leading to poor employee loyalty and considerable losses to the company. I wanted to entertain one of the ideas that may be causing this employee loyalty issue – the idea of hiring younger employees to save money.

Young employees are the most notorious for quitting work to find a new job elsewhere. In fact, most estimates put the average timeline at a job of about two years. With very little to tie them down, no job experience, and very little idea of the career they want in life (beyond what they imagined during college), there is a high probability that a younger employee is going to be upset at their early jobs and continue to find work in other locations.

Yet at the same time, younger employees can be beneficial. You can train them to be leaders within the company. Their motivation to succeed is often higher, and with enough training they can take charge for years, leading to long term success with the organization.

It is also not uncommon for them to learn easier and be trained on the latest techniques, and the technological know-how of the younger generation is second to none. You can also pay them less than seasoned employees, on average, depending on the role. This demonstrates the basic problem with the idea that companies should hire younger employees.

On the one hand they’re more likely to leave. On the other hand they may represent long term success.

The key question, though, is whether or not the younger generation is an investment over the older generation of workers. Many experienced employees are being laid off in order to save money – but are they really saving money? Experienced employees are much less likely to bounce around for job to job.

If you hire someone at age 50 for a career they are qualified for, there is likely a much better chance they will stay for the remaining 16 years or so until retirement. If you hire someone at age 21, they may stay for 45 years, or they may leave within 2. Every time an employee leaves, there is a significant financial investment made in their replacement.

If the replacement leaves again, they need to invest in yet another replacement. Each of these replacements may or may not be qualified to do the job well, so there is the additional issue of potentially less productivity. So is it a good idea at all to invest in the younger class? These thoughts will be continued in an upcoming article.

Related Blog