Posted on 06/10/2015 8:18:11 AM PDT by thackney
While many HR professionals have seen the oil and gas industry’s downturn as an opportunity to acquire some highly-skilled workers, the industry is still challenged with a shortage of STEM-capable people in the pipeline. And once the industry is back on the uptick, oil and gas companies will have to rehire – probably rather quickly – to remain competitive.
So HR has some important decisions ahead.
And while one can never determine how long an individual will stay with a company, Chris Melillo, managing partner and energy practice leader for Kaye/Bassman International Corp., recently told Rigzone it was a very “realistic fear” for employers right now whether or not employees hired on during the downturn would remain loyal to their companies.
But company loyalty has changed over the years and today, on average, an individual stays at their job for 4.6 years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). That is lower than in the past, but people now have different reasons for staying – or leaving – a company.
Results from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York May 2015 Survey of Consumer Expectations (SCE) reveal that bachelor’s degree graduates are more likely to voluntarily leave their jobs than their counterparts who have some college, a high school diploma or less. Additionally, the survey found that those under age 40 were more likely than their older counterparts to voluntarily leave their job.
Millennials have been known to switch jobs frequently, a term many have referred to as “job hopping.” But, their reasons for working are different than generations of the past. Millennials prefer meaningful work over a high salary and are motivated by career advancement.
In essence, some millennials switch jobs frequently, not because they are unhappy at their current company, but because they are constantly seeking out new opportunities. According to the same CSE survey, nearly 65 percent of those under age 40 believe they will find a job in the next three months if they were to lose it today; compared to about 52 percent of those aged 40 to 60 and nearly 31 percent over age 60. Many millennials see new job opportunities as a way to advance their careers.
Oil and gas recruiters and HR professionals have identified there will be a great need in the industry for future leaders who are tech-savvy and innovative. Millennials stand a good chance at filling that void.
It works both ways; they know that they're the first to be bumped out in any "rightsizing."
My Millennial son is 30 with a civil engineering BS and a Masters in Urban Planning. He's worked three jobs, a private firm in Tampa, the Waukesha WI transportation planning, and then took a sideways move to Phoenix last year, where he seems to actually be settling in for the long haul, he likes the work and they're less likely to lay him off than in other places he's looked into.
Every generation has faced being on the low rung of the ladder.
Employers are not a generational demographic.
And neither are employers, for the most part. . . do a good job, but corporate needs change ? Gone. .
They have been so screwed by the Boomers by things like NAFTA, totally free immigration of all classes of laborers, outsourcing of jobs by greedy executives, hyperinflation of educational expenses by the government flooding the supply of load dollars, the erosion of the schools and universities to the point that their degrees are often worthless, saddling them with an impossible gargantuan national debt, etc., etc.
Shame on you Millenial bashers for doing this... it's really scandalous how badly the Boomers have screwed them.
Would you point to a single comment by me bashing Millenials?
caddie.. I don’t think you posted to the right person. He never bashed Millenials. In fact, he discussed how he managed his career.
No but, they will make bait fish out of you
If they’ve come of age in an era where companies have no loyalty to anyone, cutting people at 40 because they are too expensive, why be loyal to anyone but themselves (in the workplace)?
I have met many a man around age 57 that has been given a retirement package by their employers after 30 years or so working for them. The retirement package has never been enough to carry them through to full retirement age. Good luck to them to find other work at or near their current job compensation.
Now, I don’t blame a company for wanting to stay profitable. Companies need to stay profitable, for if the company folds and then no one profits - employees and the company. But many times, these forced retirements don’t seem appropriate, and seem to be taking advantage of the elderly or near elderly.
Millennials see what is happening to their fathers. As such, they don’t trust big corporate America. I don’t blame them.
This is why, as much as possible, we need to try to get the younger generation to start their own businesses. Then they are more apt to in control of their own destiny.
No employee should ever make his or her interests subservient to the interests of an employer -- especially if that employer is a corporation.
If they get a retirement package at age 57, contract work or other low benefits, no retirement jobs are ideal. They no longer need the same compensation for the same lifestyle.
In my opinion, it is a mistake to depend upon a company to provide a pensions and retirement package. Better to create your own savings and control it yourself. Not receiving that benefit tends to result in higher pay; at least that has been my experience.
With Hubby it was 2 days after he turned 60, only no retirement package, minimum severance package, considering he had been there almost 30 years. The company RIFed 250 people with him, 95% of them had been at the company more than 20 years and were part of the old pension plan that newer employees aren’t part of. Nothing more than cutting overhead.
Amen! Company loyalty is one way, and that is you are expected to be totally loyal to them and don’t even consider it going the either direction. Seen it too many times with friends and relatives expecting some form of loyalty from a company they loyally worked for for years, even decades, only to be crushed when the company no longer has use for said employee.
You are exactly right.
Yes, they want to make 300 times the salary of the lowest-paid employee in the company they own!
And to parents soon to die and bequeath over assets, which means the kids will not need to work at all.
Unless the jobs were leaving the state/country, so many of the layoffs since 2007 were outright violations of age discrimination laws (which kick in at 40 years of age). Companies wanted to adjust their payrolls to the “new normal” Third World economy of our country, so they laid off a lot of middle-aged workers and replaced them with either imported foreigners or young people at much lower wages. Any of the middle-aged people I know who lost their jobs in the shuffle and found another (even doing the same work) are making a lot less money (and are starting out with two weeks vacation again).
It seems pretty obvious that many financial institutions just swapped their staffs to start them over again as all new hires at low wages/no perks.
“Millennials see what is happening to their fathers. As such, they don’t trust big corporate America. I don’t blame them.”
Absolutely; so many have grown up in an environment where companies prefer to hire foreigners or preferred minorities anyway. I love watching co-workers move on to better jobs; those stories are among the few bright spots in this bleak economy (and the employer that played tight-fisted with them pays a price).
BTW, watching their parents’ struggles has also driven our birthrate down to practically zero as well...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.