Talk:Great Resignation

New Yorker

Article. --- Possibly ☎ 21:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Diagram

What is this diagram supposed to show? The x-axis isn't labeled and there is no curve. Is this the first frame of an animation evolving into some curve? 2001:A61:3AAE:1601:A4DB:AF1D:C656:9907 (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

The diagram quickly shows the quit rates in the United States, and while it may not be too sophisticated, I believe it serves its purpose. Additionally, I believe this article is better because the diagram is on it. If you can find a better diagram for the article, let's give it a try. Cheers, Pistongrinder (talk) 16:50, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

There's definitely a bug with the diagram. It does seem to have data, but it's rendered as the OP suggested for me as well. -- Dandv 19:14, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

That's really strange, this is what the diagram is supposed to show. The advantage of the current format (Graph:Chart) is that it's easily updatable, but of course that's inapplicable if readers can't actually see it. Is anyone aware of another way to present easily-updatable high-res graphs on Wikipedia? ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 14:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

On my machine (W10) it works on Chrome but not Firefox MarmotteiNoZ — Preceding undated comment added 23:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

A IP user claimed to fix the graph for Firefox users, could you check to see if it works now @MarmotteNZ? ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 16:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

The graph displays in Firefox, however there's no (graph) title, and is missing basic graph conventions like including clear labels (x-axis=none; 'Share of...' percent of? what? @ y-axis) along with the fuzzy attribute (to New Yorker) that I think continues to create confusion, as opposed to a visual aid that helps to quickly clarify or inform. (And not unique to this subject or uncommon on the 'pedia). Letter2the3ditor (talk) 15:32, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

It's now an SVG instead of the Graph:Chart so it should be universally displayed now. I will add most of these elements (title; rewording y-axis to "percent of") when I next update the image. I would assume that the x-axis being year would be self-explanatory though and adding an axis title there would be clutter and redundant. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 17:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

India

Do we have any numbers on India? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konintje (talk • contribs) 08:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

corona vaccine mandates

Very weird that there is no mention whatsoever to vaccine mandates. Being as it is that, by official numbers, at least 20% of the population rejected corona vaccines worldwide. Would make sense that a part of these people would quit in those countries/companies that disregard human rights and discriminate against people that did not want an experimental vaccine made by multinational pharmaceutical conglomerates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.131.68.200 (talk • contribs) 08:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

It's the left leaning bias of Wikipedia showing again is all. The fact that mentioning that people may not want to take a vaccine, and that being fact being political is ridiculous to begin with, but here we are. I'd like to think that it could be mentioned but judging by how Wikipedia has run other articles on this subject I have my doubts. Modern NFL Historian (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

If you have a source for this claim, I encourage you to WP:BOLDLY add it. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 19:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

False facts.

People have not been quiting their jobs in numbers. 2603:7000:B901:8500:6844:322B:20DE:1028 (talk) 20:53, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

False Historical Event.

This event was not credited by historians as an historical fact. 2603:7000:B901:8500:6844:322B:20DE:1028 (talk) 20:54, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Provide reliable sources for your claim and describe what you want to be changed. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 03:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

It is still too early to decide whether or not this deserves to be called a "historical event." Regardless, the situation is more complex than what some people might claim. Nerd271 (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Labor shortage inclusion

Hi Nerd271, I noticed you added some good information regarding the US labor shortage (or lack thereof). However, the Great Resignation simply describes how people are quitting their jobs, not if they are remaining out of the job market.

I do think it's important to note this relationship between the labor shortage (or lack thereof) and the wave of resignations, and how understanding of this relationship has shifted over the past year or two. The narrative at the moment is that workers are quitting their jobs primarily because they believe they can find jobs with better working conditions; earlier in 2021, there was a large (if not the dominant) narrative that people were quitting and leaving for good.

However, I think the bulk of the information you added about the labor shortage (particularly in Impacts) would be better suited in another article - whether it's a new article or an existing one like Aging of the United States - because it doesn't relate to the resignation wave. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 23:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

No, as I mentioned above, this is more complex than the headlines may appear. And frankly, it is immaterial what the "narrative" says. We ought to go deep and unveil the roots of this phenomenon. This is both a demographic and economic trend. Given how quickly the labor force rebounded after a calamitous dip in 2020, it is clear that people in general were not and are not leaving for good, except for seniors who retired, and even then, some of them came back. This is clearly a great time to be a worker. Nerd271 (talk) 16:12, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you're confused about what the Great Resignation is. The Great Resignation simply describes how people are quitting their jobs at a higher rate. It is not describing labor shortages. The idea that workers were leaving for good was a common early interpretation of the data, but it's now understood that is incorrect. That is where the subject of labor shortages fits within this article: within discussions of the behavior of the resigned workers and discussions of how the understanding of the behavior of the resigned workers have adapted.

The information of the "inevitable" labor shortage caused by baby boomers is irrelevant to this article and so I will be removing it. I encourage you to include it elsewhere. I'm keeping much of the other text you added for now because it can be adapted to fit in the article. I think the way to go about this is to move information from Impacts into a section about the behavior of resigned workers.

To address some other things you said: I used the word "narrative" as a synonym for "consensus among reliable sources". That is not "immaterial"; in fact, it has to be the foundation of the article. I agree that this article shouldn't be surface-level, but we have to be careful to not venture into original research. Your concluding statement This is clearly a great time to be a worker. makes me concerned that you are not approaching this with a neutral point of view in mind. I'm not dismissing your positions, and I do believe you have good faith. I just want to make you aware of your possible internal biases that may be influencing you to downplaying the scale of the Great Resignation through your editing. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 02:33, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

(Thank you for acting in good faith.) Any "bias" I might have is my skepticism of popular narratives. If you look at the labor participation rate, there has been no drastic change whatsoever, making the idea that is is a "great resignation" doubtful. As the article and some reliable sources explain, it was less of a "resignation" in the sense of quitting the workforce but rather switching for a better deal. How could workers possibly do this if it weren't for a tight labor market? In other words, what is this if not a symptom of a labor crunch? My knowledge of history tells me that this runs parallel to the golden years in the West following the Second World War, where young people horrified their parents by quitting their jobs and going on vacation for weeks before coming back to find new ones. (See Age of Extremes by Eric Hobsbawn.) Nerd271 (talk) 20:11, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

BappleBusiness & Nerd271: Was this ever resolved? I happened on this article, and it looks like it's a lot of WP:SYNTH about different unrelated employment and job market factoids, leading to a lot of self-contradiction within the article. And as a side note, this blending of unrelated ideas also makes it unclear what applies to the world and what only applies to the United States. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:39, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I think Nerd271 and I both agree that the Great Resignation isn't a case of people leaving their jobs permanently but rather switching their jobs. From what I've read, the media narrative has shifted from the former to the latter roughly about a year ago as more data has come in. There are still quite a few places in the article where unrelated economic factoids exist—particularly about the "labor shortage" which isn't inherently related to mass quits—and I would be more than happy to fix these. I'm curious what you think is WP:SYNTH, because while there are many problems with the article, I don't think that's one of them. I do agree that there is a bit of confliction in the article between the U.S. and the world. I think this is because 1) sources about the Great Resignation tend to center the U.S. and this will create an impetus to skew the article's focus, and 2) it's difficult to generalize when certain areas are affected differently than others. BappleBusiness^[talk] 18:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien: I agree with BappleBusiness. There are parts of this article that should be rewritten. This is not necessarily that common of a trend. Nerd271 (talk) 00:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Virtual Meeting of TCAP NLO, NLA, RCA-NR and ARASIA Representatives (08010836) (50670373548).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Great Resignation - Police 2023

A few examples are shown below of how police who are not allowed to strike in many states and now being maligned are now the next group of professionals that are resigning in massive numbers even though the resignation trend among the public is reducing.
This may be a good section addition or maybe a related article. Thoughts?

"‘It’s changing’: As officers quit in droves, departments see an opportunity for police reform"
[Police] Recruiters face a myriad of challenges: the great resignation, COVID-19, a cultural divide between baby boomer leadership and Gen Z recruiting base."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/12/21/police-officers-quit-reform/10891315002/

"'Vicious cycle': Inside the police recruiting crunch with resignations on the rise A new survey of police forces shows increase in retirements and resignations."
By Peter Charalambous April 6, 2023
"Police departments across the country are facing a "vicious cycle" of retirements, resignations, and fewer hires, according to policing experts, leaving the communities they protect with understaffed departments and potentially underqualified officers." https://abcnews.go.com/US/police-departments-face-vicious-cycle-challenges-retaining-recruiting/story?id=98363458

"Minnesota police force's resignation sparks outcry: 'Defund the Police lunatics' just got their wish The entire police force in Goodhue, Minn, resigned this week"
By Charles Creitz Fox News Published August 16, 2023
https://www.foxnews.com/media/minnesota-police-forces-resignation-sparks-outcry-defund-police-lunatics-just-got-wish

"NYPD cops resigning in new year at record-breaking pace — with a 117% jump from 2021 numbers"
By Dean Balsamini, Joe Marino, Craig McCarthy and Steven Vago March 10, 2023
It’s ’23 skidoo.
New York City cops are resigning at a record-breaking pace this year as the NYPD’s alarming exodus continues, according to new data obtained by The Post.
“The NYPD staffing emergency is approaching the point of no return,” said Police Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch.
The shocking stats show 239 officers tapped out in January and February, a 36% spike from the 176 who fled in the same period last year and a disturbing 117% jump from the 110 in 2021, NYPD pension data show."
https://nypost.com/2023/03/10/nypd-cops-resigning-from-force-in-2023-at-record-pace/

Jrcrin001 (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

@Jrcrin001, this is definitely interesting, though I would prefer if there was more of a connection to the term "Great Resignation". I think this could be included as one of the "industries" affected, while also noting that there are other, potentially bigger factors in this specific case. BappleBusiness^[talk] 20:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)