Retaining Older Workers More Important
Forget about Gen Y/Millennials for a second, how about retaining the older generations?
Unfortunately, we can’t all work for a dot com where younger workers and older workers can enter the industry on essentially the same footing. There are many industries where the wealth of experience an older person brings to a company actually does make a real significant difference. And with early retirement being offered in many of those industries (and early retirement being a voluntary option), the time to strengthen your retention strategy is now. Canada focus says:
The study showed mature, large companies to be at greatest risk from the demographic shift, due to their hiring history - rapid growth through the 1970s, followed by downsizing in the ’90s that left them with few mid-career employees today. Leadership, sales and technical positions will be the hardest to fill.
The cost of losing older workers is high. Replacing an experienced worker can cost 50 per cent or more of their annual salary and the cost is higher in jobs requiring specialized skills, advanced training or extensive experience - all more likely in 50-plus employees.
Employers often complain the generation now entering the workforce lack core competencies - which can be counterbalanced by older employees. Many 50-plus workers have experience, dedication, focus, stability and enhanced knowledge.
So not only are people more interested in the older generation, they suddenly find worth (and aren’t anchor weight) in the corporations of today. Couple this with the fact that older workers need some serious help in the job hunt and there is opportunity screaming all over it. Some have taken advantage of this opportunity, will your company?
Comments
5 Responses to “Retaining Older Workers More Important”
Leave a Reply






Another good one….needs to be shared in “Getting Hired” in the near future.
Marvin
[...] YourHRGuy.com: Retaining Older Workers More Important “Unfortunately, we can’t all work for a dot com where younger workers and older workers can enter the industry on essentially the same footing. There are many industries where the wealth of experience an older person brings to a company actually does make a real significant difference.” [...]
Let me go on record saying I have no sympathy for most major organizations that are trying to let go of older workers because they’re “too expensive”.
They are digging their own grave and can’t see it.
I’ve talked to some excellent candidates who couldn’t get on at a company because they’re over 50. In essence, they’re saying, “Yeah - that 30 years of experience is great and all, but we’re looking for someone who could screw up on a grand scale…”
The massive retirement boom coming is going to drive a whole different employment industry and will spur so much technological innovation that I can’t wait for it to start.
Dan
As implied in your post, the budding labor shortage will require firms to place more energy into retaining the 45 worker vs. finding creative ways of “retro-recruiting” them. Most firm’s do not even have a clue yet.
robert edward cenek, RODP
http://www.cenekreport.com
Uncommon Commentary on the World of Work
Employees are an investment made by a company. The longer they’re around, the higher the return on investment (in theory) which is why I don’t understand the rush to early retire employees. A typical misread is that replacing the older, higher-paid employee with a younger cheaper hire is cost-effective but that ignores the tremendous value of experience. At the same time, I have seen older employees that stop making an effort to keep current which in turn drops their value but not their salary… For people like that and others, I blogged this:
http://jobmob.co.il/blog/40-tips-for-job-seekers-over-40/