Joseph Coughlin, director of the MIT AgeLab, writes for Forbes about the impact Baby Boomer and Gen X retirement can have on the increasing labor shortage in the United States. “While some millennials can’t wait for the Boomers and older Gen X’ers to step aside in the job market, there are critical labor shortfalls in many key industries that will be sharply felt by Millennials as consumers and as the next generation of leadership in business and government,” writes Coughlin.
MIT researchers have found five main predictors of attrition: toxic work culture, job insecurity, stressing innovation, not being recognized for performance, and poor response to Covid-19, reports Meghan M. Biro for Forbes. “Everything boils down to valuing your people – and possibly undertaking a bout of serious self-assessment,” writes Biro.
Amazon workers from Staten Island have become the first group to vote in favor of unionizing, reports Ari Levy and Annie Palmer for CNBC. “I would expect now that there is this first victory on the part of a union that Amazon is going to have to reassess its labor relations strategy and begin to negotiate in good faith to reach an agreement,” says Prof. Tom Kochan.
New York Times reporter Steve Lohr spotlights how the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Omidyar Network have made a gift to help establish a new program that will analyze forces contributing to the erosion of job quality and labor market opportunity for workers without college degrees. “Markets are terrific, but we have to overcome this notion that ‘markets are autonomous — so just leave it to the market,’” says Prof. David Autor. “That fatalism is a decision.”
Bloomberg reporter Ben Holland spotlights “The Work of the Future: Building Better Jobs in an Age of Intelligent Machines” – a new book written by Prof. David Autor, Prof. David Mindell and Elizabeth Reynolds PhD ’10 – about the future of job mobility and social safety nets in the United States.
On Point host Meghna Chakrabarti speaks with Prof. David Autor about his research investigating the success and failures of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). “If there's one thing I would change, is that I would rebuild our unemployment insurance program, so use modern data systems integrated nationally,” says Autor of how he would alter the PPP.
Prof. David Autor, Harvard University Prof. Gordon Hanson, University of Zurich Prof. David Dorn, and Monsah University Prof. Kaveh Majlesi have described an “ideological realignment in trade-exposed local labor markets that commences prior to the divisive 2016 U.S. presidential election,” reports Thomas B. Edsall for The New York Times.
New York Times reporter Gina Bellafante spotlights a report from the Sloan School of Management which found that toxic work culture leads to a higher attrition rate than unsatisfactory pay. “Attrition rates in the financial sector hovered around 9 and 10 percent, several points higher than those for the health care and telecommunications industries and nearly twice as high as the figure for the airlines,” writes Bellafante.
Forbes reporter Bryan Robinson spotlights a report by researchers from the Sloan School of Management, which found people are quitting their jobs because of toxic workplace culture, not low pay. “The report says toxic workplace culture is 10.4 times more likely to contribute to an employee quitting,” writes Robinson.
A new study by Prof. David Autor examining the effectiveness of the Paycheck Protection Program found that the program ended up subsidizing business owners and shareholders more than workers, reports Stacy Cowley for The New York Times. “Jobs and businesses are two separate things,” says Autor. “We tried to figure out, ‘Where did the money go?’ — and it turns out it didn’t primarily go to workers who would have lost jobs. It went to business owners and their shareholders and their creditors.”
Fortune reporter Tristan Bove spotlights a study led by economists from MIT, Stanford, the University of Chicago and Mexico’s ITAM on how workers are spending their time while working from home. “Pandemic habits give Americans around 70 minutes of extra free time a day,” writes Bove. “The lion’s share of this, around 60 minutes, comes from getting rid of commuting, but workers have also spent around nine minutes less on average doing daily activities such as grooming or picking out fresh clothes.”
Economists from MIT, Stanford, the University of Chicago, and Mexico’s ITAM polled U.S. workers to see how the pandemic impacted American’s work from home setup, reports Nate DiCamillo for Quartz. “Overall, remote workers report that they’ve become more efficient at working from home than in office,” writes DiCamillo.
The Economist spotlights a study by MIT researchers that found that less than a third of Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) funding went to workers who would otherwise have been laid off. “Almost $366bn – 72% of funding in 2020 – went to households making more than 144,000 per year,” writes The Economist.
Prof. David Autor speaks with New York Times columnist Peter Coy about the new book he wrote with Prof. David Mindell and Elisabeth Reynolds, “The Work of the Future: Building Better Jobs in an Age of Intelligent Machines.” Autor explains that: “Most people’s fear of technology is really a fear of capitalism, what the markets will do with the technology. You can’t make a lot of progress if you’re making people poorer at the same time.”
The Economist highlights new work by MIT researchers investigating the impact of automation on the labor market. A study by graduate student Joonas Tuhkuri finds that at Finnish firms “adoption of advanced technologies led to increases in hiring.” Meanwhile a new book by Profs. David Autor, David Mindell and Elisabeth Reynolds concludes that “even if robots do not create widespread joblessness, they may have helped create an environment where the rewards are ‘skewed towards the top.’”