Emer Moreau

I think it is a new name for something that's not totally new. We are seeing more of it now because of the way economies around the world are changing and how the labour market is changing. If you compare it to quiet quitting, so that was kind of a trend a couple of years ago where people were sort of not going above and beyond in their jobs, kind of not maybe pushing themselves, not putting themselves forward for extra work, things like that. But they were staying in their jobs. And I think in that sense...

Job hugging is sort of like quiet quitting's kind of sad cousin, because either way you are staying in the job. But I think quiet quitting was a bit more about agency. It was sort of taking back a bit of a sense of a work-life balance, but you weren't necessarily worried about losing your job. Whereas I think with job hugging, the thing is people are worried that there could be layoffs, there could be cutbacks in their job. So they don't want to look a bit further afield and just hang on to the security that they already have.

Mitä numerot kertovat siitä, kuinka paljon ihmisiä on työpaikalla nyt ja onko se jotain, mitä näemme nuorempien työntekijöiden kanssa? Singapurissa järjestelmät ovat menneet vähemmän nyt kuin 2008-kriisin jälkeen. Jotkut katsojat, jotka olisivat liian nuoria, huomioivat, että se oli aina, kun kaverit kaikkialla laitoivat ihmisiä ja pysyivät töihin. Joten olisi hienoa jättää töitä valitettavasti, koska olisi niin pieni mahdollisuus löytää jotain muuta.

Mielestäni se on ero siitä, että jos ihmiset ajattelevat, että on parempia mahdollisuuksia muualla, ja nyt paljon ihmisiä ei tunne, että jos he jättävät töitä huomenna, he voivat löytää töitä ja löytää jotain parempaa kuin mitä he jo tehivät. Mikä on joitain syitä, joita ihmiset antaa, kun he kysyvät, miksi he haluavat pysyä?

A.I. on iso asia. Sanoit, että työntekijät eivät tiedä, mitä A.I. tekee yrityksille ja työntekijöille. Työntekijät eivät tiedä, voivatko heidät muuttaa tietokoneella muutaman vuoden aikana. He haluavat pysyä koko ajan. Jotkut gen-Z-yhtiöt menivät työntekijöille pre-COVID-vaiheessa. Työntekijät pysyivät työntekijöille. Miksi pysyisit työntekijöissä, kun voit saada paremman arvoa, hyökkäyksiä ja työllisyyttä?

Mutta nyt on korreksia siihen, että on paljon pienempiä mahdollisuuksia. Työntekijöiden perusteella, mutta erityisesti nuorten ihmisten perusteella, työntekijöiden peruste ei ole sama kuin työntekijöiden perusteella nyt. Mutta työntekijöiden perusteella, työntekijöiden perusteella, työntekijöiden perusteella, työntekijöiden perusteella,

Työntekijät tarvitsevat paljon rahaa, ja sen lisäksi työntekijät tarvitsevat paljon rahaa. Lämpöturvallisuus on se, mitä yritykset haluavat. Joten ihmiset pysyvät rauhassa pitkällä aikavälillä. Se auttaa. Mutta yritykset sanovat, että jos voin mennä tähän paikkaan, miksi pysyisin täällä, jos minulle ei ole parempia parantumia. Mikälaisia ongelmia se luo yrityksille ja ihmisille, jotka pysyvät rauhassa?

Yeah, so disengaged staff is really bad for business and in turn that's really bad for the economy. So last year it's estimated that employee disengagement cost the world 10 trillion dollars in lost productivity. Basically, if you're spending X amount of money on staffing employees, you want to see a good return on your investment essentially.

Mutta jos käsittelee sen toisesta, niin työntekijät sanovat, että miksi käsittelee minua ainoastaan yhteydessä? Miksi käsittelee minua ainoastaan yhteydessä? Minä en voinut mennä eteenpäin, jos en tunne, että olen saanut palveluani. Toinen tutkimus käsitteli, että työntekijän onnistuminen kasvaa, kun työntekijät tuntevat, että heidän työntekijänä on tärkeää. He tuntevat, että heidän työntekijänä on parempi, että heidän palvelu on parempi tulevaisuudessa. Kun työntekijät eivät tunne sitä, kuten monet tekevät nyt, niin se voi luoda ongelmia työntekijöiden kanssa.

I don't think there's many kind of plumbers, nurses, farm laborers who are particularly worried about AI coming for their jobs. And the reason they're not worried is because they have skills that AI can't replicate. So there's a huge element of kind of what skills do you have in this conversation. Again, one study found that if all the world's workforce was 100 people, 59 of those would need upskilling by 2030. So it's all about kind of

If you can find opportunities elsewhere that will give you the tools and give you the skill set to be more resilient against things like AI and cutbacks. I think the tech sector is a good kind of canary in the coal mine. Because again, if you think back to pre-COVID, and COVID wasn't necessarily the cause of all this, but I very much see pre-COVID as the tech companies, they couldn't expand fast enough. They wanted more workers than they had because they had all this work to be done.

Whereas now a lot of them are kind of maturing as companies because they were these really rapidly expanding startups, you know, back at the kind of start of the 2010s and further back into the noughties. But they're slowing down in their kind of output. Some of them like Facebook have invested a lot of money in the metaverse, which hasn't really worked out too well financially for them. So they're making cutbacks, they're slowing down. So their workers are kind of thinking, instead of going from one tech company to another, I'm going to stay where I am because there are no other companies offering me better pay right now.

overlooming factor when it comes to job hugging. People are really afraid that if they leave a job, they won't be able to simply walk into another one, and if they do, it won't be as good as what they have now. Whereas I think if you go back six or seven years, in a lot of industries, staying in your job was like leaving money on the table. It was like, why would you show loyalty to a company if they're only going to give you, say, a 1% pay rise, whereas you can get a 5% pay rise if you move to this job, and then you can get another one if you move to that job in 10 months. That's not really the case now. Mm-hmm.

If we go to early careers, how long should people be staying in their first or second jobs? How do you know when you've outgrown a role and you're at risk of hugging it? I think it goes back to that skills thing. So if you are kind of in a position where there is no obvious next step for you, like the next kind of rung up on the ladder, and your employer isn't giving you any kind of opportunities to upskill and to develop yourself and your skill set so that you could move into another slightly higher role,

I think that would be kind of a sign for me to either look elsewhere or look to see where you can kind of be a bit more proactive and upskill by yourself. I think historically companies invested a lot more in their workers in the sense of like they would train you to do certain things. But as the companies kind of make cutbacks and they want to sort of

A good kind of rule of thumb is it's easier to get a job if you have a job. So a lot of kind of career coaches and kind of experts in this area would say kind of don't just leave a job with no plan. And like a plan could be, you know, doing a master's, doing some sort of full time kind of upscaling and training education. But generally speaking, employers like to see you're in a role right now because it means you're sort of a little bit more proactive and you might stay at the company a bit longer. Eima, thank you so much. Thank you.