Abstract
Unskilled workers in low productivity jobs typically experience higher labour turnover. This article shows how this finding is related to variation in the efficiency of the matching process across occupations. If employers find it less profitable to invest in search and screening activities when recruiting for low-productivity jobs, matches at the lower end of the occupation distribution will be more prone to separation. The analysis of a unique sample of British hirings, containing detailed information about employers’ recruitment practices, shows that more intensive recruitment leads to matches of better quality that pay higher wages, last longer and make employers more satisfied with the person taken on.
Hazel’s comment:
It makes sense when you read the abstract.
Employers are not going to waste time on the waste removal operative in the turning shed. Anyone who is sufficiently fit and can read the safety notices will do for that job and if s/he has to be replaced in a month or so then that is what will happen. Choosing the right foreman (is that a taboo word these days?) for the same shed has a significant impact on the profitability of the enterprise. The employer will, quite naturally, take a lot longer to make a choice.
However, read the whole article and you begin to understand that labour turnover is expressed for an industry or a geographic area or a specific company which tends to hide the higher turnover in “lower-level” jobs.
Anyone involved in matching people to jobs whether a prospective employee, an employer or an agency should read this article and reflect on the matching process at every level or qualification and skill.
Repeatedly investing less time into lower-level job recruitment is a real waste of time and resources. I wish I'd had this information when I was working on the front-line.
No comments:
Post a Comment