My guess is they've exhausted the local supply of labor for the price they're willing to pay, but I've been in situation where I don't think they crunched the n

My guess is they've exhausted the local supply of labor for the price they're willing to pay, but I've been in situation where I don't think they crunched the numbers (or they didn't care). In my situation, which I feel bad comparing since it wasn't anywhere near as egregious, a team of us had mandatory overtime--enough to cover another salary at base pay. They didn't want to hire someone else because they said paying us 1.5x was less than hiring someone new with benefits. What I don't think they appreciated was covering vacations, resignation, or illness put even more stress on us and local laws required double-pay after a certain number of worked hours (which was put on us to try and avoid but still cover the shifts). When someone did resign, interviewing and onboarding made the next few months suck. Even with stronger labor laws than Kansas, the economic pressure wasn't enough to have them address the situation. A few people didn't mind the overtime and had the flexibility and willingness to work. I suspect that many organizations have a "model" that's profitable and they're afraid to mess with it or dig into problems making it work better. I had another job where it was kind of a joke that most people quit their first week. They had a group that had been working there for years, they just had a lot of turnover for new hires. It seemed like a weird process to interview and hire so many people that left immediately, but they were running (presumably) a profitable business and they didn't seem interested in changing things.