> But if it were accurate, wouldn't companies spend more effort on retention and engagement over hiring? Retention and engagement are hard, complicated problem

> But if it were accurate, wouldn't companies spend more effort on retention and engagement over hiring? Retention and engagement are hard, complicated problems. The mindset that employees are interchangeable cogs with no real needs of their own—particularly psychological needs that have anything to do with the workplace—is still a very strong one in every sector of the American workplace. Even for those companies where management, as a whole, does genuinely understand that it benefits everyone to have engaged employees, if you ask 10 people "how do you keep employees engaged?" you'll get 12 different answers. We're still just a few steps away from tenant farmers, sweatshops, and company towns. The fact that there's research that shows spending on retention is massively more effective than spending on hiring will take generations more to actually catch on amongst the American executive class...unless we can manage to pull together a serious union renaissance and demand the better conditions that will actually help everyone.