View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

FRBSF Economic Letter
2022-08 | April 4, 2022 | Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

“Great Resignations” Are Common During Fast Recoveries
Bart Hobijn
The record percentage of workers who are quitting their jobs, known as the “Great
Resignation,” is not a shift in worker attitudes in the wake of the pandemic. Evidence on
which workers are quitting suggests that it reflects the strong rebound of the demand for
younger and less-educated workers. Historical data on quits in manufacturing suggest that
the current wave is not unusual. Waves of job quits have occurred during all fast recoveries
in the postwar period.

The labor market recovery since the depth of the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020 has been the
fastest in postwar history. This historic rebound is evidenced by the steepest decline of the unemployment
rate and the fastest growth in payroll employment on record (Hall and Kudlyak 2021).
At the same time, the share of workers quitting their jobs—either to take new jobs or to exit the labor
force—has also hit its highest level since 2000, when the data began being collected. This recent spike in
quits has been referred to as the “Great Resignation.” Some have interpreted it as a wave of resignations,
driven by people reconsidering their career prospects and work-life balance, that is drastically altering the
labor supply. In this Economic Letter, I provide two pieces of evidence that cast doubt on this narrative
and, instead, suggest that the high rate of quits is simply a reflection of the rapid pace of overall labor
market recovery.
First, I find that the increase in the quits rate is driven by young and less-educated workers in industries
and occupations that were most adversely affected by the pandemic. This is also where payroll employment
growth has been high recently, offsetting the job losses incurred in 2020.
Secondly, the Great Resignation is not so great after all. Historical data on the quits rate in manufacturing
point to waves of quitting being common during fast recoveries when employment growth was high. Thus,
it is not an anomaly, but instead fits the pattern of many past rapid recoveries.

The quits rate and the Great Resignation
In the past few months, a record share of workers in the nonfarm sector quit their jobs each month. A quit
is an employee who leaves their job voluntarily, either to go to another job, search for another job while
unemployed, or drop out of the labor market. This share, known as the quits rate, reached 3.0% in
November and December 2021—its highest level since it was first reported in December 2000 as part of
the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) release.

FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-08

The record level of the “Total” quits
rate in Figure 1 is often pointed to as
signaling a Great Resignation. This
supposedly reflects a wave of people
reconsidering their career prospects,
opportunities for hybrid and remote
work, and work-life balance—and
ultimately resigning in such numbers
that it is drastically altering the labor
supply in the wake of the pandemic.

April 4, 2022

Figure 1
Job quits rates: Total nonfarm and manufacturing
Percent
4.0

MLTS discontinued

3.5

JOLTS introduced
Total
Manufacturing

3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5

1.0
Because quits data for the total
nonfarm sector are not available before
0.5
2000, I use the Manufacturing Labor
0.0
Turnover Survey (MLTS); it measures
1948
1958
1968
1978
1988
1998
2008
2018
quits and other labor turnover series
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Shaded bars indicate NBER recession dates.
similarly to JOLTS, for the
manufacturing sector only. Although it was discontinued in 1981, combining it with the JOLTS quits data
can provide a longer, though interrupted, historical perspective, shown as “Manufacturing” in Figure 1.

The earlier manufacturing data reveal several waves of quits that rival the current wave. Though the 2.3%
rate in December 2021 is a record-high since 2000, the manufacturing sector hit comparable highs
between 1948 and 1973.

Quits and rebound in demand for young and less-educated workers
One limitation of the JOLTS data is that they do not reveal what type of workers are quitting or whether
they quit for career-changing reasons, such as switching industries or occupations, versus exiting the labor
force. However, one can supplement the JOLTS information with evidence from the Current Population
Survey (CPS; see Flood et al. 2021).
It is not possible to construct the direct equivalent of the JOLTS quits rate in the CPS because of
conceptual, sampling, and scope differences between the two. With that in mind, I construct a proxy by
measuring a quit in the CPS as someone who is payroll employed one month and, the next month, either
reports to have switched job-to-job within payroll employment, switched to another type of employment,
become unemployed and reports to have quit, or dropped out of the labor force and reports to have done so
because of unsatisfactory working conditions.
The CPS data reveal four important facts. First, the industries with the biggest increase in their quits rate
during the pandemic also saw the fastest job growth in 2021. Among these sectors are retail trade; arts,
entertainment, and recreation; and accommodation and food services. These are also the sectors hit
hardest by the pandemic. More generally, the correlation across industries between the change in the quits
rate between November 2019 and November 2021 and payroll employment growth in the 12 months
preceding November 2021 is positive in both the CPS (0.46) and JOLTS (0.49) data.

2

FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-08

April 4, 2022

Second, a similar pattern holds across occupations. For example, the occupation with the highest increase
in its quits rate is food preparation and service, which saw rapid employment growth over 2021. The crossoccupation correlation in the CPS between the quits rate change over the pandemic and 2021 employment
growth is 0.38. Workers in these most-affected occupations tend to have less education.
Third, there was not a particularly large increase in the share of job quitters that changed either industry of
employment or occupation. Such an increase would be expected if the current wave involved a broad
reconsideration of career choices. The absence of such an increase is consistent, however, with the
observation by David (2021) that there
Figure 2
has not been a large net reallocation of
Job quits rate proxies by age
payroll jobs across industries after the
Percent
onset of the COVID recession.
5.5

The fourth fact is that the increase in
the quits rate is largely due to younger
and less-educated workers, as seen in
Figures 2 and 3.

5.0
4.5
16-24

4.0
3.5

Figure 2 shows that the increase in the
quits rate is particularly pronounced
for younger workers, including
millennials (ages 25 to 34) in the
current wave. That is reflective of a
normal cyclical pattern in which the
quits rate of younger workers responds
more to business cycle conditions and
drives a large part of the movements in
the overall quits rate.
Figure 3 reveals that the increase in
the quits rate is concentrated among
less-educated workers, confirming the
industry and occupation evidence. This
is inconsistent with quits being driven
by people who pursue other remote
work opportunities: according to the
CPS data, such changes are largely
among more highly educated
individuals.
Thus, the evidence from the CPS
suggests that the increase in the quits
rate is being driven by young and lesseducated workers in industries and
occupations that were most adversely
3

3.0

25-34

2.5

35 and older

2.0
1.5
2002

2005

2008

2011

2014

2017

2020

Source: CPS and author’s calculations. Shaded bars indicate NBER recession
dates.

Figure 3
Job quits rate proxies by educational attainment
Percent
3.2
3.0

Less than high school diploma

2.8
2.6

Some college

2.4

High school
diploma

2.2
2.0

College degree
or higher

1.8
1.6
2002

2005

2008

2011

2014

2017

2020

Source: CPS and author’s calculations. Shaded bars indicate NBER recession
dates.

FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-08

April 4, 2022

affected by the pandemic and where payroll employment growth is high to offset the job losses incurred in
2020.

Quits waves common during fast recoveries
The relationship between high payroll
growth and elevated quits rates is not
only true across industries and
occupations—it is also true over time.
Figure 4 shows this, comparing the
quits rate in the manufacturing sector
with payroll job growth in the overall
economy and in manufacturing.

Figure 4
Payroll employment growth versus manufacturing quits rate
Percent
20

Payroll employment growth - Total
Payroll employment growth - Manufacturing
Quits rate - Manufacturing

15
10
5

The figure shows that the quits waves
in manufacturing in 1948, 1951, 1953,
1966, 1969, and 1973 are of the same
order of magnitude as the current
wave. All of these waves coincide with
periods when payroll employment
grew very fast, both in the
manufacturing sector and the total
nonfarm sector.

0
-5
-10
-15
1948

1958

1968

1978

1988

1998

2008

2018

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Shaded bars indicate NBER recession dates.

Thus, when the data are extended back prior to the JOLTS time frame beginning in 2000, the Great
Resignation does not appear unusual. The current level of the quits rate is at a record high since 2000
because the recoveries of the 2001 and 2008 recessions were very slow by historical standards and thus did
not put the same upward pressure on the quits rate as during other recoveries.

Wages and the “Great Renegotiation”
The link between employment growth and the quits rate that I document across sectors and occupations
and over time is consistent with the model commonly used to assess the U.S. labor market conditions for
low-skilled workers (Burdett and Mortensen 1998). That model explains how the quits rate is related to the
frequency of job offers from other employers.
After a temporary spike in layoffs, like the one during the pandemic, employers post many vacancies to
restaff and satisfy the rebound in demand for their goods and services. This explains the highly elevated
job openings rate that has coincided with the record quits rate.
These vacancies do not only attract applicants who are unemployed. They also draw workers from other
employers. Workers who receive a better offer will either quit their current job for another higher-paying
job or renegotiate their wage, benefits, and work arrangements with their current employer. So, the “Great
Resignation” is actually better interpreted as a “Great Renegotiation.”

4

FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-08

April 4, 2022

As Manning (2006) points out, this can be interpreted as a temporary reduction in the bargaining power of
employers that puts upward pressures on wages. His interpretation is consistent with recent wage
pressures being highest in the retail and the leisure and hospitality sectors, which have also seen the
highest employment growth and increases in job openings and quits rates.
These upward pressures on wages wane as the fast employment recovery slows down, the job openings rate
tapers off, and the fraction of workers being poached by competitors declines.
It might take until late 2022 before this happens, however. Respondents to the November 2021 Survey of
Professional Forecasters (Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia 2021) generally expect nonfarm payroll
growth to remain high in 2022. If these forecasts are correct, the job openings and quits rates are likely to
remain elevated and wage growth is likely to remain strong for the rest of the year.

Conclusion
Evidence from both recent worker surveys and historical data on quits shows that the “Great Resignation”
is not as unusual as one might think. Waves of quits have been common during fast recoveries in the
postwar period. In line with this historical evidence, the recent wave reflects the rapid rebound in labor
demand for young and less-educated workers, largely driven by the retail, leisure and hospitality, and
accommodation and food services sectors.
This analysis covers data through February 1, 2022.
Bart Hobijn is Professor of Economics at the W.P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University,
and Visiting Fellow in the Economic Research Department at the Federal Reserve Bank of San
Francisco.

References
Burdett, Kenneth, and Dale T. Mortensen. 1998. “Wage Differentials, Employer Size, and Unemployment.” International
Economic Review 39(2), pp. 257–273.
David, Joel M. 2021. “Has COVID-19 Been a Reallocation Recession?” Chicago Fed Letter 452 (March).
https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/chicago-fed-letter/2021/452
Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. 2021. “Survey of Professional Forecasters,” November.
https://www.philadelphiafed.org/surveys-and-data/real-time-data-research/spf-q4-2021
Flood, Sarah, Miriam King, Renae Rodgers, Steven Ruggles, J. Robert Warren, and Michael Westberry. 2021. “Integrated
Public Use Microdata Series.” Current Population Survey, version 9.0. University of Minnesota.
https://doi.org/10.18128/D030.V9.0
Hall, Robert E., and Marianna Kudlyak. 2021. “Comparing Pandemic Unemployment to Past U.S. Recoveries.” FRBSF
Economic Letter 2021-33 (November 29). https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/november/comparing-pandemic-unemployment-to-past-us-recoveries/
Manning, Alan. 2006. “A Generalized Model of Monopsony.” Economic Journal 116(508).

Opinions expressed in FRBSF Economic Letter do not necessarily reflect the views of the
management of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco or of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System. This publication is edited by Anita Todd and Karen Barnes. Permission to
reprint portions of articles or whole articles must be obtained in writing. Please send editorial
comments and requests for reprint permission to research.library@sf.frb.org
5

FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-08

April 4, 2022

Recent issues of FRBSF Economic Letter are available at
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/
2022-07

Jorda /
Liu /
Nechio /
Rivera-Reyes

Why Is U.S. Inflation Higher than in Other Countries?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2022/march/whyis-us-inflation-higher-than-in-other-countries/

2022-06

Jargalsaikhan /
Leduc /
Oliveira

How Are Businesses Responding to Climate Risk?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2022/march/howare-businesses-responding-to-climate-risk/

2022-05

Daly

This Time Is Different…Because We Are
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2022/february/this-time-is-different-because-we-are-speech/

2022-04

Barnichon /
Shapiro

What’s the Best Measure of Economic Slack?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2022/february/what-is-best-measure-of-economic-slack/

2022-03

Lansing /
Oliveira /
Shapiro

Will Rising Rents Push Up Future Inflation?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2022/february/willrising-rents-push-up-future-inflation/

2022-02

Albert /
Valletta

Searching for Maximum Employment
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2022/february/searching-for-maximum-employment/

2022-01

Cúrdia

Average Inflation Targeting in the Financial Crisis Recovery
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2022/january/average-inflation-targeting-in-financial-crisis-recovery/

2021-33

Hall /
Kudlyak

Comparing Pandemic Unemployment to Past U.S. Recoveries
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/november/comparing-pandemic-unemployment-to-past-us-recoveries/

2021-32

Albert /
Foerster /
Sarte

Employment Effects of COVID-19 across States, Sectors
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/november/employment-effects-of-covid-19-across-states-sectors/

2021-31

Daly

Policymaking in a Time of Uncertainty
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/november/policymaking-in-time-of-uncertainty/

2021-30

Tarasewicz /
Wilson

How Strongly Are Local Economies Tied to COVID-19?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/november/how-strongly-are-local-economies-tied-to-covid-19/

2021-29

Christensen /
Lopez /
Mussche

What Would It Cost to Issue 50-year Treasury Bonds?
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/november/what-would-it-cost-to-issue-50-year-treasury-bonds/

2021-28

Bauer /
Rudebusch /

Climate Change Costs Rise as Interest Rates Fall
https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economicletter/2021/october/climate-change-costs-rise-as-interest-rates-fall/