Forget return to office. In this economy, many employees are returning to previous employers, breaking taboos about workplace loyalty and bucking assumptions about the so-called Great Resignation.
Their numbers are up. In the US in the first quarter of this year, 4.2 per cent of all new hires for companies that advertised jobs on LinkedIn were boomerangs, compared to 3.3 per cent in 2019, the social-media firm said.
Their reasons for returning are varied. What’s more, their returns are being brandished by firms large and small, who are boasting everywhere from social media to Slack that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side.
So-called “boomerang employees” embody the economic ambiguity of the moment. Earlier this month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed the US labour market added 528,000 jobs in July, beating forecasts more than twofold. Yet just the week prior, the data showed that the US economy shrank for a second straight quarter, amplifying concerns about a recession.
All the while, employees and employers are locked in a stand-off over perks, pay, remote policies and the very meaning of work itself.
Return perks
“I just realised that start-ups don’t really offer a lot of family benefits that larger companies do,” said Rachel Bentley, a 31-year-old from Austin, Texas, who recently boomeranged back to Duo, a two-factor authentication company owned by Cisco Systems, after stints at Microsoft and a smaller start-up she joined in 2021. It was a mix of cultural comfort, pay and concern about the economy that drew Bentley back to Duo, whose employees she stayed in touch with on Slack even after she left the firm. It paid off: Bentley says by returning, she was not only able to rejoin colleagues she loves, but also double her pay.
Others are doing the same, particularly at a moment when career risks — such as joining a start-up in a new industry — may begin to lose their appeal. Although the job market is still strong, firms that once seemed like sure-fire bets in a stay-at-home economy are laying off staff or freezing hiring.
In June, crypto firm Coinbase Global said it would lay off 18% of its workforce. Robinhood Markets said this month it would eliminate nearly a quarter of its staff. Even Apple laid off many of its contract-based recruiters, and firms from Peloton Interactive to LinkedIn have also recently shed staff.
That may partly explain the recent growth of boomerang employees.
“The hard reality is that at 30, 40, or even 50, it’s really hard to change careers and maintain the lifestyle you’re used to,” said Adam Kail, founder and chief executive officer of Harrison Gray Search and Consulting in Grand Rapids, Michigan. “I’ve seen people switch careers drastically but in a short period of time realise, ‘I’m not as happy doing something I like more, but with my pay a third of what it was before.’”
Manager approval
In contrast to decades past, firms are now happy to take their old employees back. And they aren’t being quiet about it. LinkedIn is filled with posts from companies including Deutsche Bank, EY and Deloitte touting returning employees, often with elaborate blog posts, pictures and videos showing happy staff back at their companies.
“On social media, you can very easily click back in and say, ‘Hey, I’d love to talk to someone again about maybe reengaging in employment with the firm,” says Dan Black, EY’s global leader for talent attraction and acquisition.
Social-media posts from boomerangs can help with hiring in a still-tight labour market by showing the firm is a good place to work, according to Catherine Shea, an assistant professor at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business who co-authored a 2021 study on returning employees.
COST OF A ‘Boomerang’
- Boomerangs are paid more but perform on a similar level as those who stayed
- Boomerangs also tend to change little between their first and second tours of the firm in terms of how they perform
- Companies considering bringing back a boomerang candidate need to investigate carefully why he or she left in the first place
- Red flags might be dissatisfaction with upward mobility, concerns about management, or poor cultural fit
Sources: Studies by Catherine Shea from Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business; John Arnold of the University of Missouri