"People don't want to work anymore"

www.epi.org/publication/irregular-work-scheduling-and-its-consequences/

Irregular scheduling and outcomes

Employees who work irregular shift times, in contrast with those with more standard, regular shift times, experience greater work-family conflict, and sometimes experience greater work stress.

Less than 11 percent of workers on “regular” work schedules report “often” experiencing work-family conflict in contrast with as many as 26 percent of irregular/on-call shift employees, and 19 percent of rotating/split shift workers. Similar differences appear for reporting that they “never” experience work-family interference.

Overtime work that is required by the employer increases the likelihood of having an irregular schedule and particularly of working on rotating/split shifts.

Overtime work that is mandatory is greatest among those who earn at least $22,500 but below $40,000 per year; who work longer weekly hours; who work inflexible daily schedules (they can’t take time off or change their starting and ending times); or who report that there are often too few workers on staff to get all the work done.


Public policy measures

The documented associations with work-family conflict and work stress not only reinforce the existing “business case” for limiting work hours fluctuation at the behest of employers only, but also underscore the need to adopt preventative public policy measures, such as recent reforms taking place in states and municipalities across the United States. Specifically, community action groups and labor unions that have witnessed the deleterious effects of irregular work schedules on people and their families have spearheaded efforts to propose and adopt legislation at local and federal levels.

A legally protected “right to request” changes in work hours, schedules, or location, with protection from retaliation—modeled on the laws in the U.K., Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Germany—has been implemented in the state of Vermont and in San Francisco and Berkeley, California. These measures provide employees with caregiving responsibilities a right to request flexible work schedules or part-time work.

Adopting recommendations from the Retail Workers Bill of Rights, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors has enacted new protections for hourly workers in retail chain stores, to require employers to provide more advance notice in setting and changing work schedules to make them more predictable. The protections include providing priority access to extra hours of work—if and when available—to those employees who explicitly request such hours, which could be a model way to help alleviate the chronic underemployment in the U.S. labor market.

San Francisco requires paying workers who have not received sufficient advance notice of last-minute schedule changes for a portion of their hours lost, for “on-call” hours, for being scheduled on split shifts, and for instances in which they are sent home before completing their assigned shifts.

Some employers have adopted various voluntary arrangements that might constitute model practices or minimum standards, including some large companies in the highly competitive retail sector.

The experiences in cities could inform elements of reforms of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) at the national level, such as the proposed The Schedules that Work Act (H.R. 5159).

I've read it.  I didn't like it though.  it wasn't my kind of book.  I had to force myself to finish it.

Plus they closed their plant in Fairlawn NJ laying off all their workers

Or they feel like there are not adequate safety measures in place in the workplace to go back. Or they don't have childcare available. Or any of many many many other things that have been mentioned in this thread beyond being lazy 🙄

Oh,yeah. When the employer-employee relationship is no longer working for the employer, it's "f-you workers."

When the employer-employee relationship is no longer working for the employee it's "Oh my god, they're so lazy, they're so shiftless, they're so spoiled!"

As a restaurant manager, I faced this struggle. A lot of my servers were not comfortable returning to work when they opened restaurants back up. At the time, it was understandable so we let them stay on unemployment. They took advantage of this as restrictions lightened and hours became available but we couldn't really question someone's comfort level even if we suspected it was bogus. As the pandemic went on, we reached the point where if the work environment made you uncomfortable maybe it's time to part ways - not because we were insensitive but because the reality is the work environment won't change for the foreseeable future, so maybe restaurant's aren't "for them" anymore so to speak. When it came down it, I lost 4 or 5 people who refused to come to work and we eventually reported them to the state. 

My niece was living in NYC when Covid hit. Her restaurant job shut down indefinitely and she was on unemployment. She eventually moved back home and instead of getting a job there (plenty of jobs available there), she stayed on unemployment for several more months b/c she'd make more by not working than she would by getting a job. Recently moved to CA with some friends, but I don't know if she's working or still collecting unemployment.

A friend of mine was a bar/restaurant manager- once restaurants here opened back up again, a lot of her workers didn't come back. Again, they were making more in unemployment than they would by going back to work.

I'm sure this is incredibly regionally dependent. Neither of my teens had any issue getting hired this summer. My son is always in demand as a lifeguard and this year was crazy as it was so difficult to get certified as covid restrictions made the recertification/certification process a nightmare. He could literally pick his job and hours as they were begging for certified guards and a ton of pools had to reduce hours as they couldn't get enough guards. My daughter put out a couple applications and was hired at Starbucks, she didn't take a ton of shifts as she was also hired as a counselor at a day camp for $18 an hour - 40 hours a week. She found Starbucks to be incredibly accommodating with flexible hours and availability, but perhaps she just was lucky with her manager.

No, not when the unemployment bonus ends.  More than 30 states already stopped it.  There’s been a slight uptick in employment in those places, but not significant.  There has been an increase in vaccinations, too but for other reasons.  Primarily, people are scared of the delta variant.  Or, they were taking a wait and see approach.  There might be some people waiting for the full FDA approval.  Vaccinations might increase when more employers require it.  Regrettably, most of the people still unvaccinated have dug in their heels and refuse to get it.  The only way to convince them is a discussion with a primary health care provider or other trusted person in health care.  Or, if they’re required to get one for work or if we make life really inconvenient for them.