logo
Build A Bridge: Why Every Company Needs An On-Ramp Strategy For Former Employees

Build A Bridge: Why Every Company Needs An On-Ramp Strategy For Former Employees

Forbes6 hours ago

Employees leave for many reasons—but often want to return. Re-employment strategies are a smart, ... More low-cost way to build a more loyal, future-ready workforce.
Career paths are no longer linear. Not only are employees of all ages changing careers and starting over, but many are stepping away from work altogether. Whether for caregiving, mental health, personal growth and development or simply a reset, some of the best employees choose to take a break. What many of them want, however, is a way to return to work when the time is right. At the same time, many employers struggle to fill vacant positions. Re-employment options are one way to address both challenges.
Employers that make onramping former employees a possibility unlock a hidden asset to talent sustainability–experienced, high-performing, values-aligned talent ready to re-engage. While the last few decades have seen return to work programs focused on mid-career professionals, particularly parents re-entering after child-rearing or caregiving responsibilities, re-entry programs for retirees are quickly emerging. The reality is that workers of all ages and life stages sometimes want or need to step out of the workplace.
The Business Case for Rehiring Former Employees
In March 2025, rehires (also known as boomerang employees) made up 35 percent of new hires, up from 31 percent a year earlier, according to ADP Research. There's a clear reason why rehires are on the rise–a shrinking, ageing talent market. Increased longevity, combined with decades-long declines in birth rates–a demographic duo that challenges talent sustainability strategies worldwide.
To offset the decreasing talent pipeline and knowledge drain, leaders are focused on new models for attracting and retaining talent. The benefits of rehiring former employees in good standing make a strong case for talent sustainability. From easing the burden and cost of recruitment to boosting brand reputation, rehiring former employees makes good business sense.
Re-employment is faster, not only in terms of interview time and background checks required but also because employee data may still be stored in the system. Rehires are also faster to onboard because they already understand the company culture. 'The boomerang's foundational understanding of the social systems that underpin the organization gives them a clear advantage over new hires who have to learn these nuances from the ground up,' according to MIT Sloan. 'This is especially true in large organizations with complex systems, divisions, and hierarchies.' Studies conducted by Harvard Business Review suggest that re-hiring former employees can save up to 50% in recruitment expenses.
Companies invest a lot in employee training and development, so keeping the door open for their return saves money. Returning employees allow a company to recoup some of its previous investment–not only in recruiting but also in training and development, according to one study. Aimed at helping companies reduce the expense of high turnover, the study concluded that a cost-effective method was to keep the door open to rehiring valuable workers who leave. Rehires are typically more satisfied and more committed than external hires and therefore stay longer.
When employees feel a sense of loyalty and belonging, they are 167% more likely to recommend their company as a great place to work to others–increasing reputation exponentially–internally and externally. 'Returning employees reinforce your company culture and validate leadership effectiveness,' writes Carol Warner. 'Their choice to come back sends a strong signal of confidence that can elevate overall morale.'
In other words, onramping former employees is a lower cost, high loyalty approach to building a resilient workforce that caters to employees of all ages and life stages.
How to Structure a Re-Employment Option
To ensure fairness and build a credible program, clearly communicate the eligibility criteria via multiple internal channels, specifically voluntary or redundancy exits of employees in good standing, based on performance and conduct. The more flexible the company is with its return timeline–for example, up to 10 years–the larger the talent pool.
The standard process for the exit interview should include a reminder that a future on-ramp is a possibility. Before employees leave, have them join any alum groups so they can receive current job openings and company news.
Make yearly calls to former employees to gauge their interest in a possible return. Offer reskilling pathways for those who may want a different type of job. Keep data on the percentage of employees that express interest and successfully return. And how long they stay once back onboard. Share stories internally to help normalize the employee rehires and build internal morale.
Build a Bridge and They Will Come
Instead of off-ramps as a final exit, companies that offer re-employment options can increase employee trust and belonging while also future-proofing their workforce. Not only does this strategy acknowledge high-performing employees but also the personal demands of life.
In a world where careers stretch longer than ever and talent shortages are the norm, organizations can't afford to lose good employees permanently. By giving employees the time they want and need to step away while creating pathways to return, companies build more flexible, resilient and loyal teams.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Wall Street shivers over ‘hot commie summer' after Mamdani's success
Wall Street shivers over ‘hot commie summer' after Mamdani's success

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Wall Street shivers over ‘hot commie summer' after Mamdani's success

When Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old self-described socialist, won New York's mayoral Democratic nomination last week over a seasoned but scandal-scarred veteran, the city's financial elite had a meltdown. This was the start of 'hot commie summer' in the city, New York hedgevfund billionaire Daniel Loeb posted to X. John Catsimatidis, billionaire CEO of grocery chain Gristedes and friend of Donald Trump, warned on Fox Business: 'If the city of New York is going socialist, I will definitely close, or sell, or move.' CNBC financial news channel anchor Joe Kernen compared New York to Batman's crime-riddled Gotham. ' They're taking Wall Streeters and making them walk out onto the ice in the East River, And, and then they fall through. I mean there is a class warfare that's going on.' Related: 'New Yorkers have been betrayed': can Zohran Mamdani become the most progressive mayor in the city's history? With five months until the mayoral election proper, the 1% are revolting, led by loquacious billionaire hedge funder Bill Ackman, who said he and others in the finance industry are ready to commit 'hundreds of millions of dollars' into an opposing campaign. 'The risk/reward of running for mayor over the next 132 days is extremely compelling as the cost in time and energy is small and the upside is enormous.' Ackman said he was 'gravely concerned' because he believed the leftwing candidate's policies would trigger an exodus of the wealth that would destroy the tax base and undermine New York's public services. The city under Mamdani, he posted on Wedneday, 'is about to become much more dangerous and economically unviable.' In 2021, the top 1% of New York City taxpayers paid 48% of taxes – up from 40% in 2019, according to a report from the city's finance department. But at the same time, New York has become an increasingly unaffordable city for those outside the 1% – especially for people of color. In a post a day later, Ackman said: 'The ability for New York City to offer services for the poor and needy, let alone the average New Yorker, is entirely dependent on New York City being a business-friendly environment and a place where wealthy residents are willing to spend 183 days and assume the associated tax burden. Unfortunately, both have already started making arrangements for the exits.' 'Terror is the feeling,' Kathryn Wylde, the chief executive of the Partnership for New York City, which represents top business leaders, told CNBC on Tuesday. Gerard Filitti, senior legal counsel at the Lawfare Project, a pro-Israel thinktank, non-profit and litigation fund, and a New Yorker with strong ties to the finance industry, said Mamdani's nomination 'marked a dangerous turning point for the city'. 'There's big concern that businesses and the economy will be hurt. There's already a move by business leaders and entrepreneurs to consider a move outside of the city, taking jobs and tax dollars with them, at time when the front-running candidate promises to make even more change that could destroy the economy,' Filitti said. The anger was not necessarily purely economic. Wall Street's decision makers have been shaken after seeing their preferred candidate, Andrew Cuomo, pushed aside despite the millions they poured into his campaign. Fix the City, Cuomo's political action committee (Pac), raised a record $25m to help see off Mamdani. Former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg alone gave $8.3m to the Pac. 'These are billionaires who are giving hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars to Andrew Cuomo precisely because they know we are going to tax them to make life a little bit more affordable here, in the most expensive city in the United States,' Mamdani told the New York Times before the election. 'They know they can count on Cuomo because Cuomo has a track record of rewarding the political donors.' New York's moneyed class argues it's not about them but the future of the city. 'When you look at what New York City is and has been historically – a bastion of trading and the center of world capitalism, the engine of economic growth and prosperity, the stock market, an the inspiration for other world economies to develop their markets and economies in line with New York – and now what were seeing is an economy and quality of life that is slowly deteriorating,' said Filitti. 'Now we have a front-running Democrat candidate who is promising even more radical change and that change is a threat to the structure of New York and the way people identify with New York City,' Filitti added. It's an argument the rich have made many times before. Many of the 1% threatened to leave after former mayor Bill de Blasio called for raising their taxes to pay for the losses the city experienced after the Covid pandemic. Wall Street poured millions into mayor Eric Adam's 2021 campaign for office to see off more progressive candidates. They won those fights; this time, they lost. A former Wall Street CEO told Politico: 'These titans of Wall Street and titans of finance are used to getting their way. They didn't get their way. They got the opposite of their way. They got a guy who couldn't be more disliked by them – and vice versa.' Wall Street's vision for the city is probably far from that shared by many other residents of a sprawling metropolis that traditionally has played host to vibrant immigrant communities from all over the world, many of them poor. It is of course, host to the Statue of Liberty on whose base is written the famous lines: 'Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.' Manhattan was also the birthplace of the Occupy Wall Street protests in the US back in 2011, which occupied the downtown Zucotti Square – blocks from Wall Street – and eventually saw protests spread across the rest of the country and the world. Democratic progressives were quick to celebrate Mamdani's victory. 'Your dedication to an affordable, welcoming, and safe New York City where working families can have a shot has inspired people across the city. Billionaires and lobbyists poured millions against you and our public finance system. And you won,' wrote representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, another progressive who won out against a more establishment candidate. Another longtime critic of Wall Street and the billionaire class also saw a change in politics as usual. 'The American people are beginning to stand up and fight back. We have seen that in the many Fighting Oligarchy events that we've done around the country that have drawn huge turnouts. We have seen that in the millions of people who came out for the No Kings rallies that took place this month in almost every state. And yesterday, we saw that in the Democratic primary in New York City,' senator Bernie Sanders wrote in The Guardian. Millions will now be spent attacking Mamdani. But he has seen off one well-funded attempt to derail his campaign. Whether or not his campaign has the momentum to last until November, remains to be seen. But Wall Streeters have been put on notice that New York, and the changing nature of the Democratic party, may no longer be as amenable to their interests, or their vision for New York.

Graham says Trump megabill reduces Medicaid growth: ‘We haven't cut Medicaid'
Graham says Trump megabill reduces Medicaid growth: ‘We haven't cut Medicaid'

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Graham says Trump megabill reduces Medicaid growth: ‘We haven't cut Medicaid'

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) claimed President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' does not cut Medicaid but reduces its growth. During a Sunday interview on ABC's 'This Week,' Graham was asked about Sen. Thom Tillis's (R-N.C.) warning that significant changes to Medicaid would be'devastating to North Carolina.' Tillis voted against the bill. Graham said that while he respects Tillis, he said that lawmakers instead 'limited the growth of Medicaid.' 'I respect him a lot, but here's what we're doing when it comes to Medicaid: It's grown 50 percent in five years. It's about to take over Medicare,' he said. 'What we've done is we limited the growth of Medicaid to 6 percent for two years. After that, 4 percent growth. We haven't cut Medicaid. We've reduced the growth.' When asked about Trump's heavy criticism of Tillis, with the president even threatening to back a primary challenger running against the North Carolina senator, Graham said Trump 'runs hot' but that 'he can forgive.' 'I've been on the receiving end of that,' he said. 'He runs hot … and he can forgive.' 'We're trying to do hard things that should be done and have to be done,' he added. 'We're $37 trillion in debt. Medicaid has grown 50 percent in five years. It's about to take over Medicare. What we've done is limited the growth to 6 percent for two years, 4 percent after that. So, Medicaid is not cut.' Graham's comments follow Senate Republicans' narrow vote to advance a sprawling 1,000-page bill on Saturday despite the opposition of two GOP lawmakers. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump says there's a TikTok buyer that he'll reveal in ‘about two weeks'
Trump says there's a TikTok buyer that he'll reveal in ‘about two weeks'

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump says there's a TikTok buyer that he'll reveal in ‘about two weeks'

President Donald Trump said in an interview that aired Sunday there is a 'buyer for TikTok,' teasing an announcement to come in 'about two weeks.' 'We have a buyer for TikTok by the way. I think I'll need probably China approval, and I think President Xi will probably do it,' the president said on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo.' Asked who the buyer is going to be, Trump said, 'I'll tell you in about two weeks.' 'It's a group of very wealthy people,' the president added. It's been about five months since a law requiring TikTok to be banned in the United States unless it was sold off by its China-based parent company, ByteDance, technically went into effect. But thanks to President Donald Trump's promises not to enforce the law, neither of those things have happened, aside from an approximately 14-hour blackout in January. Trump has instead signed three orders delaying enforcement on the ban. As a June 19 deadline to enforce the sale-or-ban law approached earlier this month, Trump granted TikTok a 90-day extension. The deadline for its parent company ByteDance to hand over control of TikTok's US operations is now September 17. The delay raised questions about the status of a deal that could secure TikTok's long-term future in the US. The Chinese government has offered little public indication that it would be willing to approve a sale beyond suggesting that any deal could not include TikTok's 'algorithm,' which has been called the app's secret sauce. In April, a deal that would have transferred majority control of TikTok's US operations to American ownership was nearly finalized. But it fell apart after Trump announced additional tariffs on China, forcing the president to announce another 75-day delay to keep the app operational in the United States. 'There are key matters to be resolved. Any agreement will be subject to approval under Chinese law,' TikTok parent company ByteDance said after Trump's tariff policy stalled progress on the deal in April. Former president Joe Biden last year signed the sale-or-ban law last year to go into effect January 19. TikTok briefly took itself offline, sparking outcry from creators, but quickly came back after Trump signed his first order delaying the ban's enforcement by 75 days. It was one of his first acts as president, made in hopes of reaching a deal to keep the app 'alive.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store