Most job switchers are making a change in career: Top 5 fields they're leaving.
Most job switchers are making a change in career: Top 5 fields they're leaving.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Bolster these work skills amid the AI boom
With new college graduates entering the workforce, these are key skills employers will look for amid the AI boom.
Nowadays, when Americans switch jobs, they're not just making changes around the edges.
Sixty-four percent of workers who switched jobs from 2022 to 2024 also changed careers, according to an Indeed study of 35 million profiles on the leading job site.
Among the fields workers left at the highest rates: hospitality, and arts and entertainment.
Those fostering the most loyalty: nursing and software development,
Experts largely attribute the trend to shifts that took root during the COVID-19 pandemic, which triggered 22 million layoffs as well as new perspectives about work.
On a practical level, the health crisis spawned unprecedented labor shortages that allowed workers to hop among jobs for better pay, benefits and less tangible rewards.
'People could really change jobs if they wanted to,' said Allison Shrivastava, an economist with the Indeed Hiring Lab, the job site's research arm. As a result, she said, 'There was a lot more opportunity for people to change careers.'
How did COVID-19 affect the workforce?
COVID-19 also sparked deeper transformations. During the crisis, many workers burned out as they toiled long hours to fill in for idled colleagues or grew more aware of life's fragility. That spurred a desire among many Americans for better work-life balance, remote or hybrid work set-ups and greater job fulfilment.
'People really started wanting to align their careers with their personal visions and values,' said Toni Frana, a career expert with FlexJobs, a job search site specializing in remote and hybrid jobs and roles with flexible hours.
While the job-hopping frenzy known as the Great Resignation has faded along with the pandemic, the fresh attitudes about career fulfilment and work-life balance seem to have endured.
According to a FlexJobs survey for USA TODAY in February, 24% of Americans said they tried to change occupations the previous year, 6% did so and another 39% said they're looking to make a switch this year. That's nearly 70% of workers changing careers, according to the online survey of 2,293 respondents, conducted by SurveyMonkey.
What are the reasons for career change?
The top reason: to work remotely, cited by 67% of respondents, followed by better work-life balance (52%), more meaningful or fulfilling career (48%) and higher pay (48%), the FlexJobs poll revealed.
Neither Indeed nor FlexJobs has previous data on the share of career switchers years ago. But Labor Department figures suggest the practice was less common. In January 2024, workers had been with their current employer a median of 3.9 years, down from 4.1 years in January 2022 and the shortest median tenure since January 2002.
Generally, the fewest workers switch from and to occupations that require formal credentials, licenses, training and specialized skills, according to Indeed. And there's more turnover in fields with lower entry barriers and, typically, lower salaries.
Here are the top five occupations Americans left from 2022 to 2024, according to the Indeed survey:
Hospitality and tourism
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 91%.
Key reason: There's not much upward mobility in the field, Indeed's Shrivastava said.
Do you work for a great organization? Nominate it as one of America's Top Workplaces.
And many workers are in lower-wage positions that have long hours and unpredictable schedules, according to Payactiv, a financial services company.
Arts and Entertainment
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 86%
Key reason: Jobs such as actors and authors are appealing but the chances of success are low.
'A lot of people may try their hand at it' but then leave for more stable occupations, Shrivastava said.
Child care
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 86%
Key reason: The field can be rewarding. But, 'It's a lot of work for not a lot of pay,' Shrivastava said.
During the pandemic, the sector laid off or furloughed 373,000 employees, or 36% of its workforce.
Logistics support
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 86%
Key reason: Supply chain troubles during the pandemic led many logistics workers to quit for better pay and less stress, according to Intelligent Audit, a logistics company.
Personal care and home health
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 86%
Key reason: While the job can be rewarding, many people leave because of low pay, long hours and inconsistent schedules, according to CareVoyant, which makes software for the industry.
Here are the bottom five fields workers left from 2022 to 2024:
Nursing
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 28%
Key reason: There's lots of demand for nurses, wages have risen and few nurses leave once they've invested the time and money to earn nursing degrees, Shrivastava said.
Software development
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 37%
Key reason: Software developers have relatively high salaries and job satisfaction levels, Shrivastava said. It's also a low-stress job with good work-life balance, according to U.S. News rankings.
Dental
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 38%
Key reason: The pay is good, the investment in schooling is significant and skills aren't transferable to other occupations, Shrivastava said.
Therapy
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 51%
Key reason: Occupational therapists and speech pathologists earn a comfortable living and have high job satisfaction levels, Shrivastava said.
Accounting
Share of workers leaving in the two-year period: 52%
Key reason: Accountants have specialized skills, stable work environments and good work-life balance, Shrivastava said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
Michael Goodwin: Dems agree NYC is too expensive — and voters can't afford them being in charge
If there is a single point of agreement among all the Democrats running for mayor, it's that New York is too damn expensive. They uniformly call it an 'affordability crisis' and pledge to do something about it if elected. They are largely correct — the cost of living in New York has become absurdly high. Advertisement Although part of the trend grew out of the inflation sparked by massive spending by federal, state and local governments during the COVID era, there is also a long history of Gotham being one of most expensive places in the nation to live. A study shows that, in comparison to the national average, food prices in the five boroughs are about 22% higher, while housing is 278% more expensive. Making ends meet The United Way finds that basic costs for city households have risen twice as fast as the median income and estimates that about half of them need help from the government, friends or family just to make ends meet. Advertisement As Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani recently told The New York Times, 'There are far too many New Yorkers who do not know if they will be able to call themselves that next year, who do not know if they will be able to afford their rent, or their child care, their groceries, or even their MetroCard.' True to his socialist affiliations, Mamdani is promising the longest list of freebies, but his rivals have all joined the spree. Even Andrew Cuomo, often regarded as the most centrist of the bunch and the leader according to polls, is no shrinking violet in the giveaway games. The candidates' promises to address the problem sound very nice — until you realize that nearly everything they are offering would ultimately drive the sky-high cost of living even higher. Advertisement Already that burden is one of the top reasons why New York City and state lead America in losing residents to lower-cost jurisdictions. Congestion pricing is the latest example of how and why the cost of living here keeps rising. If the candidates all want to raise prices even higher, they should support a joint slogan: 'Dear Voters, If you're not broke yet, just wait.' The problem is that government compassion doesn't come cheap. Advertisement In fact, it's outrageously expensive. That's certainly true in the case at hand. The candidates' 'solutions' are just promises to give away more stuff to more people, such as free bus service, free child care, free this and free that. It's all wrapped in the language of compassion for the poor and working class. But what the lefty Dems leave out of the conversation is an honest explanation about where the money would come from to pay for all their added goodies, and what the impact would be of an expanded redistribution scheme to deliver them. Don't be fooled by the lack of details. That's intentional because the numbers would be frightening. Take away to give away But hiding the truth doesn't change the fact that because City Hall can't print money, it will first have to take more from residents and businesses if it is going to give away more. Advertisement Consider the obvious impact on businesses. If they are taxed more, most will make up for it by raising prices on their customers, cut the pay of their workers or reduce the number of workers. When a business goes broke, the city gets no taxes and the workers have no income. Because higher taxes always impose a trickle-down cost on some people, a similar outcome is true if the government raises income taxes on individuals, sales taxes or property taxes. Advertisement Somebody somewhere along the line is going to feel the pinch of every added dollar the city takes to give away to someone it declares more deserving. For those forced to pay more, the 'solution' to the problem means their cost of living is going to get even higher. That's why the candidates' plans need to be seen in light of the current budget. As it stands, City Hall will raise and spend a whopping $112.4 billion this year — nearly as much as the entire state of Florida. Advertisement New York state, meanwhile, will raise and spend $255 billion, with much of that money coming to the city. Additional agencies, such as the MTA, have their own budgets, which spend tens of billions more. Clearly the problem isn't a shortage of money to spend. Advertisement The problem is a shortage of responsible spending. Thus raising spending for 'new needs,' as the politicians call their freebies, by hiking taxes and fees at this point is almost certain to create as many problems as it solves. There is still time for the Dems to lay out a plan to actually reduce government costs. The first debate was little more than a bidding game to see who could promise more new giveaways and most vehemently denounce Donald Trump while pledging to 'resist' his presidency. The second and final mayoral debate, required by the NYC Campaign Finance Board, will take place Thursday, with primary day falling on June 24. It's incumbent on the moderators to demand that Mamdani and all the others explain, with specifics, where they would get added funds and who would pay them. Glib lines like taxing the 'top 1%' mean nothing because those families already pay inordinate amounts of the city's personal income tax. According to a city comptroller report, in 2021 the top 1% — about 6,000 families who reported incomes of $1 million or more — paid a whopping 48% of the city's total income tax haul. It's neither fair nor sensible to demand they pay more, when packing up and leaving altogether is proving to be so popular. Leftward lurch Unfortunately, we haven't heard much of a different message from other candidates in the race, including Mayor Adams, who is running as an independent. With GOP candidate Curtis Sliwa widely considered not viable, there is so far no check and balance on the Dems' leftward lurch. The vast majority of their spendthrift City Council candidates and those seeking other offices on the ballot are proving to be automatic supporters of larger and more expensive programs. National conversations about cutting taxes and reducing government waste, fraud and abuse have yet to find meaningful support in New York. That must start to change this week. Libs' stupidity taking a toll There they go again: Another major media outlet is confusing victimhood with the consequences of wrongdoing. The bleeding heart Boston Globe writes, 'Unpaid fees jeopardize thousands of Mass. driver's licenses,' saying, 'Thousands of Massachusetts drivers each year face the possibility of losing their legal authority to drive unless debts unrelated to road safety are paid in full.' Among the debts it cites are tolls the drivers evaded. Here's a crazy idea: The drivers could pay the tolls and keep their licenses. Why is that so hard?
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why are more Americans filing for Social Security benefits?
(NewsNation) — More older Americans are claiming their Social Security benefits earlier, a potentially alarming trend that could significantly reduce the income many rely on in their golden years. As of May, individual retirement claims are up 13% in the current fiscal year compared to the same period last year, an increase of nearly 320,000 claims, according to the latest Social Security data. To put the recent surge in perspective: From 2012 to 2024, retirement claims rose by an average of just 3% per year, according to an analysis by the Urban Institute, a research group. Plan to garnish Social Security checks for student loan debt paused Part of the recent uptick is due to more retirees claiming Social Security benefits earlier, a choice that permanently reduces their monthly checks if done before full retirement age. Jack Smalligan, a senior policy fellow at the Urban Institute, described the increase in earlier claims as 'disconcerting' because it can impact people's 'long-term retirement security.' 'For most individuals, delaying the time that they claim Social Security is a smart retirement decision,' Smalligan said. While demographic factors, such as an aging population, have contributed to the rise, increased concern over the Trump administration's handling of the system may also help explain the surge. Social Security data shows the spike in monthly claims was especially pronounced in November and January — the month Trump was elected and the month he took office. Polling shows public concern about Social Security is now at a 15-year high, an uptick that coincides with the Trump administration's plans to slash the agency's workforce. The president and advisers, like Elon Musk, have made unfounded claims about rampant fraud within the system, while website outages have also caused confusion. Smalligan pointed to the recent surge in calls to Social Security and the rise in field office visits as further signs of growing anxiety. At the same time, top Democrats, including former President Joe Biden, have amplified those fears with misleading claims that give the impression Americans' monthly retirement checks may not arrive. Democrats sound alarm on Social Security as Biden returns to stage Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has warned that Trump and Musk are coming for people's benefits and hiding behind bogus fraud claims to justify stealing people's checks. The political rhetoric appears to be resonating, but it's also fueling the broader uncertainty, potentially causing real harm. During a meeting in March, Social Security officials said that 'fearmongering has driven people to claim benefits earlier,' The Wall Street Journal reported. Overall, 52% of Americans say they worry a 'great deal' about the Social Security system, up from 43% in 2024, according to Gallup. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, that figure rises to 65% — a 30-point increase from the previous year. 'No one's scheming right now to privatize Social Security or dismantle it … that type of fearmongering is not helpful,' said Charles Blahous, a researcher at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University who specializes in Social Security. While Social Security does face long-term financial challenges, the system isn't going away, and future policy uncertainty isn't a good reason to claim benefits early today, Blahous said. Trump has repeatedly promised not to cut Social Security benefits, while Democrats argue that staffing reductions will make it harder for retirees to access services, undermining the system in a different way. Other factors, unrelated to political rhetoric, could also be driving the rise in retirement claims. There are three key reasons for the uptick, according to a Social Security official: The start of the peak 65 baby boom, a massive surge of Americans turning 65 years old Implementation of the Social Security Fairness Act, which increased benefits for certain workers receiving pensions from jobs not covered by Social Security Improved outreach notifying spouses of Social Security beneficiaries that they may be eligible for a higher benefit Blahous acknowledged that the three factors are real but thinks 'the jury's still out' on how much of the recent rise is due to anxiety about the program's future. Another possibility is that stock market volatility, partly driven by Trump's ever-changing trade policies, temporarily lowered the balances of millions of retirement accounts and prompted some older Americans to claim their more reliable Social Security benefits earlier than planned. Americans can start collecting Social Security retirement benefits as early as age 62, but that doesn't mean they should. Claiming before full retirement age permanently reduces monthly benefits, which is why waiting often makes more financial sense. It's even more concerning when that decision is driven by fear about the program's future rather than a careful assessment of personal circumstances. 'It's basically an irrevocable decision, which is all the more reason why people should be very cautious about when they make it,' Blahous said. When is the best age to take Social Security? Someone who turns 62 in 2025 would see their monthly benefit lowered by about 30% versus what it would be at their full retirement age of 67. On the other hand, those who delay claiming until after their full retirement age receive an 8% increase for each year they wait, up to age 70. That can amount to thousands of dollars. In 2025, the maximum Social Security benefit is $2,831 for someone retiring at 62, but it rises to $5,108 for those retiring at 70. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
BCSD to use general fund to finish HVAC projects after US Department of Education rescinds spending extension
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — The Bakersfield City School District is expected to fund the remaining $22 million balance for its HVAC improvement projects through its general fund after federal officials abruptly canceled a previously approved COVID-19 fund spending extension in March. The HVAC upgrade and chiller replacement projects seek to replace the chiller-based heating and cooling systems at schools with new HVAC systems, which provide 'more energy-efficient and reliable climate control' while also improving indoor air quality for students and staff, according to BCSD spokesperson Tabatha Mills. The project is ongoing and under active construction at eight schools: Munsey Elementary Fremont Elementary Wayside Elementary Washington Middle School Horace Mann Elementary Mt. Vernon Elementary Pioneer Drive Elementary Roosevelt Elementary Mark Luque lands new job after surprise resignation as head of Bakersfield City School District These projects were launched when the school district received funding through the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief III program, which was meant to support American schools as they address the impacts of the pandemic, according to Mills. The remaining project balance is $21,912,159, according to the agenda for the board meeting set for Tuesday. On March 28, the United States Department of Education rescinded its decision to extend the spending deadline for ESSER III for school districts that applied and were approved to get an extension. While local education agencies like BCSD who were approved for an extension had until March 2026 to liquidate all its received funding, the Department of Education changed the deadline to March 28, 2025. KHSD to consider banning discriminatory teaching material in proposed revision to policy U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon announced the new deadline in a letter addressing state education chiefs on the same day as the new deadline, saying they 'ran the risk' of getting their extension request denied by not meeting the formal deadline in January. 'Extending deadlines for COVID-related grants, which are in fact taxpayer funds, years after the COVID pandemic ended is not consistent with the Department's priorities and thus not a worthwhile exercise of its discretion,' McMahon said. This change prevents BCSD from finishing the HVAC improvement projects using federal grants. At the board meeting May 27, the board approved the updated ESSER III Expenditure Plan. Through the updated plan, the funding source for the HVAC updates was moved from ESSER to the district's general fund to successfully complete the projects. Never miss a story: Make your homepage This shift in funding will not result in any increase to BCSD's general fund budget and the board is not looking to approve new spendings regarding these projects at tonight's meeting, according to Mills. If approved, BCSD will report the remaining construction commitments as of June 30 in its financial statement, Mills said. The projects are all expected to be completed in the next fiscal year, according to the agenda. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
