Most of our labour laws and policies are based on long term employment, as close to permanent as possible.
There are several "stories" we could formulate, though it's hard to know which dynamic is significant or dominant in the overall scheme of things. That's why it's hard to get conclusive results from ex post analysis (expiremental study is rarely possible).
Maybe young people (on a faster learning/earning curve) switch jobs more often. Maybe underpaying employers have higher attrition rates. Maybe people only leave if the prospective job offers a big raise (causation is reversed).
There is also the question of lead indicators in changing markets. 6-7 years ago, new employees (where I live) were earning far less than old ones. The labour market was terrible, so you could hire new employees for cheap. Older employees were earning salaries based on raises they received during the boom years, 2-3 years previous. As the market changed, the newer employees got bigger raises. In this case, the dominant ( I think) dynamic for about 3-4 years was a slow gradual reaction to a big market shock, because salaries are negotiated iregularly an seldom adjusted downward.
There are several "stories" we could formulate, though it's hard to know which dynamic is significant or dominant in the overall scheme of things. That's why it's hard to get conclusive results from ex post analysis (expiremental study is rarely possible).
Maybe young people (on a faster learning/earning curve) switch jobs more often. Maybe underpaying employers have higher attrition rates. Maybe people only leave if the prospective job offers a big raise (causation is reversed).
There is also the question of lead indicators in changing markets. 6-7 years ago, new employees (where I live) were earning far less than old ones. The labour market was terrible, so you could hire new employees for cheap. Older employees were earning salaries based on raises they received during the boom years, 2-3 years previous. As the market changed, the newer employees got bigger raises. In this case, the dominant ( I think) dynamic for about 3-4 years was a slow gradual reaction to a big market shock, because salaries are negotiated iregularly an seldom adjusted downward.