[everforward]

I don't think that's unavoidable, but businesses typically fail to correctly reassess the value of those employees.

If the business responded appropriately, I think people could be convinced to stay.

E.g. if they offered:

1: An instant promotion with raise for anyone not at the max level for an IC, to acknowledge that they are now the most knowledgeable people on that product.

2: Double pay until those slots are filled and newbies are trained.

3: A contract saying they get a month of PTO when the slots are filled and newbies trained.

4: Assurances that they are offering above-market rates to get the slots filled quickly (which should still be lower than the new rates for people who stayed).

What usually gets offered is pittances. A 10% raise to work 30% more hours. Maybe some flex time. It doesn't make sense for workers to stay, they can usually get better benefits and lower working hours by leaving anyways. Businesses need to offer substantially more than employees can get elsewhere.

[pjz]

I worked at a place where we had an open dev/support slot for multiple months to cope with increased load due to our success. In the meantime we all just did more support and less dev. My suggestion to management that the existing team split the salary of the open rec until it was filled (since we were doing the work anyway) was met with just short of outright laughter.

[cableshaft]

> What usually gets offered is pittances. A 10% raise to work 30% more hours.

At least in my instance, I've never seen the 10% raise, just the 30% more hours bit.

[jtbayly]

Especially when they are going to have to spend that much to get new hires in anyway, who still have to get caught up to speed, it seems like this would make a lot of sense.

But I can understand how it is difficult for a business leader to convince himself that this jump in cost is, in fact, required. Maybe the person will just stick around? (And indeed, they do fairly often.)