What's 'The Great Hunkering Down' and why are benefits and perks at risk?

• Key Insight: Learn how the "Great Hunkering Down" enables firms to retract perks while retaining staff.  
• What's at Stake: Reduced benefits and return-to-office mandates could amplify future attrition and costs.  
• Forward Look: Prepare for intensified talent competition when mobility and hiring rebound.
  Source: Bullets generated by AI with editorial review
  

Over the last few years, workplace trends like the Great Resignation and quiet quitting have reshaped employee-employer dynamics. Now, a new trend is emerging and it's threatening employees' access to their favorite workplace perks.

Currently, the U.S. is experiencing a decade-low quit rate of 2% as workers hold onto their jobs, according to findings released earlier this month by Economist Enterprise. The move to stay at their companies isn't necessarily out of love for their work, but rather out of fear of losing job security in a new trend coined as the "Great Hunkering Down" — and many organizations are using it as an excuse to cut costs. 

"This trend seems to go hand in hand with companies withdrawing certain benefits and perks," said Peter Duris, CEO of career services company Kickresume. "Perhaps it's because they no longer have to offer them to stay competitive, now that there's less movement of workers between different employers."

Read more: RTO mandates aren't flexible enough for employees

It's not just gym memberships, in-office catering and summer Fridays being nixed, Duris said. According to a new report from workplace insights platform Axios, 53% of employers are cutting back on benefits, with 61% reducing bonuses and another 53% are pulling back on raises. Even benefits that became standard post-COVID like fertility subsidies and 401(k) matches are on shakier ground, the report found. Deloitte and Zoom are among the largest companies to pull back on previous benefit efforts, with Deloitte recently trimming vacation time and fertility support. 

Remote work is the clearest example of this, Duris said. After promising flexibility and hybrid workplaces in an effort to retain employees, many companies are using the "Great Hunkering Down" to reduce the number of days employees can work from home. And while it may seem like a viable strategy now, Duris warned those responsible for perks and benefits such as benefits and HR leaders that they will have to choose between saving money and preserving headcount after the trend inevitably passes. 

"Workers who know certain benefits are on the decline might be on high alert for these changes within their companies — and employers should be sensitive to that," Duris said. "[This] may be a reason [for employees] to start looking. However, the smart move is going to be to line up their next role before leaving the current one, not after."

When the pendulum swings back

In the long term, the impact on employees depends on what those perks were, Duris said, like whether they were just nice-to-haves or they genuinely had a big impact on people's well-being at work. For example, employees who are now being asked to come into the office more frequently might be adding hours of travel onto their day, putting them at a greater risk of burning out. In a recent survey of job seekers and employees, KickResume found that two-thirds of people have already taken unannounced time off work before, with the top two reasons being burnout or mental health and personal or family issues. How leaders strike the balance between keeping a stricter budget and continuing to support their employee base will soon become critical, Duris said. 

Read more: Why Gen Z men are taking more mental health leave than their older colleagues

"If you're planning a major policy change at your organization, it's always worth communicating it compassionately," Duris said. "Consulting the team beforehand also gives them a chance to offer feedback and help shape a plan that works for everyone."

Businesses that don't offer an attractive benefits package might not see a wave of people quitting immediately. But when the pendulum swings back and the moment the right opportunity appears, employees will leave, Duris said. 

"That's why it's worth protecting the perks that genuinely matter," Duris said. "Cutting them might trim costs on paper, but losing experienced people — and the expense of recruiting and training replacements — usually costs far more than was ever saved."