A team can look stable on paper while its employees are quietly considering their next move. People attend meetings, meet deadlines, and keep projects running. What the headcount report cannot show is whether they still see a future with the company.
That’s why employee turnover statistics need context. Resignations tell employers who has already left. Engagement surveys, job-search intentions, and employee experience research can reveal what’s happening among the people who are still there.
Recent research points to a complicated picture: U.S. quits declined in 2025, yet half of employees worldwide were watching for or actively seeking another job. Meanwhile, global employee engagement fell again. Fewer resignations don’t necessarily mean happier employees.
So, what should employers pay attention to in 2026? Beyond departure numbers, the research points to financial security, manager support, fragmented work, and uncertainty about AI. These factors don’t tell the whole story, but they offer a useful starting point for understanding why people stay, disengage, or start looking elsewhere.
Key employee turnover statistics for 2026
Here are nine findings from official labor-market data and research published in 2025 and 2026. Each measures something slightly different, from actual resignations to employee engagement and concerns about job security.
- 38 million quits in the U.S. in 2025. That’s 1.3 million fewer than in 2024. The decline shows that voluntary job departures slowed, but it doesn’t explain why employees chose to stay. (BLS)
- 60.6% of U.S. job separations were quits. Voluntary departures still accounted for most separations in 2025. Employers need to distinguish people choosing to leave from those affected by layoffs, retirements, and other changes.
- 50% of employees worldwide were watching for or actively seeking another job. Not everyone in this group will resign, but the finding suggests that staying employed and wanting to stay are two different things. (Gallup)
- Only 20% of employees worldwide were engaged at work in 2025. Gallup’s 2026 report recorded a decline from 21% in 2024 and 23% in 2023. Low engagement doesn’t automatically lead to turnover, but it raises questions about employees’ day-to-day experience. (Gallup)
- Manager engagement fell from 27% to 22%. Managers are dealing with their own engagement challenges. That’s worth attention because they’re also expected to support their teams, communicate changes, and help employees develop. (Gallup)
- 48% of employees and 52% of leaders said their work felt chaotic and fragmented. Microsoft’s 2025 survey points to a familiar problem: people can spend so much time coordinating work that getting the work done becomes harder. (Microsoft)
- 35% of workers felt overwhelmed at least once a week. Among Gen Z respondents, the figure reached 42%. Persistent overload is a reason to examine workloads, priorities, and staffing rather than simply asking employees to become more resilient. (PwC)
- 48% of Gen Z respondents and 46% of millennials didn’t feel financially secure. These findings from Deloitte’s 2025 survey are a reminder that culture and flexibility can’t replace fair pay and a reasonable level of financial stability. (Deloitte)
- More than six in ten Gen Z and millennial GenAI users worried that AI would eliminate jobs. These respondents also said the concern motivated them to seek work they considered safer from disruption. Technology is changing not only how people work, but also how they think about their career prospects.
A note on the numbers: These findings cover different populations, time periods, and measures. They shouldn’t be combined into a single turnover estimate. Together, however, they help explain why employers need to look beyond resignation totals.
1. U.S. quits declined, but voluntary departures remained substantial
U.S. employers recorded 38 million quits in 2025, a decrease of 1.3 million from the previous year. Voluntary quits accounted for 60.6% of all separations, while layoffs and discharges accounted for 33.8%. The remaining separations included other departures, such as retirements.
At first glance, fewer quits might look like good news for employers. But the numbers don’t tell us why people stayed.
There are two things worth keeping in mind.
First, the Bureau of Labor Statistics counts separation events. An employee who leaves more than one job during the year can appear more than once.
Second, a decline in quits doesn’t necessarily mean employees are more satisfied. People weight their current working conditions against the alternatives available to them. Some may stay because they enjoy their jobs. Others may be waiting for a better opportunity or avoiding the financial risk of changing employers.
For employers, the more useful question is whether lower turnover comes with improvements in workload, trust, career development, and job satisfaction. Departure figures alone can’t answer that.
What is the difference between turnover and quits?
Employee turnover generally refers to employees leaving an organization, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Quits are employee-initiated departures, as defined by the relevant statistical source.
The distinction matters. A company experiencing frequent resignations may have a retention problem. A company reporting many departures because of restructuring may be facing a different challenge. Treating these situations as the same problem can lead to the wrong response.
2. Half of employees worldwide were open to another job
According to Gallup’s 2025 World Poll, 50% of employees globally were watching for opportunities or actively seeking a different job.
This isn’t a turnover rate. Watching job listings isn’t the same as applying for a position, and looking for work doesn’t guarantee someone will resign.
Still, the finding highlights something employers can easily miss: an employee can remain in their role while becoming less certain about staying.
What might make someone consider leaving?
- Unclear expectations. Employees who aren’t sure what matters most can spend their time guessing instead of making progress.
- Limited manager support. People need a way to raise concerns, get answers, and understand what is expected of them.
- Few development opportunities. If employees can’t see a realistic next step, another employer may look more appealing.
- Unsustainable workloads. Constant urgency can make even a good job difficult to maintain.
- Pay and working conditions. A supportive team matters, but employees still need fair compensation and reasonable conditions.
These are questions worth investigating, not assumptions about why every employee considers leaving. The goal is to understand what makes staying worthwhile for the people who work there.
3. Global employee engagement fell to 20%
Gallup’s 2026 State of the Global Workplace report found that 20% of employees worldwide were engaged in 2025, down from 21% in 2024 and 23% in 2023.
Engagement and retention aren’t the same thing. An employee can feel disconnected from work and still stay for financial, family, or practical reasons. Someone else might enjoy their job but leave for a better opportunity.
So, what should employers look at beyond the engagement score?
Start with the everyday experience of getting the work done. Do employees understand how their work contributes to a larger goal? Can they make progress without constantly waiting for decisions or chasing information? Does anyone notice their contribution?
These questions help turn a broad engagement score into something a team can act on.
Collecting employee feedback is a useful first step, but it shouldn’t be the last one. If people repeatedly report unclear priorities or a lack of support, they need to see changes in hw work is organized and managed.
4. Managers are experiencing their own engagement problem
Global manager engagement dropped from 27% in 2024 to 22% in 2025, according to Gallup’s 2026 report.
Managers are expected to explain change, recognize contributions, resolve conflict, and help employees develop. But those responsibilities become harder when managers themselves lack clarity, time, or support.
There’s a practical lesson here. Telling managers to communicate more won’t solve much if they don’t know what’s happening or have no time to follow through.
Employers should look at a few things:
- Access to information. Do managers receive clear, timely explanations of organizational changes before they’re expected to discuss them with their teams?
- Administrative workload. How much time do routine tasks take away from supporting employees?
- Realistic priorities. Can managers meet their own targets while also making time for their teams?
- Training and support. Do they have the skills and resources to handle difficult conversations and help employees develop?
Managers influence the employee experience, but they’re employees, too. A retention strategy that ignores their working conditions may be missing part of the problem.
5. Nearly half of employees described work as chaotic and fragmented
Microsoft’s 2025 Work Trend Index found that 48% of employees and 52% of leaders said their work felt chaotic and fragmented. Its survey covered 31,000 knowledge workers across 31 markets.
The finding doesn’t establish how many resignations result from fragmented work. It does identify an everyday experience worth investigating.
Think about a task that starts in a chat conversation, gets discussed in a meeting, and ends up in a document nobody can find. Someone still has to confirm the decision, identify who’s responsible, and check whether the work gets done.
One missing detail might not seem like much. Repeat the process across dozens of tasks, and coordination starts taking time away from the work itself.
There’s also a human side to this. People need enough information and control to understand a task, act on it, and see progress. When context is scattered and responsibilities are unclear, even capable employees can feel ineffective.
A few practical changes can help:
- Record important decisions where the team can find them.
- Make task ownership and deadlines explicit.
- Keep relevant files and conversations accessible.
- Agree on which messages require an immediate response and which can wait.
The goal isn’t to add another process or tool for every problem. It’s to make work easier to understand and complete, without asking employees to spend half their day reconstructing what happened.
6. More than one-third of workers felt overwhelmed weekly
PwC’s 2025 Global Workforce Hopes and Fears Survey found that 35% of workers felt overwhelmed at least once a week. Among Gen Z respondents, that figure reached 42%. The survey included 49,843 workers across 48 countries and regions.
Feeling overwhelmed doesn’t automatically mean someone will resign. It’s not a clinical diagnosis, either. But it’s a useful signal that the way work is organized may need attention.
Before introducing another wellbeing initiative, employers should look at the work itself.
- How many priorities are treated as equally urgent?
- What happens when employees say they lack capacity?
- Are staffing levels appropriate for the workload?
- Can people disconnect outside their working hours?
- Which tasks or processes could be removed?
These questions matter because employers can’t solve every workload problem through better time management. Sometimes the issue is too much work, conflicting expectations, or lack of resources.
Wellbeing initiatives are more credible when employees can see that their employer also addressing the conditions creating pressure.
7. Financial insecurity remains part of the retention picture
Deloitte’s 2025 survey found that 48% of Gen Z respondents and 46% of millennials did not feel financially secure. These shares were higher than in its 2024 survey.
That finding is an important reminder for employers who focus exclusively on culture, purpose, or flexibility.
Employees may value their colleagues and meaningful work while still needing better pay, predictable hours, or greater stability. Financial pressure can also make career decisions more complicated. Leaving an unsatisfactory job may be appealing in theory, but risky when the next paycheck isn’t guaranteed.
Retention strategies should therefore consider compensation and material working conditions alongside management quality, development opportunities, and workplace culture.
Employers cannot determine an individual’s financial situation from a generational statistic. They can, however, review whether their pay practices, scheduling, and employment arrangements provide reasonable security.
A supportive culture matters. It just can’t compensate for every practical problem.
8. AI uncertainty is influencing career decisions
Deloitte reported that more than six in ten Gen Z and millennial GenAI users worried that generative AI would eliminate jobs. These respondents also said the concern motivated them to seek roles they considered safer from disruption.
The finding applies to surveyed GenAI users, not all workers. It also reflects reported concerns and motivations, rather than a measured number of AI-related resignations.
Still, it raises a question employers can’t ignore: what happens to employee confidence when the technology used at work is changing faster than the expectations around it?
Employees may wonder which responsibilities will change, what skills they’ll need, and whether their current role will still exist in a few years.
Leaders don’t need to have every answer. They do need to explain what’s already been decided, acknowledge what’s still uncertain, and give employees opportunities to ask questions. Training is more useful when it connects to the work people are actually expected to do.
Broad promises about innovation won’t settle much if employees don’t understand what the changes mean for them.
Clear explanations, realistic training, and honest conversations about the future can give employees a better basis for making career decisions.
Recognition and inclusion deserve attention, too
Deloitte’s research also found a gap between what younger workers expected from managers and what they experienced. 42% of Gen Zs and 41% of millennials believed managers had a responsibility to create a positive, inclusive culture. Only 22% and 21%, respectively, believed that was happening.
The finding points to a difference between what employees expect and what they experience. A positive culture can’t be established through occasional appreciation messages or statements about company values.
Employees need to see consistent behavior. That includes fair access to information, constructive feedback, acknowledgment of contributions, and a response when concerns are raised.
Recognition is most useful when it is specific enough to show that someone understands the work involved. Telling someone that they did a good job is one thing. Explaining how their work helped the team solve a problem shows that someone actually noticed the effort.
Managers play an important role here, but they need enough time and support to do it well.
How to use employee turnover statistics responsibly
External research provides context. Internal evidence helps an organization decide what to change.
A useful retention review combines several types of information:
- Departure data: voluntary and involuntary exits, tenure, role, location, and team.
- Employee feedback: workload, management support, development, fairness, and working conditions.
- Operational evidence: vacancies, overtime, changing responsibilities, and recurring coordination problems.
- Follow-up: whether actions taken after feedback actually improved employees’ experience.
It’s also important not to treat an engagement score or a stated intention to find another job as a prediction that a particular employee will leave. These measures describe broader patterns and reported experiences, not individual outcomes.
The point of collecting data isn’t to predict every resignation. It’s to identify problems early enough to do something about them.
Frequently asked questions
How do you calculate employee turnover rate?
For a defined period:
Employee turnover rate = (Number of employee departures ÷ Average employee headcount) × 100
For example, 12 departures from an average workforce of 120 employees produces a turnover rate of 10%. State whether the calculation includes all departures or voluntary exits only.
Is there a good employee turnover rate?
A useful benchmark depends on industry, role, location, and workforce structure. Compare equivalent measures and examine which departures are creating problems. An organization-wide average can conceal substantial differences between teams.
Does low turnover mean employees are happy?
Low turnover alone cannot establish employee satisfaction. Employees may stay for many reasons. Review departures alongside employee feedback, engagement, workload, and development opportunities.
Can better communication improve retention?
Clear communication is a practical area employers can improve, particularly around expectations, decisions, and organizational change. Its effect on retention should be evaluated within the organization, alongside pay, workload, management quality, and career opportunities.
What employers should take from the numbers
The most useful retention questions come before an employee hands in their notice.
Can people understand their priorities? Do managers have the time and information they need to support their teams? Is the workload sustainable? Do employees receive honest answers about changes that affect their future?
The 2026 employee turnover statistics offer reasons to examine each of these areas. They don’t provide a single explanation for why people leave, and they don’t prove that one intervention will solve the problem.
What they do offer is a starting point. Listen to employees, look for patterns in the data, and address the problems people encounter in their working day. That’s a more useful approach to retention than assuming a stable headcount means everything is fine.
