Help – We Need Help!  The Forever Labor Shortage

To successfully help clients you must first have a trained staff to work with them. And we all know that turnover disrupts successful service delivery.


Even before Covid there had been a struggle to both recruit and retain the trained line staff we have needed to deliver our services. This is more and more members of generations Y and Z. Covid amplified that need. Since Covid our younger generations have become more mobile and more outspoken about what they require from an employer.


The problem is most organizations, both nonprofit and public, have continued to run their human resources processes the same today as before Covid. 


There will be HR Directors and agency leaders who will challenge that statement declaring how their have changed their processes in this way or that. 


The truth is we need to shift our framework from what do we, the agency, need from you to  what do the incoming Gen Y & Z need from our agency so they will close to come to work for us and stay.


 "The labor shortage we're dealing with today is likely to remain this way — and perhaps get even worse," says Jay Denton, the chief analytics officer at LaborIQ, which provides salary analysis to employers. "It's going to continue to be really hard to attract people and get them into new jobs." We're entering what is shaping up to be the Forever Labor Shortage.


Human services nonprofit and public agencies don’t have the financial resources to simply raise wages till we get fully staffed.


First, income is important in that line staff must feel they are making a living wage. That amount is different based on where you live – you as an agency should be able to tell what the living wage is for your location and show that you are at least meeting that minimum living wage which is not the minimum wage.


Then the real challenge begins. 


We have decades of studies that tell us that our employees stay or leave based on (to name a few):


     (1)  what they are asked to do – clear job expectations stated as deliverables. And only 4- 6 deliverables 


     (2)  able to be successful in achieving those deliverables


     (3)  how they are treated – especially by their immediate supervisor 


     (4)  that they work in a non-punitive work environment


     (5)  that how their immediate supervisor treats them is fair and consistently how all staff are treated by their supervisors. And up the chain-of-command to the top. That requires you have an adopted model of supervision that all supervisors are trained on and that all supervisors at all levels are required to use.


     (6)  that the agency supports work-life balance 


     (7)  the agency offers benefits valued by line staff. Line staff are not excited by 401K retirement plans as they don’t see themselves as being with the agency for the adult career. 


Supervision for Success is a skills-based model focused on training supervisors at all levels and holding them accountable to practice in that model and for upper management to model that for all supervisors so they understand it is the only agency model of supervision. 


This requires many long-standing practices be modified. Five examples:

  1. Job descriptions that are 4 – 6 items defining success in the job and no statement “other duties as assigned”
  2. Move from annual evaluations to ongoing performance management
  3. Replacing progressive discipline with steps toward success
  4. Changing employee handbooks to practice guide for success
  5. Adoption of a supervision practice model that all supervisors use at all levels

LEADING FROM OUTSIDE THE BOX is a monthly newsletter for human services leaders.

Its purpose is to challenge your thinking and help you improve organizational and outcome performance.


To receive your copy free, simply email Jeff Bormaster and ask to be added to the mailing list. Feel free to share these newsletters with other human services leaders, simply include the contact information. 

You can read previous issues of Leading Outside the Box at www.jeffbormasterconsulting.com/topics



Are you a non-profit struggling to recruit and retain a workforce
By Jeff Bormaster 26 Feb, 2024
Is your primary audience for hiring Gen Y and Gen Z, folks under the age of 41?
02 Oct, 2023
Coaching for Success in Human Service Agencies
By Jeff Bormaster 22 Sep, 2023
Its Time To Teach Supervisors How to Supervise Gen Y & Z
By Jeff Bormaster 17 Aug, 2023
Why Can’t We Keep Front-line Workers?
By Jeff Bormaster 15 Jul, 2023
Why Can’t We Retain Line Staff?
By Jeff Bormaster 11 Jun, 2023
Why Can’t We Recruit & Retain Foster Parents
By Jeff Bormaster 11 Jun, 2023
Our systems are all interconnected and interactive, each one nested within the other. In this image we only have four layers of these nested systems but remember that the layer labeled “government, funders, and the public” is itself nested within larger social and global systems. Therefore everything that happens to one system is likely to be reflected in all of the others. The concept of parallel process taken out of the individual context and applied to organizations is a useful way of offering a coherent framework that can enable organizational leaders and staff to develop a way of thinking “outside the box” about what has happened and is happening to their service delivery systems, based on an understanding of the ways in which trauma and chronic adversity affect human function. Parallel process has been defined as what happens when two or more systems – whether these consist of individuals, groups, or organizations – have significant relationships with one another, they tend to develop similar affects, cognition, and behaviors, which are defined as parallel processes …. Parallel processes can be set in motion in many ways, and once initiated leave no one immune from their influence. Clients bring their past history of traumatic experience into the social service sectors, consciously aware of certain specific goals but unconsciously struggling to recover from the pain and losses of the past. They are greeted by individual service providers, subject to their own personal life experiences, who are more-or-less deeply embedded in entire systems that are under significant stress. Given what we know about exposure to childhood adversity and other forms of traumatic experience, the majority of service providers have experiences in their background that may be quite similar to the life histories of their clients, and that similarity may be more-or-less recognized and worked through [2]. The result of these complex interactions between traumatized clients, stressed staff, pressured organizations, and a social and economic environment that is frequently hostile to the aims of recovery is often the opposite of what was intended. Staff in many treatment programs suffer physical and psychological injuries at alarming rates and thus become demoralized and hostile. Their counter-aggressive responses to the aggression in their clients helps to create punitive environments. Leaders become variously perplexed, overwhelmed, ineffective, authoritarian, or avoidant as they struggle to satisfy the demands of their superiors, to control their subordinates, and to protect their clients. When professional staff and nonprofessionally trained staff gather together in an attempt to formulate an approach to complex problems they are not on the same page. They share no common theoretical framework that informs problem-solving. Without a shared way of understanding the problem, what passes as treatment may be little more than labeling, the prescription of medication, and behavioral “management”. When troubled clients fail to respond to these measures, they are labeled again, given more diagnoses and termed “resistant to treatment”. In this way, our systems inadvertently but frequently recapitulate the very experiences that have proven to be so toxic for the people we are supposed to help. Just as the lives of people exposed to repetitive and chronic trauma, abuse, and maltreatment become organized around the traumatic experience, so too can entire systems become organized around the recurrent and severe stress of trying to cope with a flawed mental model based on individual pathology, that is the present underpinning of our helping systems. When this happens, it sets up an interactive dynamic that creates what are sometimes uncannily parallel processes. The result can be seen in the chart below. Bloom and Farragher, Destroying Sanctuary: The Crisis in Human Service Delivery Systems
By Jeff Bormaster 07 May, 2023
Understanding the Role of Residential in Child Welfare
By Jeff Bormaster 09 Apr, 2023
If You Can’t Bribe Them to Stay How Can You Keep Employees?
By Jeff Bormaster 09 Apr, 2023
Public Child Welfare’s Challenge of Lack of Staff
More Posts

Share by: