talent trade-offs: what today’s workforce will (and won’t) compromise on - and what that means for employers.

The retention conversation is no longer just about remote working vs onsite. The big shift? Employees want assurance they’ll remain relevant.

• Worldwide, 67% of workers say they would choose increased employability (the ability to stay relevant, skilled and secure) over the option to work remotely.
• In Australia, that figure rises to 71%.
• A majority (59%) say employability matters more than having an “exciting/inspiring” role.
• 52% globally say they would prefer skilling/training opportunities over remote working.

What this means for employers: Think of employability Australia as the new entry-ticket for talent engagement. If you want flexibility and loyalty, you need to offer career insurance — ongoing skilling opportunities, manager-led development and pathways that aren’t just about next month’s role, but next year’s relevance.

It’s tempting to assume pay is king — but that assumption is increasingly flawed.

• Globally, 60% of employees say they would rather move to a less stressful job than chase more pay.
• 40% have already accepted a lower-paid role in exchange for less job stress.
• These preferences cut across generations and job-types — so this isn’t just millennials being “picky”.

What this means for employers: Stress isn’t a “nice to have” to tackle later. It’s a retention risk. If your leadership isn’t already having the conversation about workload, pace, role clarity and support—now is the time. Because burnout and isn’t just a wellbeing issue — it’s a flight-risk indicator.

Where you work is less of the issue when it comes to retention. When and how much agency an employee has over time matters more.

• Globally, 59% say they’d rather have autonomy over when they work than a higher salary.
• And 56% say they prefer control over their hours rather than control over their work location.
• Remember: workplace flexibility means many things. Control over time is now the currency.

What this means for employers: Stop asking your people “Will you come into the office?” and start asking “How can we let you shape your working hours and commitments?” An employee’s output and outcomes matter more than their physical presence.

If you’re considering brining workers back to the office full-time, the trade-off your employees expect is clearly rising.

• If mandated to return full-time to the office, talent expect: • 65% greater schedule or time autonomy • 64% higher pay • 61% more annual leave
• At the same time, among fully remote workers: • 74% would require more flexible hours if they returned to the office. • 75% expect a higher salary. • And 66% more leave days.
• Considering a mandated return-to-office without adequate compensation? • 38% globally say they would consider quitting if asked to come back to the office full-time.

What this means for employers: You cannot just flip the “office full time” switch and expect loyalty to remain unchanged. You need to make it worth their commute. Articulate the value of being in-person and compensate accordingly (understanding salary inflation) or you risk losing people. It’s about connection, purpose, energy — not presenteeism.

Employee retention isn’t won by one big move — it’s built on an ecosystem of fairness, development and values.

• 74% of respondents say receiving annual salary increases that keep pace with inflation is critical to their staying.
• 68% cite strong manager support for their career development as essential.
• 67% say shared organisational values help them stay.

What this means for employers: Retention is personal. One-size perks don’t cut it. Your people want to know you see them, support their development and share the same “why”. Make sure managers are equipped for career conversations. Make sure your values are real. Make sure raises keep pace with reality. Employees aren’t looking for “jobs” anymore — they’re choosing partnerships and purpose. If your EVP doesn’t reflect reality, they’ll trade you in.