Abstract :

Millennial employees in the bakeshop industry exhibited high turnover rates primarily due to the need for a safe work environment, recognition, and opportunities for promotion. The study focused on the factors contributing to millennial employees’ turnover rates. This study employed a quantitative, non-experimental, correlational design to investigate turnover intention among millennial employees in the bakeshop industry in Cebu Province. Data were collected via a researcher-made questionnaire from 34 randomly selected millennial employees. Analysis through descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and weighted means revealed that millennials, who formed a significant portion of the working class, tended to leave their jobs if their specific needs were not met. The primary factor driving their turnover was self-preservation, with employees prioritizing a safe and healthy work environment. A workplace free from injuries and accidents not only attracted but also retained employees, leading to reduced absences and increased productivity. Consequently, a commitment to health and safety by employers enhanced employee retention and reduced business disruptions. Additionally, recognition and opportunities for promotion were crucial for retaining millennial employees. They were likely to leave if they felt undervalued or saw limited promotion opportunities. Training and development were less significant than promotions in influencing their decision to stay. The study also found that changes in management or internal talent management practices had minimal impact on retention, provided the work environment remained stable and employees were treated well. Overall, addressing millennials’ needs for safety, recognition, and career growth was vital for reducing turnover rates in the bakeshop industry.

---

Keywords :

Employee retention plan, Human Capital theory, Likelihood to leave the organization, Millennial employees.

---

References :

1. Acemoglu, D., & Pischke, J.S. (1999). Beyond Becker: Training in imperfect labor markets. Economic Journal, 109(453), 112-142.
2. Ambrosini, V., Bowman, C., & Collier, N. (2009). Dynamic capabilities: An exploration of how firms renew their resource base. British Journal of Management, 20(1), 9–24.
3. Bannon, S., Ford, K., & Meltzer, L. (2011). Understanding millennials in the workplace. The CPA Journal, 81(11), 61-65.
4. Barney, J.B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
5. Bass, B.M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, pp. 8, 9–32.
6. Benson, G.S., Finegold, D., & Mohrman, S.A. (2004). You paid for the skills, now keep them: Tuition reimbursement and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 47(3), 315-331.
7. Deal, J., Altman, D., & Rogelberg, S. (2010). Millennials at work: What we know and what we need to do (if anything). Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 191-199.
8. Eldor, L., & Harpaz, I. (2016). A process model of employee engagement: The learning climate and its role with extra-role performance behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(2), 213-235.
9. Espinoza, C., Ukleja, M., & Rusch, C. (2010). Managing the Millennials: Discover the Core Competencies for Managing Today’s Workforce. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
10. Gialuisi, O., & Coetzer, A. (2013). Leveraging informal learning in SMEs: An examination of the New Zealand wine industry. Enterprise Development and Microfinance, 24(2), 134-150.
11. Lancaster, L. C., & Stillman, D. (2010). The M-Factor: How the Millennial Generation is Rocking the Workplace. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
12. Schullery, N. M. (2013). Workplace engagement and generational differences in values. Business Horizons, 56(3), 271-280.
13. Taylor, P. (2014). The Next America: Boomers, Millennials, and the Looming Generational Showdown. New York, NY: Public Affairs.