[_dczq]

Is the average tenure truly due to "employee choice" or simply a result of the system we created?

[mawburn]

Its employee choice. People get bored, they get tired of processes, and there are plenty of companies willing to hire them that will allow them to try something new, do something different, and deal with different processes.

[moorhosj]

Unions could help in each of these case, so you haven't answered the question or provided any evidence.

[rexpop]

I believe it's the result of the system we've created. Frogs leap from boiling water, and there's no sense in calling that "frog choice": obviously, the water is too hot.

That workplaces are universally intolerable after 2-3--as is accepted industry common knowledge--is not a matter of individual preference, but systemic inadequacy of workplace conditions.

Burnout is not a personal problem, it is an institutional pandemic.

> One of the first things we discover in these groups is that personal problems are political problems. There are no personal solutions at this time. There is only collective action for a collective solution.

-- Carol Hanisch, "The Personal Is Political", in Notes from the Second Year: Women's Liberation

[eeZah7Ux]

Good point. Employees are often promised very interesting projects, career growth and salary increases. Very often it turns out to be a bunch of lies and people move on and the cycle continues.

Despite all the claims on HN on how good life is for software engineers, our field has very high burnout rates and it's very ageist.