Ask HN: Is the Great Resignation in tech real? If so, why?

325 points by noobhacker ↗ HN
According to the media and from watching my professional circle, it seems that many are indeed changing jobs with significant pay raises--the so-called Great Resignation.

I'd like to hear from HN about job changes and raises. Anecdotes are welcome, but ideally one of us works in HR and has systematic data.

But more importantly, I'd like to think through the reasons driving the Great Resignation. Below are several explanations with my own assessments.

1. People die from Covid, reducing the labor force. -> Irrelevant for tech workers

2. People get large checks from the gov and are not pressured to find job. -> Irrelevant for tech workers

3. People avoided changing jobs during the pandemic. So the high turnover now is simply making up for low turnover in 2020. -> This does explain the high turnover, but not the significant raises. Indeed, the number of workers and jobs remains the same--people are shuffling between places. To be convinced of this theory, I'd like to see that raises are flat.

3. Senior workers are retiring early due to pandemic-related revelation. Mid-level workers are thus getting more promos than usual. -> Seems plausible. To be convinced, I need to see mid-level workers getting raises, and entry-level workers NOT getting raises.

4. [My theory] Remote work allows better matching of people and jobs. Imagine that person A can deliver lots of value to company B, but is hitherto prevented to do so due to location. With remote work, Person A can now work for Company B and get paid higher accordingly. -> To be convinced, I need to see that remote job offers have higher comp vs comparable non-remote job offers. If this theory is true, then the Great Resignation/Remote Work makes the job market more efficient, creates value for society, and should be celebrated by employees and employers alike.

5. [My theory] The pandemic pushes society forward in terms of tech adoption, making tech workers even more valuable than before. -> Seems plausible, since tech has become more valuable as a whole (e.g. stock price), not just salary. If this theory is true, then it is again a good thing for both tech workers and the broader society.

269 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 241 ms ] thread
I feel my company has had a greater number of departures this year than in past years. But I don’t know if it’s because a competitor is offering higher wages, or if I’m noticing a higher number because everyone decided to stay out last year.
Higher wages. I worked for a Fortune 500 company and got a 85% raise by leaving.
Also, the building of the new Amazon HQ is having an effect on the DC Metro area labor pool.
Switching employers, especially in tech, to get more money is not a new thing due to COVID. For whatever reason, employers are more likely to hire new talent at a higher pay grade than give equivalent raises to current employees. I know lots of folks in tech who would switch jobs every 2-3 years and get a much more significant raise each time than by staying with their current employer.
Also, since there are less in office perks now due to WFH, it’s easier to focus on salary as the determining factor and not have judgement clouded by all the “glitzy stuff”
True. Catered lunch and snacks in an office with people I like to work with were legitimately good perks that I personally valued more than some dollar amount.
I did value these things as well, and still miss going into the office, but since it’s not a choice anymore, might as get something else in exchange
THIS --> "For whatever reason, employers are more likely to hire new talent at a higher pay grade than give equivalent raises to current employees."

Gets even worse around promotions.

Amen, this is the unvarnished truth. I suppose it's easier to overlook the employees and knowledge you have. If I stayed in the same company for the past ten years I'd bet on less than half of what I'm on now
This is true. But switching jobs this fast a lot doesn't look that good on resume.
I think inflation is a part of it. There is more money around but always the same internal reluctance to give raises that match the market. So higher inflation implies that more people have to switch jobs in order to take advantage.
sure we are seeing inflation now, but the last many years, we have seen none to deflation, its a natural correction.
> There is more money around but always the same internal reluctance to give raises that match the market.

This is exactly why i switched jobs. My employer refused to adjust my pay for inflation.

Some managers don't understand it and dismiss inflation
The worst part is that some workers are being completely left behind and the divide grows greater. Tech jobs have kept up and exploded over inflation rates while retail and gig economy jobs are now paying unliveable rates.

IMO there _needs_ to be a complete recalculation of costs of living for the current year and an adjustment of minimum wages to reflect this.

The thing that I think would be the biggest help in equalizing skill, inflation, value, cost of living, etc is information. We need to break out of this bubble that has kept all of us in the dark about pricing. For physical products as well as our salaries.

We need to fight against giants that are using spam and sheer numbers to confuse pricing in the market. That applies to job boards, spam Chinese resellers, Amazon product listings, confusing Google ad prices and website listings, recruiters and heck even estate agents that thrive on information asymmetry in the market. There is huge value being lost/captured there for no reason other than a lack or restriction of information.

Sorry I'm rambling a bit.

A ~month ago I complained in the presence of my tech lead that the raises we got this year were below inflation. Last week I got a raise above inflation.

That and the fact that I don't want to go work in blockchain/smart bulbs contribute to my decision to stay where I am for now.

My friends in the last 4 years got 2x/3x salary increments without COVIDs help.

Tech inflation has been happening for a while now for the small minority.

I think COVID just caused more people to tap into it because of some of the reasons you listed. So inflation isn’t COVID caused, but the excess market movement is.

Can you clarify what "2x/3x salary increments" means? Are you saying people are tripling their salary? Or do you mean, like, 3x a normal (~3%) raise, or whatever?
Tripling your salary isn't unheard of. It's pretty common to start at $50k, then $100k the next job, and end up somewhere for $200k.
That trajectory seems believable over several years, but I thought people were talking over the last several months. (Also, I'd say even that trajectory is somewhat unusual, without something significant changing like a getting a degree or location change from a third tier city to SV, or something.)
I think, quite simply, remote work in the tech sector has redefined work-life balance. Rather than work 9-5 and go home and disconnect, you can mix and match personal and work tasks throughout the day. This reduction in sole focus on "work time" has led a lot of us to realize that work isn't everything. As such, for those who have significant savings, resigning and taking a sabbatical or an early retirement is an attractive option as it allows us to maximize our life balance.

For others, the taste of flexible remote work is preferred and so they'll resign and find a job that better suits their desired work-life balance.

Consequently, because companies are more flexible on location since they're remote, competition to hire talent has become a national game and not just a localized one. Therefore, salaries _must_ go up across the board to pay the risk premium of folks going to a FAANG. As such, companies that want top-talent in the midwest are going to have to pay significantly closer to Bay Area/FAANG rates, or settle for less than top talent (which is likely). For those who fall into the upper echelons of talent, though, the compensation and location are no longer mutually exclusive ventures. Again, this expansion of the game makes finding new work more attractive and with significant, and sufficient, savings, resignation is suitable while they lackadaisically find their next opportunity.

For me, being stuck inside with COVID made me stay at a job longer than I would have, because I'm stuck inside, might as well make money. Taking a sabbatical during covid lockdowns feels pretty sucky and even more isolating.
I think the american paradigm of "going out on your own" at 18 and not starting a family until you have had a career is what fuels this psychological damage. Immigrant types with big families seemed to not have this problem and are ok with whatever allows them full wfh. Myself, I never once lamented the lack of physical interaction in the office; it was a burden precisely because my full religious/family support group was always accessible even under maximum lockdown conditions.
… immigrant types? What “type” is an immigrant? Not all immigrants have “big families”.
Not to mention that our extended families are in the opposite side of the world, so we hardly ever see them.
It's an optics issue. Immigrants will come often come with family in tow and often live together.

Compared to American families which are spread out with usually only the immediate family living together.

So it just looks like they have bigger families- but of course it's usually quite the opposite, they are just new to the country.

Not everyone has the luxury of a supportive family or a religious group that’s willing to risk its members by ignoring quarantine.
> Rather than work 9-5 and go home and disconnect, you can mix and match personal and work tasks throughout the day.

Personally that sounds, difficult. I cannot multitask, and frankly the lockdown was horrifically lonely for me. Stuck in the same place, all the time, with no opportunity to go out.

Low interest rates -> cheap capital -> lots of tech funding -> lots of jobs.
This is the only correct answer here.
Interest rates have been low for long time though. Seems you need another explanation to explain the recent increase in resignations.
A world with many changes?

Do we really have to put our finger on exactly why? Maybe it's a million small things. Maybe it is one or two major things. But maybe we'll never know.

The world was VERY different for a year and a half. In that way, any different outcome wouldn't be surprising. Would I have predicted a great resignation? No. Does it surprise me? No.

I think there a variety of factors at play in the tech sector driving hiring trends:

1. There are, in fact, tech companies that still demand employees come into a physical office. There comes a tipping point in a laborer's market (tech being one of them) where this becomes sufficient reason to leave when there are plenty of reasonable alternatives that don't require employees be physically present.

2. Mental health is often overlooked in these discussions. The pandemic has been a huge source of stress, uncertainty, and general chaos. Many people (myself included) lost their usual outlets of stress (going out, meeting with friends, catching up with family, etc). From personal experience, this lead me to having a spat of time where I was burned out and had to lay off working at all for several months before joining a new organization. From what I hear, I'm far from the only one who's gone through such an experience.

3. In light of COVID, many people are facing the realities of mortality much earlier and more frequently than they would prior to a pandemic. Many of us have lost friends or loved ones if not to COVID, than to COVID caused problems (mental health, substance abuse, health problems that became critical due to lack of ER capacity). Having a brush with death is a strong incentive for people to reevaluate their situations and reexamine how they spend their time. For many people, work is not fulfilling and they may be more willing to adjust their lifestyle to prioritize things important to them that don't require as much money; or things that take them to other careers; OR give folks a kick in the pants to demand more from their current employers.

I suspect there's more to this trend; more nuance than is being captured by the current news cycles. The US has a diverse population of people in a variety of situations and the driving factors for hiring trends for bay area companies are likely not indicative of what employees are seeing from their side of the table.

> 2. Mental health is often overlooked in these discussions. The pandemic has been a huge source of stress, uncertainty, and general chaos. Many people (myself included) lost their usual outlets of stress (going out, meeting with friends, catching up with family, etc). From personal experience, this lead me to having a spat of time where I was burned out and had to lay off working at all for several months before joining a new organization. From what I hear, I'm far from the only one who's gone through such an experience.

Yeah, this is super evident in my circle of friends and colleagues. One senior-dev friend started an apprenticeship as a carpenter, another one opened a store for booze. Some others got serious about following their passion projects. Everyone seems to have a little crack or two.

FWIW, as a hiring manager, our stance on remote is one of the first questions I get asked. BUT, I hear roughly equal numbers of people who want Full-Office as who want Full-Remote.

In other words the flow is not only from in-person work to WFH, but rather people are flowing both ways and sorting into whichever lifestyle they prefer.

I think thats actually the endgame here: long-term all companies are going to have to pick Office/Hybrid/Remote as one of their core values and selling points, and there will be almost 3 distinct labor pools for each type based on what sort of work style a candidate wants.

I am fully in support for full-remote work as a policy, as I view WFH as right or at least an advancement that has been needlessly deprived from many white collar professions for a long time.

That said, I personally would not mind some in-office work, even only one day or two days a week, or even alternating in-person weeks. WFH feels incredibly isolating at times.

I think the unique and extraordinary circumstances of the pandemic have been incredibly limiting, leading people to feel trapped. Hence it’s obvious why people rebel against being in-office, but also explains why the people who didn’t mind working in person now bristle against full-remote. Zoom fatigue and the isolation of full digital existence also contributes towards the demand for full-office.

It will be interesting to see how this changes after the pandemic, when more freedom and flexibility hopefully returns to the workplace.

Not sure how it is today, but I felt DigitalOcean had the right mix pre-pandemic: 50% onsite and 50% remote. We could choose which we wanted as time went, and remotes could fly in and work from the office about once per quarter. This allowed me to be remote while also developing in-person relationships with a lot of employees, as there were always some people in the office (revolving remotes and regular onsites). It was the best of both world!
And there is the core difference....

For some socialization is stress relief.... for others, such as myself, it's stress.

6. Inflation is pushing everything up but pay rises in your current jobs and not following that price curve. Jumping to the next job generally gives you a pay bump but if you include inflation, the current bump looks higher than normal.

I've seen this from friends who have moved in the past few months where the pay increases are not insignificant.

My personal experience with ex co-workers who have taken other positions is that the main reason for them going elsewhere is because market compensation is highly competitive and most jobs require fewer responsibilities. For one of them, his kid's school location was also a factor: his mother wanted him in a Montessori school and it was a 20 minute drive out of the way every morning.

A simpler way of putting it is this: employers are set on giving employees cost of living increases, but a 3% COL increase can't match the 8% annual increase of the local market. Jobs that were going at 95K a couple years ago are at 115K+ today.

The chaos and government intervention merely accelerated trends in the economy.
Every tech company was forced into remote working, suddenly now every tech worker is (really) competing on the global job market, and the market is adjusting to the new offer/demand. That’s my theory.
I think only recently have we seen companies adopt actual long term remote policies since initially the intent was to come back into the office. Also, I think it’s probably closer to a regional or national market at most. Most companies won’t just let any employee work from anywhere due to tax laws. For example, I can currently live in any state but that state has to have my company incorporated in it(which is about 25 states).
This would drive wages down.
Should drive the average global wage up for top talent.
Yes, there are some companies who have changed to fully remote and now hiring people from anywhere. There isn't enough of these companies to make even a small blip in the global job market.

The vast, vast majority of companies are still hiring people locally.

> People get large checks from the gov and are not pressured to find job. -> Irrelevant for tech workers

Want to mention here, even though it may be "Irrelevant for tech workers", employment did not rise again when these checks ended. This line of reasoning is false.

also if $6000 in a year is that much to someone, then who are we to judge.
Double that, and you have the Andrew Yang version of UBI. People seem to overestimate the number of people willing to be poor. Everyone I know would choose to work even if they were getting an extra $6K to $12K per work. The people that would choose not to work and would rather spend time with their family need that kind of resource far more than me. (But, with something like UBI, I would expect to get it too!)
Yup.

Also, I bristle when people suggest the govnerment was just "handing out checks" willy-nilly. That seems to be the perception every time I hear someone complaining about "the government giving people checks."

If you were unemployed before the pandemic, you got nothing. So for example if you did seasonal work, and the pandemic hit during the off season, forget it. If you weren't employed for a fair bit of time before you lost your job during the pandemic, you got nothing.

If you were self-employed, you got nothing (at least at first. It took a while but they eventually came through.)

Getting any sort of welfare or government assistance usually involves a lot of paperwork and time and hassle. For example, WIC - Women with Infants or Children - a program for mothers who can't afford to feed an infant or child - requires them to come into an office in person during business hours, every 6 months, to "re-certify" their children.

Most states require regular paperwork and record-keeping to "prove" you were "actively searching" for work, and a signed statement that you did so, etc.

Many state unemployment offices were completely overwhelmed and I remember during the early months people who lost their jobs were getting really desperate because paperwork wasn't getting approved, payments weren't showing up, phones weren't being answered. Lots of redditors in my city were talking about not knowing how they were going to buy groceries because they'd been waiting for so long. I knew a fair number of people who ended up moving back with parents because they couldn't afford rent or groceries.

At least in my state the unemployment office that was so overwhelmed? Now they have lots of extra time on their hands, it seems, and are chasing down people they claim they overpaid.

Yes, it's real. IMO it's the following - 1. tech has flourished during the pandemic, and that plus money printing means there is a ton of demand and money floating around to attract talent. 2. after 18 months of working from home and being miserable during covid, people are ready for a change. that's why we see a lot of new home purchases, job changes, moves, etc. It seems liek covid has basically accelerated people's timelines by several years because they realized life is short, things can change in a flash, and they reassess whatever it is they're doing and whether it's something they want to keep doing, and a lot of the time the answer is no. Increased demand/$$ plus increased supply = ton of movement between jobs
Mostly no - if you look back more than a year, you'd see that quit rates are modestly higher than normal, but balanced out by the very low quit rates in 2020. If you do 2 year averages, the past two years looks the same as 2018-2019 or 2016-2017.
For which country?

Source on these quit rates?

I worked for a university, lifestyle job with bad pay but plenty of time off. But when a plan to fix pay schedules was shelved and replaced with furloughs due to the pandemic, I took the first thing I could find, which was with a local company that's a total cultural mismatch and where my skill are underutilized.

Which is to say I'm applying like mad to find remote work since I like owning a house and having room to breath instead of paying multiples of my mortgage to share an apartment in a tech hub city.

But I also need to make up for the long-term damage the university job did to my earnings/early retirement potential.

“Having money isn't everything, not having it is.” - Kanye West

I hope you can find a middle ground of decent pay and culture similar to academia.

My theory is a combination of (3a) (you have two 3's :) and an additional hypothesis that you didn't mention: people have a pandemic-induced sense of pent up angst and unease with their life, and so they are making life changes in an attempt to find happiness again. Obviously, changing jobs won't relieve the pain the pandemic has caused, but I'd argue there's a subliminal desire to try to change something.

Anecdotally, my personal experience supports (3a), since I tried to find a new job in mid 2020 and found the job market incredibly challenging, but then looked again in mid 2021 and ended up finding a job I was excited about.

The second (3) is quite valid as “I’m tired of this sh*t” affected all those close to retirement who didn’t need short term cash flow. Folks with no kids, the kids out of the house and the house paid for.

The first (3j also strikes me as valid as the possibility of f2f interviews was basically zero. Between social distancing and the collapse of border crossing and air travel “sitting tight” was prudent. Remote interviews lead into (4).

Edit: the loss of external child care forced some workers home. It’s possible the positives of at home care shifted the balance vs the expense of external care. And now, perhaps due to the difficulty of securing it.

Generally it's kicking out foreign workers and banning/discouraging people from expensive things/ideas like international travel, living in cities is 'cool', leaving the house to see friends rather than watching Popcorn Time.

For IT I'd be wanting to hear what the Indian part of HN says.

Generally for the West it's been at the expense of the developing countries.

How is IT in India and other non Western countries doing? They should rule out 4 (Are they being matched better in the USA?) but could confirm 5.

1.Inflation. Money is worth less now that we printed so much more. Same reason why you see companies raising a lot at crazy high valuations. Nobody wants to keep cash because at some point the price of everything will catch up. Stock, house, crypto going up can be explained as that. 40% of dollars have been printed in the last 12 months. People trust businesses, houses and even crazy cryptocurrency with no real basis more than their government not printing infinite money.

2. People had a taste of remote work freedom. That's an extra bargaining cheap when negotiating.

People mental health went to the bin after being locked up for so long and they either: - had enough of their company - had enough of their job at all

Hopefully it will translate to more small business entrepreneurship. We definitely need those given that the pandemic favoured incredibly big businesses (unsurprisingly)

If you are a big employer but lack quality applicants due to labour market shortage. Could it be worth risking some churn, with the possibility of increasing new applicants by seeding the ' great resignation ' in the media?
This would explain a really strange news segment I heard on the radio yesterday. They were interviewing an alleged “HR expert” who talked about the “great resignation”. It seemed to me that this segment was tailored towards convincing people to worry less about leaving their jobs, but I could not discern any motive that made sense.
I noticed that many news sources were pushing the "great resignation" message.

At first it seemed logical due to covid/wfh movement so I didn't think much about it.. but then the articles kept appearing. It struck me as paid placement especially when mixed in with unrelated news sections. I should have taken screenshots.

There has been a lot of weird reporting around this topic. From the beginning where there was no numbers to back up the news stories, to people creating weird manager strawmen to make it seem like any company that wanted people back in the office was as bad as slave plantation overseer.

It's all very strange and I don't know why.

Pre-Covid much of my job satisfaction came from the sense of comradery of working on a team. Even as an introvert I enjoy interacting with coworkers, and being intune with the needs of the group and generally helping other people succeed.

When we transitioned to full remote, all of this was stripped away and I was left to focus purely on a product that on its own I was not passionate about (think ad-like product). I was met with a sudden loss in motivation, burnout, and decided to take 9 months off to pursue a tech unrelated hobby.

9 months after leaving, I have accepted a position with a 50% raise over to my previous job.

I think covid was a splash of cold water that's caused many of the people in my circle to re-evaluate how they spend their time. Tech workers are so in demand that we can freely change jobs so it follows that many people would availing that option.

I feel like im reading my own thoughts. The thing that got me into work was the people not the product. I also worked in ads.
(comment deleted)
Similar struggle. Joined the company for a group of people, who all subsequently left. Stayed on for a year of diminishing financial and psychic rewards. Now looking.
Not working in tech but this seems to make a lot of sense. If you had a socially fulfilling job pre-covid then maybe you're wage didn't matter so much because being in tech it's probably pretty good. But being stuck at home it's hard to optimize for anything else than your salary when you're considering your employment. So if you're gonna sit and stare at a screen you might as well get as much money as possible.
Another introvert here, working fully remotely since before COVID. I couldn't imagine working on a product I wasn't passionate about and genuinely wanted to succeed. Most of my motivation is based around doing interesting and socially valuable work. This doesn't have to be groundbreaking, but knowing I'm helping put out some good in the world is a large factor in choosing and staying with a company.

The team is also important, of course, but it's minor compared to the product as the way of working remotely is quite different from being in an office. To me it's mostly for the better, since everyone is focused on the product and not on some pointless team building events, company gossip or drama.

I hope you chose a more fulfilling industry than advertising. It's interesting that a sibling comment also mentions working on ads. I wonder what the breakdown of resignations per industry looks like, and how relevant remote work was in that decision.

>To me it's mostly for the better, since everyone is focused on the product and not on some pointless team building events, company gossip or drama.

It's very interesting to see how people look at relationship building with others. Many introverts on HN and Reddit see it as a mostly negative thing and equivalent people interaction and relationship building to drama, gossip, and forced friendliness.

I like making friends outside of work. To me emulating friendship in corporate environment feels cringeworthy and I literally see people forcing themselves into it. I also like to get out of the programmer environment as much as possible. I just don't like it, even though I'm a programmer myself.
I think there is a difference between team building through shared struggle (like new soldiers going through boot camp) and what hr comes up with as “team building activities” in the office after they went on Pinterest and searched for “team building ice breakers for meetings”.

At my workplace they came up with employee appreciation day. They make a slightly better lunch and they clap for you when you walk into the cafeteria. I much rather be allowed to leave 30 min earlier.

While I understand the pipeline where those ideas come from (management appoints one poor soul to quickly come up with something that looks fun on paper, is cheap, quick and doesn’t allow for any possibility of rule breaking), they don’t really help me bond with anyone.

What does help me bond is being part of a team with a great leader that makes everyone want to push in the same direction and makes us a unit. For that you need solid hiring that takes into consideration what team the to-be-hired person is going to be working with at a social level

That sounds like a scene from the office and I grimaced inside from the thought of someone clapping for me! Any of these forced fun activities are generally not actually fun.

One of my managers used to sneak around and whisper to people to go home early (like at 1pm) on days before holidays, now that was appreciated!

It is. The office is so accurate. All the way down to the donation campaigns and the toy drives and weird little events to hide that we are all in a gray cube away from the beautiful sun grinding numbers away
> Many introverts on HN and Reddit see it as a mostly negative thing and equivalent people interaction and relationship building to drama, gossip, and forced friendliness.

There is a difference between team building, workplace social dynamics, and genuine relationships. Thankfully, most of my coworkers recognize this. We work together as a team, the negative workplace social dynamics are at a minimum, and genuine relationships between coworkers don't exclude others or erode the confidence of others. Simply put, everyone behaves as professionals.

On the other hand, I have been in workplaces where the opposite is true. Team building exercises lead to cliques that reinforce certain relationships and erode others, coworkers undermine each other through gossip and use forced friendliness will conceal their intent. None of the relationships are genuine since you know that the drama will eventually lead to someone being in tears (sometimes in front of their coworkers) or leaving altogether.

For what it's worth, I have seen both situations arise outside of tech and both dynamics in play with both introverted and sociable people.

> much of my job satisfaction came from the sense of comradery of working on a team

I think this is a seriously undervalued factor and something I was completely unaware of.

I used to always judge job opportunities either by how well they pay, or how interesting the work is. But in reality, the social factor is just as important.

So some time ago, I was trying to hire my first employee. I paid a lot of money for job ads, and got very little applications. I offered the same salary as the other tech companies in my city, and I really tried my best to attract people.

I couldn't understand why people instead only applied to work for boring consultancies or even for an online gambling company -- why would people prefer such mind numbing or even morally questionable jobs?

I realized that the social situation at work is really important. When I met people who worked at the online gambling website, they weren't talking about the actual work; they just told me about their awesome boss, and how they had fun with their team mates, etc. It didn't matter how interesting my project was, nobody wanted to sit all day in an office just alone with me.

I think the OPs point was that the past employer effectively leveraged the social aspect to underpay. Now that there is a hobby outside of work, the latter is suddenly not a center of life anymore. The pay raise is the ironic reality of employers catching up with the real cost of labour.
That assumes that these social aspects are valued at zero. Money isn't everything in a job. Your compensation consists of the money, yes, but also everything else in the job. Good social aspect at work takes effort to build and maintain, so maybe, actually, those employers weren't underpaying at all. Again, money isn't everything.
Counterpoint: with basic human decency and almost every company following the same blueprint when catering to that social aspect, odds are in practice it really doesn't matter. Either you're an outlier socially and lucky to hit it without turning your CV into Swiss cheese, or you're more average and almost every company will cater to you the same way, so odds are high you'll fit in similarly regardless.

Good social aspect is still in the eyes of the beholder, and for people like me, this blueprint absolutely isn't beneficial. Nor is the risk of looking for an outlier culture worth the potential benefits, when that same outlier culture can be much more easily found outside work.

It assumes exactly the opposite of that. The underlying economic principle at work is that the social aspects of a job do have an equivalent monetary value, and now that they're gone, employers have to make up the shortfall by paying more in plain money.
Years ago, I remember someone talking about working in film. Ideally, you work on three movies a year; one for the pay, one for the script, and one for the people you work with. I've tried to keep this in mind when looking for full-time work and I think it lines up with what you're saying.
Consultancy might have a boring image, but the work can be extremely varied. I was at one of the big names and got to go behind the scenes at a major theme park, spend a night with police officers on blue light calls, watch open heart surgery in person, meet a lunar astronaut and eat lunch in a tv studio watching a live broadcast.
Wow, that sounds way more interesting that I've been led to believe! Did you just get lucky? What was your role?
I think you make your own luck for things like this. I was a technology architect which had the advantage of being quite broad in scope. I came to the company with a deeper technical background than some which helped, but I also built a specialism after I joined that was rare in the company. That meant if there was a need for that skill, I had a high chance of being asked to assist. And of course, when it came to change projects, choosing ones that held an interest helped. But for example, anyone who joined the project with the police force had an opportunity to join a shift, anyone who worked on the TV project could have lunch where I did, so it isn't all about the role.
I'll chime in since I also worked in consulting for a long time (still do). It depends a lot on what vertical you get pulled into, but I'd say it's 50% luck and 50% you putting in the effort to develop and prove you have skills (including social ones) to get staffed on interesting projects. Many consultants never see more than conference rooms and the home office, but the parent commenter's experience also happens quite a bit. It's worth noting that in my experience the more advanced you get in your career the more likely you are to work only in a specific industry.
This was almost my EXACT experience ad well. differences are I took 6 months off, wasnt working on an ad-like product, and my pay boost getting back into the market was 48% instead of 50%.
I recently landed a new job. I'm currently in the process of leaving my old job and awaiting my first day at the new one.

And I think this played into it. I was pretty happy with my old position, but I did have some small desire to find something new. What always kept me back was the fact that I liked the people I worked with.

But as WFH has sort of dragged on, I found that the social bonds have become a much weaker glue for me and there's a minor burnout coming from how stale it is working from home. The camaraderie that kept me at my job sort of faded away. The monotony and increasing apathy toward the people I was working with really pushed me hard into wanting some kind of change, and so almost on a whim I applied for a job at a company that I've been itching to work for. And I got it!

So I'm excited about my new job. I think it'll be more impactful and interesting work where I'm going to get to grow my skills a lot. And my compensation will be doubled. I should be happy that the circumstances forced the change, but I'm also a little uncomfortable with the feeling that it was an impulsive decision due to a mental state that has been caused by temporary circumstances.

I would posit that most of your points are relevant for the economy as a whole, but you are missing inflation, which is probably the 2nd or 3rd most important factor for the economy as a whole (after your number 2 and your first number 3), but the single most important factor for tech workers, who are seeing huge comp increases due to stock packages in an M2 fueled bull market. That, and remote working trends, as you mentioned.

When you can get a 30% raise at a new job and there is too much psychological resistance for companies to give those raises internally, high turnover is inevitable.

I can see many incompetent/below average tech workers being replaced with offshore workers (e.g. India and Phillipines) once international travel is permitted again.

COVID in countries that supply most of the offshoring has been devastating. Many people from India and Philippines resigning from their roles to move to Western nations to live a better life.