Executive Summary

The modern labor market presents a profound paradox: an abundance of reported job openings exists alongside persistent hiring challenges and a perceived scarcity of qualified candidates. This report deconstructs this apparent contradiction, moving beyond a simplistic supply-and-demand analysis to reveal a complex interplay of behavioral shifts, structural deficiencies, and technological inefficiencies. The central finding is that the problem is not a simple numerical imbalance but a systemic lack of fluidity and a fundamental disconnect between the positions employers are seeking to fill and the characteristics of the available workforce.

The analysis synthesizes key findings into a comprehensive framework:

  • Behavioral Contradictions: A shift from the “Great Resignation” to a new era of “Job Hugging” has created a cautious, often disengaged workforce, reducing labor market churn and the pool of actively seeking candidates.
  • Structural Mismatches: Long-term demographic trends are creating a dual workforce problem, with an oversupply of college-educated workers and a deepening shortage of “hands-on” labor in critical sectors. This is compounded by a widespread skills gap that is both technical and foundational.
  • Technological and Institutional Bottlenecks: The proliferation of “ghost jobs”—job postings for non-existent or unfillable roles—distorts market data and erodes trust. At the same time, rigid, automated hiring processes, particularly the use of Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS), mechanically filter out skilled candidates who lack traditional credentials.
  • Evolving Worker Priorities: Younger generations are redefining career success, prioritizing work-life balance, flexibility, and continuous skill development over traditional notions of corporate advancement. This necessitates a fundamental re-evaluation of how employers attract and retain talent.

The report concludes that the perceived shortage of candidates is a symptom of a larger, systemic breakdown. Navigating this new labor landscape requires a paradigm shift for employers, moving away from outdated, credential-based hiring models toward adaptive, skills-centric talent strategies that acknowledge the evolving priorities of the modern workforce.

Section 1: The Apparent Paradox: Deconstructing the Data

On the surface, the U.S. labor market appears robust, with an abundance of opportunities. Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) for June 2025 provides the primary evidence for this perception. The report showed 7.4 million job openings, a number that validates the impression of a wide-open market. A “job opening” is officially defined as any position that is available on the last business day of the month for which the employer is actively recruiting and which could begin within 30 days.

However, a deeper look at the same data reveals a more nuanced and contradictory reality. While the number of vacancies remains high, other key metrics for June 2025 showed little change. Hires held steady at 5.2 million, and total separations were 5.1 million. The number of separations is a crucial indicator of labor market churn, and the lack of significant change suggests a stagnation in worker movement. Furthermore, the ratio of job openings to unemployed workers, a key measure of labor market tightness, has declined from a peak of approximately 2:1 in March 2022 to roughly 1:1 in June 2025. This metric, which directly compares the number of available jobs to the number of people seeking them, indicates a market that is far more balanced than the raw job openings number alone would suggest.

The disparity between the high volume of job postings and the relative stability of hires and separations points to a significant inefficiency in the labor market’s “matching” function. The perception of an overwhelming number of jobs is accurate in a purely numerical sense, but the rate at which those jobs are being filled is not keeping pace. This demonstrates that the problem is not a simple supply-demand issue, but a deeper structural or behavioral friction that prevents the effective matching of available workers with open positions. The paradox, therefore, is not a contradiction of numbers, but a reflection of a decline in labor market fluidity.

U.S. Labor Market Snapshot (June 2025) ——— Data Points

Job Openings ———————————– 7.4 million

Hires ——————————————– 5.2 million

Total Separations ——————————- 5.1 million

Quits ——————————————– 3.1 million

Layoffs and Discharges ————————- 1.6 million

Job Openings to Unemployed Worker Ratio — Approx. 1:1

Section 2: The Evolving Dynamics of Labor Supply: A Cautious Workforce

The labor market is a reflection of worker confidence, and recent data signals a significant shift in behavior. The era of the high-churn “Great Resignation” that defined 2021-2022 has given way to a new period that some experts are calling the “Great Stay” or “Job Hugging”. This phenomenon is characterized by workers holding onto their current roles more tightly than before, a trend that directly contributes to the apparent shortage of candidates. The JOLTS report for June 2025 indicates that the quits rate has stabilized at around 2.0%, its lowest level since early 2016 (excluding the initial disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic).

This behavioral shift is rooted in psychological and economic anxieties. A quarterly poll by ZipRecruiter found that the share of job seekers who are “not confident at all” about the availability of jobs has risen to 38% in the second quarter, up from 26% three years ago. This widespread caution is a direct response to ongoing economic, political, and global uncertainties. Workers are hesitant to leave their current positions due to a perceived lack of opportunities elsewhere, a dynamic that directly limits the number of actively searching candidates and creates the illusion of a sparse talent pool. This fear-based behavior slows the overall movement of labor, which in turn limits opportunities for new entrants and can pose challenges for both employers and job seekers.

The “Great Stay” carries profound, often hidden, negative consequences for both workers and their employers. While staying put may offer a sense of security, it can lead to wage stagnation, as many of the most significant pay increases are typically earned by switching jobs. It can also result in career stagnation, with fewer opportunities to take on new responsibilities or develop new skills, which can negatively affect long-term marketability and career progression. For companies, this phenomenon can manifest as “quiet quitting,” where employees, unable or unwilling to leave their unsatisfactory roles, disengage and perform at a minimum level. This hidden dissatisfaction costs companies billions in lost productivity and morale, as disengaged employees are more likely to take sick days, put in less discretionary effort, and be less creative and productive. The apparent candidate shortage, therefore, is not merely a friction in the hiring process but a symptom of a broader issue of a less dynamic and, in many cases, a disengaged workforce.

Section 3: Structural Frictions: The Supply-Demand Mismatch

The challenges in the labor market are not just behavioral; they are rooted in deep-seated, long-term structural issues, most notably a fundamental demographic shift and a pervasive skills gap. The U.S. working-age population (ages 18–64) is experiencing minimal growth, a trend that has been in place since 2017 and is projected to persist for at least the next decade. This stagnation is primarily a result of the accelerated retirement of the large Baby Boomer generation and consistently low birth rates.

A closer look at this trend reveals a critical education divide. The decline in the working-age population applies almost exclusively to those without a college degree. In contrast, the number of working-age individuals with a bachelor’s degree continues to grow steadily, projected to increase by 1-1.5% annually through at least 2035. This compositional shift is reconfiguring the labor supply. While there is a surplus of workers for white-collar roles, a severe shortage of “hands-on” workers in fields like manufacturing, construction, and healthcare is emerging. These are jobs that cannot be automated or done remotely and are heavily reliant on the shrinking pool of non-college-educated labor. While a small counter-trend of “unretiring” has seen 1.5 million retirees reenter the workforce since 2020, the persistent decline in workers’ expectations of full-time employment past retirement age signals that this is not a long-term solution to the demographic problem.

This demographic shift is compounded by a pervasive skills gap. A significant majority of corporate leaders (70%) report a critical skills deficiency in their organizations, which negatively impacts business performance, innovation, and growth. The gap is not limited to hard skills like data analysis and project management; it extends to crucial soft skills such as strategic thinking, problem-solving, and communication. The deficiency is surprisingly foundational; a study by ACT found that for middle-to-high-level jobs in manufacturing, healthcare, and construction, a majority of examinees lacked the ability to “locate information” from workplace graphics like charts and graphs, indicating a disconnect between formal education and practical, on-the-job skills.

A critical component of this problem is that employers are unintentionally contributing to the very talent shortage they lament. Many companies maintain rigid hiring criteria, such as strict degree requirements and a specific number of years of experience. These criteria often exclude a large pool of candidates who possess the necessary skills and transferable competencies but lack the traditional credentials. This problem is exacerbated by technology. Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS), designed to streamline the hiring process, are often programmed to filter resumes based on these rigid, keyword-based criteria. This results in a paradoxical scenario where 88% of employers believe they are losing out on highly qualified candidates who are screened out by their own systems because their resumes are not “ATS-friendly”. The skills gap is thus not just a problem with the candidate pool; it is also a self-inflicted wound created by outdated hiring practices and the technology that enforces them.

Section 4: The Illusions of the Job Market: Ghost Jobs and Broken Signals

A significant portion of the perceived abundance of job postings is, in fact, an illusion. A growing body of evidence suggests that a considerable number of online job listings are for “ghost jobs,” which are roles companies have no intention of filling. A 2024 ResumeBuilder survey found that nearly 40% of hiring managers admitted to posting fake openings, with 85% of those even interviewing candidates with no plan to hire. Other studies suggest that at least one in five online job listings is fake or never filled.

The motivations for this practice are varied and often strategic. Companies post these phantom listings to build a talent pipeline, collecting resumes from strong candidates for potential future openings. They also use these listings to project an image of company growth for investors, clients, or the public. Furthermore, these posts serve internal purposes, such as pacifying existing employees by giving the illusion that new workers will be hired to alleviate workloads or, conversely, to make them feel replaceable to boost productivity. In some cases, ghost jobs fulfill bureaucratic human resources requirements, allowing companies to justify internal hires by creating an external candidate pool.

The prevalence of ghost jobs creates a fundamental problem of information asymmetry and erodes trust in the labor market. This practice not only wastes countless hours for job seekers who are applying for positions that do not exist, but it also gives the false impression of a robust labor market. For job seekers, this can be a disheartening experience, leading to burnout and a feeling that the system is broken. This negative feedback loop can reduce the number of truly motivated and engaged candidates, as they become more skeptical of online listings. The apparent paradox of high job postings and scarce candidates is, therefore, partly manufactured, a result of questionable corporate practices that distort market data and break down the signaling mechanisms that connect employers and talent.

Section 5: The Economic Consequences and the Path Forward

The labor market’s systemic disconnect carries significant economic and financial consequences. The direct and indirect costs of inefficient hiring are substantial. The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that a bad hire can cost a company at least 30% of the employee’s first-year earnings. For specialized roles, this figure can escalate to as much as twice the employee’s annual salary. These costs extend far beyond recruiter fees and training expenses; they include lost productivity, the time and effort of management and team members to correct errors, and the negative impact on team morale and culture. Research by Gallup estimates that actively disengaged employees, a likely outcome of the “Great Stay” phenomenon, cost U.S. companies between $450 and $550 billion annually in lost productivity.

Moreover, a prolonged time-to-fill for open vacancies negatively affects a firm’s financial performance. Higher hiring difficulties translate into a decrease in vacancy postings, which hampers employment growth. A significant increase in recruiting time can lead to a quantifiable decrease in a firm’s employment, investment, and sales. The hidden costs of labor market inefficiency are therefore substantial and directly impact the bottom line.

The True Costs of an Open Vacancy

Description

Direct Costs

Recruiter fees, job board postings, background checks, and sign-on bonuses.

Indirect Costs

Time spent by HR and hiring managers on interviews, onboarding, and training.

Cost of a Bad Hire

Up to 30% of first-year earnings on average, and up to two times the annual salary for specialized roles.

Loss of Productivity

Ineffective employees or a vacant role result in a decrease in team output and a cost to U.S. companies estimated at up to $550 billion annually due to disengagement.

Financial Impact

Prolonged recruiting time negatively affects a firm’s employment, investment, profits, and sales.

To navigate this new landscape, employers must fundamentally rethink their talent strategies. The future of work will reward organizations that are adaptive, human-centric, and willing to challenge long-held assumptions. The following strategic recommendations are essential:

  • Embrace Skills-Based Hiring: The over-reliance on proxies like degrees and years of experience is a mechanical bottleneck that prevents companies from accessing a broader talent pool. Employers should shift to evaluating candidates based on demonstrated competencies, transferable skills, and practical assessments. Applicant Tracking Systems should be reconfigured to prioritize these attributes, allowing for a more nuanced and effective screening process.
  • Invest in Existing Talent: The most immediate solution to the skills gap may already reside within an organization’s walls. Implementing robust, role-specific learning and development programs and tuition reimbursement can address skill deficiencies from within. This not only makes a company more resilient to external labor shortages but also aligns with the priorities of younger generations who highly value continuous learning and career development.
  • Prioritize Flexibility and Well-Being: Modern workers, particularly those from Generation Z, are redefining career success. For them, a sustainable work-life balance is a higher priority than earning a high salary or reaching a senior role. Employers who wish to attract and retain this talent must offer meaningful work, fair compensation, and a focus on employee well-being, including adaptable scheduling and remote work options. A “hardline approach” to the on-site versus remote work discussion is increasingly viewed as a red flag.

In conclusion, the paradox of high job postings and scarce candidates is a multifaceted problem, reflecting a complex interplay of demographic realities, worker behavior, and deeply ingrained hiring inefficiencies. The apparent imbalance is a powerful signal for systemic change. Organizations that are agile, proactive, and willing to adapt their strategies to a changing workforce will not only resolve their hiring challenges but also build a more resilient and productive future.

Mike DePaulo, LSSBB, CDR,

DePaulo Consulting, LLC.

Works cited

  1. usafacts.org, accessed August 25, 2025, https://usafacts.org/answers/how-many-job-openings-are-there-in-the-united-states/country/united-states/#:~:text=About%207.4%20million%2C%20as%20of,business%20day%20of%20the%20month.
  2. How many job openings are there in the United States? | USAFacts, accessed August 25, 2025, https://usafacts.org/answers/how-many-job-openings-are-there-in-the-united-states/country/united-states/
  3. Job Openings and Labor Turnover – June 2025 – U.S. Bureau of …, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/jolts.pdf
  4. The great resignation becomes the ‘great stay’ in the US: What you need to know about job hugging and stagnant labor markets, accessed August 25, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/education/news/the-great-resignation-becomes-the-great-stay-in-the-us-what-you-need-to-know-about-job-hugging-and-stagnant-labour-markets/articleshow/123412955.cms
  5. The hidden costs of quiet quitting, quantified | McKinsey & Company, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.mckinsey.com/uk/our-insights/the-mckinsey-uk-blog/the-hidden-costs-of-quiet-quitting-quantified
  6. Shifting Demographic and Education Trends and Their Impact on …, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.burningglassinstitute.org/bginsights/shifting-demographic-and-education-trends-and-their-impact-on-the-us-workforce
  7. Workforce of the Future: What Businesses Need to Know | U.S. Chamber of Commerce, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.uschamber.com/workforce/data-deep-dive-the-workforce-of-the-future
  8. “Unretiring”: Why recent retirees want to go back to work | T. Rowe Price, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.troweprice.com/personal-investing/resources/insights/unretiring-why-recent-retirees-want-to-go-back-to-work.html
  9. The Post-Pandemic Shift in Retirement Expectations in the U.S. – Liberty Street Economics, accessed August 25, 2025, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2024/05/the-post-pandemic-shift-in-retirement-expectations-in-the-u-s/
  10. Workforce Skills Gap Trends 2024: Survey Report – Springboard, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.springboard.com/blog/business/skills-gap-trends-2024/
  11. A Better Measure of Skills Gaps – ACT, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.act.org/content/act/en/research/reports/act-publications/a-better-measure-of-skills-gaps/measuring-workforce-skills-gaps/a-better-measure-of-skills-gaps.html
  12. www.prosourcepeople.com, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.prosourcepeople.com/why-your-hiring-criteria-might-be-too-rigid/#:~:text=A%20study%20from%20Harvard%20Business,could%20quickly%20adapt%20and%20succeed.
  13. Why Your Hiring Criteria Might Be Too Rigid – ProSource Staffing, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.prosourcepeople.com/why-your-hiring-criteria-might-be-too-rigid/
  14. What is an Applicant Tracking System (ATS)? – SAP, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.sap.com/products/hcm/recruiting-software/what-is-an-applicant-tracking-system.html
  15. Applicant Tracking System Statistics (Updated for 2025) – SSR, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.selectsoftwarereviews.com/blog/applicant-tracking-system-statistics
  16. www.rezi.ai, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.rezi.ai/posts/ghost-jobs#:~:text=Ghost%20jobs%20are%20roles%20companies,growing%2C%20or%20keep%20investors%20happy.
  17. Ghost job – Wikipedia, accessed August 25, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_job
  18. Why Ghost Jobs Exist & How to Spot Them – Rezi AI, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.rezi.ai/posts/ghost-jobs
  19. Ghost Job Postings ARE Real : r/recruitinghell – Reddit, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/recruitinghell/comments/1mo7ask/ghost_job_postings_are_real/
  20. Out of the 1641 hiring managers surveyed, 40% of respondents admitted to posting fake job, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/jobsearchhacks/comments/1kyipqp/out_of_the_1641_hiring_managers_surveyed_40_of/
  21. 39% of hiring managers report fake job listings, report says – Staffing Industry Analysts, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.staffingindustry.com/news/global-daily-news/39-hiring-managers-report-fake-job-listings-report-says
  22. The Hidden Costs of Bad Hiring: How to Calculate Your True Cost-Per-Hire | HBK, accessed August 25, 2025, https://hbkcpa.com/insights/the-hidden-costs-of-bad-hiring-how-to-calculate-your-true-cost-per-hire/
  23. The Cost Of A Bad Hire And Red Flags to Avoid (2025) – Apollo Technical, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.apollotechnical.com/cost-of-a-bad-hire/
  24. Hiring Difficulties and Firms’ Growth* | Banca d’Italia, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.bancaditalia.it/pubblicazioni/altri-atti-convegni/2022-5th-cepr/Ronchi_Hiring_Difficulties_and_Firms_Growth.pdf
  25. How Much Does an Unsuccessful Hire Cost Your Organization? – TalentLens, accessed August 25, 2025, https://www.talentlens.com/blogs/financial-impact-bad-hire.html
  26. Gen Z brings new expectations to the workplace | Handshake, accessed August 25, 2025, https://joinhandshake.com/network-trends/gen-z-benefits-expectations/
  27. The Gen Z Effect and the Workforce Evolution: 2024 Statistics, accessed August 25, 2025, https://cake.com/empowered-team/gen-z-workforce-statistics/