I find this interesting. The article puts emphasis on nurses NOT retiring, but the BIGGER TRUTH is that Due To the great ECONOMIC CRUNCH, while hospitals may post positions, they have FROZEN HIRING OF NURSES, PERIOD. They aren't hiring even many strongly experienced nurses.
So now new grads can to continue to blame the nurses that aren't retiring, but the truth is, these hospitals have been told from the top to severely restrict hiring of nurses. They will post jobs to the outside b/c they have to; but those internal RNs will get the jobs that they advertise for. There may be a few smoozers that get through the wall of HIRING FREEZES, but mostly ADMINISTRATIONS are told to squeeze tight nursing positions, even if they can use them for positions.
I can prove this with the postings for hiring up and pulled down after meetings, inside administrators that have shared as much, and HR directors that are willing to be straight forward and address the REAL issue.
I find that the USA Today article is NOT being balanced in addressing the REAL ISSUE re: Tight Job Market for Nurses.
Sure, those that hold on longer d/t to 401K losses and economic fears are there, but the BIGGER and more realistic issue is that hospitals are being told to SEVERELY RESTRICT HIRING OF NURSES. Experienced nurses that seek to return to the hospital are NOT being hired either. So GNs, don't be misled here. It's a MUCH BIGGER economic issue than people not wanting to retire. Much, MUCH BIGGER.
USA TODAY, pease get to the bare bones of reality rather than touching on one factor while skirting around the bigger issue.