Daniel Zhao

@danielzhao.bsky.social

Glassdoor Chief Economist glassdoor.com/research I post charts about the job market and workplace trends Formerly known as @DanielBZhao on Twitter Maryland born & raised, now in NYC

Good June #JOLTS report with modest firming: -Hires rate improves to 3.4% from 3.3% in May -Quits rate flat at 2% (May revised up from 1.9%) -Job openings down slightly to 7.36m from 7.54m -Layoffs unchanged at 1.77m 1/

Employee sentiment fell in July to a new record low. According to the Glassdoor Employee Confidence Index, 43.5% of employees reported a positive business outlook for their employers, down from 44.4% in June Job security remains a top concern for workers + rebounding gas prices in July didn't help

line chart of Glassdoor Employee Confidence Index. trend was increasing from 2016 through mid-2022, sharp drop starting in H2 2022 and then unsteady decline since mid-2023 to a new record low in July 2026 (43.5%)

Researchers at Vanguard, Yale & MIT have an interesting paper looking at improving 401k match formulas. Employers could offer different formulas that would encourage more saving or reduce inequality in savings at the same cost by offering non-elective contributions and stretching out the match range

Title: "Figure 4: Many cost-equivalent match formulas would increase savings, decrease inequality or both"
Notes: "This figure compares employer match formulas that all have the same total cost as that in a typical plan design (a 50% match of up to 6% of pay), shown in red and labeled as “current formula.” Each of the other circles represents an alternative cost-equivalent formula. The horizontal axis shows how unequal employer contributions are across workers, measured by the coefficient of variation, while the vertical axis shows the increase in worker saving rates. The upward-sloping pattern highlights the trade-off between boosting saving rates and reducing inequality. The darker blue dots form the frontier, tracing the set of best-performing formulas along this trade-off. Two examples are highlighted with labels along the frontier line in yellow: one that increases saving rates the most
without increasing inequality and one that reduces inequality the most without lowering average saving rates."Title: "Figure 5: Better match formulas pair nonelective contributions with a stretched match"

Notes: This table presents better match formulas for the five most common match formulas under both voluntary enrollment and automatic enrollment plans. Specifically, it lists the cost-equivalent match formulas that either increase employee saving rates without increasing inequality in employer contribution rates (in other words, increase worker saving rates) or decrease inequality in employer contribution rates without decreasing employee saving rates (in other words, decrease inequality). Worker saving rates are measured in percentage points (ppts). Inequality is measured as the percentage change in the coefficient of variation (CV) in employer contribution rates.

3/ I didn't include it in the prior chart, but health insurance costs are growing at their fastest rate in almost two decades - that's probably at least a partial explanation for acceleration non-wage benefit costs.

Bild

GDP was dragged down by inventories and trade. Underlying demand ("real final sales to private domestic purchasers") was much stronger. Grew at an annualized rate of 3.9%, up from 1.7% in Q1.