It may be a very Merry Christmas for one lucky Powerball winner. The Christmas Eve Powerball jackpot is accumulating like a snowball tumbling down an epic sledding hill. The total is now so large, it’s a number rarely attainable even for high-stakes gamblers.
The prize has continued to grow after five drawings worth at least $1 billion went unclaimed with no ticket matching all six numbers. According to the Powerball website, that makes the current prize of around $1.7 billion the fourth-largest in Powerball history. It’s also the longest the game has ever gone without a winner.
Much like the holidays, Powerball is a game that brings people together to dream big and hope for a brighter future, said Matt Strawn, Powerball product group chair and Iowa Lottery CEO. We hope this growing jackpot inspires excitement and joy and, most importantly, good will to all. A portion of every ticket helps support programs and services that benefit local communities.
The next drawing takes place on Christmas Eve at 10:59 p.m. EST. And while it’s rare, a winner could claim the grand prize this very night. It happened once before, on December 24, 2011. Historically, Christmas Day has been a bit merrier for Powerball players, with four winners over the years having claimed the jackpot on December 25in 1996, 2002, 2010, and 2013.
Not quite a billionaire
Still, even if a lucky Powerball player’s Christmas wish came true (and what a wish!), that doesn’t mean they’ll have $1.7 billion in the bank when its all said and done. According to Powerball, after federal taxes the lump-sum prize will have an estimated cash value of $781.3 million.
But that’s before state taxeswhich vary widely across the countrycome into play. Some states take a hefty portion of lottery winnings: In Maryland, the tax rate is 9.5%; in New York, its 8.82%; while New Jersey takes 8%. Washington, D.C., imposes the highest tax on lottery prizes: a whopping 10.75%.
On the other end of the spectrum, a winner in Arizona would have to turn over just 2.5% of the prize to the state. Indiana and Louisiana take 3% and North Dakota takes 3.9%. A handful of locations won’t take a dime of the winnings. If you live in California, South Dakota, Washington, New Hampshire, Texas, Wyoming, Tennessee, or Puerto Rico, the jackpot is yours to keep after federal taxes are imposed.
Therefore, after all the taxes are sliced off the top, the final takeaway could range from $492,261,980 for locations with no state tax down to $408,272,230 for Washington, D.C.
While no one has walked away with the grand prize just yet, nine tickets in the most recent drawing matched five numbers, earning $1 million prizes: one each in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, and two in New York. That drawing produced 28 tickets eligible for $100,000 in winnings, and more than 100 tickets worth $50,000. Hardly a Dollar Store stocking stuffer!
The S&P 500 hit a record high on Wednesday, with broad gains across sectors supporting the main indexes during a shortened Christmas Eve session.
The benchmark S&P 500 touched an intraday record high of 6,921.42 points, surpassing its previous peak in October, as investors continued to bet on more interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve next year following mixed economic data.
The U.S. economy grew at its fastest pace in two years in the third quarter, government data showed on Tuesday, after the release was delayed by a 43-day federal shutdown. Worsening consumer confidence in December and a flat reading on November factory production, however, tempered the outlook.
Data on December 24 showed new applications for U.S. jobless benefits unexpectedly fell last week.
“Despite ongoing seasonal volatility, initial jobless claims remain in ranges consistent with relatively steady labor market conditions and don’t change our outlook for the labor market or Fed policy,” said Nancy Vanden Houten, lead economist at Oxford Economics.
Trading volumes were thin, with U.S. stock markets set to close at 1 p.m. ET (1800 GMT) on Wednesday. The markets will remain shut on Thursday for Christmas.
Micron Technology jumped 4% to scale a record high, extending its rally after issuing a strong forecast last week. Bank stocks were also among the top boosts to the S&P 500, with financials rising 0.4% to a new peak.
Recent gains in U.S. stocks have spurred hopes of a “Santa Claus rally,” a seasonal phenomenon where the S&P 500 posts gains in the last five trading days of the year and the first two in January, according to Stock Trader’s Almanac.
That period began on December 24 and would run through January 5.
At 10:36 a.m. ET, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 167.50 points, or 0.35%, to 48,610.95. The S&P 500 gained 10.24 points, or 0.15%, to 6,920.24, while the Nasdaq Composite lost 2.48 points, or 0.01%, to 23,558.35.
U.S. equities have swung sharply this year as tariff-related headlines, concerns about high valuations in technology and AI companies, and rapidly shifting interest-rate expectations boosted volatility.
Wall Street’s “fear gauge” was hovering near its lowest since December 2024.
Still, the bull market, which began in October 2022, stayed intact as optimism around AI, rate cuts, and a resilient economy supported sentiment, with all three main indexes set for their third straight yearly gain.
In the year ahead, global markets will be closely watch potential successors to Fed Chair Jerome Powell, after President Donald Trump said on Tuesday anyone who disagrees with him would “never be the Fed chairman.”
Nike climbed 4.7% after Apple CEO Tim Cook, the sportswear giant’s lead independent director, bought about $3 million worth of shares.
Intel fell 1.6% following a report that said Nvidia has halted tests to manufacture on Intel’s 18A chipmaking node after initial tests.
Dynavax Technologies surged 38.5% after French drugmaker Sanofi said it would buy the U.S. vaccines company for around $2.2 billion.
Advancing issues outnumbered decliners by a 1.69-to-1 ratio on the NYSE and by a 1.33-to-1 ratio on the Nasdaq.
The S&P 500 posted 11 new 52-week highs and two new lows, while the Nasdaq Composite recorded 43 new highs and 117 new lows.
By Sruthi Shankar and Shashwat Chauhan, Reuters
The European Union, France, and Germany condemned U.S. visa bans on five Europeans combating online hate and disinformation on Wednesday, after President Donald Trump‘s administration took its latest swipe at long-standing allies across the Atlantic.
Washington imposed visa bans on Tuesday on five European citizens, including French former EU commissioner Thierry Breton. It accuses them of working to censor freedom of speech or unfairly target U.S. tech giants with burdensome regulation.
The bans mark a fresh escalation against Europe, a region Washington argues is fast becoming irrelevant due to its weak defences, inability to tackle immigration, needless red tape, and “censorship” of far-right and nationalist voices to keep them from power.
Europeans forces to rethink Transatlantic ties
They come just weeks after a U.S. National Security Strategy document warned Europe faced “civilizational erasure” and must course-correct if it is to remain a reliable U.S. ally.
That documentand other comments by senior Trump officials, including a bombshell February speech by Vice President JD Vance in Munichhave upended postwar assumptions about Europe’s close relationship with its strongest ally, and concentrated minds across European capitals on the urgent need to diversify away from reliance on U.S. technology and defence.
In Brussels, Paris, and Berlin, senior officials condemned the U.S. bans and defended Europe’s right to legislate on how foreign companies operate locally.
A European Commission spokesperson said it “strongly condemns the U.S. decision”, adding: “Freedom of expression is a fundamental right in Europe and a shared core value with the United States across the democratic world.”
The spokesperson said the EU would seek answers from Washington, but said it could “respond swiftly and decisively” against the “unjustified measures”.
French President Emmanuel Macron, who has been travelling across France to warn about the dangers that disinformation poses to democracy, said he had spoken with Breton and thanked him for his work.
“We will not give up, and we will protect Europe’s independence and the freedom of Europeans,” Macron said on X.
DSA angers DC
Breton, a former French finance minister and the European commissioner for the internal market from 2019 to 2024, was one of the architects of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
A landmark piece of legislation, the DSA aims to make the internet safer by compelling tech giants to do more to tackle illegal content, including hate speech and child sexual abuse material.
But the DSA has riled the Trump administration, which accuses the EU of placing “undue” restrictions on freedom of expression in its efforts to combat hateful speech, misinformation, and disinformation. It also argues that the DSA unfairly targets U.S. tech giants and U.S. citizens.
Trump officials were particularly upset earlier this month when Brussels sanctioned Elon Musk’s X platform, fining it 120 million euros for breaching online content rules. Musk and Breton have often sparred online over EU tech regulation, with Musk referring to him as the “tyrant of Europe”.
Breton, the most high-profile individual targeted, wrote on X: “Is McCarthy’s witch hunt back?”
Germany says bans on activists ‘unacceptable’
The bans also targeted Imran Ahmed, the British CEO of the U.S.-based Center for Countering Digital Hate; Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon of the German non-profit HateAid; and Clare Melford, co-founder of the Global Disinformation Index, according to U.S. Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers.
Germany’s justice ministry said the two German activists had the government’s “support and solidarity” and the visa bans on them were unacceptable, adding that HateAid supported people affected by unlawful digital hate speech.
“Anyone who describes this as censorship is misrepresenting our constitutional system,” it said in a statement. “The rules by which we want to live in the digital space in Germany and in Europe are not decided in Washington.”
Britain said it was committed to upholding the right to free speech.
“While every country has the right to set its own visa rules, we support the laws and institutions which are working to keep the internet free from the most harmful content,” a British government spokesperson said in a statement.
A Global Disinformation Index spokesperson called the visa bans “an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship.”
“The Trump Administration is, once again, using the full weight of the federal government to intimidate, censor, and silence voices they disagree with,” they said. “Their actions today are immoral, unlawful, and un-American.”
Breton is not the first French person to be sanctioned by the Trump administration.
In August, Washington sanctioned French judge Nicolas Yann Guillou, who sits on the International Criminal Court, for the tribunal’s targeting of Israeli leaders and a past decision to investigate U.S. officials.
Sudip Kar-Gupta, Gabriel Stargardter, Sarah Marsh, and Sam Tabahriti, Reuters
In many states, you can get kicked out of your home if the local government thinks someone else will generate more tax revenue.
The Takings Clause is a part of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and it says that if the government wants to take away someone’s private property, they have to do it in a way that’s fair. Most of us grew up hearing adults say that life isnt fair. And theyre rightit isnt. Neither is an authority forcing you to give up your property for whatever they think is fair.
Courts have said the government can take your property if it’s for something that benefits the public, like building a road or a park. As if that couldnt go wrong.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
How did we get here?!
In the years leading up to the American Revolution, the British government had a policy of taking land from private citizens and giving it to favored individuals or companies for economic development. This practice, known as eminent domain or expropriation, was a major source of frustration for colonists, who were aghast at the violation of their property rights.
The Proclamation of 1763 forbade American colonists from settling west of the Appalachian Mountains, because British officials might move to the colonies and want some land. This policy prevented colonists from using the land for farming or hunting, and was one of the factors that contributed to the war for independence.
The overreach by a central authority was fresh in Americans minds when the Virginia Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1776. Its one of this countrys earliest documents to recognize the importance of property rights. The Declaration said “all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which . . . the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
Property rights are essential to individual liberty and should be protected by the government, but there was always a fanbase for central power. During the debates at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, there was significant discussion about the need to protect private property rights. James Madison argued that without such protections, the government could seize property at will, which would be a threat to individual liberty. Madison proposed a protection of property rights, which eventually became the Fifth Amendment.
This was only a decade after Americans experienced the widespread abuse of eminent domain that some of their new leaders were saying ackshully, taking your property by force is for the greater good.
In the early 19th century, the Supreme Court ruled that private property could only be taken for public use and with just compensation. This principle was reaffirmed in several cases, including Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co. (1872) and Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago (1897).
Later decisions expanded on this idea, such as the landmark case of Kelo v. City of New London in 2005, which held that the government could take private property for economic development purposes.
Kelo v. The Man
In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled the government could use its power to take Susette Kelos private property for economic development purposes, even though her property was not blighted or in disrepair. The city where she lived wanted Pfizer to have her property along with a bunch of other properties, because Pfizer would generate more tax revenue than a lowly nurse and other working class households.
The homeowners in the affected area argued that this was an improper use of eminent domain, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city, claiming the taking was permissible because it was part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan to create jobs and increase tax revenue.
Some states were angered enough to pass laws limiting the use of eminent domain.
Pfizer didnt even end up building what they promised, and the land ended up being sold for people not named Susette Kelo to live on Susette Kelos old property.
Why do I vent about this?
Because I want you to wrestle with the idea that eminent domaintaking property by forceis a power move. I want you to feel something between discomfort and rage when you hear about people being forced to let a road widening take over their front yard, or being forced to move out of their home to make way for some corporation.
Weve gotten to a place in modern culture where the press equates property rights and right wing extremist, sending a not-so-subtle message to readers or viewers that you dont want to side with those people. But property rights arent a right/left or red/blue issue. My most left-wing friend should be a staunch property rights advocate to hold big corporate power at bay.
The British Empire was hardly a left-wing operative, taking what they wanted when they wanted in the 1700s. And the City of New London was definitely not pushing a working-class agenda as it kicked out homeowners to make way for Big Pharma in the early 2000s.
If you shrug at a government having the power to take stuff just because, then all your other rights and protections are up for grabs.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
Bruce Springsteen said it best: “Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town.”
While the rest of us are wrapping up work, Santa Claus is in the midst of his busiest day of the year, flying across the globe, distributing wrapped-up Christmas gifts to hundreds of million of kids.
Want to know where Santa is, and when he’s coming to your town?
For real-time tracking of Santa and his reindeer, NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, is providing a live feed all day on Christmas Eve, Wednesday, December 24, which started with Santa’s departure from the North Pole this morning at 6 a.m. ET.
Eager kidsand let’s face it, just-as-excited adultscan “see” where Santa is from moment to moment (at the time of this writing: Russia) over at NORADs website by clicking on View Santas route on a 2D map and Santa’s big red hat.
At last look, Santa hit some snow over Russia on his way down to the Indian Ocean, and has been delivering a lot of packages: 2,026,550,394 to be exact, at last glance at the gift tracker in the upper right corner.
What is Santa’s route?
NORAD has been tracking Santa’s route for the past 70 years, which traditionally takes him from the North Pole, down the International Date Line to the Pacific Ocean, through the South Pacific, New Zealand, and Australia. Then, he typically heads west through Asia, Africa, and Europe, before crossing the Atlantic Ocean to Canada, then here to the U.S., before heading south to Mexico, Central America, then South America.
However, keep in mind that due to weather, Santa’s route can change.
How to track Santa on social media
In addition to NORAD’s live map, the Command center is also posting updates on the NORAD Tracks Santa app, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and X; and precocious kids everywhere can speak to Santa by calling 1-877-HI-NORAD (1-877-446-6723).
A pro-Russian hacking group claimed responsibility for a major cyberattack that halted package deliveries by France’s national postal service just days before Christmas, prosecutors said Wednesday.After the claim by the cybercrime group known as Noname057, French intelligence agency DGSI took over the investigation into the hacking attack, the Paris prosecutor’s office said in a statement to The Associated Press.The group has been accused of other cyberattacks in Europe, including around a NATO summit in the Netherlands and French government sites. It was the target of a big European police operation earlier this year.Central computer systems at French national postal service La Poste were knocked offline Monday in a distributed denial of service, or DDoS, cyberattack that still wasn’t fully resolved by Wednesday morning, the company said.Postal workers couldn’t track package deliveries, and online payments at the company’s banking arm were also disrupted. It was a major blow to La Poste, which delivered 2.6 billion packages last year and employs more than 200,000 people, during the busiest season of the year.France and other European allies of Ukraine allege that Russia is waging a campaign of “hybrid warfare” to sow division in Western societies and undermine their support for Ukraine. The AP has tracked more than 145 incidents including sabotage, assassinations, cyberattacks, disinformation and other hostile acts that are increasingly draining police resources.
Associated Press
Chinese tech giant ByteDance has signed an agreement to sell a majority stake in its video platform TikTok to a group of U.S. investors. President Donald Trump announced a preliminary agreement for the sale on Sept. 19, 2025, following his negotiation with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew told employees in a memo obtained by news organizations that the company is working to close the deal by Jan. 22, 2026. Chinese and U.S. authorities will also need to approve the deal.
The deal creates a new U.S.-only version of the app, bringing it into compliance with a law signed by President Joe Biden on April 23, 2024, and upheld by the Supreme Court on Jan. 17, 2025. Specifics of the deal remain to be hammered out, but some details are emerging. These include what will happen to the video-sharing apps core algorithmand what that means for TikToks millions of U.S. users.
The Chinese government has indicated it will not permit ByteDance to sell the algorithm, because it is classified as a controlled technology export, per Chinese law. Meanwhile, U.S. tech industry executives and some lawmakers say compliance with the law requires the algorithm to be under American control. The deal as proposed includes licensing the algorithm so that it remains Chinese intellectual property while the U.S. version of the app continues to use the technology.
TikToks For You page algorithm is widely considered the most important part of the app. As one analyst put it: Buying TikTok without the algorithm would be like buying a Ferrari without the engine.
The algorithms value lies in its uncanny capacity to anticipate users content preferences. Many users claim it knows them better than they know themselvesa sentiment that has evolved into a curious mix of spiritual belief and conspiracy theorizing, as my colleagues and I have documented. Other scholars have similarly noted that users feel more intimately seen and known by TikToks algorithm than those powering other popular platforms.
I have studied social media algorithms for nearly a decade, exploring how our relationships with them have evolved as they become increasingly entwined with daily life. As both a social media scholar and TikTok devotee, I want to shed some light on how the algorithm works and how the app is likely to change in the wake of its sale.
How the TikTok algorithm works
In some ways, the TikTok algorithm does not differ significantly from other social media algorithms. At their core, algorithms are merely a series of steps used to accomplish a specific goal. They perform mathematical computations to optimize output in service of that goal.
There are two layers to the TikTok algorithm. First, there is the abstract layer that defines the outcome developers wish to accomplish. An internal document shared with The New York Times specified that TikToks algorithm optimizes for four goals: user value, long-term user value, creator value and platform value.
But how do you turn these goals into math? What does an abstract concept like user value even mean? Its not practical to ask users whether they value their experience every time they visit the site. Instead, TikTok relies on proxy signals that translate abstract outcomes into quantifiable measuresspecifically, likes, comments, shares, follows, time spent on a given video, and other user-behavior data. These signals then become part of an equation to predict two key concrete outcomes: retention, or the likelihood that a user will return to the site, and time spent on the app.
The TikTok For You page algorithm relies on machine learning for predicting retention and time spent. Machine learning is a computational process in which an algorithm learns patterns in a dataset, with little or no human guidance, to produce the best equation to predict an outcome. Through learning patterns, the algorithm determines how much individual data signals matter for coming up with a precise prediction.
A Wall Street Journal investigation found that the amount of time users spend watching each video plays a large role in how the algorithm chooses videos it suggests to users. Using the equation it has generated to predict retention and time spent, the algorithm assigns a score to each video and ranks possible videos that could be shown to the user by this score. The higher the score for an individual user, the more likely the video will appear in their feed.
Of course, content characteristics and other users additionally inform recommendations, and there are other subprocesses folded into the equation. This step is where algorithmic moderation usually comes in. If a video looks like engagement bait or has excessive gore, for example, the contents score will be penalized.
Here are the basics of how TikToks algorithm works.
Whats likely to change for US users
The sale has not been finalized, but the algorithms fate is coming into focus. According to reports, the United States-only version of the algorithm will be retrained on only U.S. users data. Users wont need to download a new version of the app for the changed algorithm to work.
Even though the algorithm itself is the same as before, its fairly certain that TikTok will change. I see two key reasons for change.
First, the proposed apps U.S.-only user population will alter the makeup of the underlying dataset informing algorithmic recommendations on an ongoing basis. As the kinds of content come to reflect American cultural preferences, values and behaviors, the algorithm may be slightly different as it learns new patterns.
Though users are more likely to stick with the app because they dont need to download a new version, not all users will choose to, especially if it is seen as under the control of Trumps allies. Under the current deal, Oracle Corp. and the U.S. government would oversee the algorithms retraining. This arrangement suggests that the U.S. government may have significant influence over how the app works.
The deal would give an 80% share to U.S. investors, including 50% to new investors Oracle, Silver Lake and Andreessen Horowitz. These investors have connections to Trump, and an apparent provision of the deal allows the U.S. government to select one board member.
These influences raise the possibility of a boycott from left-leaning users and creators similar to earlier boycotts of Target for rolling back DEI measures and Disney after the since-reversed suspension of Jimmy Kimmel. This may result in a user populationand datareflective of a narrower realm of interests and ideologies.
Second, its possible that the majority shareowners of the new app will decide to adjust the algorithm, particularly when it comes to content moderation. The new owners may wish to modify TikToks Community Guidelines according to their view of acceptable and unacceptable speech.
For example, TikToks current Community Guidelines prohibit misinformation and work with independent fact-checkers to assess the accuracy of content. While Meta used to follow a similar approach for Instagram and Facebook, in January 2025 Meta announced that it would end its relationships with independent fact-checkers and loosen content restrictions. YouTube has similarly relaxed its content moderation this year.
With reports that the U.S. government would oversee retraining the algorithm, theres a possibility that not only the new investors but also the government itself could influence how content is prioritized and moderated.
The bottom line is algorithms are highly sensitive to context. They reflect the interests, values, and worldviews of the people who build them, the preferences and behaviors of people whose data informs their models, and the legal and economic contexts they operate within.
This means that while its difficult to predict exactly what a U.S.-only TikTok will be like, its safe to assume it will not be a perfect mirror image of the current app.
This story was updated on Dec. 19, 2025, to include new details about TikToks sale.
Kelley Cotter is an assistant professor of information sciences and technology at Penn State.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
As 2026 begins, the workplace is rapidly changing due to technological advances, shifting labor dynamics, and evolving employee expectations. Organizations that anticipate and adjust to these changes are more likely to attract top talent, boost productivity, and stay competitive. From embracing artificial intelligence in the workplace to a continued focus on skill-based hiring, the future of work is being shaped by trends that could redefine how we collaborate, learn, and thrive. Here are three top workforce trends to watch in 2026.
1. THE AI-AUGMENTED WORKFORCE
The adoption of AI is quickly becoming a critical factor in modernizing the workplace. Companies and employees alike are recognizing AIs value and are actively weaving it into their daily operations and workflows. Rather than replacing jobs and skills outright, AI is reshaping roles and creating new opportunities to boost efficiency and improve work quality.
McKinsey Global Institute reports that AI-driven automation has the potential to generate $2.9 trillion in economic value across the U.S. by 2030. Their research suggests that unlocking this potential value will require more than just automating individual tasks. It involves rethinking entire workflows to enable effective collaboration among workers and AI assistants.
By automating routine, repetitive tasks like document preparation and basic research, AI allows employees to focus on more complex tasks and contribute in more strategic, impactful ways. A March survey we conducted with 1,000 HR professionals showed that nearly 70% view AI positively and find it helpful for their work. This benefit is particularly evident when automating initial, high-volume administrative tasks in the recruitment process.
The survey suggests that AI adoption is highest during the early stages of the hiring process, especially in job posting (39.7%) and résumé screening (39.5%), with larger companies more likely to use these tools due to a higher volume of applications. Usage drops for more subjective tasks like hiring decision (14%) and shortlisting (13%), showing a continued preference to leave key judgments and final decisions to humans.
2. SKILLS-FIRST HIRING AND UPSKILLING
With many industries continuing to struggle with labor shortages, more employers are reevaluating their hiring practices. To fill this gap, many companies are moving toward skills-based hiring. The transition to skills-based and skills-first hiring is more than just a passing trend; it’s a strategic response to evolving labor market dynamics.
A National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) found that 65% of employers surveyed reported adopting skills-based hiring practices for entry-level hires. Additionally, 90% of employers who use skills-based hiring report applying it during the interview stage, while almost three-quarters include it in the initial filtering process.
This emphasis on a candidates skills highlights a common misunderstanding between skills-based and skills-first hiring methods. Skills-first hiring primarily evaluates candidates based on skills, though other factors might still influence the decision. In skills-based hiring, a persons abilities are important but not necessarily more important than other factors like education or experience.
By embracing continuous learning, individuals can effectively bridge existing skill gaps and proactively position themselves for the jobs of tomorrow. Our March survey of 1,000 unemployed individuals found that among respondents actively seeking jobs, 59.3% of those who considered upskilling reported receiving a job interview compared to 48.7% who did not, a 21.8% difference.
Upskilling not only boosts their short-term marketability but also strengthens long-term resilience in a constantly changing workforce, ultimately leading to a more confident and successful return to employment.
3. A STAGNANT LABOR MARKET FOR NEW GRADUATES
The U.S. labor market is currently experiencing a stagnant phase, often described by economists as low-fire, low-hire. This means companies are not laying off employees, but they are also not hiring new staff quickly. While this stability benefits current workers, it creates a significant obstacle for the newest generation of workers, especially recent graduates. This is particularly true for those not pursuing in-demand fields, such as the healthcare industry.
NACEs 2026 job outlook reports that 45% of employers view the overall job market for 2026 class of graduates as fair. The last time the majority of employers (52%) described the job market this way was in 2021, when hiring expectations were similarly stagnant. This signals a return to when the market was still recovering from the pandemic, and companies were more cautious and hiring out of necessity.
Despite this bleak outlook for young job seekers, students are still optimistic. ZipRecruiter research shows that students overwhelmingly expect a quick transition from campus to career, with 82% expecting to land their first professional job within three months of graduating. While 77% do manage to find employment quickly, 5% are still searching for their first job.
While the present job market offers stability for current employees, it creates challenges for new graduates trying to succeed. Moving from college to a professional career is now more like a marathon than a sprint, requiring young job seekers to focus on building skills in high-demand fields and refining their job search tactics to navigate an increasingly selective employment environment.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The 2026 workplace will be influenced by emerging technologies, changing expectations, and evolving hiring practices. Although economic uncertainties and slower recruitment may pose challenges, they highlight the importance of innovation and adaptability in business strategies. Organizations that invest early in AI and focus on skill-based hiring are better positioned to attract and retain top talent, foster innovation, and boost productivity and growth. Recognizing these trends is essential for successfully navigating the rapidly changing labor market and maintaining competitiveness.
Paul Toomey is president and founder of Geographic Solutions.
I didnt set out to found a tech company, much less a brand that would redefine the standard for outdoor cellular cameras. Tactacam started with a simple passion for capturing and sharing outdoor moments, and that same passion drives us today.
Throughout the years, Ive found that success, growth, and customer loyalty come down to staying true to who you are. The brands that thrive lead with purpose and values, using them as guiding principles to earn trust, influence decisions, and create lasting loyalty, even during change.
When brands drift from their core, they risk disrupting the very foundation of trust theyve built. Weve seen the consequences of brand drift play out in recent headlines with failed rebrands and campaigns that alienate core customers. But when the foundation is strong and missteps happen, 67% of consumers are more likely to stay loyal to brands they already trust, according to Edelman’s Trust Barometer.
Staying rooted in our purpose to enhance outdoor pursuits has shaped how we innovate, serve our customers, and define our culture. Here are four lessons Ive learned about keeping purpose at my core, and why it gives brands a winning edge.
1. LEAD WITH VALUES THAT MEAN SOMETHING
Meaningful values are more than just a slogan on a breakroom poster. Core values are field-tested standards that define how you innovate, care for your customers, and how your people show up.
What began as a humble garage operation, evolved into a new way to experience and share outdoor memories. This foundation of passion, getting our hands dirty, and ambition continues to define our mission. At the core is a deep appreciation for the outdoors, and a commitment to innovation and improving the way outdoor moments are captured. These values underpin how we continue to serve our community.
Our approach was simple: We started by identifying our values and making them simple enough for everyone to repeat. Then, we committed to embodying those values at every level of the organization, ensuring they guided every interaction and decision, even the difficult ones.
2. STAY CONNECTED TO YOUR CUSTOMERS
A strong customer satisfaction score is an important benchmark, but it doesnt tell the full story. The most meaningful interactions happen behind the scenes in genuine customer interactions. According to Zendesk, 60% of consumers have made purchases based solely on the service they expect to receive.
Weve learned that authentic customer relationships are built from real conversations without scripts or chatbots. When your support team speaks with thousands of customers a day, they have a unique opportunity to not only help them solve challenges, but also celebrate their successes, and hear insights on what customers want to see next. Investing in these human relationships creates immeasurable value that automation simply cant.
Listening to customers isnt just the role of customer service. Making time to listen is the responsibility of everyone in an organization. Spend time with your customers and listen to their stories and their feedback firsthand. Some of the most powerful innovations will come directly from customer stories.
3. TURN CUSTOMER INSIGHTS INTO INNOVATION
Innovation starts with insights from your core customers and understanding: How can we solve a problem? How can we improve the experience? And what will it take to deliver the best possible product?
When our customers asked if we could build a more advanced cellular trail camera solution, we accepted the challenge. We listened and engaged them every step of the way, from incorporating their most requested features, to involving them in the testing process to ensure it performed in real world conditions. They said, what if, and we delivered. The result was not only a great product but a solution that exceeded their expectations.
The takeaway is to allow customer insights to lead you down the path of innovation. When they ask, listen and find a way to deliver. It will almost always pay off in a big way.
4. CREATE A CULTURE BUILT ON HUMAN CONNECTION
AI is changing how we interact. Going all in on human connection is more important than ever. As organizations grow, culture becomes about creating real, human connections and rallying people around a shared purpose.
The most valuable lesson weve learned in building our culture is that impactful traditions come from creating authentic connections to employees passions. At our core, its about spending time outdoors. Programs like TactaTreks, which takes top-performing team members on epic outdoor adventures with leadership throughout the year, arent just fun. They also bring employees together around shared values. Even offering extra PTO days for time exploring the outdoors reinforces that we prioritize what our people value most.
Culture is truly a lived experience that connects your people to your purpose. Its built around the moments that create community and inspire teams to do their best work.
Purpose and values are the foundation to lasting loyalty. By consistently leading with your core, staying connected to your customers, and creating human connections with your community, you dont just win, you build a brand with staying power.
Jeff Peel is CEO and cofounder of Tactacam.
About 1 in 3 Americans make at least one New Years resolution, according to Pew Research. While most of these vows focus on weight loss, fitness, and other health-related goals, many fall into a distinct category: work.
Work-related New Years resolutions tend to focus on someones current job and career, whether to find a new job or, if the timing and conditions are right, whether to embark on a new career path.
Were an organizational psychologist and a philosopher who have teamed up to study why people workand what they give up for it. We believe that there is good reason to consider concerns that apply to many if not most professionals: how much work to do and when to get it done, as well as how to make sure your work doesnt harm your physical and mental healthwhile attaining some semblance of work-life balance.
Country music icon Dolly Parton wrote and sang the theme song in the movie 9 to 5, and had a starring role as well.
How we got here
Most Americans consider the 40-hour workweek, which calls for employees being on the job from nine to five, to be a standard schedule.
This ubiquitous notion is the basis of a hit Dolly Parton song and 1980 comedy film, 9 to 5, in which the country music star had a starring role. Microsoft Outlook calendars by default shade those hours with a different color than the rest of the day.
This schedule didnt always reign supreme.
Prior to the Great Depression, which lasted from 1929-1941, 6-day workweeks were the norm. In most industries, U.S. workers got Sundays off so they could go to church. Eventually, it became customary for employees to get half of Saturday off too.
Legislation that President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed into law as part of his sweeping New Deal reforms helped establish the 40-hour workweek as we know it today. Labor unions had long advocated for this abridged schedule, and their activism helped crystallize it across diverse occupations.
Despite many changes in technology as well as when and how work gets done, these hours have had a surprising amount of staying power.
Americans work longer hours
In general, workers in richer countries tend to work fewer hours. However, in the U.S. today, people work more on average than in most other wealthy countries.
For many Americans, this is not so much a choice as it is part of an entrenched working culture.
There are many factors that can interfere with thriving at work, including boredom, an abusive boss, or an absence of meaning and purpose. In any of those cases, its worth asking whether the time spent at work is worth it. Only 1 in 3 employed Americans say that they are thriving.
Whats more, employee engagement is at a 10-year low. For both engaged and disengaged employees, burnout increased as the number of work hours rose. People who were working more than 45 hours per week were at greatest risk for burnout, according to Gallup.
However, the average number of hours Americans spend working has declined from 44 hours and 6 minutes in 2019 to just under 43 hours per week in 2024. The reduction is sharper for younger employees.
We think this could be a sign that younger Americans are pushing back after years of being pressured to embrace a hustle culture in which people brag about working 80 and even 100 hours per week.
Critiques of hustle culture are becoming more common.
Fight against a pervasive notion
Anne-Marie Slaughter, a lawyer and political scientist who wears many hats, coined the term time macho more than a decade ago to convey the notion that someone who puts in longer hours at the office automatically will outperform their colleagues.
Another term, face time, describes the time that we are seen by others doing our work. In some workplaces, the quantity of an employees face time is treated as a measure of whether they are dependableor uncommitted.
It can be easy to jump to the conclusion that putting in more hours at the office automatically boosts an employees performance. However, researchers have found that productivity decreases with the number of hours worked due to fatigue.
Even those with the uxury to choose how much time they devote to work sometimes presume that they need to clock as many hours as possible to demonstrate their commitment to their jobs.
To be sure, for a significant amount of the workforce, there is no choice about how much to work because that time is dictated, whether by employers, the needs of the job or the growing necessity to work multiple jobs to make ends meet.
4-day workweek experiments
One way to shave hours off the workweek is to get more days off.
A multinational working group has examined experiments with a four-day workweek: an arrangement in which people work 80% of the time32 hours over four dayswhile getting paid the same as when they worked a standard 40-hour week. Following an initial pilot in the U.S. and Ireland in 2022, the working group has expanded to six continents. The researchers consistently found that employers and employees alike thrive in this setup and that their work didnt suffer.
Most of those employees, who ranged from government workers to technology professionals, got Friday off. Shifting to having a three-day weekend meant that employees had more time to take care of themselves and their families. Productivity and performance metrics remained high.
Waiting for technology to take a load off
Many employment experts wonder whether advances in artificial intelligence will reduce the number of hours that Americans work.
Might AI relieve us all of the tasks we dread doing, leaving us only with the work we want to doand which, presumably, would be worth spending time on? That does sound great to both of us.
But theres no guarantee that this will be the case.
We think the likeliest scenario is one in which the advantages of AI are unevenly distributed among people who work for a living. Economist John Maynard Keynes predicted almost a century ago that technological unemployment would lead to 15-hour workweeks by 2030. As that year approaches, its become clear that he got that wrong.
Researchers have found that for every working hour that technology saves us, it increases our work intensity. That means work becomes more stressful and expectations regarding productivity rise.
Deciding when and how much time to work
Many adults spend so much time working that they have few waking hours left for fitness, relationships, new hobbies, or anything else.
If you have a choice in the matter of when and how much you work, should you choose differently?
Even questioning whether you should stick to the 40-hour workweek is a luxury, but its well worth considering changing your work routines as a new year gets underway if thats a possibility for you. To get buy-in from employers, consider demonstrating how you will still deliver your core work within your desired time frame.
And, if you are fortunate enough to be able to choose to work less or work differently, perhaps you can pass it on: You probably have the power and privilege to influence the working hours of others you employ or supervise.
Jennifer Tosti-Kharas is a professor of management at Babson College.
Christopher Wong Michaelson is a professor of ethics and business law at the University of St. Thomas.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
