&gt; A lot of plugins&#x2F;libraries require jQuery, so by using jQuery you can use those plugins.<p>I&#x27;m seeing more and more mature &quot;Vanilla JS&quot; libraries for common tasks I used to use jQuery plugins for.  But yes, if you <i>must</i> have some plugin, then you have to use jQuery.  In that case, it&#x27;s probably not worth the time to re-write the plugin in Vanilla js unless you have some specific bandwidth constraints among your users.<p>&gt; It&#x27;s easier to hire junior devs that can write good enough jQuery, compared to native JavaScript.<p>Sadly, you&#x27;re probably right about this.  I&#x27;m a little uncomfortable with the term &quot;native&quot; JavaScript since that makes some devs think it&#x27;s some kind of OS hacker-level of difficulty, when in fact, most jQuery equivalents in modern JS are quite similar to...jQuery.<p>&gt; As a very mature library, there&#x27;s lots of documentation out there for standardising the way you do things. This makes it easier for other devs to pick up your work.<p>Sure, I can see this being true.  I guess if you have to hire and train a bunch of relatively middle-of-the road junior developers, jQuery is a good choice at the moment.  But even if I were in your position, I&#x27;d still try to push them to get used to writing in vanilla JS.  This is good not only for your project, but also for them, since more and more employers, even mediocre employers, will start expecting potential frontend dev employees to be able to write vanilla JS.