A future-of-work expert said Gen Zers didn’t have the “promise of stability” at work, so they’re putting their personal lives and well-being first.

  • Showroom7561
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    What does an OK lifestyle look like if you aren’t prioritizing work?

    I’m not being critical to sound like an ass. I think we’re all stuck in the same, miserable, work-dependant lifestyle, and it’s aweful.

    • Takios@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      I realize I’m privileged as my situation is a lot better than having to live paycheck to paycheck. However, if I wanted to get a nice house, decent car, vacations, etc. I’d have to put in a lot more work than the usual 40 hours. Instead of doing that though I looked at my finances and decided, I could reduce my hours to 35 without decreasing my quality of life too much so I did that instead.

      I do understand though that people in precarious and less-compensated jobs cannot afford this luxury.

      • Showroom7561
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah, if you’ve got a high-paying job then you have the means to not have to prioritize work. Hopefully, that remains constant over the next several decades.

        But how many Gen Z’ers are in that position?

        We keep seeing articles about Gen Z’ers not being able to afford rent, let alone food and other basic comforts. They are, or will be, forced to put work first. Not just working harder to get the luxuries of their grandparents or parents, but working harder to scrape by.

        And I don’t even see and end to this. Corporations will eventually abolish retirement, because very few will be able to retire the way things keep going.

        • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I think the idea is that a lot of people prioritize only their work. The whole hustle grindset thing, working obscene hours to try to get rich. Instead of doing that, seeing that whole rat race for what it is, doing enough work to get by, and then actually enjoying your time elsewhere seems to be what this is advocating for.

          • Showroom7561
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think the idea is that a lot of people prioritize only their work.

            Is this really a thing? Has it ever been for the masses?

            Sure, people might prioritize work over anything else when they are young, but that’s often necessary to secure a future.

            Other people live to work, but that’s pretty rare.

            Instead of doing that, seeing that whole rat race for what it is, doing enough work to get by, and then actually enjoying your time elsewhere seems to be what this is advocating for.

            I thought that what most people do. Does anyone actually believe that working hard at their low-paying job is going to make them rich? I thought that idea was dead decades ago.

            • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Just look at the hustle grindset, or sigma grind, or whatever you want to call it. No, most people aren’t working 120 hours a week at a McDonald’s, but a lot more are getting multiple jobs, side hustles, etc to get to “get ahead” in the game.

              • Showroom7561
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                To get ahead or to get by? Nobody who’s grinding two or three jobs is wealthy, and I think they’re only doing it to pay the bills because a single job doesn’t cut it anymore.

                I’ve spoken with uber drivers who already have a “good job” but they need money to support their parents who are living with them, perhaps multiple kids, etc. It really sucks to be in that situation because work is all you do.

    • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      Do the minimum to put the food you like on the table, to afford a place to live, and then fuck off for the rest of the time. No OT, no projects outside of work hrs, no checking email overnight. Do your job, to the level that is strictly required, and reprioritize yourself any other time.

      • Showroom7561
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        And you think that’ll allow you to retire at 65? 85?

        Look, I get it. I don’t prioritize work over “life”, but I’m not naive to believe that I’ll have a comfortable retirement, because I won’t.

        I think the majority of us will stuggle tremendously in the coming decades.

        • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I never said you’d be able to comfortably retire. That’s another part of it. The younger generations know they won’t retire at all, or at a reasonable time, so just do your 40, get enough to live, and go do something actually fulfilling.

        • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Most don’t expect to retire ever - they will work enough to survive until they die, naturally or otherwise.

          Whether this is bleak realism or self-fulfilling, dangerous pessimism is an interesting question.