The working style of Generation Z is unprecedented! "Labeling them as lazy is misguided," says the top economic advisor in defense, while social media is divided in opinion.

The working style of Generation Z is unprecedented! "Labeling them as lazy is misguided," says the top economic advisor in defense, while social media is divided in opinion.

"Young people today don't work"—a cliché that a top German economist has directly challenged. Monika Schnitzer, chair of the "Five Wise Men" (Council of Economic Experts) advising the government, argues that the generational criticism is misplaced, stating that Gen Z (born roughly between 1995 and 2010) is "working more than previous generations."


The reason this statement has garnered attention is not just because it defends young people, but because the ongoing "work more" debate in Europe has shifted its focus from welfare recipients to part-time workers, and now to the youth. Economic uncertainty, energy prices, and industrial competitiveness concerns create a narrative where someone is often blamed for "laziness."


The content of "working" includes increased student employment

Schnitzer's argument is clear: young people are entering the labor market earlier and working more hours. A particularly symbolic aspect is student employment. More people are finding it necessary to work while attending university to make ends meet, which in turn raises the "youth employment rate."


In fact, analysis by the labor market research institute IAB shows that labor market participation among those aged 20-24 has significantly increased since 2015, contradicting the common stereotype that "young people have lost their diligence." The key point here is not a narrative of increased "willingness to work," but rather the strengthening of a structure where they "have to work." As tuition, rent, and prices rise, part-time jobs and short-term work become a "survival strategy" rather than a "rewarding experience."


The "I want to go to BMW" comment and what it signifies

Schnitzer also touched on the tendency of young people to be less inclined to pursue public service careers, citing that in Munich, many prefer to work at BMW. This reflects a preference for growth and rewards over stability, or the reality that "government salary structures can't keep up with living costs."


However, this narrative could spark another issue. Simplifying "going to the private sector = ambition" risks blaming the shortage of public servants on "youth values." Ignoring the attractiveness of the system (wages, work styles, careers) and dismissing it as a generational preference is risky.


And the debate shifts from "time" to "productivity"

The main reason this topic has heated up is the repeated political message in Germany to "increase working hours." Derogatory terms for part-time work have caused a stir, and statements like "work an extra hour every day" have emerged.


In response, Schnitzer criticizes, "The issue is not the weekly working hours, but productivity." She argues that without addressing structural weaknesses like insufficient investment, delays in digitalization and automation, and the lack of updates to AI and machinery, urging individuals to "work more" won't solve the problem. She also points to insufficient childcare and tax systems that discourage full-time work (like spousal taxation) as barriers.


In essence, the problem is not that "someone is lazy," but that the country hasn't created a system that allows for "achieving results in less time."


Social media reactions: Why empathy and backlash don't align

This topic has also divided opinions on social media. Broadly, three patterns stand out.


1) Empathy: "We're not lazy. We just don't have the luxury."

From the young people's side, the empathy is that "it's not that we don't work, but we have to work due to living costs." The increase in student employment is more about "household circumstances" than "conscious reform," and there's a sense that "working = healthy" can't be celebrated unconditionally.


There's also strong backlash against being lumped together in generational discussions. In response to statements like "young people have too many demands" or "lack grit," reactions such as "look at the data" and "conditions are different" naturally arise.


2) Backlash: "The definition of 'working' is off."

On the other hand, skeptics argue, "Even if part-time work increases, it doesn't necessarily boost the overall supply capacity of society," and "value-added is more important than time."


Additionally, reports that discuss "seriousness" based on data like "low absenteeism" are met with skepticism, with some questioning if this is merely a reflection of economic conditions, job types, or employment insecurity. When the evaluation axis is fixed on "diligence," the discussion quickly turns into a moral debate, leading to misalignment.


3) Compromise: "It's about workplace design, not generations. Stirring conflict is a loss."

The compromise camp views generational conflict as inherently unproductive. LinkedIn surveys show that communication gaps and misunderstandings between generations cast a shadow in workplaces, and the atmosphere of conflict can lead to "loss of collaboration."


The key point here is that whether defending or criticizing young people, what's ultimately needed is "the design of systems and workplaces." Until childcare, tax systems, wages, skill development, investment, and management are in place, the back-and-forth of "work more" and "young people are lazy/not lazy" holds little meaning beyond venting emotions.


Conclusion: The issue is not "working hours" but "conditions for working" and "productivity"

Schnitzer's statement is closer to a warning against "scapegoating" than a celebration of youth. Even if it's true that young people are working, it doesn't necessarily mean it's "good news." If increased working hours are due to the pressure of living costs, it could affect the quality of education, health, and future human capital.


The main focus should be on creating an environment where "higher value-added can be achieved in the same time" through investment, digitalization, automation, childcare support, and correcting tax distortions, rather than extending working hours by one hour. While generational bashing is easy to understand, it's a roundabout way as a prescription to strengthen the economy—this debate reflects that point anew.


Sources

Related Articles