I know I'm going to regret posting in this thread, but here goes...
I had a promising 21 year old tell me he was “physically and mentally exhausted” - after working a 32 hour week(!) He wants to work 4 days a week to have “balance” in his life.
At his age, I was on salary for $550 a week, and scheduled to work 60 hours. If it took longer to get things done, I had to stay longer. And I had a part time job.
I guess these kids would have starved.
The key difference is I didn’t think “my company owes me more.” I thought “what can *I* do to make more money/cut expenses etc.” It’s my responsibility, not my employer. I agreed to the deal when I got hired, and they stuck to that deal.
At that age, I was on salary as a secretary for $300 a week. And the year after that, I would get married and be responsible for my own household. Nowadays, it seems like 30 is "young" to be leaving the nest. I think that I would not like to be 21 now.
TBH, though, I didn't have to put in massive amounts of OT until after I was the one of the founding employees of the company I "retired" from last year, after 25 years of doing what needed to be done. The company had been sold to a giant corporation, and the corporate BS wore me down after 3 years. Last month, my boss' son bought his dad's company back from the giant corporation, and I'm being tugged out of retirement, but am now attempting to insist on some "balance". I've gotten used to sleeping til 8:30 and a massive reduction in my commuting costs! Somehow, though, of the three days that I went into the office last week, I was there past 6 on two of them. Tigers can't change their stripes, eh?
So basically, "fist bump", my northeastern compadre.
I know what you’re saying, but I think this country can and should do better with “work - life” balance. The old way isn’t always the best way.
It’s going to take some thought and restructuring though, by both employers and employees. Clearly, an employee demanding all the concessions while making none is not the right way.
I totally don't disagree with you here. But I do think that exhaustion after 32 hours at the age of 21 is a bit melodramatic. And I also think that we are looking at an entire generation of pampered adults whose parents are mostly to blame for their inability to launch. I will also admit that it is my generation who produced that generation. (I, however, am off the hook, because I have no children, so am able to silently judge. I'm only half-joking)
21 year olds still don't know what to expect out of life and are rather confused regarding opportunities placed before them verses the ones they need to work for. Don't fool yourself, the same train of thought happened with prior generations at that age too.
What he asked was not surprising.
During my childhood (which I realize seems like the stone age), 21 was the age of adulthood. As mentioned above, I'd been working already for a couple of years (granted, I went to what was then referred to as "business school" and once MBAs became a thing, suddenly I'd gone to "secretarial school") and would be married at 22 (BTW, I'm still married to the same guy). So I refute your statement that prior generations had the same confused thoughts. At least, not many of us.
As also previously mentioned, I don't necessarily blame today's 21 year olds for their predicament. I blame their parents. No one should be confused about what to expect from life at 21. Sorry.
What I'd like to know is did you entertain the idea at all? While many jobs cannot, some types of work can be done in 4 days vs over 5.
I'd also have pointed him to some counseling to help him with anxiety as it sounds like he's getting overwhelmed - life doesn't get easier. A good boss would recognize the emotional state of his employee and address concerns early on. Don't let them build.
I don't necessarily disagree with you here. There are some jobs that can be done in 4 days. Generally, that's been 4 ten-hour days vs. 5 eight-hour days.
Back in the 90s. I never experienced it myself, but my husband worked for a large insurance company back then, and they did "summer hours"--ten hours on M-Th, and Fridays off. This was back before email existed, so the Fridays were definitely days off. Job sharing could also be a thing. I'm presently contemplating it myself.
Going back to Disney chopping jobs - I believe in re-configuration to save money and make the work flow better, but I sincerely doubt Disney knows how to do this so that it does not cause more problems than it solves. Big companies simply run to layoffs as a solution to make the books lighter causing burn out among the remaining staff.
I also do not disagree with your closing sentence.
