Work ethic comparasions among generations: 8

[rhodie]

I am younger, but have the opporuntity to work with much older, well-seasoned coworkers.

I work in a management position above them, and I rely on them to daily work very hard and long to accomplish company goals and fill orders.

I would like to think that I have a good relationship with them, as good as managment can expect with his employees. I make it point to regularly "work in the trenches" with them. I do it to refresh my memory on what realistic expectations of work from them are.

I often hear comments about how people from my generation do not know hard work, that a life running computers and leisurely tasks is all we have known. I laugh it off most times, and just attribute that attitude to a bad case of "grump old men syndrome"... but it still grinds on me.
(Maybe I'm too closely correlating "hard work" with "physical work"...)

Recently, after pondering these comments more closely, I look to US history and life during industrial revolution, agrarian society, and the Great Depression, and I think maybe these guys hold an element of truth to what they are saying. Granted, these guys are all from an age post war, but they still remember hard living as a way of life.

I pose the question to the group: Do young people these day show the same hunger for hard work that people from your generation show? Do older people have an aversion to laziness that my generation lacks? I'm curious to see what posters in other countries observe as well.

Thanks in advance.

 

[IRstuff]

The issues of Social Security are NOT caused by the payees. The payout schedule is dictated by the SSA. The problem is that the US government had NEVER properly configured the fund to be self-sufficient, since it was the entity that configured the payouts to be substantially larger than the inputs and there was never enough investment income to cover the delta.

However, if anyone thinks that living on an average benefit of $955/month is a great deal, they're welcome to it. That's only slightly better than the poverty level.

If you look at the situation historically, you can see that the very reason that SSA was created was precisely because people spent all their money BEFORE retirement, even in the "good ole days."

This is NOT a question of counting on SSA, but a reality of living beyond one's means. If you look at the primary cause of that, I suggest you look in your mailbox. I get an average of 2 creditcard offers A DAY!

Easy credit --> debts --> no savings --> poverty level retirement

TTFN

 

[EngJW]

So what is all this "work ethic" business? One guy can come in on time, get organised, do his work, and go home in 40 hours. Another guy can show up when he feels like, slack off all week, and then work 40 hours nights and weekends.

What is the difference? This is it:

1. The guy who doesn't work long hours has time to enjoy life.

2. The guy who doesn't work long hours is viewed as the slacker by the company.

"It is not what you do between 8 and 5. It is what you do before 8 and after 5."

 

[jsummerfield]

I doubt that work ethic generalizations are accurate. Few generalizations are credible. There may be something to the older work ethics thing but likely for people the next generation older than me. One example relates to unpaid overtime. Having never been laid off, perhaps younger people may be less flexible than the older worker who has been laid off - from a first-hand observation.

Younger people are often energetic and enthusiastic. This add lots to the work place. Often older people are more knowlegeble except for recent technologies. Their diverse experience and previous mistakes make the older worker valuable. They may also be jaded by their experience. A good work place has a mix of both.


John

 

[ewh]

In regards to unpaid overtime, I feel that it is a misnomer. It is really an extended work-week. It is one thing when a company offers comp time or an expectation of a bonus for continually working over 40 hours a week, but today more companies offer neither. There is always a fire to put out, and you are expected to do what it takes to put that fire out. Some companies will take advantage of your exempt status and would work you 12 hours a day seven days a week if they could.
I have been laid off several times in my 25 year career, due to work downturns or poor company finances, and I am still inflexible when it comes to unpaid overtime. I don't mind putting in extra unpaid hours occasionally, but it seems that when you do, it is expected of you always. Perhaps this is a poor work ethic on my part, but I still enjoy my work and am proud of the results I produce.

 

[CRG]

A government is not an isolated entity in a democracy/representative type nation. Whether we like it or not, a government in free nation reflects the will and moral character of its citizens. It is easy to turn a blind eye towards an inequity when you receive the benefits of the program. I cannot frame the “something for nothing” group as anything except what they are: greedy. In the state I live in, the government unfunded retirement benefits run close to 30%. What type of work ethic is this? You vote yourself raises and benefit packages, and pass the expense onto young kids to pick up the unpaid margins.

It a no brainier, the work ethic of the older generation is poor. Now the question resides whether the current work force, including myself, is just as culpable by looking for “something for nothing.”

When it is all said and done, perhaps the best test regarding the work ethics of a generation is whether they leave a better life for next generation. If you believe you life will be better than that of the previous generation, you can say the previous generation had an admirable work ethic. If not, shame on previous generation.

 

[BJC]

I lost part of what I intend to post above. It happened because I am a poor speller and sometimes have to write things on MS Word, spell check and then paste. What should have been at the start of my post is:

Work ethic is a learned trait. IF you go back to pioneer days, the depression and on to modern times people have to work less and less to get by. In the 1950s it was easy to find someone who had to have done some serious work to live. Now days lots of people survive without doing much at all.

So much for cut and paste. MAby we need a thread on engineers are very detail oriented vs those of us who do things fast.

 

[vonbad]

“Do young people these days show the same hunger for hard work that people from your generation show?

It’s easier for the younger generation to have less drive than previous generations. There are so many ‘welfare baskets’ available people are quite simply put not made to be responsible for their action or inaction; Hence, social security to name a single one.

 

[matthewj]

I think a lot of these posts are right in saying that you cannot compare generations. Work ethic is often quantified in terms of output. I don't think this is easily comparable between generations.

I would say per work day, I do less hard engineering than a peer engineer did 50 years ago. However, I would say that engineers now spend a great deal more time doing overhead tasks (often on their own time), deflecting office politics, and flat-out scrambling to keep employed and current in a competitive company/market. I would say the average engineer today may not produce as much engineering output as someone 50 years ago, but does have to put up with a lot more non-engineering issues, which are just as difficult and taxing as traditional engineering issues.

 

[BJC]

vonbad
Where I shop for grocerys there are a half dozen or so people over retirement age working. There also drawing social security. They had what was supposed to be a good retirement plan but the crooks at Enron pretty much stole it.
Pretty dumb of them not to see it comming.
I alway figured I'd get some of what I put in back and the rest of it would go to people like these.
It's the other part of my tax money I have a hard time with, especially the part of it that should be putting Ken Lay in jail.

 

[HVAC68]

It's what is normally called the "generation gap". What's considered a luxury in an earlier generation is a necessity these days. Similary what's considered by me as a luxury, will be considered as a necessity by my son.

It's also a question of changing with times. The "oldies" (I will be one soon !!!) worked and lived based on what was required at that point of time. Today we live based on today's needs which may not be liked by the next generation.

HVAC68

 

[Jabberwocky]

*Newb Engineer Alert*

I'm enjoying this discussion y'all are carrying on. As a "Nexter" (is that the best name for my generation that exists?) I am just starting out in the workforce. I still think it is nigh impossible to precisely gauge the work output of workers across generations. You would have to juggle all the relative details in every given project - unfeasible I think. To try and extract "work ethic" solely from results produced does not seem possible.

I think one could make broad generalizations about the age and relative enthusiasm of a worker, but I don't feel such generalizations would be worth too much.

Every decent person acts as they think best - in work and play. Hard or "soft" workers do not come only from certain age groups.

 

[TheTick]

I think a good question to pose would be, "How would an eager, industrious, young engineer best handle the arbitrary prejudices of the older generations?" From the posts on this thread, it's obvious this phenomenon will persist for untold generations to come.

 

[jsummerfield]

I do not know if there are issues that concern TheTick. As a baby-boomer at age 56 I may be 10-15 years older than he is, thus I must be headed into that older worker class. However, the same question (How would an eager, industrious, young engineer best handle the arbitrary prejudices of the older generations?") seems reasonable for new entries to the work place - each year. Good luck. One day you will not be the new grad but the experienced EXpert.

John

 

[ajack1]

Are peoples ethics really that different are all we just more comfortable these days?

Without trying to sound prejudice how many all night stores or the like are manned by white middle classed people?

You seldom get the best hunters where the prey is abundant.

 

[haggis]

First, to CRG. Ever heard of “bad karma”? I hope you are as successful as you seem to think you’re going to be and retire very confortably. There are millions out there who have worked all their lives earning just enough to get by who really know the meaning of “fiscal restraint” and must rely on social benefits like old age pension. This is the whole idea of social programs albeit the abuse of same always ensues. You always here about the bad ones, kiddo.

To Jabberwocky, I like your outlook on this subject and considering you are probably the youngest who has put his two cents in, very well said.

Rhodie, while I may be mistaken, sounds to me, is in the UK where a rant about social security benefits and some recipients is very well founded. I left there almost 40 years ago when I got fed up with leaving with my father for work every morning while the guy next door was sleeping off the drunk from the night before. Yes, he lived next door, similar house (flat) and enjoyed everything in life that we had. Generally in North America, if you choose to live on social security benefits, you get to live in what and amongst those you deserve. Heaven forbid that they might be asked to sweep the streets in return. Unfortunately, the working poor have to endure the same accomodations and fine neighbours also.

Work ethic linked to generation? Rubbish. I am a boomer, circa 1946 and have seen all kinds since my first job in 1962. Generalization is slapping paint on with a broad brush.

My rant for today.

p.s a star for jabberwocky!

Haggis

 

[automatic2]

In response to the original post, I had the pleasure of doing my apprenticeship back in the mid seventies. My tradesmen were largely european, and approaching retirement. I can say that one thing stood out, and that was their troubleshooting skills. It was not about hard work, it was about solving problems and employing effective remedy. At the time, most of us apprentices where crazy young kids, many who dropped out because we couldn't learn the importance of taking responsibility. There was a third group mixed in with us, and they where tradesmen and non, that were north American. They tended to be transient, many had family problems, and most had poor work ethics. Many years later, as I performed maintenance management functions, I became introduced to yet another group, and that was the tradesmen, like myself, but that had been trained in the North American sense. Most of these individuals where very good at production/construction tasks. Once pointed in the right direction, they perform well.

When I hire, I explore that individuals background, and learned skills. Are they troubleshooters or construction. There are needs for both, but one does need to know.

 

[buzzp]

I just wanted to point out that when considering work ethics evolution you had better consider one of the driving forces behind a change in work ethics - corporate ethics. Not to say this is the sole driver of work ethics but certainly influences it.


I would say that in general, young people are lazier because they can be. There is no need to go milk the cow, feed the chickens, or walk 10 miles to school in the snow (with no shoes). However, some are just plain lazy. Some of the old timers are just as lazy.

 

[HgTX]

I'm kind of confused by this conversation.

I see some people (e.g., vonbad, April 5) griping about "the younger generation" defined as social security recipients. I hadn't realized we had so many centenarians on this forum.

I'm also not entirely sure what the point is. Do different generations have different standards for how much work they should put in in a day? Sure. Buzzp put it very well just above, as did everyone in this thread who mentioned how corporate treatment of employees has a lot to do with how employees treat the employer in return. And having options allows one not to be so desperate as to do absolutely anything an employer wants (like the old company towns--let's not pretend that employers were always benevolent until recent years).

What's the applicability of this conversation? Whether one might choose to hire the older or younger of two equal candidates?

Hg



Eng-Tips guidelines: faq731-376

 

[EngJW]

We ought to start a new thread about working long hours. A lot of different opinions are sure to come out of it.

In that regard, I don't think there is a lot of difference in generations. A lot of young people work long hours; perhaps they feel in will benefit them in the future. Old timers also work long hours. Some are workaholics and some do it out of fear. (I have seen both young and old work long hours out of fear and the company treated them quite badly in turn, so I don't think corporate ethics is a factor.)

 

[HVAC68]

Working long hours is ok - but working long hours regularly, is a big NO from me.

If somebody is working regularly long hours, then it's probably due to one or more of these

(a) He/She is inefficient.
(b) Understaffed organisation.
(c) Working long hours or maybe sitting long hours, since his/her boss also sits long hours!!!
(c) He/She is a workaholic.
(d) He/She fears to go home !!!


HVAC68