Gen Z workers are likely to be “union curious,” which makes them ideal Big Labor targets, but they also aren’t hiding the keys to their satisfaction in the workplace. Their unique wants from employers include, first and foremost, a healthy work-life balance.
Much of this prioritization has to do with where we’re sitting, historically. Gen Z-ers entered adulthood during choppy pandemic waters, when remote work encouraged the blurring of home and professional lives. They also graduated from college into an economic climate full of chaos. Such outside factors cannot be controlled, but Gen Z does want to exert agency at work, especially in spaces where personal time might not be valued.
Meanwhile, a work-schedule trend known as “996” embraces the opposite mindset. News headlines on both have been making the rounds and provide an interesting contrast while also portending a collision to watch.
Working Smarter, Not Harder
A new Washington Post article gathered feedback from Gen Z workers who believe that some workplace environments are manufacturing “urgency” at the expense of work-life balance: "We're saving PDFs, not lives."
It’s a daring catchphrase that cannot be ignored. Here’s the thing: Many younger employees have seen co-workers laid off after routinely dropping everything to meet emergency/overnight deadlines. They’ve also watched relatives, maybe even their parents, fall short at home–missing dinners, holidays, celebrations–to prioritize work emergencies. And Gen Z isn’t willing to live by those same expectations, only to later feel disposable.
The Gen Z-ers interviewed by the Washington Post are largely weighing whether workplaces that regularly slip into “crisis” project mode do so legitimately or artificially and by design, and they aren’t buying it.
The 996 Cautionary Tale
A different mindset is taking root where certain corners of the tech crowd are embracing the “996” trend, which has been noted by Wired, NPR, and the Washington Post after surfacing in China. Essentially, Silicon Valley’s AI startups are racing against each other and believe that they must do so through 9 am to 9 pm, six days per week work schedules. That adds up to 72+ hours per week, which sounds unsustainable by every standard.
Sure, the 996 jobs don’t allow for separating work and personal lives, but that’s also the point. These companies often set up “hacker houses,” where 1 a.m. meetings are not unusual. The workers’ arrangements are voluntary, but if this model becomes an industry standard, this extreme quest for innovation could backfire and inspire something else: unionization.
The Union Risk Some Employers Are Overlooking
Aside from 996, Gen Z workers are leading the charge in realizing that nixing their personal lives doesn’t guarantee that they will be valued. If they also don’t feel that their employers are listening, they will feel powerless. Sooner or later, these workers will compare their negative experiences with those of other workers, which could lead them to consider third-party representation.
This creates a vulnerability point where unions, including salts, can swoop in and make false promises about how they can “fix” a workplace. It’s also hard to blame workers who fall for these pitches if they don’t see another solution for organizational dysfunction fueled by a constant “on” culture.
Many employers already know that work-life balance helps build teams who collaborate, innovate, and have better retention rates. These same qualities also happen to exist in functional, high-performing workplaces that are resilient to union infiltration, which signals a win-win for any company. This includes those who hope to attract Gen Z workers, who are the future.
