Weird editorial in the Financial Times UK today from Michael Skapinker, which is a neat name. He titles it A dose of austerity for a pampered generation, and is sort of all over the map.

Look, he starts here:

This recession has already hurt people such as over-mortgaged home owners and bank staff. But employers and headhunters predict a real shock for one group: those in their 20s and early 30s who have never experienced an economic downturn before.

Then hits us with this old chestnut:

For the baby boomers’ children, mass unemployment will be something new. The shock will be all the greater because the best educated of them have had it their own way ever since they entered the workplace.

Doom! Gloom! We’re so screwed. If only Generation Y hadn’t been so pampered and demanding. If only we were more like the boomers.

But wait — maybe we’re actually okay? Skapinker continues:

In one sense, today’s younger generation are better prepared for economic hard times than their parents or grandparents: they were not expecting jobs for life.

Nor did they ever think they would have defined benefit pensions, calculated as a proportion of salary at retirement. (One young worker was astonished when I explained the idea to her.)

However pampered Generation Y may have been, switching jobs and reconsidering careers are second nature to them.

It’s always nice when an author refutes his own headline. It just sort of wraps everything up nicely, doesn’t it?

I’ve written about this already. It’s still way too early to really speculate on how the economic downturn will affect Gen Y’s employment prospects. My personal feeling is that if it does hurt them, it’ll be a very short-term period of pain, and then it will end. But regardless: I think claims that Gen Y needs to adjust their attitudes in light of the recession are completely insane.

Here’s why: Generation Y hasn’t demanded greater work/life balance and so-called perks (Skapinker makes reference to Gen Y getting time off work to “train for the triathlon”) solely because they can. We’re not holding jobs ransom, hoping to get a sweet flex-time schedule out of the deal. We ask for these things because we feel that they’re important. They’re not frivolous or expendable and, most importantly at all, they don’t actually affect the quality or amount of work we get done.

Seriously, if your employee can do great work, get things done on time, and also takes two extra hours every morning to train for the triathlon, what does it matter?

Am I missing some logic here? Have I just not taken my dose of austerity yet? Should I really take austerity on an empty stomach?

Photo by Pulpolux !!!. Licensed under Creative Commons.

Tags: economics, finances, recession