Talk:The future of office work

Kyla Scanlon’s argument

In agrarian societies people worked during daylight hours. Great!

with industrial revolution, things were mechanised and it went to 16 hours a day. That got whittled down to 8 through various labour reforms> then H Ford - not usually a Gen Z pin up, but still - reognised you got more work if paid more for people to do less.

Now things have changed again: Break work down to

• Job
• Commute
• Community

This can feel like a hamster wheel. (The insight, honestly!)

But now industries have changed from production of goods to delivery of services (“B2B SaaS”) Unlike production line jobs services can be delivered remotely. Scanlon had six months of this before the pandemic intervened. As far as we can tell, she never went back.

Gen Z are special: “ Unlike previous generations, they face unprecedented challenges: climate change, an uncertain economy, ballooning student loans, and the struggles of identity and purpose in a digitized world.”

The problem is boomers like Blackstone CEO Steve Schwarzman expecting everyone to graft just like they did, as if hard work, and not smart work, is a religion. but seeing as Gen Zers have it worse than anyone else the payoff is no longer worth it. the only reason we even tolerate is that it is enforced by modernity, artificial constraints and, basically habit.

Ironically, Scanlon says, “every time you talk about a change in the workforce, it’s a typical response of “I can’t envision a world different than the one I inhabit personally, therefore, nothing is possible” or some variation of that.” Yet this is more or less where she comes from: she can’t envision a world different from the one she inhabits personally. But Kyla Scanlon’s world, with a roaring influencer presence and a Bloomberg column aged twenty five - is hardly an ordinary one.

To be unable to envision a future different from the present is pea-brained.

Why should we change it: there are biological reasons, like circadian reasons. (but these have existed since before the industrial revolution: they are no reason to change now). Or Max Weber’s iron cage of hierarchy, rules, process and dehumanising PowerPoints. (again, these are not unique to Gen Zers, so that is not what makes things different)

and that seems to be it: Beyond that we shouldn't mock young generations (though actually we should: they mock us happily enough) and we shouldn't close our minds to new ways of working.

Jemima Kelly’s argument

Why shouldn’t she be upset that this is what notching up tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of debt securing a college degree gets you? Why shouldn’t she take her happiness and quality of life seriously? Why do we need to keep glorifying the daily grind as if it were an inherently worthy or virtuous way to live?

Good questions, but again: this time isn’t different. No-one — except maybe Steven Schwartzman — glorifies the daily grind. Like greed, it isn’t actually good: it is inevitable. We have configured the way we work, the complex system that is the grand game of financial services pass the parcel, so that it is this elaborate game of formal hoop-jumping and box ticking. We have between us consented to the flawless execution of form as the highest art, the highest aspiration of professional life.

Gen Z, the generation born between around 1996 and 2012 — have concerns about their mental health, and are bringing those into the world of work. And for good reason: depression and anxiety among teenagers and young adults has skyrocketed.

This, too, may be our fault for giving them false expectations, or a function that, as social conditions improve, incidence of neuroticism necessarily increases.

We need to work out how to get the balance right between the Zoomer-style coddling and the Boomer-style stiff upper lip — that’s tricky.

Or not: the JC is fond of the quotable Nietzsche, but it is no more than seeking out antifragility. Along that axis, if the choice is between coddling and stiff upper lip, it is easy: stiff upper lip.