Free overtime? Natural for Generation X, absurd for Generation Z
Why do business owners and managers take it for granted that part of our work is a "gift", while we don't get more goods for the same money in the shop? Judit Bárány, organisational development and HR expert, guides us through the generational legacy and possible solutions.
If you go to a bakery and ask for a kilo of bread, you won't get 1.2 kilos for the same price. In fact, if we insisted that we were entitled to it, we would most likely be "quietly" escorted out of the shop. Yet, in the world of work, the unwritten rule in many places is that to a "kilo" of work, you add two or three hours of overtime, a little weekend email, a little presentation hacking in your spare time - for free.
Why? How did this become the "norm"? And is it still realistic to expect this of employees today? That's the subject of this article, which I hope will encourage many managers and business owners to think again.
The origins of free overtime: a generational legacy
In most corporate cultures, especially in multinational companies, the custom of free overtime did not grow out of nowhere. In the second half of the 1990s and early 2000s, large companies appeared in Hungary in droves, attracting young graduates with the promise of stable pay, career prospects and prestige. Many of the X-generation workers, aged 25-30 at the time, arrived in the corporate world without families, dedicating all their time and energy to proving themselves.
They were the ones who were willing, even proud, to take on after-hours client calls, project deadlines that slipped into the weekend, the "I'll stop by in the evening to get it done" mentality. This was not only career-building, but also a generational attitude: "If you work, you work hard"
.Generation X's persistent drive to prove itself has not gone without results. In previous decades, the top and middle management of large companies was mostly occupied by members of the Baby Boomer generation, who built up strong positions through their experience, networking capital and stability in the years around the change of regime and beyond. Then came Generation X, which in many cases not only adapted to the culture of multinationals, but also outbid the Baby Boomers in terms of performance culture, long hours and outstanding results. In the end, many of them got the recognition they had been waiting for: they pushed Baby Boomer leaders out of key positions and became the new, more dynamic face of the corporate hierarchy.
The problem is that what they volunteered then is now part of organisational cultures, meaning that overtime is not a choice for the employee, but has become an expectation. The main problem with this is that 20 years have passed and the labour market, society, technology and the values of workers have changed.
As Krisztián Steigervald regularly says in his podcasts and presentations, "Everyone's reality is what they are born into, what they experienced as a child, and what surrounds them in their everyday lives. It becomes the norm, the pattern to follow, the benchmark - and it's what they later often unknowingly hold others accountable to." In other words, for most people, the basis of their everyday reality, their values, is the reality they are socialised in, so that they have different norms from generation to generation. (Often, those born at the beginning and end of a generation represent different things.) As I wrote above, for a significant portion of Generation X, working overtime for free to give "life and blood" for the company is a natural functioning - and not just at the managerial level. Because of this, a lot of tension develops between different generations of workers even at the same hierarchical level. This is why it is important for all generations to be aware of the drivers and origins of their own and each other's actions, so that there is an understanding and acceptance that leads to happier and therefore more effective workplaces.
Generations Y and Z: different world, different work
Generation Y (roughly those born between 1980 and 1995) believes in the importance of a work-life balance. They have experienced what it is like when their parents - for career advancement or financial reasons - overcommitted themselves for decades and as a result were not present in their lives when they needed them as children. They have also experienced serious health consequences (heart attacks, chronic illnesses, burnout) of their parents' years of overtime and, not least, in many cases a disintegrating personal life as a result of the "work obsession". These childhood experiences and the redundancies suffered as a result of the 2008 economic crisis have transformed the way Generation Y view life: for them, "working themselves to death" is no longer the most important thing. And this has a strong impact on their loyalty and attitude to overtime.
And Generation Z - from today's 28-year-olds to young professionals - have gone one step further: for them, work-life integration is important. They don't necessarily have a sharp divide between work and leisure, but in return they expect work to fit in with their lives, not the other way around. They look for motivation in flexible work, hybrid models and meaningful tasks - they won't tolerate 60-hour weeks and won't answer the company phone after hours - which, of course, Generation Xers find outrageous and accuse them of laziness.
These differences in attitude are the reason why many Generation X managers, who themselves once voluntarily "invented" the culture of overtime, are now perplexed (and, unfortunately, disgusted) by the behaviour of new colleagues:
- "We never complained when we had to stay in..."
- "They don't really want a career if they go home after five hours..."
- "There didn't used to be this big whinge about work-life balance..."
But, if Xers really think about this issue after reading this article, they will realise that these are not "whinges" but simply differences in values.
Why is it wrong to take free overtime for granted?
1. Distorts the labour market: if real working hours are never factored into wages, budgets and capacity planning, companies are building on unrealistic expectations in the long run.
2. Causes burnout: those who work 10-15 hours a week for years doing "invisible work" will eventually lose motivation, health, emotional energy.
3. Unfair to the worker: a professional is not paid to be available day and night. The employment contract describes the working hours precisely, and if regular performance is expected beyond that, there is a counterpart: extra pay, time off, extra benefits.
4. Generational tension: if a manager automatically assumes, based on his/her own youthful experience, that anyone who does not stay overtime is "not loyal", the relationship with young workers becomes a conflict.
5. Reduces company credibility: a company that communicates wellbeing in an employer branding campaign but in reality expects free overtime will sooner or later lose its attractiveness in the labour market.
But who will do the work?
This is the most common management question. The answer is not simple, but the key is to reframe the question. It's not a matter of pushing people endlessly, but of setting realistic goals, prioritising wisely and organising tasks within the timeframe of the workday.
If a project can only be completed regularly by everyone working overtime, it is not the fault of the individuals. Organizational liability: under-planning, too few people, poor processes, perhaps the result of an unrealistic customer promise
The absurdity of unpaid overtime