Most Millennials Would Throw Work Friends Under the Bus for a Promotion | Hacker News Reader

Most Millennials Would Throw Work Friends Under the Bus for a Promotion

businessweek.com

10 pointstrekkin11 comments

The article implies that Baby Boomers are more virtuous, however I'd contend that those same people wouldn't have been so virtuous when they were 18-24.

Loyalty from the 18-24 age-group is difficult to come by, regardless of which generation they belong to.

Now, the article fails to mention who the subjects of the study were betraying -- their Millennial peers, or non-Millennial ones? I would hazard to guess that most Millennials would happily betray their Boomer co-workers, perhaps even gleefully (schadenfreude?) -- and vice versa.

The question is open to interpretation even more -- Millennials count potentially everybody as a "workplace friend" (due to a far larger pool of competition), whereas Baby Boomers generally have only themselves as workplace friends.

This might out me as overly cynical, but I'd go a step further and say that baby boomers don't have to throw coworkers under the bus because our younger generation got collectively thrown under the bus by our/their politicians already.

That's a little harsh. The job market has changed, there is less of a hierarchy for people to climb. Thanks to technology. There is more competition for the better jobs thanks to globalisation.

These are two things which are not the fault of boomers.

Millennieals need to innovative out of their situation, change the game. Something like their own political party.

That's a really good point that wasn't at all mentioned. It could also be that the older people are less likely to admit that they threw someone under the bus and consider it "just business."

It's possible that in the economic climate they grew up in, it was simply never necessary.

The citizens of Leningrad in 1937 would surely not resort to cannibalism, but ask that question again in 1943...

From the article:

First, job-hopping millennials proved disloyal to employers, and now apparently they’re also disloyal to each other.

I would say, first employers proved disloyal to their employees . . .

The rest is just a rational response to a changing work environment and culture.

Yeah, that line stood out to me as well. I'd love to stay with one employer for a long time, but doing so now is just shooting yourself in the foot. From what I've seen, the best way to increase your salary is changing employers, maybe if raises weren't always so meager this wouldn't be the case.

News flash: people early in their business careers make different tradeoffs than people late in their careers.

Not untrue, but it's important to note that in many cases 'workplace friend' is basically 'someone they made me sit near that I feel share some interests'. Not exactly someone you'd invite to your birthday party.

The question can be interpreted in many ways. I could think that a friend who is making me choose between them and a promotion is not a friend worth having.

It's not always the friend that makes you choose.

Suppose Al and Bob have been accepted to ycombinator. Things don't work out very well and 1 month out from demo day they're pretty sure they are going to bomb. Al gets a spectacular employment offer -- contingent on a start date before demo day. Bob doesn't. In fact, Bob has faith that they'll be able to make <metric of the year> if they try hard enough. Through no fault of Bob (and possibly no fault of Al), Al now has an incentive to throw Bob under the bus.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com