Since a New York Times article declared the rise in popularity of millennial and Gen Z internet meme “OK boomer” to be “the end of friendly generational relations,” the topic of age-related discrimination on both ends of the scale has resurfaced as a hot-button issue.
Born out of the younger generations’ exasperation with an outdated, dismissive attitude typically associated with those born between 1946 and 1964, “OK boomer” is the defeated retort of young people who have had enough.
This debate of who has it worse and who is worse isn’t new. Since the dawn of time, parents and children have butted heads over an ever-widening cultural gap.
Parents don’t get it. Today’s youth have it easy. A rapid-fire technological revolution at the end of the 20th century that infiltrated nearly every aspect of everyday life hasn’t helped when it comes to intergenerational relatability.
One area where age seems to be doing no one any favors, however, is the workplace.
Recent college graduates tear their hair out weeding through hundreds of entry-level postings requesting candidates with at least five years’ experience. Meanwhile workforce veterans who find themselves searching for a new job late in their career report their “over-qualifications,” perceived technological illiteracy, and impending retirement as reasons they’ve been passed over for positions.
In a job market where employers often have their pick of applicants and young workers are frequently willing to work for low pay just to gain experience, no one wins.
Persisting in its relevance, “OK boomer” once again made headlines last week when the phrase landed before the Supreme Court as a potential example of age-related workplace discrimination.
Chief Justice John Roberts posed the question to lawyer Roman Martinez: If a hiring person were to utter the phrase “OK boomer,” would the recipient of those words have a legal case against them?
Martinez responded it was certainly possible.
However, in an essay published on nbcnews.com, Miami University leadership and management professor Megan Gerhardt argued that it’s the up-and-coming millennials — who she referred to as “the most maligned generation” — who would benefit most from age-related workplace protections.
“No one alive today has borne the brunt of generational name-calling as much as millennials,” Gerhardt argued.
“Following labels of disparagement ranging from the ‘Me Me Me Generation’ to ‘The Trophy Kids,’ nowadays just the word ‘millennial’ has become synonymous with a rush of negative adjectives, most often ‘entitled’ and ‘lazy’ (despite evidence that they are neither).”
On either end of the spectrum, a person’s age is often used in an attempt to discredit them — to make them irrelevant based on preconceived notions of who they are and what they’re capable of.
Knowing what we know about the cyclical nature of this age debate, it’s clear that our attempts — or lack thereof — to find common ground will play a crucial role as we search for solutions to some of our most pressing contemporary problems, such as climate change — problems that will ultimately affect generations to follow.
