Gen Z has been in the workforce just long enough to want out. Well, at least temporarily. The concept of a micro-retirement has started to trend (again) on social media, which makes it seem as if an entire generation of 20-somethings wants to take an adult gap year.
Is that a rebranding of the more well-known sabbatical? Yes, with a couple of noteworthy caveats: Micro-retirement is not employer-granted — say goodbye to pay while you are away or a guaranteed job upon return — and it is meant to be more of a routine lifestyle choice to combat burnout and pursue personal passions.
However, it is not Gen Z that should be fixating on micro-retirement; it is companies.
Illustration: Mountain People
Employers can and should offer those sorts of breaks to their employees as a workplace benefit, especially if working remotely is no longer an option. Offering access to an employer-granted micro-retirement, which sounds far chicer than “sabbatical,” is one more set of golden handcuffs. It is a perk akin to an employer-matched 401(k) — restricted stock units with a suboptimal vesting schedule or the ultimate golden handcuffs: health insurance. Asking businesses to adopt workplace changes inspired by the whims of the youth can seem impractical and create the cliche “kids these days” response from older employees and bosses, but they should remember that the practice is not necessarily a new phenomenon.
Everything from what people wear to what is a socially acceptable way to speak to a subordinate to the demographics of the office was shifted by young employees over the decades. Gen Z just happens to broadcast their strategies, such as “quiet quitting” or “lazy girl jobs,” on social media, which can often make the ideas feel like passing trends.
However, before micro-retirement is dismissed outright, consider what companies are up against. Businesses should be focused on retention, especially with 18 percent and 36 percent of the workforce now made up of two generations — Gen Z and millennials respectively — that have demonstrated they have no qualms with quitting and job hopping.
It can cost tens of thousands of dollars to replace an employee. First, there is the recruiting process and lost productivity that comes with it, including the managers and employees taking time to interview prospective replacements. It also often takes an increase in pay to attract quality talent to the now-empty position, especially if the previous employee was around for several years. Then there is having to train talent, which can still result in lost productivity until the new hire is fully onboarded and up to speed on the role.
Salary.com estimates that replacing an employee can cost between half and twice their salary.
On the other side, micro-retirement could be treated like an employee going on parental leave and work could be distributed amongst colleagues. Perhaps it could be a benefit that is unlocked after three years at a company, can last up to four weeks at a time and eligibility renews every three years. However a company chooses to implement it, the advantage is that it is a perk available to everyone, which might lower any animosity that coworkers sometimes have toward those going out on parental leave.
If you are wondering if the concept of a sabbatical truly needed to be rebranded, perhaps it does. The newer term might represent more than just a catchy phrase for its users. Sabbaticals have usually been tied to academia. Taking one often includes research or bettering skill sets to return more useful for an employer. However, the term micro-retirement embodies the idea of a complete break from work to indulge in life while you are younger and presumably healthier.
The indulgence does not have to be a swoon-worthy vacation to splash all over social media, either. It could be as simple as having the gift of focused, uninterrupted time to spend with loved ones.
That is the sort of break that sounds enticing to younger workers when they start crunching some numbers.
According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, life expectancy in the US has fallen in recent years to about 80 years for women and just shy of 75 for men. A 2023 Gallup poll showed that the mean age that non-retirees anticipate retiring is 66 years old.
Having less than 15 years to enjoy leisure time after more than 40 years in the workforce is pitiful, particularly in a country where, according to a 2023 Pew Research Center study, 4 in 10 workers fail to take their full allotment of vacation days. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported the average private sector worker receives 11 vacation days after one year of employment, and it only goes up to 18 days after 10 years.
Even with that grim outlook, the likelihood of companies rapidly coming around to offering micro-retirements is slim, which is why anyone who wants to take one would have to continue to work toward funding their own time off. That is so long as the prospect of finding another job or figuring out a backup plan for health insurance would not cast a pall on the micro-retirement movement.
I have dealt with burnout more than once in my career — both when I was traditionally employed (and working a side hustle) and as a self-employed millennial. The latter status allowed me the flexibility to take a three-month break, but worrying about losing out on opportunities was hard to shake. I suspect Gen Z might need a little bit of practice to overcome this part: I had to be confident and disciplined enough to decline work opportunities for three months, fully get off social media, and focus on pleasure and creativity to alleviate the burnout.
It was not a magical cure-all, but the distance from the rut of routine sparked new ideas and clarified changes I needed to make in my business and life.
Erin Lowry is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering personal finance. She is the author of the three-part Broke Millennial series.
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS