Gen Y Enthusiasm Can Smell Like Impertinence

Sometimes when we members of Generation Y care about something, it’s mistaken as impertinence.

Bruce Tulgan, author of the 2009 book Not Everyone Gets a Trophy: How to Manage Generation Y, explained it perfectly in an article by AARP:

The classic thing is they [Gen Yers] show up on Day One and want to tell you how to change your business … It leads older people to think they have a radically different work ethic, but Gen Yers said 'I thought you want me to care about this place.'

Obviously I offer the Gen Y perspective, but here are valid points I think managers of Generation Y could make:

• Gen Y workers need to realize that there’s a lot of other non-creative crap you need to do to keep a business running.
• Furthermore, there’s a lot you might learn while doing that crap that will help shape your perspective in order to implement new ideas.
• Just because we haven’t done it doesn’t mean we haven't thought of it.
• You have to earn respect before you get more responsibility.
  

And on the other hand, here’s what Gen Yers could say back:

• If you are going to attract young, bright individuals, you need to make them feel like an integral part of the creative process.
  
• Generation Y is used to a horizontal environment where everyone’s ideas count, and where talents are more important than tenure. That should be helpful to this company because the world is moving that way; the Web is horizontal, not hierarchical.
• When I come up with new ideas, it’s not an insult to you and the way you do things; I just care about what I do.
• I see work as something with a fluid structure I don't want to fully disconnect from. It could be a good thing for you, because I sought out a career I enjoy and plan to spend a lot of time doing ... just not necessarily 9 to 5.
  

So, is there a middle ground?

JobSpice Creates Your Resume for You

Resumes are such a pain to create, so how great is it that the new site JobSpice will do it for you?

You seriously just go to the site and plug in your info, and, tada, there’s your resume.

You can choose from a few templates and also decide whether you want to include certain sections, such as “objective,” which not everyone includes on their resume. My scan of the templates tells me that it would be suitable for most careers.

The best part is that it turns your resume into a pdf, which is the most compatible format to share your resume. It also allows you to create a custom URL where you can send prospective employers.

The downside is that it’s not totally customizable. You might want more flexibility, especially if you like to customize each resume for every job you apply for. Also, some employers still request resumes be made in Word; JobSpice doesn’t offer that format.

With that said, if you are lazy enough to want someone to build your resume for you, you probably won’t care that it’s not totally customizable. This is perfect for people looking for an easy, simple and professional way to display their resume. I’ve had friends spend $200 for someone else to create it for them—JobSpice definitely beats that.

Should You Keep Your Maiden Name in the Digital Age?

The debate over whether to take your husband’s name is not new, but it continues to get trickier because of digital branding. By the time many women get married, they have made quite a name for themselves professionally. Particularly if they are in a career that involves online publishing, they have likely built up a digital brand. Google searches won’t have the same power with a new name.

To resolve this, a woman has a few options, such as having two last names, or separating her legal name from her professional name. Joan Indiana Rigdon chose the latter option and wrote about it for Forbes.com. It would be a seemingly perfect solution, except work and personal lives, as we know, are not easily divided in the digital age. Aside from figuring out how to resolve her taxes and pay stubs, Rigdon also had to decide which name to use on Facebook and her e-mail (so which is professional and which is personal?).

As you can see, the debate is post-feminism and far transcends the "old" debate over whether taking a man’s name is submitting to patriarchy. A lot of Gen Y women (much to the chagrin of feminists before us) are “over” the need to prove ourselves equal, and willing to embrace traditions at times. And yet, one of the products of feminism is that we earned more of a place in the workplace—and that has led to our name being more important—and that has led us to question the tradition of taking our husband’s name for pragmatic reasons.

On a side note, my friends are getting hitched right and left (and I'm in two weddings next month); as far as I know, none have kept their maiden names or are planning to do so.

Luckily digital tools might evolve more to solve the conundrum. I created a profile on Google and was able to give it alternate spellings of my names (such as “Ellen,” my full name). That could be handy for married women as well.

Does America Have Worse Health Care than Other Countries?

With all this hype about health care, I find myself asking: Is the American health-care system really worse than other countries? Here are some points to consider:

1. America’s mortality rates need work.

American health care basically doesn’t get the same bang for its buck compared to other countries. Actually, it seems like we pay more for less. The major indicators (mortality rates) show that America is at a disadvantage compared to other developed countries. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development released a report last year with these findings:

"Notwithstanding very high health spending (about 15% of GDP) and the use of cutting edge technology, the health status of the US population does not appear to fare well by international comparison. The United States ranks poorly in terms of life expectancy at birth, infant mortality and ‘amenable mortality’ (i.e. mortality that can be averted by good health care). While there are factors beyond the health care system itself that contribute to this below average health outcome and/or higher health expenditures such as the relatively high risk of death or injury from violence or accidents, the higher prevalence of obesity and of low birth weight babies, and the cost of the medical liability litigation system and the associated practice of defensive medicine, these factors do not appear to explain all of the gap in performance between the United States and other countries."

2. We have less coverage than other developed nations. That's a fact probably most familiar to us.

The OECD estimates that 46 million persons were not insured at all in 2007 (16% of the population), with a larger share of the population underinsured.

And yes, if you are wondering if the coverage problem has something to do with our mortality rates, you might be right. The report notes:

"It is therefore plausible that the significant and growing proportion of the population that is uninsured or underinsured is one of several factors that help to explain the growing gap in life expectancy between the United States and other countries."

3. We get less value.

So, we pay more than other countries and yet don’t have a lot to show for it. Another fascinating study is straight from an association of U.S. CEOs, who want to get the most out all the money they shell out for insurance. The study found that on a weighted scale, U.S. workers and employers receive 23% less value from the American health-care system than the average of five leading competitors: Canada, Japan, Germany, the U.K. and France, and 46% less value than the average of emerging competitors Brazil, India and China.

The CEOs concluded that “the costs and performance of the U.S. health care system have put America’s companies and workers at a significant competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace.”

4. The price of health care is going up.

Skyrocketing costs are another widely reported symptom of the ailing health system; it has been a large impetus behind reform (on both sides of the aisle). Just today a study was released by consulting firm Mercer that found that if employers kept their medical coverage as is, they would see a 9% cost hike. More than half of the surveyed employers plan to shift some of that cost onto employees by asking them to pay more.

5. Americans like their insurance...So something is right? Right?

Despite all of the above considerations, the majority Americans are not exactly protesting in the streets for reform. We are happy with our $20 copays to whatever doctor we want. Many Americans are scared by the horror stories of long lines and less choice in other countries with more socialized systems. The U.S. seems to promise bigger and better opportunity. (T.R. Reid recently wrote an interesting piece arguing that some of our perception of services in other countries is myth.)

Of course, many Americans do not have health insurance at all. And many Americans aren’t aware of how much that health insurance costs. Maybe it won't always be so available.

There seems to be a poll to prove everything about how Americans feel about health care. Even if we can’t rely on polls, it’s still pretty fascinating to see what people say. One poll last year by Harris Interactive found that America’s health system is the least popular compared to other countries. (One-third of respondents said it should be completely overhauled.)

And another survey by Harris Interactive and Harvard University is pretty amusing: Republicans are more likely than Democrats to think America’s health-care system is the best in the world.

So is America’s health system worse off than other countries? I guess it depends on who you ask.

1 in 3 Young Workers Live with Their Parents

Well isn’t this depressing: Young workers are worse off today than a decade ago.

Back when“September 11” meant nothing, young America seemed to live a more hopeful, carefree existence, minus the occasional, trendy quarter-life crisis. Today’s young people, while still optimistic, are feeling a little less like Carrie Bradshaw.

A recent study commissioned by AFL-CIO, a federation for unions in the U.S., found that workers under the age of 35 have lost some financial ground and optimism in the last 10 years. While more than half (55%) of respondents are hopeful and confident about achieving economic and financial goals in the next five years, the number is down from 77% in June of 1999.

Of course critics would say a survey from a union organization is digging to find worker dissatisfaction, but I disregarded the public policy section in the report. The startling statistics are worth mentioning:

• Thirty-one percent of surveyed young workers reported being uninsured, up from 24% 10 years ago (almost half cited the reason as being unable to afford it).
• Twenty-four percent make less than they need just to pay their monthly bills, up from 10% in 1999 (only 31% make enough to pay bills and put money aside—down 22 percentage points from 1999).
• More than one in three young workers live with their parents.
• More than half (51%) of young workers do not have a retirement plan, up from 41% in 1999.
  

The nationwide study, conducted in July by Peter D. Hart Research Associates, surveyed 1,156 people ages 18 to 34 and currently working or looking for work.