Artificial intelligence and its impact on fate is a topic that has become hot potatoes in news reports. I know how algorithms replace human intelligence. Yes, it's a bitter truth that automation is creeping up into the boardroom and taking over. But it lurks behind the curtain, which is truth, or rather stereotype. Young people themselves can be responsible. It's not because they don't have education, but because they're young, not because they lack skills.The stereotypes are sharp and stubborn. Young workers are fired if they are qualified, unreliable and too soft. They are labelled as impatient and unperceptive to feedback, and are distracted by side hustles. This idea justifies reducing and cutting off the initial rung of a career ladder. It turns an entire generation into a perceived risk rather than an asset.Yes, Generation Z often challenged and dismantled the current situation, where its predecessors were hesitant to ask questions. However, the remaining questions are: Is it correct to stereotype them and discriminate against them? Can we truly thrive as a nation by stripping them of future generations of suitable opportunities?
AI as a scapegoat
Now, employers have artificial intelligence as a veil to hide the real reason. The machines can handle basic tasks, they say, reducing the need for initial rungs. But the evidence shows that technology can change tasks. It does not rule out the need for training. Young workers learn judgment, resilience, and tacit knowledge, and are segments that machines cannot replicate. Without them, institutional know-how will be eroded.
Evidence from the US workplace
A 2024 survey by Intelligent.com highlights the degree of youth in the United States. Of the 966 business leaders, only 25% were eager to hire Gen Z Freshers, but 17% expressed hesitation or total reluctance. Employers cited perceived flaws in motivation, professionalism and work ethic. Almost half say younger recruits struggle to respond constructively to feedback, with 65% saying they are qualified to disrupt team dynamics.The report also revealed that after onboarding, Z employers found that a small number of Z recruits had met their expectations, with 60% having to fire at least one young employer. Internships, traditionally a bridge to full-time jobs, are less reliable. The offer rate has fallen to 62%, the lowest in over five years. These figures show the disconnect between Gen Z's potential and established workplace norms.
Wideer impact
Youngerness is spreading beyond the workplace. Debt, stagnant careers, and fewer opportunities delay home ownership, family formation, and long-term planning. The birth rate will decrease. It increases frustration. Legally, federal age protection starts at 40, with Gen Z remaining in invisible blind spots for bias.
Costs to businesses
Taking a sideline to young talent is not merely unfair, it is expensive. Can you really afford it? Increased recruitment costs and sudden increases in sales. When veterans leave, knowledge is leaked. Short-term convenience becomes long-term vulnerability. Companies weaken innovation, truly weaken the workforce.The road aheadThe solution is clear. Post a real entry-level job with realistic requirements. Rebuild the path from internship to job. Introducing apprentices in a white-collar field with structured mentoring. Provide feedback, guidance and support to help first job participants stay. Culture is a multiplier. Treating young employees as contributors rather than risks will compete with young people while increasing long-term performance.AI is not the main culprit. That's the case for young people. Alienating generations threatens both individuals and organizations. Ignoring young people may seem convenient today, but costs are inevitable tomorrow.
