Generational Conflict in the Workplace | USA

Last year, Forbes reported that employees of five generations populate our workforce: the Silent Generation, Baby Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z. It is no secret that the differences in perspectives generally held by employees of these generations present unique challenges in the workforce. For example, Jodie Foster recently made headlines when she said of Gen Z in an interview: “They’re really annoying, especially in the workplace.” While this was temporary fodder for the media, had the same comment been made by a manager about their junior reports, there could have been meaningful legal ramifications.

Many generational workplace conflicts can be explained by reference to common stereotypes. Younger workers are often portrayed as high-maintenance, entitled, non-committal, unreliable, unmotivated, and unable to communicate effectively outside digital spaces. Older workers, by contrast, can be seen as intolerant, burnt out, blind to work-life balance, resistant to change, and not tech-savvy.

As the Harvard Business Review concluded, these stereotypes are often unfounded. Still, as employment lawyers, we routinely see generational workforce schisms arise. These conflicts sometimes manifest as traditional age discrimination claims: eg, failure to hire/promote/compensate those within – and/or terminations disproportionately impacting – certain generations. Although older employees raise most age discrimination claims, a Resume Builder survey found that of “1,344 managers and business leaders polled, 27% have fired a Gen Z employee within a month of their start date, with the majority reasoning that the generation gets too easily offended and lacks motivation and effort”. Similarly, a 2021 Fast Company-Harris Poll found that 36% of younger millennials and Gen Z members allege they have encountered age-related workplace discrimination.

Another growing trend, however, is less straightforward but growing in prominence: HR matters involving communication/management issues arising from purported generational differences. These situations frequently involve: (i) “bullying” and/or “hostile work environment” complaints by younger employees based on the management/communication style of older managers; and/or (ii) managers alleging they are now subject to investigation/discipline for the same management/communication style they have used throughout their long career.

Generally, these types of hostile work environment and/or bullying claims will not be legally actionable unless the employee is targeted based on their status in a protected class. See, eg, https://www.eeoc.gov/harassment (“Harassment is unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation, gender identity, or pregnancy), national origin, older age (beginning at age 40), disability, or genetic information (including family medical history).”); N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(1)(h) (“Such harassment is an unlawful discriminatory practice when it subjects an individual to inferior terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of the individual’s membership in one or more of these protected categories.”); https://www.nyc.gov/site/cchr/law/discriminatory-harassment.page (“Discriminatory harassment is threats, intimidation, harassment, coercion or violence that…[i]s motivated in part by that person's actual or perceived race, creed, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, or immigration or citizenship status or other protected status.”).

Currently, state and federal laws do not prohibit workplace bullying. State legislatures have been considering various bills that would change this, including the Workplace Psychological Safety Act (introduced in Massachusetts, Oregon, and Rhode Island in 2023) and the Healthy Workplace Bill (introduced in 32 states). To date, none have become law.

Thus, at this point, how can attorneys best represent employees who allege they have either been bullied or who have been accused of bullying, or employers confronting these types of complaints?

First, because “bullying” may be subjective, it is important for all involved to ensure the employer does an appropriate investigation. This should include reviewing past formalised feedback (such as 360° and managerial reviews) as well as conducting contemporaneous interviews of the employees involved and colleagues who regularly interact with them. If an employee has never had any notice that the management/communication style they have used for years is problematic (yet lawful), then: (i) the accusation may be unfounded; and/or (ii) coaching – as opposed to termination – may be warranted (whether in general, if necessary, or concerning the accuser specifically).

Second, counsel (regardless of who they represent) should monitor whether the accuser or accused has a potentially viable age discrimination claim. When an employer chooses to terminate or discipline an older employee based on an allegation by a younger employee (or when it chooses not to), there may be a claim that the employer has favoured one over the other due to age.  

Third, if the accused is terminated for “cause”, counsel should confirm whether the alleged conduct falls outside the definition of “cause”, which could entitle the accused to severance and/or other forms of compensation. An assertion of “cause” by the employer may also render relevant discovery into whether other employees have engaged in similar conduct without consequence (which could help establish that the employer did not view the alleged conduct as “cause”).

Fourth, while alternative workplace bullying claims have generally been unsuccessful, employees can explore recovery through, depending on the facts and jurisdiction: (i) breach of contract for failing to abide by company policy; (ii) workers’ compensation; (iii) intentional/negligent infliction of emotional distress; and (iv) defamation.

Finally, ensuring that employees of different generations can understand each other’s perspectives and communicate effectively is critical to a successful workplace. Both employers and employees should take advantage of HR programmes aimed at fostering and improving cross-generational relations, such as team-building activities, mutual mentoring, in-house mediation, and coaching.

Regardless of what the law technically requires, all involved benefit from a positive working environment and the retention of productive and satisfied talent at all ages.