Lately, several of my early-career clients have said some version of this: “I need pick a job where I make a lot of money. It’s like the only criteria is a job that can support their spending needs. They don’t seem to be thinking about finding a job that matches their skills and interests, then planning their spending routine.
Sometimes they tell me this when they are new graduates considering whether to apply for a particular job. Sometimes they were laid off after a few years of work and are rejecting positions because the salary feels too low. They are not arrogant about their decisions, but they are steadfast. Most are looking at rent, student loans, healthcare, home prices, the cost of building an adult life, and trying to calculate what it will take to feel secure.
I understand why they are focused on money. I also know that the labor market does not set salaries according to what any of us want or need.That creates a painful collision between the life a young person hopes to afford and the value employers currently place on the work they are qualified to do.
I have been struggling with how to talk about this because I do not want to dismiss the economic reality Gen Z inherited. Frankly, the work world I entered was a lot easier.
I never questioned whether hard work would lead somewhere. I went to university at a time when the name of the school and evidence of intelligence could open doors even when you had little or no experience. I assumed I would find work, learn, advance and continue to earn more. While that path was never guaranteed, it felt reliable.
Many young people no longer believe that sequence works.
A recent New York Times opinion piece highlighted that graduates do not trust traditional career effort to produce a reliable payoff. They have watched wages stagnate, housing become unaffordable, degrees lose their value and employers lay off talented people. Their ambition has not disappeared but they have stopped attaching it to an employer’s career ladder (Nietfeld, 2026).
They also feel they must earn very large amounts in order to feel secure. The income expectations reported in the article were very high. In one poll, members of Gen Z said they would need to earn nearly $600,000 a year to feel financially successful. Many of the students interviewed said they would need $200,000 to $300,000 even to feel stable (Nietfeld, 2026).Those numbers may sound absurd to an seasoned leader. But before we ridicule them, we should ask what the numbers represent.
For some young adults, the desired salary is a rough estimate of what adulthood appears to cost. It represents rent, debt, future children, retirement, healthcare and the hope of owning a home. It may also represent protection against an uncertain future.
One Forbes reporter coined the phrase “liquid adulthood” and it helps explain some of this. He said the traditional anchors of adulthood, including long-term employment, homeownership and predictable progression, feel much less stable. Social systems and rules are changing constantly instead of staying fixed, so work feels more temporary and liquid (Bakhtiari, 2026).
However, none of that changes how jobs are currently priced. Employers generally set salaries according to the market value of the work, the availability of people who can do it, internal equity and the organization’s ability to pay. A candidate’s financial needs may be entirely legitimate and still have little connection to what a particular position commands.
That is the part I am trying to help young job seekers understand. Wanting to earn $100,000 does not make someone qualified for a $100,000 job. Refusing to look at any job that pays less may also prevent them from acquiring the experience that would eventually make that salary possible.
But simply telling someone, “You have to start at the bottom,” is demeaning and incomplete. It asks the young person to trust a system that has given them good reason to be skeptical.
Employers have work to do here too. For years, organizations have told early-career employees to pay their dues, prove themselves and be patient. Too often, those instructions come without a clear explanation of what the employee is supposed to learn, how long progression usually takes or what evidence will be used to decide that someone is ready for more responsibility and pay.
“Work hard and opportunities will come” is no longer a convincing employment proposition. The more useful conversation is about a young worker’s current market value and future market value. An early-career employee needs an honest understanding of what their present skills and experience can command. They also need to know whether taking a particular job, even for a short while, will increase that value.
A position paying less than someone hoped can still be a rational choice when it provides things like: ownership of outcomes, industry knowledge, client exposure, measurable results, management experience, a scarce skill or access to a strong professional network. A low-paying job that provides none of those is not a great bargain.
Young people do not need another lecture about being flexible. They need a comprehensive way to evaluate jobs. Instead of asking only, “Does this job pay what I want?” they could evaluate opportunities through several lenses: What jobs am I currently qualified for? What do those jobs pay in my market? What skills would I need to qualify for the next level? Will this position allow me to build that experience? How long am I willing and financially able to make that trade?
Employers and hiring managers should be ready to answer some questions as well as: What has progression looked like for employees in your company? What training and coaching will be provided? How will an employee know whether they are moving forward? This does not require an employer to promise a promotion or raise salaries beyond what the work supports. It requires transparency about the bargain.
Folks that are managers and leaders today (including me) benefited from a system that was more forgiving. We were hired for potential and did not have to demonstrate ability to land our first jobs. We could believe that learning and effort would lead to financial gain because they generally did.
I cannot promise a young person that the same sequence will work as neatly today. I cannot make housing affordable, change the salary range or guarantee that loyalty will be rewarded. What I can do is help young folks avoid making a difficult situation worse.
A salary goal is useful. It tells you what kind of life you are trying to build. But it does not tell you which job you can get today, or whether the current job will help you become qualified for something better tomorrow.
Perhaps the fairest thing we can offer young workers is neither false reassurance nor a scolding about unrealistic expectations. It is a clear-eyed assessment of where they stand, a credible path for increasing their value and enough information to decide whether the next step with your company is worth taking.
______________________________________________________________________________
Resources
The sources below include the articles that prompted this piece and all the research used in developing the analysis and recommendations.
Adhvaryu, A., Molina, T., & Nyshadham, A. (2019). Expectations, wage hikes, and worker voice: Evidence from a field experiment (NBER Working Paper No. 25866). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w25866
Bakhtiari, K. (2026, July 12). What happened to adulthood? Welcome to Gen Z’s liquid adulthood. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kianbakhtiari/2026/07/12/what-happened-to-adulthood-welcome-to-gen-zs-liquid-adulthood/
Belot, M., de Koning, B. K., Fouarge, D., Kircher, P., Muller, P., & Phlippen, S. (2025). Advising job seekers in occupations with poor prospects: A field experiment (NBER Working Paper No. 33819). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w33819
Conlon, J. J., Pilossoph, L., Wiswall, M., & Zafar, B. (2018). Labor market search with imperfect information and learning (NBER Working Paper No. 24988). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24988
de Koning, B. K., Muller, P., Belot, M., Engels, Y., Fouarge, D., Keer, M., Kircher, P., & Phlippen, S. (2026). Online buddies for job seekers: A field experiment (NBER Working Paper No. 34912). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w34912
Deloitte. (2025). 2025 Gen Z and millennial survey. Deloitte Insights. https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/topics/talent/2025-gen-z-millennial-survey.html
Deloitte. (2026). 2026 Gen Z and millennial survey. https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/issues/work/genz-millennial-survey.html
Krueger, A. B., & Mueller, A. I. (2014). A contribution to the empirics of reservation wages (NBER Working Paper No. 19870). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w19870
Mustian, J. (2026, July 23). Gen Z, millennials, Gen X & boomers have wildly different ideas of what a healthy work-life balance looks like. Yahoo Life. https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/articles/gen-z-millennials-gen-x-072057267.html
Nietfeld, E. (2026, July 23). Gen Z fell out of love with work. I don’t blame them. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/23/opinion/gen-z-ambition-millennials-career.html
Park, I.-J., Rie, J., Kim, H. S., & Park, J. (2020). Effects of a future time perspective-based career intervention on career decisions. Journal of Career Development, 47(1), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845318781043
Walker, T. L., & Tracey, T. J. G. (2012). The role of future time perspective in career decision-making. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 81(2), 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.06.002
