It isn’t very often a phrase stops me in my tracks. Over the past few weeks, however, the Tik-Tok trend for “lazy girl jobs” has done just that. Coined by several content creators, the term is used to refer to jobs that are deemed undemanding but well paid. Typically, these are remote roles involving menial ‘office’ tasks.
Rather than building a career, those in “lazy girl jobs” are working purely to earn the financial freedom to pursue their passions away from the workplace. In essence, individuals in these roles are looking for an untaxing role that carries little stress and does not require them to exceed their contractual hours.
I have to admit, my initial reaction was to roll my eyes and dismiss the term. After all, social media and many so-called influencers are not always known for their credibility. And that is without considering the blatant sexism of the term; whatever happened to lazy boys?
On reflection, however, I realised that the concept behind the term is actually quite valid, to a point. Research has shown that generation Z (those born between 1997 and 2012) place greater importance on work-life balance and roles that fit with their own beliefs and values than previous generations. This is a cohort that typically expects work to fit around their lives, rather than the other way round (although there will inevitably be exceptions). Deloitte’s 2023 Gen Z and Millennial survey, for example, found that having a good work-life balance is the top consideration among these groups when choosing a new employer. Three-quarters of respondents who were working in hybrid or remote roles, meanwhile, would consider looking for a new job if their employer asked them to work on-site full time.
Post-pandemic, we have seen this desire for a better work-life balance increase among all generations in the workplace. The rise in hybrid and flexible working models are testament to the ways in which employers are working to support and accommodate this within the workplace.
While I appreciate the desire for a good work-life balance, therefore, I certainly don’t believe that the only way of achieving this is by working in a minimum effort job. So, does the term ‘lazy girl’ do these roles a real disservice?
It also begs the question: how sustainable are these roles during an individual’s entire career? Will even the most committed “lazy girl” reach a point where they desire a role that stretches their skills and provides a greater sense of fulfilment? If they were to have a family, what message does this philosophy send to generations to come? After all, it is perfectly possible to work hard in a role that you love, but also have the ability to switch off and pursue a life away from work.
Debbie Lovewell-Tuck
Editor
Tweet: @DebbieLovewell