“It’s still enough for me”: The 2nd Mountain.

29. July 2023

Content:

Every manager in the car industry is aware of this:

The car industry will shrink in the coming years.

Many of the approximately 12 million jobs in the European car industry (according to ACEA) will be lost. The population in Europe is shrinking. Sales figures have been declining in Europe for years. Electric platforms require fewer parts and less time to assemble. And the competition in China is gaining market share.

In the next few years, the last “boomers” (1946-1964) in the automotive industry will retire and their positions will no longer be filled.

A “socially acceptable shrinkage” in installments has begun.

Early retirement does not fit into the knowledge economy.

“Socially responsible downsizing through early retirement” was a mechanism used in the coal and steel industry in the 1980s. Jobs were cut and physically hard-working steelworkers and miners were retired earlier.

This does not work in the restructuring of the car industry.

The needs and interests of today’s generation of managers, who work in offices and are being downsized, are different from those of steelworkers in the 1980s.
The car industry is too big to “push away” this shrinkage. 12 million employees are equivalent to the population of Belgium, Greece or Sweden. The importance of the automotive industry for economic performance and social wealth in Europe is correspondingly high.
With every employee who leaves, society loses experience, productivity, competitiveness and therefore added value and social wealth. Whether this economic output can be compensated for by new mobility, automation, AI or other innovations, for example, is debatable.
Gen X (1965-1980) retires early, sometimes at 58, 57, 56 or earlier. At the same time, they are too young to retire as life expectancy increases. Studies on life expectancy show a clear correlation between binding social integration and life expectancy. “He who rests, rusts.” Or: those who retire don’t have long to live.
With a life expectancy of 80+ years and increasing every year, they have a 20+ year period of life ahead of them that not only needs to be financed, but also filled with meaning and social inclusion. The US is currently led by a generation of politicians older than 75. Henry Kissinger traveled to China for foreign policy talks when he was over 100 years old. We should realistically assume that managers still have +/- 30 productive years ahead of them after they leave the company.
This creates a period of life that needs to be financed and filled with meaning and social integration. Studies on longevity, e.g. in Okinawa, show a clear connection between binding social integration and life expectancy. “He who rests, rusts”. Or: those who retire have less to live for.

Everyone should think carefully about and evaluate the idea of gainful employment followed by a passive pension. Those who no longer play will be removed from the playing field. The upside-down age pyramid tells us that society cannot afford this.

Early retirement for healthy 60-year-old managers is not sustainable.

The contradiction between lost economic output, the expected passivity of being a pensioner and the unused potential of the suddenly inactive could not be greater.

However, extending the employment contract is not a solution either.

The question is no longer whether “socially acceptable shrinkage” will become a problem, but when.

We lit the fuse from both sides.

Decisions on early retirement are made by companies. There are no macroeconomic calculations that are discussed publicly.

And even if all the economic aspects could be solved, the question remains: what are these people with enormous potential suddenly doing without jobs?

It has taken years and decades to build up a career and bring it into harmony with family, health, finances and lifestyle.

And from one day to the next, this structure collapses.

Because there was no time to set up a parallel structure beforehand. In industry, people usually work very hard. Very few people have time for “side jobs” and it is not economically necessary.

It would be good to have a second structure in addition to employment.

Because people need meaningful work in addition to many other things. We need the challenge and the confirmation. And we need the cooperation and recognition of our colleagues. And if that disappears, it’s not a financial issue.

It’s not right to put all your eggs in one basket.

When will Gen X recognize this dilemma for itself?

Meaningful work is a misunderstood need.

Because it is confused with salaried employment.

I know what I’m talking about.

In 2019, I took a one-year sabbatical from my employment at Volkswagen and went on a trip around the world with my family. The pandemic eventually turned one year into two.

I received a project request during the lockdown in Mexico. During the project, I realized that life under the tropical sun without work was simply not enough for me.

As a result, I founded my first startup in 2021.

I started AutomotiveLearners in 2023.

Working means creating value for others. And not having an employment contract.

The “happiness” of not having to work is misunderstood.

When a boring, unsatisfying job disappears, everyone is happy. “Retire at last, lucky you.” However, this happiness only occurs if the work has no meaning.

I would argue that this only applies in exceptional cases.

Most of my colleagues are excellent at what they do. And they do it with a lot of passion. Of course, it’s often stressful and frustrating. But it’s like playing soccer: Even if you lose a game, you don’t give up playing soccer straight away.

I keep noticing that early retirees are looking for new fields of activity. Surprisingly, however, these tend to be temporary experiments: long trips, new building projects – things that have been put off for a long time are being made up for.

The question remains: Is this enough to fill the next 20-30 years?

Achieving clarity about the “Second Mountain” in good time

The first mountain of life consists of education, career and financial provision. At some point it is reached: the house is paid off, the children have moved away.

Behind it lies a valley: retirement.

Socially acceptable shrinkage will only get us there faster.

And the question: What happens when the current job ends?

Do I have clarity about my future and myself?

Our professional identity depends on an employment contract that is secure for many years.

But our working lives are limited and have a predictable end.

The industry is currently stagnating and shrinking. “It’s still good enough for me,” is what you hear everywhere.

And then, suddenly, it’s over.

In most cases, financial security is a given. However, this does not mean that everything is taken care of for the rest of your life. And that you are no longer needed.

European companies cannot afford this either.

Politicians are not finding answers to this contradiction, see Germany or France.

The answer can only be found individually.

I have developed a program to find individual answers.

Practical and comprehensible.

This program is about finding clarity about how we envision our future. It is about finding a balance between professional value creation and all other areas of life, such as finances, health, social network and lifestyle.