Why Young Workers in Singapore Now Choose Job Security Over Flexibility

A new picture of youth priorities

Young workers in Singapore are reordering what they want from work. Pay and job security now sit at the top of the list, ahead of flexible arrangements or rapid promotion. That is the clearest finding from a new study by the Singapore University of Social Sciences, which surveyed more than 1,000 youths aged 18 to 35 and over 250 employers. The study, released at the Youth Forum 2025, challenges the common view that a digital native generation cares most about working from anywhere or designing their own hours.

Across the three age bands studied, the signal did not waver. Financial gain and job stability outranked flexible work or career progression for youths aged 18 to 25, 26 to 30, and 31 to 35. Flexibility still mattered to the youngest group and those in their early 30s, but it was not the anchor. For workers in their late 20s, work life balance took precedence over flexibility alone, a sign that coping with responsibilities is shaping how they judge job offers.

The study also found a restless job market among young adults. About 68 percent are exploring new roles, with the youngest respondents more actively searching and older ones more focused on stability. Many are open to change because they feel salary growth is too slow and culture is not supportive. Employers, on the other hand, often expect promotions or added exposure to motivate younger workers. Without matching pay and security, those offers do not land.

The headline conclusion is simple. Young Singaporeans want security first, then a path to grow. An official summary of the findings is available from the university’s media release at SUSS.

What changed since the pandemic and tech layoffs

Several forces are shaping this shift toward security. Living costs have climbed. Competition for quality roles is intense. Well publicised layoffs in technology and other sectors made risk more visible. For someone in their early 20s, flexibility and autonomy can feel attractive because commitments are lighter. By the late 20s and early 30s, housing plans and caregiving responsibilities press in. The floor of stability starts to matter more than the ceiling of opportunity.

Long running research in Singapore points to the same baseline priorities. A national youth panel that followed thousands of young people through the late 2010s found careers and financial security near the top of their goals. Many reported more stress at work after graduation, yet they also developed stronger tolerance and skills to manage it. Job security and good pathways for progression consistently ranked as important in evaluating roles, while the value placed on flexibility rose over time. These results show that flexibility is desired, yet it does not replace the need for dependable pay and a stable employer.

Academic reviews reinforce that this is not a fleeting trend. Studies in Singapore and abroad show that younger workers tend to value pay, working conditions, and growth opportunities most. Purpose ranks lower on average. Priorities did not swing wildly during the pandemic. Structural realities, such as education, income level, and the availability of quality jobs, shape expectations. For youths without degrees, higher earnings matter even more because the room for advancement is narrower. For degree holders, growth and progression are a bigger focus once a reasonable income baseline is met.

Where employers and youths are misaligned

The SUSS study highlights a communications gap that keeps turnover high. Youths say they are motivated by financial incentives, flexibility, and autonomy. Employers put weight on promotions and long term growth opportunities. Each side focuses on different levers. That gap helps explain why so many young workers remain open to new roles. When companies present exposure or added responsibilities without clearer pay progression and job security, younger employees interpret it as extra workload with little protection.

What counts as security is more than keeping a job. It includes fair and predictable pay, sustainable workloads, and visible investment in skills. Clarity on role scope and how performance is measured also contributes to a sense of stability. Without these basics, promises of development do not build trust.

Soft skills gap

Employers in the study ranked problem solving as a core capability for advancement. Youths rated their strengths differently, giving more weight to communication, adaptability, and teamwork. This mismatch matters. Problem solving is often the gateway skill for higher complexity roles, while communication and teamwork are essential to coordinate daily work. Closing the gap requires employers to make expectations explicit and give young staff chances to practice and demonstrate problem solving in safe settings.

How youths want to learn

Youths prefer external courses and hands-on experiences to build capability. Employers prefer mentoring and coaching at work. Both have value. The best results usually come from blending structured guidance with project based exposure. When workers can apply new skills on real tasks, confidence grows and the learning sticks. When mentoring supports that practice, growth accelerates. A shared plan that combines both methods will align expectations and reduce frustration.

Flexibility still matters, on firmer ground

Flexibility has not vanished from the wish list. Surveys of employees in Singapore continue to show work life balance as a powerful draw for talent and a reason to stay. Many workers rate balance and attractive pay packages as their top two priorities, with job security close behind. Younger groups tend to prize training and growth as well, while older groups are more sensitive to company stability and a manageable workload.

These views sit comfortably with the SUSS findings. Flexibility is valued, yet it is most attractive when pay and security feel solid. In the 26 to 30 age bracket, balance outranked flexibility itself, a sign that predictability around workload and time off is the point. Employers can combine firm anchors, such as stable contracts and pay progression, with flexible arrangements that protect focus time. That blend meets the desire for control without asking workers to accept income risk.

Practical design choices help. Teams can set core hours for collaboration so flexible schedules still align. Managers can watch workload so flexibility does not become a shield for chronic overtime. Leaders can model boundaries, such as limited after hours communications and enforced leave, so balance becomes a lived practice rather than a slogan.

Shorter job tenures are a rational strategy

Younger workers in Singapore are also more willing to switch roles to build skills and income. In a recent regional survey of Gen Z, respondents here reported the shortest preferred stint in a role, at under three years on average. A sizeable share said one to two years was their optimum. Reasons are pragmatic. Changing jobs is often the fastest way to gain scope, move to better culture, or negotiate higher pay. Many have seen that hiring budgets tend to be larger than retention budgets, so external moves can deliver bigger jumps.

Frequent change has trade offs. Workers risk being seen as lacking depth if they cannot show a clear narrative of growth. The best strategy is to change for learning and impact, not for a small raise. Employers can respond by making internal progression real, so a worker who wants new scope or compensation can find it without leaving. That reduces churn and protects institutional knowledge.

Hiring managers can also evaluate candidates on the substance of each move. Did responsibilities expand? Did the person complete projects with measurable outcomes? Candidates who frame each move as a step toward defined capabilities, rather than a reaction to discomfort, signal maturity even with shorter tenures.

Health costs of chasing stability

The drive for financial security can come at a personal cost. Research on young adults working in Singapore found long hours to be a cultural norm. Respondents reported fatigue, desk meals, and less time for exercise. Many gained weight after entering full time work. Women often shouldered more household responsibilities after work, further shrinking time for recovery. Most participants accepted long hours as necessary for career advancement and stable pay, even though the habits undermined health.

If job security is to mean more than a contract, it should include sustainable workloads, predictable schedules, and adequate staffing. Those choices support health, reduce burnout, and make it easier to maintain family commitments. Workers who can rest return with better focus and energy. Companies that reduce chronic overtime or set guardrails around after hours communications often see steadier productivity and lower attrition.

It is also practical economics. Replacing staff is costly and slow. Investing in job design and manager training to protect time off pays back through higher engagement and fewer sick days. Younger employees watch these signals closely when judging whether to stay.

What employers can do now

Employers that want to retain young talent can treat security as the foundation and growth as the structure built on top. Concrete steps help translate that principle into daily practice.

• Put pay and job security first. Benchmark salaries, review increments regularly, and ensure any increase in scope comes with commensurate pay. Convert extended temporary or contract roles to permanent where viable.
• Clarify roles and reduce hidden tasks. Map responsibilities, cut low value administrative work, and invest in systems that remove repetitive burdens.
• Show transparent pathways. Publish pay bands and promotion criteria. Provide examples of internal moves so staff see how advancement works in practice.
• Redesign for sustainability. Track workloads, prevent chronic overtime, and set norms around after hours communications. Protect leave and recovery time.
• Build soft skills with practice. Create rotations and projects that let staff exercise problem solving, then support them with coaching and feedback.
• Co-create learning plans. Allocate budgets and time for external courses and hands-on experiences, while pairing them with mentoring to apply the skills.
• Strengthen manager capability. Train managers to discuss careers and pay openly, recognize contributions, and support balance without penalizing flexibility.
• Focus on fairness and culture. Address equity in hiring and advancement. Encourage a respectful environment where people feel safe to share different views.
• Measure what matters. Track retention at 6, 12, and 24 months, analyze exit reasons, and adjust programs based on evidence.

These actions build trust. When pay keeps pace with responsibilities and workloads are managed, development opportunities feel like real support rather than extra demands. Younger workers then engage more with internal mobility instead of scanning job boards.

How policy is trying to help

Government and unions are moving to strengthen the floor for workers while helping them build new capabilities. The National Day Rally outlined measures aimed at jobs and skills in a more uncertain economy. A government funded traineeship scheme will give students and new graduates from ITE, polytechnics, and universities paid exposure to real work. Expanded job matching, including fairs on campus and community level services, targets quicker transitions into suitable roles. SkillsFuture programs are being upgraded to fund more training time and widen course options, including offerings from industry leaders and private providers.

There is also a push to redesign jobs as technology spreads. Examples include retraining equipment operators for automated systems and studying how AI could change processes in logistics and aviation. The goal is to help workers shift into safer and higher value tasks rather than be displaced. Union partnerships remain central to this approach, keeping the focus on fair wages, safety, and training as roles evolve.

Beyond policy, the SUSS study team is working with self help groups to analyze data on different youth segments, so support can be tailored. That reflects a wider lesson. Youths are not a uniform block. Education level, family duties, and financial buffers all shape how each person weighs security against flexibility. Programs that meet people where they are will be more effective than one size fits all solutions.

Key Points

• A major study of more than 1,000 youths and 250 employers found that financial gain and job security outrank flexibility or quick promotion for young workers in Singapore.
• About 68 percent of youths are exploring new roles, many citing slow salary growth and weak culture, even as they value stability.
• Youths prefer financial incentives, flexibility, and autonomy, while employers emphasize promotions and long term growth, creating a motivation gap.
• Employers rate problem solving highly, but youths see communication, adaptability, and teamwork as their core strengths, pointing to a soft skills mismatch.
• Flexibility still matters, yet it retains talent best when anchored to fair pay, clear contracts, and sustainable workloads.
• Gen Z workers here report shorter preferred tenures, often moving every two to three years to gain skills and income.
• Long hours are common, with health trade offs. Real stability should include predictable schedules and manageable workloads.
• Practical employer steps include pay transparency, role clarity, workload management, blended learning, stronger managers, and attention to equity.
• New measures on traineeships, job matching, training allowances, and job redesign aim to support stability and skill growth as technology advances.