-
By Ethan Chen 陳奕辰
-
-
The phenomenon of “lying flat (tang ping, 躺平),” has recently re-entered the forum of public debate as a criticism of the work ethics of public sector employees.
However, assigning individual blame ignores the key institutional factors at play.
In the past, the iron rice bowl of the civil service did not necessarily mean that work was light, but that the system offered a high level of predictability and security.
Stable salaries, clear pathways for promotions and sound retirement packages once gave people a reason to commit themselves to a career that would offer security in the future.
It was an arrangement that shaped behavioral choices prioritizing stability; this is not evidence of laziness, but a rational response to institutional incentives.
In 2018, pension reforms saw widespread restructuring of the system that once provided long-term protections.
Retirement payments shrank, and future uncertainty increased, meaning that new employees struggled to rely on “job for life” assurances as a basis from which to plan their careers.
At the same time, salaries and career development opportunities in the private sector continued to rise, leaving the civil service with a comparatively diminished appeal.
It is also important to note that it is not just remuneration challenges that the public sector faces, but an internal asymmetry of incentive mechanisms.
Under rising operational burdens and societal expectations, if the system cannot effectively reconcile the relationship between employee performance and rewards so that doing more and doing less actually result in different outcomes, it is not difficult to see why workers might remain conservative in their efforts.
Today’s so-called “lying flat” phenomenon, therefore, is best described not as an issue of personal values, but a reflection of institutional signals.
If the system cannot make it clear where the value, lies in working hard, then a reduced level of commitment is an entirely predictable outcome.
Progress cannot be made if public debate only goes so far as to label others and level criticism.
What is needed is a systemic redesign to ensure that those who are willing to put in the effort and shoulder more responsibility can see reasonable returns.
Only then could the public sector regain its appeal and meet public expectations for high-quality governance.
“Lying flat” is not the disease; it is a symptom. When more and more people are no longer choosing to go all-in, it begs the question: Is what is on offer by the system worthy of a lifetime’s devotion?
Ethan Chen is an associate technical specialist.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
