Voice or Overreach? Age Labels, Supervisor Attribution, and Procedural Safeguards for Intern Voice

Interns are often the first to spot inefficient processes, yet the same observation can be read by a supervisor as constructive input or dismissed as inexperience and overstepping. Grounded in attribution theory, this paper treats “post-00” not as a stable generational trait but as an identity label that becomes salient when task information is ambiguous, and traces its consequences for supervisor attribution and intern voice. A Pilot Study using the Critical Incident Technique (three interns, six critical incidents) identified the mechanisms of label substitution and information diagnosticity; a Main Study survey of 174 valid responses tested the pathway from perceived age-label salience through psychological safety to voice behavior and defensive silence. Greater perceived label salience predicted lower psychological safety (r = −0.163, p < 0.05), which in turn predicted more voice (r = 0.358, p < 0.01) and less defensive silence (r = −0.330, p < 0.01). Contrary to expectations, structured expression channels strengthened rather than weakened the salience–safety link (B = −0.215 vs. −0.061), implying that formal channels protect interns only when substantively used. The paper reframes alleged generational conflict as a problem of information screening and procedural governance, and proposes governance pathways—role specification, feedback templates, tiered supervisory response, and university–employer co-governance—to ground youth workplace development in institutional design.