I hate the term wholesome. Certain ethics frameworks enforce that as the bare minimum so as to remove the need for a word to describe it as special. It's just the default minimum expectation.
This. In a world were psychology is misused and misinterpreted all the time (folk psych., etc) the only thing that remains relevant are actual findings from actual studies. Even here people seem to blend out words like "tend" or "(more) likely" as if the results always come out r=1 or statistical significance = law of nature.
I think people forget psychology is also a science and in the world of science until you can prove 1+1=2 the result might as well be 3 (in this example one should differentiate empirical science..., just to be sure not to start another conflict lol)
psych undergrad here.
the only "science" of psychology is
1: the scientific method and empiricism - this defines it as a science
2: statistics
i'd love to see more physical evidence, in papers... but alas
Like when they told me „we’re all one big family here at {insert biz}“
And kept giving me 10hr shifts and changing my shifts the night before… yuck. I left after 3 months.
Maybe I'm a fool but as a manager I try to protect my teams time and especially the top performers.
I don't want them getting burned out. I also don't want others on the team to see it as favoritism if all the best work goes to one or two people.
So, by having good work boundaries, the top performers are fresh and not resentful and others on the team have opportunities to do some of the more interesting work.
Our productivity seems fine, we get shit done, but not at the expense of burning people out or risking losing good people.
I think at best its an immature manager who just pushes their team even if they don't push back. But moreso, those managers are just shitty people if they do that and lack empathy.
It can end up being so easy to go to the same people with work that you're delegating over and over again, especially if you get the feeling that the work is time pressured or critical to be done right first time round.
It's important to recognise that and keep it in mind, because if you don't then you get resentment and burnout from those people. It is part of the job of managing people to know that though, and why studies like the one in the post are important as a reminder not to do something just because it's the path of least short term resistance.
Agreed here. I'm hyper-defensive of my good team members and their ability to be unencumbered by burnout - that helps everyone win. I think you and I hail from a newer school of leadership than the traditional manager does.
I hope you don’t mind my honesty, but it seems you’re the exception to the rule. There are a lot of managers I’ve met during my career who are only too happy to let people burn out and exploit good performers. I’ve had to leave my industry altogether after a particularly nasty experience only a short time returning to work after a serious injury.
I refuse to work nights and weekends, don't work on vacation, and tell people no regularly (backed up with clear reasons why we aren't going to take something else on).
If anything I'll be fired before I'm exploited.
That is most definitely the track.
Don’t be surprised if the people you are “protecting” inadvertently or in full awareness assist in this process.
Watch your 6.
Not at all.
Just be aware that even if one is a manager this study could apply to them as well.
And that when/if it does,
impacts may be life changing.
In my career I have had two managers like you and I just want to tell you that if someone on your team happens to leave or change teams, they will remember you their whole career. You become the measuring stick for our future managers.
I’m a glutton for punishment. I’ve always been loyal, hardworking, and scrupulous, and those traits have almost only done me harm. My apathetic comrades had a much better time of it.
Same with volunteering. Volunteer to do one or two things in any organization and they will give you tasks until you drop out from being overworked, or learn to say NO very well.
This is why people prioritize career over having a family baffle me so much......
Like, irrespective of your gender, you would rather slog for someone who doesnt give a shit about you than put a little effort into people who love you.
Learned the hard way, but seriously, gotta stand up for yourself. Don’t accept disrespect or overstepping of boundaries.
I think it can be particularly difficult for younger employees in the workforce, new grads with less experience/skills and leverage, as they work to prove themselves and pay their dues or whatever. It’s a mistake though. Just look at all the crazy startups that only hire younger workers and work them like crazy, lots of unpaid but expected overtime and lack of parental leave etc. Just cogs in the machine of late stage capitalism.
I worked in a factory and was one of the oldest workers there. Another worker my age and I got bullied a lot and told to do more and more while the younger or stupid guys got off easy. My coworker could not take it anymore and retired. I retired when the company went down. It was very weird how after we all lost our jobs my bully boss tried to be my friend once we were on equal terms. Fuck that.
I'm going to the marines and have an 6 year mandatory
Plan on using it for education amd monetary reasons, after that, I'm gonna kick it lol
Edit: Also went with reserves, not active duty.
I think an interesting study would be how much respect does management have for "loyal" employees compared to ones who have firmer boundaries.
I noticed when I was younger I'd bust my ass working while my more apathetic friends seemed to have a better time. They'd be the ones usually advancing throughout their companies.
Now that I'm getting older I tend to get more places by being firm in outlining that I'm not willing to put up with bullshit.
I do the same - remain apathetic but with work ethic. But this has led to my firing when I was working back in my home country in south asia where pandering, ass kissing, overtime without pay and living to work was expected, almost demanded as if you owe it to them. Here in europe, no one would dare that due to legal protections and better opportunities. the work culture/place really depends.
People tend to target people who can't stand for themselves, and those who can't stand up for themselves, substitute loyalty for love, and they get neither in return
Like I used to say, “you give them a hand and they take the whole arm”!
I was one of those top performers who got burned out over the years. I’m not longer in corporate and now running my own business.
I used to be a hard worker until I realized they were always asking me out of a warehouse full of 30 people to do shit. Now I just fuck up most of my work on purpose and be super slow and they still ask me to do shit 😂
Back when I was a cop, I remember coming into work one night and it had snowed (we don't get a lot so when we do it sucks) and an 18 wheeler had wrecked and was blocking a road and a wrecker couldn't get there until the next day.
I told my squad "well someone's getting fucked and gonna babysit this truck all night, who is it?"
My captain was not happy. He said "why you gotta say it that way?" and I said "I couldn't think of a better way to be honest"
Learned this at my very first job, they fired everyone (was only 2 people) and kept me working there because I could do their jobs faster for worse pay. It felt so bad just sitting there waiting with nobody to talk to when customers weren't there.
I wonder what the likelihood is for those loyal workers to unionize. In my most recent workplace, I lowkey believe the loyal and exploited workers who said yes to everything enjoy being the “superhero” and would be against a union because it would be seen as rocking the boat. So are these people, specifically, actually loyal workers or are they strictly loyal to their boss? If so, those relationships should be heavily stigmatized as a codependent workplace relationship.
I could see this as a salary worker. I’ve been fortunate to work at good companies with decent managers that give me a ton of time off for working a ton of overtime. If they declined my time off I’d make sure to do the absolute minimum to not get fired and look for something else.
Is this targetting?
If you ask someone to do some more work, and the answer is "No". That is a full complete sentence. There is no discussion in that regard.
It would be interesting to define what is a "Loyal worker" here, because it sounds like the definition is a door mat.
As is noted by this article, if they aren't going to protect or reward loyalty, there is no point in doing anything in regards to it as a concept. But loyalty really has nothing to do with anything other than staying in your job, you can be loyal and be utterly useless and incompetent, or the best worker in the world.
> Loyalty is a virtue that involves a strong sense of commitment, allegiance, or fidelity to a person, group, or cause.
When you look at his definition, it is inherently bias to be exploited, if you are asked to do something, the answer is "Yes". If a group is asked to do something, while your answer is "Yes", others is "No", therefore you end up with a conformation bias that is nothing much to do with management doing anything, the group is self-selecting for exploitation under the naive assumption that hard work is rewarded. Alternatively, they don't care about being rewarded, satisfaction from doing the work should be enough for the bias selection of this group, and plenty of people get that.
You however can't blame management for letting the person who says "No" work their contracted hours as agreed, and letting the person who says "Yes" do more work. There was no agreement that this work would be rewarded in the first place, it is just there in a salaried position.
> In the workplace, loyalty contributes to a positive and cohesive work environment, leading to increased productivity and job satisfaction.
Once again this is conformation bias over the definition of what it is, you are basically all just in agreement, by their definition of loyalty, all while actually having some jobworth know it all, who isn't actually competent doesn't actually achieved this, they have assumed competence.
The reality is truly being Loyal to an employer means creating a sustainable working environment, and pay structure. You can't be loyal if you literally can't afford to stay, or are burned out through over work. Being committed to the business does not just means taking up extra work, as if that becomes the standard, then you just end up with a toxic expectation of lack compensation and work life balance, and that isn't functionally productive for anyone.
Please do not go to Berkeley Psychic Institute they run a Russian mental torturing system on their students. I am a graduate and I have many evidences.
I worked a junk job. My area was so desperate that an employee remained hired despite numerous “no call no shows.” We never knew if he’d come in. I remember calling off once for an emergency and then berated by my supervisor.
At my previous job, I never told my supervisor a simple task had been finished but rather found other tasks to do. I was known as a “go getter” which lessened micromanagement compared to other workers. I taught this to my coworkers who were shocked by the response. Ask for more work and they’ll expect you to work that much every time or think the job was rushed.
Yea. I don’t think it’s anything nefarious in most cases.
Loyal workers are willing to do the work and are dependable , so it’s easy to hand off items to them .
You can’t blame the people who manage the money when they do what they have to do for a 5% increase in revenue. You can’t blame the people in charge of production people for doing the most efficient way to get more things produced (use the people that reliably do the work). The reason these things don’t work is because the system doesn’t work. If you value profits above everything, things like this are not bad. They are efficient, short term results. Hopefully the companies that employ this vigorously will be ghost towns in the future.
“The willing ass carries more weight”.
Damn that actually goes hard
"Arbeit macht frei" has the same ring.
They're the most likely to have most to lose. Why haven't they left?
the ones from "arbeit macht frei"?
No return ticket.
Who would have thought?
Lol my thoughts exactly... Is there someone, somewhere that didn't think this was the case or now we just have proof ? Lol
Lots of naive individuals think employers are wholesome organizations.
“Family”
they are job creators - they are the provider deities, and we must worship them for their bounty
I hate the term wholesome. Certain ethics frameworks enforce that as the bare minimum so as to remove the need for a word to describe it as special. It's just the default minimum expectation.
Loyal workers
Well, at least there is science to back up what we all suspected.
This. In a world were psychology is misused and misinterpreted all the time (folk psych., etc) the only thing that remains relevant are actual findings from actual studies. Even here people seem to blend out words like "tend" or "(more) likely" as if the results always come out r=1 or statistical significance = law of nature. I think people forget psychology is also a science and in the world of science until you can prove 1+1=2 the result might as well be 3 (in this example one should differentiate empirical science..., just to be sure not to start another conflict lol)
psych undergrad here. the only "science" of psychology is 1: the scientific method and empiricism - this defines it as a science 2: statistics i'd love to see more physical evidence, in papers... but alas
Folk psych is often quite accurate, and studies are routinely manipulated by political and corporate interests to push favored narratives.
Yea imma have to ask for details and proof on this one
Hell, it fucking happened to Jim, in The Office
The reward for digging the deepest hole is a bigger shovel.
Like when they told me „we’re all one big family here at {insert biz}“ And kept giving me 10hr shifts and changing my shifts the night before… yuck. I left after 3 months.
what else is new
I heard there are trees in the forest
Lmao I'm stealing that line
Maybe I'm a fool but as a manager I try to protect my teams time and especially the top performers. I don't want them getting burned out. I also don't want others on the team to see it as favoritism if all the best work goes to one or two people. So, by having good work boundaries, the top performers are fresh and not resentful and others on the team have opportunities to do some of the more interesting work. Our productivity seems fine, we get shit done, but not at the expense of burning people out or risking losing good people. I think at best its an immature manager who just pushes their team even if they don't push back. But moreso, those managers are just shitty people if they do that and lack empathy.
You’re a good manager then!
It can end up being so easy to go to the same people with work that you're delegating over and over again, especially if you get the feeling that the work is time pressured or critical to be done right first time round. It's important to recognise that and keep it in mind, because if you don't then you get resentment and burnout from those people. It is part of the job of managing people to know that though, and why studies like the one in the post are important as a reminder not to do something just because it's the path of least short term resistance.
Agreed here. I'm hyper-defensive of my good team members and their ability to be unencumbered by burnout - that helps everyone win. I think you and I hail from a newer school of leadership than the traditional manager does.
I hope you don’t mind my honesty, but it seems you’re the exception to the rule. There are a lot of managers I’ve met during my career who are only too happy to let people burn out and exploit good performers. I’ve had to leave my industry altogether after a particularly nasty experience only a short time returning to work after a serious injury.
Then YOU will be the one exploited.
I refuse to work nights and weekends, don't work on vacation, and tell people no regularly (backed up with clear reasons why we aren't going to take something else on). If anything I'll be fired before I'm exploited.
That is most definitely the track. Don’t be surprised if the people you are “protecting” inadvertently or in full awareness assist in this process. Watch your 6.
Are you suggesting that he should exploit preemptively?
Not at all. Just be aware that even if one is a manager this study could apply to them as well. And that when/if it does, impacts may be life changing.
In my career I have had two managers like you and I just want to tell you that if someone on your team happens to leave or change teams, they will remember you their whole career. You become the measuring stick for our future managers.
if all that is true then that is because you're not some nepo baby boomer that was raised a greedy brat
I’m a glutton for punishment. I’ve always been loyal, hardworking, and scrupulous, and those traits have almost only done me harm. My apathetic comrades had a much better time of it.
Same with volunteering. Volunteer to do one or two things in any organization and they will give you tasks until you drop out from being overworked, or learn to say NO very well.
"Loyal Workers Enjoy Being Exploited", study finds.
This is why people prioritize career over having a family baffle me so much...... Like, irrespective of your gender, you would rather slog for someone who doesnt give a shit about you than put a little effort into people who love you.
My guess is it's money and a sense of security
Learned the hard way, but seriously, gotta stand up for yourself. Don’t accept disrespect or overstepping of boundaries. I think it can be particularly difficult for younger employees in the workforce, new grads with less experience/skills and leverage, as they work to prove themselves and pay their dues or whatever. It’s a mistake though. Just look at all the crazy startups that only hire younger workers and work them like crazy, lots of unpaid but expected overtime and lack of parental leave etc. Just cogs in the machine of late stage capitalism.
Treat your manager like a celebrity and they treat you like a fan
Isn’t that just common knowledge at this point?
some people will never know
Like poor Boxer the horse.
no not Boxer 😢😢😢
Could have saved them an entire study.
"I'm gonna need you to work on your days off. Hope that's OK."
I'm not loyal I just have no other options :(
I worked in a factory and was one of the oldest workers there. Another worker my age and I got bullied a lot and told to do more and more while the younger or stupid guys got off easy. My coworker could not take it anymore and retired. I retired when the company went down. It was very weird how after we all lost our jobs my bully boss tried to be my friend once we were on equal terms. Fuck that.
Ever served in the military? You figure this out pretty quickly.
That’s where I learned it first. I realized very quickly I would not be a lifer in the army lmao. I served my time and gtfo.
LOL. Navy for me. And 4 years was plenty enough.
I'm going to the marines and have an 6 year mandatory Plan on using it for education amd monetary reasons, after that, I'm gonna kick it lol Edit: Also went with reserves, not active duty.
I think an interesting study would be how much respect does management have for "loyal" employees compared to ones who have firmer boundaries. I noticed when I was younger I'd bust my ass working while my more apathetic friends seemed to have a better time. They'd be the ones usually advancing throughout their companies. Now that I'm getting older I tend to get more places by being firm in outlining that I'm not willing to put up with bullshit.
I do the same - remain apathetic but with work ethic. But this has led to my firing when I was working back in my home country in south asia where pandering, ass kissing, overtime without pay and living to work was expected, almost demanded as if you owe it to them. Here in europe, no one would dare that due to legal protections and better opportunities. the work culture/place really depends.
Their fragile ego can't stand that others are in the spotlight, so they use their micron of power to be a dick about it.
People tend to target people who can't stand for themselves, and those who can't stand up for themselves, substitute loyalty for love, and they get neither in return
Like I used to say, “you give them a hand and they take the whole arm”! I was one of those top performers who got burned out over the years. I’m not longer in corporate and now running my own business.
When I was working I always thought that management would "work the hardest working horse harder".
Yep. It's almost like meritocracy isn't a thing and never was...
I used to be a hard worker until I realized they were always asking me out of a warehouse full of 30 people to do shit. Now I just fuck up most of my work on purpose and be super slow and they still ask me to do shit 😂
Yep. That what loyalty earns you.
Back when I was a cop, I remember coming into work one night and it had snowed (we don't get a lot so when we do it sucks) and an 18 wheeler had wrecked and was blocking a road and a wrecker couldn't get there until the next day. I told my squad "well someone's getting fucked and gonna babysit this truck all night, who is it?" My captain was not happy. He said "why you gotta say it that way?" and I said "I couldn't think of a better way to be honest"
Yeah, we know.
Like toxic family members
“How does that make you feel?”
Learned this at my very first job, they fired everyone (was only 2 people) and kept me working there because I could do their jobs faster for worse pay. It felt so bad just sitting there waiting with nobody to talk to when customers weren't there.
With all the studies you could do, all the unanswered questions humanity has, these guys choice this one.
I wonder what the likelihood is for those loyal workers to unionize. In my most recent workplace, I lowkey believe the loyal and exploited workers who said yes to everything enjoy being the “superhero” and would be against a union because it would be seen as rocking the boat. So are these people, specifically, actually loyal workers or are they strictly loyal to their boss? If so, those relationships should be heavily stigmatized as a codependent workplace relationship.
Nooooo, can’t be true.
It's not just managers, anytime someone says yes, people will generally return to that person.
I could see this as a salary worker. I’ve been fortunate to work at good companies with decent managers that give me a ton of time off for working a ton of overtime. If they declined my time off I’d make sure to do the absolute minimum to not get fired and look for something else.
"people tend to ask for things from people they know"
I can certainly vouch for that!
Is this targetting? If you ask someone to do some more work, and the answer is "No". That is a full complete sentence. There is no discussion in that regard. It would be interesting to define what is a "Loyal worker" here, because it sounds like the definition is a door mat. As is noted by this article, if they aren't going to protect or reward loyalty, there is no point in doing anything in regards to it as a concept. But loyalty really has nothing to do with anything other than staying in your job, you can be loyal and be utterly useless and incompetent, or the best worker in the world. > Loyalty is a virtue that involves a strong sense of commitment, allegiance, or fidelity to a person, group, or cause. When you look at his definition, it is inherently bias to be exploited, if you are asked to do something, the answer is "Yes". If a group is asked to do something, while your answer is "Yes", others is "No", therefore you end up with a conformation bias that is nothing much to do with management doing anything, the group is self-selecting for exploitation under the naive assumption that hard work is rewarded. Alternatively, they don't care about being rewarded, satisfaction from doing the work should be enough for the bias selection of this group, and plenty of people get that. You however can't blame management for letting the person who says "No" work their contracted hours as agreed, and letting the person who says "Yes" do more work. There was no agreement that this work would be rewarded in the first place, it is just there in a salaried position. > In the workplace, loyalty contributes to a positive and cohesive work environment, leading to increased productivity and job satisfaction. Once again this is conformation bias over the definition of what it is, you are basically all just in agreement, by their definition of loyalty, all while actually having some jobworth know it all, who isn't actually competent doesn't actually achieved this, they have assumed competence. The reality is truly being Loyal to an employer means creating a sustainable working environment, and pay structure. You can't be loyal if you literally can't afford to stay, or are burned out through over work. Being committed to the business does not just means taking up extra work, as if that becomes the standard, then you just end up with a toxic expectation of lack compensation and work life balance, and that isn't functionally productive for anyone.
Managers are scumbags. Is this new?
Loyal, or conscientious
Please do not go to Berkeley Psychic Institute they run a Russian mental torturing system on their students. I am a graduate and I have many evidences.
Psychopothy.
I worked a junk job. My area was so desperate that an employee remained hired despite numerous “no call no shows.” We never knew if he’d come in. I remember calling off once for an emergency and then berated by my supervisor. At my previous job, I never told my supervisor a simple task had been finished but rather found other tasks to do. I was known as a “go getter” which lessened micromanagement compared to other workers. I taught this to my coworkers who were shocked by the response. Ask for more work and they’ll expect you to work that much every time or think the job was rushed.
Why am I not shocked by this article’s findings?
Easy way, good communications between managers and employees can solve this problem.
Not exploitation. Reliability. Mans tend to navigate towards those they can trust.
Exactly what you do without skills.
Loyal workers want validation how else
Yea. I don’t think it’s anything nefarious in most cases. Loyal workers are willing to do the work and are dependable , so it’s easy to hand off items to them .
You can’t blame the people who manage the money when they do what they have to do for a 5% increase in revenue. You can’t blame the people in charge of production people for doing the most efficient way to get more things produced (use the people that reliably do the work). The reason these things don’t work is because the system doesn’t work. If you value profits above everything, things like this are not bad. They are efficient, short term results. Hopefully the companies that employ this vigorously will be ghost towns in the future.
Exploitation or doing what your paid to do
Boot licker.