TEDx Talks
Workplace Mental Health – all you need to know (for now) | Tom Oxley | TEDxNorwichED
Is Mental Health important in the workplace? Tom explores all things related to workplace mental health, including mental health in school workplaces, in this insightful video. Tom helps employers figure out mental health at work. He reviews workplaces, trains managers and writes plans.
Since 2012 he has interviewed more than 130 people, surveyed thousands and worked across the UK with corporations, civil service, charities, the public sector, schools and small business. Tom has worked with national mental health charities Mind and Time to Change and consults widely across the UK. He lives in Norfolk and is mildly obsessed with cricket and camping.
He runs Bamboo Mental Health, an organisation dedicated to improving how employers support their people on mental health. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx
[Music] what's it like to work where you work school somewhere else busy right everybody being asked to do more with less hands up who gets their work email on a device at home hands up who sleeps in the same room as their that device hands up who who works evenings and weekends just to do more work the next day hands up who who sometimes wakes up in the night thinks about work can't switch off speaks to the phone before their family in the morning ah yeah early signs of stress okay sorry to tell you hands up who is so busy they they have their breakfast on the toilet no good just my brother-in-law then that's reassuring but but most of the things that I talked about are communists the new norm before we leave the house in the morning our rucksack is is half full it's no surprise then that that the third to half of us will experience some kind of stress anxiety and depression during our working lives those those conditions are common and they are responsible for 30% more absence than anything else including musculoskeletal and physical industry in injury 30% more and yet we we struggle in which we struggle on CI review workplaces and how they support people or not on mental health and I've interviewed more than 170 people and looked at the information from 15,000 survey respondents and a mental health is complex but this much I know people who have poor mental health they want to be at work on the whole and they struggle in to do that when they're at work they they have difficulty concentrating communicating juggling tasks and they get cranky sometimes with the customers and colleagues but they can't speak up to their manager the manager doesn't know how to have a conversation the employee doesn't know if the manager is going to support them or stigmatize them or say well we're all stress mate or manage them out of the organization so our employee who wants to be at work doesn't know the support choices can't have a conversation about it they feel significant stigma sometimes from the organization sometimes from themselves and it just rumbles on right they they don't take the time off that they need or if they do they give a different reason for their absence and here's one of the reasons was because we just don't talk enough about mental health in our workplaces until past breaking point how do we get to this well I thought we were all supposed to be resilient these days in the workplace we are supposed to have brazilians how do you get resilience well you ought to have a good work-life balance that's the first thing okay life life life the field of flowers that I skip through to and from work right if your life's like anything like my life it contains things like separation and grief and dental bills and add peas that get stuck up your child's nostril and exhaust that fall off your car the day after the MOT but we we soldier on my rucksack now three-quarters full we were taught to and we go into work and when we shouldn't really be there presenteeism it's called and presenteeism costs the workplace 1.8 times that of absenteeism being away but we don't even get that bit right because we go in and we say to our manager I think it might be struggling it might be stress anxiety depression they get then always good I think well you must go and see your doctor and so we go off to the doctor and we say hi I'm really struggling I'm losing sleep I can't talk to my manager I'm having my breakfast on the toilet and the doctor says well if we're in this country you're going mmm that's interesting I'm gonna sign you off for two weeks it's the first NHS response okay it's well-meaning and I get that and sometimes time time off from from work is a really good thing and seeing our doctor is a good thing but it's not the first place for that conversation it took an employment lawyer in King's Lynn in Norfolk 28 seconds to be signed off from work having entered the consultation room it's not the first place for that so you leave the surgery with a with a label a diagnosis and you're staring down a packet of pills and daytime television and it's it's really scary I've been there and and if we just so quick to disengage people we need to be having these conversations in the workplace rather than disengaging and let me tell you about disengaging and I know illustrate the business case for this so I I interviewed somebody called Nick was a senior manager global firm constantly exceeding expectations at appraisal because there are appraisals remember to get more money we have to do more work than we should be doing different point but anyway so Nick Nick's mom died then he had his two or three days compassionate leave and he came back to the organization and he tried to organize himself some flexi time work more during the week have a bit of more time off from fridays and his manager said no on the basis that and I quote everyone will want it Nick's a good lovely guy a really lovely guy and really did it him but of course you know he was unable to talk to his manager they fell out he went to the doctor he got lots more time off but this was sickness and he disengaged and he never really came back to the organization properly unions go involved cost a lot of money and was entirely avoidable Sally's story Sally is or sell his dad died as she was working for international charity again you get successful manager and her manager said Sally I don't think you're right I think you need some more time off I think you you know we can do some work from home and a phased return and you might be surprised here that Sally still works for that organization it's still a high flier okay and she's an advocate of the employer so had they had the global firm that Nick worked for acted like the charity it would have saved itself many thousands of pounds okay so what should we do leaders had teachers project managers whoever wherever you lead you need to talk about mental health in the workplace when you speak other people listen okay the the conversation the positive language it cascades down an organization you don't make more people unwell by speaking about mental health you give them the opportunity to seek help sooner remember Nick remember Sally leaders who talk about mental health universally gain respect same with managers managers you need to talk about mental health in the workplace and you need to train managers train and train them to spot the signs and the symptoms know what to say know when to say it know where to shut up know when to listen know how to have a human conversation if you're a manager use this rule of thumb be the manager you'd like to have if you were experiencing stress anxiety depression HR an occupational health I can I can pretty much guarantee that your schools and and your workplaces policies on stress anxiety depression or absence and and those sorts of things are probably too long full of jargon self-serving same with the the the absence procedure right they when somebody calls in sick on that first day as a golden conversation for a dialogue on mental health who's listening who's writing this down where is it going who's offering support and this is the same thing for your people right you've got it you've got it offer support to your people therapy is fantastic stuff but through the NHS it's gonna take you eight weeks three months six lessons of therapy three hundred pounds what's that compared to a great bit of time off in it and that disengaging it's off your therapy the other thing we do with people when they join in a workplace is we teach them how to lift a box which is great and thank you for that but why don't we talk to them about how to have a conversation with a colleague okay call it when they're struggling okay so if you were out there and you see somebody struggling then say something say how are you my cup of tea if you think you're struggling that you should say something this is not just a a a once and done conversation it's all just a poster on the back of the toilet door it's a camp it's a cultural shift and it takes time okay but the wonderful thing is that everybody can do this okay what you need is a tray of sandwiches and a packet of post-it notes and a bunch of people who've been off while they've been working for you okay they'll give you all the information that you need okay you could you could partner with a charity like mindful employer if you like you could hire a consultant if you must but you really ought to be listening making adjustments changes and writing this down the Health and Safety Executive expect you to be doing this already by the way right in the future would be we'll be talking about some of the things that have been mentioned today mindfulness meditation in meetings virtual reality glasses to Train managers reporting on on workplace illness as well as injury little robots that pop up on your screen to ask you how you are psychotherapy through our mobile phone those things are being trialed right now they're just around the corner but here's the thing you're people don't need to throw loads of money of this what they want from you is your commitment that they can speak safely about mental health I said you all you all have the resources to do this look around you this is what mental health is it's not just the one in 103 we all have mental health all the time the hands up who'd like their employer to do more on mental health right as an employer all you need to do is give your people permission to speak safely and be prepared to listen thank you [Applause] [Music] you
#Workplace #Mental #Health #Tom #Oxley #TEDxNorwichED
source
It’s frustrating when you feel like you are trying your best and just get reminded of the mistakes you’ve made rather than the good
I am overburdened with work as a Senior analyst. The management keeps taking new clients while not having clarity on how to function with the existing ones. My manager to add to it is a micro manager and at the same time is of not much help when u approach them. They make me check every tasks that my juniors do and i feel overwhelmed and overburdened by all the responsibilities. I dont think talking to them would help either. I feel stuck.
"Life has never been objectively better and subjectively worse" – Jimmy Carr
1:33
Namaste
Employees who have any health issue must ideally consider taking complete time off work , till such time as they completely recover from the illness
Some people prefer to switch to work from home etc. but I have personally seen severe health impact on employees who continue to work admist stress
The destruction of people’s mental health in the workplace is a byproduct of capitalism.
Depression is just the beginning, pretending everything is okay is at its worse, being expected to be strong.
fantastic advice. look after each other .
Thank you so much for this video. It was very interesting.
I’d be grateful just to be treated like a human being at my job.
Here’s a few things (aside from the money) that has kept me in the corporate world that might hopefully help some other folks that are struggling or looking for new opportunities;
-I’ve always worked within 15 minutes of my home. This allows me to go home on lunch every single day. I have also sacrificed money, promotions, and opportunity in order to have and maintain this luxury.
-I do not, I repeat, I do not take my work home, and I very rarely get in early or leave late. It’s about setting boundaries. If I can’t get my work done in a solid 8 hours or 80 hours or whatever, the company is understaffed and that isn’t my problem. Period. Now there are certain times that I need to work extra, but that is up to me to manage and not the company to decide.
-I try to SAVE and invest as much money as I can afford to and live as debt free as possible. This is, in my opinion, the biggest reason people get trapped – lifestyle inflation. It only costs ~$35k-$40k per year to live in the majority of America. Anything above that is not a necessity. I live like I make poverty wages so that the company will never own me. Create a budget, then stick to it.
-Always have something to look forward to outside of work. It might only be one night that week but that excitement build up keeps me in the game. It’s like a reward. I worked hard all week so now I get to go out and hang with friends, or play golf, or whatever. Never let your job become your identity.
Hope that helps some folks on their journey to finding peace in this crazy world. Get in, take what’s yours, and move along. If you don’t, someone else will. It’s a harsh reality out there but it’s possible to survive in it.
The bottom line is that money and greed come before ANYTHING in business, otherwise there would be no business. The idea that dialogue with understanding and exploring alternative option's or whatever corporate measures are in place to help an employees personal growth is simply untrue. Those "tools" are put forth by safety hands or "managers" to ensure that the company investment pays off to their own benefit..(both the company as well as the Manager). Mental health and well being, will always be the last thing on a company's mind as long as they're prosperous. Sad, but true.
Money talks.
Im a truck driver, i dont make enough money for bills food or gas. I work 14 hours a day. No time for life joy, no money to enjoy life either. My wife will be moving away for her grad school and im supposed to go with her. I cant afford to move with her tho so after 10 years togeather she will be leaving me. I cant get a second job because i only take one day off a week if that. And i really dont know how to get out of this since my skill set and career has been trucking for the last 10 years. I need help 😢
I just listen to him, knowing I'm not gonna get any help at my workplace but atleast knowing someone understands my struggle gives me some comfort.
Say goodbye to stress with Planet Ayurveda’s Stress Support capsules. They’ve been a great help for mental well-being.
I really appreciate your efforts! Could you help me with something unrelated: I have a okx with USDT, and I have the 12word phrases: ( proof inner hobby bounce blouse able donate virtual luggage cart morning ticket). What's the way to send them to Binance?
What if one raises the problem time and again, but nothing gets done. Its always some new excuse/putting band-aid or betting around the bush. In that case what does an employee do than? Leave the job?
I AM WORTHY OF PAID EMPLOYMENT INSTEAD OF BEING WRITTEN OFF; I AM ALMOST 30 YEARS OLD.
Choosing offices for certain staff while downgrading others to spaces next to dustbins and toilets, or providing them with outdated office tools, is a form of workplace discrimination and favoritism. This practice undermines equality, creates a toxic work culture, and can severely affect employee morale, productivity, and overall job satisfaction. Here's a breakdown of the key issues and their impact:
1. Unfair Allocation of Office Space: Assigning prime office spaces to favored employees while placing others in less desirable locations, such as next to dustbins or toilets, creates a clear division between staff members. This practice sends a message that certain employees are valued more than others, which can lead to feelings of resentment and inequality. The environment in which an employee works is essential to their comfort and well-being, and being placed in a subpar location can make employees feel devalued.
2. Impact on Professionalism and Productivity: Office spaces play a significant role in how employees perceive their status within an organization. Working in a clean, quiet, and well-equipped office enhances focus, collaboration, and efficiency, whereas being placed in a less desirable location can lead to distractions and a lack of motivation. Proximity to noisy areas, unpleasant smells, or high-traffic zones, such as toilets, can make it difficult to concentrate and perform at a high level. This can lead to decreased productivity, poor performance, and lower job satisfaction.
3. Inequitable Access to Resources and Technology: Providing employees with outdated office tools and technology while offering others the latest equipment creates an imbalance in the workplace. Advanced technology can enhance job performance, streamline processes, and improve outcomes. By denying certain employees access to these tools, employers are hindering their ability to succeed. This disparity in access to resources is a clear example of favoritism and can create a sense of exclusion among staff.
4. Psychological Impact: Office placement and access to technology are not just logistical issues; they can have a significant psychological impact. Being placed in an undesirable office or denied access to modern tools can make employees feel unimportant or undervalued. It can lead to feelings of alienation, frustration, and disengagement. Over time, these negative emotions can contribute to lower morale and a lack of motivation to perform well.
5. Damage to Company Culture: Favoritism in office placement and resource allocation contributes to a toxic work culture where employees feel that success and recognition are based on favoritism, rather than merit and contribution. This can foster resentment among staff and damage the trust and collaboration that are essential to a productive and cohesive team. Employees who feel excluded or marginalized may become less engaged, leading to a decrease in overall team performance.
6. Long-Term Consequences: Over time, these practices can have serious long-term effects on employee retention and the organization's reputation. Talented employees who feel consistently overlooked or mistreated may choose to leave the company for a more inclusive and fair work environment. Moreover, if these practices become widely known, they can damage the organization's reputation and make it difficult to attract top talent in the future.
How to Address the Issue:
1. Fair Allocation of Resources: Office space and technology should be allocated based on need, role requirements, and fairness, rather than favoritism. All employees should have access to the necessary tools and a comfortable work environment that supports their productivity and well-being.
2. Transparency in Decision-Making: Employers should establish clear criteria for assigning office space and resources, and communicate these criteria to staff. Transparency helps to ensure that employees feel the process is fair and based on objective factors, rather than favoritism or personal bias.
3. Promote Equality and Inclusivity: Creating a culture where all employees are treated equally and fairly is crucial for fostering a positive work environment. Employers should strive to treat all employees with respect, regardless of their position, tenure, or relationship with leadership.
4. Invest in Employee Well-Being: All employees should have access to a workspace that promotes their productivity and well-being. This includes ensuring that offices are clean, quiet, and free from distractions. Employers should also provide employees with the tools and technology they need to succeed in their roles.
5. Monitor and Address Favoritism: Leadership should be vigilant about the impact of favoritism and work to correct any imbalances in the workplace. This includes addressing any disparities in office placement, technology access, or other resources that might create division among employees.
In conclusion, choosing offices for certain staff while downgrading others and providing unequal access to office tools is a form of workplace inequality that can negatively impact employee morale, productivity, and the overall work environment. Employers must ensure that all staff are treated fairly and have equal access to resources to foster a positive, inclusive, and productive workplace.
Cherry-picking staff for projects with better prospects while positioning others with less opportunity, especially when the latter are more deserving, is a harmful and unethical practice that undermines fairness in the workplace. It creates a division among employees and can lead to frustration, resentment, and disengagement. This practice is particularly detrimental when hard-working employees are used to complete the work of favored individuals while being denied the tools and resources they need to succeed. Here's a breakdown of the key issues and their impact:
1. Unfair Distribution of Opportunities: When managers or leaders favor certain staff members by assigning them high-profile projects or positions with better career prospects, it creates an imbalance in opportunities. Employees who are more deserving, often those who are hardworking and committed, may be overlooked despite their contributions. This undermines the merit-based system and leads to a sense of unfairness in the workplace, which can negatively affect morale and motivation.
2. Exploiting Hard-Working Employees: In situations where hardworking staff are made to complete the tasks of favored employees, they are essentially being exploited. These employees may be forced to take on additional work, often without proper recognition or compensation, leading to burnout and decreased job satisfaction. This practice also breeds resentment, as the effort and contributions of these employees are not acknowledged in a fair and meaningful way.
3. Denial of Resources and Support: Denying employees access to the necessary tools, such as printers, uninterrupted internet access, or other resources that would allow them to perform their job effectively, is a clear tactic of sabotage. When employees are not given the resources they need, it prevents them from doing their work efficiently and can lead to delays, poor outcomes, and unnecessary stress. This further compounds the sense of inequality and mistreatment.
4. Exclusion from Key Support Staff: By asking support staff such as HR, finance, data managers, and technicians not to work with certain individuals, employers are essentially isolating those employees from the support they need to succeed. This exclusionary practice can hinder their ability to complete projects, solve problems, or get the help they need to move forward in their roles. It reinforces the power imbalance between favored employees and others, and may create a toxic work culture.
5. Impact on Employee Engagement: Employees who are constantly sidelined, excluded from important tasks, and denied access to essential resources may feel disengaged and demotivated. They may begin to question their value within the organization and lose interest in their work. This disengagement can lead to lower productivity, poor job performance, and, ultimately, higher turnover rates.
6. Toxic Work Culture: These practices contribute to a toxic work environment, where favoritism and exclusion are normalized. When employees witness unfair treatment and the manipulation of resources for certain individuals, it can erode trust in leadership and reduce collaboration across teams. This toxic culture can become ingrained, making it difficult for the organization to retain talent or foster a positive working atmosphere.
7. Long-Term Consequences: The long-term effects of such practices include a decline in employee retention, as talented and hard-working staff may leave the organization for better opportunities. The company risks losing skilled workers who contribute significantly to its success, which can ultimately impact its growth, innovation, and reputation in the market. It can also damage the employer's brand, making it harder to attract new talent in the future.
How to Address the Issue:
1. Promote Fairness and Meritocracy: Organizations must ensure that opportunities are given based on merit, skill, and contribution, not favoritism or arbitrary decisions. Implementing a transparent system for assigning projects and recognizing achievements can help employees feel that their efforts are valued and rewarded appropriately.
2. Provide Equal Access to Resources: Ensuring that all employees have access to the necessary tools and support they need to perform their job effectively is crucial. This includes providing adequate resources like technology, training, and support staff to all employees, regardless of their position or the perceived favorability of their role.
3. Encourage Collaboration Across Teams: Employers should foster a culture of collaboration, where employees work together to achieve common goals. Encouraging support staff, such as HR, finance, and technicians, to assist all employees equally ensures that everyone has access to the help they need, promoting a more inclusive and supportive work environment.
4. Transparency in Decision-Making: Clear communication about how decisions are made, particularly regarding who is chosen for important projects or leadership roles, can reduce feelings of resentment or favoritism. When employees understand the rationale behind decisions, they are more likely to feel valued and motivated.
5. Invest in Employee Development: Providing equal opportunities for professional development, training, and growth ensures that all employees have the chance to progress in their careers. This can help eliminate feelings of alienation or exclusion and give everyone a fair chance to succeed.
6. Leadership Accountability: Leaders must be held accountable for their actions and the work environment they create. Favoritism, exclusion, and denial of resources must be addressed through clear policies and procedures. Leaders should model fairness and inclusivity and encourage others to do the same.
In conclusion, cherry-picking staff for projects with prospects, while sidelining deserving employees and denying them necessary resources, is an unethical and harmful practice that can damage both individual employees and the organization as a whole. It fosters a toxic work culture, reduces productivity, and ultimately harms employee morale and retention. Addressing these issues requires a commitment to fairness, equal opportunity, and clear leadership that promotes a positive and inclusive work environment for all staff.
Alienating staff through tactics such as ignoring their greetings or threatening them with job insecurity creates a toxic work environment and can have significant negative impacts on both the individual and the organization. These behaviors are forms of emotional manipulation and bullying that can affect an employee's mental health, job satisfaction, and overall performance. Here's a breakdown of how these practices work and their harmful effects:
1. Emotional Manipulation: When staff members are deliberately ignored or excluded, it manipulates their emotions and self-worth. This tactic is used to make employees feel insignificant or unimportant, undermining their confidence and sense of belonging in the workplace. When this is combined with threats of job insecurity or shorter contracts, it creates an environment where employees feel powerless and anxious about their positions.
2. Impact on Mental Health: Prolonged exposure to exclusionary practices can lead to serious mental health issues such as stress, anxiety, and depression. Employees who are alienated may start to feel isolated and undervalued, which can affect their overall well-being and hinder their performance at work. The toll on mental health can extend beyond the workplace, impacting personal life and relationships as well.
3. Undermining Job Security: Threatening staff with shorter contracts or job loss for engaging in basic social interactions, such as greeting colleagues, creates fear and insecurity. This undermines employees' sense of job security and stability. The constant threat of losing their job for trivial reasons can lead to disengagement, demotivation, and a diminished sense of loyalty to the organization.
4. Toxic Work Culture: When leadership or colleagues engage in exclusionary behaviors, it cultivates a toxic work culture. Employees may begin to avoid communicating with one another or participating in team activities for fear of being ostracized. This lack of open communication erodes collaboration, trust, and respect, which are essential for achieving shared goals and maintaining a healthy work environment.
5. Power Dynamics and Control: Alienation tactics often stem from a desire to control or manipulate employees. Leaders or individuals in positions of power may engage in these behaviors to reinforce their dominance and keep others in a subjugated position. This creates an unhealthy power imbalance, where employees are more concerned with avoiding punishment than performing their jobs effectively.
6. Employee Retention Issues: Employees who feel alienated are more likely to leave the organization, resulting in higher turnover. Exclusionary tactics and threats of job insecurity can lead to dissatisfaction, lower morale, and a lack of motivation. This ultimately harms the organization, as the loss of employees creates recruitment and training costs, and the work environment becomes less appealing to new talent.
7. Legal and Ethical Concerns: The practices of alienating employees and threatening their job security for social interactions or greetings may violate labor laws and ethical guidelines. Employees subjected to such behaviors may have legal avenues to challenge these practices, either through labor unions, employee rights organizations, or legal claims for workplace bullying and discrimination.
How to Address the Issue:
1. Promote Open Communication: Organizations should encourage open communication channels where employees can express concerns without fear of retaliation. It is essential for leadership to create a culture where all employees feel heard and respected.
2. Foster Inclusivity and Respect: A culture based on inclusivity and mutual respect can reduce the occurrence of exclusionary behaviors. Training in diversity, inclusion, and team-building activities can help employees learn how to engage with one another positively and respectfully.
3. Establish Clear Anti-Bullying Policies: Workplaces should implement clear and comprehensive anti-bullying policies that define acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Employees should be aware of how to report bullying, and management should have clear procedures for addressing complaints. Ensuring that these policies are enforced consistently helps create a fair and supportive environment.
4. Provide Support for Affected Employees: Organizations should provide support for employees who feel alienated, whether it's through HR resources, employee assistance programs, or access to counseling services. Supporting employees who are being targeted by exclusionary practices helps them cope with the emotional and mental toll and empowers them to take action.
5. Ensure Accountability: Leaders must be held accountable for creating and maintaining a positive work environment. If exclusionary behaviors are allowed to persist or are overlooked, it sends the message that such practices are acceptable. Strong leadership and accountability are crucial for addressing these issues and ensuring that all employees are treated with dignity and fairness.
In conclusion, alienating staff through exclusionary behaviors and threats of job insecurity undermines employee well-being, job satisfaction, and organizational productivity. These tactics foster a toxic work environment where trust and collaboration break down, and employees feel marginalized and demotivated. Addressing these issues requires leadership commitment to fairness, transparency, and inclusivity, as well as clear policies that prevent bullying and protect employees from emotional manipulation.
When office bullies and leadership corrupt the process of allocating benefits, such as car loans, parking spaces, and access to office amenities, it creates a highly toxic work environment. Exclusionary tactics and corrupt practices that undermine fairness and equity not only harm the individuals directly affected but can also negatively impact the entire workplace. Here's a closer look at how these issues play out and their detrimental effects:
1. Exclusionary Tactics by Office Bullies: Bullies in the workplace often use subtle or overt exclusionary tactics to target certain individuals. In the context of access to office benefits like car loans or parking spaces, these tactics may include selectively offering perks to only certain individuals, while systematically denying others access. This could be based on personal preferences, biases, or even a desire to maintain control over others. Employees who are excluded may feel demotivated, isolated, and less valued, leading to decreased job satisfaction and performance.
2. Corrupting the Process for Personal Gain: When leadership is involved in these exclusionary practices, it signals a deeper issue of corruption. Leaders who engage in corrupt behavior, such as steering resources or benefits to their favored employees, may be doing so to maintain power or control. For example, they may allocate car loans or parking spaces to employees they prefer or who are aligned with their personal interests, while denying these opportunities to others. This corrupt behavior undermines the integrity of the organization and breeds a sense of unfairness among the staff.
3. Favoritism and Unequal Treatment: When certain employees are given preferential treatment—such as access to loans, parking, or even the office canteen—while others are excluded, it creates an atmosphere of inequality. Staff members who are denied these benefits may feel that their contributions are not being recognized or valued. This can lead to resentment and division within teams, eroding trust in leadership and damaging overall morale. The perception that benefits are not allocated based on merit or need, but rather on personal relationships or favoritism, can foster a toxic culture.
4. Impact on Employee Well-being: Exclusion from perks like car loans or parking spaces can directly affect employees' daily lives. Employees who are forced to rely on public transportation, for example, may experience longer commutes, higher costs, and more stress, all of which can negatively affect their work-life balance and mental well-being. Furthermore, mocking employees for their reliance on public transport adds insult to injury, making them feel belittled and unsupported by their workplace.
5. Undermining Productivity and Performance: When leadership or office bullies corrupt processes, it distracts employees from focusing on their core tasks. The frustration and disengagement that result from being excluded or treated unfairly can lead to lower productivity and a decline in performance. Instead of being motivated by fair opportunities, employees may feel disheartened or disconnected from the organization's goals, which ultimately hurts the company's overall success.
6. Creating a Divisive Work Environment: Favoritism and exclusion create divisions within teams. Employees who receive preferential treatment may form alliances with leadership or other favored individuals, further alienating those who are excluded. This division can affect teamwork and collaboration, as employees may be less willing to share ideas, help one another, or work together effectively. The resulting toxic work environment undermines team cohesion and cooperation, which is essential for achieving organizational goals.
7. Disrupting Merit-Based Opportunities: When perks such as car loans or parking spaces are granted based on favoritism rather than merit, it disrupts the merit-based system that organizations should strive for. Employees who are excluded from these benefits may feel that their hard work and contributions are undervalued, while those who are favored may receive unearned advantages. This can demotivate employees and lead to a lack of trust in the organization's leadership and decision-making processes.
8. Increased Employee Turnover: Employees who feel consistently excluded or unfairly treated are more likely to leave the organization. High turnover can result in significant costs for the company, as recruiting and training new staff can be time-consuming and expensive. Furthermore, when employees leave due to unfair practices, it damages the organization's reputation, making it more difficult to attract top talent in the future.
Addressing the Issue
1. Establish Clear and Transparent Policies: Employers should implement clear, transparent policies for allocating benefits like car loans, parking, and other perks. These policies should be based on objective criteria, such as need, merit, and job requirements, and should be communicated to all staff to ensure everyone has equal access to these opportunities.
2. Encourage Fair and Equal Treatment: Leaders should model behavior that encourages equal treatment of all employees. Favoritism should be actively discouraged, and leaders should strive to treat all staff members fairly and consistently. Ensuring equal access to resources and opportunities helps build trust and respect within the organization.
3. Create Mechanisms for Reporting Unfair Practices: Employees should have access to confidential mechanisms for reporting exclusionary practices or corruption without fear of retaliation. These reports should be taken seriously and investigated promptly to ensure accountability. Leadership must demonstrate a commitment to addressing unfair treatment and ensuring that all employees are treated with dignity and respect.
4. Promote a Culture of Inclusion: Creating a culture of inclusion, where all employees are valued and supported, helps to eliminate the harmful effects of favoritism and exclusion. Leadership should work to ensure that all staff members feel welcome and included in the workplace, regardless of their personal background, status, or relationships with others in the organization.
5. Provide Equal Access to Opportunities: Opportunities for growth, including access to car loans, parking spaces, and other benefits, should be available to all employees based on clear criteria. Employers should ensure that all employees have an equal chance to benefit from these opportunities, regardless of personal relationships with leadership or colleagues.
6. Address Bullying and Harassment: Bullying, including the exclusionary tactics you mentioned, should be addressed promptly. Leaders should set a positive example and create a zero-tolerance policy for any form of bullying or harassment in the workplace. This includes mocking employees for their transportation choices or excluding them from benefits for personal reasons.
In conclusion, when office bullies and leadership corrupt the process of allocating benefits, such as car loans, parking spaces, and other perks, it creates a toxic environment of exclusion, favoritism, and inequality. These practices undermine employee well-being, damage morale, and ultimately harm productivity. By addressing these issues and promoting fairness, transparency, and inclusion, organizations can foster a positive and supportive workplace where all employees have an equal chance to succeed.
When employers or leaders use scholarships and job positions as tools for favoritism or personal gain, it creates a toxic and unfair work environment. The practices you mentioned, such as favoring certain individuals or their children for scholarships and job opportunities, and excluding deserving staff members, undermine the principles of equity, fairness, and meritocracy. Here’s how these issues manifest and the negative impacts they can have:
Favoring Specific Candidates: When scholarship opportunities or job positions are given to certain individuals or their children, even before the recruitment or selection process begins, it creates a system of inequality. This favoritism undermines the integrity of the recruitment or scholarship process, where decisions should be made based on merit, qualifications, and need. Employees who feel that positions or scholarships are pre-determined based on personal relationships rather than abilities or qualifications may feel discouraged and disengaged, knowing that their efforts will not be recognized or rewarded fairly.
Excluding Deserving Candidates: When deserving staff members are excluded from job or scholarship opportunities because leadership has already selected candidates based on personal relationships, it leads to frustration and a sense of injustice. The exclusionary practices can demotivate employees, as they feel that their hard work and contributions are undervalued or ignored. This can foster resentment and may cause talented staff members to leave the organization, resulting in lost potential and reduced productivity.
Nepotism and Corruption: Offering scholarships or job opportunities to the children or relatives of leadership, while denying the same opportunities to other deserving staff members, constitutes nepotism. This corrupt practice not only damages trust within the organization but also breeds a culture of favoritism, where employees are more likely to feel that their chances of success are dependent on personal connections rather than their qualifications. Nepotism can also create an environment where employees are more focused on aligning with those in power rather than working towards organizational goals, stunting creativity and innovation.
Disruption of Meritocracy: A workplace built on meritocracy ensures that individuals are rewarded and recognized for their skills, qualifications, and achievements. When job positions and scholarships are allocated based on favoritism or nepotism, it disrupts the merit-based system. This results in an unfair workplace where promotions and opportunities are no longer based on merit, but on personal relationships or connections. Employees who see this happening may feel demoralized and less motivated to perform at their best, which negatively impacts the overall productivity and success of the organization.
Creating Unhealthy Competition: When leadership prioritizes personal interests over merit, it creates a competitive environment that is not based on healthy competition. Employees may feel pressured to align themselves with leadership, rather than focusing on improving their skills or contributing to the organization. This unhealthy competition can result in favoritism, backstabbing, and toxic behavior among staff members, further eroding morale and teamwork.
Undermining Organizational Integrity: Allowing favoritism to dictate the allocation of job positions and scholarships undermines the integrity of the organization. If such practices become known, they can damage the organization’s reputation both internally and externally. Employees, prospective job candidates, and other stakeholders may lose trust in the organization’s ability to uphold fairness and integrity, making it more difficult to attract and retain talent.
Impact on Employee Motivation and Engagement: Employees who perceive that job opportunities and scholarships are granted based on favoritism are less likely to be motivated and engaged in their work. When people feel that their efforts are ignored or that they have no real chance of advancement due to personal connections, they may become disengaged. This can result in reduced performance, a lack of initiative, and ultimately, a negative impact on the organization’s overall success.
Addressing These Issues
Implement Fair and Transparent Selection Processes: Employers should establish clear, fair, and transparent policies for job recruitment and scholarship allocation. Selection criteria should be based on merit, qualifications, and performance, rather than personal relationships. These policies should be communicated to all staff, ensuring that everyone understands how decisions are made and that no individual is given preferential treatment.
Promote Equal Opportunity: All employees should be given equal opportunity to apply for job positions and scholarships, regardless of their relationship with leadership. Decisions should be made based on qualifications, performance, and need. Leadership should ensure that every employee has access to the same resources and opportunities to advance within the organization.
Ensure Accountability: Leaders and managers should be held accountable for ensuring that recruitment and scholarship processes are fair and transparent. If nepotism or favoritism is discovered, those responsible should face consequences. Holding leadership accountable for their actions helps to foster trust in the organization and reinforces the importance of fairness and integrity.
Encourage Merit-Based Recognition: Employers should encourage a merit-based culture where employees are recognized and rewarded for their skills, achievements, and contributions. This includes ensuring that promotions, job opportunities, and scholarships are given based on performance, not personal relationships. A merit-based approach helps to motivate employees to perform at their best and fosters a positive and productive work environment.
Create Clear Channels for Reporting Unfair Practices: Employees should have access to mechanisms for reporting unfair practices, such as nepotism or favoritism, without fear of retaliation. These channels should be confidential, and complaints should be thoroughly investigated. By addressing complaints in a timely and fair manner, organizations can ensure that their workplace remains equitable and just.
In conclusion, favoritism and nepotism in the allocation of job positions and scholarships are clear examples of corruption that undermine fairness and equity in the workplace. By promoting transparency, accountability, and merit-based decision-making, employers can create a work environment where all employees have an equal chance to succeed, ultimately leading to greater productivity, morale, and organizational success.
Using office canteens and office functions as a means to create favoritism or as personal spaces for certain individuals, especially in leadership positions, is a form of workplace bullying and an abuse of power. This practice undermines team morale, creates division, and fosters an environment where exclusion, corruption, and inequality thrive. Here’s how these behaviors manifest and their potential impacts:
Exclusion and Social Isolation: When certain employees, particularly those in leadership positions, use the office canteen as their personal feeding space, it leads to a clear divide between those who are included and those who are excluded. Denying access to the canteen or meals during office functions creates a sense of alienation and isolation. Employees who are excluded may feel undervalued, and this can create resentment. Such behavior diminishes the sense of belonging and inclusivity, which are vital for a healthy workplace culture.
Unfair Distribution of Resources: When office functions, including meals, are paid for by the organization but certain individuals are given preferential access, it results in an unfair distribution of resources. Employees who contribute to the organization, regardless of their rank, should have equal access to these resources. When certain individuals, particularly leaders, take advantage of their positions to access special meals or take meals home while others are denied, it undermines the organization's integrity and fosters inequality.
Corruption and Favoritism: If certain individuals are allowed to demand specific meals or treat the canteen as their personal "pot" to choose what they want, while others are denied the same privileges, it shows clear signs of corruption. This manipulation of office resources for personal benefit creates a system where favoritism thrives. Leadership or influential staff members may use the office canteen to reward themselves while ignoring the needs and rights of other employees. This practice can foster a sense of injustice and resentment, damaging the workplace culture.
Manipulation of Office Functions: Office functions and meals are meant to bring employees together, celebrate achievements, and promote teamwork. When certain staff members, especially leadership, manipulate these events to their advantage—whether by taking food home or limiting access to certain groups—it undermines the purpose of these functions. Rather than fostering inclusivity and community, such practices encourage division and favoritism.
Erosion of Workplace Culture: The practice of using office canteens to create exclusionary practices, whether through limiting access or demanding special meals, erodes the overall workplace culture. Employees who feel excluded from these activities or who see that their colleagues are treated unfairly may lose trust in the organization. This can lead to disengagement, decreased morale, and higher turnover rates, ultimately harming the organization's long-term success.
Long-Term Organizational Damage: If these exclusionary and corrupt practices continue, they can harm the organization's reputation both internally and externally. When employees witness these behaviors, it can lead to dissatisfaction and disengagement, reducing their commitment to the organization. This can result in decreased productivity, lower morale, and difficulties in recruiting and retaining talent.
To address these issues, employers should:
Implement Fair Policies: It is important to establish clear policies regarding office functions, including access to meals and canteen resources. These policies should ensure that all employees, regardless of their position, have equal access to these resources. Any special menus or benefits should be handled transparently and equitably to prevent feelings of exclusion.
Promote Inclusivity: Office functions and events should be inclusive, and all employees should be given equal opportunities to participate. The goal should be to foster a sense of community and teamwork, not division. Employers should ensure that no employee is excluded based on rank or perceived value.
Hold Leadership Accountable: Leaders should set an example when it comes to using organizational resources ethically. Leadership should not exploit their position to gain preferential treatment in the canteen or during office functions. If such behavior is identified, leaders should be held accountable to reinforce the values of fairness and respect.
Foster a Transparent and Ethical Work Environment: Employers should work to create a transparent and ethical workplace, where favoritism and exclusion are not tolerated. Channels for employees to report concerns or unethical behavior should be made available and actively promoted.
Encourage Open Dialogue: Employers should encourage open communication, where employees feel comfortable expressing their concerns about unfair practices. Regular feedback sessions can help ensure that exclusionary behaviors are identified early and addressed effectively.
In conclusion, using office canteens or office functions to create exclusion or to manipulate access to resources for personal gain is damaging to the workplace environment. Employers should ensure that all staff members have equal access to office resources, including meals and office functions, and should foster an inclusive, fair, and ethical workplace. By doing so, they can create a more cohesive and motivated workforce, which ultimately benefits the entire organization.
Using office canteens and office functions as a means to create favoritism or as personal spaces for certain individuals, especially in leadership positions, is a form of workplace bullying and an abuse of power. This practice undermines team morale, creates division, and fosters an environment where exclusion, corruption, and inequality thrive. Here's how these behaviors manifest and their potential impacts:
1. Exclusion and Social Isolation: When certain employees, particularly those in leadership positions, use the office canteen as their personal feeding space, it leads to a clear divide between those who are included and those who are excluded. Denying access to the canteen or meals during office functions creates a sense of alienation and isolation. Employees who are excluded may feel undervalued, and this can create resentment. Such behavior diminishes the sense of belonging and inclusivity, which are vital for a healthy workplace culture.
2. Unfair Distribution of Resources: When office functions, including meals, are paid for by the organization but certain individuals are given preferential access, it results in an unfair distribution of resources. Employees who contribute to the organization, regardless of their rank, should have equal access to these resources. When certain individuals, particularly leaders, take advantage of their positions to access special meals or take meals home while others are denied, it undermines the organization's integrity and fosters inequality.
3. Corruption and Favoritism: If certain individuals are allowed to demand specific meals or treat the canteen as their personal "pot" to choose what they want, while others are denied the same privileges, it shows clear signs of corruption. This manipulation of office resources for personal benefit creates a system where favoritism thrives. Leadership or influential staff members may use the office canteen to reward themselves while ignoring the needs and rights of other employees. This practice can foster a sense of injustice and resentment, damaging the workplace culture.
4. Manipulation of Office Functions: Office functions and meals are meant to bring employees together, celebrate achievements, and promote teamwork. When certain staff members, especially leadership, manipulate these events to their advantage—whether by taking food home or limiting access to certain groups—it undermines the purpose of these functions. Rather than fostering inclusivity and community, such practices encourage division and favoritism.
5. Erosion of Workplace Culture: The practice of using office canteens to create exclusionary practices, whether through limiting access or demanding special meals, erodes the overall workplace culture. Employees who feel excluded from these activities or who see that their colleagues are treated unfairly may lose trust in the organization. This can lead to disengagement, decreased morale, and higher turnover rates, ultimately harming the organization's long-term success.
6. Long-Term Organizational Damage: If these exclusionary and corrupt practices continue, they can harm the organization's reputation both internally and externally. When employees witness these behaviors, it can lead to dissatisfaction and disengagement, reducing their commitment to the organization. This can result in decreased productivity, lower morale, and difficulties in recruiting and retaining talent.
To address these issues, employers should:
1. Implement Fair Policies: It is important to establish clear policies regarding office functions, including access to meals and canteen resources. These policies should ensure that all employees, regardless of their position, have equal access to these resources. Any special menus or benefits should be handled transparently and equitably to prevent feelings of exclusion.
2. Promote Inclusivity: Office functions and events should be inclusive, and all employees should be given equal opportunities to participate. The goal should be to foster a sense of community and teamwork, not division. Employers should ensure that no employee is excluded based on rank or perceived value.
3. Hold Leadership Accountable: Leaders should set an example when it comes to using organizational resources ethically. Leadership should not exploit their position to gain preferential treatment in the canteen or during office functions. If such behavior is identified, leaders should be held accountable to reinforce the values of fairness and respect.
4. Foster a Transparent and Ethical Work Environment: Employers should work to create a transparent and ethical workplace, where favoritism and exclusion are not tolerated. Channels for employees to report concerns or unethical behavior should be made available and actively promoted.
5. Encourage Open Dialogue: Employers should encourage open communication, where employees feel comfortable expressing their concerns about unfair practices. Regular feedback sessions can help ensure that exclusionary behaviors are identified early and addressed effectively.
In conclusion, using office canteens or office functions to create exclusion or to manipulate access to resources for personal gain is damaging to the workplace environment. Employers should ensure that all staff members have equal access to office resources, including meals and office functions, and should foster an inclusive, fair, and ethical workplace. By doing so, they can create a more cohesive and motivated workforce, which ultimately benefits the entire organization.
Using office canteens to create an illusion of superiority and a class system based on who can afford special menus, as well as using the office eatery as a tool for social exclusion, is a deeply problematic practice that can significantly impact the work environment and employees’ well-being.
Below are some ways in which this can manifest:
1. Creating a Class Divide: If office canteens offer different menus or food options based on an employee’s position, salary, or status, it can lead to the creation of a visible class divide. For example, if high-level staff members have access to gourmet meals or special dining areas, while lower-level staff members are relegated to basic or lower-quality food, this signals inequality and can foster resentment among employees. This type of behavior reinforces the idea that people’s value or status within the organization is determined by their pay or social standing, rather than their skills, contributions, or potential.
2. Exclusion and Isolation: When certain employees are excluded from accessing certain meals or eating in designated areas based on their rank or perceived social status, it can lead to feelings of isolation and exclusion. This can further deepen the divide between different groups within the workplace. Employees may feel less included in informal networking opportunities or team-building moments, especially if meals or social interactions in the office canteen are important for building relationships and creating a sense of community. Such exclusion can diminish morale and create cliques, which can erode teamwork and trust.
3. Undermining Team Collaboration: A canteen that is used to segregate employees based on their financial means or job titles can hinder the development of a collaborative work culture. If employees from different levels are unable to interact casually over meals due to imposed divisions, it can reduce the flow of communication and ideas across the organization. This separation can prevent lower-level staff from engaging with higher-ups or sharing valuable insights, which can ultimately harm the organization’s overall performance and innovation.
4. Psychological Impact: Constantly being reminded of one’s social or economic position within the organization can take a psychological toll on employees. When food choices or access to certain areas become markers of status, it can negatively affect self-esteem, job satisfaction, and general well-being. Employees may feel less motivated to work in an environment where they feel judged based on their salary or rank, leading to decreased morale and engagement.
5. Unfair Power Dynamics: By using the office canteen as a platform for social exclusion, employers or staff with more influence may reinforce unhealthy power dynamics. This can perpetuate favoritism and control, where certain groups have the upper hand in dictating who can access what, based on arbitrary social distinctions. This can ultimately lead to toxic workplace dynamics, where power is used to create divisions rather than foster an inclusive and supportive environment.
6. Undermining Inclusivity: One of the fundamental values many organizations strive for is inclusivity. Using the office canteen to create an exclusive atmosphere, where certain employees are privileged over others, directly contradicts this goal. A workplace culture that promotes inclusivity ensures that all employees feel valued and respected, regardless of their role or pay. When office spaces, such as canteens, are used to undermine this, it damages the organization’s ability to attract and retain talent, especially those who may feel marginalized or excluded.
To address these issues, employers should consider the following strategies:
1. Promote Equal Access: Office canteens should offer equal access to all employees, ensuring that no one feels excluded based on their salary, position, or social status. Offering a range of affordable meal options that everyone can enjoy, regardless of their financial situation, is key to promoting inclusivity.
2. Foster Social Inclusion: Canteens can be used as spaces for employees of all levels to come together, interact, and collaborate informally. Employers should encourage a culture where employees are free to sit and eat together, regardless of their roles, fostering a sense of community and breaking down hierarchical barriers.
3. Ensure Transparency: It is important for employers to ensure that any special menu options or offers in the canteen are communicated transparently, and that employees feel they have equal opportunity to access them. If there are special offers or menus for specific groups, these should be handled in a way that avoids reinforcing divisions or creating feelings of exclusion.
4. Encourage a Supportive Environment: Employers can use the office canteen as a place to build team spirit and foster support among employees. Events such as team lunches, casual meetups, or employee appreciation days can be organized to ensure everyone feels welcome and appreciated, regardless of their rank or salary.
5. Lead by Example: Managers and higher-level employees should lead by example, making a point to sit and interact with staff from all levels during lunch or other canteen events. This demonstrates that social or professional status does not determine who can share a meal, which can help break down hierarchical divisions and promote equality.
In conclusion, using the office canteen to create a class system or engage in social exclusion is detrimental to both the workplace culture and employees’ sense of well-being. Employers should ensure that their office spaces, including canteens, foster inclusivity, transparency, and equal opportunity for all employees, regardless of their position or pay. By doing so, they can cultivate a more positive, supportive, and productive work environment.
When employers and staff use office functions such as family fun days, seminars, workshops, conferences, meetings, theme/unit retreats, and other workplace activities as platforms for exclusionary tactics and favoritism, it undermines the purpose of these events and damages the organizational culture. These events, ideally meant to foster unity, skill development, and collaboration, can be manipulated to perpetuate inequality, favoritism, and exclusion, which can erode morale and trust within the team.
Below are some key ways in which such practices manifest:
1. Exclusionary Tactics: Instead of promoting inclusivity, some employers and staff may selectively invite certain individuals to office functions based on personal preferences, status, or relationships. This could lead to employees feeling left out, particularly those who might not be part of a specific social group or favored by management. This selective participation undermines the goal of fostering a sense of belonging and collaboration among all staff members.
2. Favoritism in Recognition and Opportunity: During seminars, workshops, or team-building activities, some employees may receive disproportionate recognition, rewards, or opportunities based on favoritism rather than merit. This could include preferential treatment in promotions, salary increases, or opportunities to attend high-profile conferences or training sessions. Such practices can demotivate other employees, especially those who feel their achievements are overlooked in favor of those with personal connections to management or colleagues.
3. Undermining Merit-Based Systems: Ideally, workplace activities like workshops or seminars should be designed to recognize employees’ hard work, achievements, and professional growth. When favoritism takes precedence over merit, it sends a message that individual effort and accomplishment are not valued as much as personal relationships or loyalty. This can lead to resentment among staff and a breakdown in trust between employees and management.
4. Manipulating Workplace Events for Personal Gain: Some employers or staff members may use office functions as a way to advance personal agendas, form alliances, or reinforce power dynamics within the workplace. For example, management may organize an extravagant retreat or seminar to strengthen their ties with favored employees, while neglecting the broader team. This manipulation not only wastes organizational resources but also creates a toxic work environment where individuals feel their value is tied to personal relationships rather than professional abilities.
5. Exploiting Vulnerabilities for Control: In some cases, office functions are used to create a sense of loyalty by exploiting vulnerabilities, such as giving certain staff members preferential treatment in return for their obedience or loyalty. This type of behavior fosters dependency and compliance, rather than encouraging independent thinking and teamwork. It reduces individuals to pawns in a power play, creating a highly unequal and toxic work atmosphere.
6. Disregard for Employee Rights: When employers prioritize personal relationships over a rights-based approach, they may overlook employees' legal rights or fail to provide a fair and transparent process for promotions, training, or other workplace opportunities. Employees who are not part of the favored group may find themselves repeatedly passed over for opportunities and facing challenges in accessing resources that are rightfully theirs.
The negative consequences of these practices include:
– Decreased Morale and Productivity: Employees who feel excluded or unfairly treated are likely to become demotivated, which can lead to reduced engagement and productivity. This can have a direct impact on the overall performance and success of the organization.
– Loss of Trust: Favoritism and exclusionary tactics erode trust between employees and management, leading to a lack of transparency and accountability within the organization. Once trust is lost, it is difficult to rebuild, and the workplace becomes less collaborative and more divided.
– Increased Turnover: Employees who feel that their work and contributions are undervalued or ignored in favor of others may choose to leave the organization. High turnover rates can disrupt operations and increase recruitment and training costs.
– Toxic Work Environment: When favoritism is prevalent, it can lead to unhealthy competition, gossip, and rivalry among employees, further exacerbating divisions within the team. A toxic work environment makes it difficult for employees to work together harmoniously, leading to decreased morale, poor performance, and potentially even legal challenges.
To mitigate these issues, employers should focus on the following strategies:
1. Promote Inclusivity: Office functions should be designed to encourage participation from all employees, regardless of their background or relationships with management. Creating an environment where everyone feels valued and included is key to fostering a positive and collaborative workplace culture.
2. Recognize Achievements Based on Merit: Employers should ensure that promotions, rewards, and opportunities are given based on the achievements, skills, and contributions of employees rather than personal relationships. A clear and transparent system for recognizing employees’ efforts ensures fairness and motivates staff to continue performing at their best.
3. Ensure Equal Access to Opportunities: All employees should have equal access to workplace functions, training opportunities, and career development programs. Favoring a select group undermines the professional growth of others and leads to a sense of injustice. By creating equitable systems for access, employees will feel that their contributions are recognized and valued.
4. Adopt a Rights-Based Approach: Rather than using office functions to create loyalty through favoritism, employers should adhere to a rights-based approach, focusing on treating all employees fairly and upholding their legal rights. Transparency in decision-making processes helps prevent the exploitation of employees and fosters a more just and supportive workplace.
5. Encourage Open Communication: Employees should feel comfortable speaking up about unfair practices or exclusionary behavior without fear of retaliation. A culture of open communication, where employees are encouraged to provide feedback and raise concerns, is crucial to maintaining a healthy, transparent workplace.
In conclusion, using office functions as platforms for exclusionary tactics and favoritism not only undermines the purpose of these events but also creates a toxic and unequal work environment. Employers should strive to implement merit-based recognition, inclusivity, and fairness, ensuring that all employees have equal access to opportunities and are treated with respect. By doing so, organizations can foster a positive, motivated, and productive workforce.
I always feel so anxious and I feel like I always need someone to help me at work. I can’t even function when I was alone. I can’t do things on my own. I feel really anxious like really anxious and nervous talking publicly. Help me
This video is a must-watch. If you're interested in improving your work-life balance, I've been using the Astirna New Tab extension recently and it really helps keep my priorities straight and my stress levels down.
I work as a mechanical designer in the semi conductor industry. The communication between engineers is so bad that I sometimes feel completely lost. Worrying that I won’t make it through the next project. I think it causes me great stess. I feel like a fraud at times.
I work 2 jobs and I am in school. Two very stressful jobs. Fast food full time and as a corrections officer part time.
We have just hired a guy who is toxic and already I have had a run in with him. I’ve told my boss it’s not gonna work. I’ll distance myself from him but try and work professionally with him. I looked at his job history and he moves from job to job. I know why.
Mr Lee KY has encouraged entrepreneurship . So don't think so much, just embark on a new journey if things don't go as it would turn out as predicted. Most people working for someone are being exploited for bosses' own gains. So start and be your own boss. Find and use the right people to your very advantage, take care of them and you will be successful in near future. And when the time is ripe, stop all that you have achieved, relax and live life. That's what life is !!! It's ok should you think other wise or have own opinion. Seek the true path.
The very reason I left a job. I had to save myself. Mental health is so underrated at work.