QUESTION:
The hectic load at the workplace brings a lot of confusions, psychological disorders and imbalances that lead even to death. Though there are many incidents, our response and legal system seem to be clumsy and narrow. What kind of work culture should we promote?
George M Mathew

ANSWER: Saji Mathew Kanayankal CST

The tragic death of Anna Sebastian Perayil, a 26-year-old chartered accountant at Ernst & Young (EY), has ignited a series of discussions on workplace culture and employee welfare in current India, especially in its corporate environments. The allegations of Anna’s parents that their daughter died out of ‘overwhelming work pressure’ has been taken up by many human rights organisations and individuals. According to her parents, their daughter was forced to work late into the night and on weekends and she “worked tirelessly” to meet the demands of her new job, but the workload, new environment and long hours took a toll on her health. Though officially the reason for her death is ‘unclear’ the circumstances tell that this girl was experiencing anxiety, sleeplessness, and stress soon after joining the company, but she tried to keep pushing herself, believing that hard work and perseverance were the keys to success. According to her parents, in the days leading up to her death, Anna was complaining of tightness in her chest and doctors told the family that she was not getting enough sleep.

“Backbreaking work” is not a new term for the corporate sector. Most often, the companies, while focusing on the targets and their profit, forget the health – both physical and mental – of the employees. Since the appeal of attractive payments of career advantages, pressure and harassment from seniors usually go unreported, allowing managers to get away scot-free. The relentless demands and the pressure to meet unrealistic expectations from the firms are the ‘new normal’ in the companies and the employers are forced to bear the physical, mental and emotional harassment in the workplace as part of their normal life and job. As Pawanjeet Mane, FITE senior representative observes; “with the growing number of suicides and sudden cardiac arrests among young IT employees, we have observed that many deaths go unreported. The reason often comes down to workplace stress and mental torment. This needs to be investigated.”

Change of Work-Culture and Workaholism

The work culture in India, especially in the public sector is notoriously infamous for its inefficiency, bureaucratic autocracy, corruption, political interference and inept resource allocation and utilization. The quality of service and the facilities we provide are inadequate and its lack of transparency and accountability make the system more inefficient and unattractive. Poor planning, outdated technology, limited upward mobility and insufficient training with exhausting work conditions result in apathy or a lack of commitment among employees that further lower morale and motivation. Many of its shatters could be seen in the private sector as well. However, this work culture had shifted by the 1990s with the advent of information technology (IT) and corporate influence. With the rise of the service sector, leading firms could bypass labour laws to meet round-the-clock demands. At present, the culture at the workplace is institutionalised by firms and generally, the employees accept such changes. Though there are many good effects, the hustle culture at the workplace leads to many unprecedented complications and difficulties. At present, India is known to have one of the most overworked workforces globally. According to the International Labour Organization, Indians work an average of 49 hours per week, compared with 38 hours for Americans, 36.6 hours in Japan, 38.6 hours in South Korea and 46.1 hours in China. On the other hand, India is struggling to provide jobs for its 1.4 billion people. According to World Bank, the jobless rate for people ages 15 to 24 in India was 17.9% in 2022.

“Backbreaking work” is not a new term for
the corporate sector. Most often, the companies,
while focusing on the targets and their profit,
forget the health – both physical and mental –
of the employees. Since the appeal of
attractive payments of career advantages,
pressure and harassment from seniors usually go
unreported, allowing managers to get away scot-free.

Many entrepreneurs in India appreciate and encourage people to work more for their gain and the growth of the country. In 2022, Shantanu Deshpande, founder of the Bombay Shaving Company, asked the youngsters to stop “cribbing” about working hours and suggested that new recruits at any job should be prepared to work 18 hours a day for the first four to five years of their career. In October 2023, Infosys co-founder Narayana Murthy suggested that young Indians should work 70-hour weeks to boost the country’s economic growth. This was backed by Bhavesh Aggarwal, Ola’s chief in India who does not believe in the concept of work-life balance. He says; “if you are enjoying your work, you will find happiness in life and work, and both of them will be in harmony.” Though their statements may inspire many people to work hard and more, its repercussions are affected in the corporate work culture. Over-emphasis on work and career may lead to the danger of workaholism and toxic work.

Workaholism is “an attitude to work that may have begun innocuously (a tempered sense of pride in one’s efforts, a sense of contributing to something worthwhile, a desire to seek new opportunities), but which ends in outright addiction.” It creates a drive to work to the exclusion of all other potential sources of life, especially negating the need for family, friends, community involvement and even personal health. There are differences between work-ethic and workaholism. The work-ethic prioritises dignity and value of work as well as the worker, whereas workaholism alienates the labour and the labourer and thus leads to selfishness and narcotic. Workaholism devalues human dignity, increases the anxiety and stress of workers and leads to various psychological and social syndromes. There are many studies regarding the work-obsessed culture and its psycho-social impacts. Japanese calls it ‘Karoshi’ (kah-roe-she) – death by overwork. The sudden illness of Japanese former Prime Minister, Keizo Obuchi, is one of the clear examples of this syndrome.

The rise of different diseases related to ‘work-family conflict,’ the growth of ‘stress-related to job-bad family outcome,’ and ‘stress related to mental and physical problems,’ and the syndromes like ‘burnout and turnover’ are the main offshoots of workaholic culture. The problems become acute in an experience of Negotium i.e., the negation of otium, (otium means free time, leisure, ease, peace, repose). As an effect, estrangement, resentment, anxiety and emptiness encompass the human self. However, the effects of these psychological syndromes do not remain in one person; rather it affects the family, society and eventually the entirety of nature.

To understand clearly, we have to distinguish between ‘workaholism’ and ‘overwork.’ Overwork denotes a situation, in which people are forced to work more, and have to spend more energy to meet their basic needs, especially in developing and underdeveloped countries. George Schultze, interestingly observes that “the first-world workers suffer from workaholism, elements of alienation, and burnout on job and the third-world workers struggle to sustain themselves on less than adequate wages and few or no employment benefits.”

Toxic Culture and Its Impacts

The Consumer cravings, insatiable material needs, and the breeding of insecurity about the workplace are some of the major reasons that prompt one to embrace the excess work. The continuous demand of the employer to do more work than one can do leads to the danger of a toxic work culture. The term ‘toxic work culture’ describes a company environment that perpetuates unhealthy working habits and conflicts among employees in the workplace. It refers to the practices, policies and management styles of a company environment wherein unhealthy habits and conflicts among team members are being developed. It is institutional-centric and its causes vary like ineffective work practices, policies or management styles and so on. In the corporate era, the policies and procedures of a company are designed for its benefit, without considering the benefit of the workforce or employees. Though the company seems to benefit from the production, in the long run, it is harmful, for overwork damages the employees, preventing them from being productive and growing professionally. Employees in a toxic workplace may find themselves left to figure out work problems on their own. In a Flex Jobs survey of 2,600 American workers, 42% of respondents said they were seriously considering quitting their jobs, and 20% said they had quit recently. In the American Psychological Association’s 2023 Work in America workforce survey, 22% of employees opined that their work environment has “harmed their mental health.”

“Once the employees are happy and content, and
satisfied both physically and psychologically,
their productivity will increase with new ideas and
innovations and they can work with more vigour,
energy and vitality. The simple logic that
healthy workers produce better results will benefit all,
for the company, clients and employees.
The government also has the responsibility to form
suitable laws and norms to safeguard the work ethos.”

In many cases the employers are picked away from their fundamental needs and desires, shrinking their personal responsibilities and day-to-day tasks. It may grind down, humiliate, exhaust them and create frustration that breeds despair and anxiety which leads to ill health and social disruption. Here the employees are considered just as ‘homo faber,’- a term articulated by Hannah Arendt and Max Frisch, with the meaning of “man as the builder of the world and the maker of things,” neglecting all other dimensions. This overemphasis on work in human life disconnects one from their ‘self’ as well as from fellow beings. In this culture the value of work is explained only in economic terms, in which the employee becomes just a commodity and the ‘paid labour’ is seen as more valuable than the ‘unpaid tasks.’ When work is seen only in economic terms of ‘increased efficiency, productivity and profitability,’ it negates the psychological, moral and spiritual satisfaction of it. In such a view, we magnify the objective dimension of work and forget its subjective dimension.

Possibilities of a New Work Culture

After the death of Anna, there were many discussions on the present work culture in India. Her death is a brutal reminder that the relentless pursuit of profit, deadlines, and client satisfaction can come at the ultimate cost – someone’s life. If we simply ignore the signs and warnings of her death, we will face more hazards and tragedies. What we need is a real shift in our mindset, especially in the corporate culture. Unfortunately, most of our laws are in favour of the corporate world and the advice of the Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman after the death of Anna (not referring to it directly), that educational institutions should integrate stress management lessons into their curricula to better prepare students for challenging life situations, clearly shows the mind and ethos of present regime.

The suggestion of Prof. Chandrasekhar Sripada seems to be more realistic in the contemporary Indian scenario. According to him, toxic work culture is complex and everyone, from industry leaders to managers to employees and even society, would have to change the way they view productivity to have any real change. He makes a distinction between hard work and productive work. Instead of working more hours, he suggests focusing on ‘sustainable growth’, not just from an environmental standpoint, but also from a labour rights perspective. The demand to work around the clock is not sustainable. Many countries, especially the members of the European Union, have created much gentler working environments, which is conducive both for the firm and for the employee. India can follow some of their ideals.

Most of the companies give priority to clients- not to employees. No doubt that clients are important and companies have an obligation to meet the demands of their clients. As it is observed; “clients might be the ones paying the bills, but employees are the ones keeping the lights on. If they are not looked after, client satisfaction won’t matter in the long run because the people delivering that work will burn out or leave.” From the part of the clients too, new approaches are to be formed. They have to realise that their consultants are partners, not machines, who have the rights to be treated justly and gently. Good treatment both from the part of the employer and the client will actually result in better. Once the employees are happy and content, and satisfied both physically and psychologically, their productivity will increase with new ideas and innovations and they can work with more vigour, energy and vitality. The simple logic that healthy workers produce better results will benefit all, for the company, clients and employees. The government also has the responsibility to form suitable laws and norms to safeguard the work ethos.