Slashdot Mirror
Stress Costs U.S. $300 Billion a Year
jburroug writes "A new study, as reported in the New York Times claims that the stress of the modern always-on work environment is taking a far greater toll on the health of workers than previously believed, to the tune of $300 billion in lost productivity and increased health care costs in the U.S. alone."
That's because people in the US tend to work to much (sometimes for less money). Hope this shows the rest of the world not to follow that trend in favor of some inexistent productivity benefit.
....with their 4-6 weeks of vacations and holidays each year. We work about 25% more per year than do most Europeans.
I really do not understand why we Americans have let ourselves be brainwashed into SweatShopAmerica.
See my sig for links on how the social democracies of Europe fought and are still fighting for a better , less stressful workplace, for universal healthcare, and for a social welfare state/safety net that lets them less afraid of losing their jobs.
eat shiat and bark at the moon
At my workplace, it is widely accepted to use a day of sick leave and call it a "mental health" day.
We all need to step away from the everyday crap and let our brain rest. Sometimes you need it and you usually come back to work energized and ready to finish the rest of the week.
Decent companies are forced to drug test their employees for harmless substances like THC.
.AU for good this time. My advice to americans... hmmm, get the fuck out of that madhouse now.
I tried my best to work in the u.s., but I couldn't hack it, just couldn't do it. Even the innocuous suggestion that we go down the pub for an ale during lunch raised some eyebrows and instilled fear in my coworkers. Why do the people working in corporate america have this attitude ? Is it just plain fear? Are you all so desperate to climb the corporate ladder that _living_ takes a backseat to it? Then the 60 and 70 hour workweeks, people taking work home with them for at least another dozen hours of unpaid work...
Absolutely ridiculous... I'm glad to be back in
" US are very too dumb, they will elect Bush and they stress, it's very funny!"
."
.they will elect Bush and they stress , , ,"
.it's very funny!"
The word you're looking for is "ironic", perhaps "sardonic". George W. Bush being president has been anything but funny.
" US are very too dumb . .
This part of your sentence does not translate well. The flaw in your grammar could, with a little allusion, be extended so that YOU (plural) are ignorant also.
" . .
The 'each and several states' send delegates to the appropriate state capitols in the second week of December. These electors will cast their votes for President and Vice President. http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm
Individual citizens will vote of course, but the popular vote in a presidential election is only a barometer for the electors to gauge the political atmosphere. Additionally, many/most of us will not vote for Bush.
" . .
Maybe you'd like us to vote for isolationist Pat Buchanan?
See: https://www.cato.org/dailys/12-22-99a.html
Stuff that matters.
Stop measuring everything in terms of money!
In fact, measure things as rarely as you can get away with, whether it's your income, the number of friends you have, the size of your steak or the speed of your CPU.
Out of touch executives are running the country (US) into the ground from within. They percieve a need to squeeze every penny into their quarterly EPS reports. CxOs will stop at nothing to look good on paper. Their shortsighted strategies combined with an out-of-touch lifestyle make life a living hell for a vast majority of their collective underlings. Their only concerns in life are:
1. Where do I park my boat? What? No valet service?!?
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!!!
If executives were more entrenched and had more at stake there would be more coherent operations at work. CxOs need to have their livelyhood at stake in the same way the rest of us do in order to make the right decision. Nothing trickles down to the underlings. You might survive in this corporate culture by sucking up. 1 minute of "face time" has become much more important than fixing a problem or making an improvement. God help us all.
Once upon a time, I worked for the Company Formerly Known as USWorst. That experience left me with more knowledge of both their database and their employee benefits program than I ever wanted to know. The stress of that position also left me with carpal tunnel syndrome, the beginnings of a whopping good ulcer, and stress-related dissociative attacks. (Literally, my brain was going on mini-vacations, and neglecting to take me along with it.)
Now, I own my own business. The pay isn't as regular, but my schedule is my own, and the unreasonable request list is pretty minimal. The carpal tunnel still flares up form time to time, but it's in remission without surgery. (Since I use my hands a lot, this is a critical point.) The other problems started to heal as soon as I escaped the toxic work environment. I'm not spending as much time sitting in a doctor's office, and nowhere near as much money on things like Pepto and pain relief nostrums.
So, yeah; not exactly news, but it's nice to see that somebody has quantified the impact that work-related stress has on people's lives.
Doing my level best to piss off the religious right wing...
Marijuana: My anti drug. It kills stress too.
Amen to that.
And, contrary to popular opinion, I'm not a drooling idiot, but function just fine with my occasional cone to relieve stress.
Those people living like moles in the New York subways sure as hell aren't counted in the unemployment statistics, but equally they sure as hell aren't "gainfully employed" by anyone. That's a few million, right there.
The European Union may not have the perfect system (and most of Europe holds to the 35-hour week) but they do seem to be more honest about the real cost of their system.
If we're spending 300 billion dollars from overwork - money we're no longer earning, because a certain US President just eliminated overtime rules - then we're just burning money we don't have. We'd be better off banning the overtime and putting the money into better healthcare. We'd be paying the same, it's just that we'd be in better physical shape when we do fall ill, and the health system would be in better shape to take care of us.
Of course, you could argue that the country is overcrowded anyway. True enough, but I'm not sure that involuntary euthanasia by excessive workloads is really the way to deal with the problem.
I guess this could be taken by a cynic as confirming previous Slashdot articles which claimed that Republicans were mentally ill and had deficient brain activity.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
That's me, the reporter who wrote the story. What fascinated me about this is that everybody knows that workplace stress is a problem, but you rarely see the dots connected. There's a lot of fascinating research out there -- especially the Scandinavian studies showing links between change in the workplace and illness. Anyway, I didn't mean to stress y'all out. But I have to say that I did think of slashdotters often while I was writing it...
"speaking only for myself since 1957"
I recently dropped a self owned startup for a "corporate" job working for the DoD...for the most part security restrictions make it dificult (i.e. a hassle) to take work home...needless to say, I'm loving it. When I'm at work, I get more done, when I'm at home I get more R&R...
SPAM
But what about Europe: they are less stressed, but the Industrial Revolution started there!
The reason they are less stressed is because their governments have restrained the amount of leverage that employers may apply to the employee.
eat shiat and bark at the moon
Man, what a downer you are. ;)
Actually, you're right. She really is the one thing tying me down, not that I resent it. Truthfully, I think this fact speaks highly of her character. If I break up with her, I'm off to Thailand or Burma for ordination.
But don't forget the noble examples of the laity! Queen Mallika and Pasenadi Kosala come to mind. The Buddha himself praised dedicated and loving relationships, impermanent as they may be.
(Posting anonymously to avoid karma hit for going OT)
Workplace stress costs the nation more than $300 billion each year in health care, missed work and the stress-reduction industry that has grown up to soothe workers and keep production high, according to estimates by the American Institute of Stress in New York
Seems kind of useless to know that stress costs $300 billion per year without knowing the benefits of that stress. Surely some of this stress results in increased productivity. (I know I never get work done unless I have a deadline.)
Also, how much of this stress is preventable? Surely every culture has some degree of stress. How much would it cost to treat this baseline level of stress in the current American medical system? Without knowing that, it's impossible to tell to what extent this means Americans are really stressed out, or whether this is just another indication that we're relatively well-off and consume lots of expensive health care.
Workers who report that they are stressed, said Steven L. Sauter, chief of the Organizational Science and Human Factors Branch of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, incur health care costs that are 46 percent higher, or an average of $600 more per person, than other employees
Similarly, this could just reflect that those who have stressful jobs also have excellent health plans and thus consume more health care.
Saying stress cost us $300 billion a year assumes our economy exists to maximize overall wealth and happiness. In point of fact, our economy is built around making a select few staggeringly wealthy. All enonomies throughout history have been. Right now we're not really noticing this because Globalization has allowed most people in developed countries to be comfortable w/o having that 1% of the populace who won't settle for less than their every desire compromise a few of the more extravagant ones.
But as the rest of the world developes, we're running into serious resource shortages. As these shortages start to be felt, the greedy won't scale back their extravagance, so the rest will be made to suffer. The stress will be increased, your health will go to hell. But it won't matter, since there are plenty of fresh bodies to replace you, just waiting to be used up. Right now this is an issue because society can afford to coddle it's workers while letting that 1% live like they always have (the phrase 'live like a king' didn't just come out of nowhere). Wait and see. The response to a study like this won't be treating workers better, it'll be discarding them faster.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The whole idea of "the money going back into the economy" is an oft-repeated fallacy.
It's a good idea to avoid confusing "money" with economic wealth. They are actually only very loosely linked, and the fact that money continues to circulate is largely irrelevant to whether the economy does better or worse.
As an example, let's say a falling tree crushed your car and you buy a new one for £20,000 (no insurance - damn). You are worse off by £20,000. Other people (car dealer, company, suppliers etc.) are on aggregate better off by £20,000 minus the full cost of making and selling one car.
Money supply hasn't changed for the economy as a whole - the £20,000 just changed hands. But the economy as a whole is worse off by the cost of making and selling one additional car.
In the same way, money spent on medical expenses casued by stress absolutely does represent a real loss to the economy as a whole. The size of the loss here is the cost of providing those medical services.
Whether this loss is worth it or not due to other benefits of a stressful work environment is, of course, a separate question.
It depends what values you have. Freedom or money.
I prefer freedom, why spend all your life working and buying a lot of stuff you don't need?
I rather spend 2 months on my bicycle during the summer than earning enough money for even more crap.
I guess I am lucky to have had a few good role models growing up and early in my career. You should pick the 1 or 2 most important things that need to be done, knock them out, and then move on to the next 1 or 2. Concentrating your effort and attention gives much better results. You get more done in less time and you make fewer mistakes. It is much more effective and a lot less stressful.
One of my first bosses is like that. The "fire fighters" as we called them would be running around frantically all stressed out about every problem. They always looked really busy and really stressed. He, on the other hand, would sit down and make a list of the problems and figure out how best to tackle the situation and then concentrate on one item at a time. He would get that one highest priority item done properly and then move on to the next. Sometimes people would get pissed at him for not working on 10 other things but he would stick with it and get them all done. The fire fighters would always look more busy and frantic but in the end they would accomplish very little and much of that would have to be redone.
Never mistake activity for work. You have to be deliberate and figure out how to get the highest value out of your time. Work less, be more effective, make more money. That's my motto. Everybody gets the same 24 hours in a day. Its how you use them that counts.
Why wouldn't this be an optimum level?
Just some random musings, don't try to find a coherent train of thought...
:-)
Some research suggests that people can't really concentrate well more than 6 hours a day (three hours in the morning, and three hours in the afternoon after a lunch break), if even that. Even so, try getting companies to let their employees off that easy.
Among my friends are some people who work or worked for international companies such as Ericsson, Volvo or Saab-Scania. They said when they came to the US they thought it striking how most companies either didn't allow proper lunch breaks, or had employess who were eager to show how efficient they were. Instead of 40min-1 hour time to go to a resturant, most of the employees remained in their cubicles and ate some sandwiches while continuing their work.
Also, while American workers stayed long, perhaps until 5-6 pm, there was a noticing slacking of pace in the afternoon. People pent more time talking around the water cooler, killing time by surfing or just staring into space. They were just mentally exhausted and couldn't do much efficient work, but they were still required to stay for several hours.
One of my friends held a presentation about Swedish working conditions. When he talked about the generous working laws and vacations, such as 4-6 hours paid vacation per year minimum (even with "vacation bonus" to your salary, since you spend more when you are on vacation), the workers were amazed and the managers started to fidget and make unhappy faces. He wasn't allowed to do that presentation ever again.
I really liked a recent article in the Economist, that suggested that European and American productivity was about equal, Europeans just choose to sacrifice income in favour of more free times, and Americans were willing to sacrifice free time in favour of more money. Perhaps the old joke that Europeans work to live, and Americans live to work has some truth in it. I'm not looking down on people in the US, but I think I prefer our system.
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die