Slashdot Mirror
Your Boss Is Not More Stressed Out Than You, Science Says (vice.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Work under capitalism is a brutal psychological gauntlet -- low pay, long hours, and little to no safety net. But bosses usually expect you to take some solace in the fact that you're not doing their (supposedly more difficult) job, even if they make more money. Some part of you might think that's bullshit, but hey, what do you know? Well, according to new work from researchers from the University of Manchester, University College London, and the University of Essex, it probably is bullshit. According to their study, published on Friday in the Journals of Gerontology, people lower on the corporate ladder are, on average, more stressed than people higher up. Worse, according to the study, the elevated stress continues into retirement for average working people. 'Workers in lower status jobs tend to have more stressful working conditions -- they have lower pay, poorer pension arrangements, less control over their work, and report more unsupportive colleagues and managers,' Tarani Chandola, a professor of medical sociology at the University of Manchester and one of the paper's authors, wrote me in an email.
Maybe being better at dealing with stress is what allows you to climb higher up the corporate ladder.
Every time he tackles a new problem it turns out to be harder than he thought during his campaign. We stand with you though, Mr President! #MAGA
More money = less stress.
You think Marissa Mayer was stressed that Yahoo was sinking, and everything she did made it worse? No, she was going to make hundreds of millions regardless of how she did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... (began in 1967)
"The studies, named after the Whitehall area of London and led by Michael Marmot, found a strong association between grade levels of civil servant employment and mortality rates from a range of causes: the lower the grade, the higher the mortality rate. Men in the lowest grade (messengers, doorkeepers, etc.) had a mortality rate three times higher than that of men in the highest grade (administrators). This effect has since been observed in other studies and named the "status syndrome".[3]"
Getting a start on the clickbait lying right with the first sentence, I see:
"Work under capitalism is a brutal psychological gauntlet -- low pay, long hours, and little to no safety net."
Compared to what? And when? Lord knows no one under feudalism, mercantilism, socialism or communism ever worked "long hours for low pay."
Life in a state of nature is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. Capitalism, and the technological progress it helped engender, is the system that helped lift those out of the poverty that previously plagued all but a tiny hereditary elite since time immemorial until a period just two centuries ago.
If you want to see what life is like without capitalism, trying looking at Venezuela, where they're rioting because socialism can't provide enough food for them to eat.
But enough. This is just another example of Slashdot leftwing clickbait, because evidently covering actual News For Nerds is evidently too boring compared to launching yet another left vs. right flamewar.
Is msmash the designated leftwing agitprop admin now?
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
This has been shown in studies for many years now and is pretty well beyond questioning.
The biggest factor is probably the 'control' aspect. In testing with mice, if two mice are in a cage that electrocutes them until they perform some task they are equally stressed. If one mouse is assigned to be the boss, such that the boss' actions shuts off the electricity for both of them, with the other mouse having no control......... the boss' stress drops, the other mouse's stress shoots up.
So yeah, that dumbass boss that never listens to your ideas on how to improve things is causing you stress.
Stopped reading right there. Just move to someplace like Venezuela if you want to see what happens when you deny the realities of the market.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Responsible Owners of companies and high level executives are burdened with the fact that they are responsible for the livelihoods of their employees. I have worked for several companies where I have personally seen a manager or owner stress to the point of depression when facing the task of laying off an employee.
Contrary to what people think, most managers are good people and have the back of their employees.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Of course it's all BS and it's always been. You get fired - you usually get nothing and then break your neck trying to find a new job. Oh, and your wife may divorce you in a process 'cause you've become insolvent.
Guys who are upper in the corporate hierarchy enjoy golden parachutes and resumes which say that they've got experience in managing other people, so they move to other management positions in other companies where they continue to manage while those at the lowest rank get all the flak for the company's failures or misfortunes and get fired whenever the quarterly goals are not met.
And don't get me started on their salaries and benefits.
Seriously. I've worked INCREDIBLY hard, and voluntarily submitted myself to WAY more stress than my peers through my earlier years. My friends thought I was nuts. But where are they now compared to where I am? You can likely figure that out on your own. The stress should be your driving force to move up. You're constantly presented with challenges that you need to accept in order to get to where want to be. What's that old saying? Ain't nothing in life free. I continue to work very hard, although now I work on different and more broad projects than those under my direction. My stress level is indeed lower than it was in past years, my salary is much higher, my debt to income is very low, and my retirement accounts are looking pretty nice. I worked really hard to get here, and I make no apologies for those who merely "come to work and do their job." You have to go above and beyond, you have to look forward and look upward in order to succeed. If your idea of a promotion is doing the minimum to not get fired long enough to "deserve" a raise, you will be stuck forever as one of the people bitching about "those rich people." Money opportunities are astoundingly abundant in America (and many other countries). But you have to put forth the effort to go out there and get it. I'm now, and have been for quite a while, at the point in my life where I have the flexibility to relax more. I built my home closer to work, both are in an area where I'm not wasting my time in traffic or spending a fortune to merely exist. I'm 15 minutes door to door and earned the ability to take time off to be with my family pretty much any time I wish. That is worth more than money at this point in my life, and I built that by not partying my ass off and blowing off work during my 20's. Life is what you make it. If you make it about doing nothing, you'll have nothing. If you make it about setting and achieving goals, you'll have success. It's a simple concept that has always and will always work. Further, if you read this and made a mental excuse for my success, you just answered every question about not being where you "deserve" to be.
Well if one study shows those results, then it must true everywhere! Science sez so!. That's how Science works.
More than a few of us have seen the garbage startup boss who waddles in hungover around noon to wax heroic on his drunken exploits in the name of "schmoozing" and "networking."
Amazingly, there are so many tech-pragmatists who fail to make the connection between the Mar-A-Lago Management techniques of Startup World, and that Donald J. Trump is exactly such a nobody who has been artificially bolstered.
But she deals with a bunch of garbage that I don't have to care about because she insolates me from it so I can get my work done. I see some of the E-mails about the issues she's keeping off my plate and I shudder to think what my life would be like if she didn't do what she does. She takes the stress so I don't have to and I owe her both my loyalty and thanks.
But I can assure you, my current manager isn't typical.... No sir. In my 25 years of having all sorts of managers, she's in the top 5% and I will be sad when she retires. My previous manager was totally opposite, visited his scorn for failure to meet real and imagined (by him) requirements when he demanded (regardless of if they'd been communicated or not). I'm sure he was stressed too, given all his direct and indirect reports generally didn't care one bit about keeping him out of trouble given the likelihood of getting your head handed to you when you raised an issue. He was a moron of a manager and I am lucky I escaped with my self respect from that place. I find this kind of manager much more common....
So, Yes, my managers ARE more stressed than I am.... I'm guessing the good managers are LESS stressed though than the ones who should have never taken the job in the first place.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
What's with these articles. First a blatant plug for UBI, now a bogus criticism of capitalism. Is msmash trying to drive off the few readers /. still has?
Life is probably much less stressful the less financial worries you have.
One study does not constitute a scientific result.
That's strange, because times have changed for anyone outside the very senior executive levels of a company. Previously, promotion into middle or upper management was like being admitted into an exclusive club, where everything was basically taken care of for you and you were just the public face of your organization. You had a high salary, a whole staff to manage every aspect of your life, etc. Now, flatter organizations push a lot of things onto lower numbers of managers that they wouldn't have to deal with in the past.
I think it's the flatter organizations that cause more stress...the managers are responsible for more than they used to be, and the speed/pace of business has wound up to levels that are beyond healthy.
Work under capitalism is a brutal psychological gauntlet -- low pay, long hours, and little to no safety net.
Average wages in the US are among the highest in the world. "Brutal psychological gauntlet"? As opposed to what? The rainbows and daisies that come from living under a dictator?
Capitalism does not imply the lack of a safety net either. There is nothing about capitalism that prevents a safety net from being put in place.
But bosses usually expect you to take some solace in the fact that you're not doing their (supposedly more difficult) job, even if they make more money.
Which bosses? "Usually"? This is a straw man argument. Some managers are more stressed than those who report to them. Sometimes it's the other way around. Furthermore stress is not an easily quantifiable state so comparisons of any sort are fraught.
'Workers in lower status jobs tend to have more stressful working conditions -- they have lower pay, poorer pension arrangements, less control over their work, and report more unsupportive colleagues and managers
In other news water is wet.
People lower on the ladder make less money. Less money means more stress.
There could be some personality filtering going on: those who can accept heavier pressure are more likely to move up into management.
It's more or less the Peter Principle: you raise up until you hit your pressure limit.
My wife rejected a management position that paid more than her current position because it was more stressful. She used to do that kind of work so she knows what's involved. She prefers to save some energy for family and friends. Because we have 2 white-collar incomes, we don't have significant financial pressures (knock on wood). Time is a scarcer resource than money for us.
For example, when in management, she had to deal with problem employees, sometimes stay late to resolve logjams, get urgent vendor/shipment-related calls on the weekend, etc. Her non-management job has a fairly narrow role such that she's not nearly as often thrashed around by miscellaneous issues popping up.
You kind of have to have "no life" to be a manager in most orgs, or the work-world ends up being your life, such as an enjoyment in shmoozing with customers, etc.
Table-ized A.I.
Obviously not a US statistic if pensions are mentioned. Here in the States, we all get to suffer in our retirement equally based on how much we little we invested when we were just starting out.
. . . .I'm a manager, and I'm stressed as all hell. We've got 2 of 5 slots open, no decrease in workload, and I haven't even seen a candidate resume in months. Our contract is up for re-compete, and we're getting continuous 30-day extensions. Several of my reports are "problem children", who have been foisted off on me for my demonstrated ability to not throttle the lazy bastards and take all the arguments out of customer earshot, as well as being the overall team troubleshooter.
I'm not getting paid enough for this shit, and regret ever agreeing to stepping up to manglement. . . . oh, and I'm the junior manager onsite. . ..
Welcome to Far Left Radicalism Celebration Day at Slashdot! Where facts be damned; we're going to blame all of the world's ills on freedom, democracy, and capitalism!
This is an exciting time of year for the far left. Popular messianic leftists are often born in the May-August months: Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and other benevolent leaders of the revolution!
Together we must FIGHT the evil forces of Capitalism, Individual Freedom, and Democracy! Together we can all ensure a long life living in blissful poverty for the masses, with free ultra-basic healthcare when you can get it, highly sought-after food rations, and the world's most advanced 3rd grade education!
I rather think that the authors know what correlation means far better than some blowhard idiot spouting a catchphrase of the ignoranti when faced with evidence they'd rather not consider does.
Do you think that the phrase somehow never caught anyone's attention before you brought it up?
And do you think that just because things fall down when you let them go, this is not proof of gravity, since you "know" that just because they correlate the falling down rate being universal and consistent with letting things go unsupported this does not equal the causation being gravity?
"Work under capitalism is a brutal psychological gauntlet -- low pay, long hours, and little to no safety net."
Why don't you ask Cold War era Eastern European citizens how work was under Communism?
Low pay? Check.
Long hours? Check.
Safety net? Well maybe a plastic tarp to catch the body when quotas were not met.
No matter what system you prefer to think might work,what has done so much damage to the planet and many of its temporary residents is corruption and self centred,self serving greed.
And it's a problem under any system you can invent a name for..
Too many folk live by the creed of Do as I say,not do as I do..
Someone show me one organised group of people anywhere at any time that has not suffered the above problems..
It can be greed for stuff or power, it's still greed and too many people always want more, no matter how much they have..
Many people use many arguments and words to try and excuse it,many systems have been tried to curb it,none appear to have worked.
Even in tiny small groups,there will always be at least one person who thinks they need/deserve more,wether they can show they need or "deserve" or have "earned" the right for more..
Basically we have advanced no further than the ancient primates we still are..
We can do this,we can do that,we have achieved much,some of it we should be proud of,but this is one problem we will probably never find a solution for..
Individuals or some small groups can appear to control the trait of greed for a while,but never for long..
After all, the American voters are all the boss of the POTUS. I can tell you he really stresses the hell out of me.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Actually, no .... Capitalism doesn't encourage laziness or "slacking off". That's for sure. But "increasingly lower pay"? That's B.S. There's absolutely a pretty standard concept of receiving regular raises throughout the American workforce. And especially in times like we've seen in the recent past where there's really no inflation happening? Even those "cost of living adjustments" amount to raises that slightly increase your buying power.
You can't use the "minimum wage" as the sole metric for whether people are making less money with time! In fact, I'm not sure it's much of a useful metric at all?
Every employer/employee pay agreement in the private sector EXCEPT mandated minimum wages are decided on without government interference. Even in a union, you have a "collective" of workers who can push to receive a pay and/or benefits boost they think is fair, while the employer has to negotiate with their leadership to come to an agreement both sides can accept. In other situations, it's based on what you can "sell" your employer on as your value you bring to the table, and/or the value they perceive you bring - causing them to voluntarily give you more money, to keep you happy working for them.
And if you want to argue about "long hours"? I grant that statistically you can probably prove that people are putting in more hours than they used to. But I'd also say you really need to look at WHY before judging it a bad thing. I know doing I.T. work myself, I definitely put in more than a "40 hour work week", but much of that is by choice. Because actually, I take pride in what I do and I'm not happy leaving a project unfinished if I know I can get it up and running a little bit faster by poking at it a bit after hours in the evening or over a weekend. That doesn't mean someone is DEMANDING I put that time in, and it doesn't mean I'm missing out on social events or other things I *want* to do in my personal time. I'm simply choosing to do a bit here and there when I have nothing better to do.
How many lower-level workers are willing to spend the up-front costs and take the risks associated with moving up? I'll tell you how many -- all the ones that moved up, and none of the ones that didn't.
I've got many friends with the skills and abilities to easily either start they own business in their trade or move up in their existing industry, but don't.
Usually, they don't start their own business because they aren't willing to risk being unsuccessful. They won't take the initial pay-cut during the transition, because "what if they fail". They won't borrow the money (as an additional mortgage, for example), because they just don't believe in their own success.
Similarly, they won't apply for the "managers' job", or whatever the next step up is, because they don't know how to keep that job. They know how to work hard, and keep the low-level job, but they don't know what's involved in managing others, so they worry that they won't be able to be responsible for their subordinates, and hence will get fired.
In either scenario, they stick with their current job simply because they are afraid to take new risks.
They forget that a) they took an initial risk when they got their current job; b) that if the company isn't doing well, they'll get fired before their boss does, no matter how good they are at their boss; and c) you keep taking the same risk until you figure out how to make it work, or you're forever stuck where you are.
You don't get people to advance by showing them how to advance. You get people to advance by removing their fear of the unknown; then they'll advance all by themselves without any help from anyone.
Good luck.
She's at her desk for maybe 2 hours a day, then off working a side gig or at a 2 hour lunch. No worries though, her days are numbered.
I also suspect being a CEO is worth nowhere near 800x the amount I make.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Uh.. raises? My company only gives yearly bonuses. No one gets raises.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Rights-protection is one way to define the status quo. If we went with rights-protection, we would do away with most taxpayer funded initiatives including public schools. And don't say vouchers.
What we want instead is human development, which is not a strict interpretation of rights protection. Otherwise, we'll turn into a third world country real quick. Once the disparity of wealth increases, it is hard to keep out corruption (because the cops simply aren't making enough money and justice is what you can buy). But maybe that's what you want - an America where you are rich in an island of poverty. Maybe what you want is not that things are better for you, but worse for others.
The highest work-stress job, from the Wharton–Harvard perspective, is the star performer (software developer, sales person) promoted into their first management position, often without any prior psychological preparation for the change (how hard can it be to manage people doing what I so clearly excelled at doing? larvae in ointment: without actually doing their work for them?)
In a high-pressure setting, first year is hell, usually devolves into an unrelenting fire fight, with a high ultimate attrition rate. (Who new that hardball sales tactics don't translate well to daily proximity?)
Once the junior manager recovers from Boot Camp, the job remains difficult, but the compensation is pretty good, if you "manage" to hang around long enough to get promoted off the management front line.
Year one: learning how to delegate down
Year two: paying more attention to what lies above (and not just the marching orders)
Year three: fully investing in peer relationships with other managers at the same level, elsewhere in the organization
Someone who entered the work force intending to become a manager likely accomplishes this in less time. But these people have always been a small minority in the studies I've read.
A year into the job, there is nearly a 100% response rate that the new managers had failed to appreciate the importance of investing in peer relationships (not that they would have found the time during Management Boot Camp 101 in any case). Lateral politics. It's a thing.
Back to the article, at the bottom of the heap, how does one carve a reasonable line between general life stress and work stress?
I can't even imagine.
Dunderheads. Imagine having to manage the people who wrote this study. One can only imagine.
Look on my workers, troubled sea of mighty dunderheads, and despair!
So of course my boss it less stressed, he makes more. I'm guessing this started out as another narrative along the lines of "job creators" and the like meant to stop the working class from questioning their declining standard of living...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
the only bosses that have the time to answer their surveys are the non stressed ones!
Already the fact that they selected the word boss, and not owner, is a sign that they had their result, before doing their study!
someone hired to be a boss or CEO, have noting to stress over (other than their greed), as most of them can quit any day they want to. (only losing a bonus or stock options.)
But the owner of at company, can lose their entire livelihood.
They still have to pay their employees, and a lot of other shit, even if the company is not making any money. Some may have worked 60 hour weeks for 40 years and if they cant get anyone to buy their company, may have to leave it all to the bank and end up with absolutely nothing.
A CEO on the other hand is just an overpaid employee! nothing more, nothing less.
In a truly free market owners would be liable for the debts of the company. Funnily enough scrapping limited liability isn't part of the free market manifesto.
Seriously? Leninist babies. How about you go live in North Korea. Capitalism is the best option out there until robot overlords take over and provide for cattle-like Utopian existence for all humans you so dearly desire.
My boss is the one that filters out the corporate bullshit and lets me do my job. I have managed to have it that way with 2 different companies and 3 different bosses.
I don't get stressed out because of timelines, I let them do that. I just get the job done.
Hey folks, I am still waiting on your TPS reports. Remember we are using the new TPS cover sheet. Don't get it confused with the old cover sheet. Oh, mmmyeah, I am going to need you come in this weekend.
Unions helped lift those out of the poverty that previously plagued all but a tiny hereditary elite since time immemorial until a period just two centuries ago.
Not only is my version correct, it's shorter.
"I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
I used to believe that my boss worked hard and was more stressed that I was because he and he is an authority figure. Now that we have scientist, another authoritarian figures to displace the authority of my boss, I have to believe the scientists. They are scientist after all. I know that the media tells me science is always right and a force for freedom so I will believe the scientists. My only question is what scientists made this ground breaking authoritative study.
Was it the same scientist that said the negro man was inferior to the white man
Was it the same scietntist that absoluty positively concluded through a double blind placebo controlled scientific study that steroids do not promote muscle grow in the 1950's
was it the same scientists that said the earth was posively 2. billion years old, or the scientists that said it was absolutley 4 billion years old, or the ones that said that it wasa 4.5 billion yeaRS OLD or the ones that said it was 4.6 billion years old.
I an an educated american american and I realize that religion is superstition. I like all people brainwashed by the media, blindly accept the authority of science and scientist. I am too stoopit to think on my own and will defer to experts to do all my thinging and spelling for me. After all scientist can see electrons. Who am i to question the omniscience of scientist with their magical all seeing eyeballs.
All Hail Science. Only homophobic homosexual nazi pedophile communist Trump supporters dare question the supreme power of science. Don't think on your own. Instead believe in Science! Questioning denies the power of science. Do not deny science!
You have to factor in the fact that some people have a greater tolerance for stress than the rest of us. Those are the people who can climb over the backs of everyone else in sprinting up the corporate ladder. I would expect their cortisol levels to be lower, just because they are not as bothered by stress as the rest of us.
A correct study would measure the same person's cortisol levels when they were in a low-level job, and when they were in a high-level job (and having to deal with all the powerful people there). I'd bet that person's cortisol level would be higher in the higher-level job.
IIRC there was a study some time back that said monkeys near the middle of the pecking[1] order had the most stress.
Of course managers aren't monkeys ...
[1] or shit throwing or flea picking, whatever the equivalent is
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Money is like gravity, the more you have, the easier it is to attract more of it. The less you have, the more likely it is your money will be sucked into the gravity well of a larger amount of money belonging to someone else. Example: My cousin was given a $100,000 4% interest loan at the age of 21 from his multi millionaire father. He also was given a job after dropping out of university (his university debt was wiped by his parents), as a forklift driver (aroun $55k) in his dad's company. Within 2 years he was making commission as a salesman in same company (around $65k BUT with commission around $85k). after 10 years he has bought 3 investment properties. This is due to his starting conditions. Now my situation: I went to university and dropped out after 2 years. This left a student loan debt of $10,000. I have been working entry level jobs for the past 4 years (averaging $50k and am finally breaking into an 80k role). My dad is not as successful as his brother so I was never offered a 4% interest loan at the age of 21 like my cousin. In Australia there has been a property boom/bubble and the average price of an apartment is $350,000, and a house is pushing $750,000 nationally. As a result I own 0 property and am still struggling to save for a deposit, those who got in earlier such as my cousin have had a massive leg up. I am currently being head hunted for a well paying job, but I still don't have that extra boost of a loan no bank would issue a 21 year old with. Capital matters. The sooner you start with a sum of money the further ahead you'll get. Start with 100,000 at 21, and it's easy to get a million dollars by 35.
The whole premise of this study is silly. Stress is bad. You do not want any employees to be stressed. You want them performing highly without stress. You especially do not want supervisory employees stressed, as that can be contagious, AND work by folks higher in the food chain is highly levered. You want high performing, calm, stress free supervisory employees. And, you want them to be both smart and lazy. I don't remember the name of the quadrant, but there is a famous quadrant showing IQ and laziness... high IQ and low laziness tend to be poor managers, as they don't delegate tasks they should delegate. High IQ and high laziness can result in a manager that delegates well and can scale his/her IQ across workloads of many employees.
Orgs like Entrepreneurs Organization and Young Presidents Organization will beat owners/CEOs up for trying to work IN the business rather than ON the business. You do your company a great disservice if you are trying to scale by working harder yourself. That scale factor is really poor, increasingly poor at each level of growth, and has a ceiling. You should be working to work yourself out of a job, and you should perform tests where you disappear to play golf and observe what does and doesn't break. You won't actually ever work yourself out of a job if you're growing, but you won't be the limiting factor to your growth.
And that's why supervisory employees get paid more, btw. It's not that they work harder. Good managers have a high ROI due to the scaling of their direction and oversight
The study is looking specifically at UK civil servants after seven years or so of government austerity policies.
I'm not convinced it's representative of the workforce as a whole.
I wish to remain anomalous
The higher-ups are usually higher-up because they can deal with stress more eloquently. Starting and running a business is immensely stressful - but learning to deal with that stress is what allows you to continue. It's foolish to belittle those who've found success and excuse it like they were just lucky - it's that kind of attitude that will ensure you never find success yourself.
"elevated stress continues into retirement for average working people."
Seems like pretty good proof that it had nothing to do with their working environment then...
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
The problem with capitalism is that it should pay people with the hardest jobs more.
The difficulty of a job does not strongly correlate with its economic value. Watch the show Dirty Jobs if you need evidence of this. The value of a job is a direct function of supply and demand for that job. There aren't a lot of people with the skills to be a heart surgeon or a professional athlete. This doesn't imply that those jobs are harder or more valuable than others, merely that the talent is hard to come by. Being a school teacher can in many ways be a harder job but it's not as difficult to find people who can perform adequately.
What this means is that if you want to maximize your earning potential you need to develop skills that are comparatively rare and hard to replicate. My wife is a MD with a fairly rare sub-specialty. As a result she does well financially and has to work less hours than doctors in more common specializations. She has a rare skill that is not easy to replicate by people with less training. It's not that her job is harder but that it's harder to find people who can do it adequately.
While a person up the ladder may have a more difficult job, by this article my suspicions are true and it is not necessarily the case. I also suspect things really get easier as you move up
Some things get easier when you move up the ladder and some get harder. The physical toil and economic stress can be less. But the responsibility tends to become more. If the guy up the ladder fails it affects a lot more than just himself and his family. The CEO is responsible for many families and I can assure you that they feel the pressure. The hours at the top tend to be longer and you have a lot more people watching and judging what you do and how well you do it. If you are the owner of a company and it's your money on the line if things go tits up, that can be enormous stress.
And it's the type I don't want to deal with. I like working with systems that do what I tell it to do.
Maybe 40 hours a week is too much. It's great that you want to work for free after hours, but the vast majority of people don't want to work for free ever. Most people with FTE don't have enough free time to pursue their dreams and achieve what they really want to get out of life, because by the time they get home, cook/eat dinner, there's little time for anything else. Sure, you can spend that last hour or so working on your dream, but never spending any downtime to unwind and relax is a surefire way to burnout.
Basically, unless you have the opportunity to get a good headstart on your dream before you get shackled to the FTE life, you're essentially a wage slave until you retire (if you're lucky enough to even get retirement), at which point you have all the time in the world to pursue your dream. Of course, you need to have the foresight at a young age to pursue your dream before getting shackled to FTE (which, at that age, most people don't). And in retirement, maybe your dream isn't feasible anymore because it was time-sensitive, or somebody else did it first, or you're just tired and worn out from working FT for decades and all you want to do is sit on a boat, drink beer, and fish. It's no wonder we have so few wildly successful people, when the vast majority of us simply aren't afforded the time necessary to pursue our dreams.
We keep seeing all these increases in productivity, automation, efficiencies, things to free us up from doing work, but do we ever actually get to do less work? Hell no, they just lay off half of us, pocket the extra cash, and make us do even more.
Then maybe you should take advantage of the free market and start looking for a better-paying job elsewhere. If your company won't give you a raise, you can give yourself one by changing employers. Assuming, of course, that you are actually worth more. Capitalism doesn't guarantee that you are always underpaid.
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }