Slashdot Mirror
Half of All Tech Workers Surveyed Think Their Workplace Is 'Unhealthy' (wfaa.com)
"Half of tech employees think their work culture is toxic," reports one Texas news site, citing a new survey by Blind:
Blind, an anonymous work talk app, asked more than 12,000 tech staffers to respond to the statement: "I consider my current workplace a healthy working environment." Slightly more than half, 52 percent, said the survey statement was "false," versus nearly 48 percent who responded with "true."
Intel was named the tech company with the least healthy work environment, by 48.5 percent of its employees, followed by Amazon at 46.5 percent, and eBay at 44.5 percent. Employees who consider their workplaces healthier work at LinkedIn, where 17.3 percent responded true, followed by Google, at 23.7 percent, and Uber, at 29.7 percent.
It depends on how you define "unhealthy," of course -- but it'd be interesting to hear how Slashdot's readers respond to the same question. So leave your own thoughts and reactions in the comments.
Is your work environment unhealthy?
Intel was named the tech company with the least healthy work environment, by 48.5 percent of its employees, followed by Amazon at 46.5 percent, and eBay at 44.5 percent. Employees who consider their workplaces healthier work at LinkedIn, where 17.3 percent responded true, followed by Google, at 23.7 percent, and Uber, at 29.7 percent.
It depends on how you define "unhealthy," of course -- but it'd be interesting to hear how Slashdot's readers respond to the same question. So leave your own thoughts and reactions in the comments.
Is your work environment unhealthy?
The question is, "I consider my current workplace a healthy working environment," so a high percentage of true responses means the workplace is healthy. Yet the summary says:
Employees who consider their workplaces healthier work at LinkedIn, where 17.3 percent responded true, followed by Google, at 23.7 percent, and Uber, at 29.7 percent
If a low percentage of people are responding true, then, contrary to what the summary says, that means they find their workplace unhealthy.
I get "Access Denied" when I try to look at the article so it's not clear if the summary has simply been worded wrongly or if Google is the toxic shithole we all thought it was.
If by unhealthy, you mean:
"Our bosses are insane, and keep mandating inhuman and inhumane hours, while simultaneously cutting pay and benefits. They tell us that this is just the market responding to industry pressures, but somehow our quarterly reports remain stellar, and our bosses bring home multi-million dollar bonuses every year."
then yes. That is epidemic. The only real solution is the Pyrrhic option of unionization. (Yes. I know it has real bad sides. There really isn't a valid alternative without legal enforcement from the feds, and face it-- the suits have more money than you do, and will never support such an initiative without a shotgun pointed at them.)
If you mean "There is an unhealthy sexist culture that makes me feel uneasy or victimized."
That is somewhat supported, but it also goes the other way-- "I am afraid to even so much as mention the word "sausage" at the office, lest I be fired for being gender insensitive." This is a situation where a carefully balanced degree of enforcement is the ideal, and management needs to resist the urge to over-enforce to placate vocal minorities at the expense of silent majorities.
If you mean "The building is literally toxic. There is fucking asbestos hanging out between the ceiling tiles, falling on us every day."
that too has a surprising incidence rate. (It combines with the first interpretation, where "employees and their welfare are not worth spending investor money on!" is the pathology.) However, it is ALREADY illegal to provide such a work environment... which brings us to--
If you mean "My employer is abusive, and threatens extraordinary consequences for addressing grievances of any kind. Shit is real here, but if I speak up, I will not only be sacked, but never work in this industry ever again."
That too is a thing, especially in the hyper-connected world we live in today. Sadly, this would require sweeping changes in how HR approaches social media and how it automates its hiring practices in order to prevent abuses in the employer/employee relationship of this kind, as well as stronger penalties for industries that defacto engage in it. This suffers the same problem as the first interpretation; the solution requires the individuals with all the political momentum to work against their own interests, in favor of those with little to no political or financial power.
This is still a useful question to ask, but it needs the followup to clarify. Of course, I dont think industry or government really want to know.
The survey asks for a healthy environment. If the answer is negative, is it necessarily 'unhealthy'? Or could it be 'not healthy', i.e. neutral?
Surveys are very often phrased so vaguely and inaccurately that it's virtually impossible to answer them in a meaningful way. Which is a real problem when trying to interpret the results. At other times surveys have leading questions.
It depends on how you define "unhealthy," of course
It sounds to me like a more generalised level of dissatisfacton. Whether specifically with the work environment or the company, or the boss, or the pay rates or the amount of holiday.
Or even the weather on the day the question was asked, indigestion, the quality of the coffee, the distance to the car park or any of a multitude of other potential issues.
In short, asking people how they feel about anything is neither a reliable basis for a professional study, nor a robust measure of the actual question asked.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
I work with criminals and lawyers in the judiciary. It's rape, murder, drug dealing and bad parenting everyday. People in the tech industry are too affected.
I mean really. The question itself is designed to give non-meaningful results. Why waste the time of /. readers with something so flawed?
... is probably to get more people to download their app.
is someone who assembles smartphones in a sweatshop a tech worker? How about someone who works in a cobalt mine?
It's bitztream the autism-hating, custom EpiPen-hating, Musk-hating, Qualcomm-hating, Firefox tabs-hating, Slashdot editors-hating Slashdot troll!
Especially if you combine it with eating while working with computers all day
Like "King Size Homer" https://youtu.be/-VHlwcxUUnE
Many of the buildings I've worked in with my company over the past couple of decades have had levels of mold, damage and inadequate upkeep
that ranged from elevated to downright ludicrous.
Like many large companies, they have their own Health / Hazard / Safety teams that we are supposed to contact about any concerns.
When we did complain ( many times ) about the mold growing on everything ( walls, floor, desks, chairs, etc ) in the locked room next door to us,
they would simply send out a cleaning crew to vacuum, wipe down and otherwise remove the most obvious stuff. The Health Organization ison the
company payroll so it is their job to fix any issues as quickly and cheaply as possible, so keep that in mind.
Finally, someone got OSHA involved and after showing up the inspector ordered the evacuation of the impacted area and the areas adjacent to it.
( Three floors ) The company was forced to rip out everything down to the concrete and steel. Clean up took years.
That was the first building. My doctors seem to think that the time I spent there ( many years ) are why my lungs and sinuses are where they are
today. One of my coworkers always had what we thought to be an Asthma issue as he was always coughing and spitting out crap. After
developing similar symptoms, I wonder just how much the daily exposure to those levels of mold had in his condition.
I heard he died not long after retiring. :|
After moving from the building, anytime my symptoms started to worsen I would ask the Health folks for an air quality check.
I've had to vacate two additional buildings ( three total now ) because of the results showing high / elevated concentrations of various species
of mold.
The most recent building I work in rarely gets cleaned. The cleaning crews show up roughly once a month ( the building only has a few full time
employeesin it ) to change out the paper towels, take out the trash and clean the toilets. They do not sweep, mop, vacuum the floor or wipe down
any horizontal surfaces at all. Where a roach died on the floor, it stayed there for years even if it was the middle of the room.
Once again, I contacted our Health folks and the building manager to come look for themselves and to run an air quality check.
I straight up asked the building manager why the cleaning crews didn't vacuum, sweep or clean up the obvious and his answer was:
" It's not in the budget. "
I then walked them around the building to show them all the dead roaches, the fact that the carpet hadn't seen a vacuum for more than a
decade, the mold growing on the walls of an unused front door entrance, breaks and splits in the walls from previous water damage that was
never fixed, the multi-colored water damaged carpet in one of the hallways and the list goes on and on.
The air quality check produced results as one might expect from said conditions. :| )
( Of course the cleaning crew made an extra effort the next time they were out due to the complaints. They even washed the carpet.
Here's the kicker. This is a Fortune 500 company whose profits were ~$20 BILLION last year.
( Profits. Total revenues in excess of ~$150 Billion in 2017 )
" It's not in the budget. "
I've debated bringing OSHA back into the picture as there is a clear pattern of incompetence on the part of the company I work for.
The company owns thousands of buildings across the country alone. Many more overseas. I could probably keep OSHA inspectors
busy and employed for the next decade just inspecting the buildings.
The problem is, we all know what will happen if I do.
I won't get fired for reporting it ( that's illegal ), but they will certainly find something ( anything ) they can fire me for eventually.
So the conundrum is this:
Try to outlive it with the few years I have left before retirement, or report it and risk getting fired which will likely wreak any retirement
plans I had. ( Assuming I don't kee
... and the answer is, "yes" and "no."
"I consider my current workplace a healthy working environment."
Yes:
I worked 18 years at a law firm and my coworkers and I had a good time, laughing and protecting each other from management. When the network fell down, they expressed sympathy instead of bitching and I worked hard and fast to get them back up. We respected each other and the socialization was healthy.
No:
Management was fraught with pure assholes of the idiot kind. Those dumb goddam son of a bitches thought they were being treated with respect when it was actually fear. They didn't know the fucking difference.
One of them asked me how many computers we were buying from Dell. I told her, 20, and she told me to call up Dell and ask for a volume discount.
I went to my office, called my Dell rep, asked him to give me a discount because I was buying so many goddam computers and, after catching our breath, talked about how fucked up management was. I reported to her that Dell said when we got up to the volume-buy of the state of Texas, please try again.
Yes:
The reason I stayed was the managing partner.
He was a gruff bastard He was busy, direct, decisive, dismissive, had a steel-trap memory and was, like me, a military veteran.
I learned one thing very quickly: The roles were: He was an officer and I was enlisted ... roles we both had in common.
He walked in on me one time and I was kicked back, drinking coffee. He said, "Caught you!" I said, "You will never catch me. Whatever I'm doing on your dime is the very best I can do on your dime." He was skeptical and asked, "So what are you doing now?" I said, "Thinking." He asked "About what?" I said, "The problem." He asked, "What problem?" I said, "Exactly! You don't know we have a problem and I'll never tell you we're having a problem because it's my problem, not yours. When I need your help with it, I'll let you know about it."
He asked me, "So what's with the coffee?" I said, "I'm trying to think of a way to fix the problem." He smiled and said, "Carry on."
Lower management would go to him to complain about how I would not process impossible tasks they assigned and he would say, where everyone could hear him, "I don't give a shit about your problems. He does a damned good job for me and you don't matter. Now, get out."
HA! What a guy. What a fucking guy.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
It is stressful and something you do not do of your own free will. No surprise it is generally not healthy.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
They really mean none of the things you mention.
What they mean by "toxic workplace", is people are are too negative. It only takes a handful, and about 30 days they can turn everyone there negative - like a really slow acting zombie plague.
The reason why workplaces have gotten somewhat more negative over the years is that managers have gone a bit soft overall and are not willing to fire people everyone that works there wish would be fired.
It's one of the things that moved me into consulting, after many years working at various size tech companies. Rampant negativity I've seen in companies from 20 people to twenty thousand (or more!), so it's nice to be able to more easily move between companies.
I've also worked in small groups in larger companies and very small companies, that have a great culture and are not toxic because all of the people are great to work with. So it's not like it's impossible, generally people would not like to gripe all the time.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I've loved the internet for a while, but am frustrated by the current limits of many major text based services...including slashdot.
Why can't we focus our comments on a word, or section of words, to clarify where our comment is directed? Then people could say what their unhealthy comment s directed at.
Or link our comments to a direction of replies that seem similar? Instead of just "all replies"? Down is only one direction!
OK, another "million dollar idea" gone to waste as not implemented, but this seems so basic...
How's life in the hypocrite lane?
According to WaPo Amazon is much better with employees who just cry at their desks instead of dying.