All That Glitters is not Gold: The Reality of Modern Work Culture

The tragic passing of Anna Sebastian Perayil has sparked a lot of conversation around workplace culture. My deepest sympathies go out to her family, and I hope we never have to witness such incidents again. However, it’s important to acknowledge that the pressures of modern workplaces, especially in large corporations, are deeply embedded in their systems. This piece is not specific to any organisation but overall reflecting on aggressive capitalist organisations.

The issue here isn’t just with one company. It reflects a wider societal norm. From an early age, children are primed for a life of relentless competition. In India, students choosing science in Grade 11 often forego two years of their youth in the name of preparing for competitive exams. Dummy schools are used to ensure students spend all their time on these exams. They sacrifice their teenage years to chase the dream of getting into top-tier colleges. Parents, too, have accepted this as a way of life, driven by the scarcity of seats and the prestige associated with these institutions.

The Pressure Starts Early

The pressure to excel doesn’t stop after high school. Even in top-tier management schools (B-schools), the competitive intensity persists. Students are expected to push themselves to the limit, often sacrificing basic needs like sleep. It is almost ingrained in the system that these two years are meant to prove you can endure stress, meet demanding timelines, and be prepared for the rigours of the corporate world. When these people get into the real work environment, they consider that this is necessary and required to excel in corporate life. This culture of proving one’s ability to “deliver” sets a tone for what is expected in high-pressure workplaces.

The Illusion of Higher Salaries

This competitive mindset carries over into the workplace. Organisations offer high salaries, but those salaries come at a cost. If one company is offering 6 lakh rupees per year and another offers 10 lakh, many people jump at the higher figure. But what is often overlooked is the real cost behind the pay. The smaller company might offer stability, fixed hours, and less pressure. The larger organisation, meanwhile, demands shorter delivery times and often blurs the line between personal and professional life.

In capitalist organisations, where the goal is profit, the higher salary is justified by getting more work done in less time. It’s simple maths. A smaller company might take 10 days to complete a project, while the larger company completes it in 4. Both have similar charge-out rates, but the latter requires employees to work longer and harder to meet these demands.

Earnings Per Hour: A Realistic View

When you break it down into an hourly rate, the employee at the smaller firm might actually earn more per hour of work. This is only the financial aspect of it, leave aside the consideration of staying away from family and the stress that comes with extra work hours. However, most people don’t consider this. They are blinded by the annual salary figure, focusing on the total amount that will hit their bank account at the end of the year. It’s important to understand this when choosing an employer. The promise of a big salary often hides the reality of intense workloads and long hours.

Refer to the below working to see how the hourly earnings differ between the smaller and larger firms:

Company Offering: Small Company

Annual Salary: ?6,00,000

Average Weekly Hours Worked: 48 hours (Realistic)

Number of Weeks per Year: 50 weeks

Total Hours Worked (per year): 2,400 hours

Earnings per Hour: ?250/hour

Company Offering: Large Organisation

Annual Salary: ?10,00,000

Average Weekly Hours Worked: 70 hours (Conservative)

Number of Weeks per Year: 50 weeks

Total Hours Worked (per year): 3,500 hours

Earnings per Hour: ?285.71/hour

Well-being Programs and The Illusion of Feedback

Many large organisations have employee well-being programs and mental health initiatives, but these are often more about optics than actual care. Such programs also serve as evidence that employees didn’t officially raise issues, as organisations can point to these systems and claim they are working. The reality, however, is much harsher. In most cases, feedback mechanisms in these organisations are far from anonymous. Employees are often aware that giving critical feedback can lead to repercussions unless they are already planning to leave the organisation. The blurred lines between personal and professional life, especially with the rise of remote work, further complicate these issues.

When working from home, the distinction between "work hours" and "personal time" can disappear entirely. This flexibility, though marketed as a perk, often means employees are always "on," with no clear boundaries. It makes it easier for organisations to demand more from their workforce without officially extending working hours.

Normalising Overwork in Capitalist Organisations

Extreme capitalist organisations have normalised this overwork culture. Voices of concern have been raised in the past, but they seldom lead to significant change. These companies have systems in place that make it difficult to prove overwork. Timesheets may not allow employees to record more than 8 hours a day, even if they are working longer. Recently, a company announced a five-day break for employee well-being (and also marketed it: 15-19 August; with many employees also posting about it); it doesn’t mean the work stops. Employees may still be working, but they won’t be allowed to log those hours, leaving no evidence of overwork.

Calls for regulatory inquiries into such practices are understandable, but I do not expect much to come of them. The systems in place make it difficult to prove anything. Official communications and records will show that everything is by the book, and anything outside of that will be deemed unofficial. Furthermore, these organisations create a significant amount of employment. Regulators, aware of the country’s unemployment issues, are unlikely to push too hard against them except a possible eyewash reprimand or a political matter erupting out of it leaving the main point out of focus.

Blue-Collar Workers: A Similar Struggle

This isn’t just a problem for white-collar workers. Blue-collar workers, too, face similar challenges. In the summer, construction workers toil in unbearable heat, handling metal bars without proper safety gear. Even safety norms are flouted by the workers themselves, as it is nearly impossible to wear protective gear in such extreme conditions. In factories, workers aren’t paid overtime, and records are manipulated to save costs. The fear of losing their job keeps them from speaking out.

Physical and Mental Health Matter Equally

The point I am trying to make is that health is twofold—physical and mental. Both need to be respected in the workplace. However, this respect is often missing in many organisations today.

Increasing Employability for Job Choice

What’s the solution then? One of the most important aspects of employment is the ability to choose where you work. This choice comes from increasing your employability. If you have the right skills and experience, you have the power to choose the kind of job you want, even if it comes with a lower salary. Many people get trapped in jobs they dislike because they lack employability skills or have insufficient financial savings. This forces them to continue working in environments that cause stress simply because they need to meet their EMIs or run their families. Escaping this cycle is not easy, but it starts with investing in skills that give you the freedom to choose your path.

The Cost of Capitalism

Nothing in life is free. When you enjoy something that is free, such as content on social media, remember that you are the product. What I see more and more on social media is a demand for high-performance culture, often associated with toxic work environments and mental abuse. But the truth is, many want to earn more while working less, which doesn’t align with the reality of how pay structures work. As long as capitalism prevails, this is unlikely to change.

In a capitalist economy, employers need to make more profits to pay higher salaries. This would be different in a socialist system, where income inequality is minimal and only basic needs are met. However, even this would not be acceptable to the very same people. But in capitalism, the rich live easier lives, and the poor struggle. These are the facts of capitalism and something we must accept if our outlook remains capitalist, which is not likely to change.

My Thoughts

Finally, while I sympathise deeply with Anna’s family and hope such tragedies never repeat, we must be realistic. If you find yourself in a similar situation, don’t expect a magical turnaround. These organisations are built on these practices. Many of my colleagues working in such environments claim to be happy, and maybe they are. But if you are not, you must decide what is more important for you.

If the cost of change is the life of someone, it is an unaffordable cost. No job, career, or ambition is worth sacrificing one’s life. And if, even after such tragic events, there is no real change, then it calls for deeper introspection. It may be time for affected individuals to take appropriate decisions about their own lives and well-being.

In times of such hardship, there is a song that I would recommend for anyone feeling lost or trapped by the pressures around them. It’s an unconventional piece, not in the specific context but can be inferred. Here’s the link: https://youtu.be/gkds6yVdDLI?si=StcjYgtLu6XIImyF. For those affected by toxic work cultures or personal struggles, listening to such music can provide a moment of clarity, offering the strength to take control and make choices that protect their well-being.

Drastic change is unlikely to happen on its own, but the responsibility to make that change lies with each of us. These are just my personal perspectives, and I welcome your thoughts.