Skip to main content

mental health mondays [rewind] :: burn baby burn

this was initially a labour day themed post a couple of years ago, but i figured that, with a lot of businesses in the home stretch to their year end, with only nine weeks left to make sales numbers, set budgets, determining how close to [or far from] your business is on major issues like inventory, etc. there can be a lot of stress at this time. so here's a little piece about the state of stress, with links for you to evaluate your own stress level.

but the main reason i'm reposting this is because next week, i want to do a follow-up/ second part looking at techniques that can and have been employed to deal with workplace stress.  

*

a friend on facebook recently shared this article about how our thinking on the advances of the modern labour may not be quite so substantial as we're lead to believe. in fact, when labourers first began to organize and demand that employers change their policies regarding hours worked, minimum holidays and safety standards, what they were actually endeavouring to do was reclaim rights that had been guaranteed to most workers before the industrial revolution. so when you hear talk of how far things have come, keep in mind that the starting point has been arbitrarily chosen to fit that narrative. look a little further back and you might find that labourers worked very hard, but often for only part of the year, or worked long days because they had a substantial break in the middle to consume their lunch.

the article linked above itself includes a link to this study, showing that one in three americans are chronically overworked. it's hardly unique in its findings [and increasingly applies to countries besides america as a mania for austerity and workplace martyrdom spreads through the world like a strain of virulent diarrhea]. many scientists have pointed to the costs to the health system and to productivity because of the increasing pressure to work harder, not smarter, costs that include sick days or sick leave, insurance payouts and turnover. but here's the million dollar question for labour day: if it's such a massive, well-researched, well-understood problem, why is noone doing anything about it?

the one in three figure is a significantly larger proportion than workers exposed to asbestos who became  sick and governments have stepped in to force companies to set aside funds for their victims and to ban the material in order to prevent future illnesses. is this just another case of a mental disorder being judged as inferior because it lacks physical proof?

well yes. and no. in fact, burnout does present with physical symptoms, which can include hypertension, insomnia, heart disease and more. so chronic stress actually has a leg up on other mental disorders, in that it can be easier to prove. [at the very least, someone with those problems would be counselled to reduce their stress as part of a treatment program, even if it couldn't be identified as the primary cause.] the issue is not with proving the effect, but with assigning responsibility. i say "responsibility" rather than "blame", because i fully believe that a majority of managers and workplace supervisors don't want to cause stress- it makes their lives more difficult- but that the constant pressure to perform better, to bring in more money, to save on costs and to innovate is so ingrained in the western industrial mindset that it's pretty challenging to think of outside solutions. furthermore, our records of what life has been like since the industrial revolution are considerably more detailed than records of peasant life say 600 years ago, which can make it difficult to tell how things were managed before the era of longer work days and severely restricted vacations.

what complicates things further is that most moderate-to-large corporations are trapped in a perpetual panic cycle, having their managerial direction put under scrutiny every three months in the form of quarterly reports to investors and/ or directors. this mitigates against the possibility of larger, long-term planning. the benefits of reducing workplace stress may not be seen over such a short term, which makes them a difficult sell, especially for companies faced with declining or stagnant profits.

finally, most of the information on how to deal with workplace burnout focuses on actions that can be taken by the employee. which might be helpful for one individual at a time, but there's little available guidance for companies even if they've come to the decision that they do want to make changes for the better. and if you're starting a business, there's even less information on how not to cause employee burnout in the first place. so immediately, the problem is being treated as something outside the norm, a freak possibility that a company might encounter, even though statistics don't bear that out.

those who have gone through burnout or work-related periods of extreme stress can tell you that the pressure it exerts on mind and body can be like a toxin. the solution, then, i'm convinced, is to treat it as one. best if corporate leaders step forward to make changes themselves, but, in the absence of any short-term incentive to do so, i personally don't see that as likely. which leaves us with the possibility of government intervention, always problematic, but proven effective.

or public insurrection.

want to test your own burnout levels? here's a quiz from psychology today. it's long enough to be somewhat in depth and separates your results into areas where you're doing fine, areas where there are some signs of problems and areas where you need to pay serious attention. you'll need to pay for the in depth analysis, but the test and the summarised results i've described are free and do not require registration. if you're feeling stressed for time, there's a simpler, faster test [although not professionally vetted] that you can take here.

more like space friend martin rouge sent me a link to the service industry version of the psychology today burnout test. given that the service industry has the highest rates of burnout, that makes total sense.

so those of you in the service industry can go here.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

i agree, smedley [or, smokers totally saved our planet in 1983]

so this conversation happened [via text, so i have evidence and possibly so does the canadian government and the nsa].

dom and i were trying to settle our mutual nerves about tomorrow night's conversion screening, remembering that we've made a fine little film that people should see. which is just about exactly what dom had said when i responded thusly:

me :: i agree smedley. [pauses for a moment] did you get that here?

dom :: no?

me :: the aliens who were looking at earth and then decided it wasn't worth bothering with because people smoked even though it was bad for them?
come to think of it, that might mean that smokers prevented an alien invasion in the seventies.

dom :: what ?!?!?

me :: i've had wine and very little food. [pause] but the alien thing was real. [pause.] well, real on tv.

dom :: please eat something.

of course, i was wrong. the ad in question ran in 1983. this is the part where i would triumphantly embed the ad from youtube, except that the governmen…

making faces :: bette davis lips

the inscription on bette davis' grave reads "she did it the hard way", which should tell you something about the kind of life she led. indeed, she was known as a fighter, taking on studio executives at a time when that simply wasn't done, unless you "never wanted to work in this town again". even when she lost a legal battle against warner brothers that forced her to see out her contract, she was able to parlay her return to the screen into better roles that secured her legacy as one of the greatest icons of the screen. she was the first woman ever to garner ten nominations for best actress at the academy awards and the first woman ever to be president of the academy of motion picture arts and sciences [the people who give out the awards].

that bette davis ever became a movie star, let alone one of the biggest movie stars in the world, is kind of remarkable. after all, she wasn't conventionally beautiful, although her face was certainly unforgettable. …

making faces :: eyes without a face

these are indeed strange times, my friends. no one living has ever seen anything like this because there has never been anything close to the current set of circumstances in the modern world. sure, people will make the comparison with the spanish flu epidemic of 1918-20 but the fact is that things were very different then and those differences are not limited to the technology we now have available. that has an effect, of course, but consider the other factors: the world had just been through the most destructive war in its history. aside from the fact that millions had died, millions returned home injured in body and mind and there was little in the way of a social safety net to protect any of them. in many countries, "peace" was hardly peaceful because the political fallout of the great war plunged many nations into civil wars. so in that way, we're in a better position now because we don't have an entire generation of people walking around who are already severel…