WHY are there SO many crappy work environments? Rant, please chime in

I'm 48 and have worked full-time for the last 25 years or so. I have worked in many different industries and fields, and I have held a variety of positions.

At this age and at this stage in my life where I am now a senior in my field, I can honestly say there are more toxic and crappy work environments led by crappy and toxic bosses than I care to even think about.

I have had about five or six abusive bosses in my career -- bosses who have been threatened by my level of competence, my intelligence and my ability to not only succeed, but to thrive and expand in my role.

I have met far too many insecure, inept bosses who somehow managed to climb the ladder without being fully qualified OR without having good managerial skills, who have wreaked havoc on all their underlings.

I have also worked in environments whereby the executive management team is horrific. Where they take advantage of all employees, pay them as little as possible and stretch them as thin as possible, without a care in the world and without conscience.

So, WHY are there SO many horrific work environments out there?

Is it because people are generally crappy people in this world, and therefore, work environments are the result of people's general crappiness???

On PC, I hear more work horror stories that point to this reality of the working world.

Then, on top of it all, IF you are being abused, or IF you are being overworked, taken advantage of, stepped on, or any number of circumstances, you are NOT allowed to stand up for your rights to human decency, respect and to a healthy work environment. If you do, you're deemed as a troublemaker. So basically you're expected to lie down, shut up, and take the abuse.

I think this may all be leading to my working for myself one day again. Not now, not yet, but perhaps in five years.

If you happen to have the opposite, you are very lucky, and in my experience, that is very rare. This is basically a rant, but please feel free to chime in.

I recall, years ago, hearing about the "Peter Principle":

"The Peter principle is a concept in management theory formulated by Laurence J. Peter in which the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate's performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and "managers rise to the level of their incompetence." (from Wikipedia)

Very interesting!!!

I think most work environments favor the executives and top leaders. Respect is expected (almost enforced) up the hierarchy and disrespect is acceptable down the hierarchy. As an employee, I have been expected to accept that my management 'knows better' and not question things. There is no reason to assume a manager knows more than an employee working on the front lines. In much of the cases, the employees have a clearer detail picture of what will work, but we are forced to adhere to decisions made by managers only because the old rules of the workplace assume the manager knows more.

The corporate hierarchical structure also seems to create rivalry, politics, and power struggles. Managers and team members feel a need to fend for themselves, usually at the expense of others.

I would like to find a workplace that is more collaborative where everyone has a say. It would be refreshing to work in a company were everyone felt they were in the 'same boat' and working towards the same goals. Maybe there are a few workplaces like that somewhere.

Peter Northouse wrote a great book about leadership styles, Leadership: Theory and Practice. It's a great book. Each chapter is about a different leadership style, explained with case studies and research followed by real life case study examples of how that leadership style looks in the real workplace. It's used as a textbook in business classes (I took a business class and learned a lot about the leadership styles of my previous supervisors and it helped me learn why I failed to thrive under each of those supervisors' leadership styles that didn't match my work style or personality).

You can find each chapter of his book here.

Types of power that managers yield in the workplace, from Northouse' book:

Bases of Power -- French and Raven identify five bases of power.

Referent Power – Based on follower’s identification and liking for the leader. A school teacher who is adored by her students has referent power.

Expert Power – Based on followers’ perceptions of the leader’s competence. A tour guide who is knowledgeable about a foreign country.

Legitimate Power – Associated with having status or formal job authority. A judge who administers sentences in the courtroom exhibits legitimate power.

Reward Power – Derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others. A supervisor who gives rewards to employees who work hard is using reward power.

Coercive Power – Derived from having the capacity to penalize or punish others. A coach who sits players on the bench for being late to practice is using coercive power.

In my business course we had to take this quiz to help us figure out what our own leadership and follower-ship styles are, to help us figure out what work environment and what kind of manager we thrive under or fail under. It was really interesting! Happy reading!!

Citing the above styles of power managers yielded in my former workplaces, I worked under many managers who yielded coercive power:

1. Call center manager who put me in a 2-week disciplinary plan as punishment for going to human resources to complain that he showed favoritism to my colleague who was promoted to an enrollment director position for an online university b/c he liked her, despite her lack of experience since he didn't like me as a person.

2. School principal who fired me after I reported being assaulted by a middle school student during the specialist class I was teaching.

3. School president who fired me because I complained about the middle school boys punching holes in the school walls near the specialist classroom I taught in fr a long-term sub assignment, and they also sent me inappropriate email messages where they told me to "go f---- yourself Ms. Blanche."

4. Radio station program director fired me because I reported to human resources that I was sexually harassed by the guy who board trained me for the weekend engineer shift, who was hired by the program director himself.

5. Vice president of a company fired me after I told him that I would not participate in the office "Margarita Mondays" or "Whiskey Fridays" which required me to mix alcoholic drinks for him and his fellow v.p.'s ( I only did this once, the first time I was asked, b/c I didn't want to lose my job, but...he still fired me when I wouldn't do it again for him and his Mad Men cronies).

Ideally, I want to work for a manager who yields referent and reward power.

That seems like a load of injustices.... I'm very sorry for how you got treated.That's just not right. People should be able to stand up for themselves in a work environment without negative repercussions.

@golden_eve

Good discussion. I agree that the work environment has gotten very toxic these days. There were always issues but it has gotten way off balance in my opinion. I won’t even look for another job because I think I would just find more of the same when it comes to personalities of the people. I pick and choose my battles. I don’t tolerate abuse but I have definitely endured plenty of nonsense. I think if you want to move up in a company you have to be very comfortable or at least very tolerant of all the toxicity. Most people probably just don’t have the stomach for it. Oh and I recently read that a fairly good number of CEOs are likely psychopaths. Don’t quote me on that but that was my understanding of the article I read. Nothing against psychopaths. I can see why that personality type could handle today’s leadership environment.

It is a boatload of injustices. I didn't even go into the other examples I experienced of coercive power from toxic former managers.

I agree. We should be able to protect ourselves in our workplace without negative repercussions. But as the history of the human resources dept. shows, companies have those depts to PROTECT themselves from their own employees. It's just astounding to me, that employees have to whistle blow or file a lawsuit to get justice.

Look at this Walmart employee's story. He was fired from his job, and Walmart owed him overtime, but Walmart won't list dates on their employees paychecks. Why? So that the employee CANT TRACK HOW MUCH WALMART PAYS THEM AND WHEN. Walmart is evil incarnate. All the big chain stores are. He sued Walmart and was awarded millions. But do you think if you look at a Walmart employee's check today, you'll see the required changes to those paychecks? Of course not.

Workers Sue Walmart For Manipulating Employee Classification To Deny Them Overtime Pay – ThinkProgress

You cannot...CANNOT...trust your employer to have your best interest at heart.

I could create an entirely new thread in the Work and Careers forum detailing the ways the U.S. gov't is set up as a coercive power (Northouse) to punish its citizens' when those citizens civil rights are violated. Maybe I will...

@Sisabel, thank you for your input.... I know you personally have endured a ton of crap at work.... yes, you gotta pick your battles, I suppose, but also not take the abuse.

It makes me so sad that this is what's happening.... more and more toxic work environments. I am sure that some out there are healthy and good, but like I wrote above, in my experience, that's been rare.

Yes, agreed with all points you've made. It is astounding to me too. Maybe you should create that thread!

Personally I think there is a power imbalance.

Most people at the bottom seem to think that the playing field is level and that people get picked for things via merit. But I feel that it is more a big club. People get picked for jobs by who they know, what the people they know can do for the company / organization... etc. I do think that good jobs now are rewards that are handed out for something else. It is only the little people who don't know it. Little people are allowed to stay and work as long as they don't make trouble. The University you went to is, imho, just a sign of how likely you are to have riches or know people who can benefit the organization. Remember the college scandal that came out recently. You never would have believed such a thing was going on. But it is and I suspect it is happening in the workplace. Good workplaces go to schools like Harvard and hire a bunch of no nothing kids and pay them tons of money. In the hopes that one of them will be the son or daughter of a senator. But when they figure out your NOT powerful, they will find a reason to fire you.

All of this points to a very scary idea but one I think employers have already figured out... that even if 50% of their employees do a poor job, the business will still thrive. So why not use the "jobs" as ways to achieve other things. Need an inspector's approval a lot? Make sure he nephew works for you etc. Need a Judge's favorable opinion...hire their former law clerks. But what about the 200 or so regular people out there who need work? Well, the employers will hire them for a bit but eventually when they want someone else working for them they will come up with a reason to get rid of them... and there are so many.

I think the only think real people can do is
(1) start their own business.
(2) work for the government.
(3) start rumors that they are connected.
(4) keep their heads down and work for as long as possible and keep expenses as low as possible.