Especially in a Catholic business which promotes itself as an apostolate?
A business is a business.
Simply because a business represents itself as a Catholic business does not necessarily make it so. Disparity between a company’s mission statement and business practice can erode as the business expands and management is handed on to others.
It happens with religious institutions, evidenced by the decline of religious vocations in some cases. I know of one instance involving the actual suppression of an institution, as was the case of an order of religious women associated with the World Apostolate of Fatima in New Jersey a few years ago. Of course a religious community is not a business, yet I cite the example as evidence that even the most well intentioned organization can derail from its original purpose.
Avoid greed in all of it’s forms. (I think that’s in the Gospel.)
If the mission statement, written or unwritten, involves the idea that the business is an apostolate by nature, one assumes business practices would be ethical as well as equitable in the treatment of employees, not to mention customers. In such a case employees would naturally be considered as assets, even partners in the company’s mission.
However, when an employer views their employees as an expense rather than an asset, while considering the employee to be inferior to themselves as regards such things as social status, education and other class distinctions, the employee intuits these attitudes. In religious based business, differences of religious opinion or expression may also be a contributing factor of contempt by an employer.
Examples of an employer viewing an employee as an expense.
I know of a retired gentleman who worked for a Catholic company for many years. He developed cancer and successfully completed chemo therapy, rarely missing aa day of work. Shortly after his treatment and beating the cancer, he injured his back at work. Because of this he incurred a workman’s compensation claim. Within a short time he was terminated as an insurance risk. He was later employed by another company. The man is in his 70’s.
In another instance, a woman with functional mental disabilities was terminated after filing a workman’s compensation claim due to a minor back injury while at work. The company refused to pay her medical bill because she delayed making the claim. The woman went to the Doctor and the Doctor ruled it a workman’s comp issue since the injury happened on the job. The company had no policy in place for making workplace injury claims. Which begs the question, is that in itself a violation, or is the employer covering up unsafe work conditions?
In this company, there are cases of other employees who have been terminated for whatever cause and who sought unemployment compensation yet were fought against as well. Once again, one or two of these were people with dissabilities.
When an employer fails to give fair and equitable compensation and benefits, it is pretty evident that the employee represents an expense rather than an asset. The delay or elimination of periodic reviews and raises, which is a direct infraction against their own policy, is another huge indicator of viewing the employee as an expense. (Discrimination issues and non-compliance with company policy are lawsuits just waiting to happen.)
Toxic effects: gossip, mockery, bullying, malicious rumours, disrespectful behaviour.
In the company I am referring to, this behavior is clear evidence of management’s view of employees as inferior to themselves, not only when they participate in this nefarious conduct, but encourage the climate and either tolerate it or condone it in other employees.
Aligned with this activity is the complete lack of confidentiality regarding employee’s performance, personal faults, health issues, or employment status, past and present. Implementing excessive surveilance tactics, without notification, as well as the use of informers in the workplace all combine to create an atmosphere of mistrust and hostility.
The disconnect between the charity of the Gospel and the evangelical mission, not to mention just plain ethical business practice is astonishing.
In just about every case of involuntary termination of an employee, the nature of the termination, and any suspicion regarding the employee’s conduct are publicly discussed in this company. For instance, one woman was accused of theft after her termination, yet had never been approached about it while employed, instead she was fired for an argument with a co-worker.
In the same company, another employee was terminated after having been excused to go home because of illness, and instead went to a bar. (He is an alcoholic, hence the bar may have been his home.) The terms and reasons for his termination were widely discussed and joked about amongst management and employees alike. It is not only unethical conduct, it is illegal.
So how does a workplace become toxic?
A number of factors contribute in creating a poisonous environment:
- increased economic stress (or greed)
- consistent and unresolved conflict in the workplace
- high number of people with personal agendas (especially in upper management)
- poor management practices
- failure to have a set emloyee policy, or to abide by it
While money is at the core of this issue, people are the ones who perpetuate this poisonous cycle. Remember that a toxic organization cannot function without a toxic leader.
The Toxic leader(s)
A toxic leader fuels poisonous environments. Typically, he/she has most of the following characteristics:
- unreasonable/unrealistic productivity targets and unattainable goals
- doesn’t listen
- expects employees to work when ill
- talks to employees only when he/she needs something
- aggressive/pushy
- narrowminded
- poor communicator
- cold, distant or overly reactive and emotional
- inconsistent, unpredictable – mixed messages
- usually avoids emotionally charged situations (conflict, discipline) - Toxic Workplaces
Share This
