Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Key_Abbreviations658 t1_ix0aacz wrote

Reply to comment by NihiliSloth in Workplace brain scanning to make employees happier and more productive by BotJunkie

But why would they care, why is that an expectation?

1

NihiliSloth t1_ix0agke wrote

I never said it was an expectation. I was replying to their comment “wow, once this tech begins mainstream use companies are going to realize that workers had a real reason to be miserable.”

My point being, they already know. It’s not news. They don’t care.

1

Key_Abbreviations658 t1_ix0bs9y wrote

But why would not caring make somebody a psychopath?

0

NihiliSloth t1_ix0cmc9 wrote

Psychopaths only care about themselves. They don’t care about who they step on or hurt to get what they want. People who are considered very wealthy and people who are at the head of companies like CEO’s actually do a lot of messed up things to get to those positions. They don’t get those positions being nice and giving to employees. They get there by pushing people to their limits, making budget cuts, firing people, and on top of that, they take away from employees to line their pockets. They will cut funding from important programs just so they can make more.

How is that not being a psychopath? If they cared about their employees and their well-being, don’t you think they would push for their rights, benefits, and fair wages instead of taking them away?

1

Key_Abbreviations658 t1_ix0evbn wrote

There are billions of people in this world that I don’t really care about, many employees do not give a shit about their ceo and many ceos do not care about employees the relationship is strictly transactional in those cases.

0

CodingLazily t1_ix1zg4e wrote

Seems like poor wording or definitions. Psychopaths in this instance are people who manipulate society and it's members to selfish ends. You can have transactions and be a reasonable person. You could even negotiate the terms of the transaction to decide the value. But when your whole thing is "How can I convince everyone who works for me to give up their rights to restroom breaks and union representation" you become a manipulative prick and a burden on healthy society. You're not negotiating, you're actively trying to brainwash people and mess with their emotions. It's easy to control people who need the work, after all. "Oh, your family is out of a home if you get laid off? Sounds like the solution is that you need to increase productivity so that doesn't happen." That's pretty close to psychopathic rationale. Again, it's manipulation, not negotiation. It's taking advantage of rather than coming to an agreement. And the fact that upper management will literally never see the peons they employ makes it that much easier to disconnect from humanity.

It's not an expectation that they care how good your life is going, but I think it should be reasonable to expect that they don't actively try to ruin it.

I think that's the point he's trying to make anyways. I don't like being so pessimistic myself.

1

Key_Abbreviations658 t1_ix2ami2 wrote

i genuinely don't know why i am continuing this as i don't care for any of these people all that much but i guess stopping now would be weird but in my opinion what you described was not trying to ruin lives but trying to just squeeze as much productivity out of the agreement as possible it is unfortunate that in many cases the reality's of employment make responding difficult but this is an unfortunate world, the only responses that i can think of are unions or seeking a job elsewhere but both are easier said than done and both don't always work out.

0

MINIMAN10001 t1_ix5lzge wrote

>According a study dating back to 2010, there were at least three times as many psychopaths in executive or CEO roles than in the overall population. But more recent data found it’s now a much higher figure: 20 percent.

Source

Because studies are showing upwards of 20x the general population rate of psychopaths in the position of CEOs on an upwards trend.

1

Key_Abbreviations658 t1_ix6glov wrote

That’s about 1 in 5 on the very highest end and 3 out of a hundred for the initial estimate you gave.

1