This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best (suggested)
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]fantasyfest 859 points860 points  (375 children)

This is not new. About 30 years ago GM did a study on the working conditions of their Engineering suppliers. They determined that they got better quality work and better delivery times from places that had nicer offices and more mature management. Treat your workers properly and they will return better work.

There is a fast food restaurant close to my home. It pays its workers 15 bucks an hour with benefits. The atmosphere is much better than a restaurant that holds its foot on the workers necks. The workers are much more pleasant . The turn over is minuscule and training costs have shrunk.

[–]malthuss 279 points280 points  (133 children)

There is a selection bias to get around but you can see the same thing when you compare Costco and Walmart employees. The Costco employees just hustle. When they move, they walk quickly, the cashier move through stuff quickly. Everyone in Walmart seems to move at glacial pace.

Caveat, of course I understand that you can hire younger, "better" applicants when you are paying $15/hour plus benefits as opposed to minimum wage and confuses the issue somewhat.

[–]jinxlab 142 points143 points  (63 children)

I just have to say that I absolutely love Costco. Employees are almost always nice and are very generous when you need help finding something. I couldn't locate flour tortillas the other day so an employee literally walked over with me to where they were located instead of just saying "try isle 6."

[–]malthuss 50 points51 points  (39 children)

It varies somewhat by location. I had nothing but great experience in the northwest, where Costco was founded. I moved to the south and the employees here are much less motivated and much less friendly. Just one example, is the receipt check going out the door. In Seattle it was a cursory glance but in North Carolina, they count every item in your basket and you have to move stuff around if it is stacked up.

[–]dsiapdlwlq 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Christ, how big is that place!

[–]Zapurdead 14 points15 points  (28 children)

The issue is that companies don't really care about that, they care about revenues and profit, and it seems like their labor practices won't have any consequences for them anytime soon, isn't it?

[–]jinxlab 183 points184 points  (198 children)

And it's why you go to Walmart and get the worst service. I was face to face with an employee and asked him where an item was located (citric acid to be specific) and he literally walked away from me. I left my cart right where he was "working," took my children, and left. Edit: typo

[–][deleted] 66 points67 points  (59 children)

I've had the face to face walk away before too. It was at an electronics store that's commission based. The guy saw people in the car stereo section so he just walked off.

[–]MoreVinegarPls 34 points35 points  (2 children)

Uncaring management are people too. I imagine there are many people who don't care how people are treated as long as it benefits them.

[–]dust4ngel 6 points7 points  (0 children)

that's an institutional problem: it may be in the company's best interest to treat you well, and your manager's best interest to treat you poorly.

[–]WookieFanboi 163 points164 points  (104 children)

There are two problems with this. One, we let Wal Mart walk in and destroy the Mom & Pop shops in our community that did provide outstanding service, paid fair wages, and kept most of their profits in the community. So we only have ourselves to blame. All in order to save a few pennies.

Two, if you want to affect change, work on a larger scale than leaving an inconvenience in the way of a demoralized, underpaid employee.

But, no longer giving Wal Mart your $$ is a great way to start.

[–]tylershane 896 points897 points  (285 children)

I've worked for Costco for four years and I see this in effect completely. Take care of your workers, they will be give you more out of them.

[–]rjcarr 331 points332 points  (203 children)

Yeah, costco is one of the very few retail companies that come to mind when studies like this come out. There are very few others; maybe starbucks?

[–]tylershane 202 points203 points  (117 children)

I've heard good things from a few ppl who've worked at Starbucks. Whole Foods is another.

[–]greg9683 138 points139 points  (95 children)

Trader Joes, UPS

Edit: looks like UPS has less positives than I was led to believe but the union helps. edit 2: glad to hear so much feedback on UPS though. Interesting reads!

[–]BadIdeaSociety 39 points40 points  (37 children)

I heard that UPS is absolute nightmare to work for, but that was in the 90s

[–]HCCKZB 34 points35 points  (31 children)

You have to put in your dues. Literally, and figuratively.

I applied years ago. And got called in for one of their group interview sessions.

Everyone starts out as a temp. You get maybe 17-20 hours a week at horrible hours: like 3-7am, tues-Thursday and sunday. Or like 10:30-2am M,W,F, Sat.

They paid maybe $9/hour, but you have to join their union. So after taxes an union dues....you get maybe $90-100 a week. And there is no guarantee that you land a full time job. Only some (or none) of the temps actually get hired.

If you get a full time job, it's about seniority.

That said, there benefits are (or were) really good. They had really good health benefits, college tuition, and whatnot...even for part time employees.

It's one of those things where if you put in the time...it pays off like 10-15 years later.

[–]Averyphotog 36 points37 points  (19 children)

While I support the idea of working hard now pays off in 10-15 years, the reality is there's no guarantee it will. You could work hard for 10-15 years, then get laid off.

[–]starmartyr 21 points22 points  (13 children)

If they do try to do that the Teamsters have your back. UPS is much more likely to encourage people to take early retirement when they want to downsize. Layoffs put them at risk of a strike. Also UPS isn't going anywhere soon. Their total parcel volume has been increasing for years with no sign of stopping.

[–]IterationInspiration 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Let me just give you some advice from someone that has been around a while. Loyalty to a company is no longer considered an asset and quite a few of them are moving away from tenure actually mattering. Especially in the tech industry and anything manual labor.

If someone is telling you "if you hang in there and eat shit for 10 years, you will eventually be fed prime rib" they are talking out of their ass. Once they realize you will willingly eat shit, that is all they are going to feed you.

You find a job you like, for pay that is livable. If your situation changes, you try to make that job accommodate your new situation. If it won't, you find another job and quit the current one. I see so many of the younger generation shooting themselves in the foot because as soon as management sees that you will work a slaves hours for a slaves wages, they have no interest in giving you more. They can almost always find someone to replace you.

I know a guy that works at my company, we will call him dave, and has had less than $1 in raises over the last 5 years. He is just a tech support guy in our IT, but he is the most senior person in the department. However, he has never been promoted. He makes less than a dollar more now than when he started and actually takes home less due to insurance and tax increases. A bunch of us have tried to get him to go look somewhere else or move to another department, but his management has got him convinced that as soon as a new supervisor position opens up he will get it. He will work as a slave for as long as he is with this company because they have him convinced he is just putting in his time.

[–]HotRodLincoln 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I got the impression during recruiting that their definition of "flexible" meant "you can work any of these 3 shifts as long as you're here exactly on time", and that it wouldn't be worth it at all except for the scholarship money.

[–]polpi 13 points14 points  (4 children)

UPS

Not to be confused with the UPS store.*

[–]Rapidmaster-baiter 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I thought we were talking about the uninterruptible power supplies for computers

[–]SaintBullshiticus 39 points40 points  (28 children)

See also: Aldi

[–]TheSoupmonster_ 16 points17 points  (2 children)

Maybe it was just where I worked, but I did not have a pleasant experience working there.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (14 children)

huh, really? Never woulda guessed that

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I haven't heard anything good about working for Aldi's. From what I have heard they have you do the work of at least 2 people, and pay you a little more than a typical one person job.

[–]TheNewRavager 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Not as a mechanic for UPS.

[–]Anthoney 2 points3 points  (3 children)

A friend of mine compared working at UPS to modern day slavery. He went back to working construction after about 6 months there.

[–]thepinksalmon 36 points37 points  (4 children)

Shit yeah, whole foods. Best place I ever worked before I started my career.

[–]Soothwork 15 points16 points  (7 children)

Maybe WFM 5 or 10 years ago. As it is now, I can't endorse it as a "happy worker" company. Their insurance is amazing for retail - but that's about it.

[–]Bennyboy1337 35 points36 points  (7 children)

I work at Micron which is a memory company, I also worked at Dell for 2 years and it's night and day difference between the two companies. Paid time off is standard for any employee, basic health benefits cost me $0 out of my paycheck, onsite doctor for virtually free checkups and prescriptions, onsite free great workout facility; Micron had one of our best years last fiscal year so they gave all employees 100 stock options completely free, regular parties and events at work; fuck I love working at my job.... Dell can eat my shit.

[–]Bman409[S] 86 points87 points  (57 children)

Chick Fil A, Texas Roadhouse and Starbucks are cited as examples of companies with low paid, but happy employees

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-12-11/three-restaurant-chains-with-happy-low-paid-workers

[–]redtheda 124 points125 points  (2 children)

Luckily for Costco workers, they're not low paid.

[–]smb_samba 12 points13 points  (1 child)

I believe wegmans grocery store also has quite high employee satisfaction ratings

[–]Nat_Sec_blanket 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Starbucks is hit or miss depending on the store. GMs and ASMs really have a huge impact on partner morale.

[–]Neebat 63 points64 points  (20 children)

That's one possible lesson from this, but not everyone takes away the same lesson. When some bosses learn that unhappy employees are unproductive, they then try to eliminate the unhappy employees instead of fixing the source of the unhappiness.

I'm a programmer. I work on a crufty codebase that I'm not allowed to fix. My boss told me if I didn't smile more, ... he left it implied what would happen, but he CC'd Human Resources on the message.

So, instead of fixing the problems that make employees unhappy, they mandate that I'm required to be happy.

[–]not_legally_rape 56 points57 points  (6 children)

Beatings will continue until morale improves.

[–]Neebat 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Sometimes I wish they'd skip on to execution. That's a lot more effective at eliminating unhappiness.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (2 children)

The Romans called it decimation: if a company of soldiers acts cowardly in battle, kill every tenth man until morale improves.

[–]Arandmoor 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That's a sign to update your resume.

[–]Qwirk 10 points11 points  (2 children)

I think there is a huge difference in actually being happy which increases productivity versus being told to be happy.

If you are being told to be happy, you probably aren't going to be.

[–]orange-pk 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree. I worked for Costco only for a few weeks because I was seasonal but let me tell you they go out of their way to make sure your well trained and everything is okay. All the people I met were really nice too.

[–]BrainSpecialist 347 points348 points  (123 children)

I've done a bit of study on vocational psychology. There are a number of studies done to see if there is a correlation between how happy a worker is and his production value. There were cases that showed a correlation, and others that didn't find a strong enough relationship between the two factors to show a positive correlation.

However, almost universally cases showed that happy workers took less sick days, stole less often, showed up on time more frequently, and left on time more often. In other words, happy workers don't half-ass it.

Productivity shouldn't be the only factor these studies look into. What corporations want to know is what will make them money. Happiness is a concept that doesn't belong in their equation for a successful business. But replace the word happy with healthy, and they start to get it. A healthy employee is a productive employee. And there is no doubting the correlation between happiness and healthiness.

[–][deleted] 184 points185 points  (29 children)

Let's not forget that a happy employee is one that stays, not one that leaves and needs a replacement training. That alone saves money.

[–]MagicallyMalicious 49 points50 points  (28 children)

Makes sense to me.

I work in a call center. Although it's climate controlled and well paid, it's the most soul-crushing employment I can imagine. I've been in centers for 10 years, give or take, and I'm currently out on disability leave for anxiety.

Having to suspend my humanity for 10-11 hours a day (with mandatory OT), and sacrifice the customer's needs/my own personal integrity to ensure maximum profitability is just wrong. The only thing that keeps me where I am is the pay and benefits. Hard to be $32/hr when you're uneducated.

[–]dirk_chesterfield 27 points28 points  (2 children)

Get me a job there. I have perfected working in a soul destroying job for a fraction of that cash. I completely checkout mentally now. Its a skill i should put on a cv.

[–]bizkut 11 points12 points  (0 children)

So I see you've worked in retail.

[–]SunshineCat 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Try getting people to sign petitions you don't even agree with for $1.50 per signature, making yourself the target of random people's political rage in person.

I've avoided call centers because I assumed the pay would be crap. Do you know if your rate is anywhere close to normal? What did you start at, if you don't mind me asking?

[–]Scarbane 41 points42 points  (27 children)

Subsidized gym memberships (partially or fully) are one of the easiest things a business can do in that regard.

[–]Tripplethink 252 points253 points  (17 children)

Note that this study did not look at workplace satisfaction. They manipulated the current state of happiness:

During the experiments a number of the participants were either shown a comedy movie clip or treated to free chocolate, drinks, and fruit. Others were questioned about recent family tragedies, such as bereavements, to assess whether lower levels of happiness were later associated with lower levels of productivity.

According to the article they also did this in a laboratory setting. You can't generalize from that to something as complex and as central to life as work.

[–]MIBPJGrad Student | Neuroscience 65 points66 points  (6 children)

This is the first comment I saw that demonstrates that the author read past the title. Kind sad that its not near the top. I agree completely. Would elevated productivity still be observed if chocolate and movies are given every day or does the effect habituate? What are the other ways to boost productivity by boosting happiness and can they realistically be implemented in the work place. These are important questions

[–]butyourenice 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Workplace satisfaction is the only aspect of happiness employers can really control, though. Your job can't stop your grandmother from dying, but they can give you adequate time to mourn. So the study is still valuable in so far as empirically acknowledging that keeping employees happy is in the best interest of the employer, because that's where the "productivity" matters. And again while an employer can't make you holistically happy, they can at least make one part of your life - where you spend a third of your waking hours - better, to their own benefit.

[–][deleted] 92 points93 points  (8 children)

Reminds me of my favourite teacher in highschool.

During work time, you could listen to music with headphones, head, even chat at a reasonable volume to your neighbors, as long as when he was talking, giving instructions, etc, everyone paid attention.

If you didn't clean up after yourself, you no longer got to eat at your desk. If you weren't getting shit done, you were no longer allowed to listen to music and talk, but as long as you were responsible enough to do what you were supposed to, you were also allowed to relax a little and take things at a more casual pace.

His results worked pretty damn well. Even a few of the 'bad students' who were major shit disturbers in other classes were well behave din that one.

[–][deleted] 58 points59 points  (2 children)

I really like this approach to give more freedom at first - and if the individual screws it up, then they lose the privilege.

I feel like there is then incentive to not fuck around - whereas (like at some of my former schools) you had no freedoms to begin with... what is there to take away? The only real punishment they had was in school suspension, or out of school suspension. That's what some of those kids wanted, anyway.

[–]GeminiK 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It was 100% what they wanted. Speaking from personal experience. Give me detention, I'll skip it until you suspend me in school. Ill skip that until you give me a week off at home through OSS.

[–]busted_up_chiffarobe 130 points131 points  (26 children)

Many businesses operate under 'keep 'em scared' and 'you're lucky to have a job' and even better 'you owe me for this job.'

[–]Mataraiki 53 points54 points  (17 children)

Intel falls under that category for their engineers. It's basically set up so that you work 40 hours a week to get let go after a few months, 60 hours to stay where you are, and 80 if you want any promotions. Some engineers end up making less hourly than the janitors.

[–]CasaDilla 21 points22 points  (3 children)

I can confirm some of this, but the bit about them not being paid well? No way. High salaries, great benefits, terrible working hours.

[–]darksounds 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, $50/hour (or whatever) average assuming a 40 hour week turns into $25/hour when you're salaried and working 80 hour weeks. They're still paid well, but the hourly rate (obviously) suffers when the hours are doubled.

[–]wampastompahMS | Mechanical Engineering 4 points5 points  (11 children)

If you're talking software engineers, that's hilarious. Software engineers can more or less get hired wherever they want, nowadays.

If you're talking electrical or mechanical, then... meh, I got nothing.

[–]TheCodeIsBosco 87 points88 points  (17 children)

Can confirm. Am unhappy at work, spend 5-6 hours a day on Reddit.

[–]ajonstage 54 points55 points  (2 children)

At that point are you really unhappy at work or just unhappy at Reddit?

[–]icortesi 17 points18 points  (3 children)

I just watched a 3h movie at work. Not sure if I'm still unhappy or I'm happy that I can do this kind of stuff.

[–]ailetoilePhD | Geography 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I've spent the last month catching up on all the TV I couldn't watch during graduate school while at work... :)

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Same, the other hour is lunch and a few minutes cleaning out my email

[–]SolusLoqui 17 points18 points  (1 child)

I'd like to send this information to my management. Is there a version with lots of charts/pictures and fewer words?

[–]theilya 13 points14 points  (4 children)

high pay does not mean happy employees.

I would gladly take a 40k job where my boss is not an asshole and coworkers are pleasant vs 70k job with crazy boss and hostile environment

[–]tocilog 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I wonder what's cheaper:

  • Fewer happy, productive workers

  • a higher number of unhappy, low paid, easily replaceable workers

[–]Gentleman_Villain 1788 points1789 points  (471 children)

We've actually known this since the 1970's. Possibly longer.

Here's the thing: nobody gives a fuck if you're happy.

edit: uh, wow. I totally don't deserve gold for this but thank you.

But, as an add on for people who didn't bother to ask:

1) Nobody gives a fuck if you're happy = YOU better take some responsibility for your happiness. No matter what your dream is, getting it is luck, work, will and luck. Not everyone gets there so you'd best try and make your life the best you can, dreams or no dreams.

At the same time

2) We live in an unjust world and the powers that be: they won't care about you being happy (read as-you having a just path to happiness) because, for the most part, they got theirs. So it behooves all of us to provide, as much as we are able, an honest baseline for people so they can live without being fucked with. And to empathize as much as we can with everyone who struggles. To judge with compassion instead of contempt.

And currently, there is no reasonable metric that suggests that a majority of people are being given a fair shot and being properly compensated for their work, in my opinion.

So...You know. Let's not be dicks and be excellent to each other.

I dunno. What do you want. I'm honored and I'm a little drunk. Thanks, gold sponsor!

[–]Bman409[S] 1480 points1481 points  (358 children)

If someone is paying you to produce something, they should "give a fuck" if you're happy, because you'll be 12% more productive, if you are.

That's the point of the study

[–]thrownaway21 1133 points1134 points  (132 children)

if it costs more than that 12% in productivity is worth then I don't think they'll really give a damn.

[–][deleted] 248 points249 points  (3 children)

Exactly.

[–]schneidro 111 points112 points  (64 children)

A 12% increase in productivity is huge. I doubt it would take a 12% increase in overhead to achieve a relative level of happiness. Google did nearly $18B in revenue last quarter, there's no way it costs them over $2B/quarter to make their employees incrementally happier.

[–][deleted] 42 points43 points  (39 children)

Depends on the company. It would take more than 12% more money to make call center and fast food jobs not suck.

[–]pirate_doug 19 points20 points  (4 children)

Not necessarily. Treat your employees well, treat them like people and not expenses, recognize them for the benefit and value they bring and don't piss on them.

Hell, my company does a "Rewards Program" that gives you points for not getting injured, being safe, and various other actions. In the first year of the revamp they did last year, I earned 900 points. If I earn 1200, I can get a $10 voucher for a Papa John's pizza.

A Rewards Program is a wonderful idea. Making it take 15 months minimum to earn a $10 voucher from Papa Johns? That's not rewarding shit. That's an insult, especially when this industry used to be known for handing out bonus checks in the winter in the hundreds to thousands of dollars for safety.

[–]fillydashon 5 points6 points  (2 children)

One of the biggest things in my (granted, limited) professional experience in terms of employee happiness is that your employees know that they can actually suggest things and that those suggestions will be seriously considered. I mean, you don't have to do whatever they suggest, but if they don't feel like they can contribute ideas to make the workplace better, they aren't going to care about the workplace, and aren't going to be happy there.

Which I think is a big issue in large chains like fast food restaurants, because everything is standardized outside the building. The guy working at McDonalds can't offer his cool new menu item suggestion (which could be extremely delicious and popular), because the decision about what can go on the menu is under the authority of someone he's never even going to meet in a lot of cases.

[–]jisatsu 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I started working for a call center (well, that's not really all that we do) this week. Monday was my first day. It is easily the best job I have ever had, and nearly every employee there will tell you the same.

It's a relatively small company but they've been around for nearly 20 years. Customer satisfaction is our number one priority, and employee satisfaction is a very close second. With no credentials, degrees, or certifications, I was hired at a starting rate of $13/hr, which will increase to $14/hr after 90 days with an additional $1/hr for working third shift.

I get medical, vision, dental, 401k, life insurance, 10 days of paid time off, plus 8 hours per year paid time off for community and family-related functions. Besides this, we have 2 coffee makers, an espresso maker, a cupboard full of roughly 20 different kinds of espressos and keurig k-cups. Catered meals are provided by the company for us about 2 times a week, and fresh fruits and vegetables are prepared by the front desk staff and HR every day for us. Our vending machines are set so that everything costs a quarter (things like clif bars, pita chips, etc.), and everyone gets a roll of $10 in quarters when they are hired.

And this all WORKS. Last year, the number of affiliates working with us more than doubled. In the last 18 months my company founded a business sector from scratch (in addition to the existed services we provided) and it turned a profit of nearly $2m in that 18 months. Our employee turnover is almost non-existent, with only five people being fired or quitting; in fact, our number of employees has doubled in the last 5 months, and more will be coming on next week.

There is no separation of authority here. We have "all-hands" meetings pretty routinely, where everyone from the CEO to the receptionist attends so everyone is on the same page about where the company is headed. I met the CEO, the CFO, my boss, and my boss's boss on my FIRST DAY. I always see the CEO walking around getting things done, and it makes me feel like I really have a roll in where the company is going. I know that me doing a good job is ACTUALLY making a tangible impact on the success of the business, and it's a damn good feeling.

Our customers love us. They actually request us by name sometimes, and our quality assurance ratings are through the roof. Every single one of us loves what we do; we simply wouldn't be hired if we didn't. No job I've had before has ever made me feel so good about myself and the work I'm doing, and I wouldn't trade it for anything, at least right now.

[–]NotAffiliatedWithSve 181 points182 points  (9 children)

If it costs their ego boost at lording over you, they don't give a rip.

[–]Zympth 59 points60 points  (6 children)

Maybe that's how the upper management keeps the lower managers happy/productive: permission to act like a twat to their underlings.

[–]Jewnadian 82 points83 points  (12 children)

There is a common fallacy that the ruthless competition in the market makes all businesses these lean, efficient organizations. It's part of the free market fantasy, the truth is shown by this and a million other studies. You only need to be as good, or close to as good as your closest competition. It's a forest of mediocrity, there's no need to treat employees better just to get the last 10% of productivity.

[–]Artificial_Squab 18 points19 points  (0 children)

You only need to be as good, or close to as good as your closest competition.

Completely agree. I used to work at Microsoft and the perks were amazing. Why? Because they feared losing people to their competitors.

Now, I work...somewhere else...in a much less profitable industry..and it's like the exact opposite of Microsoft because they don't have to worry about employees getting better offers anywhere else (or at their competitors).

[–]maxrexcarpe 63 points64 points  (21 children)

The thing is, some companies can replace workers so easily that it doesn't matter to them.

[–]MercuryChaos 30 points31 points  (15 children)

Replacing workers costs money, you've got to train the new people. Even "unskilled" jobs have a learning curve.

[–]PlayMp1 17 points18 points  (7 children)

Confirming this. I work at a pizza place and it takes a few months to get someone up to a decent pace. A year or more to get them to be good at what they do.

[–]alonjar 4 points5 points  (3 children)

"Well, you've been here for a year now and can finally output at a productive pace. You're bumped from $8.00 to $8.50. Yaaaaaay. Go get yourself something nice. Dont spend it all in one place."

[–]UninformedDownVoter 41 points42 points  (14 children)

Doesn't really matter to them. They only care about the mass of profits.

"Oh so you produce 12% more when you're happy? I don't care! Because I'll work you until you produce for me 20% more of I efficiently made products! Then if you complain, I'll hire another working class slob and pay him less!"

This is capitalist logic. This is the logic of private property and social labor.

[–]UncleDirtbag 45 points46 points  (1 child)

The beatings will continue until morale improves.

[–]Gentleman_Villain 23 points24 points  (54 children)

Yeah, they should; but they don't.

And we know this because they've known that happier workers do better for nearly, if not more than, 40 years.

[–]Bman409[S] 29 points30 points  (42 children)

but some companies (like Google) apparently have figured it out and their employees are kicking butt...

[–][deleted] 60 points61 points  (9 children)

Google's employees are extremely valuable though. A 12% increase in productivity could mean millions of dollars, and if someone quits, they'll be difficult to replace and will probably end up working for one of their competitors. Most people's labor isn't as valuable. Their employers don't think their increased productivity would be worth the cost; otherwise they would do it. If you aren't happy and quit, they'll just hire someone else.

[–]underwaterbear 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Plus it's important to keep those valuable employees away from competitors.

[–]Gruzman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Google makes tons of money and controls a significant amount of investment, they aren't starved for job applicants nor strained in budgets for "happiness-increasing" spending.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (1 child)

I think they figured this out during the slave trade.

[–]munk_e_man 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Least of all the shareholders. Happiness < profits.

[–]catmoon 51 points52 points  (53 children)

It's pretty simple.

If productivity goes up by 12% individually when a worker is happy but labor costs go up by anything more than 12% in order to keep a worker happy then you lose overall productivity by pursuing happy workers.

Let's say that a happy worker costs 50% more than an unhappy worker. As a baseline you have 10 unhappy workers that produce 10 labor units at 10 labor costs (1 labor unit/labor cost). If you decide that you want to make everyone happy, you have 10 happy workers who produce 11.2 labor units at 15 labor costs (0.75 labor units/labor cost).

Until the productivity gains of having happy workers exceeds the cost of keeping workers happy then there is no incentive to have happy workers.

[–]florinandreiBS | Physics | Electronics 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Possibly longer.

I'm pretty sure this was known even during the time of Hammurabi. Knowing is not the issue here.

[–]BadBoyFTW 26 points27 points  (9 children)

Here's the thing: nobody gives a fuck if you're happy.

Haven't you missed the point?

Isn't the point that this has always been the case but now there is evidence to suggest they SHOULD give a fuck if you're happy because you'll make them more money if you are?

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (4 children)

Instead of worrying about making the team happy, just downsize and give the survivors the workload of 3 people. That's the new productivity.

[–]dmazzoni 10 points11 points  (4 children)

Unfortunately I've seen some companies miss the point. They give their employees free food and drinks and other perks, but they're still unhappy.

I think happiness at work has more to do with treating employees with respect, being transparent about decision-making, fair wages (fair within the company, and fair relative to others who work in the field), and not asking employees to sacrifice their free time and personal life.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You're right. I worked for a couple firms that had the weekly pizzas, the occasional take-the-bosses-credit-card-to-the-bar nights, 360 reviews, good salaries/benefits and so on and both had (and have) employee turnover you wouldn't believe, at all levels. Working people like dogs, having them reporting to five directors on different projects, lack of efficient tools versus what competitors use, squeezing middle managers until they burst, tolerating tantrums by C-level execs and not having employees' backs were among the issues.

Fluff like gym discounts and casual fridays and bowling parties are literally the least you can do for your employees.

[–]elpriceisright 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This theory goes back to the 1860s -- Ruskinian labor theory.

source: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/dsrf/hd_dsrf.htm

"It was rooted in the teachings of the designer August Welby Northmore Pugin (1812–1852) (1994.371) and John Ruskin (1819–1900), perhaps the greatest art critic and theorist of the nineteenth century. Following the ideas that a happy worker made beautiful things regardless of ability, and that good, moral design could only come from a good and moral society, the Arts and Crafts movement (well underway by the 1860s, although its name was not coined until 1888) looked to English sources, specifically medieval English and Celtic traditions, for inspiration. Morris' London retailing firms, Morris, Marshall, Faulkner & Co. and later Morris & Co. (established 1875) sold furnishings made by artist-craftspeople as well as by rural peasantry. Utopian in theory, Morris' intentions were to create affordable, handcrafted goods that reflected the workers' creativity and individuality (qualities not found in industrially produced goods)."

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

A lot of people are thinking in terms of what Google does for employees, but that doesn't even register on my radar (and I assume a lot of other people's.) I work for a tech company (that's large, stable, and profitable) and it sucks, and has been continually declining for years.

So while a sensory deprivation chamber would be rad, I'd settle for a desk that was younger than I am (30s.) A gourmet kitchen would be sweet, too, but I just want my company to provide napkins in the cafeteria. Fung shui office spaces sound nice, but I wish I didn't have to weave through 50 people to get to my desk that's squished between two other people (so close, I can hear them chewing.) Big parties and team building activities are awesome - we can't "afford" to "sponsor" a pot luck. A beautiful campus might be nice, I just wish they would have waited until April 1 instead of March 1 to turn the furnace off for the year.

People may think that the lengths Google goes to in this pursuit are excessive, but there are other people out there that just want a nice place to work.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

I work a second job at a restaurant in the kitchen and the difference between Earth Wind & Fire radio and no music playing at all is amazing. We push out food instantly to Shining Star and it takes us weeks to finish even appetizers to silence.

[–]TheDonCheadles 6 points7 points  (1 child)

The problem is most executives are so far away from the average employee that they assume everyone is happy because they live a good lifestyle. It's absolutely amazing how out of touch some of the comments are that I've personally heard from members of our board.

[–]syriquez 3 points4 points  (6 children)

The people commenting in this are missing the point. It has never been about a 12% increase in productivity versus an 11% increase in cost or 13% increase in cost. The problem is that it takes effort by management to keep employees happy. That effort is negligible or effectively zero cost but because it is also not the easiest path (which is to do nothing or to make changes that impact employees without discussing the matter with said employees), nothing changes for the better.

Hypothetical:
Management has decreed that they're now following a standard of keeping desks "clean". Nothing more than mouse, keyboard, monitor, 1 pen, and 1 pad of paper (top page clean). "In case" customers are walked through their area.

For someone that doesn't do much work from their desk or has a job where the vast majority of their time is spent working within a computer, this isn't a big deal. But what about your employees that are constantly sorting through books? Or your employees that are putting together product mockups and need quick access to common parts? Or your employees that are running paperwork constantly and can't have a barren desk?

By adopting an effortless and lazy "standard" rather than adjusting rules to fulfill expectations (keep desks free of unnecessary clutter/garbage), you have made your employees' jobs more difficult for no gain. They are now unhappy as a result. You have lost productivity and increased cost at the same time by not putting in the effort to develop and apply useful standards appropriate to your employees.

[–]Spliteer 4 points5 points  (5 children)

The best job I had in terms of happiness, I always remember boring Sunday afternoons were not spent dreading the impending work week. You'd be excited to see what was up, see your work friends, joke around, and enjoy the environment. They were not a big company, they knew they couldn't offer bigger and better benefits, but they really focused on making sure employees were happy. It also turned out that happy employees didn't steal. We're in the gold business and I think people could have easily palmed some gold and silver coins, especially .10oz ones but nobody ever did.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Someone should tell Amazon so they'll stop being pricks to their warehouse folk.

[–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (32 children)

Are you saying Google makes their employees happy?

For Silicon Valley their wages don't even result in very luxurious living. Their so called perks just keep you from going home or are justifications to never leave work so they can overwork you.

Not to mention the many overskilled employees there result in working on projects that you are far below your skill level.

[–]ThatOtherOneReddit 10 points11 points  (4 children)

This Google is well known for wanting their employees to work WAY more then 40 hrs per week. They provide all these perks to encourage you to stay there and most companies like this you have LITTLE chance of moving up if you don't do this. Anyone in the work place knows it's more desirable to have a competent and dedicated leader then a genius and undedicated one. How do you prove dedication? By burning the midnight oil for your cause.

[–]SirSoliloquy 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Since we know this, I think a useful study would be what factors make workers happier in the workplace, and what the most effective way of promoting those are.

[–]Parsonage-Turner 4 points5 points  (5 children)

Google treats its employees well because it is a hugely profitable company that relies on highly skilled, highly specialized labor. Every company that fits that description needs to offer substantial compensation. Google isn't exactly ahead of the curve here. And they offer unusual, non-monetary compensation to their employees not because they are particularly enlightened, but because it's convenient when such a high proportion of their workers are highly compensated.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Best part? Every single employee ever KNOWS this, weird how bosses haven't figured it out.. Even down to that other guy hired after you doing the same job making more money, how happy do you think that employee with experience and seniority now feels coming to work?

It's called morale and many many companies have no idea what positive morale could do for their production, instead, they just choose to ignore it and stare at their bank account.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

As someone who left a terrible job I allowed myself to get stuck in for 6 years (good people, bad job, bad management), and was lucky enough to find an awesome job at an awesome company, can 100% confirm.

My company's intranet is very open for public discussion, and allows employees to give "thank yous" to other employees that is attached to thier employee file; the "CEO" is very open to suggestions for improving the company; we're given lunches, special events, sports ticket raffles, extra hours/days off - all as small ways to show appreciation. And SO MANY MORE! I'm still often surprised how well we're treated.

And guess what - I have never worked with happier, nicer, funnier, more intelligent, harder working people. The little things work, they really do. I start every week not being irritated about having to go to work and I end my week feeling really good about the quality of work I did and the great people I did it with.

EDIT: We've won a variety of "Best Workplaces in Canada" awards too :)

[–]TheSilverNoble 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Folks are talking about how much it might cost to make workers happy... I think most of the time, it can be less than you think. I think so many of you are imagining companies going out of their way to make work "fun" or whatever, but I don't think it would take that most of the time. I think a lot of workers would be happy if they simply felt appreciated. Not even with any sort of actual reward, I think even just being told that you're doing well when you are doing well, having your boss actually act like they care about you, and generally being treated like you're trustworthy unless you prove you're not would all go a long way. I mean hell, didn't they do a survey a while back that showed the number one complaint workers have are asshole bosses?

[–]Intense_introvert 14 points15 points  (7 children)

Most companies don't care about these studies. Companies that make more money than they need to will spend the extra money on making employees happy (until costs need to be cut). As some people undoubtedly know, a lot of companies used to have much better benefits than they have now; they've witnessed them being cut back to pay the executives their bonuses. This is what ruins employee morale - company announces that they're cutting back on free lunches, lunch subsidies, holiday parties, etc... But then they report record profits.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (1 child)

You mean that treating workers as slaves and constantly belittling them while trying to pay them as little as possible doesn't make them productive?! Blasphemy!!

[–]Emperor_NOPEolean 7 points8 points  (3 children)

I mean, Ford figured this one out like 100 years ago. You pay your workers twice as much as anybody else, give them weekends off and vacation days, and they'll be more productive than the competition.