Scott Galloway @profgalloway.com · Jun 10 The agreement that the most successful organizations usually have with their employees: You're going to work, not have a lot of balance, and you're going to make an extraordinary amount of money. https://links.profgmedia.com/4uqN0ok
57 likes 10 replies
Replies
Tell me you never had to go to HR without telling me you never had to go to HR.
Actually, at most high tech, like Hughes Aircraft, where I worked, the folks responsible for product development, like are always working 90s! It’s usually the young folks and bosses a couple levels up putting in the 90s. My wife worked for a division controller and never put in a 90. Stars Only!!
Podcast listener here: it is toxicity. If you get a job making lead-acid batteries, and the company makes it clear the health risks and the very good pay! (and even test you monthly,) people take that deal, but still get lead poisoning & have health problems. That is still toxic. So is your case.
Describe this body language. Open and enlarged arms, chin posture forward, knee forward as if stepping towards... Shorter, faceless woman, arms closed protectively... Is this a workplace discussion, some asshole mansplaining or should the caption read, "Where the hell were you last night bitch?"
Now we see why we need unions. Now we see why there is a 40-hour workweek, why there is a weekend off & why corporate culture abuses faux "loyalty" to exploit the younger workers. It's not about finding one's compatible culture; it's about limiting exploitation. "Not a lot of balance" = horseshit.
This will not age well.
Spoken like a true rapacious capitalist where people are there just to serve shareholder value and it assumes everyone is as greedy and morally bankrupt as you…
I mean this was the deal maybe 40 years ago. But they all re-traded, firing that Junior 100+ hrs a week staff in both 2001 and 2008. Also when GS and Lazard etc. went public, the then partners (boomers) took the value of the firm in PERPETUITY via IPO $- screwing the next generation’s upside.
I love Scott's content, but not sure I agree with this. What is a successful company? It's subjective. Revenue generation? Profit margin? Customer satisfaction? Squeaky clean reputation? Happy employees? Let's not pretend that success is only bound by overclocked work culture. Too narrow.
Not on this SG page. I've seen lots of companies that he might label as 'toxic...but so what...?' that are the incubators for even more toxic cultures. Again, people of the older working generation (like me) can overadjust for what they see as a need for coddling in the workforce. There is a path.