Democratic gestures boost morale
If you were to ask people what kind of government they prefer, almost all would surely vote for a democracy. Assuming they’re granted a right to vote, that is.
Despite its flaws and laborious decision-making processes, democratic systems are still the fairest models of government we have. So why aren’t they extended to the workplace?
Even apart from the way we’re governed, there are certain democratic rights to which we’ve become accustomed and would never give up. The right to free speech is one, as well as the right to practice your preferred religion, the right to equality, and the right to legal representation.
No matter how much room there is for improvement, there’s little denying democracy is more palatable than the alternative. And yet it’s the one that often prevails within organisations.
Employees ‘‘check their deeply held democratic rights at the door every day when they show up for work’’, say Canadian scholars, who have published a fresh analysis on this issue.
‘‘That is because the rules and rights associated with democracy only apply to people’s relationship to their government, not their employer. Citizens in a democracy remain subjects in the workplace – the place where most adults spend a large part of their waking hours.’’
Outside the workplace you can pretty much say and do whatever you want, so long as it doesn’t cause harm to another human being. In the workplace, though, there are tight restrictions on what you can express.
Politics, religion and sex are just three topics that are almost universally regarded as taboo.
Outside of the workplace you’re essentially allowed to congregate anywhere that takes your fancy, so long as it doesn’t pose a security risk.
In the workplace, however, there are no-go zones for most of us: the boardroom, the director’s office and meeting rooms are but three demarcated areas.
Outside the workplace there’s no way the government would tap your phone or monitor your whereabouts unless you’re a criminal.
In the workplace, conversely, you sign those rights away the moment you sign your employment contract.
Your emails can be read by your manager, for instance, and your movements monitored by cameras and clock-in systems, whether you like it or not.
At this point, I have to declare I’m not advocating a change to employer-worker relations – not in the formal sense anyway.
I can’t recall ever being a member of a trade union, not voluntarily at least, although I don’t begrudge anyone’s right to join one.
I’m merely posing a couple of questions: One, is it enough for bosses to treat their employees well? And two, is it time for a democratic type of set-up?
As a columnist I often focus on ways employers can proactively engage their employees and nurture their wellness.
So it’s admittedly concerning to read (and difficult to support) the researchers’ analysis, which calls for more ‘‘direct confrontation with employer power’’, for more ‘‘militant minorities in the workplace’’, for greater combat against ‘‘schemes [that] force workers to set the terms of their own exploitation’’.
There’s got to be a more pleasant, collegial way. A way by which employers aren’t forced into cultivating environments because of fights and strikes and boycotts, but because they’re enticed to do so by virtue of the many business benefits that ensue when you treat people well.
In the meantime, there’s negligible harm in incorporating some democracy into your workplace. Getting your team to vote on occasional decisions, for example, would make them feel important, while giving them greater leeway to choose their hours and work patterns could make them feel more valued.
Ultimately, on this I agree with the scholars: ‘‘The issue that most moves workers to action is not low wages – it is lack of respect at work. That lack of respect is intimately tied to a sense of powerlessness on the job.’’ Sydney Morning Herald