Micromanaging Workers Beyond The Workplace

The workplace is a social construct that--despite the fact that survival is actually not dependent on it in the strictest sense, as people could survive without the trappings of modern civilization, even if not always as consistently--is erroneously treated as the philosophical and personal focal point of everything in life by so many who are deluded enough to think that submitting to arbitrary social structures makes them deep, unique, or intelligent.  It can also be treated as the focal point of life by people so desperate to get by that they do not think beyond the comparatively unimportant pursuit of wealth.  There is little that is not expected to be sacrificed for the sake of even jobs with trivial pay by many in the workforce and many who manage it.  The inverse priorities shape entire lives.

Instead of actual philosophical truths, friendships, and self-actualization being prized first and foremost (and yes, Christian life intersects with all three, so Christianity is not being excluded here), these things are acknowledged or celebrated to the extent that they are useful for maintaining corporate interests or providing potential to help with finding or keeping jobs.  With Americans so deeply pressured to waste their lives away working jobs that likely do not even pay well enough to support a family without additional income, the national culture becomes one that generally treats work as if it is more foundational or necessary than anything deeper or even more foundational than working for money.  In turn, instead of work being rightly treated as something that hinges on other things, like mental health, a philosophically and relationally positive environment, and support from friends or family, work gets treated as if it is so important that life outside of the workplace still revolves around it.

From discouraging needed visits to doctors during normal working hours to letting relationships deteriorate for the sake of work opportunities to demanding that non-problematic actions outside of work get abstained from, there are numerous ways that some industries or managers micromanage--or at least try to micromanage--workers beyond the workplace.  This worsens with specific jobs, like that of teaching at schools.  Teachers in particular usually get pressured to avoid public activities that are not immoral as far as any philosophical evidence suggests and that do not even have to interfere with their role as an educator, like drinking alcohol in front of the public that might contain their students or the parents of their students.

It is outright stupid to see someone not abusing alcohol and assume that they are, but it is even more irrational to see someone drinking alcohol and think that they must be impairing their work ability by doing so unless they are engaging in some hedonistic rush to drink to the point of drunkenness or are drinking recklessly while working.  For teachers at Christian schools or pastors and their spouses, the church equivalent of this secular trend has the added idiocy of legalistic hypocrisy, of being mistaken for Biblical obligations although the Bible opposes adding to its instructions (Deuteronomy 4:2).  This could be extended to all sorts of Biblically innocent activities like profanity, wearing bikinis for women or forgoing a shirt for men, viewing controversial movies at a theater, or some other nonsinful thing.

It is irrational for an employer to ever enforce this kind of policy.  As long as a person is not in ideological delusions or moral error, there is literally nothing to object to about their lives, and if a person is not needlessly hindering their work performance because of things outside the workplace, what would drive an employer to support this other than irrationalistic entitlement?  With varying degrees of stupidity (including both assumptions and knowing denial of facts) or selfishness behind it, this belief reduces down to an arrogant desire on the part of certain people at the top of the workplace hierarchy to see others give other parts of their lives to make the business leaders feel more secure.  What workers need and their moral freedom to do anything that is not immoral are not less important than an employer's reputation among imbeciles.

Work is nothing more than a means to some sort of practical end on its own.  It is not any more special in and of itself, as much as it is enjoyed subjectively by some people or mistaken for something more, unless there is philosophical and moral significance beyond the mere completion of tasks for money that could hypothetically be exchanged for many other jobs.  Those who do not want to put effort into increasing their own resources might simply demand that others cooperate with random, petty, asinine expectations to enhance their own reputation or earnings.  Of course, this could only be perpetuated on a large scale if enough consumers, workers, or employers go along with this or even believe the fallacies of this idea.