When Conservatives Reward Laziness

It seems to be a common complaint that managers or employers in general get rewarded for doing very little, perhaps almost nothing at all, while workers underneath them on the company hierarchy do not get recognition or raises for doing far more intensive or relentless physical or mental activities.  There are indeed many industries or many roles where these things could be true.  Political and theological conservatives might nonetheless deny the very logical possibility of something like this ever being true in any scenario, or just assume that there must be something about the employer that makes it morally permissible for them to be rewarded, monetarily or with praise and respect, for relative inactivity or even outright laziness, while their employees deserve minimum wage, little to no work-life balance, and being overlooked for raises despite them perhaps doing far more in their jobs.

It is not true that if someone is a manager they must be inattentive, lazy, and uncaring about their employees as liberals are more likely to believe--though even conservatives talk frequently about how much they despise their career situation, even as they might go out of their way to fallaciously defend the current structure of American business as a whole.  Being abusive or inactive does not logically follow from being a manager.  It is still true that conservatives frequently look down on people performing strenuous physical or mental labor for "entry level jobs" for not working "enough" or "well enough" to deserve persistently livable pay, but they are at the same time often eager to praise managers or employees simply for having their titles, even if they literally just sit around doing very little on most of their working days.

Having an easy job or a job where one monitors others with minimal effort is not the issue.  The exploitation of lower workers and the hypocrisy of praising some people for doing less and condemning those who do more for supposedly not doing "enough" to deserve recognition are the issue.  In a job where a manager mostly has to periodically check worker progress as they sit down, watching feeds or perhaps occasionally submitting reports, does involve far less effort than even a restaurant waiter/waitress or many other jobs.  They too can be a victim of underpayment by their own managers if they are not the very top of the hierarchy, but it is untrue that just having a certain title means someone automatically would deserve to be paid more than those who in one way or another do more.

However, conservatives are infatuated with power as a whole, and this is probably why so many of them have incoherent stances on it when it comes to business and other things.  Like liberals, they fear or despise power when someone else not like them holds it, but they absolutely love to wield it even as they might simultaneously believe that power is evil or corrupting, which is itself false because power cannot be evil, only how someone expresses it or their motivations in doing so.  Conservatives perhaps hope to hold managerial or executive power themselves, which in turn keeps them locked into the assumption that managers and general employers or corporate leaders deserve special respect by default.  In such cases, they simply want to do the very thing they condemn: get rewarded for laziness or a lesser level of activity in the workplace.

Even bringing this up to them is likely to only be met with more assumptions or emotionalism oriented around traditions.  The conservative obsession with keeping the social constructs of business and money exactly as they are or were in some imagined golden era of the past (after all, conservatism is indeed about conserving traditions rather than knowing necessary logical truths about metaphysics and epistemology) leads them to favor the status quo, which sometimes does involve rewarding laziness on the part of management and trivializing the effort of lower level workers.  They misunderstand any flaw in the status quo or objections to it, right or wrong, to be a rejection of business, to the rewarding of effort, and (if they are Christians) to the genuinely Biblical idea that every able-bodied person does need to work in some way in order to survive put forth in 2 Thessalonians 3:10.  This is all intentional misrepresentation or misrepresentation due to the utter stupidity of not even wanting to understanding what really logically follows from something in the first place.