SoylentNews

hubie [soylentnews.org] writes:

For years workers were taught to endure stress in silence. Now, rising burnout is forcing employers and governments to confront the cost of modern work [abc.net.au]:

Hayley Hughes said yes to everything. She worked in health care at a Queensland medical centre, managing nine GPs and up to 18 staff, while overseeing a change of ownership.

[...] Over many months of an intense workload, Hayley started to feel physically ill from the stress. She experienced brain fog, a racing heart and insomnia.

[...] The path to burnout recovery can include mental health leave, seeing a doctor, maybe receiving a diagnosis of anxiety or depression, medicating yourself, and returning to work ready to roll again.

Or — like Jeffrey and Hayley — you could change roles, reduce hours or move into less senior or less stressful positions.

[...] While taking control of burnout can help recovery, more people are asking if the onus should be on employers.

With almost half of Australian workers feeling burnt out [abc.net.au], experts are asking how workplace culture and systems contribute to, or even cause, exhaustion, and whether systemic change might lead to a reduction in burnout overall.

The question of who is responsible for burnout matters. Whether we define burnout as an individual failing or a systemic one determines how we treat it. And, in turn, determines where the responsibility, and the cost, lands.

Burnout has entered the cultural lexicon with a thoroughness that has outpaced its clinical definition.

It is discussed in podcast episodes and performance reviews, in resignation letters and therapy sessions, on TikTok and in medical journals. Yet despite its ubiquity, or perhaps because of it, there remains no consensus on what burnout actually is and, critically, whose responsibility it is to prevent and treat it.

[...] "From my experience, unless the condition is part of the psychiatric manual, it doesn't exist. Insurers won't recognise burnout," he says. "What happens instead is people take their accrued leave, or [seek a diagnosis of] depression in order to get sick leave."

This pathway comes at a cost. Depression is classified as a disorder of the individual, a medical condition located in the person's brain, body, and history.

When a burned-out worker is diagnosed as depressed, the implied cause shifts from the workplace to the worker. The worker uses their own leave, sees a doctor on their own dime, takes medication, pays for therapy and formulates individual coping strategies.

When they recover, they often return to a workplace unchanged from the one where the injury occurred in the first place.

[...] Longitudinal studies suggest certain personality traits can increase the risk of burnout [nih.gov].

But the data is also clear that, over the long term, personality makes a relatively small impact and workplace culture and expectations are far more significant in determining who burns out.

By framing burnout as an individual worker problem, organisations do not have to examine deeper systemic issues like toxic work cultures, unrealistic expectations, or inadequate support structures.

The employee — not the employer — is paying the price.

[...] "In any service work if you are deeply connected to the cause, you are more at risk of burnout," she says.

Jill scoffs at resilience training, mindfulness, wellness programs and apps, as a satisfactory measure to fix burnout.

"The whole idea of someone being resilient is ridiculous," she says. "To whose standard?"

She sees restorative justice as a model for treating burnout. The worker and employer talk about the conditions that lead to burnout and explore new ways of working that may alter the workplace and make it less harmful for others.

The clearest example in Australia of what happens when governments and institutions accept burnout is their problem to solve is in education.

Teacher burnout in Australia is not new. But it has reached a point where its consequences are too visible and too costly to keep attributing to individual teacher inadequacy.

[...] The National Teacher Workforce Action Plan [education.gov.au] is a federal government attempt to address burnout on a systemic level. It seeks to do this by reducing workloads, improving retention and increasing teacher support. According to the plan, the key strategies focus on relieving administrative burdens, expanding mentorship and providing financial incentives.

[...] Dr Ben Arnold, an associate professor in educational leadership at Deakin University, says teachers have higher levels of meaning in their work than many others, but it comes at a cost.

"They have higher workload, higher pace, higher cognitive demands, and very high emotional demands. And then there are all these other non-teaching things as well," he says.

These include communication with parents that goes way beyond the usual check-in at parent-teacher night, a greater amount of admin and external testing.

"Teachers often describe earlier decades in Australian education as a period when they experienced greater professional autonomy and public trust," says Arnold, whose research focuses on how education policies and working conditions in schools impact the health, sustainability and diversity of teachers.

Increasing emphasis on performance measurement, accountability, external testing and compliance has introduced additional pressures and administrative demands, he says, and teacher goodwill holds the system together.

[...] "We see there's a link between teacher burnout and student achievement," says Collie. "It is a system thing."

[...] "Mindfulness, taking time off: these can keep burnout at bay. But if you are working in a toxic workplace, you need to address that," he says. "Leaving one toxic workplace for another will not help."

[...] The cleanest individual solutions to burnout — leave the job, take months off, downshift — are available only to those with financial security.

For everyone else, the question of systemic change is not a luxury. It's the only real option.

Original Submission