5 ms·

> ...encouraging your employees to drink at work at your workplace is downright creepy. How is encouraging your employees to drink at your workplace creepy of

> ...encouraging your employees to drink at work at your workplace is downright creepy. How is encouraging your employees to drink at your workplace creepy of all things?

RodgerTheGreat 6y ago
A manager offering an employee amphetamines to improve their performance is unethical, and extremely creepy. A manager encouraging employees to take up smoking to fit in better with their coworkers is unethical, and extremely creepy. A manager encouraging employees to consume alcohol at work in order to foster team building is not fundamentally different than either of the above, it's just milder and deeply entrenched by convention as socially acceptable behavior.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  I drink in general, yet at work gatherings with alcohol I stick to sparkling water. I'm approaching my mid-30s and never had anyone "encourage" me to put the water down and suck on a beer. Nor do I think wheeling a keg into the office is the same as a manager encouraging you to drink. You definitely stand out when you're in a drinking context and your hands are in your pockets. There's something that can feel distrustful about that in some scenarios. I'd encourage non-drinkers to at least learn to play along and have some beverage in their hand. A lot of our creep-detector software seems to kick in when someone isn't playing along with social ritual, and complaining that you have to play along doesn't really serve you. They're just basic social skills.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    To recap: there's nothing creepy about bullying people into drinking -- pretending to drink if they must! -- to prove their loyalty to the group, and despite the fact that should be common knowledge for everyone, you've never seen it happen?
    - atq2119 6y ago
      This discussion is absurd even on a linguistic level. If you have a glass of water in your hand, you are drinking. Maybe you're not drinking alcohol, but calling it "pretending to drink" is just silly.
    - DonHopkins 6y ago
      If they always bully you into pretending to drink, remember to bring some fake vomit to seal the deal.
  - sdigital 6y ago
    > There's something that can feel distrustful about that in some scenarios. That's prejudice. Alcohol makes people violent and out of control, more so than any other drug, and yet we're the ones that are untrustworthy? > I'd encourage non-drinkers to at least learn to play along and have some beverage in their hand. I'd encourage you to fuck off while I smoke a blunt and blow the smoke in your face.
    - jayjader 6y ago
      Dude, a "beverage" can just mean a glass of water. We're talking about parts of human psycology like not having the same posture as the rest of the group. Of course it's prejudice, but it's also real and difficult to be aware of when it's happening to you. Also, nobody is showering their drink on you if you don't participate, so blowing your blunt smoke in their face is a much bigger asshole move for me.
    - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
      > Alcohol makes people violent and out of control, more so than any other drug. No, PCP is known to make users violent beyond what alcohol would do. And increased alcohol consumption correlates with less ability to act violently, because at some point the drinker is going to be unable to move, while PCP does not degrade one's motor skills.
      - DonHopkins 6y ago
        PCP is the one drug that all the scare stories the government tells you about it are true.
- ahupp 6y ago
  Presumably it's entrenched by convention because it's a successful practice; organizations that do it are in some small way more successful than ones that don't. I doubt that is true for amphetamines. I don't know about offering cigarettes, but I've definitely been in environments where smoke breaks were an effective way of building connections across the organization.
  - RodgerTheGreat 6y ago
    Would you feel the same way about "successful practices" which discriminate against employees on the basis of race, sex, or religious preferences? There are plenty of commonplace social practices which do not benefit employees or society. The mere presence of a feature does not prove that it is adaptive.
    - distant_hat 6y ago
      But they do benefit employees. I am not a smoker but a number of people in a former company were and they shared a camaraderie that if you didn't hang out with them you wouldn't get. It also cut across levels, so you could be an intern and it was an easy time to hang out with some mid level manager and get noticed.
  - sukilot 6y ago
    Huh? Amphetamines are extremely popular in successful organizations, from banking to biking to booking (college studies).
    - ahupp 6y ago
      For sure, but I'm not so sure they would be net-positive for an organization. Plenty of people can't take them in a sustainable way, and if they were given out like beer at happy hour I think a lot of folks would go off the rails. My last employer offered an on-site therapy benefit and I sometimes wondered whether we'd see a progression from therapy -> on-site psychiatry -> little nudges to take ADHD tests -> everyone is taking Adderall.
  - 6y ago
- microcolonel 6y ago
  > ...deeply entrenched by convention as socially acceptable behavior. Have you considered that some things are deeply entrenched because they work? I think most people who aren't teetotalers and who have worked at a startup have brought beer or whiskey to the workplace for after a long day, and I don't think that it's that different when the boss brings the beer: if you are working with people you can't trust, you probably have other issues. Nobody's saying you have to drink, but it's not a tragedy if that leaves you out of some of the benefits of social drinking.
  - justforyou 6y ago
    >> if you are working with people you can't trust, you probably have other issues. If think your workplace is exclusive of people you can't trust, you're probably very naive.
- ballenf 6y ago
  And coffee? What about sugary sodas? Energy drinks with supplements? I think even your examples make clear there is a spectrum here and not absolute equivalence. You can’t assess these things in a vacuum from their position in society. If adderall were over the counter and considered as safe as alcohol, the spectrum would change. If alcohol were offered in a culture where it’s frowned upon it might be seen as worse than cigarettes.
alecfreud 6y ago
It introduces a non-work ritual into the workplace that is exclusionary to non-drinkers. It is naturally divisive to the workplace by encouraging social bonds between drinkers and excluding non-drinkers without a regular alternative. It's like having a basketball game every Friday and expecting the guy in a wheelchair to show up and keep score. Sure, they can socialize a bit, but its inherently ostracizing and annoying especially if the person doesn't want to keep score. Sure, voluntary social drinking among employees is fine whenever. And work sponsored drinking on occasion is fine, same as a work sponsored basketball game once in a while. Wheelchair guy won't have a problem with that. But every week? Ostracizing. But having the sole, weekly, work-sponsored social event as something exclusionary is cult-like and creepy. It makes drinking integral to regular social bonding at work. Sure, people can sip a sparkling water and play along. And they do. And sometimes it's fun, but it's almost never the context under which that individual prefers socializing. And once people have had a few drinks, it is ostracizing because they are not drunk. They cannot discuss their drinks, offer shots, or engage in drunken antics.

> ...encouraging your employees to drink at work at your workplace is downright creepy. How is encouraging your employees to drink at your workplace creepy of all things?

RodgerTheGreat 6y ago

A manager offering an employee amphetamines to improve their performance is unethical, and extremely creepy. A manager encouraging employees to take up smoking to fit in better with their coworkers is unethical, and extremely creepy. A manager encouraging employees to consume alcohol at work in order to foster team building is not fundamentally different than either of the above, it's just milder and deeply entrenched by convention as socially acceptable behavior.

hombre_fatal 6y ago
I drink in general, yet at work gatherings with alcohol I stick to sparkling water. I'm approaching my mid-30s and never had anyone "encourage" me to put the water down and suck on a beer. Nor do I think wheeling a keg into the office is the same as a manager encouraging you to drink. You definitely stand out when you're in a drinking context and your hands are in your pockets. There's something that can feel distrustful about that in some scenarios. I'd encourage non-drinkers to at least learn to play along and have some beverage in their hand. A lot of our creep-detector software seems to kick in when someone isn't playing along with social ritual, and complaining that you have to play along doesn't really serve you. They're just basic social skills.
- sukilot 6y ago
  To recap: there's nothing creepy about bullying people into drinking -- pretending to drink if they must! -- to prove their loyalty to the group, and despite the fact that should be common knowledge for everyone, you've never seen it happen?
  - atq2119 6y ago
    This discussion is absurd even on a linguistic level. If you have a glass of water in your hand, you are drinking. Maybe you're not drinking alcohol, but calling it "pretending to drink" is just silly.
  - DonHopkins 6y ago
    If they always bully you into pretending to drink, remember to bring some fake vomit to seal the deal.
- sdigital 6y ago
  > There's something that can feel distrustful about that in some scenarios. That's prejudice. Alcohol makes people violent and out of control, more so than any other drug, and yet we're the ones that are untrustworthy? > I'd encourage non-drinkers to at least learn to play along and have some beverage in their hand. I'd encourage you to fuck off while I smoke a blunt and blow the smoke in your face.
  - jayjader 6y ago
    Dude, a "beverage" can just mean a glass of water. We're talking about parts of human psycology like not having the same posture as the rest of the group. Of course it's prejudice, but it's also real and difficult to be aware of when it's happening to you. Also, nobody is showering their drink on you if you don't participate, so blowing your blunt smoke in their face is a much bigger asshole move for me.
  - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
    > Alcohol makes people violent and out of control, more so than any other drug. No, PCP is known to make users violent beyond what alcohol would do. And increased alcohol consumption correlates with less ability to act violently, because at some point the drinker is going to be unable to move, while PCP does not degrade one's motor skills.
    - DonHopkins 6y ago
      PCP is the one drug that all the scare stories the government tells you about it are true.
ahupp 6y ago
Presumably it's entrenched by convention because it's a successful practice; organizations that do it are in some small way more successful than ones that don't. I doubt that is true for amphetamines. I don't know about offering cigarettes, but I've definitely been in environments where smoke breaks were an effective way of building connections across the organization.
- RodgerTheGreat 6y ago
  Would you feel the same way about "successful practices" which discriminate against employees on the basis of race, sex, or religious preferences? There are plenty of commonplace social practices which do not benefit employees or society. The mere presence of a feature does not prove that it is adaptive.
  - distant_hat 6y ago
    But they do benefit employees. I am not a smoker but a number of people in a former company were and they shared a camaraderie that if you didn't hang out with them you wouldn't get. It also cut across levels, so you could be an intern and it was an easy time to hang out with some mid level manager and get noticed.
- sukilot 6y ago
  Huh? Amphetamines are extremely popular in successful organizations, from banking to biking to booking (college studies).
  - ahupp 6y ago
    For sure, but I'm not so sure they would be net-positive for an organization. Plenty of people can't take them in a sustainable way, and if they were given out like beer at happy hour I think a lot of folks would go off the rails. My last employer offered an on-site therapy benefit and I sometimes wondered whether we'd see a progression from therapy -> on-site psychiatry -> little nudges to take ADHD tests -> everyone is taking Adderall.
- 6y ago
microcolonel 6y ago
> ...deeply entrenched by convention as socially acceptable behavior. Have you considered that some things are deeply entrenched because they work? I think most people who aren't teetotalers and who have worked at a startup have brought beer or whiskey to the workplace for after a long day, and I don't think that it's that different when the boss brings the beer: if you are working with people you can't trust, you probably have other issues. Nobody's saying you have to drink, but it's not a tragedy if that leaves you out of some of the benefits of social drinking.
- justforyou 6y ago
  >> if you are working with people you can't trust, you probably have other issues. If think your workplace is exclusive of people you can't trust, you're probably very naive.
ballenf 6y ago
And coffee? What about sugary sodas? Energy drinks with supplements? I think even your examples make clear there is a spectrum here and not absolute equivalence. You can’t assess these things in a vacuum from their position in society. If adderall were over the counter and considered as safe as alcohol, the spectrum would change. If alcohol were offered in a culture where it’s frowned upon it might be seen as worse than cigarettes.

alecfreud 6y ago

It introduces a non-work ritual into the workplace that is exclusionary to non-drinkers. It is naturally divisive to the workplace by encouraging social bonds between drinkers and excluding non-drinkers without a regular alternative. It's like having a basketball game every Friday and expecting the guy in a wheelchair to show up and keep score. Sure, they can socialize a bit, but its inherently ostracizing and annoying especially if the person doesn't want to keep score. Sure, voluntary social drinking among employees is fine whenever. And work sponsored drinking on occasion is fine, same as a work sponsored basketball game once in a while. Wheelchair guy won't have a problem with that. But every week? Ostracizing. But having the sole, weekly, work-sponsored social event as something exclusionary is cult-like and creepy. It makes drinking integral to regular social bonding at work. Sure, people can sip a sparkling water and play along. And they do. And sometimes it's fun, but it's almost never the context under which that individual prefers socializing. And once people have had a few drinks, it is ostracizing because they are not drunk. They cannot discuss their drinks, offer shots, or engage in drunken antics.