The venerable NR Narayana Murthy won’t reappraise his views on work-life balance or 70-hour-a-week work schedule. “I will take this with me to my grave,” he reasserted at a news channel’s event recently. He even dragged Prime Minister Narendra Modi into the matter, saying the latter reportedly had a 100-hour workweek and people should match his dedication. It’s no surprise that on social media there’s an explosion of uncharitable remarks.
Some of them point out to the hard work and compensation mismatch, some to the toxic work culture in India and some to the wisdom in sacrificing the welfare of family for work that is solely driven for someone else’s benefit. Let’s not get too much into that. All are valid points which Mr Narayana Murthy has never addressed clearly despite the stinging criticism of his remarks earlier. The impression is he is speaking the language of a slave-driving, exploitative corporate rather than a compassionate capitalist.
The Infosys co-founder, it appears, presumes that youngsters are reluctant to work hard. He also seems out of touch with the reality that in many organisations across sectors more than 14 hours a day is the norm. The fact that he won’t talk about obnoxious work culture inhibiting productivity, creates reasonable suspicion that he puts the onus on low productivity on workers only, not the managers or proprietors. That surely is a blinkered approach if it’s truly about national economic growth.
If it’s one’s own dream, like Murthy’s was before Infosys came up, anyone would work 20 hours a day without a whimper of protest. Work-life balance would be sacrificed without a second thought. The struggle has its rewards, financial and otherwise, and a deeply personal satisfaction. But why would someone make any sacrifice for organisations where the trust deficit between employees and the managers is high? Why would someone work hard if the scoundrel of a boss is going to hog all the credit and there’s no acknowledgement of the good work from the organisation?
Work-life balance is subjective. It depends a lot where the person is positioned in the professional structure and how he/she is valued by the organisation. If the level of satisfaction from work is high, there’s no sense of insecurity and the money earned is good enough to take care of the financial needs, then life can be built around work. Working 70 hours a week is not an issue at all. It makes sense for top executives earning very high salaries to show more dedication to work. Because work makes their life secure. But not so the case of those at the lower rung of the ladder.
Mr Murthy should give a thought to why well-educated people opt for low-paying government jobs. Here life can be planned and built around work. Not so in private jobs. Instead of talking about long work hours why doesn’t he speak about profit-sharing among employees? It would incentivise hard work. In case he is unaware, overwork culture is deeply entrenched in India. It is, according to the International Labour Organisation, the second most overworked country in the world after Bhutan.
To be fair to the Infosys co-founder, he has also made the point about compassionate capitalism earlier. He wants companies to take care of employees and ensure that the education and health needs of those at the lower end of the corporate hierarchy are taken care of. He has also spoken about obscene salaries at the top end and the income inequality within corporate set-ups. But when he keeps harping on the 70-hour-a-week and hard work, it rankles.
(By arrangements with Perspective Bytes)
