Scott Schieman is a professor of sociology at the University of Toronto and author of the forthcoming book I Want M.O.R.E.: Why Your Job Still Matters (AEVO).
We talk a lot about what workers want: decent pay, job security, schedule flexibility, opportunities for advancement. But something more fundamental gets less attention: whether our work compromises our conscience or personal ethics.
When we can’t maintain our conscience on the job, we split ourselves into the person we are at work and the person we are everywhere else. The costs are real – burnout, cynicism, disengagement. At the same time, it’s notable how many workers seem to have found ways to avoid that split altogether.
The idea of compromising our conscience at work is also, right now, making headlines.
In a statement from Anthropic chief executive officer Dario Amodei, he wrote: “we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.” There’s much more to this story, but the main point as it relates to this research is Anthropic is pushing back on the Pentagon’s demands to remove safeguards against using Claude for mass domestic surveillance and autonomous weapons.
Most of us aren’t in such high-stakes scenarios, but I wondered: How common is this for ordinary workers? The answer, it turns out, is more encouraging than I expected.
To establish an historic benchmark, I excavated data from the well-regarded 1977 Quality of Employment Survey, which asked American workers whether they agreed with the statement: “On my job, I have to do things that go against my conscience.” Back then, 28 per cent agreed (6 per cent strongly), while the vast majority rejected it (25 per cent strongly).
I was curious if things had changed, so I partnered with YouGov to survey 2,500 American workers. And to see where things stand in Canada, I fielded a parallel survey of 2,500 Canadian workers with the Angus Reid Group. Both were designed to be broadly representative.
The data closely align across both countries, though the American data showed improvement in two notable ways: now 22 per cent report having to do things against their conscience, and 40 per cent strongly disagreed with that notion. In an era of generalized negativity about work, that 15-point increase is a finding worth reflecting on.
When I probed with open-ended questions to see how this plays out in practice, I unearthed a striking cross-section of experiences.
While some are never put in a situation that challenges their conscience, others understand the greater good of their professional codes.
“We sometimes find ourselves translating people who say things with which we do not agree,” said a 45-year-old interpreter. “However, I cannot change these words. I must translate in full, regardless of whether it contradicts my conscience or my values. I have a code of ethics to respect.”
And for some, that code provides an easy guiding light because it aligns.
“We have a code of conduct and ethics,” said a 51-year-old dentist. “I would not jeopardize my career in any way, for example, using expired materials to fix a person’s tooth.”
Some workers described something equally valuable as the professional codes: the power to stop, redirect and seek alternatives. “If I find a situation unacceptable, I have the power to stop everything and request a new work plan with my supervisor,” said a 27-year-old electric technician.
“The work I do offers significant professional autonomy,” said a 39-year-old college teacher. “My superiors do not interfere with our decisions without having excellent reasons. As a department, we have powerful levers to counter political whims that would hinder our values.”
Others expressed more defiance. “I have an ethical standard that I hold myself to,” said a 35-year-old people and culture manager. “I would rather be walked out the door for underperforming than doing something unethical.”
And a school bus driver said: “I have never, nor would I ever, go against my conscience – the safety of the cargo I carry is far too important.”
However, my surveys reveal that too many workers still face ethical dilemmas – and those vary widely.
“I have been involved in several rounds of layoffs. These were not performance-based layoffs – these were hard-working people who contributed. It went against my conscience to lay them off.” said a 42-year-old operations director.
A 28-year-old care advocate echoed the sentiment: “I work explaining the American healthcare system. The system is broken and hurts my morals knowing the pain it causes for nothing but profit.”
Some predicaments represent miniature versions of Anthropic’s dilemma. “I work in government,” a 31-year-old senior policy/economic analyst told me. “I have to follow the directives of elected officials.”
“Government policy dictates when and how much money we can provide to social assistance recipients, and it is clearly not enough,” said a 62-year-old case manager for a social assistance program before asking, “Could you live on $733 per month?”
“I create communications tools for causes I don’t support and defend positions and ideas I don’t believe in.” That’s how a 37-year-old communications officer described their job.
Those voices matter. But my data suggest they are a dwindling slice of the workforce.
That’s progress – and these days, any positive news about work is worthy of attention.
This column is part of Globe Careers’ Leadership Lab series, where executives and experts share their views and advice about the world of work. Find all Leadership Lab stories at tgam.ca/leadershiplab and guidelines for how to contribute to the column here.