The boss, not the workload, causes workplace depression

Then again, two of the summaries you quote actually suggest that things have a lot more to do with office politics and work environment.

Think of it this way: if you've an infinitely long todo list, but no pressure whatsoever ("wake me up as you complete the tasks"), it's just an insurmountable amount of work that you'll grow used to never completing and you'll do as much as you can and be satisfied with yourself.

Now, toss a boss into the equation -- one that tells you to get it all done by yesterday. Or put another way, one that essentially goes: "let me load your backpack with 50kg before I order you to swimm across this river". That can screw you up rather quickly. Especially if that boss's priorities change daily or hourly.

Unfairness is not hard to detect. Just put yourself in the other person's shoes and see if you would like to be treated this way. Corporate and business ethics are well established with tons of case studies and guidelines, mostly common sense. If only there was somebody to read them.

Let me illustrate with an example from the best Division director I ever had. He came to us from NIST and valued analytical work, which made him a perfect fit for our materials characterization division. On numerous occasions when we would raise concerns over decisions our client divisions made that we felt hurt the company. He would go (or go with us) to have uncomfortable discussions with clients. On three occasions he made decisions that that adversely affected me and each time I went to him, he listened to my case and changed his decision. He was not afraid to say "no" if one couldn't build a case. The all time winner came when we needed to buy an expensive piece of equipment. At the time, capital would frequently become available near the end of the year because other divisions overestimated their needs. We then had the opportunity to purchase the instrument. This was the first year when management bonuses were tied to budget performance. Signing the order meant forfeiting his bonus. He signed it. That showed me that he valued long term organizational well being over his own short term profit. He made his share of questionable decisions - as all human beings do, but always retained my respect and loyalty.

The cult of cheerful actually has a purpose. No need to improve working conditions when you can choose those candidates from the pool that will put up with the workplace as it is.

Improving conditions is more difficult - it's the supervisors that set the tone, and changing entrenched habits is a hard task.

You give people more responsibility. You give them more control over their workplace, somehow. And, most important of all - you listen.

If I'm making significantly less than others who produce the same amount and quality of output that I do, or making less by people who produce less, then I raise it as a point with management.

If nothing is changed when review time rolls around then it's on me to take action and look for another job. If I decide to stay somewhere that I'm unhappy, that's on me too.

As an adult, I'm not going to stand around and whine about unfair conditions. If I perceive a problem, I create a change in my life.

(Also, I am not a doctor.)

Friendly / Strict is a false dichotomy. The ideal boss is always friendly, strict when they have to be.