Some companies see their employees as orange trees that they need to keep healthy year after year.
Some companies see their employees as oranges they need to squeeze as much as possible.
Some companies see their employees as oranges they need to squeeze as much as possible.
How often does a company see its employees as equals? How often does a company try to ensure that the employee's demands and the company's demands are equitable? Most of them mask their blatant anti-employee bias in moralistic language to try to shame people out of asking questions: as one example, if you leave for another opportunity whilst involved in a project, you're considered "disloyal" or "unstable" and guilted, even though a company would shave off a unit in a heartbeat if it meant a major change in their financial prospects.
Even companies that claim they understand career progression, work-life balance, etc. often have these problems lurking underneath the glitzy exterior. I say this and people will think, "Yeah, that sucks, but not my workplace!" The reality is yes, your workplace probably has this same issue too. Just think about it for a while.
We need to start thinking of employment as a mutually beneficial exchange between equals with equally applicable moral rules. Why should the company keep 90%+ of the revenue an employee generates? Would that fly if it were a partnership deal between corporations? Surely the services of an employer are worth something, but are they really worth that much? The only reason employers can take that much is because employees don't believe they can claim any portion of that revenue without an employer, and they have to take the paltry 2% or they won't be able to get anything, which is usually false if the employee has a marketable skill.
And out but never open
But there are trapdoors
That you can't come back from