Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Resilience Is Not a Workplace Strategy

Opinion

Resilience Is Not a Workplace Strategy

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers the State of the Union address during a joint session of Congress in the House Chamber at the Capitol on February 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kenny Holston-Pool/Getty Images)

In his State of the Union address this year, the president gloriously celebrated how the nation is “winning.” Timed to lead into Women’s History Month, he made a brief mention of how women successfully balance both work and child-rearing. These stories matter. Representation matters. However, there is danger in glorifying resilience, particularly when it allows toxic workplace cultures to remain unchanged while employees absorb the cost.

Before we are employees, we are taught from an early age that freedom means pursuing “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Yet for many American women—especially Black women—the conditions required for these pursuits are constrained by economic structures that consume the very time and energy needed to experience the joy of being fully alive and free. In fact, a national survey conducted by the American Psychological Association found that women consistently reported higher stress levels than men. And a poll by the National Women’s Law Center and Morning Consult specifically highlighted the number of Black women (more than half) who described how stress in the workplace adversely impacts their health.


This is a structural consequence of workplace cultures that normalize overload and treat exhaustion as evidence of commitment and loyalty. Not surprisingly, younger generations are increasingly unwilling to remain in workplaces that disregard personal wellness. According to a report from the Mather Institute, about 6 out of 10 Millennials and Gen Zers would leave their jobs if they believed their workplaces did not support their wellbeing. This shift signals a growing awareness that sustainable work requires respecting human limits. While frequently and unfairly framed as frailty, it is, more accurately, a refreshing reality about achieving sustainability.

After dedicating more than a decade to education and the nonprofit sector, I recently left the workforce voluntarily. The expectations for the workplace culture were unsustainable. Expectations and demands expanded while capacity and support did not. For example, when I raised concerns about managing an unrealistic workload and asked for guidance on prioritization, I was told, “Everything is a priority.”

My experiences are not unique to me or to nonprofit organizations. They reflect a broader culture of overwork that treats productivity and eventual burnout as the primary measure of value. When “everything is a priority," employees internalize the burden.

My decision to leave paid work was not an act of retreat but an interruption. In this pause, I began to see more clearly how the structure of work had shaped my life. I operated out of a scarcity of time because there was none. I now exercise twice a day. I signed up to volunteer in my community, something I had wanted to do for years but could not schedule while working full-time.

My decision to leave paid work fits into a broader pattern of exit, such as the rise of “BLAXIT,” a movement in which Black families are choosing to leave the U.S. in search of safety, stability, and peace. These decisions are not impulsive but a response to cumulative stress compounded by unbearable economic, racial, and political unrest that makes living, let alone thriving, feel impossible.

Leaving your job is not reasonable for everyone in this economy, but there are small ways to liberate yourself. We can engage in small, consistent acts that conserve our energy and invite intentional ways of living beyond productivity alone.

To be sure, the decision to leave paid work may reinforce the justifications used to push women out of the workforce into more "traditional" roles outside the labor market. In these roles, women cannot exercise economic freedom or influence institutional work policies to create work environments that are equally fair for all.

But the response cannot be silent resilience inside systems that harm wellbeing. Workplace culture, whether stated explicitly or not, is experienced by employees and should not be accidental.

Employers cannot continue celebrating the resilience and achievements of women while designing workplaces that depend on that same resilience. If organizations are serious about retention and productivity, they must:

  • Set realistic workloads.
  • Train managers to clarify decisions and priorities.
  • Treat rest as a condition for sustained performance.

Tools like Preferences, Traditions, and Requirements (PTR) can help leaders distinguish essential outcomes from habits and personal preferences, aligning teams on clear results rather than unspoken customs.

Women’s History Month invites us to ask not only what women have endured but what kind of lives we are able to imagine beyond endurance. Until we honestly confront these challenges, we can at least honor and celebrate:

The woman who reimagines.
The woman who rests.
The woman who resists.

Kamye Hugley is a Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project in partnership with the National Black Child Development Institute.


Read More

A male senior stands in the shadow of a Social Security card with bite missing.

Social Security faces automatic cuts in 2032 and Medicare in 2033. New polling suggests that gives Democrats a powerful election issue. Here’s the case.

DNY59 / Getty Images

Will the Debt Crisis Engineered by Republicans Succeed in Cutting Social Security and Medicare?

Overview

The Republican Party’s long game to reduce administrative state entitlement spending centers on creating a debt crisis to provide an excuse for limiting such spending. It may soon pay off. That strategy involved a quarter-century of engineered tax cuts responsible for the stunning rise in sovereign U.S. debt, threatening an eventual economic crisis.

Social Security benefits are projected under current law to be automatically cut in 2032. And Medicare benefits are projected to be automatically cut in 2033. Congressional Republicans intend for those automatic cuts to occur, opposing new taxes to prevent cuts. And they are using the ballooning national debt as an excuse to also oppose new general revenue spending to prevent benefit cuts.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner at the White House.

Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner in the East Room of the White House on September 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

When Leaders Disagree, Ceremony Plays an Important Role

When Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived at the White House on 24 September, the U.S. welcomed him with an elaborate display of ceremony. The Army Herald Trumpets sounded a fanfare, the Chinese and American national anthems were played, and the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps performed. A military review was followed by a flyover involving a B-2 bomber and four F-22 fighter jets, according to the White House. It was an extraordinary production for two countries that still disagree on some of the most important issues in international politics.

Talks between President Donald Trump and Xi touched on trade, artificial intelligence and Taiwan. The visit was marked by warm words and some signs of cooperation, but it did not erase the fundamental competition between the United States and China. So why was all this ceremony staged? It is tempting to dismiss political pomp as mere window dressing: an expensive historical relic surrounding the serious business taking place behind closed doors. As a music historian, however, I think this misunderstands what ceremony does. Ceremony can become particularly valuable when words alone are not enough.

Keep ReadingShow less
Americans Voting in an Election

Americans Voting in an Election

Getty Images

Voting Is Not Just a Privilege It Is Every Citizens’ Responsibility

Despite the consistent determinations that US elections are secure across the country and there is virtually no evidence of non-citizens voting, in reports released as recently as September 2026; President Trump has doubled down on his claims that voter fraud is a major problem in America and on October 20th, he announced a new $25 Million Fraud Whistleblower program to be administered by the Department of Justice.

This announcement achieves a variety of the president’s goals: (i) It intentionally perpetuates the misinformation, that voter fraud is a serious problem in the United States; (ii) it undermines the trust in the voting systems, as well as in the states administering the elections; (iii) it fosters distrust amongst neighbors, who are more likely to suspect people of color and report them for a reward. This has the concomitant benefit of (iv) intimidating people who are in fear of going to the polls and (v) It gives the illusion that the federal government is prepared to give away more free money (along with the Tariff rebate checks, the Trump Accounts, the DOGE dividend, the direct payments for healthcare and the $5,000 for supporting GOP midterm candidates.)

Keep ReadingShow less
Capitol building with American flag behind it

Political Polarization and Extremism

Getty Images

Both Parties Have Forgotten How to Lose: It’s Time for Guardrails

On November 3 Americans vote in the midterm elections, and the most important question may be whether the losers accept the result. A Pew survey this summer found that just 55 percent of Americans are confident the midterms will be run fairly and accurately, down from 64 percent in 2022. The partisan detail is more revealing. Since 2024, Republican confidence has risen and Democratic confidence has fallen from 77 percent to 58 percent. Trust in the referee now depends on who holds power.

Democracy rests on a kind of sportsmanship agreement. The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr put it well: man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but his inclination to injustice makes it necessary. B. R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of India’s constitution, called democracy a method of bringing revolutionary change without bloodshed. Both understood that the system works only if the losing side agrees to try again next time instead of burning down the field. Americans in both parties are forgetting how to do that.

Keep ReadingShow less