[Teever]

Would you prefer an employer who didn't give a shit about your well-being and treated you like a lump of labour to be wrung of all economic value and tossed aside when there's no more to get from you?

Like is it really so grating that someone tells you to do something good for yourself, even if their reason is because it's good for them?

Really?

[dotgov]

The same employer treated my like a lump of labor, wrung me out and I could not leave because I was shackled by being on a work visa. And they knew it. Those were the most miserable years of my life. I'd do it again, still, cause of the perspective it gave me, but there are probably other ways that involve less trauma.

Which makes them telling me to use sunscreen even more grating. The reason I find it so off-putting to tell employees to wear sunscreen in an all hands meeting is that I do not see this as the role of my employer. What I do in my private life is my responsibility and my choice. This might be a cultural difference too, I remember being alienated by the possibility of drug tests. The copious amounts of cocaine I might or might not do in my spare time are none of my employers business.

And about cloaking things in "good": I have yet to see a bureaucracy that does care about "good". In my experience bureaucracy cares about risk mitigation and liability. My personal risk assessment works differently than that, it takes things like my human experience into consideration. So I get cranky when I feel my employer is encroaching on my personal space.

[impendia]

If someone, i.e. an individual person whom I know in real life, gave me advice then I would happily listen. This includes bosses or coworkers.

But when it is coming through a bureaucracy, by mass email from someone whom I don't know (if it is signed by a named individual at all), I would be less happy.

Maybe this reflects excessive cynicism on my part towards large organizations. I recognize that not everyone feels the same way.

[HWR_14]

> But when it is coming through a bureaucracy, by mass email from someone whom I don't know (if it is signed by a named individual at all

What if it comes from XXX in HR, who just lost a family member to skin cancer and decided to use their corporate authority and "send to all" powers to remind everyone to use sunscreen.

What if it comes from a new study that shows that monitors cause skin cancer and it's new information most desk workers don't know to use sunscreen at their desk?

What if it comes every year in the "get ready for Summer" info packet?

What if it came with a reminder to be careful on Friday half-days that you weren't expecting?

I'm not sure what the cynicism is geared towards? It's impersonal? Isn't it a benefit that these aren't people who think you personally don't know to use sunscreen?

You said you questioned their motives. Would it help if you knew the people in HR and knew they were legitimately trying to help you? Would it help if they said "hey, don't get sick and raise our premiums. It comes out of the same pot off money everyone's bonuses come out of"?