Moral injury is no longer confined to doctors and nurses, with workers across sectors increasingly facing psychological distress when corporate decisions clash with personal ethics
When earthquakes struck Turkey and Syria in February 2023, more than 50,000 people were killed and thousands more were injured.
One month after the disaster, a bank employee named Efe Demir died by suicide in İstanbul. Before his death, he had sent an email to colleagues questioning the actions and motivations of his employer, saying he felt that the organisation prioritised profit over caring for clients who were victims of the tragedy.
The bank strongly denied the allegations, but Demir’s accusation highlights a broader, and often invisible, problem: how a corporate approach, especially in times of crisis, can cause employees to experience psychological harm.
Sometimes referred to as “moral injury” or “ethical suffering”, it often involves feelings of distress that arise when workers are compelled to act solely in the interest of profit.
The psychiatrist Christophe Dejours, who specialises in work and mental health, has argued that the complexities of work require employees to constantly expend emotional and cognitive energy navigating moral dilemmas.
Those dilemmas could be to do with a company’s environmental record for example, or how it relates to a country engaged in a military conflict. Moral injury does not arise only from what workers are required to do.
It can also take the form of intense feelings of isolation when an employee feels what a company is doing is wrong, but nobody is doing anything about it.
Eventually, moral injury can become a deep crisis, with workplace suicide as its most tragic manifestation.
Disasters amplify moral harm
Moral injury is commonly used to describe the experiences of workers in care-giving professions such as medicine or nursing, where decisions can carry life or death consequences. But moral injury can appear in many occupations, especially during disasters, when individuals suddenly feel a heightened responsibility for others.
For employees like Demir, the earthquake in Turkey was not only a national tragedy – it was a moment when the employer’s values were put to the test. For Demir, among other allegations was an accusation that the bank had not looked after customers who have been affected by the earthquake, in terms of their ability to repay loans or be given credit. Such cases are rarely publicised. Employers often move quickly to protect their reputation, while colleagues fear retaliation and families hesitate to link suicide to work.
The connection can be difficult or even impossible to prove. There research which suggests that employee suicide can serve as a final attempt to expose injustice.
Modern work often involves tasks that are legal but morally questionable, whether it’s carefully manipulating clients, competing unfairly or remaining silent about harm. Employees may become unwilling participants in practices that violate ethical standards – and this is precisely what makes these experiences difficult for the employee to talk about.
Even though physical dangers in the workplace are recognised, psychological dangers such as ethical conflict and feelings of loss of integrity often remain unacknowledged. Long-term exposure to ethically ambiguous environments can reshape someone’s character, moral sensibilities and sense of self. Over time, Dejours argues, workers numb themselves to others’ suffering – and eventually, to their own.
In countries such as France and Japan, work-related suicides are part of public debate, thanks to labour activists. In France, unions such as the CFE-CGC actively fight workplace bullying and at a global level, the International Trade Union Confederation Ituc named work-related suicide as a priority issue in a campaign on psychosocial hazards.
To confront moral injury at work, especially in an era of overlapping crises, whether it’s environmental, geopolitical or natural, research suggests that many organisations need to pay more attention to the ethical integrity of their employees. Professional dignity is not just about the terms of work – the hours, the pay and conditions – but also what we produce at work.
This also means expanding occupational safety to include not just physical risks but moral and psychological hazards – and talking more openly about the ethically questionable tasks that people may be asked to commit at work.
