OpenAI plans to take on LinkedIn with AI-powered jobs platform

Organizations showcase flexibility and inclusivity, yet for marginalized groups, the cost of accessing these benefits is high. Promotions stall, opportunities shrink, and subtle penalties follow when employees actually use the policies meant to support them.

The impact of real care

The evidence is clear: performative gestures may look good externally but erode trust internally, leaving employees disengaged and disillusioned. In contrast, authentic investments in well-being fuel loyalty, enhance productivity, reduce turnover, and ultimately drive long-term profitability.

In the glossy brochures and LinkedIn posts of many organizations, “employee well-being” has become the language of the moment. From flexible work promises to mental health awareness days, companies are quick to showcase their compassionate side. But for a growing number of employees, particularly in marginalized groups, these promises ring hollow.Beneath the surface lies a practice critics call carewashing: using the appearance of employee care as a branding and recruitment tool while offering little substantive support in practice. Instead of following through on commitments, these organizations win trust with assurances of support, then leave employees fighting to meet basic needs while quietly penalizing them for it.When “care” becomes bait

The bait is often irresistible. Flexible work arrangements (FWAs), for instance, have been shown to improve work-life balance, reduce stress, and increase employee commitment, in turn boosting performance and innovation. But in carewashed workplaces, flexibility exists only on paper.

Women who are mothers may be offered remote work but later face questions about their commitment. Caregivers may be told they can adjust hours but find that using these arrangements comes with stalled promotions or reduced project access. People with disabilities may join believing in the company’s accessibility promises, only to encounter buildings they can’t easily navigate and long, frustrating battles for simple accommodations. The very policies that attracted them soon become a source of stress when each request is met with raised eyebrows or quiet resistance from managers.Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace 2025 report warns that employee engagement has fallen globally to just 21%, with managers—especially young and female managers—seeing steep drops in both engagement and well-being. This decline is not just a statistic; it signals that workplace culture and leadership support are fraying. When engagement declines, the promised benefits of care campaigns also diminish. Real well-being efforts boost productivity, loyalty, and retention, but performative care leaves employees not just disengaged but disillusioned.HR: The missing bridge

In theory, Human Resources exists to bridge the gap between employee needs and management priorities. In reality, in carewashed environments, HR often functions as the organization’s advocate—explaining away delays, defending insufficient policies, and reframing systemic problems as isolated misunderstandings. This shift from employee champion to corporate shield weakens trust. Employees who reach out to HR for help often find themselves stuck in endless paperwork or, worse, made to feel as if asking for support is unreasonable. Over time, HR’s inability or unwillingness to challenge management decisions alienates employees further, deepening disengagement and attrition risk.

A low-key trap

Carewashing works because it operates in the gap between perception and reality. Employees enter believing the organization will align with their life needs in exchange for commitment and performance. Instead, they find themselves stuck in roles where exercising promised benefits—like taking parental leave, requesting schedule changes, or accessing mental health support—comes with career penalties.

Gallup data from 2024 shows that 50% of employees globally, when they feel unsupported, either actively search for new jobs or quietly watch for opportunities elsewhere. Yet for many caregivers, parents, and persons with disabilities, changing jobs is harder, making them more vulnerable to staying in environments where promises go unfulfilled.

The business case for care

Ironically, academic evidence suggests that genuine investment in employee well-being is not just ethical—it’s profitable. A meta-analysis by Harter, Schmidt, and Keyes (2003), covering 7,939 business units and nearly 2 lakh respondents, found strong positive links between workplace well-being and productivity, as well as strong negative links with turnover.

Gallup’s updated meta-analysis in 2020 expanded the evidence base to 112,312 business units across 276 organizations, including about 2.7 million employees. It reaffirmed these patterns, showing that units in the top quartile of engagement achieved 23% higher profitability and 18% lower turnover compared to those in the bottom quartile. This means that organizations engaging in carewashing are not just harming their people—they’re undermining their own long-term performance.

From performative gestures to real reforms

In practice, carewashing often shows up as visible but superficial efforts that make organizations look supportive without addressing the real challenges employees face. Many companies roll out yoga sessions, meditation retreats, or team-building getaways as proof of their commitment to well-being. While pleasant, these perks sideline deeper issues such as heavy workloads, lack of flexibility, inadequate accommodations, and unsupportive managers.

Insurance schemes are promoted, but exclusions—like dependent parents, contract staff, or gig workers—limit their reach. During crises, employees are celebrated as “heroes” even while working in unsafe or underpaid conditions. Short-term wellness weeks or motivational events further create an illusion of care while leaving systemic problems untouched. Even when progressive policies like flexible work or caregiving leave exist, employees often find them difficult or risky to use.

Perks and retreats may provide brief relief, but they do not ensure lasting well-being. The real challenges lie in workplace toxicity, a hustle culture that glorifies overwork, fears of layoffs, and uncertainty during crises. Without addressing these structural issues, wellness initiatives remain temporary distractions, offering respite while underlying pressures continue to erode health and morale.

Fixing this starts with transparency: share how often policies are actually used, broken down by gender, disability, and caregiving role. Make managers answerable for truly supporting their teams. Create accountability by integrating employee well-being into Key Result Areas (KRAs), so leaders are evaluated not just on output but also on how they foster supportive, inclusive workplaces. Build a culture where using benefits is normal, not a risk.

Without these changes, carewashing will remain an act, not a commitment. Gallup research on re-engineering performance management shows that only 2 in 10 employees strongly agree their performance is managed in a way that motivates them to do outstanding work, underscoring why accountability systems must evolve to emphasize development, fairness, and well-being rather than just output.

Carewashing thrives in workplaces where image matters more than substance. But in a world where employee networks and online platforms make it easier than ever to share internal realities, the gap between what companies say and what employees experience is difficult to hide.

For organizations, the choice is clear: treat well-being as a mere branding exercise and risk disengagement, attrition, and reputational damage—or make it a genuine priority that benefits both employees and the bottom line.

The author, Amruta Prabhakaran Thottapalli, is a Research Assistant, and Dr Megha Gupta is an Assistant Professor at the Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Mumbai.