I wrote in length about the terrible tragedy of death of Anna Sebastian Periyal in my story Be the Senior you needed when you were a junior: How one simple idea could change the world.Many of you asked me for a dedicated post to Anna, with the reserved question, will she and many other exploited workers in India today ever get justice? Or rising unemployment levels will allow the greedy to fill their corporate coffers without any shame or remorse.
First Published on 01/10/2024 22:33
It has been several months since the tragic death of Anna Sebastian Periyal, a young Ernst & Young (EY) employee, shook the corporate world. Her passing was tied to the toxic work culture at EY, particularly during her auditing assignment for Bajaj Auto, where excessive pressure and untenable work conditions reportedly contributed to her demise. As her story gained widespread attention, the question remains: Will Anna get justice in this world driven by greed and selfishness?
---
Why has the nation Been so apathetic to Anna’s death?
India, a country known for its emotional response to high-profile events, has shown a stark contrast in its reaction to Anna's death. Despite widespread awareness of her tragic story, the response from both the public and the authorities has been tepid. Media reports and social media platforms have given voice to her story, yet beyond initial outrage, the apathy is overwhelming. It appears the young woman’s death is fading into the background of daily news cycles, with the salaried middle class—the very group she was part of—largely unbothered.
Critics have pointed out that this apathy might stem from the normalisation of extreme work pressures in corporate India. It's not just EY; toxic work cultures have been festering across industries for decades. The fear of losing jobs and the lure of better pay make many employees turn a blind eye, even when their colleagues or juniors suffer.
One might ask, why isn’t there more empathy for Anna, who lost her life due to this very system? It seems that for many, the harsh conditions of corporate life have become such a given that it’s easier to move on than challenge the system that sustains this exploitative culture. The death of a young woman, a symbol of ambition, talent, and youth, should have provoked deep soul-searching. Instead, the silence is deafening.
---
What Was EY’s Human Resource Department’s role?
Much of the blame for Anna’s tragic death has been placed on Ernst & Young's toxic work culture, but the spotlight also falls on the company’s Human Resources (HR) department. Media reports have been scathing about HR’s role in fostering environments where juniors like Anna are left to fend for themselves.
HR departments in corporate India, including EY’s, have been widely criticised for their subservience to higher-ups, and Anna’s case reveals the ugly truth behind their operations. HR professionals are often tasked with protecting the company's image rather than the well-being of employees. In Anna’s case, instead of addressing the extreme pressures and the mental health toll on her and others, HR either turned a blind eye or facilitated the exploitative environment by appeasing senior management.
This is part of a broader trend across corporate India, where HR departments focus on helping higher-ups secure promotions, bonuses, and status. In return, they often sacrifice junior employees, leading them to a professional slaughter for the company's benefit. How did HR fail to act when it became clear Anna was struggling? This is a question that remains unanswered.
By not prioritising the mental and emotional well-being of employees, HR professionals often contribute to the toxicity of the workplace. Instead of being a neutral party, protecting both the employees and the company, they increasingly serve the interests of senior management. The systemic failure of HR in the case of Anna’s death has opened a conversation about the true role of human resources in corporate India and whether it genuinely serves the employees it was created to protect.
---
Has Kerala, Anna’s Home State, let her down?
Anna Sebastian Periyal hailed from Kerala, a state that is often celebrated for its progressive politics and focus on labour welfare. The communist government in Kerala has long positioned itself as a champion of the working class, yet Anna’s death reveals an uncomfortable truth: Does Kerala’s focus on labour rights extend only to blue-collar workers?
In Anna’s case, the silence from Kerala’s political leadership has been jarring. While her family continues to seek justice, the state government, led by communists who claim to stand for the working class, has been conspicuously absent. Why hasn't Kerala's Chief Minister or the Labour Ministry intervened? The sad reality is that Anna’s status as a white-collar worker seems to have made her less of a priority for the state, even though she was an exploited worker in her own right.
It raises an important question: Is communism in Kerala reserved solely for blue-collar workers? Labour rights shouldn’t be divided along class lines, and yet, Anna’s case reveals a glaring gap in Kerala’s advocacy for its citizens. In Pune, where Anna worked, apparently the office was not even registered with the labour department. Who cares? Right?
Many Keralites have taken to social media, expressing outrage that a "working daughter of Kerala" has been ignored by the very government that claims to protect its workers. Anna’s death is not just a corporate tragedy but also a societal one, where state intervention could have amplified her family’s plea for justice.
---
What actions have Been taken by Authorities So Far?
After Anna’s death, there were calls for investigations into the toxic work conditions at EY, particularly during the Bajaj Auto audit. However, tangible actions from either the corporate world or the government have been slow. There have been internal investigations within EY, but these reports are typically sealed from public scrutiny, leading many to doubt their sincerity.
External pressure from labour rights groups and mental health advocates has resulted in public statements about creating better work environments, but as of now, no meaningful policy changes have been implemented. What’s being done to ensure that no more juniors like Anna fall victim to toxic work environments? The lack of urgency from the authorities has left many questioning whether justice will ever truly be served.
Some corporate leaders have announced their intention to look into mental health resources, and there have been promises of improving working conditions. Still, without legislative intervention or strict regulations, these words often ring hollow.
Will the concerned authorities take stronger action to investigate Anna’s case thoroughly? Is there hope for systemic change, or will Anna’s death become yet another statistic in a country where corporate exploitation is the norm?
---
Is there hope for justice in a world of greed and selfishness?
With every passing day, the likelihood of real justice for Anna seems to diminish. Her case has exposed a deeply flawed system where corporate profits come before human lives, and where HR departments, supposed to protect employees, often become complicit and eager in their exploitation.
The overwhelming greed and selfishness that permeates corporate India show no signs of letting up. The problem is larger than EY or the firm’s leadership; it is a culture of success-at-any-cost that has infected nearly every major industry. Anna’s death was a painful reminder that this system is unsustainable.
So, will Anna get justice? There are no glimmers of hope. The public outrage, though fleeting, has sparked some conversations. Pressure on EY continues to build, and the demand for change is growing louder. But for true justice to be served, systemic changes must occur in how companies treat their juniors, how HR departments function, and how governments protect their citizens—both blue and white collar alike.
Until then, Anna’s tragic death will stand as a stark reminder of the cruel, heartless machine that corporate India has become. Whether she gets justice depends on how many are willing to keep fighting for it in a world that is all too willing to forget.
---
Are toxic Workplaces Really Changing — Or Are we just getting Better at enduring them?
Every time a tragedy like Anna Sebastian Periyal’s death makes headlines, LinkedIn fills up with long posts about empathy, “people-first leadership,” and mental health awareness. HR departments circulate carefully worded emails. Leaders host town halls. Some even cry on camera.
And then?
Quarter-end targets arrive. Bonuses are discussed behind closed doors. Appraisals are weaponised. Juniors are told to “be resilient.”
And the machine continues.
Why Don’t Toxic Systems Collapse After Public Outrage?
Because systems are designed to protect themselves.
According to a 2023 Deloitte Global Gen Z and Millennial Survey, over 46% of Gen Z professionals report feeling stressed or anxious most of the time at work. Nearly half. Yet only a fraction formally escalate complaints.
Why?
Fear of retaliation
Fear of being labelled “difficult”
Fear of career stagnation
Fear of social isolation
Financial insecurity
The World Health Organization estimates that depression and anxiety cost the global economy nearly $1 trillion annually in lost productivity. Yet organisations still treat mental health initiatives as branding exercises instead of structural reforms.
The hard truth? Toxic workplaces don’t change because they are profitable.
Overwork increases output in the short term. Fear drives compliance. Silence preserves hierarchy.
When exploitation benefits the top, change requires moral courage — and moral courage is rarely incentivised in corporate systems.
Has Gen Z Failed to Speak Up — Or Have We Made Comfort the New Currency?
I say this gently, not critically.
Generation Z is brilliant. Digitally native. Socially aware. Emotionally articulate. They speak about therapy, boundaries, burnout. They understand trauma vocabulary better than any previous generation.
And yet.
When it comes to institutional confrontation, many remain silent.
Why?
Because we have created comfort bubbles.
Remote work. Curated Instagram activism. Anonymous Reddit threads. Safe group chats. Venting on Twitter. Quiet quitting.
We talk. But do we confront?
It is easier to resign than to reform.
It is easier to switch jobs than to challenge a senior.
It is easier to create memes about corporate exploitation than to file formal complaints.
Gen Z is emotionally intelligent — but institutional courage is a different muscle.
The missing bridge? Organised action.
Where are the collective whistleblower protections?
Where are junior unions in white-collar sectors?
Where are structured peer-support escalations?
Where are employee-driven cultural audits?
Comfort has become seductive.
We curate our careers like feeds — aesthetically pleasing, strategically optimised, emotionally managed.
But outside our cocoon, systems continue crushing the most vulnerable.
Anna was Gen Z.
She was ambitious. Capable. High-performing.
And like many young professionals, she likely believed enduring was part of “earning.”
The tragedy isn’t just that seniors failed her.
It’s that peers often feel too unsafe to stand beside each other.
Toxic workplaces survive because silence is fragmented. Each junior thinks they are alone.
They are not.
But they do not organise.
How Do We Create Safe Containers for Others — Not Just Safe Corners for Ourselves?
This is where leadership begins.
If you are reading this, you may already have walked through emotional healing. You may have done the therapy. Journalled through trauma. Rebuilt boundaries. Reclaimed your worth.
Now comes the next evolution.
Creating Safe Containers for Others
Not safe spaces that are fragile and reactive.
Safe containers.
There’s a difference.
A safe space says: “No discomfort allowed.”
A safe container says: “Discomfort can exist here without humiliation.”
A container has structure. Boundaries. Integrity.
If you are stepping into conscious mentorship or becoming a coach, this is your sacred responsibility.
Because trauma-informed leadership is not about being soft.
It is about being steady.
Let’s break this down.
What Is a Safe Container in Leadership?
A safe container is an environment where:
Emotions are acknowledged without being weaponised.
Accountability exists without shaming.
Feedback is direct but humane.
Growth is encouraged without fear.
Vulnerability does not become gossip currency.
It requires three energetic centres — if we borrow the chakra language:
When you combine these, you create conscious mentorship.
Why Is This Critical Now?
Because many people are healing.
And healed people don’t want bosses.
They want guides.
They don’t want authority.
They want alignment.
After healing yourself, the question becomes:
“How do I lead without replicating the harm I survived?”
This is where many empowered individuals feel uncertain.
You’ve healed.
You’ve grown.
You want to serve.
But you fear becoming controlling. Overbearing. Preachy.
That fear is healthy.
It means you are conscious.
How Do You Become a Conscious Mentor?
If you’re wondering “how to become a conscious mentor,” here is the real framework:
1. Lead from Experience, Not Superiority
Do not mentor from “I know better.”
Mentor from “I’ve been there.”
Share your failures. Your therapy lessons. Your mistakes.
Conscious mentorship is storytelling with accountability.
2. Separate Guidance from Control
You are not responsible for fixing others.
You are responsible for:
Holding clarity
Offering perspective
Asking better questions
Encouraging autonomy
Healing others after healing yourself does not mean rescuing.
It means modelling.
3. Practise Trauma-Informed Leadership
This means:
Understanding triggers
Recognising burnout signals
Avoiding public shaming
Never using fear as motivation
Being aware of power dynamics
Many leaders say, “I didn’t mean to hurt them.”
Intent is irrelevant if impact damages.
A trauma-informed leader asks:
“What impact did my authority have here?”
4. Build Emotional Infrastructure
Companies invest in technology infrastructure.
Few invest in emotional infrastructure.
Create:
Regular check-ins
Anonymous escalation pathways
Transparent feedback systems
Peer support circles
Clear grievance redressal mechanisms
Psychological safety isn’t a slogan.
It’s a system.
5. Reward Empathy, Not Just Aggression
Why do toxic leaders get promoted?
Because they “deliver results.”
What if we changed KPIs to include:
Team retention
Psychological safety scores
Mentorship impact
Internal mobility support
What you reward multiplies.
Why Don’t Things Change — Even When we Know Better?
Because change threatens hierarchy.
Because kindness is seen as weakness.
Because fear feels efficient.
But here’s the irony.
Harvard Business Review reports that employees in high-trust organisations show 50% higher productivity and 76% more engagement.
Empathy is not charity.
It is strategy.
What Would It Mean to Truly Honour Anna’s Story?
Not just hashtags.
Not just outrage.
But structural reform.
Juniors standing together.
Seniors refusing toxic promotions.
HR professionals choosing integrity over favour.
States intervening regardless of collar colour.
Leaders learning to unlearn.
Most importantly?
Each of us asking:
“Am I the senior I once needed?”
Is there hope?
There is always hope.
But hope is not passive.
Hope is built through:
Conscious mentorship
Speaking truth despite fear
Naming bullies
Rewarding empathy
Designing safe containers
Toxicity thrives in silence.
Healing thrives in courageous structure.
If you have healed — your work is not done.
It has just begun.
Tushar Mangl writes on mental health, soul food, leisure, and a greener, better society. Speaker, author of "Hey Honey Bunch", "Ardika" and "I Will Do It."
Comments