Overemployment in the time of layoffs

Overemployment took off with the surge of layoffs back in 2020. With the economy feeling like a rollercoaster, some employees take on multiple full-time jobs. The goal? To make sure they’ve got enough in the bank if things go sideways. I was quite opposed to this practice. However, after delving deeper into the subject, I’ve come to understand the reason behind overemployment a bit more.

I get it

Yes, overemployment might be tempting. Job security, particularly in tech, isn’t what it used to be, and who doesn’t want an extra cushion? It’s natural to want to protect yourself or your family with more than one income stream, especially when you hear about layoffs left and right. People are weighed down by debt, and overemployment stands out as a short-term solution to stabilize their finances.

There’s also a bit of hypocrisy in how we view this issue at the different levels of the company chain – take CEOs, for example, who sometimes hold full-time positions in multiple companies simultaneously. Whether they do it for money, power, or ambition, this practice is accepted at the highest levels of business, yet often discouraged among the rank-and-file.

The downsides are real

The drive to overwork doesn’t stem solely from financial needs. As Dr. Gabor Maté explains in his discussions on societal pressures, “our culture frequently prioritizes productivity and economic gain over individual well-being, causing people to overwork as a coping mechanism for underlying emotional pain and a sense of emptiness.”

The risk is that overdoing it with multiple jobs is a recipe for burnout, whether you are a junior employee or a senior executive. Consider the ‘mighty’ Steve Jobs, who once described his time juggling CEO roles at Pixar and Apple as “rough, really rough—the worst time in my life. I worked 14-hour days, struggled to balance the two jobs with my family and my health, and started to get kidney stones. It got close to killing me.”

Besides, overemployment can be legally risky. Some contracts prohibit working with competitors or taking on additional employment, which could lead to legal trouble or job termination. Spreading yourself too thin across more than one full-time job can decrease your performance in each. Ironically, by trying to secure more income streams for job security, you might end up performing poorly and risk losing them all.

Plus, it’s really just a fix that covers up bigger issues—like companies not doing enough to keep jobs stable (or maybe some of us just not being the best at handling our money – only 14% of overall Americans would be able to cover two to three months of expenses with their emergency fund).

Time to change the narrative

Layoffs are rough for everyone, and I’ve been there firsthand, making those tough calls as part of management. Of course, it’s the people directly affected who really feel the sting. Let’s change it.

I think we’ve all been caught off guard by the economy at some point, forcing companies to pivot. But how many times have companies overhired—I’ve been there, done that myself—thinking that throwing more employees into the mix would lead to stellar growth?

Businesses should focus on keeping things more stable, planning properly, and using layoffs only as a last resort. We need to push for changes that make one good job enough to live on, tackling both financial and societal pressures.

Thanks to that, overemployment, like layoffs, won’t become the new norm. That should be desired, given the implications this would have on our society.