Loyalty is often considered one of the most admirable traits an employee can bring to work. It signals commitment, teamwork and a willingness to go above and beyond.
And in many organizations, loyalty is praised as the glue that holds culture together and the fuel that drives performance.
But new research suggests that loyalty can also make employees susceptible to wage exploitation.
MORE NEWS: The 100 Best Doctors in Arizona for 2026
INDUSTRY INSIGHTS: Want more news like this? Get our free newsletter here
Christopher Neck, a professor of management at Arizona State University’s W. P. Carey School of Business, and his co-authors have found that practices such as unpaid overtime or skipped breaks are more likely to be seen as morally acceptable when framed as acts of dedication.
Their work was published in a peer-reviewed study titled “Loyalty as a Legitimizer of Wage Theft” in the Journal of Business Ethics.
This research arrives at a moment when many companies are rethinking culture in the new year. As organizations head into 2026 talking about renewed purpose, belonging and commitment, the study raises a philosophical question: What happens when loyalty is emphasized without equally strong ethical boundaries?
Here, Neck unpacks why loyalty can blur moral lines at work, how hustle culture and burnout have become normalized, and where the boundary lies between healthy commitment and harmful self-sacrifice.
Question: Your recent study suggests loyalty isn’t always the virtue we assume it is. What surprised you most about how loyalty can make people more accepting of wage theft?
Answer: What surprised us most was not that loyalty mattered, but how powerful it was in changing people’s moral judgment. We tend to think of loyalty as an unqualified good, something that makes workplaces stronger and more humane. What we found is that when people strongly value loyalty to a company, they are more willing to see unpaid work as acceptable or at least not that bad.
In other words, loyalty can quietly flip the script. Instead of seeing unpaid overtime or skipped breaks as the company taking advantage of workers, people start seeing it as employees stepping up for the greater good. The same behavior that would feel wrong in a neutral setting suddenly feels justified when it is framed as helping the team or supporting the organization.
That was the real surprise. Loyalty didn’t just soften reactions to wage theft; it actually led some people to view it as legitimate. A moral value that usually protects relationships can, in certain contexts, end up protecting unfair practices.
Q: Many employees pride themselves on doing whatever it takes for their company. At what point does that mindset cross the line from commitment into moral blind spots around unpaid labor?
A: Doing whatever it takes becomes a problem when sacrifice stops being voluntary and starts being expected. Staying late once in a while to help during a busy week is very different from routinely working off the clock because that is just how things are done. The line gets crossed when saying no feels like letting people down or being disloyal.
Our research suggests that strong loyalty creates a sense of obligation. Employees begin to feel that giving up pay, breaks or personal time is part of being a good team member, even when it violates basic labor standards. At that point, commitment is no longer just about effort or pride; it becomes a moral pressure.
The danger is that people stop asking whether something is fair and start asking whether it shows loyalty. When loyalty becomes the primary yardstick, ethical concerns about unpaid labor fade into the background.
Q: Wage theft is often framed as a management failure, but your findings point to employee psychology as well. How does loyalty change the way workers judge what’s fair or ethical at work?
A: Wage theft is often blamed on bad managers or weak oversight, and those factors absolutely matter. What our research adds is that employees themselves can unintentionally help legitimize these practices through how they think about loyalty.
When people strongly value loyalty to their employer, they are more likely to judge unpaid work as reasonable or deserved. They may think things like, “Everyone has to pitch in” or “This is just part of paying your dues.” Loyalty shifts the focus from rights and fairness to sacrifice and commitment.
This does not mean employees are at fault. It means human psychology plays a role. People want to see themselves as good and loyal, and that desire can change how they interpret situations that would otherwise feel clearly unfair.
Q: As companies head into 2026 talking about renewed culture and purpose, what risks do you see when leaders emphasize loyalty without equally strong ethical guardrails?
A: When leaders emphasize loyalty without clear ethical boundaries, they risk encouraging silence and self-sacrifice at the wrong moments. Employees may hesitate to speak up about unpaid work or illegal practices because they do not want to appear disloyal or difficult.
Culture messages like “We are a family” or “We always go the extra mile” can sound positive, but without guardrails, they can blur important lines. If loyalty is praised more loudly than fairness, people may assume that sacrificing pay or time is simply part of belonging.
The safest cultures balance loyalty with clear rules and values. Leaders need to make it explicit that loyalty never requires giving up legally owed wages or basic protections. Otherwise, good intentions can quietly turn into harmful norms.
Q: Burnout and hustle culture remain major concerns. How does your research help explain why unpaid overtime and skipped breaks can become normalized, even defended, inside organizations?
A: Burnout and hustle culture thrive when sacrifice is framed as virtue. Our research helps explain why unpaid overtime and skipped breaks become normalized, because loyalty turns those behaviors into signals of commitment rather than warning signs.
When people believe that loyal employees should put the organization first, even at personal cost, unpaid work starts to feel noble. Employees may defend these practices themselves, saying things like, “Everyone here works hard” or “This is what success looks like.”
Over time, those beliefs spread. What started as an occasional extra effort becomes an unspoken expectation. Loyalty does not just excuse burnout; it can actively justify it.
Q: For workers who genuinely care about their organizations, what’s the key difference between healthy loyalty and the kind that unintentionally enables exploitation?
A: Healthy loyalty is rooted in mutual respect. It means caring about the organization while also believing that fair treatment and pay matter. Employees can be committed without sacrificing their basic rights.
Unhealthy loyalty demands one-sided sacrifice. It treats unpaid labor as proof of character and frames fairness concerns as selfish or disloyal. That is when loyalty stops being a strength and starts enabling exploitation.
The key difference is whether loyalty allows room for boundaries. Healthy loyalty says, “I care about this place, and I expect it to care about me too.” Unhealthy loyalty says, “I care about this place even if it costs me what I am owed.”
