The uncaring so far—customer service representatives, supervisors, even a vice president—are more interested in passing on the problem to someone else.

“I’m just the dispatcher,” yesterday’s pass-the-buckster told me.

“No one else has ever had this problem before,” the VP told me then ended the call with “Have a nice day!”

At every level, each person dutifully checks off their customer service goals: 1. Be sure to say, “We appreciate your business,” 2. Always ask, “Is there anything else I can do for you?” and 3. Tell the customer to have a nice day (even though it’s 9:30 at night). But nothing gets solved.

It’s no wonder so many workers from all industries come to me with this complaint: Why is my work so unfulfilling? How can I have more meaning in my work? How can I be more appreciated?

Well here’s an idea.

Choose to have a purpose for the work you do—not just goals.

While “goals and metrics are essential for achieving success, too often they are established without a clear sense of purpose,” says CEO Mark Samuel in his book “Making Yourself Indispensable: The Power of Personal Accountability.”

“Goals without a purpose behind them will generally create an ‘empty’ feeling of going through the motions,” he says.

But making the choice between being purpose-driven or goal-driven “has the highest correlation to success, indispensability and personal fulfillment.”

Whether your company sets goals to achieve customer satisfaction, sales or quality, every day, “It becomes about being busy and doing what we are told rather than about making a meaningful difference,” he says. There’s no clear sense of purpose.

And that’s why customers like me get what he calls an “empty experience devoid of the care, consideration and empathy that make up true customer service.” Not to mention no resolution.

But if you are purpose driven, you are dedicated and “in that dedication you will go beyond satisfactory performance or acceptable communication to achieve excellent results.”

“If you have a purpose of customer satisfaction, it won’t be the checklist that is most important. It will be your care, concern, and dedication to serving your customer that drives your communication, behavior and actions. You will go out of your way to serve your customer because that is your purpose.” And that adds up to more personal fulfillment, appreciation and yes, even becoming indispensable at your job.

It starts with personal accountability, which as Samuel points out, is a life value and competency for success.

What is so hard about that and why aren’t more workers personally accountable? You may be fearful that if you’re accountable you’ll get blamed if something goes wrong. Or that if you take a risk, a mistake could happen.

You might fear success, says Samuel. If you are more successful, then you’ll need to meet higher standards. What if you can’t handle these expectations?

It takes courage to be accountable. “You don’t cover up. You don’t escape. You don’t pretend. You don’t censure or play CYA games,” he says. “You boldly admit what doesn’t work and you trust that you have the strength and resources to eventually find solutions.”

You also end up with grateful customers who keep your company going. And much more fulfilling days at the office. Instead of focusing on a bunch of meaningless drivel, when you care, everyone really does have a nicer day.

Oh yes, one more thing: Could this job have no–or really low– stress?

All of these factors—a bad boss, work you don’t enjoy, poor relationships and insecurity–can contribute to undesirable work situations and add to stress. You control some factors more than others.

But even a job in a room overlooking the ocean with your dog at your feet has its stressful moments. And what you may find stressful, someone else may find exhilarating.

Stress is everywhere and in small doses, is good for you. When you have to handle something unexpected and are challenged to work faster, smarter and more creatively, you feel stress as a powerful burst of energy.

There’s also a difference between stress and challenge.

“A workplace challenge puts a demand on you that temporarily goes beyond the routine level for your job,” say Laurence Shatkin and the editors at JIST in the book 150 Best Low-Stress Jobs.

When meeting a challenge, it may require you to think harder, exert more physical strength, show more patience, put in extra hours, pay more attention to details and face more competition, they say.

But when the demand greatly exceeds your abilities and you have good reason to expect to fail, that’s stress.

And when that “demand is the normal level of expected work output rather than the exception,” it’s stress.

It’s beyond a challenge when your “greater effort saps your energy; the demands on your patience leave you burnt out; the longer hours of work feel like a prison sentence.”

When that turns into chronic stress, that is not good for you and can lead to problems.

But is it possible to minimize the level of stress you may encounter depending on the type of work you do? Yes. It helps to know what stresses you most.

Some workers tell me they can’t deal with unpleasant people.

If that’s you, take a look at their list of 50 jobs that deal the least with unpleasant or angry people. It includes: mathematicians, computer software engineers, physicists, animal trainers, massage therapists, curators and hydrologists.

Other workers can’t stomach competition. The list of jobs with the lowest level of competition include: tour guides and escorts, museum conservators, archivists, file clerks, librarians, bakers and meter readers.

The book points out that time pressures and constant deadlines are the single most important cause of workplace stress and illness that result from it.

Jobs with low time pressures include fitness trainers, computer software engineers, electrical engineers, funeral attendants and political scientists.

I’ve also known people who don’t want the pressure of knowing a mistake they make can cause catastrophic results. Jobs with the least consequence of error include bakers, audio-visual collections specialists, survey researchers, sociologists, credit analysts, home appliance repairers and commercial and industrial designers.

Of course the more responsible a job the higher the economic reward, but then, that comes with more stress. Is there a perfect mix?

Low-stress jobs with the highest overall combined ratings for earnings, projected growth and number of openings include computer software engineers, sales managers, civil and environmental engineers, environmental scientists, construction and building inspectors, set and exhibit designers, zoologists and wildlife biologist.

Whether you head in one of these directions should be contingent upon how you’re wired plus other factors. Because doing something that just isn’t you–you guessed it–can cause even more stress.

It’s that moment you realize you lost the file with your last six months of notes for that make-or-break project. Or in the middle of a job interview when they ask: “Why’d you leave your last two jobs after only three months?

Out loud or to yourself, you react to stress many times in a day at work or in a job hunt. In that moment, it’s stress city. Hard to think straight. As a result, you say or do something you’ll regret.

What if you could keep yourself from being your own worst enemy and not become unglued in crisis or stressful situations?

The first and most important rule for taking control is to get yourself under control first, says Mark Goulston, author of “Just Listen: Discover the Secret to Getting through to Absolutely Anyone.”

But, you may be saying, I already know how to handle a tense situation. Most likely, you don’t know how to do it fast enough, says Goulston, a psychiatrist and consultant to FBI agents and hostage negotiators.

Because a few minutes after a stressful encounter, you usually calm down a bit. Your pulse slows and you breath more slowly. Then minutes or hours later you gain enough self-control to think through your options. When it’s too late.

“You’ve already lost a sale, alienated a boss or coworker. Or you’ve missed the moment to make a perfect comment or a great first impression,” he says.

In a moment of a big crisis, Goulston says we go through the “Oh F#@& to OK” process. This includes the:

• “Oh F#@&” reaction phase (“I’m screwed, it’s all over.)

• “Oh G-d” release phase (“This stuff always happens to me.”)

• “Oh Jeez” recenter phase (“Alright, I can fix this…”)

• “Oh Well” refocus stage (“I’m not going to let this ruin my career…here’s what I need to do to make it better.”)

• “OK” reengage phase (“I’m ready to fix this.”)

The secret is becoming consciously aware of these stages so you can “manipulate your emotional response at each stage” and then speed up the steps from start to end in minutes, says Goulston.

He’s not suggesting you can solve a crisis in minutes. He is saying “that you can think your way through to the possible solution that quickly.

So the first step to move your brain from panic to logic “is to put words to what you’re feeling at each stage”—silently or out loud.

When first reacting to a stressful situation, you don’t want to “lie to yourself and say, ‘I’m cool, I’m calm, it’s fine.’” It’s time to say—at first, anyway–“Oh f#@&” or I’m scared as hell.” he says.

After acknowledging your feelings, breath deeply and slowly through your nose until you let go of the powerful emotion. Relax. It might help to say the words of each stage: “Oh jeez…oh well.” Then start to think of what you can do to control the damage and do what you need to do.

This is also an invaluable tool if you tend to cry when feeling attacked by someone.

“By actively acknowledging the urge to cry (“Okay, this is the “Oh G-d” stage and I feel like crying at this point’) rather than trying to fight it, you’ll be in the powerful position of observing that option and deciding against it,” says Goulston.

There are dozens of things that can and will go wrong in your day. Rehearse these steps in your mind to so that next time you’re bubbling over with anxiety, your brain will go from panic to logic much quicker.

Here’s the difference.

When you only wonder: “Where are the jobs?” you’re focused on staying merely employed.

But when focused on discovering new ways to apply your talents and interests to the megatrends shaping the world, that’s thinking about staying employable for the future.

Doing the latter will keep you relevant which means you’re less likely to be in that constant state of asking: “Where’s my next job?”

Yes, this takes time and research. And yes, the work world will keep changing–probably mostly due to technology. But it will lead to enlightening discovery that then leads you to, well, a way to stay employable the rest of your career.

It’s a matter of looking at trends and asking questions that focus on what work will be needed as a result of those trends.

In an article in The Futurist, managing editor Cynthia Wagner talks about three approaches to help do that. They include “retrofitting.”

This is when you add new skills to an existing job or incorporate new trends and social changes into a current job.

An example might be the successful plumber referenced in a recent New York Times Magazine article on the new economic rules. Such a plumber “who has mastered all the new water-flow sensor technology and pipe-fitting innovations…can make more than $100,000 a year, while other plumbers who just know the basics, could make less than $20,000.”

To examine how to “retrofit” your career, ask yourself:

• How do technological trends and social changes apply to my career?
• What new skills and knowledge can I add to my line of work to support those?
• Can Iincorporate new trends into my current work, and if so, how?

Wagner also points to “blending careers.”

This is when you make a connection among two or more separate areas. You can do this by combining skills or functions from different jobs or industries to create new specialties.

As one example, she cites the blending of work in human and environmental health. This has resulted in the emerging field of environmental health nursing, where professionals treat patients exposed to toxins.

A broader look at this field includes occupational and environmental health nursing, a specialty that has evolvedinto “a health care industry that includes health promotion, case management, environmental health, counseling, legal and regulatory compliance and detection of workplace hazards,” says Pat McKay, occupational health nurse.

One of my clients with 15 years sales experience and a personal interest in Crohn’s disease is another example. He had developed exceptional skills as a persuasive communicator and excellentpresenter. He blended these skills with his interest and became a medical educator specializing in Crohn’s disease.

Ask yourself: What skills, interests and talents do I have that I can blend into a new specialty and fit a growing need?

The third approach is good old problem solving by looking at problems people will face and coming up with new roles and functions to help solve them.

Take the problems the communications age has brought including privacy and security. As a result, one growing area is digital footprint management.

As issues such as privacy, terrorism and overall rage in society become more prominent, new problems around security in cyberspace, immigration, security preparedness and food safety will evolve.

Ask yourself: As trends develop and new problems arise as a result, what services will be needed to support customers and businesses? Which ones interest me?

Start asking these questions sooner than later—and often.

How could what happened to them happen to you? Your downfall may not make headlines. But your lack of good communication skills could stall your career or land you out on the street.

No matter your job title, it’s the skill that allows you to work well with co-workers and clients. To lead and inspire others to get things done. Whether you work for yourself or someone else, “good communication skills” is in every job description.

So how are yours? Hint: Just because you can talk doesn’t mean you communicate well.

“Most people feel they have above-average communication skills and average presentation skills,” says Kurt W. Mortensen, author of “The Laws of Charisma.”

The reality is most people are lucky to have average communication skills and below-average presentation skills, he says.

What did in Charlie Sheen? His public meltdown.

He “lost control and went on a rampage not once, twice, but for a significant portion of 2011,” say Ben and Kelly Decker in the Decker Communications list of the 10 worst communicators in 2011.

Sheen, #3 on the list, is a “painfully clear example of how erratic communication can destroy a reputation, and perhaps a career.”

Rupert and James Murdoch, #4, communicated elusively and “went on the defensive in the wake of their cell phone hacking scandal” associated with their News Corporation companies.

When Hewlett Packard cited reasons for firing CEO Apotheker, #9, they said, “Communications were horrible.”

Known for “not communicating a clear vision for HP” and “not getting the consensus and buy-in of his executive board,” he also failed to communicate clearly with staff and customers, say the Deckers.

On their top ten best communicators in 2011 we have Steve Jobs, whom they describe as the “rare one who creates and develops vision, communicates it clearly and colorfully and then leads to completion.” He also didn’t rely on PowerPoint to make his point, speaking from the heart, “well-rehearsed, but real—authentic, and always with a message.”

There’s Lady Gaga, who although she “projects a character that’s pretty out there,” when she speaks, she’s articulate, poised, confident and sincere and personifies originality. She can “own a stage” with her “goosebump-inducing cadence when delivering a speech.”

They also like Christine Legarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, named one of the most powerful people by Forbes. She speaks with clarity andcandidness, knows the facts yet summarizes key points, is knowledgeable, measured and speaks with firmness and grace.

When it comes to your own fine-tuning, take a look at one maddening communication habit you probably do without even knowing: the usage of vocal fillers.

These are “Um”,  “uh,” “ya know” and the one that makes me so crazy I write about it every

year–“like” or “I’m like.”

They “can destroy your presentation, annoy people, hurt your credibility and make listeners tense,” says author Mortensen.

Such non-words are worse than sloppy, says Ben Decker. “They are lazy and distracting.”

Often used because people don’t want silence, they “let comfort be their guide when it comes to communications,” he says, heading straight for the “Ums,” “uhs” and “likes.”

To improve, record yourself and ask others to count how many repetitive, irritating non-words you say per minute. But most of all, replace non-words with pauses.

As you’re about to say, “And I’m like,” just stop.

“Then go on. Miracles will happen over time,” he says.

And I could finally stop writing about it. Until then, that’s your assignment for 2012.

Before you craft a single sentence, here’s the one and only guideline you will need to ask to know whether to keep or leave something off your resume:

Does this information position me the way I want to be seen?

If the information isn’t relevant, doesn’t support your new career objective or help build a case for how you want an employer to see you, leave it off.

Yes, that means you may not list every job you’ve had. It could even mean leaving off the first 10 years of your work life.

But what if, under no circumstances, do you want to leave gaps? Here are a few solutions.

First, in a broad summary statement early on, reference the fact that you have 10 years, for example, in public relations.

When it comes to listing experience, write a phrase that explains what you were doing from 1995 to 2002 that plays it down: “Prior positions include…” then list those jobs.

Or, let’s say you’re making a change from database analyst to sales, and while in transition you’ve had several jobs unrelated to either role. Try this sentence: “Other positions include temporary administrative jobs.”

For whatever reason, it might be important to show that you worked during a period, but the details aren’t relevant to what you want to do next. So again, de-emphasize it, listing the jobs without going into detail.

Keep this goal fixed in your mind as you’re writing the other sections of your resume: To help the reader understand your potential to be successful in this new career. Show the reader you not only have past experience, but also relevant, transferrable skills, newly acquired knowledge–if you gotten more education–and the passion that qualifies you for this new career.

Be sure to:

• Make a point to state your transferable skills so the reader can make the leap.

• Include relevant volunteer experience that enhances your credentials and demonstrates your interest.

• List relevant achievements from your past that illustrate how you made a difference and can do so in this new career.

For example, one of my clients was a nurse who wanted to show that she had skills, knowledge and hands-on experience in communications, the area she wanted to work in. So she included this achievement:

“Assisted in development of a documentary film that was viewed by 9 million students and contributed to a significant reduction in traumatic injuries.”

This client with a nonprofit background, wanted to show his strategic-marketing and planning skills. He listed this achievement:

“Developed and implemented a communications strategy that resulted in the passage of a $90-million tax levy.”

This person—who had been in highly technical roles–wanted to be a trainer. She used this achievement on her new resume:

“Trained team of designers on Macintosh operating procedures that significantly enhanced graphic presentations.”

Be careful not to cross the line between persuasive marketing and lying. Lying would be misrepresenting number of years you’ve done something, exaggerating or taking credit for something you didn’t do.

When writing any kind of resume—career changer or not—I don’t believe I a lot of rules. Except one: Never lie.

But when it comes to creating the best marketing document to help potential employers see you’ve got what it takes to be successful in this new career, the rule is: Don’t tell all, do tell what’s relevant.

But good—and maybe surprising–news: Some older workers are pleased as punch with their younger superiors, even giddyabout their mutual admiration and respect for each others’ differences. And visa versa.

This younger boss/older worker phenomena is gaining steam as older employees work longer. A 2011 Pitney Bowes survey says 20 percent of midlevel corporate employees report to a younger boss. A 2010 Career Builder survey showed that four out of ten workers over 35 work for a younger boss.

If you’re in one of these potentially cantankerous relationships, perhaps a look at how some of them work so well will help.

Steven Lowell, 38, community manager for Voice 123, told me if I was looking for people who hate their younger bosses, don’t talk to him.

His boss, Leo Lopez, 27, used to report to him, which could make things even weirder. But it’s not.

The switch happened when the company was going through a change and Lowell told him “I want you to take my job.”

“It was a dare of sorts to motivate. Maybe I was surprised at how much he rose to the challenge to leap from my position completely and become my boss,” says Lowell.

But he quickly learned of Lopez’s skill and says their relationship works because they have no problem being completely honest with each other and “we do not take things personally.”

Since he’s in New York and Lopez is based in Bogotá, Colombia, they speak a lot on Skype and visit each other. The age difference becomes apparent to Lowell when the younger Lopez presents ideas and “I realize that I am getting older and may not be on the pulse of what many consider mainstream.”

On the other hand, Lowell’s longer “life experience allows for me to let him know ‘why people do what they do.’”

Kathleen Berzon, 43 and director of public relations at The Fresh Diet in Miama, reports to CEO Zalmi Duchman, age 31.

“We both have things to learn from one another,” says Berzon.

“He is more willing to take risks in business. It’s refreshing and should not be mistaken as naivety.”

Differences show up in communication style. He typically communicates via email only. “I’m still inclined to not only email but pick up the phone as well. I had to grow accustomed to his ‘text style’ format of emails.”

“Ours is a mutual respect that is not based on how many more Presidents I’ve witnessed in the White House.”

Sue, 53, works for an 18-year old boss at a marketing company. “I assumed he knew what he was doing or the company would not have made him a manager,” she says.

“He trained me and did a great job explaining, then tactfully pointing out ways I could improve. I’ve worked with a lot of different types of managers and very few take that time to actually say ‘thank you’ at the end of the work day or compliment you at all. He does both, and in this respect, he is one of the best supervisors I’ve worked with.”

She observes that when it comes to younger bosses, “young people often have an energy, enthusiasm and drive to prove themselves that makes up for any lack of experience.”

Regardless of age, when it comes to the relationship between manager and employee, the old fashioned concept of appreciation for the other person still works like magic.

As one man who has spent much of his career researching this four-letter phenomena says, luck has the power “to transform the improbable into the possible” and to make the difference between “reward and ruin, happiness and despair.”

According to psychologist Richard Wiseman and his research, lucky people create, notice and act on chance opportunities and transform bad luck into good fortune. Heaven knows, this can come in handy in one’s career.

How does this work? Lucky people, says the author of The Luck Factor: Changing Your Luck, Changing Your Life, tend to be calmer and more relaxed than most and therefore are open to what’s around them and more likely to notice chance opportunities.

And because they are more relaxed, when lucky people meet others, they’re tuned into opportunities.

“Lucky people see what is there, rather than trying to find what they want to see” and as a result, are “more receptive to any opportunities that arise naturally,” he says.

Lucky people also build and maintain a strong “network of luck,” he says. They tend to be more extroverted, which “significantly increases the likelihood of having a chance encounter in three ways—meeting a large number of people, being a ‘social magnet,’ and keeping in contact with people.”

And of course, the more people you meet, the greater chances you have of running into someone who can have a positive effect on your career.

Lucky people are also open to new experiences, says Wiseman. They like variety and trying new things. This greater openness can lead to more chance opportunities.

Lucky people expect the best for the future which helps them fulfill their ambitions. If something bad happens, lucky people see it as short-lived and don’t dwell on it. They are convinced that any ill fortune will work out for the best in the long-run.

Unlucky people are convinced any good luck they have will only last for a short time, to be “quickly followed by their regular dose of bad luck.”

Typically they also don’t speak about “trying to discover why they had not been successful in the past” with a reluctance to learn from their mistakes.

But lucky people treat their failures as a chance to learn and then focus on exploring other ways of solving a problem.

Lucky people expect their interactions with others to be lucky and successful. Unlucky folks “believe that they are destined to meet people who are far more downbeat, sad and boring.”

These expectations of course, then affect how others respond to you. “Throughout the business world, expectations have the power to become self-fulfilling prophecies,” says Wiseman.

It is not just dumb luck to be lucky. It’s a way of thinking. If you’re not feeling so lucky, one technique he suggests to help change your thinking is the use of a luck diary.

At the end of every day, you write down the positive and lucky things that happened.

That builds up and what you’re doing “is adding on, each day,” he explains in a Fast Company article. So you “look back and it’s five days’ worth of positive events and now it’s day six. After doing that for a month, it’s difficult not to be thinking about the good things that are happening.”

With any luck, that can’t help but rub off on you and your career.

Having said that, this small thing can have ramifications at work. So it’s worth a mention, right?

That was it. The small, really annoying thing. Did you catch it? The usage of “Right?” with that question mark at the end. It’s how many people talk in the workplace. They say a sentence then end it with, “Right?” but don’t listen for or really want a response.

It’s not new, but more pervasive and these days I am particularly sensitive to this since I have been listening to dozens of professionals talk. I’m working on a project that requires me to interview people who toil away in various workplaces. And I do not exaggerate when I say that not a single interview has been without the speaker ending about every fifth sentence with: “Right?” or a combination, “You know what I mean, right?”

One person, in describing his co-worker told me, “He expects everyone to speak up if there is a problem, right?” This prompted me to think, “How would I know?” which led me to wonder if this person was sure about what he was saying.

Another worker, in reference to his boss said: “He sometimes thinks small talk is a waste of time, right?” That made me think: “Are you asking me if your boss thinks this or if I agree that small talk is a waste of time? And if I didn’t agree, is our conversation over?”

I broached the subject with an executive who I hear use “Right?” to end her sentences. When I asked her if she even knew she did it, she said, “Yes, on occasion,” adding that she hears it from others then ends up saying it herself.

“When I hear it from other people it drives me crazy,” she said. “I feel irritated with the individual. I want to say, ‘get on with your point and quit throwing out extraneous blah blah blah and asking for my approval.’”

She attributes it possibly, to the fear of offending someone. As a result, though, “They’re irritating, which is another type of offensiveness.”

An employer who has been interviewing a lot told me he too finds it irritating. “It’s a subconscious device to get someone to agree with you whether you do or not, to reinforce their opinion.”

Another employer says it represents insecurity. “It’s as if the person needs constant validation that they’re right.”

When I hear it, I am left with a similar feeling I get when people’s sentences rise at the end of every statement which makes what they’ve said sound like a question or when they sprinkle “like’s” and “sort of’s” and “maybe’s” throughout a statement.

The speaker is hedging. Not sure they’re committed to what they’re saying. Or it’s as if they’re trying to get me to agree.

It’s called a “tag question,” according to Dr. David Silva, professor of linguistics at the University of Texas at Arlington.

By using them, he says, yes, “there’s something to the idea of fostering a certain type of relationship between the speaker and the hearer, one that seeks to build mutual understanding and shared attitudes.”

Someone in the workplace might use “Right?” to confirm what they said, “giving you a chance to be my ally on this particular matter,” says Silva.

Wherever it comes from, it comes down to this: You can sound as if you’re speaking without the courage of your convictions, which is not helpful for your career.

If you can’t say what you mean and stand behind it, it’s hard to have a real conversation. It’s tough to help others improve and build relationships. To fix things and get work done. And that’s no small thing. Right?

If you want someone to be present and productive, a little empathy goes a long way. And not just when beloved animals or people die. It’s also essential when a family member–or you–become terminally ill and you suddenly have added strains and responsibilities.

How hard is it to get management’s support? For some, very.

When Frances Ponick’s daughter died of a brain tumor she says, “My feelings were pretty much ignored.” Another employee at the company had just lost his wife to cancer, and “we had no one to talk to but each other. It was hard and strange. We felt shunned.”

It’s not that management was insensitive as much as ignorant, she says. “They simply didn’t know what to do with employees who were bereaved.”

When word of Anna Renault’s cancer diagnosis spread throughout the company, her two managers “bent over backwards to be nice about the fact that I would be off work for about six weeks.”

She returned to work where “some days there was an attitude of unreasonable expectation.” One boss “expected me to work really hard to catch up within the first week or two–not realistic even if I had not had cancer and two surgeries and two hemorrhages!”

She says she can understand her boss’s concern for getting the work done, “but I did expect more compassion.”

When Lori Ames’ son was diagnosed with a brain tumor she couldn’t go to work and her boss felt abandoned.

“We just ultimately mutually agreed that I would step down. I think my boss did the best she could. Her concern was running a business and how my son’s illness and my absence affected her life.”

Joni Aldrich’s experience was different when her husband was diagnosed with cancer and for two years they commuted 800 miles for treatment.

“I had always been a good and valued employee, and because I was the only one trained to do my job my company worked with me,” she says.

She often worked fewer and odd hours, but she and her boss “talked openly about what was happening. We never had any problems. Consequently, I was able to work full time and get my husband through three outpatient stem cell transplants.”

Most companies make allowances for traditional mourning. But as medicine becomes more advanced, a second type of “new grief” must be recognized. That’s what clinical psychologist Joseph Nowinski says people deal with when a loved one receives a terminal diagnosis.

It’s a “protracted process that leads to treatment, possible remission, possible relapse,” explains the co-author of Saying Goodbye: How Families Can Find Renewal through Loss.

The impatience that some workers sense from employers “reflects the fact that we have come to value productivity and efficiency above all else. The idea that something like grief might slow us down–make us less productive–has become increasingly unacceptable.”

Nowinski favors ways for colleagues and co-workers to be part of a support network by:

• Training supervisors to support workers dealing with terminal illness.
• Offering on-site support groups for employees in this situation.
• Enacting job sharing and flexible work hours to accommodate workers.
• Creating a system where employees can voluntarily help out coworkers in need of support.
• Educating human resources so it’s another source of information and support.

If lower productivity is a concern, employers have to ask themselves this: How productive and motivated will an employee be when he or she works for someone who is unsupportive and lacks empathy about their pain, suffering or loss? Probably not very.