Unreasonable Demands Are a Form of "Tempering"? Stop Leading Teams with an Old Mindset!

In the management memories of many senior executives, there is a golden rule that was once viewed as an absolute truth:

"Reasonable demands are training; unreasonable demands are tempering!"

In the past, we often viewed enduring hardships as a nutrient for growth, believing that high-pressure, iron-fisted military management was the only way to forge true leaders. When subordinates faced unreasonable tasks, they simply had to grit their teeth and swallow it.

However, in today's landscape of rising labor rights awareness and the strict implementation of workplace bullying prevention under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, I must seriously remind all corporate executives: This traditional golden rule of success has completely transformed into a fatal legal landmine under modern labor regulations and workplace bullying prevention guidelines.

When we beautify unreasonable demands as "tempering," we often unconsciously cross the legal red line defining workplace bullying. Why is this traditional management mindset highly likely to violate the law today? Let's take a deep dive from a legal perspective into the 7 critical points that managers absolutely cannot afford to ignore.

1. Exceeding the Reasonable Scope of Business: Hitting the Core Red Line of Workplace Bullying

Some managers might feel wronged and argue, "I just have high expectations for my employees and want them to grow quickly. Is that against the law?" Under the latest amendments to the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the legal definition of workplace bullying is very clear. One of its core elements is utilizing one's position or power to exceed the necessary and reasonable scope of business operations. When you intentionally make unreasonable demands and then pat the employee on the back privately saying, "This is just to temper you," an objective legal review will likely judge this behavior as exceeding what society deems reasonable business conduct. The law requires an employer's or manager's right of command and supervision to be built on rationality. Intentionally making unreasonable demands inherently satisfies the objective criteria for workplace bullying.

Key Takeaway: In the 21st century, unreasonable demands are no longer "tempering"—they are bullying.

2. Mistaking Abuse of Power for a Test: A Typical Pattern of Workplace Bullying

The Workplace Bullying Prevention Regulations (Draft) and the Directives for the Prevention of Unlawful Infringement in the Workplace clearly list various specific behavioral patterns of workplace bullying. Among them, if a manager intentionally assigns unreasonable tasks under the guise of "tempering" a subordinate, it easily constitutes an abuse of power in practice.

Specifically, abuse of power includes two extremes:

• The High Extreme: Intentionally assigning highly unreasonable or completely unachievable work goals.

• The Low Extreme: Assigning work that is visibly beneath the employee’s capabilities (e.g., forcing high-level talent to do mundane tasks day after day), or conversely, assigning tasks far beyond their position's capability without providing any guidance.

These management techniques—which used to be packaged as "testing an employee's stress resistance"—will now be recognized by courts and investigation panels as an improper abuse of power.

Key Takeaway: Management power is a responsibility, not a privilege for managers to abuse.

3. Violating the Principle of Proportionality: Deep Harm to Human Dignity

Judicial practice maintains a strict standard regarding the boundaries of managerial control. According to established court rulings, while supervisors have the authority to correct, warn, or urge subordinates to improve, any disciplinary method must be reasonable and adhere to the principle of proportionality.

If a manager's words, actions, or demands exceed what is acceptable by general societal standards (i.e., so-called "unreasonable tempering"), it ceases to be mere business guidance in the eyes of the law. Instead, it becomes a violation of the subordinate's human dignity. Once a manager crosses this line, the legitimacy of their discipline completely vanishes.

Key Takeaway: Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut—or severely reprimanding and punishing minor mistakes—is a clear violation of the principle of proportionality.

4. Setting Unattainable Goals: Easily Deriving into Chronic Verbal Abuse

When managers give employees unreasonable demands, employees generally struggle to achieve those performance goals due to a lack of corresponding resources and time.

At this point, traditional-minded managers often do not reflect on whether the goals were realistic. Instead, they habitually blame the failure on the employee's "poor stress tolerance" or "lack of competence," which escalates into worse bullying behaviors.

The most common manifestation is prolonged, inappropriate scolding or continuous devaluation, using phrases like: "If you can't even handle this little bit of tempering, what can you do?" This management style constantly denies the employee's dignity, existence, and contributions, ultimately evolving into chronic verbal abuse that destroys the employee's self-confidence.

Key Takeaway: Setting work and sales targets is fine, but they must be realistic and attainable.

5. Beware of the Overriding Proviso: A Single Instance of Severe Humiliation Counts

Many managers hold a fatal misconception that bullying must be a long-term, continuous, and high-frequency behavior to count legally. However, modern regulations contain an overriding risk proviso:

If a manager loses emotional control and severely humiliates a subordinate in public or launches severe personal attacks during an open meeting because the subordinate failed to meet an unreasonable goal, it can directly constitute workplace bullying—even if it only happens once. As long as the circumstances are severe, the new law specifies that continuity is not a requirement. This means managers can no longer use excuses like "I was just in a bad mood today," "It was an impulsive moment," or "We actually have a great relationship privately" to justify illegal conduct.

Key Takeaway: A manager's EQ is no longer just a matter of personal cultivation; it is a strict legal boundary.

6. Modern Management Mindset: Lawful and Reasonable Supervision Must Focus on the Issue, Not the Person

The iron-fisted management of the old era is completely unsuited for the new generation of talent. The old mindset of "unreasonable demands are tempering" is essentially mistaking the abuse of power for performance coaching.

Modern corporate managers must realize that lawful command and supervision must be objective (focusing on the matter, not the person) and based on realistic resource allocation. When an employee underperforms or fails to meet a goal, a manager's duty is to analyze the root causes together, provide assistance, and make adjustments—not to blindly apply more pressure.

Only by establishing psychological safety within the team can you truly unlock your employees' potential. This is the ultimate dividing line between an excellent leader and a mediocre manager.

Key Takeaway: "Focus on the matter, not the person" may be an old saying, but it remains the highest standard for demanding performance.

7. The Consequences of Ignoring Legal Red Lines: A Massive Lose-Lose for Managers and Enterprises

If a manager refuses to change these high-pressure management methods, resulting in severe harm to an employee's physical or mental health, the final cost is something neither the individual nor the company can afford.

In legal practice:

• The Manager: Faces severe internal corporate discipline, demotion, or even termination, alongside potential civil liability for damages or criminal liability.

• The Enterprise & Its Chief Executives: Face heavy government fines and reputational sanctions for violating the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

In today’s business environment—which highly values ESG, Corporate Governance Evaluation scores, and talent sustainability—such managers are not assets to a company; they are massive legal liabilities.

Key Takeaway: Non-compliant enterprises will have their company names and the names of their responsible persons publicly disclosed by the government.

💡 Lawyer Chen's Reminder

The true essence of management is to empower others, thereby empowering the team. When we genuinely care about every employee's mental health and workplace safety, you will find that reasonable guidance and warm encouragement bring out far higher performance from an excellent team than unreasonable tempering ever could.

I hope every corporate leader currently in a management position can let go of the baggage of the old era. Let us adopt progressive legal concepts to build a healthy workplace environment that delivers both high performance and human warmth.