his Metaphorical Phrasal-Noun is also Industry Terminology because this phrase — presently — is only used in the corporate world (usually in the form of “The Higher-Ups”).  However — in this-day-and-age, when so many people are so concerned about being “woke” and “PC” — I am surprised that this term has not been “Cancelled”.  Because it is actually quite Elitist & Rude in a very disgusting Classist way.

his term probably comes from the fact that — in the past — large companies often occupied an entire building — or at-least a large portion of that building.  And, it is usually the executives of the company — (those who this term refers to) — who occupied the “higher” levels of that building.  There-fore — to a person who has a “Lower-Level” job in the company…

Perhaps, Being “Upstairs” With The Hot-Shots & Executives Is Not Such A Great Place To Be After-All

espite the logical description from above — this is also an example of how (in The Corporate World) people often take perfectly good English and change it to fit some sort of “pop-culture”.  And I’m referring to the “pop-culture” of “Corporate Language”…  (yes, there is such a thing.)

he term “Higher-Up” is — by itself — a Prepositional Phrasal-Adjective which is used to say that something (like the executives in the building) are at a physically “higher” elevation than some other thing.  But then — by adding an “s” to the end of the term — it magically becomes a Phrasal-Noun used to describe people.  And since it is describing one thing as being some other thing which it literally is not — then it is Metaphorical.

his practice of describing people by simply taking some Quality or Condition about them, and then turning the Adjective that describes that into a Phrasal-Noun to describe those people — implies that those people are nothing more than that one Quality or Condition…  As if that is their “Identity”.

n this particular case — it (sort of) “Elevates” those people (no pun intended).  But in almost all other instances — it does the opposite!  (Like referring to people who ARE creative as being “Creatives”.)  There is much more to a person that some specific quality about them.  And categorizing them ALWAYS limits that person, as well as the way that others think about them.

his is a VERY common practice in the modern “Pop-Culture” of “Corporate Language”…  (And it is actually the OPPOSITE to what is intended by PC culture, which is what “Corporate Culture” CLAIMS to be.)  Therefore — in both Theory & Practice…  It makes no sense.  😐

his term is not used to refer to people who are simply at a higher level in a company.  Instead — this term is used to say that the “Higher-Ups” are somehow “More Important” or “Better” than others.  And I don’t mean that they are “More important to the company”, or  “Better at their job”.  Even the most “woke” PC nut-job knows that there are those who are “More Important” in a company, or “Better” at what they do than others.

ut this phrase is used to say that the PERSON is “more important”, and “better” AS A PERSON than other people.  They are Metaphorically “Higher Up” in their being.  However — history has shown us — extensively — that the type of people that think this way — are actually quite horrible, disgusting, and terrible people that The World would do much-better without.

o the reason that I dis-like this phrase so much is because:  It is an example of the type of language that is actually very divisive, and will work against you if you use it.  Because — essentially — what is happening if you refer to other people as your “Higher-Ups” (even if it is only because they hold a “higher” position in the company) — then you are implying — both outwardly and to your sub-conscious mind — that the other person is somehow “better” than you.

his term is not only dis-empowering to the one individual who is supposedly NOT the “Higher-Up” — but it also falsely boosts the ego of the other who THINKS that they ARE “Higher-Up” (which they are not).  And this — in-turn — only strengthens and complicates the original situation even more.

hat is another very good question.  And the answer is definitely NOT to refer to those people as one’s “Superiors”.  Although that would be “Better English”, as it is the proper term for what the term “Higher-Ups” actually describes.  But the meaning between each term is exactly the same.

o very simply — and very correctly — refer to any person who has a “higher” level in a company or organization than you may have, by that person’s title…

nd if you are referring to someone who is not YOUR “Supervisor” / “Manager” / etc. — but you are generally referring to individuals in a company (in The 3rd Person) — then the term:  “Executive” is perfectly fine — and is in no way demeaning to anyone.

hat makes the term (one’s) “Higher-Ups” — one which I certainly do NOT recommend using — is the fact that it is both Overt & Sub-Conscious Manipulation & Social Class-Distinction.  And this has been proven throughout history to NOT serve Mankind — if We are EVER to evolve to a Higher State Of Reality.

reality which which is considered to be Wholly & Completely “NOT Acceptable” for us to achieve — by those wretched individuals who considered themselves to be…