Abusive leadership has multiple interchangeable terms, such as destructive leadership, dark side leadership, petty tyranny, toxic leadership, tyrannical leadership, and harassment, to explain roughly the same thing. Whichever term utilized, none of them are healthy for a work environment in Student Affairs, whose purpose is to provide guidance, service, and care for college students with regularity, consistency, and efficiency. If their main task is creating that welcoming and inclusive environment for students--including student conduct conversations and advisor-role--related conversations for the smooth running of groups and creating "good" environment for students--why, as professionals, are they so bad at creating it for themselves? Why do they treat each other so badly at different points for different reasons? The research points to burnout as one reason, which is known to be common among student affairs professionals leaving the profession. Supervisory issues is another reason--such as supervisors who did not value the work being done, were not supportive, made decisions that benefitted them and not students, lack of leadership, mentorship, and effective modeled work behaviors, and finally, supervisors who left other staff members holding the bag for tough decisions. While it is realized that management training is lacking for supervisors in this field, especially when a professional rises to the director-level and above, avenues should be provided to introduce and develop effective skills to lead a department. There is a lot to be learned about hiring processes, effective leadership/management, institutional politics, and resilience. More important, there is a lot to be learned about basic human decency, simple kindness, and inclusion.