Ask a Manager

It’s four answers to four questions. Here we go…

1. CEO shared family trip photos after announcing budget cuts

We just had a company-wide town hall, and the CEO — whom I’ve always known to be even-tempered and generally reasonable — kicked things off by sharing a recap and photos of his recent Disney World trip with 20 family members. This comes shortly after we were told about budget cuts, no bonuses, and rising health insurance costs that are eating into our modest merit increases. Needless to say, vacations aren’t exactly top of mind for most of us right now. Was this tone-deaf? Or am I overreacting?

It was tone-deaf.

Most people have no interest in seeing the CEO’s family trip photos at the best of times! Displaying the photos at all is weirdly self-centered for a town hall. But doing it right after announcing bad financial news is astonishingly out of touch.

2. Struggling new hire won’t stop aggressively complimenting our work

I work in a 30-person department in a much larger 10,000-person organization. The department is divided into several smaller teams with individual supervisors and team leads in addition to the more junior folk, and I’m the departmental manager.

We have a recent hire who is struggling performance wise. We have them on a PIP and are doing all we need to there. Some of the areas of improvement are really, really basic (and this is not an entry-level position) like “respond to colleagues’ email questions” and don’t no-show meetings. They don’t have much in the way of skills yet in the position either. I share this for context, that this employment relationship is really not going well. They also don’t have much grasp of organizational norms like not asking the CEO for direction on a project directly in the bathroom.

Yet this person loves to give work-related compliments. Daily “I’m so impressed by the quality of your work on this project” type of comments to me, who is more senior and decades more experienced than them. “I am struck by how passionate and hard-working this team is. Well done” after their colleagues have completed a project they had nothing to do with. Occasionally, this is peppered with unasked for, lengthy feedback on projects they had nothing to do with, with wacky suggestions for improvement. These have been easier to deal with directly.

The compliments, however, appear awkward for folks on the receiving end. I’ve noticed the immediate team barely responds anymore. It feels like this is the individual’s attempt to dominate and exert authority in areas where, frankly, they have no subject knowledge. How would you respond?

“Thank you, I appreciate that.” That’s it.

It’s possible that it’s an attempt to assert authority where they have none (the unsolicited feedback on projects they’re not involved with certainly sounds like that), but it’s also possible that they know they’re flailing and are looking for some way to better enmesh with the team / be liked / contribute something people will appreciate. It’s the wrong way to do it, but I’d look at it as an additional facet of the incompetence you’re seeing in other areas. They’re not reading situations well, they probably sense that on some level, and they’re trying to fix it … just badly.

If they were otherwise a promising employee and the inappropriate compliments were affecting their working relationships or the way they were perceived, it would be a kindness to talk to them about it. But since this is the least of the issues you’ve got to tackle with this person, a quick “thanks, appreciate it” is the way to go.

3. Calling out your company on social media

Last week Meta announced some changes to their free speech policies, including some quite awful examples of posts they will now allow, which include things like calling immigrants “dirt” and describing homosexuality as a mental illness. I don’t work for Meta, but I saw a post from a connection of a connection on LinkedIn who does work there. She’s written a long and (in my view) well-argued post, criticizing the new policy and outlining the harm to marginalized communities, including the LGBT+ community she’s a member of. Frankly I wish more people were as brave as her in calling out the terrible practices of their companies.

She has not put anything about her intention to leave, but my question is: is someone working for an organization as big and as politically influential as Meta risking their job by publicly criticizing their company on an issue like this? In my view it’s not the same as airing your office’s dirty laundry — it’s not like she’s posting about her boss Gary who she’s fallen out with. And these are major changes that will likely affect her community, maybe her personal online safety, and are quite obviously politically driven. But of course she is calling into question the wisdom of her organization’s leadership and the decisions of her colleagues, even if they are people she doesn’t know personally. What do you think?

Yes, there’s some risk to her job. Not necessarily the “call you into HR and fire you today” kind of risk, but the risk that she’ll be more likely to end up on lay-off lists? Or not be promoted into a higher-level position she might want at some point? Absolutely. (In theory there’s also the “fire you today” kind of risk, but she hopefully has enough of a read on the politics of her workplace to know whether that’s likely or not.)

It’s also true that the larger the company and the more they’re used to being part of the public dialogue (as Meta is, and especially right now), the more they’re probably used to these kinds of internal discussions playing out publicly and the less jarring it may feel internally.

4. My boss calls me, and only me, by my last name

I have been employed at my current company for 20+ years. My manager and I share the same first name. In one-on-one conversations or emails, he refers to me by my first name. In all other instances, he calls me by my last name. Others are starting to pick up on this during team meetings and they do the same. He only does this to me — everyone else is on a first name basis. It makes me feel disrespected. What is a good way to tell him this bothers me? And should it bother me?

I don’t know that he’s doing it to disrespect you, but you’re allowed to prefer being called by your first name!

My guess is that because you share a name, he might be trying to distinguish between the two of you. Obviously when he’s the one speaking, it’ll be obvious that when he says Lucien, he’s referring to the Lucien who is not him (unless he has a habit of talking about himself in the third person). But maybe he’s hoping that if he uses your last name, others will pick up on it (as they are) and it will cut down on confusion about which Lucien is being referenced when others talk. I don’t know — just a guess. Regardless, you can absolutely say to him, “I noticed you often call me Mackelberry instead of Lucien. I really prefer Lucien.”

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. People are bouncing on yoga balls during Zoom calls

I’m at an all-remote company. Zooms are our go-to. In the Zooms I organize, I prefer videos off and most people know that. (So I don’t have to do my hair or get distracted, and it just drains me so much!) Obviously I make exceptions where called for.

But I’m at the mercy of others when I join their meetings, and a lot of them have videos on as a default. And a few of my coworkers have recently started bouncing on yoga balls and walking on walking pads throughout their meetings. This makes me feel ill/seasick! And, then I feel really irritated at them, unfairly, because they’re making the meeting more difficult for me.

Will I seem overly nitpicky, grumpy, irritable if I ask them to just do videos off when they do this? I don’t have a medical condition like vertigo or anything. I’m one of the most senior execs in the company, FYI, and the people who do this are all my level or below. (None of them report to me directly.)

As a senior exec, you absolutely have the standing to say, “Kudos to anyone choosing to exercise during this call, but please turn your camera off if that’s you. The movement is rough on the rest of us.” And if that doesn’t solve it, feel free to direct it to specific people — “Jane, can you turn your camera off, please? The activity is distracting.”

Frankly, it’s obnoxious (and maybe a little performative?) that people aren’t figuring this out for themselves and need to be told, and I bet others on the call will be silently thanking you. You also probably won’t have to do this a ton; it’s the kind of message most people will retain after being told once.

Related:
is it unprofessional to take a Zoom call from a treadmill?

2. Employer wants to offer paid parental leave — but only for women

My employer is thinking about joining the modern working era and offering paid parental leave. But … only to women. As you can imagine, the reception is mixed. On one hand, we’re excited to possibly finally have something. On the other, many staff feel like this devalues a) the role of fathers, b) the responsibility of men to care for their children and partners, and c) the role of women in the workplace generally (after all, why promote a woman who might need this leave when a man definitely won’t?). We’ve clarified that adoptive moms would qualify, so physical recovery is not the sole issue.

The employer is hinting loudly that we should be grateful that he is doing “more than he legally has to” and that he might drop it entirely if we push too hard. Any thoughts on next steps?

Well, it’s illegal. Offering different amounts of parental leave to male and female employees violates the federal law against sex discrimination (just like basing vacation leave or raises on sex would). It would be different if it were framed as “pregnancy leave” or otherwise linked to medical recovery, but it’s not. So: the strongest argument against this is that it’s illegal.

Of course, if you point that out, your employer might drop the whole thing — so you should pair it with a strong lobbying effort by employees for a legal, gender-neutral parent leave policy. If you can show that your competitors offer that, that could help too.

Related:
my company is creating a paternity leave policy, but has no maternity leave

3. My company is ignoring my reimbursement form after laying me off

I was laid off from a remote job in November 2024. I was told to ship my laptop back, given a paid shipping label and told to purchase packaging at the shipping store and submit a receipt for reimbursement. I submitted the form for reimbursement with a receipt the same day … then heard nothing.

Every few weeks I would send an email asking about the reimbursement status and would hear nothing. On the emails I’ve included my manager, my manager’s manager, and the HR representative who handled my layoff. It’s been two months and no one replies to emails (which have all been cordial). The amount of money ($30) isn’t a big deal but I’m frustrated that I followed their directions and then they’re not honoring their commitment. Also them not reimbursing me after laying me off is just rude and petty!

Any other ideas about what I can do? For context, I also signed an NDA so I probably can’t make a post on social media publicly calling anyone out.

Stop emailing and call instead! Start with HR, and if that doesn’t work, call your manager, then your manager’s manager. If you get voicemail, leave a message explaining the situation; say that it’s been several months, and ask to get it handled ASAP.

They should be replying to your emails and it’s rude that they haven’t, but one when method of communication isn’t working, moving to another will often solve it. (And who knows, it’s possible that emails from your personal email address are being filtered as spam or something. Probably not, but calling will solve it if that’s happening.)

4. Can my company completely change my job?

I am an executive assistant at a remote-first organization. There is currently no requirement to come into our office, with the exception of our front desk staff (who belong to a separate department). I have been told confidentially that due to financial constraints, a plan is in place to lay off our front desk staff and require myself and another executive assistant to perform the duties usually performed by our front desk staff (in addition to our current duties). This change would mean that I would have a completely different role than what I was hired to do, not to mention what I see as the extreme burden of being one of the only employees in a remote organization with an in-office requirement, and the significant extra work. Can they legally do this? What can I do to resist this change, other than simply walking away from a job that I really don’t want to quit? We have a union in place, which I have been told I am unable to join due to the confidential nature of my job. Would appealing to the union anyway have any influence?

They can legally change the requirements of your job. You can push back on that, of course — but ultimately they can make the change. The union probably won’t help since you’re not a member (unless they see benefit to their membership in some way, which isn’t impossible — you can certainly ask them and see).

How much standing do you have at your job? Are you a highly valued employee who they don’t want to lose? Or even a reasonably valued one who they don’t want to deal with the inconvenience of replacing? If you have a decent amount of standing, your best bet is to talk to your manager and say exactly what you said here — the change would leave you with a completely different job than the one you were hired for and significant additional burden — and that you’re strongly opposed to doing it. The trick with this kind of conversation is to walk a fine enough line that you’re not outright refusing or openly saying “I will quit over this” but leaving the strong implication that you are indeed highly likely to leave over it (maybe not on the spot, but soon). On the other hand, if you’re willing to openly say you’ll quit over it and are comfortable with whatever that results in (including “okay, we’ll be sorry to see you go but let’s set your last day”), go for it. There’s a possibility they’ll see this as an opportunity to hire a replacement who’s willing to do the new job, so this is all very dependent on how much capital you have there, how willing you are to walk away over it, how quickly you’d be willing to do that, and how much they’d care.

If the other assistant affected by this is willing to do the same, that can give you additional power, particularly if she has capital of her own to spend.

5. What is a “director of first impressions”?

I’m on the job market. I’ve been in higher ed. administration for years (also a teacher), and I’m done with it. All I want to do is help people, help an organization function well, get paid / treated decently, and stay with a good job until I retire, if ever. I’ve been on the market for roughly four months with little luck. I had one interview, which I think went well, but I didn’t get the position. Part of it, I think, is that I’m “overqualified” for the kind of role I’m looking for. The thing is, I don’t want to be in charge. I hate being in charge. I make an excellent assistant.

But then I see job adverts for things like a “director of first impressions”: “The director of first impressions will play an important role in setting the tone for the organization. As the first person and last person clients see when they are in the office, the director of first impressions is instrumental in making sure clients have a positive experience. Ability to work in a high capacity, high intensity position is a must, while maintaining a joyful and diplomatic spirit. Multitasking is necessary also, as this position is characterized by spontaneity and being ready for any phone call or visit. You will be the direct source of office support leadership, while maintaining office supplies and managing the calendar.” Good lord. I don’t even know how to respond seriously to this. Is this a receptionist role? Okay, I can work with that. Director of first impressions? I cannot.

Yep, it’s a receptionist role, with what sounds like some additional admin support thrown in. It’s a silly title, but it’s usually the sign of an organization trying to put a high premium on you making visitors and callers feel warmly welcomed and taken care of. As in, they’re not looking for the vibe visitors get at the DMV.

The best way to approach it is to ignore the title and focus on the job duties.

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. Our HR person helped her mom get hired in secret

I work for a small company of 12 people, led by two partners. In the hierarchy of the company, I am the next tier down from the partners. We are not large enough to have an HR department, so our accountant, “Jan,” operates as the HR person as well as office manager.

We have been looking to hire an executive assistant for the company’s partners and Jan has been in charge of placing the ads, screening the resumes, and doing initial interviews. Jan also attended the interviews with the partners and candidates. An interview was set up with a candidate, but Jan was unable to attend as she was out sick. About a week later, we received an email that this candidate had been hired. We later found out through the rumor mill that this new employee is Jan’s mother and that partners did not know about it until after the offer was made. So far, nothing official regarding their relationship has been shared with the office. Neither Jan nor her mother mentioned at any point in the process that they are mother and daughter. I do know that Partner 1 was not pleased that this information was kept from him, but has the mindset that they need someone in the position, so they are just going to go with it and said that if it doesn’t work out, it’s going to be awkward when Jan has to let her mother go.

There are so many things wrong with this, I don’t know where to begin! I won’t be working directly with Jan’s mother so it probably won’t affect me much one way or another, but part of the job is to help out with accounting, so Jan could potentially be supervising her own mother in some capacity. Our employee handbook does have a small section on employing family members, saying they can’t supervise each other. To me, this brings up serious questions about nepotism and ethics and what appears to be a conscious effort from both of them to conceal this information from the partners.

I have some standing to let both partners know that the optics surrounding this look pretty bad and I worry that this blatant display of poor judgement does not bode well for the future. I guess I know this is really bad, and am interested in your take on the situation.

Yeah, that’s a massive problem. It would be a bad idea to hire someone’s mom to work closely with them under most circumstances, and doubly so if the daughter is the HR person*. (Is she really going to handle complaints about her mom impartially? And even if she is, are people likely to believe they can safely raise complaints about her mom?) But the fact that they both went out of their way to hide the relationship — and it’s not believable that in a small office where Jan was involved with the hiring she wouldn’t think to mention that one of the interviewees was her mom — makes it much, much worse; it shows that they’re willing to to subvert professional norms and transparency in order to advance their own agenda, which is the exact opposite of what you’d need if you have two relatives working together.

By all means, let the partners know that the secrecy and nepotism look terrible (from anyone, but especially from your HR person). But it sounds like this is going forward regardless, so I’d brace for the dumpster fire.

* In an office of 12, “accountant who handles HR on the side because someone has to” usually means things like benefits administration, not substantive employee relations work (including things like investigations of things like discrimination or harassment) … but your mention that Jan is the one who would end up firing her mom indicates that Jan’s HR role may be bigger than is typical with this set-up, which makes this worse.

2. Coworker is identifying herself as a psychologist when she’s not

I work at an outpatient mental health clinic as a case manager. My coworkers and I are all on a team of case managers that don’t require any degrees or certifications. If you want to move up to become a therapist or clinical supervisor, you need your masters in counseling, clinical psych, or a PH.D.

When I was collecting mail for my clients, I started noticing an influx of mail for my coworker, which I found strange. The mail was coming from several different banks and I started noticing it showed her full name, along with the title “clinical psychologist” and business owner.

I looked into it and saw that she is advertising herself online as a business owner as a clinical psychologist and takes client appointments at our address. Most of the mail is coming from several different banks so I am thinking (although unsure) that she may be receiving business loans or something of the sort identifying herself as a clinical psychologist who runs her own business. The other thing is I also found her on several websites advertising herself as a “mental health counselor” and either a Psy.D, PH.D, or clinical therapist on yellow pages, white pages, and for one insurance company with her name and our business address. It shows our address on one and on another it shows her as a psychologist for her previous job.

Do I submit all of this to HR? Do I let it go and mind my own business?

Are you sure she’s not a clinical psychologist? It’s possible she has credentials you don’t know about.

Otherwise, though, the potential for harm to patients and your clinic’s reputation is high enough that yes, flag it for HR and let them decide if there’s any action they need to take. You can frame it as, “There may be an explanation for this that I’m not privy to, but it alarmed me enough that I wanted to bring it to your attention in case it’s something you’d want to know.”

3. Handshakes and sweaty palms

I’ve had abnormally sweaty hands my whole life. I don’t know exactly when or how the excess sweat will start or what triggers it; sometimes it happens when I’m nervous, but sometimes I am merely existing. It does not seem to be correlated to temperature or how many layers I am wearing.

Usually this doesn’t cause me more than some minor inconveniences, but I had a situation the other day that I’m afraid will repeat itself, especially as I get older and more into the workforce. I was meeting a professor for the first time, and as I was leaving, she held out her hand for me to shake. Not knowing how to decline, I shook it, even though my hands were sweaty. She immediately wiped her hand on her pant leg, and I realized what I’d done. In the future, how would you recommend I deal with this situation? Sometimes when people try to high-five me and my hands are sweaty, I fist-bump them instead, but it seems inappropriate to offer a fist-bump when someone offers me a handshake.

Can you discreetly wipe your hands on your pants first, especially when you’re in a situation where you know a handshake might be coming (like any time you’re meeting someone new)? If you’re worried it’s noticeable that you’re patting your pants, say, “Sorry, my hand is damp!” (That could mean you just washed them, for all anyone knows.) There’s also the option of just confidently and cheerfully saying, “I’ve switched to fist bumps since Covid!” You won’t be the only one.

There are also medical treatments available if it’s something that really bothers you and you want to go that route.

4. I don’t know how to respond to this job rejection feedback

I’m a mid-career professional in tech who got laid off a few months ago. I’ve been applying and interviewing for similar roles ever since, but a couple of recent rejections have somehow gotten me really depressed and demoralized.

Both positions seemed like a good fit, and I was able to develop a good rapport with the hiring managers during each respective interview. However, the feedback I received was:

1. I didn’t have enough experience with a specific kind of document that’s relevant to my industry but not readily shared unless you need access for a specific reason, as it contains quite a bit of confidential client data (none of the projects I worked on required me to access that level of data, so I never had access to this document).

2. A well-liked former employee expressed interest in the position after I’d been scheduled for an interview, so the company went with them.

I know these are relatively normal things to hear when interviewing (and it’s not the first time I’ve heard them either), but I don’t know how I can make myself a better candidate for these kinds of roles with this kind of feedback. At least if it had been something like a lack of technical skill, that would still be something actionable that I can work on.

I have more interviews in the pipeline, but I find myself anticipating rejection for similar reasons as I’m preparing, and I’m starting if it’s time to just quit this industry altogether and pivot to a different career/industry. Do you have any advice on how to stay motivated during a slump like this?

Not all feedback is actionable, or needs to be. Sometimes it’s just an explanation or context.

It you’re regularly hearing that you need experience with the kind of document from #1, that could be a sign that you’ve got to find a way to get that experience in order to be a serious contender for these jobs. But if you have no reason to believe it’s a widespread requirement (like hearing that from multiple interviewers or seeing it in most of the ads you’re interested in), there’s nothing much you have to conclude here (other than if you do get the opportunity to work with that document in the future, you should take it).

The second item — they hired someone already well-known to them — is just a thing that happens, and not anything you need to respond differently to.

For what it’s worth, you won’t always get useful feedback, or any feedback, when you’re job-searching, and it’s not a sign of failure if don’t. You’re much more likely to get useful feedback from mentors and people working in the field you’re applying in.

5. Employees aren’t paid for short bathroom or coffee breaks

This happened last year, and has nothing to do with me, but it struck me as odd, so I thought I’d ask for your take on it.

I work in the legal field. In the course of an online conversation about billing, someone commented that the staff at their firm are W2 employees, but don’t clock in/out and they only get paid for the time they bill. They clarified that any time spent not working on a case, such as lunch or bathroom visits, is unpaid.

I’ve worked at various law firms, but I’ve never heard of anything like this. Admittedly, I’m no expert on employment law, but this sounds like they’re being paid per project (i.e., they spend four hours working on the John Doe case, so they get paid for four hours of work, but the 10 minutes they take to run to the restroom or get a cup of water before starting the next project isn’t paid), which does not seem very W2-ish. Is this a common practice that I’ve just never encountered before, or is this as weird as it seems?

Surprise! It’s yet another law firm violating employment laws. If they’re W2 employees, not independent contractors, they’re legally required to be paid for all the time they’re expected to be at work, even if that includes down time in between projects (it’s called “engaged to wait”). Moreover, federal law requires that short breaks of 20 minutes or less be treated as paid time.