the reality check post: does your job suck or are you being too picky?

by Alison Green on March 2, 2016

If you’re early in your career and still learning what is and isn’t normal, it can be really hard to judge whether your employer is great, fine, or shockingly awful. New grads, for example, often put up with boundary violations, illegal practices, and terrible bosses because they don’t have enough of a frame of reference to realize what is and isn’t normal. And on the other end of the spectrum, they might end up thinking practice X is horrible and worth leaving over, without realizing that it’s normal and common.

Last week, a reader made this brilliant suggestion:

I wonder if we could have a post/discussion where we can get a “reality check” on whether things are awful or we’re just being picky. I’m also working at my first professional job after graduating from college and often wonder whether things really are dysfunctional/unhealthy here, or if I’m just being a sensitive snowflake and need to suck it up. I’d love to be able to ask people who have been working for longer “Is this normal?*”. I think a lot of us at our first job might not have a reference point to compare to.

* Note: Not so much wondering whether things are “legal”, especially since that’s something I can look up if I want to. I’m more curious as to whether certain things are normal and expected at most companies – if I were to switch jobs, should I expect to see something similar?

So, here it is: the reality check post. Here are the ground rules:

  • If you’re wondering if something your employer or manager does is pretty normal and par for the course, describe it here.
  • To make this as useful as possible to people, limit this to genuine requests for input — not stuff that you already know is horrible.
  • If you feel you have a helpful perspective on someone else’s question, post your answer. (“All employers suck” is not a helpful answer. “That practice isn’t unheard of, but you’ll usually only encounter it at lower-tier firms” is helpful.)
  • If you’re giving input on someone else’s situation, keep in mind that this post is to help people figure out if something is normal, not if it’s fantastic. The difference between “that sucks” and “that sucks but it’s pretty normal” matters here.
You may also like:
{ 1,217 comments }

{ 1,217 comments… read them below }

  1. Fawn*

    I’m in higher ed on contract. Often (as in 3 of the last 4 times) my contract is not extended until very close to the deadline (1 – 14 days). Is this normal in public secondary education?

    1. AnonInSC*

      It can be normal – at my local Uni people may know a semester in advance. But I know of it being really cut close with people with 1-year contracts in the past. If you are talking about adjunct contract work, if a class doesn’t make the numbers, it will be cancelled at the last minute.

        1. Sunflower #2*

          At my University, we are unionized (even part-time employees), so even temporary positions require 90 days notice. Term appointments require one year notice for nonrenewal. If you don’t have a contract, you are at-will and at the mercy of the school and your administrator. Sorry.

          -Administrator at University

          1. justcourt*

            If your school normally has contracts or offers tenure, then faculty without a contract or tenure is probably at will. However, if a public school has kind of a de facto tenure, then faculty might have a property interest in their job and would be due some type of hearing before termination.

            That’s a super simplified explanation, though.

    3. Murphy*

      I don’t know eduction well, but I do know government and I believe there are some similarities. When I was on contract they were usually extended either the day before or the day after the deadline. So it seems pretty normal in that large public institution setting.

    4. super anon*

      There could be budget issues with the position. We have an admin position that we extend every few months at a time and it’s because there is uncertainty about funding, and often we don’t find out about if the funding will continue until the last minute.

      1. Bon*

        I’ve experienced this as well. Funding and also workflow prediction heavily influenced my contract renewals to the point where I would get my contract renewed for a month at a time about 1-2 days before the contract was due to expire. Thankfully my boss was honest with me when he was discussing the department’s budget and how my contract was weighed against the other standard running costs.

    5. Xanadu*

      I work in higher ed and it’s pretty common here. The layers of paperwork are daunting and a lot of managers put it off until the last minute. In some cases, there also seems to be some issue with funding/account management where if you try to put in the new contract too early it causes issues.

      1. Artemesia*

        for years on contract, I had worked 3 mos or so into the new year before I had a contract.

    6. Admin of Sys*

      A lot of Universities do this, if they’re having to wrangle state funding to support the position. It’s not very nice to the employee (ie You) but the funding structure can be so mangled that they can’t tell if they’re going to get renewal on the position until the last minute.

      1. JessaB*

        Also it’s possible some funding depends on student levels, so if at the last minute they don’t get the enrollment and they cancel courses, they may have less budget for support personnel.

    7. MorganLizzie*

      Have you spoken to your manager about your contract security and their process for extending? I worked on a contract with a large IT company and my contract was extended every 60 or 90 days (I can’t remember) and was always extended one of the last days. The first time it was happening I was really nervous to talk to her about it because I was scared I was just completely out of a job with no warning in a couple of days, and she clarified that they would definitely tell me ahead of time if it wasn’t being extended but that it was just the way the process worked in their system. It may help to get clarification on how/why they do things so you don’t feel as anxious about it every time it’s coming to the end of their contract terms!

    8. Ash (the other one)*

      I work in a non-academic research organization. You don’t specify if you’re on contract doing teaching or research, but I can say this — until I know what funding I have in the door, I can’t guarantee my contract staff work. Funding determines everything.

    9. Mallory Janis Ian*

      I work in higher ed, and while we don’t have administrative positions on contract, I can tell you what happens with faculty on year-to-year contracts, and it may be comparable. With adjunct faculty, we may know absolutely that they will work on contract for the next academic year, and we know that the contract deadline is such-and-such date. The deadline is not a “real” deadline (i.e. if we submit contracts after the deadline, there aren’t any real consequences; the contract still goes through). So filing the contracts isn’t much of a priority to the department head or the dean. I, as the department head’s assistant, will prepare the contract for him to review and it will sit and sit in a folder for him for a while. Then once I’ve finally gotten him to sign it, I pass it along to the dean’s assistant, and the same process happens in the dean’s office. The only person who is antsy about the contract is the professor whose contract it is. Everyone else considers it a foregone conclusion that the professor will teach next year (barring a class that doesn’t make its numbers), so nobody get in any kind of hurry over it.

    10. BRR*

      Generally yes. If you’re an adjunct definitely yes. I would ask yourself where your salary comes from as well as your role in the departments. It’s common for certain types of positions to be this way.

    11. Anon2*

      I worked for a major private research university in a research role for several years and my contract was once officially renewed a few weeks after it had expired (though I continued to get my paycheck during the gap). When I expressed concern, people said it was pretty par for the course.

    12. Jellybish*

      I’m a staff member at a large public university (student-facing, but not instructional staff) on an annually-renewable contract, and I never get my reappointment letter until right before the end of my contract term. Sometimes it’s come a few months into the next appointment year. It’s assumed that renewal is pretty much automatic for these contracts (although if it were a new position paid for by soft funding, I’d be nervous about late notice of renewal.)

      1. fposte*

        That’s where I am, too. And since our appointment letters started being posted online I don’t usually even notice when it happens. Raises aren’t surprises, since they adhere to the campus program, and there’s nothing else that would be news in the appointment.

    14. Lia*

      Absolutely normal. At my institution, if you do not get notice of non-renewal, you will be automatically extended — they have to notify you if you are not renewed. Read your union contract, though!

      That said, you are not eligible for pay increases without a valid contract, so ensuring you have one is important.

  2. I'll start*

    Manager (two levels above my position) will not offer advice or become involved in problems if there is any chance of blowback or resistance. Her response is that her employees should be the ones taking risks and limiting her exposure.

    1. Roscoe*

      2 levels up, that is pretty normal, depending on the size of the company. Your immediate supervisor probably should get involved, but the one above that, probably not. If it needs to be escalated, HR is probably the best route.

    2. Katie the Fed*

      That is not normal or acceptable. Risk-averse managers cannot effectively manage. Are these tasks your direct supervisor has the authority to take on? Or does everything stop with Captain Spineless?

      1. WorkingMom*

        I tend to agree here. I work in a massive corporate environment. My Manager has my back. If I get a request to complete a task that I think is risky, or I’m not sure if I should be the one to complete it because of the risk level – I have no qualms about reaching out to my manager. Often she’ll take the lead and either be the one to push back on the request or to complete the request. Along the same lines, I am also a manager and I don’t want my employees in a situation of taking risks. If someone is going to take a risk and say, agree to waive a fee for a client or something – I’d prefer that I be the one to do that, rather than put it on them. As a manager, I can absorb an executive decision gone awry better than they can. I’ve made a judgement call before that my manager actually disagreed with. She let me explain my logic and how I arrived at my decision, and then shared what she would have done, and what she would prefer I do next time. That was the end of it. Had one of my employees made that judgment call, they don’t have the tenure that I have – and my manager would have come down harder on them for making a judgement call she disagreed with. In my role though; I have enough accountability banked that one decision she disagreed with is not going to make much of an impact. I think good managers should be willing to shield their employees from potential blowblack – assuming of course that it was a good business practice or ethical decision in the first place.

    3. Bookworm*

      Can you provide some more detail? Maybe an example?

      It’s not unusual for a manager (particularly one who’s two levels above you) to abstain from weighing in on issues that shouldn’t be on her radar.

      On the other hand, I think it would be unusual if she was actively telling employees that it was their job to take risks on her behalf.

      It depends, I guess, on what you mean by blowback or resistance, since that can cover all manner of sins.

      1. Rat Racer*

        Yeah, I’ll second bookworm here. I think we need more context. If the question is “Can you help us settle a dispute between two co-workers” then absolutely not, the 2-levels up manager shouldn’t even be asked. If the question is “I think we should start a new line of teapots as a source of revenue diversification,” then it’s insane that the front-line employee would make that decision independently.

        1. I'll start*

          It’s more in align with the second one where projects and/or revenue is potentially impacted.

          Examples are too many to name so let’s start with a few of the most recent ones:
          Data security would have been potentially impacted for a few thousand users exposing us to hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. I asked for direction from her at which point she responded “Figure it out” and wouldn’t help coordinate a meeting between directors and the CIO then got pissy when I threw it together (with help from my immediate supervisor) and left her out of the meeting invite.

          Need help coordinating cross application support and project assistance – she refuses to do anything more then send an email leaving us to figure it out.

          Very much do as I say and not as I do manager (uses work from home time freely and openly abuses it i.e. repair people coming but then refuses to grant it for employees as it’s not to be used for that)

          Openly reports you to HR for using too many unscheduled days but will then disappear for a week on end with no communication.

          Actually writing all this, I figured she’s a terrible manager and this isn’t / shouldn’t be normal but luckily she’s retiring in a few years and the rest of the job isn’t bad. I”m just always going over her head which makes me look great and gets me decent reviews/raises.

          1. Bookworm*

            Yeah…that sounds unusual.

            The first example you list is particularly egregious. Some of the following ones (depending on severity) are a little more commonplace.

            Either way, she sounds like a lousy manager. If going over her head makes you look great and gets you good reviews, then I imagine she’s not well-regarded at your company.

            1. Doriana Gray*

              If going over her head makes you look great and gets you good reviews, then I imagine she’s not well-regarded at your company.

              Yeah because in any other workplace, going over a manager’s head for something that isn’t about illegal or unethical practices would not make you look good.

              1. Mallory Janis Ian*

                And that is the danger in learning abnormal norms in an early-career job. Imagine thinking that going over one’s manager’s head is the way to get ahead at work, and then doing that at a normal company where that is definitely not the case.

          2. BusSys*

            I’m actually reading this as her wanting proposed solutions to choose between rather than just being informed there’s a problem or difficult decision. At the level I work at, it’s totally my job to present those options and seek their guidance when looping in my 2 executive level bosses and not just say “help, there’s a problem”. Could it be that she wants that from you and hasn’t clearly explained? Because that’s fairly common.

            1. Irishgal*

              I agree with this possible interpretation and wonder also where the direct line manager is in this. Maybe “figure it out” means “please go speak your manager to come up with a proposal to sort this out and include me at the appropriate levels” or maybe it doesn’t and she’s a bad manager not just one with poor communication.

              As for stuff about her use of working from home etc .. well that’s none your business. She’s 2 tiers above you and you have no idea what agreements or arrangements she has with her bosses about how she works. That has nothing to do with whether you get to misuse unscheduled time off.

              And what is not normal is routinely going above your direct manager’s and the tier above that manager’s head except in the most extenuating circumstances. In most companies this would be a career tanker.

              In fact your lack of mention of your direct manager at all and their role your list is also not normal; they should be the one you are approaching with/interacting with about all your listed matters.

          3. Bon*

            To be honest, the more risk something exposes your company to, the more the higher level management/directorate should be getting involved, both because they are presumed to have more knowledge of the bigger picture, legal implications, et al., and because they are often required to authorise some risks to the business, i.e. major contract cancellations, data breaches, damage to company reputation, potential legal fall out.

            The fact that your (two levels up) manager does this would make me worry that if something did go wrong, that she/he would have no hesitation in scapegoating you as the source of the disaster. You’re definitely right to loop in your line manager and take things higher if necessary.

            For the working from home stuff, it happens. Some managers have a do as I say attitude and you never really get away from that.

    4. rd*

      You have a bad manager. Limiting exposure to what? Risk? You never get better without taking risks.

      Unfortunately bad managers are par for the course, so it’s reality. It takes a while to find good ones. Don’t stop looking.

      1. Sadsack*

        I am confused though because this is a manager 2 levels up. Why not go to your immediate manager, why are you going above?

    5. Juli G.*

      It’s not normal to be that open about it! Wow!

      It’s not totally uncommon but it is a sign of a bad leader. The good leaders I know absorb hits for their team while still holding the appropriate people accountable.

      1. Karowen*

        I think this is the right answer. There are a lot of managers who would do that, but they realize that they’re trying to pawn off an essential function of their job, so they try to keep it quiet/turn it around so you don’t realize. The good managers are the ones who are willing to stick up for their employees/stick their necks out as appropriate. I could never imagine a scenario where I asked my boss for assistance with something out there and he told me to do it. The options are (1) it’s too risky and no one should approach it, (2) it’s risky but he’ll handle it, or (3) he doesn’t see it as a risk so I can handle it (but he’ll back me up if his assessment was wrong).

      2. Sadsack*

        My manager says that when we do well, it is a win for the team and when we make a mistake, it is on him. He’ll take responsibility for it, no matter who on the team was at fault. This is, of course, after discussing the issue to determine how the mistake occurred and making changes so it doesn’t happen again.

    6. WhiskeyTango*

      I think it would depend on your department and industry — I’m in Legal. It comes back to me no matter how low on the totem pole the mistake was made. Same thing for Compliance and Accounting. Sales or operations though? It might be more normal in those groups.

    7. Mike C.*

      Managers should be enabling the employees under them to succeed and to intervene when appropriate. You being successful means they are successful.

      Sure, they might not get involved with everything, but they should be willing to step in if other options have been exhausted. Also note that they’re going to focus more on larger picture stuff, so it’s helpful to be able to tie whatever you’re doing to that overall vision.

    9. Sunflower #2*

      Normal for politically-unsavvy and poor managers. I don’t agree with it as a manager myself, but I see it all the time. You can’t guarantee not having this at your next job, but you can ask questions about their managerial styles at interviews to get a sense for how they roll.

    10. NK*

      Not OK. In fact, the opposite is true – good managers will encourage employees to take risks, but will absorb the exposure to their employees (assuming it was a reasonable risk to take). One of the qualities of every manager I’ve had who I considered a good manager was that they would protect their team rather than throw them under the bus. Again, we’re taking about normal and reasonable risks and mistakes – not recklessness, neglect, etc. on the part of the employee.

    11. The Rat-Catcher*

      It’s ineffective because in reality, when a lower-level employee makes a mistake, their managers are held accountable. That’s because an inherent part of managing is not just doing your own work, but knowing what’s going on with those you manage. Lack of awareness of a problem, or an intentional lack of contribution to its resolution, does not absolve you.

      If it were mine to categorize, I’d put it in “common, but definitely not okay.”

    12. Koko*

      Opposite of normal by my reckoning. My managers have always made it clear that one of their functions is to shield their team from upper management. There are times I know for sure we have made mistakes that our managers paid for, but all I ever hear is a vague comment or two about the VP having talked to the Director about how this can’t happen again and you can kind of presume it wasn’t a pleasant conversation, but when Director talks to us about it he’s all constructive and much kinder than you imagine the VP was to her.

    13. Anxa*

      In the case where my managers have made significantly more money than I did when I felt I often worked harder, I always thought of that extra money as being decision-pay.

      I don’t think it’s that uncommon for some managers to feel like they need to protect themselves more than their employees (especially if they feel they have more to lose…a living wage, benefits, what have you), but I don’t think it’s the way its supposed to be.

      That said, I think this strategy can be effective when used once in a while, but only in some organization structures. For example, I look young and work alongside student workers. There are a lot of disadvantages to that, but sometimes I can leverage the perception that this is a more developmental role to my advantage. I’ve also advocated for a few things as a volunteer or intern.

  3. I'm Not Phyllis*

    In the non-profit world, how normal is it for managers to expect their staff to work overtime without any compensation in the form of extra pay or time off in lieu? And by this I mean regularly – not something that only happens once a year during crunch time.

    1. TCO*

      For what it’s worth, I’ve worked in several nonprofit agencies and uncompensated overtime was very rare. I was always exempt in these positions (so they didn’t have to pay me overtime), but I was encouraged to take unofficial comp time for anything I worked beyond 40 hours. The comp time was intended to be used in the following 1-2 weeks. There was no official policy or tracking system, but informal comp time was supported from the top levels down, even when we had tight budgets and a need for more staffing.

      1. Nonprofit worker*

        I agree with TCO. However, I was often the only one trained to do certain things, so I didn’t always take enough comp time. It definitely got tiresome, but I knew it was my choice and personal sense of responsibility that made me do it. However, a thank-you would have been nice.

        That organization did eventually make everyone except senior leadership hourly and reminded us that there was no money in the budget for overtime. That’s when things started to fall apart.

        Long story short, I think it’s fairly normal, but it really shouldn’t be and is not a healthy way to manage staff.

    2. Non profit in College*

      I volunteered for a non profit it college, and it seemed like most of the employees consistently worked overtime. While I don’t know if they were paid overtime or not, I know a lot of them groused about it – so my thinking would be probably that they were not compensated for it.

    3. Enginerd*

      I’m not sure about the non-profit world but I’ve worked both defense and manufacturing as a salary exempt and it’s been pretty much expected in both worlds. We were even sent an email from higher up at my last job that you could not get anything above satisfactory on your performance review if you averaged less than 50 hours a week.

      1. Finman*

        “We were even sent an email from higher up at my last job that you could not get anything above satisfactory on your performance review if you averaged less than 50 hours a week” I don’t think that should be considered normal

        1. Green*

          Requiring hours above 40 for exempt positions in order to succeed or be bonus-eligible is indeed normal in lots of industries. We’re not looking for normative (how it should be) but descriptive (how it is) here.

        2. Bon*

          This is one situation where what’s normal and what’s right are at odds. Yes, it’s normal. People are often supposed to sacrifice their own time to put in that little bit extra to show they are dedicated.

          Is it right? No. But there is very little you can do about it. I’ve worked in companies where being the first one out the door was a sign of weakness and you were almost asked what the emergency was when you were leaving at 6 on a standard 8-5 day. I’ve also found that it leads to burnout and doesn’t help your attention to detail at all.

      2. Kira*

        In my nonprofits exempt workers don’t get overtime/comp time, but all the non-exempt workers definitely would (so they’re discouraged from working past their 40 hours). We’re super-sensitive to the risk of legal troubles, though, so a place that’s not paying attention to the legal risks might have these issues.

    4. Roscoe*

      Depends on the non-profit. Many of my previous jobs were at non-profits, but big ones. Think museums in major cities. At those types of places, no it is not normal. However, if you have a place with like 5 staff members who are all stretched thin, I’d say its pretty common

      1. WorkingMom*

        I agree that it depends on the nature of the NPO. In my experience, a service-based non profit is going to have more expectations of employees who are willing to put in extra hours “to support the cause” so to speak. And also, in service-based organizations, most donors don’t want their money supporting administration, they want their money to go towards the cause. These are the types of NPO’s that will have lower pay, generally speaking. Also – you’d have to be exempt. In my personal NPO experience at a service-based organization, we were salaried and just worked however long it took to get the job done, no set hours. On the flip side, when I worked at a non profit Association – that organization ran more like a corporation, in terms of managing employee hours.

      2. North*

        Yes, absolutely. The larger the organization, the less overtime I’ve worked (when salaried). Previous job, medium sized museum in a major city, part of a HUGE larger nonprofit – overtime was extremely rare.

        Current job, small museum, small town, small state: I’m entering my 12th hour at work today, it’s 3pm est, and I’ve got ~2 more hours to do tonight after I get home. Granted, today is extra-awful, but I have many weeks out of the year where I work corporate lawyer hours on…basically admin assistant money.

        Now I am depressed all over again.

      3. I'm Not Phyllis*

        I agree with you there. This organization is a national one (though not incredibly large in numbers) … think more than 50 but less than 100 employees.

    5. Ask a Manager* Post author

      Extremely normal in the advocacy world, but illegal if you’re non-exempt (in which case it’s still extremely common, but is breaking the law).

      1. I'm Not Phyllis*

        Almost everyone there has the title of “manager,” and they seem to believe that this means never having to compensate overtime. I know that simply having a title and legal definitions mean different things though …

    6. Victoria Nonprofit (USA)*

      A lot depends on the role, and whether it is exempt or not. Obviously, if you are legally entitled to overtime pay, you should get it.

      Otherwise, working more than 40 hours a week? Very normal. Working evening and/or weekend events, without getting equivalent “comp time”? Crappy, but very normal.

      1. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

        My first boss used to give us comp time if we worked evening or weekend event. Like, if we stayed late for a board meeting we could come in at 10 am the next day. The week after the Gala, we all got Friday afternoon off.

        It really, really spoiled me for future employers.

    7. Andy*

      I don’t know if it is normal across the board in np but here’s my experience…
      I did non-profit in a position where Saturday events were part of the job, but taking comp time was brought up in PMPs as ‘unsupportive’ of the rest of the staff/mission. This meant that if I worked a 40 hour week (non-exempt) I was seen as slacking. It was normal, but extremely unhealthy and sucky, and part of why I jettisoned from non-profit work after 4 years and did NOT look back.

    8. Mona Lisa*

      Great question. I worked at a non-profit that made all of its workers exempt partially so they wouldn’t have to pay overtime anymore because they were spending so much on it. We weren’t “required” to work all events, but it was “highly suggested” we volunteer to help at larger events throughout the year. Sign up sheets were passed around on company-wide e-mails to which everyone replied all so people would notice who was and wasn’t volunteering.

      1. Tyrannosaurus Regina*

        I worked at a place like this, where 3/4 of the staff were considered salaried/exempt so they could work as much OT as needed. Except, oops, turned out most of us were working in positions that didn’t meet the criteria for being salaried/exempt—so nearly everyone had to be converted to hourly.

        …and were still pressured to “volunteer” outside normal working hours. Because of The Cause. :/

      2. saf*

        Ah, a former employer did that “you are all exempt” thing, and all our (many) events were required.

    9. Ruthie*

      In my experience, it depends on a few factors. If the employee is salaried and exempt, they are not paid by the hour, but by the job and will not receive “overtime” pay for longer work weeks. If there is an expectation of work outside the standard 9-6 working day will depend on the organization’s culture and the field. From what I’ve observed working in non-profit communications in DC, it is not uncommon for there to be the expectation that staff put in a significant amount of hours a week. I have a lot of friends, for instance, who like to “brag” about the extreme hours they put in to their job.

      That said, if a reasonable work-life balance is a priority to you, there are many non-profit organizations that do not expect their staff to work long hours. It’s something you can ask about in a job interview to get a sense of what the culture is like. At my organization and our partner organization, everyone is typically gone by the close of business.

      If the employee is non-exempt, they are entitled to overtime pay by the Fair Labor Standards Act for working more than 40 hours. Unfortunately, it is not unusual for that policy to be ignored in competitive work environments. I used to work on Capital Hill in a non-exempt position and it was sort of understood that those of us at the bottom of the totem pole would only report our overtime hours if they really piled up, not for staying up to an extra hour a day. My boyfriend works in well-known non-profit where most employees are exempt. Only the senior staff accurately report their overtime pay. Junior staff only report their overtime when they are literally working around the clock so that their superiors will eventually send them home. It’s not really legal, but it does happen.

      1. Bwmn*

        Here to second the DC nonprofit exempt bragging.

        I will say though that typically speaking the emphasis on working more than 40 hours (as basically all of my experience comes from being exempt) – often comes from peer pressure and talk about commitment to the cause. So staying late in the office or attending evening/weekend events – the impetus to do that is because “everyone” is doing it. And sometimes that’s accompanied by having your manager say “It’s 5, go home”. I’ve found the DC nonprofit world to very much so be a case of “go home means stay late” where no matter how much work/life balance is proactively pushed, those who stay late and go to evening events are rewarded.

        At least in the nonprofit world, I’ve found it to be rare to have bosses push overtime in the office. However, even when attendance at an evening event is mandatory – I’ve never been directly offered additional time off aside from being told to feel free to come in a little late.

    10. babblemouth*

      I worked 7 years at a large NGO. Overtime was frequent, and never paid. However, you could get in lieu, though it rarely matched the amount of overtime you had done. A large reason for that is that decent managers knew all the overtime was a recipe for burnout, and turnover is their worst enemy.

      I wouldn’t hold out for financial compensation, but you can normally make a good case for in lieu.

    11. Tom*

      “Exempt” vs. “non-exempt” is an important distinction. Assuming that you are or should be classified as “non-exempt” I would have to say that in my experience it’s sadly common. And also illegal. But it’s very hard to be the one to have the courage to hold your employer to legal standards when you are relying on them for a paycheck. I pointed out to my last employer that I was working unpaid overtime, and I don’t think they believed me. I chose not to push the issue, because I felt there were good odds they would want to renegotiate my position and/or salary if I did.

      1. I'm Not Phyllis*

        Yes – this. I accumulated what amounted to about 10 extra days of work in one month, and when I asked for time in lieu, I was told that I could have 2 days. But what threw me was that this was told to me by HR, who also said I wasn’t really supposed to ask for time back. They made it sound like I was the only one who would think of asking – so I thought maybe I was out of line and this was just normal practice?

    12. Rex*

      Depends what you mean? Checking emails evenings and weekends, and maybe having to work late once a month or so, not uncommon, especially as you get more senior. Frequently putting in 80 hour weeks, unfortunately not uncommon at some orgs, but really bad management if you want to not burn out everyone. Comp time is a good idea, but some orgs are wary of it.

    13. Chinook*

      “In the non-profit world, how normal is it for managers to expect their staff to work overtime without any compensation in the form of extra pay or time off in lieu?”

      I think it happens too often and is not right. When I ran a day camp, my manager made a point of making sure I knew that they couldn’t afford overtime for me so, if I ended up spending time as my choice, she insisted I log it in as volunteer hours. Still not with the spirit of the law, but at least I could justify it because I usually ran into OT on the days it was warm and sunny out and I joined the kids in whatever they were doing and was hiding from paperwork. I could then justify that time as volunteer (because we did have adult volunteers working with our camp counselors) and then my paperwork time as just being flexible. But, if the tasks were similar enough to what I am normally paid to do, then they are overreaching.

      From a business perspective, working off the books gives the board and donors a false sense of the real cost of what you are doing. At the very least, they need to give you credit for volunteer hours so they can say it takes “X (wo)man hours to run Program A – Y are volunteer hours and Z are paid.”

      1. JessaB*

        My understanding is you cannot volunteer extra hours doing what is essentially your job. That dodge against overtime hours does not hold up to scrutiny if it’s reported to the labour board.

    14. NJ Anon*

      It depends on how your job is classified. If you are exempt from over-time laws, this is normal. If you are non-exempt this is not even legal.

    15. Chicken*

      In my experience (mostly at legal nonprofits), it is typical to expect exempt employees to average significantly more than 40 hrs/week without any additional compensation.

      1. De Minimis*

        Same at the nonprofit where I work..everyone is exempt [all employees meet the salary test due to it being a high COL area and everyone also meets the test for administrative duties–we have a temp that handles the traditional receptionist/admin duties, all of the regular employees are performing essential program work.]

        It’s been tough for me to make the adjustment…my boss always stays late and I think there is a sense of disappointment that I don’t do the same. Other departments seem to generally stick to a regular work schedule, but I’ve been unlucky in that respect. It’s also annoying to not be eligible for anything like comp time.

      2. addiez*

        Every non-profit I’ve worked for has expected exempt employees to work more than 40 hours a week. It isn’t considered overtime, it’s just considered the standard expectation of behavior. We don’t consider it overtime, we just consider it working. When I do something like work on a holiday, I’ll get comp time, but not for going over 40 hours a week.

    16. Anonymous in the South*

      I work for a non-profit and it is very much NOT done for non-exempt (hourly) workers and in fact, illegal for non-exempt workers to work overtime without being paid for those hours.

      Exempt (salaried) staff can work as much as needed and take comp time for any hours worked over 40. Which unfortunately is/can be abused, at least at my company.

    17. B-Bam*

      I’ve worked in the non-profit world (in HR specifically) for about 10 years and I would say this is very common. It is a problem I think is rooted deep in general non-profit culture that employees at the entry level absorb it and carry it forward as they move up, keeping that cycle going. From what I’ve gathered, this seems to come from a combination of resource scarcity and a misguided belief in what it means to be passionate about the work. It makes me see red – not only is it a compliance issue when it’s at non-exempt level, it increases the pace of an already high burn-out rate for employees at all levels who are working often at lesser wages for incredibly demanding work.

    18. Lily in NYC*

      Very, very, very normal. Unfortunately. We do get more vacation time in general, but we don’t get extra for working long hours. I also see a lot of admins working free overtime here, myself included (I’m not asking for advice on this, just relaying how it is in my nonprofit). It also depends on the department (and nature of the nonprofit, I guess) – we have a few departments (like IT) where no one works late, but there are also some groups who work until late at night and come in on weekends to catch up without distractions.

    19. intldevt*

      I think it is fairly common. My experience is also fairly limited (have only worked at two organizations), but it was the case at both positions. My current job has a time off in lieu policy which our managers tell us we’re allowed to use, and sometimes we are, but it’s simply so busy that we often give up trying to find any free time to take off in lieu.

    20. fposte*

      The use of “in lieu” makes me think you might not be in the U.S. However, based on the U.S., I’d say you might be misunderstanding what “overtime” is. If you’re exempt, there’s just time. Your job may want you working later than you like, but work hours over 40 are pretty common.

      1. I'm Not Phyllis*

        You’re right – I’m in Canada! I believe the law here is that your employer cannot ask you to work more than 48 hours per week without special permission from the Ministry of Labour (unless special circumstances apply – none of which would apply to me). I don’t mind working overtime at. all. when it’s required, but when it’s required every day so much that you can’t even take your vacation time that is part of your benefits – you get tired.

        1. mousie housie*

          Dependent on province. In Ontario, managers and supervisors are exempt from hours of work and overtime legislation. :(

    21. non-profit manager*

      If you are exempt, this is very normal in many industries, at least in my experience. If you are not exempt, then it is illegal.

    22. Amo for This*

      Where I work it’s pretty common. The only exception is when I travel and I’m on the road working over a weekend, I get time off in lieu.

    23. Zillah*

      I’ve never personally been in this position, but in a previous job at a non-profit, my boss (who was exempt) definitely got comp time for the same week when she had to work on Saturday afternoons or at evening events. I’m not sure if she had to use it the same week, but she typically did.

    24. Different Here*

      I’ve worked for several national and local non-profits as exempt employee. It was rare that I worked over 40 hours a week. When I did, comp time was available to me take for that same week.

    25. Massachuset*

      I work in the humanitarian sector for a non-profit and this is very common, though depends on what you consider overtime. We have contracts that state 37.5 hours = full time, but no one actually works that. I think most people work 45-50 hours/week regularly, and others often (like once a month or more) put in more than that. That seems standard for my sector, though at the best places you’d work out other perks with your boss. It’s not necessarily normal you’d get an official perk (like compensation days) and if you’re salaried you definitely wouldn’t be paid overtime usually, but more normal that a good manager would work out something with you informally.

    26. megj*

      Definitely normal for non-profits to expect evening and weekend hours beyond the 40hr work week, especially orgs that have events. Organizations I’ve worked for give comp time (same as time off in lieu?) for full days worked but not for a couple extra evening hours. In fact, I’m writing this response while lounging on a comp day for my (regular, expected) Saturday work but I definitely won’t get comp time for the board meeting that lasted until 8:30 last night and the 8:00pm event I attended on Monday.

    27. Al Lo*

      Reasonably normal in my job. I work at a small-ish non-profit arts org (~$2M budget; 5 FT employees; 60 contract artists), and I definitely work more than 40 hours many weeks. However, my boss is very cognizant of what the industry asks of people, and tries to help us juggle where possible.

      I’m a salaried FT employee, so I juggle my hours accordingly. I’m still owed lieu time, but I also have many days where I work, say, 5 hours after a busy week.

      However, our artists have pretty set contracts for what they are expected to do and what they get paid for. The nature of the industry and the personalities, though, is that many people want to put in more time and effort than their contract. We rarely say no, because many people benefit from more artistic talent, but they’re made aware that choosing to take on additional work doesn’t mean a contract bump.

    28. cbq*

      I’ve worked in the arts in a major city, at organizations ranging from 5 to 100 people (all salaried positions). Unpaid overtime has been required at every job I’ve had – the good employers offer informal comp time in exchange, the bad ones post it in the job description as par for the course.

    29. Koko*

      Career NPer here. It varies wildly. Most of the smaller places I worked awarded comp time in some fashion for OT. My current large employer doesn’t officially compensate for OT, but also doesn’t make us charge PTO if we arrive late or leave early by <3 hours. I've also often been encouraged by manager to take a day without charging PTO after working a weekend or evening event, so that's sort of like informal comp time.

      You may have heard the term "Founders' Syndrome" as it relates to nonprofits. It is essentially a problem that arises in organizations that are still headed by a founder who may or may not have any background, training, or skill at running an organization. In the early years when they were the only staff person working out of their apartment that didn't matter so much, but eventually the organization grows enough that the founder becomes a big obstacle to success because they have bad business instincts and won't relinquish control to someone who does. These organizations are the ones where I have observed the most rampant labor abuse, with EDs/CEOs who work their staff to the bone 50-60 hours a week for $35,000 a year plus guilt trips.

      At Founders' Syndrome orgs, what you're experiencing is crappy and normal. At well-run orgs, it is crappy and not normal.

      If you plan a career in the NGO world, I urge you to think long and hard before working for an organization headed by its original founder.

    30. pnw*

      I am a manager in a non-profit and I would never expect my staff to work overtime uncompensated. Sometimes it is inevitable that work has to be done after hours (server upgrades, training evening staff, etc.) but I usually encourage the exempt staff that have to do that to take off time at a later date. I also don’t track the time staff come in or leave – I am more concerned with results. I know that in most cases they work approximately 40 hours a week so if they are meeting their deadlines I don’t worry about them coming in 15 minutes late or occasionally taking a long lunch.

    31. Anonvocado*

      From my experience (6 years in not for profit arts organizations) this is super common. Many organizations (even large reputable ones!) either don’t know the laws or don’t follow them to the letter. I know a local arts company that gives everyone a “manager” title because they think just having manager in the title makes an employee exempt. I’m not sure about other parts of the not for profit sector though – my experience is very arts specific.

    32. saf*

      It was constant in my last nonprofit job, and one of the reasons that my dream job turned out to be not so dreamy.

      The job could have been flexible, as there was a lot of community work requiring night and weekend meetings, but one high-level manager who was afraid of people getting over insisted that everyone be in the office or using leave M-F, 9-5.

    33. Megan*

      I’ve spent 5 years in the non-profit world. I think it’s very normal to work 1-2 hours of overtime in non-crunch periods when things come up. (In non-profits things often come up.) At a good non-profit you will be compensated with either flex time or a manager that recognizes your willingness to do a little extra an encourages you to take easy and leave early. In a bad non-profit they will tell you that’s what you have to do or guilt you into doing it anyway. Good non-profits exist, go find one with work life balance!

    34. YawningDodo*

      As others have said, it really depends on the type and size of the nonprofit, as well as which kind of role we’re talking about. I work at a mid-size museum and my projects are generally very long-range, so I’ve ended up being under little to no pressure to put in extra time throughout most of the year. When we do work extra time, we’re allowed/encouraged to take an equivalent amount of time off within the same pay period. That being said, a number of my coworkers who have shorter-range projects with lots of deadlines to meet have ended up racking up a lot of technically unpaid overtime because the work simply has to be done. One in particular I’ve encouraged to push back and reduce the amount of overtime she does (and thankfully she has) because I believe that if it’s impossible to do a typical week’s work in forty hours, it’s too much job for one person. I’m sure that cuts me out of the list of contenders for a lot of well-paying jobs out there, but maintaining a work-life balance has always been much more important to me than making the big bucks. Anyway, even the overworked coworkers are generally encouraged by their managers to balance it out by taking weekdays off when they come to the end of a busy period. Another coworker who typically racks up a ton of unpaid overtime in the spring works thirty-two hour weeks over the summer. There’s generally an effort to balance things out.

    35. stevenz*

      Legal distinctions between exempt and non-exempt aside, it does, as has been said enough, depend on the non-profit. I have a lot of experience in the non-profit world and I would describe the approach to hours as flexible. The employer and employee are mutually flexible, that is. If you work overtime because that’s what is required – evening meetings, a gala dinner that you host, fundraisers, etc. – then you understand when you take the job that that is acceptable to you. But the employer should, and in my experience has, expect that you have given up some of your home life and that you can be trusted to make up for it in a responsible way, such as coming in late the next day, leaving a bit early here and there, staying home for the plumber, etc. In other words, everyone treats everyone as adults and professionals. If this sounds too ideal, it is actually practiced at enlightened work places which usually means non-profits. Or non-profits that are well-funded which has been my experience. (I worked at one that didn’t even have a vacation policy – decades before Richard Branson – but it was abused and then a policy was enacted but a very liberal one.)

  4. I'm Not Phyllis*

    And second question (then I’ll stop, I promise!) how normal is it for employers to give staff the title of “manager” but none of the responsibilities? (and why do this? – but that might be a discussion for another time.)

    1. Rat Racer*

      I work for a fortune 50 company, where titles mean absolutely nothing because they’re so vague. I think it may vary by company – at my previous job (also a large, national firm), the title “Director” was the golden apple on the glass hill. Here, everyone and their dog is a director.

      1. annonymouse*

        A manager doesn’t have to manage people – they might be the person in control of a specific role/process/department and earned it that way.

        I.e account manager at my work is responsible for making sure at teapot club everyone’s accounts are current and chase up arrears. No one reports to them but they are in charge of this very important process and the only one authorised to do it.

        But calling your receptionist “front desk manager”, your pa/ea an assistant manager or something fancy? Weird.

        People might want to make their company seem more formal/prestigious/appealing to outsiders.

        Also the reverse can be true. My official job title was “Admin Assistant” but I did all the day to day running of the business and was closer to office manager.

        The litmus test I’d apply is
        Is this person in charge of people?
        Is this person in charge of a department? (No matter how small)
        Either would qualify in my book as a manager.

    2. Mark M*

      At my department in a large bank in Canada, the “pecking order” which is usually followed for promotions is Analyst > Senior Analyst > Manager > Senior Manager > Director > etc…

      Typically, employees only start working as people managers at the Senior Manager level – so the Manager title doesn’t mean people manager. In the finance world at least, it seems that Manager often refers to other types of management besides people management (eg. portfolio management).

      1. Finman*

        In corporate finance, it can also mean a higher level of authority/responsibility for something (budget, departmental support, etc) than an analyst where you may not need a team to help you.

        1. anon corp fin*

          Interestingly, I work in corporate finance at a Fortune 100, and they will not give the title of manager to anyone who does not have people report to them, even though every other part of the company gives a manager title to those in the same numbered level, direct reports or not. So we have 2 levels of Sr. Analyst (indistinguishable to anyone since our numbered levels are not public), and then jump to Sr. Manager. It sucks from a resume perspective.

          1. Finman*

            I’ve been in fortune 300 and fortune 30 and both had individuals who were Finance Manager or Finance Director without any direct report due to the nature of the business. They were responsible for supporting business units and needed to have the experience and authority to be the “CFO” of that business unit.

      2. Electron Whisperer*

        UK merchant banks used to be really funny this way, but it did kind of make sense.

        Since they wanted to be able to post people overseas at need, and since the US (in particular, but not uniquely) had annoying visa requirements, which mostly went away at director level, they made basically **Everyone** a ‘Director’ as getting a work visa for a ‘Director of information retrieval’ (Aka, the backup tape monkey), was easier then getting one for ‘Low level IT grunt’.

        The magic phrase for the real thing was ‘Executive Director’.
        Those places (while generally toxic to work for) rocked for polishing a CV.

        In truth it varies very, very widely by company, and the meaning of the works in a job title are massively variable, look at what people did not at the title as that is far more meaningful (I have been a ‘Technical Manager’ with neither budgetary authority nor minions, both of which are kind of important to a title including the word Manager in my view).

        Regards, Dan.

    3. Nother Name*

      I think this depends upon how the title is used. Can you give an example? (For example, sometimes it’s used for people who handle social media or online content. You’re managing content, not people.)

      That being said, I’ve known of smaller places that sometimes give their staff impressive titles to look good on a resume or business card.

      2. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

        I did some contract work for an Arts organization where everyone had a Director title for this reason.

        1. overeducated and underemployed*

          Yeah, I interviewed for a department director position at a small organization this winter, and I was shocked to find out *at the interview* that it was a half-time position. Since it would’ve required relocation, obviously it didn’t work out. That was a learning experience.

      4. Just me*

        My old boss made everyone “director” of something. With barely any staff to report to us. It was all chiefs and no Indians. He just wanted us to look good… to whom, I’m not sure.

        Then again I could write a book on “Is this normal? NO!” about him.

      5. Stranger than fiction*

        I was once a Business Development Manager, but nobody reported to me, we were all called that, and the only thing I managed was my territory.

      6. I'm Not Phyllis*

        So my title was “Executive Assistant” but they said I was classified as management, even though my work was 100% administrative.

        But also there was a “Manager, Accounting” who didn’t have any staff under them and reported up to a director … things like that. There are also program directors and program managers – but I understand these to be different.

    4. HRG*

      Sometimes “manager” can mean managing a program, a process, or particular piece of the organization – not necessarily people. Not sure if that’s the case here but something to think about.

      1. Bookworm*

        Yup. It’s pretty common for someone to be, say, a “Northeastern Teapot Operations Manager” and they don’t have any direct reports but are directly responsible for managing the operations.

        Especially as some career paths don’t lend themselves to ever being a boss, the title can be used to convey more seniority than a “coordinator”.

      2. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

        I have often been “X Manager” or “Manager, Y” without actually managing people.

      3. sunny-dee*

        Yep, I was going to say this. Program / project manager is a really common example. My new title is “senior marketing manager” and I don’t manage people — I create marketing content.

      5. LD*

        So true. Account manager, program manager, project manager, systems manager, product manager, are all examples of titles that don’t necessarily come with staff, but are titles for those who manage a function, a relationship, a product, etc. At places I’ve been, even the manager title was more about level in the organization and not people management. I’ve been a manager with staff reporting to me and I’ve been a director without staff. Titles do not always connote level of responsibility and are often inconsistent even within organizations.

      6. skyline*

        Yup. In an earlier job, I was a marketing manager with no direct reports. We were a small organization, and I managed many activities and a budget. However, the lone marketing associate reported to my boss, the marketing director. My title reflected my level of work.

    6. Eliza Jane*

      If it’s a customer-facing position, this can also be done to make customers feel they’re dealing with someone higher in the pecking order than they are,

      1. Kelly L.*

        My first thought was fast food. There were days almost everyone on the shift was some kind of “manager” or “supervisor.” You didn’t necessarily get much authority, since so many other people were also managers, but the company got to switch you to salaried and not pay you overtime. Totally worth the fancier work shirt…not.

      2. el conejo de fuego*

        +1

        That’s the case here. Well, that and some of what HRG said above about managing processes instead of direct reports. We have a team here that works with clients and all 12+ team members have the title “[position] manager.” I think it helps lend an air of authority and experience.

    7. Ruthie*

      Depending on the field, salaries can be pretty specific, or vary wildly from company to company. At my non-profit organization, titles are utter nonsense. Entry-level staffers start as directors. It’s especially common in the non-profit sector to offer automatic raises to people who are good at their jobs and they become managers without actually having any managing skill or responsibilities.

    8. Lizzy*

      Where I work (a large community foundation), we have a ridiculous amount of staff with the title of “Director” and many (if not most) of them do not even have direct reports. In fact, I think there are more directors or assistant directors than their are employees with titles like associate, coordinator, assistant, etc.

      That being said, the structure of my workplace is very siloed and many of these directors are overseeing divisions or special projects within their departments; however, they are generally doing it alone.

      1. Irishgal*

        This is my “norm” in practice; in the 10 or so workplaces I’ve experienced Director is a person in overall charge of a division so they would only “line manage” the very senior staff directly under them (and at that level those people would be expected to pretty much manage themselves on a day to day basis); so you have Director of HR, Director of Customer Services, Director of H&S etc.

        Manager titles varied even within the same company so I’ve worked with a Customer Services Manager who managed the customer service processes but had no direct reports and the Customer Services Staff Manager who managed the actual service agents themselves.

    9. Guam Mom*

      (Assuming this is in reference to the non-profit sector given your first question, but disregard if not). I found this to be pretty normal in my non-profit experience (9 years in non-profits, higher education and institutions/museums). I have been a “manager” and an “associate/assistant director” without any of the responsibilities to manage a team or direct a program. As to why, I have been told by two different organizations that we “give our employees good titles to compensate for pay/lack of benefits/some other trade-off.” Which is nonsense to me but some of my colleagues feel very differently. What I think it has helped me with (although I have no direct evidence) is the job search–I have an inkling that hiring managers, for better or worse, have seen those titles on my resume and put me on the “call” list vs. someone with the same experience but a lower sounding title. It may have helped get my foot in the door when when looking for for-profit work or when switching non-profit industries.

    10. Slippy*

      It is very common now for titles to be vague and unhelpful outside of the C-Suite. Some places have a rank structure for pay purposes, but the individual’s authority and scope of work may be drastically different.

    11. Sunflower #2*

      Sometimes manager can mean “project manager” not “manager of people.” When I worked in the staffing industry, this was done often.

    12. Ihmmy*

      last job was a non profit and our ED grumped about a previous staff who she had given the title of Office Manager to, but all she wanted was a glorified admin assistant. Not uncommon, especially if the title is “office manager” or something similar where there aren’t actually people to manage

      1. Chinook*

        “ED grumped about a previous staff who she had given the title of Office Manager to, but all she wanted was a glorified admin assistant.”

        I am confused – I thought an Office Manager WAS a glorified admin assistant. When I have been given that position, I did not only Admin Asst type work for an executive but also was responsible for managing the logistics of the work environment (everything from accepting deliveries and planning international trips for the boss up to helping plan renovations and the move to a new office).

    13. Chinook*

      “how normal is it for employers to give staff the title of “manager” but none of the responsibilities?”

      Depends on how organized the company comes when it comes to their org chart. Most places I have worked, “manager” means you are managing humans (and it is actually listed as such at a payroll/hr level). But, I have also worked in places where a manager doesn’t manage humans but projects. But, if you are given no responsibilities and decision-making powers, then I would say that is quire unusual and might be worth to ask whomever you gave that title what exactly you are expected to be managing.

    14. Serin*

      My company will use the phrase “people manager” to distinguish people with supervisory responsibilities from people with ‘manager’ in their title for some other reason. (We employ a ton of project managers; that might be why they feel the need to do this.) So, pretty normal from my POV.

      1. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

        I worked with an org that used Director for people who oversaw an area (Marketing, PR, etc.) but then used Managing Director for people who oversaw an area and staff.

      2. nerfmobile*

        Yes, my company has Product Managers, Program Managers, Project Managers, Community Managers, Marketing Managers, Contract Managers, Sales Managers, Event Managers, Operations Managers, and more, none of whom (may) manage people. But they all have decision-making authorities for Things, so they get a manager title. People managers may also have the decision authorities for Things (the ones above, but also functions like QA, Development, Customer Support, User Exerience), but also do the supervisory work of managing people.

        So it’s not JUST the title you need to look at. But if you’ve been given a manager title and don’t have final decision-making authority for something, then that’s a problem.

    15. NJ Anon*

      They may think that by giving them a “manager” title, thinking they can then classify them as exempt from overtime. There is more to being classified as exempt than that but it’s frightening how uninformed higher-ups at nonprofits can be with regard to labor laws. My executive director actually asked an outside HR expert whether the labor laws were different for nonprofits. I was mortified but glad he told her the same thing I already had-a big, fat, NO. Only size matters, ahem.

    16. InterviewFreeZone*

      When I worked in higher ed and someone deserved a promotion but there was no vacant position to promote them to, they often became a “manager” even if there were no direct reports, etc. Very normal in that industry.

    17. Mando Diao*

      My job does that. I’m Marketing Director. My coworker is Data Manager. Part of it is to help us out for future job searches, and the other part is to butter us up and make us more willing to fix 11th hour mistakes that are outside our job descriptions.

    18. Green*

      I’m at the Director level but I have nobody under me to direct. However, I’m in a professional role with lots of responsibility, just don’t manage anyone.

    19. AEB*

      In my industry “manager” means something totally different. Basically you start out as an associate, then you’re a manager, then a director. As a director you actually manage people.

      But there isn’t any consistency.

      I think it’s sort of like you “manage” projects and whatnot.

    20. Koko*

      What do you consider the responsibilities of a manager?

      At my workplace we have two types of jobs in the Manager job tier: individual contributors who manage budget/strategy/etc for a sub-program within a department, and project managers who run lead on all of the discrete projects that pop up in their department. Neither type of manager needs to have any direct reports to be in this job tier, if that’s what you’re thinking of as being the responsibilities of a manager. The title has more to do with the amount of responsibility and autonomy they have, being able to set their own budget and strategy, and being held accountable for their program’s successes and failures in a way that lower-ranking staff aren’t.

      Manager is just a step on the ladder somewhere between “Specialist” or “Coordinator” and “Senior Manager” or “Director.” It doesn’t necessarily mean you manage a team of staff.

    21. One of the Sarahs*

      We used to joke in my civil service job that the more impressive the job title sounded, the lower down the ladder they were. We had standardised grade titles, but people would create their own job titles too…

    22. Kira*

      I’d say normal. Where I work, “manager” doesn’t mean “somebody who manages other staff members” it’s more of a word stuck onto the title because you need a noun somewhere in there. You can’t just say “Operations person” so they went with “Operations manager/director/coordinator” based on whatever they felt that day. After all, that person is managing operations, right?

    23. AdAgencyChick*

      Very common in my industry (although the title usually includes “supervisor” instead of “manager”). Junior creative types get promoted REALLY fast because they can so easily get jobs elsewhere, so giving them a shiny new title is one way to justify to upper management why they’re being paid more money even if they’re doing the same work as they did when they started, just better.

      Then you get a bottleneck right about at my job title!

    24. Anonvocado*

      Piggybacking on your other question – I think not for profits do this because they think calling someone a manager makes them exempt from overtime. (Which is not true.) I’m in Canada too, and I know several organizations that do this so as not to pay proper overtime to employees.

    26. Honeybee*

      This happens all the time, and I think it’s because sometimes the term ‘manager’ refers to managing responsibilities/administrative duties/a specific project rather than managing people. There are lots of project managers running around my company who are fresh out of college. Here we call people managers ‘leads’, and manager can me anything.

    27. NaoNao*

      Super, super normal. Every job I’ve had as a professional is a “manager” and I manage no one and nothing. It’s based on “levels” and often differentiates admin or support personnel from call center, customer service, or “team lead” type posts within the same company. It absolutely can vary from job to job, but most of the time if there is no direct reports or management duties it means “This level of work/salary/overall comp” and not much more!

  5. Amber T*

    We’re not given the option to negotiate anything. All decisions about raises and bonuses are discussed and settled by the partners, then it goes through layers and layers of supervisors until I’m told what’s new. Everything is behind closed doors and hush-hush. They’ve been generous with both in the past, but I’m disappointed with my (lack of) new numbers with my promotion. Our HR rep (we outsource most of HR) had to ask me what my “new” salary was (didn’t change) and if I was exempt or not.

    1. SMT*

      That’s how my raise (at a supervisory level) has always been. The managers have a meeting to discuss the amount they have for raises, and then allocate it. We are told, and that’s that.

      1. ElCee*

        Yes, same at my org. The department head allocates merit increases from a pool. For promotions, dept. head discusses with organization directors/HR and states a number to the promotee(sp?), no negotiating.

      2. MAB*

        That is also how my raises worked at my old job. However if there was a promotion, negotiations where expected

      3. TootsNYC*

        ditto.

        In my job as a manager right now I get consulted on category (“exceeds expectations” sort of thing), and that’s it. I sometimes don’t even get consulted on that.

        1. Girasol*

          We used to have that but with a neat sheet from HR showing the pay curve for a job and where on the curve corresponded to “meets” or “exceeds.” If am employed was ranked “exceeds” and was paid at, say, “needs improvement” there was a specific minimum percent raise required. I always liked the transparency of that.

      4. Koko*

        That’s how it works at my current job, too. But after a few years I figured out that the place to do the negotiating is with your own manager before they have that meeting. If your manager knows you’re unhappy and seeking a large increase they’re more likely to fight for you and make the case to the other managers that you need the raise in order to retain you, than if they think you’re just fine and will be happy with any raise at all.

      1. The Rat-Catcher*

        ^This. They will lose their best people this way. It sounds like they are hoping if they offer “enough” money and advancement opportunities, people won’t complain – which will work for some, but chase others out the door.

    3. Bookworm*

      In my experience, raises and bonuses have always been allocated behind closed doors.

      That said, people were able to occasionally negotiated higher raises if they could make a strong argument. But it was a slow process.

      It is weird that your HR rep doesn’t know your salary or classification.

      1. Nother Name*

        I agree. The raise process is pretty secretive where I work. But HR should know what the salaries and classifications are for people who they’re providing services for.

        1. Bookworm*

          Yes. At least in my experience, part of the reason was that there was a certain amount allocated for raises and bonuses, and it was distributed based on performance.

          So of course it would be weird if the managers openly discussed that with all their employees.

    4. Enginerd*

      Depends on the promotion. If you went through the internal job postings and applied for it usually they allow you to negotiate, if your boss comes to you and says they’re giving you a promotion to roll X, there’s usually no negotiating.

    5. AnotherAlison*

      Totally normal here. We only get our annual raises, no matter the promotion. No negotiating. Had a guy leave last week for a 60% raise because he was being paid as his Technical Role 3 salary, despite having 18 months in a Sales role. You might get a big annual raise if you change jobs (at annual raise time, not at the time of the change), but you won’t get a 60% raise, even if that’s perfectly appropriate for a new title. It sucks.

      1. Sans*

        That may be normal at your company, but not at any company I’ve worked for. If you get a promotion, you get a raise, in addition to your annual raise. I’ve seen people get significant increases as they move from manager to senior manager to director.

        1. Bookworm*

          Agreed. Raises and bonuses being allocated behind closed doors is normal (in my experience)…but it would be odd if your company gave you a promotion but made you wait for the corresponding salary jump.

    6. AFT123*

      Experience at a few gigantic global corporations – this is normal in my experience. It sucks, but it’s normal. I think this is also why a lot of people decided to switch back and forth between companies, because coming in new is the only way to negotiate anything and/or get paid actual market value.

    7. Ruthie*

      That’s normal in the government and non-profit offices I’ve worked in. I’ve actually received a raise and a bonus that I wasn’t told about in advance, it just showed up on my paycheck. I began managing in the last six months, and spoke with my boss about how I was excited for the opportunity, but that I was expecting my salary, title, or workspace to be reconsidered because of the increase in responsibility. A few weeks later I was told what my salary increase was without another conversation or negotiation taking place.

    8. hbc*

      I think it’s pretty normal for big companies (or even smaller ones) to do those closed door sessions and then present the information. Much rarer to give a promotion without at least a token increase, and very rare to not have an explanation because everyone associates more responsibility with higher pay.

      For example, it would be okay (but not great) if they said they wanted a trial period of X months before bumping you up. Or if you were maxed out at pay for Level 1 and need to start at the bottom for Level 2 and there’s some overlap in the pay bands. But they should definitely give you that information.

      1. nerfmobile*

        My company does the behind-closed-doors thing. We’re a big global corporation. If you waited to try and make a case for a raise or promotion at the time the info is given out – you’re way too late. The time to actually make your case is 3 to 4 months prior. Our cycle this year looked like this: Lets say they inform people about raises in the first week in December. That means that during November, managers were haggling behind closed doors about how to allocate the merit increase pool they were allocated. And they are allocating those numbers based on performance rankings that were negotiated behind closed doors during meetings in October. Which were based on 360 degree feedback, and mid-year performance conversations that were collected and held in August and September.

        So, if you want to influence your raise (no direct negotiating in this model), you have to make your case with strong data about your performance in August. Not just to your manager, but to inform other managers who your manager will be haggling with during those closed-door sessions, too.

    9. Mando Diao*

      That’s pretty common. On one hand, it’s very fair to know that you’ll get your flat 5% raise every year and no one is being shunted or favored.. On the other hand, some people really do deserve more.

    10. BusSys*

      This may be unfortunate, but it’s common. The most transparency I get is my manager assuring me a glowing review if I’ve earned it, but the numbers come from top down as is.

    11. ThatGirl*

      At my job, during annual review our managers determine what raises they’d like to give us and then it’s approved through upper layers of management. There’s no negotiation. So I’ll say normal.

  6. Rat Racer*

    General question: for those of us who are further along in our career but reflecting on jobs we’ve held in the past, is it OK to post here? As in, “I once had a job where the Employer did X, and I thought it was untoward, but now wondering if I was naive/too picky.”

    1. Mark M*

      I would think that’s fine! Alison has occasionally posted questions from readers that refer to situations in the past.

      1. Okay then*

        My first job out of college I worked in a 2 person satellite office as a recruiter for a staffing agency. The ‘manager’ of the office was a huge micro manager. She wouldn’t let me talk to anyone in the corporate office directly without her permission. She would travel a lot and required me to text her when I left office for lunch and text when I got back. She counted if I was even a minute or two late. Sometimes she’d act very motherly and kind towards me (mother/daughter age difference) and sometimes she was rude and mean. If she was ever traveling she called me office line every hour at random times to ensure I was ‘there’ and if I was ever in the bathroom even I’d get read the riot act for not answering. Once I was at the bank for an hour over lunch and left my cell in the office and had 17 missed called and 32 texts when I got back to my office.
        After 4 months a colleague from corporate finally called me directly and we got to talking. I finally mentioned what was going on and she said that everyone was wondering how long until I spoke up! Apparently the woman had run off 4 recruiters in 2 years with her actions and I was her last shot. But, I put up with it for another 4 months until I left – I didn’t know any better!
        Is this really common though? I have only had good managers since then who do not micromanage (I screen for that when I interview places and say if you micromanage we won’t work together well) but it’s a horror story of all horror stories.

        1. Dawn*

          Not common AT ALL, however, I think that everyone who has ever had more than about 3 jobs has had at least one horrible micromanaging and/or a trainwreck of a boss. It’s like a rite of passage in the job world.

          1. AMT*

            Yep. It brings to mind the boss that would keep the stamps locked in her desk and require everyone who needed one to come in and justify our need for a stamp. And then she’d give out…one stamp.

          2. Wendy Darling*

            I had a temp job with a boss who wouldn’t give me a day off (unpaid) to sit at the hospital with one parent while the other parent had a major and terrifying surgery with a significant chance of leaving her permanently disabled. Then he threatened to dock my pay for going to the bathroom at times other than my break.

            TMI: I was going to the bathroom a lot (by which I mean every 2-3 hours) because I was having an unusually heavy period and was changing my tampon to avoid having my workplace turn into a scene from Carrie.

          3. YawningDodo*

            Yep. Had one boss who got very angry if we talked to anyone else in the department about a project without going through her, despite the fact that going through her for every little thing 1.) delayed things ridiculously and 2.) resulted in her acting all harassed when we went to her for permission, because she was overworked and didn’t actually have time for us. Overall the result was that we’d either talk to each other secretly or we would just leave smaller tasks undone indefinitely.

            I’m pretty sure she also made literally everyone in the department cry at least once.

            1. Wendy Darling*

              Slightly off-topic but one time in grad school I forgot my phone but remembered my laptop. I have software that lets me see missed calls on my computer, but I cannot use it to make calls. I ended up rushing home after class because I had 15+ missed calls from a strange number and thought there must be some emergency.

              Nope, flower shop wanted to deliver some flowers and decided to BLOW UP MY PHONE because I was not at home.

        3. Anna*

          I would say that’s not even normal for a micromanager. It sounds like borderline obsessive-compulsive disorder (not the rude and mean part, but the compulsive checking in).

          1. Okay then*

            Honestly I think it was just severe trust issues; she said the 4 other recruiters she’d ‘chased off’ (not her words, I learned that part later) were all ‘gunning for her job.’ I know she’d also had a nasty divorce at some point with infidelity, from the ‘good’ days where she was motherly and nice. It just wasn’t cool for that part of her to overflow into her professional life. She also treated our contractors at the client site similarly and had habitually bad reviews from them.

          2. Doriana Gray*

            No, that just sounds like someone who’s a controlling pain in the ass. No mental illness required.

          3. Leisabet*

            Nah – I have OCD, and while I can’t speak for everyone who has it, I’d be happy to write that off as “super controlling, deeply insecure weirdo”.

        4. Okay then*

          Actually that was when I fell in love with AAM – As I began to job hunt I stumbled across this website for career advice. That was a long time ago! I don’t have an ‘account’ but I still follow fairly frequently – when it’s not busy season at work :)

        5. Triangle Pose*

          She read you the Riot Act for not being able to answer because you were in the bathroom? How do you even respond to that?

          While I can conceive of a reasonable response to general calling and micromanaging “Jane, you seem to be calling to check up on me and whether I am here often and it’s disrupting my actual work – can we walk about whether we can schedule check-ins a less disruptive way that still alleviates any concerns you might have? To that end, is there anything in my actual work product that is driving this?” But if she’s chewing you out for being in the bathroom, I’d have a hard time keeping it cool.

          1. Okay then*

            Yea, I did have a hard time keeping it cool. Being used to college/sorority #DRAMA when I gave my notice and had to hand in my computer and give an exit interview – to her – I half expected her to confront me and #HASHOUTOURISSUES but she was very civil and professional, to her credit. The bridge is thoroughly burned though – I got a mean email from her about 3 months later going over how untrustworthy and terrible I was (I learned from the colleague that she’d been let go, since I was her last shot)

            1. LD*

              It was so unfair of them to put you in the position of working for a manager who apparently didn’t get the coaching and feedback she needed to even manage you appropriately. Unless, of course, they did tell her what was expected and that’s why she didn’t want you talking to corporate…even then they should have called you earlier to probe about your experience. Hope you are in a much better situation!

        6. Kate M*

          I think the thing about this, and probably a lot of other workplaces where there is abnormal behavior, is that SOME of the behavior might be ok in certain circumstances. Which makes you rationalize it, and then think that if A and B are ok, C and D must be too. Like, not wanting you to reach out to corporate in some instances might be warranted (if she didn’t want you bothering higher ups with problems she could solve or something). And if it’s a 2 person office, letting her know generally when you’ll be in and out of the office is reasonable. But then add on everything else, and these become symptoms of a larger problem.

        7. Observer*

          That level of micromanagement is NOT common, fortunately. But, some level of micromanagement is not uncommon, although good managers generally do NOT do that.

        8. LD*

          Not uncommon, and in the way you describe, so inappropriate! When a person is new in a role, then it makes sense for a manager to check in regularly to ensure the office is covered. I have a friend who worked in a remote office with no other colleagues around. She said that for the first couple of months in the job her manager called the office every Friday at right about 4:55 p.m. After her answering the phone every time, the regular Friday afternoon calls stopped. He trusted she was doing what she needed to do and not skipping out just because he didn’t have eyes on her. He wasn’t exactly micromanaging, just setting expectations. And then when she did need an afternoon, he trusted she was managing herself and her time appropriately.

    3. Nervous Accountant*

      I posted a smilar question down below, but I’m not sure–can I post my question here or should I start my own post??? Don’t want to piggyback or add clutter!

      1. Ask a Manager* Post author

        Either.

        Also, I’m not necessarily going to see all questions in this post, so as a blanket statement to everyone, err on the side of assuming that if you feel like you’re following the rules at the top of the post, you’re fine. (I don’t want anyone waiting on an answer from me to “can I do this?” and not getting one).

  7. TaxAnon*

    So timely!

    Is it normal to have a terrible time trying to make time to take time off work? I’m not talking during busy season (those are blackout months anyway) but on normal months, I end up having to work overtime in the week leading up to PTO to be able to actually take off. I took 2 days off last week and had to work late the week before plus Saturday to be able to do it. There’s really no flexibility (things are due when they are due) and no sharing of responsibilities for someone to be able to help out. It’s both stressful and exhausting, even to take just 2 days off.

    1. Bookworm*

      I imagine this would depend on your industry.

      My experience is mostly in tech. What you’re describing would be unusual, but not unheard of (especially with smaller start-ups.) However it’s uncommon enough that someone could leave their own company and search for one with better life balance.

            1. De Minimis*

              Can be the norm for that particular field, depending on the work culture at your firm.

              Most people just put up with it for a few years and go to better positions.

        2. BRR*

          My best friend is an auditor at a big four firm. She basically always works overtime (including asking to have a Saturday off). Taking PTO doesn’t seem to affect her.

        3. Former Retail Manager*

          If you’re at Big 4, then yes, I would say this is pretty common. If you are a recent graduate and only staff, they will work you to death. Big 4 doesn’t really care about burning you out. They will just re-up with the next round of graduates. If you stay long enough and move to senior, manager, etc. it gets a little easier to take time off. This also tends to become more and more of an issue the larger the firm you work at. Smaller firms tend to value work life balance a little more.

          1. TaxAnon*

            Thanks – I’m not at a big 4, but senior level in a regional firm. I guess I’m more curious whether this is specific to where I am now in my career or if it’s just a norm that I’ll always have to work around.

            1. De Minimis*

              From what I saw, seniors usually had a higher workload than most other employees, even some higher level people, so I would say it’s somewhat typical…but seniors are generally in a good position to move to better jobs outside of public after a few years, or else move to a different public firm with better balance.

            2. Former Retail Manager*

              Not sure if you get comment notifications…..I’m a little slow. Sorry. As De Minimis says below, some seniors have higher workloads, but I think it really is a firm to firm issue and definitely something that you should ask a TON of questions about during the interview and, if possible, network with some people who actually work at the next firm/company you want to work at to see if the firm actually practices what they preach. Many don’t.

              I routinely visit various accounting firms (small and mid-size, but not Big 4) in my current position, although I don’t work in public accounting. I’ve had the opportunity to observe the culture/work environment in many and I hate to say it’s a crap shoot, but it kind of is. I’ve seen mid-size firms that work you do death leaving you in the situation you’re presently in, while others allow employees to take a week off, sometimes with short notice, without it being a big deal. It really seems to depend upon the attitude and values of the managing partners and how they choose to run things.

              As for other jobs on the outside, after you’ve spent 3 to 5 years as a senior, or possibly even in total, I’d definitely consider positions in industry or government. Most CPA’s I’ve known in industry have some busy times but it’s nothing like public accounting and government virtually always guarantees you a 40 hour work week. Best of luck! My personal opinion….do a great job, secure some good references and get out. Public accounting is a beat down.

            3. Crystal*

              It’s normal for the accounting industry. Unless you are in a situation where there are multiple people at the same level with the same job description, you are going to end up working extra before you take off and after you get back.

              I don’t even work in public accounting. Passed the exam 26 years ago and have worked for a variety of employers since, and this seems to be the norm everywhere. It’s just a job where you live by the calendar and die by the calendar.

          2. Liz*

            I’m a Manager in a Big (Consulting) and its totally normal to work a lot of hours leading up to PTO. I always expect to have long hours and work the weekend before taking off. PTO is hard to take–I can take it, but often end up working during PTO because things come up or people keep emailing with questions assuming I’ll just take care of it. So, I go out of the country, and can’t bring my laptop (government clients). Best way to get off.

          3. bopper*

            My husband worked at a Big 4…they knew you at least wanted to work 2 years to get the required experience for the CPA license…and if you were not deemed worthy of moving up, you were “counseled out”…but that was okay because other companies would want to hire Big 4 “alumni”.

    2. Connie-Lynne*

      It depends? I’d say it’s not uncommon to have to push harder the week before a one or two week vacation to make sure your coverage is covered, but to have to exhaust yourself for a 2-day break seems extreme.

    3. Victoria Nonprofit (USA)*

      Do you mean that you are not *allowed* to take time off, or that in order to take time off you have to do all that work before you go away? I’d say the first is not normal, and the second is.

      1. TaxAnon*

        It’s policy that deadlines that occur while you’re gone must be met before you leave. So taking a week off means that I have one week to do two weeks’ worth of work before I leave. Because of the cycle we work on it’s rarely possible to spread the work over multiple weeks prior to PTO.

        1. Victoria Nonprofit (USA)*

          Hm. I don’t know about the level of specificity you’re describing, but in my experience it’s pretty normal to have to get done the same stuff you would have gotten done if you were there (before you leave, or shortly after).

          1. Engineer Girl*

            In this case it sounds like a recurring task that will recur while OP would be on vacation. That means it is impossible for OP to go on vacation if there is no on else to do the task.
            It is still a sign of bad management if no on is cross trained on other jobs. It would be reasonable for another person to pick up that task while OP is gone. In a well managed office that would happen.

          2. Bookworm*

            I think it must depend on the work. In some of my past work, having to meet the deadlines that took place while you were gone would effectively ban vacation.

            As such, it was customary to put things in good order and hand off specific tasks to coworkers. Everyone had to do it, and no one grumbled (provided the work was well organized.)

            TaxAnon, hopefully someone who’s worked in your industry can chime in. It sounds unsustainable to me…but then, I’ve no experience in that area.

          3. Green*

            Yes; I always get stuff done I would have gotten done if I were there. I push up meetings or push back meetings, and provide an emergency back-up for each of my subject areas I handle if stuff hits the fan before I’m gone, but generally I’m just compressing that work into the weeks around it.

        2. neverjaunty*

          Normal, but a sign of a crappy workplace. In a functional workplace people cover for one another.

          1. Lily Rowan*

            Totally.

            I’ve also found taking a full week to be easier than taking a couple of days. With a couple of days off, you’re still trying to do a week’s worth of work in less time!

          2. fposte*

            I think that’s too broad. Some of what I do can’t be covered for, and it’s not unusual around my department. It’s one thing if a large portion of the work is compressible, but if it’s not, 40 extra hours for the week is more than most co-workers could handle even if they had the expertise.

            So while nobody hands that to me as an official policy, yes, I have to get the work done before I go or else cover it on vacation. Usually I do a bit of both.

            1. Ask a Manager* Post author

              Agreed — in some jobs it would actually be far less efficient to train someone to cover for you, particular more senior-ish jobs where you work with a lot of autonomy.

            2. neverjaunty*

              Okay, it would have more accurate to say that in a functional workplace, people cover for each other where it’s reasonable to do so. It’s not a healthy environment when a vacation just means “tons of extra work before and after”, and where nobody else can pitch in because they’re overworked too.

              This is, btw, one of the reasons I end up arguing with AAM when she firmly insists vacations are a must; there is pretty much no point in taking vacations in a workplace where “vacation” really just means “pushing the work down in the middle so it squeezes out on either end”, and where you end up spending vacation doing extra work or worrying about it.

          3. Turtle Candle*

            Yes, or at least in my industry there’s a mix. There are some things that only I can do that have to be done before I leave (so I may pull a few extra hours before vacation), some things that my coworkers cover for in a pinch, and some things that will wait for me to get back. If I had to get all of them done before I left, I wouldn’t be able to take vacation at all; as it is, I might have a bit more to do before and after, but I don’t have to do two weeks of work in one week to be able to take the next week off.

        3. Michelenyc*

          My step mom is an accountant and given her area of expertise when she took time off before she made partner she really had to bust her butt to get everything done before she went on vacation or took time off. I am still shocked by how much she works even though she has a full staff to delegate too.

        4. Sunflower*

          To an extent yes. Basically there is someone in the office who can kind of push things along but I have to set everything up for them to make it as easy as possible so it pretty much always necessitates putting in some extra time.

    4. Tom*

      I have found this to be common. It is always “crunch time” for me before or after taking time off, and I sometimes don’t take my vacation because I will be more stressed at work as a result.

    5. Engineer Girl*

      It is common in badly managed offices (and there are a lot of them out there). Good managers put padding in deadlines so that people can take time off as needed. Another tactic is to ask for the dates a good 4-6 months in advance. I used to include that information in my weekly activity report to my manager as a reminder. Good managers would honor those dates because they knew about them long ahead of time. Bad managers would still grouse about how I was making it hard for them by leaving 3 days.

      1. Crazy Dog Lady*

        I echo this – I think while the ability to easily take time off depends on the industry, it’s even more dependent on the management. I’ve had two bosses at my current company, and the first made it incredibly easy to take time off. The current boss will approve time off, and then weeks later (like days before vacation starts) take it back. There are other management issues now, so it’s the new normal, unfortunately.

    6. Ad Astra*

      This is a common experience, but I’m on the fence about whether you should expect this in every job. It depends a lot on your function and the staffing situation at your office. Typically, you’ll have better luck in larger departments or larger companies, where there’s adequate staffing and support for cross-training so that someone can cover for you while you’re gone. If you know people in your industry who work for different companies, you might try picking their brains a little to see if this is an industry-wide issue or just particular to your company.

    7. MaryMary*

      I’d say it’s not unusual, but not good. In large professional services firms like accounting, law, and consulting, I’d say it’s actually pretty normal. One of the primary reasons I left OldJob (consulting) is that my workload was like yours: I’d end up working late(r) nights or weekends just to take a few days off. We tried to implement summer hours (work at least 9 hour days and leave at noon every other Friday), and I only managed to leave before 3:00 once or twice all summer. My role was chronically understaffed and I had no real backup, so if I wasn’t there things just did not get done.

    8. Hannah*

      This is normal in the tech world I’m in. Project managers often have a mental block about plugging vacation days into a delivery timeline – they think work should keep going, whether that means the person on vacation has coverage, or just makes up the missed time before or after vacation, they don’t care. No allowances are made for vacations that were earned or the fact that people aren’t interchangeable. That doesn’t make it right but that is a really really common attitude.

    9. Serin*

      In my experience, the larger the company, the easier it’s been to take time off.

      e.g.

      – tiny little tri-weekly newspaper? “Vacation” was a thing that was paid out at the end of the year because if anyone was missing it would be impossible to put together an issue.

      – Monthly trade magazine? Sure you can take a week of vacation — just get the entire issue to the point where it’s a week ahead of schedule.

      – Giant multinational corporation? Antonio is your backup, and Janet is Antonio’s backup, so double-check that their training is up-to-date and then go on and have fun. On the other hand, don’t forget that you’re Mike’s backup and every year he spends all of February and two weeks of March in Vietnam.

    10. NJ Anon*

      Depending our your industry (taxes?), totally normal. Sometimes I hate going on vacation . . .

    11. AnotherTax*

      I’ve heard of this, so I do think it’s fairly common, but it doesn’t happen in all firms. I’m also in tax at a large public accounting firm, and in a junior manager position. Ignoring busy season (as you said, blackout months), we generally request time off well in advance for anything more than ~2 days off. We may work some OT leading up to and/or after the vacation, but less than what you’ve described, and not in all cases. We have enough people in my office doing the same types of work that partners and/or senior managers can reassign new work on their clients while someone is away.

    12. Chicken*

      I’d say that it’s not unusual, but it’s not standard either. Well functioning workplaces have systems in place so that people, especially junior staff, can take time off without a ton of stress to prep for it. Mediocre (but not terrible) workplaces often don’t. In most offices, the more senior you are, the more difficult it becomes to take time off without a lot of pre-planning and extra work.

    13. just another techie*

      In my experience that only happens at places with other dysfunctions. At a reasonable workplace you should be able to find coverage for your tasks, especially for such a short vacation!

    14. BusSys*

      In my finance experience, this is unfortunate but normal, particularly if you’re a key player in certain processes. But the key to making it work in those environments is to be straightforward with your manager about when you’d like to take vacation and how long you’ll be out and present/work together on a plan to make it happen.

    15. Another TaxAnon*

      I also work in tax at a public firm and I would say that sounds the same as my experience, although it may vary by level and team. I generally try to cover for my teams when they are off, but when I am away while my team members can help keep things moving, ultimately I do have to get involved and weigh in on things or review.

      I have had very bad luck taking one or two days off, for the reasons you mention. The deadlines don’t move, clients still expect answers, and nothing will be reallocated based on a single day off.

      I will say I’ve had more success taking midweek days off, since on Fridays clients/partners tend to want to wrap things up. On a random Wednesday, most things can wait until Thursday and I can ignore my emails. This doesn’t change the fact I still have to work several extra hours elsewhere.

      I often take full weeks (or multiple weeks) off instead and that works better, although still involves some work while away.

    16. Another Lawyer*

      I have a friend at a Big 4 and even if she’s taking time off, she works overtime. I’d say she averages 80 hours, even on a week with vacation. If we’re at dinner, she will need to work after the dinner and then be up for a call at 6am most days.

    17. Doriana Gray*

      This is normal in my industry (risk management). Our division is growing faster than they anticipated, and the higher-ups are cautious about hiring more people in the event that things slow down and the newbies not have any work to do (thus, layoffs begin). So in order to take my PTO this week, I too had to work late and through lunch on some days last week to have things caught up enough so I wouldn’t be behind (it helps that I’m new and didn’t have much of a caseload anyway).

    18. Koko*

      Probably varies but in my job it’s normal. We have some cross-training, but honestly that’s just so my coworkers can cover for me on pop-up situations while I’m away without having to disturb me. We all strive really hard to add as little work as possible to our colleagues’ plates while we’re away out of consideration.

      In general, taking time off requires some combination of:
      1) Pulling some long days or putting in weekend hours in the week or two before and after the trip
      2) Tabling all non-time-sensitive projects until after vacation
      3) Deciding some optional/voluntary things don’t need to get done during that time (things like, say, a weekly status update to collaborators on a project – they appreciate and use the updates when I send them, but nothing is going to break down or fall apart if they don’t get my update for a week or two, so I’m not going to ask someone else to do it)

      So I wouldn’t say I put in 1 hour of OT for every 1 hour of vacation I take, since there are non-essential tasks that can be foregone, but it’s typically maybe 1 hour of OT for every 2-3 hours of vacation I take.

      Slightly related but I also find that it’s critical to send an email to your team about 7-10 days before your vacation to remind them you’re going to be out and give them a deadline a few days before your vacation to get you any items they’ll need before you go. Really helps avoid being slammed with a mountain of work in the final 2-3 days if you can do some of it earlier.

    19. Anxa*

      I think so, but probably depends on industry.

      Some places had a no weekends off policy. After a couple months you may be able to get a Saturday off if you had found coverage and a backup coverage (which wasn’t too bad, they were more coveted shifts). But you could not take off for any holidays.

    20. stevenz*

      It’s the way the workplace culture has been going for a long time – dehumanising. They are going to get everything they can out of you and you can’t do a dam thing about it. It’s a Puritan macho work ethic that has no basis in reality. It reduces costs by keeping staff numbers down, and keeps a steady flow of eager, new, young lower-paid people coming through the door when the less-young (smarter) ones leave.

  8. Bonnie*

    I work in the restaurant world – but on the corporate side. Is it normal to have to “babysit” chefs and managers at restaurants (reminding them of every. single. thing. several times) and is it normal to get zero holidays besides Thanksgiving & Christmas Day?

    1. Mythea*

      I worked in several restaurants and all staff, even corporate worked all holidays (and weekends). That part seems completely normal. I can’t answer the babysitting question though

    2. Bookworm*

      Hahaha. I also did some work with restaurants at a corporate level.

      In my experience, the answer is yes.

      It’s not always necessary (some chefs are awesome) but the restaurant world is a bit odd in terms of it’s professional norms, and hand-holding is much more common in that scene. I found that a lot of people loved it or hated it.

      I did get holidays off, but a lot of people were expected to be available on holidays as those are really busy days for restaurants.

    3. Sunflower*

      Not getting holidays off is pretty standard. Some places will give you one and make you choose between 2 biggies.

      Managers it depends. Some places hire managers by taking their best server and promoting them- not always the best solution. I mostly worked FOH so we obviously bickered with BOH a lot. I’ve only seen good chefs at higher end places.

    4. Q*

      The place my friend works for all managers work every holiday. They may only have to come in for 2 or 3 hours but every manager has to be there every holiday. I find this crazy but I guess its normal for that industry.

    5. Mando Diao*

      The restaurant industry is pretty packed with people who either
      1) Are just starting out and don’t have much experience
      2) Are not great fits for more professional jobs, for a variety of reasons.

      By no means am I casting aspersions on people who can’t land fancy office jobs, but if you’re trying to figure out the norms in restaurants, a major feature of that industry is the constant turnover on the entry level of either serving or cooking. There are a lot of people who knowingly work for three months at a time in between traveling stints, and restaurants are one of the very few places that will hire people on those terms. There is also a subset of people who are constantly being fired from their current cooking jobs and then moving on to the next kitchen, and they don’t get weeded out because the interview process is “informal” at best.

      1. Sunflower*

        Management can be people like that but depending on the restaurant, a lot of managers are recruited out of hospitality programs in college and are making it their career. If you’re hiring these managers out of these programs, they should need obvious guidance but not babysiting.

        1. Gabriela*

          Agreed. The hospitality industry is full of people who could certainly “land a fancy office” job if that’s what they wanted, but have chosen hospitality management as a career. There are definitely some service-specific idiosyncrasies in this industry, but it’s not fair to assume that everyone who is in the hospitality industry is there because they are transient or because they can’t hack it in other industries.

    6. Rat in the Sugar*

      Normal for managers at least. They have about 10-30 different people yelling in their ear at any given moment and are always putting out (metaphorical) fires in the kitchen, so they get distracted constantly and have to be reminded of things.

      I haven’t worked on the corporate side of things so I don’t know if they worked holidays with us line workers, I’m afraid.

    7. The Rat-Catcher*

      Normal in restaurants and retail, unfortunately. A great place would give you other days off to compensate for at least the more major holidays you worked, but most places aren’t great, they’re…well, they’re normal.

    8. HR Recruiter*

      I started laughing when I read this. Yes, our managers/chefs have to be babysat. I’m new to the restaurant world but from what I’ve heard from others that’s pretty normal. We are a bigger company and we get the standard holidays paid like Labor Day, Memorial Day, etc. But not as many as when I worked in other industries.

  9. JazzyisAnonymous*

    This is my first job out of college. My boss is semi-retired and spends most of his time in Florida. Whenever there are conflicts among he employees he asks us to work it out ourselves. Is that normal? Some of these conflicts never get resolved, and have been ongoing for months.

    1. Bookworm*

      This is your direct manager? He’s semi-retired? That is weird.

      Is there no one in the office in a supervisory capacity?

      1. Elizabeth West*

        I wondered the same thing. I worked for a small business (a lab) once whose owner lived in Pennsylvania and ran it from there, but we had an actual office manager on the premises, and someone who oversaw scheduling and such for the chemists.

        If he’s not-managing from afar and there is no one else to oversee things, then yes, that’s weird.

    2. Not a Real Giraffe*

      Not normal. Managers are supposed to manage people, problems, etc. Your boss sounds like he’s more retired than semi-retired and has checked out of the management part of his job.

      1. JazzyisAnonymous*

        Some combination. Our boss isn’t really involved in the work itself, but when issues arise around it and conflicts between staff about how work is getting done, he doesn’t really get involved.

        1. Ask a Manager* Post author

          Pretty normal to expect you to work out personality conflicts on your own (and to intervene if you can’t — but be pretty damn frustrated with at least one party that he had to). But work-related conflicts he should be involved with, unless there are managers between you and him.

    4. Nother Name*

      Asking staff to work out minor conflicts is normal – you should be working together as a team. However, some things do require a manager to get involved. (For example, if Esmerelda always leaves a ton of work for others to handle while she’s on vacation, or when you are splitting up workload, Wakeen always takes the “best” assignments, then the manager needs to step up.)

    5. Sunflower*

      Are you in a small office and hes the owner? If so, I could see this as kind of normal as my mom’s office is kind of like that. However he should really have someone else in charge in the office to be making decisions(what my moms does)

    6. JazzyisAnonymous*

      He is the owner- there are 7 of us and we all have the same job title. One of us has more leadership inclination than the others, but no authority. It’s issues like one person who spends all of her time on her cell phone and ignores the customers, and another pair who get into screaming blowouts in which one of them often leaves the office…

      3. non-profit manager*

        It might be normal in small, closely held businesses. I have seen this many times myself. My husband is experiencing it now. Normal is not necessarily good.

        My husband’s situation is such that there are a lot of performance problems that are affecting the company’s ability to serve their customers. The owner constantly reminds everyone that he’s the owner and he’ll deal with them, but he never does. Very frustrating.

      4. OhNo*

        In that context, definitely not normal. It sounds like even the interpersonal issues are bad enough where whoever is in charge should be stepping in. It sounds like this guy is just a really bad manager.

      5. KH*

        It’s not “normal” from a professional office perspective, but it’s typical from a small business owner perspective. Most small business owners who have become just successful enough to semi-retire but not much bigger are TERRIBLE at running a business and managing people. The only way you’re going to escape that type of situation is to not work for a small business with an individual owner, IMO.

    7. I'm Not Phyllis*

      I think it would be normal for employees to try working it out amongst themselves before involving the boss … but if you guys are already doing this, then he needs to step in when asked.

    8. GOG11*

      I was an assistant director at a small nonprofit and the director was semi-retired. He was very hands off, but he would step in or take things on when called upon to do so. I can’t say whether it is or isn’t normal across the board, though.

  10. Grapey*

    I’ve actually been employed at one place for about 10 years -my first job out of college- and STILL wonder how normal this is:

    We have many common job titles like “project manager”, “business analyst” …but oftentimes the people in these roles do more company-specific stuff and REALLY not what you’d think if you were hiring a “Business Analyst”. For example our ‘business analyst’ never actually talks to different stakeholders but is more of a scrum master for his own tiny team. What someone else would think is a BA we call the ‘systems administrator’. I’ve always hated it. It’s difficult to be called one thing here but then not have an obvious “in” when networking. First time contacts very commonly assume I have skills I don’t actually have. (And forget about if I ever decide to leave and need to market myself!) Is this normal?

    1. AFT123*

      I’ve experienced this more times than I thought could be coincidence as well and always wondered if it was normal. It will sometimes have an upside – like when your title is paid better than what your title should be – but it sure makes career moves a challenge.

    2. Bookworm*

      It’s not unusual. Job titles are sort of notorious for being vague and being applied differently at various companies.

      It does sound like your company might be a little weirder than most, but it’s still a common problem.

    3. Sunflower*

      Very common. Just look at job postings. You’ll see 2 jobs for a Business Analyst that share zero of the same qualifications.

    4. Penny*

      I think that’s not super unusual, especially in the tech world. I’ve definitely run into people in similar situations when looking to hire a technical writer.

    5. Mike C.*

      I work at the sort of place where you could spend decades working here and the same thing happens!

      One thing that might help if/when you leave is that companies of that type usually have written job descriptions – use those to help better define what you actually do and what your skill set is.

    6. MaryMary*

      I feel like this is pretty common, and so is the flip side of having a “unique” or company-specific job title that doesn’t match the titles everyone else in the industry uses (for example, if the internal financial software your company uses is called ProfitTracker, and your title ProfitTracker Analyst instead if Financial Analyst).

      This came up in the open thread a couple weeks ago, and Alison’s answered similar questions. She suggests putting your functional/common used title in parenthesis next to yournactual title on your resume. You could take a similar approach when networking “my title is business analyst, but the work I do would make me a sys admin at most other companies.”

      1. Nicole*

        I love this suggestion and have been doing something very similar. I once had the title of Telecom Tech II but I didn’t work on the technical side – I just paid the telecom bills. I put my official title on my resume and in parenthesis added “serving in an Accounts Payable role” because I didn’t want to be declined for roles I was qualified for just because my title was misleading.

    7. Triangle Pose*

      Huh, thanks for giving me a reason to look up “scrum master?” I’ve never heard that term before and now I know it!

      1. Shishimai*

        It’s a really cool role! At least, from the perspective of a scrum team member.

        A good scrum master is a true BAMF. A bad scrum master can make the entire team’s life miserable.

        No idea how to make that title work in a non-scrum system, though.

        1. Johanna*

          Scrum Master can sometimes be translated to Agile Project Manager. That’s not totally accurate, but it helps get the point across.

    8. Almond Milk Latte*

      I was once a Business Process Analyst, but I was more product than process. Aside from background checks, I always used the title that most of my business partners used to refer to my team, which more accurately explains what I do.

    9. OhNo*

      I agree with everyone else – this is very normal. It seems to cross almost every single field. There’s always a slight difference between companies, of course, but there’s always a few that are way out in left field with how they assign job titles to different positions.

      Just as a side note, if you know the title that most companies in your field would use to describe that job, you can use that on a resume with your actual title in parentheses if it would help. My office just hired somebody who did that on their resume, and it was pretty easy to figure out what they meant and it helped a lot to figure out exactly what their job was.

    10. Ros*

      I just left a job that had this same issue. While some of the titles matched up, the actual structure of titles was very weird. 3 departments went from Coordinator ->Director->Chief and then Analyst or Officer thrown in there randomly depending on the department, one department had it’s own progression that started at Officer, and the other was just random titles it seemed.

      Anyway, before leaving this job a couple months ago I spoke with our department “Analyst” about this. His title as Research and Policy Analyst was very misleading as his tasks were very different than if he had that title anywhere else in our market. He was also concerned that by being in this position for so long with this inaccurate title would screw him over when he decided to leave (there is no way of moving up, so you must leave to move up).

      Honestly, I’m glad my title fit what I actually did, but I feel bad for those who have to struggle because of poor title development.

    11. themmases*

      Normal, unfortunately. “Associate” and “coordinator” are two titles that tend to get tacked onto a topic area and just mean whatever the organization wants them to mean; I think “analyst” might be starting to go that way too.

      I had one of these titles at a previous job and it makes things very confusing! My organization created a title between entry level and the standard title most people in the field have (the one they would just start tacking “senior” and “lead” onto most places). Unfortunately this title actually means something in our field– a role quite different from what I actually did. It’s hard to explain to people what my job was without describing it as higher or lower than it was, and two years later I still get recruiting messages on LinkedIn for that other role I never had and don’t want.

      That said though, obviously it’s not universal or there wouldn’t be a “normal” meaning of these titles to deviate from. If you have a weird title somewhere that titles are negotiable, I think it can be worthwhile trying to get it changed to something that is understandable or at least not misleading. My organization had strict descriptions for these titles and I think people found it awkward to complain that this title wasn’t understandable to outsiders without sounding like they were job searching.

    12. J-nonymous*

      This is pretty common in general, but unusual in the specifics you mention. Scrum Master is pretty significantly different than BA (which isn’t to say a BA couldn’t have the role of Scrum Master on a scrum team). Similarly, Functional Analyst has been a more common crossover with system admin than BA has (in my experience).

      It almost makes me wonder if your organization had decided to adopt scrum without taking on scrum roles and terminology? (Which is common in its own right.)

  11. Dawn*

    I love my job, but I do have one question: Is it normal to not have an office manager in a smaller (40ish) office? The 2 owners (President and CEO) are very hands on and like to do things themselves and so they will do things like order office supplies from Costco themselves (and they’re busy so they sometimes forget and then we run out of coffee and paperclips). I’ve mentioned having an office manager to them before (in my capacity as Business Analyst) for things like office supplies, initial resume screenings, dealing with building management, piddly paperwork, that kind of thing but my suggestions have been rebuffed. I KNOW that having even a part-time office manager would free up SO MUCH of their time and brainpower it wouldn’t even be funny, and it would skyrocket their productivity and halve their stress levels.

    I was under the impression that an office manager is the first thing you hire after you have about 5 people but apparently not. How weird is this?

    1. EA*

      Do they have assistants? I don’t think its normal for an office of that size to not have admins or an office manager. I think its weird for them to be doing ordering themselves. The point of support staff is to do things other people are overqualified to do.

      1. Lily Rowan*

        Or underqualified! I would not want to be responsible for office supplies, and clearly these owners should not be, either.

      2. Okay then*

        My second job was a Marketing Assistant, (basically admin for marketing) and I served as backup for our office admin. We had 60 employees at the time. And he had a FULL TIME job, and even needed me for backup/assistance quite a lot.

      3. Z*

        That overqualified comment stung little bit as I am in administration. I prefer to think of it as things that aren’t part of their core responsibilities, or things someone else could manage better, as opposed to things for dumb low level people. :(

        1. Crazy Dog Lady*

          Administrative jobs are so important! I was a secretary in college and I was TERRIBLE. I would forget things all the time, get overwhelmed, and I’m pretty sure all of the attorneys (rightfully) hated me. Thank goodness I never made any horrible mistakes.

          I’m a marketing writer now, and I’m good at my job – but I’m never going to pretend that I could be an admin. I am not cut out for handling travel, supplies, schedules, expenses, etc. I’m glad that I work with people who are, and who are good at their jobs!

        2. OhNo*

          I’m in a partly admin role, too, and I agree that the perception that admin work is for a certain type of person does sting a bit. Unfortunately, framing the work that way is very, very common across the board.

          And can I say for the record that I think it’s super that the CEO and President are totally okay with doing all that admin work themselves? I mean, obviously it’s not working out that great for everyone else, since it sounds like things are getting missed, but it’s so uncommon to hear about high-level employees not pawning off such work. I like it!

        3. Annonymouse*

          It less crapping on admin people and more thinking “They’re a president/CEO. Is this the best use of their time?”

          I know because I’m an admin/office manager at a small business. One of the owners used to call up potential new members all the time but not have enough time for upcoming schedules and events.

          Since I took over the process he has enough time to get his other work done. Doesn’t make my job less valuable, in fact it makes me more valuable since he can see the value in what I do for his schedule and the business.

    2. LisaLee*

      That’s normalish. I think office managers are one of those positions that some people think is nice but not necessary. I don’t have one at my current job, and we’re a large department.

      1. NJ Anon*

        I think it depends on the nature of the business. I am in a nonprofit with many silo positions. If we didn’t have an office manager, we would be in trouble!

        1. mousie housie*

          I work for a non-profit (15 full-time and 20 seasonal employees) WITHOUT an office manager and it is not fun. “Shared responsibilities” = guess who’s stuck taking out the trash after working unpaid overtime.

      2. Okay then*

        Yea, Office MANAGER is generally a senior-ish role (our company hired an office manager to be over the office admin after we grew to 100 employees), but an office ADMIN I think would be helpful to do the day to day office management tasks.

        1. PizzaSquared*

          This probably relates to the question above about differences in job titles between companies, but nowhere I’ve worked in my ~20 years in the workforce has considered “office manager” to be a senior role (or have had anyone managed by the “office manager” – they manage the office, not people).

          1. Melanie*

            In my experience Office Managers often manage anyone in a support roles’ e.g. PAs (unless they report direct to their principals), office juniors, receptionists, mail staff, etc.

      3. Annonymouse*

        Also depends on the business and level of growth. If it has recently gotten bigger and the CEO/president used to do general tasks it makes sense they’d have trouble letting go.

        My bosses (owners of the small business I work for) are guilty of this.

    3. MorganLizzie*

      I don’t think that’s very weird at all, especially on a team with only 4 people. It’s often going to be very dependent on the budget available to actually pay someone to do those things. I see where you’re coming from with saying that it would free up their time and be worth it in that capacity though if they really are spending that much time doing it (however, I feel like running out of coffee probably ins’t the best argument in the world). It may be helpful to see if you can talk everyone into tracking their hours doing admin/office management type work for the week and work out with how much you’re paid “hourly” (I’d assume on salary) how much you’re actually paying yourselves to do that work and if it would make sense to hire someone. However, I’ve worked in much larger companies where there wasn’t an office manager because it simply wasn’t fiscally responsible to do so. It’s also pretty dependent on industry…that company was a web based platform, so there maybe wasn’t as much going on admin-wise as if it were a small doctor’s office or law firm or something that required more formal paperwork and client interaction.

    4. Dawn*

      Thanks for the replies so far- to clarify, CEO and President do not have dedicated assistants. There are a few people around the office who help out with admin stuff when it comes up but the CEO and President take a lot on themselves. Our office is looking to expand headcount over the next year or two so I’ve really been trying to bring it up as a good idea NOW before everyone gets completely overwhelmed with admin stuff.

      1. Michelle*

        I think an office of 40 would benefit from an office manager. My “official” title is administrative assistant but I do most of the things you mention- order office & break room supplies, resume screens, “piddly paperwork” like background checks, E-Verify, new hire paperwork, check request, etc, in addition to regular duties.

        P.S. I think “office manager” is really more in line with what I do but we have this weird requirement where you have to be managing people to get the manager title. I’m non-exempt and being a manager would be make me exempt and we already have a combination of 18 managers (7 directors and 11 with the actual title of manager) for an office of 85 (full time w/o manger title and part-timers).

      2. TootsNYC*

        In your shoes, I might suggest they ease in to the whole idea w/ a part-time solution. Probably not a part-timer, but someone who has that as a core part of their duties. An Admin for the whole office, maybe.

    5. Ad Astra*

      It’s not unheard of, but I do think an office of 40 could benefit from hiring an office manager. I work at an office around that size and we have one fantastic office manager (who also functions as our receptionist) for the whole place but no other admins. She schedules business travel, orders office supplies, handles mail and FedEx, and probably does some other things I’m not aware of. It gives the office a more professional feel, imo.

      1. Elizabeth West*

        At Exjob, we had roughly fifty employees total, including shop personnel. People scheduled their own business travel (not often necessary) but the Accounting/HR manager (my boss) also functioned as an office manager of sorts. I, the receptionist, did all the supply ordering and odds and ends stuff. Nobody had an assistant after my first boss left and her assistant was promoted into that role, and I became the only clerical person (ugh). The Accounting/HR person was absolutely swamped. Both she and a subsequent person ended up quitting.

        If you have more than forty people and are adding more, an office manager makes sense. I hope they see how valuable such a person could be.

        1. Chinook*

          Dawn, I worked for a company that sounds a lot like your. The boss was used to doing a lot of office admin stuff for himself and our HR, payroll and accounting departments were in the US, so he didn’t feel the need to hire a f/t admin assistant or office manager when he had just 6 people working in his Ottawa office. He had also been burned previously by an office manager who hoarded information from him in hopes of guaranteeing job security, so he was reluctant to let go of a lot of it. I started as a p/t temp admin assistant and was able to slowly pry stuff like ordering supplies and managing invoices out of his hands by showing iniative and demonstrating how I documented what I did. Within six months, I was offered a full-time, permanent position.

          So, if the executives seem reluctant to see the need for an office manager, it might be worth it to pitch the idea of a part-time position and/or using a temp agency. When looking, you will want to emphasize with applicants that this position is a trial not only for them but for the existence of the position as well. With luck, you can get someone with the right personality who can show the value of an office manager.

    6. Quirk*

      Speaking for a couple of smaller past companies:
      ~12 employees: no office manager, and very hard to think what we would have done with one. Office supplies just didn’t occupy that much time to sort out, resume screening needed qualified eyes, building management was sorted by the organisation we were renting an office from, and our paperwork was generally meaningful.
      ~150 employees: office manager, whose time was not always well spent (emailing the whole office to tell them not to stand near a cracked window in case they fell through it was… dubious), but I would assume she probably had a reasonable quantity of things to do.

      At 40 employees there might start to be a case for one, but I certainly wouldn’t be thinking of hiring one at the 5 people mark.

      2. Doriana Gray*

        I worked at a for-profit school six years ago in an office of 14 (including myself) as one of two Office Assistants (we were both supposed to be part-time, but I needed full-time pay, so I just found things to do to keep myself busy). We did the typical office supply orders/receptionist type duties, but then we also had to order textbooks and equipment for the students and instructors, create ID badges, administer and grade entrance exams, and my coworker did some light janitorial work as well. It was such a huge weight off our Director’s shoulders to not have to deal with that stuff when she was constantly battling with our corporate office for more resources and dealing with high employee turnover (due to our insane enrollment goals set by corporate).

        I also worked as an admin/office manager/receptionist hybrid for an office that had a Director and two direct reports. Granted, I was a part-time student worker, but it was a real help to the office as a whole having me there.

    7. Quinalla*

      This is very normal in my experience, though I’d say much more common for places that are in the 20 or less employees. But, for a 40 employee office, the owners may just not be willing or desiring to start making the transition from “small company” to “medium company” where you start hiring office managers and HR and so on. It can be a hard transition to make

    8. NJ Anon*

      Not weird. Most of the places I have worked in my long and not so industrious career did not have an office manager.

    9. Busy*

      We have about 60 office personnel in this company and no office manager (though not for my lack of trying!)

    10. Lily in NYC*

      I have never worked at a place with an office manager! In my experience, it’s the admin assistants do the work that you mentioned.

    11. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      It’s probably more normal than not to see weird “hands on” things from company owners when you’ve got under 40 employees.

      Our principals (brothers at the time) did all kinds of things when we were a small business. The one brother always shoveled the snow, came in at 6 am to clear the walks. The other brother, who was writing many millions of dollars of business at the time took forever to accept an assistant. “I’ll ship my own packages until the day I die!”

      That was close to 30 years ago and now that we’re over 200 employees, those days are long gone. Eventually they wanted to grow more than stubbornly hang on to snow shoveling and package shipping. (Principals will still run out and do below job grade things, tho! Like, run out of plastic silverware….)

    12. LAI*

      It might depend on how many other tasks there would be for an office manager to do. In my current office of about 40, we have an administrative assistant who takes care of most office management duties like ordering supplies, but we have a hard time coming up with 40 hours/week worth of tasks for her. She constantly gets assigned random side projects just to fill her day.

    13. Mando Diao*

      Office Manager seems like a position that’s associated with older business configurations. They’re being phased out as start-ups and small businesses simply aren’t creating those positions.

    14. Stephanie*

      When I worked in an office of 50-60, we had an executive assistant AND an office manager/receptionist. This was in part because the staff did a LOT of business travel, however a senior team is rarely self-sufficient enough to really be productive at their actual tasks without someone to support them with the minor tasks. Being able to drop off receipts and have someone else fill out a reimbursement form so they can focus on the strategic plan… that just sounds like money well-spent. I’d rather they focus on creating new business than how much copy paper is in stock, or how to unjam the copier.

      But, like I said, there was a LOT of business travel; I can see the case being made that the office is theoretically small enough to absorb those tasks around the office, but really, I’m pro-support staff once you get above maybe 20 employees (just a rough estimate, it will changed based on each company’s needs!).

    15. nerfmobile*

      I worked for a company of about 35 people and we definitely needed our Office Manager. She was also the admin assistant to the CEO and supervised the receptionist. That said, we were an agency-type company and had a lot of clients coming in and out. So physically keeping the building looking good and being able to provide amenities for client meetings was important. Later on I worked for a software-startup of about the same size and the closest we had to an administrative person of any sort was the marketing assistant, so it really can vary by company type.

    16. Ros*

      I worked a a mid-sized health charity and we didn’t have an office manager until the office was nearing 80 ppl. It was mayhem. Several admin staff had parts of what would be considered “office management” tasks, but coordinating these things began to get ridiculous so they hired someone part-time. Then it went full-time.

      Office management is not something to be taken lightly I have learned.

    17. CanadianDot*

      Our office of 12 has an office manager AND an admin, but then again we’re government, and we’re *supposed* to have about 30 people.

      I think that having an office manager makes everyone else more efficient, but that’s ultimately their choice.

    18. LD*

      It can be normal…for all the reasons others have shared; regular admin staff have the responsibilities covered, managers do their own work or split the responsibilities, etc. We have about 30 people in our department and we have an office manager. She handles dealing with the landlord of our office building, works with our corporate IT, does billing for our services, schedules front office staff, assigns admin duties (one of them tracks and orders supplies, for example), and acts as our systems administrator and general IT support. And the five or six admin staff all report to her.

  12. M*

    Is it normal to never be given an opportunity to make a case for a promotion or raise? We have annual reviews at my company, but decisions about raises and promotions are made prior to the reviews and by someone above our manager’s head — so even if we knew when the discussion was taking place, our direct manager has no involvement/power over that decision.

    1. Sascha*

      I don’t think so. I worked at a university where that was the case, and everyone I knew told me it was not normal. In fact, that university did not even do performance reviews so that people wouldn’t get the idea that they *could* ask for a raise or a promotion.

      1. Tardis*

        I agree – I work at a very large private University in the U.S., and that is our standard practice. It is pretty awkward, though.

    2. LQ*

      Have you ever tried to ask about it? Even at the review, like “I’d really like to be considered for a promotion to Head Teapot Maker, what do I need to do that?”

    3. KathyGeiss*

      This is how my company works too. But, we also have active discussions with our managers about career development. My bonus is determined by a formula and my performance review ranking. My merit raise is determined by who knows what in the background. But, my manager knows where I’d like to go in my career and we actively talk about professional development opportunities and internal jobs that are open and whether I should apply. So, I don’t have a say in bonus or merit raises but I do feel like I’m being given opportunities to discuss my future. That help?

    4. Tom*

      I expect this varies widely by industry and company size, among other factors. In my own experience (18 years working, if relevant) I’ve never been asked to discuss the matter, and usually (but not always) when I’ve brought it up myself, it has not gone well. When I want a promotion/raise, I look for another employer.

    5. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

      We are allowed to give each of our employees up to a 5% raise each year. So I budget that all of my staff will get 5%, and then give everyone 5% (and general push HR when someone is in the pro-rated time frame to ensure they get the full amount).

      So from my perspective, even if you came in and made a case for a 6-10% increase, I likely won’t have it in the budget and would have to get sign-off from the entire c-suite to go around company policy.

      It’s the same thing with promotions unless we have an opening, I don’t have a promotion to give. So even if you came in and made an excellent case for a Senior Teapot Designer position, I don’t have it to give you.

      But we are pretty upfront with all this.

    6. Green*

      This is normal. In my company you’d need to have a sit-down very early on to request a salary review. You can always talk to your manager about it (and ask your manager to advocate for you at a higher level), but it’s not a formal opportunity. It’s also very common for promotions, grades, reviews, and raises to be sorted out on a higher level.

    7. Michelle*

      Normal for my company (nonprofit). They even changed the language in the employee handbook about what annual performance reviews were for . They use to say something like “to recognize and reward good performance” to “meeting the expectations of the position and to discuss any needed improvements”. We don’t get a raise every years, we’re lucky to get them every 3 years, but our part-time employees make $2 above minimum wage in the door and full-time employees have much more flexibility with their hours vs. other businesses. (Of course we do have people who abuse it).

    8. fposte*

      This is kind of like the question upthread and kind of like previous discussions on negotiations. In general, you don’t get given an official opportunity to get yourself more money. Your situation doesn’t make it easy, but it doesn’t necessarily make it impossible–you ask if your manager can go back and request a change, or you ask your manager before your review.

      There are some systems where it’s top down–I’m in one, where the state sets a percentage raise I get or don’t get. But even in that system, I can go to somebody and say “Look, the job has changed, the salary isn’t right, I’d like more.”

    9. Emmy*

      I work in higher ed, staff side. There aren’t formal opportunities to ask for a raise/promotion. I’ve brought it up as part of my weekly check-ins, or at this year’s performance review to lay the groundwork for getting the promotion next year.

    10. martinij*

      Ooo, I wonder if anyone at my company (large private university in the U.S.) is commenting here! We receive poor feedback from top performers who want a raise, but the underperformers seem agreeable with this strategy as it allows them to skirt performance reviews.

    11. Happy*

      I had a similar situation at my old work place. I actually found out ahead of time one year with a few higher up that I wanted a raise and I got it but it took a lot of speaking to various prior to see who handed what.

  13. EA*

    Hi all-

    New job- 5 Months. I have an administrative supervisor (AS- my official boss but she does not assign me work), and I support 2 executives. My AS is pushing me to get more projects from the executives, she is thinking non administrative longer term things that I can use to develop. When I talk to my executives about this they want to give me that work later – they don’t think I am ready or it is necessary so soon. I don’t know what to go back to my AS and say. If I tell the truth, she will go to my executives and demand more work for me (she told me she is ready to do this), and this will annoy/bother the executives. It is a highly political environment and everyone has competing priories. I think my AS doesn’t want me to get bored and leave (which has happened with others), so she is pushing this hard. I understand it is my job to keep them all happy. This has happened in other situations (AS wants me to take a class, my executives do not).

    Is this normal? Do I accept politics? It’s hard to balance making everyone happy when everyone has wants different things.

    1. Not a Real Giraffe*

      First: What do you want? Do you want the longterm projects? Do you feel ready to take these things on? Are you happy for the time being to learn the administrative side of things and hold off on the big projects? Answer that first.

      I was in a similar role a few years ago, except it was one of my executives who wanted to give me more project-oriented work and my AS wanted me to focus on the administrative items. For me, it was important to make the executives happy because their input mattered the most when it came to raises and promotions. If they want you to focus on administrative stuff, and you’re relatively happy with that for now, that’s what I’d do. I’d broach the long-term project topic again in a few months, when you have a proven track record of multitasking, organization, etc.

      1. EA*

        Thanks. I would like to do more, but the way the AS is pushing it is very off putting. I would rather have more work be gradual. The AS just keeps saying I am not doing ‘enough’ and I need to get more. So I look at it as a problem I need to solve for my boss to be happy with me. Would you suggest I just be honest with my AS and have her talk to the executives? I think they each have a different vision for me, which really they need to figure out among themselves.

        1. Dawn*

          I’d just tell your AS exactly what the executives have told you, and say “I would like to do more but I do not want to upset the executives since they have explicitly told me not to ask for more right now. How would you like me to handle this?”

    2. Ash (the other one)*

      That is what your AS should be doing for you… she is there to advocate for you even if you don’t see that as what she’s doing.

      Your structure is similar to what we have at my org: your manager is different than your project managers (often, though they sometimes overlap) and it is your manager’s job to serve as an advocate to make sure you have enough work, are being utilized at your skill level (not just given grunt tasks if you’re capable of more and at a higher level) and are not being taken advantage of or are committed.

        1. EA*

          Thanks. I am fine with her advocating for me. It is just that the executives are much higher up in the organization and I am worried this advocating will end in them being irritated with me. I know its probably a problem the 3 of them need to work out among themselves, they just each have a different vision of my role.

    3. some1*

      This is par for the course in every admin job I have ever had, except this one, because I report to the same director of the people I support.

      1. EA*

        See that is the situation I need, reporting to the person you support. I’ve never had a job where this has occurred.

        1. some1*

          It is nice because I don’t have to deal with conflicting agendas, except that come review/raise/promotion time, you have to advocate that much harder because your boss either A) doesn’t know [all of] what you do &/or B) has never had an admin/clerical job.

    4. Mike C.*

      Yeah, this sort of thing is very common. Don’t worry so much about the executives getting upset since it’s your AS that will know how beset to approach it and will take the brunt of any fallout, not you.

  14. Ashley*

    I was hired at my first office job about 2 years ago. I loved my first manager, but he left the company very shortly after I started, and therefore for my first year here, I had almost no guidance or feedback about how to do my job. I figured things out the best I could, and while it was frustrating at first, I adjusted to working independently and actually heard great things at my one year review. Then, about 8 months ago, my new manager was hired (outside hire). Joe seemed great at first, but quickly I learned that Joe is very authoritarian in his management style. I was looking forward to having feedback and collaboration on my decisions, but instead, Joe hands out orders without any explanation. When I try to ask for clarification about why a decision or policy change was made, he views it as me questioning his authority and being disrespectful. I’ll provide one example out of many:

    In November, I traveled to one of our satellite locations to visit a partner we’ve been working with for several years. Joe is determined to promote this partnership based on the history we have with them; However, after this trip (and also a previous trip in 2014), my recommendation to Joe was that we seriously look into whether or not to continue this partnership because of many major concerns I had with the way they operated (lack of transparency with funds, not delivering on the product we asked for, etc). I mentioned I was hesitant to keep promoting this partner because their lack of professionalism could reflect poorly on our organization. Joe replied, “So, you’re saying you don’t want to do your job, then?” (because my position is in partnership promotion), and also said that I “need to have more faith in our partnerships.” I asked if we could implement some sort of accountability system to make sure the partner was following through on the contract in a timely manner, and he said, “Don’t worry about it, I’m handling it.” Anyway, fast forward four months. Yesterday, Joe and I were called into a meeting with the VP of our company. The VP said she had heard from a reliable social contact that this partner company “did not have their act together” and strongly recommended that we cut ties with them. The VP repeated the exact same concerns I had mentioned in November. My manager, Joe, acted completely surprised by this news and thanked the VP profusely for the information and agreed it would be wise to sever the relationship. So in other words, Joe refused to listen to my input four months ago and actually chastised me for it, but will happily accept opinions from people outside the company he doesn’t even know.

    This is one example, but as I mentioned, there are many more. Am I being unreasonable to think working for Joe is going to drive me crazy? Or is this a normal boss/subordinate situation that I just need to get used to?

    1. Simplytea*

      Honestly, I’ve had a lot of bosses who are (unfortunately) like this, and don’t know how to take possible decision-guiding information from people under them. A lot of them are very focused on hierarchy, so it’s better to present information to them in a way that… gives them the end result in a way that they think they thought of it. So you might want to “incept” your ideas by adding a lot of “well you told me this, and so on that same vein I figured out this” instead of saying “I think we should do this”.

      This may, indeed, drive you crazy, and it’s neither ideal nor conducive to good business practices. But, it is sadly normal with people who don’t know how to manage.

      2. Doriana Gray*

        + 1 Simplytea (although I’ve been fortunate to only have had two managers like this in my nearly 11 year work history).

    2. Dawn*

      Not normal. A good manager would trust your word as someone whose job is partnership promotion, and have a back-and-forth conversation about why you felt the way you do about this particular partner, reasons why Joe might not agree with what you think, and you would both come to a mutual understanding of how to proceed with this partner moving forward.

      Also it’s absolutely petty of Joe to respond to you bringing up a completely valid point about this partner with “So you don’t want to do your job then?” NO, you imbecile, I’m doing my job RIGHT NOW by telling you my concerns about this partner! Joe sounds like someone who’d be very difficult to work long term with.

    5. Mando Diao*

      Ugh, I’ve had bosses like this…You try to gently tell them that you think something won’t work and they write you off as a Negative Nancy, but then when things predictably go wrong, your manager wonders why no one gave him a head’s up. Do you think you can build a boundary that allows you to not care when things explode at the office? If not, you’ve hit the two-year mark, so you can start looking for new jobs in good conscience.

      1. Ashley*

        You described my situation perfectly! I have tried to set up boundaries to not care when things go badly, but I really do care a lot about my job and the partners I work with, so it’s hard to maintain a carefree attitude. I really don’t think I am a Negative Nancy–when I have a concern about something, I always propose possible solutions or alternative routes, like in the example above, but these other ideas are consistently ignored.

        1. Mando Diao*

          I work in marketing so it’s something I deal with all the time. People will come up with ~great ideas for promoting their products, and I’ll say, “I anticipate that this campaign will result in a lot of people asking such-and-such question or being confused about [whatever].” Then they get mad that I’m crapping on their GENIUS IDEA. And they get madder when they start getting thousands of customer service emails from people asking the very questions I predicted.

          Anyway, you’re not alone. In some industries you can’t avoid it, but it’s common enough that you can identify it and try to not work with people like that.

    6. Stephanie (HR)*

      I have been in this situation with a manager in a previous job. I think it is relatively common, however, I was not able to function in that kind of work relationship, and I found a new job.

      The only advice I can give you if you want to stay, is to sit down with your boss and have an honest conversation with him. Something along the lines of, “I feel that I have strength in areas x, y, and z, and before you were here, I had some autonomy (or voice) in x, y, and z. I would like to continue to be (able to give in put, have autonomy) in these areas, but I haven’t felt that you have been receptive. Can we talk about your expectations for me in this role?” It may simply be The New Rules of the Job, and he really just wants a worker bee. This is most likely the case. However, if your manager is open to allowing you to grow in your role, he may have some thoughts on how you can earn his trust and respect and be able to have that level of voice/autonomy again. Some people just need it said to their face before they see what you are trying to do. He may be suffering from Previous Bad Employee Syndrome, and needs to hear that you are a capable employee.

      Best of luck!

      1. LD*

        I love most everything about your script, but I’d suggest that instead of saying …”but I haven’t felt that you have been receptive.” that the person says, something more like, “what would you think about that?” or “How do you feel about that?” I think it would come across as more collaborative that way.

    7. Anna*

      Your manager sounds like a jerk, but that’s not so uncommon.

      The situation that I infer from your description is that he’s new and had a plan to improve business by building up a partnership that he didn’t know at the time was faulty. Is it possible that he sees you as a naysayer who is trying to undermine him when you were actually just giving him a reality check?

      I’ve had decent results delivering bad news to these types of people (i.e. immature and defensive) by first stating my willingness to support them, then giving them the bad news. I end by reiterating my support, as in “I’m happy to help you any way I can, but I do want to give you a heads up about this company’s past behavior…I just thought you should know. Again, I’m here to help, whatever you decide.” It’s even better if it can be done in an email because if Joe goes down in flames, you have documentation that you did bring up your concerns with him.

      When I was in that situation, I found it easier to survive when I mentally separated myself from my manager’s stupid decisions. I stopped asking question or offering opinions unless it was about something really serious, did my job, and then enjoyed the fail show that followed. That’s not really sustainable in the long-term though–if you are someone who wants to be a valued team member rather than a “subordinate”, you should probably start looking for a different position.

      1. Not So NewReader*

        I agree. Start looking around and seeing what other positions are out there. This boss is not going to help you grow and develop. Over time he is going to give you a distorted perspective of how workplaces function. Look for a boss that has mentor/teacher tendencies. This boss is afraid you will out shine him.
        Argumentatively, he could have a bad case of new-boss-itis, where he is more worried about his standing in the company and not worried about your standing. He could be intimidated by the fact that you have been there longer. Or it could be that you are actually cutting in to his ability to be a boss. I kind of doubt any of this is true. But these are the types of things that go wrong when there is a new boss over an old employee.

    9. Afiendishthingy*

      Certainly some bosses are like this but it’s not the norm. You’ve been there two years which is respectable; Id start looking if I were you.

    10. anonandonandonamous*

      Your manager sounds like a jerk.

      One suggestion that might help is to present facts without giving him any conclusions and then look concerned and ask him what he thinks.

    11. stevenz*

      There’s an old saying something like how much you can do if you don’t worry about getting credit. It’s BS. Your boss is a serious egotist and suck-up. If he wasn’t he’d find a way to say “ya know, Ashley had that same concern. This must really be a problem …” (Don’t hold your breath.) His need for control, or his ego, or ambition keep him from sharing credit. But this is extremely common behaviour in the management class, especially middle managers who are climbing the ladder.

      It’s *extremely irritating* to not get credit for good work, a good idea, a timely caution, etc. We need to get credit to succeed, for our professional reputation, for marketability, and as an important part of the compensation for doing good work. I feel for you, but neither you nor I should expect this to change any time soon.

  15. Simplytea*

    Is it sad that I know the answer is “the people you work with suck, and what they’re doing is weird, but that’s pretty normal”?

    I’m in my mid-20s, and it’s all about thickening your skin, and separating work from personal. You can’t let it get to you, and you have to work your way up the ranks to gain respect. Not ideal, but that’s the way it is. I have a lot of friends who can’t let it go, and think they’re better than XYZ or something isn’t fair. Fair isn’t the name of the game my friends. And it’s all good fodder to help you figure out how you would like to manage others in the future.

    Also, I have started telling my friends that “askamanager is bae”. No regrets.

    1. ElCee*

      There’s a difference between being the bottom of the pecking order, so to speak, and subjecting oneself to abuse. Personal attacks are never cool. Sometimes it is just a matter of thickening your skin (if it’s not egregiously personal…I’m thinking of, say, a notoriously crusty newspaper editor who is grumpy to everyone but has a heart of gold and really just wants to see them succeed…why yes I stole that from a fictional movie) but paying your dues don’t need to mean accepting total dysfunction.

    2. Rabbit*

      Are you in the apparel manufacturing industry? The stories I have about being screamed at, disrespected and sabotaged are unreal. I have a family member in HR and her jaw literally falls open when I tell her my latest story.

      I’m with you thought–someday I’m going to be a kickass manager, because I’ll know all about how NOT to treat people like garbage.

  16. LisaLee*

    Ooh, I have one. I’ve been applying for jobs and one of them wants me to submit my ACT scores. This is not an academic job. Is this a thing, or am I right for thinking it’s a bit of a red flag?

            1. Elsie*

              I work in consulting for a major firm and our firm asks recent college grads for their SAT/ACT scores. I think it’s fairly typical in consulting/finance/investment banking for recent grads (and for recent MBA grads, some firms ask for your GMAT score).

        2. ThatGirl*

          This is more or less my field and I’m gonna say super, super weird. Nobody here gives a crap about my college GPA, much less high school college entrance exams.

        3. Just me*

          EXTREMELY weird. Experience matters way more than arbitrary test scores in content management/development/editing.

    2. Sascha*

      That seems odd even for an academic job. I’ve been working in higher ed for ~10 years, and have applied to many higher ed jobs, and while they do want transcripts from every school you’ve attended, none of them wanted standardized test scores.

      I think you should watch out for other indicators that they do hiring strictly by the book and don’t take a flexible, holistic approach to hiring.

      1. Ad Astra*

        And transcripts would even be an unusual request for a content development and editing position, I think. Usually applicants will have a portfolio of work that’s much more helpful in assessing someone’s skills. I get the impression that STEM fields are more likely to want transcripts.

      1. LisaLee*

        You could submit SAT, LSAT, or GRE scores too. I suspect they might be using it as some sort of crude IQ indicator.

    5. TCO*

      The only time I’ve ever seen ACT/SAT scores requested was for tutoring jobs, which kind of makes sense. That’s weird everywhere else.

      1. katamia*

        Yeah, I’ve had to either supply scores or take a practice test (sometimes both) for all my tutoring jobs, many of which included test prep.

    7. Rock*

      There is a local Tech Giant in my area (Midwest) that hires predominantly recent grads. They require college transcripts, test scores, and (wait for it) high school GPA.
      They employ something like 8,000 people I think?

    8. voluptuousfire*

      Odd. I worked in test prep recruiting for teachers, so it was appropriate for my role. I have seen such requests before for roles that were looking for candidates right out of school, so in some ways that may make sense.

      Id skip it.

    9. Sara*

      I had to do this for a job once, but it was an ACT/SAT tutoring gig. I’ve never seen any other job ask for that.

    10. Laufey*

      Ugh. My company asks for ACT/SAT scores (finance industry). I hate it, but I’m not high enough to have any input on the matter. Fortunately the recruiting team does seem to be understanding if the scores are no longer available. Still annoying that we ask for them in the first place.

    11. Tris Prior*

      I recently was asked for this too, along with the year I took the test. I figured it was a sort of roundabout way to make us disclose our age. This was for a writing/editing role too.

      1. VintageLydia*

        The scoring methodology has changed TWICE since I took the SATs and I’m only 30.

    12. Elizabeth the Ginger*

      Also even more weird if you’re not, like, 19 years old. If you’re even 22, then there are a multitude of more-relevant, more-recent measures of your achievement and skills.

    13. Green*

      Super weird. You don’t even have to submit your LSAT scores for law internships and it is weird if you volunteer them… They are for getting into schools and getting scholarships. That’s it.

    14. sam*

      Very weird – as someone noted above, I’ve never even had to submit my LSAT scores for a legal job. Transcripts, sure, but other than my very first job, they’re mainly to prove that I graduated. Of course, I’m so old now that I took the SATs back when they were still a 1600 max score AND before they were recalibrated the first time (and the only reason I know about *that* is because my six-years younger brother took them on the post-recalibration but still 1600 scale. Nothing like a little sibling rivalry to create COMPLETELY random memories). So my score would be completely meaningless at this point without a giant asterisk anyway.

    15. MommaTRex*

      Wha…? I’m not sure I can even remember my SAT scores. Or where to find them. I can’t even remember my scores for the CPA exam – which not even any CPA jobs have asked for. At least I might be able to find them . . . nope . . . nevermind.

      From what I’ve observed in the CPA world, all CPA test scores boil down to two: passed and going to pass it next time! :D

    16. Searching*

      I was asked for my SAT scores in a job interview for a think tank position. It was at a college-run job fair where they were getting a pool of candidates. I honestly said I couldn’t remember, and mentioned my ACT score but that they were high enough to admit me to several schools and were commensurate with my excellent college GPA. My mom had a theory that this was a “throw you off” question. But my reaction was more- why on earth would you want to know that? Its either super pretentious or just weird.

      1. Searching*

        Anyway, just wanted to say that this does happen, but it super weird to everyone I talked to. Haven’t been asked since college and gaining more work exp. though. I will say I’ve mentally marked off that think tank as “not to apply to in the future” though.

    17. Brett*

      The only time I ever had to submit my SAT/ACT/GRE scores for a job was for a position writing test questions for ACT.

      1. Brett*

        Oh, but my job was definitely content development and editing. All the editing was in house, but large chunks of the content development were outsourced, and the outsource contractors had to submit test scores for their employees.
        Is it remotely possible that this company has contractors with ACT, SAT, or NCS Pearson?

    18. Jane*

      Gross, but not that weird. I know international development NGOs that do this (with SAT scores). I think it’s a fad among “data-driven” orgs looking for ways to measure intelligence of prospective hires, or to imitate Google’s tricky employment questions.

  17. LQ*

    Not early in my career but I feel like my history doesn’t help me. I’m at a government agency (unionized if that matters) where the only promotions occur from within. No one is ever hired into any kind of a higher level. We never hire outside supervisors. We never hire people for positions like: Business Analyst, Project Manager, Trainer, Elearning Developer…etc etc. There is occasionally some training (like going to a local college to get a 2-4 days crash course on project management or business analysis), but mostly it’s learn as you go. People are exclusively hired though client facing “entry level” positions. There are a couple of kinds of these jobs (we have a call center, but not just a call center).

    Personally I wouldn’t have ended up here if I hadn’t been desperate for something in the middle of the recession and took the job where I got promoted pretty quickly to something more fitting my skills (one of the above), but it feels kind of lucky, and we have a really hard time finding new people for the team I’m on right now since the economy is so good.

    Is this normal? Is it good?

    1. Slippy*

      Sounds like the USPTO. For them it is normal, for most other government agencies that is not.

    2. MaryMary*

      I think this happens at organizations with specialized (or unique, or proprietary) processes and systems. OldJob had a habit of developing its own software internally, and we worked in a fairly specialized subject area. It was hard enough finding external candidates who had expertise in our subject area, but it was very difficult for them to succeed in an environment where all the software and processes were specific to OldJob. They tried to improve training and documentation, but external hires spent way too much time trying to get up to speed, and then would stumble into some non-documented, happens once every ten years problem. When I left they were trying out a hybrid senior non-manager role where experienced new hires could kind of go through an apprenticeship before moving into a real managerial role, but they had a hard time selling candidates on that idea.

      1. LQ*

        This is really helpful. This is very much how our leadership thinks of our work (including our own software). I think it would be good to get outside eyes in, but maybe I’m underestimating how much it would take getting people up to speed on things. Thank you.

        1. Anon for this*

          My current workplace is similar. We rarely hire externally for supervisory or management positions. There are benefits and downsides to this. On the one hand, we aren’t a huge organization and there aren’t many opportunities for advancement besides these roles (which aren’t vacant all that often), so hirinng from the outside could quickly eliminate any real chance at internal advancement. Also, we do have a lot of very specific rules and regulations we have to follow, and understanding those is a big part of what is involved in those management, fundraising, etc. roles. So internal hires are at an advantage in that regard. That said, if we never hire people with experience from outside, we become like an echo chamber. We want an external perspective or skills you get from other organizations, but we have to hire from the outside to get those.

          1. LQ*

            I’ve been trying to advocate for things like more user testing and using some vendors to bring in outside perspectives, so I think I’ll focus on those pieces. I have some limited capital but I think it sounds like that is a better way to get those outside perspectives.

    3. Thinking out loud*

      I worked at a software company for a few years. Almost every new hire had to do tech support when they were first hired, and then they moved into other places in the company if they did well – the goal was to make sure that people were familiar with our software and how our customers used it as well as the frustrations our customers were going through. In that case, I think it was good.

      1. LQ*

        Thank you this is very helpful. This is a part of the idea that is happening here I think. Better perspective on things.

    4. Former Retail Manager*

      I also work for a unionized Government agency and your question about hiring supervisors from the outside is the case here as well. It is a unique environment that cannot be replicated anywhere else and, unless you learn the basics of the job at the lower level, you really cannot manage effectively. Even the lowest levels of management who supervise people in my position are promoted from within. This is not the case for EVERY operating division, but 90% work this way.

      In terms of having a hard time recruiting in a good economy, that is common as well. Keep in mind that your agency’s hiring is also very likely budget driven and, good or bad economy, if there’s no $$, there’s no $$. As far as whether it’s good or not, I can’t say. I personally perceive my agency’s lack of hiring as a good thing as it ensures my job security. When people retire/quit/are fired in Govt you can’t just post the position and hire. So as time goes on and the ranks dwindle, they become more inclined to keep the employees they have and there have been concerted efforts in my division for managers to really try and make employees happy to try and keep them around.

      1. LQ*

        Very good to know.

        I know for us hiring means that during a recession our pay is pretty good and we get a much higher quality of applicant (yo! plus all the coworkers I know who are at higher level positions, management or not, came in during one recession or another) but when the market is good we pay well for the jobs we hire for, not for the jobs we aren’t hiring for.

        I’m not worried about my own job (like you, I feel very secure in it because it will be a long time before they hire another me) but I do worry about the quality of the people I work with. And having enough people to fill the gaps as people retire or move on. Plus I think I’ve had a feeling of we just need people with outside eyes to come in sometimes. People forget that we are incredibly laden in jargon and making words mean things they don’t mean to anyone outside our office. I will have to work more on other ways to bring that up.

    5. CMT*

      I’m in state government, and this is very common in my division. For the most part it makes sense, since the people coming from the field have the program knowledge necessary. It’s not mandatory, though. And for more technical jobs, like systems operations, they hire from outside.

      1. LQ*

        This is apparently way more common than I thought, I am so glad I asked! Thank you for the feedback.

    6. Master Bean Counter*

      When I worked for a government agency the over all theme was to promote from with-in when ever possible. mostly for institutional knowledge. But as the economy improved and there was a change in elected officials it became clear that they would have to go outside to find people actually skilled enough to do the higher level jobs. Then it was a new era of bringing on people who had the skills and requirements that they wanted into higher positions. I also think there was a touch of not wanted some of the lifers to think they could just skate unqualified into those higher positions.

    7. doreen*

      In my experience , promotions coming from within is typical for government agencies. There are generally some number of “entry point” jobs – and I don’t say “entry-level” because depending on the agency, there may be various entry points for different fields (physicians, social workers, lawyers, janitors, clerks etc). After that entry point, promotions are from within until a fairly high level is reached , which can again be filled from the outside. Those high level jobs filled with “outsiders” are often the jobs that change with a new administration.

    8. MommaTRex*

      I work at a local transit agency, and I would think this is NOT normal. We very much try to promote from within, and we have a few positions might be advertised only internally – – for example, positions that would be the most likely to have coach operators as the best candidates (like coach operator instructor). But most of our positions are competitively recruited.

    9. Blitz*

      Chiming in as another state government employee. Very normal. But , is it good?

      As a newer employee, I’ve found it helpful to work with others (my level and higher) who have been around a long time to pass on the history (and quirks) of the department. I wouldn’t have that if turnover occurred often. But then it does feel like an echo chamber at some point.

      Another problem is that all supervisors became so not because they are actually gifted at the job, but it was because a body needed to fill a spot and the division only hires a position like that internally. But the supervisors do need to understand the day-to-day of their employees, which really is only possible if you’ve been there yourself.

  18. Tom*

    Hope I’m using this thread correctly, apologies if not. I’m suspicious that toxic jobs are the norm in my industry, and am considering a switch. Here’s some things I regularly encounter (all have been present in my last 3 positions):

    – A wide pay disparity (for example: manager makes $90k + benefits, other 4 staff-people combined make $80k w/o benefits)
    – Managers who do not “practice what they preach” in terms of effective communication, forward planning, or direct conflict solution.
    – Failure to classify “exempt” vs. “non-exempt” staff correctly, or acknowledge the problem when presented.
    – Lack of accountability across the board: manager does not enforce standards with staff, nobody holds manager to standards.
    – Poor hiring practices, leading to conflict with new hires that could have been avoided.
    – A minimal approach to staff management that quickly leads to burn-out and low morale.

    I’m pursuing a degree to go into a line of work, but I’m a little concerned that in a different field, I will encounter “more of the same”. I’ve tried to watch for red flags and avoid them, but every job I’ve interviewed for exhibits them as well. Is the grass greener in some fields? Have people managed to find jobs where they don’t deal with these? Or am I just being overly sensitive to problems we all face?

    1. AFT123*

      I can tell you what I have an haven’t experienced… not sure if overall these things are normal or not. If it helps, my experience has been in sales orgs for a few gigantic global tech companies as well as a mid-sized tech company.

      A wide pay disparity: I have not experienced this. IMO, managers were paid better, but their reports were paid decent as well and got benefits.
      Managers who do not “practice what they preach”: Every.single.time. Even good managers. I think maybe this is human nature sometimes… I’d assume this can be summed up as “normal”, with varying levels of severity.
      Failure to classify “exempt” vs. “non-exempt” staff correctly: I don’t have experience with this.
      Lack of accountability across the board: Every place I’ve ever worked, again to varying severity. Normal IME, especially with management.
      Poor hiring practices: Mixed bag for me. Larger corporations I’ve been at seem to have rigorous and long interview processes and it seems to yield better results. Mid- and small- sized in my experience hire more quickly and with less due diligence. The tradeoff is that in the gigantic corporations, it seems to end up being a very homogenous workforce, which sucks in a different way.
      A minimal approach to staff management: I feel like this is more and more common. A lot of people I know and in my own experience – seems like managers are now too tied up on meetings and stuff to have time to really manage, and so many positions are really self-directed now. I really prefer clearer expectations, but I’ve gotten used to this type of environment, and I’d be willing to say now that this is pretty normal. Gone are the days of hands-on training, feedback, and employee development! Maybe others can chime in on this one though.

      1. Tom*

        Thanks very much for your thoughts! Sounds like effective management is absent in a lot of places.

        1. AFT123*

          Seems like it!! Or maybe it’s just that the standards for what qualifies as “effective” have changed. I’m not sure. Seems like the role of managers has totally changed these days.

      2. Steve*

        I’d say it’s quite common, though illegal!, to incorrectly classify staff as exempt or non-exempt. Similarly between 1099 (independent) and w-2 contractors.

    2. Ad Astra*

      The “80k without benefits” detail is probably the oddest bit of your whole post, at least in my eyes. Not a lot of full-time (non-contract) jobs come without benefits, and $80k is an awfully high wage to be making without benefits. Is it possible these employees are incorrectly classified as contractors?

      1. Tom*

        Sorry, I could have been clearer. $80k is the combined pay from the rest of the staff: two full-time and two part-time. Highest of any of us is $35k.

        1. Ad Astra*

          Ah, ok. That is a little more normal, but it’s still not all that common for full-time, professional positions to not have benefits.

          1. Sunflower*

            They must be contract? I think Obama care says anyone over 30 hours needs benefits.

            1. MaggiePi*

              Not if they have less than 50 full time equivalent employees. We have less than 10, so no benefits for anyone. :-/

          2. Steve*

            It seems odd for a manager’s salary to be higher than the sum of their direct reports. But it really depends on how many reports they have and what the specific roles are.

    3. Slippy*

      Which industry?
      Anyways based on my experience when managers have a large pay gap between themselves and their direct reports it fosters bad behavior from the management. This happens because it is much more expensive to replace the manager than their subordinates; therefor bad managers will be kept in place as long as they meet their goals.

      1. Tom*

        I work at a nonprofit doing creative/marketing work, looking toward something more mathematically oriented in the business world.

        Thanks for your feedback! In general, I think bad behavior is fostered in these jobs from everyone, because nobody wants to go through the hiring process. (Also because the idea of “goodwill” seems to count for a lot here… I could be terrible at my job, but if I’m pleasant and claim to do my best, I suspect I wouldn’t be fired for years if ever.)

          1. Ordinary World*

            Agreed, my experience has been the same. Which is why my job search isn’t focused on that industry anymore, as much as that breaks my heart.

            I’m quite sure there are good NPOs out there, I just haven’t been fortunate enough to work at/interview with them as of yet.

        2. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

          NO! NO! NO! This is not normal…says the Creative Director! Your points made me absolutely cringe!

          The pay difference between me and my lead graphic designer is 10k. And quite honestly, he’s the one with talent.

          All those things are just really, really bad management and if the non-profit is letting him get away with it then there is a larger problem!

          1. Sunflower*

            I can’t speak to nonprofits but in other industries that pay gap is not that weird at all

            1. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

              I think I was reacting to more of the overall than the pay discrepancy. You are right, my salary vs. a starting writer is about that much…but we give them benefits!

        3. A Non*

          Ah, yeah. I’m in tech and have worked in both for-profit and non-profit organizations. The non-profits were significantly worse about all the issues you mentioned. The smaller they were, and the longer the leadership had been there, the worse they were. I don’t know why non-profit apparently means people don’t have their act together – you’d think it should be the other way around.

          That said, there are decent non-profits. (I work for one now.) They’re just harder to find.

          1. Anon for this*

            I think it’s probably something that is more common in smaller employers, in employers where upper management has had a long tenure, and in non-profits. Start combining those factors and the odds of these problems starts to increase exponentially.

            I suspect that the underlying issue is a lack of training in management and HR issues. A small business or non-profit is less likely to have the resources for that type of training and less likely to have dedicated HR, legal, compliance, etc. professionals on staff. A business or non-profit where the leadership has not changed in a long time is more likely to be stuck on older ways of doing things.
            And non-profits in general (although certainly not all non-profits) come from a tradition of lower salaries, heavy reliance on volunteers, “scrappiness” and “dedication to the cause,” etc. that can make it harder for them to get into that business mindset.

            To be fair, a lot of non-profits are really pushing to be be more “business-like” but a lot of the perception of non-profits is external too. So non-profits are in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” position. Don’t pay competitive salaries and offer competitive benefits = can’t attract and retain competent staff; pay competitive salaries and offer competitive benefits = not “good stewards” of donor funds. Know you need to hire dedicated HR person; don’t have enough unrestricted funds to pay HR person’s salary. Need to hire person with very specific skill set to fill special, one-year, grant-funded position; only person with those skills who applied and is willing to work at special, grant-funded low salary with no job security is a an absolute mess of an employee (thankfully grant is only for one year….)

        4. Chickaletta*

          I think it depends on your manager’s title vs. your title. At one job I was a graphic designer and my direct manager was a VP, so we probably had the pay difference that you’re experiencing, maybe even greater. If your manager is a creative director or a marketing manager, then I can see how that pay gap would be infuriating.

          I have worked for all kinds of poor managers, so what you describe is not unusual. At the above described job, for example, I was excluded from staff meetings about marketing because they didn’t feel I had anything to add to the conversation. I was basically their glorified keyboard.

    5. F.*

      If you hadn’t specified the salaries, I’d have sworn that you were my coworker. Common, especially in small companies, but totally not acceptable on any count.

    6. Rabbit*

      Unfortunately yes. In my industry, yes yes yes. Crappy yet pervasive.

      – A wide pay disparity: oh yeah.
      – Managers who do not “practice what they preach” in terms of effective communication, forward planning, or direct conflict solution: do some managers NOT do this?
      – Failure to classify “exempt” vs. “non-exempt” staff correctly, or acknowledge the problem when presented: Definitely. I don’t even want to calculate how much I would have earned in my years if I got paid overtime as I should have.
      – Lack of accountability across the board: manager does not enforce standards with staff, nobody holds manager to standards: yep.
      – Poor hiring practices, leading to conflict with new hires that could have been avoided: Definitely. I can’t believe that I’ve been offered jobs after speaking to hiring managers for 20 minutes! That’s a huge red flag to me. You hire people that quickly!?
      – A minimal approach to staff management that quickly leads to burn-out and low morale: definitely. :/

    7. Tom*

      Really surprised how many people see managers not practicing what they preach as a pervasive part of holding a job. Some examples I’m thinking of from recent managers:

      – Manager stresses the importance of deadlines, but unapologetically pushes them back if his work is not done on time.
      – Manager makes “improving communication” the goal of the year, but her e-mails and agendas contain so many spelling errors, incomplete sentences and side notes for herself, that it is hard to discern meaning.
      – Manager teaches that conflicts need to be resolved directly instead of behind-the-scenes gossip and complaining, but has a closed door meeting with a co-worker about my personality, and puts down members of the board for no reason while speaking with me.

      I’m so hopeful that these are at least extreme examples of what others have experienced. None have really made my job harder to do, but all have made me lose respect for the people I work for. And that, in a way, does make my job harder, or at the very least less pleasant.

      1. Anna*

        Yes, all of that’s very common. From what I understand, meetings about co-workers are usually just between the manager and the employee at first. However, a good manager should give you a chance to tell your side of the story after the initial meeting has taken place.

      2. Not So NewReader*

        Deadlines: It could be the manager’s job to adjust deadlines. That maybe within his range. Additionally, he maybe getting adjustments because he is expected to manage on top of doing his own work. So he may be allowed wiggle room that is not given to non-managers.

        Improving communications. To be fair, I don’t know what other ways he is messing up. If his other methods of communication are okay, I would let this one slide. And by slide, I mean I would go instance by instance, in private email to him and say, “I am not sure what you want me to do here.” I would do this until his emails started improving.

        Managers talk with employees about personality conflicts. Honestly, I think a closed door is better than in the middle of the work area, I’m not being snarky. I have had some bosses bellow out criticism at the top of their lungs for all to here. It’s painful. Yes, he should be encouraging you folks to talk things over with each other and no this is not two faced. UNLESS, she is encouraging these gripe sessions- then my answer is waaay different.
        Board members: People talk about people. People like to gripe about board members. I am not saying it’s right, but I am saying it’s not the end of the world, either. Part of the griping comes because people think board members should cure all problems. And that is not the function a board member serves.

        I am not saying you have a good boss, so please don’t misunderstand. I have had good bosses do these things and I have had bad bosses do these things. I really don’t see enough here to be able to tell which one you have. I can see that you are very unhappy at the job. It could be that you just do not have the setting that is right for you. You might do the same work some where else and be as happy as a clam.

    8. Anna*

      Yes and no. I’ve worked for a university and as a government contractor before and there was a lot more structure than what you describe. The pay disparities between an employee and a direct manager were usually under $20k, exempt and non-exempt were classified correctly, and hiring practices were mostly reasonable. I felt like the university was the best place to work, but there was dysfunction there too.

      Bad management can be an issue in every sector. A lot of managers have had no training to manage whatsoever.

      It used to really bother me how there were different standards for different staff members, and that was one of the reasons I went into a field were I could work more or less independently. I was the only person at the site who had that position, and while I supported other staff members occasionally, I mostly worked alone. It was nice to get away from the drama and constant reminders of unfairness.

    9. MsChandandlerBong*

      I think it depends on your industry. I used to work for a small company in the oil industry, and the pay disparity there was shocking. One of our managers made $250K per year, there were a few people making around $100K, and then everyone else made about $9/hour. Everyone had benefits, but how much you paid depended on your level. Executive staff got free benefits, managerial staff only paid for maybe 25 percent of their premiums, and then the people who could least afford it at $9/hour paid 50 percent of the premiums. I left shortly after I had to tell all the workers in the third group that their premiums were doubling, some of them from $400 to $800 per month.

      1. LD*

        That’s a sad and shocking story, and not uncommon. I’d like to share a more compassionate version from a place I worked several years ago. The company had been paying all medical benefits and when they determined that they could no longer do that, instead of passing along the costs equally to all employees, those of us at a higher level in the organization paid a little more so those at lower levels, with correspondingly lower salaries, wouldn’t have to pay as much. I’m proud of my executive team who helped advocate for that and I’m proud of the board who agreed that it was a suitable thing to do.

  19. Anon for this*

    I work at a for-profit company that is part of the tea industry. Is it normal to get political propaganda for only one party every week or so from executive management? They haven’t explicitly said ‘Vote for Teapots’, but during November’s election we were given info on how a certain organization is voting (down to vote yes on Issue 1, no on 2, no on 3, yes on 4, for example). It is all very skewed towards Teapots, and Coffee Makers haven’t been represented at all. It makes sense they would be very pro Teapots, but it just seems strange to me that it’s being shoved down our throats. Is this normal?

    1. Dawn*

      Not normal. Any good employer will know that politics has ZERO PLACE in the workplace. It’s super backwards/unprofessional for an employer to espouse a particular political viewpoint and share it with the staff- almost like saying “yeah so this is what WE think, the unspoken thing here is that it’d be better for you if you thought this way as well…”

      1. Green*

        Difference here is between politics and policy. It is common to send out a “Write your Senator about X issue [related to our work], and here is a button to do it!” vs. “This person running for office is endorsed by all the Teapot-friendly organizations.”

    2. KathyGeiss*

      My company got a lot more political during the last election (we’re Canadian) and it was weird. They didn’t outwardly push one way or another but their stance was pretty obvious.

      We’re a global company and I always got the impression this was more common in the US. I know my company supports PACs related to our industry and the like. But up until this past year, talk of politics from the company was non existent. When it did happen, a lot of people didn’t like it but no one said anything openly (that I know of)

    3. rek*

      I’d say that’s another thing that depends where you are. At the private sector places I’ve worked (for-profit and not-for-profit) this was pretty common. As you said, it’s all heavily skewed toward that particular corporate viewpoint. Sometimes there was even information enclosed on how to contact our representatives to support this corporate view. (Although that was more related to specific legislation than to elections.) What made it OK, or at least not noxious, was that there was no pressure to actually *do* anything with the information. I think that’s important in evaluating this on the “normal” scale. Where I am now (public sector, state government) any sort of politically biased activity is strictly forbidden in the workplace. What a relief!

    4. Judy*

      The only political issue I’ve seen in emails at work over 20 years was one specific time when there was one ballot initiative that was very directly related to the Teapot Industry. There was one email with some propaganda about a month before the election and one email the day before the election basically just reminding everyone to vote and consider the initiative.

      I have worked at places that send out a reminder to vote the day before, especially one place that gave a bonus 2 hour PTO to let you vote, but there was no mention of the parties/candidates/ issues.

    5. Mike C.*

      It really, really depends. My company certainly sends out stuff regarding specific legislation that directly affects us, but it’s always presented as “this is how this legislation directly affects our business, please call your reps, write a letter, here’s a form letter for you, etc” rather than as a partisan, vote for Coke not Pepsi type thing.

      No records are kept if you do it or not and it’s just an occasional company-wide email regarding mostly economic rather than social issues, so it doesn’t really bother me. Anything beyond that can get asinine really quickly.

      1. Mike C.*

        Oh, and I want to add that there was never a request to donate money or time phone banking or anything like that.

      2. Green*

        Agreed here. We have an employee PAC but there are pretty strong rules in place (i.e., solicitations can only go up the chain, not down), there are no communications about individuals standing for elections, and only occasional “Here is an issue that impacts us, and a link to contact your legislator.”

    6. Elsajeni*

      I’m a little unclear on whether Teapots and Coffee Makers are representing political parties or industry issues here, but I’d say I agree with Mike C.: normal to send out information on a political issue that affects your workplace, including promoting a certain position on that issue (example: I work at a university in Texas and we certainly heard from the faculty senate, staff council, etc. about their position on campus carry and how we could make our voices heard on the issue, with strong implication that of course we would agree with their position); not normal to tell you whom to vote for or push the issue in partisan terms (“Vote Republican to support X issue,” etc.).

      1. Anon for this*

        Political parties, sorry. I wanted to remain vague and neutral.

        It’s more like “The current administration is limiting tea growth. They are trying to pass a bill that will further limit tea growth and put 1000 tea botanist jobs out of work!” -insert link to OPINION article written on a news site here-

        1. Elsajeni*

          Yeah, that seems both unusual and inappropriate to me. “If passed, SB1234, the ‘Teabag Protection Act,’ will limit tea industry growth and put 1000 tea botanists out of work; please consider contacting one of these senators who support the bill to share your concerns” would be within normal range (although even then I’m sure opinions will vary on whether it’s appropriate), but what you’re describing sounds more explicitly partisan (“LIBERALS HATE TEA!”) and also less focused on a specific bill or issue.

    7. Hlyssande*

      I work for a giant industrial corp and we’ve received political stuff officially in the past, though nothing recently as blatant as the 2008 letter telling us that if so and so was elected there would be workforce reductions (really wish I’d saved a copy). Thankfully, I’ve only ever experienced one other incident (in a meeting where one of the dept supervisors brought up recent legislation to the CFO which opened a discussion I wanted to walk out of). It’s definitely been toned back around here.

      I’d say that it varies from company to company, but it’s in ridiculously poor taste and they shouldn’t try to influence your vote.

    8. F.*

      At the very large financial services corporation where I used to work, everyone at VP level and above (think many levels of VPs) were expected (forced) to contribute to a banking and finance industry PAC via payroll deduction. Many of the VPs (including my boss) were also required to give an fundraising speech to their peers. As her admin, I had to take attendance at these mandatory meetings and record who pledged and who did not. It was definitely held against anyone who did not contribute.

      1. Mike C.*

        That’s incredibly illegal, you should report this anonymously to the Federal Elections Commission.

        1. F.*

          I worked there from 2000-2004, and it was a Fortune 500 company. I am sure they made sure it was set up so that it was technically legal, despite what happened in actual practice.

        2. Green*

          That’s very illegal, and that is not at all appropriate. We have suggested contributions based on org levels, but you’re not allowed to solicit down the chain at my company to avoid the implicit pressure; the PAC is completely voluntary, and the only thing I get out of a high level of participation is a a day each quarter to travel to the meetings. My involvement (and others’ lack of involvement) isn’t considered for my evaluation and never would be. And nobody sees the donations or the membership except the PAC administrator. We can see high level data about X % of this part of the org has joined, but that’s it.

    9. AnonForThis*

      It depends on your industry – if you’re directly impacted by policies, executive orders, or proposed legislation of one party or the other, it is very normal for that to be communicated down to people, even if it’s just rumored legislation. It’s weird if it’s not relevant to your industry or if it’s about everything teapots, instead of just teapots issues that specifically relate to the business.

    10. Not So NewReader*

      Not the same, but I have seen unions send information to my home via mail TELLING me which candidates to vote for and making it sound like the union could find out who I voted for.

      1. Mike C.*

        First off, no one can ever find out who you voted for. If they’re threatening people, go up the chain and get them to knock it off. You’re a member after all.

        Secondly, there’s a much closer alignment between you and your union’s interests vs you and your employers interests. You ultimately make the final choice of course, but it’s still useful information.

    11. Spunky Brewster*

      I sure hope it wasn’t skewed towards Tea Party (sorry, couldn’t resist the bad pun with your teapots references).

  20. Emmie*

    My prior company would never disclose a position’s salary range when they offered me a promotion. Is this normal?
    I had several promotions over the 10 years I was there, always asked the question, and they always refused. (Non-union publicly traded company, professional positions.)

    2. Engineer Girl*

      Not normal that I know of. All jobs have salary ranges and you should be able to go to HR to find them out.

    3. KathyGeiss*

      This is how it works in my company. I’ve also asked and always been told a non-answer like “you’re just starting out in this role so there is lots of room to grow!” (Translation: your at the bottom of the band).

      I work for a large, global corporation.

      2. Doriana Gray*

        So is mine. We have a performance management guide that shares the job grades and corresponding pay grades, plus breaks down in minute detail how things like bonuses and promotions and reviews are supposed to work corporate wide.

      3. Green*

        For my company, you can see your salary band and the band above yours but not all salary bands.

    6. Nell*

      My company never discloses salary but instead says vague things like “You should be happy you’re making this- this is on the higher end of the range” when there’s no way that can be true (other people in my same role have been in field for 10+ years more than me)

    7. No Longer Just a Lurker*

      I think it is more normal (although not very smart) for internal candidates based on my experiences. Internal candidates salary with the promotion would be based more on their current salary rather than what was budgeted or was the norm/market rate for that position and many times was a lot lower than what they would willingly pay an outside candidate. When I inquired about salary for my last role there, which really was more of a job change than an inline promotion, they told me it was a calculated based on several factors and never really gave me a number. When the offer did get made I pointed out that it was more than $5K below the low number on the external posting (as well as about $20K lower than the person leaving the post which isn’t a fair comparison since he had more than twice the experience I did as well as a professional certification that I do not have but was also not a requirement or even a “plus” for the position) and I had more experience than they were looking for as well as the system knowledge that was critical to the job. They came up another $1500 and when the one year mark hit and they denied me a merit based on that I left within 3 months for a position that paid 20% higher. For some reason they were shocked (eyeroll).

      1. Hlyssande*

        That’s such a short-sighted way of doing things. They’re only shooting themselves in the foot in the long run. Ugh.

        1. Steve*

          I worked at a company that capped promotion-related raises at 10% maximum. Supposedly you could get exception up to 15% with CEO approval (as if the CEO of a public, multinational company is going to spend his time giving some peon an extra 5% pay).

          1. Hlyssande*

            I seriously don’t see what the big picture view of this is other than ‘make sure our employees leave’.

    8. Stephanie (HR)*

      Not normal, but probably not unheard of. Most places will share the range, some are more transparent, some less, but not even sharing the starting wage for the position is a good way to lose good applicants.

    9. KH*

      Not normal in my experience. In fact I just had my annual review and money talk with my boss. Not only did he tell me the figures, but I got a written documentation that says something like:

      The range for Sr. Technical Teapot Manager is $XX ————$Y————–$ZZ. $Y is where your salary falls on the scale.

      Pretty much every job I’ve ever had has given me something similar to this – even as a contractor.

    10. Observer*

      Bad practice but not uncommon, especially if there are pay disparities that someone wants to obscure.

    11. Steve*

      Do you mean that they won’t tell you what your new salary will be before you accept the promotion? That would be weird.

      Or that they won’t tell you the salary range for people in that role? That seems normal to me. I don’t think I’ve ever been told the full salary range for any position I’ve ever held, neither before nor during.

      1. Emmie*

        The company told me my salary, but refused to tell me where in the salary band it fell. (Good point. Did not think it could be interpreted this way!)

        1. CuRey*

          I don’t think that’s unusual. I work in HR and we keep the salary bands very much under wraps. If you’re told the band is between $X and $Z, and your salary is $Y – wouldn’t you be dying to know who was getting $Z and why? Or even who was getting $X and why? Or you’d extrapolate that someone in the next level up was definitely making more than $Z (not necessarily true since bands could overlap). It gives you info about other people’s salaries you don’t need to know.

    12. Emmie*

      Keep the feedback coming. This is so helpful. At my resignation, I found out from others in my role that they were making 1.5 xs as much as I was w/ less experience, lower performance ratings, less company outcomes, and less education. Confirmation that moving on was the right choice. :) I really wonder if holding back salary bands is common in other non-union public companies.

    13. HR Recruiter*

      Totally normal, but not a best practice. Some companies feel they need to keep everything on a need to know basis. I prefer companies that are completely transparent.

    14. Zahra*

      Depending on where you fall in the management/non-management position (I think), you would be totally justified and protected by the law if you asked your future coworkers what their salary is. If they are uncomfortable naming numbers, you could always ask “Here’s what they’re offering me. Compared to your experience level and salary, do you think it’s fair/on par with what you make, or is it significantly lower?” You might find a pattern of higher salaries for external hires/people from some departments/etc. Or you might find a pattern of discrimination, which why the law was created in the first place.

      Caveat: as a woman who is determined not to be victim of discrimination, I have no qualms divulging my salary if gets me/others better tools to negotiate.

  21. Anon for this*

    I work in marketing as a content specialist, and have recently started cooperating closely with an art director. Every discussion I have with that person on assets that need to be produced feel like an ordeal to me – if I share the size a specific asset must be to go on the website, they will argue that it should be a different size *even thought that simply will not fit on the website*.
    When I raised this with my manager (different from the art director’s manager) he said it’s a strength for an art director to be pushing boundaries, and my role is to counterbalance that.
    Normal or not normal?

    1. ElCee*

      Annoying, but I can kinda see why? They are thinking of it from purely a design perspective I assume.

    2. justsomeone*

      That is weird. The specs are the specs. The box can only be so big. They’re really pushing back if you say I need a banner that is 27p h x 340p w? Bizarre.

      Yes an art director should be “pushing boundaries” as it comes to the actual art – but not as it applies to the size of the canvas!

    3. Dawn*

      I agree with ElCee, I think this is totally normal for an Art Director. You’re in charge of the content (the actual words and images) and the Art Director is in charge of making it look good. Now, it sounds like the Art Director has a mental block around reality for some reason, because you can’t put a 2000px image on a 1000px website in any universe, but I think what they’re doing is normal for their position.

    4. Naomi*

      I’m not in marketing, but I am a tech person working with artists, and this dumbfounds me. When I send a request for assets, the artists might push back with their own opinions (e.g., “If we make it that small the user won’t be able to see what it is”, or “That would be confusing because it looks too much like X other thing”, or “I have a better idea, let’s do Y”). But that then becomes a conversation about the best option, not a stubborn refusal to change. And it goes in both directions–we listen to their point of view, and they listen when we explain which constraints are flexible and which aren’t.

      And pushing *artistic* boundaries does not mean refusing to acknowledge practical concerns. Especially at work!

      1. pomme de terre*

        Seconded what Naomi said. There will be a push-pull between words and images, but your artistic director isn’t pushing creative boundaries by trying to put a square peg in a round hole.

        If I asked our designers for a blue square and they sent me a turquoise square because turquoise is better for a bunch of design reasons I don’t even understand, I will be grateful for their skill and experience.

        If I ask for a blue square and they send me a red square, I’ll live with it if we’re on deadline and it physically fits what I’m trying to do.

        If I ask for a blue square and they send me a blue dodecahedron with yellow stripes, that’s not something I can use even if it belongs in the MoMA and I have every right to be pissed.

    5. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Normal? Not abnormal. The tug and pull between marketing and design is frustratingly normal.

      Healthy or productive? No.

      I actively hire for and manage marketing and design people who can work together. I think without someone above managing for that, it’s “normal” for the relationship to be a lot more the way you describe.

      (I think your manager is closing her eyes and wishing the problem away because she doesn’t want to tussle with the art director’s manager. I think the problem is “normal” because each of you reports to a different manager.)

    6. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

      Art Directors are a-holes…says the Creative Director :)

      Honestly, a huge part of my role is being the connector between my designers and our clients. I find myself saying, “I agree that this would look better in blue, but Teapots Unlimited’s brand guidelines specifically say no blue.”

      The one thing I find helpful is asking “why?” when someone says it has to be a different size/shape/color.

    7. Karowen*

      From what you’ve said, it seems like a contrarian artist and a manager who doesn’t want to deal with it. Not abnormal, by any means, but annoying as crap. Have you been clear each time that you have no control over the size?

    8. Also anon for this*

      Sadly normal.

      I once had a highly artistic boss who wanted a bunch of small cards with various bits of text on them. All the cards were to be the same size. All the cards should be in the same font size. The amount of white space should be about the same on each card.

      The bits of text were not the same length. So, one would say “lorem ipsum,” and the next would say “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit,” and they were supposed to go on the same size card with the same size font and have the same amount of white space around each one. THE LAWS OF PHYSICS PROHIBIT. PICK TWO.

      Right now I’m dealing with bosses who all want Their Thing to be front and center when you first land on our website. If I put everything there that they wanted there, it would look like when your mom downloads 50 malware toolbars.

    9. Emmy*

      Totally normal for an art director. I’ve had lots of arguments with designers who think design should drive the content. And yes, I do think it’s a strength (to a degree). Those arguments have pushed me to think carefully about my opinions and often led to better work.

    10. Cath in Canada*

      I’ve experienced this in a former job, marketing products that purify a specific type of cell from a mixture of multiple types, selling exclusively to research scientists. Every single ad / label / flyer / booth graphic was a battle with the art director:

      “Why did you use the basophil image on a T cell product?”
      “It looks better”
      “But it’s wrong”
      “But it looks better, and that’s the most important thing”
      “No, wanting scientists to be confident that we know what the hell we’re doing is the most important thing”
      “But it looks better”

    11. Lady H*

      I’m a (senior) graphic designer and function both as an art director and designer in my current role—and this does NOT seem normal to me. The only thing I can think that could be happening with your example is that the art director needs to be able to think about using assets on multiple platforms and for some reason they’re not communicating that to you, which is annoying, but sounds like something you can raise with them.

      For example, let’s say I’m trying to get an asset to use on a web banner that’s 728 x 90, but I’m going to leverage the banner design for print pieces. In that case, I can’t use something sized for web and I’ll almost always request assets that are print-ready (hi-res, CMYK, TIF/PSD files) so that I don’t have to come back to you for every single format we need because my team can take care of that. That’s really, really common but I’m not sure from your example if that’s what’s going on. In any case, it sounds like the art director isn’t communicating with you about why they’re fighting you on specs and that’s really annoying. I tend to overexplain (can you tell?!) because after years of working with people who give vague directions, I strive to let production artists know exactly what I need in the long run so I don’t waste their time.

      Pushing boundaries doesn’t seem to have anything to do with what your art director is doing, and it sounds like your manager gave you one of those “oh, designers are just stubborn and artistic, haha” type reactions that many people have when dealing with creative folks. Design is about communication, not making things look pretty!

      1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

        It really is normal.

        Because we do customized teapots for companies, we’re exposed to literally thousands of marketing & design departments across the US (as customers) and hundreds of marketing & design departments from our vendors. It’s a common dynamic. You’re completely right that it’s not desirable, and it’s not the only way, but it is a thing we run into daily and have to compensate for.

        1. Lady H*

          I should have said that while it may be common, it is not an acceptable way to interface with production artists and to urge the OP to try to prod the art director to communicate their needs more clearly instead of just accepting that all art directors are going to be argumentative for mysterious reasons. That’s what I meant by “not normal” to me; an art director should be able to openly communicate about what they need from others because that’s basically the whole of the job.

          I understand where you’re coming from, I know that one of the reasons our firm gets so many word-of-mouth (and awesome!) clients is because we check our “artistic” egos at the door and just act like, well, professionals. Every client I’ve worked with in my current role has commented on how unusual it is that we’re so responsive and helpful. On the flip side, for us, it’s more often clients who hem and haw about giving us what we need to do our jobs, so it does go both ways. :/

            1. Lady H*

              Y’all need a design agency? ;)

              Just kidding, we’re so busy right now that I’m stress-reading AAM instead of dealing with the pile o’ work ahead of me!!

              1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

                If you want to drop an email addy in this thread (you can make it a throwaway gmail or whatever you like), I’ll connect.

                We have 15 in house artists but we contract some things out sometime. Always a good idea to connect with people who can communicate!

                If it’s not convenient for you, (we’re all anon), that’s fine too!

                1. Lady H*

                  Absolutely! (And thank you! We really do get virtually all clients by word of mouth, so I’m out of practice with promotion and networking these days.) We support a lot of in house departments and do what we can to make it painless, we know an in house team is hard to beat in terms of convenience and expertise! Here’s a throwaway gmail: aamneedadesigner@gmail.com.

          2. OP anon*

            Actually, we do work from one principle design that then gets translated into a bunch of smaller assets, so the art director is getting all the elements needed before I even start talking about website specs. I’m dealing with “this will look better as portrait so I’m making portrait” when the spot on the website is landscape.

            1. Lady H*

              Arrgggghhh, wish I could tell the art director to knock it off and stop perpetuating the reputation of us all that we can’t take direction! That’s terrible, anon. Honestly, that is really out of line for the AD and I’m flabbergasted that your manager won’t back you up because it’s such a waste of time and money for everyone involved.

              I have occasionally had to ask the ad buyers to reconsider the purchased orientation if, say, they wanted to feature an image that just would not work cropped for landscape but would look perfect in portrait, but that is so incredibly rare and I would never assume it was my call to make.

              Best of luck dealing with that madness!

    12. Zahra*

      Do you have mock-ups? You could keep them in a mutually accessible location and tell them/show them why it won’t work. You might get push back on how the site/page is designed, though. Maybe keep a collection of (recent) best practices?

  22. Amber*

    Is it normal to be made to do things way outside your job description under the title of “other duties as assigned”? I was hired into a tea-pot support position. Recently, my manager has been assigning me tea-pot promotion and marketing tasks. She expects me to continue with my hired duties while also adding on these new duties which would typically fall under a totally different job description in a different department. I get no choice in the matter, no change in title, and no raise. The tea-pot marketing tasks will require me to travel quite often with no input into where or/when I travel. I’m not opposed to travelling or learning new skills because I realize it will help my career in the long-run, but I’m irked about the lack of control I have in how these new duties are assigned. For example, I now have to miss an important personal event this summer because my manager is sending me to Japan (I live in the US) for 3.5 weeks for marketing purposes, and when I explained it was not a good time for me and perhaps I could go earlier/later, I was reprimanded for “resisting the responsibilities for my position.” This seems crazy to me–am I out of line here?

    1. babblemouth*

      It would be normal if it was smaller tasks, and not super often.
      However, here it’s becoming a consistent change of your role, and additional responsibilities, so not normal.
      If these are duties you think you could be interested in furthering, you could ask for formal training, as well as a formal change of your job title (and assorted pay raise if applicable).

    2. Engineer Girl*

      It depends. “Other duties as assigned” can take up 10-20% of your normal tasks. Your total job adds up to 100% work. It sounds like your manager wants to take your 100% work and add other tasks on top of that – job scope creep. In that case it is fair to argue for a pay raise or promotion after 3-6 months of performing the new job.
      It is not unreasonable to work with your manager to find good times to travel, but many business travel tasks are last minute and therefore hard to negotiate ahead of time. Travel for 3.5 weeks is extensive. I can see doing it once or twice as part of your normal job duties. After that they should acknowledge the impact with a salary bump
      It would not be unusual for you to participate in planning sessions about upcoming activities that affect you. It would be unusual for your manager to know about travel weeks ahead of time yet dump it on you in the last minute. Good managers know that people have lives outside of work.
      BTW, I find your managers wording interesting. She referred to your position as a new position. If that is the case then you should be able to negotiate on salary.

      1. Amber*

        No, actually my manager meant that these responsibilities fall under my current position because of the “other duties as assigned” clause. I don’t think she meant to imply this was a new position.

    3. Mike C.*

      Is it just me, or does it almost always seem like whenever there is job creep, it’s always into sales/marketing?

      1. Karowen*

        Everyone thinks that if a person can string a sentence together, or knows a product, they should be able to do sales or marketing, which frustrates me (a content specialist) to no end.

        1. Mike C.*

          This must be it. Sales/Marketing/Design/etc are all actual skills which need to be developed over time just like everything else.

      2. Cat like that*

        Yep, I’ve experienced this in the last 3 of my jobs. I am terrible at sales and not a great marketer, hence why I did not pursue careers in those fields. But somehow excellent at managing vendor and client relations = ability to do SEO and sell products.

      3. NJ Anon*

        Try working at a non profit. We take out the garbage, stuff envelopes, do all kinds of “other duties as assigned!”

      4. MommaTRex*

        I work in accounting/budgeting at a local government agency. Job creep galore. But that’s what happens when you do a good job with a task – hey, give it to MommaTRex! She’ll do it! I’m sure she can squeeze it in with the other 75% “other duties as assigned”. Actually, we did update my job description and it seems to me like it is a crazy mix of who would have all the skills to do all these things? Me. Been here 20 years and it grows…

    4. Tardis*

      I think it is a lot more normal for smaller orgs than larger. I worked for a very small (>5 staff) non-profit, and my role continually developed based on what we needed. I was hired to do research but also ended up writing contracts, paying vendors, organizing events, hiring staff, developing strategic plans, starting up and running social media, managing our website, etc. etc. etc. It made sense since we were such a small team. Because my responsibilities were so broad, I ended up making a pitch to hire on additional staff to take on some specific areas and offered to manage the hiring/interview process. We now have additional staff to do almost every single one of those tasks (and are no longer a >5 staff org :))

    5. Terra*

      It can be normal, usually in a temporary capacity, in the period between someone being let go and a new person being hired. If this is going to be longer term/more permanent then at the very least there should be a conversation regarding how to prioritize everything as well as if there will be a new title/promotion/raise.

      1. Amber*

        Yes, actually that’s exactly how this came about. The person who used to do international marketing trips left the company last year. It took awhile to replace her and train the new person. In the interim, I picked up several of her responsibilities and was happy to do so, but didn’t understand that it was going to become a permanent new assignment without any raise or job title. The rationale now is that “you did it before, so you’re the most qualified to continue doing it”–even though I don’t have any formal education or training in marketing.

    6. Pwyll*

      I think this is the type of situation where you want to go to your manager and ask for clarification on your role. Something like, “When I was hired last year, my responsibilities were xyz, which did not involve a lot of travel. Recently I’ve been assigned a lot more abc, which involves a lot more travel than we originally agreed upon. I am, of course, happy to help where I can. Do you believe my new travel/marketing/etc. responsibilities are going to be a permanent part of this position? If so, can we discuss whether I should make abc or xyz my priority?” A change that involves a lot of travel like this is not normal, however.

      1. fposte*

        “And if so, I’d like to request my salary adjust to reflect the greater responsibilities.”

        I don’t know that it’ll happen if you ask, but it definitely won’t if you don’t.

  23. extra anon*

    I think I know the answer, but that’s only from doing a lot of scouring on AAM as specific issues come up so I may as well ask it for anyone else who has been in the same situation.

    My job is a newly created position in a new department operating within a much larger organization. I’ve been here 10 months and have never met with my direct supervisors, who are the heads of the organization, 1 on 1 in that time. Others at my level have a weekly meeting with them and I do not, and have not been able to get one. We communicate by email, and I am often ignored – even with emails are titled with URGENT (when things are genuinely urgent). They need to sign off on everything I do, but they don’t reply to requests in a timely fashion making it very difficult to do my job. When I do manager to get meetings scheduled with them they have been cancelled or I have been bumped for other people with more pressing issues. When I was hired there was never any conversations about process, institutional rules, etc and I’ve been making things up as I go along. I have a coworker who I am to take direction from, but most often the direction is “talk to our bosses”, which isn’t helpful when you rarely receive replies to the emails you send. The heads of the organization do the roles off of the sides of their desk and there is no managing director on site, they are rarely in the office. In the 10 months I have been in my role I have yet to receive a budget and get mixed messages about spending – there is a significant amount of funding that needs to be spent this fiscal year, but when I try to spend it on traveling (which is a significant part of my job description and duties) or events, etc I receive significant pushback. I rarely receive feedback on my work, but when I do it’s usually positive. I didn’t receive my 3 or 6 month performance reviews.

    Earlier this week I found out I made a pretty egregious mistake due to the lack of communication at all levels, and when I realized it in a conversation with a coworker I brought it up to her asap and tried to figure out how to fix it. Instead of working with me she got very angry with me and hasn’t spoken to me since. I emailed our bosses explaining what happened and what I would do in the future to ensure it didn’t happen again but received no response other than to let me know they would talk and decide what to do with me. This reaction makes me think hiding mistakes would be the best thing to do – even though I would never want to do that and am big on accountability and taking ownership of your mistakes.

    There is a coworker I work with who hasn’t come to work for months. In the 4 months since we moved to our new site I have seen her in the office twice. There has seemingly been no consequences for this. There was recently a meeting with her about attendance, and rather than any kind of PIP, etc they instead have decided to let her work the remaining 3 months of her contract. Another employee quit shortly after being suspended by HR after a lengthy complaint process was filed against her – her coworkers accused her of bullying them, but from what I saw they ganged up on her. When I first started the position I was accused of lying about my race to get the job more than once, and there have been comments made since about how I don’t deserve to get the same benefits as others because I’m “not from here”, even though I was born in this country the same as them. One of my female coworkers touches me incessantly and insists on calling me pet names like girl, lovely, etc. I’ve asked her to stop but she continues to do it. It makes me uncomfortable but I feel like there’s nothing else I can do about it, as when I complained about the racism I experienced nothing was done.

    Oh, and I get paid 50% less than people who do this job both in and outside of our organization.

    I feel like all signs point to “get out!”, but this is my first job after graduation and I love what I do. I also feel like I’ll look like a job hopper if I try to leave now.

    1. Dawn*

      Uhhh… the first complaint is weird enough- you should absolutely expect things like the ability to talk to your boss and get direction and get approval for your budget. However after all of the other things you listed here, RUN. Run far, far away. This is all not normal and very much toxic.

    2. babblemouth*

      Definitively Not Normal. However, if you’re worried about job-hopping, you can try to stick it out a few more month so you have a full year of work there to put on your CV. Since you say you love what you do, it should be alright to survive, also knowing for sure what is going on is not normal.

    4. Ad Astra*

      Bad news: None of this is normal or something you should expect to put up with.

      Good news: Your next job is likely to be much better — because almost any organization will be better run than this one. So go find that next job!

      10 months is not a long time to be at a job, but everyone gets one freebie before taking on job-hopper status, and this would be a good time to use that free pass. When you’re early in your career and applying for jobs that are a good fit for your skills and experience, people are pretty forgiving about short tenures.

    5. BuildMeUp*

      I don’t think you’ll look like a job-hopper as long as you have a good, non-negative reason for leaving that you can use in interviews. Do try to be careful not to jump to the first job you can find – you want your next job to be one you’ll stay in for a while! But one shorter stay is not the end of the world, and it sounds like this workplace has a lot of issues. Good luck!

    6. caligirl*

      Extra anon, yes, you are right – “get out”! This is not healthy for you or your career. Use AAM’s 1 short stint job advice and move on as soon as you can. You deserve to speak to your bosses (!) and to get paid a comparable wage (!) as your colleagues. The whole place sounds like a mess and you can do so much better. Good luck!

    7. Pwyll*

      Um, not to mention the racial comments are likely an EEO violation. None of this is normal. I can’t even imagine working somewhere that I’ve never even been able to meet with my boss. Outrageous.

    8. NJ Anon*

      GET OUT! Not even remotely normal. Are you in the US? You could file a EEOC complaint against these a-holes.

      1. extra anon*

        I’m Canadian, I don’t think we have the EEOC here. I also can’t go to my HR department, as I don’t really trust our HR manager here. On my first day she asked me a really inappropriate question about my race right out of the gate, and then she didn’t give me the opportunity to negotiate my offer. I thought maybe that was standard for the organization, but I found it later everyone else had been able to negotiate when they started.

        2. Zahra*

          We do, it’s called the Human Rights Commission (as Headachey points out) and, good news, regardless of the company size, they are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which includes protection against race, sex, sexual identity (and more) discrimination.

          I know Wikipedia isn’t a perfect source, but, along with the commission, it will give you a head start on what the courts deem necessary to prove discrimination.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_Fifteen_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

    10. Ros*

      Start gather evidence of all of this, make a file of evidence, contact your provincial human rights board and file a grievance.

      Seriously this is horrendous. At first I was nodding along thinking that this wounded very much like a place I worked at. I would have to chase down my supervisor and hold him accountable for my reviews or to get him to sign off on things. But once you got to the bullying and absence and race stuff, it’s now time to get prepared for a battle.

      Gather that evidence, look for a new job, get a new job and get away from that place.

    11. I'm Not Phyllis*

      Definitely not normal. I don’t believe that saying “we’ll decide what to do with you” and then leaving you hanging for days is appropriate. They should decide and then act.

      I hate to agree with you because you love with you do, but I believe that all signs point to “get out” as well. Sorry!

    12. LD*

      If no one else has mentioned this, start writing things down. March 2, 2016, 9 a.m. Inappropriate Jane stroked my hair and when I asked her not to do that she said in a creepy voice “you look lovely today.” March 3, 2016, 2:30 p.. Inappropriate Wakeen called me a liar and accused me of being “a different race.” etc. Keep track of all of it and keep a copy of your notes at home. You may never need this, but if you’ve complained, and nothing is done, you’ll have records to share with your manager or with HR if anything comes back on you. Email yourself and blind copy your personal email on messages you send to your manager requesting help dealing with the Inappropriate Team and requesting feedback or support for your job. Then you’ll have a personal record that they can’t delete from the system, just in case they are evil that way.

    13. Not So NewReader*

      OP, I think you have talked about some of this before here. Please, please say you are seriously job hunting. Please make a plan to get out of this place. While I do not see cause for worry about your physical well-being, this job is teaching you ALL the wrong things here about work and work places. Everything is wrong. Screw the ten months and salvage yourself- get out.

      Even if you get a job in two months that will mean you have been at this one a year. A year sounds better than ten months, right? Don’t worry about longevity, what is going on here is a much bigger concern. Go ahead and make a plan. Get to another company as soon as possible.

    14. YawningDodo*

      It’s been said, but no, this is not remotely normal or acceptable. The time to start job hunting is *now,* for two reasons:

      1. It’s probably going to take you a while to find your next job. If you start searching now, you may well be at the one year mark before you land something and get out, especially if you follow BuildMeUp’s solid advice on not jumping ship for the first job that will take you.

      2. With all the HR-approved racism being directed against you, the bullying, and the refusal to give you the tools and feedback you need in order to do your job, they’re setting you up to fail and/or be bullied out of the organization. Get started now on your exit plan so you leave on your terms, not theirs.

  24. Rat Racer*

    OK – having gotten the green light, here’s my “Was I being a Prima Donna” question from long ago:

    I used to work for a University department that acted as its own non-profit. The executive director started a charter school in inner-city Baltimore and hired me to write grants, conduct program evaluation, and manage other operational issues on the back-end. Finding it difficult to keep the school appropriately staffed, she mandated that I station myself on the campus and serve as everything from a hall monitor to a substitute teacher. I had zero teaching experience, and the kids walked all over me. It was humiliating.

    After several weeks of miserable, I confronted my boss with a “this isn’t what I was hired for” conversation, which didn’t go well — this is probably the part where I was acting entitled. Upshot: she fired me, but not before telling me that my unwillingness to work with the kids at the school was indicative of an attitude that I was “too good to get my hands dirty.”

    Question: when you sign up to work for a small non-profit in your first job out of grad school, how far should you take the “I’ll do anything” attitude? Is it fair to set up boundaries between front-line versus back-end work? Obviously, if this was a role that required clinical training, it would be illegal/crazy to put an unqualified person out in the field, but education is (unfortunately for this country) a grey area.

    1. LQ*

      I think this is entirely reasonable. I planned an event where we had a lot of musicians, some years we had a hard time finding acts. But me getting up and singing would NOT have helped the cause, it would have hurt it. It sounded like you serving as a hall monitor and sub took away from your regular duties and didn’t improve the school (sorry, just going with what you said!) that’s hurting your cause, not helping it.

      I don’t know that I would phrase it as front line vs back end, but I would focus on the aspect of to succeed we need GOOD teachers, and good grant writers, I can be a good grant writer or a bad teacher.

      1. Nother Name*

        I agree. I don’t think you were being a prima donna, but being young and new to the workforce you didn’t know how to phrase your (very valid) objections to staff (you) being mis-assigned.

    2. Ama*

      It’s possible that your approach to the “this isn’t what I was hired for” conversation might have been tonally wrong (can’t say without having more details), but I don’t think you were out of line for having that conversation. There is a huge difference between handling operations for a school and actually teaching/staffing the student serving positions and your boss should have understood that a shift that large might result in you having concerns.

      1. Rat Racer*

        Oh, yeah, I totally botched that conversation. I still cringe when I think about it. Even if I nailed the tone, though, I don’t think it would have mattered. She was desperate for warm bodies to keep the school going, and would have probably monitored the halls herself, if it came to that. That school was her life-long dream, and the fact that I was having nightmare flashbacks to my own high school days was not a compelling excuse.

        1. Observer*

          Nice vicious cycle there, and one almost certainly leading to a crash and burn. Shoving anyone into roles they are unsuited for is not a way to keep staff or run an organization. That school may have been her dream, but she clearly had no idea how to run it.

    3. LizB*

      All the charter schools I’ve interacted with have been anywhere from mildly to horrendously disorganized, and everyone pitching in for big events/light hall-monitoring duties wouldn’t have been unheard of. But I think even the worst of them would have balked at the idea of having a staff member without a sub credential or any classroom experience sub for classes on a regular basis and try to deliver instruction. As a one-time, emergency, “just sit there while they watch a video” thing? Maybe. But actually having you try to teach with no experience? That seems abnormal even in that field.

    4. Chinook*

      “Finding it difficult to keep the school appropriately staffed, she mandated that I station myself on the campus and serve as everything from a hall monitor to a substitute teacher. I had zero teaching experience, and the kids walked all over me”

      My experience in (Canadian) schools is that everyone who works there (even if they are processing invoices like my sister does) are expected to interact with the kids and pitch in when it comes to supervision (especially if you are understaffed otherwise some of the teachers may not be able to get a bathroom break or lunch break during the day). In a pinch, they would also be asked to supervise a classroom if a teacher had to leave for an emergency and/or no qualified substitutes were available. But, in that case, they would be expected to be more of a babysitter than a teacher (and the teacher they were covering for would be required, under the terms of their contract, to have left detailed instructions on what was planned).

      That being said, it is a more principal that puts a support person back into a classroom to supervise kids after they have shown no classroom management abilities. Not because it is bad for their employee but because it creates a real risk to the students in the classroom. If she was so short staffed that it was her only option to use you repeatedly, then she also has bigger issues she needs to deal with.

      1. Elizabeth the Ginger*

        I agree with all of this. Our office staff members all have one recess supervision duty a week, for example (which, frankly, they seem to like, as it’s an excuse to get out of the office and just stand outside in the sunshine for 15 minutes). But they would never be asked to substitute teach – they’re not trained for it! I could envision one of them supervising a classroom for a short time in a true emergency (e.g. teacher suddenly has to go to the hospital!) but not actually teach, and definitely not regularly.

      2. Rat Racer*

        I think the key difference though is that I was not an employee of the school itself, I was an employee of the non-profit that started the school, which was only one of several programs in their portfolio.

    5. Argh!*

      It would depend on whether you were required to have a degree in education or teaching experience. If you were, then the “other related duties as assigned” could apply. But in general, if your actual job was so irrelevant that you could be spared for whole days at the charter school, you were lucky to get fired!

  25. Anonneeee*

    I was told that my manager is to be fired, and I will be offered their position (already know that this is not ideal…).
    Question is related to compensation: I was told that I will be offered the minimum of the pay scale (slightly higher than my current comp.), despite taking on most of my manager’s responsibilities for last year. Manager that will be fired will have made 30k more than salary offered to me. I would make less than 65 percent of his salary and less than 60 percent of salary of another manager in equivalent position.

    I’m told that there is no room for negotiation (we are state gov and compensation is determined by head of our organization – 4 levels above me). Also, performance raises are not offered in organization. Is this normal/acceptable?

    1. rek*

      Depends on your state, but that sounds pretty much like my experience. Where I work (also state government) promotions come with a 5% increase OR an increase to the minimum salary of your new grade, whichever is higher. It doesn’t matter what the previous person in the role made, and it doesn’t matter what other people in that grade make. Increases are annual and *not* merit based. As a result, people who have been in a particular grade longer will make more. The only way to increase your salary, other than those annual raises, is to post for a job in a higher pay grade. I am a fairly recent transplant from private sector to public sector, and that was a difficult adjustment for me.

    2. AnonInSC*

      In my experience, state gov’t will have a cap on the percentage a salary can be increased in moving positions. However, these can be worked around with extra paperwork and justification. In many cases I saw, the attempt just wasn’t made. So it should be possible, even if the rule is there in general.

      No merit raises in years in SC (or very, very few). In general the state and grant budgets are set. No changes.

    3. Amy*

      I work at a (unionized) state job, and this is essentially how we work. There is a pay scale set by the union contract. You start at the lower amount, and work up through the tiers yearly (at least that is how ours works). You cannot really compare your salary to someone else in the same position, because it’s based on how long you have been there and what scale you reached. So for example, Person A might have been working for 10 years and reached the top of the scale at, say, $80,000, but when they leave and Person B takes their job, they start at the base of the scale, and make only $65,000. That’s completely normal. You can’t negotiate (in our case anyway) because the salary scale is set by the union. There are no “performance based raises” because raises are built into the contract yearly.

    4. Murphy*

      Yup, that’s pretty normal for government. Pay scales are set and generally so are pay changes for promotions/job changes. For us it’s 8% for a promotion in manager class (or going from non-manager to manager) or one (maybe two) steps for non-management along the pay grade. Pay isn’t based on what someone else is making, it’s based on where you are now and the formula they apply. Crappy, but what it is (and why one of my managers makes $15K less than another or my managers for the same job).

  26. justagirl*

    I was recently out of work for 5 weeks for PTSD/Panic disorder. I work for a 10 office organization, at no point did anyone at work see me have a break down, I am a very professional person. I kept this very private telling only a few family members and never posting about it on social media.
    Upon returning to work my supervisor suggested part time rather than full time at a different office, it sounded good to me so I did.
    Today I called an office that neither I nor my supervisor work at regularly and was greeted with “oh Jane, so happy to talk to you, we were all so worried about your mental break down”
    that’s the third staff member at 3 different offices that has confirmed that they have some false idea of what happened and she said “WE” my boss told people that I had a mental break down which isn’t even accurate. I would call it just a rumor if it wasn’t somewhat related, with the vague info my boss has she could think mental break down would be the appropriate term.
    I’m furious and considering just quitting. am I being petty?

    1. Tom*

      I feel like some details are missing here for a complete picture, but that sounds incredibly out of line for your boss to tell people you had a “mental breakdown”. Not sure if that should lead to quitting or not, but I would definitely feel personally and professionally betrayed by said boss. And I would ~not~ expect this type of behavior from a boss. Not everyone is appropriately aware of or sensitive to mental/emotional health issues, but that’s a terrible thing for your boss to tell people behind your back (or even in front of it!).

    2. Dawn*

      I don’t think you’re being petty, but I think your desire to quit is definitely born out of anger. I’d suggest sitting down with your boss and seeing what she has to say for herself- “Cerce, three offices now have said they heard about my ‘mental break down’, do you have any idea why they would have that opinion of my leave of absence?”

    3. babblemouth*

      You have every right to be furious, and your boss was out of line. What happened is not ok.
      However, no matter how wrong their information is, these coworkers sound caring (correct me if I misunderstood). Before quitting, try to put an end to the mental health coversations (“Thank you for your concerns, but that’s not really what happened. I’d prefer to move on, though”). Also, tell your boss what he/she did was wrong, and that in the future, such information should be kept confidential.
      If things don’t end at that point, then yes, go ahead and quit.

      One caveat: obviously your health is the most important thing. If the well-meaning but inaccurate wishes make you feel worse, do quit right away.

      1. Nother Name*

        Actually, I did work with a woman who had a (very obvious and public) mental breakdown. When she came back, we all treated her as if she had been inpatient in a hospital for any other type of illness. Welcomed her back, asked her how she was doing in general terms, but never brought up the exact reason for why she was gone, only discussing it if she brought it up. To me, this seems like the most tactful way to handle it when a co-worker is absent for a long period due to any health issue. (I’m not your doctor – I don’t need to know the details of your illness.)

        1. A Non*

          Yeah. Whoever spread this info was WAY the heck out of line, but the other coworkers aren’t handling it well either. You don’t discuss mental health stuff unless the person in question volunteers the info and wants to talk about it.

          If the OP has a trustworthy HR department, it may be worth bringing up with them. That’s definitely reprimand-worthy behavior from her boss. Unfortunately if their organization already has a highly-functional rumor mill, I’m not hopeful about HR.

          1. LD*

            Yes, and not just mental health, but any kind of health, I think it’s best to err on the side of a generic, “Glad to see you’re back.” and “Hope your doing well.” and maybe, “Anything I can do to help catch you up?”

      2. fposte*

        I would agree with this. Have you liked the job otherwise? Then I don’t think this is worth quitting over unless it really ramps up your distress.

    4. Mando Diao*

      I think that reading sites like AAM can sometimes give people the false security of thinking that all decent, open-minded people will be aware of the verbiage for every little thing. There are a lot of left-leaning, caring people who nonetheless don’t know the proper terms for talking about mental illness. I’m not even sure if my mother (a Bernie supporter whose facebook is full of Rachel Maddow memes) would grasp the concept of an anxiety order the first time she came across the term.

      Obviously you can gauge whether you think the statements were made out of care, but I wouldn’t focus on the language of “mental breakdown” or look for linguistic distinctions that still only exist in internet or academic circles.

      I’m glad you’re feeling better.

      1. Nother Name*

        I think the term “unwell” covers a lot of ground. People who have been ill know what was wrong with them, they don’t need others to share the details with them.

        1. Mando Diao*

          I agree. I guess I can just imagine a lot of older people saying something like, “I heard you had a mental breakdown, and I’m really glad you’re feeling better.” A lot of people, especially people who missed out on the internet for a large chunk of their lives, don’t have the vocabulary to articulate, “I heard you were struggling with issues that weren’t physical health problems, and I care for you, and I’m happy you got through it.”

          1. Nother Name*

            But if you get to the people who are old enough, then you end up back at “unwell.” (I’m talking the generation that considered “cancer” a whisper-worthy word.)

      2. Salyan*

        A fair number of decent, caring, right-leaning people probably don’t know the best terms to use either. ;)

  27. Mona Lisa Saperstein*

    I work in entertainment as an assistant to a director who owns a production company. She pays me and all of her other employees as contractors with flat day rates and no overtime, and since we routinely work 18-hour days, this often breaks down to less than minimum wage if we were being paid by the hour. Is this normal in Hollywood? And/or legal?

    1. Jean Ralphio*

      This isn’t totally out of the ordinary but it is possibly illegal depending on whether or not you meet the legal requirements for being a contractor. Bigger studios and companies with more resources are less likely to pull things like this, but it’s not uncommon at smaller operations. My former partner is in the industry and it wasn’t until he had enough pull with multiple producers and production coordinators that he could be sure work wouldn’t dry up (about 3 years of steady work in NYC) that he could actually do anything about productions illegally classifying him as a contractor and underpaying him. When he did start walking away from jobs that did things like this, a simple mention of the labor board (“Oh, my understand is that I need to get paid for these hours, but I’m sure the labor board can help us clear it up”) was usually enough to get him his backpay.

      1. Elizabeth West*

        As I understand it, there’s been some pushback lately on this kind of thing (and egregious working conditions that often go along with it, like not getting any bathroom breaks for twelve hours).

        1. Rabbit*

          Paramount PAs were “forced” to “poop in their cars” because they were not allowed bathroom breaks.

          I could not make this stuff up. Only in LA.

          1. martinij*

            Paramount also wanted to pay their Mid- to Senior-Level Data Analysts $17/hr with no benefits, no negotiations about two years ago as well. Hollywood.

          2. AVP*

            That was actually in New York! :)

            I actually have a lot of opinions on that particular case because I work with similar people a lot and I can 100% see how it happened and how the producers can claim “we had no idea!” but I will withhold them here.

            2. Rabbit*

              Wow! I truly thought this happened in LA–it’s close to horror stories I’ve heard from PAs I know here out west. Pretty horrible regardless of where this happened!

      2. Mona Lisa Saperstein*

        Thanks–yeah, it’s a pretty small company. I sort of figured there wouldn’t be much I can do about it until I’ve built up more connections and have a bit more pull than, you know, a bottom-of-the-totem-pole assistant.

        1. anon for this*

          Former producer here. If you’re an assistant, what your boss is doing is probably illegal (though sadly not uncommon). Flat day rates even for non-exempt positions are common in production to simplify budgeting and payroll, but those flats should back into an hourly rate that is at least minimum wage, with time-and-a-half after 8 hours and double time after 12. (E.g. – day rate for an assistant might be $150/day. If you’re regularly working a 12 hour day in California, that’s 14 pay-hours factoring in the OT, so 14 x $10/hr = $140/day at minimum wage. Your $150 rate would cover that, but it’s cutting it close and your employer should be keeping an eye on your work hours.)

          Also, you should still be paid as an employee, even if your employer of record is the payroll company. Are taxes being withheld from your paycheck? Are you being paid through a payroll company? If not, if you’re just getting a flat check with no deductions each week, you may not be covered by worker’s comp. That is a huge personal risk for you, especially if you’re working excessively long hours and running errands as part of your job.

          I hear you that you feel like you need to stick it out in order to move up, but you really do need to protect yourself. Also, seconding AVP on “walk away from the crappy ones” – lots of good ones are out there. If I were you I’d try to network my way into a better job ASAP. Good luck!

          1. anon for this*

            *to be clear, the example I gave is the kind of deal I used to see in LA production, but of course what you’re entitled to depends on where you’re working and whether you can be classified as an independent contractor or not. YMMV quite a bit.

          2. AVP*

            Seconding that I don’t think she needs to wait until the “one year” mark to start networking and trying to find a better situation…crazy turnover is expected in this part of the working world especially if you’re a contractor. I don’t speak for everyone but I wouldn’t blink an eye if I got a resume of short stays like that. If I knew the company and thought they were a good place to work, I would second guess it, but I think it’s assumed that most of these places are terrible and dysfunctional and people are trying to get out.

      3. AVP*

        +1 to this. The big goal is to build up enough of a reputation with good producers and PM’s that you can walk away from the crappy ones, who are unfortunately prevalent in a lot of the industry.

        And once you find a really good PM or producer willing to follow the rules and pay what they owe, do what you can to get in with them! Even if you have to give up 5 days of work with a crappy company for a 3-day job with a good one, try to swing it if you can – getting to know the better players is absolutely worth it.

      4. fposte*

        Points for the user name in the response :-).

        And it’s probably not legal, and it probably is normal.

    2. AVP*

      It’s hard to comment on the legal aspects (my impulse is you should be getting overtime but she’s probably paying you as a contractor to avoid that, which means your big legal problem is that you are classified incorrectly). You should be getting minimum wage.

      But I would say this is reasonably common in smaller and more independent production companies, less so once you work for bigger companies and the names get bigger – for companies working with famous people or major brands this kind of working arrangement is a liability and PR disaster waiting to happen so they try to curb it.

      IMHO the end game is to use the experience you’re getting now to get into a bigger company ASAP. And get into one of the guilds or unions if it’s in your career trajectory.

      I have ten years’ production experience but in NYC, although many friends have similar careers in LA.

      1. Mona Lisa Saperstein*

        Thanks–you’re right, like I said above, it’s a very small indie company.

        I’m getting really good experience and making a lot of connections, so hopefully I can stick it out for a few more months to get past the year marker, and then find something better. I just wish I could be fairly compensated–I’m afraid to say anything because I was lucky to land this job, and there are SO many great applicants to our company (I know, I get to sift through their resumes) who would be completely willing to do this job for less or free.

        1. AVP*

          Oh, she knows what she’s doing. They all do. Unfortunately the system is built to take advantage of young people and there are so many people willing to do jobs like this for cheap that they get away with it!

    3. BuildMeUp*

      It’s unfortunately pretty normal in the industry when you’re working for indie/smaller filmmakers. Larger productions are usually better, although I think it’s fairly standard for it to be framed as a flat rate for x hours and 1.5x the rate after that.

    4. Not the Droid You are Looking For*

      Unfortunately, this is really standard :(

      I have friends who have horror stories of working for certain production companies that would contract them to do ten movies in twelve months for SyFy and just run everyone on staff ragged.

  28. Sunflower*

    Is it common to take a cross country red-eye home and be expected to come to work the next day? Last job I had to either come in the morning and leave early or I could come in late but still had to go in that day. We weren’t allowed to stay the night and fly home in the morning. (This was OldJob so just wondering)

    1. Nell*

      I travel often for work and even if we get home at 1am, we are just allotted a 2-hour delay to our arrival into the office the next day. I think the expectation to work the next day is common. You are saving the company money on a hotel room for the night but you’re technically “spending” it, too, if you take a whole day off.

    2. Elizabeth West*

      Every job I’ve ever had where people traveled, they would come in, even if it was only for a few hours. If they routinely worked remotely, they logged on. So I would say normal. Red-eye flights are often cheaper and of course there is the extra night in a hotel, so this was probably a cost-saving measure.

    3. AVP*

      I’ve gotten a pass on coming in the next day but typically only when traveling with my boss – if he’s exhausted and doesn’t want to come in then he’ll say I don’t have to either. If he’s not there, I can generally ask for a late start but that’s it.

    5. Kristine*

      I travel often for work, usually every other week. If I get home any time after midnight then I work from home the next day. I have to wake up at 5:15 to get to the office by 8, and NO ONE benefits from me getting only 3 or 4 hours of sleep.

      If possible, I try to schedule my flights so that I arrive home mid-day and then work from the airport/plane in the morning and from home in the afternoon.

    6. Liz*

      I’d probably be expected either in the office (but later that day) or to work from home that day. Expecting a full day’s work after a redeye would be unrealistic, but I wouldn’t at all be surprised by a half-day expectation.

    7. Anonymous Educator*

      I don’t know if it’s common, but I used to have a job like that, and it didn’t make any sense. There was absolutely no reason people working several nights cross-country should have to come into work the next Monday, let alone after a red-eye.

    8. fairyfreak*

      Normal. I used to travel a lot in my old position, and we only got a comp day to catch up on personal business if we were out of the country 2+ weeks.

    9. AnonForThis*

      Normal. Late arrival is also pretty normal, because they want you to get some sleep, but occasionally if there’s stuff you have to do or be at first thing, then you have to be there at normal time.

    10. Doriana Gray*

      I don’t travel often for work, but when I do, if I’m coming back on a weekday, I can take the next day off. I try to schedule my return flights on weekends though so I won’t have to waste a PTO day.

    11. Almond Milk Latte*

      I’ll say this is normal but awful. I used to run into the same problem flying from the West Coast (departing 11pm their time) coming to the East Coast, which after my connection got me home around 8am. Management saw no problem with me working a full day in Seattle, spending an evening at the airport, a night flying, and then having me work the next day. Jerks :(

    12. Jane*

      I worked several international non-profit jobs and they all had 1-2 days off as policy following any international flights. Culturally, few took the time but it was in the manual. In practice is looked like taking some flex time (late arrival, leaving early).

  29. ElCee*

    Large nonprofit, the PTB seem to be attempting reorgs/major changes with varying levels of effort and success. However they are not really letting the information flow downward, that is, to those of us whose jobs would be affected by these ideas. I like it here otherwise and have accrued good benefits (6mos maternity leave) so a new organization would have to be really attractive to entice me to leave. Am I being stupid by rolling the dice and staying, when there is a possibility my job might go *poof*?

    1. Ask a Manager* Post author

      Hmmm, this sounds like it’s less about “is this normal?” and more “what should I do?” — so I’d say it would be better to email it to me directly or save it for a Friday open thread.

      (I do want to keep people on topic here or it will get really unwieldy.)

      1. ElCee*

        Heh, yeah I think it started as an “is this normal” and then my anxiety took over. Sorry!

  30. Nonny*

    I never have anything to do at my job. I have daily and weekly tasks that may take up the first few hours of a day, but unless it’s busy season, I end up just sitting here and pretending to work (read: reading AMA, etc.) for the remaining 4-6 hours. Also, I work through a contract and am no longer really sure who my direct supervisor is since a change in contract. Plus, no one really checks in with me (forget on a regular basis, I mean at all) even though I’m the most junior person in the place. Maybe I got used to regular check-ins at a previous non-pro job, and I’m just being weird, but is that typical? This is also a Super Serious environment (and not for any practical reasons like “this is the court of law and we need to be super serious all the time”; it’s just the culture here) — probably normal for some places, but still makes me sad.

    2. babblemouth*

      Not normal, but also non completely unheard of.
      It’s hard to give specific advice without knowing more about your job, but could you volunteer for some tasks? For instance, if Jane says her life would be so much easier if she had stats on Teapots Production, could you go to her and volunteer to do the research? The key is to not make it sound like you’ve been slacking “Hey Jane, I have some extra time, and I heard you needed some stats. Would you like me to research them for you?”
      It will fill your time, AND make you look like a useful colleague. Even if Jane is not your boss, she’d remember.
      Alternatively, maybe it’s time to start putting your CV out to find a more stimulating job.

      1. Nonny*

        I have asked for more to do, but those requests have been pretty much ignored. I’ve been looking for something new since about three months after I started. But it’s comforting to know I’m not being unreasonable in my expectations. Thank you!

        1. babblemouth*

          Since this will be ongoing then, for your own well-being, try to make goals for yourself in the meantime. Spending time on personal development could be nice. If no one is looking over your shoulder, pick a free online course (take a look at Coursera) and learn about a topic you find interesting but never had time for! It will help tide you over til you find a new job.

          1. Nonny*

            I’m a bit limited on that because online usage is monitored. I’ve done some writing, though, some of which I hope will help reach some professional goals.

            1. Chrissie*

              Can you bring files from home? Coursera lectures etc can often be downloaded. Of course this doesn’t work if all USB slots are blocked for security reasons.
              But I agree, use the time for self-development!

    3. ZSD*

      In my experience, this isn’t terribly unusual for low-level employees, or at least it’s not unusual to have a lot of downtime at certain times of the year. But it stinks! I second what babblemouth suggested about asking others how you can help.

    4. Chicken*

      I’d say that not having (nearly!) enough work to do is normal in some types of positions, mostly lower level positions without much autonomy. It can happen if the company needs you to be available for crunch times or last minute requests, but doesn’t figure out a way to give you background work to do when you don’t have a pressing task. It’s not a good use of company resources in most cases, but I’ve seen it a lot.

    5. justsomeone*

      Somewhat normal. I run out of things to do at work pretty regularly, and I’m an FTE. Since you’re on a contract, reach out to your agency’s contact and ask them who your on-site supervisor is. Ask that person if they have more work you can do and for semi regular check ins.

    6. twenty points for the copier*

      This was really typical for me early in my career. I am a very efficient worker, which exacerbates it, but a lot of my first couple of positions involved doing reactive work – I didn’t have much that I was able to take the lead on on an ongoing basis, so it was more responding to requests from clients or supervisors. I think in some situations, I could have done a little more to be proactive and really try to position myself to others around the department who were swamped and may have needed help. But ultimately in some positions, there’s just not that much to do.

      It definitely made me sad as well! I know it could have been much worse – getting worked hours and hours of overtime without pay, being in a toxic environment, etc, but feeling like nobody noticed me and each day was a new challenge in finding stuff to fill the time does become very frustrating.

    7. LawPancake*

      It took me about 2 years at my position (full-time not contract) to get enough work to regularly fill up my day. That’s just kind of how the work flow in this department goes, when I started I was given 5 or 6 long term-projects to work on but those only took a couple hours a week (if that) but now, as additional project come up, I’ve got 30-40 different areas or projects to handle. The first year or so was brutally boring though and I’m still trying to unlearn all the bad work habits I picked up trying to kill time.

      If you have essentially the same tasks, have been there for awhile, and don’t enjoy that pace I’d start floating your resume elsewhere.

    8. Ife*

      Hey, me too! My actual work takes only a few hours per day, and I have been spending the rest of the time trying to look busy. Asked for projects, and was basically told, “chill out.” It has been over a year, and it’s getting a little better. I actually have a project or two, so I am idle about 50%-60% now, instead of 80%-100%. Some glorious days, I’m actually busy all day!

      It pains me, because I’m really not wired this way, and I have a real problem with saying that you need my butt-in-seat for 8 hours, when you only give me about 3 hours of work to do.

  31. Ihmmy*

    Ok, my job is mostly awesome, but I have a question about this – I’m unionized, so apparently that means we cannot negotiate for merit raises ourselves, we only get whatever the union negotiates for our annual change. We don’t have annual reviews either, though I meet about once a month with my manager (and discuss other issues along the way as they arise). Does this seem relatively normal? Canadian union if that makes a difference.

    1. LQ*

      I’m union (US) and I can’t negotiate merit raises either. But I do get annual reviews, and I have got promotions that came with raises. I think trying to make a case for a promotion might be the way to go. (No reviews seems very strange to me, is that an HR policy? Union policy?)

    2. CV*

      Very very normal for a Canadian unionized environment. The trade off is that your union rep is supposed to go to bat for you with management in case of problems, and the pay and benefits negotiated in the CBA are usually better than what is found in non-unionized employers.

    3. Ama*

      I don’t think it’s unheard of for unionized positions, but when I was in a unionized clerical position I saw a lot of managers get super conservative when it came to anything that might cause an issue with the union, so if it’s your manager telling you this, double check with your union rep to make sure she’s not misinterpreting the CBA.

    4. Jake*

      100% normal in a US union. In fact any other way would likely be a violation of any union CBA I’ve ever dealt with.

    6. jhhj*

      So normal. The union where I work negotiates every 5 years and then that’s what you get.

    7. Not So NewReader*

      Right no merit raises, just the standard raise that everyone gets. Reviews are more or less a formality and not much else. (Old job was unionized, located in US.)

    8. Mike C.*

      I work in a heavily unionized environment, and the unionized folks do have merit raises but that’s because it was made part of the bargaining agreement. Essentially it’s a formula combining a flat percentage, an additional amount based on company performance and a final amount based on managerial rating. Suffice it to say, it’s a good deal higher than for those of us who aren’t part of the bargaining unit. Like lots of things, it all depends on the contract and the creativity/practicality of those sitting at the negotiating table.

      First, understand that merit raises are historically a very, very tricky thing to deal with. A classic way to bust a union was for management to blatantly play favorites (remember the saboteur manual?) by handing out raises and bonuses to certain individuals to convinced them to break away and eventually decertify the union. Once that happened, all those bonuses and raises were gone.

      Look, if this is something that you feel strongly about, get involved with your union! Go to meetings, become a steward, make your case, that sort of thing. A union is nothing more than it’s members acting collectively after all.

  32. Kai*

    I work in academic administration and saw a job posting at another local university. Didn’t apply for it because as part of the online application process, you had to submit your official transcripts (yes, official!). I’ve never encountered this, certainly not at my current job. Is this a common thing for universities to ask for? It was a public institution, if it makes a difference.

    1. ZSD*

      I used to work for a public university. No, I don’t think this is common. If the position was combo administration and academic, such as a dean position, then *maybe*, but I still don’t think it’s common.

      1. Kai*

        Yeah, if I recall correctly it was for a mid-level writing/editing job, so it seemed pretty extreme to me. Thanks!

    2. AnonAcademic*

      I had to provide proof of my degree for my research job that’s supported by a federal fellowship. Since the degree is a requirement, transcripts are one way to provide proof. In my case they accepted a letter from the graduate school and the registrar instead. I wonder if in your case, the school has been burned by staff who overstated credentials?

    3. Newbie*

      There are two different colleges in the city I’m in (U.S.) and neither one requires a transcript during the application process. The transcript may be required later in the process for confirmation of degree completion, but not from every single applicant. This seems odd to me.

    4. fizzchick*

      I’m on the professor side of things, where requesting transcripts is totally normal. One thing that’s common to a lot of places is that their online systems are set up with one default format, which is not changed for different jobs. So because they need transcripts from the adjunct professors (many places require at least X graduate credits in the field to teach a class), they just have that in there for everyone. It goes the other way, too: because they request a complete job history from everyone, I have to spend ages typing in all the info that’s already on my long-form CV. tl;dr: academia is weird. FYI, if you have a copy of your transcript, they will often accept a high quality scanned pdf for the online application, and may or may not need official printed ones later.

    5. Lia*

      Yes, this is normal if it is a unionized public. All of the ones partner or I have worked for have minimum degree requirements for staff/faculty, and verification via transcripts was required. This is in 4 different states, FWIW.

    6. Pwyll*

      The thing that boggles my mind about this is that official transcript usually means it’s in a sealed envelope with a stamp/seal/signature over it. For you to open it and scan it into the system, it would automatically become unofficial, would it not? In any position that has required official transcripts, I’ve needed to pay to have them sent in directly by the university, and that only happened after I’d accepted the job offer (also needed to prove my licenses as well).

      1. fizzchick*

        For many places, that used to be true, but they’ve gone to accepting scanned copies. Many schools will also now send a digital version directly if requested, which is faster and sometimes cheaper. My “favorite” experience was a job I applied for a few years ago where I’d sent the scanned version but they insisted I needed to bring a sealed version to finalize hiring paperwork. So I brought it, the HR person opened the seal, made a note on her worksheet, and offered me back the envelope and transcript. Gee, thanks. She didn’t even make a photocopy/scan for their records, just ruined that copy for future use.

        1. Midge*

          I had something similar happen with a digital transcript. I was very excited to see that the department where I was applying to be a non-degree student (to take advantage of my employer’s tuition assistance program) accepted official copies of your digital transcript. So I requested the transcript be emailed to me, saved it for future use, and uploaded it to my application. Everything was fine the first semester. But when I went to sign up for a second semester there was a hold on my application because they hadn’t received my official transcript. Finally they told me that it’s only considered official if the school sends it directly to them. So I had to re-request it, and pay for it a second time.

  33. Beth*

    Recently switched over to the PR field working at a ~40-person agency. On the first day, they had me sign a non-disclosure agreement as well as a non-compete. A non-disclosure agreement seems normal, but what about the non-compete? From my memory (didn’t receive a copy for my records), the non-compete bars me from working in any sales, marketing, or communications/PR role within the U.S. for one year after the end of my employment with them. Is this normal for agencies to require? Should this have been a red flag?

    I have a feeling that this agency deals with a lot of turnover, so I’m wondering if the non-compete is related… Then again, I’m new to PR. I’ve tried to research where former employees have gone and it seems either 1) it’s fine to go against the non-compete specifications as long as you’re not actually in direct competition with the agency and clients it represents, or 2) the non-compete got put into place after those employees left. I’m happy with my job, but might see myself moving cities (still in the U.S.) in the next 1-2 years and want to know if I’d have to wait for the non-compete to expire.

    1. Dawn*

      Non-competes are pretty common in most industries, however, in the research that I and my partner have done on them in the past they are notoriously hard to enforce and almost always are judged in favor of the employee.

      IANAL, and I don’t know what state you’re in, but I’m willing to bet that based on what you’ve said here your non-compete is way too broad and would not be enforceable in court. Also, GET A COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS, like right now- a truly shady operation could easily change the non-compete while it’s out of your sight then pull it back up with your signature after you leave and use it as leverage against you.

      2. Busy*

        Going with normal on this one, but I’m with Dawn … and I am a lawyer, but this is of course isn’t legal advice because I am not YOUR lawyer, but my initial thought when I read your comment was “holy broad, Batman!”. Get thee to a lawyer; this might not even be enforceable.

    2. Ad Astra*

      That is a pretty broad noncompete. It would be more common to have you sign a noncompete saying you can’t work for a competitor or former client in the same capacity that you’re working for your current company now. IANAL, but your noncompete is probably way too broad to be enforceable — because how would a PR professional be able to make a living if they’re barred from the entire industry for a year? My guess is that people who’ve left the agency for other agencies have violated the noncompete, knowing it’s unenforceable.

      1. ElCee*

        Yeah. I read some horror stories about companies going after employees anyway, but at a smaller outfit I don’t know they’d even have the resources to do that. Still, I would recommend becoming more familiar with the NCA itself.

        1. Ad Astra*

          Yes, and it’s possible that other firms won’t want to hire someone who’s under a noncompete — even an unenforceable one — because they don’t want to deal with the hassle. Even confirming that it is, indeed, unenforceable would mean involving lawyers to so some extent. But the fact that people from Beth’s firm have moved on to competitors makes me think it may not be a huge deal in that market.

          I would definitely recommend having a lawyer look it over when you can, and definitely make sure you’re covered before you decide to resign or accept another position.

    3. Quirk*

      Check your local laws, but in the UK these conditions are both a) common in job contracts and b) more or less flat illegal/unenforceable where they are seen to operate as a restraint of trade – i.e. they’re forbidding people from continuing to be employed in the trade they’re currently working in, which is seen as a social ill. In the US I gather it varies state by state.

      The breadth of the clause sounds like it would be struck down in most places.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_clause#United_States

    4. ElCee*

      IANAL but recently dealt with this–I got a job offer (and verbally accepted) before seeing in the written offer that they required a noncompete. I declined.
      The gist I got from everything I read was this: noncompetes aren’t great but they are becoming more common. If you are in California they are not enforceable. On the other hand, if the agreement is as you state, it’s EXTREMELY broad and therefore will be difficult for them to “win.” (The entire U.S.? Really?) Most noncompetes that have been successfully challenged in court have been ones that are overly broad on the basis that a company cannot prevent you from making a living. On the other, other hand, if they do attempt to sue you, you might have to spend some money defending yourself. On the other, other, other hand, who knows whether it’s something they even have any intention of enforcing.
      Again IANAL but I think NCAs in general should be talked about more. I’d get a copy of your NCA and have a lawyer take a peek.

    5. No Longer Just a Lurker*

      Its normal to sign a NDA and in many places a non-compete but the scope of the one you signed seems a bit wide and I doubt they could uphold it in court. In general non-complete agreements have to be very specific to a region, specific role, and industry. For example The Office – Michael Scott opened the Michael Scott paper company in the same town and targeted the same customers. That would be a sufficient reason to sue had he signed a non-compete because the scope of his company as well as the region put him in direct competition with his former employer. Another example would be if someone left a medical practice to open their own but the non-compete indicated he/she couldn’t open a practice within 50 miles of the current office. I can’t see them being able to enforce that unless you opened your own practice (or joined one) that was a direct competitor for all of your current accounts where you might have built up a relationship with a customer that could influence them to move with you.

      1. Enginerd*

        Get a copy and check the dates. Every non-compete I’ve ever signed was only valid for X years after I signed it and usually only valid for certain competitors under certain circumstances. Usually something along the lines of for the next 5 years from signing this agreement if you leave our teapot manufacturing you cannot go to company Z and make teapots. You can go to company Z and make lawn mowers but no teapots. As a side note I’ve never seen them enforced unless you worked on something that was deemed critical information, like the recipe for coca-cola or something along those lines.

    6. Sunflower*

      Agree with everyone else. Normal to sign non-competes that specify specific places you can’t go but this is way too broad so legally wise it’s probably not enforceable. It’s so broad that I’m guessing they are using it for a scare tactic in which case I’d say it’s a red flag. They basically are saying ‘sign this and then you can’t ever leave here’. It could be a sign of other bad things going on or it could mean nothing.

      We had a joke non-compete at my old company. It was put into place after one of the employees left, literally went down the street and started his own, same exact business. I forget what exactly mine said but I was slightly nervous when I left. I think they would only go after people who did this or went to work for him. Also IDK what level you are in your career but if you’re newer, it might not be worth the $$ it would cost to go after you anyway.

      Also ask for a copy NOW. And in the future, don’t sign anything without getting a copy yourself.

    7. Recovering ED*

      Non-competes are common in the startup tech world, in my experience. Not necessarily enforceable, however.

    8. PeachTea*

      I can’t even come close to seeing how this is legal. The 1 year limit is fine, the entire United States is way too broad. Non-competes cannot “prevent you from making a living.” Ruling out your entire country is most definitely preventing you from making a living.

  34. Laika*

    How often do organizations typically overhaul their employee hierarchy/business structure? I’ve worked in a medium-sized non-profit for about eight years now ( I went from part time retail to receptionist to current coordinator) and I’ve seen three full-scale organizational restructurings – from shifting the executive director’s position relative to our board of directors to closing/opening/rebranding our services to a series of lay-offs(/unhappy staff quitting?) that resulted in a pretty dramatic shift in almost everyone’s roles to make up for the difference. It’s all been done in the name of appeasing our customer base, but since our customers are a huge and varied group (hi, post-secondary students!) there’s never going to be a one-sized-fits-all answer.

    Do many businesses follow this model of constantly tearing down and building back up based on client feedback? It’s frankly awful and has actually created a lot of tension and us vs. them mentality between the client-facing staff and their respective directors but since this is actually the only organization I’ve worked for I have no basis for comparison. Thankfully my current position doesn’t seem to be at risk but rumour has it that staff turnover has increased dramatically in the last five years and there’s a lot of muttering about how the company’s grown far too fast recently without any clear vision.

    1. Okay then*

      My large corportation went through a reorg in 2015, and apparently there was a previous one in 2009 (a nicer way of saying ‘layoffs’) and then another one in 2004.

    2. The Alias Gloria Has Been Living Under, A.A., B.S.*

      I’ve been with my company about 5 years and we’ve had at least 3 major reorgs. Seems the only thing that really changes is management.

      1. Laika*

        Ugh! That’s the only thing that stays the same for us – every director in the company has been here for 15+ years and will be here until they retire, and there’s a weird void of managers so it’s just upper-level directors and their teams of minions/coordinators. They just expect the lower-level staff to step up and handle most of the change planning (under the guise of brainstorming) and don’t offer any support when it comes to dealing with practical and client-facing aspects of restructuring… then act shocked when things flop??

        Regardless, thanks for affirming that it’s normal, since that means I should be working on my resilience rather than just languishing in “it could be different”s.

    3. FJ*

      I work at a large Fortune 500 manufacturer, on the corporate side (not at the plants). I’ve been here for 8 years out of college, and there has been re-organizations of various types every 1.5 – 2 years. Sometimes it is the process that changes, and sometimes it is the people doing the work that changes, and sometimes a combination.

    4. F.*

      It’s known some places as “rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.” Lost my job twice in those so-called reorganizations.

    5. KH*

      I work for one of your standard Three Initial Organizations – a Fortune 50 company. I’ve been with the current organizational group in that company for about 3.5 years and we’ve had (counting on fingers) 2 major re-orgs (restructuring from the Sr. VP level down) and 3 minor ones (shifts in teams under various directors all reporting to the same VP) in that time.

      So from my perspective, it’s business as usual. I expect there will be another minor one before the end of 2016.

    6. Ros*

      Ours was constantly talking about it in the 5 years I was there but I never actually saw any change, except good workers leaving who were tired of waiting to see change or improvements and got a better deal somewhere else.

      Lots of title changes with increasing responsibilities and no increases or raises of any kind.

    7. MaryMary*

      In my experience it’s fairly common. OldJob regularly reorganized itself every three to five years. I was there for ten years and watched it happen, and we had some employees who’d been there for 20-30 years and had been through dozens of reorgs (including several “let’s go back to what we were doing five years ago”).

      CurrentJob did a big reorg just before I joined, and smaller changes (let’s create these new roles in department X, let’s add a new layer of management here) every year or so since (I’ve been here three years).

    8. AnonForThis*

      About every 5-7 years we do a big re-org, and every 2-3 there’s a smaller shift. And we’re government, which means we’re probably twice as slow as industry at it. In our case, it’s also to attempt to please a customer base that is too widely varied for a one-size-fits-all answer, so every few years we just trade the problems and devils we know for a new set.

    9. Doriana Gray*

      Never worked in non-profits, but at the law firm I used to work at, they reorged at least three times a year during the nearly three years I worked there (I was even laid off at one point, and then brought back six weeks later). Hundreds of people lost their jobs, they’d bring in temps who would inevitably quit or be fired after a few months, and the madness carried on (and still does, and I’ve been gone from that place a little over two years now).

    10. BusSys*

      It depends on the company culture (change-ho vs change-resistant), their status in the industry(cutting edge, or perhaps needing an edge on competitors? ), and economic performance (eg needing to shrink or expand staff, move into/out of markets, etc). And sometimes there’s just turnover at the top that causes reorg to make sense.

      Your frequency of experience doesn’t ring alarms or as unusual to me, I’ve seen a lot of change in places I’ve worked (for all the tyes of possible reasons I gave).

    11. nerfmobile*

      When I joined my current company (a pretty large international operation), my manager outlined some organizational structures on a whiteboard for me (I had to work across a couple of organizational boundaries so I needed to understand some details), and then said, “that’s the org structure, and if you don’t like it, it will change.” There had been a major reorg of the entire company about a year prior. A year after I joined, there was a divisional reorg that did shift our positions, and there have been several smaller ones in various groups since then. And, we’ve just completed a very major reorg. So, six years between total shake-ups seems about right, with ongoing minor upheavals.

  35. Nell*

    Is this a bonus?

    Salary negotiations happen at the start of every year and included in our salary breakdown is our “bonus” for the upcoming year. My bonus has always been a specific percentage of my income although my performance has improved (generated more sales, increased revenue). When asked, manager says that bonuses are not tied to performance. Then it’s not a bonus, is it? Although we are taxed on it like a bonus when it really seems like they’re just withholding income until a later part of the year. Also, what incentive do employees have to improve performance if bonus is not tied to it? Seems like bonus is tied more to tenure, as we generally make MARGINALLY more each year.

    1. Okay then*

      Same thing happens to me. But on top of that, we can’t get higher than a 3 as a corporate policy (scale of 1-5, 5 being good) within our first year in a new position at the company. So getting a promotion means you’re not rewarded in a bonus, it means your bonus is limited. And, rarely do people ever get higher than a 3, apparently.

    2. LQ*

      Bonuses can be lots of things. This sounds like it might be something that is tied to your company’s success. So if your company has a bad year then no one gets a bonus. Bonuses don’t have to be tied to performance at all.

      1. Nell*

        It is tied to my company’s success, but even when we have a banner year (we were told this past year that “it was a great year” for our company over and over again which was also in part to the number of tea pots I sold) bonuses do not change. They remain a consistent percentage of income.

        Instead, there is often a raffle of smaller gifts that anyone is eligible to win- no matter how many teapots have been sold.

        1. LQ*

          This doesn’t really surprise me. I’ve seen other people get bonuses (nonprofit and government work doesn’t lead to lots of bonuses) and this structure isn’t out of line with what they’ve had. I’d guess if you had a really horrible year they’d not have bonuses at all.

          Some industries and some companies do tie it directly to performance, but your company doesn’t. If you want an industry check you might have to be more specific about what your industry is. (And if you are in sales specifically that will be a bit different as well.)

          Also? Lots of people strive to perform well even if they don’t get bonuses, so I don’t think you need a bonus to have incentive to do a good job, promotions, wanting to do a good job, wanting to help people, whatever. People have lots of incentives to work hard.

    3. KH*

      I think it’s fairly standard. Your bonus isn’t directly tied to your performance, but if your bonus is a percentage of your salary, then as your salary increases, your bonus will increase. So from that perspective it is kind of performance based.

      My company does a base bonus rate and then you can “earn” up to 6% more based on your performance (no one ever gets the full 6%). But even if you tank your performance review, you still get the base bonus.

    4. Sibley*

      Also, about taxation. Bonuses are taxed as ordinary income. So, it’s not a higher tax rate. However, it feels like it because of how the payroll systems (all of them as far as I know) handle it. My understanding is: Taxes are withheld assuming that what you’re getting is what you normally get paid, even though it’s just the bonus – the system annualized it and isn’t smart enough to tell the difference. That typically kicks up the withholding rate, so it often withholds 25% of the bonus, instead of whatever percentage is used for your regular paychecks.

      When you file your tax return, totals are used for income, deductions, etc and everything is trued up.

  36. Okay then*

    Two things:
    People in my corporation use the term ‘Brain Damage’ – like they’re giving me ‘brain damage’ or we’re going to get ‘brain damage’ over this. I find it a little insulting given that I have a seriously handicapped relative as a result of traumatic brain damage… but I’m not rocking the boat I just don’t use the term myself… Do other corporations use this? Is it another corporate ‘jargon’ thing now?
    Secondly, the fact that we’re constantly getting this said ‘brain damage’ from corporate. I work in a satellite region of an international corporation and it’s like everything is just shoved down our throats. Everything is a fire drill, everything is always wrong, etc. I could go into the exact cultural difference and you’d totally get it as it’s a stereotype of the country the company is based in, but then you’d know where I work so….

    1. Nother Name*

      I’ve never heard the term used this way, but I also find it offensive. With everything in the news about the effects of concussion, etc., I would think that this would seem especially offensive right now. Although I understand if you aren’t comfortable, I do think this is a case where some gentle pushback might have good results, just explaining why the term is offensive and should probably be avoided.

      (My guess is that these are the type of people who used to use the term “retarded” in this way until it was pointed out that this is horribly offensive.)

    2. LQ*

      “Brain damage” is -hopefully!- not coming into corporate jargon. It isn’t something I’ve heard anywhere. I really hope it doesn’t catch on. (I have someone in my family too who has severe traumatic brain damage and getting that pile of emotions evoked every time someone was talking about something stressful at work would be exhausting.)

    3. Marketeer*

      People say it at my company all the time. I never heard anyone say it before I worked here. My office is the Northeast US, so it’s possible it could be the area.

      1. Okay Then*

        Our headquarters is in the northeast as well. To others’ comments – it’s such a pervasive term used at the company that ‘gentle pushback’ from me wouldn’t make the slightest dent in its usage…

    4. Tom*

      I wouldn’t think twice about hearing the phrase “brain damage” or using it myself. This is the first time I’ve even considered that it would be offensive to someone. It’s not the most common phrase in my experience; I could imagine it’s been over a year since I last heard it. But I would assume most people using it aren’t thinking about its literal meaning or the sensitivity of others, similar to how many people would have used the words “retarded” or “gay” not that long ago.

      1. fposte*

        I would argue that it’s different, though. It’s not a slur on any group of people; it’s using a literal health problem for metaphorical effect, just like “You gave me a heart attack!” And I would therefore argue it isn’t, at least in the same way, offensive, any more than it’s offensive to say “putting out fires” metaphorically when people tragically die in fires. I think it’s fine to ask somebody to avoid the term if it’s making you uncomfortable, but I don’t think metaphors are inherently offensive if they’re used for lighter situations than their real-life equivalents.

        1. Triangle Pose*

          Agreed! I wasn’t able to put my finger on why it reads differently to me than “retarded” or “cripple” and you’ve hit the bullseye!

          (I almost said “you hit the nail on the head” but given that this post is all about brain damage I decided against it.)

          1. fposte*

            It makes me think of comedian Dara O Briain talking about how an editor changed a phrase in a newspaper column he wrote–he had written that something “spread like swine flu” and they changed it to “spread like wildfire.” They explained it was because flu was something people actually died of, and he pointed out that the same was true of wildfires.

        3. Tomato Frog*

          It’s not really the same, though. Brain damage affects how a person behaves and who a person is, which is different from referring to something which might have bad associations for a listener but isn’t about someone’s identity or how they present themselves. When you refer lightly to heart attacks, you’re making light of a thing that happens to people. Making light of brain damage makes light of a person.

          1. fposte*

            I can’t agree. Calling somebody “brain damaged” deprecatingly could be construed as making light of an actual person, but that’s not what the people described are doing. They are using the physical injury of brain damage metaphorically.

            (You think a heart attack doesn’t affect how a person behaves and who they are?)

            1. Nother Name*

              I think the difference is that for me “brain damage” connotes a disability. Anyone can have a heart attack and it might or might not affect them physically long-term. However, once someone has brain damage, that is a part of them. That makes it fall (to me) within the realm of rude terms for people with physical and mental disabilities.

              Also, as adults we should just really have better vocabularies…

              1. fposte*

                I still think a term for an injury is very different than using a term for a person, but I think there seem to be two different and unswayable camps on this–which may be illustrative for Okay then right there.

              2. Tomato Frog*

                Yes, agreed.

                The difference was borne on me recently when I heard a story about a woman who had brain damage, and realized my first thought on hearing the term “brain damage” was to take it as a joke about her. I’ve never reacted that way to hearing that someone had a heart attack, no matter how lightly people may use it.

        4. Not So NewReader*

          One thing that struck me was how we use these extreme metaphors without realizing how extreme they are.
          Shortly after my father had his heart attack and triple bypass, Olivia Newton John (?) came out with a song “you’re giving me a heart attack”. I hated, hated that song. I thought, “Sweetie, you have no idea what it is like to be a solid grey color from head to toe and covered by a canopy of tubes and wires over your bed in order to stay alive.”

          And I go back to something I learned in a class some where: Be careful of your use of metaphors.1) If you cannot communicate without using metaphors, then you need to learn. 2) Metaphors in the extreme distract from your main thought that you are trying to communicate. It makes people think you have dire situation going on, when you may or may not. Or like us here, we stop an analyze your metaphor and ignore the rest of the message. 3) Not everything is a five alarm fire. Don’t use metaphors to unnecessarily raise problems to higher levels. Remember the little boy who cried wolf. You put everything on a par with a five alarm fire, your own credibility could go down the drain.

          Going back to the original OP’s example, I can see these three things apply. They are overusing, over-relying on the expression brain damage. They do not have other ways to convey urgency/wrongness/whatever. And people are fatigued, because every annoying thing that comes along some how has brain damaged associated with it. (Tired people use the same worn out expressions over and over.) Finally, because everything is so dramatic, nothing is credible which in turn triggers more higher drama in order to get numbed people to respond.

          After my father’s illness I became more aware how I was using heart attack as an expression. I very seldom use it now. I almost never use “brain damaged” unless I am explaining how someone was hit on the head. Somehow I associate these expressions with my teenage years, once I saw what this stuff actually was the expressions fell by the wayside.
          Nutshell: Adults realize these are serious situations and nothing to be taken lightly, just my opinion. I see a heavy reliance on such expressions and I start to wonder how much life experience the speaker has actually had.

    5. Fabulous*

      They might not be aware it’s an offensive term. I once had a co-worker who passed away from an aneurysm. I didn’t realize how much I joked about “this is going to give me an aneurysm” until she was gone. I’ve become more aware that the things I say and joke about may have adverse effects. You might consider saying something aboutthe use of the term to your manager or something who can pass it along…

        1. KH*

          Yeah, I think there becomes a time when you can take this entirely too far and no one is allowed to say anything figuratively because it might be “offensive” or “hurtful”.

          If someone says “oh just shoot me now!” out of frustration are we going to say they can’t say that because Jane in the other office had a family member who committed suicide?

          If someone says to me “you nearly gave me a heart attack” do I get to chastise them for being thoughtless because my mother died of a heart attack?

          If someone says “I think we need to light a fire under her to get that project started now” can Wakeen say “My uncle died in a fire and you’re being insensitive”?

          At some point this whole “offensensitivity” thing (with apologies to Opus) needs to stop.

          1. fposte*

            I’m actually pretty keen on avoiding slurs, so I don’t have a big problem with sensitivity. But I think that language is always going to use real things as metaphors, and many of those real things are bad, because we want to describe bad things that happened to us. I think because we like categories and rules there’s a bit of an attempt to say that therefore all such metaphors are inherently offensive, and I don’t think there’s a rule that gets us off the taste, judgment, and culture hook here–some of them are and some of them aren’t.

            1. fposte*

              P.S. to Fabulous–I meant my question sincerely, because there could well be stuff going on that I’ve missed. I hope you don’t think it was meant snarkily.

    6. Tyrannosaurus Regina*

      I’ve worked a lot of different jobs at a number of different organizations over the last ten years, and I’ve never heard the term “brain damage” used this way. I also find it distasteful and offensive.

  37. mortorph*

    I am a department assistant with independent tasks and priorities, but supervisor treats me as if I am her administrative assistant. Essentially, passes off the stuff she doesn’t want to do directly. Flip side, she continually asks me for advice on senior-level projects (strategy, planning new programs, etc…) that are not directly related to my job.

    1. Okay Then*

      Super common. My second job was department assistant. I had a lot of admin type responsibilities for the department, but also did a lot of higher level stuff (owned some large print productions we did, owned our CRM system). First manager left dept, new manager came in externally and realized that my value was more than I was being recognized for given what I did and promoted me. But, if she hadn’t ever come in from an external aspect I’m not sure it would have changed in the same time frame.
      Make your case! If you’re doing more say you should have it reflected in your title.

    2. Sunflower*

      I’d say normal. So we have a dept assistant and she technically supports the whole dept but she directly supports the Chief and Director. So she manages their calendars, schedules travel, does expenses, etc. and assists anyone else in the dept with tasks they need help on. I don’t know how your org works but we have managers who each have their own coordinators. Usually coordinators will do stuff like data entry or research but if the manager and coordinators are busy, then the assistant will do it. So I’d say it’s normal unless she’s asking you to do her expenses.

    3. Not So NewReader*

      Ordinary stuff. I am my boss’ only employee. We frequently discuss her work and she frequently asks me to throw a few thoughts at her. It’s a compliment. People don’t ask employees they feel have nothing to offer. And it’s human nature, it’s tough to stay inside our heads and stuck with our own thinking. It’s also a good habit to seek advice of people we respect.

  38. Great Topic!*

    I am so very happy about this topic and have a handful of questions (thank you to everyone ahead of time).

    I work in an exempt direct service position at a non profit.

    1) Frequently, I drive clients. I submitted my drivers license and insurance to my employer upon hire (I am from out of state). Is it common for an HR Department (whose had your information on file since your hire date and completed all of your onboarding) to declare your license invalid 5 months after you were hired and say instate license or fired?

    2) Is it common for organizations who are doing budget-related layoffs to offer everyone else (but you, the most recently hired employee) a post restructure position? And afterwards, tell you that whether or not you’ll be layed-off depends upon if other people accept their position offers?

    3) If you called into work to take a day off due to extreme weather circumstances (which would have been the only full day of PTO you’ve taken in almost half a year), gained approval from your supervisor, and arranged to complete your work from home; is it common for your supervisor to call you two hours later and require you to come in to work because “other people are arriving?”

    4) What does the turnover rate look like in most direct service positions? I’ve lost three coworkers (including a supervisor) in three months and have had four supervisors total in five months. (Can you say “baptism by fire without feedback?)

    1. LizB*

      1. Do you still live in the state your license is from and commute to another state, or do you now live in a new state? Some states require you to switch your license to their state once you become a resident/register a car there; your HR department may just have taken another look and realized you need to switch it, and that there could be problems with liability or legality if you get into an accident and don’t have the right license.

      I can’t speak to 2 or 3.

      4. Pretty high, in my experience. Four supervisors in five months seems REALLY high, though. In my experience it’s more common for front-line, entry-level staff to have lots of turnover (since some of them discover they’re not a good fit for the work), and supervisors stick around for longer (since they’ve likely been in the field longer and know what they’re getting into).

      1. Okay Then*

        1. Yes It’s normal to need an in state license. You need it for your insurance to be valid! Your license must be from the same state your car is registered/insurance is from.

        1. Sunflower*

          But what if you live and work in diff states? It’s really common in PA/NJ/DE/NY/CT

      2. The IT Manager*

        Yes. I was in the military and maintained residence in another state and had that state driver’s license. Once I got out of the military I had a couple of months to get an instate license. Then I moved and had 30 days to get a license in my new state. You need a license from your state of legal residence which is where you live unless you maintain residency another way.

    2. Dawn*

      1- your HR department is really not on the ball, as you should NEVER have been allowed to even be hired for your position unless you had a valid-to-them liscense.

      2- not a way to win goodwill but makes sense, since you’re the newest person and presumably the most expendable.

      3- this is Asshat Boss behavior. Not normal *at all*, especially since you can complete your work from home. Also, I don’t know where you live but where I live there’s streets that get plowed immediately and streets that get plowed three days after the initial snowstorm, and that has ZERO to do with me personally, it’s just how the snowplow routes are.

      4- can’t speak to direct service in nonprofits, but that seems like *seriously* abnormal churn.

    3. Chinook*

      ” Is it common for an HR Department (whose had your information on file since your hire date and completed all of your onboarding) to declare your license invalid 5 months after you were hired and say instate license or fired?”

      I don’t know about US driver’s licences, but in Canada there is a limited time where you are suppose to transfer your license and registration to your current province of residence. Some people play the system and just wait until it needs to be renewed (I think they don’t realize that you can get a refund on the unused portion of the registration – I often got $20-$0 dollars back when I mailed my license plate back to the originating province halfway through the year) but I could see a company getting nitpicky about it because you are technically not locally licensed.

      That being said, if you live in one province and work in another, it is a case of tough noogies for your employer, especially since you can only apply for these types of things based on where you primary residence is.

      1. AVP*

        I think this might be a state law in the US. For New York State you’re supposed to do it within 30 days of moving.

      2. Talvi*

        IIRC, it’s three months in Canada, unless you’ve got special circumstances such as being a full-time out-of-province student – then you can keep your home province driver’s license provided it remains your province of permanent residence and you intend to return to your home province upon completing your studies.

    4. Terra*

      1) It’s not uncommon for positions that require driving to also require an in state license (since legally if you live in the state for more than so many months of the year you’re required to get one anyway) but they should have warned you in advance that you would need to produce an in state driver’s license by [date].

      2) It’s not great to put it that way but it can be common. Budget layoffs are all money based so it often involves having “tiers” of employees. The first tier gets offered jobs first, then the second tier, and so on.

      3) Some managers are more likely to do this than others but it’s bad management to agree to something and then change their mind without good reason and consideration to how it will affect the employee.

      4) Turnover varies widely by industry but at most “professional” level jobs 20% or higher should raise some concerns.

    5. TCO*

      4) In my observation, direct service positions experience a MUCH higher rate of turnover than many other fields, so I wouldn’t try to make comparisons. Direct service jobs are often stressful and hard, with tough schedules, low resources (training, benefits, etc.) and low pay. It’s sad that the turnover is so high because it really hurts clients. While your experience does sound a little more extreme than the norm, it’s not that far off from what I’ve seen. There are definitely agencies with better leadership, better pay, and lower turnover but they are not the majority.

    6. KH*

      1 – Yes. The law in almost every state requires that you get a local license with a correct address within 30 days. You can get a ticket for not doing so. If you are on a commercial insurance policy, they can refuse to insure you if you are in violation of state law. If your company can’t get insurance on you and part of your job is to drive clients around, then yes, they absolutely can fire you for it.

      2 – Yes. You’re lucky that they didn’t simply go with the “last in first out” method instead – a lot of companies do that. It sounds to me like they’re trying to keep you employed as best they can by figuring out who is taking restructuring, who is taking an early retirement payoff, and then figuring out what they have left after that.

      3 – It’s kind of jerky, but not unheard of.

      Can’t speak to 4 at all.

  39. T3k*

    This happened late last summer, but it’s been irking me if I was right in thinking this wasn’t normal, or is actually normal (too much goes on around here to be normal in job settings, so now I just classify everything not-normal).

    So, I do design work, but being a small company (at the time it had 5 employees including the owner) it also means I have to do extra stuff, including printing these sheets of film that have to be set at certain widths to fit on the products they’re going on. There was no standard sizing chart for me, so I basically had to guess each time. It finally came to a head after the third time I used the wrong size because I hadn’t been informed what it was going on, so the owner came into my little office along with the coworker who the film goes to to discuss a chart size and another coworker that mainly helps with customers but also helps out everywhere, including helping the previously mentioned coworker. This is where I’m not sure if this was right or not: the owner, seeing that every other worker was there now, then decided to call in the last employee that wasn’t in my now very cramped office to have a meeting over film sizes. The last coworker doesn’t handle film or any of the design work as she was hired only to assist in helping customers, take orders, and set up the displays in the front of the store. So is this normal, to pull employees into a meeting over something that they have no hands on and doesn’t affect their job?

    1. Dawn*

      “So is this normal, to pull employees into a meeting over something that they have no hands on and doesn’t affect their job?”

      If I had a dollar for every time that has happened to me I could retire and would never have to work again, and I’m pretty sure 99% of the people on this site would tell you the same thing! Some managers just looooove to pull anyone and everyone who might even tangentially be related to anything into a meeting.

      1. AnonAnalyst*

        Seconding this. I find this is particularly true in super small companies or departments. I’ve actually been in these meetings where almost everyone from the company is there because they are impacted directly by whatever is being discussed, and people realize that only one person isn’t included and calls them in “since everyone else is already here.”

        1. TootsNYC*

          And it can be useful, because often in small companies, people assist eventually even if it’s not actually their job. Or, it’s good to let them see what others are doing.

          1. AVP*

            Agreed! Especially because they often turn into an “all hands” meeting where something that does affect that last worker is discussed. Like, “okay since we’re all here, I meant to ask you guys, what do you think of the new health insurance? Is it working or no?”

      2. T3k*

        Ah dang, now I have a lifelong future to look forward to of meetings I don’t need to be in. Oh well, good to know at least something around here is normal, albeit annoyingly so.

    2. SS*

      In my experience at small companies, also in the design world, it has been normal. Like you pointed out, because it’s a small company there’s often a lack of rigorous standards and people wear many different hats. At my last company of 12 people the office manager regularly sat in on project update meetings. Of course she didn’t care about specific details like sheet sizes, but it helped everything run smoother if she knew so-and-so was on a deadline that week, or that there was an angry client, or if there were little things she could take off someone’s plate like creating a checklist or spreadsheet.

      In such a small close environment (like a 5 person design office) that it helps to have everyone on the same page, even if it’s not technically their job description.

  40. Rabbit*

    Undecided if I should stay at my current job. I’ve been here 1 year (very frequent turnover in the fashion industry, to the point where a 1 year stay isn’t truly looked at as job-hopping). The work is boring. My boss and I get along ~okay~ but not great. He is quite moody and will frequently (2-4 times a month) lash out at me in front of all my co-workers, telling me “I could do this without you” and “Why are you giving me attitude?” (I’m old enough and have enough experience that I would NEVER display “attitude” to any superior or ANY co-worker for that matter). I work hard and because it’s so boring I’m usually on top of everything, but he has a bad memory and does not communicate well so these lashings-out are usually a result of those two things not bringing him the outcome he was imagining.

    All that–I could probably handle. However, there is a band of co-workers here (and it’s a small, small company) who have decided they hate me. We went from pleasant-enough conversation and sometimes eating lunch together to them shutting me out one day. I am now invisible (they ignore when I say ‘good morning;’ they do not deliver my mail or packages to my office, instead leaving them in my old seat in a part of the office I do not sit at anymore); etc. I do not go to work to be popular, and I don’t expect everyone to like everyone else at work, but I have never experienced this level of childish nastiness directed towards anyone in a workplace (and now it’s towards me!). (I could get more into it, but these people are openly racist, make statements about wanting to abuse and kill animals, talk nasty about others in their clique if they are not in the room,etc etc–being shut out by them is almost an honor ;) Still makes working around them miserable.)

    The one benefit of this job is they are very flexible when it comes to doctor’s appointments/leaving early, and I can almost reliably be out the door by 5 PM. Since taking this job I’ve really enjoyed having more time at home by myself/with my partner, cooking, reading, relaxing. Most of the jobs I’ve worked in this industry are unpaid overtime (at the office until 7-8 PM usually, but I have worked into the wee wee hours of the morning). Taking any other job would be giving up this rare work-life balance I’ve found.

    I’m looking, but not finding anything challenging/interesting that pays decently. I’ve really tried to “block out the haters” so to speak but working in a place with a heavily negative, cliquey energy is exhausting. Add to that a hard-to-please boss who wants me to read his mind–should I GTFO of here? I have a feeling that ALL jobs within the fashion industry are like this (except you work a lot, lot later, and for free) and I should suck it up. (I’ve held about 2 jobs where I really loved the work and my co-workers, but both companies shut down , so.)

    1. F.*

      Alison will weigh in, but this is a question that should probably be addressed on the Friday open thread.

    2. Rabbit*

      Attn: Alison, I saw in a thread above you wanted to keep people on track (this thread should be “is this normal” not exactly “what should I do”)–if this doesn’t fit those parameters, feel free to delete my post here. While I am hoping for a “what should I do” answer, I also want to know if I’m being too picky/”is it normal for no job to be a good job” type answer.

      1. Ask a Manager* Post author

        If you keep the question on whether this part is true — “I have a feeling that ALL jobs within the fashion industry are like this” — fine to keep it here!

    3. Sunflower*

      I’ll comment that I think all jobs in the fashion industry seem like that. My friend in fashion has described every place and person she works with as crazy, continually operating way understaffed and paying people pennies to work there. Lashing out seems pretty normal for the industry but it would be crazy in pretty much all others

    4. I'm a Little Teapot*

      At my one long-ago job in the fashion industry, my boss made me cry every day and ended up getting convicted of assaulting my coworker. Not sure if that means this is “normal” though….

      1. Rabbit*

        I unfortunately think the fashion industry is where “normal” and “this happens all the time so expect it” diverge. Damn. Thank you for weighing in however!

    5. Casanova Frankenstein*

      I have been in the industry both in NYC and greater LA area for about 10 years now and worked at multiple small companies during this time. My experience has been that work/life balance and culture varies widely from company to company. Most of the small companies are run by a founder and the founder’s personality and management ability really dictates norms and acceptable behavior far more than it would in a large corporate environment with a formal HR and what not. When I interview, I always ask about the backgrounds of my supervisor and key management figures as a way of gauging how professional they will be. I’ve found that managers who haven’t worked for other people tend to be the most dysfunctional.

      I have worked at companies with outright abusive and discriminatory practices, but I have also worked at companies where nearly everyone was a paragon of professionalism and 40 hours/week was the norm. Admittedly, the latter is far rarer, but they do exist. Not sure where you are based, but if you are in NYC or LA, there are tons of other fashion companies out there. It may take you a while to find a softer landing spot, but it is totally doable. As you have already attested, you have worked in much better conditions before. I found some of my best jobs through an agency so that might be a good route to take if you decide to look for another job. Not saying every company the agency works with will be awesome, but any company that is willing to pony up a significant chunk of money to get a good candidate is usually less likely to be ok with driving him/her away in a short amount of time. I’m so sorry to hear about your negative work conditions and hope you will be able to find something better soon!

      tl;dr #NotAllFashionJobs

  41. Alli*

    In a private/employee-owned engineering company of 1200+ people spread over 10 locations, how normal is: Jesus-specific prayer before all location-wide lunches/meetings, company vehicles tuned to religious radio stations (on all of the several occasions I’ve been in them – I’ve been too afraid to ask if that’s a rule or a coincidence), weekly devotional prominently displayed on the intranet, automated weekly Bible study calendar invitations until you decline (are they monitoring who does?), and more? I mean, I’m fairly certain none of this is normal, but what parts if any are not ok? They all, taken together, make me uncomfortable but more importantly, make me sympathetic to the possible discomfort of others.

    1. Ad Astra*

      All of it strikes me as weird and inappropriate. Even Hobby Lobby and Chick Fil-A play secular music and avoid company-wide prayer.

      1. Kelly L.*

        IDK, every time I’ve been in Hobby Lobby, religious music has been on. It’s CCM, so you have to pick up the lyrics to realize it, but it is. Maybe it varies from store to store.

        1. Ad Astra*

          It probably does vary from store to store, and the bulk of my Hobby Lobby trips have been to stores in liberal college towns where it would sound pretty odd to hear Christian music at any business that wasn’t, like, a literal Bible store. But it also seems probable that I didn’t notice the religious nature of an otherwise poppy tune.

          1. Kelly L.*

            Funnily enough, this was also a college town! I think that’s why it stuck out so much to me.

      2. Log Lady*

        lol oh no, Hobby Lobby plays Christian music, only without the lyrics. I mean, you’d have to have some familiarity evangelical, charismatic church services to pick up on it. But, those sure aren’t secular songs.

    2. Phoebe*

      I work for a non-profit religious organization that publishes a Christian Devotional and even I would find this weird.

      1. Phoebe*

        forgot to add: Our organization is headed by a pastor and his wife, so it’s not uncommon for us to have company-wide prayer (not daily, but sometimes weekly) , but it’s never Jesus-specific (we’re non-denominational). That’s the only thing we do from your list though.

    3. LQ*

      Extremely weird to me.
      The only thing I’d say might not be strange is the vehicles radio stations. I use shared vehicles for lots of things and they are always tuned to what the last person using it was. (Which gives an interesting demographic slice depending on location, use, etc.) Though with everything else you’ve mentioned I wouldn’t be surprised to find out it was a rule and not just the last person who used it.
      I would personally not be ok working at this place.

    4. Dawn*

      Really, really weird. If it was a non-profit Christian ministry then I could totally understand it, but an engineering company? Extra super duper weird, and with 1200+ employees they’re definitely subject to equal opportunity employer laws so it seems like their HR department is either totally out of it or completely unconcerned, always a bad sign.

    5. MyDogIsCuterThanYourDog*

      I have experienced something similar at a 100-200 family owned company. The family that owned the company was very strongly Evangelical Christian, and we would have (optional) prayer before all company-wide meetings and (optional) Bible study before work, among other religious-y things that would be said by the owners frequently. My impression is that these kinds of things are not uncommon within businesses that are owned by the Evangelical Christian community and my understanding is that as long as all of these things are optional, it’s legal. However, I know a fair number of people (including myself) who were made uncomfortable by these practices or developed paranoia around whether or not you had to be Christian in order to succeed within the company.

      1. Alli*

        Yeah, my impression has been that everything is optional, and there are really only one or two employees who have ever acted evangelical at work, but the sheer amount of this stuff that is present at all times gives me that same paranoia. Not to mention a robust fear of speaking up about it.

        1. MyDogIsCuterThanYourDog*

          I worked there for a number of years and got a lot of great experience and really loved my day-to-day work, but ended up leaving partly because the intense Christianity of the place, as well as some other aspects of the culture, made me feel like I wasn’t a great cultural fit there in the end. Although I left feeling frustrated, now that I have a little distance and work at an organization more in line with my values, I feel like it’s their prerogative to run their family-owned business however they see fit. If they’re willing to accept losing good people over it, I’m willing to take the things I learned there and move on to an organization where religion is a non-issue.

    6. ThursdaysGeek*

      I’ve worked for a for-profit corporate farm owned by the LDS church, and we did have prayer before a company dinner party, but the atmosphere of the job was generally kept pretty secular.

      I’ve worked for a small company owned by Christian brothers, and other than offering free tickets to some local events put on by their church, the job atmosphere was nearly completely secular. We did have a Bible study during a lunch, but it was employee only, and not publicized in any way other than verbally (to people who appeared like they might be interested).

      I have a friend who works for a Catholic hospital organization, and she says that meetings often open with prayer.

      I’ve walked into Hobby Lobby and at least 2 local restaurants, and they always have Christian music playing.

      So, except for the music, I would say very much not normal. For a non-profit, like the hospital, it might be more normal, but not for a for-profit job.

      1. nonegiven*

        I had an outpatient procedure in a Catholic hospital. A nun comes around and prays for you but asks permission, first.

  42. Ad Astra*

    Is it normal (in advertising/PR/marketing) that people at my company socialize primarily with coworkers? I live in a medium-sized city that is not particularly attractive to young professionals — so it kinda does feel like all the twentysomething and thirtysomething white collar workers in town are in my office. Our office also has a pretty big drinking culture (beer:30 every Friday, alcohol at the annual meeting, lots of leaving early on slow afternoons to drink at the bar next door, party bus Christmas parties, etc).

    At past jobs, I went in expecting my coworkers to become my best friends in an unfamiliar city, and was disappointed that it didn’t happen that way. Now, people are so buddy-buddy that I worry about it affecting work.

    1. Busy*

      Normal here (in manufacturing, but our marketing department is really close) … and I’m wondering if we work at the same company based on your description. ;)

      And in case you’re wondering — yes. It affects work.

    2. ElCee*

      This is super common in journalism. Are you are staffed with a lot of reporters-who-fled? ;) Really though I think that this makes sense for certain offices, particularly if the young people in a city are all at the same employer.

      1. Ad Astra*

        See, that’s interesting that you should say that: I’m a former journalist myself, but I don’t think any of my coworkers are. When I worked in news, I didn’t end up forming many real friendships. Working at this ad agency is a lot more like working at my college newspaper, where everyone is together all the time.

        1. NZ Muse*

          When I was a journo I didn’t really form many bonds either – working in online, we typically all worked somewhat different hours/shifts. But now people finish work around the same time so socialising is easier…

    3. babblemouth*

      Normal, especially if you have a lot of 20-somethings who relocated here for the job and don’t have an existing network of friends in town.

      1. Cath in Canada*

        I was going to say the same thing. Most of my jobs have had large populations of non-local (mostly international) grad students and postdocs, and when you have a large population of people who don’t have any other real ties to the city, they’re all going to hang out together.

        1. AcademiaNut*

          Yes – particularly for short term jobs of a few years. It takes time to make connections outside of work, and the pool of contacts and activities varies a lot by location. Plus, the locals tend to have established routines and social circles, so hanging out with other new arrivals is much easier than trying to find a social group that you are compatible with and is willing to add new members.

          Long hours, erratic schedules, and travel can make the effect more pronounced.

      2. AnonForThis*

        Also pretty normal if there’s the combination of travel/long hours and NDAs or other things that make it difficult to talk about work with anyone except who you work with – people still have other friends, but if there’s a limited subset of people who will get why you’re happy or frustrated or just meh, then you’re going to hang out with them.

    4. Guam Mom*

      This was definitely the norm at the advertising agency I worked at in a major city; I can imagine that it would be even more amplified in a medium or smaller city.

    5. BusSys*

      Can be normal. The hedgefund I worked at was that way (70 hour weeks mean you know your coworkers better than most relatives), as was my first job out of college (all new grads on the team).

  43. Anon for this*

    This is a question about my previous job – I know it was dysfunctional in various ways, but I’m wondering if this particular situation was handled in a normal way or not. Essentially there was an incident in my very small organization where my manager raised his/her voice at an employee and a shouting match ensued. (The employee was behaving poorly, though obviously in a totally functional environment there shouldn’t have been shouting at all.) I couldn’t avoid overhearing most of the shouted argument despite putting on headphones. My manager must have known I overhead most or all of the conversation. He/she never mentioned it with me, not even in a “sorry you had to hear that” way. I know personnel issues aren’t really my business, but if you knew an employee had overheard a loud argument, would you debrief with that employee in any way?

    1. Z*

      It doesn’t strike me as odd that no one talked to you about it afterwards. If it doesn’t relate to you or your job directly I can see them just wanting to move past it. I’ve overheard a raised voices exchange between IT and Marketing recently that was maybe 15 feet from my desk. Neither of them came by and said anything to me afterwards because it didn’t have anything to do with me.

      1. Anon for this*

        That makes sense. One quick clarification though – the anger escalated to the point where it became threatening. No direct threats were uttered, but would that context change anything? Sorry for the vagueness; I don’t want to get so detailed that it becomes identifiable.

        1. Laurent*

          if you weren’t involved other than being unable to avoid overhearing it, I don’t see that it makes any difference at all. It had nothing to do with you.

    2. TootsNYC*

      No, I wouldn’t mention it to anyone else.

      I wouldn’t feel I needed to apologize to you for the “burden” of “having to hear it.” I wouldn’t consider it to be such a burden, and especially not one you needed an apology for.

      And I wouldn’t want to compound my unprofessionalism by talking about anything related to a personnel issue.

      If I felt that I, the manager, had behaved in a way that might make another direct report fear that I’d yell at them someday, then I might bring it up. Or, I might just also make sure to behave so very reasonably for a while.
      The manager “raised his voice” at a poorly behaving employee, so the manager may have felt that this original action wasn’t actually unreasonable. And the shouting match that ensured, she may have placed all the blame on the employee. Ergo, no apology, especially not if the manager thinks the apology should come from the other employee.

      1. Anon for this*

        Right. Generally I definitely wouldn’t think of overhearing a verbal disagreement as a burden, but the anger from the employee reached a level where it began to make the environment feel unsafe. There didn’t end up being any violence, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if it had turned physical. I apologize; I think my vague phrasing made the argument sound more mundane than it was. But this is good to know for in future.

        1. TootsNYC*

          But again–it’s the anger **from the employee**, so I wouldn’t feel I needed to apologize.

          I’m not sure what I’d say, as the manager in that position. You already know (presumably) that I don’t normally like that to happen. And don’t create it. And would want to avoid it.

          What else can I say? I suppose I could say, “You don’t have to worry about him and his anger any more; I fired his butt.” But I can’t say, “He’s on a PIP.”

          I’m just not sure what I’d say.

  44. Mira*

    At my husband’s job people communicate by screaming and shouting at each other. It’s a finance office, most people there are traders although my husband is IT. One person who was particularly abusive did get a formal warning for saying stuff like “you’re a r*tard” but in general it seems accepted, even the owner acts like this. I’m pretty sure this is not normal but everyone there treats it as if it is, even the few nice people who don’t do it.

    And another one about my friend’s job: She can’t take holiday because she would have to find someone to cover her shifts and since they’re understaffed anyway that’s practically impossible (that person would have to work two full-time jobs that week, and that’s if the shifts don’t clash which they probably would, or she’d have to find five different people to take a day each). We’re in the UK so getting to take holidays is required by law, but I can’t find anything to say whether this practice is allowed or not.

    1. AVP*

      A friend who also works in finance as a trader has told me a lot of stories that makes me think the yelling and insults are common. She says her office is always at a dull roar and she regularly has a headache from the volume level. People can’t get up to go talk to someone because they would miss a sales request, so they just yell from across the floor.

    2. Rae*

      I worked in finance in the UK and this was very very normal in my office. It made me (normally a quiet person) learn to speak up and I ended up liking the atmosphere in some ways. The conversation could get pretty aggressive though and crossed the line daily. Only a couple of abusive incidents that had to get reported.

    3. Hlyssande*

      That doesn’t sound legal, but your friend should probably do some research on local laws regarding leave. Even if it is legal, it’s crappy and if that’s the way the place operates I’d be looking to move on.

    4. Ros*

      Is your friend in health care or a helping profession of some kind? If so, than this is quite common even if access to vacation is by law like it is in my province. Finding a qualified replacement is required in any profession where you work directly with vulnerable populations and good care depends on relationships and connections with the people in your care. Especially in self-regulated professions.

  45. anon968*

    What about favoritism? I’m in my second ‘proper’ job and in both I’ve been really frustrated by managers having clear ‘favorites’ on the team. I never had an issue with this in my 5 part-time-with-school jobs and don’t know if I’m just being too sensitive about it now! In my last role it was worse and the manager actively victimized other staff which I’m guessing isn’t normal, although from what I have heard, not totally unusual for that line of work. However, in my current job I just see smaller things, they’re just ‘good friends’… but it totally undermines other staff. We only hear about overtime after the friend has turned it down, she organised our schedules ‘as a favor’, she’s been given extra responsibilities that, frankly, I am far more qualified for (and was originally ear marked for), comes in and leaves when she fancies it etc.

    1. Dawn*

      Favoritism is a sign of a really crappy boss- a professional boss would not let it happen. It’s definitely something that pops up in the working world, but it’s not something that a good manager will do.

    2. Kai*

      Common and pretty gross. I am the “favorite” at my job and, while this can work to my benefit pretty frequently, everyone notices it and it can make things awkward with my coworkers. I make sure they know that I’m aware of it and annoyed by it, too.

    3. ADL*

      I’d say this is pretty normal when you work for a crappy boss. And there’s nothing you can do about it.

    4. Doriana Gray*

      This is normal at some places. I was one of my former manager’s favorites until I posted for another internal position. Like the others said, bad managers play this game a lot and it ends badly more often than not for everyone. But take heart: the favorite will eventually fall off the pedestal and you’ll all be hated equally.

      Find a new job with better management if you can.

  46. kraken*

    A few months ago I was fired from my second job out of college for poor performance. I definitely did poorly and made multiple fatal errors that warranted firing. At the same time, I think the company was giving me work wildly beyond my skill level, work that I could not possibly have succeeded at, given my lack of experience. That, I think, is where I need validation or a reality check: was the workload reasonable for someone like me?

    I was hired as an entry-level admin for a specific department, though because the company was small I had a hand in everything. My day-to-day work was very challenging, but nothing I couldn’t handle, and the feedback I got initially was that I was progressing well.

    I knew when I started that the company would be moving offices and that there was a massive event being held in another city. A few months into the job, the dates for both the move and the event were set, and they were within three days of each other. I had never moved an office before, and only planned small-scale events in the past. I also had three months to work on both of these projects.

    The event was already half-way planned by another person in the office. I was hired partially to take some of that off her plate though, and took on a large chunk of the rest of the planning. I was assigned a lot of the work related to moving the office, and that’s ultimately what overwhelmed me. Moving was a major challenge I wasn’t prepared for. I couldn’t keep up with these two projects, their deadlines, and my already somewhat challenging day-to-day work, and I was fired.

    I should also mention I was terrified of my manager. Though she said early on she was always available to help, the times I went to her for help she reacted with anger and impatience, and she was always low-level furious about something. I know this is probably something I need to just get over, but it did make seeking assistance scary. My strategy when looking for a new job (and I have since found another job) was to assess my potential manager’s personality more carefully to make sure I would be comfortable seeking their help. I am not afraid of my current manager and I do go to her when I need help.

    While I suspect the work given to me was unreasonable, I’m honestly not totally sure. If it was reasonable, I want to know now so I can prepare to take it on for real in the future. If it was unreasonable I want to know so I’m not overly hard on myself. I do want to take responsibility for my short-comings, but at the same time I tend blame myself pretty hard for my failures, and I’m pretty sure that’s not productive. Thanks everyone.

    1. AVP*

      I have been an entry-level admin assistant in the past, and I would think that either the party or the move would be reasonable but probably not both at the same time, and your boss should have seen that and thought it through before assigning them. In an ideal world, sometimes things like this happen and you can go to your manager for advice but it sounds like she wasn’t really open to that, no matter what she said about being available.

      Sounds like a perfect storm and I’m sorry it happened to you! Glad to hear you have moved on.

    2. Amber Rose*

      I don’t feel the work was unreasonable. I do feel the response to your requests for help were unreasonable, and also that you probably should have fought harder to get the help you needed but that it’s understandable why you didn’t feel like you could.

      What I’m trying to say is, your work was normal, you just got saddled with a crappy boss that you didn’t have the experience to know how to deal with. I’d take it as a learning experience, not beat myself up, and move on, if I were you.

      1. Whippers*

        Hmm, how do you figure that the work wasn’t unreasonable? A new entry-level employee having to coordinate two major events in addition to her own workload? I’d say that’s really unreasonable.

    3. Fabulous*

      Event planning is a common admin function, but not the moving project. Oftentimes the facilities person and/or IT will handle the majority of it, or perhaps a real estate team.

        1. LQ*

          I agree with Toots, I’d have said the opposite. (Unless the events were lunch-n-learn or smaller kinds of things, office potlucks, that kind of event I could see being an admin function.)

          1. kraken*

            I did those smaller events often and they definitely fell within the admin role I had. The large event I’m referencing above was a 300+ guest marketing event that I know took at least a year to plan. I don’t know if that changes anything but maybe it will clarify? The admin before me was also fired right after this event in a previous year. My manager was a trash-talker and hinted that it was related to this person’s work on the event.

            I’m grateful for all the advice. It sounds like I can expect this kind of workload in the future, so I’ll prepare for that. I was dealing with bad management, which I didn’t fully realize at the time. I started approaching her more often after my mistakes were becoming serious even though I was scared, and I was met with more anger and zero support. Almost every other manager and employee at the company was like this, so it seemed normal. I’m really, really grateful for all the advice.

    4. CM*

      I don’t know if your particular workload was reasonable or not. But I do know that in a reasonable workplace, you would communicate with your manager early and often about feeling overwhelmed and needing additional resources, and your manager would respond by helping you figure out how to get things done (whether by giving you more training, having a coworker help you, reducing your workload, or some other solution). It sounds like you felt you couldn’t really communicate about this because your boss was so negative when you approached her for help. Also, for someone who had only been with the company for a few months, plus being early on in your career, your boss should have been monitoring how you were doing, and should have intervened early even if you didn’t proactively approach her and say anything. Firing someone who’s struggling with their work at a new job, without even trying to help them out? Totally unreasonable and bad management.

      1. Doriana Gray*

        All of this. Your workload wasn’t unreasonable, but your manager was. And was there a reason you didn’t ask the person who had been planning the event for guidance when you got stuck? I know you were supposed to take the bulk of the tasks off her plate, but just saying, “Hey Jane, I’m trying to figure out what caterer to use for the event. Can you tell me who you were thinking about using? I went to Cathy to ask, but she was busy, so I just wanted to check with you to make sure there wasn’t a preferred list or company we should be using for discounts.” Use your coworkers as resources in the future if you run into roadblocks and management isn’t available to help.

        1. Whippers*

          Yeah, but how do you know if her workload wasn’t unreasonable? You don’t know what her other duties were so you don’t know if adding two major events to them was reasonable or not.

    5. Z*

      I’m admin and if we were to move offices my office manager would handle a lot of those details. I wouldn’t even know where to start with that. As for the event planning, our events are limited to social committee planned Christmas party, etc. I don’t think either of these tasks is outside the range of what admin may be asked to do, these task are big responsibilities for one entry level admin to manage. Further to that, I don’t think you had the support to manage this work. I’d chalk this up to a good lesson about communicating with your manager in future jobs.

    6. Kira*

      My office goes much more slowly and cautiously with assigning responsibilities to a new admin. For example, the new admin might get the day-to-day work, while the veteran admin takes on the high profile project like coordinating a move. In fact, we’d have something with as much impact as an office move get handled by our leadership team, who would delegate certain tasks to the admin.

    7. Not So NewReader*

      Maybe it’s me. It looks to me like they needed temp help with their event and their move. They needed an extra set of hands, so they hired you. Now that the move and event are over, they do not need you, so good-bye. The fact that your boss did not support you kind of upholds my theory. She knew you would not be there long, so why bother.

      All that to one side, even under a normal situation your boss set you up to fail by withdrawing her support like that. No, you do not need tougher skin, but you do need an actual boss. I think overall you did well here. You looked at the story from all sides, made changes in what you were doing and now you are in a better place. This is as good as good gets, so congrats on the new job.

    8. Whippers*

      Is it just me who thinks that asking an entry level admin to organise a big event and an office move is really not reasonable?
      I would consider entry level admin as helping other people with their admin, not organising large scale events. Surely that would be the role of an events/project coordinator.

  47. NO I AM NOT*

    Is it normal for older women in the office to ‘mother’ younger women? I’m in my mid-late twenties and am married. If I ever feel somewhat sick and go home from work, one older woman will always ask if I’m pregnant. (I’m not, yet!) The other two older women are quite nice but they don’t go that far. I know all of them have daughters about my age, and the three of them have always been the only 3 women in the office working together for 20+ years, and on top of that I’m a much younger woman.

    Is it normal for them to adopt this mother/daughter type relationship with me? I think that the third woman IS unusual, but the other two also tend to err on the side of mothering rather than professional. These three are the sweetest women you’d ever meet, and I know that given that they have daughters close to my age AND aren’t accustomed to working with young women, that may be their default relationship. I don’t MIND it from two of them, but the third kind of oversteps her bounds quite a lot.

    1. Shishimai*

      This would squick me out, big time. No, not normal.

      I work in an office with a remarkably high proportion of women (I’m in tech) and not a single time have I seen a relationship form up like this, even though there’s definite mother/daughter-type age gaps in evidence.

      Professional people don’t push you about your reproductive status or pry into your personal matters. It’s worth asking Too Close to back off – someone who doubles down when presented with a request like that is giving you important information about how they handle relationships.

    2. CheeryO*

      Not normal. In the past, I’ve asked about a couple of my coworkers who try to father me (telling me that I should break up with a long-term BF who has not proposed yet, pressuring me to buy instead of rent, etc.) and the consensus was, “Ew, no.”

    3. Liz*

      That is not normal. There are women who tend towards the mothering type, but asking if you’re pregnant is way past “mothering” and into “intrusive”. One of my previous supervisors was a mothering type – to all of us, not just the other women – but she’d just ask if anything was wrong, offer hugs/tea/sympathy if appropriate, and let us know we could always talk to her.

    4. CM*

      I’ll dissent from other commenters and say this is in the “normal but unfortunate” category. There are several AAM questions about how to deal with this — basically, by being professional and setting firm boundaries so they get the idea that they’re not actually your mother.

      2. KH*

        I’m with “normal but ugh”. In every job I’ve worked, there have been at least one or two “motherly” types who seem to think the younger women in the office need their advice and support.

        Luckily I’ve been able to avoid becoming a pet project for any of them. ;)

      3. Chinook*

        “I’ll dissent from other commenters and say this is in the “normal but unfortunate” category.”

        I have to agree with CM. Overmothering by older women is normal but something that should be discouraged because it is not helpful to either the motherer or motheree.

      4. Slimy Contractor*

        I agree that it’s “normal but unfortunate.” This has definitely happened to me, more than once, and the worst offender was a man. He actually would call me “daughter” in the office! I would never put up with that now, but I was younger and meeker then. My advice is to stand up for yourself and create firm boundaries now. Don’t just silently fume about it, or only halfheartedly complain, like I did.

    5. Z*

      I think this is bad, but I’m not surprised by it. I’ve found it to be a generational things. Women are notorious for asking inappropriate personal questions to me. I’m 31 and I constantly get asked about marriage and children. Over the last 3-5 years I had a lot of friends get married and my manager knew I was attending a lot of weddings on my vacation time. She would make comments about me being next, or when’s my wedding.

      1. Another Lawyer*

        Yes!! I had 9 weddings one summer and I was in a few of them. My manager was constantly asking about who I was dating, did I meet someone, were they going to commit?

    6. Sascha*

      I think it’s common but inappropriate. In any group, including work, some people just really want to parent everyone else.

    7. TootsNYC*

      It’s not appropriate.

      But it’s also not uncommon in the WORLD, not just the office.

      My kids are turning into adults (one graduates from college this spring), and in trying to transition out of “parenting” mode, I am starting to see (in myself and in other people) how very hard it is for people to come up with any other paradigm for interacting with other people. Throw in an age difference, and it’s harder.

      Alison had a whole post on it once. I think her great suggestion (and in the update, it turns out it worked) was to say, “That’s a weird thing to ask a colleague.” Or, maybe “That’s not something I’d reveal to colleagues.” Something to point out the “colleague” status.

    8. A Non*

      I’m in a very similar situation, and no, I’ve never been asked about pregnancy. It’s professionally Not Done, mostly because of the implicit sexism, though we all know from reading this blog just how common it is for people to be unprofessional. Go ahead and push back. I’d probably phrase it as “No, I’m not pregnant. If my husband and I decide to have kids, we’ll let you know when it happens.” If they’re really dense, you may have to directly add “Please stop asking.”

    9. LQ*

      Of the women I work with all but one are old enough to be my mother (and all have kids my age). None of them do this to me at all.
      (Same for all but one of the men on my team as well, including one who has a son that is like 2 days older or younger than me? But none of them treat me like they are my father.)

    10. Kira*

      My office is full of women – at all life stages. I’ve seen that the older women whose children have grown up often chat with younger women about our pregnancies (real or potential) and raising children. It seems to happen naturally as one of the ways they find common ground. I’m young and childless, so I’ll mostly get jokes about how everyone’s getting pregnant but I’m needed for this project so I shouldn’t catch it!

    11. Ad Astra*

      I might say normal but unwelcome and unacceptable. If it’s not normal, it’s certainly common.

      I think Alison has a few posts about this subject in her archives. It’s very annoying, though usually well-meaning. If it really bothers you, try limiting the number of personal details you share about yourself and keeping your conversations extra professional.

      A helpful response to unsolicited advice is “Thanks, I’ll think about it.” It’s honest (technically, deciding not to take the advice is indeed thinking about it) and it ends the conversation right there instead of dragging it out into reasons you can’t or won’t take their advice.

    12. Rabbit*

      I wouldn’t consider it “normal” but this kind of thing seems pervasive. I’ve seen it on AAM before. and as a young woman myself I frequently get asked why I’m not pregnant, why my boyfriend won’t marry me, why I’m lying to myself about not wanting to get married.. ugh. These are questions I’d be hesitant to discuss with my OWN mother, much less a co-worker. Let me note that my company is equal-opportunity: both men and women ask me these invasive questions. (Barf.)

    13. Anonyhippo*

      It has been normal to my experience (4 jobs over 25 years, youngest or nearly youngest person hired, happened each job).

      I’ve learned to set boundaries and not volunteer a lot of personal information. It’s nice to have mentoring and advice but I want it kept to work-related matters. I definitely don’t want or need their advice/meddling/curiosity/gossip in regards to my personal life.

      I’ve learned to keep chatting work-related and self-monitor how much I disclose re my personal life and interests. I’ve found that I can’t change THEM, but I can change ME. I look it as damage control having been burned badly in the past.

    14. Ros*

      This happened to me the minute I got married. The 3 older women in my area of the office were annoyingly in my space about being preggers, gaining weight, or whatever. They started sharing gross details of things they had experienced to “warn me” of what was to come.

      I’ve asked many of my late-twenties friends and this seems to be quite normal, unfortunately. It’s like women seem to think it’s find to get in each other’s personal business and ask such invasive questions.

      I often laugh it off the first time, give them the “this again” look the second time, and then full on stink face any other time until they get the hint. Sadly… some dont.

  48. Grey*

    Tuition reimbursement?

    My employer didn’t force me to get my certification but they told me they’d pay for it if I got it. They reimbursed me for the cost. And why shouldn’t they? It benefits them too.

    Here’s the question: I had to miss 3 days of work to attend the class. Do companies typically reimburse you for the missed pay? Mine didn’t.

    2. Elysian*

      If the certification isn’t required for the position, I think its normal they you wouldn’t be paid for the days attending the class. Sometimes employers will let you use vacation time, sometimes they’ll give you the time off unpaid, but sometimes they also just say “We’ll pay if you do it, but you have to do it on your own time and can’t miss work.” Practices vary a lot based on employers, and what the certification is for/how closely it is related to your job. But I would put this in the “normal” category.

    3. Liz*

      It depends on the employer. I’ve had some which said, “Count this as a work day” and others where I took vacation time. It’s always worth asking, but if you asked and they said no, that’s their answer.

    5. F.*

      We pay for both the fee and payroll for required certifications. For other industry-related certifications/licensing exams, we will pay a certain amount toward the fees and allow the employee to take PTO or an unpaid leave of absence (if feasible) to prepare and take the exam. I work in an engineering/architecture/construction management/inspection firm. If the employee quits or is fired for cause (not laid off) within a certain timeframe, they have to pay back a pro-rated amount of the fees, travel and lodging costs associated with their certification, but the payroll money is theirs to keep.

  49. Teapot Copywriter*

    I temped as an ecommerce copywriter for a few months several years ago and we wrote product copy for teapots that other companies made but we sold. (Another department handled the purchasing, we just wrote descriptions). Our copy was to include information like teapot color, designs that appeared on them, and the material they were made out of. However, the only information we had to work off of was spreadsheets with short codes on them that no one really knew what they meant, so a lot of our time was spent guessing what the product might be/look like and Googling for information. (Occasionally we’d get lucky and be given a catalog that had information on some of the teapots we needed to write about, but only sometimes.) We’d then write the descriptions and pass them off as what our customers would receive, when often we did not know for sure. Is this common in ecommerce? Regardless, I learned that product copywriting wasn’t for me, but I’ve always wondered.

    1. CMT*

      I’ve heard this from copywriter friends of mine. Although maybe you worked at the same company they did.

  50. Accusatory*

    A few months ago someone at our team was put on a performance improvement plan for consistently not returning emails, being late on deadlines, and just all around not doing well at his job (he’d been warned several times to turn it around before being put on official notice).
    As soon as it was ‘official’ he went to HR and alleged that my boss and the rest of the team were racist (he was NOT the only racial minority on the team, and I am the only woman on a team of all men). We all had to go through extensive interviews to prove this was not the case – and we were given the ‘examples’ that he provided, none of which had any racial connotation at all. We were all cleared of the ‘charges’ but it’s left a very … scared/sour taste in my mouth. I am now worried that no matter what I do someone will find a way to twist my words and use them against me.
    For reference, I’m the only woman on the team and sometimes things are said that *COULD* be taken out of context and used against people. But I understand the context in which they’re taken and I don’t want to implode my career (don’t worry, anything especially egregious or directed AT me instead of just said in my presence would immediately be handled, but like, a joke is a joke). But I would never do that because I don’t want these men to be afraid to work with me! AGAIN – nothing is egregious. It’s the same kinds of jokes I might make with my own girlfriends outside of the work place. It’s a mark of feeling ‘comfortable.’ Nothing is beyond MY personal boundary limits.
    Anyway, is it normal for people to pull their ‘card’ at work all the time? Because, like I said – I certainly COULD pull my card, but haven’t and wouldn’t. Am I the exception? (I TRULY TRULY hope not)

    1. CM*

      Not normal, but I’ve seen it happen… some people just see themselves as victims and think everybody is out to get them.

      1. CM*

        Also, as a lawyer I can tell you that the company has a duty to investigate complaints like that. So I wouldn’t take the investigation as an indication that anybody actually thinks you did something wrong… the company is just showing that they’re taking this seriously. It’s a pain, and thank goodness most people don’t do this!

        1. Accusatory*

          I know that, the people doing the investigation even were like – this is just a protocol but we have to get to the bottom of it (he was suing for loss of wages, even though he hadn’t been let go yet…)

          1. Chrissie*

            The interviews with HR were tedious, but they did what they should, investigate what really happened.

            Just think about it from the other side: If some coworker suddenly did overstep your boundaries (could be a new colleague, or someone who unexpectedly turns into Drunk A$$hole at the christmas party), maybe even justifying it “but you never say anything when we joke around, so how can you be mad now?” – You would want HR to properly check any complaints that you raise.

    2. TootsNYC*

      Am I the exception? (I TRULY TRULY hope not

      You are not the exception. I think the vast majority of people cut one another some slack.

      And even when they want to strike back, I think most people also don’t go on the offensive by calling out racism or sexism where it doesn’t exist.

    3. A Non*

      It’s hard because the exact same joke that everyone is totally fine with in one situation may be really harmful in another. I’ve been in work situations where people were deliberately using their “jokes” to pick on the other woman on the team, and yeah, I spoke out about that. I’ve been in other situations where people were pretty foul-mouthed, but they weren’t trying to hurt anyone and would have stopped if asked. I’m glad that your company investigated your coworker’s allegations – it shows that they care about these things and take complaints seriously. I’m equally glad that they dismissed his bullshit as such.

      1. Accusatory*

        Yea, I think it’s all about the context, and your personal line – what’s ok and what isn’t ok (someone above isn’t ok with the jargon term ‘brain damage’ but to other people it feels completely normal and fine). You have to trust your gut.

  51. YayYouMadeMySuggestedThreadThankYou!*

    I have recently moved into a supervisory role, and as it is my first role of this nature, I don’t have a wealth of experience as to what’s “normal” or not. My position involves the training of new hires and the supervision of those within my department – however, the expectation from my manager seems to be to constantly hover over people as they work, and babysit every action they take, even when they are long past the initial training period. This seems counterproductive to me; surely if people are monitored constantly, they will stall in their growth and become reliant on my always being there to field every little question, put out every tiny fire for them, etc.

    There will also be occasions where I am called away by my manager to work elsewhere in the building (as sometimes my experience is beyond that of others and I’m “the only man for the job”, as it were), and if the TINIEST thing goes wrong in my department while I’m away, why wasn’t I there to stop it?!

    Am I way off base in thinking that this is not really what a supervisory role should be… that although such a role is naturally going to involve insuring that the actions of others are on course with the department’s goals, it shouldn’t mean absorbing all responsibility for the smallest of failures of other competent adults?

    1. AVP*

      Did you work with your current manager before you took on the supervisory role? My impression is that she is just a micromanager by nature and doesn’t understand that there are other (better!) ways to supervise adults. Some people love to do this but no, it’s not a normal way to treat people unless they’ve earned that level of scrutiny.

    2. Kira*

      I bet my manager is in a similar boat to you. She’s trying to pass more independence and responsibility to me, but her boss insists that she knows everything I know. My boss’ predecessor had the same issue.

  52. Terra*

    Is it common for your boss to be a bottle neck when it comes to getting work finished? For example, my current boss insists on approving anything that is going to be sent to more than one customer. The result is that we have at least 35 documents and blast emails that are waiting (sometime for nearly a year) to be approved.

    1. Another Lawyer*

      Normal for a bottleneck to happen, but a year seems EXTREME. At most, I usually have 1-2 weeks on non-time sensitive things.

    2. babblemouth*

      It’s common, in that there are plenty of bad managers in the world. It’s certainly not best practice to require everything goes through them, as that creates bottlenecks.
      There are exceptions where it would be normal though: a new employee that is still being onboarded, and someone who has made a lot of mistakes in the past and needs to be checked.

    4. TootsNYC*

      well, a year is a long time. If they can sit that long unapproved, maybe they should just be canceled.

      But yes, it is VERY common for the person at the top to be a bottleneck.

      When they have to see everything, it’s very important that the things that go to them are really, really good–so the only work they have to do is minor approval and tiny tweaks.

  53. Mimmy*

    I have a question about a previous job. This was several years ago, so I don’t know if the norms are the same.

    I used to work in a nonprofit that serves people with a particular disability and their families along with the professionals who work with this population. My job was to provide information and resources, either by phone or email. My 2+ weeks training period consisted of me reading various resource materials, watching videos, reading prior call logs and maybe one or two 1:1s with my supervisor.

    The one thing I wish they had was to let me listen on some calls, then have a staff person listen to me on some calls, just to ease me into it. I was wondering if that’s normal for new I&R employees. My guess is that privacy / confidentiality concerns was what prevented them from letting me listen to calls. Even if I did some mock calls with a staff or volunteer would’ve been helpful.

    The other thing is that I did have an internship with this population and did a paper on them too, so they probably thought I knew about the issues and resources inside and out. I&R just seemed like such a perfect job for me because I can’t drive and it fits in with my interests and some of my skills. Perhaps I expected more from them than I realized or I bit off more than I could chew.

    1. fizzchick*

      Not at all my field, but I’ve been in plenty of medical settings and sales settings where whoever’s helping me asks “Jane is new here and getting settled in, is it ok by you for her to help out?” Obviously lower stakes for a new waitress than a new ER nurse, but same idea both places, and seems like it could be extended to your situation. Plus if they’re recording the calls (with prior notification/approval) anyway, I don’t know why privacy would prohibit it.

    2. A Non*

      That’s poor training practices. Privacy shouldn’t prevent you from the kind of training you’re asking about – as you and fizzchick mention, there are a number of ways around it if it really is a concern. If you run into something like this in the future, it’s worth bringing up with whoever’s overseeing the training.

    3. Kelly F*

      Yeah, at an externship that only lasted a semester I had a caseload of my own and had to take down detailed information from them in a narrative way for affidavits. Before I did my own, however, I sat in on other people’s. And they was in a legal context, but confidentiality wasn’t an issue (because I would be bound by the same ethical code as the person conducting the interview). It was super helpful and I can’t imagine doing my own before listening in.

  54. Shishimai*

    I work at a big US corporation. We have multiple locations and I frequently work with people who aren’t in my time zone.

    Our telepresence is so bad. So very very bad. If we have video at all, it is glitchy and stuttery and weird (and sometimes we just don’t have it; not even a shared screen. That makes it hard to keep up with the documents that weren’t sent on the meeting invite.) Our audio is littered with the noises of half a meeting who can’t find their mute buttons, and for some reason we can’t turn off the “x has joined” or “x has dropped” notifications, so some meetings sound like the speaker is competing with an overenthusiastic doorbell.

    Naturally, I have come to hate large, location-spanning meetings, because they are utterly useless and tend to cause sensory overload in a hurry.

    Please tell me not everywhere is like this?

    1. Dawn*

      At my last job we used WebX all the time to do teleconferenced meetings. These were frequently globe-spanning calls, too, usually either with our Europe office or with our Asian offices. We had zero problems whatsoever, so there’s hope for you yet!

    2. JenB*

      No, not everywhere is like this. I work for a big US corporation also, and we have a great teleconferencing set-up. I’m not sure how it all works, but we have a contract with a company that manages all of our teleconferencing stuff – I have a button in Outlook that lets me schedule meetings, including sending links to everyone for web meetings. And the screen sharing for our web meetings works very smoothly. This also means we have good support we can call with questions (like how to turn the “x has joined” notifications off) For huge, company wide calls (this can be 100’s of people) the company we contract with will have someone dedicated to set-up and manage the call to make sure everything goes smoothly. We never use video – so I have no insight on that. And the muting thing – you have to constantly remind people to mute their lines, but I think that happens everywhere!

      1. Shishimai*

        That’s a relief. Thanks!

        I wonder if we could get someone to manage those company-wide calls. Those are really the worst offenders, but if you’ve got hundreds of people on them without problems, I don’t see why we can’t.

    3. FJ*

      On our meetings (Multiple US and Europe locations), we have a lot of “Hey Fergus, please mute yourself please.” and “If you’re not talking, please go on mute.” It’s normal and understood for people to say that regularly.
      Our screen sharing is slow, but generally passable. I do occasional video calls with my boss, but hardly ever with anyone else.

    4. AFT123*

      I used to work for a popular conferencing provider – all of these things are easy fixes except perhaps video, and conferencing can be made very convenient and efficient. Unless the business has told the provider otherwise, the join/drop notifications can usually be turned off by individual account, either by calling the provider or using their self-service web portal tool, or some providers allow using keypad commands in individual calls. You can also turn beeps off which I always recommend on larger calls. Muting – all conferencing should have the option for the host to mute everyone, either with a keypad command or through the web interface (ex. WebEx). Participants can un-mute themselves to ask questions, or the host can lock it so only they can control the participant mutes. This is a very basic conferencing function and should 100% be available to you regardless of your provider.

      Glitchy video is usually a bandwidth issue, especially if you’re on VPN.

    5. Navy Vet*

      The fact that you used telepresence makes me think I know what company you get your conferencing system from. I ked there for a very brief period. In fact it was my first civilian job out of the military.

      I was laid off because they weren’t doing very well financially.

    6. The IT Manager*

      Not normal. We have issues, but not to the extent you described. We don’t share video; although, we do share screens/documents and it usually works fine. We can usually get people to mute when we tell them to.

      Biggest problem: people talking on mute – “oh, I was on mute.”

    7. KH*

      Mostly not normal. I work for a remote team – my teammates are everywhere from California and Seattle to up in Connecticut and everywhere in between. I’m on at least 2 or 3 conferences a day because of that and we RARELY have the scope of problem you’re describing.

      What we do have are:
      1 – someone forgets to mute and we hear their conversation with the dog or their spouse or the mailman.
      2 – someone forgets to unmute and we’re all going “Jane are you talking to mute?”
      3 – every once in a while someone gets kicked out (usually because of the VPN connection.

      We have learned to adapt to those minor inconveniences.

      Also I present this for your amusement and entertainment:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYu_bGbZiiQ

    8. Hlyssande*

      My company has adopted WebEx and its lovely Outlook plugins and I frequently have meetings with people around the globe – it’s cool that way, actually. I might have a training with people in Australia one day and meet with people in Romania the next morning.

      Phone connection issues on the conference calls aren’t all that common, but when they happen it’s really frustrating. My most common connection issues are calls with people in China and India. At least part of that has to do with the telephone systems where they are.

    9. LH*

      We use GoToMeeting which has worked really well for us as a small company with multiple international offices. Everyone gets assigned a local number to dial (US number, Canadian number, etc.) for the same meeting or you can use your computer for the call. We can also share our screens so people can follow along with a presentation and transfer sharing screens between multiple users. For example, if I’m showing everyone my tea pot design proposal and Fergus has the latest layouts for the purple pots, I can transfer screen sharing to Fergus so everyone can see the new purple pot and then he can return the screen back to me.

      No “x has joined/dropped” notifications, but the lack of mute button usage is a user error that seems to happen no matter what service you use. The GoToMeeting organizer can mute someone else’s line at will but that’s not recommended. ;)

      (I don’t sell their product; I just really like it compared to what we had before!)

  55. Oy*

    Is it normal to have a remote supervisor?

    When I first started this position, my direct supervisor was located in my office. She left the company and now my new supervisor is located halfway across the country. I communicate with him via email occasionally (maybe once a week to ask a question or send him an FYI) but other than that, there’s nothing. He’s come in to our office a handful of time, but he rarely takes the time to meet with me for any catch-ups. We haven’t had an actual conversation about my position or performance in over 5 months.

    What’s more, if I am still a contracted temp worker who was replacing someone no longer with the company. We started talking about bringing me on full-time over 6 months ago, but again, nothing’s happened for the past 5 months.

    My last temp position was like this too. My supervisor, while in-office was constantly traveling and MIA for weeks at a time. We never had a performance review in my nearly 2 years there either.

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      It’s normal (although less common) to have a remote supervisor. We have two remote employees (long term, valuable employees who relocated because of family reasons) who supervise teams.

      The communication level you have with your supervisor may or may not be normal, depending on how independent your work is. We all work together so that little communication wouldn’t be normal in our world.

      A contracted temp worker waiting 6 months to be brought on (not hearing) is also kind of normal (although not in our world. I think it’s rude.)

      Everything you described isn’t abnormal but it sounds like the net effect is you feel left hanging and you’re going to have to address it yourself. Identify what the real problems for you are in the situation and proactively see if you can get those changed.

    2. The IT Manager*

      It’s normal for me and my organization. There’s tons of remote employees all over the country so remote supervisors are common. It’s a very culture dependent thing, though. And it sounds like your supervisor is doing very little supervision which is also organization and job dependent. That’s normal for me to, but OTOH my supervisor is very good about conducting the mid-year and end of year performance reviews, and being available if I need her. Sounds like your boss is not, and that it’s a problem for you.

    3. Kelly F*

      As long as you don’t have the ghosts of the previous governess and grounds keeper haunting you and your young charges, it’s not abnormal.

    4. nonegiven*

      One of my son’s teams he was on was distributed across 4-5 time zones. He was the only member in the same city with the manager. They had daily video conferences, IM, github, and a freenode channel.

  56. Dana*

    Is it normal for your direct supervisor to not tell you when he is going to be out of the office. Not just one-off days, but an entire week for vacation. Sometimes it is as if he is intentionally hiding the fact he is going to be gone.

    1. Another Lawyer*

      No, that’s weird and bad planning. Every place I’ve ever worked has a shared calendar where you mark yourself “OUT” for approved, planned days.

    2. AnotherAlison*

      In my case, yes. I think it depends how large of a department we’re talking about. No one tells me my manager is going to be out, but our admin assistant would usually know, so you’re not just wondering all week when she’s coming back.

    3. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      It’s kinda normal. It’s not abnormal.

      Sometimes it is inconsiderate (if the team is left hanging not knowing how to get hold of the boss who is unreachable on an island cruise) and sometimes nbd (if the boss is just as reachable as on a normal day, just not physically there.)

    4. The IT Manager*

      Not normal to me unless you rarely interact with your supervisor. And I rarely interact with mine and she still tells me when she’s going to be out for a few hours.

    5. JJ*

      My supervisor has a secretary and supervises a team of three (including me). Most of the time, I don’t know when she’s gone until I need something urgent and learn from the secretary that she is not here.

      I don’t know if some supervisors suspect that everyone will just plan parties if they know when their supervisor is gone or what, but I would appreciate being told about absences more often so that my projects don’t get put on hold for preventable reasons.

    6. Liza C*

      I work very closely with my supervisor and often forgets that he hasn’t told me that he’s going to be gone for a few days, particular when it’s for work. He just assumes he has.

      1. Liza*

        Hi to Liza from another Liza! I’m in the same situation–my supervisor sometimes forgets to mention he’ll be out, but I think he too assumes he mentioned it. He does put it on his calendar.

    7. Judy*

      We have a shared “Training – Travel – Vacation” calendar, and my manager puts his absences on there, just like the rest of us.

      We’re expected to put “Judy – Vacation” or “Judy – visiting X vendor” if we are out of the office for more than half the day. If we’re out for work purposes like travel or training, a contact number is put in the entry, usually along with the timezone, since some of the travel is international.

      But in my experience, it’s very much usual to not know that a manager is gone on vacation or business travel. I remember calling my manager at a previous company on his cell phone while he was in China and waking him up. If you don’t let me know where you are, I can’t know to not call you.

    8. Ama*

      I’m surprised how many people are saying this is normal — my experience is primarily with managers who are almost too diligent about sharing their schedule (sending around an email to the entire office if they are taking a half day, for instance).

      2. Not So NewReader*

        Yeah, this has been my experience, too. I am surprised by the answers here. I thought the few bosses who did this just did not care about their jobs and their people.

    9. TowerofJoy*

      Yes and no. I’ve known supervisors who did this, but it was always, IME, because they were doing something they were supposed to be doing. For example, abusing their vacation time, not reporting it, etc.

    10. LH*

      I think it is normal for some offices. Mine just this did last week, I only found out he was going on a cruise the following week when a coworker mentioned it off-hand. We do have a shared Dropbox calendar which everyone else fills out… except the boss.

      Maybe your supervisor is trying hoard his PTO by not recording them (thus not telling anyone). If it’s not recorded that he’s gone, he can essentially get “free” PTO days.

    11. QA Lady*

      My boss doesn’t always tell me when she will be out of the office. BUT if she’s going to be gone more than a week she will usually send an email blast to the department (most of us work out of different offices from her) and she always has an out of office set up with alternate contacts listed (typically her boss–who I am quite comfortable contacting if needed–and sometimes another QA person).

  57. Anonymouss*

    This is thematically related to a post above, but a bit different.

    I’m in public higher education, non unionized.

    Is it normal when you achieve tenure and get the resulting raise, to be specifically excluded from consideration for anything in that same year from a merit pool (if one is available that year).

    Had a great year, which also happened to be year I applied for promotion (here we apply for promotion at the beginning of the year, whereas merit is decided at the end of the year, so any good that I do during the year doesn’t factor in to my promotion/tenure application because all those materials are already submitted.) and was told that because I had a raise coming from my promotion they weren’t going to consider me for the merit pool, and we hadn’t had merit money available for a couple of years prior.

    1. Liz*

      I’m also in public higher ed, and it works that way here for all employees. If you get a raise or other adjustment, you are not eligible for merit raises for 12 months. (Unfortunately we’re also not guaranteed any merit raise, thanks to continued proration and funding cuts, so we tend to get nothing *unless* we get a separate adjustment.)

  58. CheeryO*

    State government employee here… my supervisor has told me that he doesn’t have time for regular check-ins and that he won’t be able to provide me much feedback, if any. I think it’s because our hierarchy is kind of messed up (11 junior and senior level staff all working under one person, but with a lot of independence). He has asked me to go to other senior level staff when I have questions. I don’t mind doing that (and they don’t mind helping me), but I feel like I’m not making much progress after a little over a year… it’s hard to identify what I’m doing well with and what areas need improvement. It’s also depressing me because I could definitely skate by doing the bare minimum, and no one would ever know the difference. I’m trying not to fall into that trap, but it’s hard to self-motivate sometimes.

    1. Former Retail Manager*

      Not state government….federal….however, I work in a position that sounds similar to yours. I have my own case load and work my cases mostly independently and my manager manages 13 people. However, I know many state governments continue to have budget issues today even though the economy, and their related budget, has supposedly improved and I don’t know enough from what you asked to know if it’s budget driven or not.

      If you were not assigned a formal trainer when you were hired, then yes, I don’t think that’s normal. You could try talking to some of the “old timers” to see how things went down when they were hired. Ask if there used to be assigned trainers that may not exist anymore due to budgetary issues. Ask who they went to and how they handled learning the ins and outs of the job. If it turns out that what your manager is saying is accurate, then I think you should be forthright with him and tell him that you feel you could really benefit from more frequent, detailed feedback and suggest perhaps a mentor or someone below him who might be able to assist you formally, with his blessing.

      My position has various built in reviews every other month (different types but they average a review of some sort every other month) and I will say that my boss seems overwhelmed. For the employees whose work that he is confident in, he reviews their work far less stringently, simply due to time constraints. All of the mandatory documentation that he is required to complete, in addition to his regular duties, doesn’t provide much time for him to be helpful. And I do believe you should be getting worthwhile, detailed feedback at least once or twice a year. Hope this helps! Good luck….state govt is tough.

      1. De Minimis*

        I was in a similar situation as CheeryO at my last job, which was federal. I had some level of training from a coworker who was on the verge of retiring, but she mainly passed off tasks she no longer wanted to do, and I worked a lot on my own to figure out how to do things.

        Once she left, I had more or less no real guidance…my boss had no knowledge of the work I did and couldn’t help me, she just knew certain things needed to be done at certain times. Thankfully, the pace was generally fairly slow and I rarely got into trouble, but it was pretty stagnant as far as professional growth.

    2. Liza C*

      Unfortunately, I think this falls in the category of “normal” for an overextended manager. Frankly, the fact that he was forthright about not having time for check-ins and referred you to other senior staff is commendable. At least he’s being honest! I also work in state government, though for a state university, and outside of a one-day orientation held once per month, there are no formal policies or practices for on-boarding new staff or expectations around what “supervising” entails. When I started, my direct supervisor intended to meet with her 12 other direct reports once a month, but that rarely happened. I have a colleague whose supervisor didn’t even know she’d started for more than a week. Now I’m on the hopefully-not-to-neglectful supervisor side of the equation and I can relate. What I found helped me to feel successful early on was 1) connecting with my more seasoned colleagues, not just when I needed help, but also to talk to them as professionals with general experience to share. and 2) Take classes – easy for me to say working on a university campus, I know – but I got a lot out of master’s degree because I was able to relate what was happening at work to the theory I was learning in the program. Good luck!

    3. LQ*

      Same here. Though I don’t have a lot of senior staff to turn to, it’s more, you always figure it out on your own. The staff he spends a lot of time with are the “problem staff” or people who need a lot of handholding. So I guess at least with my boss if you started to go for the bare minimum you’d get a lot more face time?

      Have you tried asking for something like quarterly check ins? Maybe he can’t manage weekly or even monthly, but something like quarterly might work and help a lot.

  59. Luz*

    I love this! Thanks, Allison!

    I have two questions. For background, I am in my second year of working full time in the legislative branch, but have worked part-time for the entire last eight years while in school, in a law firm and previously in food service.

    1. How normal is it for your boss to police your time to the minute? My direct supervisor does this. I am not in a junior-level position, but I am the most junior person on my team. I have never encountered anyone else in this field who does this, and none of my colleagues have encountered it (in my previous job it wasn’t a problem). Staffers usually go to briefings and lunches and coffees when they don’t have other things they need to be working on, but my boss begrudges this. Especially because we are paid so little relative to our qualifications, these “perks” are completely standard and that kind of networking and flexibility is frankly how a lot of things get done and how we get inside information. Even the other teams in my office all operate more flexibly. I’ve never neglected any assignments for this and have received overall good feedback from this boss and the big boss. My boss seems to be one of those people who judges people on “face time” rather than “quality of your work”. I’ve never worked in an office like this, how do I deal with it?

    2. A more general line of inquiry – any AAM readers have advice on how to handle a manager who is smart and a nice person but just judgmental and micromanagey? I feel sorry for her because I know she is unhappy in her personal and professional life and finds it hard to relate to people. But the things she arbitrarily hates include heat, cold, skirt suits, desserts, alcohol, almost a hundred random words (seriously, I keep a list), and millions of other things. She is good at the technical parts of her job but she also works an hour later and an hour earlier than everyone else because admittedly she doesn’t have anything else to do. I need to keep a good relationship with her without taking her criticisms personally, because she is critical of everyone. I am good at my job and get along well with her, but her unhappiness is starting to affect my happiness!

    2. Dawn*

      1- not normal at all. Everyone has had at least one micromanaging boss, tho, so consider this your freebie :)
      2- Save this one and ask in Friday’s open thread, I bet you’ll get a bunch of good responses! I don’t have anything to add to this one tho.

    3. ADL*

      1. not normal at all but if you have a crappy boss, then this is what happens. Mine – she has a minion that keeps track of our time and reports to her (even though I am far from being a junior staffer of any kind).

    4. Doriana Gray*

      My division has started tracking people’s comings and goings, and the job I had at the law firm prior to coming to this company, and come to think of it, the for-profit school I worked at prior to that, have all done it. So yeah – I’d say it’s common (and highly annoying). When I was hourly and exempt, okay, it made sense. But I’m salaried and exempt and still being treated like a child. It’s one of the few things I don’t like about my new job.

  60. SmallTownReporter*

    I work at a local newspaper, I’ve been here for about two years.
    I know my pay isn’t great, but that has a lot to do with the small size of the paper and the rural place I’m living, so that’s not what I’m asking about, but it does factor in.
    We are expected to be in between 8:30 and 9 in the morning, and our paper goes to print at 4:30 p.m., so there’s really very little to hang around after 4:30. I’m also expected to clock around 40 hours a week, which during busy times is no problem at all, but particularly in the beginning of the year, can be hard because we’re asked to clock out for lunch. I know from working at retail stores that you clock out for a 30 minute unpaid lunch, but I really thought that at a professional office where we’re more or less allowed to manage our own time that it wouldn’t be an issue. Adding to this is my annoyance that I regularly skip lunch on busy days to get my work done, and have given up loads of weekends to cover events, but I get penny-pinched out of what is basically $9 for a 30 or 40 minute lunch break.

    1. Lily in NYC*

      If you are non-exempt, then this is very normal. I work in a professional office and am non-exempt, and I don’t get paid for lunch. I am allowed to manage my own time, but if I work through lunch (which I usually do), I am giving them an hour of free work. But if you are non-exempt, you should be getting paid for working weekends. Wait, if you are “covering events”, does that mean you are a reporter? If you are a reporter and are expected to clock in and out, then I don’t think that is very normal at all.

      1. SmallTownReporter*

        Yes, I’m a reporter and we do get paid for covering events. I don’t mind working on weekends to cover events, or at night, but I feel like allowing me a little freedom during slow times to take lunch (which I never take more than an hour, if I know I’ll be gone for longer than that, I clock out) is, balancing the scales I guess?

    2. Not a Real Giraffe*

      Depends if you’re classified as an exempt employee or not. Non-exempt employees are required to take a break. You can’t just work through it; your employer has to give you an unpaid break. It’s the law (I think). Most non-exempt employees are entitled to overtime pay, or at least comp time, so you should look into that.

      1. Ad Astra*

        Federal law doesn’t require breaks for non-exempt adult workers, though many states do.

    3. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      If you’re non-exempt, it’s normal to do things that way.

      If you’re exempt, it’s not normal to be clocking in and out keeping track of “paid or unpaid” lunches.

      (but if you’re non-exempt but working through lunches that you’re not paid for, that’s illegal)

    4. Kira*

      I’m exempt and still get treated kind of this way, so I’d say it’s normal. Work 40 hours a week (though obviously work more when there’s a long meeting, or a tight deadline). But don’t work less than 40, or show up late, or leave early, even when things are slow.

      1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

        Yeah but it’s not normal to literally clock in and out for lunch if you’re exempt.

    5. Ad Astra*

      This is a normal thing for reporters, copy editors, and photographers — who are almost always non-exempt, despite being full-time professionals. When I was working the copy desk, I often took extended lunch breaks on nights when I knew most of my work was coming in late to off-set the fact that I’d be at the office well past the nightly deadline. Some days, it was so busy that I ate at my desk instead.

      Most exempt employees are scheduled 8-5 or 9-6 or some other span of time that is actually 9 hours; they may not have to clock out for lunch, but they’re not being paid for the hour-long break they take to eat because their salary is still based on an 8-hour day or a 40-hour week, despite being scheduled for a 9-hour day or a 45-hour week. It’s somewhat unusual to be paid for your lunch hour, and it’s pretty much unheard of in journalism. (And you can bet any exempt employee at a community newspaper is working way more than 40 hours a week with no overtime pay.)

      They’re paying you for those weekends you’re working, though, right? You should be clocked in for every minute that you’re working. I know many papers/editors pressure reporters to work off the clock, but that’s illegal for a non-exempt employee.

      1. SmallTownReporter*

        Oh yeah, I get paid for all the work I’m doing covering events and stuff, that’s not a problem. (And we do actually get overtime pay, but we’re STRONGLY discouraged from taking more than 2 or 3 hours, and that’s in rare cases when we’ve got like, 6 festivals in one week and they’re all in the evening or something.) I just felt, I dunno. Dinged? I guess, because it sort of felt like I was being reprimanded for taking a break during the slow times, when I bust my butt to get work done and not go into overtime during the busy times.

      2. SmallTownReporter*

        Oh, I misread you, yeah, I qualify for overtime, but we’ve got like three people in the newsroom who are on salary, though I don’t know if they’re exempt, so I don’t know about overtime

    6. Chinook*

      “We are expected to be in between 8:30 and 9 in the morning, and our paper goes to print at 4:30 p.m., so there’s really very little to hang around after 4:30. I’m also expected to clock around 40 hours a week, which during busy times is no problem at all, but particularly in the beginning of the year, can be hard because we’re asked to clock out for lunch”

      I think this is abnormal. When I worked for a small newspaper in layout as an hourly f/t employee, we would be done on press day by 2 pm (sometimes I would be the one sending it to press, so I could confirm here was nothing more to do) and then we would relax, maybe crack open a drink or go home early. The reporters would come and go as needed because what they covered wasn’t limited to office hours. It was acknowledged that there will be times when there was last minute work to be done (think new real estate ad changes the day we go to print) that would require us to work through lunch if need be, but also that it evened out by the times you could go home because your work was done. Those of us used to office jobs may get started on the following week’s work, but at some point you were just killing time and it would be better to just let us go.

      Then again, we never had to punch a clock and I couldn’t see that going over very well for most of the staff.

      1. SmallTownReporter*

        Yeah, this is my first job as a reporter outside of a school paper setting. And we’ve got literal punch cards, btw, welcome to rural North Carolina ;)
        Most of our work does get done during the ‘normal’ work day, because we don’t really have an online presence, there’s no need to run to a crime scene at 2 a.m. But that’s sort of my feeling, is that during the summer and fall when we’re just packed all day with stuff, I work very hard not to go into overtime and get everything done, which very often means working through lunch. And, at least for me, this isn’t true for the other reporters all the time, once a week I cover a board meeting that regularly runs til noon, so I’ve got to head straight back to work and work straight through the day to get the story in on time.

  61. Potatoe*

    Is it normal and common to get weird reactions and joking-not-joking comments about taking vacation? I work at a small professional family business, and while my boss is probably on the better end on the spectrum of small business owners, he has this thing where he forgets (“forgets”?) all the time when we’re scheduled for vacation, despite reminders months, weeks, or days before, or makes passive aggressive comments about how our vacations interfere with office operations. Here are some examples:

    – [a really shocked expression when you let him know you’re heading out and going to see him in X number of days, like he can’t believe you’re actually leaving.]
    – “You’re leaving already? Don’t you have vacation coming up?” [when you’re heading out on time at the end of the day]
    – “Wow, I guess you’ve earned your vacation this time.” [after working after hours for weeks straight to get work done]
    – “Uh oh, we’re getting busy so vacations are cancelled for everyone.”
    – [after someone has come back from vacation] “Things were so crazy without you, we can’t let you go on vacation ever again. Haha.”

    He doesn’t actually block us from taking our vacation time or act resentful when we ask for days off, it’s just… these constant comments, all the time. Is this… common? Or is it even anything worth complaining about? At the end of the day, talk is talk, I’m still going on vacation and my boss isn’t making it hard for me to do so, so maybe I should just get used to brushing it off and not letting it bother me.

    1. CM*

      Ugh, it seems like this comes up a lot, but I’ll still vote for “not normal.” I’ve never had a job where taking vacation was a big deal. It’s part of your compensation. A friend of mine just had a difficult conversation with her boss about how she wanted him to stop giving her a hard time about vacation, which she had earned and had the right to take. But she’s skeptical that this will actually change anything. I think your approach of brushing it off is a good one.

    2. Sascha*

      I think it’s normal for bad managers, not normal for good ones. Good managers try to be aware of how they come across, even when joking, because of the power differential. Even if your boss isn’t resentful and it’s all 100% joking to him, it is still stressing out his employees and giving them the impression they can’t take time off.

    3. Mando Diao*

      It’s common in small businesses. The last time I worked for this kind of business, my boss would say, “I’ll give you hell when you want to take vacation time, but you know I”ll let you do it.” He thought he was being good-natured and also showing people that they were too essential to be gone for too long. I’ve gone on about my issues with small businesses in in other posts so I won’t reiterate all that here, but the sticking point is that if you’re working for someone who launched his own business instead of working his way up and learning office norms, is used to working with family members who ask for things informally, and who thinks he’s doing you a favor by paying you at all, you need to decide if you want to move on to a bigger company with real HR and an on-paper vacation policy.

    4. JJ*

      I’ve only taken maybe four vacation days off (two days at a time) during the 1+ year I’ve been at my current org, and each time my supervisor forgot, came to my office to confirm 1-2 days before, and got a panicked look in her eyes each time when I confirmed that yes, I will be taking that time off in 1-2 days.

      To put that in context, though: I work at one of those places that is so disorganized that a “crisis” or some other allegedly super-important-event-that-I-just-cannot-miss seems to be happening 75% of the time (or, like this week, it is rescheduled at the last minute to take place during your vacation time, so there’s pressure on you to reschedule to accommodate that stuff). I find it to be inconsiderate and I don’t appreciate anyone bringing panic about it to me days before I take time off, but it’s not going to stop me from using my benefits. I earned them, and so did you.

    5. Marketeer*

      I work with a lot of executives and after my vacation last summer, 2 of them told I wasn’t allowed to be out for that long anymore. I know they’re going for a compliment but still annoying.

    6. DCGirl*

      Annoying and normal. I work with a lot of people who use their vacation days for their children’s activities and appointments, so it’s a day here and a day there but not much more. My husband and I don’t have children and taking nice trips every year is something we save and plan for. The passive-aggressive comments I get are through the roof some times.

    7. TowerofJoy*

      Is your boss the owner? When I worked for a small business before yes, I got this a lot from the owner. I think its because its small business and sometimes that means they don’t always understand how you might perceive that, and they are very close to their bottom line.

  62. Anon for this*

    Employer has two career tracks for professionals, Track A and Track B, each of which have three levels (assistant, associate, and senior). The qualifications (PhD), responsibilities, and promotion criteria are the same for both tracks. In theory, track A emphasizes teapot research *slightly* more and track B emphasizes teapot production slightly more but in actuality, people in both tracks are doing pretty much the same job.
    Here’s the question: there is a 20% salary differential between the two tracks at each level. Department policy is that both tracks are supposed to be paid the same, but over time they seem to have diverged. As a new hire I was told that both tracks paid the same. There is no political will to fix this, and questioning it seems to have gotten me labeled as “difficult”. I know it’s not illegal, but am I wrong to think it is bad management? We are losing a lot of employees in the lower-paid track and projects are suffering.

    1. AnotherAlison*

      I think it’s normal two have two different pay scales for two different tracks.

      Seems a little abnormal that the jobs are almost identical and the policy is that they pay the same, but to me, that’s the weird part about your company. I work in an engineering firm, and diverging tracks for tech experts and PM-path engineers is normal. They DO try to say that the tech experts are just as valuable and that they need people on both, but at the end of the day, the PM-track is more lucrative (except for the most senior tech expert in each group, who is usually an industry-recognized type of expert). In my world, the equivalent to your “assistant” would probably look the same on both paths, but the scope of the job diverges further up the ladder.

      On a different example, when I started in the workforce at a printing company, operators in one division made something like 3x what operators in another division made. That division made more money and was more important to the bottom line, so the employees made more. Seems crazy, but that’s how they ran things.

    2. AnotherHRPro*

      I would guess that the minor difference result in different compensation rates (salary grades) per benchmark data.

  63. AnonforThis*

    My husband works in public secondary education (high school) and is currently applying for new positions. He has never applied for a position, including his current one, where any kind of salary or benefit information was provided before the offer stage — not even as a general range. He was told during his graduate program that seeming to care about or asking for this information during an interview process could hurt his candidacy because ‘teaching is a calling’ etc. Recently this resulted in him reaching the offer stage with a position only to learn that the position was a $10K drop in pay, no benefits, and a temporary contract. This also caused me to remember a situation several years ago where I had interviewed at a public school that insisted I actually accept the position before I was given salary or benefit information (I declined).

    This all seems to contradict what I’ve seen on AAM before about how one should approach interviewing, so I’m just wondering — can anyone comment on whether this practice is actually typical (albeit kind of lousy) in public education? In case it matters, most of my husband’s experiences have been applying to public charter schools, but this has definitely happened with regular old public schools too.

    1. Elysian*

      I’ve worked as a teacher in public schools but didn’t really experience this. That said, I’ve only worked in one district, so I don’t know if it is common or not elsewhere. Our salaries teacher salaries were all pretty public. I’m pretty sure there was a website somewhere where I could search my name and come up with my salary that a newspaper or something had put together.

      That said, in my district our union contract governed pay, and the contract was public knowledge. If your district is unionized, perhaps you could circumvent some of the inconvenience to you by trying to dig out the contract (or even calling the union directly to ask what they pay would be at his level).

    2. The Rat-Catcher*

      In MO, teaching salaries are public knowledge, so there was nothing like that in the process. Generally the salary would be included in the job posting because there was no point in trying to obscure it.

      But when it’s not public information, it is, unfortunately, very common to be looked down upon for asking about that information before the offer stage. It seems the hope is that you will fall in love with the job so much that salary, benefits, etc will be incidental to you – which is downright ridiculous for most of the workforce. You can offer me a job playing with puppies in the morning followed by mystery shopping at salons and spas in the afternoon plus a free European vacation every year, but if I can’t pay my bills with the salary, I can’t take it.

      I usually just try to take some solace in the fact that they’re shooting themselves in the foot with this practice. If they want to go through all the trouble of interviewing me, background-checking me, and making me an offer, only for me to turn it down because the salary/benefits are insufficient, that’s a waste of time and money they could have avoided by being upfront from the start.

    3. Ad Astra*

      My husband also works in public secondary education, and I know he doesn’t ask a lot of questions about salary during interviews. That’s primarily because the salary schedule is set by the district/school board; it’s non-negotiable and it’s public information. Many school districts will have their salary schedules on their websites if you poke around enough; many newspapers will also publish actual salaries of public employees, including teachers, on their websites. (I am a little surprised that principals don’t supply candidates with the salary schedule, because again, it’s basically set in stone.)

      There are probably some administrators who do have that “teaching is a calling and money doesn’t matter” attitude, but I think the main reason public ed veers so far from AAM’s advice on salary is that there is really no room for negotiation. Some districts do have special incentives for certain types of teachers (ESL certified, math and science, sometimes SPED certified) but they’ll definitely tell you about those up-front as a recruiting tactic.

    4. AnotherHRPro*

      I have several family members who teach in public high schools. While compensation isn’t withheld it isn’t discussed much because it is public information and starting salaries are established per the collective bargaining agreement with the teachers union.

    5. Ekaterin*

      In my experience, this really comes down to a combination of district and union practices. The union in my old district has a weak online presence, so salary and benefits information was not available for me to look over on my own; however, the district itself made up for this by providing that information as part of the written offer packet. My current district has a very strong union with an equally strong online presence, so although I lack a hard copy of my contract (including salary/benefits info), it’s very easy to access online.

      I did get a job offer this summer from a district that did not provide the current contract at offer and didn’t post it online. (I was only able to find the previous one, which was several years out of date.) When I asked, I was told that I’d get that information after I accepted the verbal offer and met with the superintendent. The meeting with the superintendent was not the last step in the offer process, but the first in the onboarding process – so I was basically being asked to accept with no salary/benefits information. I turned the job down for multiple reasons, but that was one of them.

      All of these were public districts; I don’t have charter experience so I can’t speak to that.

    6. M-T*

      Yeah, at a public school you’re not going to have a lot of wiggle room, because salaries are all determined by the union – googling “CBA [district]” or “Teacher contract [district]” would be your husband’s best bet. I’m not sure how that plays out in charter schools…they’re still public schools, technically, but I would expect less transparency, not more.

      The one place where there might be some movement would be in terms of experience – if he taught in District A for 5 years, he might be able to come in to District B at the “sixth-year teacher” pay rate, or at least at something above first-year. Again, that would be something that you might find in the contract, although I haven’t seen it in every district I’ve looked at.

      More generally, there is absolutely a strain of “this is a calling, and therefore any discussion of money is crass and demonstrates a lack of moral fiber” throughout education – because having a ~*~calling~*~ exempts you from having to pay rent, I guess? It’s gross, obnoxious, and vaguely classist (worrying about how you’re going to pay your bills is something other people do), but unfortunately quite common. Best of luck to your husband!

  64. Just a Question*

    I’m a director-level employee at a decent-sized non-profit (200 – 500 employees). I find that I typically attend 10 – 15 hour-long meetings a week and that I’m really not necessary for about half of them, but listed as a “required attendee” by the organizer (other directors or VPs at my org, not my boss) and I get side-eye if I chose not to attend. Is this kind of meeting load normal? How many meetings do people typically attend in a given week?

    1. TCO*

      Sounds pretty normal to me, though that doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t ask for your boss’s help to reduce your meeting load (assuming it’s standing in the way of you completing other work).

    2. The Rat-Catcher*

      If you have Outlook, the default is for anybody who is invited to be a “required attendee” unless the scheduler makes an effort to switch it to optional.

      Your meeting load isn’t unusual, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessary. I’d talk to your supervisor about which meetings you can actually contribute to and which would run just as well without you.

    3. The IT Manager*

      Normal for me and my team; however, I try not to invite non-contributors. You should work on skipping those meetings perhaps by asking them to explain your role. If they can’t articulate what you’re doing there then you shouldn’t have to be there.

    4. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      I’m ruthless about guarding my time from being stuck in meetings where I’m not necessary, and completely control my own schedule and still, an average week will have 10 meetings 1/2 hour to 1 hour long, not including one on ones or impromtu pop ins.

      If I had to let other people control some of my time? Shudder.

    5. AnotherHRPro*

      The number of meetings seems normal to me. However if there are meetings that you find do not add any value, I would recommend declining them with an explanation. If someone else should attend in your place, recommend the meeting to that person.

    6. Rebecca in Dallas*

      Fairly normal for managers at my company. I’ve tend to decline meetings that I know I won’t be needed in and when I do, I ask someone who will be there to fill me in if there is anything I need to know.

      I’ve also attended meetings in place of my boss, when they need feedback from our department but not necessarily her.

      If anybody side-eyes us, I haven’t noticed!

  65. Kate*

    My company has an annual award trip for the top salespeople plus a handful of star performers in non-sales roles. The trip is a group trip to the Caribbean for winners and their +1s that has to be worth at least $5k per couple. But there is no alternate prize. If you can’t make the trip, your award is basically a plaque. Is this common?

    1. The IT Manager*

      No. I’ve never heard of places offering trip as rewards except as part of TV/movie plots. Not normal.

    2. Kristine*

      This happens at my company. If you can’t make the trip then the slot is opened to another star performer or top sales rep. I’m not in sales, but I imagine it sucks when you’ve worked so hard to earn the trip and then are unable to attend. But at my company the sales reps make large commissions on top of their already substantial base pay (we’re talking $75k base pay + 10% commission on 6-figure deals), so they still receive a reward for their work.

    3. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Totally normal.

      The prize is the trip. It’s normal to not have a cash equivalency because if they wanted to give a cash bonus, they’d do that instead.

      (I’m not commenting on the advisability, just the normality.)

    4. AnotherHRPro*

      These types of awards are not typical, but when there are these it is completely normal to not offer an alternate prize. The award is the trip, not the cash value of the trip.

  66. ScoobyBlue*

    I’m coming up on 5 full years at my current position.

    I’m making $2.50/hr more than when I started.

    I have been offered a promotion before, but I didn’t take it because 1-I would basically be adding new duties (which I’m not trained in) on my already full plate, so it wouldn’t have been an actual full transition out, and 2-I wouldn’t have been making any more than my normal raise rate (I would just have a new title).

    First, is this raise (really lack of) and promotional system (or lack of) normal? For additional info, it’s a tiny company, and my feedback has always been good–the boss once called me the “lifeblood of the company.” Cash flow isn’t the best right now, though, which leads to the second question:

    Considering I’ll be eligible for additional vacation time this year, should I push for a more than normal (normal being $0.50/hr) wage increase? I already know I’ll be getting a bonus.

    2. F.*

      Very normal. In fact, we don’t get bonuses at all, and most of our employees have not had a raise in five years. Why yes, I do work for a dysfunctional small business!

  67. FJ*

    I’m wondering how other companies handle bonuses and performance reviews and rankings with HR. I’m at a Fortune 500 manufacturer. We have a spring to fall evaluation cycle, so it’s really only a partial year review. Our managers rank us on a scale of bad to good, and then submit the rankings to HR. Then upper management and HR force a bell curve on the rankings. I don’t manage anyone myself, but I’ve heard that all the managers or directors within a group end up in a conference room discussing each employee and adjusting them up or down on the scale to match the force ranking dictated by HR. Mostly I hear about high performing employees being adjusted down because “you can’t have more than 3 people in your group at the high ranks” which sucks when an entire group is high performing. But, I’ve also heard of bad employees being adjusted upwards. It seems that HR has lots of power and doesn’t trust individual managers to rank their people appropriately.

    Our management/HR is also not very transparent about pay scales and options for career paths, which is probably a separate topic.

    1. The Rat-Catcher*

      The bell curve is unfortunately very normal, but not good practice.

      I think Alison has stated before that this is a misguided attempt to combat ratings inflation. It forces the assumption that the highest performers of each department are equal, the second-highest are equal to each other, and so forth, and that may not be the case at all. I also don’t understand why any managers besides yours should have any say-so in your performance ranking. How familiar are they with your work, really?

      If these ratings have a significant impact on your raises/promotional paths through the company, your career path will be more determined by your manager’s persuasive skills than anything else. If that’s not acceptable to you, I’d start job hunting.

    2. Judy*

      The way the forced ranking system has always been described to me was that no more than 5% can be the highest rank, no more than 10% can be the next highest rank, at least 5% must be the lowest rank and at least 10% must be the second lowest rank, with the remainder in the center.

      I’ve not heard anything about bad employees being adjusted upwards, I’ve only heard managers complain that their team was good, and there was no need to force 1 of 20 onto a PIP and 2 more of 20 possibly onto a PIP and certainly on the “manage this person out” list.

    3. Liza*

      FJ, my company has the healthy version of that: managers within a division meet together to discuss their employees’ performance so they can make sure they’re all using a similar scale (so one manager’s “average” isn’t another manager’s “outstanding”). There’s no forced bell curve, just comparison to make sure the rating scale matches.

  68. MissMushkila*

    I’m in my first job as a software developer (I’ve been in the workforce for awhile, but this is a significant career change). The company I work for is small – less than 20 people total, but not really “startup-y” – they’ve been around a long time and have an established customer base. I had no experience in their core languages or tools when they hired me; something I was very upfront about. I’m almost done with a masters degree in comp sci, which I take classes for nights and weekends.

    When I started, they had me work my way through some online tutorials for the language and framework we use for a couple of weeks. Then they asked me to work on some use cases they had written for a new product that is intended to replace their core application. I’ve been working on that alone ever since, and long ago ran out of any written requirements. Sometimes my manager says something like “the workflow should be something like this”. I try to write those down and implement matching features to the best of my ability.

    There’s no test plans for my work, and most of the testing has been done by me, the developer. None of the other developers that work here have ever reviewed my code. I have very little opportunity to ask for help or feedback. When I try, I mostly get told no one has time right now, or “…later” – which never seems to arrive. I’ve been here for a little over 8 months.

    They’ve already sold a customization of the app I’m building to another company, which has a deadline of late May.

    How worried should I be? None of my coworkers/manager seem very worried, and my impression of them is mostly that they are smart, kind people – albeit over-scheduled. I know that software projects are notorious for running over deadlines, and that a lot of places don’t do things the textbook “right way”. I also, beyond being concerned about what some of this means for the project, am *super* lonely. I know programmers are stereotyped as being very introverted and autonomous, but am surprised how little interaction I have and am struggling with it. How much of this is just how the industry operates?

    1. Kvaren*

      Being your own Business Analyst and QA is very normal, especially for small software dev companies like yours. I worked at two that were that size or smaller. You will work in several roles. There might be more down the road that you don’t know about yet.

      At the same time that you’re performing several roles, your managers probably are doing the same and may not realize if/when your workload becomes unrealistic. My best advice is to be up to the challenges, but don’t wear yourself down/burn yourself out/build so much anxiety that it gets unhealthy for you. If you feel that there are serious obstacles to meeting deadlines, speak up often and early and leave a paper trail (email) so that you can CYA if you need to.

      I remember at least half a dozen personal nightmares from my times at small startups when I let deadlines creep up on me and allowed myself to drown in too much responsibility to the point that it kept me up all night and nervous and tense all day. My biggest regret is that I didn’t communicate more.

  69. TCO*

    Parking expenses:
    I work in an office where an increasing number of employees bike or take transit to work. Many of us still need to drive on occasion, though, for off-site meetings/events that don’t fill the whole day. If I drive to work, I only get reimbursed for mileage between the office and meeting, not between my home and office. I can handle that part. But I am also required to pay for most of my own parking at my office that day, which is somewhat pricey by our city’s standards. In fact, the cost of parking is one of my main motivations to bike or bus most days.

    Obviously my own transportation to work is my choice and my problem. But I think it’s petty that they won’t help me cover extra costs when I have to drive due to work requirements. We work in a transportation-related field, so supporting different kinds of transportation should be important to us.

    So… is it normal for your driving expenses to go unpaid even if you normally don’t drive to work?

    1. The IT Manager*

      Yes. I think it’s unfortunately common.

      I’ve also heard of people who drive everyday because if they didn’t park regularly they’d lose the pass and then be forced to pay for parking if they could find it on the rare days they’d prefer to drive because of bad weather and other situations.

    3. Irishgal*

      I worked like this before and I started leaving the car at home and taking taxis/public transport to off site meetings as a way to manage it (not only was parking expensive but driving to work added as substantial amount of time to my commute). Would something like that work for you?

  70. Navy Vet*

    I spent the first half of my adult life as active duty military. I still have some difficulty knowing where the line is between normal and acceptable requests/behavior from an employer and what is not.

    A couple of years ago at my last job a bird had gotten caught in the drop ceiling and died. It managed to go unnoticed there until it became maggot infested and then suddenly the president of the company had maggots raining down on him (YUCK).

    Instead of calling a company to remove the dead bird and cleaning out the maggots, the office manager and admin assistant did it. I still question if they should have. It’s super unsanitary and unhealthy to handle a dead animal with a maggot infestation. Not to mention they did not have any rubber gloves etc. They were in there with plastic shopping bags on their heads to protect their hair!

    Is it acceptable and normal to have your office staff take care of tasks like this?

    1. Another Lawyer*

      WOW. I really have no words. I definitely would have called maintenance or the cleaning crew.

    2. Kira*

      My workplace probably would have had the admin workers clean it up. We take days to weeks to get maintenance crews in, and nobody would have been okay waiting that long once they noticed the issue. Of course, we would follow that up with tons of cleaning and sanitation checks.

    3. The IT Manager*

      Not normal, but it sounds like those two were real troopers. I am also prior military and not squeamish. Really, though, is it really that unsanitary if they don’t touch the dead animal? I don’t think it particularly unhealthy if the maggots and dead flesh don’t come into contact with them.

      Not normal for office workers to be willing to deal with this, though. Not normal for them to be expected to.

      1. fposte*

        I don’t think it’s hugely unsanitary either, presuming you wash your hands. Maggots are gross, but they’re not particularly filthy. While I sure wouldn’t want to handle the bird, I don’t know that I’d want to wait a week or so for a company to come by and deal with it.

        However, it’s so abnormal to have maggots rain down on your head in an office that it’s really hard to say what a normal response would be.

    4. KH*

      This is another of those small office/private business things. Is it normal in a corporate setting? No. Is it normal in a small privately held business that doesn’t have a maintenance or cleaning crew? Yup.

      My family’s business was a fairly large one but what we did was send construction crews out into the field. So our main office was in one of those “warehouse” type industrial office blocks with maybe 15 people total in it. We didn’t have a cleaning crew or a maintenance crew. If an animal had died in a drop ceiling (not that it ever happened to us) I don’t know that anyone would have known who to call – and even once they did find out who to call, it’s not likely they could have gotten anyone scheduled the same day. Or that it wouldn’t have cost $1000. So – you do what you have to do.

      1. AnotherHRPro*

        Completely agree. In large organization, there are people who have all sorts of roles including facilities and janitorial staff. In smaller organizations they typically don’t want to spend the extra money to have someone do this when one of their current employees can take care of it.

      2. Rebecca in Dallas*

        Agreed, I once worked as a store manager in a department store. We had a facilities/cleaning crew but they weren’t there all night. A couple of times there were… bio hazardous materials (people are disgusting, that’s all I have to say) that needed to be cleaned up immediately. We couldn’t leave it there until the morning when the cleaning crew would come in. So someone would have to clean it up as best they could with the cleaning materials we could find. And if you drew the short straw or however we determined who was going to clean it up, you got some kind of reward (usually a gift card or something).

    5. TowerofJoy*

      I’ve had to remove dead animals in the nonprofit world, because no way would we spend money when we could do it ourselves. I hated it, and avoided it as much as possible. Honestly, I would have paid my own money to not have to do it but that usually isn’t an option if you don’t want to look silly.

  71. Kira*

    Wonderful timing. I’ve been having a lot of stress at work and want to leave, but I don’t know if I’m too eager to jump ship, maybe this situation is something many people encounter and overcome. I’ve worked a couple jobs, and have been at the current place 2.5 years. Everything was pretty good until late 2015, when we were all under stress and a coworker blew up at me, leading most of the management team to take her side and lose trust in me. Everything up until then led me to believe I was appreciated and well respected, “worth my weight in gold”, “we’d do anything to keep you”. Now every conversation includes pointed comments about how they think I’m dropping the ball, random micromanagement of things I’ve been excelling at for years, and lectures about vague qualities like being more of a team player. My current boss is immune from this and still loves my work, and I really don’t think my quality of work has changed – just my coworkers attitudes towards me.

    Is it normal to work through this kind of mess and recover, or should I start looking to move on to somewhere I don’t have this albatross around my neck?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      :( None of this is normal or healthy.

      If your boss is still rooting for you, maybe she can help you sort through what you should do next with your co-workers. Ordinarily you should try to solve your problems yourself but perhaps she has some useful advice, knowing all parties.

      1. Kira*

        Thanks. My boss is definitely being supporting and we’re actively discussing ways to rebuild my reputation. I was also talking to some friends for perspective (this post is so well timed) because I couldn’t tell if this was just me overreacting to the first time I wasn’t considered an all star, or if this is seriously messed up.

  72. Heavenly Mashpea*

    Hello! I am a recent college grad who has been working at the same institution (a for-profit college) for three years, and wanted to know if the following three things were normal:

    1. Our Academic Dean has no sense of grammar or spelling. She sends out emails capitalizing every other word, drops punctuation, refers to other women as Mr. instead of Ms., ends sentences with seven exclamation points, and tells instructors they must “call row” instead of “call role”. She does not have an assistant, and I was wondering if she was just a horrible example of academic excellence or if it was normal for college Deans to have assistants that typically fix this stuff for them before their emails go out.

    2. My PTO must be accrued before I can use it. I’ve heard of this but a lot of other people have told me this is absurd so I wanted to hear from the community!

    3. I was promoted with no pay and no title change, but technically I am at a higher position than I was previously. Does this tend to happen according to the needs of the business? I am worried that should I apply for another job, it will be difficult for them to verify that I actually do this work.

    Thanks everyone!

    1. Amber Rose*

      I don’t know about the first one though I suspect you just got unlucky, but the second one is standard. Speaking from the law where I am, that’s rate of PTO accrual is regulated however employers can choose to give set numbers of days off instead if they prefer. The accrual thing has been the way for nearly every job I’ve ever had.

      3 sounds off to me, but if you have taken on new responsibilities I’d take that to your boss and ask for an increase. If you don’t get it, time to consider options.

    2. The IT Manager*

      #2 – Very normal. I’d find it weird to get a lump of PTO when starting a job.

      #3 – Unfortunately normal; although , without a raise or title change I wouldn’t say you were promoted. You just got extra duties permanently assigned to you. A promotion would require a pay raise or change of title. But it’s common for people to pick up new duties without actually getting promoted

      1. Bowserkitty*

        OldJob gave 20 days right off the bat in addition to whatever time you’d eventually accrue. Only recently did they switch this to a flat 30 and no accrual, but they still offer it from day of hire.

      2. Doriana Gray*

        But it’s common for people to pick up new duties without actually getting promoted

        My old firm called this a lateral move when they did this to me.

    3. JJ*

      RE: your Dean: It’s not uncommon for academics to not uphold the highest of standards of communication over email, though your example does sound a bit extreme for what I’ve seen among the Deans I’ve known. Sometimes things like the “row” versus “role” thing can be chalked up to exhaustion, as Deans are very busy people.

    4. Liz*

      #1 – Could be ignorance, could be carelessness, could be a disability. I’d probably lean towards the latter for an academic dean, but it’s hard to tell. Your example seems more extreme than most.

      #2 – Totally common. A good manager will (if possible) let you “borrow” time in the early stages though. I’ve occasionally had to borrow time for a funeral or special vacation.

      #3 – I’d ask for at least a title change to reflect the promotion, because that affects how others see you. Also, how is it a promotion otherwise?

    5. fposte*

      1. I would be stunned to see that from a college dean. While many deans have assistants handle their communication, they’re generally coherent people. I don’t know if it’s linked to the school’s being a for-profit but it sure doesn’t help in my mind.

      2. Absolutely normal.

      3. I don’t get what makes this a promotion. “Gave me more work to do” isn’t a promotion.

    6. AW*

      I only worked for a university a short time but I can’t recall seeing any emails from anyone high up with a lot of grammar or spelling issues. In fact, the only person I can recall having any spelling issues was a co-worker and even then that was mostly short, quick messages sent just to me.

      I’ve never worked anywhere (2 corporations in addition to the university) where you could use PTO before you accrued it. It’s really weird that you’ve had a lot of people tell you this is absurd. What happens if you use up 24 hours of unearned PTO and then quit before you earn it? Do you have to pay that back? How would that even work?

      I can’t speak to this but it certainly sounds to have a promotion that’s essentially invisible and doesn’t seem to benefit you in any way.

    7. Chinook*

      “2. My PTO must be accrued before I can use it. I’ve heard of this but a lot of other people have told me this is absurd so I wanted to hear from the community!”

      This is normal and I think it comes from a company not wanting to risk giving away too much money before it is earned. Ex: If an employee takes 2 weeks vacation that hasn’t been accrued and then quite upon her return, the company is unable to get back those 2 weeks of wages that were essentially unearned.

      And, for perspective, it could be worse. One company I worked for only allowed you to use the PTO you accrued the previous payroll year. This meant no vacation for atleast 1 year or, if you were hired in the month or two before the new payroll year, possibly only 2 or 3 days vacation in a 2 year period. The irony was this meant the company had this gigantic liability on its books towards its employees as vacation pay is required to be accrued as real dollars in Canada and must be paid out on your last pay cheque when you leave.

      1. Ros*

        Hmmm… I’m actually surprised by this. In the market I work in it seems to be rather normal to be able to take time off before it’s accrued as long as you are after the 3 month probationary period. If a person quits and has taken more days than they earned, they have to pay back the time. I believe there is a percentage calculated, and this percentage also applies if you quit and you have unused accrued time. The company pays it out to you at whatever that percentage calculated comes out to. I can’t remember the specific number unfortunately.

        Is my experience the anomaly?

      1. Ama*

        Yeah I used to edit emails/publications from our Dean as an admin in higher ed and even though he wanted me to check them over just for general proofreading, I can maybe count on one hand the number of times I did anything more than fix one tiny typo.

        It was a little more difficult with my direct boss, who did not have an academic background but thought having taught grade school English as a volunteer at a church mission made her a good writer. Many times I’d just ignore edits she made to things because it would change a verb tense in the middle of a sentence or result in a sentence fragment.

    9. Rebecca in Dallas*

      #2 is pretty normal, I did have one job where you could “borrow” PTO if you hadn’t accrued enough yet. So your PTO hours could go into the negative, but would build back up into positive. But I think that was fairly unusual.

    10. EW*

      I see #1 from a certain higher-ups in my organization too, and while I find it very annoying myself, I think it’s something that’s tolerated from *certain* people. It would look absolutely sloppy from a more junior staffer, but higher-ups have earned more leeway/privileges. I’m thinking of one very senior person who frequently does this; he’s also one of the longest-tenured and best-respected people in the organization, and I guess people have just learned to accept his emails the way they are and realize that if you look past the typos, there’s a lot of good content under there. (Granted, I’m not in academia, and I can see how it might be less tolerated there …)

    11. AG*

      #2) Very normal. Companies I’ve worked for typically don’t let employees “borrow” time until around their 1 year mark. It’s essentially a pay advance, which we wouldn’t allow under any other scenario. If I approve that as a manager, I’ve got to be really sure you’ll be around long enough to “pay it back.”

      However, I did have a friend whose company changed PTO policies to something similar to what you’re describing. Maybe you can confirm? Her company tried to improve cash flow by only approving PTO requests once the PTO had been accrued AND was already in the PTO bank. Plus there were notification requirements. You could take up to maybe 3 days or so off with at least 2 weeks’ notice, but anything that was about a week or more required 3 to 4 weeks’ notice, presumably so they could arrange for coverage.

      This is how it played out in real life. Say you earn 10 days of PTO every year. It’s January, you’ve got zero PTO days in the PTO bank, and you’re planning on a two-week Caribbean cruise at Christmas. By the time that cruise rolls around, you’d have your 10 days accrued and you’d be able to give your boss a year’s notice! No problem right? But her PTO system wouldn’t let her submit the request in January because she didn’t ALREADY have her 10 days in the bank. She’d essentially have to submit her request right before she went on the cruise…and then she’d still be denied due to the notification requirement.

      I’m not sure if you meant something like this, or more in line with the not “borrowing” from the PTO bank?

      1. AG*

        Just to be clear, not allowing borrowing from PTO is normal while essentially barring people from using PTO in practice is not normal.

    12. M-T*

      1) It’s been my experience that some the best-educated and highest-placed people in academia have some of the worst grammar & spelling in internal email. They can get away with it in a way that less senior staff can’t – the presumption is of inattentiveness, not a lack of ability. Frustrating, and probably something that your coworkers are rolling (rowing?) their eyes about, but not that uncommon.

  73. Lady Kelvin*

    I have a question for US Feds about applying for jobs. I’m finishing up my PhD and am applying to mostly Fed jobs because thats really my only option other than academics. A couple of jobs I’ve applied for I’ve made it through the initial screen and was “referred to the selecting official” but then I have heard nothing. For almost 4 months. With another Fed Org I applied with I’ve already been interviewed and turned down (fine, I realized I didn’t want it during the interview). Should I give it up as lost? I’m at the point now where I am 2 months from finishing and need to find a job, so should I start applying everywhwere? Is it normal for Fed jobs to take so long?

    1. The IT Manager*

      Unfortunately, yes, that delay is normal. I wouldn’t say you’re out of the running, but you should start apply everywhere.

      I’m sure it different for people with PhDs, but govt jobs are hard to come by for non-veterans not already in the system so you should keep applying elsewhere.

      1. Lady Kelvin*

        Thanks, I’ve been applying all over the place, but I’ve only been applying to jobs related to my work/I’m interesting in. The jobs I’m waiting for are directly related to my field. I’m just getting concerned that I need to apply to jobs slightly related to what I do/would not be something I want to do long term/are in areas I’m not really willing to relocate too because it requires Lord Kelvin to move too. Because of the type of work I do, being super specialized, its really rare for veterans to meet the qualifications/experience to get a job with the org. But thanks, its good to know there is still a chance to get one of those jobs.

        1. The IT Manager*

          Yes, I suspected that with the PhD requirement veteran’s preference doesn’t come into play as often as it does for jobs with less educational requirements.

          1. De Minimis*

            I’ve seen that too…basically anything grade 9 and above usually is less likely to have vet’s preference involved, because the minimum educational requirement is a master’s degree if someone doesn’t have equivalent experience.

    2. ElCee*

      Yes, Fed jobs can take many months and even years. USAJobs can be glitchy, too–I know someone who received an e-mail informing him he was Not Referred to Selecting Official for a federal position….a few months after starting that very job.

      1. De Minimis*

        They usually take a long time, but not always. Best option is usually to try for positions in more out of the way locations, but the downside is you can be stuck in a location you don’t really like.

    3. Aisling*

      Yes, unfortunately. It took me 4 months from the time I applied to the time I stepped foot in the door on my first day, and that was a lower-level GS-4 position. Another unfortunate thing to keep in mind that it’s very, very difficult to start out in federal service with a high-grade position. It may depend on the job, but it my experience, people often apply for and take lower-grade jobs than their experience/education qualifies them for, just to get their foot in the door, and then try to move up from within. I don’t say this to discourage you – keep applying! – but I do say this just so you know how it generally works.

    5. AnotherFed*

      That is very, very normal for USAjobs. Many government jobs are only open to people who are already government employees, so when something mid-level opens up to everyone, there are tons of applicants. Jobs that want people with PhDs are even fewer. Everyone who makes the initial cert must either be interviewed of the hiring manager must fill out special paperwork justifying not interviewing that candidate. That takes forever, even assuming the initial cert was good and didn’t need to be redone. Don’t count on a federal job until you have a formal offer letter in hand! Until then, keep applying for jobs!

  74. JJ*

    Alrighty, here’s my Q:

    My current org seems to have traditionally had zero interest in investing in professional development resources for “normal level” staff while throwing tons of attention and resources at senior-level staff. As a result of this, “normal level” staff don’t feel valued and there has been quite a bit of turnover.

    I was put in a position to do something about this, so I assembled a team of “normal level” staff to talk about the opportunities they’d like to have, things they wanted to learn, etc. We plan on organizing an “Org Con” event where “normal level” staff can voluntarily attend the events that interest them without having to travel elsewhere (many aren’t able to travel to conferences or workshops) or pay for it out of their own pockets. For example, one staff member is in love with an online project management tool she uses and wants to offer a workshop to show it off to other interested people and teach then how to use it. Again, the intent behind all of this is to shift from having a “culture of work” (where the “normal level” employees feel they are perceived as cogs who should just work and should not have motivations, goals, feelings, etc.) to a culture where employees feel the org is investing in their skills, job satisfaction, and general happiness.

    We reveal these plans to a small group of staff, and are immediately treated to an aggressive reaction to the tune of, “Why do you think I need this? Why do you think we’re not good enough? Why do you think I need training?”

    So……normal reaction? Would you guys and your colleagues react defensively to this idea? Does framing it as “training” versus “professional development” make a difference?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      I’m sorry, I kinda laughed.

      Is it normal to go out of our way to do something that you think is good, only to have it blow up on you as you described?

      YES, normal. I’m so sorry. :(

      You can either only include people who don’t have that reaction, or, semi start over from the bottom on up. You need buy in. Start out by asking people what they want . Some people will not want anything.

      1. JJ*

        I laughed too, Wakeen. :)

        (Not AT the staff, just….to myself when I got back to my office over what a disaster that was, haha.)

        1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

          You should have seen the crestfallen look on my face the first (and not the last) time I did something like that. Best intentions and hard work crushed by a so-no-what-I-expected reaction.

          :-)

          1. Irishgal*

            Yes it is a normal reaction and often you need to go back to square one and look at what you are trying to achieve e.g. training for training’s sake e.g how valuable will that excel tool be to everyone else? There was a previous post like this about how people impose “their brilliant” task tracking/project tracking tool on others when theirs does the job just fine for them but in a different way. Or are you trying to design an “upskill” programme that helps people progress from level A to level B? If so then have the ideas you’ve come up with met that? Did you communicate how having access to a, b and c will achieve x, y and z for you.

            It seems that what you are trying to do and what every one heard are two different things? Did people hear “x of us sat in a room and decided for you that you’ll want to do a b and c”? Often consultation with employees about new initiatives needs to have 2 or 3 rounds of consultation including every increasing numbers of employees to be successful rather than 1 round. The Dutch Postal service did a huge piece of work on this around 2013 when they were looking at efficiency and staff welfare and development ideas and one of the things they looked at was why their employee consultation process failed; they ended up changing it significantly. Might be worth looking it up.

    2. fposte*

      Yes, hugely. “Training” is “here is your homework.”

      But also cultures are hard to change with single-point innovations. In a place where need is the only reason somebody would have gone to a workshop, it’s not surprising that that’s how they greet the possibility, and it just looks to them like they’re cogs in your slightly different workplan.

      1. JJ*

        “….it just looks to them like they’re cogs in your slightly different workplan.”

        That’s actually some really helpful insight. Thank you.

    3. Fred*

      It sucks, but yes, it’s pretty much how it works.

      Where I work, our big bosses always like to tell us that if we have ideas on how to improve productivity or whatever, we should feel free to share them. My direct manager has told me the same thing. But the moment I suggest that maybe I have an idea, I get shot down immediately.

      E.g. we create documentation for contractors to use for construction (we’re engineers). But I feel that the way we present that information can be confusing, and can definitely be improved. I have used a different format at my previous job, and it worked great.

      It’s not just my opinion; I actually asked one of our contractors for his input, and he said that yes, these documents are a bit unclear, and they end up making mistakes. So I know I’m right. But no manager is even willing to listen. So I just say “fine” and do it their way. It sucks, but yeah, that’s life.

  75. apopculturalist*

    Someone up there had a really great question about coming into work after traveling, and my question stems from that a little:

    Is it normal to work over the weekend at an out-of-town, work-required event and not receive any time off in return?

    For detail: I’m exempt (salaried, a trade mag editor) and travel to teapot trade shows a few times a year. Sometimes, these trade shows require us to work on the weekends or travel to/from the trade show on weekends.

    In my first job out of college, we got a 1/2 day of ETO for every two weekend days worked. In my current job, you suck it up and that’s it.

    I just find myself feeling super stretched thin after working a trade show on a Saturday, coming back Sunday and essentially working for two weeks straight. So I end up taking my own ETO anyway to recover, but it’s never struck me as fair.

    So, fellow AAMers — normal or no?

    1. Kristine*

      >Is it normal to work over the weekend at an out-of-town, work-required event and not receive any time off in return?

      In my experience, yes. I’ve been planning events in 2 separate jobs and never got extra time off for working weekend events. Both companies were of the idea that exempt means “you work when we say you work”, regardless of how many hours or what days of the week that was.

      In an ideal world, our compensation package would reflect this work schedule. But my reality has never been that.

    2. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      If your job is travel, it’s normal enough. Some of my closest friends are vendors in our industry and the first quarter of the year is a brutal travel schedule + they have to be accessible during normal work hours M-F.

      It’s the nature of their gig so, in a gig with that nature, it’s normal.

      When we send people to trade shows, a few times a year, we comp them a day for any weekend travel or work, even though they are exempt. Going to a trade show is not their primary gig.

      1. apopculturalist*

        Good to know, thanks. Trade shows aren’t a primary part of my job, just something I do a few times a year. But given the burnout I feel from doing even that little amount of back-to-back travel, I wish they’d throw us even an afternoon off! It’d make a big difference for me.

        (Also, those people with the brutal travel schedules — I don’t know how they do it!)

        1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

          I have no idea. They are a marvel to me!

          My one friend has young children, two dogs, horses and a husband who isn’t the most hands on, so going out of town isn’t just packing her own suitcase, it’s making sure the rest of everything else runs in her absence. She’s the most organized, caffeinated person I know. I never see her dragging. She’s been doing this for 20 years!

          1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

            Heh, I just remembered. She has a live web cam on her dogs (not her kids :p) so she can keep an eye on the dogs wherever she is. They have a farm hand so she’ll call the farm hand to go into the house and give the dogs water if the bowl runs out.

    3. AdAgencyChick*

      Unfortunately, yes in my industry. I’ve had to travel on holidays (not major holidays, more like President’s Day) and attend trade shows that invariably require 8 AM-6 PM attendance over a full weekend. No comp days. Boo.

      1. Kristine*

        I’m in the same boat. I get the major holidays (Christmas, Thanksgiving, Labor Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day) off, but am traveling for all of the minor holidays. And I don’t get any comp days back in return. Though I leave 15 minutes early twice a week for a standing doctor’s appointment, so I guess I make it back over time.

    5. EW*

      In my experience (admittedly in professional, salaried, jobs with reasonable employers) it is NOT normal to work weekends without getting time off in return. That includes work-related travel on a weekend, like if you’re traveling Sunday in order to be in the off-site location Monday morning to work. In my experience it’s usually that you earn “comp time” or “credit hours” for the time worked on weekends or evenings, and then that becomes essentially the equivalent of paid vacation time off that you can use later on. Sometimes there’s a limit either to how much comp time you can build up, or how long you can hold onto it without using it (at my old job this was theoretically pretty short, like a month, but wasn’t enforced strictly). In other words, because of being exempt you’re not paid more for working the extra hours — same paycheck amount as always — but you do get the time back to use later on.

      I guess this puts me contrary to the other replies here, which just goes to show there’s a wide variety of “normal” in workplaces!

  76. Tau*

    UK-specific contract questions:

    So my contract forbids me from discussing my salary with fellow employees. Is this normal? I was really put off by it when I saw it, but that’s because AAM has hammered in that it’s illegal to forbid that… in the US. I really don’t know about the UK.

    Also, are non-competes normal? I’m in tech, if it matters. My contract has what I’d consider some hefty clauses in this regard; if I left, it’d be difficult for me to continue working in the same geographic region at the same sort of job without possibly violating it, for instance. For this job it’s not such an issue since I’m not planning on sticking around afterwards anyway, but I was wondering if this is something I have to be prepared for generally.

  77. Librarianna*

    When a director resigns, is it normal to appoint a temporary director and wait for months to years before beginning to look for a permanent replacement? This has happened in the past two organizations I have worked for.

    1. fposte*

      I don’t know about normal, but it’s pretty common, especially if/when you’re talking civil service positions that have to go through a board and even a period of public comment–an institution really needs to gear up for that–and the interim director is somebody known and established so people are comfortable with her being in charge.

    2. babblemouth*

      Months is definitively normal. Years, much less so. You want to take the time you need to find the best person for a job, especially in a senior position. However, anything above 9 months is too long – the company or department lacks direction, and that’s not good for big decisions and employee morale.

    3. TowerofJoy*

      Months is normal. Years is normal if the temporary director is good at what they do, or doing a good enough job that the gap goes unnoticed by the powers that be.

  78. Another Question*

    I’m still at my first job as an engineer about 2 years out of college. And I think I only talk to my managers about once every 2 months. I get most of my work from senior engineers in my department or directly from customers I’ve done work for previously. But I have to wonder if I should be making more of an effort to interact with my managers. I pretty much only talk to them when I get some kind of award/recognition from a customer (somehow they always know before I do) or at performance reviews where I have to summarize what I’ve done in the past 4 months. Is it normal to have so little interaction with my bosses?

    Honestly I don’t think they have any idea what I’m working on and they don’t seem to care as long as my customers aren’t complaining to them. Actually I now that I think about it, I’ve spent more time presenting results from my work to the company’s VPs (4 layers of management above me) than I’ve spent with my managers. This is strange right? I don’t have a problem with it really but it isn’t how I expect most organizations operate.

    1. AnotherFed*

      It depends on your org structure. Lots of engineering companies end up with a matrix org structure where your manager is not the same person who tasks you for a project. In those cases, your manager would worry more about making sure the number of people to do work and the quantity of work to do match up and less about the particulars of your tasks. As long as there are good feedback mechanisms to make sure they stay in the loop on your achievements, this is a normal and reasonable system.

  79. Nobody*

    This is kind of silly compared to what other people have been asking, but is it normal not to have a janitorial staff to take out the trash, vacuum the floors, etc.?

    I work at a large company with several hundred people at our location, and I’m surprised that we have to take out the trash ourselves in an office of 15 people. My last job was at a very similar company, and they had a janitorial service take out the trash every day (and at that company, everyone had an individual trash can at his or her desk, while at my new job, we just have a couple of communal trash cans), as well as vacuum/mop the floors multiple times per week. There is a janitorial staff here that cleans the bathrooms and mops the hallways, but they don’t clean the office areas — at least not in my department.

    Someone in my department once refused to take out the trash when she was newly hired, saying that she didn’t go through four years of college to take out the trash. She is now a manager and people still make fun of her for that.

    1. Lily in NYC*

      This seems very abnormal! Especially if you have several hundred coworkers (I can’t figure out if you work somewhere large or somewhere with 15 people).

      1. Nobody*

        It is a large company with hundreds of people working on site, and at this site, there is an office with 15 desks and that is where I work. The 15 of us share two trash cans, and we have to take the trash outside to a dumpster. There are many other offices with varying numbers of people (only high-level managers get their own individual offices — the rest of us are at desks or cubicles), and as far as I can tell, each office has to take its own trash out to the dumpster.

    2. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Woah.

      Abnormal!

      Even the tiniest office I ever worked in (four people) had a cleaning crew.

    3. babblemouth*

      Not normal, especially for a large company. For small companies, it varies, but anything above 10 employees would have janitorial staff taking out the trash. It’s not a matter of having gone through X years of college, but a matter of rational use of company time.

    4. Sascha*

      My large state university definitely has a janitorial staff, but they aren’t allowed to enter individual offices. So if I want to have a trash can in my office, I am responsible for putting in bags and emptying it into the larger hallway trash can. I’m not sure how normal that is, but it makes sense that they don’t want non-essential people in offices that may contain sensitive student information.

    5. The IT Manager*

      As a federal employee, I have had to dump my trash can in a centralized trash can (as a cost saving measure). Not a big deal. I have not had to do more extensive cleaning (except as a military trainee).

      1. AdAgencyChick*

        I worked at an agency that decided to “go green” (read: save money) and make us all take our trash to a centralized can. Worked like a curse, or whatever the opposite of “worked like a charm” is. People would just let their lunch scraps sit at their desk for hours, stinking up the office. NOPE.

    6. TowerofJoy*

      Not normal. And I don’t blame her. I understand that it sounds bratty, but I did in fact, go to college and get a higher education to get out of restaurants/retail/cleaning. If I did all that and still had to do it, I’d be pretty sour. I did my time in that sector already.

      1. Doriana Gray*

        At my first post-college job as an Office Assistant at a for-profit school, the other OA told me that, in addition to the normal admin duties, we would have to unclog the toilets in the bathrooms. If she wanted to do that, more power to her, but I wasn’t going to do it, and I never did.

    7. AnotherFed*

      Normal if you work for the government. Also fairly normal if the areas not serviced by the janitorial staff are in a secure/restricted area – they may not want the janitorial staff in there ever.

      1. Lily in NYC*

        But they also have to mop floors and clean bathrooms. That is not normal (and I am a government employee).

    8. Irishgal*

      It’s become the new normal over the last 5 years or so in businesses I’ve worked in; a desk top tray is the norm and the plan is you ideally empty it daily into the communal bin (recycling as appropriate).

      A combination of promoting recycling and cutting costs. As many office services jobs are now managed ny contract services it also means the contractor staff only have access to one area and are not wandering around all the workspaces so is a security thing too.

  80. Joy*

    Hi,

    Three members of senior management in a department that is not mine have quit in the past week with zero notice. One of them founded the company (that department) and was acquired by us (larger company) two years ago. The two others who have quit both worked under him as a Director and VP. So we have a COO, VP and Director in this department that have all left, and the only ones left are associates. Should I be worried that they know something I don’t that is bigger in the company?

    They were not laid off or fired, they left of their own accord, I know that to be true.

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Abnormal.

      It would be abnormal for one of those people to leave, on their own, with no notice. Three?

      Abnormal.

      Something is a afoot.

      2. Artemesia*

        When I see this sort of thing I assume a merger, a layoff, a bankruptcy or a very bad quarterly report is in the offing. Could be coincidence but when rats start fleeing, check the hull.

    2. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Wait, amended answer!

      I just read this more carefully:

      One of them founded the company (that department) and was acquired by us (larger company) two years ago. The two others who have quit both worked under him as a Director and VP.

      This could be normal, because that’s a typical time in a purchase agreement (2 years) that a previous owner agrees to stay with something they sell.

      It’s not abnormal for someone who sells, and agrees to stay own via contract to leave when the time is up, nor is it abnormal for them to take key people with them.

      1. AnotherMuseumPerson*

        Yes this is true. I know through friends who just went through this at their company. The founder, VP, etc. all left when their “term” was up.

    3. KH*

      Are you sure it was “without notice” or just without notification to the rest of the company?

      As Wakeen’s Teapots said below, it’s not uncommon for an old owner/leadership to stay on for a set period of time after a buyout and then to leave quietly at the end of that period. If the old owner is moving to a new startup of his own or a new leadership role, he might very well take a few of his senior people with him.

      I think more information is needed to know if this is a sit-up-and-take-notice event or just business as usual.

    4. Cath in Canada*

      When this happened in my former company, the three people who all left within two weeks of each other turned out to be forming a new company that ended up being a competitor for some, but not all, of the original company’s business. But I have no idea how common that kind of thing is.

      2. Artemesia*

        This happened at a company I worked for. The two key players in a division left and founded their own consulting company. They didn’t share this with me ahead of time but they did take steps to essentially put me in place to take over their positions leading the division.

  81. Marie C.*

    I recently had a job as a Church secretary, which was my first time ever doing any kind of admin. work. In our office we had five metal filing cabinets where most of our files were stored. Since the past few secretaries before me were not especially organized, the filing “system” was a mess.

    Often, the pastor would hand me a piece of paper and ask me to file it, but I would honestly have no idea where it was supposed to go. When I’d ask him where it was supposed to be filed, he would tell me it was my job to have a system in place. I told him about the state of our filing cabinets, and he said he was aware of that, but that it was my job to re-organize the whole thing and create a new system ASAP.

    I was of course willing to take that on, but my problem was that—since I have no background in accounting or business management—I wasn’t sure what the different kinds of paperwork in the files were. We had all sorts of things there: employee personnel files, Church membership lists, tax records, and what looked like different kinds of legal permits—along with other documents I couldn’t identify, as well as things which arguably might not have belonged in our permanent files in the first place (such as flyers from local businesses which appeared to have been mass mailings). I was hesitant to re-organize all the files totally on my own, since I didn’t know for sure what needed to be easily accessible and what was being kept just for the sake of records; what needed to stay and what should have been thrown out; which kinds of paperwork needed to be kept together; and which paperwork needed to be filed in what order (e.g., I didn’t know if I was supposed to file the receipts from local businesses by company, type of service rendered, or in strict chronological order). I was really scared that if I went to re-organize “blind,” I might lose or accidentally throw out something important.

    I explained my questions to the pastor and asked if he and I could ever spend some time to go over some of the files before I tried re-organizing them, but the pastor said no and yelled (as in, actually raised his voice) at me for not being willing to do my own job.

    In the end, I wound up getting laid off by a new pastor after just two months on the job, as the new pastor wanted to bring in his own person. But, the pastor I worked under did tell me he would be giving a negative reference to any future employer who contacted him.

    So I’m honestly not sure, was the pastor I worked under being unreasonable? Or am I really just not cut out to be a secretary? Or is it a combination of both?

    1. Sascha*

      The pastor you worked for was being an unreasonable ass. You needed a subject matter expert in order to complete your project. You didn’t know what files were to be kept or tossed, or where they went…so while you were responsible for putting the system into place, the pastor should have given you input on what to keep and where to put it. You weren’t being “unwilling to do your job” by simply asking him questions.

    2. KH*

      I don’t agree that the pastor was being an unreasonable ass nor that you need a “subject matter expert” to set up a filing system.

      Being able to set up a filing system might be the very definition of a core skill that an administrative secretary (which is what a church secretary is) should have. A church secretary is more than just an admin – she (and it’s usually a she) is the gatekeeper for the pastor/minister, an administrator, and often an office manager as well. It’s her job to make the ministerial staff’s jobs easier, not harder.

      I think you fell down on this one. You basically acted paralyzed without his hand-holding for what should be a routine admin task. If it were me, that would tell me that I couldn’t count on you to handle anything that required decision making – much less handle anything more serious.

      A better way to handle it, IMO, would have been to tackle the job, put the files in order as best you could using your best judgement and a little bit of internet research. Anything you couldn’t identify or didn’t know what to do with, set aside. Then AFTER the job was done, you go back to your boss (pastor or CEO, the setting doesn’t really matter) and say “I’ve got the files straightened out and organized and labelled so we can find everything at a glance. But I have a handful of things I’m not sure about. Can I take 10 mins to run those by you to see if you think we should keep them or can I shred them?”

      1. KH*

        I’d like to add – as this might be helpful if you pursue other admin roles – you said that you were scared you might lose something or misfile it. Generally in an admin role like that the whole point of having a system is to have one that works for YOU. Your pastor most likely didn’t care how you filed things – whether you sorted them by date or business or service type. Most likely what he wanted was to know that when he said “Sascha, how much did we pay for our Easter teapots last year?” that YOU could readily put your hands on last year’s Easter teapot receipt and say something like “Pastor Smith, last year we paid Wakeen’s Teapots $180 for 22 teapots.”

        It would be going the extra mile if you could say “We also got a quote from Teapots International for $160, but they had higher shipping. Do you want me to check back with them for a quote this year?”

        1. Marie C.*

          This is all very helpful. I’m actually leaning more towards thinking I’m just not cut out to be a secretary. I actually liked most aspects of the job (answering phones, greeting people, putting the newsletter together), and I didn’t have a problem creating my own working mini-system for the things I was actually personally involved in working with. But when it came to re-organizing 40+ years worth of files, I felt like I literally didn’t know where to start.

          I am wondering, though, what would have been a reasonable time frame to have had everything re-organized and sorted? The last secretary had left suddenly and without notice, so during the two months I was working there I was already quite busy reorganizing the computer files (which actually I had no problem with, for some reason—it was just all the paper that made me panic) and tracking down all the passwords to various accounts we had.

          Also, the pastor I worked with was sort of a selective micro-manager. Sometimes he would expect me to take initiative, but other times he would be very particular about minor things being done in a certain way Like, one time he was upset that I put the tape dispenser in the second drawer of my desk instead of the top drawer, or that I stopped by the post office to mail parish letters on my lunch break (which I thought would have been the more secure way to mail things) rather than putting them in the mailbox by our front door (as in, the kind where you put the little flag up.) So I was concerned that he would be upset if things were filed in a different way than he would have expected.

          But again, I am now thinking that I just don’t have the personality or the skill set to do admin work.

          1. Not So NewReader*

            I think you have to disregard this job when considering if you are cut out for the work, because I don’t think there are too many people out there who could work for this guy.

    3. Formica Dinette*

      If I were your manager, I would have been extremely frustrated with you for insisting on meeting with me before you started the work. I would have wanted you to make a start, organizing the things you could identify immediately, researching the things you couldn’t and hopefully making some more progress, and then meeting with me. At that time you could present the system to me for feedback and get help with the things you weren’t able to identify. Nothing would have been lost or thrown out. If I have to develop the system and hold your hand throughout, I might as well do it myself.

      What he asked of you is normal in my experience. The yelling is not. In many jobs, people need to be able to do their work without explicit instructions. IMO you showed a lack of initiative and ability to work independently. But if you can learn, you can improve, right?

      1. Marie C.*

        Well, I was told I would get a very negative reference, so I don’t think I’ll have much of a chance to learn or improve on this.

        Again, though, these replies are very helpful. I felt completely overwhelmed with the task I mentioned, when I see now that I shouldn’t have. Sometimes there’s value in knowing what you’re NOT good at.

        1. Formica Dinette*

          You sound pretty upset about this experience–and understandably so. Since it was recent, you may need some time to gain perspective, but it sounds like you are already learning from it. In some of your other comments, you identified several aspects of the job that you liked and didn’t like. Now you know to avoid the jobs that are heavy on the things you didn’t like and include more of the things you did like. You said it yourself: “Sometimes there’s value in knowing what you’re NOT good at.” And now you also know to avoid working for selective micromanagers. I have worked for a few people like that and it’s crazy-making!

          There is life beyond negative references. I have a friend who was fired from what she thought was her dream job for making an objectively tiny mistake that happened to be a huge pet peeve of the company she was working for. That didn’t prevent her from finding another job in her field. It’s now many years later. The last time she decided to change jobs, she discussed that incident and the lessons she learned from it in job interviews. She said she received positive feedback on it from all of her interviewers.

          I hope you find a job you enjoy soon!

    4. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      I think it’s normal for a pastor to not want to get involved in helping devise the filing system. I also think it’s normal for someone new to being an admin to be overwhelmed, having inherited a bad filing system to begin with.

      I’m sorry you had such a rough start. I don’t think that means you’re not cut out to be a secretary. It probably means you are better suited to a job where you have a supervisor, vs a church office where you’re supposed to be a one woman show.

      1. KH*

        Even in a situation where there is direct supervision, I think the OP would have had problems. And I really do say this with all kindness and in the spirit of being helpful. I don’t want you, OP, to think I’m beating up on you; I’m offering some advice as someone who started her career as a receptionist and secretary and is now a Project Manager, managing a team of 20.

        Here’s the thing:
        Often, the pastor would hand me a piece of paper and ask me to file it, but I would honestly have no idea where it was supposed to go. When I’d ask him where it was supposed to be filed, he would tell me it was my job to have a system in place. I told him about the state of our filing cabinets, and he said he was aware of that, but that it was my job to re-organize the whole thing and create a new system ASAP.

        I may be mistaken but that reads to me like this happened multiple times. If the admin on my team was constantly asking me where she should file things and complaining that the filing system was a mess and I told her “so handle it” – I would expect her to handle it. I would absolutely expect to field the occasional question about a item or a file, but I would not expect her to come back after I repeatedly told her to handle it and say “but I can’t unless you help me”.

        Part of any job is taking initiative and following direction. If you aren’t sure of the scope of your authority in the situation – ASK. “Pastor, you told me to clean up the file system ASAP so I’m making that my priority. Do you have any input on how you want it structured?” If he says “no” then take him at his word. Say “Ok, great. I’m going to get started and I’ll come back to you if I have any specific questions!”

        I don’t think your pastor was right to yell at you, but I can kind of understand what might have provoked him to do so. No matter what job you eventually wind up having, you are going to have to take the initiative, make decisions (even if they turn out to be the wrong decision), and think for yourself.

        1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

          Well sure but this was her first admin job!

          Say Marie came and worked for us a temp. We’d have a set role for her with specific tasks. She’d have training and a written out routine to follow. She’d have somebody checking her work. She’d have somebody to ask questions of and retrain her if necessary.

          You can’t get a more 180 degree experience from her first job experience to that one. Marie’s first experience is not a predictor of her success in the set up I just laid out.

          1. F.*

            Having been an admin. asst. for more years than I care to count, I think the OP was thrown into the deep end way over her head. Many managers, including this one apparently, have absolutely no idea what is involved in efficiently running an office. If the previous secretary had been there for years, things probably seemed to get done like magic. I agree with Wakeen’s Teapots that you would have been much better off with a more structured role and closer supervision.

    5. mousie housie*

      I agree that you could have taken more initiative in researching and building a draft organizational system for the files before asking for help, but I don’t think that means you “aren’t cut out to be a secretary.”

      In a job with more levels of management (e.g administrative assistant, office managers) you’d pick up training on the job and probably be just fine. However, being a church secretary typically means you only have one manager (who is not an administrator), and should have sufficient experience through either work or college to work independently.

    6. Amy*

      I am quite surprised at how many people feel that the OP was to blame in this situation. If he wanted someone to do the job magically, he should have hired a more experienced person with the background he was looking for. Having said that I wonder what would have happened if you mentioned to him that “hey look, if you don’t get back to me on how best to manage these files , I’ll reorganise to my personal taste and that may mean you’ll may lose some information you need :)”. I do agree however that in the future its maybe an idea to make a start to the task and ask for feedback and mabe you should look for a more entry level position with someone whom are more willing to take you under their wing and train you…

      1. Marie C.*

        To give some more background…I actually have a very specialized professional degree (which required nine years of higher education), but it’s in an EXTREMELY small field that I have not been able to find a job in for a few years. Given my circumstances, I’m doubting I’ll ever be able to find a job in this field now.

        I took the admin. job because the last secretary left without notice, and that pastor really need someone with basic computer skills to jump in (the pastor himself didn’t know how to use Word and had a hard time checking his email). And I accepted because I needed a job and it seemed like something I should have been able to do well. I was also very clear before starting that my job involved no book keeping, and I guess the thought of trying to organize several decades’ worth of business-related paperwork on my own just seemed overly daunting.

        Finding more entry-level type jobs can actually be quite hard, because people see my degree and write me off as being overqualified. I also can’t just leave it off my resume, because then I have to explain a 5 year gap after college. So I’m now trying to think of alternate kinds of work I can do. It is helpful to know that I’m MAYBE not the best candidate for secretarial work. I now have serious respect for people who can efficiently run an office, though!

        1. Not So NewReader*

          FWIW, I think your boss was too detached from the work you were actually doing. A few years ago I walked into a job in a new-to-me arena. Adding to the complexity the work space was under renovation. The files were in cardboard boxes because there never were filing cabinets and the cardboard boxes moved around the room as the renovation went on. (Picture trying to file papers in a moving target.) As the weeks went by, I saw what I was using on a daily basis and I was able to throw together files to accommodate my immediate tasks. My boss would mention the things that were not obvious, ” We need a file to collect up all our XYZ reports.” Right away I realized, “oh I need to be doing XYZ reports.” But there’s no training so it pure OJT. I figured out how to get the reports. (Sometimes by pure luck and sometimes by working for hours on finding these reports.) I would ask my boss where she wanted the files and her answer was the same, “Put them some where that suits you, but tell me where they land so I can find them.”

          But wait. That is not the end. Turns out we have over 30 years of files to clean up. The mess is jaw-dropping.

          In order for us to get through this, she needs me to do the actual work AND I need her expertise in telling me what is necessary and what is not necessary. Sometimes there are finer points, such as I save all ABC’s but I toss all AB’s. Small differences means changes in course of action. This knowledge is all arena specific. No job outside of this field would teach a person these things.

          With you not being familiar with keeping church records, I have no idea how you would know what to save and what order to keep it in. It’s not like you could use the system in place and fake it as you said the files were a mess. Even though, I do the work, my boss is the one with her job on the line if we do not have those records. Your old boss sounds careless to me, like he feels he will not be held accountable if records are missing and he is not concerned with future pastors/employees needed to reference these records. My boss and I have put a lot of effort into making sure that people who do our jobs in years to come can find the records they need, with the information they may need.

  82. appletoapple*

    Not sure if this is all in my head, but my direct supervisor constantly goes out to lunch, grabs coffee, etc with my colleague. He’s more cheerful around him than me. My interactions with my boss are no where near as jovial as my colleague’s. It’s actually borderline terse. I don’t know if I need a reality check here, but it’s affecting me a lot. I should note that this does not affect my work output. In fact, I’ve been told I am excelling in the position.

    1. Ros*

      I know it sucks, but he may just get along with your colleague better and may enjoy spending him with him more. It’s pretty common where I’ve worked for people to hangout and do things with people at the office they like. It’s like making friends anywhere. Some people just attract to others easier.

    2. Sibley*

      Sometimes you just don’t click with a person. It’s not great, but it happens. Be polite, professional, pleasant, etc. It may get better, it may not.

      Example: I’ve got a coworker who avoids speaking to me. Like, she won’t say hi if she can avoid it. Clearly, she just doesn’t like me. That’s fine, I don’t like her much either. If anyone realizes it, it’s not a problem.

    3. AnotherFed*

      If your direct supervisor is also the supervisor for this colleague/peer, you have a problem. This isn’t that weird, but isn’t healthy, either – at a minimum, your supervisor is giving the appearance of bias, which isn’t okay. Even if there were a good reason – it might be that he has worked with your colleague for 10 years or they are secret twin siblings separated at birth – treating one direct report so differently shows favoritism. If you aren’t the favorite, go elsewhere!

      Of course, if this colleague doesn’t report to the same supervisor, it totally doesn’t matter.

  83. Alexis*

    Just want to say, this was such an awesome idea because I am new in my career and have these types of questions ALL the time. You should do another one of these again later!

  84. fritobandito*

    So, I started a new position a year ago, which I mostly enjoy. My boss essentially yells over anyone who disagrees with them, and seems to have the ear of our CEO, to the point where the CEO will almost always go with this manager’s position. The manager has recounted, multiple times to different people, the story of how they were essentially fired but somehow negotiated to only work part-time (they take Friday’s off now). My job has turned from handling a few clients, to handling pretty much every client this manager has because they delegate all of the work to myself or our office admin. Previously this manager, the CEO and I had discussed my responsibilities, where we had worked out which clients I would handle, and which would stay with this manager. However, I’m now handling all the clients for basically everything but contract updates. Is this normal? I feel like I should have been told that I was handling all the clients before we got into crunch time, but I’m also fairly new at being a PM and I’m not sure how it normally happens with other companies.

    We’re a small company (20 people), so it’s understandable for people to pick up the slack, but I’m doing my job, trying to do this manager’s job, and doing “other duties as assigned” and frankly, it’s hard to do a good job at any of them because I’m just trying to keep all my tasks afloat.

    1. Wakeen's Teapots Ltd*

      Another yeller. There’s one down thread also.

      Some yelling might be normal in some fields (think movie production or wall street trading where you are making a bazillion dollars or the armed forces) but managers yelling is not normal in most any other situations. In an office environment the norm is for people to hold their tempers.

      Having more work dumped on you than you expected, without clear communication ahead of time, isn’t good, but it’s not crazy abnormal.

      Feeling as if you have so much work that you can’t do a good job on anything is not super uncommon, but it’s not normal (or healthy). A normal workload might be challenging. A normal workload might have you feel as if you can only do a good job at 80% of it. But a normal workload won’t have you feel you don’t get a shot to do a good job at anything.

  85. Dixieland Lawyer*

    Lawyer here, I work at a small (60 or so full-time staff, including attorneys), somewhat (arguably very) dysfunctional private firm. I had a career prior to the law, which I often compare to my experience at the firm, but that career was in the non-profit realm so I’m not sure how much really translates. A few examples from crazytown:
    1. Marketing manager (responsible for 2 staff) firing 5 folks in one year. No one (beyond the marketing manager and the HR person who fired them) was ever informed these folks were fired, we just found out via word-of-mouth when we went to look for them and weren’t there.
    2. Receptionist discovered evidence of a staff member’s affair with a vendor (I believe pictures or messages sent via work email, it was before my time) and reported to Partners, receptionist was fired. Receptionist (unsurprisingly) sued, firm settled. Staff member still works here.
    3. Secretary responsible for assisting five attorneys sits on her computer and watches cat videos all day. Graciously checks in with male attorneys, occasionally still spells my first name wrong after five years working together (it’s not a difficult name).
    4. We are only informed about raises if we happen to be in the office the week between Christmas and New Years on the day after the Partner end-of-year meeting. Otherwise, we are left to figure it out from our pay stubs.

    1. F.*

      2. Can’t say specifically, but if the receptionist was snooping in emails they had no business looking at, then I can see why they were fired.
      3. After 8-1/2 years at my company, people still occasionally spell my first name wrong. I just shrug it off. I take it that you are not male, since you mention that the secretary checks in with the male attorneys. The secretary has probably figured out who (they think) has the power and kow-tows to them accordingly. Happens all the time with those who enjoy the office politics game. Totally sucks.
      4. Your HR department or managing partner (whoever has the responsibility) is not doing their job if you are not notified of raises.

    2. Sibley*

      My experience is in a slightly larger accounting firm, but there’s similarities.

      1. My guess: incredibly bad at hiring, people are quitting because it’s so terrible, or manager can’t get people to go along with their brand of crazyness so fires them.

      2. The affair with a vendor is pretty bad. Firing the receptionist, that’s worse.

      3. Lazy secretary. Sucks up to the guys, has written off the ladies as having no power.

      4. You’ve got crappy HR practices there.

    3. WhiskeyTango*

      I would say all of the above are wildly normal for private practice. Lawyers are notoriously bad managers and rarely open to criticism. That’s why I moved in-house ten years ago. It’s better. Only half those things happen in the in-house environment.

  86. Small Creatures Such As We*

    Is this normal for tech? And is this even more common in software development (given that I want to shift my job to something that involves more software development / less client-wrangling)?

    I am a consultant at a several-hundred employee SAAS company that also does a lot of technical consulting. I am 100% assigned to a long-term client, where we support/develop custom, internal-facing applications, which run on an internal server that my company supports (their IT does software upgrades / houses the virtual server). Business users only interact with it during standard business hours.

    My boss has worked with this particular client for over a decade; he’s forgotten more about the client’s technology than I (or anyone there) will ever know, but he’s been busy with higher-value clients in the past year (that’s another story).

    I got married recently, after consistently working >40-hour weeks (I’m salaried) for over a year before the wedding. I took off the full week before our wedding date date so I’d finally have time to get everything ready. My boss directed me to take my company-issued laptop to the wedding venue (from mid-day Friday to Sunday) “just in case” I needed to debug/fix something on that server. Is this normal or not?

    1. AdAgencyChick*

      WHUT? NO!

      I mean, I’m not in tech, but there’s NO ONE who can cover for you for your freaking wedding?!

    2. Liz*

      No, this is not normal! I can see him asking you to check in occasionally in the run up to the wedding, but not that weekend!

    3. AG*

      Not normal. BUT. He didn’t ask you to be available, just to take the laptop. I mean technically, right? So if you “had” the laptop “but just didn’t have a chance to check email/take phone calls” (because it was sitting on your desk at home like a rock the whole time and your maid of honor has your phone), then what was he going to do? Fire you?

    4. Slippy*

      No this is not normal, even in tech they should respect your right to celebrate your wedding uninterrupted. If your boss can’t handle a weekend with you gone he has serious issues with his client. If you are forced to bring the laptop leave it in the trunk of the car and disable the data on your phone so you don’t get email.

  87. Middleman*

    I’m a branch manager at an organization that has two branches and is opening up a third. I will be moving to lead the launch of the third location.

    The branch I’m currently running has been operating for half a year and is only offering half the services we intend to offer. I was originally told that construction would be complete and systems would be in place for our fourth (out of seven) service by the third week of October 2015. Not only has this not been done, but I pester on a weekly basis about when I can expect it and at this point I have no firm date.

    Construction on the third location hasn’t even started even though we’ve had a lease for close to half a year now. I pester about timelines where this is concerned, since I’ll be moving to a different city to run it, and I’m not being provided any dates.

    One of the owners and our technical director have been working on revamping things in our first branch (across the country, not the one I currently manage or will be moving to manage) ever since the technical director was hired half a year ago. I pester but I’ve been given no timelines as to when they will be done with with and be able to get branch two up to where it should be and start construction on branch three.

    Meanwhile, said owner has spent an obscene amount of money and time talking with consultants and developing franchising options, which I find infuriating and ridiculous since I don’t understand how we can look at franchising when obviously we aren’t able to keep on top of our existing infrastructure.

    The only people in the company who outrank me are the two owners. One is the guy described above, who acts as if nothing is going wrong at all, and the other is barely involved because he runs a different company, but he has faith in his partner and is dismissive of my complaints as to how the company is being run.

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      This is sort of normal and very scary.

      Construction and execution delays are normal. We grew out of our old building 3+ years before our new building could be completed. We moved in two years after the first “move in” date . Some of the delays were on company ownership end (deciding where to buy land and approving plans), some were zoning, some were construction and some were inspection.

      Delays on big plans, whether it is construction or software development/launches, are very normal.

      What’s scary to me in what you wrote is the focus on franchising when the core business isn’t yet working to plan. That sounds flimsy and maybe even scam like (looking for $$$ influx from franchise fees) vs just a standard “wow, this is taking longer than we planned” normal delay.

      1. Middleman*

        Thank you for your response. I need perspective as I’m extremely frustrated.

        Yes, I am particularly concerned about the franchising stuff, as we aren’t anywhere near capable of taking that on right now. But I’m convinced that the owners are delusional and logistically incompetent rather than there being any malicious scam-like element to it…for context, they were originally convinced we’d have eight branches in two years. Not in franchising, but their own funding. We’re a year and a half in now and we don’t have the resources to have our second branch fully completed yet.

        Also making things significantly more incompetent than standard construction delays, I should mention that it was late Sept 2015 when I was told I’d have the additional service up and running third week of Oct 2015…so at the time he was convinced it would be ready in a month and now half a year later there is no sign of when I can expect it.

        The entire time I’ve worked here, the owners had ridiculous expectations that were always based on best-case scenarios where 1000 different variables all lined up perfectly, I’ve raised laundry lists of concerns that were dismissed, and everything turned out worst than even I had tried to prepare for. I’m just completely disgusted and angry and it’s difficult for me to look at this objectively at all at this point.

        1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

          That’s all normal for people who are going to drive themselves out of business, not to be overly dramatic. Not being able to plan for time and not being able to plan for money are the same sort of thing.

          Unless you are in super high margin business or the owners have deep independent wealth, I’d keep that in mind.

  88. CPA From Heaven*

    I have a supervisor who I find very unapproachable. When I swing by her desk to ask her small questions with quick answers, she will answer, but often in a method where you can tell she didn’t want to be bothered (didn’t look up from her computer/develops a moderately aggressive tone). For bigger questions, you simply can’t just swing by her desk – she will say she’s too busy for that right now. This intimidates me and makes me uncomfortable with bringing new ideas to her on the fly.

    It is possible to bring up ideas to her in small staff meetings (me, her and one other person at my level), but those meetings have been few and far between lately, so projects stagnate. I could ask for more meetings, or for them to happen more regularly, but I feel as if she could take that as me saying that she’s not doing her job well, since she has a powderkeg personality (she’s ultimately nice and not vindictive, but she’s incredibly tightly wound). Because the projects stagnate, she forgets they ever existed, and often puts the kibosh on them at these small staff meetings.

    When I was hired, she told me I could come to her to tell her what sorts of work I was interested in doing and to ask her to give it to me if I wanted it. When I set up a meeting to do this (I wanted to work more on public speaking), she got defensive and essentially said I needed to wait my turn for that. She did encourage me, however, to be more assertive, so I took it as a mixed message. Essentially, I’m gunshy around her.

    Is this normal? Thanks for any help you can provide!

    1. Middleman*

      To be honest, I was going to say “you need to be more assertive” before I got the part where you wrote that your supervisor told you the same thing.

      This sounds normal to me. The supervisor is likely very busy and this affects her tone in dealing with subordinates, which is unfortunate. Don’t let that deter you from asking necessary questions.

    2. Amy*

      Does it happen often ? Yes. Is this something you should tolerate? probably not – because in the long run you’ll probably simply stop going to her with your concerns; projects will continue to stagnate and you may just end up being blamed or taken off these projects when top management find out about this. If you want to be sure if this is her normal behaviour , look at how she treats others in the office for eg. the one other person at your level. I would find ways to transfer/change managers if I were you .. these types of managers who are never available and yet feel free to judge you just demotivate you… i don’t think being assertive will help much in this case as you hav shown this once (by setting up meetings) and she merely got defensive… find another mentor/boss and move on…

    3. Chrissie*

      It is possible that “you can come by anytime” is just a phrase, and you actually spontaneously swinging by her desk destroys her focus (it would for me). So, the fact that she dislikes unscheduled interruptions seems normal to me.*
      You can test if this is the case by requesting a single meeting, to talk about project updates to projects x, y and z. In my office, this mini-agenda would be included in the email for scheduling. Then, if that was productive, you can request another meeting, and suggest for it to be at the same time the next week/two weeks later. If this works well a couple of times, you can point out the benefit of working. “these last meetings have been useful for my productivity and I do not have to interrupt your own work so often, Jane. Do you think we could have regular meetings like this?”

      *I just realized you can also check whether the “small questions” that you approach her with are the issue. My partner gets a lot of “I don’t know how to do x in y software” from the colleagues, and is annoyed to no end, because that kind of stuff is in the manual/googleable.

  89. TowerofJoy*

    Is it normal to not want to share a room with someone traveling, and pay for your own room? I know we’ve had this discussion elsewhere on the site in the past, and everyone had their personal opinions. But how abnormal would it be to request to do this?

    1. Amy*

      depends on how long the travel is for – if its only a day or 2 then it probably looks strange… ofcourse if having your own room improves your work performance by for eg. allowing you better sleep and the chance to work longer hours in the night without disturbing colleagues, then I guess you can always justify it in this way …

    2. newreader*

      I’m not sure if it’s normal, but it certainly seems reasonable. I don’t travel often for work, but when I traveled with a coworker I reserved separate hotel rooms and let her know it was so that she wouldn’t have to listen to me snore all night. Fortunately, the company paid for both rooms, but I would have paid for it myself if necessary. Just because two coworkers are the same gender doesn’t mean they should have to share a hotel room, IMO.

    3. AnotherFed*

      It is pretty normal to get a separate hotel room. Whether your company will pay for it or not varies – government tends to pay for it, but some of the contractors who support us pack people in like sardines to save money. I think nonprofits and/or interns sometimes expect more room-sharing, but I haven’t run into that myself.

  90. IM*

    > Is it normal to have the equivalent of normal days worth of work (8 hrs ~) after attending trainings that go for hours a day? I just started at my new job a week and a half ago and have to had to manage trainings and actually doing the job… I feel quite stressed already…

    1. Doriana Gray*

      It’s not normal at my current company. If you’re in all day training, your workload is adjusted accordingly. Talk to your manager and see if you can get some things moved around.

    2. KH*

      Pretty normal. When I was first hired at my current job, my start date was Dec 1. That gave me 30 days to complete all of my new hire training PLUS the regular assigned training for all employees. (All employees have 40 hours of required training throughout the year – because I was hired in December, I had 11 months of back training to complete, although some of it did overlap with my new hire training, so that was convenient.)

      But I still had to do my job and meet deadlines while completing all of the training.

    3. AnotherFed*

      It shouldn’t be 16 hour days, but it is pretty normal to expect new employees to catch up on required training at the same time as starting real work. However, it is also not uncommon for HR or trainers to dump a pile of mandatory training on you and your boss assigning real work and additional training without the two groups realizing how much the other has assigned. If you are drowning, talk to your boss and make sure you and he are aligned on what you need to be doing while you get through the training.

  92. NewGrad*

    Love this thread!

    I’ve been at my first job out of school for about 8 months now and think I may be at a dysfunctional workplace. My office is opened 7 days a week so, while I am a full-time salaried employee, my days off vary each week depending on the schedule of the sales team (I’m the office manager). This irks me because I’m constantly told that I need to reschedule my day off to another day because my manager needs me in and have even had my pre-approved vacation days retracted at the last minute! My manager also regularly yells at us in meetings, especially when she feels we aren’t meeting her crazy expectations or for not coming up with an idea that she thought of on a whim/read online. She’s also yelled at us all individually for missing work calls or emails on our days off/late in the evening (I’m talking midnight).

    Is this normal? I spoke with a few of my friends and they confirmed that they’ve experienced similar treatment from upper management/executives. I always feel embarrassed when my manager yells at me in meetings and I really hate that feeling. I want to find a new job, but don’t want to look like a job hopper so early in my career.

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Not normal.

      It is normal for a sales environment to be a little more high pressure or emotional than the next place. And good bosses aren’t immune from losing their temper once in awhile. But when you say things like “I always feel embarrassed when my manager yells at me in meetings”, not normal.

      It’s not abnormal to have to change your schedule some times and it’s not abnormal to have maybe one vacation day rescheduled for a big emergency, but the frequency you indicate? Not normal.

      Emails and work calls as late as midnight? Well if you work for NASA and there’s a comet on path to Earth, sure, but most people in their first job aren’t working a position of such great importance any such thing needs to happen. Not normal! (and I’ll bet $100 that they’ve classified you as “exempt” when you are no such thing and they should be paying you overtime for those emails and phone calls)

      Now, is it normal to have a crappy first job out of college? Sure, why not. Hopefully it will be a wild and crazy story for you to tell at your next, normal, job soon!

  93. Frankie D*

    Sorry if this has been asked already. I’m an entry level admin at a non-profit, and I often have stretches of nothing to do. I’m apprehensive of asking for more work – firstly because when I did during my second week, my boss gave me a soft answer of ‘there will be work, just not right now’. I usually finish tasks pretty quickly and usually double or triple check my work just so it takes more time and to decrease the illusion that my quality of work is suffering from how quickly I turn things in. Do I just need to slow down and let there be 2-4 hours of my day where I’m not doing anything – and if not, how do I broach the subject that I can handle more work load? Or should I let it go because I’m entry level and this is just how it’s going to be until I’ve proved myself over time?
    Thanks for any and all input :)

    1. OP / Winnie*

      I don’t have an answer for you because I wonder the same thing! The amount of work I am given – there is just no way it would take 8 hours a day, unless I worked extremely, extremely slowly. Therefore, they must assume I either 1) spend a lot of time each day doing non-work related things (like going on AAM), or am 2) beyond slow. I also ended up double and triple checking my work, because I felt like maybe I was working too quickly and being careless!

      I’m not sure if this helps, but now that I’ve been at the job longer, I’ve found that I have much more to do. It’s still not quite enough that I need to “work hard” to get it done, but it’s definitely not as bad as before. You didn’t specify how long you’ve been doing your job, so I wonder if it’s something that would get better with time?

      1. Frankie D*

        Thanks for your response! Glad I’m not alone :) I know I am a sometimes overly eager and ambitious person… because yes, I have only been there for 2 months or so. (And 2 weeks of that I was working conferences that didn’t really reflect my day to day responsibilities). So you’re probably right! I guess I’ll see how it is in a few months. I certainly don’t think my job sucks, I just feel anxious about someone catching me doing nothing when I have nothing to do!

        1. catsAreCool*

          Are there things you could be learning when you run out of work to do? Maybe reading manuals, learning something related to what you do? That will probably look good.

      2. Artemesia*

        I would identify self improvement tasks and do those. If the boss every comes by and sees you doing that and asks what you are doing you say ‘I thought it would be helpful if I upgraded my excel skills and so I am doing an advanced excel tutorial.’ Or whatever skill set you can acquire on the computer (and that is most of the things you do in an office) that would be relevant to your current job or the role you aspire to in the company. If you work with budgets at all e.g. for proposals, whatever, they you could do an accounting tutorial to upgrade those skills if you don’t already have strong accounting skills. etc etc. In fact if you haven’t had accountancy training that is such a useful thing to know that it is worth doing regardless. Someone busily doing what looks like work on the computer will look busy (say compared to someone reading a graphic novel) and it is an investment in your own future.

    2. Wakeen's Teapots Ltd*

      It’s normal to not have enough work when you start a job. It’s normal for the first answer you get when you ask for more work to be “later”.

      It’s also normal to speak up again after a period of time and ask what else you can do. The emphasis should be on wanting to help out wherever you can and be productive for the employer, not because you’re bored.

  94. OP / Winnie*

    Whoa! I am the reader that left the comment with the original suggestion to do this post, and I’m so happy to hear that 1) my suggestion wasn’t terrible and 2) I am not the only one who is often confused and possibly naive.

    Here are my own “is this normal” situations:

    1) Is it normal to be expected to use your personal funds (without reimbursement) to buy lunch for the office? My boss expects me to buy lunch for him almost everyday. I don’t mind going out to grab it, but he only gives me cash or his card 30% of the time. My coworker (who was previously responsible for lunch-gophering before I was hired) told me that she just used her personal credit card, implying I should not be using the company card. It’s not a huge expense, but as someone with a lower salary to begin with, it sort of adds up. Are others expected to be spending their own money to do their job as well? (Note: I’m not asking about coworkers buying each other lunch from time to time, since that seems really normal to me. I’m talking about when it’s both a regular occurrence, and an obligation.)

    2) My boss sometimes will make comments on my appearance, including what I wear, etc. He’s also made borderline inappropriate comments (about going on trips together if we were single, asking a lot about my relationship, etc). He treats other women in the office like this too. I know this obviously isn’t ideal and it’s not fun to deal with, but is this pretty common?

    3) For other assistants/EAs/etc out there: is it normal to be asked to do personal tasks for the person you assist, but keep these tasks a secret? For example, to downplay the amount of time that you spend doing “personal” errands, instead of purely work related tasks.

    For context, I work at a smaller company, and my direct boss is the owner/founder/CEO (I am an assistant), both of which are probably factors that contribute to possible dysfunction since there isn’t anyone to hold him accountable.

    Thanks in advance! :)

    1. Doriana Gray*

      I have no answer to your third question because it sounds like your company is using you as both an office assistant and a personal assistant, but the answer to your first two questions is hells no! None of that is normal or appropriate. If the boss wants lunch, he can pay for it himself by either giving you cash or his own personal credit card or a company card. You are not obligated to buy him meals as if he’s your spouse or your child. And as for the talk about the trips together and your relationship status, that needs to be shut down immediately. Sexual harrassment is not okay.

    2. Wakeen's Teapots Ltd*

      Egads.

      1) Hell to the no. Highly, highly not normal . The boss should be buying your lunch if you’re picking up his (in my book, ’cause that’s what I do, because that’s POLITE), but in the least you should never buy his. Practice giving him the benefit to the doubt he just forgot and ask him for the money up front. Don’t be shy!

      2) Erk, creeper. No, it’s not normal, we aren’t on Mad Men and that’s not how offices run. Practice “It makes me uncomfortable when…”

      3) That could be normal. If you’re EA to the company owner and he asks you to buy his wife’s birthday gift, being discreet about that could be normal.

      1. Winnie*

        Thanks for responding!

        I didn’t think the buying lunch thing was normal either, but my coworkers have probably validated this behaviour by doing it for years. Which made me think this happened at other offices too, even if it made 0 sense. I often do ask for the cash or even ask for it later on. (I was shy about it at first but it’s turning into quite a bit of money!) Sometimes he’ll give me cash or his card to use, but even when asked explicitly, he’ll often say he doesn’t have cash and then make excuses later on. Frustrating!

        1. Lily in NYC*

          I had a boss like this! I bought her lunch every single day and she paid me back once in a while. She lived in a penthouse on Madison Ave and was loaded but cheap as heck. I look back and cannot figure out why I was too embarrassed to ask her to pay me back – but she was very strong-willed so I was pretty intimidated by her (which is so not like me). She left owing me $350.

          1. Winnie*

            Hi Lily! Ugh, it’s terribly annoying. It makes it hard to budget and track my finances when I have this expense I’m not even in control over. I also have a strong willed boss who is hard to talk to, even though I normally am good about standing up for myself. It took me a while to try to ask him to pay me back, and when it wasn’t met well, it made me not want to bring it up again (and again, and again). I’m glad to hear she’s no longer in your life, though!

            1. HKS*

              Stop buying the boss lunch. When he asks you to go pick it up, ask for the money or credit card and if he can’t give it to you then you can’t get his lunch. Or direct him to delivery options where he would be responsible for paying himself.

    3. NicoleK*

      1. NO. It’s not normal. Typically there’s a significant salary disparity between assistants and their supervisors. Any supervisor who expects their assistants to buy them lunch is clueless and thoughtless.

      2. Not normal. I’ve had bosses of the opposite sex. The most complimentary comment I’ve only heard is, “you look nice today”. Anything beyond that is bordering on being inappropriate.

    4. Sibley*

      1. No. Ask for cash or their card, “how would you like to pay for it”. Or just bring your lunch all the time (much cheaper anyway).

      2. He’s a creep. Inappropriate. I’m sure there’s advice for how to handle it on this site somewhere.

      3. Personal things – depends on the organization. Some places, it’s ok, some it’s not. Keeping it secret all the time – that’s weird. Sure, if you’re picking up a present for someone, you keep that quiet. But it should be fine to say you’re doing something for Joe, or whatever.

      1. Winnie*

        Hi Sibley! Thanks for the response!

        I actually do pack my lunch most days (it’s so much cheaper, like you said!) but am still obligated on those days to pick up lunch for my boss, who probably packs lunch once every few months or so. (And as I said in an earlier comment, I often ask explicitly, but the question somehow gets redirected…)

        1. AG*

          If it’s getting redirected, you’re letting it get redirected. I think you’re feeling the tension in the situation and internalizing it. But it’s not your creation, it’s his. So it’s his responsibility to solve. Push it back on him by refusing to feel tense.

          Practice, “I can absolutely get the plane tickets to Philly booked by 3 pm/get the marketing packages to Suzy for review/bring you Bob’s latest teapot report… Before I leave for the lunch pickup, will you be using credit or cash today?” It’s said in the same tone as “Would you prefer I email or FedEx that?” It’s not a choice of “if”, it’s a choice of “which”. Your feet don’t move out of his office until you have an answer.

    5. KW10*

      No, no, and no – not normal! Basically your boss sounds like a creep who’s trying to take advantage of you in many different ways. The one caveat here is that I think it’s normal to do personal tasks as an assistant (especially when you work for the owner/founder of a small business) – but definitely not normal that he asks you to keep it a secret.

        1. Winnie*

          :( Sorry to hear you’re going through it too. I guess I know it’s not normal, but am wondering if it’s common (although from this thread, it sounds like it’s not?)

        2. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

          There are some environments where it might be more likely to still encounter male boss creeper behavior (I’m thinking food service, bars, places like that), but the age of “you’ll have to smile and put up with some of that behavior in order to get ahead, just deflect” is over. It’s no longer common or in anyway normal.

          If you’re in a situation like that, you may only have so many remedies that aren’t nuclear (assuming the places doesn’t have an HR to talk it out with), but it’s not like “oh well, the next place I go will be more of the same, I might as well put up with this crap since I’m here already.”

          Signed,
          Woman who Joined The Professional Workforce in 1980 and has the stories to go with it. :)

    6. Artemesia*

      When you work for the owner he is likely to see you as a personal assistant and doing personal tasks may be part of what he thinks he is paying you for. He isn’t stealing time from the company if he owns the company. So you have to decide if that is the kind of job you are willing to have.

      The lunch thing. HELL NO. This is absolutely abusive and you should never put this on a credit card of your own or pay for it. I would passive aggress this starting tomorrow. ‘I will need the card or some cash because I don’t have enough to cover that.’ Leave your own credit card at home and be ‘short of cash.’ You can play games like ‘I just had to pay a dentists bill and so am short of cash.’ ‘I just went to the grocery store last night so I am tapped out.’ This is stupid of course, but apparently you haven’t felt able to say ‘buy your lunch jerk? you have got to be kidding.’ I would never ever ever do this again. Always have no cc with you and be short on cash till you have trained him to stop expecting this. This is awful and clearly a power trip on his part. If he actually says ‘can’t you just put it on your credit card’ say ‘oh I have started following Dave Ramsey’s budgeting plans and have cut up my credit cards.

      And start looking for a job somewhere where the guy is not an abusive jerk. You have a job so you don’t have to panic about that, but time to find something better.

      1. Winnie*

        Hi Artemesia, thanks for the response!

        I don’t take too much issue with doing personal tasks as part of the job (there days when I don’t prefer running after his kids, but for the most part it’s okay. It’s just a little off to me that he doesn’t want others in the office knowing that I’m spending time helping him with personal tasks – I’m not talking about buying gifts or anything like that that others have suggested.

        It’s funny that you come up with these suggestions because I’ve actually started to do that all. the. time. Forgetting my card, etc. I’ve also talked to our Finance department, and they’ve suggested putting it on the company card from time to time. Ironically, my boss doesn’t like this, so when he finds out about using the company card, he’ll tell me not to and make comments like “Oh, I don’t like the company paying for my lunch! They don’t have to do that!” (And I do …?)

        1. Snork Maiden*

          Yikes! His last comment is definitely not normal. Could you say something like, “Finance suggested I use the company card for your lunch expenses. Is there a different way you’d prefer to handle that?” I’d like to think this would force him into saying “I want YOU to pay for it,” because clearly that’s what he’s thinking. A cheerful and matter of fact “I’m afraid I can’t keep paying for *your* lunch” as a reply might be on the table depending on how comfortable you are in the role. Also, keeping track of how much per month you have been spending on his lunch – he may not even realize how much it adds up.

          1. Winnie*

            I’ve tried that, and he’ll tell me “I’ll pay for my own lunches, don’t worry!”. But when it actually comes time to buy lunch, he often doesn’t actually give me his card or anything, so then I’m left paying for it myself again. Maybe 10% of the time, he’ll offer to buy my lunch while I’m grabbing his. I’ve tried responding to this with “it’s okay, I can buy my own lunch as long as you buy yours!” and he always agrees, but then doesn’t stick to it.

            Honestly, there are other possibly weird/not normal things that happen in our office and this isn’t even close to the only example of my boss being a little delusional and strange. So I wouldn’t be surprised if he genuinely found this to be normal or somehow acceptable, which doesn’t excuse it but makes it harder to call out. It definitely sounds on paper like he’s just taking advantage and is fully aware of what he’s doing, but he other behaviours and thought processes make me think that he might just be totally clueless.

    7. insert pun here*

      #1 is not normal, bordering on monstrous. I would feel terrible if my assistant brought me anything pricier than a piece of candy from the office candy dish, frankly.

  95. learningToCode*

    My company has been around for about 6 years (it’s under the larger organization as a whole that’s been around for ages) and I’ve been here for a little after 1 year. I’m hoping to stay here at least another year or two for the sake of my resume (1st job post undergrad), but is it normal to change focus so much in only a year?

    We went from “making software to sell to other companies and then move on to different software” to “making software to spin off into other companies, employees and all”. Some of my coworkers are already getting offer packets for a spin off, so I know it’s not just fluff from the higher-ups. I wanted this job for the stability and location, but now it feels like I could be moved elsewhere if my project gets successful enough.

  96. Caity*

    My new job in retail doesn’t pay their employees time and a half for overtime, but rather has them “bank” the hours and use them to get days off later. These hours are not confined to a single pay period. I have yet to use the system and as a part-time employee I don’t have set hours to go over, but I’ve never heard of this before.

    2. Ms T*

      Sounds like flex (flexible time), which I’ve seen in office jobs but not retail. Its fairly normal in a lot of industries, but I haven’t heard of it in retail and I’m curious to how well it works.

      In an office job, you’ve got more flexibility to handle someone not coming in one day, or getting in late or leaving early, so if you have a reasonable manager flex can be really great (I take at least one Monday off a month! =P). But in retail, I understand its harder to miss shifts or only do one half way.

      So it would depend on how easily your manager will let you use that banked time.

      1. Wakeen's Teapots Ltd*

        If it’s in the United States, that’s not legal unless the employees are exempt.

        Non-exempt employees have to be paid for the time they’ve worked. They can’t be paid in banked time, it’s cash money.

      2. Ms T*

        Forgot to add – there is a distinct difference between flex time and overtime (at least in Australia). If you work late in standard opening hours specified in your contract (mine are anytime between 7am-7pm) that’s flex.
        Weekends (again, office), holidays and after standard hours cannot count as flex – they need to be paid as overtime.

        So if you stayed after your shift ended because you were helping a customer, that would be banked. If you were asked to work an extra shift, that would be banked – unless it was the weekend, which would have to be paid flex. It depends on the contract though.

    3. AnotherFed*

      Unless that is for the government, banking hours instead of paying OT is illegal if you are in the US.

    4. Lily in NYC*

      My office tried this tactic on me and ended having to pay me 5K in back overtime! Which was even more awesome because I had already taken the comp time.

  97. KW10*

    Is it normal to never have a formal performance review/annual review? My company gives raises at the end of each fiscal year; when that came around last year, I had been there about 6 months. My boss called me in, we had a very short conversation that was mostly along the lines of “you’re doing great, keep it up, hope you’ll stay with us a long time…”, and he told me my raise. As far as I know they don’t do any other type of performance review. In comparison, a friend says where she works they have formal performance reviews each year, where they fill out a form with accomplishments, goals, etc and discuss the whole thing in detail with their boss.

    Also, is it normal to be assigned to supervise someone without managing them? Let’s say I’m a Teapot Production Manager and when we hired a Teapot Assistant I was told I’m his day-to-day supervisor, but we both report to BigBoss. I trained the Assistant and oversee his tasks and day-to-day questions. We both work with BigBoss but Assistant doesn’t interact with her all that frequently. I have no control over Assistant’s promotions, raises, bonuses, etc. Is that normal?

    Thank you for any comments and sorry my question is late! This is a great topic.

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      1) no formal performance reviews, not normal, but not necessarily bad if you are getting enough feedback on your performance anyway. If you don’t know where you stand and there are no performance reviews, not normal. (If it’s a small company with no HR dept, this might veer into “normal”. Not everybody does performance reviews.)

      2) normal. A Team Leader position would have supervisory responsibilities without the rest of the management responsibilities of the person. If the person who does have management responsibilities isn’t requesting your input on her performance in order to determine raises/bonuses, or if the management person isn’t responding to your performance concerns, that part is not normal.

    2. Liz*

      No, but I wouldn’t think it uncommon either, especially if you’re in a smaller company.

      Since I started working at this university over 10 years ago, I’ve had just one formal performance review (and I’ve been through four departments!). I think this was luck of the draw, though, because theoretically they are supposed to be yearly, but exempt staff tend to keep going on a “we’ll let you know if/when anything changes” whereas non-exempt staff do tend to get annual reviews.

  98. Anxa*

    I am a part-time, hourly worker.

    Is it normal to cap hours at 25 instead of 30 (or 28, 29).

    I would much, much, MUCH rather work a job for 40 hours or 30 hours without benefits than have no benefits and be capped at 25 hours.

    I get that now they’d have to give us some form of benefits at 30 hours, but why do you think I’d be capped at 25?

    Is this normal?

    I work with people on FWS so they are capped at 20 for different reasons.

    (Also, the whole not hiring anyone full-time thing is starting to grate on me. I feel like I could do a much better job if I didn’t have to work on job applications during the evening and lean back from any commitments here at work knowing I can’t start any projects or invest in any long-term growth)

    1. Doriana Gray*

      I’ve seen part-time positions capped at 25 hours – I think there may be some at my current company. So yeah, I’d say that’s normal, or close to it.

    2. TC_Seattle*

      Capping part-time at 25 hours is pretty common to avoid paying benefits for positions. If the positions typically have low training commitments and high-turnover rates (call centers, customer service) then companies think this is a reasonable way to control total employment costs. However as you note unless they are offering advancement opportunities to full-time, benefit positions the pool of people that want to work part-time without benefits is limited and they will experience significant churn as people like yourself look for other options.

  99. Rune*

    I’ve got one from a few months ago when I was being hired by my current job. During the hiring process they had me fill out a survey. The survey was not created by HR and was an outside service they used for new hires. HR said it was to determine working style and help them figure out what questions were best to ask me.

    It was an online survey I’d never seen before, it had three different categories and in each one I had to rank phrases or habits according to what I personally thought was best. The survey gave me an example: Out of these five things what is the best and worst scenario: Nuclear War, Graduation, World Peace, Broken Leg, and Reading a Book. They made it pretty obvious where I was supposed to rank things in this one.

    I move on to the the real survey and here’s where it gets a little weird. The categories have around 20 choices instead of 5 and in one category it had me rank phrases according to personal preference. Some were obvious: “I don’t feel like working today” is probably not something you want to put at the top of the list. Most things were work related but there were a couple personal items like “I want a baby” and “I can’t wait to get married” were on there and those were the ones that struck me as very strange. What are your thoughts? I’d love to know if someone took a similar survey.

      1. Rune*

        I don’t believe that it was since HR said they’d use my answers to best gauge my working style.

      1. Rune*

        You did!? Did you find it weird? Not just the obvious baby and married implications but I’ve never taken a survey that had me rank opinions and phrases like that before.

    4. Snork Maiden*

      I have nothing to say but…this is really weird, and if it’s trying to subtly ferret out subconscious desires, it’s failing miserably?

    5. Lynne*

      That…sounds really discriminatory, even if they’re not using the data in that way. What, after all, could reasonably be the purpose in asking if you want to get married or have a baby, other than to filter out women who have such plans? Welcome to the 1950s…

      (Yes, men would be answering the question too, but you just know it’s not aimed at them.)

      Since it was a survey they didn’t create themselves, maybe they didn’t read the questions closely or think about them very much. That’s the kindest interpretation I can come up with – it’s either a matter of poor judgement or active discrimination, and neither reflects on the company well.

      1. Rune*

        I’d like the think that HR didn’t know about ranking being married or having children. Our HR at work is amazing. She’s really on the ball with a lot of things and she’s one of the ones I know that would nip any kind of harrassment at work in the bud.

        1. Lynne*

          Please tell her, then. They really need to stop using that survey! If she is good at her job, she should be glad you brought it to her attention, too.

  100. Not So NewReader*

    Thanks for doing this, Alison. It’s been a fascinating read. I hope we can do again in the future!

  101. Argh!*

    Is it normal to hire people for a job who don’t meet the stated requirements? Two people who are very nice and very smart have been hired in the past couple of years in jobs where I have to deal with them rather often, and as someone who exceeds the stated requirements for my job, I find it degrading. One of these was an internal candidate. The other was from a very distantly related department. A couple of my coworkers are rather angry about these hires, not just me. We feel it cheapens the specialized knowledge we have.

    1. catsAreCool*

      Why is it degrading to deal with these nice and smart people? Do you feel like you’re constantly teaching them their jobs?

      If the specialized knowledge is tough to learn, then in the long run, this will probably prove that your specialized knowledge is important.

    2. Bon*

      I think it depends on what way they don’t meet the requirements. If it’s something that’s quite hard to get, then no, it’s not unusual. If it’s something that can be taught on the job and they can get to a specific standard, and they meet the other hiring criteria, then it’s not unusual at all.

      If there are specific concerns about the learning curve and not achieving it, maybe have a chat to your manager but there was something to these candidates that made your hiring team offer them the position. I’ve been brought into companies and departments before because I viewed problems in a very different way, a way that wasn’t present in the department already and as a result, the department as a whole refined some procedures and we got better results overall.

    3. Sunshine*

      If they’re nice and smart I don’t see the problem. If they’re incapable of doing the job, that’s another matter.

  102. Tiffany*

    I just started my first job out of grad school 6 months ago and was wondering what a normal interaction amount is supposed to be with your supervisor. My previous experience has just been from internships since I did not take a break in between undergrad and grad school.

    When I first started my job, my supervisor gave me a plan of what I was to accomplish within the next year and we did not meet again for a long time after that. Since then, we have had only two one-on-one meetings.

    I have sent him emails on material that needs to be approved and I usually only hear a response 30% of the time. My manager is the head of the entire department so he is extremely busy but it seems like he is completely disinterested with everything relating to the work done by my position.

    How often do you check in with your supervisor? Who is responsible for checking in? The employee with their supervisor or should it be the other way around?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Not normal, not normal.

      The amount of interaction you have with your supervisor is going to vary based on your job. If it is a very independent job, you’ll have a lot less than with a highly interactive job. (Our environment is highly interactive and I have to remember that other places and jobs are different.)

      This:

      I have sent him emails on material that needs to be approved and I usually only hear a response 30% of the time.

      Not normal.

      (This is another good one for open thread on Friday if you want advice and conversation with people about what you should do next.)

  103. Nonny Nina*

    Oh, just the thread I need!

    I have a small dilemma – I wonder if someone could help me out with a reality check.

    I was hired at my current job a while ago, and accepted an initial wage far below the industry standard for my profession – it’s above minimum wage, but not by much – because I was fresh out of university and still had a lot to learn and a lot to be trained in on the job. It was essentially a “probationary period” wage.

    Two years later, I’m still in the same job and still on that probationary period wage. Living costs have been going up, so I’ve been asking about a raise every time I meet with the CEO who does our six-monthly performance reviews, and every time, I’m told that’s not on the cards for me yet because I have performance deficiencies. I’m meeting my targets, I’m getting everything done, but I apparently need to work more on my “soft skills” before they can consider me for a raise.

    I’ve asked other people in the same profession as me, and their opinions have been varied. Some have said that I’m being taken for a ride, and that they’re just saying I have this deficiency in soft skills so they don’t have to pay me any more and it’s an area that’s not measurable – if I was really that bad, they wouldn’t have kept me on after the probationary period, or would have fired me by now. Others say if I’m not up to scratch then I’m not entitled to a raise, and raises are only to reward absolutely stellar employees. (Still others have called me an “entitled millennial” and say I should just be grateful to have a job at all. I don’t know if this is true – that’s why I need a reality check – but there are certainly more constructive ways they could have said it!)

    Really, I don’t want gold bars and company cars – I just want to be paid at the industry standard and be able to start paying off my student loan. Meanwhile, I can’t get another job (I’ve been looking) because this one is my only reference and they say I have performance deficiencies that are holding me back.

    So, where am I going wrong here? Reality check, please? Am I probably truly a bad employee who isn’t yet worth more money, or am I naively being strung along? Is it normal to keep a bad employee around and just not pay them any more than minimum wage?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Post this again in open thread on Friday? You’ll get a lot more responses, advice, and back and forth conversation. This is an excellent question. People will want to help.

      As far as normal/not normal, it is normal to not increase the pay of an employee who has performance deficiencies.

      It’s not normal to tell people the deficiency holding them back is vague “soft skills”. If all other targets are being met (as you describe), it’s not normal for the factor making one deficient for a basic salary increase to be undefined.

      That could be normal (although not helpful) to say for a requested promotion/advancement, but not for a basic wage increase, especially if you are so far below standard.

    2. Artemesia*

      I hope you are looking for another position in your field and are able to demonstrate that you have the skills and met the targets for this position. Some places will exploit people as long as they can. Maybe you need to improve soft skills but if so they need to be specific about your deficiencies and how you need to change. I would be asking for this kind of feedback but it is possible that it is just an excuse. And I would be aggressively looking for another position.

    3. Snork Maiden*

      I agree, put this in open thread if you can. I would also be interested in reading others’ responses.

    4. Slippy*

      Easy test of this is looking at your performance reviews. Is there a specific measurable plan to help you get better or fix the deficiencies? If they are not helping you figure out how to improve then you are likely being taken for a ride. Companies generally won’t keep around bad employees, but they certainly keep cheap employees whose work is “good enough”.

    5. Nonny Nina*

      Thanks for the responses everyone!

      Differing opinions – it’s interesting to see your reasoning.

      I’ll post it in the open thread now, along with a small update.

  104. Bon*

    I worked in a job as a senior consultant for approx 6 years before it was taken over by another company. Part of the job was that we went onsite to deliver consultancy to our clients. The new company brought in a new Operations Director and they decided to lengthen our consultancy visits.

    Previously, we had a consultancy visit of 10am – 4pm (possibly with working lunch but often with no breaks during this time), but in addition to this we would have to drive to the client site (good if it was just down the road, not good if they were far away). We would also be expected to be onsite early to ensure that everything was in order so that we could start promptly at 10am, so we’d often arrive at the site around 9.30 and begin as soon as we were able. Under the new proposals, our consultancy day would now officially be from 9am – 5pm, and still with the expectation of arriving about half an hour early to ensure a timely start.

    I raised some concerns with my manager about this change mainly because we’d now have to leave home earlier to deal with rush hour traffic and given that most of our clients were at least 3 hours away by car, this meant changing our working day from 10-12 hour days as stanrdard to in excess of 14 hours on average. And we were expected to carry this out 5 days a week. 70 and 80 hour weeks were common. I cited health and safety concerns as at least 3 people on our 7 person team were dealing with chronic conditions brought on solely by spending at least 6 hours a day driving.

    When I brought this up, I was laughed at, mocked and ridiculed. I was told that he “owned me from midnight on Monday morning to midnight on Friday night” and told to put up or shut up. His very first words to me after me finishing laying out my concerns were “Bon, that’s bulls***”. He claimed that a company car and a slightly (very slightly) higher salary was the compensation that I got for the role but I honestly felt that I was sleepwalking during the week and more than once fell asleep at the wheel.

    I don’t think I was being too sensitive, but I honestly don’t know if this is something that consultants do on a regular basis. Consultants of AAM… is this normal?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Well if that’s normal in consultancy then I’m glad I don’t work in consultancy. That’s lunacy.

      If nobody else responds to this today (since it’s yesterday’s thread), why don’t you ask again in open thread?

      My friends who are outside sales reps for some of our vendors will work occasional long days like this: 9am meeting in an area that’s a two hour drive from them, other meetings in the area, don’t get home until 7pm or so, but I don’t know anybody who’d consider that kind of travel + onsite work as normal, M – F, 52 weeks a year.

    2. Slippy*

      No that is not normal. Occasional long days dictated by the needs of the client and the project are fine but this is a safety issue. If remote work is an option try bringing that up or else see if you can get overnight accommodations for every other night so you are only driving one-way per day. If none of that works bail from the company as soon as you are able. Consulting companies live and die on the strength of their consultants and if they don’t value their people then you want to get out sooner rather than later.

      Besides no job is worth a potentially fatal car accident.

  105. SH*

    I’ve had a couple of bosses during my time at my company (a lot of turnover here) that were either angry/aggressive all the time or catty/emotional. I was wondering if those temperaments are normal for employees in management roles or if I’m in an abnormal situation? Thanks!

    1. Winnie*

      You commented on my post above, so we’ve already established that we both work for crappy bosses. But this describes my boss too – immature, petty, aggressive all at once. I mean, I know it isn’t ideal, but also wonder if it is pretty commonplace and something I just have to accept.

      Either way, I’m sorry you have to deal with this!

      1. SH*

        I’m sorry you have to deal with a crappy work environment too! I work alone with one manager due to a staffing shortage. I kind of wonder if the poor treatment throughout my time here is because they know no one is watching. I’ve been reassured my office is getting more staff this year but if I have to deal with several crappy bosses instead of one or two I may have a nervous breakdown.

    2. Sunshine*

      Not normal exactly, but I think it’s common in small-medium size companies because they’re less regulated and have less oversight.

  106. LaurenH*

    I applied for, and got, a job that was advertised as a contract technical writing job. After receiving the job offer I discovered it wasn’t actually a contract job because there wasn’t actually a literal contract. After reading several AAM posts I was careful to make sure the company wasn’t misclassifying the position to avoid paying a portion of the income tax but that doesn’t appear to be the case.
    In reality I think this is really a temporary position and they’re just calling it a contract job. I work 40 hours a week, in their offices, during hours they determine and they own the work I produce. Originally I was told it would end in December and they couldn’t guarantee work after that but its March now and I’m still here and there’s no sign of the work ending anytime soon although nothing has been officially confirmed.
    At this point I’m wondering if they’re classifying us as “temp” workers to get out of providing us the same benefits they provide their full time workers (insurance, paid time off, etc). Is it normal for “temp/contract” jobs to work like this? At what point are you really a “full-time” worker regardless of what the company calls you?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      It sounds as if they aren’t paying you as a 1099 or “independent contractor”, which wouldn’t be normal or legal for the way you’ve described what you do, so that’s not an issue. As long as they are treating you as non-exempt, paying you for the hours you work, and paying their side of the taxes, that part is normal.

      A company having extended temporary/contract employees vs full time employees is also normal, in that those terms are specific to a company and don’t, that I’m aware, have legal implications. It sucks for the worker who wants an internal “full time” designation that comes with benefits!, but it’s not abnormal for a company to not have budget set aside for full time positions but continue to employ temporary or contract workers for as long as they need a job to be done.

      So they are not really avoiding anything so much as drawing the money that they pay you from a different line item in the budget. (And yes, it sucks. But it’s not weird or strange.)

  107. Anomalously Anonymous*

    Is this normal, or am I insanely lucky? I’ve had two bosses in a row who are great to work with, who appreciate me and the work I do. The current one has been giving me increasing supervisory responsibilities (having me supervise our part-time contractors instead of having them report directly to him) and has been mentoring me and advising me when I run into new situations. I hadn’t ever thought of going management track, but now I aspire to become as good a manager myself.

    (Also, both my previous boss and my current boss have had regular 1:1 meetings with me every week, where we talk about any current issues the other needs to be aware of, and career development, and good stuff like that.)

    1. NotASalesperson*

      Based on my experiences, you’re either insanely lucky or very capable of working with a variety of personalities. I’ve had a range of bosses, and really only one or two of them have been interested in my professional growth.

  108. lfryer*

    Question about health disclosures and termination: myself and a friend had similar experiences where we started a job, and shortly thereafter, that is to say within a couple of weeks (my friend) or months (me), were fired. Both managers gave a reason for the termination that ended up being related to an undisclosed health condition, and as soon as they were made aware (during the termination conversation) of the health condition, immediately switched gears and blamed the termination on something else.

    I haven’t really looked in to it, but given that behavior, I assume that the people who were firing were afraid of running afoul of ADA or some other law. My question is: is it normal for someone to get fired for reasons related to a health condition, but have it blamed on something else? And if so, should one always disclose health problems that may cause occasional issues?

    1. Wakeen's Teapots, Ltd.*

      Hrrrm. This is kind of a trick question! :-)

      Okay, if somebody wants to fire somebody because of a heretofore undisclosed health condition, it’s totally normal for them to blame it on something else. That’s exactly what they would do, every time. (They would also do this to fire somebody for any other protected class issue.)

      However, it’s not normal to fire people for health conditions!

  109. NotASalesperson*

    I just realized I have a situation that would be perfect to ask on this thread…

    Is it normal to feel kind of lost in a new job for the first six months or so? As a second point to this question, is it normal for companies to provide minimal training (e.g. “here’s our guidebook – just read it and you’ll pick things up”) before being thrown into the position?

    I’m asking this because I’m an administrative associate who has a range of things I could be asked to do – I’ve done a financial audit, research, copy writing, and I help one consultant manage her projects. I kept thinking for the first six months of my job that I was doing badly, then I turned a corner and started to actually get a feel for what people were asking me. Today I got another question about billing, which I’ve had very minimal training on (ever – but also minimal training on our internal processes), and I’m feeling lost and like I don’t know how to do something I should know how to do. My prior experience was in program management, IT, and training development.

    I’d appreciate any thoughts on this.

    1. Liz*

      Totally normally to felt lost and/or overwhelmed in a new job. There’s a lot to take in, a new office culture to learn and adapt to, and just overall a lot of changes.

      Minimal training… maybe. If it’s a fairly standard position (e.g. receptionist) I can see that level of training being more designed to acclimatize you to expectations, but if the position were very specialized or higher-level that would be strange.

      1. NotASalesperson*

        What if the position involves an extensive amount of internal knowledge? It’s a lower level position, but it’s very involved internally.

        My position tends to require knowledge of how the company works (who to contact for billing, how to put in work orders, what the tone should sound like in a whitepaper, etc). We have some things that are standardized, but it took me a while to learn that they were standardized because no one told me in the beginning, then the people I’m working with assumed I knew about the standardization when they assigned me the work.

        1. Liza*

          NotASalesperson, it sounds like you could do a huge amount of good by starting to document this stuff! You’ll have it to refer to for yourself, and when you move on, the person who replaces you there will have a much easier time than you are now.

          I’d say that kind of situation (minimal training) is not abnormal, though it’s also not unusual to have more training than that. And I agree with Liz that it’s totally normal to feel lost for the first 3-6 months or so in a new job, even when one does have more training!

          1. NotASalesperson*

            I was actually doing the primary work of training material development at my last company, so I’ve definitely done that before! The weird thing here is that everything is actually changing – I helped two more senior people compile a training manual that is now partially defunct, and I’ve been at this job just over six months. We’ve had a lot of turnover at the high levels and our billing/finance teams have seen a lot of upheaval since the offices were moved overseas.

            I’m definitely going to see what we can do to create more documentation; I’ve already volunteered to assist with training new people on multiple occasions, but we’ve had a few new hires come through and my supervisor didn’t ask for my help, so… *shrug*

            Thanks for the feedback!

    2. Formica Dinette*

      I don’t know if it’s normal, but it most of my jobs I have received little or no training.

  110. Jane*

    I actually ended up leaving this position but, was it normal to have 7 bosses in 4 years? My “dept” kept being tosses between managers who weren’t sure where to put us and during those 4 years, I had 2 where I was not coached at all. My boss at the time’s response was that I have no time for this.

    1. Kai*

      I think that’s somewhat common in dysfunctional workplaces, which it sounds like this was. Unfortunate, but normal.

  111. boop*

    Is it typical to only have gov’t mandated wage increases (minimum) in the restaurant biz (BOH, not FOH)? Or am I the only one getting 50 cents higher than minimum after 9 years of service? hmmmmm

  112. Irishgal*

    Can I just suggest you all move to the UK or Ireland because although crappy managers are pretty much a worldwide phenomenon all this stuff about cancelling scheduled time off last minute, having to regularly work extra hours without TOIL , working more than 40 hours a week as standard, having to do your own work day on top of a training day/being expected to complete induction training and normal workload at same time? Well all that stuff is pretty much illegal over here .. thankfully! Oh.. and by the way our 40 hour week includes lunch/breaks so our working hours tend to be 35-37.5 hours depending on the employer.

    I feel for you all :)

    1. Slippy*

      But you all are SOCIALISTS!! over there for not wanting to work yourselves to death. Someone on television told me so!
      /snark

  114. Dragonfly*

    Is it normal for people to be texting all day long? I was out of the workforce (by choice) for over 20 years and am now working in an office again, and the amount of time I’m seeing people spend on their phones is beginning to annoy me.

    If someone comes to work on something with me that absolutely does not require a phone (which is like 99.999% of things) they bring their phone. Their phone buzzes, and they excuse themselves while the answer a personal text.

    Half my coworkers are 20-somethings to early 30 somethings, but I just don’t think this excuses anything. Yes, I’m older but I’m not ancient! Our office is small and we all get along well but lately I’m just having a hard time with this. I don’t want to seem like a complainer and in a small office, their isn’t much room for addressing these things elegantly. The constant refocusing of attention from personal to business matters has got to affect work.

  115. Herah*

    Is it normal/legal to be expected to work a “42 hour work week” as a non-exempt employee? I am often expected to work through my lunch hour and come in before my scheduled time for weekly trainings. This week my manager even texted me right after I had left to pick up something to eat, demanding I return to the office and work through lunch even though my coworkers who take lunch earlier than I do were permitted to take their lunch breaks. I know we are not exempt, because the job is entry-level and I have hear my manager mention overtime pay once, but it seems like we work over 40 hours way more than we are actually offered overtime pay.

  116. Who Even Knows*

    I have been working at a place for about 4 years and it was awesome until about 6 months ago. They’ve told three separate areas to not talk at all. One has the ability to talk if it’s job related. They are also timing us on many things… how long it takes to do certain things and if you are over that you are written up. Some of them are even down to seconds and it’s getting rather uncomfortable. We’ve had a lot of people leaving now and I’m wondering if it’s time to get out too.

    There are some policies I understand they’ve had to update but leaning on these metrics and telling people to not speak because it slows them down is starting to bother me. People think I’m in the position to stop it and I’m not. So I’m getting stress from both sides. What do you all think? Am I being too picky?

  117. Sunshine*

    Very small company, boss essentially turns up if and when he feels like it, and takes multiple holidays. He didn’t turn up for an entire month last year. Will also turn up very late. Other week he left me with a meeting I knew nothing about that *had* to take place that day.

    I occasionally get annoyed about it and I’m not sure if I’m being reasonable.

Comments are closed.