is my girlfriend’s boss crossing a line, commenting on food expenses from a business trip, and more

by Alison Green on July 31, 2024

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

1. Is my girlfriend’s boss crossing a line?

My girlfriend is a manager at a psychiatric office, but I feel that her male boss crosses the line in conversations — for example, giving her his opinion on periods and how she shouldn’t have one and telling her she should get a IUD and so on. They just got a new building and she told me they were going to drive across town to pick out furniture, which I told her I felt would be inappropriate. She got very defensive and started telling me I was being weird. I’ve voiced how I feel before just to be ignored, and with this specific situation I feel like there are many other options that could have been taken to get furniture. Would love to hear your opinion!

It’s not weird for her to go with her boss to pick out office furniture. That’s a pretty unremarkable thing that might happen in a small office.

It is weird for him to discuss her period with her. But I also don’t know what the context was for that conversation or how comfortable your girlfriend feels with him or how active a participant she was in the discussion.

If your girlfriend feels her boss is crossing boundaries with her, you should support her in figuring out what she wants to do about that. But that would be about supporting her in her right to feel comfortable at work, not about you feeling another man is encroaching on your relationship.

2. Commenting on food expenses from a business trip

One of my pet peeves with my former manager was that after I submitted my receipts for reimbursement after a business trip, he would always comment on what I ate. (Things like: “That’s all you had for lunch? You should eat more than that!”) I think he was well-intentioned and didn’t want me to feel like I had to skimp on the company dime, but it made me really uncomfortable. I felt like I had to constantly justify not being hungry in the mornings or just wanting a snack instead of a full meal while traveling.

I recently became a manager and am now approving expense reports. One of my direct reports was on a two-day trip and only expensed one meal. (It’s possible her hotel offered free breakfast.) I wanted to ask her if she had any other food expenses to submit, with the implication that she should feel comfortable charging the company for multiple meals a day, but I hesitated because of my past experience. I didn’t want to put her in a position where she had to awkwardly explain her eating habits.

What is the right balance here?

Two options, depending on your sense of what she would be the most comfortable with. One option is to tell her the story you shared here, and then say, “I never want to make anyone feel like that so please don’t explain anything to me — but I also want to make sure you know that you can submit for three meals a day if you eat them in the future!” Alternately, you could just send a message saying, “No need to respond to this, but I noticed you only submitted for one meal on the X trip and I want to make sure you know that you can submit for three meals a day on future business trips.”

3. Company is angry that I turned down a non-offer

After a year-long job search, I received an offer from Company B for a position in a specific country. Company B is a large multinational and, after making the offer, they realized they could not fulfill the offer in the location that had been agreed on. I withdrew my acceptance and said I would reconsider if a solution could be found. I had received another offer and risked losing it if I did not make a prompt decision. After a few days without a solution (or communication) from Company B, I accepted the other offer.

The hiring manager and the connection who had referred me were both angry and said that I should have waited for them to find a solution, like start work in my home country and then potentially move to the new country in future. I have attempted to maintain good relationships with them both but they have stopped all contact.

Did I do something wrong? Was there a way to manage this differently?

As additional background, Company B has ghosted me twice. Once was after six rounds of interviews (for one position) and the other was after being told I would receive an offer (for another position). I was not confident that Company B would find a solution and did not want to risk losing another offer after more than a year of job-searching.

You didn’t do anything wrong. They made an offer and then they changed key terms of it. After that, they offered you only a possibility that maybe they would be able to come up with a new offer that you’d accept. “We might be able to find you a job in another country, one that you may or may not agree to, and either way we have no firm timeline for resolving this” is not a reasonable thing to expect you to plan around, especially when you have another offer — a real offer — waiting on your response. That goes double since they’ve jerked you around the past.

Now, maybe on their end they knew this was highly likely to be solved in just a couple of days, but they didn’t share that with you if so, and either way you weren’t obligated to wait for them, particularly with the clock ticking on the other offer. The fact that they were angry about this makes their handling of it particularly ridiculous. Disappointment would be fine! But anger is misplaced.

4. Can my employer ask for my diagnosis when I’m seeking a medical accommodation?

I am having some health issues and am considering asking for an ADA accommodation. The accommodations coordinator sent this (boilerplate) response: “Please fill out this Medical Accommodation Request Form. After receiving the request form, we will work directly with leadership on occupational development to understand your job requirements. We will then send you your job description and a healthcare provider’s medical evaluation questionnaire for your provider to review and complete, along with an authorization for release of health information for the accommodations office to assess the request. We keep the medical information received confidential for review, as it is not shared with your supervisors. As part of the process, please understand that we may explore a range of possible accommodations under the essential functions and conditions of employment.”

The form itself says: “The purpose of this form is to assist the company in determining whether or to what extent a medical accommodation may be necessary for an employee to safely and effectively perform the essential functions of their job, or to access other benefits and privileges of employment, without creating an undue hardship for the company.” It then says, “Identify and describe the physical or mental disability that is the basis for your request for reasonable accommodation(s).”

This seems like too much. I don’t want to disclose my private medical information and the exact nature of my disability to my employer. Isn’t it enough to have a doctor attest that I have a disability and the requested accommodation is relevant to it?

Oddly, there’s not a ton of guidance from the EEOC about this. Employers may be able to insist on knowing the name of your specific diagnosis or impairment as part of determining whether you have a condition that’s covered under the ADA, although some states have laws that prohibit that. Even if your state doesn’t prohibit it, you can try just giving a general description of the condition and see if they’ll accept that (for example, “I have a condition that affects my vision”).

In addition, they can’t request your complete medical records (since that’s likely to contain info unrelated to your accommodation request), so make sure that the release they want you to sign limits the info that can be shared with them.

5. Should I consider an internal move to get away from my irritating manager?

My job involves designing and implementing programs within a large nonprofit. This is a new project, so we expect growing pains as we learn how to work with one another. The pace of my current job, workload, and colleagues are great; I have work-life balance, good pay, and am in an organization with great long-term prospects. The only problem is my manager, “Lucy.” On my first day, Lucy informed me that she never wanted her job, but was appointed by a senior manager. I find Lucy to be inflexible, a poor communicator, and not very creative or strategic in her thinking. We especially differ in communication style and work approach: I want to think about a question and reserve time for deep work, whereas my manager is a frenetic “yes-woman” who gets flustered if I ever respond by saying, “I need to think about that.” I often feel irritated with Lucy, and I suspect the feeling is mutual.

“Michelle” recently announced she will be leaving. Michelle, our grand-manager, and I consider it crucial for me to know what Michelle is doing, so that I can incorporate the policies she creates into my programs. Lucy, however, criticizes how much I “help” Michelle and other colleagues, reminding me that Michelle’s job is not my own. I feel as though Lucy wishes I would work with her frenzy, rather than consider questions like how the policies that colleagues design will be up to me to implement. I have tried every communication strategy I know of to work with Lucy’s style, but it remains the case that, while not an unkind person, she just isn’t a talented communicator, and (I think) is narrow in her thinking about the work.

Lucy and I met to talk about my objectives for the coming year, and she brought up Michelle’s pending departure. She asked if I would be interested in applying for Michelle’s job, or for a training-focused job that will be posted within the next year. These jobs are at the same pay grade as mine, and both would report directly to my current grand-manager (who I adore and get along with very well). I think I could be halfway competent at either role — but only halfway. I had not given it much thought, but now that my manager has brought it up, I am wondering about applying for one of these jobs, if only to get away from her. I also wonder if her bringing up the idea was a subtle suggestion. Do I apply for jobs I don’t think I am qualified for, in order to (potentially) work for a better manager? Or do I continue to work on the relationship with Lucy, and stay in my current position?

Can you imagine wanting either of those jobs if you believed you could learn to be good at them? If not, there’s no reason you need to pursue them just because Lucy mentioned them. But if you can imagine finding either or both of them appealing, why not do some more investigation? For example, you could talk to Michelle about what she thinks it takes to do the job well and learn more about the day-to-day; it’s possible you’ll realize that it wouldn’t be as challenging as you fear, or that it’s something you’d be able to master in six months. You could also talk to your grandboss since it sounds like you have a good rapport with her and she manages both of those roles; she probably has a useful vantage point about whether either of them could be a good match for you.

None of that commits you to applying, but given how frustrating you find working with Lucy while simultaneously loving the wider organization, it makes sense to at least explore it.

You may also like:
{ 468 comments }

{ 468 comments… read them below }

  1. Not A Manager*

    LW1 – “My girlfriend is a manager at a psychiatric office, but I feel that her male boss crosses the line…”

    He might be crossing a line, but you are definitely crossing a line.

    1. Anonys*

      To be fair, while getting upset by the furniture shopping is not warranted in the slightest, I cannot imagine the context in which saying the sentence “you shouldn’t have a period” to someone is in any way appropriate. That’s weird and creepy, even coming from a doctor and even if the conversation was triggered by the girlfriend mentioning her period pain or something. And while the girlfriend’s boss might be a psychiatrist/doctor, he is certainly not her OB/GYN.

      So unless OP is very incorrectly paraphrasing the conversation about periods (e.g. if what was actually said was “IUDs can help with period pain and some people will stop getting their period entirely”), I do think boss crossed the line here reg. what he can say to an employee. I think that’s true even if girlfriend didn’t personally mind the comment (because most people would indeed be made very uncomfortable).

      Also OP, did you ask your girlfriend (non-judgmentally) how she felt about the period conversation with her boss? Did she tell you in a “this kind of weird/uncomfortable thing happened at work today” way or in a “boss gave me some helpful medical advice” way?

      1. the og perfect beasts*

        I find the period one a bit weird too, but I think the key thing here is what we consider ‘the line’ to be. I’d think that was potentially crossing the girlfriend’s boundaries, and wonder if she needed support/sympathy/help figuring out what to do about it. That’s my idea of ‘the line’. But it sounds a lot more like LW thinks the line being crossed here is ‘another man encroaching on my territory by having conversations and buying furniture with my girlfriend’. And that’s BS. None of this is indicative of an affair or anything like it, and the girlfriend is not LW’s property.

        So I’m wary of saying ‘yes, that crossed the line’ when LW’s idea of what that means is very different to mine.

        1. Irish Teacher.*

          And I think the fact that she ignored his advice indicates that either she has it in hand (or it’s not actually a problem to her) or that his advice isn’t really helpful for whatever reason.

          1. ferrina*

            100%
            This is girlfriend’s situation to handle, and OP’s role is support. If girlfriend doesn’t see a problem, OP needs to trust her. As the saying goes, you can’t help someone who doesn’t want help (and that irrelevant as to whether or not they even need the help). OP needs to step back and trust the girlfriend to handle it. And if OP doesn’t trust the girlfriend, that’s a different issue.

          2. Salty Caramel*

            Or she wasn’t looking to him to solve her problem. There are a lot of people who treat almost anything someone tells them as a problem for them to solve.

            2. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

              Right. I could see a scenario where boss tried to solve a non-existent ask by giving unsolicited medical advice in response to her popping an advil for cramps. And then she thought it was hilarious that boss tried to mansplain periods to her and told LW who then tried to solve a non-existent ask.

        2. M*

          Also, while it’s not entirely usual, there are definitely people who have the kind of working relationship where softly-phrased medical suggestions, even quite personal ones, can be completely within bounds. There are absolutely working relationships where a colleague – even a manager – saying something like “hey, it seems like you’re really struggling with menstrual pain, and you should absolutely talk to your GP/ObGyn about managing it, including potential solutions that just let you skip periods” wouldn’t be at all out-of-bounds. LW1’s girlfriend is the person in the position to judge that, but LW1 doesn’t seem all that concerned with her opinion on the matter.

          1. WantonSeedStitch*

            Yes, this. It could be creepy and boundary-stomping, or it could be helpful and appreciated, and it’s up to LW’s GF to figure that out, not the LW. I’ve had work relationships where I actually recommended an OB/GYN to someone because I knew she was getting frustrated with the lack of medical help she was getting for a pretty serious problem, but there have also been work relationships where I wouldn’t even dream of having a more in-depth conversation about health than “sorry you’re under the weather, hope you feel better soon.”

          2. SheLooksFamiliar*

            M, your scenarios are all possible, especially if the ‘male boss’ is a psychiatrist. If so, he has a medical degree. It’s also possible that OP’s girlfriend asked for his medical opinion or the topic came up in a relevant conversation.

            Also: ‘LW1’s girlfriend is the person in the position to judge that, but LW1 doesn’t seem all that concerned with her opinion on the matter.’ Exactly. OP, step back please, and let your girlfriend handle this.

            1. Nebula*

              I literally had a conversation with a friend yesterday where I said she might want to run her pill packs together and not have a break, so that she doesn’t have a period. Granted that was a friend and not a colleague, but I can definitely see a situation where it would be a perfectly normal conversation to have.

            2. MigraineMonth*

              Actually, a medical doctor should absolutely *not* be giving their medical opinion outside of their area of practice *or* to people who are not their patients.

              1. SheLooksFamiliar*

                Whether or not he should isn’t my point, only that it was a possible scenario.

              3. Lea*

                Not an official recommendation but one of the perks of medical colleagues is free advice that in no way constitutes medical treatment

        4. Tiger Snake*

          But in the past on this very site, we’ve agreed that periods and other such things are a normal part of the human experience and that women shouldn’t feel ashamed or uncomfortable talking about them just because the other party is a man. And we don’t know what the conversation or how GF’s boss came to mention using IUDs to avoid periods, just that it did.

          It feels very much like women can’t win, to now say it’d be okay if the topic was discussed with a female boss but not a male one.

      2. Also-ADHD*

        I think what’s weird to me about LW1 is there’s no mention that the girlfriend is bothered (except by LW acting like she shouldn’t look at office furniture) so that really does make me wonder the context.

        1. PineappleColada*

          To be fair, what I suspect *possibly* happened at the psychiatrist’s office, is the subject same up in the context of PMDD (Premenstrual Dysmorphic Disorder, which is a more severe form of PMS that can cause depression symptoms that a psychiatrist would absolutely treat).

          So it could have been that’s how the topic was raised…and then the girlfriend herself asked questions about her cycle, etc. Let’s not forget that psychiatrists are MDs as well. Doctors of all kinds are so used to having people ask them off-the-cuff medical questions, it doesn’t faze them at all.

          So it may not have been that the doctor was just randomly issuing advice on her cycle, it could have come up in a much more innocuous way, perhaps even driven by the girlfriend questioning the doctor.

          All we have is the word of the boyfriend… who doesn’t appear to be a reliable narrator.

          1. Peanut Hamper*

            Yes, we are missing out on the context, either because LW doesn’t have it, or LW deliberately left it out of their letter. So while it seems weird on the surface, there are contexts where it could make sense. But we’ll never know.

            1. Dawn*

              Honestly, it sounds like the doctor is probably the less invasive of the two major male figures in her life.

          2. sparkle emoji*

            Yeah, there’s so may ways the period comment could have been either wildly out of line or innocuous depending on context we (and the LW?) don’t have. The girlfriend does. If she is bothered, she can deal with it in the way she finds appropriate.
            The rest of the issues seem like a non-event. LW says she’s a manager at a psychiatric office– does that mean office manager type role or a manager of the medical professionals? Because it seems totally normal for an office manager or similar high level admin professional in a medical office to have some control over common areas.

            1. Jiminy Cricket*

              Right. There’s a world of difference between someone walking into your office and making declarations about your reproductive system and having a respectful, trusting, voluntary conversation about your medical needs in which someone says, “You know, there are effective forms of birth control that eliminate menstruation.”

          3. Jaydee*

            That was my thought too. The boss could still be a creeper – some medical providers are. But the conversation seems less categorically out of place than it would in an accounting firm or a construction company or something.

            1. Ellis Bell*

              I feel like I’ve experienced every type of creepy guy there is, and I’ve never had one who tried to use my periods and/or office furniture to seduce me. If OP were naming some of the more classic symptoms; complaining about their wife, using her as a free therapist and/or texting her late at night with those weird “hey” messages, expecting her to be available sociably, and getting snippy if she’s not, comments on her appearance etc, then I would say; “Hey that would concern me, but you can only ring the warning bell and the rest is up to her own creep-o-meter”. I’ve never met a woman who doesn’t have a creep-o-meter, even if she needs an external warning to trust it (like the OP whose boss was rude to her husband). But, the periods and office furniture feels more like a guy trying to imagine what would be/should be creepy to a woman and not really… listening. Scheduling the two of you to work alone for unnecessary reasons is sometimes a classic symptom, but I don’t think driving across town with the guy to do very necessary work really qualifies.

            2. Fieldpoppy*

              Yeah, I work with a lot of doctors and some of them just have Opinions on everything, lol. Like she could say « I have cramps » and he could respond « I don’t know why anyone has periods when there is medication for that! ». I have practically had that exact conversation. The real issue here is that the LW is seeing encroachment everywhere AND is trying to step into his gf’s work relationships.

          4. Observer*

            All we have is the word of the boyfriend… who doesn’t appear to be a reliable narrator.

            Exactly!

            I was having one sort of reaction as I was reading the letter. Then came the argument over the furniture and my mind went to “what exactly did the boss say to GF? This LW is out to lunch.” And on thinking about it more, I think that maybe that’s too kind. But *certainly* an unreliable narrator.

        2. Olive*

          I think that it’s inappropriate and unprofessional, that she should be bothered, and that it could hurt her or hold her back in her future career to not realize that it’s an inappropriate work conversation, especially with a boss.

          I’d have said that if she wrote in.

          But that’s 100% for her to figure out where her work boundaries should be, not her boyfriend’s choice. He’s already expressed his opinion more than once and needs to butt out.

          1. a clockwork lemon*

            Other commenters have pointed out all the ways that this conversation could be perfectly innocuous or have come up naturally–I DON’T work in a medical office but I’ve had my coworkers ask me for provider recommendations or if I’ve got personal experience with particular types of treatments because it’s come up in a perfectly appropriate context (for example, talking about treatments for torn ligaments in the context of sports injuries.)

            An individual person gets to be the arbiter of their own experience, and it’s telling that LW mentions the period comment then jumps to office furniture without ANY mention of how his girlfriend, the actual employee, feels about either situation.

            This is someone looking to be validated for their own controlling behavior, not a person writing in good faith to solve a problem or get some strategies on how to support a partner struggling in an inappropriate work environment.

      3. nodramalama*

        I mean we not only don’t have the context of the conversation, but we also have LW’s version of a conversation he wasn’t present in.

        It could be creepy. It could also be a paraphrase, or part of a conversation where she was discussing a medical issue. As in, you shouldn’t have a period (that often/for so long). I think its telling that the person who was actually there for the conversation does not appear to have concerns about her boss.

      4. Dust Bunny*

        I would like to know from the girlfriend what the context was of this. We already know the LW has his nose out of joint about something as utterly routine and appropriate as choosing office furniture (which the GF and any other employees might have to use), so I’m a little skeptical about his ability to report accurately.

      5. Deborah Vance, Vance Refrigeration*

        I agree, I can’t think of a comment about an employee’s period not being inappropriate. Even if the girlfriend doesn’t think it is, it could be a case of a toxic boss/ workplace warping her sense of what’s normal. But regardless, the only thing OP can do is be supportive (and by seeing a problem with furniture shopping together, he’s not being it) of the girlfriend.

        1. Baldrick*

          There are plenty of examples already stated on here. It could have also been a generic comment about a patient that OP’s girlfriend thought was useful to her. Specifically, the boss might have had a patient with hormonally-related health problems and commented openly that a lot of people who have periods while on the BC pill don’t know that a period is artificially in there, and that if they took the hormonal pill constantly (rather than the placebo for 7 of 28 days) then someone who has mental illness due to hormonal changes might really benefit. Or maybe boss was saying it to a patient and OP’s girlfriend overheard and thought it was useful personally. We have no idea what was said exactly.

      6. LCH*

        yeah, i feel like OP heard about the period convo and is now freaked out about all the GF’s interactions with the boss.

      7. Lea*

        Maybe op is giving their interpretation of the period thing and it was not this abrupt. I have definitely discussed various medical stuff with
        Medical colleagues and they have also done so. Some people are more open/chatty.

        If gf isn’t bothers it’s none of lw1s business.

        I have also 100 gone office staff furniture shopping and it’s super weird that he thinks that’s not ok, it has the religious conservative don’t be in the same car with a woman vibe

    2. A. N. Other*

      You and Alison (and LW1’s girlfriend for that matter) seem to belong to the ‘if my girlfriend wants to sleep with the football team, well, it’s no business of mine what she does with her body; I’m just lucky she puts up with me in the meantime’ school of thought. It’s perfectly natural not to want your significant other to spend time with his or her boss when that boss has clearly demonstrated a willingness to cross what most would regard as personal boundaries. LW1 is right to be upset and I think it would be obtuse to pretend otherwise.

      1. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

        Wow – what an insane leap.

        And she is not “spending time” with her boss. She is working with her boss. As one does when they have a job that has a boss. Furnishing an office is working.

      2. flora_poste*

        This is a wildly offensive and out-of-line response to what is essentially ‘woman discusses potentially work-affecting health issues with boss’ and ‘colleague accompanies boss to pick up office furniture’. I absolutely don’t want to assume anything about your life, but it could be that there is some projection happening here.

      3. Irish Teacher.*

        No, that is not what people are saying. If the GF were sleeping with her boss, then yes, the LW would be right to be upset, but a) upset at the girlfriend rather than at the boss and b) there is absolutely nothing here to suggest that is the case.

        It’s not obtuse because there is no pretence. There is no reason to assume the girlfriend and the boss are sleeping together, so there is nothing for the LW to be upset about.

      4. the og perfect beasts*

        We have one possibly-awkward step across maybe-boundaries, depending on how that conversation actually took place, and we have a boss and his employee working together on setting up a new office with furniture. How anyone gets from that to sleeping with the football team I have no idea.

        My boss once told me a story about a guy he knew who was into body modification and got his penis bifurcated. I have yet to sleep with my boss, bifurcated man, the football team, or anyone at all other than my husband. A conversation can take an awkwardly personal turn sometimes without any dreadful implications. If the guy was texting her all night complaining about how his wife doesn’t understand him, now there’d be a sign that he at least was looking for something from her – and even then it still wouldn’t mean she was likely to go along with it.

        How do you function in relationships with this little trust?

      5. Nonym*

        For sure. Going on a work errand with your boss during your work hours is the same as cheating on your boyfriend with the football team. Very comparable. I myself rarely pick up furniture without sleeping around on the way there or back. Sometimes both. Sorry to have been so obtuse.

        1. Giant_Kitty*

          I make sure only buy furniture in areas where sex workers congregate so I never overlook this important aspect of decorating.

      6. MigraineMonth*

        LW1 is clearly upset. There are any number of reasonable ways LW1 can deal with being upset with the situation:

        1) If the gf thinks that the comments about her period, in context, were boundary-crossing or sexual harassment, LW1 could support his gf while she sets boundaries, reports to HR or finds another job.

        2) If the gf thinks that the comments about her period were fine but LW1 feels that they were too intimate, he can have a discussion with his gf about whether or not the relationship can work, given that she is comfortable with that level of intimacy outside the relationship and he is not.

        3) LW1 can accept that there isn’t a reasonable basis for being angry that his gf is doing her job (i.e. buying furnishings) and work on himself.

        Nowhere in that list is “accept that gf is cheating on him”, but neither is “write to a work advice column to get validation for being angry at gf for working where I can’t watch her all day” or “demand gf quit her job because I feel threatened”.

      7. Giant_Kitty*

        If someone’s girlfriend/boyfriend/non-binary partner does decide they actually want to sleep with an entire football team that is indeed still their own business about what they want to do with their own body.

        Their partner only gets to decide how they are going to deal with it. Give an ultimatum? Proactively leave the relationship? Find a compromise? Accept it? Choose to be nonmonogamous themselves? Something else?

      8. Nodramalama*

        Sorry, what? She’s not “spending time with her boss”. She’s at work. Working.

      9. Bitte Meddler*

        OFFS, A. N. Other.

        My ex watched p0rn 40+ hours a week and, after I explained why that bothered me, why I thought it was detrimental to his mental, physical, and monetary health, he continued to do it anyway, but just upped his lying about it.

        Guess what.

        I don’t get to tell him what to do or how to spend his time.

        I *DO* however get to decide how to spend *my* time and who I spend it with.

        Spoiler: I don’t spend a single minute of my day with him now.

        LW1 still has agency and can decide that this isn’t the relationship for him.

        What he *can’t* do is control another human being. No one can. No one should even try.

        Literally nowhere on AAM has anyone EVER said, “LOL. Put up with whatever your partner does, no matter how painful their behavior is to you.”

        How you twisted Alison’s and the commenters’ advice into that says… a lot.

    3. Little Miss Sunshine*

      I think LW1’s GF’s boss has an employee whose partner is very insecure.

      1. Rex Libris*

        Or controlling. For me, the letter had serious vibes of “I told my girlfriend what to do and she ignored it. Please validate my angst over that.”

    4. duinath*

      Yep. You can feel, LW1, that your gf is crossing lines in *your* relationship, and that is something you can talk about if you feel the need.

      You are not a part of your gf’s worklife, you are not in her shoes, she is the one who sets the boundaries in her own work and her own relationships.

      1. Decima Dewey*

        Yeah, LW1, it’s up to your girlfriend if she want to confront her boss.

        Myself, I wouldn’t seek or take advice on my period from someone who hasn’t experienced one. Assuming the boss is a cisgender male.

    5. Meep*

      Sorta agree, but I feel like we are overlooking her male boss informing her that she shouldn’t have her period. Maybe I have just been following “Bad Medical Takes” for too long (a lot of them are men and their opinions on women’s vagina), but that is horrendous in itself and needs to be addressed. Not by LW#1 but definitely by HR. And adult male should know better. Someone who is there to help people when they are most vulnerable really should not be allowed near anyone with that belief.

      1. Kay*

        I think context, which we DO NOT HAVE, is crucial here before coming to this conclusion. This is a medical office, which the notion that a comment to the likes of “no woman should have to deal with the torment of periods” seems even more likely to occur.

      2. Artemesia*

        The boss is a an md — it is possible this was a medical discussion initiated by her perhaps in the context of a patient and then applied to her.

      3. MigraineMonth*

        “Women shouldn’t have periods” may be a harmful belief, but there are definitely specific women who shouldn’t.

        For example, my partner is a woman who shouldn’t have her period. I think that was the consensus of all the ER doctors, nurses and ultimately the gynocological surgeons who removed her uterus so she stopped hemorrhaging until she passed out every month.

      4. zuzu*

        A lot depends on context here.

        Remember, the boss has an MD. “You shouldn’t have your period [if you’re on X type of birth control]” is a perfectly normal thing for an MD to say to someone who has asked for their opinion about the pluses and minuses of various types of birth control. I really, seriously doubt he was saying it as a prescriptive thing. Jealous boyfriend does not seem like the most reliable narrator.

        She may well be taking advantage of the fact she works in a medical office to get some free medical advice on her BC options, like IUDs and other long-term methods. Hell, I totally would if I worked for a doctor. Even if he wasn’t the one I actually got my care from, I’d definitely want to discuss my options so I had better knowledge going into my gynie.

  2. TheBunny*

    LW#2

    Please say something, even if you go with the “in passing” option.

    We recently had a team meeting at my work. One of the team is remote and drove in for the meeting…and brought something with her to eat for dinner. She didn’t know that the company paid for meals and was surprised when we told her. It never occurred to any of us that she wouldn’t know this, but some people really don’t know what the rules are around this.

    1. Awkwardness*

      This. I think it is important for LW to see that there is a difference between somebody constantly commenting on your expenses and somebody doing this once to explain how it works.
      If OP does a very factual check-in (“I was not aware of ABC, so I walked to make sure you know this going forward and do not miss out on something”), I cannot see how somebody would feel harassed.

      1. ferrina*

        Yes! Especially since 3 meals is a really typical cadence and the employee only submitted for 1. It’s normal to double check number when they are off from what you expect. OP isn’t calling out what the employee ate or encouraging them to eat more, they’re just making sure the numbers line up.
        (of course, if the employee ensures them that the numbers match and OP continues to push it, that’s a problem. Or if the next time the employee also submits one meal and OP pushes- at that point you would know to expect a variance from this employee)

      2. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

        THIS! Mentioning it once and then leaving it alone is not food policing.

        My first job involved a lot of travel and I turned in my meals for reimbursement for my first trip, we just self reported, we were not required to provide receipts for meals if we stayed under $35 (1990!), just a daily total. My boss pulled me in the office and told me I had to spend more. I didn’t get it and he had to give up on being subtle and say that it was expected that I “turn in” between $25 and $35 per day regardless of if I spent that much or not because it would lead to too many questions if one person was spending $7 and everyone else was spending $30.

        1. Artemesia*

          Reminds of where I worked. You could spent say $25 on dinner without receipts. So we would all fill out $25 when we went to places like New Orleans or Chicago. The accounts decided we were all scamming the organization and so demanded receipts for everything. So we would go to New Orleans, have dinner for $50 and submit a request for $25 with the receipt for $50 and get whining about how ‘you are only allowed $25 so we can’t accept this receipt.’ Took a lot longer than you would think to straighten this out.

    2. AcademiaNut*

      The main difference with the LW’s case would be spelling out, once, what reimbursements cover, rather than commenting every time.
      It’s worth doing this with new employees in general, because things can vary a lot between employers (or industries), in both what is covered, how it is covered, and how grudgingly it is covered.

      1. Meal expenses*

        I’ve had to have this discussion with many employees over the years, who had tried to save the company money or didn’t want to get into trouble by expensing too much.

        It only takes one discussion.

        1. ferrina*

          I’ve been the employee that needed this discussion! I had no idea what I was/wasn’t allowed to expense, or what was a reasonable amount (and I came from a low income background, so for me “a reasonable amount” was ridiculously low, far lower than what any of my bosses would consider “a reasonable amount”). I lost a lot of money because I didn’t reimburse for things I should have.

          I deeply appreciated the bosses that made sure I knew what the expense policy was, and I’m retroactively side-eyeing the bosses that were fine with me paying out of my (deeply underpaid) pocket.

      2. Pastor Petty Labelle*

        There’s also a big difference between – we expense 3 meals a day and why did you just order a salad? Commenting on the number of submissions is different than commenting on the contents of the submission.

        But some people do only eat one meal a day. Its an outlier so not likely but if only one submission continues its something to consider.

        1. Polly*

          I’m glad my previous company didn’t require the itemized receipt. I used the final credit card receipt that I signed when I submitted my expenses. As long as I didn’t go over the daily limit, I could eat whatever I wanted. And for companies that don’t give you a limit, they still didn’t get to scrutinize your meal choices!

          1. Lisa*

            We don’t have to submit an itemized receipt if the meal expense is $25 or less. For more than that the only thing they actually care about is that you aren’t spending disproportionate amounts on alcohol.

            If a manager has the time to scrutinize what people are eating they don’t have enough real work to do.

            1. Double A*

              Wow, our expense will be rejected if we don’t include an itemized receipt! But it’s public money so they need to make sure there’s no alcohol on the bill.

    3. Irish Teacher.*

      I think it might also be worth specifying if she can expense meals that are a little different than expected, like can she expense take-out? As somebody who has some sort of sensory issue around food, I sometimes find I can’t eat the meals in say a hotel and may need to go elsewhere. So being clear about exactly what is and is not allowed might be helpful.

      1. ThatGirl*

        I mean, I won’t speak for the LW, but at my company they don’t care whether it’s from McDonald’s, a vending machine or a steakhouse, as long as you have a receipt and it’s within the spending limits. Takeout, delivery and room service are all perfectly fine.

        1. UKDancer*

          Same. We have spending limits in my company for each meal (and it varies depending on where you are in the world) but within that you can get what you like (excluding alcohol) as long as you have a receipt. So I’ve had room service or takeaways before now.

    4. Alice*

      This exactly. My boss didn’t tell me until several days into a work trip that I should use my company card for meals. He was the type to hope I just paid for it myself to save him money.

    5. Tell it like it is*

      A general statement about what you expect to see rather than talking about what is missing. For example:
      “Remember that when you expense a trip you should be sure to include transportation, meals, tips, and other necessary expenses. ”
      You could be more explicit if you have never covered this with your employee before, e.g. “Use the company card for X, Y, and Z. Try to get a receipt for A, B, or C (e.g. uber/taxi), but we know that isn’t always possible. It should still be included in the expense report.”
      And you could make a general “your expense report seems light, did you include everything?”

      1. TeaCoziesRUs*

        I’d also include any company-specific foibles of which you’re aware. (I’m thinking of the RSlash Malicious Compliance story where someone was under the daily limit but the receipt was rejected because the tip was too high… even though it was STILL under the guidance for dinner cost.) I.E. “The company’s tipping policy is 20% standard and anything extra comes out of your pocket.” Every accounting department has their peccadilloes. Make sure your new employees are aware. :)

        1. MigraineMonth*

          I worked for a company where some employees traveled a ton and were a bit notorious for going to fancy restaurants. Meanwhile, I was questioned over getting a GPS navigator with the car rental.

          I pointed out that I didn’t own a smartphone and they flew me in to an airport 90 miles from my destination. If they actually wanted me to show up at the worksite, yes, the navigator *was* necessary.

    6. Crencestre*

      The Bunny, it’s always better to clarify IN ADVANCE that the company will pay for a meal than to assume that every employee knows that you will. In fact, there’s an old saying “To assume makes an ASS of U and ME.” That “it never occurred to any” of you that your colleague wouldn’t know an unspoken “rule” was a tip-off that this “rule” had never actually been stated – maybe the rest of you knew it, but your remote-working colleague had been kept in the dark. And given how many remote-workers have complained of feeling left out of their company’s culture and perks, that’s not a good position to have placed her in.

      1. TheBunny*

        We did. We told her we would pay for the hotel, meals and fuel…and sent copies of the policy…before the trip (I confirmed this after I had the conversation with her) this employee just happens to be one who doesn’t read things and just assumes she knows what is going on. It created all sorts of issues when written directions weren’t followed and is actually the main reason this person is no longer with the company.

        I just didn’t think the rest of the story was particularly helpful for LW. :)

        1. porridge fan*

          So presumably the reason that it didn’t occur to anyone that she didn’t know that the company provided meals is that she had, in fact, been told that the company provided meals. She had just not paid attention.

          Perfectly reasonable to assume that she did know, in that situation.

          1. TheBunny*

            Thanks. And exactly.

            I made my (redacted for usefulness to LW) comment because it’s worth mentioning as the employee at my work, despite being told (repeatedly) didn’t seem to grasp the concept until we asked her why she brought a lunch to eat for dinner and she said she wasn’t sure how to handle that…and yet wasn’t concerned with how the hotel was being paid…she would pick and choose what she paid attention to.

            Which is a lot to say I’d bring it up with the employee in this specific “hey I noticed this” way.

    7. Katie*

      Right! My job as manager is to let my employees know what pay they are open to. Last week, I had employee whose aunt had passed away. She was only going to take a few hours for the funeral as PTO until she found out she was open to 5 days of bereavement. I didn’t push it when she only took a day.

      1. TheBunny*

        I clarified above.

        We DID tell her. And emailed her copies of the policy. She just didn’t read it. Which is actually an issue we had with her and just…not…following directions but rather taking in the info, nodding, doing her own thing, and then getting angry when we corrected her or asked if she read the info we sent. This just didn’t seem helpful backstory for LW.

  3. Tiger Snake*

    LW5 – I think I’m confused about why your manager shouldn’t have brought this up?

    You know you don’t like working for her and find the job frustrating because of how she – as the manager – is defining it. You know Michelle, who you did work with closely and enjoyed working with and smoothed a lot of those ruffled feathers out for, is leaving. Presumably Lucy can see that the buffer between your perspectives being removed too.

    You sound unhappy about working for Lucy. But then, wouldn’t pointing out opportunities to where you’d be doing things you’re good at in the same organisation and be happier with the management of not be a good thing for Lucy to do? I’d presume Lucy and the company would much rather you transfer than quit the company altogether because you don’t like the job you do when Lucy’s the one defining it.

    1. MsM*

      Yeah, I thought it was a surprisingly insightful and considerate move on Lucy’s part: she knows being LW’s manager is a bad fit for her, but she knows LW has skills she doesn’t, and she’s okay with LW potentially advancing above her if it means LW can work with people without the two of them clashing over it.

      1. SarahKay*

        Lucy might well be aware that she is not an especially good manager and be doing what she can to fix that. She might see ensuring that LW5 knows about opportunities that *might* interest them as a way of supporting LW5 in their career.
        I can easily see someone trying to succeed in a manger role reading up on what good managers do and trying to apply that, without necessarily realising that other parts of their management style are flawed.

      2. TeaCoziesRUs*

        +1 This isn’t being managed out, it’s an acknowledgement that OP is great at her job but not fun for Lucy to manage. And Lucy thinks highly enough of OP to encourage her to apply elsewhere so that her talents can still be used by the company.

    2. ecnaseener*

      Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see anything in the letter suggesting LW thinks Lucy shouldn’t have brought this up. The closest thing is “I also wonder if her bringing up the idea was a subtle suggestion,” which, yeah, maybe it is, there’s no indication that LW thinks that’s a bad thing.

    3. MassMatt*

      I find myself wondering if perhaps LW is selling herself short in thinking she would only be “halfway” competent at those jobs. We are to take LW’s at their word and it sounds as though this LW is very reflective of things but it’s so common for people (esp women, though we don’t know LW’s gender) to focus on qualifications they lack while others look at the same job with the same skills and think “great, I’ve got half of those, I’ll pick up the rest on the job!” it bears mentioning.

  4. El*

    Another option regarding meal reimbursement is to give them an allotment without requiring receipts. For my trips it was a set 15 for breakfast, 15 for lunch, 30 for dinner (60 a day). It was paid to me whether I used it or not, so I could skip breakfast and eat a nicer dinner, or whatever my eating habits were. It made me more comfortable eating whatever I wanted without the thought someone might judge me and without the worry I’d spend too much.

    2. Coverage Associate*

      I also appreciate the flexibility of the per diem as one of those people who can’t eat much breakfast and needs something with at least flavor (so, not tap water) to take pills at bedtime. It will be rare that my total food and drink expenses will even reach normal for business trips, but somehow it feels unprofessional submitting receipts for the equivalent of snacks (and there’s the impossibility of a receipt from a vending machine).

      I think I have even seen the occasional travel policy that excludes food and drink apart from meals. I think the reason was something about mere convenience and also not wanting to reimburse alcohol and lumping everything outside a meal with that. (The policies often have exclusions for things that could be reasonable business travel expenses but that clients want you to handle on your own time. Hotel laundry services stand out in my memory as a non reimbursable “convenience.”)

      1. bamcheeks*

        I had a drive-300-miles-a-week sales job as my first job out of university, and I was 100% in the “didn’t have lunch but bought a brownie at a motorway service station” stage of life (I couldn’t do that now without feeling violently sick!), and I haaaaated submitting my expenses to the colleague who approved them. But I also couldn’t afford NOT to!

        1. Light Dancer*

          Hey, as long as Guacamole Bob wasn’t overseeing your expenses, you should be fine!

      2. WellRed*

        I’d hate to think water or pretzels outside if a meal is considered a convenience and therefore not reimbursesble. We work done long days while traveling.

        1. NotRealAnonForThis*

          My days traveling were absolutely exhausting. Full 9-ish hours doing XYZ at a site or the main office, then an additional 4-6 back at the hotel so that I didn’t fall behind on whatever I was working on normally as I’d lose time (against deadlines set by third parties outside of our company) while traveling to and from. Traveling to and from meant spending significant amounts of time in an airport, often with crappy flight times that landed me home in the wee hours, and still needing to drive to actual home.

          I’m glad I don’t travel much now.

          1. CommanderBanana*

            Same. I totally burned out on work travel after working at an org where I ended up doing the bulk of the traveling for event staffing because everyone else in my department was on mat leave more or less continuously for over two years. I went from staffing an event every 4 – 6 weeks to staffing 2 – 3 events a month, all of which ran over weekends, plus trying to keep up with my actual other job.

            I kept getting told it was “temporary” when I asked to offload some work or to have people from other departments who wanted to travel to take on some of the offsite staffing, but two years isn’t temporary, IMHO, so I quit instead.

    3. Testing*

      It’s unlikely that the LW can decide whether to use per diems or receipts, though. Those decisions are typically firmly set within an organisation, and it doesn’t sound like it’s LW’s own company.

      1. Brain the Brian*

        Yep. At my company, we do a per diem allotment without requiring receipts — no manager can just decide to do it differently on their own. For now, I would recommend that the LW be supportive of their staff submitting as many meal receipts as are allowed. In the larger picture, I would encourage them to advocate up the chain for a company-wide switch to a daily allotment system.

      2. Observer*

        It’s unlikely that the LW can decide whether to use per diems or receipts, though.

        Absolutely. All the LW can do here is make sure that their employee knows the *actual* rules and the “unwritten” ones, to be able to do what’s best for her (the employee) within them.

        1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

          Perhaps the employee is following an unwritten rule. It sounds like the employee was there before OP was manager, so perhaps there’s backstory OP isn’t aware of.

        2. UKDancer*

          Yes, we have to produce receipts for everything and there are ceilings as to how much you should be spending. I would love to give my staff a per diem but the company says we need itemised receipts so we need itemised receipts.

          I can’t change the company rules on this because it’s decided at a much higher level. I do make sure my staff know what they can and can’t claim for though.

    4. Michigander*

      At my work we don’t have set limits or per diems, but we do have general guidelines. I never travel for work but if I did I think it would be useful before (or after, in this case) the first trip to have someone let me know what the general guidelines are: We expect about this much for a meal, we don’t reimburse alcohol, etc.

      1. Lab Boss*

        That’s how my company does it. We have soft guidelines but they only get brought up if you repeatedly and significantly break them. We also finally officially announced that the guidelines were an average over the trip- if you spend about $X each day, that’s fine, but it’s also fine if you want to have fast food for dinner a few nights and then splurge on a fancier dinner the last night if your trip average is still about $X/day for the trip. It’s nice to not have a rock-hard limit but still have some kind of sense over what’s expected.

    5. Meh*

      That only works if the per diem allowance is sufficiently large to cover 3 adequate meals at the travel location.

      Otherwise, you go somewhere and discover that the only convenient option for a meal is a restaurant where sandwich+drink is $25 and whoops there goes the bulk of your $30 per diem.

      1. Polly*

        Whenever I had to travel to NYC for work, I had to get approval for hotels that were over the daily limit. The system wouldn’t even let me make the reservation. I don’t remember if I also needed to spend more on food, but if I did, I don’t remember any pushback on it.

        1. TiffIf*

          My company travel policy specifies that for certain cities, including the NYC Metro Area, the food per diem is higher.

          1. Silver Robin*

            My org uses the federal per diem rates, which adjust based on location. Any time we are budgeting for potential travel, we specifically look at where we are sending people to make sure we provide reasonable amounts.

      2. Jackalope*

        One option for those who are in the US is the GSA per firm rates. It’s the per diem rate for federal employees, and varies based on the region. If I remember correctly you put in the zip code of the area you’re traveling to and it gives the amount for that location, so it’s not an across the board rate for the whole country, and it at least tries to take into consideration the different range of costs in different areas.

        1. Le Sigh*

          Yeah I had to have a conversation about this with my company. Apparently, despite the fact that they would send people to high COL major cities all the time, they were surprised it was hard/impossible to get a halfway decent breakfast or lunch on the go for $10 (nevermind if you have any dietary needs).

          Like, where y’all been living?

    6. Ally McBeal*

      Agreed – I came to the comments to see if anyone had already mentioned implementing a per diem. That really helps eliminate confusion, and you can always add caveats for things like “excludes alcohol, which must be purchased with your own funds” and “per diem increases to $XX for breakfast, $YY for lunch, and $ZZ for dinner if you are entertaining clients.”

    7. Lady Danbury*

      I worked at a smaller company that had a set per diem, paid in advance. It didn’t always cover reasonable expenses in higher COL areas and the finance director also complained it could be gamed (eat McDonald’s for breakfast and lunch in order to splurge on dinner or pocket the rest of the money)*. He proposed a receipts based system. The exec team sat down and calculated exactly how much switching would cost in terms of employee time versus potential savings. This overwhelmingly reaffirmed the per diem approach, with receipts only required if you felt like you needed more (in which case you’d need receipts for everything being claimed). Companies often forget to factor in the value of employees’ time into these type of calculations, which is especially short-sighted considering they’re paying for that time.

      *Personally, I have no issue with someone eating cheaply and pocketing the rest of the per diem.

      1. Clementine*

        I believe that if you pocket your per-diem, that’s taxable income. But double-check.

        1. Lady Danbury*

          The company is located in a country that doesn’t have income tax, so that wasn’t a consideration in this instance.

        2. Over Analyst*

          If per diem is set within the GSA guidelines it’s not taxable, even if you keep extra. I believe that’s a way it makes it easier for companies and employees; you don’t need to track receipts, just give the employee the GSA per diem values.

      2. CommanderBanana*

        If the per diem is paid in advance, I don’t see how that’s gaming the system.

      3. Orv*

        I definitely knew people who would each cheap so they could pocket the rest of the per diem, but I’m not sure I see anything unethical about that. The money is to compensate them for being away from home; it’s their choice how to use it.

    8. Mockingjay*

      Came to say the same thing.

      Option 3: Provide per diem instead of reimbursing for individual meals. That way people don’t have to fuss with receipts or worry about when/how they eat.

      Also, as other commenters have noted, make sure employees are informed about travel and reimbursement policies. Little things can add up and an employee might not even realize that these things can (should) be reimbursed. For instance, my company double checks travel claims to ensure we get back the small fee the travel agency charges for booking services (which I’ve forgotten about because I booked weeks earlier).

      1. Sheworkshardforthemoney*

        I have a corporate credit card and just found after 3 years that I can use it for gas when I’m using my personal car for work purposes. It would have saved me lots of gas money over the past years. Now I fill up every time with the card.

    9. AF Vet*

      +1. The US federal government does this and it makes life SO much easier. I know I’m getting a flat cost per day – and can easily look that cost up by location on a public website. So if I grab drive-thru for breakfast and lunch then splurge on a $45 dinner of sushi and sake, no one knows or cares. They only care about the alcohol IF I get stupid enough to get in trouble with its usage. Then they’ll still reimburse the cost as they’re slapping my hand (or worse).

    10. Leenie*

      Per diems aren’t a magic bullet though. When I travel, I might spend $60 on a dinner, which can be reimbursed. If I had a $60 per diem, as you did, I’d be uncomfortably out of pocket. At the same time, it wouldn’t make sense to tell everyone that they can have $120 a day to spend on food. For some companies, where you have employees who are traveling to similar areas for similar reasons, a per diem might be a nice way to streamline. But for other companies, where people are in very different roles, in different departments, and traveling all over, a per diem could actually wind up leaving a lot of people spending their own money on work travel. I think the main thing is just to make sure that employees are collecting full reimbursements, in whatever system exists at a given company.

      1. Le Sigh*

        I got tired of dealing with this issue and just told them if they want me to travel, give me a company CC. I was tired of fronting them money or eating the difference if I went slightly over the per diem. With the CC, as long as I stay reasonably within the guidelines and keep receipts, no one says anything. Much easier.

      2. I can read anything except the room*

        There’s usually going to be a dollar limit of some kind, whether it’s a maximum reimbursement amount or a flat per diem. The only difference is whether you have to submit receipts for reimbursement and only be reimbursed what you spent, or if you just get the entire amount in cash up front and can spend it however you see fit – in either case it’s possible to spend more than the allowed/allotted amount.

    11. Cinnamon Stick*

      I like that a lot. When I traveled for business, I had a set amount for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and we had to send receipts. I tried doing breakfast and lunch on my own and using everything for a nice dinner. While my boss understood and sympathized, policy stated I was not to do that again.

    12. LaurCha*

      I do think it’s time for us to all accept, alas, that lunch is more like $20 and dinner more like $40, and that’s pretty much a fast-casual type meal. If you’re expected to dine with colleagues or contacts, dinner somewhere nice is going to be even more.

    13. Alan*

      Per diem is awesome. When I was early-career my company sent me on a 6-week trip. I didn’t eat much and came back with hundreds of extra dollars in my pocket, which on my salary, was very much appreciated. I kept this frugality up until I retired. I never recall spending my entire per diem.

    14. Person from the Resume*

      While this is possibly an improved process, it is unlikely the LW is in a position to change the process and make it retroactive so that she doesn’t need to speak to her employee about her concerns.

      Not that El’s point is not bad, but it’s certainly far outside the scope of this questions.

    15. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

      My former company did this because they were dealing with too many teeny tiny receipts. How about if you grabbed a coffee at Starbucks and then a breakfast sandwich later at the food truck. What if you were a medically required to do 6 small meals rather than 3. Questions on how you got reimbursed when you spent all night working in the factory where you got your food from a vending machine using cash.
      They figured out it was costing them too much money and time organizing the receipts, reviewing the receipts, filing the reports with the receipts, answering questions.

    16. sometimeswhy*

      I love per diem. It’s my default when traveling for work. The simplicity of it makes up for the possibility of coming out behind (though I usually come out a little ahead).

  5. Properlike*

    Anyone else catch the “benefits and privileges of employment” line in #4’s boiler plate?

    What about the benefits and privileges of having people working for your company?

    1. Punk*

      I don’t see a problem with the company stating that one of the goals of accommodations is to ensure that all employees have access to their benefits snd perks.

      1. RT*

        Yeah I think it’s just (badly) stiffly-worded, not them saying, “Haha, do this or you’ll be fired.”

      2. Striped Badger*

        Same.

        I once worked with had some sort of anxiety disorder. I don’t know the details of his condition, but I do know he originally wanted an accommodation to be able to just leave or not show up to work without any sort of warning if he felt too anxious.

        Much as I sympathise with him, the job was not one where you could regularly be a no-show. Numbers and reliability were not just “necessary”, it was “the entire police raid to catch human traffickers fails and all the evidence we have to be thrown out of court”.
        It was not a reasonable accommodation, and trying to make it a reasonable accommodation would have prevented most other employees from being able to use our own benefits, as well as blocked him from being able to use them himself because he’s no longer meet the requirements.

        So, they had to go back to the drawing board about what could be done instead. Understanding what specifically the nature of his disorder was and how it occurred and impacted his functioning would have felt very personal to him, but it was necessary for them to find a compromise that would actually be able to work for him.

        1. Cj*

          I didn’t do any research to see if there were rules about this specific type of situation, but, while his not showing up at work wouldn’t have been a reasonable accommodation under the ADA, couldn’t he have gotten approved for intermittent FMLA, and would have been able to not work without prior notice that way?

          obviously that wouldn’t be good for the company, but isn’t that how FMLA works? I don’t think it matters if it is an undue hardship to the company like it does for ADA accommodations.

          somebody please correct me if I am wrong.

          2. Nocturna*

            According to the DOL fact sheet for employees: “To request FMLA leave, employees should follow the usual and customary procedures at their workplace for requesting leave, unless they are unable to because of unusual circumstances.”

            I’m not sure that “felt too anxious” would fall under “unusual circumstances” (the example given was someone being rushed to the hospital), so if the workplace requires prior notice, I’m not sure that using FMLA leave would bypass that for the described situation.

            1. Nocturna*

              On further investigation, FMLA does specifically include leave for “unforeseeable reasons” as allowed/covered (even if employees can’t follow usual leave notice policies), but they also state that “Even when the need for leave is unforeseeable, it should generally be possible and practical for the employee to provide notice of leave within the time required by the employer’s usual and customary notice requirements.” So I’m not sure where an intersection of FMLA-eligible unpredictable intermittent leave and a job that usually requires advance notice for leave would fall legally.

              1. Cj*

                I doubt anybody will see this since I’m posting it so late, but I think if you have a doctor’s appointment or something else that is scheduled in advance, you would need to give notice under the same policy that you would give for a vacation, a doctor’s appointment that isn’t related to your fmla, etc.

                And if your leave is unforeseeable and you don’t know you will be gone until that day, you would need to give notice under the same policy as if you were sick.

          3. Striped Badger*

            But he wasn’t after his FMLA. He wanted a separate accommodation to be able to simply not turn out to attend literal police raids without any warning or foreplaning.

            If you are a specialist person who has been flown 8hrs two days before specifically to attend this (and yes, at least two days 2 days – they already have a full planned day factored in for you to recover), then deciding that it’s too stressful to show up doesn’t just mean something gets deployed late. It means the entire operation gets cancelled. Deciding the job is too stressful and just getting up to leave half-way through not only means that all the evidence has to be thrown out and people who should be convicted get off scot-free, it means that you’re putting multiple people at serious risk of personal harm or death.

            It simply was not a reasonable accommodation for the type of work we were doing.

    2. The Unionizer Bunny*

      Anyone else catch the “benefits and privileges of employment” line in #4’s boiler plate?

      I did, and it impressed me (in a positive way) with their attention to detail – this is a requirement of the law that I’ve seen missed, people often stop at “accommodations are for doing the job” and it’s more than that:

      Reasonable accommodation is any change or adjustment to a job or work environment that permits a qualified applicant or employee with a disability to participate in the job application process, to perform the essential functions of a job, or to enjoy benefits and privileges of employment equal to those enjoyed by employees without disabilities.

      I was impressed with their wording in other areas too, though I think some of that might have been exposure to really terrible approaches that some other employers take. Their accommodations coordinator already knows (and respects) your decision to not go through the supervisors you work with every day, so your supervisors won’t have to know the particulars of your condition, only how to treat you differently. They don’t expect your doctor to recommend accommodations, they aren’t asking for every medical condition that might affect your ability to do the job, and they aren’t even asking for every symptom of your condition! I don’t know that I would even call this “boilerplate”, it seems unusually respectful.

      I am a bit puzzled as to why they need an authorization for “release of health information”. Who do they think is going to be filling that out? You? Who do they think is going to be authorized? Your doctor? Are they providing self-funded health insurance through the company, and want you to authorize their medical staff to tell your supervisors what accommodations you need? (This shouldn’t be necessary; a note from your doctor would fall under “employment records”, so HIPAA wouldn’t apply even if the company was providing your healthcare.)

      I’m seeing that they need it “for the accommodations office to assess the request”, and that just makes no sense to me. If they just mean for the questionnaire, okay, that would make sense. But for your doctor to give them information wouldn’t have to be a form that they provided – they can offer one to make sure it contains all the legally-necessary elements, but they can’t require you to use their form, and you should be very careful about doing that, since they might put in wording allowing them to get more information than they are normally entitled to. (For instance, they might want to be able to call your doctor’s office directly and claim “We need this additional information to evaluate the accommodation request.” and obtain the new information directly without needing to go through you for informed consent. This is a sneaky trick since it can look innocent when they first make the request.

      Confidentiality is required by the ADA, but they shouldn’t need an authorization-of-release form for that. I’ve also never heard of ADA insurance, their ADA accommodations aren’t provided through a health plan. They may be anticipating the need for short-term disability insurance, but if you aren’t requesting that, they can’t simply refuse to engage in the accommodation process until they get the information they want for a different service.

      To answer LW4,

      Isn’t it enough to have a doctor attest that I have a disability and the requested accommodation is relevant to it?

      What you need is a doctor’s note that you have “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity”. (AskJAN has a non-exhaustive list of “Major Life Activities and Bodily Functions” that are only examples what could qualify.) You then can show the employer a “nexus” between your medical impairment/limitation and a work-related activity. This triggers the employer’s duty to engage in an interactive process, during which you may request the accommodation you think will work best, and they may suggest cheaper/easier alternatives. The employer may also want to ask your doctor to confirm that the accommodation you requested will be safe for you, but you can write a separate release form then instead of letting them play Twenty Questions with “Well would this work?”

      Actually, if they already provide to non-disabled employees what you requested as an accommodation, they can’t make you jump through any hoops that a non-disabled employee wouldn’t need to.

      1. sometimeswhy*

        This is what I came to say, but much more detailed and referenced better than I would’ve.

        I’ve been peripheral (the manager of requesting employees) to requests and have had to raise holy h3ll about not just accommodating what they need to do their particular job right now but also potential future roles and *drumroll* the benefits and privileges of employment here: affinity group participation, retirement parties, team building activities, professional development, hell even company-wide meetings! That part is so, so important to employee retention and I’ve had to fight my own personnel dept about it.

      2. badger*

        I assumed they wanted the employee to sign an ROI to allow their doctor to release records to the employer. Which really shouldn’t be necessary, but if for some reason it is, should be limited to only those things necessary for the determination.

        1. Manic Pixie HR Girl*

          So this is it, essentially.

          We require –
          – Application
          – Doctor’s note with information about the condition (or, specifically, what about their condition is limiting them to need an accommodation)
          – Signed form so that we (meaning, the Designee for Reasonable Accommodations which is typically, though not always, located in HR*) can call the office directly if we have follow up questions rather than going to you, as the employee, and forcing you to make another appointment and/or pay another copay.
          – Sub-bullet – this is because you’d be surprised (or maybe you wouldn’t be) about how often we get vague and/or not-helpful initial medical documentation to back up these requests.

          *This does not (or at least it SHOULD not) go to your manager! The interactive process would be the DRA calling your manager stating, “Employee X has a medical condition requiring an accommodation and we are looking at approving Accommodation Y. Is there any reason this is an undue hardship based on Employee X’s duties and responsibilities?” Because it doesn’t matter what the medical condition IS at that juncture.

          Why WE need it (HR or whoever does RAs for your employer, we call them DRAs here): Because we may already know there are certain things we can’t accommodate, BUT if we know WHAT the diagnosis is, we are in a better position to brainstorm alternative accommodations. What we don’t want is people who are not trained and/or who may have a different stake in the matter (no matter how good their intentions may be) making a judgment/value call on one diagnosis vs. another diagnosis.

          For example, a cancer diagnosis AND a mental health diagnosis (i.e., agoraphobia) may warrant the same/similar accommodations (i.e., full time remote work), but it doesn’t matter what it is. However, if the job cannot accommodate remote work, it DOES matter because we might be looking at very different accommodations. (For #1, it might be a flex schedule and a private office with an air purifier; but that alternative wouldn’t work for #2.)

    3. Cinnamon Stick*

      The word “privileges” in this context irked me so I did a quick Google search. The language is taken right from the US Department of Labor site.

      https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/program-areas/employers/accommodations

      I still don’t like the concept of it being a privilege to have an accommodation to work. That comes under the whole, “You’re lucky to have a job,” BS that comes from abusive management. As they say on Archer, “PHRASING!”

      1. B*

        You are getting this exactly backwards. They’re not saying it’s a privilege to have an accommodation. They’re saying the accommodation must allow you to enjoy all the privileges of your job. So for example, if everyone gets a free lunch in the cafeteria but you can’t get to the cafeteria due to a physical disability, the accommodation should aim to give you access to that privilege of employment.

    4. ferrina*

      Honestly, I’m not mad at this form. It’s really clunky, but it seems to just be describing what the ADA is. I think “benefits and privileges” is just meant as an HR CYA for “we need to make sure that you aren’t losing opportunities in any way based on your disability, because if you are, we’re opening ourselves up for a lawsuit.”

      1. Dawn*

        I don’t love it because it asks for more information than it probably should, and then goes to pains to explain why they feel like it’s necessary. Particularly that whole “we will send your healthcare provider a questionnaire for them to fill out” – the law requires them to “enter into an interactive process” with your care provider, it says nothing about sending them a form, and your doctor might well decline to fill it out.

        I’m not saying that they’re explicitly wrong about any of this, necessarily, but the wording here makes it sound very ominous and people with disabilities are often used to playing them very close to the chest. And the law also doesn’t require a “medical accommodation request form” either – like this is very bureaucratic for something that the actual law says you don’t need any of to be enforced.

        1. The Unionizer Bunny*

          Particularly that whole “we will send your healthcare provider a questionnaire for them to fill out” – the law requires them to “enter into an interactive process” with your care provider, it says nothing about sending them a form, and your doctor might well decline to fill it out.

          The wording indicated they would give LW4 a form to hand to the doctor. If it had been “we will send your doctor a questionnaire”, I would have been alarmed, and if they hadn’t specified who was going to send it, I would have told LW4 to spell out in any release form (this goes to the doctor, not the company) exactly what information the doctor had permission to share, possibly including a note to the effect of “if the questionnaire asks for information you cannot disclose, err in favor of not completing the form as Employer wants it”.

          Incidentally, the law does not require employers to enter into an interactive process with a care provider – it requires them to enter the interactive process with their employee. An employer cannot require the doctor to propose accommodations, though they can ask the doctor to verify that an accommodation the employee requested would be medically acceptable. (For example, the employee says “I would like an accommodation for a light-duty role where I only have to lift up to 10 pounds, not 25” and the doctor says “no, even 10 pounds will stress their healing joints” and the company says “this accommodation would pose a direct threat to this employee, therefore we cannot grant it”.)

          1. Dawn*

            Fair enough; the point is more that the bureaucratic requirements here are the employer’s, not the law’s, and I do not come down on the side of the employer here or in most conversations about medical conditions/accommodations because most employers famously handle them badly.

  6. RCB*

    Letters like #1 always make me chuckle, because he describes several items that sound legitimately problematic, but then describes the most normal, run-of-the-mill task and that’s the one he wants opinions on if it’s inappropriate or not.

    There are times where I think “you’ve written into the site, but have you ever actually read it?”

    1. Emmy Noether*

      Letter 1 is one of those strange ones. Those conversations are weird (and: she shouldn’t have periods? what?!), but if she’s ok with them, I guess it’s ok? Indicative of poor boundaries, but if everyone is consenting and it’s back-and-forth, not a lecture, whatever. But if she’s ok with them, why is she telling her boyfriend about it?
      And then he draws the line at something completely normal and unrelated? They’re not going to her OBGYN appointment together, they’re buying furniture for the office!

      I’m struggling to form an opinion because I can’t get a read on the situation.

      1. coffee*

        Some people think you have to have a period each month, medically – they think skipping them affects your fertility, although that’s not the case. So he might have been saying that it’s fine to skip them if she wants to, rather than giving a workplace directive? Hopefully it’s something like that.

        It is very hard to get a read on the situation. Alison gave some excellent advice (as usual).

        1. Emmy Noether*

          You mean skipping as in long-cycling the pill? Or getting a hormonal IUD? (I WISH there was another way to just flip a switch and skip a period). I think discussing those medical effects and the new science on it in a clinical way could be an ok discussion if both people want to be discussing it. More information is a good thing on this subject, because in my experience, info from the gyno is often woefully incomplete.

          The “shouldn’t” threw me, because that’s definitely over the line, but maybe that’s rephrasing on the LW’s part?

          1. YetAnotherAnalyst*

            If you think of it as Girlfriend talking about her debilitating period symptoms, maybe talking about her doctor being blase about her issues, and Boss saying “You shouldn’t have to deal with that” and suggesting she talk to her gynaecologist about some specific options… I think I can see this being a reasonable conversation, kind of?

            1. MsM*

              That’s exactly how I pictured it going. I will grant that if their dynamic is casual enough to allow for that, I can maybe see why LW’s uncomfortable with it, but that doesn’t necessarily make it inappropriate.

            2. bamcheeks*

              Or it could even have been a general comment rather than about LW’s girlfriend specifically: “I don’t know why any women have periods these days when they can just go on birth control and not have to bother with them!” Something like that, I’d see it more in the line of someone saying, “I just think people should adopt dogs rather than pay for an expensive breed, which encourage bad practices!” — overly broad generalisation, lots of valid counter-arguments, but not Clearly Out Of Line In A Work Context.

              1. Lola*

                This way to phrase would be problematic since it implies that women who don’t take measures to stop their periods are dumb – if that were the case, I would find the boss out of line. But the examples from MsM and YetAnotherAnalyst are good at showing how this could be a normal, respecful conversation.

                1. BigLawEx*

                  I will say that I’ve heard a number of doctors say this about menstruation. I’ve also heard quite a few say they wish anti-depressants were in the water. I don’t agree with either myself and I think they’re inappropriate, but not for the reason the LW probably thinks.

                2. BigLawEx*

                  I should clarify they’ve said this in casual and work conversations, so IME this kind of ‘shop talk’ is common.

                3. bamcheeks*

                  I mean, like I said, I think both examples are broad generalisations with lots of good counter-arguments, and they’re not the kind of thing I’d say at work! But I’ve certainly heard people say things like and not immediately thought OMG this person needs to be reported to HR immediately.

                4. sparkle emoji*

                  I mean, I agree that I wouldn’t say it at work, but it’s definitely a type of thing that some people would say at work. A little out of line but not enough that I’d act on it if it was my boss– and the girlfriend may have made a similar decision.

                5. Rex Libris*

                  It could even just be that, working for a doctor, she’s in the habit of asking for off-the-cuff medical advice or recommendations. Just saying “I’m having problem X, do you know someone who would be good to see about that?” could have easily led to the comments from her boss. There’s no way to know from the letter.

                6. Emmy Noether*

                  @BigLawEx (ran out of threading)
                  Well, antidepressants in the water would certainly be necessary if I took measures to stop my period. Hormonal birth control does dark things to my brain.

                7. Hroethvitnir*

                  Welp, doctors talking about antidepressants in the water* belies a pretty concerning attitude about mental health IMO – given if they actually had experience with mood disorders they should know very well how much our available treatments are a crapshoot every time as to whether they work at all and are worth the side effects (comments like that tend to regard antidepressants as “happy pills” and depression as overstated). Aside to aside I am pro SSRIs/SNRIs but they are laughably far from a panacea.

                  *My background is medical so I am very familiar with the casualness unto offensiveness for some, but I’m also familiar with medical professionals with terrible attitudes toward mental health. -_-

                8. Orv*

                  @Hroethvitnir

                  That remark may have been related to a study that found that cities where lithium naturally occurs in the drinking water have a lower suicide rate. Lithium is a pretty powerful mood stabilizer in higher doses, so the idea that low doses of it might have similar effects is not far-fetched. But obviously medicating a whole population with a mental health drug is a non-starter; even fluoride raises questions for a lot of people.

              2. Anon for this*

                I’m willing to believe that the original conversation was perfectly above board.

                But having an IUD = not having periods is just not always true… Signed, someone with an IUD whose period started today (yes, it’s lighter than before, but still)

              3. AF Vet*

                Yeah… I wish I could have stopped or skipped my periods, too. But if I tried on any form of birth control my body simply said, “HA HA… NO,” and I bled anyways. Then I stopped birth control and would bleed for weeks straight – INCLUDING when I was pregnant! I didn’t even realize I was pregnant until the end of my first trimester BECAUSE of the constant bleeding.

                FYI for the other female US vets in the commentariat – This is one of MANY reasons I’m glad the PACT act was passed for veterans – it finally covers female reproductive system issues more thoroughly, which qualifies me for better care and a higher disability rating.

          2. Observer*

            The “shouldn’t” threw me, because that’s definitely over the line, but maybe that’s rephrasing on the LW’s part?

            That’s exactly the question. There are possibilities here that are not totally ridiculous. And given the LW’s reaction to the *very* normal task of working with the boss on new furniture for the office, it’s hard to trust that their read on the conversation is complete and accurate.

            I don’t think that the LW is intentionally mis-stating anything. But I do think that it’s likely that they are misreading.

        2. Testing*

          I’m willing to believe it was indeed a fully OK conversation about how periods are not actually medical necessary. I do hope, however, that the message wasn’t “IUD = no periods”, since that’s often not actually true.

          Anyway, all this doesn’t change the LW’s position which is exactly as described by Alison.

      2. Rowan*

        I suspect it’s less about the furniture and more about the driving across town together, so being in an enclosed space outside the office alone for an extended period of time. This is, of course, a ridiculous thing to get hung up on, but it lines up with the jealousy expressed in the letter.

        2. Awkwardness*

          Or the thought of picking furniture together with a male.
          It its unavoidable for LWs girlfriend to think of this as a prelude to furnishing a home together wirh her boss and happily living there! /s

          She is the office manager. If course it makes sense to go looking at furniture together. I would always prefer this over catalog if shops are available.

        3. Humble Schoolmarm*

          I mean, if my boss was making random comments about my period outside of the reasonable contexts others have suggested, I probably wouldn’t want to be stuck in an enclosed space with him either. For me, the important thing is the girlfriend doesn’t mind, which means that OP needs to butt out.

      3. Shower of Fish*

        I can easily imagine a situation where there’s a conversation at work where her boss mentions IUDs as part of the discussion, maybe OP’s partner has been having really bad menstrual pain and is talking about ways to deal with it, and she brings it up later in conversation with OP when telling him her plan. Like, “I’m going to make an appointment to speak to my gynaecologist about getting an IUD. (Boss) mentioned the other day that his friend/sister/ex got one and it really helped.” Like for her, it’s context for a decision she’s informing him of, and for him it’s apparently “crossing a line”.

        1. WellRed*

          Discussing ones period with your boss and having them recommend an IUD (I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt he wasn’t man’s planing women’s health) is making me cringe. It’s not typical.

          1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

            Psychiatrist office so presuming he is an MD too. Which maybe it came up as hey you’re a doc got any suggestions, I know you can’t treat me but any advice where to start would be appreciated.

            Or maybe it was the boss trying to impose and the GF raised it with OP to get some support and he went all big BF on her and gave no good advice so she ignored it.

            But the whole thing comes down to – OP this is not a work problem. This is between you and your GF. More importantly its about how you feel about your GF working for a male boss. If you can’t handle something that is definitely part of her job like picking out furniture, you need to do some thinking about what you think your relationship really is.

          2. nodramalama*

            its so dependent. some women treat their periods like any other medical issue and are not squicky about discussing it at work. My manager (granted a woman) would get hormonal migraines from it and we would openly discuss it the way we’d discuss migraines caused by anything else

            1. AF Vet*

              I love that so many more women, especially young women, are making these conversations to be nothing special! Periods are a natural part of having a female body, yet we’ve spent centuries living under Puritanical thoughts that periods = birth canal = sex and therefore MUST be shamed at all cost.

          3. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

            It’s a little weird, but he’s a doctor and we have very little context — maybe she was talking about mental health related period symptoms because he’s a psychiatrist, maybe she called in sick with period symptoms, etc. etc. If the girlfriend shared this with LW and said “this is weirding me out, help me figure out how to deal with it?” that’s one thing. But I didn’t see that, and the combination of that and LW being bothered by the furniture shopping suggests this is really an LW thing.

        2. Caffeine Monkey*

          Especially when you consider that, unlike a psychologist, a psychiatrist is a fully qualified medical doctor who has then chosen to specialise in psychiatry. (Absolutely nothing against pyschologists – both do incredibly important work.)

        3. Irish Teacher.*

          Yeah and we’re getting this third hand, so it could have changed a lot. I can easily imagine a situation where GF mentions having period pains or heavy periods or anything onto that line and the psychiatrist says, “that definitely shouldn’t be happening. Have you considered an IUD?” and GF mentions in passing to LW, “Boss recommended I get an IUD. He says these periods should not be happening,” meaning ones that painful or heavy or whatever the situation is but out of context, the LW hears it as “you shouldn’t have periods at all.”

          Or the boss could be a creepy mansplainer, but I think the GF who heard the original and the context is probably best placed to judge if it were inappropriate and the LW should probably ask her rather than an advice column.

      4. Ana Gram*

        I mean, I use continuous birth control to not have a period and have been doing so for 20 years and it’s awesome. I’ve talked about it with female colleagues but never a subordinate and I definitely wouldn’t want a man’s opinion about it. I think the conversation sounds odd in the OP’s retelling but his opinion isn’t really relevant.

    2. Resume please*

      Yeah…”blue vs gray” uncomfortable waiting room chairs kind of pales in comparison to what’s going on in an employee’s underwear

      1. Paint N Drip*

        To be fair, boss is a medical doctor and sometimes workplace chitchat with a medical professional turns into medical discussions and questions. Boss could have touted the virtues of an IUD to avoid PMS/PMDD, I can see that easily happening in one of my former offices (“ugh I’m tired, PMS sucks” > friendly advice) – boss could have also said weird actually inappropriate stuff but I’d guess it’s more the former.

      2. Dawbs*

        that feels like sexualizing something that isn’t.

        Matter of fact period talk is a good thing. Men (especially in medicine) being able to discuss it without saying “ewww cooties” is a good thing.

        the discussion with her boss may or may not have been ok, but calling discussion of it what’s happening in her underwear feels like trying to shame GF and her boss about what easily could have been a medical discussion.

        let’s stick with ‘surfing the crimson tide”

        1. MassMatt*

          There’s a difference between being able to discuss periods and a boss telling an employee they shouldn’t have periods and what birth control to use. Yes the boss is a doctor but he’s not HER doctor, and he’s a psychiatrist not an OB/GYN or other reproductive health specialist.

          It’s hard to get a good read on this because we only have a third-hand account of how that conversation came about, but it and definitely not the office furniture issue is what I would be digging into more.

          1. Dahlia*

            For all anyone knows she mentioned her periods are bad as a reason she takes sick days or something and he said, “That shouldn’t happen.”

            OP does not need to do ANY digging because it’s not his boss!

    3. The Prettiest Curse*

      Since the boss is a psychiatrist, maybe the boyfriend’s thought process went couch –> sex couch. But unless they actually are selecting erotic furniture, it’s a totally legitimate work activity!

      1. The Prettiest Curse*

        (The other stuff DOES sound creepy, but the boyfriend is getting this all second-hand, so doesn’t know the context.)

        1. Awkwardness*

          But it does sound creepy and weird to an extent, that it almost makes me doubt if it really occurred like this. She should not have her period? I cannot think of any context where this sentence makes sense (except maybe in discussions about transitioning or medical problems? – but that would be a whole different problem).
          LW should really trust his girlfriend and her instincts.

          1. Seashell*

            I guess I could see if she’s calling out sick due to her period cramps and the boss tells her she shouldn’t have her period because she could get an IUD? That is problematic, but possible.

            I do think it’s likely the LW is twisting things to sound bad or something was confused in the retelling.

          2. sparkle emoji*

            I’m someone who uses BC to avoid periods, and used to be a little proselytize-y about how great it’s been for me. I’ve also had doctors, male and female and of many specialties, get really enthusiastic about this type of use. Not super appropriate for the boss to do in a conversation with an employee but I can see it happening since he’s a doctor. Maybe the girlfriend decided it’s not a huge deal that he said that if this guy’s typically a good boss.

        2. Nodramalama*

          Yeah I mean for all we know his girlfriend was complaining about debilitating period pain and asked boss as a doctor for advice. Now whether he should give advice as a psychiatrist is definitely unclear, but thats a very long way from “psychiatrist gives unwanted opinions on her period”

          1. Coverage Associate*

            As someone from a medical family who has worked in healthcare, there’s a wide variation in what non medical people, and even non doctors outside their practice areas, know about common health issues. My husband had never heard of seasonal allergies before I figured out that his “colds” always happened at the same time of year, for example. And he has a master’s degree, just very much not in medicine. I was just reading a listicle on Buzzfeed that had some detailed, accurate information on other topics, and then repeated the myth about cold weather causing colds.

            If an employee asked or if a medical condition showed up at work, I can see a doctor employer giving basic medical advice. And a psychiatrist treating women of child bearing age should have some knowledge of hormone cycles and how to change them.

            1. Nodramalama*

              Also, I can’t speak on the U.S because people seem to use the psychiatrist to mean any kind of therapist so I don’t know what qualifications they have. But in Australia psychiatrists are medical doctors who did a speciality in psychiatry.

            2. allathian*

              Yeah, cold weather by itself obviously doesn’t cause colds, but they’re notably more common in colder seasons for many reasons. For example, people tend to cluster indoors in cold weather increasing the rate of transmission, heating lowers the humidity levels that can cause mucus membranes to dry out and become more permeable to bacteria and viruses, and the cold weather by itself is a stressor that lowers immunity.

              This is true in temperate climates like the one I live in. Sure, summer colds exist but they’re much less frequent, at least in the adult population, than in winter.

              1. Irish Teacher.*

                Yeah, but that’s a lot different from people’s assumption that “if I don’t wear a warm enough coat, I’ll get a cold” or “it’s definitely not covid. I had to go out in the cold last week and that’s definitely why I’m sick now.”

              2. ecnaseener*

                And there’s actually some recent research suggesting that cold temperature reduces the immune response in your nose, thus probably making you more susceptible to colds!

              3. AF Vet*

                Speaking of cold and allergies, I never realized that one reason I got sick as a dog in January when we lived in South Texas is allergies! It was finally cool enough to be outside!! And have the windows open!! BUT the menace of Western Cedar took my ass out every winter! Once I had an allergy test I discovered that Western Cedar was one of my main allergy triggers – and it blooms in January. *sigh*

            3. We’re Six*

              “And a psychiatrist treating women of child bearing age should have some knowledge of hormone cycles and how to change them.”

              Lololol

              Oh man that’s the best joke I’ve heard all week

              1. Seashell*

                I am a woman with zero medical training and zero interest in IUD use, and I know that an IUD can stop your period. It’s possible the psychiatrist did gynecology rotation back in the day, so it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that he might be aware of this too.

                1. Nightengale*

                  It was almost definitely required the psychiatrist did a gynecology rotation back in the day. How good that rotation was, how recent it was, how much is remembered from it, those are all up for grabs. . .

              2. Lola*

                That was rude.
                It’s also wrong – first off they said they SHOULD (doesn’t mean that all psychiatrists do know about that), plus a very relevant reason why they should know that is medicine interaction between different pills / between psych pills and hormone cycles.

                1. metadata minion*

                  I have never had any of my psychiatrists/prescribing NPs bring up the possibility of psych medication interacting with hormonal cycles over 20ish years of being prescribed them.

                  And thank you, now that I know this is a thing I’m going to look up more info!

              3. Meh*

                Not actually – a lot of psychoactive medications are not safe (or not enough evidence for safety – which is a separate problem) for a fetus. So it is common to verify that a person who could potentially get pregnant take active measures to prevent that.

          2. Oui oui oui all the way home*

            But it could happen as he is an M.D. so presumably has some knowledge about physical as well as mental health issues. So if she had asked him for advice, then it could make sense in that context.

            1. Merrie*

              This. He is a licensed medical doctor, even though he’s in a different specialty. I’m a pharmacist and it’s very common for our non-licensed support staff to ask us for medical advice, or for us to end up offering advice during a conversation about medical issues.

    4. Tiger Snake*

      The fact we’re hearing this second hand, LW1 seems to be more focused on feeling insecure than whether his girlfriend feels uncomfortable makes me wonder if some of the alarming things have been misunderstood. Not on purpose, but because these were things he glossed over in his listening to as well. The fact his GF is defenseive and doesn’t see an issue makes me think the story coming to us third hand is missing details and we’re making incorrect assumptions.

      Like the periods part – we have no idea how this came up and was discussed, but hypothetically it could be that his GF was the one who started complaining about the inconvenience of periods, and all her said “Oh you should get one of those IUDs. That’s what my wife has, and it works great.” before the subject moved on. Then his GF comes home and mentions it because, now she’s thinking about maybe getting one.

    5. Hlao-roo*

      There are times where I think “you’ve written into the site, but have you ever actually read it?”

      There are people who write into this site without reading it first (same with all advice columns, I think). People want advice, so they google “advice column” or “work advice” or similar and send their question in to one of the results.

      1. Irish Teacher.*

        And also, in general, it can be hard for us to judge our own problems and views in the way we do other people’s. In fact, I often find when I’m having an argument with somebody, a good way to think about it is to imagine what I’d think if it were other people. It is very possible that somebody could see Alison’s advice and that of the commentors on similar topics going against them and yet not see that the response to their issue is likely to be the same because they can see the other people are being unreasonable but they feel their situation is completely different.

        I’m now thinking of a friend of mine who constantly asks for advice and was complaining about her husband telling her that a career decision was up to her because that was no help, then complaining about a friend of hers asking her for advice and saying, “it’s really annoying when people ask ‘what should I do?’ because how is anybody else supposed to know?” I said, somewhat ironically, something along the lines of, “yeah, some people do that a lot, all right?” and she replied, “yeah, and it’s really annoying,” not even realising I was referring to her.

    6. learnedthehardway*

      Once you have several problematic things happen, even innocuous things start looking hinky – I expect that is the issue here.

      I mean, unless the girlfriend is initiating discussions about her menstrual cycle with her boss (and really, who on earth would?!?), her boss is making some seriously inappropriate comments.

      In that context, if the OP is wondering if his girlfriend is SAFE to be traveling about town with the boss, that would be a legitimate concern for him to express. Jealousy, however, is definitely NOT the appropriate reaction.

      If a friend of mine told me that their boss was being inappropriate, I would likely suggest that they refrain from being alone with him, on the grounds of safety. I think that’s okay for anyone to suggest.

      On the other hand, wondering if one’s significant other will cheat on them, when they are actually being sexually harassed – that’s just gross and victim-blamy.

      1. Dahlia*

        “I mean, unless the girlfriend is initiating discussions about her menstrual cycle with her boss (and really, who on earth would?!?)”

        With her doctor boss? It’s not that wild. Maybe she had to take some sick days or something and it came up.

    7. Person from the Resume*

      I agree. LW1 sounds like a controlling, jealous boyfriend looking for validation from a website he has never read.

      There are some letters where someone writes in on behalf of their friend or partner and genuinely sounds like they’re trying to get advice for their friend/partner. This is not one of them. If it were one of them, the perfectly legit furniture shopping task would not be mentioned and the question would be how can my girlfriend get here boss to stop crossing professional boundaries and sexually harassing her.

  8. TheBunny*

    LW#1 If your girlfriend thinks her boss is crossing a line, SHE can tell him so. This isn’t any of your business. At all.

    1. A. N. Other*

      I really don’t understand this attitude. If—and I’m using the word ‘if’ deliberately—your partner is being harassed at work then how is that not your business? I can’t imagine anyone in my life—and particularly the women in it—taking such a blasé attitude. We’re not merely atomized individuals; we live in a society in which we should look out for this sort of thing, especially when it affects those we care about.

      1. Observer*

        I really don’t understand this attitude. If—and I’m using the word ‘if’ deliberately—your partner is being harassed at work then how is that not your business?

        That’s not the question. It is an SO’s business if their SO is being harassed. However, it is till not their place to tell the victim that their behavior is inappropriate.

        What is appropriate? Things like:
        ** Listen with patience
        ** Encourage your SO to push back if possible
        ** Strategize on how to get out of a bad situation ~~if the SO wants to do that~~
        ** Be a booster for your SO and help them see that they do actually deserve better treatment.

        This is obviously not an exhaustive list. But my point is the the LW is doing the one thing that they should not be doing while not indicating that they are in any way actually supportive of their GF.

      2. the og perfect beasts*

        Of course it’s your business if your partner is suffering. But it’s still not *about* you. You still don’t get to ride in on a white horse dictating what should happen and getting irked when your partner doesn’t obey you. There’s zero indication in LW’s letter of them supporting their girlfriend, or caring how she feels about the situation, or anything. It just reads like jealousy and fuss and what-about-my-feelings.

        Also, there’s precious little indication that the girlfriend is being harassed anyway. So there’s that.

      3. Kella*

        Sure, but the appropriate response to hearing a story that sounds like harassment is to respond with something like “Woah, that’s kind of an invasive response. How did you feel about that?” Then the OP’s gf has the opportunity to explain context that means she’s fine with it or further reveal dysfunction that she’s not realizing.

        Either way, the girlfriend has to be directly involved in assessing whether this was appropriate behavior or not. Ignoring the gf’s input (to the point of not even mentioning whether she was uncomfortable with the comments or not) and going to an unrelated advice columnist about it is even more dismissive than simply letting the gf decide for herself whether it’s okay, without any outside reflection.

    2. Seashell*

      If the girlfriend said that she found the period talk creepy or weird or whatever, it would be fine for LW to encourage her to act on that if she wants. The furniture thing just sounds like jealousy on LW’s part, so that is not his business.

  9. Adam*

    LW#2, my philosophy as a manager has always been to say the quiet part out loud if there’s any chance of confusion. So in this case, I’d say something like, “Hey, I noticed that you only submitted expenses for one meal. If you only ate one meal, that’s totally fine, I just want to make sure you know that the company will happily reimburse you for up to three meals a day [or whatever your policy is].”

    3. ferrina*

      Love this so much. I’m ADHD + from a low socioeconomic background (which most people don’t realize about me), and I miss out on the unspoken bit a lot. I deeply appreciate when people are direct!

    4. Humble Schoolmarm*

      I really like this script. It’s informal and non-judgemental. I wasn’t totally sure about Alison’s advice for the LW to tell her story. I’ve got one of those “tell me your troubles” faces and I hate the feeling of “Why are you telling me this? How do you want me to react?” while people are telling their tales. A simple, you can expense three meals per day if you want or need to, would feel much less awkward to me.

    5. Higher Ed Cube Farmer*

      Cosign this.
      My org has ridiculously complicated expense policy and procedures.
      (For instance, we have *both* a route to reimburse receipted expenses within limits, *and* a flat rate meal allowance like what folks in the comments here are calling “perdiem” … and *also* a separate flat rate with different limits that is what we call perdiem.)

      I spend a LOT of time explaining in plain language and advising folks how to accommodate their needs within policy and get the fullest compensation to which they are legally entitled. Because the simplest way folks assume is “common sense” is usually not it.

    6. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain*

      This is good… I’d even maybe suggest including any info on what to do if they don’t have receipts or only have info on an app or CC statement. My first assumption when the expense report only showed one meal wouldn’t be that they didn’t eat, it would be that they are getting food from someplace other than a restaurant. If they got a burrito at a gas station, and have a credit card statement showing just the total charge with the date and location, but no itemized receipt, can they still get any reimbursement. Or they hit up vending machines since there are some nice food vending machines these days.

    7. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

      I’m not even sure I’d say “if you only ate one meal.” Maybe just: “I noticed that you only submitted expenses for one meal. If you have more meal expenses, feel free to submit — the company will reimburse you for [policy].”

      Caveat: I grew up in the “WOW, are you really going to eat ALL of that?” family, so I’m probably oversensitive about any comment on eating (too much or too little).

  10. Cathie from Canada*

    Regarding question 2, I wonder if her office has ever considered just using a “per diem” approach for travel meal expenses? Basically, this would mean a set amount is allocated for each day away (for example, a typical per diem amount might be set at $10 breakfast, $15 lunch, $25 dinner, total $50 per day).
    No receipts necessary, it doesn’t matter what you eat or whether you actually consume each meal, but also if you spend more then no overages are covered either.
    Per Diem policies usually also consider issues that can affect the reimbursement — for example, if a conference attendance also includes a luncheon, then you don’t include that meal in your per diem charge for that day; if you leave for the business trip mid-morning, then you don’t get the breakfast per diem that day; if your flight home arrives at 4 pm then you don’t get the dinner per diem, etc).
    Basically, changing to a per diem system is so much quicker and easier than everyone trying to hold on to and total up a litter of paper receipts or credit card charges, which then also have to be copied and checked by managers and accounting, and then filed somewhere.

    1. rain*

      Are these numbers for real? I don’t know where you could get a $10 breakfast other than McDonalds, which is insanely unhealthy. My company’s limit is $150 per day.

      1. londonedit*

        That surprises me – I live in London, which is widely assumed to be a very expensive city, and there are tons of nice quality chain places (Leon, Ole & Steen, Gail’s, Pret a Manger) where you can get breakfast for under £8, which is about $10. No you can’t sit down and have a full-on breakfast, but you can have a breakfast roll and a coffee, or a croissant and a yogurt and muesli pot, or something like that, which is as much as most people will have for breakfast.

        1. Emmy Noether*

          I suspect in addition to cost-of-living differences, there’s a difference in cultural expectation what an adequate breakfast is. You can get a coffee-and-croissant for much cheaper than a full eggs-bacon-etc. or pancake breakfast.

        2. BigLawEx*

          So much ‘casual’ food is cheaper in Europe than the U.S. I was just walking through Paris this week and seeing if the global inflation/post Covid issues had caused prices to jump. Yes, BUT, not much. One can still get breakfast, and some lunches for under €10. I’m in Central/Eastern Europe and it’s cheaper.

          In Los Angeles, I’m not sure even fast food is that cheap. Two eggs and coffee is $20 without tip.

        3. CommanderBanana*

          I work in a large city on the East Coast and we have a zillion Prets here (I think there are…3? in my work neighborhood alone) and there’s no way you can get breakfast for under $10.

          I don’t drink coffee. A small chai is $7 and change. A coffee, croissant and yogurt is closer to $20 than $10.

        4. Lexi Vipond*

          I was surprised by that too – I had always vaguely understood that eating out regularly was both far more common and far cheaper in the US. (I expect I could find a full breakfast including tea or coffee for £8 in Edinburgh, although maybe not in a quality place!)

        5. Lisa*

          I live in a large metro but with relatively low cost-of-living. At for example Starbucks I could stay under $10 if I got a pastry and regular coffee but any kind of breakfast sandwich or a latte would push it over.

          1. Never Knew I was a Dancer*

            Not to mention that a pastry in the US is usually (almost always?) something insanely sugary and/or buttery or oily.

            Sorry, but pound cake or donuts or frosting-laden scones are not going to get me set up for success for the rest of the day

        6. Fellow Canadian*

          I would say Tim Hortons is the go-to quick breakfast place in Canada and you can certainly get a coffee and a baked good for about $6. Something with eggs and meat will put you closer to $10. Honestly, it’s the $15 for lunch that I would side-eye. There aren’t many options outside of fast food for that.

                1. DisgruntledPelican*

                  If I’m ordering it at a counter and paying for it before it’s handed to me, it’s fast food.

        7. Bee*

          I spent $15 on a lukewarm egg sandwich and a coffee to go last week (insert crying emoji here). Granted, this was right outside Port Authority in NYC, so we’re talking about truly jacked-up prices, but I would be shocked if you could get that for under $10 in any US city. It would’ve been cheaper if I just got a pastry, granted, but unfortunately I need protein at breakfast. And even a yogurt parfait runs about $6-7 these days!

          1. samwise*

            I’m in Chicago. Unless you’re getting an espresso drink, that’s under $10 at Starbucks.

        8. Giant_Kitty*

          A breakfast roll and a coffee would in no way be enough of a breakfast for me while traveling.

      2. Allonge*

        They seem low to me too, but I suppose a company could set the numbers so they compensate for the additional costs, not the full meal in all circumstances (you would still have lunch at home after all, so the extra is to cover for the fact that your choices will not be the same as at home).

        And it will also depend on where the travel takes place, how much budget there is at all, salary levels in the first place etc.

        1. Lady Danbury*

          I hate when companies use the argument that you would be responsible for your own lunch at home. At home I have access to a grocery store and a full kitchen, as well as much more control over my time to organize lunch. I may not have any of the above while traveling. As Alison has said many times, employees should not have to pay to travel on behalf of their employers.

      3. mreasy*

        The difference in understanding about what “reasonable” PD allocations are, based on different cities and different eating habits, is why I prefer not to use them.

        1. WellRed*

          Agreed. I have a company card. I still need receipts ( but can sign an attestation) for lost ones. I can’t imagine a per diem with such low amounts on 12 hour days where a bottle of water is $4.

        2. Lady Danbury*

          I previously worked at a company where the PD was scaled to the location where you were traveling. Obviously NYC would have a much higher PD than Lansing, MI. Still preferable (to me), than having to submit receipts!

      4. AF Vet*

        Wow! Your company is wonderfully generous! I’ll link the US Government’s per diem info, but they basically assume $59/day – $15/ea for breakfast and lunch, $25 for dinner, $5 for snacks. They do have some areas in which it goes up to $64-79/day, but for most of the US that’s what you get. When I was in, I’d hit a grocery store for fruit, veggies, snacks when I got in town for a week. I’d eat the free hotel breakfast, grocery goodies or leftovers for lunch, good dinner, and still pocket a decent chunk of change.

      6. ThatGirl*

        My company’s limits are $20/breakfast, $30/lunch, $50/dinner, just for comparison. (It *should* be $100/day, but no, if you spent $20 on lunch and $55 on dinner you have to get approval…)

        1. MassMatt*

          I like the per diem but per meal reimbursement works pretty well too. I found when I had it at one job where I travelled a lot that I could splurge a bit on dinner without having to do receipts because I underspent on breakfast and/or lunch. Or just pay the difference, I always figured I would be paying $ for food if I were not travelling (though not nearly as much) so I didn’t mind if it wasn’t 100% reimbursed. But in essence there’s not a whole lot of difference between per meal or per diem if you don’t need to show receipts.

          But definitely it’s better not to have to submit a ton of receipts for guacamole Bob to review.

      7. STEM Admin*

        I work for a state government in the US and my per diem is $50/day. Fortunately I can afford to absorb the cost difference and eat whatever, but there was a time when I would only order a side dish at fancy restaurants when I was dining with a group at a conference because I couldn’t afford to go over my reimbursement.

    2. Morning Reading*

      But…. Per diem means per day. So would usually be a flat rate for a day, not per meal. Used to be $50 at my work years ago; should be higher now. Rate connected to how many meals would be… per cena ?

      1. Caramel & Cheddar*

        Per diem has always meant per meal per day anywhere I’ve worked, with meals covered by third parties / meals outside the travel window not included in the calculation for the day. I don’t think it’s meant to be as literal as you’re interpreting it re: what it should technically be in Latin.

      2. Allonge*

        Yes, if you are taking thing literally.

        But in practice, ‘per diem’ is meant to cover certain costs and you can break it down to breakfast/lunch/dinner/other – especially if, as in the example above, you are expected to declare when your lunch is covered by someone else.

      3. doreen*

        My per diem was broken down into breakfast and dinner – but the reason for that breakdown was because on the day of departure or return, we might be eligible for one or the other but not both.

      4. TiffIf*

        My company has a meal per diem of $75 for full day travel ($106 for certain cities/metro areas) – if it is only partial day it breaks down to a per meal.

    3. MsM*

      Depends how the travel’s being funded. With government grants, we still need the receipts in case we get audited. (And it helps us figure out how much money we need to be putting into that category when we reapply.)

      At any rate, I’m not sure the LW’s in a position to influence company policy on this.

    4. Somehow I Manage*

      We’ve recently been discussing a per diem approach at my workplace, and my suggestion has always been to just tell people to be reasonable when they’re charging meals to the company card. Because every location someone might go is different and because you don’t want someone to feel like they can’t eat what they want or what their schedule allows for. Basically my guidance was “approach company paid meals like you would if you were someone’s guest.” If someone else is paying, you’re probably not going to order the steak and lobster tail meal for dinner, but you’re also not going to just order a side salad.

      1. Jenny*

        This is sort of nice. But as someone who worries about what is reasonable, it would cause me a lot of trouble because I’d be constantly worrying about what I should spend.

        For people that travel a lot, a per diem is a nice thing. There are Federal per diem rates for different areas around the country, so they attempt to take cost of living into account. I’ve found them to be mostly generous. Our policy is if a conference is covering a meal, you back that out of the per diem. However, if a hotel offers a free breakfast, you still claim the full amount for the day. Travel days are at 75%. Your per diem is meant to cover things like hotel room tips as well.

        If I had a company where travel was fairly limited and there were not many employees that were affected, I’d just keep the receipt requirements and reimburse.

  11. Nodramalama*

    LW1 yep, I agree with Alison. Some of these comments could be inappropriate but 1. Getting so caught up on the furniture thing which is normal means your position on other commends has less credibility and 2. It’s really not your concern either way

    Support your girlfriend if she says she feels uncomfortable. Don’t force her to feel uncomfortable if she’s not.

  12. Sheworkshardforthemoney*

    LW#3 Company B ghosted you twice after being very far along in the job process. Now they maybe, possibly, kind of, might, could have an offer for you with no firm timeline in place while expecting you to wait while they have a proven record of ghosting you. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 3 times? No thanks.

    1. GammaGirl1908*

      Hard agree. The company wants LW to wait around forever, and be available on their timeline, while they try to get their act together … with no concept that LW has other options.

      Take the other options, LW. The company will NEVER get their act sufficiently together. If they actually do (which they won’t), it won’t be on your timeline. Let them go.

      1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

        And if they ever do, imagine what it would be like if OP accepted the hypothetical job and ever tried to get a decision made…

        The company wouldn’t tolerate this from a candidate and shouldn’t expect OP to tolerate it from them.

        1. MassMatt*

          I wish we had more details about how company B ghosted the LW–they were in contact, so that’s not ghosting, technically–was there a very long lag? How long?

          Nonetheless, LW did nothing wrong, I would consider it a bullet dodged as company B sounds very disorganized and the people they were dealing with seem unprofessional. I imagine working there would be more of the same.

      2. Antilles*

        To add even more to your last paragraph: Even if they got their act together AND it was on something close to OP’s timeline, there’s zero guarantee that offer would even be desirable. They couldn’t even deliver on their word for what country you’d be living in and tried to change that last minute. Why would anybody be confident they won’t pull something similar with salary or benefits or title or etc?

        1. Polly*

          I agree. Company B is getting into the territory of “can’t be trusted/relied on, so OP probably wouldn’t want to be working for them anyway.”

        2. ferrina*

          They couldn’t even deliver on their word for what country you’d be living in and tried to change that last minute.

          YES! This company is unreliable, and it’s a good idea to cut your losses with them.

    3. El l*

      Yes. Consider this experience as telling OP the following about these people and their organization: They have a problem with follow through, and a huge sense of entitlement.

      Be glad you never worked for them.

      1. honeygrim*

        Yeah, pretty much if any employer (or potential employer) gets angry at you for making a perfectly reasonable business decision, you should consider that a red flag.

      2. Pastor Petty Labelle*

        Yep. 6 rounds of interviews for one position, then ghosting. That would have had me never applying there again in the first place. Then when they did offer a job, they changed the terms and were mad you didn’t accept anyway? Good riddance.

        It’s business not personal. They failed in the most basic premise. You don’t have to cater to their failure to understand this simple concept.

    4. WellRed*

      Yes, hopefully OP washes their hands of this company at this point. They sound flaky and a tad sketch. I do not want to work for a flaky company that involves moving to another country (which country? Eh, we’re not sure).

      1. Great Frogs of Literature*

        I did this when I was 23 and it was fun (and also for a limited term). I didn’t have much work experience, and also didn’t have much tying me down. Nowadays I probably wouldn’t be willing to move to a different CITY, much less country, even temporarily.

    5. Cat Tree*

      Right? Even if a real offer came through I would be hesitant to work at a chaotic place like that.

    6. learnedthehardway*

      Absolutely – OP#3 dodged a bullet with Company B. The attitude that they can futz around with an offer for which they can’t offer even a solid start date, location, or conditions, and that the candidate should turn down a good offer with another company to await their futzing is all kinds of ridiculous and totally out-of-touch. Then to be upset with the candidate that they moved on?!?! Talk about entitled on the company’s part.

      This is a great example of “a bird in hand is better than 2 in the bush”. Company B just doesn’t realize that – and their reaction says something very negative about their culture and how they treat employees generally.

    7. Somehow I Manage*

      I think an angry response is uncalled for in most situations when someone turns a job offer you’ve made them down. And in this case, LW had no need to share that there was another offer on the table. If the company needed some time to work out details, they owed LW some sort of guidance as to what that timeline was. Even a very general, “by the end of the week” would allow LW to understand the process. But if they’re just going to get back to you…especially given the history…there’s no right for them to be angry with anyone but themselves.

      1. Great Frogs of Literature*

        We had a candidate back out of an offer a week before his start date. And I’ll admit that I was kind of pissed at him, but I think my response in the moment was something like “Okay.”

      2. sparkle emoji*

        Agreed, Company B can’t claim to have had a true offer by the time LW pulled out. “Some job somewhere, location TBD at some undetermined time” doesn’t count as an offer.

    8. Slow Gin Lizz*

      Yeah, this is one of those situations for which “This sounds like a you problem” was invented. Of course, don’t actually say that to them, but at least think it in your head. It’s definitely a them problem, OP, not your problem.

      1. el l*

        I think Company B’s people did them a favor by cutting off contact.

        Because OP should’ve cut off contact themselves. Company B repeatedly wasted their time.

    9. Friday Hopeful*

      It sounds to me like that company has some kind of “ego” where they think they are so great that people would never turn them down. This is the only explanation I can think of for the overreaction. “How dare you turn US down, because we are the best.”

    10. Observer*

      Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 3 times? No thanks

      Seriously.

      So much so, that I doubt I would take a position with them even if they gave a firm offer if I had *any* other viable option.

      These people are beyond unreasonable.

    11. Kella*

      Very much this. OP3, you are not obligated to accept or even consider an offer that’s been given to you, let alone to wait to see if an offer ever appears. In reality, they *did* give you an offer, and that was to be made to wait indefinitely, with inconsistent communication, and promises that could be rescinded at any moment, with no guarantee of a position ever being offered or under what circumstances. That is what they offered you. Understandably, that did not fit what you were looking for. If they wanted you so bad, they should’ve made you an attractive offer they could stick to much earlier in the process.

  13. Awkwardness*

    #3: I wonder if the fact that LW has been applying at company B multiple times has anything to do with the anger of their contacts (“We finally brought you so far, and you go for the other company?!”).
    That does not change the answer that LW is allowed to look out for themself and what plans make sense. But I still feel as if a bit of context is missing that could explain the strong reaction of their contacts.

    1. Bird names*

      Tbh I don’t think there is necessarily more to it than plain thoughtlessness and entitlement. The company’s previous behaviour certainly points in that direction.

    2. Snow Globe*

      I think it is simply that from their perspective, they made an offer, the OP accepted, and when the location fell through they were trying to figure out a different location, but didn’t consider that the original terms had changed so the OP was viewing it as uncertain. They were taken by surprised when the OP accepted an different offer after they had already accepted theirs.

      1. Observer*

        You could be right. But if that is the case, that’s still a major red flag. Both the anger in response to the “surprise” and the idea of being surprised at all.

        This kind of change is a BIG deal. If they don’t realize that, that is very bad. And the idea that they might not realize that until they had a definite answer the LW pretty much *had* to consider it “uncertain” is beyond bad to ridiculous.

    3. LW3*

      The interview process had taken 4+ months and they had to go through lots of internal approvals to get approval to hire, review of visa, etc. I think they considered they had put in a lot of effort and for them it was “so close” to being finalized. But for me they had been unreliable on the previous job applications (ghosting), had not met their own timelines for specific steps for this position, and had made quite a few mistakes during the process. For me, dropping the ball making the offer was the last straw and meant we were “so far” from an agreement. I no longer had any confidence in their ability to find a solution or to do so within a reasonable timeline. As some other commentators have said, this was very much a “bird in the hand” situation. It’s a competitive job market and I couldn’t risk losing an offer. But I would have hoped my connection and the hiring manager would have understood this better.

  14. Despachito*

    LW 3- I’d say the anger is a red flag per se. It is unprofessional and very telling. (And in this case confirming that they are not to be trusted as they already ghosted OP twice).

  15. Brain the Brian*

    LW4, I have to be frank: I really don’t see the problem with the information your company is requesting. I suspect my opinion may not be popular among other commenters, but your employer probably does need to know your diagnosis and the ways it might impact your needs at work to be able to successfully anticipate and accommodate those needs. I have epilepsy — for example — and it’s much easier to just say that and list my seizure triggers and seizure action plan than it is to do some convoluted dance of requesting necessary accommodations without listing a diagnosis. In fact, when I formally disclosed, my HR department made a point to check with me about common seizure triggers that I hadn’t listed to make sure my neurologist and I hadn’t forgotten them on the form (for instance, flashing lights aren’t a problem for me — and HR checked with me about that).

    I think you’re concerned that disclosing what your disability is will open you up to discrimination, but the reality is that illegal discrimination based on a formal ADA request is going to happen or not happen regardless of whether your disclose your exact diagnosis. The act of filing a request for accommodations will probably set off any discrimination, regardless of whether people know your condition’s name. Your options are basically (1) file an ADA accommodation request and disclose your diagnosis or (2) don’t do either. There’s probably not much middle ground if you want a realistic solution from your company — sorry to say.

    1. Insert Clever Name Here*

      Seizures isn’t your diagnoses though, and there are other conditions that can cause seizures — why do they need to know that your accommodations for seizures are because you are diagnosed with epilepsy vs sodium imbalance?

      1. Brain the Brian*

        One example: in my state, the post-seizure driving restrictions last longer if your diagnosis is epilepsy with an unknown etiology (like mine) vs. a known cause (like sodium imbalance) that can be solved. This had an impact on which work trips I could take a for a while (thankfully, my medication is very effective, and I’m years past the driving restrictions in either case now). It can also impact which types of medical care a person needs if they do have a seizure, and in some cases general guidelines for how to prevent seizures — all of which could factor into an accommodation plan.

        I think this LW would have grounds to refuse disclosing their exact diagnosis if they really wanted to — but again, why bother when you can just be open about it and make the whole form easier to fill out? Any discrimination that does occur is likely going to result from the request for accommodations, not people knowing your exact diagnosis. Having a name for a condition makes talking about accommodations for it much easier, and this is one instance where companies aren’t just being evil about something; they do have a reason to know information as part of a good-faith accommodations process.

        1. Insert Clever Name Here*

          That’s valid — your accommodation is specifically tied to state requirements related to your diagnosis. I would be willing to guess that’s not always the case, though.

          You ask why bother not disclosing the diagnosis when it will make the form easier to fill out, and maybe this is just a difference of perspective, but why give more information than is actually necessary when asking for something? That’s not even based off thinking “ugh companies are evil,” but operating off the principle that why bother giving more information when less information would still have resulted in a “yes”?

          If someone needs a specific headset because grasping the phone in their hand is painful and difficult, and a doctor says “a specific headset because grasping the phone in their hand is painful and difficult” what really is accomplished if the company insists on knowing that request is due to rheumatoid arthritis or multiple sclerosis?

          Outside of accommodations, I ran a pre-bid meeting recently where attendance was mandatory for suppliers who wanted to participate in the bid; my company strongly encourages having at least one attendee in-person but we also have a virtual option. Three suppliers contacted me asking if it was ok to just attend virtually — two asked just that, the third said they were asking because of mitigating reasons A, B, and C (a detailed medical reason). I told all of them yes; I didn’t need to know all the reasons the third company couldn’t come in person to say yes!

    2. Malarkey01*

      I don’t see where the company is asking for a diagnosis either. They are asking for a description of the disability and a medical questionnaire to support that but am I missing where they ask for a diagnosis?

  16. Azure Jane Lunatic*

    How far is “across town” here, furniture wise? (I’m thinking time, rather than miles; a 3 hour trip is more intense than a half-hour trip, and in places like Los Angeles and Seattle with severe traffic “across town” can pack a lot of minutes into not all that much space.)

    Office furniture is uniquely heavy duty in a way that home furniture just isn’t. I would never go to a home furnishings store to pick out furniture that’s meant for constant use, for example in the waiting room. Looking at stuff in a catalog just isn’t the same. I wouldn’t always expect a boss to give an employee a big say in office furniture, but in a small office I can see why the employee(s) could be included in the process.

    1. Azure Jane Lunatic*

      Setting up in a new building is really intense, not quite as personal as moving house but a whole lot of moving parts and generally more people. I am unsurprised at off-site trips even if regular day to day business is wholly on-site.

      Now, if the boss has a habit of making an employee uncomfortable, being together in a car for any amount of time can be super uncomfortable. It’s a confined space, and there is much less chance for someone else to interrupt if the boss creates a problem. But based on GF #1’s general unconcern and astonishment that anyone would think it an issue, I do not think she is being made uncomfortable.

      If LW #1 is thinking of menstruation as an inherently sexual topic because it involves the vagina, I would respectfully disagree. When I owned a uterus, during the majority of “shark week” it felt about as sexy as a hangover. While I would be taken aback somewhat if various of my bosses brought up menstruation, that’s more on a bodily function level than a genitals situation. Some workplaces have a much different threshold for medical TMI than others.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        I feel like I’ve experienced every type of creepy guy there is, and I’ve never had one who tried to use my periods and/or office furniture to seduce me. If OP were naming some of the more classic symptoms; complaining about their wife, using her as a free therapist and/or texting her late at night with those weird “hey” messages, expecting her to be available sociably, and getting snippy if she’s not, comments on her appearance etc, then I would say; “Hey that would concern me, but you can only ring the warning bell and the rest is up to her own creep-o-meter”. I’ve never met a woman who doesn’t have a creep-o-meter, even if she needs an external warning to trust it (like the OP whose boss was rude to her husband). But, the periods and office furniture feels more like a guy trying to imagine what would be/should be creepy to a woman and not really… listening. Scheduling the two of you to work alone for unnecessary reasons is sometimes a classic symptom, but I don’t think driving across town with the guy to do very necessary work really qualifies.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        I’ve experienced almost every type of creepy guy there is, and I’ve never had one who tried to use my periods and/or office furniture to seduce me. If OP were naming some of the more classic symptoms; complaining about their wife, using her as a free therapist and/or texting her late at night with those weird “hey” messages, expecting her to be available sociably, and getting snippy if she’s not, comments on her appearance etc, then I would say; “Hey that would concern me, but you can only ring the warning bell and the rest is up to her own creep-o-meter”. I’ve never met a woman who doesn’t have a creep-o-meter, even if she needs an external warning to trust it (like the OP whose boss was rude to her husband). But, the periods and office furniture feels more like a guy trying to imagine what would be/should be creepy to a woman and not really… listening. Scheduling the two of you to work alone for unnecessary reasons is sometimes a classic symptom, but I don’t think driving across town with the guy to do very necessary work really qualifies.

      3. CommanderBanana*

        ^^ Seriously. I feel like it’s similar to telling someone about food poisoning.*

        *If your experience is a glorious celebration of sexuality, I am delighted for you! It is decidedly not for me.

      4. I strive to Excel*

        See my read on that was that it was way, way too much medical info for me to ever want to discuss at work, rather than it being somehow “sexy”. But that’s more of a personal boundary for me. If both parties are ok with talking about that sort of detail (and I’ve surely met coworkers who are, and more), then it’s no weirder than talking about foot fungus.

    2. Office manager*

      LW1 describes his girlfriend as a ‘manager,’ so it’s highly likely she’s the office manager.

      In which case it is totally unsurprising she’d be picking out practice furniture.

      1. Azure Jane Lunatic*

        A guy came up from Portland to Seattle (3+ hour road trip) for a couple days to take his pick of the furniture that the Facilities team in Seattle was discarding. It’s worth going quite a ways to get quality furniture.

        I scored some incredible chairs from that same downsizing. Very harvest gold and cranberry, but a high quality flip lounger situation.

    3. MsM*

      If they’re buying a desk or lamp or something else for the front office she’s going to be using more than him, I’d definitely expect her to be involved.

  17. Ganymede II*

    LW5 is exhibit 45875 of how good employee don’t leave jobs, they leave managers.

  18. Green great dragon*

    LW3, I don’t think you did anything wrong, but ideally you could have let them know you had another offer and needed an answer from them. I can see them being annoyed if they’ve been busy trying to arrange something and are thinking if they’d known you had a deadline they could either have speeded things up or, if they realised they couldn’t meet your deadline, stopped spending time on it. Angry seems unwarranted though.

    But I’m a little confused by your ‘good relationship’ point. I wouldn’t expect or have time for ongoing communication with an ex-candidate even if I felt nothing but good towards them. Unless there’s some sort of prior relationship or other reason they should be talking to you I wouldn’t take ceasing contact to mean anything other than they’re busy people.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      Unless there was some kind of amazing attraction at Company B, I think OP should have turned them down flat; particularly with another offer in hand. They’d been messed around in the past by this company and now their job offer had changed location! It doesn’t mean they’re bad people but they’re terribly disorganised. Then they responded with anger when the loss of this candidate can only really be laid at their door. They may have been able to respond more quickly if OP had communicated a deadline, but I’m happy for OP that they didn’t manage to pull that off. I’m also pretty puzzled at what OP is wanting to retain a good relationship for; being let down in the future? Or so they can anger someone while doing taking very reasonable measures to keep a roof over their head.

      1. tw1968*

        I think LW3 made the best choice…the way they treated LW3 is awful and their expectation that they should just put their own life on hold for this company that ghosts them? Nah, bullet dodged there.

      2. ferrina*

        Yeah, Company B isn’t being particularly impressive. It sounds like OP had even accepted the initial offer when Company B changed the terms (switching location). Any reasonable company knows that that location is a reasonable deal-breaker for a candidate.

        1. LW3*

          LW3 They made an offer and I had verbally accepted it. Then they took a month to go through internal reviews of visa requirements (which they had known about from the start), business approvals, etc. They re-made the offer and I accepted it in writing. That’s when they decided they couldn’t offer it in the agreed location. So in answer to your comment, I had already accepted it twice.

          1. ferrina*

            Oh dear. That’s even worse.

            Yeah, no one should be upset with you for declining to work in a totally different location than what you were looking for. Especially once the company changed the location (I think you said changed the country?!?) so last minute.

      3. LW3*

        The contact point who introduced me is a former colleague and we’d stayed in contact since then. I was introduced directly to the hiring manager as well as going through the formal process. I like to stay on good terms with all those in my network and to have a good reputation.

        1. Ellis Bell*

          I definitely got that sense, and your reactions and concerns are not the weird ones here. It’s very disconcerting when you’re doing your best to uphold manners and consideration, and yet other people are behaving like you peed in their soup.

    2. Observer*

      LW3, I don’t think you did anything wrong, but ideally you could have let them know you had another offer and needed an answer from them.

      I don’t think that the LW owed them that.

      The company messed up big time, and changed one of the most significant parts of the offer at the last minute. Then they could not even come back with a new complete offer. Even without the history, the LW simply does not owe it to them to beg them for a completed offer. Especially since they now know that whatever they say is likely to not be what happens.

  19. Grith*

    LW1 – this is almost becoming an AAM trope at this point! You have listed two “incidents” – the first of which is clearly unacceptable and you are correct to feel is inappropriate (although it’s up to your partner if she wants to take any action on it of course).

    And you’ve then used that entirely correct feeling of “something is wrong here” and applied it to a perfectly normal workplace interaction. The owner of the business and the senior non-clinical manager selecting office furniture? Entirely normal and appropriate, don’t let the other incident cause you to start imagining issues where there are none.

    1. TO person*

      Thank you for so clearly distinguishing the issues! I understand the LW’s concern about seemingly inappropriate medical comments (from the letter it didn’t seem like welcome or actual advice and we are supposed to take the LW at their word). It doesn’t mean predatory behaviour will result when alone in a vehicle, and the LW should let her do her job.

  20. Turingtested*

    LW #4 I understand your frustration. I’ve seen very detailed forms for ADA items, and if you have the strength to go through a few rounds with HR I’d recommend asking your doctor to fill out N/A as much as possible.

    1. In-house*

      I’m an in-house attorney and I sometimes help our HR dept with accommodation requests. If HR was having a hard time finding compromise with an employee on what constitutes a reasonable accommodation in a particular case, and the employee’s doctor filled out a form with “n/a” in multiple spots, we would probably interpret that as meaning the doctor doesn’t really think this employee has much of a problem that really needs serious accommodations.

      1. Turingtested*

        But not all medical information is relevant. For example, I have a kidney issue and depression. if I need an accommodation for the depression, the kidney stuff is literally N/A.

        My company’s forms are really geared towards physical health and very invasive and unnecessary if you’re seeking mental health accommodations.

        Our in house counsel advises strongly that we only require relevant information.

        1. In-house*

          Well sure, but the form doesn’t ask about your kidney function. I’ve never seen a form that doesn’t phrase its questions to be about the disabling condition, and the original question was about not wanting to give information about the disabling condition. If the question is truly n/a, obviously, put that, but if you/the doctor appear to be unwilling or unable to give details on the actual subject of the disability, that’s not going to be helpful to the request.

      2. Judy*

        In my state we don’t need to disclose the diagnosis, just that it’s a “serious medical condition”.

        The EEOC website says “….after employment begins, an employer may make disability-related inquiries and require medical examinations only if they are job-related and consistent with business necessity. The ADA requires employers to treat any medical information obtained from a disability-related inquiry or medical examination (including medical information from voluntary health or wellness programs, as well as any medical information voluntarily disclosed by an employee), as a confidential medical record. Employers may share such information only in limited circumstances with supervisors, managers, first aid and safety personnel, and government officials investigating compliance with the ADA”.

        I’ve been in jobs where the information was shared with managers just because they were all nosy gossips. Horrible. I’d never disclose details if I didn’t have to.

        1. Freya*

          In my country, the rules are basically the same. We don’t need to know ANYTHING about the specifics other than 1) the employee has a condition that b) does not impact the employees ability to do the inherent requirements of the job and c) requires the listed reasonable accommodations.

          Under Australia’s laws, we’re also required to preserve the employee’s privacy, unless disclosure has specific relevance to their employment or is required by law. Failure to give appropriate protection to sensitive personal information and share information inappropriately with other employees or third parties can give rise to discrimination, which the employer is then liable for. Employers are advised to obtain written consent from the employee to share information about their disclosed disability within the organisation (eg boss sharing with HR so there’s a paper trail when the boss moves on) and encourage them to state how they would like their information to be handled or shared, in order to reassure the employee that the information will be treated appropriately.

          But it’s much much easier not to disclose information that you don’t have. So if (for example) I don’t know that an employee has PTSD, I cannot share that information with prejudiced people – and all I really need to know is that the employee requires a desk that doesn’t have their back to the room so their co-workers are less likely to accidentally startle them.

    2. Polly*

      I don’t know if the OP already did this, but they could tell HR what accommodations they need before getting into any details about their health and see if the company is open to the accommodations without the invasive requests for info. Although, given the initial HR response, the company sounds like it might be rigid about its forms being filled out.

      1. AccommodationsRequireInformation*

        In my experience the time to do this is before formally asking for an accommodation – ask your boss about it first. If it’s reasonable and something they can do, a good boss will just do it. Once HR is involved you’re probably going to have to go through a more formal process with documentation, etc.

        1. bamcheeks*

          And there’s pluses and minuses to both approaches — I had a member of my team ask me for an accommodation and I said I was happy to do it informally, but if she went through HR and requested it formally then she’d be covered if I left the company and she had a different manager, or moved to another team, or my manager left and I had another manager who wasn’t happy about it. There are good reasons for a good boss to recommend the formal process too!

          1. The Unionizer Bunny*

            Be careful about this. There is no “formal” vs “informal” distinction in the ADA – as a manager, your actions ARE the interactive process, and they bind the company (which, if another manager replaced you, would survive the transition and suddenly leave your successor struggling to justify the withdrawal of an accommodation that had worked for your employee’s essential functions) – this is why H.R. may have instituted policies requiring you to inform them the moment you become aware that an employee may have an impairment that limits their ability to perform any job function, even if not essential. H.R. will determine whether this triggers the interactive process, and, if they get it wrong, leave the company liable.

            There are good reasons for a boss to offer an employee that informal process! Just be careful you aren’t setting yourself up to be fired.

            1. bamcheeks*

              Huh, that’s interesting. I’m in the UK, so it’s the Equality Act 2010 not the ADA. All the guidance to both employer and employee is that reasonable adjustments should be recorded and regularly reviewed– that doesn’t have to be done through occupational health and HR, but it gives the employee a lot more protection that way. If I’d verbally said to a team member, “Yeah, I’m fine with you coming into the office two days a week rather than three” but that wasn’t recorded anywhere, it would be much harder for them to prove that that it was a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act rather than just a casual arrangement.

            2. Agnes Grey*

              Is it common to have a policy requiring managers to report *any* “potential imparments” to HR? And do they typically require specific information on diagnoses a direct report happens to mention to them? Would this not open the doors to huge oversharing of personal medical information? I’ve been told my office does have this requirement and it resulted in my (relatively new) manager disclosing my ADHD diagnosis to our HR (HR are the ADA coordinators) when I had *specifically stated* that I was not seeking an accommodation I’m livid at this violation of my privacy and my trust, and I can’t believe this is in any way acceptable. (Mind you no one can show me this requirement in writing, and I’ve been a supervisor there for years and have never been informed of it.)

    3. ferrina*

      If what OP shared is the worst of the form, I’m sort of okay with it. It’s clunky and not well-written, but it’s asking for reasonable information.

      The company needs to understand the nature of the disability so the company knows what compromises they can offer. If you say “I need to be able to work when I want and leave when I want”, that’s an unreasonable hardship for most companies (so they would decline). But if you say “I have a health condition where I often will need to sleep at unpredictable times,” that lets the company know what they actually need to accommodate, and maybe they could offer a mix of wfh and a small range of core hours (if predictable attendance is part of the role).

      The doctor will only share what OP allows them to share. That’s part of HIPAA. OP can ask their doctor to only share what is immediately relevant for the accommodations that they are requestion. The form says: “Identify and describe the physical or mental disability that is the basis for your request for reasonable accommodation(s)” (emphasis mine). A disability is different than a diagnosis. The ADA defines “disability” as “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual”.

      So my diagnosis might be MDD (depression), but my disability is severe exhaustion. Or my diagnosis is MS or Chronic Fatigue, but my disability is that I can’t stand for long periods of time (and I’m asking for seating as part of my accommodation).
      The company just needs to know what your limitations are so they know what they are trying to accommodate (rather than just taking employees at their word that they need Accommodation X).

      Of course, all of this is in the context of how your company is around accommodations/disabilities/humans having human needs in general. But the form itself isn’t terrible.

      1. OP4*

        Background for this: Large 5000+ company so this was definitely a pre written email. My boss noticed I was struggling and suggested I talk to the accommodations coordinator. The next day I get this email about the whole process.

        From this blog I know ADA accommodations are an interactive process and I felt flooded with forms to fill out when I hadn’t even begun to think about what accommodations I may need. On top of that my issues primarily are mental health related and I work in government contracting where mental health issues are considered a red flag (there is very fixed messaging about if it is a red flag or not).

        I appreciate your response and way of looking at what information HR really needs. I was very concerned about having to report more details about my diagnoses and thinking about just reporting the identifying the disabling symptoms is relieving.

        1. The Unionizer Bunny*

          I work in government contracting

          [pauses] This doesn’t remove the matter from EEOC’s jurisdiction, but it does add a law they have to comply with – Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

          And apparently there are also a series of Executive Orders?
          https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/about/executive-order-11246-history

          Department of Labor is the agency either way – their Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) encourages contractors to “develop and use written procedures to process requests for reasonable accommodations”, though it is “not required”. They’re probably giving you the forms to cover all their bases because they don’t want to lose their federal contracts if they’re found to have been doing anything improperly.

          I was initially impressed with your boss for going “above and beyond” when he noticed you struggling and suggested you talk to the accommodations coordinator about it, but this is very close to what is required of him under affirmative action. Still good that he’s doing the right thing, it means he’s been given the right training.

      2. The Unionizer Bunny*

        So my diagnosis might be MDD (depression), but my disability is severe exhaustion. Or my diagnosis is MS or Chronic Fatigue, but my disability is that I can’t stand for long periods of time (and I’m asking for seating as part of my accommodation).
        The company just needs to know what your limitations are

        I remembered this area being confusing and uncertain so I didn’t look it up, but just came across a reference that points more toward diagnosis:
        https://askjan.org/publications/consultants-corner/Dealing-with-Improper-Requests-for-Medical-Documentation-from-an-Employer.cfm

        All three of the examples (depression, rotator cuff injury, progressive vision loss) list a diagnosis and associated difficulty. But is it necessary?
        https://askjan.org/articles/What-Does-Sufficient-Mean-A-Deconstructive-Series-for-ADA-Terminology.cfm

        It looks like “nature” is more like “category” – an exact diagnosis is not needed, the medical provider can merely state the general type of condition. But it does have to be something more than just the limitation(s) caused by a disability. And the employer can lawfully refuse to grant accommodations until you’ve provided sufficient documentation.

    4. LCH*

      ugh. i’m fine with having a doctor fill out a form while referring to my job description, but i would not want to give my employer any medical records at all and certainly not general access. the information on the form from the doctor should be enough.

  21. Irish Teacher.*

    LW1, that conversation about your girlfriend’s period sounds completely inappropriate (unless, as others said, there was further context, like she asked him about it or she told you it out of context or you misheard something) and if your girlfriend had a problem with that and wanted to take it further, she definitely could.

    But that is 100% her decision and you should really only give an opinion here if she asks for it. I think the whole “unsolicited advice is criticism” applies here. (OK, there are times when people don’t exactly ask but it is clear from their tone that they are trying to sound you out on your view like if she said doubtfully, “my boss said something a bit weird today. I’m not sure if I should have shut it down,” then you could respond with something like, “I think you’d be perfectly justified in shutting that down.”)

    But from what you say about her voicing what you feel and being ignored, it sounds pretty clear that she is not looking for advice. The fact that she ignores you voicing what you feel on these issues is your answer to the question you wrote in here: you need to leave it to her. By ignoring you, she is clearly telling you that either she feels she has the issue in hand and does not need advice or else that you are not giving advice that is helpful to her (very common when you are speaking about a situation you aren’t directly involved in (and I know that is true for us replying here too, but you did ask and you are completely free to ignore our advice if it doesn’t appear actionable just as she is free to ignore yours and in both cases, ignoring advice that doesn’t apply is the right thing to do)).

    There is nothing at all inappropriate about her going to choose furniture and I think her response to you about that was perfectly reasonable. I mean, yeah, there are other options, but this is a perfectly normal one and it sounds like both she and the boss were happy with it so…why would they choose another option? You make it sound like this is a last resort, something they would only do if there were no other options, when it’s perfectly unremarkable.

    LW2, I really like the script about “I noticed you only submitted for one meal on the X trip and I want to make sure you know that you can submit for three meals a day on future business trips.” I think you could add something like “if you wish” or say that she can submit to “up to three meals a day.”

    So long as you just mention it once and in the context of clarifying things, I think you are fine. As somebody who has some sensory issues around food, I would be uncomfortable with being asked why I didn’t submit more, but being told “oh, you know, you can submit for up to three meals a day. Just letting you know as the guidelines are sometimes a bit unclear” wouldn’t bother me in the least.

    I also think it might be worth letting her know if she can expense things that aren’t full meals, like a breakfast roll bought on the way to a meeting or a coffee and cake in a café if she prefers those to a full meal or giving a ballpark of how much is reasonable to expense, just in case she is worried about expensing larger meals.

    But I’d keep it short, just “hey, you know you can expense up to three meals a day if you want to. Generally, the cost is around x or y. So long as you aren’t claiming hundreds a day, it’s OK to expense (whatever is OK).”

    I wouldn’t tell the story you did here. I think that makes the whole thing too big a deal

    1. sparkle emoji*

      Irish Teacher, I think you’re making good points on both letters. For LW2, these scripts seem great, and a one time mention is unlikely to feel as judge-y as the constant commentary you got. You’re clearing up confusion, not telling her she needs to buy more food when she isn’t hungry.

  22. MsM*

    LW1: I am reminded of the time my dentist asked 16 year old me if I’d be willing to accompany him on a time-sensitive errand before getting on with my appointment. Which was definitely all kinds of weird and uncomfortable, and I did not go back to him after that, but I truly don’t think the optics of it dawned on him for even a moment: it was just the most efficient solution he could think of.

    The point is, there are all kinds of reasons this guy might be the way he is. They might not all make him a good boss, but they don’t automatically mean he’s trying to steal your girl.

    1. JelloStapler*

      Hu? Why do you need to go with him- can’t he just say, “I might be a bit late for the appointment?” isn’t this at an office?

      1. Orv*

        Maybe he didn’t have a receptionist, and didn’t want to leave a teenager alone in his office?

        1. Azure Jane Lunatic*

          If we are trying to invent practical reasons, often there’s a question and answer portion of the appointment, and I could see someone with efficiency on the brain thinking that the patient could answer those questions on the way to / back from the errand.

  23. Apex Mountain*

    I suppose it doesn’t matter for the question but the structure of the team in #5 seems odd. Lucy is the OP’s boss, Michelle is OP’s grandboss, yet Lucy is suggesting OP apply for Michelle’s job? And Michelle’s job pays around the same as OPs?

    Is this a non-profit thing or am I reading this wrong?

    1. Myrin*

      I’m pretty sure you’re reading it wrong.

      You’re probably getting tripped up by this part: “Michelle, our grand-manager, and I consider it crucial for me to know what Michelle is doing, so that I can incorporate the policies she creates into my programs.”, because you’re reading it as “Michelle, who is our grandboss, and I consider it crucial”, but it means “Michelle AND our grandboss who is a different person AND I consider it crucial”.

      Another point in the letter where this becomes clearer is this one: “These jobs [= Michelle’s job or the other, training-focused job] are at the same pay grade as mine, and both would report directly to my current grand-manager”. So most likely Michelle is on the same level as Lucy, or she’s on the same level as OP but part of a differently-structured hierarchy where she earns less than Lucy (who is, after all, a manager) but still directly reports to a higher level manager than Lucy.

    2. Emmy Noether*

      I think Michelle and the grandmanager are two different people. I read it the same as you at first and was confused, but I think this sentence:
      Michelle, our grand-manager, and I … has to be read
      “Michelle and our grandmanager and I”, not “Michelle (our grandmanager) and I”.

      Makes a lot more sense with the rest of the letter that way.

        1. Silver Robin*

          Heresy!!! This must be hidden from the masses lest there be an uprising!

          but actually, I had not even noticed that it was the Oxford comma at play here, so thanks for pointing it out

        2. Dawn*

          Could you explain how removing the Oxford comma removes the confusion?

          I don’t find “Michelle, our grandmanager and I” to be at all less confusing than “Michelle, our grandmanager, and I”

          1. Myrin*

            It possibly doesn’t in English (at least not with this kind of construction; it would be different if it said “Our grandmanagers, Susan and Michelle, said XY” which means Susan and Michelle are the grandmanagers, whereas “Our grandmanagers, Susan, and Michelle” means “Our grandmanagers who are called Tim and Megan as well as our other coworkers Susan and Michelle”) but it does in other languages.

            I know Emmy is German (as am I), and in German, the comma placement makes who is who completely obvious because we don’t have an Oxford comma: “Our grandmanager, Michelle, and I” necessarily means “Michelle is the grandmanager” whereas “Our grandmanager, Michelle and I” necessarily means “I’m talking about three different people”.

            1. Dawn*

              Gotcha. That makes sense in that context. I wouldn’t say it’s owing to the Oxford comma per se though, lol; it’s more down to English’s less-formally-structured nature. Which can be both good and bad.

    3. A Penguin!*

      I think Michelle and Lucy are at the same level on the org chart, and both report to the same (unnamed) grand-manager.

      1. Slow Gin Lizz*

        Thank you for asking this because I was also confused in the same way as you were, Apex. I haven’t actually drunk my coffee yet, so that’s probably why.

  24. melissa*

    A psychiatric office is a medical office. So her boss is possibly an MD. And no, that doesn’t mean doctors just go around talking about periods all the time, but it does mean he could have some knowledge to share.

    1. Somehow I Manage*

      Maybe. But unless the employee brings it up or asks a direct question based on the medical knowledge of their employer, I think that’s a topic that isn’t one that should be part of work. With that in mind, LW could suggest that if it is uncomfortable, girlfriend should say something to stop it. But that’s as far as that conversation should go.

        1. Garblesnark*

          I think it only seems clear that LW is uncomfortable, the girlfriend has not been able to speak for herself to us.

          1. nodramalama*

            from LW’s own perspective, his girlfriend got annoyed when LW even raised the issue. Considering the nature of the letter, if LWs girlfriend had raised concerns, he would have put it in the letter

  25. MicroManagered*

    On #4 – Wouldn’t employers have a reason (and a right) to documentation of the condition they’re being asked to accommodate?

    I’m recently diagnosed with a medical condition, but so early on that I’m still learning about accommodations and which ones might help me. I don’t KNOW yet if I’m going to disclose and request accommodations from my employer, but I have been under the assumption that of course I’ll have to share my specific diagnosis and probably provide documentation.

    1. Garblesnark*

      Not precisely.

      Some examples:

      It often takes as much as ten years to get a specific diagnosis for a chronic health condition (especially when one is not a white man), but the symptoms do not wait for the diagnosis. In the mean time, symptom management strategies can still require accommodations depending on what the symptoms are.

      I have three medical conditions that can all cause a certain symptom. But for me to seek accommodations for that symptom, there’s no need or reason for my employer to be made aware of more than one of these conditions, especially as more awareness might make me more vulnerable to discrimination.

      Most medical conditions have common symptoms and uncommon symptoms, and well-known medical conditions may have a cultural idea of what the symptoms are. However, the employer’s mental picture of the condition’s symptom presentation is not in any way related to what symptoms an employee might have, and therefore what accommodations the employee might need. For example, epilepsy is a seizure disorder, with a cultural picture of the epileptic person lying on the floor moving their limbs unpredictably. However, I have a friend with absence seizures, meaning she is very still when they occur. The needed accommodations are different, and if the doctor only put “epilepsy,” the employee may not get what they need.

      1. The Unionizer Bunny*

        It often takes as much as ten years to get a specific diagnosis for a chronic health condition (especially when one is not a white man), but the symptoms do not wait for the diagnosis.

        The process of diagnosing the ailment does not wait for the diagnosis. Leave to attend a medical appointment is a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. Leave to attend multiple medical appointments, if the condition is not easily identified (or if treatment that should have worked fails later, prompting a return to the doctor with “apparently it’s not that“), and at some point the doctor may say “these are the symptoms that I have been authorized to share with you, but I don’t really know yet what it is”.

    2. Irish Teacher.*

      In a lot of cases, it probably doesn’t matter. I know in the Irish education system, reasonable accommodations have recently changed to not needing information about the specific conditions, both because as Garblesnark says, not everybody has a diagnosis and because it’s not really relevent.

      Like if a student cannot read the exam paper, then in order to properly assess their knowledge, somebody needs to read it to them. It really doesn’t matter whether the student’s reading difficulties are due to dyslexia or poor early teaching or due to English not being their first language or to having missed a lot of school due to a physical health condidtion or to decoding difficulties or to something else that I don’t even know about. Regardless of the cause, we will not be able to accurately assess how much science or geography or history or Maths they know unless somebody reads the questions to them.

      Or if a student finds it easier to concentrate while using a fidget toy, it doesn’t really matter if that is because of ADHD or autism or a sensory issue or just due to a habit. In any case, the student will perform better if they are allowed to use the toy so the reason doesn’t matter.

      Students used to need a diagnosis for accommodations during exams – like getting a reader, not for things like use of fidget toys – but that excluded people who had the same needs but for different reasons, so now schools have some leeway to make assessments. They still have to justify them, but we can now test a student’s reading and if it is not sufficient to read the exam paper, then we can apply for a reader for them without their necessarily needing to be dyslexic or fit some other category that allowed it.

      I think that is also often true in the workplace. If somebody cannot go upstairs, it doesn’t matter if it’s due to a heart condition or because they have broken their leg or have problems with their hip or have an extreme fear of heights. In any case, they need the use of a lift. If flexible office hours are possible, then it shouldn’t really matter whether the reason somebody wants to work 11-7 instead of 9-5 is because they have a sleep issue or just because they do better working later.

      I obviously don’t know the legal situation, certainly not in the US, and I guess it does to some extent depend on the accommodation, but a lot of things can be provided without worrying too much about why they are needed.

      1. General von Klinkerhoffen*

        +1

        In the English schooling system* you meet NEEDS not DIAGNOSES because the dx doesn’t tell you what the needs are. Two of my children have additional needs and they were both accommodated long before formal diagnosis.

        * (I would have said UK but it’s devolved and I honestly don’t know if it’s the same everywhere)

      2. Agnes Grey*

        I love that the system is moving in this direction – “how can we help” instead of “why should we help” is a much better approach.

    3. Sapientia*

      With my employer (in Germany), it would absolutely not be expected to disclose the diagnosis. One’s doctor usually provides a list of medical needs (e.g. no sitting for uninterrupted time longer than 2 hours), sometimes with suggested accommodations (e.g. a desk that change heights). In case of disability there are government issued “passports” in a few different categories (e.g. vision impairment or mobility impairment) with a degree of disability (25-100% I think). One can choose to disclose these to the employer, triggering certain legal protections.
      Everything else is none of the employer’s business.

    4. Malarkey01*

      I don’t see where the company is asking for a diagnosis either. They are asking for a description of the disability and a medical questionnaire to support that but am I missing where they ask for a diagnosis?

    5. fhqwhgads*

      Not really. They need to know what accommodation you need – or more specifically what you can and can’t do. They don’t necessarily need to know the diagnosis.
      eg “No stairs” – they don’t need to know if I have MS or a knee replacement. They need to know my doctor says I can’t do stairs.

  26. Somehow I Manage*

    OP2 – I think you’re overthinking this based on what I’d consider inappropriate comments your previous manager made. They may have been well-intentioned, but the way you’ve phrased it makes it seem more like passing judgement on your choices of food versus ensuring you felt comfortable with expensing “enough” to eat. Your employee may just need a bit of guidance and some generic approval of expensing up to three meals each day.

    Having said all of that, there may be some other detail that is going into why the employee only expensed a single meal. Perhaps, as you note, breakfast was provided. Or, there’s something else. I’ve found myself not expensing food when I’ve traveled for work simply because I tend to eat several snacks throughout the day and submitting multiple receipts for non-meals might get questioned. That’s a personal choice I make, and maybe your employee is doing something similar. But if you gently remind them, and everyone, that you’re going to approve up to three meals per day, they can choose their own adventure from there.

  27. Nightengale*

    About psychiatrists knowing or should they know things about menses and hormones affecting mood and suppression

    I’m a doctor in a field adjacent to child psychiatry. I did a required gyn rotation in med school although that was 20-mumble years ago now.

    I have conversations all the time with patients or patient caregivers about periods and if there are concerns about pain or mood. If there are concerns I may make a comment about their being a lot of options now including combined and progesterone only pills, the depo shot, implants, etc, and that menstrual suppression may be an possibility. For my patients with significant developmental disabilities, I refer them to a child/adolescent gynecologist and recommend they have a risk-benefit discussion with someone who is familiar with the specifics (i.e. not me.) I make some reassuring comments that the child/adolescent gynecologist is very familiar working with kids and teens with developmental disabilities because the caregiver is often thinking about their own OB-GYN experiences as an adult and thinking that wouldn’t be a good fit for their kid. If I have a teen patient who does not have significant cognitive disabilities, I have a similar conversation with them but refer back to their PCP or the adolescent medicine clinic. I generally remind all involved there may be some trial and error along the way.

    The amount I have ever talked about the menstruation of any coworkers, office staff, nurses etc would be zero. Maybe I gave someone a few Advil once? If someone asked me, I might make a generic statement there are a lot of options out there and they should talk to “a grown up doctor.” But even if I were a grown up doctor, I am not their doctor.

    (Although I’m laughing now thinking about the friend in college who brought me the package insert for Depo when Depo was new and asked if it was safe, because she said she trusted me more than the student Health Center. At that time – pre internet – I was a sophomore biology major with a child Health Encyclopedia on my shelf and therefore our friend group medical expert. . .)

    1. MsM*

      I mean, I also would have trusted my premed friends more than the health center whose solution to everything was either Tylenol or a pregnancy test.

      1. ScruffyInternHerder*

        And I absolutely would have “trusted” the advice of a friend with some pre-med background to someone who I had no clue the credentials thereof…

        Sure I can hear what the clinic doctor is telling me. Great. I don’t know them. Does my friend with any sort of medical background have an opinion on it? I want to know that because I actually know them :)

        Undergrad brain was a little wild…

        1. Nightengale*

          yeah we called it the Death Center and I wrote an anthropology paper on people’s experiences there called “Are you stressed, dear, or are you just pregnant” about the perception those were the only diagnoses anyone ever got.

          Years and training later I don’t necessarily think we were wrong to trust me and my health encyclopedia more. ..

      2. bamcheeks*

        The very first time I said, “I’m a lesbian” out loud was in response to a student health centre doctor who was being extremely arsey about the fact that I had said I was sexually active but not on long-term birth control.

        1. Nightengale*

          oh golly. the memories

          I went to a women’s college.

          The story we all heard, which may or may not have been true, is the woman who had the following conversation:
          Are you sexually active?
          Yes
          what kind of birth control do you use?
          none
          Could you be pregnant?
          no
          But you don’t use birth control?
          no

          The story goes they went around and around this way a few times before the student said

          “If I am pregnant, I hope it’s hers!”

    2. nodramalama*

      I’m not convinced its that relevant to go into detail about what kind of medical information or advice a doctor should give to someone. for one thing, some doctors are more willing to give medical advice and opinions. I am surrounded by doctors and know plenty who readily diagnose or recommend medications etc, the same way that as a lawyer i do not give lay legal advice, but i know plenty of lawyers who do.

      But, more importantly we don’t know what the context of the conversation is and the person who wrote in was not present for the conversation. So we really don’t know what was actually said, how specific it was, and if it was creepy, or inappropriate, or unprofessional, or some mixture of all three.

    3. grumpy*

      My daughter’s in college now, and the quality of medical advice from the med center is … dubious. Including someone who told her (1) endometriosis wasn’t real and (2) therefore she’d just have to suffer with made-up pains.
      Yes, this was from a female doctor.

      1. YetAnotherAnalyst*

        Even out in the real world, doctor’s understanding of the female reproductive tract is highly variable – my area apparently has a number of doctors who don’t think the cervix has nerves. We’ve got a whole Slack chat of coworkers asking for gynaecologist recommendations as a result.

    4. Merrie*

      I’m a pharmacist and in every setting I’ve worked in, our non-pharmacist support staff ask us for various random medical advice pretty routinely, some of which isn’t all that related to medications. I would think that depending on the medical office, this could be within normal limits. Do I think it’s advisable to discuss this topic at work? I would use caution, but I don’t think it’s automatically inappropriate. (And in either case, it’s up to the GF to mind about it if she thinks the conversation with her boss was inappropriate. The LW needs to nose out.)

  28. Hawk*

    LW 4, based on the text of your post, your employer and mine use an almost identical process (I can just get the forms for my doctor to fill out through an online portal at the start of the process, though). My employer is a (regional) government employer, so I’m not sure where the law falls in this circumstance. But yeah, I hate it. I need to apply for accomodations at work, and I’ve been putting it off for cough9yearscough, partly because the process is so cumbersome and invasive (plus a nebulous diagnosis and absense of a medical professional that fits their definition of “treats” a lifelong disability that has no treatment or cure). The explanation I received in the employee “preventing workplace harassment” training is that they do this so your immediate supervisor can’t discriminate against you for having your disability. I’ve had more issues with discriminatory people when it comes to *accomodations that don’t state my disability* than me saying I have a disability (thanks, college). It feels entirely CYA to me. Plus they get to dictate what accomodations you can use based on your medical info/the form and it feels counterintuitive because I’m the one that knows myself the best, not a medical professional or my employer.

  29. Delta Delta*

    #1 – Oof. This is one of those letters that feels one way but could very well be something different. OP is hearing the GF repeat parts of the conversations she had with her boss. This likely lacks context and all necessary details. Or OP jumps right to one snippet and gets upset because of the topic. Or the boss is a creep. We have no idea. And the part about furniture shopping “across town” also feels like a red flag or herring or whatever because it lacks detail. Perhaps there is only one office furniture warehouse store in their city and that’s where they needed to go. Perhaps because the GF is a manager, she’s in charge of selecting furniture but the boss is the designated check signer so they had to go together. perhaps the boss is a creep and “furniture shopping” is secret code for “I’m stealing your girlfriend.” But since there is zero context, this all comes across as sinister, when it may very well not be that at all.

    Long story short, if the GF feels uncomfortable, OP ought to support her. If GF is fine, then OP ought to knock off the wild speculation and insinuations.

    1. Irish Teacher.*

      “Long story short, if the GF feels uncomfortable, OP ought to support her. If GF is fine, then OP ought to knock off the wild speculation and insinuations.”

      I think this is key. GF heard the original comments (and the plan to go furniture shopping) in context, so she is much better placed than either the LW or any of us to judge whether they were creepy or inappropriate or a bit awkward and out of place but well-meaning or completely appropriate and the LW should really be guided by her here.

    2. Czhorat*

      Yes.

      Are they shopping for office chairs and would he also bring a male employee in the same position? It’s fine.

      Is he shopping for beds for his pied a terre that his wife doesn’t know about? That’s a whole different ball of fish.

    3. sparkle emoji*

      Emphasis on the fact there may only be one office furniture warehouse. Even if there are multiple places that sell office furniture in their town, IME those places are often in areas with really cheap real estate because they have to be big– often on the edges of a city. The fact that the store they went to wasn’t close isn’t some smoking gun here.

  30. mango chiffon*

    I process travel expenses for my colleagues who travel. Our travel meal policy isn’t specific, but asks people to be reasonable and allows for 1-2 alcoholic drinks at a meal. Some people will be extremely sparing and will get hardly anything and only eat at inexpensive places. Other people will go the exact opposite and order oysters and steak and multiple courses and pay $150 for a single person’s dinner. Honestly I have more of a problem with the latter because they are taking advantage of our organization’s lax policy. While it’s not necessarily against policy, it’s ultimately charitable funds that allow us to travel to do the work we do. I guess it balances, out, but I wish the people who ate inexpensively would allow themselves more of a treat, and the ones who spend lavishly would cut back.

    1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

      $150 and oysters isn’t “reasonable” and as such, it’s already against policy if someone wanted to challenge it. I appreciate that there’s an “inconvenience” factor when travelling, but also as an employee you have a duty to mitigate costs as much as reasonable. So say you normally take a lunch to work with you, but forgot or whatever one day so went out to eat instead. Would you go to a restaurant and order a $150 oyster dish – no, right. You’d probably get a grocery store sandwich or similar. It does always surprise me (but shouldnt) how freely people spend their employer’s money but not their own. We should strive to be as careful with the company’s money as we are with our own.

  31. Trout 'Waver*

    In regards to letter #4, it seems a little frosty to me to ask for an accommodation from someone while also telling them you don’t trust them enough to tell them why. And from a practical standpoint, they’re going to speculate, which is even worse than telling them imo.

    1. Friday Hopeful*

      Its not a matter of trust, its a matter of privacy. Just because you trust they won’t spread it around the office doesn’t mean you want the staff of the HR office knowing either.

    2. Garblesnark*

      As someone who has often had to get accommodations from people who did not deserve that trust, I wonder whether you are disabled.

      Like, employers have written me up for not working while currently undergoing surgery I was on FMLA for and advised that I was not trustworthy enough to work in an office with a lamp. Employers have told me they understand my mobility disorder because they had a sprained ankle once and cornered me to ask whether my migraines are real. Employers have told people I’d never met about every detail on my private forms and I’ve been extremely glad I didn’t give more information.

      Maybe I am frosty. I will defrost when lovely folks like you solve ableism.

      1. Pizza Rat*

        That’s awful, I’m sorry you’ve had to go through that. Writing you up while you were having surgery is abominable.

        I wish more people understood that a migraine that knocks you flat for days at a time is a real thing. Some people are just horrible about invisible disabilities or assume someone is “all better” because they happen to be having a day of fewer symptoms/less pain.

        Diagnosis information is like information security. Minimum necessary access to perform the related functions. Sharing it with anyone who doesn’t need it is vile.

        1. Dahlia*

          I think it’s clear they meant you, who called them “frosty” for wanting privacy.

          1. Trout 'Waver*

            Check your reading comprehension. I said nothing about Garblesnark. I also didn’t say people were frosty for wanting privacy.

            A lot of people are projecting their own situations onto what I said instead of actually reading and understanding it. I get that having a disability and not being accommodated or respected is frustrating. But I’m not that person. Reacting to me as if I am is defensive and projecting.

            1. Garblesnark*

              Sometimes when multiple people are misunderstanding you, the solution is to clarify your meaning, not to tell them they’re defensive and projecting and have poor reading comprehension.

              Now you just seem frosty.

        2. Garblesnark*

          “Lovely folks like you” being you, Trout ‘Waver, specifically, and other people who are very concerned about whether I am “frosty” in my attempts to survive capitalism and my disability simultaneously, often without asking whether there are forces of ableism causing me to need that frost to not be fired or worse.

    3. peter b*

      I mean, this isn’t a person, it’s a company, and the form-filling process isn’t exactly “warm and fuzzy” in return. It’s reasonable to want to disclose the minimum amount needed, especially if a person finds talking about or having others know about their issues painful or risking discrimination.

    4. AccommodationsRequireInformation*

      It doesn’t really matter in any case. You likely need to disclose q fair bit of info to get the accommodation whatever your feelings about it. You might be able to avoid it if your boss can/will informally provide accommodations (you’ll probably still need to provide some info), but formal processes do usually require supporting documentation about medical conditions (in general, the larger the company is the more invasive they are).

      So comfortable or uncomfortable, idiotic statements or lack of understanding not withstanding, you will likely have to put up with it to get what you need.

      It’s not fun, but it us what it is. Being disabled/sick/living with chronic medical conditions is rarely a pleasant experience, and this component is no different.

      1. I Have RBF*

        It’s not fun, but it is what it is. Being disabled/sick/living with chronic medical conditions is rarely a pleasant experience, and this component is no different.

        Sure, but we don’t have to take it in silence. We can complain about the level of intrusiveness and its potential for discrimination. Sure, it may not fix it this time, but enough well formed complaints may cause them to revise the process in the future.

        Yes, I realize that some ableds expect us to be fawning in gratitude that we are even allowed to request an accommodation, and “aren’t we glad we are no longer required to be shut up in our houses, unseen and unheard”, but there is no law that requires us to be silent about being treated shabbily.

        The LW needs to let HR know that their form is intrusive, and that they are not sore of how confidentially the information will be handled. It’s a valid concern, and put them on notice that the person does know their rights.

      2. tired*

        A lot of us are just really tired of putting up with stuff to get what we need, and consistently having unpleasant experiences over and over and being told to suck it up :(

    5. Irish Teacher.*

      As a teacher, I would not find it in the least “frosty” if a student asked for an accommodation without giving details. I have had students ask if they could use a fidget toy in class, for example and it would never occur to me to try and find out the reason.

  32. JelloStapler*

    LW3- good lord, that company has a lot of entitlement to think that you’d want to work with them so much you’d put everything else on hold and then do whatever they wanted while they tried to keep a promise they made. Who’s to say that other options would have ever materialized?

    1. LW3*

      These were my thoughts too: they’d had a 4+ month long interview process to identify and resolve any questions about international candidates, visas, etc so realizing after I accepted the offer in writing that they couldn’t fulfil their side of it didn’t give me any confidence that they would actually be able to deliver any other solution either.

  33. ijustworkhere*

    It’s reasonable to get a detailed summary of how the condition substantially affects major life activities. It is not the doctor’s job to tell the business what the accommodation must be; it is the doctor’s job to explain how the disability limits the major life activities and potentially impacts work. The doctor can make suggestions about what accommodations might work; they don’t get to dictate what they are.

    A lot of employees seem to think that if a doctor suggests an accommodation that the business is obliged to offer it. That is not true.

  34. Ex-prof*

    LW1– that women should stop having periods is a notion that seems to have cropped up in some sections of the man-o-sphere, along with other curious theories about the female body that are very surprising to those who wear one.

    Sounds like the boss is going to some dark places on the internet. But that’s LW’s wife’s problem to deal with, of course.

    1. Pizza Rat*

      Indeed. That’s right up there with the idea that women can control how their period flows and can “hold it” until a more convenient time. I’ve seen even weirder thoughts posed as “facts.” Some men just have no inkling of how women’s bodies work

      1. Ask a Manager* Post author

        I think there’s a misunderstanding here — some of us do use the pill to control our periods, with the support of doctors! It’s not a weird theory. PSA for anyone who isn’t aware of that. (Obviously this doesn’t work for everyone, blah blah.)

        1. tommy*

          Alison, you probably know this, but I wasn’t sure from your comment: there is ALSO a notion out there from a particularly misogynistic sector of men that if women “eat right” plus some other rules, they will spontaneously stop having periods and that having periods was never “natural” but a sign of a polluted life. This sexist assertion is unconnected to people using the pill to intentionally control or cease having periods, but sadly it’s out there.

    2. Nodramalama*

      I mean we’re hearing third hand about a conversation that LW clearly already has a biased perspective on. So we really can’t know why boss said it, what context it was in, or if thats even an accurate representation of what was said.

    3. sparkle emoji*

      As a woman who is very happy with using birth control to stop my periods and had doctors tell me about these options with enthusiasm, I don’t think the comments automatically point to manosphere weirdness. Not having a period can be very exciting if periods cause health issues for you. There isn’t enough evidence in this third hand letter to support the idea that the girlfriend should be worried her boss is a red-pilled weirdo.

      1. Beebis*

        I was advised to do this by a doctor when menstrual migraines were severely impacting my life and it worked

        1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

          Yeah, I do this and I know my sister does and some of my friends. I would be irritated with a doctor (especially a male) telling me I “should” not have a period, particularly if he wasn’t actually MY doctor. But I’ve had discussions with my (male, gay and liberal so unlikely to be in the Manosphere) doctor where he recommended it, and other folks I know have asked their doctors (various genders) and gotten the same recommendation.

    4. Alpacas Are Not Dairy Animals*

      That *some* women can and should opt out of periods because they want to, however, is something lots and lots of non man-o-sphere types endorse, and something one of them might ask a medical professional they know about in passing.

    5. the og perfect beasts*

      That’s definitely a thing, but I wouldn’t think it’s especially likely in this case. The guy’s a psychiatrist rather than an OB/GYN but he’s still got to be somewhat conversant with biological reality. He’s probably not the kind of guy who thinks half the world’s population bleeds everywhere on purpose just to be gross.

      1. the og perfect beasts*

        (Actually I reread the letter and it’s not clear if ‘boss at a psychiatric office’ is in fact the psychiatrist. So maybe, maybe not.)

    6. Dahlia*

      If you’re on the pill, there’s no reason to have a period. It’s not even a “real” pill. It’s a withdrawal bleed that was only added later in the process and isn’t medically necessary.

  35. Observer*

    #1 – GF issues.

    I think you need to two things. Firstly, pick your battles. Secondly, but more crucially you need to reconsider both your attitude and your relationship. Because right now, it’s clear that something is off. And part of it is certainly your attitude. Also, at this point you are not the most credible narrator.

    Here is the thing. When you say that her boss is telling her to get an IUD etc. that comes off as gross and inappropriate. But then you tell your GF to not do a perfectly normal office management task in a perfectly normal way. And it sounds like you have tried this before.

    Either your GF has been giving you serous reason to doubt her and you are focusing on the boss rather than your relationship. Or you are verging on being a serious control freak whose view of reality is not reliable.

    Back off and figure out which it is, and then act accordingly. In neither case do you have any standing to object to your GF going with her boss to get furniture for the office.\

    1. Pita Chips*

      The furniture shopping objection gives me bad vibes. It’s like he’s expecting his girlfriend to Mike Pence and not be alone with someone of the opposite sex in a car. That feels really controlling to me.

  36. Observer*

    #2- Food reimbursements.

    I just want to say thank you for learning from your past experience and trying keep a healthy balance.

    As usual, Alison’s advice is perfect.

  37. J!*

    #2 really stresses me out. My last job had a per diem and it was so freeing. We got a certain amount for the day no matter what, and you didn’t have to worry about hanging onto receipts or having someone else scrutinize your eating habits. If you wanted to hoard stale bagels and bananas from the hotel breakfast bar and have peanut butter and jelly every day you could pad a little extra in your pocket. If you wanted to go all out and have a fancy dinner alone at a Michelin starred restaurant, you’d get part of your costs covered by the per diem and float the rest yourself. And beyond meals you could leave generous tips for the hotel staff, taxi driver, whoever else without having to figure out how you are going to write up the expense. And the finance department doesn’t have to wade through all that, either! They see whether you were traveling a full day or a half day and give you the appropriate rate and that’s it!

    I absolutely hate having to line item charge everything I do on trips for my new job. I’ve been trying to organize for a per diem, but it hasn’t really gotten anywhere. Per diems are the way to go for sure, though. It’s so much easier for everyone involved.

    1. Alan*

      I think there’s a real tendency to think that companies save money by people not spending any more than absolutely necessary. To the extent that people are pocketing a generous per diem, that’s money “wasted”. People making this argument typically aren’t thinking about the costs of implementing their policy. I’m reminded of an employee at my work that had a $20 expense she wanted to be reimbursed for, and it took 3 people working this to find a way to reimburse her without running afoul of some anti-waste anti-fraud policy. Maybe you can find some data that would demonstrate a cost savings with per diem.

      1. Lady Danbury*

        I mentioned upthread that we actually sat down and calculated the personnel costs of switching to a receipts based system versus per diem. It was far more cost effective (in terms of employee time) to retain the per diem than any small amounts of money we might have saved by requiring receipts.

    2. Azure Jane Lunatic*

      It took me an afternoon of what I called “combat scrapbooking” to re-assemble my great-grandboss’s business trip via receipts and get it in shape to submit, and that was on a good day when she hadn’t forgotten a receipt or five. She had upgraded her organization system by grabbing a shoe bag in the airport (remember shoe bags?) and using that to stuff all her receipts into, so that she was no longer digging them out of weird corners of her car, and I would still occasionally have to get her to get the hotel to cough up receipts for the stay. I would assemble each day, highlight important information in specific colors, and tape them down to a sheet of paper to photocopy.

      I knew that I had to get her trip to the airport (taxi or parking payment), Diet Coke in the airport after security, transportation on the other end each day, housing, and three meals a day or an explanation, and reverse the process on the way back. Then I’d match it to her corporate card bill when it came in.

      A per diem would have made all that so much simpler; I would have only had to chase down hotel receipts.

  38. TryingToPostAgain*

    OP4, every formal accommodation process I’ve entered required extensive medical documentation for their review. I have gotten informal accommodation (ask my boss, he/she agrees with no problem, no HR involved) with less information, but rarely with no explanation of why it’s medically required.

    The larger the company, the more formal their process seems to be and the more they require from doctors. The less invasive request have still required full diagnoses and basic descriptions of relevant symptoms as well as some type of attestation that there’s nothing more that can be done medically to cure/improve/fix/etc the problem. They have usually not wanted the doctor to comment on what accommodations should be made (note that I have had to go through this process both for things where I needed specific accommodations and to document things that they didn’t like that were medical facts that couldn’t be altered and there was no actual accommodation, just medical documentation that I wax telling them the truth). In those cases where we discussed actual accommodations, those conversations were between me and the company. Some of the larger companies had their own doctor making recommendations based on the medical information they requested; this was almost universally not helpful in my case.

    Honestly, depending on what your issue is/how familiar with it they are, the process may be easier or harder. Moving strictly out of my personal experience to anecdata from conversations I’ve had/presentations I’ve gone to on disability access (one of the areas I work with), people often have preconceived notions you need to overcome about things like vision or hearing loss, and – more recently – perhaps because of the attention it’s been getting, have had an easier time discussing issues stemming from various types of neurodiversity (which doesn’t mean folks get everything they want, just that the frequency/familiarity level is such that these are the accessibility discussions HR are most used to having and thus seem to handle slightly better on average). The addition of FMLA into the equation has also complicated things as many companies want people to use unpaid leave in lieu of. other options that worked perfectly well before it existed.

    So, OP4, your experience is totally normal, and despite some people often saying in comments here (generally, I haven’t had a chance to read those here today) that you shouldn’t need to supply actual medical information, that is simply not the way it usually works in reality.

    FWIW, most doctors I’ve needed to fill out forms have grumbled about their being needed but expressed no surprise. I have usually needed an appointment for them to do it, though (this is so they get paid for their time, although most won’t outright say that).

    Good luck!

    1. The Unionizer Bunny*

      some type of attestation that there’s nothing more that can be done medically to cure/improve/fix/etc the problem

      Employers can’t require this!

      You don’t have to justify to them your decision to not go in for surgery to get it fixed, or take medication to cure it, and they can’t force you to. Even aside from “the side-effects of this medication would be a heightened risk factor for someone with my other conditions” (which you can’t be required to disclose to them), they can’t refuse to provide you with an accommodation merely because you aren’t willing to take medication your doctor prescribed for you:

      https://www.eeoc.gov/foia/eeoc-informal-discussion-letter-16

      The addition of FMLA into the equation has also complicated things as many companies want people to use unpaid leave in lieu of. other options that worked perfectly well before it existed.

      It sounds like they didn’t like having disabled employees working for them, and would rather have those people just go away – without pay, so the company can afford to bring in a non-disabled employee to perform the work their disabled employee is no longer around for. Remember that treating an employee differently due to productivity they didn’t have when out under a medical leave of absence may be deemed retaliation. (Under some circumstances withholding a bonus based on attendance may be lawful, but not giving a raise because their overall sales were down – instead of prorating their performance – could be considered retaliation.)

      1. Orv*

        I had a situation where I planned to use vacation to take a week off for voluntary surgery. My employer wanted me to use FMLA concurrently (presumably to run down my balance) and, to satisfy FMLA requirements, started insisting on medical documentation, return-to-work letters, etc. — which I did not want to give them and my surgeon did not want to provide.

        1. The Unionizer Bunny*

          https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/faq

          Looks like you have plenty of malicious compliance options here. Provide an incomplete certification. The employer then must give to you a written document explaining exactly what information would be needed. (This will be useful if you end up reporting them for not handling the process correctly.) If you don’t provide sufficient information to confirm FMLA leave, then FMLA protection may be delayed or denied, but the leave itself (your vacation) simply “is not FMLA leave”, and they cannot require you to submit a fitness-for-duty certification before going back to work. (The law doesn’t require it anyway; the employer may have a company policy or practice forcing them to insist on it, but if the employer doesn’t have such a policy then telling you a return-to-work letter would be required even before you took the vacation would strike me as discriminatory even if you didn’t ultimately run down your FMLA leave.)

          You also don’t have to give them your medical records, so I think your employer was not motivated by concern for following the law. Did your immediate supervisor ever contact your surgeon directly? (Prohibited.)

    2. Observer*

      The less invasive request have still required full diagnoses and basic descriptions of relevant symptoms as well as some type of attestation that there’s nothing more that can be done medically to cure/improve/fix/etc the problem

      That’s illegal. They can only ask about diagnosis to the extent that it’s relevant to the issue at hand. To use an example that someone gave elsewhere, if someone has a condition where they become exhausted during the day, the company cannot demand to know what is causing the exhaustion.

      As for an attestation that the problem is unfixable? Are their lawyers totally incompetent? Seriously – there is absolutely no basis for that.

  39. Observer*

    #4 – Accomodation.

    Isn’t it enough to have a doctor attest that I have a disability and the requested accommodation is relevant to it?

    No. Alison is completely correct that there are limits to what they can ask for, which means that they can only ask for information related to the specific issue at hand.

    But the thing is that your doctor’s attestation about your accommodation is not dispositive. The ADA requires an “interactive” process whereby they need to make a good faith effort to provide a reasonable accommodation, but that accommodating does not necessarily have to be the one that you ask for. And if you are asking for something that they don’t want to / cannot do, it’s reasonable for them to want to know what they are dealing with so they can see if there are any other reasonable things they can offer.

    1. AnonForThis*

      This.

      We’re currently dealing with a request for an accommodation by a security employee who is having issues walking from her car to the building following hip surgery.

      OK. But the accommodation she wants and had her doctor request just isn’t going to happen. We have already accommodated by giving her a seated post instead of one on patrol at the site.

      She now wants to be able to park next to the building. Parking isn’t assigned, she comes in at 12pm for an operation that runs 7am to 11pm. She doesn’t want to come in earlier to get the parking in the am. We’re a contractor on site so even if we were inclined to start assigning parking, we literally can’t do it unless the client agrees. They did not. They said if we get assigned parking all of the other employees will want it and they don’t even all come to work every day as they are hybrid.

      So… while she may think her doctor saying she needs closer parking is done and done… it’s really not. The more info we have the better shot we have of getting creative to sort this out, but we need all of the info on what we’re dealing with to do this.

      Do we need the diagnosis? No. But we do need to know all the limitations.

      How do I know this? Because we tried saying she could be transported in a golf cart to just call a security officer when she gets to work if she’s parked far. Her reply? She is concerned about having a fainting spell while on the cart. So back to the drawing board we go. Also wondering how she’s driving a car if this is happening.

      All this to say, share all of the pertinent info or the interactive process just doesn’t work.

      1. Garblesnark*

        This actually sounds to me like the interactive process working exactly as intended.

        She asked for an accommodation. You said it wouldn’t work and suggested something else. She said there was a limitation on that option, and now you can either look at a third option or look at modifying the option to make it work in the context of the limitation.

        But the fainting spells weren’t relevant before the golf cart entered the conversation, so they didn’t, in my opinion, need to be mentioned before.

  40. Alan*

    Re #2, this is one of the things that new hires, fresh-outs, struggle with at my work, where we have a per diem. They seem to worry that they’ll be held accountable in some way, that someone is tracking their spending. No one cares but it takes them a bit to understand.

  41. DramaQ*

    LW1: As someone who does research I’ve had a host of what could be considered in other context completely inappropriate conversations with my bosses and coworkers. Context is important. Did you listen to the entire conversation, did she start in the middle with no backstory? Did you just decide that that wasn’t okay and get offended on her behalf?
    Perhaps they were talking about patient related things and/or current research? Maybe PMDD is a focus of his? Perhaps she brought it up herself because she trusts her boss and wanted a second opinion? I discussed at length with one of my bosses the biologics used for psoriasis because my husband has it and my boss was a leading expert on immunology therapy. I needed help breaking down the research on it especially considering side effects.
    As far as the furniture if he’s buying and she’s using it to me it makes sense that they run the errand together. Office furniture can be wonky and it makes sense to me to try before you buy if you can.
    You need to ask yourself if the boss was female would you be as offended by shopping for office furniture or IUD talk? If the answer is no then your bias is showing and you need to step back. Neither of these scenarios as given are any indication her boss is after her romantically/sexually. She has told you to back off. She is an adult and if anything inappropriate is going on she can handle it. She doesn’t need you riding in like a white knight to save her dignity. You need to respect her boundaries just as much, if not more so than you are demanding her boss respect your imaginary boundaries.

  42. chocolate lover*

    #1 – y ou are indeed being weird about them driving to get furniture. She’s the office manager, it’s a private practice, being involved in that kind of decision is completely normal. Are you suggesting you don’t want her driving in a car with her boss/animal, because that just seems…ick.

    Some of the other boss’ comments could be creepy or they could not, as other people have already discussed in more detail, given that her boss is a medical professional. I can’t tell from your description if your gf was actually creeped out, or if she was just discussing her day, saying “boss and I were talking about X today.” You don’t seem like the most reliable narrator.

  43. bruh*

    I was just reminded of an incident at my company – last year, on Veteran’s Day, a companywide email was sent out (100k+ employees) to acknowledge and recognize veterans who worked at the company. The message was supposed to say something like –
    “We want to recognize the selfless actions of our veterans – fighting numerous wars, at home and abroad”.
    Instead, they wrote:
    “We want to recognize the selfish actions of our veterans – fighting numerous wars, at home and abroad”.

    That was corrected quickly by hoo boy did it cause a bit of consternation.

  44. Dandylions*

    #4 That’s a bog standard form and won’t mean that the employee can access your health records. It’s a generic form that they use for every employee so of course it’s broad.

    Also providers don’t give a flip what an employee sends them. They are bound by HIPPA and can only release records you explicitly release. So if you want to specify what records, when you fill out your providers Health Record Disclosure form just be explicit that only records related to the Diagnosis you are seeking accomodation for may be released to your employer.

    1. AccommodationsRequireInformation*

      Giving them a form to fill out is seen as consent to provide the information requested in theform. I have dealt with dozens of these forms and never been asked for outside consent. I’ve also never been asked how I would like them to fill out the forms and the one time I tried to comment because I wasn’tthtilled with the way a particular question was worded I was told it would be unethical for me to try to control how the doctor filled out the form- they would look at it in detail later and complete it honestly before mailing it back to me. So separate consents are not generally a thing here.

  45. Crencestre*

    LW1: ” I’ve voiced how I feel before just to be ignored”; this is the heart of your problem, LW. Rather than complaining to your girlfriend that she shouldn’t have gone with her manager to help choose furniture for the office, you need to zero in on your feeling ignored when you speak up and tell her how you feel.

    Yes, that was a bizarre conversation about what kind of birth control she should be using (?!) and yes, if it made her feel uncomfortable then it’s worth taking seriously, but it will still be up to her to decide how to handle it; you can and should offer support but you can’t solve her workplace problems for her. But you can and should work on the very real non-workplace problem of feeling ignored; that can torpedo a relationship if it’s not worked through.

    1. Indolent Libertine*

      It sounds like the LW is “having feelings” that are not rooted in reality, and the girlfriend is “ignoring” them because LW is attempting to dictate Mike Pence-y limits on her life and work that she doesn’t want to accommodate.

    2. the og perfect beasts*

      It sounds to me like LW expected their feelings to dictate how the girlfriend handles her working relationship with her boss, though. And that’s not reasonable. This person is upset that girlfriend and boss will be travelling across town in a vehicle to pick out office furniture. That’s paranoid and nonsensical. How is girlfriend supposed to respond? Tell her boss no? Apologise to LW? Quit and only ever work for female bosses? How much soothing is she expected to do before she’s allowed to go to work and behave normally while there?

  46. Cubicle Queen*

    LW 2’s workplace should consider a per diem system (unless there are circumstances like entertaining a client). It’s so much easier than sorting through individual meal receipts. If traveler goes over, that’s on them. If they’re under, they get to keep the difference.

  47. Emmy Noether*

    @BigLawEx (ran out of threading)
    Well, antidepressants in the water would certainly be necessary if I took measures to stop my period. Hormonal birth control does dark things to my brain.

  48. Nancy*

    LW1: Picking out furniture with the boss is a part of many people’s jobs. Adults can decide for themselves whether the conversations they have with their boss is inappropriate, and sounds like your girlfriend is fine with it. I work at a hospital, it is not unusual for us to talk about our own various medical situations with each other.

    LW2: Just let your employees know they can expense three meals and then leave it alone. No additional wording needed.

  49. One HR Opinion*

    For #4 and anyone else who is concerned about what medical accommodations they may want to request, what some of the forms that seem invasive might look like, etc. I recommend you check out the askjan website. They have some amazing information for both employees and employers. The form you described sounds very much like one of their sample forms.

  50. T'Cael Zaanidor Kilyle*

    LW1: The comments about her period and IUDs do strike me as odd, but there is a list of people who have standing to object. At the top of that list is the employee to whom the comments were made. Also on the list are any other employees who may be uncomfortable at hearing the boss comment on a coworker’s periods and what is or isn’t in her uterus.

    Who is NOT on the list is the employee’s boyfriend.

    The furniture thing is perfectly normal, provided she herself doesn’t have any reason to feel uncomfortable about it, and you’ve given us no reason to believe she does. This appears to be more about your own feelings of jealousy and/or possessiveness, which are beyond the scope of this blog.

  51. Raida*

    “No need to respond to this, but I noticed you only submitted for one meal on the X trip and I want to make sure you know that you can submit for three meals a day on future business trips.”

    I would go a different route like “It is the responsibility of [business] to cover travel, accommodation and food. You should not incur costs to travel for this job. I’m not going to comment on how many meals you eat or their size – I’ve had a manager do that and it was irritating and invasive – but I just need to be clear that [business] covers up to three full meals a day.
    I know some hotels include breakfast, some events include food, some meetings will provide lunch or dinner, and everyone has a different appetite and diet.
    So this is the only time I’m going to say this: One meal over three days is low enough that I just need to make sure you understand the policy and that my expectations are you do not end up out of pocket when it comes to food while on work trips. Any questions?”

    not “I want to make sure you know you *can* submit for three meals…” but rather “We cover three meals a day, that’s the policy, I *expect* you to submit for up to three meals a day if you get food.”
    This is not a generous and friendly offer they *can* accept, it’s the business providing what is required and expected when sending staff on trips.

  52. Raida*

    Broadly speaking the question “Should I get a different job just to get away from my manager?” is answered with “Yes, of course, that’s like the most common reason to get a different job mate.”

    In your case, you’ve described a situation where you’ve put in the work and given it the time but it’s as good as it’s gonna get and it ain’t good enough – so whether or not you move internally or look externally, you’re gonna look for a different job away from Lucy in the future

Comments are closed.