a dog-sitting job gone bad, delayed approval for time off, and more

by Alison Green on September 6, 2024

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

1. My neighbor, her nephew, my kid, and her dogs

My question has to do with kid work. I recently found myself in an uncomfortable situation with my middle-schooler, Falcon, and I’m wondering if I handled it badly. My neighbor, Jane, asked Falcon to check on her dogs and take them for a walk while she attended an event. She offered $15/hour, and since Falcon loves dogs, he agreed. The request was for him to spend two to three hours walking and playing with the dogs, starting between 5 and 6 pm.

On the afternoon of the event, Jane texted, asking if Falcon could instead stay at her house until she returned around 11 pm. She also mentioned that her adult nephew, Hank, would be at the house with Falcon. This change was … unexpected. We only saw the text after returning home from Falcon’s soccer game, by which time Jane had already left for the event. Neither of us had ever met Hank before, and all we knew about him was that he had learning disabilities.

Falcon was uncomfortable with the idea of spending several hours in a house with an adult stranger. But, since Jane had already left, we felt obligated to fulfill her request. I accompanied Falcon to the house at 6 pm. We walked the dogs, played with them in the yard, and greeted Hank, who was sitting in the dark and ignored us. Falcon was afraid of him. We played outside with the dogs for a couple of hours until it became too dark and mosquito-y to reasonably remain outdoors. We then brought the dogs inside and waited together in the front room with them until Jane returned, as neither of us was comfortable leaving Falcon alone with Hank.

When Jane got home, she noticed dog poop in the kitchen, which we hadn’t seen because Falcon was too scared to go in there (it was attached to the room where Hank was hanging out in the dark). It appeared that Hank and/or the dogs had stepped in the poop and gotten it all over the place. Our best guess is that the pooping happened before we arrived, as we were with the dogs fairly consistently from 6 pm until Jane’s return. Jane handed Falcon $75 as payment, but I texted her the next morning, offering to return the money since we hadn’t prevented the dogs from soiling the house. Jane asked us to return $50, which we did.

I feel terrible about the whole situation. I don’t think Jane should have put my son in the position of being alone for hours with a man he didn’t know. Falcon feels guilty for not doing a better job with the dogs. I’m wondering how could I have handled this better. Beyond letting the dogs out earlier, of course. I feel like I’ve both traumatized my child and let down my neighbor.

This is 100% on Jane. Falcon agreed to a specific job: playing with the dogs for a couple of hours, on his own, ending no later than 9 pm. Jane unilaterally changed that to “stay at my house for six hours with an adult man you don’t know.” Even if Hank had been friendlier/less intimidating, this wasn’t an okay thing to ask of a middle-schooler, particularly without checking to see if he’d be comfortable with it and possibly talking with you as well. (Frankly, even if Falcon were comfortable, I don’t think it would have been an appropriate ask. If Hank isn’t capable of taking care of the dog himself, and is someone who might smear dog poop all over the house without cleaning it up, an unprepared middle-schooler isn’t the right person to be alone with him.)

If we could go back in time, ideally you would have coached Falcon to tell Jane that he couldn’t stay later than the time he agreed to (or even told her that yourself). You say you felt obligated to fulfill Jane’s request, but you weren’t obligated; the request wasn’t the one Falcon had agreed to. I don’t think you needed to offer to return the money although I can understand the impulse, given the poop situation. But Jane should have refused that offer and should have apologized for how things unfolded.

2. I submitted a time off request 3 months ago … and am still waiting

I work at a small company, about 50 employees. Last year, the owner turned over day-to-day operations to a VP who has been with the company for the past 10 years. I report to the VP and am one of four people with the company in a managerial position.

Over three months ago, I submitted a leave request for the week of Christmas. I have been in this industry for over 20 years and that week is historically the slowest week of the year. I usually do not take off that week so that my staff is able to travel to see family (my family is small and local). Last year, my brother-in-law died on Christmas and my husband does not want to be home due to the bad memories from last year. Because it is Christmas, I submitted my request early to make sure it was timely and before any other requests were submitted.

The VP has not made a decision on my leave request and advised me he is still “thinking about it.” I’m very frustrated. I feel disrespected and unappreciated. I only earn two weeks of leave per year, which isn’t much and often causes issues as my husband has considerably more leave and we are unable to travel due to my lack of leave. It is also use or lose, so if I do not use my time by the end of the year, I will lose it. I feel like my vacation time is being held hostage. Never mind that I have to pay for the AirBNB and flight and my husband has to request leave as well for that week. Everything is in limbo over this and the costs are rising each day. The difference in the cost of the flights between early June and September is nearly $1000. I’m so angry and disappointed.

I’m willing to quit over this. My issue is that I don’t think the owner is aware of the issues with the VP, and I’m not sure how to bring it up as he has stated multiple times that he has complete faith in the VP and trusts him 100%. I do not think it is appropriate to withhold PTO approval (or denial) for over three months, all while the cost of my vacation plans are now increasing and I will not be able to use the leave before the end of the year if this vacation request is not approved. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated in how to address with both the owner and VP.

Talk to the VP first! Say what you’ve said here — the costs are rising with each day that you wait, the time off is use-or-or-lose it, and you need to be able to plan. Ask what he needs to give you a definite answer by next week.

If he doesn’t do that (or if he denies the request), talk to the owner. “Having complete faith in” the VP and “trusting him 100%” doesn’t generally mean “I believe he will never miss anything / could never benefit from help changing his perspective.” And you’re a high-level employee who’s been there for a decade; the owner probably would want to know that you’re on the verge of quitting over something so easily solvable.

All that said … two weeks of vacation time is very stingy for a management level position, and even more so after 10 years. I’d also find it grating to be in a high-level management role but still be required to get approval for a meager amount of time off during a slow period. No one should need to wait this long to have PTO approved, but typically PTO approval for managers at your level is much closer to a rubber-stamp; making you wait months for no discernible reason is ridiculous. Is this the only thing where your company is stingy and overly rigid? I’d be inclined to reassess how well this place treats you (in money, in benefits, and in respect) and compare it to other options that might be out there.

3. What do I do when my company firewall blocks a website?

On occasion I will open a safe-for-work link but it will be blocked for various reasons. Sometimes it’s because it’s a “advocacy website” (which, my job is in advocacy, so I don’t totally get) but sometimes it’s for pornography. This is absolutely mortifying! (And I must stress, there’s no reason to believe these links are actually NSFW!) What should I do when this happens? I usually do nothing, but I am very embarrassed at the idea of our IT team getting an alert that I tried to access porn at work. Do I need to email them about it and clear the air?

Nah. They’re probably well aware that the software misfires, and you’re undoubtedly not the only person it’s happening to. However, it would be fine to message them, “FYI, OatmealAlliance.com is being blocked as ‘pornography,’ which it obviously isn’t.” That way you’re informing them about a problem (their blocking tool needs refinement) and if it happens to bring you peace of mind in the process, so much the better.

If these are sites you need to do your job, you should add, “Can you please unblock it? I need it for a project I’m working on” (or similar).

4. Greeting people you’re not sure you’ve met before or not

Low stakes question, but do you have a favorite way to acknowledge people who you’re introduced to and aren’t sure if you’ve met before? Or you know you have, but they don’t remember and you don’t want to put them on the spot?

I’m usually in the latter category, but may be moving into the former. The default seems to be “nice to see you,” to cover all bases, but honestly I hate it. Curious if you have anything better?

“Nice to see you” is a classic among politicians and others who do lots of glad-handing for a reason: it covers you in case you’re forgetting that you’ve met the person previously. You could go with “hello, how are you?” but there aren’t many other options for this specific context.

You may also like:
{ 715 comments }

{ 715 comments… read them below }

  1. Daria grace*

    #4, another option here is to ask generic questions about whatever you’re involved in (eg. “Have you been enjoying the conference” or “I like what the org is doing for the new safe llama grooming techniques ad campaign. Have you seen that yet?”). Answers to questions like this will often either give you context about how you might already know them/have mutual connections or that they’re new to the organisation

    1. Justcuz*

      My husband introduced himself to what he thought was a new coworker. He had worked with the guy for over 5 years! I really believe my husband suffers from face blindness due to other such instances and mis-identifying very popular celebs. I am definitely passing this advice on to him!

      1. LookAtMeI'mTheManagerNow*

        I make sure to tell people that I am face blind if they are going to see me in a crowded area – it makes it less awkward.

      2. Alan*

        Your husband is not alone. I have introduced myself to people I’ve worked with a number of times. I also have people come up to me and start talking like I know who they are, typically people I worked with years ago, and they look familiar but I really can’t place them. It’s frustrating.

      3. Productivity Pigeon*

        I usually have the opposite problem! People don’t recognize *me*, even if I’ve met them several times.

        I look very different with my hair up, glasses and no makeup so if people see me with any of those, they generally don’t recognize me.

        It even went so far that for my first job out of college, I got a pixie cut and wore rep lipstick every day.
        It cut down on almost all misunderstandings which was a relief.

      4. Bunny*

        I was diagnosed with multiple learning disabilities including “face blindness” (I forget the medical name) when I was 40. It is a real thing.

    2. Trout 'Waver*

      Eh. It’s very immediately obvious when someone doesn’t recognize you and is fishing for context clues. It’s much more respectful to just admit you can’t place them and ask.

      1. Dawbs*

        that, of course, and they recognize you but have misplaced your name in their brain.

        the LW doesn’t know if they have met this person- and a lot of us are unblissfully oblivious to having been introduced to people a few dozen times in the past.

    3. Kari From Up North*

      My go to is: ‘I’m having a moment and I cannot remember your name” Cuts through the awkwardness, I’m spending precious energy trying to remember their name, and I can listen and engage fully.

      1. BioBrains*

        This. I will totally own it. Or hint and say “I think we’ve met before?” or “I don’t think we’ve met before?” to allow the other side to help me out.

    4. Troubadour*

      Someone [who I later ended up working for] once greeted early-career-me with a very warm “What are you up to these days?” It made me feel like like she remembered exactly what I’d been up to when we’d last briefly met a good while before, and it was only later that it occurred to me that it would also be an exceptional gambit if she couldn’t for the life of her remember a thing about me. To this day I don’t know which it was. :-)

      If you don’t remember even their name then probably you’re better off just asking it though. Not that I ever follow this advice myself….

  2. NurseThis*

    Just wanted to applaud LW#1 for being a great parent. No kid should have to wrangle that set of circumstances alone. That level of support is everything.

    1. Don’t put metal in the science oven*

      Absolutely. Even if LW wished they did some things differently they did the best thing: making sure Falcon wasn’t left alone with a strange adult. LW is winning.

      1. ferrina*

        Yeah, being there with your child to ensure their safety was the #1 thing to get right, and LW did it perfectly. If I was LW, I’d be pretty freaked out! Were there other mistakes? Yes, but LW did the most important thing right. Every other thing in the letter is something that the LW can walk back and have follow-up discussions with Falcon about. But you can never walk back leaving a child in an unsafe situation.

        1. Formerly Ella Vader*

          I also think it’s significant that the LW made the decision to stay, validating Falcon’s *discomfort*. The kid doesn’t need to decide whether or not a situation is unsafe, and in the moment the parent doesn’t even have to label it as unsafe or potentially unsafe. Honouring the kid’s discomfort and supporting based on that is going to help the kid pay attention to their own feelings in future situations, as they learn when and how to say no, and when and how to ask for help. That is some great parenting.

          That framing may also make it easier to communicate with people who might be defensive if a parent or the kid mentions safety: “I’m going to pick up Eaglet from the sleepover early, because they’d feel more comfortable sleeping at home.” “I’m sure your twins are lovely, but Duckling isn’t comfortable being responsible for more than one child yet.”

      2. Reality.Bites*

        But seems to be entirely unaware that the neighbour was entirely at fault for the situation and that absolutely none of the neighbour’s decisions were remotely okay!

        1. Presea*

          Parents are people too. Not all parents enter the job with the utmost of emotional maturity and might need to learn alongside their kids. It’s not a fantastic situation, but it’s not an irredeemable one either. LW was clearly aware that they needed some outside perspective and sought it out, and they’ll be able to guide Falcon better from now on as a result. And they got the single most important part right by not leaving Falcon alone with a strange adult that he didn’t feel safe around.

          1. Education Mike*

            Yeah, parenting does not come with a manual and you encounter “I didn’t anticipate this” situations all the time as a parent.

        2. xylocopa*

          Oh my god, people are allowed to second-guess themselves and ask for an outside read on an unusual situation.

        3. Pedant*

          I disagree with the statement “absolutely none of the neighbour’s decisions were remotely okay-” the first decision where she asked Falcon to look after her dogs for 3 hours was ok.

          It’s just every decision aftet that one that was bad.

      3. 2 Cents*

        Yep, OP#1, I get why you’re second-guessing yourself, but given the circumstances, you did your best with what you could, and you stayed with your child. I would’ve done the same.

        Now you also have very important information about your neighbor, who thinks nothing of springing last-minute changes on a child and putting them in harm’s way. Whether a strange(!) adult was there or not, this change in plans stinks all around (and it’s not just Jane’s floors).

        1. Laser99*

          Something tells me Jane did that purposely. “He won’t do it if he knows I won’t be home until eleven and that Hank will be there, I’ll tell him after I leave.”

          1. JaneDoe*

            Interestingly, I just heard part of the most recent Hidden Brain podcast, “You 2.0: How To Say No” (I’ll post the link in a follow-up comment). Basically, research shows that we have the most trouble saying ‘no’ to people who are acquaintances. Thus, it’s not surprising the LW felt uncomfortable saying no/sticking to the original agreement with her neighbor.

          2. Ellie*

            Yes – Hank I can understand, although it is unsafe and I wouldn’t have left my child alone there either, people have blind spots about their own relatives. Jame may not have thought that would be a problem and he may have been a last minute addition. But staying out until 11pm? For someone in middle-schoool? That was absolutely a bait and switch.

    3. bamcheeks*

      Yes, although I’m honestly perplexed about what made LW think that a straightforward, “I’m afraid that won’t be possible” wasn’t OK. I do think LW should have a god think about that one and think about how they can model holding their own and Falcon’s boundaries a bit better. Staying with Falcon was a good option if this had been some kind of emergency where they *couldn’t* leave Jane’s house, but there is absolutely no reason why they should have felt obliged to change their plans just because Jane asked them to.

      1. CityMouse*

        Yes had this been babysitting a child where there was a safety issue, I would have sent Falcoln home did it myself and absolutely reamed out Jane.

        I babysat as a teen and the whole circumstances changearoo happened to me. When I was young (like 13 or 14), my parents did absolutely intervene in unacceptable circumstances (like parents saying they’d be home by 10 and then coming home at 2).

        But the dogs were not going to be unsafe here being alone for a few hours. It was okay to decline the changed circumstances and should have been done. And Jane still should have been called out for changing the circumstances, not gotten her money back.

        1. bamcheeks*

          I mean, worst case scenario, Jane has to come home for 9pm and miss the rest of the event! Which would be 100% on Jane!

          1. ferrina*

            Unless Jane turned off her phone for the event. Which is within the realm of possibility for someone who is thinking like Jane.

            1. Mad Harry Crewe*

              That’s still a Jane problem, and if the dogs destroy her house, that’s entirely on her for not making appropriate arrangements. The dogs are unlikely to die for being left in the care of a disabled man for a few hours.

              I was going to say left alone, but the wild thing is there was someone there! They would not have been alone!

        2. Needs more*

          Yeah, this was absolutely Jane pulling a fast one. And it’s absolutely inappropriate for her to throw this situation at an unprepared middle school kid — Jane might be confident that the guy is harmless, but he’s still a stranger to a child.

          1. MassMatt*

            Yes, Jane ambushed the kid by springing this additional responsibility (and far greater time commitment! So what, Falcon just doesn’t eat dinner?) on him at the last minute, AFTER already having left for the event.

            It was a terrible thing to do to anyone, and a reprehensible thing to do to a middle schooler (age what, 9-12?).

            A tween is not equipped to handle taking care of an impaired adult, even one they know and are not afraid of. But respite care costs far more than $15/hour so this was a bargain for Jane, especially since she only paid $25 for five hours! Jane is awful.

            1. atalanta0jess*

              1000%, in appropriate ask. Probably not a nine year old, that’s only third/fourth grade, but possibly 11-14ish? Even the time is too late, IMO. And alone with an adult that is unknown to him and his family?? Regardless of all the other details, that’s not ok.

        3. Emmy Noether*

          We don’t know if Hank lives there full time (I’d actually think not – his presence was a surprise and LW and Falcon seemed unfamiliar with him, also it’s a nephew not a son).

          We also don’t know that he needs full time supervision. The weirdness and the tracking poop could also be entirely unrelated to whatever learning disability he maybe has.

        4. WillowSunstar*

          Yeah, for sure. That’s definitely not something a child should be doing. I could maybe see an older teenager, but only if they already volunteer in a medical setting and can assist if there are issues.

        5. Boof*

          Honestly, since dogs as far as I know can be home alone for a few hours (especially after they’ve been outside for a run) without issue, the fact that Jane wanted someone in the house until she got home makes me think it was more of a sneak Hank supervision request, not really a dog sitting request. I’ve dog sat and I visit with them a little not 24/7 supervision. It would be extremely not ok for Jane to do that but I don’t understand why else she’d want someone to stay home until she got back just to supervise dogs at home.

        6. Gumby*

          But the dogs were not going to be unsafe here being alone for a few hours.

          My cynical take on the situation is that Jane wasn’t actually sure the dogs *would* be safe if left alone with Hank for a few hours. Which means her request was really, really out of line.

          1. Elizabeth the Ginger*

            I had that thought, too. This was a completely inappropriate request – all the more so because Jane didn’t frame it as a request at all.

      2. Person from the Resume*

        I absolutely agree. I think I would have advised Falcon that you both (LW too) were going to stick to the agreed upon plan – “two to three hours walking and playing with the dogs, starting between 5 and 6 pm” – and just respond to the Jane’s text that it wasn’t possible for you to adjust your plans. And then ream Jane out later for her thoughtlessness to put a middle-school age kid in a house with a unknown adult.

        It might have even been okay or if the LW was unavailable to text back to Jane and say that since there was an adult in the house, Falcon would not be dog sitting at all. Jane made a very thoughtless change in the situation.

        You should not have given Jane back any money. You should tell Jane what she did was very much in the wrong wrong to change the conditions on Falcon both extending the night (without asking him) and leaving him alone with an unknown adult.

        1. OaDC*

          It’s ask culture at it’s finest. Make an outrageous request and make the other party be the AH because “they could always say no…”.

          1. Runcible Wintergreen*

            That’s not really accurate. The point of “ask culture” is that there are no unspoken assumptions/judgments about asking for something. It is inherently more direct because people ask for things and respond to requests without worrying about being an asshole for it.
            “Guess culture” is more associated with expectations/”hints” and less direct communication, where saying no is impolite.

            Jane was certainly unreasonable. But it’s not about ask/guess culture – in this scenario, no one communicated at all, and that was the issue.

            2. coffee*

              You can still say no in guess cultures, either indirectly or by ignoring the request.

              It’s like, if you were asking a neighbour for a cup of sugar for a cake you’re baking:

              Ask: “Hi neighbour, I’m baking a cake but I’ve run out of sugar. Would you have some spare that I could have?”
              “Sorry, no, I don’t! I’m also out.”

              Guess: “Hi neighbour, would you believe that I’m right in the middle of baking a cake and halfway through I realised I’ve run out of sugar?”
              “Oh, what a bother! I’ve also run out but thankfully I realised in time to put it on my shopping list for this week.”

              In either form, you can tell that someone asked for sugar and was unsuccessful.

              It is direct vs indirect communication but you could absolutely be judged as an asshole in both communication styles.

          2. Kella*

            Um, what? It’s not rude to say no in Ask culture. In Guess culture, you are expected to only ask for something if you have a high level of certainty that the answer will be yes *because* otherwise you would be putting the other person in the position of having to say no, which is rude in Guess culture. In Ask culture, it’s rude to do what Jane did, because Jane didn’t truly provide the option of saying no without causing a lot of hassle, so her question wasn’t truly a question.

              1. Lenora Rose*

                Ask Culture and Guess culture are legitimate framings for how certain cultural expectations collide. They both happen to be completely inappropriate and unrelated framings to this situation, but they illustrate legitimate issues in communication.

                (I disagree with the names for them, too)

        2. I Licked Your Salt Lamp*

          I know the money has already been returned but think of it this way- even if you made a mistake yourself, you still spent hours of your time there with her dogs. An employer doesn’t get to dock your pay because of a mistake, and nor should Jane take back 75% of Falcon’s pay just because he missed a doggy accident.

          1. Ole Pammy's Getting What She Wants*

            agree. i didnt like this part of it. Jane should not have accepted the money, and imo OP didnt ned to offer it. especially given the circumstances!

            1. Bossy*

              Jane was clearly going to accept the money because Jane is a crappy asshole.
              I’ll be honest when people try to put me in situations like this, I don’t get like Oh no what should I do, I get pissed. Who do you think you are to just try to change my agreement? Now if you call and ASK, great, but to send that while being unavailable would’ve just been like oh hell no.
              For the record mom and child should not have had to be alone in the house with a creepy person they do not know. He could’ve done anything to them! No no nooooooooo

              1. Intellectual disability does not a criminal make*

                Can we not demonize intellectually disabled adults, please?

                Hank seemed to need a carer (who should not be a stranger and should never be a child) but nothing about this letter suggests that he is a bad person or would be harmful to Falcon or anyone else. The assumption/expectation that he would cause harm is really gross.

                1. LWH*

                  I don’t think they’re demonizing disabled adults, the target of their comment is STRANGERS. Any strange adult that you do not know in any way in a house all alone with a kid (had mom not come along) is a potential danger. He could have done anything to them is right. That’s just as true if he wasn’t disabled.

                2. New Jack Karyn*

                  LWH: Bossy wrote, “For the record mom and child should not have had to be alone in the house with a creepy person they do not know. He could’ve done anything to them! No no nooooooooo”

                  which is demonizing a disabled adult (Hank) who did nothing wrong.

                3. Carl*

                  I was not the commenter, but I read the comment as referring to an adult man who was not friendly, which is creepy. Honestly, friendly or not, I would not want to find myself in someone’s house alone with an adult man that I didn’t know. Comment had nothing to do with disability. And people should not feel obligated to ignore their instincts/ discomfort in the name of politeness.

        3. Runcible Wintergreen*

          Keep in mind, though, that this is a neighbor. LW may have weighed the options and done what they did to keep the peace and hopefully keep a good relationship with someone who LW will presumably see near-daily for years to come.
          LW definitely could have handled it differently to prevent the chain of events that occurred, but telling off a neighbor is a bit of a nuclear option and I don’t think it’s a reasonable suggestion to immediately “ream out” Jane for asking. I think it’s important to keep in mind that LW legitimately has an interest in not having conflict with their neighbor – maybe even moreso now that Jane has shown herself to be a little unreasonable.

          2. Empress Ki*

            But did Jane act in a way to keep the peace and keep a good relationship with OP ? No. What she did is outrageous. Not having a conflict with Jane isn’t an option here.

            1. Runcible Wintergreen*

              Actually no, it IS an option to not have conflict with Jane. LW does not actually HAVE to react. Sometimes the best adult option is to just let an issue die, and learn from it for the future.

              What Jane did was ridiculous and unreasonable. But LW can choose to either disengage or continue to react. Why would LW want to intentionally continue a conflict with someone who has been shown to be outrageous? What is the benefit?

              The most realistic option for LW now is to take this experience as a lesson learned and in the future, refuse any other requests from Jane. At that point, LW can choose to say something like “The last experience with the dog sitting was not great, so for the time being we are not comfortable with Falcon doing dog sitting tasks by himself” or something. LW should be open and upfront with Falcon about what the situation is and what Jane should have done, but it’s not a moral imperative for LW to continue fighting this battle with Jane.

              1. jasmine*

                For real, this. We see way too much “well the other person is in the wrong, so why should OP have to take responsibility?” on the internet. Sometimes someone messes up and unless they did something truly malicious or dangerous, sometimes the best advice for a mature adult is to deal with the situation in a way that results in the best possible outcome even if it doesn’t give you “an edge”. Sometimes *you’ll* be the one who messes up and a relationship will rely on the other person’s grace.

              2. Crooked Bird*

                Yes–a perfectly good option is for OP not to satisfy everyone’s justice cravings but simply to take full warning from this about Jane. No more letting her hire anyone in your family! Jane has wildly poor judgment/will take a mile if you give her an inch, so we give Jane a wide berth and don’t engage beyond “hi.” That is NOT being a doormat, it’s protecting your family in a low-key and sensible way.

          3. OP*

            OP here. This is 100% it. We see Jane a few times a week, as we tend to walk our dogs at the same time. In addition, she hires Falcon a couple of times a year to do yardwork when she’s out of town, and she buys every fundraiser my kids sell. She’s a good person who I am sure dearly loves her nephew. I think that blinded her to what a terrible position she put Falcon in.

            1. 2 Cents*

              OP, I think you did the best you could considering the circumstances. I don’t think you traumatized your son — it’s a good time to talk about how other adults don’t always think things through, how he could approach this if you hadn’t been there, what to do if someone is being unreasonable, etc.

              (Up until an astoundingly old age, I thought adults had life all figured out and didn’t make mistakes like kids. Then I realized they absolutely do — they just have cars, money, and more resources to cover up mistakes LOL.)

            2. Ineffable Bastard*

              It is one of the traps of “benevolent” ableism –people who have an intellectually disabled loved one often thinks of them as children. But they are not children, even in cases where they act at a lower developmental age. If she truly believed he is not an adult, she would not have left him home alone, would she? Alternatively, she wanted your boy to half-babysit/keep an eye on an adult man and manipulated the situation to make him agree with it unknowingly.

              If you talk to her, however, do not make it about her nephew’s disability or her perception of him — just repeat that it is inappropriate to ask a middle-schooler to stay in a house alone with an adult who is not a close family member, especially not clearing with him and his parents BEFORE leaving.

              Her taking the $50 back was egregious, though. She changed an agreement, made a very inappropriate request, got incommunicable, potentially endangered a child (or at least made him feel unsafe), inconvenienced your child and you a lot by changing hours, and then took most of the payment back. She is not behaving as a good client or neighbour.

              1. Crooked Bird*

                Re “half-babysit an adult man,” this is exactly what I thought was happening & I thought the story would unfold accordingly w/ the guy being kind of high-needs in some way. It just sounded like that kind of bait and switch–here’s an easy job, oh btw this person (whether kid or adult w/ some immediate needs they can’t deal with themselves) will “just be there,” turns out caring for the person is the real job.

            3. MassMatt*

              Thanks for commenting, this is useful context. This was awful on Jane’s part, but maybe more of a “terrible lapse in judgment uncharacteristic of her” way vs: a “she is a terrible person and does/will do this sort of thing all the time” way.

          4. Ireland Bound*

            I think so too. I’ve definitely let things slide with my immediate neighbors that I would not with acquaintances/strangers simply because we have to see them all the time, we share a fence and I don’t want to feel awkward in my own home.

            1. Ineffable Bastard*

              Same, even with my landlord because he is my neighbour and overall an okay person with a lovely wife who loves my children and is not involved at all in the rental units. Sometimes it’s better to wait longer or to fix something myself, if I can, than create tension with a neighbour.

          5. Properlike*

            That would be the ONLY reason to avoid full nuclear meltdown on Jane. Jane doesn’t think that the grown nephew alone at home with a kid is problematic? She is willfully obtuse and manipulative. That she even got mad about the poop – that she would take money back – is several thousand red flags.

            She is a police report waiting to happen. Start documenting *every* interaction now, brush up on your community laws on neglected dogs, and keep a very close eye on that nephew because she sure won’t (which is terribly unfortunate for the nephew.)

            I also want to add to the chorus validating how you supported your son. This was a good and “safe” learning experience for both of you. He should not be available for anything or go near her yard, and you may want to practice how he’ll respond to any requests in advance. And you too! No guilt – you did everything right with the info you had.

            Falcon

            2. Joron Twiner*

              This is how you escalate a situation into a full blown problem. This situation is very easy to de-escalate.

          6. Princess Sparklepony*

            Although I’m guessing that Falcon will not be available for any more dog sitting jobs with Jane. At least, if LW1 is smart.

      3. B*

        I agree. This was a stressful and frankly perplexing position to be in, and LW prioritized the most important thing, which is everyone’s safety, so kudos for that. But Jane’s behavior was WILDLY, INFURIATINGLY inappropriate and, ideally, LW could have better modeled how to stand up to this kind of passive-aggressive bullying. You do not manipulate a tween into spending hours alone with a strange man well into the night. There is no universe in which this is acceptable. And Jane got 5-6 hours of dog sitting and two sets of eyes on her nephew (who, it seems, needs watching) for $25. LW and Falcon got paid no more than $2.50 an hour for their time. She completely got away with it.

        The whole scenario is absolutely blood-boiling, especially as a parent, and I think it’s critical to explain to your kids that it is utterly unacceptable to let people like this walk all over you.

      4. JFC*

        +100. It wasn’t clear in the letter exactly why the adult nephew was there. Perhaps there was a good reason, or one that didn’t make it into the letter, but it was a really bad judgment call on Jane’s part. I think the ultimate solution worked out okay, but LW should have stricter boundaries in the future, especially in situations where Falcon is being so outspoken about being uncomfortable.

      5. Risha*

        I agree with this. LW1, it would have been ok to tell your neighbor that Falcon cannot watch the dogs anymore. No one’s feelings comes before your child, especially when that person did what Jane did at the last minute. And please note I’m not saying that as a criticism to you. I’m just saying that when it comes to our kids, it doesn’t matter if we disappoint our neighbors or any other people. What Jane did was ridiculous, and it makes me wonder if she has crossed other boundaries or if she will do so in the near future. I would not agree to do anything for her in the future, no matter what she offers to pay.

        I would suggest talking to Falcon and using this as a learning opportunity to teach boundaries, and when it’s ok to back out of plans. Let him know that he can decline to do things that make him uncomfortable, even if he agreed to it prior. Tell him that what Jane did was not right, and it’s never ok to make people feel uncomfortable or spring last minute changes like that.

        And you now have valuable info about Jane and you can act accordingly, such as distancing yourself and keeping interactions to basic greetings/light convo.

      6. Domino the Dalmatian*

        As a dog person, Jane is an arse. She wanted Falcon to begin work at 6pm, which he did. The dogs pooped inside before then, so that’s on her. She is paying a minor below minimum wage ($25 for 3 hours) for her own incompetence. You should not have returned her money. She is also an arse for making Falcon tend to a disabled relative which was not disclosed to her ahead of time. I am going to out on a limb and say that this woman is abusive to her dogs.

      7. bleu*

        This is also a classic way of taking advantage of kids since they’re so inexperienced – not just for serious exploitation purposes, but also for lowkey garbage like “Hey, you agreed to do this exact thing for this long, suddenly the job has changed (and is much less desirable.)” Kids don’t have the skillset to realize that the don’t have to just go along with that. Yes to X doesn’t mean an automatic yes to X+Y. Jane should be way more thoughtful with stuff like that.

        1. Princess Sparklepony*

          Exactly. And then to take the money back when the kid had gone over and above, with his parent there as well.

          Jane got a great deal to begin with and an even better deal later. She used her neighbor leverage to get what she wanted. Thinking the kid couldn’t say no since she didn’t allow that option. Not cool.

    4. JM60*

      They kept their kids safe in an unusual situation, which is what was most important. However, I think Falcon should’ve been able to keep the $15/hr for all the hours he worked. While this situation was very unfair for the OP, I think it was especially unfair for Falcon.

      1. Green great dragon*

        Agree Falcon should have been able to keep the money. And I don’t see that they have anything to feel guilty about. They looked after the dogs, the pooping probably was before they arrived, they weren’t and couldn’t be responsible for the adult’s actions.

        1. Cordelia*

          unfortunately I think by refunding the money, OP has contributed to Falcon feeling guilty by making it look as if he was at fault, I think she needs to address this with him

          1. Bird names*

            Yes, agreed to all of the above.
            LW, if you haven’t already, please let Falcon know that he did nothing wrong here. It’ll hopefully help him maintain better boundaries with work later on.

          2. CityMouse*

            Yes, the reason it’s important to address this and apologize to Falcoln (Jane’s should, but she won’t) is Falcoln needs to understand what happened here was unacceptable and you don’t accept either severely changed circumstances or a situation that makes you feel uncomfortable. The reality is most asult pet sitters would have walked away from this situation.

            1. ferrina*

              Totally agree! If LW can, give Falcon the money and explain that upon further thought, OP shouldn’t have offered to give back the money. This is a great opportunity to talk to Falcon about what to do when someone pulls a bait-and-switch.

              This isn’t the last time Falcon will run into this type of situation in life, and this is a great lesson in how it’s not always clear what the right thing is, but it’s not ‘let them get away with it’. It’s also a great lesson in support networks and an opportunity to reinforce that you’ve got Falcon’s back and he doesn’t need to go it alone (it may seem like too big a message for middle school, but trust me, it’s not. Building trust and support at this age will last a long, long time).

          4. Crooked Bird*

            Yeah, this is actually the important thing in the situation. Go back to Falcon, let him know you judged the situation wrongly at first and Jane’s request was fully out of line, and give him back his money out of your own purse if you can at all afford it–I hope you can! At his age (& temperament, if I’m any judge) it’ll cover a multitude of sins if you give him the money & tell him with full confidence that he should spend all of it on something fun for himself b/c he deserves it after dealing so well with such a messed-up situation.

            1. Properlike*

              Yes! Such a great lesson to have, knowing that adults can make mistakes in the moment, rethink it, and use the experience to make better decisions in the future!

      2. Nicosloanica*

        Also, that rate is not competitive for dog sitting anymore, so really you and Falcon were doing Jane quite a favor by providing higher-quality and longer-term dogwalking at a discount compared to what any professional dogwalker would do. Which is who she should probably turn to in the future.

        1. Dog momma*

          …who’ve probably refused to come back bc of this man. Pet sitters assume nobody’s home. I wouldn’t want to be a pet sitter in this situation.

          1. Jayne*

            Ah, this brings back memories of the the time that I was pet sitting for the neighbors as a middle schooler. On the last time that I was to feed, water and let them out, there were strangers in the house. Being well trained in stranger danger, I ran home. Turned out, the neighbors had forgotten to tell me that they had invited friends to stay at their house and they came early. And thus ended my foray into pet sitting.

          2. CommanderBanana*

            ^^ Yup. I had a dog walking service who told me they couldn’t have me as a client because I also have a roommate who would be home during the day. There had to be either just me, or no one in the house at all.

            Granted, I did fire them because I had two dogs, one of whom got walked and the other one under no circumstances was to be walked because she would chomp a stranger who tried to harness her. The company sent a sub without telling me who tried to harness the wrong dog (11 pounds, white and brown) and not the right dog (50 pounds, white and black and actually eager to go outside) and she nipped.

            1. Umiel12*

              I had a sort of opposite scenario. I tried to hire a dog sitter who wanted to know if she could bring a friend of hers with, a male in his 50s whom I had never met and knew nothing about. I said no and found another sitter.

              1. CommanderBanana*

                UGH. That sounds like she just needed a place to crash.

                I am really fortunate to have a roommate who is the Tiny Terror Tornado’s other mom, and we’ve set up our lives so that the Tiny Terror Tornado never has to be alone (plus we’ve got a third friend that she loves as backup should we both ever end up gone at the same time).

                I absolutely don’t trust strangers around my dog and I’ve heard so many horror stories about apps like Rover that I would never use them.

                1. K*

                  Not necessarily “just” needed a place to crash. I have a friend who has been lining up dog sitting gigs back to back ever since her house burned down. She definitely does need a place to stay, but she also does the job she was hired for.

              2. dawbs*

                Once upon a time, we hired a dogwalker to let our critter out and play with/walk her around lunch time daily.
                She was committed to 15-20 minutes , but our back garden is a nice nook to sit in, so she asked if she could take her lunch break, on our back deck, after dealing with our dog–saying she’d leave the dog out for the time she was there (the dog was thrilled at extra tennis-ball time). It was awesome, about an hour of pet-socializing for the cost of 1/2 that. Probably contributed to the size of the holiday gift from us :P)

                Once we had a good rapport, she also eventually asked if her daughter could come with her during breaks–set up a time to bring her kid by–the kid and dog loved each other (we were working hard to socialize with kids, so this was also win-win) and the daughter never came inside, but loved to play with the dog. Was a rather-high-energy pup and we knew without checking which days the daughter had come, because it felt like those were the only days the dog was ever tired!

                I was so sad when she moved!

        2. MassMatt*

          …Let alone the going rate for respite care for an adult with learning/developmental disabilities!

      3. Blarg*

        We don’t know that OP didn’t give her $50 but let Falcon keep his. At least, that’s what I assumed because I need that to be true. :)

      4. Typity*

        That was my first thought as well: OP owes Falcon $50. He did the work and did nothing wrong.

        (She was right to stay with him, given the circumstances, but the money was not OP’s to refund; it was Falcon’s.)

      5. Risha*

        Same here. It wasn’t fair to Falcon to have to give the money back that he earned. Just because he’s only a child still, doesn’t mean that he should have his money taken away because of a misunderstanding or miscommunication of the adults. He did what was asked of him, and adapted to an uncomfortable situation. OP, I truly feel that wasn’t fair to him at all. I hope you will also include that into your talk with him. He must feel bad but feels like he cannot express this, since he most likely doesn’t want to feel like he’s arguing with his parent.

        1. Risha*

          Also, I think OP should apologize to Falcon for giving back the money he earned. The neighbor was truly in the wrong, but poor Falcon now only has $15 for 6 hours of uncomfortable work. If you can afford to do so, please give him that money back. He has to know his parent is in his corner.

      6. AnnieB*

        Agreed. In no way should any of the money have been returned to Jane. Falcon and OP supervised the dogs the entire time they were there. If the nephew hadn’t been there at all, and there was dog soiling from before they arrived, I hope there’d be no expectations that you clean it up – so why does that change just because there was someone else in the house? Also, the implication that Falcon (a child) was meant to look after the house/dogs/nephew (an adult) is just too much for me. All that was negotiated was dog sitting. Jane was not reasonable.

    5. Moo*

      I do get having a rabbit in headlights moments with an unusual request at the last minute. Considering that I have to agree LW1 did a great job. They made sure their kid was safe and the animals were cared for. And honestly when you have dogs poop happens! I think I would not be engaging with Jane in the future.

      It’s worth having a chat with Falcon about the situation and saying ‘on reflection I/You/We should have said no to the last minute change in the request’ and having a discussion about why. This will really help with the next time something like this happens. Even saying ‘we should have just taken a few moments to respond. And not felt pressure to respond immediately’, would help with an important life lesson of how to deal with awkward situations. You could also talk through your impulse to offer to return the money as well. We talk at kids a lot about social pressure, but talking through something you went through together which has a few examples of social pressure could be really illuminating for both of you.

      1. Yvette*

        Except that they didn’t have a chance to say yes, or no to the request request was done via text, which they didn’t even see until it was too late

        1. Moo*

          I think including that in the discussion would be helpful too. Talking about whether or not you have to assume responsibility that’s thrust on you, and how Jane is the person primarily responsible for the care of her pets.

        2. CityMouse*

          If you’re babysitting or pet sitting that is a common manipulation tactic, however. “Oh there’s three more kids, bye!”. You have to have boundaries even in those situations.

          1. PhyllisB*

            Yes, that happened to me once. I was supposed to be babysitting for one child (who I kept on a regular basis) and when I arrived, I had EIGHT to deal with. Luckily they were fairly well behaved.
            The thing that irritated me was I didn’t get any extra pay for it. I did sit for these people again because generally they were thoughtful people and tipped really well, but I was NOT happy.

            3. Bumblebee*

              That isn’t even safe – a daycare would probably have a different ratio of carers! And to leave one young babysitter in that situation is a really bad plan unless it’s like all your cousins and some of them are tweens or whatever. And even then questionable decisions will still be made by the kids, lol.

              1. Lenora Rose*

                Depends on the age. 1:8 is considered acceptable for school age and what you’d consider a preschooler, but I think for infants/toddlers it’s 1:4. Of course, that’s with adult caregivers who know it’s a day care. With a babysitter, that’s entirely INappropriate, especially to spring on them unawares.

          2. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

            This is one of those cases where — considering the age and inexperience of the worker — having parental/guardian support is so vital. Because I also remember a horrible experience I had babysitting, which my mom made me do without consulting me first, and although I never had to babysit for that family again, I also would not have had any parental backing for telling the family “no” to the changes they made to the agreement (including paying me very little because, hey, 8th graders are exploitable).

            So yeah, LW, make sure that Falcon knows if he needs to back out of a situation, you will be on his side. That’s the most important thing he needs to learn here. If he’s uncomfortable with his work conditions, he can leave. In the case of babysitting, getting to the home and seeing the situation is changed, and before the parents leave, saying “nope, not doing this”, and leaving.

        3. Colette*

          They absolutely could have replied to the text and said “sorry, that doesn’t work on our end, we will play with the dogs until 9 as per our agreement”.

        4. Person from the Resume*

          No, you can still say no. I do not agree to you change. It was dog sitting for 5 hours ( 6-11pm). Dogs can be alone in a house that long. Dogs were actually in a house with an adult.

          You couldn’t quite do the same thing with a child if it were babysitting, but with dogs they don’t need supervision as proven by Jane leaving them without designated dog sitter (but not alone because of her nephew).

            2. AnneCordelia*

              The house is not burning down and the dogs are not in actual danger. It’s poop. Jane can deal with it.

              1. Butterfly Counter*

                Exactly. My dog had diarrhea in 4 different rooms while I was at work yesterday. It took 20 minutes, but poop cleans up fine. No harm, no foul.

      2. Learn ALL the things*

        I also think I’d stop doing favors for Jane if it were me. She’s proven herself to be untrustworthy and unnecessarily punitive, and I would not want to give her another chance to put Falcon in a situation like this.

        1. Hannah Lee*

          ^ This!

          I think LW handled it extremely well overall – kept her kiddo safe, did what they could to maintain cordial neighbor relations (even if Jane totally screwed up herself on that front)

          LW may have some hindsight is 20/20 “gee I wish I’d handled this or that part differently” but none of what LW did was a huge misstep and all were understandable in the heat of the moment. And maybe having a follow up with Falcon talking through some of the age appropriate parts of that would be good.

          But a big take away is that Jane gets taken off the “good neighbor we’re happy to help out” list. Because her behavior in that night was ridonkulous. And whether she was being purposely manipulative or just displaying incredibly bad judgement doesn’t matter. This was a one-strike and you’re out situation. And LW should let Falcon know if Jane asks him to do something again, he can and should respond “Let me check with LW” and know that LW will take it from there and he doesn’t have to worry about it.

    6. Falling Diphthong*

      Agreed.

      LW1, I would frame this to yourself as a chance to teach your kid about resilience–that sometimes we do all the things right, including trying extra above what was agreed, and it still doesn’t work. The lesson isn’t “so don’t try” but “so learn to recognize the sunk cost fallacy and climb off the path that is disappearing under layers of goo.”

    7. Evan88*

      It doesn’t sound like he had much support. I mean, he had to sit in a house where he was too afraid to even go into the kitchen with a strange man until almost midnight. The easy solution would have been to put the dogs in the house, text Jane this wasn’t what falcon signed up for, and then leave. I don’t think hes traumatized or anything, but there were an infinite number of better solutions than what happened.

      1. Broadway Duchess*

        He had to sit in a house with his parent, who seems to have done as much as possible in that moment to support him. There were other options, hence the letter for suggestions, but saying Falcon didn’t have much support is not in line with what’s been presented.

    9. Jeanine*

      Definitely great job, but I wouldn’t have returned the money. You all were hit with unexpected details, and you said that the dog probably soiled the house before you got there, so how could you have “prevented” it from happening? None of what happened is your fault.

      1. sparkle emoji*

        I think returning the money shouldn’t have been necessary, but this is a neighbor that LW will have to deal with in the future. It might have been worth losing the money to keep the peace with Jane. If you haven’t already LW, I’d explain that to Falcon so he understands he didn’t mess up(and give him $50 to make up for what was paid back if you can afford it).

    10. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      100% yes! Great parent. I also would be side eyeing that neighbor. Not only for how they handled this, and the whole thing with the strange adult in the house. But also it is wrong to ask a middle schooler (so 10-14 years old) to stay up until 11:00.

    11. Ultimate Facepalm*

      I actually see several issues here:
      1. OP should have given Falcon the $50 – none of this was his fault. He agreed to this job and it was HIS money.
      2. He shoud have been shown that you don’t have to agree to something you are not comfortable with.
      3. Also that if someone is unhappy and it’s not your fault, you should not make it your problem and give the money back.
      4. All of this should be explained to Falcon – that the request was inappropriate, that they didn’t have to go, that he shouldn’t be left alone with a stranger / adult man until 11pm at night (ffs), and that he wasn’t responsible for the poop in the house.
      5. OP should have a talk with Jane about all of this – She has terrible judgment and this would harm my relationship with her if it were me.

      I am glad she protected Falcon and that is the most important thing to get right, but this was not handled correctly at all. OP needs to expain to Falcon how it should have gone.

      1. sparkle emoji*

        I agree, but there is an element of Monday morning quarterback here. Yes we can all imagine how we would have handled things differently, but LW made sure the most important thing(Falcon’s safety) was taken care of in the moment. The rest of this can be discussed after the fact. Part of the lesson is that sometimes when someone does a bait and switch, we can get surprised and not handle it perfectly, even as adults, but we can learn from that.

        1. Ultimate Facepalm*

          I’m not saying she isn’t human and this is IS a feedback platform f0r what should have been different. The good news is that OP can explain all of these to Falcon after the fact and give him the $50.

          Actually, I think it’s a really important thing for kids to hear adults say ‘I made a mistake and I should have handled it like this instead.” Seeing adults make mistakes will help them to accept their own mistakes as they grow up. :)

          But the main things is that Falcon felt safe and protected – no matter what else, OP was there for her son. <3

        3. It’s A Butternut Squash*

          I don’t think this is Monday morning quarterbacking at all. This wasn’t such a difficult or unusual situation that most of us can’t imagine how we would respond in the moment. Her neighbor wash her young-ish child to dos own thing until 8 PM, and then changed it as the very last minute to do it until 11 PM, alone with an adult man whose behavior is likely to be scary to children. It’s so inappropriate to ask a child that age to stay home alone late at night with an adult they don’t know, the fact that OP felt she couldn’t say no because she had said yes to something totally different earlier is frankly kind of baffling to me.

          OP was a kind neighbor who made sure the animals weren’t neglected and kept their kid safe and those are the only the only things that really matter, but there’s a lot of room to reflect on how they could better keep and role model good boundaries in the future. And lord I hope they paid that money out of their own pocket and let their son keep what he earned.

          1. Properlike*

            I disagree – I’m an experienced mom of teens who’s dealt with plenty of wacky situations and nightmare neighbors. In the moment, you’re dealing with risk assessment without foresight.

            That “they should’ve been able to adapt” is entirely Monday morning quarterbacking with a dash of victim blaming.

      2. It’s A Butternut Squash*

        Yes to all of this! I’m sorry but this was in no way “great parenting.” I’m not saying OP is a bad parent, I bet they’re a very good one, but this specific situation was obviously very poorly handled and deserves some reflection. I don’t really understand why everyone is piling on to compliment this unhealthy level of people pleasing.

        OPs lack of boundaries/inability to say no got her and her son into a creepy/uncomfortable position, and then she literally paid the person who put them there for doing it. She sounds like a lovely considerate person, but she let herself and her son be trampled. I don’t say this to berate her, I hope she doesn’t beat herself up over it, but some reflection over why she wasn’t able to say no to a totally unreasonable last minute request, and how that behavior is affecting her kid(s) is warranted.

        1. Risha*

          Thank you for saying this! I also don’t understand the compliments. We should still tell someone that they could’ve handled a situation better, it’s not rude or mean at all to be honest (in a nice way of course). As parents, we have to make sure our kids are comfortable doing something. We need to teach them that sometimes they can say no to an adult or not do something they agreed to prior if the person does a bait and switch on them. No one should come before your kids, even if we have to hurt someone’s feelings or even if it damages our relationship with the other person.

          This isn’t a “hindsight is 20/20” type situation. It appears OP and Falcon knew from the moment Jane changed the agreement that it was wrong. That would have been the time to empower Falcon to say no. I also don’t want OP to beat herself up, and I’m sure she’s a great parent! But this was not right or fair to the child at all, children are at the mercy of the adults around them. Most kids want to please their parents, and they don’t want to say no to an adult’s request. And on top of all this, he lost the money he earned.

          I truly hope the OP will apologize to Falcon (there’s nothing wrong with a parent admitting fault and apologizing to their child). He will remember things like this and how his mom took his money back, he will remember how this situation was handled by the adults in his life. And OP, this may be a time to self reflect. Do you have problems enforcing your own boundaries? Or saying no to people even after they change the agreement?

          On a personal note, I’ll never forget how my parents would agree for me to clean the house of this single adult man when I was between 12-14. I was so uncomfortable, I told them that too, but they still made me do it (and took my money). I won’t get into what this man did. But I will say that children are vulnerable, and it’s our job as a parent to make sure they are fully ok doing things that an adult asks of them. Even though OP was there with Falcon, he should have felt like he could tell OP that he no longer wants to do it.

          1. tiredworkingmom*

            Wow, yes to this. Keeping kids safe and out of unnecessarily vulnerable positions is our #1 job as parents. I’m sorry that your parents put you in that situation, and I’m sorry that LW1 felt she could agree to this on behalf of her child. Middle school is way too young to be working until nearly midnight, she should’ve told Jane no, and sorry, that’s Jane’s problem. Jane’s asking Falcon to stay in her home with an adult he does not know is so wildly inappropriate that I would truly keep my distance from her as a neighbor moving forward and never agree to pet sit for her again.

    12. The Bigger the Hair…the closer to god*

      That’s a hard no to put a young kid in this position. The neighbor was fully wrong. I hope mom paid the $50 to compensate the take back.

    15. iglwif*

      Came here to say this! Should LW have been less accommodating to Jane? Absolutely, BUT the biggest and most important part of dealing with this situation was making sure Falcon was supported and safe, and LW nailed that part.

  3. nnn*

    In situations like #4, if you’re meeting a lot of people, sometimes introducing yourself with a soupcon of rote autopilot in your voice can thread that needle. Not enough to sound bored, but more of a “Warm ‘Good morning!’ at 12:46 p.m.” kind of autopilot.

    Also, if you’re in a host-like role or the meeting is more on your turf than on theirs, something like “Thank you for coming!” can work in some cases.

    1. ThatOtherClare*

      For anyone looking for more advice on how to do that, the emphasis goes on the time of day. ‘Good morning!’, ‘Good afternoon‘. Think ‘tone of voice used by a friendly grade one teacher on Grandparents day’. So long as you look and sound mildly happy to see a person, they won’t care if you’ve forgotten that you spoke to them on the phone last week.

      ‘How’s your day/the conference/your shift been?’ is a good follow-up up, because it frees the other person up to say anything from ‘Not bad, how’s yours?’ to ‘Great! You remember Alandra from when you visited us at TeapotCo? She’s here too and we’ve been enjoying the buttered crumpets.’

      nnn is spot-on, friendly but preoccupied is a safe and easy route in these situations.

  4. Daria grace*

    #1, Jane is a jerk. You can’t substantially change the terms of a work agreement like that without discussing it first and it’s not okay to spring being stuck alone in a house with a stranger on anyone, especially not a minor

    1. allathian*

      Indeed. And especially not an intimidating stranger. Clearly Hank has some mental health issues that make him seem extra intimidating (sitting in the dark and not saying anything) and if he were capable of looking after the dogs on his own, Jane wouldn’t need to hire a dogsitter at all.

      1. KateM*

        That’s exactly what I thought when I got there – an adult who is not capable of taking dogs out? That’s not someone for a young teen to take care of!

        1. Worldwalker*

          There is definitely something wrong here. Hank couldn’t walk the dogs? A middle-schooler is possibly supposed to watch Hank? And Jane not only thinks that’s okay, she wants a refund because…Hank couldn’t walk the dogs?

          Yeah, no, if it was my kid, no way would he be alone in that house with a guy who sits in the dark and stares, and for that matter neither would I.

            1. Meep*

              Yeah that was the one misstep I don’t agree with (except for maybe not putting her foot down from the jump about staying later). The kid did his job. The poop is on Jane. Quite literally.

        2. I'm just here for the cats!!*

          I thought this too. I could maybe see if Hank was staying and worked nights so was going to be sleeping or something. But it would still be wrong. That happened to me once when I was babysitting. I was a little older (around 16) and was baby sitting for a couple who were like grandparents to me (called them grandma and grandpa). They needed someone to watch their 2 grandsons while they went to a doctor appointment. They lived just down the road from me and my mom agreed. They didn’t tell me that their son (the boys father) would be home. He worked nights and would be asleep so i was to keep the kids ( 4 and 6) quiet and play outside, etc. My mom was a little ticked that they didn’t tell us before.

        3. I'm just here for the cats!!*

          I would add that maybe Hank shouldn’t be alone himself. I’m wondering what his “learning disability” is and if he is getting proper care. He didn’t move or talk to them for HOURS. As someone who is the guardian of a mentally disabled family member this sounds like Hank might need better care.

          1. I wear my sunglasses at night*

            “Learning disabilities” are dyslexia, auditory processing disorder, dyscalculia, etc.
            So I’m wondering what kind of “learning disability” possibly prevents someone from putting a dog in the backyard, noticing dog dirt, or has them sitting in the dark and not acknowledging two strangers (to them) all night. Is the LW just describing Hank as such because that’s how Jane described him? Because again—ain’t nothing about any of those conditions that would have explained the events of this letter as far as the dogs’ bathroom accident and Hank’s behavior. Or did the LW actually mean a developmental delay of some type but over-corrected??? Because thats just a whole separate thing.

            Again the bigger issue is Jane’s last minute change in request, the LW bending over backwards to accommodate it, everyone showing Falcon that it’s okay to be a doormat apparently (poor kid, seriously), etc. But that part just stuck out at me, you know?

        4. Aggretsuko*

          My vibe was that Jane was trying to force Falcon to surprise “baby-sit” Hank. Which is all kinds of wrong on so many levels.

          1. popko*

            That’s exactly what it comes across as, yeah. “Can you watch my dogs… aaaand also my support-needs adult?”

            1. Carl*

              Exactly. This wasn’t a last minute unforeseen change of plans. This was a last minute reveal of known information, and an attempt to take advantage of someone. (And the fact that Jane would accept a refund…confirmation.)

    2. Yvette*

      Not only did Jane change the terms at the last minute she didn’t even wait for confirmation that the change in terms was acceptable. I think that the presence of her nephew was a last minute change in circumstances, and she was looking for someone to be with him as much as she was looking for someone to take care of the dog.

      1. Elizabeth the Ginger*

        Yes, it feels like it pivoted from dog sitting to adult-caretaking, which is absolutely an inappropriate job to ask a child to do.

        1. niknik*

          Taking care of an adult is a job not even every adult is able to do, not at the drop of a hat. I myself would not feel comfortable doing it, not knowing what exactly is going on with Hank.

        2. Jackalope*

          And aside from the inappropriateness of making a middle schooler take care of an adult, this is a significant change to what she wanted Falcon to do originally. Honestly, if the dogs couldn’t be alone at all then this is much different than what Jane originally proposed. Most dogs can manage spending at least some time in a house alone (I know not all of them), and if she was going to be out until 11 then it should have been okay to go play with them for an hour or two, let them back in, let them out for a quick bathroom break later, and then left them in the house.

        3. ferrina*

          And Jane tried to give herself plausible deniability by just sort of….not giving Falcon any information. She did the bare minimum (“Hank will be there”) and acted like that was normal. Um, no, absolutely not.
          She thinks she’s covered because she technically didn’t ask Falcon to take care of Hank, but she also is accepting a refund because Hank may have tracked dog poop around the house (which implies it was Falcon’s responsibility to make sure that an adult didn’t step in/continue to walk in dog poop). And she definitely doesn’t care about whether Falcon is okay with the situation (which is why the change was sprung last minute, where he would technically have had a chance to say no but realistically didn’t have much time and Jane didn’t wait for him to confirm that this change was okay).

      2. Lucy*

        Yeah, I came here to say this. And the nephew doesn’t need to have done anything wrong, and neither was Falcon wrong for feeling scared. A lot of times, kids without experience with adults with learning disabilities, need to learn about how it all works in a safe space with safe adults around them to help. It’s a new concept and if kids are used to adults being safe and in control and in charge, it can feel strange and uncomfortable.

        It sometimes feels there’s a sense that children should automatically be comfortable with new experiences, because it’s ableist or bigoted not to be – which ignores the fact that when you are totally lacking in experience with something, that often does feel uncertain and unsafe – and in order to avoid a child developing an unfair phobia, you need to have conversations with them, and get them used to those experiences in a comfortable way.

        Outside of all of this, no child should have to be a carer in this way anyway, especially not without notice. If the dogs had pooped in the house and the nephew and dogs had already begun tracking it around before Falcon arrived, was he supposed to just clean it and the dogs up? How was he supposed to make the nephew stop tracking it around? Was he supposed to take responsibility for cleaning the nephew up too?

        Nope, not ok at all.

        1. bamcheeks*

          I think it’s completely understandable for a kid not to know how to engage with an adult with learning disabilities, especially in a situation where they are not supported by an adult and it’s unclear who’s “in charge”. I do think it’s odd that LW was there and they didn’t engage with Hank or go into the kitchen to say hi themselves.

          To be clear, Jane was 100% at fault for creating this situation, but LW did not model handling it in an assertive or disability-confident way for their son.

          1. Empress Ki*

            Jane didn’t have to engage with Hank at all (whether he was disabled or not). A good model handling would have been to say no to the request, and go back home with Falcon

            1. bamcheeks*

              She absolutely didn’t, and my no. 1 choice would have been to say no! But once I’d decided to go into the house, I would have said hi to Hank.

              1. LateRiser*

                And they did exactly that:

                We walked the dogs, played with them in the yard, and greeted Hank, who was sitting in the dark and ignored us.

                1. bamcheeks*

                  Ah yeah, fair enough. I was looking at the paragraph where LW said they didn’t go in the kitchen because Falcon was to scared to go near Hank but didn’t say why they didn’t. (And I mean, maybe they didn’t need to go in the kitchen if the dogs were mostly in the front room and they were comfortable there! But then I don’t get why they offered to refund the money.)

                2. Carl*

                  I’m sorry, but as a woman (and this applies to children), absolutely f politeness in an unsafe situation with an adult stranger. Sitting in a room alone in the dark? Nope.

                  I’m sorry for whatever apparent disability. I’m not helping you load your van in this parking lot. No thanks.

          2. CityMouse*

            Putting the onus on a 14 year old to handle an adult is completely unacceptable.

            I was a camp counselor at a camp that catered to kids with various health issues (different weeks focused on different issues, my Dad was a volunteer doctor so I went the weeks he did it). By rule we had to be a minimum age of 16, we received training and there were still extensive restrictions on what minor age counselors could do (no lifting, no bathrooms, for instance). And we’re talking caring for kids who came with their families.

            Falcoln absolutely should not have been asked to be alone with any adult. The disability here is a red herring really.

          3. Nightengale*

            I mean I have decades of experience working with people with developmental disabilities, mostly kids but some adults, and am developmentally disabled myself. . . and I would not be comfortable caring for an unknown adult without some information.

            how does this person communicate?
            sensory or anxiety triggers (like lights? dogs?)
            what amount of supervision or help does the person need (maybe they just need someone in the house in case the fire alarm goes off but again I would need to KNOW that)
            are there any safety concerns or risk of hurting themself, other people, animals, things? And if so, what are the best strategies (again of course not all developmentally disabled people have these challenges, at all, but a caregiver needs to know if there is)

            1. ferrina*

              100%

              Professional caregivers won’t agree to care for an adult without having a baseline level of information. Even though they have extensive experience on what common triggers are and what responses typically work, each case is unique and it’s irresponsible not to get information about the individual.

              Expecting a kid to magically know all that stuff is….bonkers. Especially when that’s not what the kid signed up for at all.

            2. But what to call me?*

              Yeah, it may be that Jane thought it would be fine because she knows that Hank does just fine hanging out in his room by himself for a few hours (minus an unanticipated dog poop situation) and never minds having strangers around, but Falcon had no way whatsoever of knowing that. How is he supposed to know if Hank sitting there in the dark the whole time is a problem or just normal harmless Hank behavior? How is he supposed to know what Hank might do, if and how to interact with Hank, or what, if anything, to do if something goes wrong?

        2. Worldwalker*

          It doesn’t matter if the adult has learning disabilities or not: being alone in the house with a stranger (especially a male stranger) should not be happening. Especially without involving the child’s parents.

          1. Empress Ki*

            A minor who has a job cannot -legally- be alone with an adult who isn’t DBS checked ( it may be called criminal check in the USA).
            Gender is irrelevant.

            1. Floppy Ear Dog*

              That’s definitely not the law in the US. Minors work all sorts of jobs with adults who may or may not have had background checks (Fast food, restaurants, retail, gas stations, pet stores, grocery stores, and on and on). And anyhow, this was a “job” in that the kid got paid but it wasn’t a job-job, like through a business with payroll etc. this was cash under the table.

              1. Elitist Semicolon*

                It’s a distinction between “working with” meaning “doing the same job with” and “working with” meaning “providing some sort of support or services for.” The former doesn’t need background checking, whereas the latter (typically) does.

            2. Beehive*

              Just to be pedantic, assuming you mean the UK, that’s only the case if the worker is 15 or younger. But this is not really relevant anyway!

            3. Hiring Mgr*

              That doesn’t really make sense – so in this case even if Hank wasn’t there, what happens when Jane comes home and is alone with Falcon?

        3. CommanderBanana*

          It’s been my experience that people who are so quick to fling around accusations about people being bigoted or ableist in response to situations like this are really trying to excuse unacceptable behavior.

      3. Blue Pen*

        Yeah, that stood out for me as one of the bigger offenses. It’s bad enough to do that to an adult, but to a minor? No. Whether Jane intended it or not, that’s taking advantage of an actual child who probably doesn’t realize they can say “no.” And even if Falcon did say no, then what? Because Jane went ahead with her new plan before confirming it worked for everyone else, what happens to the dogs then?

    3. Steve for Work Purposes*

      Yeah and she’d already left for the event by the time they saw the message, so she didn’t even wait for confirmation, she just assumed they’d be ok with it – and staying out til 11pm is quite late for a kid of that age as well, what if OP hadn’t been ok with Falcon being out that late, or the kid had had a big test in the morning or something or other reasons he couldn’t stay out that late? At that age there is a big difference between 9pm and 11pm (heck for adults it is too). It sounds like she just assumed they’d be ok with it, or that the social pressure of not leaving her high and dry would make it so. I’ve had that happen to me as a babysitter in the past (at least re changing time last minute, not re looking after an additional person) and it’s really frustrating. I’m glad OP stayed with the kid, but also Jane is a real jerk for putting OP and Falcon in this situation, and personally I’d not dogsit for her again without an apology.

      1. Grizabella the Glamour Cat*

        Yeah, I’d not agree to let Falcon dogsit for Jane again without an apology AND a discussion about the unacceptability of making last minute changes without
        waiting for confirmation.

        I can’t help but wonder if Jane deliberately didn’t wait to hear if the change was going to be workable, because she knew it might not be and didn’t want to give Falcon a chance to back out. Maybe that’s not very charitable of me, but what Jane did was such a jerk move that I can’t help being suspicious of her motives.

        1. SKULL RING*

          My middle schooler wouldn’t be dog sitting again WITH an apology. I consider this bridge burnt, because there are too many red flags here.

          1. Jennifer @unchartedworlds*

            Yeah, same. Brief hello on the street would be fine, but I would never again make an arrangement with her. There are plenty of people in the world to dog-sit for (or whatever) who don’t pull that kind of manipulative bait & switch.

          2. Edwina*

            I agree. Jane behaved like a jerk – changing the time and terms of the agreement without asking first and then agreeing to take back 2/3(!) of the money Falcon had earned because of poop in the house.

            1. B*

              To my lights, Jane owes them a substantial amount of money. If she changes the circumstances, so should LW and Falcon. Under the new terms, Falcon’s rate is $25/hour and because the parameters now require adult supervision, LW’s rate is $50/hour. Let’s call it $350 owed.

              Would I demand the money? No, the ship has sailed. But in my mental ledger, I would categorize Jane as someone who unapologetically stiffed me and my kid on a large bill. I.e., no favors, no help, no nothing.

                1. sparkle emoji*

                  TBF, the offer feels like something done to keep the peace and put an end to the mess because LW and family still need to be around Jane. Jane shouldn’t have accepted it, but there’s a lot of things here that Jane should not have done.

                3. Carl*

                  Last month I offered to pay half of the cost to have a tree removed in my neighbor’s yard. Did I owe it? No! But I asked him to cut the tree down bc it was half dead and a huge branch and already fallen on my driveway. Maintaining a good relationship with a neighbor is worth a lot. It’s definitely worth more than “the principle of it.” I’m not saying sign over your 401k for nothing, but if the amount is modest considering your means…choose neighborhood harmony.
                  (My neighbor declined my offer of half. But, I wouldn’t have regretted offer if he hadn’t.)

          4. Antilles*

            I am a 30-something adult and there’s too many red flags to consider dog sitting again for Jane if this happened to *me*, never mind a middle-schooler.

            1. MCL*

              Yeah, I’m a lady in her 40’s and while I’d be more than happy to take my neighbor’s dog for a walk (and I have done this plenty of times for neighbors!), I would be very uncomfortable with this situation if I encountered it personally as an adult. “Oh BTW my adult relative, a stranger to you, will also be in the house.” That would give me serious pause.

              I was the kind of middle schooler who wanted to please adults and I would have been totally embarrassed about the poop and I would not have known what to do about Hank. I would have felt pressure to just say yes and do it. I’m so glad the OP was there and helped out their son, and I hope they take the opportunity to talk about boundary setting. I would never do anything for Jane again, her judgement is very bad.

          6. ferrina*

            YES YES YES.

            Jane showed not a whit of caring for Falcon’s comfort or safety (srsly, who thinks it’s okay to leave a middle schooler with an adult that is a stranger?!?!). She didn’t provide any chance for Falcon to say no (i.e., leaving before getting confirmation, not checking in from the event). And she didn’t even feel like it was her fault- she accepted the refund. She’s not going to magically change just because you make her apologize. Never trust her again.

        2. honeygrim*

          Honestly, I wondered the same thing. There’s basically three options here. (1) Jane is astoundingly oblivious as to why a middle-schooler shouldn’t be pressured into extending a job an extra two hours at night with a strange adult thrown into the mix–especially a strange adult who was incapable of doing the job himself. (2) Jane had a last minute change of plans and decided to go the “ask for forgiveness instead of permission” route. And then got lucky when the LW did the apology instead. (3) Jane knew all along that Hank was going to be there and decided to trick Falcon into being a babysitter for a strange adult as well as a dogsitter. None of these is a good look for Jane.

        3. Ready for the weekend*

          Agreed. Jane should not have put the burden of having Falcon be alone with Hank in house. OP1, you did the right thing by being there with your son. And don’t dogsit for Jane again.

        4. Sarah M*

          As the parent of two young teens, there would be no way in h— that Jane would be getting any more help from my kids, for anything, whatever the price. I would be coldly but extremely polite about it, but the answer would be NO. Poor kid.

      2. Becky S*

        For 25 years I worked directly with adults with learning disabilities and other challenges, and I wouldn’t have been comfortable with this situation!

      4. Goldenrod*

        Yes, Jane is a real jerk for ALL of this. She should have apologized profusely instead of accepting any refund.

        LW did a great job of protecting her child, but I hope she also loops back with the kid and makes it 100% clear that he did nothing wrong and has nothing to feel bad about! Jane pulled a weird bait and switch, and LW and kid were utterly blameless in this situation, as far as I can tell.

    4. londonedit*

      I agree. I’m not sure what age middle school is (not all areas of England have middle schools, the one I grew up in didn’t, but I think here it would be around age 10-13) but it seems very young to be a) expected to spend five or six hours looking after two dogs, not finishing until 11pm, and b) left alone with a man you’ve never met before, whether he has learning difficulties or not. I’m really not surprised Falcon felt uncomfortable.

      I’m also really not impressed with Jane for pulling the ‘Oh, actually, can you stay until 11pm?’ trick on the day. I’d be pissed off with that, and I’m a grown adult (to be fair, I’m a grown adult and I’d also be pissed off with the ‘Oh by the way, my nephew will be there so you’ll be in the house with a man you’ve never met’).

      1. Insert Clever Name Here*

        In the US, middle school is generally 6th grade (11ish years old) to 8th grade (13ish years old). There is some variation regionally both to the name of this stage of schooling (intermediate school and junior high are others) and the grades it includes (sometimes just 7th-8th).

      2. sparkle emoji*

        Depending on the district and what grades are included it could range between ages 10-14. Even assuming he’s 14, Falcon is too young for Jane’s bait and switch to be ok.

    5. HonorBox*

      I think a conversation with Jane is warranted in this situation. Firstly, she needs to know that changing the terms of the agreement last minute put OP/Falcon in a tough spot, even if you remove Hank from the situation. Playing with a dog for a couple of hours, ending at 9 versus staying in the house until 11 is vastly different, and a change like that needs to be communicated and agreed upon farther in advance. Second, putting Falcon in that kind of position, alone in a house with a complete stranger, is wildly inappropriate. She needs to know that. For reasons that are likely well beyond his own control, Hank wasn’t able to care for the dog. But if that’s the case, it is something that, like the change in hours, needs to be discussed farther in advance with OP and Falcon. And if OP/Falcon aren’t comfortable with the setup, they need to be able to walk away.

      Jane was acting in bad faith, and I’d even say recklessly. And she should have been much more gracious about the money. C’mon Jane.

  5. allathian*

    LW#1. You did nothing wrong, everything that happened is utterly and completely Jane’s fault. She may be so used to her nephew’s quirks that she genuinely doesn’t realize how intimidating he is to others, especially to someone in their tweens/early teens, like a middle schooler!

    Clearly Hank can’t be left alone with the dogs, but hiring a middle schooler to dogsit with him in the house isn’t the solution, either. I hope this hasn’t ruined your relationship with your neighbor completely, but if it does, it’s her fault.

    If Jane asks Falcon to dogsit for her again, which she might, tell her clearly that you’ll allow it only if Hank is somewhere else.

    1. Dahlia*

      Jane needs a dog daycare or a kennel. I don’t think any petsitter would want to go into this situation of last minute changes and unexpected strange men in the house. That might very well be the reason she needed a teenager for this.

      1. House On The Rock*

        This was my thought as well. Our pet sitter is a highly competent, professional woman in her late 50s who has dealt with unexpected circumstances really well (think power outage while we were on vacation that disrupted access to the house). I know she’d (rightly) balk at something like this. Pulling it on a kid is extremely poor form.

      2. Nicosloanica*

        Yeah, *one* time one of my neighbors came over to use the shower and I didn’t think there was any chance they’d intersect with my catsitter (a professional service and an adult woman) who was only going to be there 20 minutes out of the whole day. Whelp, they were there at the exact same time and it was obvious my catsitter was *extremely* taken aback to find someone in the house she expected to be empty and quite annoyed at me for not warning her. It soured our entire relationship TBH. I felt awful.

    2. kiki*

      I do think a lot of people have a blind spot for their family members and how their presence may make somebody else uncomfortable even without anything problematic or nefarious going on. In their head it’s like, “He’s just my nephew— it’s fine!” But the experience of the Falcon is “there is an adult man in this house I have never met before and it’s very unclear how I am expected to interact with him. Also, I am a tween asked be alone with this adult man I don’t know for several hours.”

      1. TM*

        Also, I hate to say this, but I know something about my own nephew’s propensities, and it is absolutely not OK to leave children alone with him. My nephew seems averagely personable and friendly, by the way.
        For anyone in your home that you don’t know very well, relative or not, it is not appropriate in the slightest to leave a kid alone with them. The level of trust and knowledge that unsupervised adults are safe with kids needs to be extremely high.
        Someone you’ve seen for a few hours on holiday occasions doesn’t qualify, frankly. It doesn’t sound like Hank is a constant presence in Jane’s life, such that she could genuinely have that level of trust in him, completely leaving aside his antisocial behaviour.
        This whole story gives me the willies and I’m glad the LW took such good care of her kid. I feel extremely strongly that Jane should be getting a lecture about her responsibilities around children along with her entirely unwarranted refund. Since she was willing to even accept the refund with no apparent consciousness of her own effed-up behaviour, this should be the last job Falcon does for her. I honestly wouldn’t let any child of mine be alone around her either, in future – her sense of what’s appropriate seems… uncalibrated. To the extreme.

        1. SKULL RING*

          I’m curious as to the circumstances that brought Hank there. Did someone ask Jane to care for Hank, and she agreed despite knowing she wouldn’t be home?

          LW and Falcon aren’t familiar with him, so it doesn’t sound like he’s around enough for them to even know he existed before this.

        2. Elizabeth West*

          Even if Hank is completely harmless, it still was not okay. That’s too much responsibility for a middle-schooler. It’s not okay to spring this on an adult either, especially with NO information.

        3. ScruffyInternHerder*

          Exactly.

          In my own family, someone on the outside looking in would say “hmmmm…decorated career military guy or the guy with a rap sheet?” and pick….the wrong one to be safe around children. (Hint, it ain’t the former as he’s a “chester”, while the guy with the rap sheet has long since overcome his addiction issues and volunteers to help vulnerable youth)

        4. Meep*

          I adore my 35-year-old sister-in-law, but she can easily come off as “creepy” as she becomes TOO personal with people too quickly. (She also has an unspecified learning disability – though that is because her parents never bothered to get her tested.)

          Not to mention, she is A LOT after a few hours. She has actually been fired from a couple jobs for making her coworkers uncomfortable due to her lack of social skills and clinginess.

          Very sweet, but I definitely would not spring her on other people unannounced.

      2. I'm just here for the cats!!*

        I agree with this. But besides how Hank acted or what is issues are Jane should have thought about the parents and the boy’s feelings. I don’t think any parent would want their middle schooler to be alone in a house until 11pm with a strange man nether of them have met before.

    3. KateM*

      Re: you will allow only is Hank is somewhere else – would you trust Jane to just not tell about Hank then? Or just go “oh, it suddenly turned out he will be there after all” which could have been the situation this time already.

      2. ferrina*

        Exactly. Hank was supposed to be somewhere else this time. Jane changed it so last minute that there was a good chance that you wouldn’t be able to argue.

        This is a legit tactic that people will use to make unreasonable asks, and this isn’t the first time I’ve seen it- make the ask so late that it’s reasonable that the person won’t see it, but in enough time to give yourself plausible deniability. Then don’t wait for confirmation or follow-up; put the onus on the other person to say “um, this isn’t reasonable.” The thing that makes this work is cognitive dissonance. She’s relying on you thinking “this is a weird ask, but Jane is saying it like it’s normal, so…um…maybe it is normal?” This makes the reasonable person second-guess themselves and be off-balance (this works extra if you already have people-pleasing tendencies or are highly empathetic or have a history of trauma/ND where you rely on other people to help you gauge norms). It worked; LW was clearly off-balance.

        Unless Jane apologizes of her own volition, assume she is not sorry and doesn’t think she’s done anything wrong. Do not trust her again; you’ve already learned that it’s not worth it.

      3. allathian*

        Good point! No, I don’t think I could trust Jane not to pull a switcheroo on Falcon again, given her track record.

        The OP posted elsewhere on this thread, Falcon has mowed Jane’s lawn and Jane participates in all the kids’ fundraisers, so she’s apparently been a good neighbor otherwise. I hope this was a momentary lapse that they can move on from.

    4. AcademiaNut*

      I’d turn down future offers. The fact that Jane would do a last minute not-actually-a-request change in job parameters, and include a random man sitting in the dark in the house would have me drop her as a client, and I’m an adult. The idea that she thought this was appropriate when hiring an adolescent pushes it into someone who can’t be trusted.

      1. Nicosloanica*

        Just changing it to 11PM would be a hard no for me! A middleschooler should not be expected to work that late and the fact that Jane thought this was fine means she should probably work with professionals next time. Never mind all the Hank stuff.

        1. Dek*

          For real though. That’s bonkers.

          If your dogs aren’t good to be left alone (and not even alone-alone) for a few hours, then you need a professional, or at least an adult, not an actual child.

          I’m really glad that LW waited with her son. It’s great that the kid knows mom has his back in bad/suss situations.

        2. But what to call me?*

          I did plenty of weekend babysitting until 11 PM towards the end of middle school, but that was planned and agreed to in advance*, not a sudden change in plans that I and my parents were expected to just accept.

          *And paid hourly. I made so much money as one of only a couple of teenagers in our very young neighborhood.

      2. Water Everywhere*

        Absolutely. If you put my kid in an uncomfortable & possibly dangerous situation, you do not get a second chance.

        I think it’s also good for the LW to model for their kid that saying no or even backing out of a commitment is completely acceptable when something like this happens.

    5. Username*

      LW did one thing wrong – she returned two thirds of the fee. Jane substantially changed the arrangement but LW instead of addressing that with her after the fact just agrees to Jane’s request to return the money. Is she worried about getting into a fight with her neighbors. She did a great job of taking care of her son in the moment but needed to follow up afterwards and discuss it with Jane and let her know what she did wasn’t acceptable and not return any of the money.

      1. Myrin*

        Returning the money was OP’s idea, not Jane’s: “I texted her the next morning, offering to return the money since we hadn’t prevented the dogs from soiling the house.”

        Jane probably felt generous by “only” wanting two thirds of the money back, but she really should’ve declined completely, since Falcon (and OP!) actually did even more work than he had originally agreed to.

        I can understand OP’s impulse but I really think she shouldn’t have made such an offer in the first place.

      2. CityMouse*

        It also wasn’t reasonable to expect a 14 year old to clean up a mess that happened before they arrived.

        I have a cat, cleaning up messes like that is just pet ownership. When I have a pet sitter their job is to take care of my pet, not extensively clean my home.

        1. bamcheeks*

          I can’t get over anyone WANTING a young person to clean up a mess like this. You’re going to trust a young teenager to be able to clean up tracked dogshit without just spreading it around further? Horrifying! I’m not sure I’d even want another adult to do this unless I was *very* confident in their cleaning abilities.

      3. Vanamonde von Mekkhan*

        Personally I think Jane should have at the very least paid twice as much per hour as originally agreed on due to the change in working hours and the inclusion of Hank.

      4. Karstmama*

        Yeah, I think I’d have been asking for the rest of the money she owed. $xy for y hours, now it’s z hours, you owe us $xz, Jane. If I was really annoyed, and I likely would be, $2xz since there were 2 of us there the whole time. I don’t think I’d have cared too much about preserving this relationship.

        1. B*

          That’s the thing. What relationship? Jane ruined the relationship, not LW and their kid! People like this go about assuming other people will accommodate them and make excuses for their bad behavior out of politeness. That’s bad enough in general, but when you bring a kid into it, it is sociopathic. If I were in LW’s shoes, I would be seeing red every time I saw Jane around the neighborhood, all the more so because she has acknowledged no wrongdoing. There is nothing to preserve here other than Jane’s continued ability to walk around like she’s above reproach.

      5. Nicosloanica*

        I’d let it go at this point and just let the takeaway be “no more petsitting for Jane” (and I’d talk about what happened with Falcon because it’s a good learning opportunity) but I wouldn’t try to get the money back now or re-open the discussion. You’re neighbors, and OP offered to return the money, which I agree was unnecessary but is water under the bridge now.

        1. sparkle emoji*

          Yeah, I think focusing on the money isn’t going to be helpful. This is a learning opportunity for LW and Falcon. Talk through how you’d handle this differently if it happened again, and what he should do if someone tries this again and you’re not there. Agree to a boundary like “no pet sitting for Jane” so that Falcon feels supported in turning her down if she asks him again.

      6. Meow*

        It’s an upper middle class behavior. Anything to avoid a direct conflict with someone in your social circle. Me, I’m going with my low-middle class response of no, we’ll be leaving as soon as the dogs have done their business. Dogs can be alone and not entertained for a few hours.

    6. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Say that any changes must be agreed before Jane leaves. State firmly that Falcon won’t stay after say 9pm and stress that if Hank turns out to be there then Falcon won’t stay at all.
      Jane is exploitive and likely knows she wants an adult-sitter as well as a dogsitter.

      1. TM*

        Just say no forever more, I feel. Very strongly. You can be polite in a neighbourly way, but that line around the LW’s kid stepping foot in that place alone needs to be firmly drawn.
        If Jane complains, fine, reiterate that she doesn’t seem to be too aware of the appropriate expectations when dealing with young kids, and it’s probably easier all round if Falcon doesn’t get thrown into complicated situations without warning again.

        1. Samwise*

          Yes, even with a less fraught situation, Jane is a no.

          When I was a tween, I sat (once) for a woman who was supposed to be home by 10 pm. She got home at 2 am. My mom (who goes to bed very early and always has) was there at 10:30 pm. Gave that mom a very clear and cold explanation of what she had done wrong; no, her daughter would not be taking a check, pay cash; pay double for every hour after the promised end time.

          Woman calls me the next week to sit. I said no.

          1. CommanderBanana*

            ^^ This. I babysat a lot (and later nannied) and I absolutely fired clients, including one who “forgot” to pay me. Her husband reported to my father (military) and he was livid when he found out what his wife had done. I never babysat for them again.

          2. Goldenrod*

            Yes, Samwise. Your mom handled that perfectly!

            Jane should be an absolute NO for anything, ever again! No favors given or received, no jobs, nothing. Just a faintly polite “hi” once in a while as you walk by (and that’s ALL)!

        2. Nicosloanica*

          “Oh, little Falcon’s so busy these days, I told him he can’t commit to petsitting anymore, so sorry.” Look, I get it, in some neighborhoods you can’t risk being on the outs with a neighbor, but Jane has only herself to blame here.

          1. Goldenrod*

            I mean, I don’t think you even have to dissemble here! A simple “No, thanks” is more than polite.

      2. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

        Nah. Just say no to any future requests. Falcon can find other ways to make some money (dog sitting for less toxic customers, raking leaves, etc.) but this level of bait and switch doesn’t get a second chance.

        OP1, if you can afford it, could you reimburse Falcon yourself? He didn’t do anything wrong and doesn’t deserve the docked pay.

      3. Antilles*

        No. There’s no point in trying to set rules like this.
        If Jane did this because she’s exploitative, she won’t listen at all. She’ll deny that she did a bait-and-switch, she’ll blame-shift to how you should have checked the kitchen for dog poop, she’ll brush the extra time off as a reasonable request. And she won’t care about your ‘agreement’ in the future either.

    7. Cordelia*

      If Jane asked again I would say no and explain why you are not happy about the situation that occurred last time. You can’t trust her to ensure Hank is somewhere else, or trust that she won’t have some other completely unreasonable expectation.

      1. Dek*

        Since they’re neighbors, I don’t know that it’s even worth explaining. Just no, he’s not available to dogsit (for Jane).

    8. Elizabeth West*

      No, I think Jane pulling this switch-up should be a deal-breaker. It was spectacularly ill-considered. I wouldn’t trust her again even if I, a full adult, were the one she had asked to do the job.

  6. Ann*

    LW4, in case helpful, I try to remember with a “You look familiar!” or inquire “Remind me of your name?” to cover my bases.

      1. English Rose*

        Yes, because the trap lying in wait if you don’t is that super-awkward moment when it would be appropriate to introduce the person to someone else!

      3. Slow Gin Lizz*

        Yup. I’ve learned that SO MANY people are actually terrible with names and faces and while of course there is the odd person who will be offended if you don’t recognize them, a lot of people seem relieved when you admit this, as evidenced by the “OMG, me too!” that I get when others say this. It’s really interesting how many people feel embarrassed at not remembering someone only to find out that the other person also doesn’t remember you.

        I am actually quite good at remembering folks I’ve met before, but even then I find myself seeing someone who I think I’ve never met before only to have them say, “Did we meet at the Oatmeal conference a few years ago?” I feel like that’s a really good way to address this. If you know you know them already, ask them about the specific situation where you met them (but don’t push it if they say, “No, I don’t think so”), and if they ask you if you’ve met before, you can say, “Oh, yes, that’s probably it!” But don’t lie; if you know you weren’t at the event you can politely say, “Oh, no, I wasn’t at that event but maybe we met somewhere else.”

        1. ferrina*

          YES! I’m someone that regularly admits to being bad at faces and names, and I’ve always gotten a good reaction. And it means that I can do things that help me remember, like when I end the conversations, I try to repeat back their name. I’ve found that probably 60% of the time when I don’t remember their name, they don’t remember mine either.
          And later when I run into them, I can say “You look so familiar- have we met?” (I only use this for social situations- at work I try to use neutral phrases until I can figure out who they are. I’ve had more people get offended in work situations that in social situations)

    2. KHB*

      Or “Did we meet last year, or am I confusing you with someone else?” Declare your uncertainty like you’re going through customs, and it’s usually not a big deal. They might be feeling the same uncertainty, and they’re waiting for somebody to break the awkwardness ice.

  7. Bilateralrope*

    #1 Were Jane’s actions here legal ?

    It sounds like she was the primary carer of Hank, but ditched those duties without making suitable arrangements. I’d suggest looking into if that can be reported and what is likely to happen to Hank if you do

    #3 If the website isn’t useful for work, I’d suggest just going without it or using your phone.

    IT probably aren’t paying attention to who attempts to access a blocked website. But requesting an unblock without good reason will be noticed

    1. Observer*

      But requesting an unblock without good reason will be noticed

      “It’s work related” is always a good reason, assuming that the block is actually incorrect.

      1. Bilateralrope*

        “It’s work related” might need a bit more detail to convince IT that it is work related. But if that’s the truth, that should be enough to get it unblocked unless the site is infested with malware.

        I’d also suggest ignoring if the site was correctly blocked or not. My guess would be that they are using some blocking software they purchased, including the blocklist. If the website is correct to block for most companies, but work related for the LW it should be unblocked. If it’s not work related for the LW, I can’t see IT granting an exception even if it doesn’t fit with whatever catagory it’s in.

        1. Edwina*

          I work in IT, and at my company at least, we would absolutely look into whether a site was blocked when it shouldn’t have been.

          In my opinion, out job is to make the other employees’ work lives easier, not harder. Of course we also hold firm on things that can’t be changed (we’re in a regulated industry), but communication is vital. If we make changes without talking to the affected people about it first, it’s highly likely to create bad feelings, so we are always looking for ways to improve those communications.

      2. CityMouse*

        I actually sometimes have to access blocked websites for my work and I submit a very specific form with a link to the issue I’m working on. Sometimes staff in another office will instead take and send me the screenshots I need.

        The thing people get warned for most at work is streaming sports on work computers, funnily enough.

          1. CityMouse*

            Oh, I know why, you think people would know better. And with unlimited data these days, just use your phone if you really must.

      1. Bilateralrope*

        Some law that protects people who can’t care for themselves from the negligence of those who are caring for them.

        Which might not exist in the LW’s jurisdiction.

        1. EchoGirl*

          It’s also not clear that Hank needed a level of care that would warrant a criminal charge here. Having a disability, even one that has significant impacts on his life, doesn’t automatically mean he can’t be safely left alone.

            1. Slow Gin Lizz*

              Nah. I don’t have any learning disabilities and I wouldn’t necessarily feel comfortable taking care of someone’s dogs either. I wasn’t raised with dogs and while I’m happy to see and pet someone else’s dogs, I don’t know the first thing about taking care of them. (Exception: had a neighbor once with a *very* sweet dog who I sometimes took for walks when she worked long hours, but I wouldn’t be comfortable with just any dog.)

            2. kiki*

              I was a tween pet-sitter and you’d be surprised by the number of my clients who had adult kids (generally sons) who had no sort of disability who were not trusted with to watch a pet for a few days despite living at home. Like, these parents considered a random 12 year old girl more responsible than their adult son.

              The first time I smelled weed and understood what it was actually happened when I was cat-sitting in one of these situations. I popped over to a house at the pre-arranged time to feed the cat and the adult son (who I had met once or twice before) was ripping bong hits in the living room. Not traumatizing or anything, but probably not an experience my parents would have knowingly allowed me to walk into.

            3. It’s A Butternut Squash*

              The leap from “I don’t trust this person to care of my dogs, even if they’re staying in my house and I ask” to “this person is so disabled another adult must be legally in charge of their care” is a large one. The leap from “Hank can’t be trusted to take the dogs out and play with them” to “Jane is Hanks legal guardian and cannot legally leave him alone for a few hours” is astronomical.

            4. Nightengale*

              I’m afraid of dogs and also not strong enough to walk any dog bigger than maybe Chihuahua size . There is no way I could care for someone’s dog.

              I live alone and am a physician. I have been a camp counselor and house parent working with kids with disabilities.

              The two are not really related one bit

      2. I'm just here for the cats!!*

        If Hank is a vulnerable adult and needs constant care and cannot be left alone, then it would be breaking the law. I am a legal guardian of my Aunt who is severely mentally handicaped. She cannot talk/sign or communicate. If she were to be left alone not only could she accidently hurt herself (like bump into the stove and burn herself) but she could wander away and get hurt.
        It’s similar to if someone left an baby or toddler alone. They would get charged with neglect.

        Now we don’t know that Hank is a vulnerable adult. Obviously something is not right with him. He could have mental health issues that doesn’t mean he needs constant care or that he is a vulnerable adult. But it I were OP I might check with my local disability group or social services to check on the situation.

        1. Turquoisecow*

          When OP and her son got the the house Hank was sitting alone in the dark, so it seems unlikely that he needs CONSTANT care, but given the situation with the poop it also doesn’t seem like he knows what to do with dogs either. But someone left him alone until OP got there.

    3. Scarlet ribbons in her hair*

      I didn’t get the impression that Jane is Hank’s primary carer. I got the impression that Hank’s parents (or caregivers) dumped him on Jane at the last minute, and she was too intimidated to say “That won’t work” and instead decided to dump him on Falcon.

      2. Slow Gin Lizz*

        Agreed. Now, while I don’t feel that this situation breaks any laws, I will say that in my state, any adult in a job that involves contact with minors requires a background check. It’s stringent enough that when I have been playing in musical groups that included high school students, we had to undergo the check even if we weren’t actually interacting with the kids one-on-one. I don’t think a pet-sitting job would fall under this jurisdiction, but I will say that it’s not cool to require a kid to do a job that involves a strange adult whom they’ve never met before. I 100% don’t blame Falcon for not wanting to be alone with the nephew and I think OP is the best for understanding that and going with Falcon.

    4. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      I don’t think is the primary caretaker of Hank because the OP said they had never met him and I think they would have mentioned if he lived there. They are neighbors. I do wonder if maybe Hank is being fostered around the family and that this was a last minute change? I feel bad for Hank

  8. Observer*

    #1- Dog sitting job.

    Please talk to Falcon and maybe even have him read this column. You were in no way obligated to accede to Jane’s request, and as a parent I cringed a bit that you encouraged him to go along with such a major, and frankly unreasonable, change that she had just dumped on him. As for offering to give back the money? No, your kid did more than he had been asked to do, and you should not have made that offer.

    I’m not a big fan of helicopter parenting. But you really should have your kid’s back. The person who you let down was your son, not your neighbor.

    To put it in purely employment terms – An employer does not unilaterally get to decide that the job is going to be for many more hours and with substantially different conditions than originally agreed to. Now, employers often have the power to get away with that, but no employee has the moral duty to agree to that. And, at least in the US, if an employer does try to do that, it would normally be considered “constructive dismissal”. And while the significance of that depends on a lot of other factors, I think it’s worth noting the essential idea that this kind of change is seen as essentially a firing.

    As for the damage, employers can’t make employees pay the cost of most errors. And that’s when the employee actually *did* make an error. In this case, your son did not do anything wrong. He went over at the agreed on time. The fact that Jane’s nephew could not do the minimum to deal with the pooping is not something your son was responsible for.

    1. CityMouse*

      I agree with all of this.

      Changing the circumstances of the job was unacceptable and giving back the money wasn’t the correct call. Asking a 14 year old to work until 11, particularly if it was a school night and with an unknown adult in the house was a huge safety issue.

      I think LW should give back the returned money to the kid (I realize that means LW funding it). They did the work and giving back money for a job done wasn’t appropriate.

    2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Yes, you needed to have Falcon’s back and refuse these unreasonably changed conditions, especially when it made him feel unsafe – and it actually was unsafe. If that meant Jane had to cancel her trip, that’s her own fault.
      It seems very deliberate to only text such serious changes after she’s already left.

      Don’t put staying on good terms with your neighbour above having your child’s back.

      I’d recommend apologising to Falcon and saying you got this wrong. In particular, thinking of his future working life, tell him that no adult employee should accept unsafe working conditions / safety violations either. Also that refunding an employee even when you make a mistake or didn’t do the work properly is very very rarely necessary.

      1. Grizabella the Glamour Cat*

        “It seems very deliberate to only text such serious changes after she’s already left.”

        I said in another thread that I suspected Jane of deliberately doing this to make it hard for Falcon to back out. I can understand why LW felt uncomfortable letting him do that, because it probably felt like reneging on a commitment, especially since it was too late to notify Jane. But in actuality, Jane was the one who reneged by changing the terms of the commitment with no warning and not allowing any chance for Falcon to decline.

        I also think LW should reach into her own pocket and reimburse Falcon the $50 Jane took back. He did nothing wrong, and giving the money back to Jane was LW’s choice, not his. As things now stand, Falcon is, in effect, being punished for the mistakes of adults and being given very mixed messages about who was at fault here. Giving him back the full amount of money he earned is, imo, the best way to send him a clear message that he was not responsible for any of this.

      2. KateM*

        OP doesn’t say that Jane texted the changes after she left but rather, OP and Falcon SAW those changes when Jane had already left. Text is an asynchronous communication method.

        This is still on Jane, though, because such important changes should have been communicated by a synchronous method, i.e. calling and talking it over before she left – and if she couldn’t get OP on phone, should have assumed that the change can’t take effect.

        1. Observer*

          This is still on Jane, though, because such important changes should have been communicated by a synchronous method

          This. 1,000x over!

          It doesn’t matter when she sent it. She should have called and gotten an agreement. And I hope that the LW would have backed Falcon on saying no.

      3. It’s A Butternut Squash*

        I don’t think we have any idea if it was deliberate or what Jane’s expectations were. All she did was ask. OP obviously should have said no – asking a tween child to work alone in a home with an adult stranger until 11 PM is a wild thing to ask for, but she bent over backwards to accommodate it instead of just saying “sorry, nope.” So we know OP isn’t great at boundaries/saying no, and we know Jane asked. We don’t know what the actual ask looked like or what Jane expected. A lot of times an ask is just an ask and people are fine with hearing no. Some of this is definitely on Jane, and it was a dumb thing to ask for, but for all we know she had no idea it would be an issue, figured they’d say no if they wanted to, and have no idea they never went in the kitchen.

        1. newfiscalyear*

          Jane still bears the full onus because she shouldn’t expect a minor to feel comfortable expressing boundaries he’s never navigated before.

    3. Lady Danbury*

      Absolutely this. Jane was completely in the wrong, but OP was also in the wrong, at least in relation to Falcon. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but there were two points where OP should have made a different decision. The first was accepting Jane’s unilateral change in the terms instead of texting back that they would be sticking to the original agreement. The second was when she offered to give the money that Falcon had rightfully earned back. This should be a reflection point and teaching moment for both OP and Falcon on setting and sticking to boundaries, what to do when you feel uncomfortable about a work circumstance, what your obligations are when a contractual relationship (because that’s what this is) unilaterally changes, etc. The fact that Falcon feels guilty for not doing more to prevent something that shouldn’t have been his obligation to begin with is a sign that he’s internalizes the wrong message from this fiasco and OP needs to act now to course correct.

    4. OP*

      OP here. This feedback has been incredibly helpful. I will give Falcon his $50 back, and have a long conversation with him about boundaries and how to enforce them in work situations. My reaction to the last-minute change in plans had a lot to do with the fact that this is a neighbor who I know and like, and who I still wanted to help. By staying with Falcon the whole time, I had hoped to keep him safe and comfortable while still helping Jane.

      Regarding the timing of the pooping, I really don’t know when it happened. Jane said it seemed “old” when she saw it. The dogs were with us most of the time once we were in the house, but not the whole time, so it could have happened while we were there. That’s part of why I wanted to return the money. The whole reason she hired Falcon was to keep the dogs from pooping in the house. She had let the dogs out before she left, and we arrived about two hours after that, so she didn’t think it could have happened before we arrived.

      2. AnotherSarah*

        OP, I agree with the comment above but/and I also want to say that this is a great opportunity for Falcon and you–he can see how not only setting boundaries is important, but also that it’s HARD especially when we want to be helpful. And that adults struggle with that, too. The repair work when we let our kids down is so helpful, IMO more helpful than if we never needed to do the repair in the first place (which would be totally unrealistic, everyone makes errors).

      3. Observer*

        The dogs were with us most of the time once we were in the house, but not the whole time, so it could have happened while we were there.

        If the dogs are so poorly house trained that they would poop so quickly in the house, then that’s not on Falcon / you. The hours you spent outside with them should have been sufficient to take care of the problem.

      4. Insert Clever Name Here*

        For what it’s worth OP, I am of the opinion that you did have your son’s back. He wanted to fulfill Jane’s request, but was uncomfortable about an adult stranger in the house and so you accompanied him so that he was not alone. And speaking as a parent myself, sometimes one of the most important things I teach my kids is 1) I don’t always get it right and 2) what to do after I don’t get it right. Yes, you could have said “no” to Jane (I understand why you didn’t) and you could have not offered to return the money to Jane (I understand why you did that, too, but also what the heck Jane for accepting it!); ultimately no one was harmed by those decisions, you and your son have learned a valuable lesson about Jane, and you now get to have some conversations about ways to do differently in another situation where someone changes the plan in a way that makes you uncomfortable. Your son’s lucky to have you!

      5. Blackcat*

        If the dogs are so poorly house broken that they would either poop in the house within 2 hours or poop in the house when you’re not looking, that needs to be explained up front. That’s not normal.

        I know you said you like Jane, but you now need to think of her as someone who would take advantage of a child. In my book, that makes someone *not* nice and not someone I’d want to continue to be friendly with. Polite but distant. Not friendly.

  9. Observer*

    #3- Firewall.

    Don’t worry about it. If this is a work related site, reach out to IT and ask them to unblock it. Otherwise, either your IT people will ignore it or they will check and see that it’s a mis-classification.

    However, you might want to ask IT why there is a general block on the category of advocacy, given that that’s your job. That might alert them to the fact that something is mis-configured in the filter. Or, though a bit less likely, that the links are not actually what they look like and that’s why the are triggering the filter. Where are these links coming from?

    1. WS*

      Yeah, I had a similar problem when trying to access patient information forums for various healthcare conditions, which is definitely part of my job. But some of those forums had (very understandable!) swearing or mentioned sex or genitals in relevant health contexts so they all got blocked. I eventually got big boss to sign off on IT removing a number of blocks for me and two other co-workers so we didn’t keep having to wait for IT to whitelist something when information was needed.

      1. Jill Swinburne*

        I used to have similar when I worked in a library – sometimes you wanted to access reviews but because of content in the book it referenced, it got blocked. Unfortunately there was little you could do about it, because I assume it was due to words and phrases, not certain sites. I found it deeply annoying.

        1. Observer*

          Unfortunately there was little you could do about it, because I assume it was due to words and phrases, not certain sites.

          It’s been years since this was a real problem. I mean, yes it could start that way, but no decent filter uses ONLY keywords – it’s impossible to do it right. And also, every decent filter has ways to make exceptions of various sorts. Some are more flexible than others, but if your IT was telling you that they couldn’t unblock this stuff for you, something was definitely not correct.

      2. Jackalope*

        I decided to block some social media accounts on my phone because they had started eating my life and I wanted my time back. As far as I could tell, the only way to do this is to put an “adult content” block on my phone and add those sites to the list of blocks. Thankfully I can clear it pretty easily – it tells me a site is blocked, I override it, we’re good. But every now and then I can’t tell at all why the site was blocked. Language? Themes? Someone else blocked it on another phone in my system? It remains a mystery.

      3. raktajino*

        My workplace’s new filter blocks the webcomic Questionable Content yet allows SMBC and XKCD, all of which are of similar level of SFW. The reason the blocklist gives? “Questionable content.”

        …yeah okay, fair.

    2. blupuck*

      #3- If you need access, ask for it. IT has likely noticed your attempts to access. Like Observer said, they either ignore it or check the issue.

      We had a situation where our lovely female graphic designer was accessing hardcore porn on the regular. Many, many times a day. We just couldn’t figure it out.
      “There she goes again! Whoa! dirty girl! ”
      She was floored when we ask about it.
      We finally all gathered in her cube to watch her work while checking the web stats.

      She wasn’t a dirty girl at all.

      It turns out, her most used clip art website was hosted on the same server as some real raunch. We got a good laugh and learned a good lesson about the accuracy of those web trackers.

      1. NYHoundLady*

        This goes back to the early 2000s, a company I worked for installed a blocker for porn sites, well and good, no problem. I was taking a break and went to look at the Kuvasz Club of America website (from the AKC link so legit) and the blocker came up all RED with bold BLACK text with I swear sirens and leader lights (unlikely to the last two) warning that I was looking at porn. I closed it so fast and to this day, still haven’t ever gone to that site. I’m guessing the correct usage of the word for female dog triggered it but who knows.

      2. AnneNotCarrots*

        I am so uncomfortable with the way you talk about her. Please don’t ever use “dirty girl” in a comment section about a co-worker, it’s so inappropriate.

        1. Meow*

          I’m a little disturbed they’re paying that close attention to peoples’ browsing history. I work in IT (although not security, so I’m not intimately familiar with how much/little they track) and everywhere I’ve worked, AFAIK, we paid absolutely no attention to who was hitting blocked sites, unless we had reason to audit it (their management thinks they’re doing something they shouldn’t, getting their computer infected with viruses multiple times, etc). I even came to this thread to say as much, but apparently there are places where IT/Security has too little to do that they dig into people’s web browsing habits.

          That’s not to say that we aren’t tracking it, because we are… but *usually* no one is looking at those logs unless they have a reason to.

          1. Orv*

            This reminds me of a time that someone emailed me in a panic because they’d tried to use “sudo” (a tool for accessing administrative privileges) on one of our systems, and gotten a warning about it being reported. They had accidentally typed the command into a SSH session to our server instead of their own server. They were sure I was about to reprimand them or something. In truth I’d noted the alert, realized it was an obvious mistake, and already forgotten about it.

          2. Rebelx*

            yeah, i came here to say something similar, since LW mentioned being embarrassed at the idea of IT getting a notification, but unless your IT department is full of busybodies with nothing better to do, most likely that notification goes onto a log that no one ever really looks at unless they have a work reason to check. it’s not IT’s job to be babysitting what sites people attempt to access, and most reasonable people are aware that things get incorrectly flagged all the time and won’t jump directly to assuming their coworkers are watching (or attempting to watch) porn at work.

            1. Kevin Sours*

              I’m pretty sure most IT people would chew off an appendage to avoid getting notified every time the web filter blocks a request.

            2. Kevin Sours*

              Even if was correctly flagged, people probably aren’t going to jump to the conclusion that it was intentional. Very few people are going to deliberately try to watch porn at work.

      3. Orv*

        I wouldn’t necessarily assume they’ve noticed. It may just be going into a log file somewhere in case someone needs to note it later. Most IT jobs involve tuning out a lot of day-to-day “noise” and accidental attempts to access something that’s blocked tends to fall into that category.

    3. Elizabeth West*

      Agreed. This used to happen to me at OldExjob when I was given the responsibility of reducing unwanted mail. Often I would have to go to a company or publication’s website to cancel unsolicited materials, and the website would be inexplicably blocked even if it wasn’t anything problematic. I assume it was some kind of commerce filter set up to keep people from shopping when they were supposed to be working. All I had to do was ask our IT / Facilities guy about it and he would unblock it.

    4. Kes*

      Agreed that it’s worth asking IT about unblocking the advocacy category given you need it for your work.
      This may afford an opportunity to also mention that you’ve noticed some sites are miscategorized. Otherwise, unless there are specific sites you need, I wouldn’t bother bringing it up

    5. ITdobby*

      I will add that also ads on a site can trigger the blocker if any ad has a link or redirect or is associated with blocked content, the firewall will usually block the entire site. Those ads many times have nothing to do with the site, the site does not choose them, etc. – they are just there. A robust adblocker on your browser can prevent those from loading and many times keep those from triggering the block result.

      But yes, talk with IT, I handle info sec and have at several companies, and no one cares (exception maybe: government jobs or religious jobs may have a stronger stance on those signals) about the occasional block, and we know lots of things can cause that. If you need access to a site, just let IT know and they usually will unblock it or give you a reason why they cannot.

      At my religious grad school, no one could do any online shopping because did you know that stores sell….bras! O.M.G. No hard-core porn allowed on these computers so you better do your clothing shopping elsewhere! LOL

      1. Observer*

        and no one cares (exception maybe: government jobs or religious jobs may have a stronger stance on those signals) about the occasional block, and we know lots of things can cause that

        Even in places that do care about porn, etc. or who need to care, like schools, experienced staff know that the filters can be triggered by all sorts of stuff that’s really fine by the standards of the organization. Like a shopping site that sells alcohol among MANY other items got blocked under the “alcohol related” category. I assure you that IT just rolled their eyes at the filter and unblocked it.

      2. anonymous IT person*

        I had to manage a filtering program in a past job, and the one we had was awful and overbroad for blocking. We could unblock individual sites but the category control was not granular.

        I wouldn’t worry about asking for a site you need.

    6. Tiger Snake*

      I cannot stress how often your gateway team will get a request to alter the firewall. It is totally okay and normal to ask.

      Now, having said its normal to ask, I need to highlight the answer isn’t necessarily going to be “yes”. It’s important that you’re able to justify why this site is needed for your work and why other options aren’t feasible. The gateway team can alter the firewall, but they’re not allowed to do it arbitrarily. They need to make sure the change is needed and they need to try and consider other options. To help them help you, make sure you’re being specific and clear.

  10. Nancy*

    Regarding the first letter, I don’t think Jane was looking for a dog sitter I think Jane was looking for a Hank sitter. Why else would she change the terms at the last minute like that? As someone else pointed out, if her nephew was capable of taking care of a dog, she would not have needed Falcon.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      I think this is what actually happened! Hank was only mentioned at the last minute and she just decided to stay two hours late with no notice? Nope, she needed someone to keep an eye on Hank and the dogs until 11 the whole time, but fudged the details until it was too late to back out. Hank only needs a light touch, like making sure he doesn’t spread dog mess around, so for the neighbour’s purposes, a kid can do that amount of clean up after Hank. Most of us want to stay on good terms with our neighbours, and Jane was hoping this consideration would get her off with being exploitative and nd inconsiderate of your child. Even if it had happened as she said, she should never have left a child in this position with a strange adult until late at night! I can’t believe OP gave some of the money back, if it has been me I would only have done so if I was also willing to say there was not enough money in the world to cover the imposition.

    3. honeygrim*

      I was suspicious of that as well (as I mentioned in my response elsewhere). Maybe I read too many books featuring duplicitous villains.

    4. Person from the Resume*

      But did Hank need a sitter? There was no “Hank sitting.” The LW and her son did not watch or interact with Hank. Jane didn’t ask Falcon to watch him along with the dogs either.

      Also both the dogs and Hank were home alone when Falcon and LW arrived. So obviously both could be left alone without a sitter at least for short periods of time.

      1. Elizabeth West*

        Re Hank, it seems like a short period would be fine, but he may have needed someone with him for the length of time Jane intended to be out. In that case, she should have canceled her event attendance, or if it was work-related, said no to whoever dumped Hank on her in the first place. It was her problem to deal with — trying to push it off on a kid is pretty shitty.

    5. OP*

      OP here. I asked this question after receiving Jane’s text indicating Hank would be at the house. I was assuming he was a child who needed looking after. She told me at that point that he was a young adult with learning disabilities, but that he wouldn’t need any help from us. She thought Falcon might enjoy “having company” while spending the evening at her house.

      1. Consonance*

        Jane strikes me as Not a Parent(TM). I can see her logic that it would be totally fine. Hank, in her mind, is harmless and fine and nice and enjoyable. Your son is also nice and enjoyable. Put them together and that’s fine. But from a parent’s perspective: You don’t ask a middle schooler to spend five to six unsupervised hours alone in a house with an adult neither you nor they have ever met. (Duh!) I’d recommend (1) debriefing with your child about what happened and what you think you might do differently looking back on it, (2) talking through what to say if this type of request comes up in the future, and (3) taking an active role the next time this request comes up.

        In particular, if she asks him to dog sit like this again (and if he’s up for it), I’d either join the conversation or talk with her one-on-one to say “I realize things didn’t go as planned last time. Honestly it was uncomfortable having the terms of the arrangement changed last minute without a chance for us to respond, and it just isn’t possible for him to spend unsupervised time with an adult we don’t know. He’s happy to provide this dog sitting, but I wanted to be up front about making sure the situation is one he can truly fulfill this time.”

      2. Ellis Bell*

        Ohhh, I can see how this phrasing would make it super difficult to object to Hank! I really think Jane does not have great judgement though.

    6. fhqwhgads*

      I think it’s very possible Hank is capable of being left alone for a few hours but also not capable of caring for the dogs, and not capable of being left alone with the dogs.
      I also think it likely she wasn’t expecting Hank to be there originally. It seems like the last minute change was Hank’s presence, which necessitated the longer time spent with the dogs.
      It’s a crap move on the neighbor’s part all around. Gotta get consent for changing the number of hours, especially when it’s going from most people’s waking hours to “late at night”. Don’t leave a teen with a stranger. Don’t put the teen in a position of being asked to consent to being alone with a stranger.
      If anything, the kid deserved hazard pay for the last second changes, not to give money back because someone else literally stepped in crap and tracked it in the house.

  11. Bex (in computers)*

    LW3 – unless you’re already under a microscope for something else, your IT department likely isn’t individually monitoring you and tracking what you visit. Most data like that is a pain to monitor, a pain to store, and a pain to sift through if a request ever even comes through (and most IT folks bristle at collecting such data on an individual or granular level because of the privacy implications).

    If it’s something you need, flag the site and the alert for your IT group. It’s possible that there are generic implemented rules based off a number of things – including outlinks, incoming referral links, even old language filters – that could be accidentally flagging.

    I usually get dinged for one or two file sharing or adult themed websites a week. All while I’m doing just my job and just researching troubleshooting steps (reading KBs and release notes from Microsoft etc). Screenshot, send, request as needed.

    1. ferrina*

      Yep- this is so common. I’ve never run into a web blocker that wasn’t overly enthusiastic. Unless you’re asking for a lot of exceptions, IT doesn’t care.

    2. Crencestre*

      In my former job, the web blocker routinely misidentified perfectly innocent websites as off limits, and I had to get the IT person to unblock them. We both got a chuckle over one such case – a children’s cooking class program (with an equally innocent name) was blocked for being porn! (We never did figure out why THAT happened…)

    3. Alienor*

      I agree on this. I mentioned tracking to an IT person at a former job once – we were just chatting while they worked on my system – and they said they had all they could do just to keep on top of the regular updates, requests, etc. There was no way they could also get into the weeds on what websites the thousand or so employees at that location were visiting all day long, which was why they had the filters in the first place. The data was there and they could have pulled a report if someone’s boss had asked, but there would have had to be a reason for the request (like someone had actually seen porn on the person’s screen).

  12. the Viking Diva*

    Yeesh. All that stress and Jane stiffed the kid too.
    Falcon, I hope you get some better pet-sitting gigs and can find some laughs in this one someday… maybe even come back and tell your tale on AAM: Next GEN.

  13. TheBunny*

    LW#3

    No specific help for you, but if it makes you feel better, my old company blocked Yelp. No big deal right? For most employees, no big deal.

    But it always seemed to be my boss and myself who were given the job to find a “well reviewed” area restaurant when VIPs would show up.

    Trying to get IT to allow Yelp was…frustrating. At one point I said if I couldn’t get access to it I was just going to use the Michelin guide to select local restaurants.

    That actually worked. :)

      2. Prudence and Wakeen Snooter Theatre for the Performing Oats*

        I mean… I waste way more time on AAM than YouTube. Makes sense to me!

      3. Observer*

        My work firewalls Ask A Manager but not YouTube. Algorithm logic?

        No. It’s the sign of either a lousy filter or lazy / overwhelmed IT.

        Many filters don’t do *page* filtering, they do *site* filtering. And, especially at the lower end, they don’t have good ways to filtering something like Youtube (or vimeo or any other site of the sort.) So because Youtube hosts SOOOO much content and a *lot* of that content is genuinely problematic and SHOULD be filtered in a reasonable workplace, the whole thing gets blocked.

        The better filters don’t do that, but I still see it.

      4. Meow*

        More than likely, enough people have legitimate reasons to use Youtube at work (marketing, training, etc) that it’s not worth it to block it. Especially since if someone really wants to slack off, they can still use their phone.

    2. raktajino*

      Considering a coworker once clicked on a restaurant’s link from inside Yelp that turned out to redirect to super gross malware, I can understand the impulse! But….then just upgrade the malware blocker, because the whole internet is a potential risk like that.

    3. Margaret Cavendish*

      At a former job, part of my role included reviewing research proposals to make sure they were compliant with privacy legislation. One day we had a proposal come up for research that involved Grindr, and required my team to do a deep dive into the T&C. That was a fun conversation to have with our IT team… no, really, it’s work related, I swear!

  14. Jackie Daytona, Regular Human Bartender*

    #2, You feel disrespected and unappreciated because you *are* being disrespected and unappreciated.

    The whole situation is absurd on the part of the waffling VP.

    Since you’re willing to quit over it, you could always just book the trip. Either it’s a yes, and then no problem. Or it’s a no or non-response, and you escalate to the owner. From there, if you get a yes, great. But if you get a no, just bide your time, use up what leave you can, and put in your notice two weeks before your trip.

    Enjoy your trip!

    1. Miette*

      Even better: secure a new job between now and then and make sure new boss knows you’ve got a pre-existing vacation coming up before you start.

    2. WellRed*

      Yes, great idea. Book the trip. They are not going to fire you for it. But also, start looking for a better job. Two weeks? Vacation approval to this level of waffling?

    3. Learn ALL the things*

      I was thinking the same thing. If you’re willing to quit over this, tell them that. I’d be tempted to email the VP and copy the owner saying “I submitted my vacation request on (date). It has now been three months and I have yet to receive approval for this request. Travel prices for this time period are beginning to rise, so I will be booking my trip this week. If my vacation for these dates is not approved, I will be submitting my letter of resignation prior to the dates I have requested.”

      We’ve seen a million letters here where bosses know their staff are unhappy, but are absolutely shocked when those staff quit over their unhappiness. Let them know how seriously you feel about this, and if they lose a great employee over it they only have themselves to blame.

      And honestly, I’d be looking for other jobs anyway. The VP sounds like a petty tyrant who would be miserable to work for.

    4. el l*

      Your PTO program sucks.* Therefore, your compensation sucks. Take this as a cue to start looking.

      *Only 2 weeks, especially after 10 years of trust-building? This level of approvals and deliberation? While from a policy perspective it being a slow period doesn’t matter much, it does speak to a lack of thoughtfulness in management or awareness of the market for people.

    5. ferrina*

      Yes!

      The PTO package is ridiculously low. Management isn’t interested in rewarding long-term employees with competitive benefits- they’re probably taking the philosophy of “we’ll do the lowest compensation we can get away with”.

      Combine that with absolute disregard for answering your PTO in a timely way (lack of empathy for you), I’m not optimistic about this work place. If you are already willing to quit, start looking at other jobs and try to quit on your own terms. Good luck!

      1. Melicious*

        Omg! I’d be willing to quit over only having two weeks after TEN YEARS(!!!) of being a trusted employee? If you didn’t know, that is absolutely bananapants ridiculous, and you deserve much more.

        1. 2 Cents*

          I’ve been in the job market since November 2023 after a layoff (I’m now freelancing) but permanent jobs that I’m looking at — if it’s anything under 3 weeks, I don’t bother applying. It’s 2023, people. Get with the program. My dad tolerated two weeks for years needlessly — every time the economy hit a snag, his department was the first to feel it.

          1. MA Dad*

            I got laid off from a corporate job where I had earned 30 PTO days (vaca/sick/floaters all grouped together), spent nearly a full year unemployed, finally got something in a new industry and it’s 2 weeks plus 2 sick days since my previous 20 years apparently means nothing. It’s pretty disheartening and I’m not even a manager like LW2

    6. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

      2 weeks is insane for 10 years. I can’t remember the last place I worked that wouldn’t have you at 4 weeks by then.

      Just book your trip. I would not tell them you booked the trip. And definitely raise this red flag to the big boss. He needs to know how his VP is treating people and what he does with it will tell you everything you need to know.

    7. Kevin Sours*

      I wouldn’t necessarily put in notice. I’d just let people know I’m going on the trip and let them figure out how they want to handle that. Don’t volunteer to quit, make them be the one to pull the trigger.

      Though that comes from the position that if they fire me over it my leave would get paid out (California has it’s good points). Though if OP can’t get the week of Christmas off during a slow period I’m not sure they’ll be able to use up their leave prior either so it may not matter much.

      But the important thing to remember is that once you’ve made up your mind that you are willing to quit over something your boss’s leverage over you evaporates. Use that.

    8. OMG! Bees!*

      This. It is not a very Alison answer, but if LW2 is willing to quit over this, at this point just send the VP a final email that she *is* taking that week off, not asking.

      I hope the pay and other benefits make up for the horrible entry level 2 weeks of vacation. Given she’s been there for over 10 years, she should have at least 4 weeks of PTO by now

  15. Zircon*

    Most organisations I have worked at have had a specific form on the intranet to complete to submit to have a website unblocked. I probably filled in one form a week or more when one company first went to blocking websites – our registration body, our professional association, our EAP website, and a lot of professional development websites were blocked. I was away when it happened – we were all told it would happen and how to complete and submit the form – no manager permission required. I returned to work from leave to mild chaos. Staff saying they couldn’t get on to access various essentials. There was mild hostility that the organisation was “preventing me from doing my job”. When I asked what date and time they had submitted the form (so I could contact IT and protest!) they looked blankly at me: “What form?” Once I got them completing the form, it usually took IT about 2 hours to unblock the website. I’m very glad I asked the questions before going off at IT!!!

    1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

      I hope you had a conversation with them about lack of initiative etc. They had the option to (but didn’t):

      – Call/email IT (independently of the form, but just the same way they would report any other IT issue)
      – Ask people in another team if they were having the same issue
      – Ask another manager for help (who would they go to for other managerial level issues in your absence?)
      etc.

      1. TM*

        Yeah, I have to agree – no-one tested with the most important sites common to the userbase, and these presumably reputable sites were blocked from the jump?
        I have to question the product (unless they deliberately enabled a block-all policy) and the competency of the IT team.
        If you’re implementing a block-all policy (ugh), you should at least do the due diligence of compiling an “allow” list of the commonly-used site based on your web traffic (checked for “appropriateness” if the place is going to be that stringent, double ugh) *before* implementing the policy.
        The way it was done in that instance was just a waste of time and money (imagine dozens of people taking time out of their day to request the same site unblocks – $$$), and was not the way to win hearts and minds.
        I really dislike poorly-managed IT changes like this – it makes things tougher for the rest of us due to the loss of trust in the industry as a whole.

        1. Observer*

          It could be that they *did* actually talk to people and realized that they were never going to get a full list from people for all sorts of reasons.

          Especially since at least *some* of the staff were absolutely not paying attention to what IT was telling them. Note that IT *explicitly* told them that “We know that we don’t have a complete list. Please let us know as soon as something gets improperly blocked.”

          It may not be the most efficient way to go about it, but I’ve seen situations where it was the only way. People don’t mean to be difficult, but often getting them to do things like “provide a list of all the sites you regularly use” can be very hard, and even when people do fill out those lists, it’s a good bet that some stuff is going to be forgotten.

          1. Zircon*

            Absolutely, this is what happened. I knew it was going to happen because for weeks before there were regular messages about the process and requests for websites we regularly used. They also said that websites which they could see were regularly used would not be blocked. The change came at the same time that re-registration was due. Lots of people only accessed some of the websites once a year – but they were essential that one time.

  16. Zurg*

    #4

    I’m bad at remembering names so I usually introduce myself to the person with a “Hi, I’m Zurg. It’s good to see you.” That let’s the other person off the hook in case thy can’t remember my name, and hopefully, they introduce themselves similarly. Otherwise I’m playing a guessing game (Bill? Mike? Tom?) that’s awkward for everyone.

    1. Not Australian*

      Then they come back with “Yes, I’m Zala, we met at Trashcon six months ago,” and it gets embarrassing… The only sane response I’ve come up with is “I’m sorry, I met so many people that day!”

      1. Blue*

        Fwiw, if I respond that way it’s to remind the person so they can make the mental connection, not to scold them for not remembering.

    2. B*

      I like this too. You can do it in a way that suggests, “of course I remember YOU, but in case you might have forgotten little old me, let me re-introduce myself.”

      Sometimes you get someone who doesn’t have the acuity to respond in kind by telling you their name but then you move on.

  17. Ladida*

    #1 It is not clear if Jane texted the OP or Falcon to ask if Falcon can stay until 11PM. I really hope she had the sense to check with their parent before asking a 11 year old to stay at her house with an adult until 11PM. In any case, I think the OP/Falkon should have texted back “Unfortunately Falkon/I will not be able to stay at your place until 11PM. He /I will take the dogs out from 6 to 8 as agreed.” Just because she asks for something it does not mean you have to comply.

    1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Even if she texted Falcon and he agreed, the OP as a responsible parent should have texted Jane back and said these changes meant it would not be possible for Falcon to dogsit – and that Jane must make alternate arrangements.

      1. Not your typical admin*

        This! Also, there’s a bit of middle schoolers who may not have phones yet. Plus, there’s very few adults I would be comfortable texting my kids at that age.

        1. Texan In Exile*

          I asked my friend if I could ask her 17 year old to shovel my driveway. No way I’m approaching a minor for something like that without getting clearance from a parent.

          1. White Squirrel*

            Same. I always ask my neighbor if her child would be interested in doing out watering while we are gone.

            One exception is a neighbor who babysits and the Mom gave me her number and I text her directly, but she is an older teen.

  18. Molly Millions*

    OP#1: I’m sorry your kid feels like he’s let someone down and I hope you’ve impressed on him that he’s 100% not at fault.

    1. Jane should have anticipated the changed terms would be a non-starter (the stranger aside, a shift ending at 11 pm isn’t reasonable to demand of a middle-schooler) and shouldn’t have left for the event without getting her ducks in a row.
    2. It wasn’t your son’s job to clean up the mess the dog made *before* he got there. She hired him to play with the dog, not scrub her kitchen.
    3. Docking his pay 1) for not performing a task he never agreed to in the first place, 2) after he worked an extra-long shift on short notice, was wrong.

    I would say Jane owes you and your son an apology for the inconvenience, not the other way around.

    1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

      > Docking his pay

      Jane didn’t dock his pay, really. She gave Falcon the $75 (which includes $15/hr for the two additional hours). OP then offered to return some of the money. Yes Jane accepted this offer and probably shouldn’t have, but it was initiated by OP. I would be curious to know if OP refunded Jane on the quiet or if Falcon knows about that part.

        1. CityMouse*

          I agree with this. OP should have said no to the changed job, but definitely should not have returned the money. The best gesture would be to make it up to Falcoln.

          I also think OP should sit down with Falcoln and apologize for the situation and talk to Falcoln about how it’s okay to say no both when the circumstance change and when you feel unsafe. Teach Falcoln it is okay to walk away.

      2. Molly Millions*

        I was using figurative language to emphasize how unreasonable this would be in a real workplace. LW presumably made the offer to smooth things over socially – Jane was wrong to accept it, and it seems she has a pattern of taking advantage of LW & Falcon’s conscientiousness.

        I certainly hope the LW paid off Jane quietly and let Falcon keep the cash he was handed – $25 for 5 hours of work is far from fair.

        1. Ellis Bell*

          “she has a pattern of taking advantage of LW & Falcon’s conscientiousness”. Yep, I think this is right on target.

      3. Ali + Nino*

        OP didn’t offer to return the money, Jane asked for it back – which is absolutely not right and should not have been honored.

        1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

          OP initiated the offer:

          > Jane handed Falcon $75 as payment, but I texted her the next morning, offering to return the money

      4. Worldwalker*

        If she clawed back the money that Falcon had earned (and went above and beyond) that is totally wrong. Let the kid have the money he earned. Nothing that happened was his fault. That’s just mean to a kid.

    2. CityMouse*

      As a parent, I think OP has to have firmer boundaries when it comes to safety of the kid. Even an adult would feel uncomfortable with a massive change like this and the presence of an unknown adult you weren’t anticipating. It’s important to teach anyone that if circumstances like that feel unsafe, it’s okay to say no. It doesn’t matter if Jane already left for the event, waiting until the last minute to make huge changes to the work is on her.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        Yeah, this was a great opportunity to model for Falcon how to say No Way; “No, we’re not doing that, it’s an unreasonable expectation and we weren’t even asked – I wouldn’t let you stay alone with a strange man even if she had”. They could have taken the dogs for a walk or been with them in the garden for a little while, but I would have abandoned the job much earlier than planned, if not completely. I also would have had some very firm words for Jane about not trying to bait and switch my kid into staying alone with an adult, and putting me in the position of having to protect him.

        1. Grizabella the Glamour Cat*

          “I also would have had some very firm words for Jane about not trying to bait and switch my kid into staying alone with an adult, and putting me in the position of having to protect him.”

          This × 1000!

        2. Bossy*

          Pu-lease- the only thing I’d do with Jane is have nothing further to do with Jane. To me this was egregious. Like should we report this to the cops egregious, only there’s nothing actionable here.

      2. 2 Cents*

        In the household I was raised, my mom would’ve done the same thing — let me go, but she would’ve accompanied me, then never let me return to work for Jane, all in the name of neighborly harmony and not going back on your commitments. In the moment, it can be hard to tell what to do. Looking back, yeah, it’s clearer that OP should’ve told Jane no way. But in the moment, I can see where the hesitation was and how OP may have felt Jane would’ve been left in a lurch (and her dogs not attended to) in the moment. She did the best with the info on hand and accompanied her son. If she’s like my mom, she may have also still paid Falcon, even after giving Jane her money back.

    3. ckee*

      I think that by allowing Falcon to return money that he more than earned, she did the opposite of impressing upon him that this was not his fault. I’m really disappointed in LW1, who it sounds like did a very poor job of teaching her son to advocate for himself in exploitative and potentially dangerous situations.

      1. ferrina*

        I think we can cut LW some slack. Could LW have done better? Yes, but this was a really tough situation and it would be really hard to know the best way to respond in the moment.

        But LW definitely needs to have a follow-up conversation with Falcon about what happened, and LW needs to admit where they messed up. It’s okay to mess up* as a parent, but you need to come back from it. Admitting your mistake teaches the kids how to mess up and come back from their mistakes.

        *unless it’s a safety issue, but LW did the right thing in not letting Falcon be alone.

  19. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

    OP2 (leave request for Christmas) – there’s kind of a dilemma about leave requests, where giving too little notice makes it hard as there isn’t time to plan / things are already dependent on the person who wants the leave, but also giving the request a long way in advance (as OP has) means it’s so far out in the future that you can’t plan or make a decision, as things are uncertain enough that we don’t quite know what the situation will be in December when the request is made in July or whatever (OP said they have already been waiting a while).

    I would go back to the VP and ask what is it that’s blocking the decision from being made, and what you need to do to mitigate that. I don’t think I’d mention the rising costs as it’s too likely to get a response of “you’re a manager, you’re paid more, suck it up”.

    1. Dina*

      In my experience, it’s better when orgs treat leave requests like that as just something they know they’ll have to work around. Like, if they had put in for leave during a time when it’s obvious it would be busy (like if I’d asked for the local pride parade weekend off at my job at and LGBTIQA+ youth org), that’s different. But just… it could be busy? Nah.

      1. Allonge*

        This. It can always be busy. I understand that in some very limited circumstances my boss is entitled to ask me to cancel my holidays.

        But that is not a reason to not authorise them in the first place – it’s actually the other way around. If we all know that I will be out the first two weeks of October (as we do since April), we can all make our work plans around this. If I would be still waiting for an approval of this leave, I would probably not be planning to go any more as it looks quite busy at that time. But I also have use it or lose it, so that too is not good.

        1. RegBarclay*

          Yeah I once asked for three weeks off nine months in advance. It wasn’t our busy time, and I was planning an international vacation – which is a big deal for me at my income! It’s been ten years and I haven’t been able to afford another one yet.

          Anyway it turned out there was a massive system upgrade happening then. But since they’d approved it (and I’d already bought my non-refundable tickets) they honored it. They were a good employer.

        2. Gumby*

          Ooof. I had once arranged a month-long vacation in Spain for June. But stuff was happening, or likely to happen at work so they asked me to move it to August. When the stuff would theoretically be done. I wasn’t thrilled with that but agreed.

          It turns out the stuff that was happening did not happen on schedule. Guess when it was actually busy at work? If you guessed August – you are right! But since they had already asked me to move it once, they didn’t feel they could ask again (they hinted, I was blithely unaware).

          Everything ended up being fine though I did a LOT of pre-work for that leave to make sure things kept moving in my absence. I think I was in the office until 10 pm basically the entire week leading up to my departure.

    2. CityMouse*

      I used to work at a theme park so Christmas time off requests were basically a battle and people put in early. But OP said this was a quiet time of year and unless there’s some pattern of a single employee getting denied Christmases off (which VP has had plenty of time to investigate), this should have been handled already.

      1. Freya*

        Yeah, my workplace has a couple really quiet weeks at predictable times of year including during the September school holidays, so I booked two days off for this September back in February, because I knew those couple of weeks are popular for my co-workers since I’m usually providing coverage throughout. My boss approved those days off within a week (and shortly thereafter all the other possible leave during those couple of weeks had been booked by co-workers).

      2. ferrina*

        I agree.

        I’ve worked in a couple industries where December can be an absolute circus. If there’s concerns about LW taking time off, then the VP should have brought them up already or told LW when to expect a response. But this is a slow season! This should have been an easy response!

        Combine that with the use-it-or-lose-it, this is a really bad approach to PTO. When I worked at use-it-or-lose-it places, I would have open and frank conversations with my people about spending their PTO before it ran out (I’ve worked somewhere that both had use-it-or-lose-it and busy December. It was awful). And this is half of LW’s PTO!.

      3. Beth**

        In a previous role, December was a very busy time for our product and we started planning for that in August or earlier. My bosses demanded some level of coverage from the team in December, but it was never clear to me what we would have been able to do if it turned out we had underestimated demand. I think they just wanted people who could write a convincing analytic report for senior management showing why it was reasonable we got things wrong. Or something.

        My first year in that team, I wanted to visit my family (on another continent) for Christmas. It was the only time in a 20 year period I had done this (though I guess, as I was new to the organisation, my boss had no way of knowing that). I asked in September so I could get flights that were not completely extortionate. My boss made a big show about how he had to consult everyone else on the team and he’d get back to me. It was only a couple of weeks, but it was annoying.

        In the end, I wound up going away before Christmas, but being back in the office on the first working day after Christmas. No one ever wants to work the week between Christmas and New Year, but I don’t mind because it’s always quiet.

        The reaction from my boss was a red flag. I wound up getting an internal transfer about a year later because of him.

    3. londonedit*

      It sounds to me like the VP is on some weird power trip. ‘I’m still thinking about it’ – WTF? These are adults in a professional workplace, they shouldn’t have to go cap in hand asking for permission to take time off over Christmas. Unless the VP’s name is actually Ebenezer Scrooge.

      1. Myrin*

        That “I’m still thinking about it” really stuck out to me, too. What is so complex and think-worthy about this very straightforward ask that couldn’t have been thought about in the past several months already?

        1. ferrina*

          Or the VP is so incompetent that they try to not make any decisions on anything so they don’t make the wrong one. They try to keep all the doors open because they are too indecisive and unaware to know which doors are okay with being closed (and which ones seriously need to be closed).

      2. doreen*

        I only had one manager ever like this – the first time I requested vacation, I asked about it when I didn’t hear anything for a couple of weeks . She said “I know people like to plan but I don’t approve vacations more than 60 days in advance”. Which was really bizarre because due to a variety of rules and practices, she wouldn’t be able to do anything but approve it – it wasn’t a particularly popular week, there wasn’t any conflict with the people who would cover for me, if there had been any sort of training/meeting scheduled she should have rejected it right away and she wouldn’t be able to reject it based on training , etc that was scheduled after I submitted my request. I came to the conclusion that it was apower trip after another incident. I had asked for a couple of days off ( say Thurs-Fri) and by Monday, I hadn’t gotten an answer. So I asked- turned out she had approved it a week before and her secretary was on vacation. So it sat on the secretary’s desk for a week – I guess my manager was above putting the form in an envelope ( or letting me know to come downstairs and get it)

    4. Audrey Puffins*

      things are uncertain enough that we don’t quite know what the situation will be in December when the request is made in July or whatever

      Okay, but one thing we *can* know about December is that LW won’t be there and we’ve had since July to bear in that in mind as something that we may need to plan around. From the company’s perspective, that is the point of getting requests in early (and why a lot of workplaces have a minimum required amount of time between requesting leave and the leave itself).

    5. Samwise*

      But they do know the situation in December. It’s sloooooowwww. If this year turns out to be busy, well, the employer will just have to figure out how to deal without the OP for once.

      That’s what every other reasonable employer does.

    6. Lady Danbury*

      The whole point of submitting early is so that the company knows and can plan well in advance for the requester to be out. That planning may look different for different roles/companies, but may including limited other people being out on vacation at the same time, adjusting project schedules or arranging for temporary coverage. We know in July that the situation in December will be that one employee will be out of office, and then have plenty of time to plan for such.

  20. LostCommenter*

    I got the IT department, and then HR riled up about a page that had questionable and content in the address. I was called in for a meeting about watching porn at work. It was for a webcomic I was checking every morning before my work hours started, so I burst out laughing when they told me and asked if they checked the page. They were so embarrassed after actually opening the link they doubled down and insisted I not read it at work anymore. I still refused to sign the write-up unless they modified the term “pornographic content” to “entertainment content” and include a link to the webcomic.

    2. Revanche*

      Hah a fellow QC fan! They should have had the common sense to check the site before calling you in, how ridiculous.

    3. Steve for Work Purposes*

      I am a fan of that too, it’s such a fun comic, glad it got sorted out ok with work! QC is so great.

    4. Not That Jane*

      Another QC fan! I do think depending on the workplace and the, um, era of the comic, there may be NSFW butts, I mean bits, in there. I work with kids and I wouldn’t be comfortable reading QC at work. BUT, I think it’s ridiculous that they wrote you up without even checking what it actually was.

    5. TM*

      This is really unusual, to be honest. Most knowledgeable IT security people kmow full well that these filters are never perfect, especially if they use some kind of heuristics to generate the blocks (some products have more rigorous curation and categorisation than others, but none are 100% accurate all the time).
      The larger an organisation gets, the less a team will be fixated on random “porn” alerts – it happens constantly. The general practice to review patterns of multiple alerts by the same individuals, or if a truly heinous/dangerous filter has been tripped.
      For what it’s worth, Alison’s suggestion to notify the IT team that something is miscategorised and/or required for work purposes is perfect. If they have a decent product, they’ll be able to supply feedback to the vendor (this is often automated too)

  22. Workaholic*

    LW3: iI once had an issue getting email from the city of Toppenish. My contact enabled me 3x, then I had her email a coworker, nothing got through. Then I realized Toppenish had a male anatomy in the name. Our system was catching and deleting the emails before they ever got to us. Had to notify IT to put it on the approved list so we could actually get work done.

    1. Coverage Associate*

      I used to be an admin for a chat group with similarly sensitive blocking, except instead of blocking the words, it would change them to a jokey word. The most common problem was the large mammal in “harassment,” which the system changed to “harbumbumment. I often couldn’t figure out what normal word was meant. I was able to change the settings so it only made the change if the bad word was standing alone.

      1. Freya*

        My ‘favourite’ is blocking the word ‘sex’, which leads to blocking five counties in the UK (more or less, depending on how one is defining ‘county’).

    2. I Have RBF*

      Overzealous censors/blockers drive me nuts. One game I play blocks the word “unique”, because apparently it’s NSFW in French?

      1. iglwif*

        If “unique” is NSFW in French, it must have evolved some interesting slang meaning recently, because as far as I know it means exactly the same thing in French as it does in. English…

  23. Elsa*

    LW2, I’m so angry on your behalf! It’s awful when managers act like they own their employees. I agree with Alison that it’s worth seeing whether you have other employment options where you will be treated with more respect.

    I’m also just so curious about how all this vacation approval stuff works with “use it or lose it” vacation policy. Can a boss just refuse to approve any vacations and then you end up losing vacation days that are part of your compensation? I don’t see how that is any different from withholding part of your salary. If the boss ended up not approving this particular vacation, wouldn’t he at least need to let you take vacation at some other time?

    1. Kevin Sours*

      In most states vacation time isn’t protected. Even in states where it is, it generally only protects vacation time that has already accrued and doesn’t prevent capping accruals (so technically you don’t lose this year’s vacation if you don’t take it, you just don’t get next year’s).

      I don’t know of any law that says you have to allow employees to take the time off.

  24. CityMouse*

    I think you should consider quitting, LW2. 2 weeks for someone in the industry for 20.years is low and the VP appears to be playing games for no reason. Brush off that resume and find a place that treats you with respect. Playing games with time off is unacceptable.

  25. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    OP: did Falcon actually give some money back, or did you privately refund Jane? If the former, then you need to refund Falcon because absolutely nothing was his fault – it was all on Jane and her late, probably planned, changes.
    He did what she originally asked and should at least receive his full pay.

    Falcon sounds a great kid and future empoyee, very concientious about his paid work, but don’t let him think he should let future employers exploit him or tolerate unsafe working conditions.

    2. OP*

      OP here. I gave the money back, but am refunding Falcon. The sticking point for Jane is that she doesn’t think the pooping happened between when she left and when Falcon arrived. She thinks it happened while we were there, and that we allowed it to happen. We really don’t know when it happened, but we kept the dogs outside for 2.5 hours, and they were sleeping next to us for the majority of the time after we came into the house. I think that it happened before we arrived, but I can say that for sure.

      1. I Have RBF*

        I would not trust Jane any more. She has taken advantage of you and your kid quite a bit, with the poop thing, the Hank thing, and the sudden extra two hours thing. Yes, he can do outside work for her, but I would not have you kid go into her house.

      2. Saturday*

        It’s frustrating that she feels you “allowed it to happen” when you had the dogs outside for hours. I mean… what were you supposed to do to prevent it from happening? She needs to work with her dogs so that they’re not so likely to go in the house.

  26. bamcheeks*

    LW1, I would do some serious reflection on why you felt you couldn’t just text Jane back and say, “Sorry, that won’t be possible. We’ll stick to the original arrangement!” Is it because you feel you can’t say no to a neighbour? Is it because you feel you can’t say no to an employer? Is it because you feel you can’t say no to anyone?

    I would honestly try and get to the bottom of that and figure out how to change it, because you do not want to model for Falcon that if someone changes an agreement, or asks him to work late, or puts him in a situation he’s uncomfortable with, or he can’t say, “sorry, no, that doesn’t work for me.”

    Frankly, even if Falcon was 22 and knew Hank well, and his only hot date was with a Lost boxed set, it would still be completely OK to say no to Jane changing the timings. It would also have been OK to say yes if Falcon was happy to do it! But someone asking doesn’t create an obligation on you, and you should re-visit this with Falcon and work together to figure out what you could have done differently and why.

    1. Cordelia*

      yes I agree, Falcon needs to know that it is ok to say no if employers try to exploit you, or really if anyone is making unreasonable requests of you. And Jane needs to know that this kind of request is unreasonable! It doesn’t sound as if you have even expressed your concerns to her. By apologising and refunding the money you’ve made it seem as if Falcon was in the wrong, and contributed to him feeling guilty about not doing a good job, which I know was not your intention. I think you could have a talk with him about setting boundaries and not letting yourself be exploited or put in dangerous situations, and be open about this being something you both need to work on as you got it wrong in this case (yes, you kept him out of a dangerous situation, but he didn’t really need to be in it in the first place).

    2. Silver Robin*

      +1. Neither OP nor Falcon were comfortable, and yet OPs solution was to prioritize finishing the job over her own and Falcon’s discomfort and safety. And then to offer and give back $50!!! That leaves Falcon with $25, which is less than what he would have earned in the first place.

      Figuring out ways to help out even if it is inconvenient is kind, which is where I assume the original impulse came from. But one’s own discomfort/safety is not an inconvenience and should not be treated as such.

        1. Silver Robin*

          Interesting, that is not how it would have been for me. especially since it is just an evening and a neighbor (assuming that at least means “same block” and not “nearby neighborhood”. No need to change the dog’s environment for such a small job. Now if folks were gone overnight or for several days, that could certainly change

    3. Catherine*

      Yes, it’s so important to model how to say no for a child. I think adults often forget how frequently and consistently most children aren’t allowed to say no, especially not to adults! It can make for a really steep learning curve when one becomes an adult and suddenly needs to figure out that they finally have the agency to refuse unreasonable demands.

      1. londonedit*

        And it’s something a lot of adults struggle with! I’m not sure how I’d have reacted to Jane’s bait-and-switch ‘Oh, actually can you stay until 11? And actually by the way my nephew is going to be there’. Once you’ve agreed to something, it can be very difficult to push back if you’re essentially backed into a corner, as Jane did by not letting them know these things until she’d already left. What were they meant to do, just not look after the dogs?

        1. Chestnut Mare*

          Yes. If the circumstances changed, it’s on Jane to change her plans, not on OP and Falcon to figure it out for her.

        2. KateM*

          It is possible that Jane let them know before she left, just OP and Falcon didn’t rtead the text before Jane left.

          1. Jackalope*

            It’s possible, but even if she texted them hours beforehand and they ostensibly had lots of time to figure it out, it was still her responsibility to make sure they had seen the text and were okay with the changes. That she didn’t strongly suggests that she was using social norms to pressure them into feeling like they couldn’t say no.

          2. Observer*

            It is possible that Jane let them know before she left, just OP and Falcon didn’t rtead the text before Jane left.

            That really does not count. When something is that material it is on the sender to make sure it reached the recipient.

        3. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

          There is an issue with what I’ve heard called “forced teaming”. The situation goes like this:

          Jane: You’re watching my dogs tonight until 11pm also my nephew will be there.

          Person getting the text: I can say no, BUT she’s already left AND if I don’t do it there will be no one to watch the dog, and the dog will starve and poop all over itself and scratch all the furniture and it will be MY FAULT that all that happens, if I leave it’s basically ANIMAL ABUSE, so I have to put up with all these changes, even if she stays out until dawn, because the animal needs me! Jane left the animal in my charge and it’s my job and if I leave, there is no one else who can do this, the animal will suffer!

          Essentially, Jane has structured the situation so that the petsitter thinks it’s his problem to solve Jane’s petsitting problem.

          All of this is to hide the option that the petsitter could have said no and forced Jane to come up with a different option.

          Maybe Jane comes home early and deals with the dog. Maybe Jane sends out an SOS on the whatsapp group. Or, since it’s not a baby and it’s a dog… the dog will poop in the house and scratch the furniture and not be happy about it, but if the dog truly cannot be left alone for 4 hours, then that’s Jane’s problem to solve, and in that case, the dog is probably needy enough that you should get professionals to dogsit. A middle schooler is not a professional. Which is why Jane feels she can get away with paying so little.

          While there ARE situations where “if I don’t do [this necessary, vital task], it won’t get done, and therefore I must go to the ends of the earth to do it”… they’re pretty rare. Dogsitting isn’t it.

          (If there was some vital work emergency that Jane had to do and leave her toddler home and she needed someone to watch the toddler until 11pm — Jane could have asked the LW. Or other adults that she seems on good terms with.)

      2. Shenandoah*

        Absolutely – I’m late into my 30’s and still learning this one. OP, I could 100% see myself making the same choices as you did here, and I think these comments are a good reminder for me at I need to do a better job modeling saying no and setting boundaries for my kid.

    5. CommanderBanana*

      ^^ This. It is so, so, so important to model boundaries with your children, especially with other adults. Jane already demonstrated that she’s not someone you can trust to have your children do stuff for, and the fact that she took back money that she’d promised your child in exchange for the work he did – which he did do – is just the crappy cherry on this poop-cake.

      I have a (probably unhealthy) addition to internet advice columns, and it’s always interesting to see people write in because after having, they realize they need to advocate for their kids and teach their kids how to advocate for themselves, and they are terrified of “confrontation” (which often just means saying no to people) or describe themselves as people-pleasers. And a lot of them realize they learned that as kids by having their boundaries trampled by adults or being told they couldn’t tell adults no, or they had to “be nice” or whatever crap adults want to dress it up in.

  27. Cinn*

    LW3 has reminded me of the filter program my school used 10-20 years ago that gave us great entertainment blocking a bunch of history nerd pages we tried to use for our Classical History homework as “porn”. We assumed it was due to the pottery & statues.

    Anyway, chances are they aren’t monitoring each and every instance you click on those links. And if you know that some are safe & relevant for work you can always ask IT for exemptions for those specific sites. So long as you can demonstrate (if it’s not obvious) why it would help you do your job.

    1. MeTwoToo*

      My company must have used the same site. Almost 20 years ago I clicked the link and it came up as blocked for ‘Japanese pornography’. I panicked and immediately emailed IT to say I was trying to access ABC site and definitely not looking at porn at work! They just unblocked the site with no comment.

    2. Coverage Associate*

      Above, I mentioned a site that changed the large mammal in “classical” to “bumbum.” As it was a Great Books page, that setting made it almost unreadable.

  28. Oof*

    Please edit the “disabled people are scary” part out of the first letter. The fact Hank is disabled is completely irrelevant.

    1. Myrin*

      It’s not irrelevant at all in this case!

      If it hadn’t been mentioned, commenters would wonder why Hank wasn’t the one looking after the dog – after all, he’s an adult, related to Jane, and stayed at the house himself! -, why he was hanging out in the dark, why he didn’t interact with OP and Falcon at all, etc.
      The fact that he is mentally disabled explains all of that in a way where people can focus on the actual question in the letter.

      (Also and just as an aside, it sounds like Falcon was afraid of him because he hung out silently in the dark, not because of his disability, which they both only knew because they were already aware beforehand that Jane has a disabled nephew named Hank. I’d assume he would’ve been afraid of a non-disabled man hanging out silently in a dark room, too.)

      1. LateRiser*

        Yeah, a stranger with no developmental disabilities who acted the same way as Hank did would be more frightening by far…

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        Yeah, I took it as being there both as an explanation of why Hank couldn’t mind the dogs himself and also as a possible other stressor on Falcon, not knowing if Hank needed support/was OK, not as a suggestion that Hank was scary because he had learning difficulties.

        If he didn’t have learning difficulties, it would have been significantly more scary – an adult not being willing to look after the dogs and wanting a child to come over alone to do it while he lurked in the dark. Which is honestly another reason to mention it. If the LW didn’t, I think there is a chance somebody would suggest that Hank was a possible predator who might have encouraged Jane to insist Falcon stay there. The fact that Hank has learning difficulties explains why he may not have been comfortable being responsible for the dog and makes people less likely to wonder why he wasn’t uncomfortable being alone in a house for hours with a child he didn’t know. (I know he wasn’t alone but it sounds like he may not have known in advance that the LW would accompany Falcon.)

    2. bamcheeks*

      I can’t decide whether I agree that it’s completely irrelevant. I do agree that descriptions of Hank as scary are ableist. And I was really struck that whilst it’s very reasonable for a middle-school boy to be scared to go into a kitchen where there’s a strange man, it seems like LWALSO spent two hours sitting in the front room with Falcon and was scared to engage with Hank.

      But I think it’s legit to find the situation alarming because of the ambiguity — not knowing whether I was genuinely there to mind the dogs or had been manipulated into being responsible for an adult with unknown support needs would piss me off too, as an adult, though I’d be more annoyed at being put in that position than scared. I’d also feel confident asking either Jane or Hank to clarify what the situation was and what I was being asked to do, and I’d tell Jane that this was an unacceptable thing to ask of a young teenager either way.

      So it does feel quite likely to me that disability is relevant because LW lacks confidence around disabled people, and that’s why they felt unable to say, “no, that won’t be possible or “what exactly are you asking us to do” They should have tackled this a bit more assertively either way, either by clarifying what was expected or straight up saying no.

      1. Audrey Puffins*

        LW did say that they greeted Hank but he didn’t respond, so it’s not automatically that they were too scared of Hank to even try, it sounds like it was more like they were unsettled by his lack of response.

        1. bamcheeks*

          This is probably getting more into parenting philosophies than work-related advice, but it’s pretty important for me to model to my kids that someone doing something that I perceive as weird / rude / discomforting does not mean that person is a threat to me or that I need to be scared of them (as an adult– for a child to be nervous about an unknown adult is absolutely legit, but that’s true however they are behaving.)

          I want my kids to be situation-aware and confident in trusting their instincts, but I also don’t want them to mistake friendliness for safety or neurodiversity or disability for a threat. So for me it would be important to model that “sitting in the dark and not saying hi” is normal human diversity, and doesn’t mean that Hank is a greater threat than an adult man who smiles and says hi and plays computer games with you or whatever.

          1. DawnShadow*

            I think they were reading the room correctly. Regardless of his abilities, sitting in the dark in the next room and not saying anything to them for hours (and they even made an overture!) sounds like someone who does not WANT to interact. Why should they impose on him to continue to try to interact with him when he clearly is not comfortable with that?

            1. Jackalope*

              My most innocent interpretation of Hank’s behavior is that he wasn’t feeling well (had a migraine, for example), which is why he was unable to care for the dogs himself and was sitting in the dark not talking to anyone. Obviously this is sheer speculation, but to your point it makes sense that once the LW and Falcon had greeted Hank and he had chosen not to respond, giving him space was a respectful way to act.

          2. Domino the Dalmatian*

            it’s pretty important for me to model to my kids that someone doing something that I perceive as weird / rude / discomforting does not mean that person is a threat to me or that I need to be scared of them

            It may not *actually* be a threat, but there’s often damn good reasons to *perceive* it as one. Trusting one’s instincts, and all that.

            I think you are doing your kids a disservice. If they’re ever in an Apalachee-type situation where if some kid strikes them the wrong way, they damn well should get out of there.

            1. Lizard the Second*

              Agreed! Too often, people are told to ignore their instincts of unease because it would make them seem rude.

              1. GythaOgden*

                Yeah, there’s a lot of people here whose experiences of the sharper end of real life are very minimal. A lot of us end up clearing up the mess afterwards and are not as fortunate to be insulated from it.

                Some of us have even experienced directly what Hank is experiencing and we jolly well know that it was frightening for other people to be around us. Trust me, from experience with my own psychosis and knowing what I was capable of, what danger I put myself in and what danger I put others in when I was under the influence of it, I’m going to continue to live in the real world where things don’t conform to the ‘heroes and villains’ mindset of orthodox social justice. I will try to make that world a better place for everyone (in terms of better health and social care facilities, as I’m already doing in my working life), but bringing your kids up with little regard for actual danger because it might be X-ist is just asking for something major to happen because they don’t have that ability to read the room.

        2. LateRiser*

          Which is honestly fair enough. Without knowing anything about Hank’s specific situation they don’t know whether he was happily sitting in the dark, or shut down due to his own fear or discomfort with strangers in the house. They wouldn’t know whether more interaction could make Hank panic or melt down or try to run away, all of which could be very dangerous for Hank’s own safety even though he likely posed no threat to LW or Falcon. I’d be surprised if anyone were comfortable being put in that situation.

      2. Colette*

        It’s reasonable to find an adult who doesn’t respond to greetings, sits in the dark, and tracks dog poop through the house as off-putting and scary. He’s not scary because he has a disability (which does not sound like a learning disability, btw); he’s scare because he’s acting outside the norms of society.

        1. bamcheeks*

          If we’re talking about an adult’s reaction rather than a young person’s, I would quite strongly disagree with this. I think “he’s scary because he’s acting outside the norms of society” is the root of a lot of disability stigma. It’s

          1. Colette*

            The thing is there are plenty of people who with and without disabilities who hate small talk and want to be left alone.

            In general, society should have a place for everyone. If the nephew as going out to get groceries, it would be reasonable to expect him to be treated with the same courtesy and respect as anyone else. But there are exceptions to the accommodations it is reasonable to expect, and tracking poop everywhere you go is over the line.

            Part of social interaction (such as returning greetings) is demonstrating that you are behaving in a predictable manner and are safe to be around. It’s OK to opt out – but it’s not OK to opt out and expect to be treated as if you participated. And that’s true whether you have a disability or not. Now, if Jane had said “my nephew will be home, but he really doesn’t like talking to strangers, so just let him do his own thing”, that can help smooth over some of that interaction. But she didn’t, so all the OP has to judge is that he is not behaving like someone safe (and that he as an adult cannot or will not care for the dogs for several hours).

            1. bamcheeks*

              But I don’t want to teach my kids that someone who acts friendly and says hi is “behaving like someone safe”, because I don’t think that’s safe for them. I think you judge safety separately from things like “is this person conforming to norms around small talk and sociability”.

              (I think the poo-tracking is by FAR the most concerning thing here, and if LW and her son were aware that Hank had done that and not cleared it up and had made the decision to stay out of the kitchen for that reason, I would see that as pretty reasonable! But at this point all they knew was that he’d not switched the light on or responded to “hi”, and I just think that’s an *extremely* low bar for “this person is scary because they’re acting outside the norms”. )

              1. Colette*

                Of course someone responding to small talk could still be dangerous – but people (as a whole) are wired to make connections, and basic pleasantries are part of that. Someone who doesn’t respond to “hi” (even non-verbally) is pretty far outside the norm. Maybe it’s a disability; maybe it’s a choice; maybe he’s hostile and angry.

                In this case, an adult in the house who can’t be trusted with dogs is itself concerning – and it appears that once that adult was there, the dogs couldn’t be left alone with him. (Prior to the nephew entering the picture, the dogs needed a couple of hours of play; afterwards, they needed someone in the house.) That’s concerning in itself.

              2. OP*

                OP here. To be clear, Falcon was afraid of Hank. I wasn’t afraid, per se, but he just stared at us when we said hello to him, and didn’t respond to us in any other way. And I recognize that I’m bringing my own baggage in here, but as a woman who has been assaulted in the past, I was nervous about Hank even before we entered the house (just because he was a man I never met before, not because he was learning disabled). It’s more than likely that he was completely harmless, but I also want Falcon to know to trust his gut, and I need to trust mine. While not scared, I was very uncomfortable with that situation.

                I tolerated the situation because the dogs needed to be cared for, Jane is a neighbor who has always been very good to us, and I didn’t want to back out of our agreement. Hindsight being 20/20, I see now that she is the one who radically changed the agreement, but in the moment, I wanted to try to do what was best for everyone.

                1. Domino the Dalmatian*

                  Neither you nor Falcon did anything wrong. This is folks trying to score ideological points. Trusting your instincts is a valuable survival skill.

        2. Ooff*

          “ He’s not scary because he has a disability (which does not sound like a learning disability, btw); he’s scare because he’s acting outside the norms of society.”

          Then why mention his disability in the first place?

          And yes, as bamcheeks pointed out, that is ableist.

          1. Stardust*

            Because–as several people have pointed out already–the fact that he’s disabled explains all of his unusual behavior.
            If it hadn’t been mentioned, OP, Falcon, and commenters alike would’ve been “WTF is going on with this guy? Why can’t he look after the dogs since he’s already here? Why on earth did he drag shit through the room without doing anything about it? Why did he spend hours sitting in the dark, ignoring OP and son?”.
            Knowing that he has a disability, nobody has to ask these questions because the answer is “because he has a disability”.

      3. Daisy-dog*

        I read it as LW viewed the outing as keeping Falcon company/feeling safe, therefore wasn’t going to venture away from him and wouldn’t have assumed that the dogs would make a mess.

        To Jane: sh!t happens. Even when you make plans to avoid it.

      4. wavefunction*

        There are no descriptions of Hank as scary. She gave neutral descriptions of his behavior and said Falcon was scared of him.

    3. Airkewl Pwaroe*

      Hank’s disability is 100% relevant. All social and personal discomfort aside, a disability that can result in an adult tracking dog poop all over the house is definitely the reason why Jane asked for extra dog sitting time; she was clearly hoping Falcon would be able to monitor and prevent any incidents. It is unreasonable to ask a middle schooler to monitor any adult, but that this is a disabled adult somewhat explains the idea behind the request.

      The disability doesn’t make Hank scary, it makes him unpredictable in a way that most children (and many adults!) can not handle. That’s the concern LW1 is expressing.

      1. CityMouse*

        It makes Falcoln in the role of supervising as well which isn’t acceptable.

        It’s also simply never okay to ask a kid to be alone with an adult that isn’t known or otherwise vetted.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        Not only is it relevant, it makes him less scary and absolves him of blame. If Hank’s condition had not been described, but OP said that he was sitting in the dark ignoring them, and that he tracked dog poop everywhere, commentators would be condemning him for being creepy and careless. Falcon would have been unnerved and afraid of any strange man who did not have the knack of communicating “I am a safe adult” cheerfully, but knowing that there is a reason for the awkwardness is a big factor in understanding what went down here; that it was Jane’s fault for creating the situation, not Hank’s fault for not handling it.

    4. CommanderBanana*

      ….it’s absolutely relevant, just as it would be relevant if an adult had been asked to babysit a child and not told until they showed up that the child had a disability.

    5. Excel Gardener*

      It’s not irrelevant. I speak as someone who used to work in a job related to caring for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (though I was not a direct support staff, I did go on premises and talk to such staff at times). The reality is that some intellectually disabled people can be unpredictable, be triggered into tantrums or even physically lashing out, and have poor or no emotional regulation, all in the body of a fully grown adult. When you know nothing about the person you’re encountering, and you’re alone with them and they’re not behaving in a friendly and social way, that’s a dicey situation where some anxiety is warranted. Doesn’t mean Hank is a bad person or anything, it’s just the reality of a bad situation Jane put LW and her son in.

    6. Elle*

      I hated this too, but there are also commenters here saying that when people complain about ableism or bigotry they’re mostly making excuses for “unacceptable behavior.” So I feel like we have a snowball’s chance in hell of making the case to anyone that including the bit about him having learning disabilities (what a euphemism, in this case!) was unnecessary or wrong.

      1. CommanderBanana*

        If you’re referring to my later comment, Jane is the person with the unacceptable behavior that I’m referencing.

      2. GythaOgden*

        I think tracking dog droppings across the house is pretty unacceptable tbh. Call me naive, but it’s something most of us, even chronically untidy people like me, would seek to avoid.

      3. Ellis Bell*

        I’m baffled as to how “learning disabilities” is a euphemism? It’s a completely standard term in my field.

        1. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

          I think there’s a seperated by a common language factor going on here.

          For some folks, learning disabilities = dyslexia, etc.

          For other folks, learning disabilities = autism, etc.

          So some folks are saying “that’s very weird to say that Hank has dyslexia, that’s not relevant to his behavior”. But the LW/Jane is not using it to mean dyslexia.

          1. Rebecca*

            “But the LW/Jane is not using it to mean dyslexia.”

            Did OP clarify that somewhere? If not, how do you know, or rather, why do you assume?

            1. Stardust*

              Dear god, because his behavior tracks for someone who isn’t fully mentally developed but not for someone whose only disability is dyslexia. Can we please be realistic for a second?

      4. Anon for this one*

        My son is neuro diverse and went through a period of having massively loud and violent tantrums — screaming, throwing things, kicking, hitting, biting. Our 7th grade niece babysat for us during this period* until one night where he woke up and threw a truly epic tantrum; our poor niece called us crying, we got home as fast as we could, and one of us got our son settled while the other drove our niece home (she got hazard pay for that night). My sister-in-law told me a few days later that Niece had been scared during the tantrum and wasn’t comfortable babysitting for us anymore and you know what? THAT WAS COMPLETELY REASONABLE. She was scared because it was scary and she was 12, not because she was ableist.

        *and yes, she was aware of the tantrums. We told every babysitter when booking them “8/10 times he will be asleep the whole time we’re gone, but if he wakes up he does sometimes have tantrums [description of tantrums and what to do, which included calling us and we would return immediately]. Is that something you’re ok with?”

        1. iglwif*

          My daughter used to babysit kids aged ~1-5 during services at our synagogue (with supervision by an adult who went from classroom to classroom), and several of those kids over the years were autistic or had ADHD. This was always relevant to her job because it affected their behaviour and how best to relate to them, but the only time it was actually a problem was the time a little boy’s adults did not disclose his neurodivergence, he had an absolutely massive meltdown (throwing chairs, screaming, hitting), and my daughter (a) was scared and upset and (b) blamed herself for not having prevented this whole thing from happening.

          When someone is throwing chairs, it’s scary! Even if they are kindergarten-sized chairs thrown by a kindergarten-sized child.

        2. Ooff*

          Congrats all the people lining up to tell an actual disabled person about the time they met a scary violent disabled person though.a

          “Well actually disabled people ARE scary and violent” is a hell of a take.

          1. maya*

            I’m disabled and you’re using a strawman argument. This is clearly not what people are saying. I’m very sensitive to this kind of thing.

    7. Observer*

      The fact Hank is disabled is completely irrelevant.

      Not true. For one thing, the LW is using this to indicate just how little they know about Hank. And that does help to explain why they thought it was reasonable the Hank could not be left to care for the dog.

      Please also note that the LW does NOT say what you claim they did. They say that Falcon was uncomfortable with a *strange* man – no mention of his disability. Then his behavior made things worse because it really is quite weird.

    8. RagingADHD*

      Given that Jane’s characterization of Hank as having “learning disabilities” seems very out of step with his behavior, I think it is perfectly normal for LW and Falcon to be worried that they were misled into taking responsibility for a situation they did not fully understand.

      Realizing that you have been lied to by someone you took at face value is scary.

  29. ACH*

    When I was in grad school, the campus had a firewall that regularly blocked websites for inexplicable reasons. For example, we couldn’t access the local hardware store website–we never did figure out why. On the other hand, it didn’t block some things it definitely should have. For example, it was supposed to block porn, but there were several websites with very explicit content that we could access just fine. How well the firewall worked seemed to be based partly on the size/popularity of the website in question. Large websites everyone knew about were correctly blocked or let through. Obscure stuff, however, it was hit or miss.

  30. Feeling Feline*

    #1
    I’m getting a cat sitter for the first time, and I’m navigating the etiquette and worried I might unintentionally make things unreasonable. I have to say, I wouldn’t ever come up with the idea on whatever Jane did was even remotely not WTF by any cultural standards.

    1. Lady Lessa*

      When I have used cat sitters, they only come into the apartment once or twice a day. They feed, water, handle the litter box and interact with the cat as much as the animal will allow. I’m currently pay for two visits a day, because Teresa Tiramisu eats mainly wet food and will not eat her usual amount if I put two cans out in the morning.

      My current one has forms that she fills out after every visit.

      FYI, I feel more comfortable if the organization that the cat sitter works for or owns is bonded.

      1. Feeling Feline*

        We’ll see how we go, I’d like to think however much I mess up it’s not going to be Jane’s scale. Is it Teresa Tiramisu in your profile photo? Please tell her she is the goodest bestest girl for me.

        1. GythaOgden*

          And from me too. She very definitely looks as sweet as a tiramisu but I’m sure is of more lasting usefulness than a pot of dessert.

    2. Raisineye*

      I have a couple of folks I use as cat sitters- one is a friend I pay to stop by a couple times a day, the other is a pro who was recommended by my friend. The pro came to my house before my trip to meet the cats and get the lay of the land. That helped all of us feel better about the situation. And my cats LOVE the pro- even the super fraidy cat will run to greet her. use references.

  31. DannyG*

    Have had the stupid firewall experience at several hospitals I’ve worked at over the years: CDC and The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases getting blocked because they covered sexually transmitted diseases. Duh…. We’re a hospital, those are things we treat.

    1. Chocolate Teapot*

      And a fly-on-the-wall police documentary I once saw had a scene in which there was a danger the case file wouldn’t reach the Crown Prosecution Service by the deadline to register charges, due to the wording.

      Said file concerned details of a young woman’s murder in horrific circumstances.

      1. GythaOgden*

        Nothing would surprise me to be honest, not after that massive Cloudstrike gaffe earlier in the summer. Made me want to break out the old abacus again.

    2. JustaTech*

      I used to work in AIDS research and now I work on sex-specific cancer research and after the 80 billionth time the researchers called IT to unblock stuff I think they just gave up and turned off huge sections of the blockers.
      (But the industry gossip sites are still blocked. Never did figure that one out.)

  32. Not your typical admin*

    Letter 1 – She changed the terms after she left to put Falcon in a position to potentially be alone with an adult he has never met?! That is so dangerous, and so unfair to ask a middle schooler to navigate that situation. Plus the fact that this adult is incapable of taking care of the dog adds so many other issues. I would be beyond furious if someone put my child in that position.

  33. WorkingInnit*

    OP #1 : Honestly, I think asking someone to dog sit for 2/3 hours and then last-minute ask them to stay in the house for 5 hours is not very respectful of someone else’s time. Maybe your kid had chores or homework to do or other plans. You cannot just spring that on someone.
    I would also wonder about whether Hank was suitable company for a middle schooler, especially when they’ve never met before and (I’m guessing) this is also Falcon’s first dog-sitting gig with the neighbour.
    Maybe Hank is just a bit withdrawn and not very good with pets but when Falcon has never met him before and he doesn’t even acknowledge people when they’re in the house, your neighbour should have first let Hank and Falcon meet beforehand and make sure Falcon and Hank felt comfortable staying in the house together before putting them both in that situation.

    1. CityMouse*

      It’s never okay to ask a child to be alone with an adult that isn’t known or trusted (like references for a babysitter).

      1. Not your typical admin*

        Yes!!! Every volunteer training I’ve done to work with kids has made it clear that there is no time that you should put yourself in the position to be alone with a child.

      2. atalanta0jess*

        This. I don’t care if Hank was scary or weird, or friendly or charming. (Weird but keeping to himself is probably safer than super friendly and oddly interested in the kid…)

        Putting a kid alone in a house with a stranger like that is not ok. Period. And the message needs to be that if you’re around someone who makes you uncomfortable, you leave.

  34. Airkewl Pwaroe*

    LW3, here’s my contribution to the list of stories of workplace website blockers home wrong: I used to know a cancer researcher at a top 20 pharma company who needed special dispensation to visit breast cancer websites. That was literally their job, but all the blocker knew was that breasts are NSFW.

  35. DD26*

    #3 – my son’s orthodontist name was Sexson and my work blocked his website as pornography. I just sent them an email and they removed the block.

  36. Victor WembanLlama*

    I realize this isn’t relevant to the question, and I assume it’s made up anyway but just wanted to say Falcon is an awesome name for a kid

    1. TiffIf*

      I knew someone years ago whose name was Fallon but in an anonymous gift exchange the gift giver ended up addressing it to “Falcon.”

      At one point Fallon said to the group at large something to the effect of, “I really appreciate the gift, but I wanted to point out that my name is Fallon, not Falcon, though that would be an awesome name.”

      1. Chocolate Teapot*

        Fallon Sherrock is a UK female darts champion, and it’s the only time I have heard the name.

        1. allathian*

          Depending on her age, she could be named for a character on Dynasty, Fallon Carrington Colby, played by Pamela Sue Martin (1981-1984) and Emma Samms (1985-1989).

  37. Name (Required)*

    LW4: I used to be in a highly visible role in a niche industry where I represented my company at regional meetings and also as trade-show staff. A lot of people remembered me, but I couldn’t always remember if someone was a person I’ve met before or a name I’ve heard so often they seemed more familiar than they really were.

    I found out that anything I said as long as I delivered it as warmly as possible made people feel good about our interactions. “It’s so good to see you!” paired with a smile and followed up by a question that centered them (“How’s the event treating you?” “I was so happy to hear you’d be joining us—how long are you here for?” “Your travels went smoothly, I hope?”) went soooo far in making a good impression, making people feel seen and hiding my uncertainty.

    1. City Planner*

      I was jumping in to say something similar! I served as president of a regional professional organization for several years and part of that role was welcoming people to our annual conference and acting as emcee for our awards ceremony. As a result, lots of people knew my name and I was often in a position of not being sure if we’d been introduced previously or if they’d just seen me introduce myself a lot. It was frequently nerve wracking! I default to “it’s so nice to see you!” but a warm “how are you?” or “are you enjoying the conference?” (when at our conference) also works very well. I think it’s always helpful to have a handful of chit-chat questions in your back pocket for any social situation like that.

  38. I should really pick a name*

    #1 Please consider giving Falcon the $50 back, even if it comes out of your own pocket.
    He earned the money, and Jane didn’t ask for a refund, you offered it.

  39. kalli*

    My uncle used to do the sit-in-the-dark-during-the-day-and-at-weird-times thing and I didn’t get to know him much until I was older – turns out he had a severe injury and had to spend a lot of time resting and napping, and he often worked evenings and nights; other than that and a tendency to hydrate with beer, he was perfectly normal and would do anything to ensure someone had a bed and a feed. Most of the time it was ‘door closed – uncle home – be quiet’ and play with the cat outside instead of in the playroom. His room didn’t have any external windows so it was always super dark even if he wasn’t in there.

    This is not to say that Hank-with-some-rumoured-learning-disability should have been considered safe to be around, but I strongly reject the assumption that because nobody was comfortable being alone with a stranger, that the stranger was inherently unsafe or requiring care. Of course, it is right for a kid to not feel safe alone with a stranger. It is also possible that the dogs weren’t good with Hank because he was new, and that Hank kept to himself to try not to scare the kid. We do not know. But I am seeing a lot of ‘learning disability = incapable, unsafe” and that is not in evidence here, and wouldn’t be even if that wasn’t dog poop in the kitchen.

    I would hope LW ensures Falcon gets his $75 since he still earned it – LW’s emotions are not relevant to the fact that Falcon worked from 6pm – 11pm.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      When you’re talking about a kid, any unvetted or unknown adult is unsafe. Heck, other kids are often unsafe if there is not proper adult supervision. It’s absolutely fine if an adult like your uncle, or Hank, can’t provide that for kids and that they prefer to stick with adults, but I’m completely blown away by the expectation that Falcon was supposed to be comfortable taking the lead socially with a strange grown up, and to be responsible for Hank’s actions, like with the dog mess. Jane was extremely thoughtless and it’s not ableism that made the situation untenable.

      1. GythaOgden*

        Yeah, in all of this it feels like whitewashing the impact of Hank’s behaviour on someone else away. The fact that there’s a stigma regarding mental health is because sometimes people under the influence of altered brain chemistry or disabilities do things that make others uncomfortable, and that’s honestly why they are classed as illnesses or disabilities rather than just being differences in personality or actions. In my case I know when I was in the grip of psychosis I behaved badly and that there were consequences for myself and other people. That’s why I worked hard for years to work with my disability and climb back up out of the pit I was in, and I’m lucky enough to have been able to. It doesn’t make the stress of that psychosis easier on anyone else, least of all my parents, with whom I lived at the time.

        It’s possible to be marginalised /and/ behave in strange ways that will unnerve people who don’t know you. One is not mutually exclusive to the other and actually it would be a lot easier to solve some problems if we didn’t keep on pretending that it /was/ mutually exclusive.

        1. allathian*

          Yes, this. If another person makes you feel unsafe, or even simply unconfortable, it’s okay to remove yourself from that situation, regardless of the reason for the discomfort. Nobody is entitled to social contact, we earn it by not making people around us feel unsafe in our presence. If that means that some people are socially isolated because they can’t, or won’t, behave in a way that people in general consider appropriate, so be it.

          There’s a spectrum here, of course. Learning to overcome your discomfort and talk to the coworker who’s uncomfortable with eye contact is good and sometimes necessary in an inclusive workplace. But it doesn’t mean you can’t tell them that you won’t answer their intrusive personal questions, for example.

  40. Falling Diphthong*

    OP2, this is one of those letters where the OP says “this particular incident is ridiculous” and outsiders are like “It is. Also all of the things around the incident making it worse are ridiculous. There are jobs that are not this ridiculous, and once you’re in one you will probably look back and say ‘Wow. I can’t believe I stayed so long.'”

    The calls are coming from inside the house.

    1. Peanut Hamper*

      The calls are coming from inside the house.

      Yes! They’ve already shown what how much they value you. It’s time to get out.

    2. Generic Name*

      I totally agree. I used to work for a company of similar size, run by a founder until shortly before I left. The company prides itself on its company culture and work life balance, and genuinely thinks they’re the best in their business. Except every person I know (including me) who left the company got massive pay raises at their new company and everyone talks about how they had PTSD from working at that place. And the company is experiencing layoffs due to lack of work since they lost a disadvantaged business designation. So my point is listen to that small voice of discontent. Don’t blindly believe what the company tells you about themselves and observe the facts. You have two weeks of leave that expire every year after ten years at a company, and you are a manager who cannot get a reasonable request for leave approved. No wonder you feel unappreciated.

    3. KHB*

      Agreed. My first thought when I read the question was, “Is your boss literally Ebenezer Scrooge?” But even Scrooge gave Cratchit an answer immediately about taking Christmas off.

      Maybe there are other good things about this company that OP likes, but this particular situation is really bad. In the most charitable interpretation I can think of, the VP is disorganized, swamped with work, and dropping balls all over the place, the owner doesn’t realize what’s going on, and a candid conversation will clear everything up. In the less charitable interpretations, they’re deliberately cultivating an environment where it’s hard to take any PTO, so you’re dissuaded from even bothering.

  41. Peter*

    I had all emails from a client automatically blocked as hate material by my former employer’s firewall.

    The client was a holocaust museum with the word holocaust in their email addresses.

    1. Dasein9 (he/him)*

      I had a workplace block the city’s LGBTQ+ center. That one was an error, but some administrators do presume anything LGBTQ+ oriented is sexual content and must be blocked. Some school systems treat this like a feature instead of a bug.

  42. Ghostess*

    #1 – This was absolutely all on Jane, and you did a great job of supporting your kid through a nightmare situation.

    I often see posters/ads in my neighbourhood from parents whose kids want to walk dogs, or from the kids themselves. And while I think it is great for kids to experience and take responsibility for animals, it is incredibly risky for them to do that professionally. It is one thing if you are looking after your neighbour’s dogs, who you already know, in their home (assuming your neighbour isn’t Jane). But when you walk a dog, you are assuming responsibility for it. Maybe the dog you are walking is perfectly calm, but if it gets into a situation with a dog who is less calm – that should not be on a kid to navigate.

    My first dog was the easiest dog in the world, and I only ever used professional sitters/walkers for her (or, rarely, adult friends who had experience with dogs). I was perfectly happy to walk her with friends’ kids if an adult was with them, but I would never leave her in the care of a minor. If kids want to gain experiences with animals, there are plenty of supervised volunteer opportunities that can give them that exposure with much less risk.

    None of this is to say LW1 did a bad job. They did great! They supported their kid, and it sounds like the kid wasn’t taking the dogs into the wider world. But lord have mercy Jane needs to find suitable care for her animals, and ESPECIALLY her family.

    1. Ferret*

      I wouldn’t call going along with all of the ridiculous requests and spontaneously returning most of the money “great”

      1. CommanderBanana*

        Yeah, to me it screams scared of “confrontation.” It sucks because I feel like it’s such a missed opportunity to show your kid how to advocate for themselves and how to recognize an unfair request.

        1. Rainy*

          I mean, if I’m armchair quarterbacking, yeah, it’s a missed opportunity but a lot of people are really scared of confrontation especially with neighbors, where a relationship that goes sour can end in all kinds of horrific consequences even (maybe especially) when you are in the right.

          It’s equally valuable to sit down with Falcon now and help them process their feelings about how it went, talk about how sometimes in the moment we feel really awkward about something that’s happening and because we haven’t prepared ourselves, we maybe don’t react the way we should have or would have wanted to, but now that we know this is a thing that happens, how can we prepare and practice a response that will be more consonant with how we want to advocate for ourselves so that when it happens in the future we can feel more comfortable asserting ourselves.

          If the situation had gone perfectly and everyone had responded ideally it wouldn’t be a learning opportunity–at least, that’s what I tell myself when something like this happens to me. And I’m almost 50! :)

    2. Domino the Dalmatian*

      And while I think it is great for kids to experience and take responsibility for animals, it is incredibly risky for them to do that professionally.

      Oh, it most certainly is not, particularly by the time the kid is in middle school. Stop helicoptering. They’ll be OK if they walk to school by themselves, or have a paper route, or (gasp) walk a dog.

  43. Maleficent*

    LW5, I’ve heard a rumor about Jeff Goldblum’s method. The internet legend goes like this:

    “Someone once introduced Jeff Goldblum to me at a party by saying “this is Maleficent” and he exclaimed, “My god, of course!”
    I couldn’t believe it. He knows who I am??
    Then he processed to say “My god, of course!” to every person he was introduced to. I love Jeff Goldblum.”

    My god, of course! Good luck :)

    1. UKDancer*

      Good one. I met a Blair era cabinet member once at an event I was organising many years back.

      About 5 years later I met him again at Eurostar departures (by this time we had a Tory Government). He didn’t know who I was but smiled at me and said “I’m sure we’ve met before I recognise your face.” I thought this was a great line.

  44. J*

    oh man, #4.

    early in my career, I worked at a nonprofit with a semi-famous board member. I was introduced to him briefly in a group setting at a board meeting. then months later, he came into the office and my boss took him around to introduce him to everyone.

    given the man’s celebrity, I knew he met tons of people and of course would not remember a lowly junior staffer at a nonprofit. so when my boss introduced us, I just said “nice to meet you!” I thought I was being polite and helping him save face bc I assumed he didn’t remember me.

    except that he did remember, and then pointed out to me that we had met before. so I inadvertently was the rude one and gave the impression that he was not memorable/important enough to recall meeting. I was mortified and have adopted “Nice to see you!” for all introductions since.

  45. Trout 'Waver*

    OP#3, if you need the site for work, put in an IT ticket and it’ll probably get white-listed.

  46. Friday Hopeful*

    Am I the only one who feels like Jane didn’t just want her dogs looked after but wanted someone to check on her nephew? I would never again say yes to any request from her.

    1. Peanut Hamper*

      Yes, agreed. I think Jane was acting in bad faith all around and should not be trusted going forward.

      If her nephew suddenly got dumped on her, the right thing to do would have been to cancel her plans.

    2. CommanderBanana*

      ^^ This. And she did it in the crappiest way possible, AND took money back from the LW? Jane is not someone I would ever do a favor for again.

  47. HonorBox*

    OP2 – Book the vacation now. Then figure out other things after that. You said you’re willing to quit (and I mean this supportively, not challenging you at all) so what’s the worst that happens if you go back to VP and tell them that due to prices skyrocketing, you couldn’t afford to wait any longer for the decision. If they balk one bit, keep collecting your paycheck and circulate the hell out of your resume. And then talk to the owner. While it is possible that sometimes approval for PTO requests aren’t immediate, asking someone to wait 3 months, especially when PTO is use or lose, is ridiculous. And their delay in responding has cost you additional dollars. And, let’s say there’s good reason that they could have rejected your request… you’ve lost 90 days that you could have otherwise taken.

    The owner needs to know a couple of things in your conversation. First, that the delay in approval cost you money. That’s not their issue per se, but I think it highlights very tangibly that the delay has caused some additional financial burden for you. Second, that you put in a request for a time that is slower and you put it in far enough in advance for plans to be made for your absence. Third, that with 20 years of experience and more than a decade with the company, you’re grossly undercompensated with your PTO. And fourth, with the tenure you have, requesting PTO shouldn’t take an act of Congress (with the speed of Congress for approval). And if the VP does balk and cause you any sort of stress over the fact that you did go ahead and book, tell the owner that this is the kind of thing you lose good employees over.

    1. MsM*

      Fully agreed. Unless the VP is on a pure power trip, I’m guessing the reason they’re hemming and hawing is because they don’t think they can cover without you. They need to get it through their heads that the choice here isn’t either you go on vacation or you don’t: it’s either they honor your perfectly reasonable request and come up with the plan for covering for you when needed that they should have had all along, or they risk having to do without you on a much more permanent basis.

      1. HonorBox*

        You’re absolutely right. If the VP is on a power trip, owner needs to know because it will have greater ramifications later on when the business loses out. And if VP isn’t and is just unsure how to cover things, owner needs to know because the meager PTO that OP gets is part of the compensation package, and VP is going to have to figure out how to maneuver when people cash that part of their check.

  48. Dog momma*

    1. No way would I leave any kid with this. guy. and refuse any more requests from her.
    2. see if you can get the VP to approve the vacation.. agree with Alison the way to go about it.

  49. Somehow I Manage*

    The first letter really pisses me off. I have dogs and can definitely see how a dog owner would like to ensure dogs get exercise and attention. But I’m struggling with the idea that Jane couldn’t just leave the dogs for a few hours given the change in dynamic in the house. I see that the dogs aren’t particularly fond of Hank and that’s part of the calculation for sure. But at worst, you could find a place – the kitchen is the default in my house…thanks baby gates – where the dogs could hang out if you need to keep them and Hank away from one another.

    Falcon was at soccer and no one saw Jane’s text immediately. But giving Jane the most benefit of the doubt, she sent the text with updates to the situation 2-3 hours before she left. Even if OP/Falcon had seen the text immediately, that still is too close for comfort. A text like that might be “hey my boss let me know I’d need to be at the event an extra hour…is that cool…if not just stick with the time and I’ll see the dogs when I’m home.” Not adding an extra person who is a complete stranger to the mix.

    Jane had another option. If Hank turned up last minute, that’s “I’m cancelling my plans and don’t need Falcon. Sorry for the late notice.”

  50. Michelle Smith*

    LW2: Respectfully, stop waiting for an answer. Since you’re willing to quit over this anyway, just go ahead and book the travel and stop waiting for the cost to keep creeping up while you get jerked around by the VP. If the PTO is approved, great, you didn’t lose any more money. If it’s not, then two weeks before your trip, put in your notice.

  51. Zooey*

    Everything about Jane’s behaviour in number one is outrageous! Even absent the Hank factor, you don’t ask a middle schooler to work till 11pm! LW, you were caught on the back foot but you and Falcon had NOTHING to apologise for and Jane was in the wrong both to change the terms and to accept any of the money back.

  52. Just wondering*

    Question related to LW #2.
    What is a reasonable amount of time for a manager to evaluate a time-off request?

    Obviously, three months is absurd and totally unreasonable.

    But is it reasonable for a manager to take 3-5 days, if it includes verifying coverage, making sure the PTO is equally distributed (e.g. Bob taking 3 weeks off won’t prevent Mary from taking any PTO during the summer), and other relevant reasons?
    Is there an expectation that the manager will immediately approve all PTO requests?
    This question relates to PTO requests of a week or longer. (I think it’s reasonable to expect a quicker answer to requests to take off one day or part of a day.)

    1. Peanut Hamper*

      Yeah, I think a week is reasonable. If people are using that time as vacation time, they need to make reservations, etc.

      If someone asks for a week off in three or more months and you can’t figure out if it’s feasible in a week, you really shouldn’t be the one responsible for authorizing this.

      1. HonorBox*

        I’d say a week, max. Generally, my boss approves my requests almost immediately, but there have been a couple of times when there have been questions about a particular “thing” that needed to be covered, and there’s a bit of a delay.

        While we’ve read stories of scenarios that fly in the face of this statement, I think a good boss should be able to trust that when someone requests PTO, they’ll have their ducks in a row and won’t let anything drop while they’re out.

      2. MsM*

        Agreed. I’d maybe allow a few days grace if it’s a ridiculously busy time of year and/or there are some other moving pieces that need to be sorted out first, provided the supervisor communicates the reason for the delay. But honestly, if the person is submitting the request far enough in advance and it’s not a time of year they know they’re expected to be available, I think approval should be the default and the company needs a much better reason to say “no” than “this is going to be inconvenient for us.”

        1. KHB*

          And if the answer really is “no,” they at least owe the employee the courtesy of an immediate “no,” rather than “we’re thinking about it…and thinking about it…and thinking about it…”

    2. KHB*

      In an organization that has its act together, none of those things should take more than a few minutes. If coverage is important, have a team PTO calendar so you can check at a glance that you have the coverage that you need. If PTO equity is important, have a spreadsheet to track that. More generally, if any piece of information is so important that it could be the basis for approving or denying a PTO request, it’s important enough to track in an organized way.

      Now, just because it takes only a few minutes to evaluate a PTO request doesn’t mean you should necessarily expect a reply within a few minutes. Still, if it’s routinely taking longer than, say, a day, I’d say that’s a sign that something is very wrong.

      For comparison’s sake, when I requested a full month of PTO (with three months’ notice), my boss approved it immediately.

      1. Shenandoah*

        +1 I’ve never had a PTO request take longer than 24-48 hours to be approved.

        My spouse, however, has had to wrangle his company to get the barest bones of information about PTO status (they can’t even give a straight answer on how much rolls over!).

        One of us is looking, one of us is not, and you don’t have to be a genius to guess. I hope OP2 quits this job as soon as she can.

    3. Hiring Mgr*

      I think it depends on the specific job among other things – the teams I manage don’t need coverage so one person taking time off doesn’t affect anyone else, so that’s an easy fast approval.

      For jobs where that does matter though, I think a few days to a week makes sense.

    4. Jackalope*

      The system that I’m most familiar with is having a set time period to request future leave; at one job we had two months each year where we’d put in leave requests for six months (so for example, November would be the month that you put in leave for Jan-June and May would be the month you put in leave for July-Dec). We had a certain number of staff that could be out at any one time and a way to figure out who would be approved if there were multiple requests and not that many slots. (It was partially but not entirely based on seniority so it wasn’t the same people always getting approved.) There was a full month to put in requests for everyone, and then you’d find out if you were approved the first week of December or June. The system meant that taking a big trip in January or July was a bit more of a pain because you wouldn’t find out until a bit late, but otherwise it worked well. You could also put in leave at other times of the year and were generally supposed to get a response within a week (less if it was short notice), but leave requests put in at the 6 month request periods were always honored over those that came at random times. It felt fair to me the way it was administered and meant that everyone knew when to put in requests and it wasn’t just first come first served.

  53. essie*

    OP #1, as someone who works closely with child protection, I am internally screaming that Jane thought it was anywhere near appropriate to ask a middle-schooler to spend time alone in a house with an adult man he’d never met. Especially considering that this man seems to have needs that should be handled entirely by family or trusted professionals. This is so wildly inappropriate, I would stay away from Jane as much as possible going forward. Talk to your son, and make sure he knows it’s ALWAYS okay to say no to uncomfortable requests, especially when unfamiliar adults are involved. It sounds like you did an amazing job and had the exact right instinct to accompany him. I am just so flabbergasted at Jane’s request!

  54. BekaRosselinMetadi*

    For a while my old company blocked sites/stories that had key words in them and our IT guy got a notice about it. Okay, no problem and it did not affect me. Until the day it did, and our IT guy came up to me and quietly told me what word was used that blocked the Washington Post story. Me “ that article was about rape in the military so I don’t think much of your use of key words to block access”. It was infuriating but I like to think it had an affect because that all went away shortly afterwards.

  55. Cardboard Marmalade*

    I don’t think Hank’s the boogieman, it’s that Jane was clearly in the wrong and it’s definitely suspicious that she wanted the dogs to be watched for two more hours answer a 3-hr walk/play session. That says to me that either she knew there was a high likelihood of a dog accident (which it sounds like Falcon wasn’t notified of) or else she felt uncomfortable leaving Hank alone for so long. Either way, it’s Jane who’s the bad guy, not Hank.

    1. OP*

      I will note here that during the walk, one of the dogs had terrible diarrhea, and I suspect that’s the one that messed up the kitchen. Jane did not warn us, and now wonder if she wanted us in the house because she knew one of the dogs was sick and would need to be cleaned up after.

      1. Observer*

        Oh wow!

        In that case, even if the dog did poop in the few minutes it wasn’t with you, that was *completely* on Jane.

      2. Ineffable Bastard*

        Oh, my goodness! Jane messed up big time with this, in addition to everything else. Nto even a heads-up, a dog pad/newspapers, cleaning supplies?

        As an addendum, if the dog had diarrhea, it likely tracked the poop itself. People were going wild here on Hank’s behaviour because of the tracked poop. Alternatively, if Hank went to the kitchen in the darkness, or came from a dark room to a brightly lit kitchen, he might have not seen the poop.

        I am also considering that Hank might have a hard time communicating and takes very seriously the “do not talk to strangers” rule, so he avoids put himself in danger (by talking to stranger adults in general) or being perceived as a danger (by talking to stranger women and children). This does not change the “no dog sitting when there is a person in the house” rule at all, of course, and is not on you or on your son or on Hank. You were all uncomfortable with each other due to Jane’s lack of foresight.

        1. Kyrielle*

          Yes. Entirely not OP’s place to address, but I will note that Jane did no kindness to Hank either. He had two people in the space with him whom he didn’t know, hadn’t established trust with. Maybe he never talks or responds to greetings, or maybe he would have in a different circumstance (like if Jane was around and introductions were made).

          This was uncomfortable and not ideal for all the people who were in the house, and I hope Jane realizes that. (But I don’t think OP’s goal of maintaining neighborly relations would allow for bringing it up even if they wanted to. Jane needing to learn that is just a separate observation, and not OP’s circus or monkeys.)

  56. Pep Rally*

    LW #1 I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts that Jane never needed a pet sitter but a sitter for her nephew with special needs and figured she could get that level of care from a middle schooler with a diligent parent for cheap. To take back $50 after subjecting a child to that is gross.

    1. CommanderBanana*

      ^^ This. It’s a bummer because this is such a great missed opportunity to show your middle-schooler how to stand up for yourself while still being polite. That the LW went ahead with the dogsitting and offered Jane the money back – and Jane took it! – makes me think the LW doesn’t have the greatest boundaries.

    2. Alan*

      Absolutely. The more I think about this, the more it seems like a calculated attempt to stick a neighbor kid with watching her nephew. For all Jane knew, Mom wasn’t even going to be there, Jane knew her nephew needed watching, and she just found the easiest solution she could regardless of the risk to the LW’s kid. Jane is indeed gross and a creep and a few other things I can’t find the words for.

  57. ferrina*

    It sounds like Hank could have some kind of cognitive impairment that significantly impacts day-to-day functioning. I’m not trying to diagnose Hank with anything, but there’s clearly something bigger at play than run-of-the-mill learning disability (this isn’t standard dyslexia or ADHD).

    Leaving a middle-schooler alone with an unknown unvetted adult is pretty bad to start with, but if Hank has some kind of significant cognitive impairment that requires care, that’s beyond the pale. A child shouldn’t be caring for a mentally impaired adult alone to begin with, and ESPECIALLY one that they do not know. Even professional caregivers won’t agree to provide care without some description of what to expect. If Jane wants respite care, she needs to hire respite care.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      ADHD or dyslexia would be a learning difficulty, whereas Hank’s condition certainly sounds more like a learning learning disabilty (or at least these are the terms used in the UK). The latter refers to intellectual development, whereas things like dyslexia and dyscalculia do not affect an individual’s intellect. There are significantly different levels of learning disability though. Not only do I agree with your assessment of how unfair this was to Falcon, it was probably also very distressing and unsettling to Hank.

      1. ferrina*

        Interesting! I’m in the US, and we use “learning disability” to generally mean “a mental health condition that impedes academic learning”. NIH (National Institute of Health) defines it as: “Learning disabilities affect how a person learns to read, write, speak, and do math” (https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/factsheets/learningdisabilities)

        What you would call a “learning disability” would probably be called an “intellectual disability” in the US: https://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/idds/conditioninfo

  58. IForgotMyUserName*

    #3 IT staff here. The default web filter settings on our router routinely block websites for odd reasons, often incorrectly classifying them as porn. Staff advise me of the problem and I override the settings. It’s a routine interaction and I have never questioned staff members or wondered why they were visiting porn sites, since it’s easy to tell they were not. No one is going to make this weird for you.

  59. CommanderBanana*

    Telling a middle schooler that, whoopsy doopsy, you’re now going to be dogsitting until 11 pm with a man you’ve never met in the house? Hard no. This would have been a great opportunity to model boundaries for your child.

    Going ahead with the babysitting and letting Jane stiff you? Not great. Any obligation you had to Jane or the dogs went out the window when she changed the terms of your agreement. If I were the LW, I would have a conversation with my kid about how I wished I had handled it and that it’s ok to tell adults no.

  60. RagingADHD*

    For #1, as a mom of now-high schoolers, I would not put it on a middle schooler to push back on such a request from an adult. I would tell Jane no myself, and I would cancel the whole thing.

    If Hank isn’t an appropriate person to be left alone with a dog, he is certainly not appropriate to be left alone with my minor child. And my minor child should not be babysitting an adult!

    If I had decided to do as LW and accompany Falcon, I would not have offered to give any of the money back. Monitoring Hank and cleaning up his mess was not part of the deal.

    The main learning opportunity here for Falcon is about reasonable vs unreasonable demands from an employer. But there is a valuable second lesson to be had for LW – going back and discussing with Falcon how easy it is even for grownups to get flustered by unexpected demands and say “yes” to things that are unreasonable, and why it’s so important to recognize when you are getting flustered, so you can stop and think.

    It’s better to default to saying “no” when you’re put on the spot, than to saying “yes” to things you aren’t sure about. Sometimes your better judgment needs a minute before you can hear it.

    3. Productivity Pigeon*

      And that it’s ALWAYS okay to say no if you don’t feel comfortable, and you don’t need to give a reason.

      As Captain Awkward says, no is a complete sentence.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        I get the impression from the letter that OP would rather set herself on fire than use no as a complete sentence. But it’s always possible to go slowly into the deep end, even if you have to hold your breath. Phrases like “Oh I wouldn’t allow Falcon to work with someone I didn’t know”, “Sorry that’s a huge change which means it’s not possible for us to do” or “Okay, it’s lucky you have someone with the dogs, because that’s past Falcon’s bedtime anyway” would all have worked just as well! It was such an unreasonable request that “actually no, Falcon can’t supervise an adult as well as the dogs, or work till almost midnight” were practically begging to be said.

        1. RagingADHD*

          There’s always the all-purpose, “Oh, I’m afraid that’s not going to work, but thanks for thinking of us. Maybe another time.”

          Which is about as non- confrontational as a “no” can get.

        2. Insert Clever Name Here*

          I don’t think that’s fair. As Runcible Wintergreen pointed out upthread (and OP replied and confirmed it’s correct) this is a neighbor, it’s reasonable that OP would have wanted to find a way to make it work to keep a good relationship with someone who they’re going to see on a regular basis, and considering that Jane has shown herself to be unreasonable not only in the ask but in her response to the situation perhaps we should cut OP some slack for not barking “no” a la Leslie Knope.

          And yes, there are nicer ways of saying no. And yes, it wasn’t the perfect response. If someone can’t see the reasoning behind why OP made the decision then well, I guess they’re the type of person who will 100% of the time react perfectly instead and bully for them.

          1. Ellis Bell*

            I actually didn’t mean that to sound especially critical, but you’re right and thank you for rebalancing what I said. I think there are lots and lots of people who are just absolutely never going to use no as a complete sentence (you can see them physically balk at the suggestion) and while I would in some situations, I don’t think I would have done with a neighbour I knew, and liked.

  61. F P*

    For number 1, you should not have returned the money. Second, I would have called up and said no Falcon is not staying later then the time agreed with a man who isn’t so reliable himself. For number 2, I would be on the VP case saying I need to take vacation at that time and that is it. Then at this point I would reevaluate this job because it seems like this boss feels you have become so indespendible especially on the Christmas holiday where everyone else can take vacations when they feel like it and you only get ten days after a decade there? Wow! Then she doesn’t that your BIL died and your husband needs the vacation. Things change over the course of time

    1. F P*

      Then she doesn’t understand that your BIL died and your husband needs the vacation. Things change over the course of time.

  62. Melissa*

    To #3 – I wouldn’t worry a bit. I once worked for a CPA firm where the filter managed to allow access to irs.gov, but blocked it if you typed http://www.irs.gov. Sometimes the filters are finicky, and someone, somewhere had to make a decision/check a box.

  63. Alan*

    LW #1, I would feel *horrible* if I was your son and had two thirds of my pay (that I earned!) given back for a reason I had no control over. If financially feasible for you, please give that $50 back to your son. I totally get that this was a weird situation for all of you, but if I were your son, losing money that I had earned would absolutely be the worst part. Your son did absolutely nothing wrong. He shouldn’t be punished here. (And Jane’s a loser.)

  64. Alan*

    Return $50? Poop happens. You clean it up. This is completely and totally on Jane. Cleaning up poop, for a situation she caused, does not warrant any payment at all.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      As I understand it, she left them alone by scampering off to her event earlier… why are the only people who actually stayed with the dogs apologising and paying back what they earned?

  65. CorporateDrone*

    I am outraged by the first story on the poor kid’s behalf. It’s unclear whether Jane came home at 9 or at 11. If she came home at 11, then kid was underpaid even at $75.

    Given that the dog didn’t poop in the house while the kid was in charge, poop damages were not on him. I don’t understand why OP offered to return money and I definitely don’t think the kid should be penalized ie mom you owe your kid sone payment for full time kid spent there. Maybe not full $15/hour given that you were there as well, but negotiate that with your kid.

    In fact if the expectation was that kid was also to ensure that the adult didn’t tread in poop, Jane effectively also asked you guys to be looking after the adult as well. That’s a) inappropriate for your average teen, let alone a middle school kid, and b) worth more than $15/h to look after both dog and ensure adult isn’t getting into trouble

    OP should reflect on why they weren’t comfortable texting Jane to let them know that it wasn’t appropriate for the kid to be alone with an unknown adult (disability or not!) without checking with both of you first, and why they were so quick to accept the blame for something that was not their fault and a direct result of Jane’s choices.

    In addition, if the dog isn’t house trained such that it can’t be left unsupervised indoors without pooping on the floor, one might wonder why the dog was left in that situation rather than crated or outdoors.

    OP I hope you reassured your kid that they did a good job, that the reason things went bad was not kid’s fault and that you arrange for kid to be adequately compensated. Probably a good idea to try and line up another similar job (not with Jane! My kid would not be working for her again!) to help your kid regain confidence.

    Poor kid!

  66. A Simple Narwhal*

    #3 I used to work for a company that ran the marketing for a series of bars and restaurants. They often partnered with breweries and featured specialty drinks, and yet IT kept blocking everything related to alcohol on our computers, which made looking up the alcohol we were meant to promote a bit challenging. So definitely know that site blockers can absolutely be a bit…enthusiastic, just ask IT to unblock those websites, I doubt they’ll give it a second thought if you ask.

    For a fun story I remember reading here about someone in England, and all of their customer form entries from the town of Scunthorpe were getting blocked and trashed because the system was flagging the town name as inappropriate!

  67. NetNrrd*

    Regarding firewalls and filtering, I have had to administer one of those systems and generally the people running these don’t care if you bump into a block on something relatively benign like that particularly if it’s just an occasional thing. If you started getting blocked trying to go to ‘myawesomemalwaresitedownloadvifuseshere.xxx’, then they might worry that your machine was infected. If your job regularly requires you to go to things that tend to be blocked, they may be able to set up an account for you to manually bypass the filtering for specific domains that you may need to get to. We had folks who worked on advertising buys and such with various vendors so they actually *did* need to go to, say, Victoria’s Secret web site for actual work purposes.

    We did have to scold someone for using his bypass account for non-work purposes because he kept using his bypass account to get to the ‘casual encounters’ section of Craigslist at like midnight. But it took a lot to get to the point of talking to him about it. Mostly I tried to ignore it unless it looked like a machine was compromised. Of course, now I work for a college and I REALLY REALLY REALLY don’t want to know what websites the kids are going to. :)

  68. RagingADHD*

    LW4, if I think I might have met them before, I’ll go with, “We’ve met before, haven’t we?”

    If they say no, I can fall back on “Oh, I could have sworn…” or “You must remind me of someone.”

    If they say yes, they’ll say where/when 99 percent of the time, so I go with, “Yes, of course! How have you been?’

  69. JelloStapler*

    #1 So may red flags here. outside of more .. sinister… reasons- Why do I fee like Jane wanted Falcon to babysit Hank?

    1. JelloStapler*

      and OP, I worry you are a people pleaser- might be good to think about boundaries and how to say “that does not work for us”.

  70. cosmicgorilla*

    LW1, I understand why you felt you should give some money back, but I do not believe you should have. You should not have felt guilty. You were outside with the dogs for hours. They could have and would have pooped then. I strongly suspect they pooped in that front room BEFORE you got there. And a grown man whose delays prevent him from avoiding walking in poop maybe shouldn’t be left alone. That’s on the dog owner.

    I gave money back after a pet sitting gig years ago, and I regret it. I did not spend the night but instead went down twice a day and spent time with the animals. I attempted to spend the night, but the smell of, I don’t know, mold, mildew, cat pee (what ever it was, it was rank) made it hard for me to breathe. I felt guilty because I didn’t spend the night but that was my usual offering, and the woman said “I paid extra for you to stay the night!”

    In truth, many petsitters in my area charged more for multiple animals (which she had) and for overnight stays. She got a bargain with what I charged, plus I was giving one animal meds. There are often upcharges for meds with petsitters. I was worth what she originally paid me and then some. I should have stuck up for myself. I earned what she gave me. Her house was untenable (it wasn’t apparent on first visit, or maybe the bedroom was just particularly awful, which I didn’t see until my stay), and I shouldn’t have given back money just because the condition of her house prevented me from staying there. You should have stuck up for your kid and showed him his value. He earned the full $75.

  71. KayDay*

    LW3 – my company blocks the funniest things–I’ve actually starting taking screenshots of things that it has blocked. Sometimes is funny, sometimes it’s downright absurd. One big category that is blocked is any drug or health related information. So in 2020, lots of websites with COVID-related information were blocked because they contained “drugs”. I also needed to find a doctor for a work-required physical and a website with local doctors accepting new patients was blocked. You can see the category/reason why websites were blocked…and a number of sites were blocked because they were “educational” or “news” =\

    In summary–do not worry. If yo have an aggressive filter, I am sure you are not the only one getting websites blocked.

  73. AnonyB*

    OP#3, as someone else who works in a legal advocacy organization that works on gender justice issues, I’ve had the same sort of thing happen, and when I brought it up, it was no big deal. I was trying to access websites about pregnancy, sex education, and contraceptives, and sometimes it would be marked as pornography or sexually explicit. *eyeroll*

  74. Alan*

    For #3, I used to run some servers, one feature of which was that people would get “reported” for security infractions. Except that as an admin I never once saw a report. The message that you were being reported was scary (I was nervous myself the first time I got one) but in practice, reports went nowhere that I know of. If your admins see web-blocking reports at all, then they’re probably flooded to the point that they can’t deal with them. I doubt that anyone’s calling a meeting to discuss your web misadventures.

  75. Boof*

    LW1 – I understand the impulse because your first thought was the original job of dog sitting didn’t go well, but holy cow I want to snatch that money right back from Jane and ream her out for good measure. Obviously the greater concern is the switcheroo and asking Jane why she needed your son at her house so late just to watch dogs, that it wasn’t ok to to ask him to be with a strange adult you’ve not met, and that while you felt bad about the poop on reflection that was totally on Jane for putting your son in a situation he hadn’t agreed on ahead of time.

    LW2 – what have you got to lose at this point by telling the VP they’re costing you serious money and stress by delaying and you need an answer by next week? Also, what have you got to lose by asking for 2x the vacation and job searching while they deliberate? I’d be looking for greener pastures if this is how they treat you.

      1. Boof*

        Yea I get LW1 was on their back foot but still, I hope they say something to Jane now that they’ve had a chance to process it.

  77. Frankie*

    OP1: You need to do a better job of teaching Falcon to stand up for and assert himself. If he’s following your example he’ll end up a doormat.

    I’m frankly shocked at how you let this unfold.

    1. Jackalope*

      This is overly harsh on the LW. Were there better ways the situation could have been handled? Yes, and those of us who are outside of the situation can see them easily. But the LW and Falcon still have to live next door to Jane, and may do so for years to come. That was almost certainly part of the mental calculus here. It’s all well and good to say the LW should have been firmer or harsher, but it’s not always that easy when you’re suddenly in a tough situation where the stakes are long term.

      1. Empress Ki*

        Harsh but true. Even if she needed to stay in good terms with Jane, offering the money back was over the top and a poor example to Falcon.

      2. Domino the Dalmatian*

        But the LW and Falcon still have to live next door to Jane, and may do so for years to come. That was almost certainly part of the mental calculus here

        Thank you. Jane is an arse but this is a repeat player scenario.

    2. essie*

      Whoa, let’s not parent-shame here. No need to threaten that LW’s son will end up as a doormat or imply that they’re setting some horrible example. Parents are doing their best, and I promise they don’t need you to tell them to do a better job.
      Obviously, the best solution would have been to refuse the job when Jane switched it last-minute. But Jane had already left for the event, so I also understand the impulse of “we said we would care for living creatures, and we need to ensure they are safe and cared for.” The best lesson would be to sit down with Falcon and explain how the situation should have been handled.

  78. Queen of Comms*

    OP #2, this is an absurdly terrible benefits package.

    For comparison, new hires at my US-based company start with one week of vacation time, then bump up to two weeks after the first year. By the time someone reaches 10 years, they’re up to four weeks off annually. And employees still provide feedback that this isn’t a competitive benefits package. Two weeks after ten years of service would result in walk-outs.

    We all have a finite amount of time on this earth, and this company is expecting you to sacrifice an unfair amount of that time to their needs. The disrespect of the VP is just a compounding factor – you have the support of the AAM community in finding a company that actually values you!

    1. Katie*

      To note, the employees are right, one week of PTO is awful and your company should do better too.

      However, 2 weeks after 10 years is doubly awful. Making her squirm for her PTO is triplely awful.

  79. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

    #1: I think you need to have a discussion with Jane in general, not specifically about this situation. Without any notice, she texted to change Falcon’s “work shift” from 2 hours to until 11pm, which is after the bedtime of every single middle schooler of my aquaintance, even if it isn’t a school night.

    Why did she think that was something she could unilaterally assign, without negotiation? Why did she think that was okay to ask? Did she assume that you would be accompanying Falcon the entire time and so that made it okay?

    I understand Falcon is getting paid under the table for this, but, like, if Falcon were employed over the table, there are laws about child labor and how late it can be at night.

    Maybe you can give this situation with Jane another chance, but personally, if this were my kid in this situation, where my kid did not feel comfortable pushing back on their “boss” in this way, and their “boss” had already shown that they were not treating my kid with respect, AND that “boss” had taken away my kid’s salary (you offered, I know, but Jane should not have accepted)… I think there is an important lesson to teach Falcon about standing up for yourself and boundaries that are more important than the lesson Jane was trying to teach him, which was “accept and agree to anything you boss says, even if you’re not comfortable about it, stay extremely late without warning, don’t complain”.

    They can find another dog minder, and I imagine there are other people in your neighborhood would might be interested in having someone walk + play with their dogs. (My middle school nibling may even take up that job after school this year, so maybe I’ll send the nibling this post later and treat it as a scenario to talk through how they would feel comfortable handling this situation if it came up).

    1. I should really pick a name*

      Why did she think that was something she could unilaterally assign, without negotiation? Why did she think that was okay to ask?

      She didn’t unilaterally assign. She asked. The LW could have said no. Why wouldn’t it be okay to ask?

      1. Silver Robin*

        …you think asking a 12 year old (give or take a year) to stay out till 11pm with a strange-to-them adult who is unable to notice/clean up dog poop in the kitchen on their own (meaning they need support/supervision) is an okay ask?

        Further, Jane did not *actually* ask. If it had been an ask, she would have followed up to confirm before she left since she had not gotten a response. She did not. So it became a de facto demand.

        1. I should really pick a name*

          The post I’m replying to only mentioned the 11pm part which I’m fine with. Not cool with the addition of an unknown person.

          As far as I’m concerned, the LW still could have said no, whether there was follow-up or not.

          1. Silver Robin*

            Then I still take issue with framing this as Jane “asking”. Just because LW had an opportunity to refuse, does not make what Jane did asking. The short notice and, crucially, lack of confirmation turns it to a presumption/demand. That is not reasonable behavior.

      2. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

        She asked a question and did not get a yes or no response, and then left without confirmation. She should have texted again or called or not left before she could talk to Falcon and confirm.

        But this leads into a good point, which is I think the LW should sit down with Falcon and do an after action report and discuss what went well (ex: LW going with Falcon was the best decision to make both at the time and in retrospect) and what should be changed, and what was within their control and what was not within their control, and what should they have done with only the knowledge they had at the time, and what they would have done with the knowledge they have now, as lessons to take forward for next time.

        Is it reasonable to suggest that the LW should have been constantly checking their phone for hours before the dog sitting in case Jane texted with changes? Is that reasonable for the amount of money he’s getting paid and the nature of this job? Does Jane often send texts with changes? Would it be reasonable to expect a professional dog sitter to go above and beyond like this, or is it only reasonable when it’s exploiting a minor?

        I personally think Falcon should never dogsit for Jane ever again after this, but this would be good scenario stuff if LW and Falcon want to talk it out. What should Falcon do if situation X, Y, and Z come up? What would Falcon like LW to have done in this situation? Have role play conversations where Falcon is Falcon and LW is the boss, and then the other way around. Try out various things, see what Falcon himself is comfortable with saying and doing.

        For me, I hope that the kids understand that when they have an after school job, they are fully empowered workers and individuals, who can say no to absurd requests and always quit whenever they need to. At the same time, because they’re still kids, they can use me as the bad guy/excuse whenever they want. “I would love to do X, Y, Z but my parents are really strict and whatever reason they need to invent.”

        1. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

          Also I want to add: adults who are employing minors for at-home work are fully aware that they are employing minors for it. In good situations, the adults treat it like the learning + work experience it actually is, and it’s good for both the adults and the minors, because the minors get money and experience, and the adults get the tasks done (ex: kids are babysat, the dogs are walked, the litter box is cleaned, the sidewalk is shoveled, the car is washed, etc).

          In bad situations, the adults are fully aware of the power they have over the minor, and abuse that power (I am not saying abuse the minor, I’m saying abuse the power) because they know they can get away with it. Because these are casual agreements made between people who are in social circles and social groups, so there’s that pressure of the adults in question all knowing each other, and the minor can often feel like their work is a “favor” from their parents to this adult, and the minor is just an extension of the adults’s prior existing relationship, and if the minor complains, it is negatively impacting the existing adult social structure. So don’t complain.

      4. Observer*

        She didn’t unilaterally assign. She asked. The LW could have said no.

        Effectively, not the case. She texted and the just *assumed* that the answer was yes. That’s about as much of a refusable request as asking a server at a restaurant to give you a menu. Sure, polite people say please and say it with the tone of a question. But does anyone even think that the server might reasonably say “No”? Of course not.

    1. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      I was thinking that too, but there could have been reasons why they couldn’t take the dogs. Like maybe they have other pets, like another dog or a cat or rabbit that the dogs would try to chase. Or if someone in the house is allergic.

      1. allathian*

        The LW has at least one dog, they see each other often walking their dogs, per another comment. But that doesn’t mean it would be okay to bring Jane’s dogs home, especially not the one with diarrhea, per yet another comment.

  81. I'm just here for the cats!!*

    So I am side eyeing that neighbor and if I was OP1 I would have a serious conversation with Jane before I allowed Falcon to dog sit for her again. It was wrong and rude to change the plans like that at the last minute and especially wrong to expect a middle schooler to stay up until 11.

    I’m also wondering why the sudden change as to why the the kid had to stay with the dogs until she got home instead of just for a few hours. And I don’t understand why she didn’t say anything about the nephew until right before she left. Even if the nephew didn’t have a disability it would be wrong to expect a child to stay with an adult they don’t know and the parents don’t know.
    For some reason I feel like the nephew has more than a learning disability and he need more help and is not supposed to be alone and Jane was taking advantage of the OP and their son and making them the ones to “watch” him. either that or it was some very odd grooming situation going on here. either way I wouldn’t allow a dog sitting situation again.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      Oh wow, I would never let him dog sit for her again! Next time she’ll probably have him retiling her roof at midnight “while you’re here”.

  82. AliceInSpreadsheetland*

    I do think LW 1 should have a conversation with Falcon about people with special needs, and that disabled people aren’t scary or monsters or necessarily going to hurt children.

    I absolutely agree it was inappropriate of Jane to want to leave a middle schooler alone with a strange adult late at night, and LW was right to come along and supervise, but accepting that your kid is too terrified of Hank to even step into the kitchen isn’t right either. As far as we can tell from the letter the only thing he’s done is… sit quietly in the dark. And have learning disabilities. Neither of those are scary or threatening things and treating Hank like he’s a bogeyman is not acceptable either. I understand that a middle schooler could be scared of a new situation and a strange person, but that’s where it’s up to an adult to talk them through it. There’s probably disabled kids at Falcon’s school, and he’s going to encounter more disabled people throughout his life- this kind of fear and assumption of threat isn’t an okay way for him to treat disabled people going forward.

    Jane is definitely more wrong in the situation- last minute changes to plan, not telling LW about Hank in the first place, not having an actual carer in the house if Hank does need supervision and/or expecting a child/LW to supervise him, having a strange adult around a child she’s hired, all wrong. But the way LW writes about Hank leaves a really bad taste in my mouth and I don’t like that everyone seems to think it’s normal for a child to be so scared of someone with special needs as if he’s a threat just by existing.

    1. Boof*

      I think it’s totally acceptable not to approach a stranger you’ve never met and have almost no information on. That’s not ableist that’s common sense – throw in some question of disability but no idea what the needs are, it’s kind of worse?

    2. DramaQ*

      This may be because I am a woman but if I was a 13 year old and suddenly found myself in a house with a man I didn’t know hell yes I would be scared! Has absolutely nothing to do with being abelist it has to do with I am a middle schooler alone with a grown man. Stranger danger! The LW said they greeted him and Hank chose to remain unmoving in the dark what was Falcon supposed to do in this situation? This was not a situation for a 13 year old to be in the LW failed by expecting Falcon to honor the agreement. Jane should have introduced both Falcon and LW to her nephew WAY beforehand if she knew he was going to be there and explained the situation to them. I do not consider a 13 year old an abelist for being extremely uncomfortable in the situation. I would be too. This is far far different from being uncomfortable simply because disable people exist in the same space. And IMO trying to frame it that way teaches kids to ignore their gut lest they offend someone or hurt someone’s feelings. To me he acted exactly as he should have in this particular situation.

      1. Jackalope*

        This. This right here. Being alone in a house with a man you don’t know who is sitting in the dark and doesn’t even respond to your greeting when you say hello is something that I too would potentially find concerning, and it’s okay to respond to your gut when it tells you something’s off. Had the LW and Falcon known Hank previously it would have been (potentially) NBD. Or if Jane had mentioned to them, “My nephew will be there; he’s had a nasty migraine today so he’s probably not going to want to interact, just ignore him and play with the dogs.” But just as Hank’s disability (whatever it might be) doesn’t automatically mean that he’s dangerous, it also doesn’t automatically mean he’s safe. I’d rather have my kids know that they can get themselves out of situations where they feel uncomfortable than feel like they have to stay because otherwise they’re being rude. There are plenty of opportunities out in the wide world to teach kids not to be ableist (racist, sexist, etc.) that don’t require them staying alone in a house with a stranger who is making them feel uncomfortable.

    3. Person from the Resume*

      I’ll agree that I was also a bit surprised about the LW also being too fearful to interact with Hank. I’m not clear on the situation exactly – she says Falcon was too afraid to go into the kitchen where Hank was, but was the LW too scared too because apparently no one went into the kitchen.

      But it is absolutely fine and I’d even say appropriate for a child to be afraid of meeting and being alone with an adult man that they have never met before. Jane did not even introduce them or give any instructions on interacting with Hank. And Hank did not act out normal social interactions when they did greet him. It sounds like Hank was just sitting in dark not speaking which is honestly kind of creepy. Without any additional context or information, it’s fine to listen to your instincts on this and be scared/nervous/cautious/on alert. Falcon should not be guilted into putting himself in unsafe situations.

    4. CityMouse*

      Disabled people aren’t necessarily scary but they aren’t to be infantilized and treated as harmless either. LW can’t tell Falcoln that Hank is a safe person because LW has absolutely no way to know if Hank is.

      You NEVER put a child in a situation where they’re alone with an unknown adult.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        This!!!! I got the impression that Hank was simply just unhappy and distressed about the terribly unsuitable situation Jane had dumped him in, but there’s no way in hell you leave your kid to it with a strange man just because some people patronisingly assume “all disabled people are harmless”. That’s completely disgusting as well as impractical.

    5. CommanderBanana*

      I’m an adult and I would absolutely be freaked out if I went to someone’s house to dogsit and there was a strange man sitting silently in the dark. I would leave! That doesn’t make me an evil meanie mean ableist.

      1. CityMouse*

        Yes, there’s this over correction trend to see disabled people as harmless and it’s absolutely not the case and is part of this thing where people view disabled adults as childlike. It’s wrong to do that too.

        1. bamcheeks*

          For me it’s not about saying he’s harmless because he’s disabled, but about saying the threat comes from the fact he’s an adult man that neither Falcon nor his parents know well enough, not because he’s sitting in the dark and doesn’t say hi and that’s weird.

          I don’t think this is just about “let’s be nice to disabled people” — I am just as concerned about the hard pragmatics of making sure my kids don’t grow up thinking that you can tell who is a threat by whether or not they are friendly! If Hank had come in with a smile and said hi and asked if Falcon wanted to play on the X-Box, Falcon might have been less freaked out but that would not make it safer to leave him alone with an unknown adult. “this person is acting outside the social norms” and “this person is a threat” are two different questions, and teaching my kids the difference is just as much a matter of their own safety as it is combatting ableism.

          1. Hiring Mgr*

            I get your point overall but in this particular case Hank was acting oddly regardless of whether it’s because he’s disabled or not. I don’t think a teenager should have to determine whether that means he’s a threat or if he’s just acting outside norms.

          2. Ellis Bell*

            It is still asking way too much for a child to be in a supervisory position over a disabled adult on their own. Yes, that’s less dangerous and terrifying than a charming, socially skilled but predatory stranger in some ways but it’s still disconcerting and scary to be made responsible for something you can’t handle because of your age. I would say it was also beyond OP, because even though she’s an adult she probably knows very little about Hank and what he needs.

            1. bamcheeks*

              I genuinely don’t think anyone is arguing that Falcon should have been comfortable being alone with Hank or that LW should have left him there? For me it’s just about making sure the safety calculation is based on “unknown adult” not “disabled/weird/unfriendly adult”.

              1. Hiring Mgr*

                I’m not sure I understand the distinction you’re making. If an adult is acting weird and unfriendly – whether I know them or not, or whether they’re disabled or not really wouldn’t matter when it comes to my kid’s safety.

              2. Ellis Bell*

                I can’t see how that’s possibly a consideration; weird and unfriendly? Terms which are not used in the letter at all? Also, even if you got to know someone better, they’re still an unsafe adult. Even if you love waving and saying hi to a disabled person in the neighborhood, they still would be very much a scary prospect *as a job* if you’re green around the gills with the requirements of the job and managing someone who is an adult. As someone who works in the field, I would be most unnerved myself to have someone who’s needs I did not understand at all dumped on me. I don’t know many professional adults who wouldn’t balk at that, without a proper debriefing. Falcon was on firm ground feeling intimidated by the disability, as well as the social awkwardness of Hank’s unhappiness of being dumped on them, IF he is expected to oversee the person’s disability *as his job*.

                2. bamcheeks*

                  So there are quite a lot of people saying in the comments that it’s not about disability but that Hank sounds scary / that Hank would freak them out because of his behaviour, and specifically because sitting in the dark and not saying hello is weird behaviour, and that it’s outside a social norm and that being scared of someone who acts outside a social norm is OK. That’s the bit I don’t really agree with: I think a lot of disability stigma is about being people who are acting outside a social norm being read as “scary”, because of things like stimming, muscle spasms, communication difficulties, disassociation, overwhelm, etc. I think we should work a bit harder to distinguish between unusual behaviour which doesn’t harm anyone and behaviour which causes harm.

                  I don’t think that means that Hank is by definition not a threat to Falcon or LW, or that it was OK to put Falcon or his parent in the position of ambiguous responsibility for/over Hank without clarifying what his needs were and getting proper agreement. Just that neither his disability nor this specific behaviour make him a greater threat than any other strange adult.

    6. somewhere someone is hammering in the street*

      No. We are not turning this Friday into last Friday’s If You Object To Stalking You’re Ableist experience.

    7. essie*

      As someone who works closely with child protection, the fact that Hank has special needs does not change anything about the safety of the situation for Falcon. Minors should never be left alone in a house with an adult they have never met, especially forced on them last-minute. The fact that Hank has special needs just makes this upsetting, in that Jane apparently doesn’t care to ensure he has the assistance he needs.
      My late brother was disabled, and I greatly appreciate efforts to ensure that children do not fear people with disabilities. But I think the issue, in this specific situation, is that there was an unfamiliar man sitting in the dark, in an unfamiliar house.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        Absolutely agree. Jane’s behaviour towards Hank is the only disrespect shown towards him in this tale.

    8. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      I don’t think the OP or their son is saying that Hank is weird or scarry because of his disabilities. It was how he acted. Take out the part of him having learning disabilites. There was a stranger sitting in the dark who did not talk to them for the hours they were there. It sounds like he didn’t even acknowledge them in any way. That is what was strange and why the kid was scared. Because there is a stranger acting weird.

    9. Observer*

      I understand that a middle schooler could be scared of a new situation and a strange person, but that’s where it’s up to an adult to talk them through it.

      No, it is NOT up to any responsible adult to talk any kid out of their *very* reasonable and rational fear.

      ** This was an adult who the kid did not know, to start with. Nor did the parent. Being hesitant worried about a person they don’t know is not jsut an irrational fear that the kid needs to get over. It’s a survival mechanism.

      ** The guy’s behavior was out of normal bounds. Now it could be that he is just shy and would react perfectly reasonably to any further interactions with Falcon. But Falcon had absolutely no way to know that, so it’s reasonable for him not to want to go into the room where he’s sitting.

      ** The fact that Jane clearly felt that she could not trust her nephew to keep the dogs from pooping in the house is a very strong signal that there is something out of kilter with him. There is no good reason to assume that whatever it is that makes it unreasonable to expect him to deal with a basic task like that is specific ONLY to this task and would not in any way indicate the possibility that he’s not going to handle interactions with strange kids well. In other words, again, a strong signal that something might not be so safe here.

      None of this is ableist. And people have a right to keep themselves safe. And that includes the right to make *reasonable* assumptions based on their limited information without being accused of bigotry.

      Especially since it turns out that something pretty significant must be wrong with this person – either her walked through the poop, tracked it around and didn’t clean up after himself (which sounds most likely) or he let the dogs do that.

      1. allathian*

        It is, and it isn’t. In the vast majority of child abuse cases, kids are abused by their own parents or other family members rather than complete strangers.

        It’s better to teach kids that they have agency and that they can tell the smarmy uncle that they don’t want a hug, and to have that no respected.

  83. Anon for This*

    I have a true story related to #4: I was checking in for a medical appointment at the reception desk, when another man came up next to me to check in with the adjacent receptionist. We finished at the same time, and I realized he looked familiar. I said “you look familiar, do I know you?” He said “Have you ever done time?”

    At this point, I realize he is not who I think he is, and before any sense of embarrassment set in, I somehow uttered the following response: “Not that I can remember.” We exchanged a strange look with each other, and went on our way.

  84. Olive*

    #1 I find it a little off-putting that there are so many comments suggesting that Falcon could dog sit again if this or if that.

    I think the LW should never agree to do anything for Jane ever again, unless there’s a true one-off emergency that they’d never ask to be paid for, like helping her call an ambulance. Anything involving detailed instructions or an exchange of money should be a no-go.

    She bait and switched Falcon and then took $50 back. She’s shown her character the first time and there isn’t any agreement or contract or sincere discussion that’s going to make her a safe employer for Falcon.

    1. Despachito*

      This.

      I think OP handled it awesomely – gave her her money back when prompted, and I hope this was the last time Falcon was working for the neighbor.

      1. Olive*

        You know, at first I was disappointed that LW gave the money back when Jane so very much didn’t deserve that, but if that was the price of making future avoidance peaceful and neutral, it was worth it.

        1. Despachito*

          I think exactly this – the money is not worth the hassle, and Jane wouldn’t have a leg to stand on if she wanted to complain that they ripped her off for lousy work (she wouldn’t be right even if they did not return the money but as they did she has NOTHING to complain of)

    2. Domino the Dalmatian*

      Jane took the $50 back after OP offered it. You can’t fault her for saying “yes” if offered.

  86. DramaQ*

    What kills me is that professional caretakers and dog walkers would have been upset over the schedule changes and either charged extra or even cancelled depending on the contract and possibly dropped Jane as a client. Yet there are people here who are trying to argue Falcon should dog sit again if only this/that happens?

    Yeah no. If an adult whose paid legal job it is wouldn’t tolerate Jane’s behavior then a 13 year old child sure as heck should not be expected to do so. This is not a “valuable life lesson” about keeping your word type moment. This was teach your kid boundaries are good and to not put himself in situations like this out of fear he will upset the Janes of the world. His well being comes first.

    1. CityMouse*

      This. Professional dog walkers would have refused both the last minute hour change and *absolutely* refused a situation where they were alone with someone in the house.

  87. TiffIf*

    #OP2

    Leaving aside the unreasonableness of leaving you hanging like this unable to book tickets or hotels, I want to emphasize that this is really skimpy PTO especially for someone at your level (a manager who reports directly to the VP).

    Now it sounds like this is a smaller company and I work at a very large company but I wanted to give you a basis of comparison.

    For Full-Time employees with 1-4 years of service there is a maximum accrual of 17 days of PTO. Technically you accrue it at 1.42 days per month but they always put your full annual maximum PTO in your PTO bank at the beginning of the year. For new full time employees the 17 days is prorated for how much of the year they are at the company (So if you start on August 1 then your PTO will be 5×1.42=7.1 days.

    At 5 years the PTO jumps to 22 days; 10 years and above, 27 days.

    You can roll over up to 40 hours of PTO year to year.

    (This is a simplification as there are some additional bands for different grades and a different sales team and shift and part time PTO schedules, but this is the structure I am under.)

  88. Fab Friday*

    If the adult nephew was incapable of watching the dogs, there is no way my minor child would have been watching the dogs and basically babysitting this adult also! That was a significant change in conditions and I would have said “We really want to help, but it’s our policy never to leave our son alone with an adult we don’t know (or something similar)”. That’s the first thing that stood out to me. The neighbor was rather inconsiderate here, but boundaries are always good.

    No way the money should have been returned, it was earned.

  89. Erin*

    LW1, as a dog-sitter, I would have cancelled over those changes. Even as an adult woman being asked to suddenly stay alone with a man who prefers the dark wound be a huge red flag for me. Original terms or I’d be out.

  90. Gustavo*

    LW 1: yes, Jane was absolutely wrong in every bit of this. My only issue with your letter is that you make Hank out to be some big scary man who is creepy because he didn’t socialize due to his disability. I completely agree leaving your son alone with a stranger would have been a bad idea no matter what but why didn’t you go in and say hi? Talking to Hank may have made everyone have a much more comfortable evening and you may have gotten to know a lovely human who just needs some understanding.

    1. CityMouse*

      Reread the letter.

      “We walked the dogs, played with them in the yard, and greeted Hank, who was sitting in the dark and ignored us. ”

      You don’t teach kids that people with disabilities are scary but you absolutely do not teach them they’re any safer than any other stranger either.

  91. professional pet care provider*

    I do pet care. Walks, drop ins, and sits. That neighbor was 100% out of line. There’s no delicate wiggling negotiation regarding time. That drop in should be canceled altogether. He should not be hanging in a house with a stranger. Neighbor can be disappointed and angry. Tough.

  92. Moose*

    Thus comment section tends to be fairly bad at boundaries when someone is mentioned to have a developmental disability so I am pleasantly surprised by many of the comments about Falcon. I’m curious about why the comments are so different between this and last week’s question but there’s clearly a difference. Ah well.

    1. Boof*

      If this was the overly chatty dude at a convention, there are loads of differences; that dude was clearly an overall independent adult and the question was more “at what point do we ban him from our party” and this is apparently “my neighbor expected my young-teen kid to supervise an adult with some kind of unknown disability as a last minute switcheroo for dogsitting”.
      For starters for many group ostracization feels like a supreme punishment, so some people will go “no, no, anything but that!” automatically.

      1. Moose*

        It wasn’t just that guy though. Commentors here have, on more than one occasion, displayed really bad boundaries the minute an intellectual or developmental disability is hinted at. It’s something that’s turned me away from reading this blog and is, in it’s own way, another expression of ableism.

        I am genuinely surprised to see so many people responding in a way that shows very good boundaries in this situation.

    2. Jackalope*

      My guess is that a lot of it stems from the fact that Falcon is a middle schooler and was therefore 10-14 depending on grade. There’s a big difference between what society expects of adults vs what they expect of children, and no matter what was going on with Hank, Falcon was too young to be in that situation.

      1. Moose*

        I think you’re right in that people are showing better judgement because Falcon is a minor. I also think that many commentors here only have experience with children with intellectual or developmental disabilities and therefore tend to universalize those experiences onto adults. I am a neurodivergent adult who has experience working with other neurodivergent adults in a caring role. Sometimes the comments here make me want to tear my hair out. I am pleasantly surprised by the good boundaries on display regarding this letter.

        Except OP, you owe your kid $50. I don’t understand why you decided to pay Jane back in the first place.

    3. It’s a job, nothing more*

      1) This was taking a job- you do x and I will pay you y. Then they switched x to z. This is no longer what was agreed to.
      2) Regardless of the nephew’s ability, this is a strange person (an adult to boot) who would have been with a minor alone.
      3) The extent to which people accommodate disability and/or differences in social norms may be a matter of some debate, but the extent to which we acommodate one-sided contractual alterations is not so much. Sending kids alone into private residences with strangers is also not very common these days.

  93. Coverage Associate*

    I work in cybersecurity, so we have pretty robust firewalls in place, but I would never hesitate to ask for an actual work related website to be white listed. If it’s a security problem, our IT staff will let me know and find a work around.

    I am still fairly new, so I haven’t asked them to white list the site for a reputable non profit where I am a member, because it’s not work related. But in a few months, I probably will, because managers have asked positive questions about their work.

    My workplace doesn’t block websites because they want to keep us on task, but a former workplace did, which resulted in blocking all .edu sites, even large universities. We could still get sites white listed for at least a day if we could show it was work related. (I am not sure why they thought education sites were distracting, but maybe it had to do with college sports or employees not dealing with kids’ schools during the work day.)

    This was a law firm, and occasionally other firms’ sites would be blocked. Sometimes the software mis classified the site, like a construction law firm blocked as an actual contractor. (No coordinating your home remodel during the work day!) But once I figured out that the site was blocked because they had a lawyer named Nazi. I just told IT that it was the site for opposing counsel on a case, and it was permanently white listed. (Nazi was the last name, and the individual belonged to an ethnic minority. I probably would have changed to Nazee or something in her position, but I think it’s fine she didn’t.)

  94. Susannah*

    LW 3, how awful! And how manipulative of them. I mean – if they keep waiting and say yes a week before, you won’t be able to afford to go. And if they say no, and you’ve been holding off to have that time, you’ll get to the end of the year without having taken PTO at all. See how well that worked out for the company?
    Honestly, I’d just book the flights and accommodations. And if they come back some day with a “no,” say you’re sorry to hear that, and by the way, your last day is X (the day before you leave on vacation).
    This is an unacceptable way to treat people – even if quitting made them re-evaluate their “no.”

  95. celestialisms*

    #3 – Our work firewalls occasionally block individual AAM letters if they have something to do with bigotry, homophobia, racism, etc… the reason for the block? “Websites promoting hatred.”

    *facepalm*

    I report it for correction each time, but still.

  96. Not A Lawyer but I Play One on Zoom*

    My favorite “firewall” story: A friend of mine is a lawyer for a city government agency, and she once told me of a case she worked where individuals had been filming pornography on city property. This is usually an issue for the local police to sort out, except in this instance the individual’s stage name was a play on a city entity name, and they’d even developed a logo very similar to the real city entity. So she had to request IT unblock a porn site for some time, while she watched all their videos to take notes like “at timestamp 05:01 [city entity logo] is visible for 35 seconds while [individuals] engaged in [activity]” and “at timestamp 7:56 [building-specific sign] is visible indicating [video] was filmed at [restricted access location]”.

  97. WhyAreThereSoManyBadManagers*

    #2 Please get out of that job. I once asked – in January – for two weeks of vacation in July, our slowest time of the year, to make a long-planned trip, so I gave my boss 6 mos notice. Over 5.5 months later I was still waiting, too late to book travel, and missed out on my trip, because my boss was a toxic bullying horrible person who kept saying every few weeks “we’re thinking about it” hut would never approve or reject the request. Finally with one week to go, they approved it but I told them too late, I couldn’t go on my trip anymore. They didn’t even apologize. I’ve never resented someone more, and it was very clear they were acting out of cruelty and spite. I was never so happy to quit a job soon after that – oh and they had to pay me for all that unused vacation, so I got a huge extra payment, and I earned it. Trust when people show you who they really are.

  98. Kevin Sours*

    The only way a human is likely going to aware that a link you accessed was blocked as porn is if you try to explain to them that you didn’t mean to. This stuff is automated and the only way anybody is checking the logs is if something happens.

    Plus stuff happens. I once accidentally accessed a porn site my first week of work (which was not blocked). I don’t think anybody noticed. Not that I wasn’t freaking out a little about it.

  99. Tesuji*

    LW#1:

    I’m kind of shocked at all of the “LW#1 did nothing wrong!” and “You’re a great parent!” kind of comments.

    I don’t like being harsh, but this feels like *such* an important point in a kid’s life, where he had a chance to learn some valuable lessons… and the LW comes across to me as a door mat who’s raising her kid to be a door mat, teaching the kid that he’s “obligated” to just suck it up when an employer unilaterally f__ks him over.

    Jane wasn’t Darth Vader. She doesn’t get to change the deal and you just have to live with it. It’s very clear to me that all of this was premeditated, that she planned on doing this from the very beginning.

    Not having someone to watch her disabled nephew was a Jane problem. The LW made it into a Falcon problem, rather than teaching the lesson that other people don’t get to decide when you need to take on their responsibilities.

    And then having the kid offer to give some of the money back because he didn’t perfectly do the job he never agreed to do? That was a *chef’s kiss* of parental failure, teaching Falcon that he is the least important person in any story, and is responsible for bearing the cost of other people’s mistakes.

    I’m sorry to be blunt, but it feels like Falcon was failed by everyone else in this story, including those who should have protected.

    1. Olive*

      My sense was that the LW wasn’t sure whether the disabled nephew was able to be home by himself without help (and we don’t have enough information to know that either), and in that kind of situation, erring on the side of not leaving him was the right thing to do. This was an adult who didn’t have the wherewithal to not step in dog poop or to avoid tracking it through the house.

      Sometimes we should take on community responsibilities. Not forever, and not without a plan to keep it from happening again. But I’d rather my kid have the lesson that if we have a person who needs help (the nephew, not Jane), we help them instead of deserting them, even if it wasn’t our job and wasn’t fair that we were the ones stuck with the problem.

      1. Observer*

        and in that kind of situation, erring on the side of not leaving him was the right thing to do.

        Nope. Not at all. Not only was Falcon not the right person for this, neither would the LW be the right person to take care of him. Even someone with credentials, training or some solid knowledge would have a hard time with absolutely zero information about the person. For someone like the LW, who simply doesn’t have the background? Nope.

        But I’d rather my kid have the lesson that if we have a person who needs help (the nephew, not Jane), we help them instead of deserting them,

        Besides the fact that this is TOTAL AAM FanFic, this is not a reasonable reaction. The LW wasn’t doing this to help the nephew. They were doing this because they felt obligated to accommodate a neighbor who they did not want to annoy. And then they essentially assumed blame for something they were not responsible for and essentially penalized the kid!

        That’s not a lesson in helping people who need it in an emergency. It’s a lesson in poor boundaries and letting people walk over you. Fortunately the LW is someone is able to “hear” difficult messages and will have the necessary conversation with their child.

    2. WorkInnit*

      Yes, this is harsh. I would have done the same as LW1 except not having given any money back. When it’s your neighbour – assuming they previously had a good or at least neutral relationship – it’s very logical to want to keep the relationship a smooth one. Sadly, the neighbour sorely over-asked and put Falcon and therefore LW in a difficult situation. I agree that kids should be taught to protect themselves and their own interests, but giving a neighbour some benefit of the doubt at first instance is not a bad lesson in life either.

  100. FunkyMunky*

    re: Christmas PTO, I don’t understand even waiting that long for a response. Once you submitted the initial PTO booking, it’s yours. I’m not a manager but I have moved far away from waiting for requests for PTOs to be granted. I get 25 v-days as a base and I do not have time to sit around around and wait for “approvals”, I just book my travel.

  101. NotARealManager*

    LW1,

    I think it’s a good opportunity to teach your child they can say no to requests. You are not beholden to an employer (or friend or classmate or whoever) if the terms of a job change that wildly and sometimes the other person is being a jerk for asking it of you. You are not the jerk for holding a boundary. It took me until college to even start to learn that.

    I had a regular, weekly babysitting gig in middle school watching the younger siblings of a friend while their mom was at “book club”. Later, it transpired, their mom had been having an affair during my babysitting hours. Book club didn’t exist. While obviously I couldn’t have known that was the case at the time, I felt awful for being used that way once it came to light (my mom and the other neighborhood parents didn’t know until later either). Jane reminds me of that experience.

  102. Scottish Beanie*

    I’m sure Falcon has learned a valuable lesson that just because an adult asks for something doesn’t mean that they’re trustworthy and doesn’t mean they’re correct. It took a very long time for me to learn that lesson. Falcon is very fortunate that he had his grown-up sit with him through the ordeal; I can only imagine how he would’ve felt if Hank decided to come out of the dark and do something inappropriate (even if inadvertently).

    I was asked to babysit a child with down syndrome when I was about 12 years old. I had no idea how difficult that would be, and I regret ever agreeing to doing something like that. That young child behaved extremely inappropriately and I felt pressured to stay and not call my parents because I wanted to show that I was responsible. Moreover, it was my mom’s Friend who asked if I’d be willing to do it and it made me give my mom the side eye because she knew the whole time that things weren’t as they seemed.

    1. Scottish Beanie*

      In other words, Jane is shady and should be kept at arms length (or de-friended). I truly believe Jane wanted a babysitter for Hank and tried to rope a teenager into doing it. LW#1, please give your son all the money he earned and, as a show of good will for him doing something well out of his comfort zone, double his payment. You don’t want him remembering being left in the lurch twice: (1) enthusiastically accepting a dog-sitting job only to encounter a scary stranger he had to stay with all night, and (2) having his hard-earned money taken away when he went well above and beyond. Left unaddressed, a teenager remembers things like that forever.

  103. Governmint Condition*

    On #3, if the firewall blocks a website you need, our IT’s position is “find another way to do your work.” It doesn’t help that IT is provided from a centralized agency that serves many government departments, so they see no unique needs.

    1. Old Lady at Large*

      #3 I ran into the same thing when I worked in a military hospital. I was a medical transcriptionist, and also responsible for providing an off-site contractor with the names of new procedures and equipment, so I had an occupational requirement to look at websites that talked about things like urological dysfunction in men, and so forth. I also had to access a bartender’s website because I handled paperwork for the Alcohol/Drug Rehab floor and as a nondrinker I had no idea how to spell or properly capitalize most liquors and mixed drinks. When I told my boss about it she was able to get me special permission to access these websites that would have otherwise been blocked.

  104. Sybil Writes*

    #1 O my goodness, this was awful and Alison’s response was correct, IMO.
    One thing I would add is that in the larger picture, you have received excellent information about this neighbor – that she definitely has terrible judgement and possibly may be rather manipulative. Either way, I would cross her off your child’s potential client list. Fine to stay friendly neighbors, but I would be forever unavailable to do repeat business with her. I cannot shake the suspicion that she either thought she’d get a ‘two-fer’ either by having your son sit both the dogs and her nephew (WTF?!) or that you would join your son rather than send him alone. That she took back the $50 from you tells you that she is also not generous/gracious (another reason for your child to steer clear). She basically got 6 hours of both your and your son’s time for the rate of $2 per hour.
    This also provides a great opportunity to have some discussions with your son about boundaries, graciously saying no (and sticking to it), and what’s reasonable in terms of customer service and responding to change terms of an arrangement. Sounds like you are a lovely person who got caught off guard at the last moment. But having lived through this, discuss with your child how you might handle a similar situation differently in the future. Sometimes life’s best lessons arrive disguised in really crappy (in this case literally) wrapping.

  105. MicroManagered*

    (Frankly, even if Falcon were comfortable, I don’t think it would have been an appropriate ask. If Hank isn’t capable of taking care of the dog himself, and is someone who might smear dog poop all over the house without cleaning it up, an unprepared middle-schooler isn’t the right person to be alone with him.)

    Yeah this is the ONLY correct answer to LW1 if you ask me. I’m really surprised it’s just a parenthetical. A middle schooler has zero business providing care to a disabled adult he’s never met before — PERIOD.

    You should have never returned money to Jane. He provided the service they agreed on. Jane was being an extremely irresponsible caregiver leaving Hank alone all evening if he wasn’t capable of letting the dogs out for a walk & a poop, or even noticing actual poop on the kitchen floor!

  106. JPalmer*

    LW2 deserves a workplace that appreciates them more and gives more vacation.

    It is nuts to me that you’ve been working there 10 years and this leave policy is so terrible on multiple fronts.

    – Only two weeks after 10 years
    – No required response time after you submit a request
    – No indication about why/why not.
    – No rollover or extension when you’re denied end of year requests
    – No recommended times of year to take requests (like a slow season)

    Think about it, you’ve been here 10 years and this so bad that it’s making you want to walk.
    I think if you do stay it’s reasonable to start a managerial discussion about improving leave policies or else the company will lose valuable employees (including the most experienced folks). If the VP isn’t an idiot they will recognize the threat that a bad leave policy can have to the business he’s taking the helm of. You represent an enormous amount of institutional knowledge and working connections.

    1. JPalmer*

      And to be clear, I’m with the “Book now and go regardless.” crowd.
      Maybe you get a different job, you could probably do that by the time VP stops being useless.

      Wanted to provide an alternative option to that in case there are reasons you don’t want to move on (like you’d need to move because your industry is location specific and another job would be elsewhere)

  108. Bill and Heather's Excellent Adventure*

    LW1, I’m sorry this happened to you and Falcon. Best thing you can do now is discuss what happened with him and emphasise that he always has the right to say no if changes to his dogsitting (or any kind of sitting) arrangements make him uncomfortable and that you will always back him up. No more favours for Jane!

  109. Summer*

    LW1 – Jane was completely in the wrong here. She never should have sent the last minute change and then left for the event without confirmation from you and Falcon that the change was ok. Who thinks it’s ok to leave a middle schooler alone in a strange house with a man they have never met before? The entire situation is so odd and I really question Jane’s judgement here. And I would tell her Falcon isn’t free to help out in the future.

  110. Sebastian*

    Re no.4, if you’re happy with sounding a little old fashioned, then “How do you do?” works quite well.

  111. OP*

    OP1 here. All of this feedback has been really helpful. As noted in some previous comments, Falcon has his $50 back and will not dogsit for Jane again.

    Jane is a longtime neighbor who has always been good to us. Had that not been the case, saying no to her in the moment would have been my obvious response. Because I’ve known her for years, and I like her, I didn’t want to bail on her when it was to late for her to make other arrangements, even though she clearly backed us into a corner. That’s why I went along and stayed by Falcon’s side all night. We would not have done it if not for the past positive relationship, and we will surely never do it again.
    One other factor in my offer to return the money was Jane’s husband. He was pretty angry about the poop on the floor, and I needed to smooth over that situation. Because I need to see these people all of the time.
    Thanks again to everyone who took the time to comment. I’ve read every one.

    1. Observer*

      Thanks for coming back to update us. And I really admire how well you’ve taken the feedback you got here. Also, I think having Falcon not dog sit for her again is a really smart and realistic decision.

      It sounds like there may be a bit more dysfunction in that household than is apparent. Which is all the more reason to avoid these kinds of situations.

    2. Myrin*

      Thanks for the update, OP!
      I think you handled this tricky situation gracefully and responsibly. All the best to you and Falcon in your future neighbourly endeavours!

    3. Ellie*

      You did well OP, but that doesn’t sound like a family you want to interact with again. I’d keep them at a polite distance from now on.

  112. Sam*

    Like others who have commented, I have face blindness. I have a very difficult time recognizing people I have not seen in a while, don’t know well, or who are out of context. I used to fumble my way through interactions, but I always ended up feeling guilty about it. I’ve started telling people I have difficulty recognizing faces and asking them to remind me how we know each other. This is actually typically well received, as humbling as it may feel for me.

  113. Computer-Man*

    #3 – I work IT in the cotton industry. If you don’t know how cotton is processed, it runs through a “gin” (“cotton enGINe”).

    Cisco’s filtering policies (of which I use both personally and at work) arbitarily decided one day that “gin” was, in fact, referring to alcohol. That’s a category arbitrarily blocked at work and home.

    These sorts of mistakes happen a lot more than you’d think, mostly because it’s a computer following an arbitrary set of criteria and sometimes the threshold for arbitrary keywords is pushed over.

Comments are closed.