my husband’s boss was fired after he told the truth about her in an exit interview

by Alison Green on September 9, 2024

A reader writes:

I’m writing on behalf of my husband, Bob, who recently left his job after two years. During his exit interview, he explained exactly why he was leaving. The reasons included his supervisor’s disorganized management style, expecting him to answer texts and phone calls at all hours, expecting him to log on to work immediately after a serious car accident, etc. To be clear, his position was not one that required him to be on call, and these were all violations of his union contract.

Three weeks after Bob left the job, his former supervisor, Jane, called in tears to say she had been fired because of what he said in his exit interview. He feels terrible because even though he gave true reasons, he did not intend for Jane to be fired. Obviously he will not be able to use her for a reference, but was it acceptable for Jane’s supervisor to put everything on my husband? He is now worried about destroying Jane’s life and the chance of legal retaliation.

I can see why Bob is upset about this, but he did not destroy Jane’s life. He didn’t even get her fired.

Jane got Jane fired.

It is also highly, highly likely that Bob wasn’t the only one to complain about Jane. It would be incredibly unusual for someone to be fired solely because one person made these sorts of complaints in an exit interview. If Bob were the only person raising concerns, it’s much more likely that someone would have simply talked to Jane, relayed the concerns, and coached her to behave differently.

It’s far more likely that Bob’s complaints were a last-straw situation — that they’d had serious concerns about Jane for a while and this gave them the final push. Somewhat less likely — but still more likely than firing a manager after one employee complained — is that they took Bob’s feedback seriously enough to start asking other employees for feedback about Jane and in doing so discovered more problems. Either way, this wouldn’t be solely about Bob’s feedback.

But even if it were based exclusively on what Bob said — which, again, is unlikely — this still wouldn’t be Bob’s fault. The concerns he raised were serious and important ones — in any situation, but particularly where Jane was violating a union contract. And given the issues with Jane, this wasn’t “she was trying really hard but couldn’t cut it, and Bob threw her under the bus on his way out the door.” This was a situation where a manager repeatedly violated boundaries and opened the company to legal liability (re: violations of the contract with the union). That’s Jane’s doing, not Bob’s.

All that said … ideally Jane’s supervisor wouldn’t have left her with the impression that Bob’s feedback is what triggered her firing. Sometimes that’s unavoidable though, like if the information that couldn’t have come from anywhere else. But it’s also possible that they didn’t frame it that way; for all we know, Jane could have already been warned repeatedly about these problems but wasn’t hearing the message (like many people in that situation) and just knows Bob was connected to the latest concern so she blames him, even if there was a string of the problems already jeopardizing her job.

It’s very unlikely that Jane could retaliate against Bob legally. Any cause of action she has for the firing would be against the company, not an individual employee. In theory she could try to claim something like defamation, but (a) she’d have to prove what he said was untrue and that he knew it was untrue and (b) it’s very unlikely a lawyer would take that case. You can never say never because some people do file nuisance lawsuits, but the chances of that are extremely low, and they’re even lower of it going anywhere.

I hope Bob will keep in mind that his concerns were real ones, he was right to share them, and his candor was a service to other employees who were also being mismanaged by Jane. And for what it’s worth, it’s refreshing to see a company taking exit interview feedback seriously, since many don’t act on it at all.

You may also like:
{ 188 comments }

{ 188 comments… read them below }

    1. Shoes*

      Posting here, in the hopes people will respond.

      For this letter Jane, was fired. In this type of situation, where I am assuming Jane is the only person who could give a reference, what is one to do for references?

      1. Somehow I Manage*

        I wondered about the statement in the letter. Bob might not have a manager to list for a reference from his last role, but could very easily put down a coworker with whom he worked closely

        1. Education Mike*

          He also could use anyone who acted in any supervisory role to him, including Jane’s supervisor, if they agree to that and if that supervisor had any sort of interaction with him at all.

        2. Lea*

          Yeah and if he already has a job this isn’t even his immediately previous job so he could just give the company to verify employment too while putting down people from his more recent job

        3. Nebula*

          Yes, a small company that I worked for folded a couple of years after I left, and I didn’t have any way to contact the direct supervisors I’d had there or the owner. I did have a couple of former colleagues on LinkedIn, and one of them kindly agreed to act as a reference for me after I contacted her on there. She was my reference for that job until it stopped being relevant.

          1. Elizabeth West*

            I have a reference in perpetuity for a former job because it was Hell and we both survived it, and we agreed we will be each other’s good reference until the end of time.

          2. Mrs. Hawiggins*

            Same. Some employers will understand if you cannot get a hold of a supervisor if it’s been too long or the company went away or you can’t reach them, and a former coworker is available. This happened to me a couple jobs ago and all I had were former coworkers. They understood and were fine with it… I got the job anyhow.

      2. Jaina Solo*

        Agree with the “coworker reference” idea by Somehow I Manage. I’d also go a step further and say choose a senior coworker. I’ve had to navigate that before and asked someone in a position above mine, albeit not my boss, to provide a reference and they were totally fine with it.

        Also, depending on your work history, you don’t have to provide a reference for each job, so you can just choose the 3 “best” manager-level references you’ve got. I did a short stint at a horrible job and usually leave that off my resume and never have a reference from there to give potential employers. Not all bosses will remain in your life as references.

      3. Wendy Darling*

        I had a job I quit due to the manager being terrible, though alas she was not fired.

        If I was just asked to give like 3 references I gave references from previous roles. If they asked for references from my most recent role I would give coworkers I’d worked closely with as references.

        I only had one company insist I let them contact that manager and they were one of those places that asks you for references way early in the process and as far as I know they never contacted mine.

      4. Festively Dressed Earl*

        That doesn’t apply here because Jane isn’t the only person who could give Bob a reference; Bob’s skip-level manager could easily provide one. Said manager’s judgment issues are another story, though.

      5. learnedthehardway*

        Bob should approach his second-line manager (ie. Jane’s boss) to get a reference, should he need one. When asked why he is not giving his direct manager as a reference, he can tell people that Jane is not available, and that his second line manager can explain the situation better.

        If he has to, he can explain that Jane blames him for the fact that she was fired after his exit interview, and that he can’t rely on her to provide an unbiased reference. No need to go into a lot of detail.

      6. Disappointed Australien*

        In my case the person doing the firing acted as a reference. Albeit in my case I would never have used the guy who was fired as a reference for fear that his obvious incompetence would reflect badly on me. I did get an email from the fired person saying he was no longer willing to act as a referee.

        It’s going to depend on the situation. A referee that says “I think Disapointed was a … llama something, for a year or so?” isn’t a lot of help, but a grandboss who says “I know nothing about what Disappointed does, but they worked here for 14 months and got positive reviews” is better. If they will talk about firing your manager for being a dick to you that’s even better.

      7. Inkognyto*

        I have worked for a company where it’s policy that manager’s cannot give a reference.

        It’s a larger company US based but also is worldwide, and I gave them the HR number and they can call there and verify employment, job title and when I worked.

        Was it ideal nope but it’s what was done. I still got employed. I think the company doesn’t want any legal liability if a manager gives a bad reference.

        Also said company only asks for the same information when they verify employment.

    2. Laser99*

      Yes, exactly. State the facts, what happens afterwards is no longer your concern. Any halfway-decent owner/manager would want to know about this type of behavior.

      1. Snudence Prooter*

        Even a terrible owner/ manager would want to know about someone repeatedly violating a union contract this much. It’s just basic self preservation for them.

      2. Stipes*

        And if the question eating at LW’s husband is, “What if Jane could have worked on her issues and turned things around”… well, it’s between Jane and her supervisor, as to whether she seemed willing and able to improve. Either she wasn’t in a place to work on this, or her boss wasn’t going to give her that chance, and neither of those options are your husband’s responsibility.

    3. Trout 'Waver*

      I disagree. The company should have taken ownership of firing Jane instead of blaming a recently resigned employee. They did better than most, but there is still room for improvement.

      1. Kevin Sours*

        It’s honestly not clear that they did. All we really know is that Jane blames Bob. I’m not sure we should assume that did so based an any rational inference from what she was told.

          1. TechWorker*

            I’m not at all saying this is what happened, but multiple possibilities:
            – reasons given to her included specific incidents which could only be about Bob
            – reasons given to her included ‘negative feedback from her reports’ and she’s concluded either via elimination or other guesswork this refers to the exit interview

          2. The Unionizer Bunny*

            If the union filed a grievance against her, she might not have heard about it from the people in the exit interview. Due process alone could account for knowing why she was being terminated.

          3. Zelda*

            The timing is suggestive. If Bob ever pushed back on Jane’s unreasonable expectations, and then two days after his exit interview she’s in the hot seat, and fired a coupla weeks after that… Jane is at least as capable of fanfic as we are, eh?

          5. Kate*

            Some will assume. I had a boss rake me over the coals for giving her bad feedback on an anonymous survey. She figured it was me because we didn’t get along. I honestly told her I had no idea who gave her bad marks. Not said: “…because I don’t remember whether I trusted the anonymity or not.”

            After I told a work friend in another department, she was so pissed on my behalf that she called the ethics hotline.

  2. Baela Targaryen*

    Nope, nope, nopenopenope. Jane got Jane fired and is doing everything she can to avoid the self reflection that comes with accepting that fact. Not your husband’s problem.

    2. Hannah Lee*

      Jane got Jane fired, absolutely.

      But I’m also spreading some shade in Jane’s manager’s direction. And not just because they may have given Jane the impression that LW’s husband’s comments were the reason behind the firing.

      But because the issues LW lays out don’t sound like one time things, and seem like things that would be known to her manager if that person was actively managing Jane. (eg that disorganization, reactionary ‘everything’s an emergency, need it now’ style would bubble up in different ways than it sloshed down, but it would show up somehow). It’s possible Bob’s resignation/comments were a last straw situation but a strong manager would have taken decisive action with Jane before it came to that, because you want to corral bad, destructive employees *before* good employees start quitting.

      Then again, there is a non-zero chance that Jane’s a reactionary unreliable narrator with no self-awareness or self-accountability for anything. Bob should not worry one bit about being responsible for anything to do with Jane.

      And as far as references, Bob should line up co-workers or managers from other groups he worked with and not worry about Jane, or even Jane’s boss (unless he’s 100% sure that reference would be solid) Because I’m pretty sure any sane employer would understand “unfortunately, my prior manager was fired not long after I left and isn’t (able, available, willing) to speak to the nature of my work in that role, but Elaine, Manager of the Teapots division worked closely with me on xyz projects and can speak to my work style and skills in Teapot production supply chain management, just the kind of skills, experience you need for this role.” And any hiring manager who wouldn’t likely won’t be a good fit long term.

      1. I missed my exit... interview*

        > there is a non-zero chance that Jane’s a reactionary unreliable narrator with no self-awareness or self-accountability for anything

        The fact that Jane thought it was acceptable to call up a former employee to complain that he got her fired tells me everything I need to know about Jane’s judgement, self-awareness, and accountability.

    1. Observer*

      Absolutely!

      What did she think she was going to accomplish by calling Bob? I can’t think of a single scenario where this is a useful thing to do. So that speaks volumes about her.

      1. Anonym*

        Sounds like a continuation of the inappropriate choices and poor judgement that characterize her behavior in the job.

        OP, please share with Bob the chorus of internet strangers thanking him and confirming that he did right here! And think of the other employees who will be protected from all of this mismanagement in the future. He did a service for many people.

        1. Specks*

          This! Bob did everyone a service and Jane just continues to show how poorly suited she is for any sorts of people management. Bob needs to see this for what it is: a strong confirmation that what he did was exactly right and he’s helped his former coworkers and former company by speaking out.

          I would also consider reaching out to HR or grand-boss at the former job to let them know that Jane made this highly inappropriate call, just in case she’s harassing other former employees. And maybe that in the future it would be best for them not to even hint that a particular employee said anything.

          1. Yvette*

            Yes, to all of the above, especially the last paragraph about Bob, reaching out to his former employer, and letting him know this.

            1. Slow Gin Lizz*

              Agreed, I said as much in a comment lower down in this thread. I think it’s important to emphasize that Bob certainly doesn’t have to do this, of course, and if he’d rather just move on and forget about it, it’s totally fine for him not to say anything. And of course this depends on the company, because if it’s a disfuntional or toxic company overall, there wouldn’t be much point and it could come back to bite him later.

          2. Kyrielle*

            When Bob reaches out for that, he can also ask them how they should handle references, since Jane is clearly not going to be an appropriate reference.

        2. anne of mean gables*

          Agreed. The fact that Jane called Bob in tears to report that he got her fired makes me believe every single thing Bob said, tbh (not that I had any reason to doubt, those are all pretty cut-and-dry allegations). Though I completely understand why Bob is nervous, since she’s demonstrated she is not taking her firing well or reasonably.

        3. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

          Exactly this. Jane’s decision to call up a former employee to chew him out for her being fired is something else! The only reason I can think of for her to do this is that she wants Bob to feel bad. Like, her goal here is to upset Bob as punishment. That’s not the type of behaviour I’d want from someone I hired to manage people.

      2. Momma Bear*

        I agree. She can be upset that she got fired. She can be angry at Bob. But she shouldn’t have then called him (a former employee) on his personal number to berate him about it. What he said and what happened are company business. Bob shouldn’t feel bad for the result of her own poor choices.

        1. Slow Gin Lizz*

          This is just further boundary stomping by Jane! More evidence of why Bob was correct to quit!

          I don’t think it’s worth it for Bob to do this, but he could, if he really wanted to, contact his former company to let them know about Jane’s phone call. I suppose I would only recommend this if Bob left on good terms and still has a contact at the company that he’d feel comfortable disclosing this information to. But OTOH, I think it’s fine for Bob to just move on and forget about Jane and his former company altogether and not talk to them about this. I honestly don’t know if calling the company is a good idea or not – anyone else have any thoughts on this?

          1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

            The most compelling reason to share the information that I can think of is it’s an FYI that Jane is pulling some nonsense. This may very well be the only inappropriate thing Jane has done or will do, but there’s no guarantee. Has she called other employees? Anyone else? I wouldn’t immediately assume that Jane is going to go and try to cause major problems, but it’s potentially worth keeping an eye out. Even if it’s just saying to her former direct reports that they want to know about it if Jane gets in touch.

      3. Laser99*

        I hold a grudge, so I would have said something like “Considering you called to nag two minutes after I broke my collarbone, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised you’re calling now. Oh wait, I don’t have to deal with you anymore. Good-byeeeeee!”

    3. Project Maniac-ger*

      Exactly. Jane blew past boundaries so much she repeatedly violated a union contract… then blew past boundaries by calling up a former employee and taking it out on them. Proving the point there, Jane.

  4. Crystal Claire*

    OP, as Alison said, this is on Jane; not Bob. If possible, maybe there is someone else from his former job that would be able to provide a reference.

  5. Observer*

    ideally Jane’s supervisor wouldn’t have left her with the impression that Bob’s feedback is what triggered her firing. ~~SNIP But it’s also possible that they didn’t frame it that way; for all we know, Jane could have already been warned repeatedly about these problems but wasn’t hearing the message (like many people in that situation) and just knows Bob was connected to the latest concern so she blames him, even if there was a string of the problems already jeopardizing her job.

    Yes, LW keep this in mind. Everything else that Alison says is true as well. But one thing is for sure – Jane is not a reliable narrator here. So you really have no idea of what she was actually told.

        1. Sean*

          Exactly. What it does show is that before being marched out of the building, Jane made sure to take with her a copy of Bob’s personal contact details – something which surely should have been locked safely in HR’s office.

          She might well have taken copies of other employees’ details, too.

      2. B*

        Indeed, the fact that she is calling him to complain about this only further reinforces this is a person who deserved to be fired.

      3. Ama*

        This is reminding me of when my boss got fired (for embezzlement). I found out from a coworker that he called her to “apologize”; she was annoyed because she felt like he wanted her to accept the apology so he could make himself feel better. His firing resulted in our entire department getting shut down – my coworker already had another job lined up, thankfully, and the only reason I didn’t lose my job is it was a union position and they had to offer me a transfer. So I was absolutely *not * in the mood to absolve my boss of anything and refused to pick up the phone when I could tell he was calling.

        He eventually gave up but not before leaving a voicemail that absolutely made it clear he didn’t care about my feelings at all, only his own.

    2. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

      Great point about Jane not being a reliable narrator. The LW and Bob should take everything Jane says with a boulder of salt, as she’s already demonstrated that she’s prepared to blame others for things that were her fault.

  6. Crystal Claire*

    OP, as Alison said, this is on Jane, not Bob. If it helps, I am sure there is someone else at Bob’s former job that would be able to be a reference for him.

  7. AndersonDarling*

    If Jane was fired ONLY based of the comments from the exit interview, then I’d expect the firing to take place the next day or within the next week. Because it took 3 weeks, there was an investigation, discussions, and likely interviews with other employees. A proper process was followed.
    This wasn’t about Bob’s comments alone. It was just a piece of it. Who knows, Jane may have done something outrageous the day she was fired and is choosing to blame it on Bob.

    1. Learn ALL the things*

      Exactly. It sounds to me like Bob’s statements in the exit interview were the springboard. He set something in motion that frankly should already have been in motion long before he said anything, but a lot of companies don’t have anything in place to monitor the work of their managers to make sure they’re managing appropriately. Bob let them know that Jane was not managing appropriately and they took the time necessary to look into his claims and determine that they were valid. This is exactly how it should have happened. Bob didn’t do anything wrong, and good on the former company for acting when they had the information.

    2. Paint N Drip*

      I think this is helpful for Bob to internalize – they investigated, and the results of looking into Jane’s behavior got her fired.
      From Bob’s perspective I can imagine he feels quite guilty, even though he shouldn’t. I also would be EXTREMELY surprised if he was the only one who got that same teary blameful phone call (for Bob it has the exit interview, for Susan it was her chat with HR, and for Jack it was his golf game with the director… Jane would blame anyone)

    3. Sara without an H*

      +1. Heck, the investigation may already have been underway and Bob’s exit interview was just additional evidence that Jane had to go.

      1. Yvette*

        Exactly Bob could either have been the tip of the iceberg or the straw that broke the camels back and either way I doubt very much was solely based on his exit interview

        1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

          And/or she had a bananapants reaction when her own bosses tried to talk to her about it.

      2. Where’s the Orcheatra?*

        Given that it wasn’t criminal conduct that got Jane fired, I’m also thinking there was an already going very quiet investigation, and Bob’s turn to talk to the investigation just happened to take place at his exit interview.

    4. ferrina*

      Excellent comment. This is a great point about the 3 weeks between the exit interview and firing.

      No functional company fires someone based solely on exit interview remarks. There was an investigation and it’s very likely this isn’t the first time that upper management has heard about Jane.
      *I assume this is a functional company; Bob would likely know if there was a history of the company firing people irrationally.

      1. Where’s the Orchestra?*

        Honestly given that it was three weeks from Bob’s exit interview till Jane’s firing, I also suspect there was a quiet investigation already happening and Bob’s turn to talk just happened to be at that exit interview.

        My reasoning, at my job it takes two weeks alone for HR and Legal to process termination paperwork (unless it’s for Criminal Conduct).

        1. ferrina*

          That’s a long time! IME, once the company makes the decision, they move pretty quickly. I’ve seen people terminated on the day of the offense. HR likes to have a few days to get together the documents (especially if the employees work in different locales with different employment laws), but the only time I’ve seen it take longer than that was when they were worried about a discrimination suit.

          1. ferrina*

            *should add that I’m in the U.S. in an at-will state working non-union jobs. So my company can fire me at any time for any reason as long as it’s not for my sex, race, or some other protected trait.

            1. Where’s the Orchestra?*

              US but Unionized. Honestly from what I’ve heard the bigger slow down is the Legal Dept wanting to make things as close to ironclad as possible.

              I’ve seen one person gone in two days for criminal conduct though.

  8. Ultimate Facepalm*

    It’s obvious that Jane has a lot of growing up to do. If I were Jane, and Bob (in additional to goodness knows who else) told HR about my actions that resulted in someone needing to fire me, I would be looking at *myself* as the root cause. Not Bob. It was so unprofessional of her to contact him with anything other than an apology.
    I hope she is able to learn a lot from this, and that she does not have direct reports in her career until she changes for the better.

    1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

      Honestly, I can imagine myself having an initial reaction that isn’t great, just to protect my ego, before getting my act together. What I wouldn’t do is call the person I was choosing to blame.

  9. Rainbow*

    Totally agree this is refreshing that they actually listened! “People are leaving partly because of this person” (if that is true) is a huge deal, and one my previous company didn’t listen to. That guy is still there, while I’ve lost count of how many people left because (partly) of him.

    1. Momma Bear*

      Same. As far as I am aware any time I left a company due to poor management the managers were still there years later. At least someone took Bob seriously.

    2. ferrina*

      Keeping a problem employee/missing stair does a disservice to every other employee. Bob may feel sad that Jane got fired, but based on the description of Jane, present and future employees are breathing a sigh of relief. Yes, it would be nice if Jane had a magical transformation, but that’s very unlikely and not fair to other employees to keep around a problem person just in case that problem person magically transforms. And I very much doubt that this is the first problem that upper management had with Jane. Based on the description of what she was doing, she’s likely to be a habitual issue.

  10. Jon*

    “Jane got Jane fired.”

    Say it louder for the people in the back. The person at fault is not the person who brings a situation to light, it’s the person who made the situation happen in the first place.

    It’s like when someone cheats on their partner and then someone finds out about it and spills the beans to the partner, who then breaks up with the cheater, and then the cheater blames the bean spiller for breaking up the relationship. Like, no, you did that yourself by cheating.

    2. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

      Precisely. And if the person doesn’t break up with the cheater, they often will also blame the bean spiller for “causing drama” or whatever.

  11. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

    OP – FYI, if on the really really low chance that Jane files a nuisance lawsuit against your husband, the union probably has legal assistance for him.

    2. Slow Gin Lizz*

      Ooooh, yes. I wonder if it would be a good idea to alert the union to what happened. It’s probably so small potatoes that it wouldn’t make any difference, but OTOH if she was regularly violating the contract, it’s probably not a bad idea for the union to be aware of it. (As with my comment in another thread, I have no idea if this is a good move or not, so if anyone else wants to weigh in I’d welcome their opinion.)

      1. sparkle emoji*

        Yeah, I doubt Bob will need assistance from the union, but telling them that Jane made this banana pants call will mean they can give him the facts about what they can do. Even if there’s no lawsuit, presumably they can reassure him that this wasn’t his fault. Is Bob someone who will be comforted by getting that gut check from someone who knows the details? If so, I really think talking to the union about the whole thing is worth his time.

    3. Observer*

      In the US, the chances of this are not just “really low”, they are close to zero.

      No lawyer is going to take this case on contingency – they are going to require that Jane pay up front, because not only does Jane not have a case, Bob is effectively judgement proof. At least enough that any share of a judgement would not be enough to make up the cost. And the odds of Jane being able to pay for more than just a nasty lawyer’s letter are not high either.

  12. 3-Foot Tall Inflatable Rainbow Unicorn*

    Jane’s karma is her own to deal with.

    And I doubt it’s going to be much of an issue in Bob’s future, to be honest. He’s already in a new job, yes? Every year he’s there, a reference from the job before that has less weight.

    But if he’s worried, Bob’s needs to start practicing saying “My direct manager at Job X was let go immediately after me and I do not have contact information for her reference.” If he knows any other direct managers or coworkers willing to put in a word for him, he can add their names as “someone who can speak to my work ethic” but really – the reference to focus on is the one for the job he’s got, not the one he left.

        1. Caramel & Cheddar*

          I think 3-Foot Tall Inflatable Rainbow Unicorn’s reading of the letter is that Bob left with something lined up, so his job working with Jane was Previous Job and the new one is Current Job. Sarah correctly pointed out that most people don’t use their Current Job for a reference, so next time Bob is job hunting for Future Job, he’s likely to need Previous Job as a reference, not Current Job, and Previous Job comes with Jane’s baggage.

    2. ferrina*

      Plenty of people can’t use former managers as references for a variety of reasons. Managers are the ideal, but it’s fine to use senior coworkers or regular coworkers who can speak closely to your work.

    3. Observer*

      Bob’s needs to start practicing saying “My direct manager at Job X was let go immediately after me and I do not have contact information for her reference.”

      Yes. In fact, I think that this is a *better* outcome for Bob than if Jane had not been fired. Because Jane would have been unlikely to be a good reference anyway – she’s an unreasonable piece of work who would have blamed Bob for who knows what when talking to a reference checker. This way Bob gets to steer people away from someone who is likely to try to harm him without sounding like he’s unfairly trashing his prior boss.

  13. Apex Mountain*

    This is the most obviously false letter ever written to AAM. I say that because it says a company listened to what someone said in an exit interview.

    /s

    1. dulcinea47*

      I’ve never had an exit interview, and I’m not too bothered b/c all the stuff I would have said is stuff they already know about and don’t plan to change.

      1. Learn ALL the things*

        I had what I call a “pre exit interview” once where I met with a member of upper management who I believed I had a mutually respectful relationship with. I told them what I was struggling with and what would need to change to make me willing to stay, and she acted like none of it was a big deal and it was my fault that I had a problem with the way the company was doing things, so I left. That person’s boss asked me for an exit interview when I resigned, and I said “your deputy already knows my reasons for resigning, I’m sure they’d be happy to fill you in.”

        1. CommanderBanana*

          ^^ Thiiiis. I no longer accept requests for exit interviews, and I no longer participate in stay interviews if I’m asked. No exit interviews because if I’m leaving, ya’ll already know the reasons why and have chosen not to do anything about them. No stay interviews because I no longer trust HR professionals to keep conversations they say are confidential confidential.*

          *I don’t trust HR professionals at all, but that’s another story.

          1. Farmerkat*

            When I left my last job, I did the exit interview to ensure that they knew that it wasn’t them, I just found something that was more in line with my career goals.

            But I was lucky for that to be an honest statement. Heck, I just chatted with both my old boss and grandboss today about industry news.

      2. Ultimate Facepalm*

        Exactly why I am not wasting my energy on one when I leave this place. If they haven’t changed after 30 years, they aren’t going to because of I left.

    2. Ashley*

      They can be helpful but not always have immediate results. I had one years ago where I listed the same problems as my predecessors. The difference was the Board knew me and the Director couldn’t villainize me the same he could others in the role. It took another year or so before he was finally removed but I was definitely able to help get the process started.

      1. GladImNotThereAnymore*

        I was in a similar situation. First sysadmin-type person for a particular group in an academic setting. Quit after a year and a half due to numerous mismanagement issues that I had tried to raise but received no support for, but as an outsider to the department it was easier to dismiss my concerns. The person who replaced me was a graduate student in that department and was well known to everyone. He experienced the same issues I did, which led to a meeting where I was asked to return and re-state what I experienced as support for his. This time the “managers” in question (actually a long-term non-tenured faculty member and a new but on tenure-track junior professor) lost their positions at the university. Definitely easier to discount the person you don’t really know but not someone who had spent years there already and had previous relationships with everyone.

        1. GladImNotThereAnymore*

          Oh, and while the long-term faculty member didn’t call me directly to rant, months later I did hear via a 3rd party that he did blame me for losing his position. Sorry you lost a cushy job, but as with Jane your failings were your own.

    3. Pay no attention...*

      IME it’s never one person’s exit interview that makes a change, but if multiple people all say the same thing, then a change might take place. The subject of the complaint matters too — generic “I’m leaving because of low pay and too much work,” is probably not going to trigger a company change, but “I’m leaving because of illegal activity of one person that could get the whole company sued” would benefit the company to fix the problem.

    4. Constance Lloyd*

      I left a job I loved because of low pay. I was effusive with praise in my exit interview, and kept reiterating I was only leaving because I just couldn’t afford to keep working there. The org gave my whole team a significant raise within a month. That felt pretty nice.

    6. Jaina Solo*

      At my one job, by the time I had reached my last day and did an informal exit interview, I was told that my boss was going to have “consequences.” Apparently, the issues had been noticed and since I wasn’t the only person to resign from that boss, my resignation was considered the last straw by the powers that be. The issues weren’t enough to be fired for, but she did get put under a different manager. And there was a truckload of info that was telling as to how many lies and other things had been happening that I’d just been working through.

      OP–you probably won’t see this but just let your husband know it’s not on him. You can be a good person and not feel bad that someone else is facing consequences for their own actions. If it helps, see if Bob acan acknowledge feeling bad Jane was fired, but also acknowledge that he doesn’t have to carry the weight of that decision or outcome since it’s Jane’s to deal with.

    7. Antilles*

      Generally speaking, yes.
      But in this specific scenario, I think there’s one extremely critical piece of information: “these are violations of the union contract.” Even if Bob didn’t directly say that, once the HR rep realized the potential contractual/legal issues at play, the company was forced to at least look into it for their own protection.

      1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

        This was my thought, too. Organizations may be a lot more proactive on violations of the law or legal agreements than they are about things that don’t implicate potential legal consequences.

        Many years ago, I was battling to get a company to honour my extended warranty on a laptop. (It turned out that there was a known issue with the graphics chip, which led to a bunch of lawsuits, and was unfixable). When I made it clear that I knew they were breaking the major consumer protection law where I live, they immediately got super accommodating and cooperative. I got to go buy a brand new laptop and they reimbursed me.

  14. Rob Moss Mob Boss*

    Jane called your hubs to complain about his exit interview and that she got fired? She is unhinged. There have to be a ton of other issues with her if she oversteps like this. It was definitely not your hubs. Who does this? And why would she call him? Unhinged behavior that’s just a glimpse into ‘Boss.’ i’m glad he’s outta there.

      1. BellaStella*

        I agree that Bob should block Jane on his phone and Linkedin and emails. He does not need her energy vampire drama nor is he her emotional support former employee.

      1. Green great dragon*

        Absolutely. A bit of me would love to pick this apart with Jane. “My behaviour was perfectly acceptable and also you should have realised it was unacceptable and then lied about it to protect me?”

  15. Caramel & Cheddar*

    “It’s far more likely that Bob’s complaints were a last-straw situation — that they’d had serious concerns about Jane for a while and this gave them the final push.”

    This. A few jobs ago, I left and mentioned different but similarly unacceptable issues in my exit interview. I knew there had been lots and lots of complaints about my manager previous to my interview, but obviously nothing had been done. It wasn’t until more than a year later that the manager was finally fired, but everyone knew it was after a long list of complaints where something must have finally tipped her bosses over the edge into finally doing something about it.

  16. The Ginger Ginger*

    OP, also keep in mind, that phone call from Jane is another example of her mismanagement. She should NEVER have called your husband like that. That’s just not something managers who are good at their job do. Instead of taking it personally, your husband should reframe it as yet another example of Jane not being suitable for that position.

    1. mreasy*

      800% – Jane believing that Jane’s needs are most important (like calling Bob at all hours when he worked for her) strikes again, here.

  17. Gritter*

    The fact that Jane’s first instinct upon being fired was to call Bob to tell him, presumably with the intention of guilt tripping him, speaks volumes.

    1. Aggretsuko*

      Yeah, I just thought, “what did she expect him to do, call them up, say he lied and give her her job back?!”

  18. Dust Bunny*

    They didn’t fire Jane on Bob’s unconfirmed one-man say-so, I promise. They’ve had suspicions/gotten other complaints/been watching her for awhile and Bob’s concerns may have been part of an overall pattern for which it sounds like Jane very much should have been fired, but Bob more than likely wasn’t the deciding factor.

    Also, the fact that she called him to tell him about it is way, way over the line and unprofessional, and just underscores what the problems were.

  19. Czhorat*

    One thing to keep in mind: when deciding whether or not to keep a manager, there are multple stakeholders whose needs need to be weighed. Their supervisees. Their boss. Internal clients. External clients. Other staff.

    “The guy who just quit” is not a stakeholder; what Bob said gave them information, but no organization is going to value the feedback of someone who is no longer with them over people who are still working there and still have to work with the questionable supervisor. What Bob’s comments could have done is either serve as a tipping point or spark an investigation – especially if Bob was a valued team member they’d not wanted to lose. It was not the cause for the decision.

    1. Somehow I Manage*

      And given the timing between the exit interview and the firing, it seems very likely that it either sparked the investigation or gave them some additional things to look into. Because it wasn’t immediate, it is less likely that Bob was the only reason she was let go.

  20. Texan In Exile*

    If exit interviews were taken seriously, there would be a line of corpses strewn on my career path.

  21. Miette*

    OP, I hope you will share the comment section with Bob today – he was in no way wrong, the the overwhelming positive reassurances here today will help him internalize it.

  22. Carol*

    Also if she repeatedly violated union rules, that may have played a big role in this and at least in getting an investigation going.

    1. MissMeghan*

      This was my thought too. I wouldn’t be surprised if his comments raised a flag that, upon investigation, uncovered further violations with other employees. That would make sense for an immediate firing rather than training or PIP.

  23. juliebulie*

    I had a bad boss who was double-demoted after I left, but I know for a fact that I was at least the third person to say something about him in an exit interview.

    Not that I would have expected them to do that just on my say-so. But, come on, three people. And the one before me was pretty spectacular: “I’m quitting because of Joe” when Joe wasn’t even his boss. Like you know in the westerns when the bad guy walks into the saloon and everyone skedaddles except for the rifleman, it was like that any time they got together for any reason, no one wanted to be a witness.

  24. Phony Genius*

    What we don’t know is what Jane’s manager said to her when they fired her. If they said “we’re firing you because of all these problems Bob told us about,” then I put some of this on Jane’s manager. Ideally, they would just tell her what the problems are and not who told them. At the very least they need to say “it’s not just Bob saying this.”

    2. pally*

      yeah- I was thinking about this too. Wouldn’t a competent HR (or management) limit the discussion with Jane to the issues and not indicate who may have told them about said issues?

      Or is Jane trying to suss out who said what to HR by calling Bob and attributing her termination to him? Maybe to see what his reaction would be? Maybe she’s out doing this to others as well.

      1. Space Needlepoint*

        I think your scenario sounds likely. I want to think that HR didn’t tell Jane exactly who made the complaints.

    3. Observer*

      then I put some of this on Jane’s manager. Ideally, they would just tell her what the problems are and not who told them. At the very least

      Nah. I mean it would be better to not do that. But this is so wildly out of line, that you can’t blame the manager for this.

      If they said “we’re firing you because of all these problems Bob told us about,”

      That’s a pretty big *if*, though. I would be willing to bet that this is absolutely not not what they said. And I would not even be surprised if they did not even mention Bob’s name.

  25. Anonymous for this*

    You’ve got lots of great advice regarding Bob’s lack of culpability around Jane getting fired, but I would like to offer some experience advise around the reference concern.

    A couple of years ago, I left a job because of my boss. Similar issues (unreasonably high expectations around availability/dedication to work) but no union to protect me. I was also honest in my exit discussions, but nothing happened to her.

    However, I changed jobs again about a year after leaving, and asked her for a reference. She refused to give me one, but I talked to the HR recruiter at my new company and explained that my manager from that job took it very personally when I left and was refusing to give me a reference. I was required to provide 2 references for my new job, but was able to provide a former (more senior) coworker from the job I was leaving, as well as a different manager from my previous job (not my direct manager, but someone more senior to me who could comment on my performance). They were totally fine with that and completely understood that things like this happen.

    So, advice for your husband: if he stays at this next job a while, a reference from the job he just left becomes less and less important…but even if he doesn’t, most decent companies will understand that sometimes managers are vindictive/petty and will work with you to find a solution. If he does get in that situation, I’d go back and look at some of Alison’s advice around explaining things factually and simply, so that any leftover emotions don’t end up leaving the recruiter/hiring manager with the impression that this was “drama” instead of a challenging situation that your husband handled very well!

    1. Anonymous for this*

      Adding this in a second comment: big props to your husband for speaking up. I know from experience how much of a difference this makes to the employees left behind! After leaving my toxic manager, I had many other coworkers tell me that they had the same issues, but wondered if they were alone if feeling that way. You have helped everyone else who had to deal with her!

  26. Katie*

    I get why he feels bad, it’s being human but alas it’s not his fault in the least.

    Honestly, the thing I would be kicking myself about is not complaining (louder?) about his issues before that. Even that is hindsight.

  27. InsufficentlySubordinate*

    I know of only one occasion that an exit interview caused an immediate (within 3 days) firing. The exiting person had been sexually harassed (explicit emails/”jokes”) despite requesting also via email that they not be sent such things but it continued for months. The exiting person outlined this in the exit interview. It was all there in the archives easily accessible and harasser was fired in 3 days. And that was in the late 90s early 2000s.

  28. Somehow I Manage*

    OP, I think you could ask Bob the following, just to see if you can assuage some of the guilt.

    Had he heard about Jane’s firing from a former colleague a couple weeks removed, would he feel as guilty?

    My assumption is no. But Jane called him because she’s obviously not a great person (see: evidence in the letter) who is now trying to emotionally manipulate your husband just because he told the truth.

  29. My Brain is Exploding*

    Please block all calls from Jane and direct any emails to a separate file. I’d be a bit worried that she would continue to try to contact you. Do not respond to her in any way.

  31. Ess Ess*

    OP’s husband should immediately call the HR of his former company and notify them about the phone call. There are 2 issues here — the former boss is retaliating by calling and blaming the firing on Bob, and that the former boss is using company information (Bob’s phone number) for personal use.

    This also lets HR know that they need to be more careful when doing actions that are based on exit interviews so that they maintain confidentiality about what is said in the interviews.

    1. pally*

      Second this. I wonder if confidences were broken by HR folks or is Jane trying to suss out who said what to HR. She may be reaching out to others in addition to Bob. And saying similar things to them.

    2. Somehow I Manage*

      I don’t know that I’d call it retaliation. She just called him in tears. She didn’t scribble angry postings on his LinkedIn account. And also it isn’t unheard of that she would have his number in her phone. But I do think looping in HR would be good, because if they want good and helpful exit interviews, people shouldn’t be subjected to this kind of response.

    3. Observer*

      the former boss is retaliating by calling and blaming the firing on Bob

      She’s not their responsibility anymore, though. So I really don’t see the point.

      that the former boss is using company information (Bob’s phone number) for personal use.

      Maybe. Or maybe not. Unless Bob’s number is unlisted, this tends to be fairly public information. And even if she would only have it through work, it’s unlikely that the company would consider it such a breach that it would make sense for them to do something about it. Again, she’s not their responsibility any more. Now, if she were using actually confidential and non-public information *and* she were doing something that the company had reason to worry about, that would be different.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        She may no longer be their responsibility, but what they say to people they’re firing about where the information comes from *is* their responsibility. It’s also their responsibility to ensure employees can expect to get fair references, and they may be willing to help OP’s husband since they torpedoed his reference with Jane.

  32. youngten*

    Please share the comments and advice with your husband here. He’s been through enough with working under those conditions. He doesn’t need to stress himself out over this. She is dealing with the consequences of her poor actions and wants to turn on the water works and blame someone else. This is yet another example of her boundary pushing. On a side note, is there something you both could do to make take his mind off this for a bit? like ordering his favorite meal or arranging a small get together with loved ones who love and appreciate him? Sometimes just being reminded that we deserve love and respect is enough to get us out of guilt mode and move on in a healthy way.

  33. Anonymous cat*

    They might not have named him specifically. If there were any comments about specific behaviors that included “pressuring an employee right after serious car accident” then she can guess at least one of the people.

  34. Not Tom, Just Petty*

    Let’s review.
    Jane, who has no boundaries and no sense of professional norms, was fired.
    Jane, who thinks her wants supercede her employees’ needs (car accident issues), was fired.
    Jane, who clearly has a history of putting the consequences of her actions on other people, was fired.
    Jane, called an EX-EMPLOYEE at HIS HOME using his personal number she’d accessed through her work and for work purposes, was fired.
    It’s hard, because she is a human and your husband is not a sociopath, but you have to put it out of your head. This is all her doing.

  35. TheBunny*

    LW your husband told the truth. The only responsibility he has in Jane’s termination is that he was honest when asked.

    Had Jane not been behaving as he described then she wouldn’t have been fired.

    I’m also positive they didn’t just take his word. The claims he made would have been investigated and compared to other issues that may have been communicated.

    I’ve been in a similar situation and I understand how he feels…but all he did was tell the truth.

  36. Sparkles McFadden*

    LW, please tell Bob that he is a hero. He could have taken the easy way out at the exit interview and just said he was pursuing another opportunity, but he told the truth in order to make things better for everyone he was leaving behind.

    With very rare exceptions, no one gets fired over just one thing. I’m sure there were other complaints about Jane, but management tends to ignore things until it costs more to keep a problem employee than to get rid of the problem employee. Losing an employee because the supervisor is awful is a big cost, so Bob and his proof of Jane’s bad management pushed things into the “We must deal with this now” zone.

    I don’t think the company reps are blaming Bob. HR may have told Jane “We’ve warned you before but now people are quitting because of you” but it’s far more likely that Jane did the math that Bob had an exit interview and then she got fired. For all we know, Jane is calling all of the people who still work there and blaming them too. Behavior like that is what got Jane fired, and behavior like that is what will ruin Jane’s reputation, not Bob’s reputation.

    Best of luck to you and Bob!

  37. SmellMyFinger*

    I’ll take a bit of a contrarian view on this one:

    If you can’t live with consequences when you give feedback (up to and including termination) in an exit interview, then you shouldn’t do the exit interview.

    I’ve read many, many posts on here from people who want to “give the real story” or “tell them like it is” in the exit interview. This person did, there were consequences for the person whom he reported, and now he feels terrible. This is an unlikely, but foreseeable, outcome.

    That is not to say “don’t give honest feedback” if you want to, but people need to realize that words have consequences. If you’re ok with the possible scenarios (ranging from do-nothing to fire-the-asshole) then go for it!

    2. Ellis Bell*

      I think it’s worth weighing the fact that an exit interview is very unlikely to benefit you (you’re leaving anyway!) and more likely to benefit the company who wasn’t looking out for you while you worked there. That said, Bob should feel really proud of what he did here. He’s doubtless helped other people from being hassled and prevented the company haemorrhaging people who are sick of Jane. I don’t know why he couldn’t be candid with his union rep, and benefit from the feedback personally himself, but this exit interview was still a good day’s work. Go Bob.

    3. The Unionizer Bunny*

      I would add that doing the exit interview can be a bad idea even if you are saying good things to increase the likelihood of people giving you a good reference after you’re gone – there was a case where an ex-employee gave testimony regarding a manager, and then the company pulled out a recording of their exit interview (with the employee responding to a question about that manager by praising the manager) to discredit the apparent change of heart that employee experienced when a lawsuit made it convenient.

    4. el l*

      It’s a vanishingly rare occurrence that someone gets fired because of your exit interview.

      And that probably didn’t even happen here. More likely was that this was just another data point in the case for firing her, with the extra sauce of corroborating evidence that she’s violated a union contract and opened the company up to liability she wasn’t worth.

      I might ordinarily agree on the responsibility – but it’s just not predictable that his words would bring her down.

    5. Viette*

      Yeah, I do read “he did not intend for Jane to be fired” with a sort of… why *wouldn’t* she be fired? Did her getting fired not occur to him as a possibility?

      Obviously lots of people who should be fired are not fired, so I suppose he could reasonably expect nothing would happen, but if so what was the point of the exit interview?

      I know what he intended, of course: he intended for Jane to get feedback and stop being inappropriate and for the problem to be solved. I do agree that a person in Bob’s position would do well to think about, and accept ahead of time, that their intended outcome may not come to pass. Jane may not respond to feedback, and the only other option (in a world with functional HR) may be that she is fired. Stand on the strength of your convictions, Bob. Not everything can be resolved with no conflict.

    6. Somehow I Manage*

      I don’t think that there would be the same level of guilt had Jane not called and tried to emotionally manipulate Bob. As I noted above, if Bob learned of Jane’s firing through the grapevine or several months later, he likely wouldn’t have felt as bad.

  38. Hurgling*

    I was in Bob’s shoes not too long ago, but with a longer gap between my exit and the firing. It became clear when I asked around at my former company that my interview had raised the level of alarm — but the alarm was already there. And, of course, once they started digging around further, they found a whole host of other reasons to let my former boss go.

    Bob did exactly the right (and brave!) thing. He signaled that someone needed to investigate. People who make mistakes as big as Jane or my former boss did are usually making mistakes everywhere, with everyone, and if investigating them hadn’t found a bunch of other errors, I doubt either would have been fired.

    I know I’m repeating much of what Alison said — just wanted to add another point of concrete evidence that agrees with her!

  39. RedinSC*

    Probably already said, but Jane calling to place blame is yet another example of how she is not suited to her job.

    1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      I said the same thing. And added that she used Bob’s number, personal contact information she got through their place of employment and clearly only for business purposes, to do so.

      1. The Unionizer Bunny*

        Hang on, that’s not a call the company can make. People give out their personal numbers to coworkers because they work together, this only happened because they were in the same business but it still isn’t something the company is allowed to police. Bob likely gave his personal number to Jane (instead of insisting on keeping a work phone with him) so she could contact him in case of emergencies, and from the sound of it she was calling him a lot of the time even when it wasn’t an emergency, but it’s also possible they spoke about non-work topics over the phone. And even if Jane doesn’t have access to her work phone anymore, it’s possible she could have inadvertently memorized his number.

        The impropriety would be if Jane didn’t work with Bob at all, but instead extracted his personal information from a restricted HR file. I was just reviewing a case last night where someone approached HR asking if he could borrow pen and paper so he could write down all the names from the timecard system instead of memorizing them a few at a time when he was there to clock out. His manager found out and promptly committed an Unfair Labor Practice against him. Employees are free to use information “which they obtain in the course of normal work activity and association”, both of which apply to Jane’s interactions with Bob.

        1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

          She called Bob to yell at him for getting her fired. That’s no OK.
          Is it illegal or actionable? No. But does it illustrate her lack of judgement, her selfishness, her view that people do things TO her instead of FOR themselves? Yes.

  40. Lady Danbury*

    Emphasis on JANE GOT JANE FIRED!!!!!!! I had a situation once where I had a temp (let’s call them Drew) who applied for a permanent role within my organization. Part of my interview process included talking to coworkers who worked closely with Drew on a day to day basis, who all gave positive feedback. Turns out, the person who worked most closely to Drew had seen some red flags in turns of his behavior/personality, but didn’t say anything because they “didn’t want to be responsible for him not getting the job.” When those red flags became major issues down the line (for both me and the other employee), I had a little less sympathy for their complaints because honest feedback at the beginning could have helped prevent issues for both of us.

    1. Sweet Summer Child*

      We have a situation like that. A parallel department (same grand boss, different boss) just hired Chatty Cathy. She’d worked for the company before. Established Employee knew her, knew her work and her colleagues. Consensus: “She’s nice, but never gets to work, isn’t a self starter, much less proactive. Always pushing stuff to other people. Never shuts up.”
      She was hired. Why?
      Established Employee didn’t want to “keep someone from getting a job.”
      Guess who can’t get any work done and is absolutely miserable now?

  41. Sybil Writes*

    I’m wondering why Bob waited until his exit interview to “tell the truth” about Jane. If she was violating his union contract, why didn’t he contact his shop steward/union rep?

    1. Annie*

      Maybe Bob did contact his shop steward/union rep but wasn’t satisfied with the pace of their investigation, or Bob wanted another job anyway, and the letter omitted that because the writer didn’t think such a detail would be relevant to the main point of, “Sometimes, exit interviews work. Sometimes.”

      IF he really did wait until the exit interview, Bob may have feared retaliation, wanted to use Jane as a reference for future jobs, or didn’t believe the shop steward/union rep would do anything to help, among other reasons.

  42. Will "scifantasy" Frank*

    In meme format:

    Jane shoots Jane’s job. Jane turns to camera: “Why would Bob do this?”

  43. Khatul Madame*

    Jane probably focused on Bob because he was easily identifiable due to his accident (that he supposedly mentioned in the exit interview among other egregious boundary violations).

    1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      Her firing followed Bob’s leaving.
      ! There’s no evidence ANYONE in the company told her Bob said anything.
      I don’t believe anyone did. I think Jane connected the dots, determined BOB SLANDERED HER

  44. Elbe*

    This is just Jane blaming other people for her poor decisions. Refusing to learn from her mistakes is probably why Jane is in such a bad spot right now.

    No reasonable person could see the long list of mistakes they’ve made, including ones that open the company to liability, and think, “But the real problem is the guy I mistreated so badly that he had to quit!”

    It reflects well on Bob that he’s compassionate toward Jane after everything that happened, but he should be proud that he helped the other employees that would have had to work with Jane.

  45. Green great dragon*

    Even if Bob were responsible for Jane’s firing (and he is not), surely that makes him also responsible for Jane’s replacement’s promotion? And whoever gets their job’s new job? He’s creating job openings for people who may need them more, and who we all hope will do a better and kinder job. As well as saving his ex-co-workers from being managed by Jane.

  46. lemonbalm*

    My old boss was let go about a month after I left. Granted the whole team was laid off due to cut. Since she also started managing another team part time I think she assumed she would be spared. I think it was my exit interview as she has yet to speak to me since.

    She even left an event we were both going to attend before I could get there….

  47. Richard Hershberger*

    I am about two months into a new job. I realized a couple of weeks in that I got my predecessor in the role fired. Not really, of course. They got themselves fired. But my application, which marched some very narrow requirements, clearly determined the timing. At first this realization gave me pause, but spending two months cleaning up the mess they left has made me sanguine about the matter.

    1. Helewise*

      Congratulations on the new job, btw – I remember you posting that you’d been looking; great to hear that worked out!

  48. Pam Adams*

    If I were Bob, I would contact Jane’s former manager to report this- further evidence of her bad judgement.

    1. Czhorat*

      Jane’s been fired; there’s no longer a point.

      She’s breaking norms by coming after him, which could be panic/anger about being out of a job, could be a sign of poor judgement and worse impulse control overall, and is likely some combination.

      For Bob to bring it back to the former manager who no longer has ties to either of them would make him feel – at the very least – odd. It’s not actionable and is not really useful.

    2. BellaStella*

      Not sure on reaching out to her former boss but it may be of interest to the union rep and also to HR, maybe.

  49. NotARealManager*

    We had an employee a couple years ago who had family ties to a different employee at the company. Employee 1 reported some of Employee 2’s bad behavior and eventually Employee 2 was fired for some of the reasons Employee 1 gave, but also for a few other reasons.

    A few weeks later, Employee 1 came to speak to me because Employee 2 was harassing them at family get togethers about how they “got them fired”. I pointed out that Employee 2 was fired for multiple infractions. Not solely on a single report from one employee. Unfortunately, we couldn’t do anything to stop Employee 2 from making Employee 1’s person life miserable at family events, but they could rest assured that they were not responsible for Employee 2’s firing.

  50. iglwif*

    Great advice!

    My kiddo’s workplace recently went through a similar situation, where a team lead was doing an absolutely terrible job, had had multiple opportunities to improve but hadn’t, and it was hard to get herdirect reports to document her behaviour because “we don’t want to be responsible for X being fired!” I lost track of the number of times I said to my kid, “Your team isn’t getting her fired, she is getting herself fired. Nobody is making her behave this way.”

  51. Happy*

    I really thought this letter was going to be a “success story” letter based on the headline.

    Poor Bob. I hope he can come to see this as a good outcome over time, and one that will benefit his former coworkers – who probably really appreciate that he spoke up and the company took his concerns seriously.

  52. Ready for the weekend*

    A similar scenario happened at my old job where a bullying coworker and her accomplist were let go. The bully still had friends at the company who kept her informed about what was happening and who was being reassigned her work (AKA, me). It was tense for a while but those who knew how these two were like just ignored their anger.

    Direct management was aware of her behavior for four years but failed in disciplining her. It took a resigning employee, who informed upper management about what was going on, that she was let go; higher ups took action.

  53. AngryOctopus*

    This is very refreshing. Everyone who worked for my old boss complained about him (me in an exit interview, his other two reports to HR/the CSO) and he got promoted.

  54. The Rafters*

    I find it interesting that the innocent parties always feel a bit guilty when something like this happens. It’s a sign of a truly kind person. I believe that HR didn’t necessarily give Jane the impression that Bob feedback resulted in her firing. He was the most recent to leave, so Jane may have assumed as much. I find it extremely unlikely that Bob’s exit interview was the sole reason for Jane’s firing. Repeat: Bob didn’t get Jane fired. Jane got Jane fired.

  55. Delta Delta*

    Jane: I got fired because of what you said!
    Bob: What I said was that you behaved terribly and gave examples.
    Jane: I mean, I did, but you didn’t have to say so.

  56. Kevin Sours*

    One quibble IANAL but I don’t believe the bit about “that he knew it was untrue” is right. That sounds like a reference to the Sullivan standard but that only applies to public figures.

    On the other hand the standard is “materially true”. Irrelevant errors don’t make a statement defamatory. It’s hard to imagine anything Bob would have said that wasn’t either an opinion or materially true.

    1. Observer*

      That sounds like a reference to the Sullivan standard but that only applies to public figures.

      Not correct. The key difference between the Sullivan standard and what applies to the general public is how reasonable the belief was. So in the case of a public figure, the inaccuracy has to be something that any reasonable person should have realized was probably not true. But for ordinary people, if you have a solid reason to believe it, you don’t have to do a proper investigation to repeat it to HR.

      1. Kevin Sours*

        That statement is of the Sullivan standard is incorrect. Sullivan is a subjective standard. You have to show that the defendant did not believe it regardless of how wacked out believing it would be. My client is so full of chiroptera guano that they’ll believe anything is a plausible defense under Sullivan.

        I will admit to being fuzzier as to the standards for private actors.

  57. Empress Ki*

    Your husband can be happy that Jane will no longer have the opportunity to abuse her other employees. By telling the truth, he probably helped his former co-workers too.
    It will also be a lesson to Jane for her next job. Hopefully she’ll do better.

  58. Union Rep*

    All I’ll say is that if this were one of my worksites I’d be sending your husband a fruit basket. Employees who take action to hold their supervisors accountable are my favorite people.

  59. Addison DeWitt*

    I know of a case where one employee got another fired solely based on their exit interview. It was at my first ad agency– a small company, maybe 60 people, I honestly don’t remember. There were two women in the media-buying department. Let’s call the boss Sharon and the #2 Melanie. Melanie announced she had taken a new job. We all wished her well. Monday comes and… Melanie is still there, but Sharon is gone.

    Apparently the partners had an exit interview with Melanie, and she told them everything she thought was wrong with Sharon’s department, and how she would do it differently. And they listened, seriously—and, surprisingly, acted on it that day. Letting Sharon go and giving Melanie her job. I admired their decisive action (and, based on my relatively minor experience with the department, believed they made the right choice– not that they should have taken a junior copywriter’s word for it!)

  60. Brevity*

    I would bet money that Jane didn’t just call Bob to cry that he ruined her life. I’ll bet she also called Carol and Ted and Alice, who also mentioned her violation of union rules in their exit interviews, and yelled the same things at them.

Comments are closed.