coworker keeps a wall of embarrassing photos of former coworkers, boss says staff absences are too high, and more

by Alison Green on March 5, 2025

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

1. My coworker keeps a wall of embarrassing photos of former coworkers

I started a new job at a start-up a few months ago and one of my coworkers, who I work closely with, has a wall next to his desk where he has pinned up half a dozen enlarged photos of everyone who has left the company recently. He finds an old school photo, or them in a costume, or with braces, whatever he thinks is funny. As soon as someone puts in their two weeks, their photo goes up on the wall.

He recently got told by HR to take the photos down after someone complained. Everyone in my corner of the office is vocally on his side and against the reporter. They all seem to agree that the photos are all in good fun and shouldn’t be something to get upset about. They joke about making everyone take down family photos to show the reporter how silly they are.

I have had a neutral opinion of the photo wall so far, but now I am on the side of the reporter. If I were to resign, I definitely would not like the idea of my photo on that wall. I also don’t want to say anything since the team is very chummy and I’m trying to fit in as the newbie. What should I do? Are the photos appropriate or not?

That’s a really odd thing for him to do, and HR was right to tell him to stop. It wouldn’t be a big deal if he did it once or twice as a good-natured joke with resigning employees who he was friends with, but it’s his system that he does every time someone leaves? He’s in the wrong to make a big deal of being told to stop, and the coworkers who are outraged that he was told to stop are being ridiculous too. If it’s “all in good fun,” then they’d surely want to be sensitive to anyone who doesn’t want to be included, right? The fact that they’re not says that it’s not really “in good fun” at all.

But as for what you should do as a new person, it’s okay to just stay out of it! If someone directly asks what you think, you can shrug and say, “Eh, if someone was upset by it, it doesn’t seem that weird that the company told him to stop.”

2. Manager says staff absences are too high

I work at a company where each employee receives PTO that can be used for sick or personal reasons. PTO requires a doctor’s note or written explanation for absences longer than three consecutive days. Each person also has a separate bank of vacation time. The amount of paid time off we are given is typical for our industry. Most people use all or most of their vacation time and some of their PTO as needed. While various employees have had medical issues and/or leaves of absences over the years, I don’t think anyone abuses the system. It doesn’t seem like anyone has excessive absences.

One of my managers, Dan, disagrees. He has made several comments in the past year to indicate that employee absences are too high (within the allotted time, he admits, but still too high in his opinion). He called a meeting this week specifically to discuss attendance.

Dan feels absences are to blame for a big issue we’re having, and he asked us to brainstorm ways to increase attendance without spending any money (insert eye roll). I disagree. The issue we’re having has about 10 causes — half could be solved by management with moderate effort (like reworking the production schedule), and half are out of our control (such as industry-wide supply issues). Attendance may be a minor cause but not enough to warrant the time and effort we are now dedicating to “solve” it. It feels like scapegoating, putting the blame on us rather than attempting to address the other causes. However, Dan is senior management and well-liked by the CEO/owner, so no one ever challenges him. No one spoke up in this meeting, although several colleagues later told me they were shocked and upset.

Even if attendance was the sole cause of the issue, my opinion is that if people are not exceeding their allotted PTO and vacation time, then they are within their right to take the time given to them. Am I wrong?

If I’m correct, then do you have any suggestions on how to tell him that? Dan does not take well to anyone questioning his opinion, so it would need to be carefully worded. We are meeting again soon to hear what (free!) ideas we’ve come up with.

You are correct. If the company offers paid time off, it’s part of people’s compensation and they should take it, and managers should expect they will take it.

Dan sounds like A Problem, so I’m not sure there will be any benefit to trying to set him straight (as opposed to just letting him continue to wring his hands over the dreadful problem of people using their time off). But if you want to, you could try saying, “The amount of time off in our benefits package is consistent with industry norms and people obviously need time off in order not to burn out, so if you think there’s a coverage issue, we should look at increasing staffing.” After delivering this bad news to him, you could then immediately pivot to other solutions to whatever he’s reacting to, like changes to the production schedule and planning differently for supply issues.

If he starts actively interfering with people’s ability to use their time off or making people feel they’ll be penalized if they do, that’s time to bring in HR, framing it as “not allowing people to use their promised benefits.”

3. When I ask my team for updates, should I share my own as the boss?

I am a new department head and would like to introduce a weekly check-in during our department meeting to ask everyone what they are currently working on and what they accomplished in the past week. Should I include myself in this process and answer these questions as well for transparency reasons?

My work is much more abstract than that of my team members, and many of my tasks are repetitive (meetings, etc.). My progress is often harder to define because it largely depends on the progress of my team.

Yes. It doesn’t need to be comprehensive, but you should have at least one thing to share each week about what you’re working on, ideally something that will be relevant to at least some of the team.

That said … do you have a good reason for introducing these meetings? You very well might! Sometimes it’s really important for reasons of communication or team cohesion that people regularly hear about what others on their team are working on. Sometimes, though, this kind of meeting isn’t a great use of people’s time and can feel like something that’s happening because the manager vaguely thought it sounded like a good idea but can’t tie it to any real impact on people’s work. I’m not assuming it won’t be useful in your case — it often is! — just urging you to make sure you know what results you’re looking for from it (and how you’ll know if it is or isn’t getting you those results), and can communicate that to your team too.

4. Measles and traveling for work conferences

I am attending a national conference next month and, given the current measles outbreak, I asked my doctor about the need for a booster since my last (and only) MMR vaccination was decades ago. My doctor did recommend that anyone with an immunization history like mine get a booster, which I did.

We have many other employees also attending national conferences, and I wonder how much we can say to encourage them to check with their own doctors about a booster during this outbreak. Would there be any liability for not mentioning it?

Your company can absolutely encourage people to make sure they’re up-to-date on vaccinations, and can cite the measles outbreak specifically and suggest people check with their doctors to see if they need any boosters and/or can share info like this from the CDC (or this piece from NPR, which does a better job of answering “do I need a booster as an adult?”). But there’s no legal liability to not mentioning it, either.

5. Start date coincides with a planned vacation

I’m hoping to get a job, and there’s a good chance I’m a lead candidate. They want overlap with the existing job holder and the new person, which sounds great to me. Problem is, that person’s last day is the Friday before my kid’s spring break, for which we already have paid plans for Sunday through Wednesday.

Do I bring this up at all now, or wait until I have an actual offer? And then, is “doing the right thing” offering to come back that Thursday, which would cause some childcare complications, or is it reasonable to ask for the whole week off? To clarify, this would be the first week of me in the role flying solo. There is a part-time assistant. This is in the middle of a big organization-wide project.

In my current job, I’ve had to work every single vacation I’ve ever taken, near or far. I’m trying to get away from that. This organization doesn’t have that culture, but this timing really stinks.

Wait until you have the offer. Then explain you have pre-paid vacation plans for that week and that normally you’d suggest starting after that but you know they’d like you to have overlap with the person leaving, and so you’re hoping you could simply take that week unpaid, so that it works out for everyone. I wouldn’t start by offering the Thursday return date; wait and see how they respond. If they seem worried about it, at that point you can offer the Thursday return date as a compromise.

It’s great to move away from working every vacation, but this this is a different set of circumstances — this is trying to work something out when you’re brand new to a job and wouldn’t normally expect to have a full week off right after starting.

Related:
everything you need to know about time off when you start a new job

You may also like:
{ 376 comments }

{ 376 comments… read them below }

  1. Edwina*

    I’m confused by the days in #5. Is the Sunday-Wednesday planned vacation the week BEFORE the current employee’s last day?

    If so, why wouldn’t the OP be able to start the new job on Thursday or Friday of that week? I understand not wanting to start a new job the day after getting back from vacation, if that’s the issue.

    But then they said, “To clarify, this would be the first week of me in the role flying solo.” So I still don’t understand which week we’re taking about because if they’re “flying solo,” wouldn’t that mean that the previous employee had already left?

    1. Persephone Mulberry*

      LW would start, for example, next week, concurrent with the departing employee’s final week. But then LW needs to take off the following week – their second week of employment and the first week after the departing employee is gone, leaving the company with only a part-time assistant for coverage.

      LW could, in theory, only miss M-W of their second week and work Th-F if absolutely necessey, but would prefer to take off the entire week.

    2. Persephone Mulberry*

      (The LW doesn’t say how much overlap the would have with the departing employee; a week was just an example. I’m sure it will be dependent on how long the hiring process takes and how flexible the old employee’s departure date is.)

    3. Hlao-roo*

      The letter says current employee’s last day is the Friday before the spring break, so I think it’s (for example):

      Current employee’s last day: Friday, March 21
      Letter-writer’s vacation plans: Sunday, March 23 – Wednesday, March 26
      LW’s child’s Spring Break: Monday, March 24 – Friday, March 28

      Ideally (for the new company), the LW could start on Monday, March 10 to have two weeks of overlap with the current employee, and then would continue on with no vacation time so the company doesn’t have a gap in that role, especially during “a big organization-wide project.”

      I think the sort of “compromise solution” is LW starts on Mondy, March 10. Two weeks of learning from current employee. Current employee leaves the 21st. LW takes off the 24-26 (three days the company will have to go without anyone in this role), and comes back to work on the 27th. LW has to arrange childcare for the 27th and 28th.

      The “ideal for the LW solution” is to take the whole week off (no need to arrange childcare). This is the worst case for the company because they don’t have anyone in that role for a whole week.

      Of course, the company is best positioned to know how bad the “ideal for the LW/worst case for the company” scenario is. Maybe it’s not that bad, and they’ll be happy to give the LW the week unpaid, which is why the LW should start by asking for that.

  2. tuxedo cats are the best*

    LW2: I would ask Dan to explain and show the relationship between the absences and loss revenue or production. Tell him when he can’t show that connection, the subject is closed till he can. If any of the 10 issues you think could be contributing ask Dan to come up with solutions to those and show how they improve ROI.

    My bet, he can’t do any of it and this will end the conversation.

    1. Your Former Password Resetter*

      You can’t really tell your manager that the subject of PTO isn’t up for discussion though. This tone is something you can only really do with an employee who needs strong direction.

      It is worth a try to redirect him to the actual problems though. Preferably about stuff that isn’t directly his fault first, since he seems like the type who blames his employees first.

      The other issue is that this problem could probably be somewhat addressed by throwing more work-hours at it. It sounds like they have problems with production and deadlines, so increasing hours isn’t a completely unreasonable plan. And that makes it very easy for a bad manager to dig their heels in and insist on their “solution”, instead of doing the hard and complex work to root out and fix the systemic problems.

      1. John Johnson*

        “This tone is something you can only really do with an employee who needs strong direction.”

        Dan needs strong direction, since he is completely lost in regards to the source of the problem, what reasonable time off looks like, and how to do his duties as a manager (support the team).

    2. Mid*

      Dan is LW’s boss. You can’t do that, and especially when your boss is known to be touchy and not take feedback well.

      2. linger*

        OP2 describes Dan as “one of my managers”, which is ambiguous.
        Either OP2’s position is subject to control of several managers (in which case, ugh, and OP2 would not have authority as an individual to challenge Dan),
        or else OP2 is in some adjunct position (maybe HR-adjacent or some other compliance check) that works *with*, but not directly under the control of, several managers including Dan. In the latter case, OP2 could even have some degree of authority to ask for consistency between managers, and thus to challenge Dan.

        [@MissMuffett: Heh, nice callback.]

    3. Nice cup of tea*

      As Dan is the boss, it doesn’t work like that.

      Subtle is the way to go. Or leave him to pontificate and ignore him.

    4. LaminarFlow*

      This would be helpful in getting Dan to stop bringing up PTO use as a reason for the problems, but I would take the approach of being curious as to why he feels that way, instead of demanding info from the boss.

      Something like “Hmmm….. can you help me to understand the correlation between people using their PTO, and the issues we are having with production/revenue/sales/whatever?” From there, Dan might illuminate that the person who is responsible for a major part of production uses more than their allotted PTO, and misses deadlines. There’s also a chance that Dan would talk this scenario through, and realize that PTO usage isn’t the problem. Dan seems prickly, and unlikely to respond favorably to demands of proof from his subordinates, but being curious, and asking for insight to gain understanding could help in getting to the actual root cause, and then a solution can be found.

      1. bamcheeks*

        Yes, I also think a “gather more information” approach would be the political way to approach this. Is Dan looking at specific numbers? Comparing your team to another? Are there specific individuals, or specific uses of PTO, that concern him? Does he have a target in mind for the level of absence he’d expect to see?

        There’s two objectives here: take it seriously, ask Dan to articulate exactly what changes he wants to see, and you might uncover some kind of issue or concern that you can address, even if it’s something like, “Dan has an unrealistic idea of how much PTO should be leaving” rather than “it is possible to reduce the level of PTO use”, and you have a firmer case to go to HR and say, “My manager thinks that my team shouldn’t be using more than 30% of their PTO, I am worried this isn’t realistic or desirable.” Or alternatively, you might find that Dan was just having a moan and looking for quick fixes, and when you start looking into it more seriously he backs off.

        But if you can’t just brush it off (and you probably can’t when it’s your manager), I always try to gather more information and show that I’m taking it seriously and often the outcome is that I can now make a better case for my point of view.

        1. Hyaline*

          I agree that opening the door to letting him extrapolate about what he means is the best option to open things here. There’s even a possibility that he has a legit gripe that something can actually be done about–I’m not particularly confident given the description, but if there’s an issue with, say, how employees are cross-trained for coverage, or a lack of blackout dates for vacation over really intense times of year, that’s actually something that could be (potentially) addressed.

          1. Reluctant Mezzo*

            And if changing production flow could help with any problem, this would be a great time to suggest it.

      1. AlsoADHD*

        I’ve had jobs where I could have dictated to my boss on certain things. Like PTO, because I was actually a union rep (K12 in a union state—not a teacher now, but my last 5 years teaching/instructional coach, I was also a union rep and then a union regional rep, and I did have to tell administrators to back off many times for many people). And even I wouldn’t start out with that tone/attitude in a situation where I was absolutely right and legally backed by a union contract. You’ll never move the Dans of the world by starting with “you’re wrong and I’m not talking about it” — even if Dan were a peer or frankly a direct report, that messaging is ineffective and only a last resort when you do have the ability (which I agree is moot here because Dan is LW’s boss and well regarded by the CEO as well, so not likely to be over-ruled readily).

    6. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

      I’m in a manufacturing setting where the majority of employees are exclusively in the building and can’t work from home, as it sounds like the LW is as well. Even if everyone stays within their limit of PTO (we just have one bucket, not separate) but all those are unexcused absences, that causes a lot of issues with production schedules. Just because the LW thinks no one is abusing the system doesn’t mean there there aren’t people who are- or even that the absentee rate isn’t a problem. Those other issues that the LW brought up? Dan probably has worked on those behind the scenes and knows which ones the company can’t control. If Dan has run the numbers and the absentee rate is high, this is definitely something the company should look into and address.

      I recently ran the numbers for my company and found that our absentee rate was double the national average for our industry. There were a few outliers who took off way more than they should, but the majority of people weren’t constantly absent- but it still ran the numbers up overall because we’re a small business. Unless the LW is tracking absences and knows how or when people call off and for what reason, it doesn’t sound like he or she knows for sure if absences are a problem.

      1. MoosesGoWalking*

        but if absences are a problem, the solution is hire more people, not convince people not to use the days off they are given to use.

        1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

          Genuine question, no trolling: at what point do excessive absences get addressed and the issue isn’t hire more people? Because at this point, we have enough people to do the work we need- excessive unexcused absences are making those tough. When I’m counting absences, I’m not taking into account planned PTO use. All we ask is 24 hour notice for it not to be an unexcused absence. So, when I say excessive absences, I mean, call in the day of sick, no ability for us to plan ahead. Currently today, I have two no call/no shows- do I just plan for 5% of the work force to just not call and not show up every day?

            1. WellRed*

              And people don’t generally have the ability to plan to be sick 24 hours in advance. Nor can they help it if a coworker also calls out sick. Your expectations don’t align with human beings.

              1. Decima Dewey*

                Sometimes people wake up with the flu. Or they think they can make it in on public transit instead of driving, but have a dizzy spell before getting to the train station. Or they throw up on the sidewalk and realize they have to call it a day. Do employers want people to throw up on the floor at work?

                Also, right now bugs are going around. At my library branch, most of us are in various stages of recovery from those bugs, or will be showing symptoms shortly.

                My library system would rather people stay home when they’re sick and not infect others and the public. If branches have to close for the day due to insufficient staff, they have to close.

                It’s not possible to create systems that no person can possibly abuse. And it’s not wise to punish the people who *don’t* abuse the system if they fall ill.

              2. doreen*

                No , they don’t – but I’ve had the bad luck to have worked with a number of people who called in day-of when they could have planned in advance for a medical appointment or procedure. Which sometimes caused issues – sure, Diana can’t help it if someone else calls in sick on a day she is sick. But if Diana had requested the day off in advance for her medical appointment, maybe Beverly wouldn’t have been approved for PTO that same day because Millie is on vacation that week and at least one of them needs to be there unless it’s absolutely impossible. This same bunch of people tended not to plan any single day absences in advance – they would call in day-of because it was their mother’s birthday or their apartment was being painted or their daughter’s play was that day. It was so normal to them that they didn’t even bother to claim they weren’t feeling well ( which no one would have questioned)

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  We had a lot of “oops, I forgot appointments/furniture is being delivered/etc” type of absences that were called in same day and one thing we wanted to cut back on was those, so that staffing could be more consistent. It isn’t that we expected staff to never get sick or to give us notice 100% of the time for illnesses.

          2. Annony*

            When absences exceed PTO it isn’t a staffing level issue. The company should be able to function and honor the PTO it promises in its benefits package. If that is not the case, they need to hire more people.

          3. Also-ADHD*

            If the absences are falling within the leave policy, then they’re not excessive. (And if you want to change an existing leave policy to be worse for employees, you better have a dang good reason and should expect it to significantly impact employee morale, productivity, and engagement.) If there are people using deceptive practices, etc., that should be addressed with individuals. But that doesn’t sound like the case in LW’s situation. LW thinks people are using leave within parameters set by the company and in good faith.

          4. Cat Lady in the Mountains*

            You set PTO levels to align with the staffing you need. If you give people 12 PTO days for unplanned absences, but you’ll have production problems if they use more than 5, then…you actually can’t afford to give people 12 PTO days. So set it at 5, be transparent when making the offer, and accept that you may lose candidates who want more PTO and can get it elsewhere.

            1. Cat Lady in the Mountains*

              (And to be clear, I really don’t think short-changing people on PTO is a smart business move in the long run, and only giving 5 days for people to be sick a year seems unacceptably stingy to me. But I also understand that some very small businesses genuinely can’t afford to operate on more than shoestring staffing levels. In those cases you need to make sure folks understand what they’re signing up for when you hire them, and accept that that’s going to limit who you can hire and folks with better options will take them.)

            2. Boof*

              Mm, I think this works against companies offering “Generous” PTO though – like let’s say most people would only need 10 PTO days a year, but the company wants to cover someone who’s having a bad year for up to 30 days out of the year (then presumably short term disability or something kicks in) – does that mean the extra PTO should not be formally allowed, or some kind of conditional clause? A group PTO bank? Staff for 30 PTO days and then be fairly overstaffed?

            3. Debby*

              YES! A thousand times YES! I agree, don’t promise 12 PTO days and then tell people they can’t use them all. thank you Cat Lady!

          5. bamcheeks*

            Genuine response question: what do you want people to do if they wake up sick? Do you want them to come in anyway?

            I’m in the UK so it’s a different system, but here the expectation is that sick time will be unplanned– it’s very much supposed to be “wake up too ill to go to work and call in sick”, and as long as you do call in, that’s not “unexcused”, it’s just sick time.

            When I managed a service, we staffed to cover 10-15% people being off on any given day, not on the expectation that there will be that many people missing every day, but that that’s the margin of error you should plan for. If you have 12 people on the shop floor, it’s perfectly foreseeable that 2 of them will get ill on the same day sometimes, and you should still be able to function as normal on those days. 3/12 off is hopefully something that doesn’t happen more than once or twice a year, and hopefully there are some less critical functions that can be cancelled that day or meetings that can be postponed to create coverage.

            If having one person off out of 12 causes significant issues to your staffing and your core work, then yes, I’d say you are understaffed. 2/12 would be my “this shouldn’t be visible to customers or people outside the department, even if we are moving a few meetings / activities around behind the scenes”, and 3/12 is where you probably need to apologise to customers and/or other teams you interact with and let them know you’re understaffed and there will be some balls dropped.

            Where I worked we used the Bradford Factor, which (off the top of my head) means that if anyone had 3? or 4? sickness absences in a rolling 12 month period, you would schedule a meeting to say, “what’s up”. This might end up in, “OK, you’ve had a bad year, let’s hope it gets better”, or, “you had three separate absences caused by coming back before you were truly over the flu, it’s actually better for you to take the whole week and not come back til you’re properly better”, or recognising that they have an underlying health condition which needs a disability adjustment, or it might be the first step on the path to firing someone. I’m not necessarily recommending it because it can cause major problems for people with variable chronic illnesses, but it has some upsides as an early warning sign and a framework to tell managers when to step in.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              Thank you for giving an actual answer (10%-15%)- that gives me a starting point to look the issue from a different perspective. I hadn’t broken out the absenteeism by position (though I do have it broken out by individuals for each year, so the data isn’t hard to gather), maybe that would be an interesting way to look at it and go from there.

              I haven’t heard of the Bradford Factor but looking it over quickly, it seems…more complicated than I want to go into with this group, especially at the moment. I want to keep the way we calculate any tardiness/absenteeism as simple as possible so it isn’t hard for anyone to understand why they got what level of discipline.

              1. bamcheeks*

                Yeah, the Bradford Factor is usually managed by HR, and where I’ve seen it implemented well it’s very much “this triggers a conversation”, not “this triggers disciplinary action”. The outcome can be that there isn’t a problem to solve, but it has been investigated.

                I think one thing I would look at is your standard deviation– “everyone is taking ~20 days sick leave” is a very different problem from “most people are taking >10 days sick leave and two people are taking 35 days”. If you’re looking at high rates across the piece, then you probably have a safety issue or a cultural issue: people are either getting ill at work or work is exacerbating chronic illness (eg. if it’s the kind of repetitive activity that aggravates back pain), or people are very fed up and any kind of mild cold/sickness triggers an “ugh, I cannot be bothered” reaction. If it’s one or two people bringing the average right up, then it’s much more likely an issue with those individuals which might need workplace accommodations or something else.

            2. wavefunction*

              3-4 sickness absences in a 12 month period is so few to me! Granted, I have a chronic illness that’s covered by intermittent FMLA, but still.

              1. MigraineMonth*

                It sounds like bamcheeks is talking about an absence as a multi-day use of sick leave that might be an entire week, rather than just 3-4 sick days. It seems like that system would penalize people like me who are out for 1 day a month for a migraine over people who get a flu and stay home 2 weeks in a row.

                1. doreen*

                  Maybe- or maybe not. I had a job with a similar system to what bamcheeks described – at different numbers of unplanned absences within a rolling 12 month period, there were certain levels of review required. The reviews started at 8 occurrences ( not days – it was possible for a two week absence to be a single occurrence) – but all that was required was a review which might result in anything from a conversation to a suggestion that someone look into FMLA (which would mean that absences due to that condition wouldn’t count) to beginning the disciplinary process. Nothing was automatic and there was enough flexibility that a 20 year employee with a bad year could be treated differently that a probationary employee, even if they had the same number of occurrences.

                2. bamcheeks*

                  It definitely does, and that has pluses and minuses. One thing it can do is incentivise people to stay off 3-4 days with a cold rather than come back in on Day 2 when you’re not really better and then end up taking Day 3 and Day 4 off because you got worse again, and I think that’s a positive outcome. But I do know people who have felt really victimised by it because they have endometriosis or something else that triggers short absences on a regular basis. Ideally, those are the situations where the outcome of that conversation is that it’s documented that you have a chronic illness that necessitates regular absence and/or other reasonable adjustments. Not all implementations are anywhere near the ideal, however.

              2. Elle*

                Yeah, IMO, expecting fewer than three or four sick days per 12 months is not in line with reality. I work from home and need sick days much less than I once did (less because I can work when I’m sick, but because I now rarely get sick) but I do still need one now and then. If someone came to me and asked “you’ve had three migraines in the past 12 months, what’s going on?” I’d be very unamused.

              3. Feckless Moppet*

                I have never counted the number of absences any of my employees have. As long as they are getting their work done, I would rather they prioritize their physical and mental health over their jobs. Given that I have multiple chronic illnesses, I am grateful to have worked for people who have taken the same approach toward me. (I acknowledge, too, that I am privileged to have a career / job that allows me the flexibility to do so; doing shift work or other jobs where my presence or absence impacts other people more wouldn’t be a good fit for me.)

                It’s bananapants, though, for me to read some of these comments about people making such bad faith assumptions about their workers calling in day of / needing notes from the doctor (I hope you are paying them well enough that they can afford to go to the doctor to get said note) / micromanaging their employees PTO. It’s a common reason why people go to work sick.

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  You hit the nail on the head about flexibility- we’re a manufacturing plant, so no WFH, and we only have one shift. So, there’s not a lot of flexibility in terms of getting work done from home or a different shift picking up some of the availability.

              4. bamcheeks*

                “you have a chronic illness that necessitates a higher level of absence than average” is a pretty common outcome of that conversation! When it’s well-implemented, it should be about something like that getting acknowledged and documented. But it is absolutely the case that it can be very difficult for people with chronic illnesses if it’s badly implemented, and in some cases where it’s well-implemented.

            3. Boof*

              I tend to agree; I think staffing so you’re only at 80-90% capacity means you can adjust easily whenever something happens; if you always are running at 120% capacity then of course it’s hard to adjust if anything happens, ever. And inevitably it will. Someone in your industry would actually have to crunch the numbers but I have the sense that around 80-90% is the sweet spot for most things.

              1. Freya*

                This – I’m a bookkeeper, and we need to be at 80-90% capacity, or the filing doesn’t get done (it’s necessary but not urgent, so gets pushed to one side in favour of making sure client payrolls get done and the tax office gets paid, and then when you have time to take a breath 6+ months later the pile is huge and it’s an all-day job). Mind you, the filing is my least favourite task, so I can always find a more urgent thing to do…!

            4. Reluctant Mezzo*

              In the US they do come in sick, especially in retail and in restaurant/fast food venues. And yes, it’s a stupid idea, but it still happens. Many of these industries have no such thing as sick days.

          6. Hyaline*

            …but sick time is exactly what NOT needing 24 hours notice is necessary for? If I wake up vomiting and my shift starts in two hours, I CANNOT give 24 hours notice. If you’re basing “abuse” or “excessive” on people not giving 24 hours notice, the problem is the policy, not the people. Stop expecting advance notice for sick days.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              It’s not that we expect everyone to give 100% notice for every absence, it’s that it was happening A LOT. Obviously there are emergencies that can’t be planned for- illness, car issues, child care issues, etc. We’re not expecting everyone to give at least 24 hours notice.

              1. londonedit*

                I still can’t get my head around the idea of not having notice being a problem, though – which you’re saying it is, because ‘it was happening a LOT’. Unless someone’s booked in for surgery on a specific date, how are they meant to give notice that they’ll be off sick? Sick days aren’t holidays, you don’t plan them in advance.

                1. I.T. Phone Home*

                  Say you have 10 employees in a department and they each have 10 PTO days. So you have to build systems resilient to 100 labor-days of people being out. Your assumption, based on previous years, is that about 75 of those days will be used as planned vacation and 25 will be unplanned sick days. You build a system that can accommodate that — you can make sure that you don’t approve too many vacations on the same days especially among people who have overlapping skills, you adjust schedules, cross-train in advance, reset timelines for the days you know you’ll have fewer people. Then, all of a sudden, you have a year where the split of your PTO is split 50/50 between vacation and sick days. Deadlines are being missed, steps are being left out, you’re missing both people who know how to do the same task, the quality of work declines. Suddenly your system can’t handle the absences despite the same amount of labor-days being missed because the balance of planned and unplanned absences has shifted.

                  I don’t agree that this means that the employees are doing something wrong by calling out, but the sudden shift is still stressful and worrisome if you’re responsible for the output of the department, and building up the resiliency gets harder and more costly the more the split shifts toward unplanned absences.

                2. bamcheeks*

                  We would never count vacation (annual leave) and sick leave as the same thing in the UK — they are completely separate things and accounted and managed through totally different routes. So that’s part of why it’s weird for me and londonedit to get our heads around! Increased absence can definitely be a problem for a business to deal with, but it has nothing to do with people taking planned and pre-approved annual leave.

              2. Hyaline*

                Ok but what is “A LOT”? I’m not trying to be a jerk here–but I think you may need to recalibrate what percentage of PTO absences you can anticipate having notice for. If you’re expecting that 1 in 10 are day-of call-ins but in reality most people are using PTO for “I woke up sick” or “My kid is sick,” then the system isn’t working for your reality and *the system should change*, not your expectations of people and their lives. A lot of things can factor into this and it can change over time. (Say you’ve just hired a lot of people with school-age kids, replacing a bunch of people who retired. They’re a LOT more likely to call in day of because they’re sick or a kid is sick.) And oof–it is a nasty, nasty flu season out there right now, and I’d anticipate that MOST absences in this moment are “I woke up sick” rather than “I made a dentist appointment three months ago.”

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  I don’t want to get too in the weeds, but we can absorb some number of absences per day and we know it’s going to be a rare day that we won’t have any. That said, it depends on the position and the numbers of absences of those positions per day. Some things:

                  1) Anything pre-planned is not considered an absence. We only require knowing the previous business day ahead of time to consider it not an absence.

                  2) Long term illnesses (STD) are not considered absences- planned surgeries, birth, emergency illnesses. Those are literally three of the issues we had in the past year and didn’t count toward absences.

                  So, on the one hand, “absences” aren’t the only reason we might be short staffed. At one point last year, we had 4 people on STD and then every absence on top of that really made for really tough planning. Obviously when we have we have an excess of absences, we work around it and management does go out to fill in, but that shouldn’t be a long term solution.

          7. Rex Libris*

            By definition, absences are excessive when they exceed the time off provided by the company as part of the employee’s benefit package. If they don’t, they aren’t.

            1. duinath*

              And in this case, I would argue they’re not taking *enough* PTO. All your vacation time, plus some PTO? Up those numbers, baby. PTO is part of your compensation for your work. Take it.

              If the company is offering more PTO than they can afford, that is indeed a mistake they are making, but it in no way means you should not receive all the compensation you are due. That’s something they should figure out on their end, and if they want to offer less PTO, they’ll have to offer you something else to make up for it.

              My opinion, of course.

              2. Boof*

                I’m really confused, if the compensation is vacation + a certain amount of PTO as needed for emergencies/sickness/etc etc (so people don’t feel obliged to hoard their vacation / actually get vacations), I don’t think one should “Try to use up all the PTO”.
                Am I misunderstanding something about the PTO on top of vacations being specifically for sick days?

                1. doreen*

                  In my experience, most places that use the term PTO mean that’s all the paid time off people get. If they get 15 days PTO a year, that has to cover everything vacations, sickness/emergencies. If they are separate there is usually not one called PTO – they’re called sick , vacation etc.

                2. Boof*

                  I thought PTO just meant “paid time off” vs “unpaid” so in LW2 example where there’s a separate vacation bank it sounds more like it’s just saying paid vs unpaid absences, not a certain amount of leave one is expected to take as part of compensation (the vacation PTO I would hope yes supposed to take it, but the personal/sick paid PTO sounds more like a don’t use it unless you need it thing)

              3. JR17*

                So this is something I’ve always struggled with. Should sick time be set at a level that you expect everyone to take, or at a level that someone might need in a bad year? I’m not going to use real numbers because I don’t want to get lost in a debate over the “normal” amount of sick time (especially when that varies so much for people with chronic illnesses, who are caretakers, etc.). Like, maybe an adult with no particular health conditions who isn’t a caregiver and doesn’t have an unlucky streak typically uses X vacation days. And it’s totally conceivable that someone might need 2X days of sick time in a year when they catch the flu, plus their childcare has a hand foot and mouth outbreak, plus they have some sort of minor procedure. And someone with a chronic condition could easily need 3X. So I want the second and third person to have the time they need, but the business can’t necessarily function with everyone using 3X days every year. I have always felt that I will use up every last hour of my vacation time, and it’s absolutely part of my compensation. But I want sick time set at a level higher than I’ll need (or use) in an average year, so that it’s there for me in a non-average year. I think sick time is for…when you’re sick. (And if you have plenty of sick time and have a headache that you might sometimes power through, use it! But don’t use it because it’s November and you have three days left.)

                All that said, I agree that the people in this letter aren’t using excess sick time if they’re staying within their allotted PTO and that companies generally shouldn’t be policing whether companies really “needed” that sick time. I just don’t agree that all sick time should be used up because it’s compensation in the same way that I fully agree with that statement for vacation time. I think that perspective will lead to overall lower sick time levels for all employees, screwing over the ones who need more.

                But I know people have really different perspectives on this, and so I’m curious how others think companies should determine sick time levels. What’s a reasonable number of days to offer?

                1. bamcheeks*

                  This is why we don’t have a set number of sick days in the UK and why the US system is confusing to me! Your PTO / annual leave here is usually a specific number of days, and you’ll have a balance which goes down every time you book a day. But sick days are as-and-when needed: if you’re not ill, you don’t take them. There are various different ways of identifying “too much”, and that will usually be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. But there’s no expectation that people will take a specific amount of sick leave. Most places will expect you to take your annual leave (it’s very dysfunctional if they don’t) though, and it’s rare for you to be allowed to carry over more than a few days at the end of the year.

          8. Irish Teacher.*

            Honestly, people usually aren’t going to know 24 hours in advance that they are going to get sick. Yeah, for things like appointments, etc, they should give notice but things like flu, covid, stomach bugs, etc or even stuff like a sick child or elderly parent, they aren’t likely to know.

            When does it get excessive? That’s a more difficult question becauseI would say it’s when people are calling in sick when they aren’t really sick. Sometimes you can spot patterns, like the person who always calls in sick after their sports team wins. Or if a person is calling in sick on like a weekly basis, it would be reasonable to raise questions.

            I would also ask if these excessive absences are one or two people or if it’s a large percentage of your employees. If it’s the former and some people call in sick way more than everybody else, that could raise questions (though of course, some people genuinely have health issues). If it’s a lot of people, then that indicates the level of absenteeism is normal (hopefully, you don’t have a huge number of employees regularly faking sick; if you DO, there is likely a hiring issue) and should be planned for.

            1. Also-ADHD*

              If it’s a lot of people, it can also indicate overwork/burnout etc. as people may be more likely to both get sick and take days when they’re borderline (non-contagious mild migraine… can I deal and push through? Not at this stressful job…) what they would consider “okay to work” (NOT endorsing anyone be pressured to come in when at-all sick, even noncontagious, but I know having been in different environments, I could work a little “not feeling amazing” in some jobs and not in others).

          9. Sacred Ground*

            Currently today, I have two no call/no shows- do I just plan for 5% of the work force to just not call and not show up every day?”

            Yes?

            If you require 20 employees to function, then you should be employing 21. To account for the fact that yes, at any given time you might have one of your 20 (5%) employees call out.

            And to echo others, 24 hrs notice for *calling out sick* is unreasonable. And ridiculous. What’s the matter with your company that they think this is OK? Do you or they not understand what illness is? It’s not something you can schedule.

            “I’m going to be sick Wednesday, does that work for you?” “No, we have that client meeting.” “Ok, I’ll be sick on Thursday instead.” “That’ll be fine.”

            Is that how it works at your company? Seriously?

            1. Colette*

              You have two different issuse you’re conflating here. Should you plan for 5% of your workforce to be out every day? Probably yes, that seems like a reasonable amount for illness/emergencies – maybe even a little low.

              Should you expect 5% of people to be out and not tell anyone? No. And that should be addressed.

              2. MigraineMonth*

                The problem isn’t that the employees aren’t calling in, it’s that they aren’t giving 24-hours notice: “All we ask is 24 hour notice for it not to be an unexcused absence. So, when I say excessive absences, I mean, call in the day of sick, no ability for us to plan ahead.”

                Since many people don’t know that they’re going to be too sick to come in to work 24 hours in advance, that’s not a reasonable standard for unplanned sickness/emergencies.

              3. Also-ADHD*

                It sounds like they’re unexcused because they didn’t give a business day’s notice, not that they’re no-call-no-show ghosting though?

            2. The Nanny*

              Yes, when I worked in preschools this was the way that admin thought and it always ended up with people not getting legally required breaks, children being shuffled from room to room, and general chaos.

              Very early in my career my school had a ‘Hallway Helper’ who was a permanent sub available to run dishes and laundry to the school facilities, sit with a child who needed a minute, assist any parents who stopped by to drop things off, etc etc.

              We also had each classroom staffed with one more person than required legally, so classrooms could break themselves for lunches and 10 minute breaks. That way, if someone was out sick, the hallway helper would come do breaks in that room, which was about an hour out of their day and didn’t impact the rest of their job too terribly. If two people were out sick, the hallway helper was placed in a classroom and we all had to pitch in to cover their tasks. Manageable. Smooth.

              Admin decided to cut the extra classroom teachers first. Hallway helper essentially disappeared because someone was always sick (preschools are petri dishes). All the slack of the hallway tasks fell on teachers. Then admin said, well, you’re already doing these jobs, we don’t need a hallway helper, and eliminated the position.

              Absolute chaos. Admin covering classrooms. Sending children home because there was legally no way to accept them. Denying teachers 10 minute breaks for the restroom. Because admin was always in classrooms, nothing was processing through admin. Parents would show up for a tour and get turned away because no one was available. Staff was pressured to work overtime.

          10. C*

            Because at this point, we have enough people to do the work we need- excessive unexcused absences are making those tough.

            If you only have enough people do to the work you need when nobody is sick then do you really have enough people? Human beings get sick. Human beings get stuck in unexpected traffic. Human beings have plumbing emergencies.

            If your system only works when it works perfectly and nobody has a problem, you do see that the problem is the system, right?

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              It’s interesting that people are assuming we’re running with no capacity to plan for ANY absences, which isn’t at all what I said- I said that absences are in excess of what we can plan for.

              1. Also-ADHD*

                But are you planning for the right number of absences for your industry and function? (This varies wildly — for instance, in healthcare with patient-facing coverage roles, you’re going to need more extra coverage than with accountants who work hybrid. You’re also going to need a much higher % buffer in fields like retail, for the most case, where you’re mostly hiring people who are not as reliable. The better the job and conditions, the less absenteeism. The less physically demanding the job, the less need to use emergency time (sick time) as well, etc. There are a lot of factors.

                If you have over a longer period of time had a lot of scheduling challenges and they can’t be traced back to a few individuals, you don’t have the staffing you actually need (or you don’t have the mitigation strategies to cover in other ways, if that’s preferable to staffing appropriately, i.e. reducing output).

          11. Mid*

            Depending on the size of your workforce, and the kind of work you do, yeah, planning for 5% of people to be out/off at any time sounds about right. In general, planning your staffing so you have exactly the minimum needed for things to get done isn’t a good plan, because things happen. Equipment breaks, illnesses (even unexpected ones that appear in under 24 hours) happen, emergencies happen. So many companies want to run everything on a skeleton crew, but are shocked when that ends up costing them money in the long run because any one thing going wrong means you can’t run at full strength. If you need 20 people to run the factory floor and 15 people to run the warehouse, you likely should have 16 people scheduled for the warehouse with 2 of those trained to work the factory floor, so there’s a backup.

            I also understand that companies are always pressured to cut their bottom lines and maximize profits and that over staffing is rarely allowed or encouraged. But that’s where we get into these sticky situations. Sure, you cut overhead by 5%, but now you’re running staff ragged and your turnover is up 25%.

          12. Aggretsuko*

            In winter, you’re going to have to expect that people, possibly a lot of them, will be out sick unexpectedly. It’s the season. So yes, maybe you should plan ahead expecting that 5% won’t come in, every single day.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              Honestly, 5% seems low for the respiratory disease tsunami we had in January. Between their own illnesses and sick kids, I think on average half my team was out all January, and we were all WFH.

          13. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

            Well…yes. There will always be unexpected callouts for people who are sick, or their kids are sick, etc. Based on your comment below, it’s fine to remind people to schedule callouts in advance when they can, like for planned doctor’s appointments or home maintenance. But plugging in a reasonable daily attrition rate seems like a good idea in any case.

          14. fhqwhgads*

            In the letter it’s clear people are using within their allotment, not over. So whether some of that is fudging the reason or not, the employer should have hired enough people to have coverage for people to use the stuff allotted to them. If there’s an outbreak of measles and 50 people are sick at the same time, sure, that’s going to affect productivity. But everyone using their entire allotment every year, at random intervals, should be factored in to the staffing level.
            Most people don’t know 24 hours before they spike a fever that they’re going to do that.
            24 hours notice for vacation, entirely reasonable. 24 hours notice for illness is not.
            Also in the letter there isn’t really anything about the idea of calling out with no notice, so I’m not sure why you’re so focused on the idea of “unexcused absences”. But I would say, your two no-call no shows are a completely separate issue from someone who does call in day of sick.

        2. Colette*

          Or adjust the schedules – if your schedule is based on an ideal world where no one gets unexpectedly sick or needs to take off time for family-related reasons, your schedule is the problem.

          A rule of thumb is to figure out how long it will take and add 25% for illness, power outages, or just something taking longer than expected.

          1. Annie*

            Right, we generally account for people being 80% effective while working, so we are giving ourselves an extra 20% padding for ineffectiveness, absentees, machine downtime, etc. which will fluctuate on a daily basis.

      2. Hyaline*

        And if individuals are abusing the system, calling on the rest of the team to propose solutions seems weird. Just work with the people who you feel are taking excessive time off directly.

        1. Sacred Ground*

          It is weird. It’s another example of this manager abdicating their responsibility to manage.

      3. Jackalope*

        I can understand that it’s difficult for people to fill in – I too have a job where it’s tricky to fill in if someone calls out last-minute – but if people are staying within their PTO time limits, that’s still them using their compensation that’s offered for the job. Obviously you can monitor to see if any one person is misusing call-ins, but in general it’s best to assume that you’ll have people get sick (or their kids get sick, etc) and have a backup plan for that. Just like the plans for someone winning the lottery and leaving suddenly.

        (And yes I know that it’s tough to do that sometimes; it’s just that people are going to get sick and you need to be able to handle it. That’s part of working with human beings. And if everyone is staying within their allotted PTO time then the employer should be planning for that because that’s within the preset amount of leave that they’re offering.)

      4. ecnaseener*

        What do you mean by “unexcused absences?” Unplanned absences, like getting sick? Or total no-call-no-shows?

        Because, if the former — people get sick and there’s nothing to do about that (other than pressure them to come to work sick, which I trust you aren’t advocating for).

        1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

          I have a reply that’s apparently caught up in moderation, but I’m counting unexcused absences- people calling in sick day of and/or no-call no shows (which I have two of today). We don’t count planned absences (anyone who gives us 24 hours notice) or medical leave. We can plan for a certain amount of unplanned absences per day, but I’m genuinely curious how many we’re supposed to account for- 10%, 20%, 30%? If we’re able to work around planned absences, what percentage of absences are we supposed to hire above and beyond for?

          This is a genuine question- my background isn’t in HR, but I kind of fell into it and am working toward improving conditions all around. I researched current national averages for absenteeism in my industry and set a goal of that, but we’re currently 3x it. It seems like we should be working to lower it- maybe we’re not?

          1. Analyst*

            calling in sick the day while inconvenient, is not “unexcused”. people get sick and they don’t always get advanced warning. Yikes….

          2. Frosty*

            but I’m counting unexcused absences- people calling in sick day of […]

            That just seems so hostile to me – getting sick (or injured) is usually the day of. If you say that’s unexcused, what does that mean, exactly? “No excuses, it doesn’t matter whether you’re throwing up, have a fever or broke you leg in an accident on the way to work!”

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              Obviously people get sick- we’re not saying that people can’t and that we can’t plan around some absences. We recently had flu go around the business and we didn’t penalize anyone for calling off because we knew it was going around and we specifically didn’t want people to come in when they were sick.

              It’s interesting that I have said I ran the numbers and compared it to national average and we’re well above (last year was double, this year is currently running at triple the average*). It’s interesting that everyone is assuming we’re NOT looking at things like adjusting schedules or hiring more people (which we are!). Absenteeism is just one thing we’re looking it- and my original point was that Dan might be in that position as well, the LW just doesn’t know it because they’re not in a role that gives them access to those numbers.

              *This year’s running average is thrown off by inclement weather and the flu, both of which we didn’t penalize employees for, but which still contributes to the average.

              1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

                just because something isn’t going around doesn’t mean people aren’t getting sick or injured.

                As long as the person has the PTO and calls in (or has someone call in for them if they are unable to) it is an excused absence. Because the company has CONTRACTED via their benefits to give them this time off.

              2. Colette*

                So one of the reasons why you might be above the national average is that someone calling in sick the day of is considered unexcused, which pressures people to come in and get other people sick and may make people recover more slowly.

                You could also have environmental factors (e.g. poor ventilation in the building) that contribute to illness.

                You could have a culture that contributes to call outs – for example, “if you’re 2 minutes late you have to take 1/2 day PTO”.

                You could be in an area with a higher rate of illness due to environmental factors.

                Or people could be slacking.

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  The excessive absenteeism was before we put any firm policies in place- ie: people called in whenever they wanted without any consequences.

                  The building is very well ventilated and we don’t produce anything toxic.

                  We don’t require PTO use unless someone is late by a half day or full day. (So, you can clock in up to 1 minute before lunch and not have to take any PTO.)

                2. Parenthesis Guy*

                  “We don’t require PTO use unless someone is late by a half day or full day. (So, you can clock in up to 1 minute before lunch and not have to take any PTO.)”

                  That seems extremely generous. Is that standard policy at other companies similar to yours?

              3. Annie*

                I think people are getting thrown off by your combining people calling out sick (which is an excused absence) versus a no-show/no-call, which is completely different. I’m not sure what industry you’re in, but no-show/no-call is absolutely completely ridiculous for any professional industry. Actually, for any industry at all. I can’t imagine someone no-show/no-call even retail/food and continuing to have a job.

                1. Heya*

                  Yeah, no-call no-show is a huge problem. People get sick unexpectedly, and 24 hours notice is often not possible, but you have to tell someone eventually if you’re not showing up for your shift! What’s the policy for no-call no-show? If it happens once? Three times? Ten times? That’s where the focus needs to be. Set a reasonable policy, communicate it, and enforce it.

              4. Reluctant Mezzo*

                Flu incidence is really high this year, so there is stuff going around even if it’s not in the local newspaper.

          3. Parenthesis Guy*

            I don’t work a manufacturing setting so maybe I don’t understand how things work. It just seems weird to me that people would just not show. In contrast, people get sick and the flu doesn’t give 24 hours notice. It’s hard to know 24 hours in advance if you’re not going to be well enough to go in the next day.

            I would think the step would be to separate people calling in sick vs no-shows. If the issue is people getting sick, there may not be much to do about it. If the issue is that a few people aren’t showing up frequently, then talking with them would be the best way to go.

            Another question you might want to ask yourself (that you probably know the answer for but I don’t) is how hard it is to fill jobs at your factory. If it’s hard, there may not be much you can do about it. Someone showing up 80% of the time is better than firing them and not being able to replace them.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              To your point about planning/hiring: there are different positions and absences for positions that hold more weight (production leads, etc) obviously are harder to work around than those of general labor. Same goes for hiring for those positions. We’re always cross training and trying to make it so that absences aren’t as impactful, but it does depend on which employees call off, how often, etc.

              1. Parenthesis Guy*

                I still think I would focus on the absenteeism first in your position. A close second would be any employees that I think are violating sick leave policies. Anyone that I think is genuinely sick but takes more days than expected would be a distant third (unless they’re out sick thirty days a year or something).

                For the people that are absent a lot, I think I’d try to figure out why they are absent. Are they doing child care? Is their car breaking down every other week? Do they just not feel like working? Are they hungover? I think that would give you ideas about where to start.

                Maybe people just struggle with the physical demands of the job and just wake up one morning and can’t go. They’re not sick per se, just not well enough to perform. Or maybe people just aren’t that dedicated to their job and wake up one day and would rather just go fishing than work.

                1. Nudibranch*

                  Also do you pay enough to be competitive and hire qualified and motivated employees? If not, that will have an effect.

              2. Rocket Raccoon*

                One thing you might look at is your employee base.

                Say that an average adult adult calls out (totally making this up) 6 times a year, but your employees are mostly college students. You’re going to have more absences, and more of those absences will be handled poorly (no call/no planning when there could have been) because that’s how college kids roll. Similarly, if you have a lot of people with young kids, they will have more absences but will call in because they are responsible but dealing with kids unexpectedly getting sick.

                If you pay well you will have more choice of responsible people. Lower wages mean people take the job less seriously. The type of job impacts this as well, and company culture to an extent. I hire for a company that struggles a lot with hiring the kind of people who actually care, through no fault of the company – it’s just part of the industry/location.

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  Our employees skew older- we’re just getting a crop of people with kids and only a few are college age, but they’re not in college. One that is college age actually has never had a job where he was taught what is acceptable behavior in a job (!) so I lobbied hard to work with him and teach him responsible job behavior. He took it to heart and he’s doing much better!

                  Our pay is on the low end, but we’re continually raising it and it varies depending on the skill of the job.

          4. Also-ADHD*

            I’ve bopped between education, L&D/product, and HR for years, and I have all my HR certs and the like. If you’re actually looking for absence policies, you can find some boilerplate on SHRM (I hate to endorse SHRM these days, but their resources are still good) and probably other places. Your organization should absolutely have leave policies and not just cowboy it.

            “Unexcused” is an org-specific notion, I guess, but I haven’t worked at an organization that used that terminology for employees (even when I worked in a school, our union policies didn’t have excuse/unexcused since an excuse is…a parent’s note at schools). Like LW, I have worked places where you needed documentation if out more than 3 consecutive days, but most haven’t even required that. If you are using that term to mean they’re violating an org policy of yours, I guess follow the policy? But people are going to have same-day absences for illness or emergencies, and that should be baked into the scheduling. And anyone doing it way too much will usually go over the leave allotment (either in that bucket, if you keep it separate like LW, or total).

            Good leave policies DO allow for same-day call-outs though and do not consider them unexcused or require documentation for all of them. If someone has a migraine, cold, stomach bug, sick kid, etc. they don’t necessarily need to go through the huge healthcare system and get a note, just let them be a person.

            Good orgs plan for things to happen, like people to be on leave, and have contingencies built in, whether that’s extra coverage, cross-trained workers for coverage-based positions, using management to cover, etc.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              I think “unexcused absence” was a legacy term from previous owners/handbooks and I think it was also used by our HR system when we were setting up the policy. We had a vague policy in place before and after absenteeism skyrocketed, we set up a streamlined, egalitarian system that is relatively easy to enforce. We had an all staff meeting about it and gave out a handout with the new policy and explained the consequences. New hires get a copy of the handbook, which it’s in, plus the same handout that the employees got during implementation.

              I don’t even want to go into what the system is because I know everyone here will jump down my throat about it. It wasn’t my idea- I came up with a completely different system- but I’m in charge of running it. Some employees think it’s too lax, some people think it’s too harsh. It’s also too early to tell if it’s working well but it’s going about the way I thought it would. Also, my resident employee who games every system we put in place, immediately figured out how to game this one too, so there’s that.

              1. Also-ADHD*

                I understand frustration in enforcing a policy you don’t believe in. That always sucks.

                1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                  The system I wanted to have in place took into account the amount of PTO people have (it’s determined by seniority, so would give extra grace to those who’ve been loyal to the company) and discuss the causes of the absenteeism and if there is any way we could help them. Since it’s one PTO bucket, we could also discuss if they have an emergency plan for if something happened and they had to use a lot of PTO.

                  I was overruled (since I’m not a manager) and we have a point system. I purposely made the set up as simple as possible to avoid confusion and I try to advocate for forgiving points as much as possible. I didn’t set the disciplinary measures or the points to reach those targets, so while I administer the system, I don’t actually enforce it and am not in the talks with the employees.

              2. Freya*

                It sounds like it’s a term that in practice at your firm means ‘unplanned absence’ rather than a strict definition of the words

            2. Bunch Harmon*

              This is my biggest complaint about my son’s school. They require a doctor’s note to excuse an absence. I’m not dragging my kid to the doctor for a cold or a stomachache.

          5. Rex Libris*

            I think, if anything, policies like this lead to more absenteeism. People will put in 24 hour notice for a sick day just to be on the safe side, then when they or their kid or whatever ends up feeling fine, they still take they day because they already put in for it.

            Policies like this also cause resentment, because people feel like their benefits are being over policed, and they are therefore less likely to be considerate.

            Either way, consider that the policy may part of the problem.

          6. Zombeyonce*

            You should be counting those two types of absences separately. Calling in sick shouldn’t be counted as unexcused—they’re using PTO and let you know. It should only be counted as unexcused if it’s a no call/no show or they’ve exhausted their PTO. If you count it that way instead (as everywhere I’ve worked does, though I’m not in manufacturing so maybe it’s different there), are you still at 3x the national average?

            You may simply be looking at the wrong calculations and that’s why the numbers seem inflated. If it is industry standard to count people calling out the day of as unexcused, you should only be comparing your numbers to companies with close to the same number of PTO hours given to employees.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              Do you know of a database or way to find out how many PTO hours/sick/vacation/etc any company has and their approximate number of employees, preferably broken down by industry? I’m not sure how I’d find that number so that I could compare apples to apples.

      5. SunnyShine*

        I’ve read a lot of your comments. You need to update your policies. No call/No Show is unprofessional unless it was an emergency. I work manufacturing. We use a 10-point system. People get sick time, personal time (that they can use at the last minute) and unpaid time that allows them to call off.

        No Call/No Show is 3 points. Multiple days in a row is termination.

        It sounds restrictive, but if you provide people will plenty of time off, it’s reasonable to set up policies that will protect the business and help out the supervisors who do the crewing for that shift.

        1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

          The no call/no shows this week are a big exception- we finally got a hold of one person and they do have an emergency; we still haven’t heard from the other and if they don’t call tomorrow, they’re terminated.

          We moved to a point system. Do give points for same day calls off? What about tardiness?

          1. wavefunction*

            Do not give points for same day calls off. It will penalize any chronically ill or disabled employees (or employees with ill children).

            Try having conversations with employees who call off all the time. If they have legitimate reasons for it, there’s not much you can do.

            1. Rocket Raccoon*

              In my company, you can avoid points just by communicating. Call out an hour before your shift? No points. Show up two hours late without telling anyone? ½ point. And if it’s something like “I didn’t call in because I was in an ambulance” then the supervisor deletes the points.

              1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

                We’re trying for communication and stress that with employees. We’re pretty flexible with the points if issues are communicated to us in a timely fashion.

            1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

              So, update: one is in the hospital, one is in jail. So…both are currently alive, yes.

      6. AnotherOne*

        Is it possible that some of the problem is that you have just one bucket? Would there be a benefit to splitting the bucket back up?

        My office does three buckets- vacation (planned), doctor appointments (planned), sick days (unplanned).

        I’m not saying I expect every job to offer time off for doctor appointments, but I have to wonder if everything being in one bucket where you both presumably can’t require a doctor’s note (it’s just not practical 99% of time) and means you can’t require people schedule that time in advance. so people don’t feel they need to plan to take a vacation in advance because they know they can just call out, after all it’s all PTO.

        (note I’m not in a manufacturing setting so that’s obviously different)

        1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

          Without going into much detail, we had separate buckets before and it was a hot mess. Two years ago, we combined the buckets and increased the overall amount of PTO. It streamlined the process and made it a lot simpler for everyone. Some people have complained about that there aren’t two buckets- but what they don’t realize is that if we did that, it wouldn’t be that they’d get more overall time off. We’d divide what we currently have into two buckets and that would potentially not give them as much flexibility.

    7. Hyaline*

      I agree with throwing the question back to Dan, but I’d be even broader, and subtler since he’s the boss. “What do you mean by too many absences?” Confused head tilt and everything. I’m guessing he either can’t answer or would have to say “I want people to come in sick” out loud.

      1. Rex Libris*

        This… I think an “honestly” confused “What do you mean? Everyone is within their allowable time off use.” Is a good way to go.

      2. Zombeyonce*

        It could even be phrased as a very innocent “Oh, are people taking more than their allotted PTO?” Make him say outright he doesn’t want people to use all their benefits, and then go from there.

    8. Can’t think of anything clever*

      You could ask him to elaborate on the relationship, suggesting some discussion of that might he helpful in brainstorming solutions, but demanding and telling him the conversation is over when he can’t is not exactly likely to be productive!

    1. glt on wry*

      Agree! What is the point of this, for the photo-display person? If it’s really ‘all in good fun,’ why doesn’t he put up an awkward photo of himself and other current supporters, to make it even more inclusive?

      1. Heather*

        If it’s really in good fun, then the photo wall guy could replace the photos of others and put up an embarrassing photo of himself, just for balance. And then remove it after a day or a week or whatever

        It also strikes me that this person has never considered the impact of what he’s doing on hiring, and in particular on hiring returners. I know it’s a start up, but it’s still something HR should be considering, even if he hasn’t. If a company can attract people back to work for them, it’s usually a pretty strong green flag

        1. Anonym*

          It’s also really strange to keep photos up of people who are gone, full stop. Having trouble pinning down exactly why, but unless it’s an old team photo or the people were genuinely close friends, it’s just bizarre. And that’s before we even get to the mean-spiritedness of what OP is describing.

          1. juliebulie*

            I kind of like to see pictures of ex-coworkers (assuming I didn’t hate them) but this guy is mean-spirited about the photos he chooses.

            I mean I don’t know if it’s a good idea at all, even if they were very dignified photos chosen with warm affection, but that’s moot because they’re not.

          2. Nina*

            In a previous workplace we did keep photos of former colleagues up (in the ‘gone but not forgotten’ corner, with their name, last title, and dates of tenure written next to them) because we had really high turnover, and new people found it helpful to be able to put a face to the name they’d found on (the document they were working on, the electrical panel, a procedure that said ‘if you get stuck speak to Sarah’, etc.) as well as roughly how long that person was there and how long they had been gone.

            1. BethDH*

              I like this idea and it’s so clearly different in spirit — which I think shows how awful the version OP’s colleague did.

          3. goddessoftransitory*

            It seems basically three steps away from a box of pushpins, multicolored strings, and Charlie smoking a cigarette while bugging his eyes out and explaining his theories.

        2. Bruce*

          Agreed, I’ve been working with the same group for more than 2 decades (including being acquired), and I have a lot of coworkers who left, got some experience elsewhere and came back. Of course that requires a long term mindset to make a work environment that people want to come back to… not perfect of course but people often find the grass is not greener…

      2. Rex Libris*

        People who complain that other people can’t take a joke usually mean that other people can’t take being the butt of their jokes.

        1. Anonym*

          Yeah, and if your joke isn’t landing well with its audience, it’s not a great joke. You don’t blame the audience, you rework the joke.

      3. Glomarization, Esq.*

        It’s mean and childish — the employees haven’t even left yet — and it makes me wonder what else in this workplace is absolutely toxic.

        1. StressedButOkay*

          It just screams “mean girl clique” to me – or people are too scared of the main guy because they don’t want to get picked on. And it, too, makes me wonder what else this guy and the department get away with because it’s “funny”.

          This is not an attitude I liked in my teens and certainly not in my professional workspace.

          1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

            Yeah, this is super middle school-ish to me, particularly because other employees are backing the guy with the pictures, and the point is apparently to make former employees look bad. (They’re not there to notice, so it could be worse, but it still smells of 7th grade bully.)

      4. Artemesia*

        The term ‘all in good fun’ is only used when someone is being humiliated. Just as ‘I have a perfect right to’ is only used when someone wants to do something offensive or inappropriate. (and ‘make no mistake about it’ is only used when someone knows what they are saying is not going to come to pass.

      5. goddessoftransitory*

        Nine times out of ten, “All in good fun!” means the exact opposite of that.

    2. Your Former Password Resetter*

      It definitely sounds like he’s making fun of them, which is definitely not appropriate or in good fun.

    3. Catherine*

      It’s really that idea of “it’s all in fun” but then if the point truly is just “fun”, you need to stop the activity as soon as even one person is uncomfortable. Because then it’s by definition not fun.

      It sounds obvious but took me ages to learn in real life.

    4. Agent Diane*

      It sounds downright creepy to me, since he’s digging around to find embarassing photos including ones of them as kids.

      It’s like a weird trophy wall.

      1. Caramel & Cheddar*

        Yeah, that’s the part about it that bothers me most — why are you creeping on people’s social media posts like this? Validates my choice not to post photos of myself online, at least.

        1. Kal*

          My advice to LW1 would be to lock down all their social media and try to get family and friends to do the same, since they now know that this coworker will likely be creeping through it, especially if they ever decide to leave. And avoid connecting with coworkers on social media and if need be you can say you just don’t use social media, since someone like this has a higher chance of taking a refusal badly – probably better to be known as the person who doesn’t use social media than the one who rejected them.

    5. Accrual World*

      He’s shaming people for leaving, which I understand can be a common reaction in start-ups or small businesses, but it’s a symptom of a poor work culture.

      1. CityMouse*

        I find it extremely weird to be hung up on people who left a job. That’s just how employment works, even great workplaces, people leave.

        1. bamcheeks*

          Yeah, that’s what I find super weird too. A silly photo wall of employees — not my favourite, but as long as it’s opt-in, just a bit of harmless office silliness that some people enjoy. A silly photo wall of people who have left — why??? It kind of feels like it must be intended to be mean simply because no other explanation makes sense.

          1. Jackalope*

            Yeah, I could appreciate a wall of pictures people provided for themselves, and would probably be down for submitting, say, a picture of myself mugging for the camera in a silly way or even something like me in my younger years Halloween costume. But that would be a picture I picked myself, not one someone dug up of me.

          2. Myrin*

            Yeah, I can imagine a situation where someone is in a very “I love all of my coworkers here, you guys are my best friends and I’ll miss all of you, wheee!” kind of mindset and as such keeps pictures as happy reminders or something but… this doesn’t sound like that.

            1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

              Yea, at a previous job, I was the keeper of that role. I used symbols of former employees, things that were dear to them, and the social media, conflict with management, and lack of personal connection in the LW’s letters are all ick to me.

        2. Tea Monk*

          Yea I miss my coworkers who left but people get sick, get a promotion or a better job, it’s just part of life

        3. Been there, over that*

          It’s the same “we’re all family”/expectations of loyalty garbage that can be especially rampant in some startups. I speak from experience–and such places can often be staffed by younger workers who don’t yet understand workplace norms, which explains the performative outrage at him being asked to take the photos down.

        4. MigraineMonth*

          It’s definitely a symptom of a toxic workplace to be contemptuous of or even angry at people who escaped. When you’ve trauma-bonded over the fact that your coworkers are the only people who can help you survive management’s abuse and impossible expectations, a coworker leaving isn’t a wonderful thing that might open up opportunities for you, it’s a *betrayal*.

      2. Not Tom, Just Petty*

        It reminds me of the person who wrote about the woman in her office who prides herself on running people out. She’d keep their nameplate as a trophy. The OP started taking the name plates of the woman’s latest victim which resulted in the woman SEARCHING the officer for it!

        1. Hlao-roo*

          I went back and re-read that letter, and she ended up displaying a photo of the manager who left when she couldn’t find his nameplate! Very strange behavior, and very similar to this letter.

          For anyone who wants to read it, the letter is #4. Nameplate drama from the “can public support of a fired employee hurt them, my boss talks to me like I’m a baby, and more” post on September 27, 2018 (with an update on February 7, 2020).

          1. RunShaker*

            Lol, that was me that wrote in about nameplate drama. We took the old manager’s nameplate so she printed his employee directory picture and displayed that instead. That was at my old job and don’t miss her rude and mean personality.

            1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

              What in the h3ll is wrong with her? UNREAL! Thank you for following up. What the eff Wednesday of our very own.

      3. MsM*

        Yeah, I’m curious how many of these people left because of him, or at least what he and this attitude represent.

    6. Seashell*

      It seems odd to me, and that’s probably what I would say if directly asked instead of the advice to say the company was right to tell him to stop.

      It’s not like people are leaving to spite this guy, but he’s basically making fun of them for leaving. It’s on par with him putting a list on the wall of “Jane, Joe, and John suck for leaving.”

    7. Falling Diphthong*

      It sounds like an overdose of passion for the company–the sort of person who wants to show their loyalty by shaming those unbelievers who dared to walk through the exit, and next will get the company logo tattooed on their neck.

      I imagine this person believes that it will improve team cohesion, much as telling everyone “Snitches get stitches” would.

    8. Snow Globe*

      I’m wondering if all the coworkers are really on his side, or are just afraid to publicly say they are not for fear of being the victim of another “joke”. Someone complained; makes sense that it would be someone in that group.

    9. AlsoADHD*

      The way you know it’s not in “good fun” is you only get up there when you leave. Though how he even finds a picture of everyone is weird to me. (I’m potentially an outlier because I taught on and off during my 20s and 30s and my only strong social media presence has always been professional — I did a side hustle even then and had my business up but that’s it). I don’t like having my picture taken either and usually avoid it, I guess. But even for people who don’t, I would imagine they usually don’t post embarrassing photos?

      1. Antilles*

        +1.
        If it was really all in fun, then shouldn’t he be hanging the photos while they’re still there so that everybody can appreciate the joke? Weird how he only makes the joke when they can’t argue or fight back.

        1. Great Frogs of Literature*

          Agreed.

          I worked at a place where one of the tasks on the list I got my first day was “Send an embarrassing photo of yourself to [email address] — trust us, you want to be able to pick.”

          And it was a little weird to me, but I figured, “Eh, what the heck” and sent a photo of myself in a silly costume that I didn’t find embarrassing, actually. My assumption is that it was an everyone-does-it sort of thing, and maybe a little closer to hazing than I personally would really encourage, but probably harmless as long as they would accept silly pictures of baby wombats or whatever if the person wasn’t willing to send them an actual photo.

          (I still have no idea what they were used for… I assume it was a pre-covid tradition that died out before I got there, and no one updated the instructions. The next time we hired someone, I just quietly took that task off the list.)

          1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

            That’s still gross, particularly the implied threat to find something worse if you didn’t choose, and I’d definitely opt out. If I became the Mayor of No Fun Town, oh well!

            That said, I’m an outlier; I opt out of ANY optional photo, whether it’s a cousin’s wedding or a staff pic at an event or whatnot. I’ll deal with it for a headshot, driver’s license or passport. I’m not even sure I could find an “embarrassing” photo of myself, unless you wanted something from childhood, and then I’d have to get it from my parents! Too weird.

    10. ReallyBadPerson*

      I would not be comfortable working at a place where that sort of thing is considered humorous or even acceptable.

      1. Don’t know what to call myself*

        Yeah, I was reading this letter and thinking a fair portion of LW’s new coworkers appear to be real jerks, and they should be on their guard with these people.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Yeah. LW, watch your back with this guy.

          Also, watch your professionalism. Double-check any professional norms you learn at this company.

          (Believe me, I’ve been there. At least you know about AAM; before I found this site, I regularly sent and received emails with photos of angry snarling badgers at work and thought that was normal.)

          1. Selina Luna*

            I’m sure it was a result of a toxic work thing, but I kind of want to know the context behind the angry badger photos. I assume these are American badgers because UK badgers are adorable.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              To give a hint, “badgering” is a synonym for “nagging”, and my company thought this was a superior strategy for workplace communications than giving the project leads actual authority to get people to do their assigned work. *facepalm*

              So the first email asking if they’ve done the task is a “gentle reminder” with an adorable baby badger image, gradually escalating to “THE DEADLINE IS TODAY WHY AREN’T YOU ANSWERING YOUR PHONE???” with this charmer: https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51Rl7bFa76L._AC_UF894,1000_QL80_.jpg

              At that company, emailing a coworker a snarling badger photo with “this is your sixth reminder!” was business-as-usual. That still doesn’t make it professional!

              1. Evan Þ*

                Aw, I like that tradition!

                (Except that I’d also like there to be someone with authority. But badger pics too, please!)

      2. duinath*

        Agreed. Seems to me like a workplace where the culture has become… malformed, let’s say.

        Like an extreme version of the “we’re all family here” crowd.

    11. mango chiffon*

      As someone who doesn’t have a lot of photos of myself with my name posted where someone could find them easily, this is very alarming and stalker-ish. I doubt all these people have given consent to have those specific pictures up unless that aspect was left out of the explainer. I really find this awful.

    12. Emily Byrd Starr*

      It reminds me of the woman who wrote to some advice column or posted on some online forum about her new boyfriend who had a collage of all his ex-girlfriends. She wrote that she felt uncomfortable and wondering if her feelings were justified, and everyone was like “RUN GURL!”

    13. Cupcakes are awesome*

      I would consider this a huge invasion of my privacy- if I no longer work there why is my picture displayed at all to anyone- especially people who might be new and I’ve never met.
      It feels so creepy to me! Honestly I hope someone who knows any of the former employees will tell them and let THEM complain to the company that their photos are being used by someone internally for creepy reasons!

      1. RunShaker*

        at my old job, our team had coworker that would collect and display desk nameplates for all employees that resigned/were fired. We referred to it as nameplate graveyard. We started hiding nameplates when someone left so she printed their employee picture and started putting them up. Even the head of our old department had a laugh and only intervened when we all started complaining and someone threaten to go to HR. The nameplate collector was rude and mean on regular so no surprise she took pleasure in collecting them.

  4. Martin Blackwood*

    #1 – Id definitely be tempted to say something like ‘I think itd be fun if we had all the current employees too :) I bet theres some funny pictures of [Wall Coworker] out there!’ because, really. this is poking fun at people and depending on the person, theyre not going to do it to their face. But, since the pictures go up before the person has left, theres some in-your-face insulting going on, i think it could backfire easily. and i wouldnt actually want to encourage social media stalking

    1. Ellis Bell*

      This made me chuckle, but would probably backfire with them going for it, and thinking this is a great idea, imo. It’s highly likely that they really do believe it’s all just good fun, and they wouldn’t mind if it were them. This is the most classic misunderstanding of the golden rule: treating other people as though they had your exact same preferences, and acting like it’s puzzling and ridiculous if they don’t think the same way. Rather, they need to show respect for other people’s preferences and respond to the fact they’ve clearly upset someone.

      1. Andromeda*

        Yep. I wouldn’t find this offensive or malicious in intent per se, especially for a startup where the culture can be very familiar, but I do think it’s bizarre!

        And yeah, potentially upsetting:
        – having personal social media combed through by colleagues without your knowledge
        – you don’t get to choose the photo, so you might have bad memories attached to it, or it might be embarrassing in a way that’s genuinely unpleasant rather than cute and silly
        – it only goes up once you’re leaving, so you probably feel like it’s completely out of control how it’s gonna be used
        – what happens if someone is fired or laid off? Ribbing like that seems like it could go really sour fast

        I think if you’re gonna do something like this at all, first of all it’s weird that it’s only in one guy’s cube rather than a department-wide thing, and also imo it would be much better to use a fun photo of the person from while they were working there or get a colleague to draw them.

      2. Not Tom, Just Petty*

        It will blow up spectacularly when all the people bring in a picture, except wall of shamer. The others will ask, they will tease, he will blow up. 1) it isn’t funny to him if everyone participates; 2) HE doesn’t have embarrassing pictures.

      3. Antilles*

        It’s highly likely that they really do believe it’s all just good fun, and they wouldn’t mind if it were them.
        I actually think it’s more likely that the guy is would *say* that he’d be totally fine with it, it’s all just a joke, I wouldn’t mind…but will suddenly find it not funny if he was made the butt of the joke.

      4. Emily Byrd Starr*

        Person A (we’ll call him Andy): Bob, can you please stop doing that thing that you’re doing? It’s really bothering me.
        Person B (Bob): But I like it when people do the same thing to me, and I believe in the Golden Rule, “treat people the way you want to be treated.”
        Andy: Do you want people to treat you with respect?
        Bob: Of course.
        Andy: Then follow the Golden Rule by treating me with respect, and stop doing that thing because I find it disrespectful.

  5. Daria grace*

    #1, if I was leaving a job under unpleasant or unexpected circumstances, having co-coworkers go digging for and displaying embarrassing photos from my past would be one more reason for draining feelings at a time that has too many already. If they wanna do this for individuals who they know are definitely leaving in good spirits and would enjoy this, whatever, that’s no big deal. But doing it for everyone risks accidentally being upsetting to someone already having a bad time

    1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

      Fair enough! I’d hate this too, but it would confirm to me I’d made the right choice in leaving, if I were to need confirmation.

    2. BlueCanoe*

      I agree. It could also be triggering for those of us who try to keep a low profile due to abusive family members or exes, or stalkers. Although in those cases, it’s often harder to find old photos since we keep our social media private (if we even have social media).

      I admit I’m a very private person so I don’t even put photos with my family members at work unless I get their consent first. Putting photos of coworkers is really weird to me.

    1. Catherine*

      Oooh he sounded much worse though didn’t he. Maybe this is the “matured” version of yesterday’s bully!

    2. Andromeda*

      I feel the need to point out that the LW’s ex was posting *nude* photos of one specific target. That IMO goes way, way farther than this.

      This is something I can imagine someone could genuinely have a laugh with friends about, though I think it’s weird to do it with people who are just leaving at the time. Feels more like an icebreaker thing for newbies, which should be optional anyway.

      1. Texan in exile on her phone*

        I can’t imagine having a laugh with friends about this. i think it’s stupid, juvenile, and mean and it reeks of Bro Culture.

        If the photo guy were just trying to be funny, he would put up silly photos of himself. But he’s mocking other people.

        1. Joana*

          “Reeks of bro culture”

          So pretty much every other question about startups I’ve seen on here.

          Seriously, absolutely no offense to startups in general because, you know, there’s the whole ‘you only hear about the bad ones’ and I’m sure that there are startups that are fine and therefore we don’t hear about them. But every startup in its first years I’ve heard both here and on sites like Not Always Right, their culture seems to be a combination of “We’re all family!” and “It’s just a prank, bro!”

          2. Statler von Waldorf*

            I have consulted for and worked with over a dozen startups over the last decade or so. 95% of them are fairly normal small businesses just like any other.

            No one writes here because they took a new job at a startup and it was great. Nobody posts to Not Always Right when everyone was actually right. These websites specifically draw on negative experiences either for the education or entertainment of their readers.

            If you try to draw conclusions from flawed or incomplete data sets, your conclusions will be flawed as well.

            1. Joana*

              Which is exactly what I said, if you’ll read my whole comment: that you only hear about the bad ones and that I’m sure there are plenty of good ones.

        2. Andromeda*

          OK, sure, but it’s still nowhere near as bad as DISTRIBUTING NAKED PICTURES OF A MINOR and if you think otherwise, I have to seriously worry for your judgement.

  7. Indolent Libertine*

    I’m sure all of these have been in the hopper for a while, but re #3 this seems like maybe not the greatest time to introduce the “tracking what you did last week” idea to a workplace where it’s not already a thing…

    2. General von Klinkerhoffen*

      Good point.

      I also think that LW risks coming over as “my job is soooooo lofty and incomprehensible to you proles” and may make them look like they’re justifying a non-job.

      Nothing like calling apparently off-task meetings to infuriate those actually creating the work product.

    3. Michigander*

      I think it really all depends on what her plans for the meeting are. Is it “everyone report back every single thing you’ve been working on so that I can monitor you and prove to myself that you’re actually working”? Bad idea! Or is it “Let us know your highlights so that if you’re unexpectedly off sick the team has a vague idea of what might need to be picked up”? Much more acceptable!

      We have biweekly calls because most of our team isn’t in the office at the same time (or ever) anymore, but I don’t ask people what they’ve been working on specifically. It’s just a chance for me to pass on any relevant updates or for people to bring up questions or issues they might be having. One of the delights of being a manager for me is getting to go, “Okay, if there’s nothing else going on we’ll just end here” after 5 minutes.

      1. Jackalope*

        Yeah, this was more my understanding of it. Let everyone have a general idea of what’s going on in their team to make sure they can work together better. “Being accountable” for every moment of their time would be bad, but a general overview for each other could potentially be helpful.

      2. Festively Dressed Earl*

        Since LW 3 is a new department head, they should start with 1-on-1s with their reports as scheduling allows. Ask them to be ready to discuss any issues/roadblocks they’re encountering as well as what they’re working on. LW 3 should be able to share their own projects as well, but the focus should be on building rapport and getting a big picture that includes ROI on team meetings. Considering what the federal government is going through, be very careful about asking questions to build up, not tear down.

      3. BethDH*

        For our version of this my boss specifically asks for no more than two bullet points, which takes away the pressure for it to be an accounting of everything.
        She also told us that it should 1) focus on outcomes/ new projects (basically major changes to our time & attention) OR 2) something you do you think other people might not know about. She also told us it was fine if some weeks we had 0-1 bullets and I’m pretty sure she planted a couple of people to say “nothing new” early on to normalize this.
        It works really well with these guardrails.

    4. Falling Diphthong*

      On its face it sounds like a quick Monday morning “what are you doing this week?” meeting that was really appreciated when I worked in house, and asked for by workers. It let the office shift assignments around, particularly things with a low priority and long deadline, and helped you know who might have more information about something that cropped up for you.

      But it would have been really weird for management to participate, as none of the editors would be taking anything off management’s desk. Which makes this sound a lot more like the “Demonstrate that you have value by explaining what you do” meeting that is justly derided. (Not only should you be able to tell what your subordinates are doing by looking at the work–if you can’t, you also aren’t going to have any idea if my claims to have engaged in critical llama flight protocols all week are true.)

      1. Great Frogs of Literature*

        To me it sounds similar to our daily scrum “standups.” There’s a little bit of accountability in them, in that you ought to have *something* to say, but it’s not intended to be a competition or a bar to measure how much work someone is doing, just a few sentences that let everyone else know what work is being done, and also a chance to bring up something you’re having trouble with. We’re fully-remote, so when I first started, that meeting might be the only interaction I had with my coworkers in a day.

        Managers have always participated, though sometimes it’s just something like, “I have six hours of meetings today.” It’s maybe a little different from your situation, in that when managers here do hands-on work, it’s generally the same sort of work (or at least on the same spectrum) as the work everyone else is doing. It makes it feel like the managers are a part of the team — not peers exactly, but not like we’re peons who can’t understand the lofty things they do all day. It also, at least to me, makes it feel more like everyone is talking to the entire group, rather than a roll call reporting to the manager. I like having the managers participate.

        That said, this meeting worked MUCH less well in a previous job, where the updates were just, “Tickets.” “Tickets.” “Tickets and working on the database.” “Tickets.” “Tickets and trying to fix that broken door.”

        1. Slow Gin Lizz*

          I was also thinking it sounded a lot like a scrum mtg. That said, I personally don’t find scrum mtgs all that useful to me, a new employee in a 15-person IT team, because I’m in a role where not only do I not really work with very many others on my team, I don’t even understand what they’re doing (I am a non-programmer and a lot of them are programmers and working on projects that have nothing to do with me). I guess that they’re useful for managers to get an idea on what the rest of the team is working on, and maybe they’re useful for my coworkers who do collaborate with each other more, but honestly I feel like one-on-one or small group mtgs that are on topic are more useful than generic “what are you doing today” mtgs. The fact that I have ADHD might also play a role in my attitude towards these types of mtgs.

          However, since my team is all remote, I do appreciate having the facetime with them all (except for the two who prefer to be off-camera, heh). So I guess there’s a social aspect to it as well.

          I guess my real point here is that OP should think about if it makes sense for all of your team members and their schedules for them to participate in a mtg like this. If you just want updates on what they’re working on, why not do that in all of your one-on-one mtgs with them instead? I’m afraid I fail to see the benefit in having everyone do this all at the same time vs. one at a time when you see them individually. I mean, yes, in certain cases it is helpful to have them all together at once, but otherwise, nah, not necessarily the best use of everyone’s time.

        2. MigraineMonth*

          Yeah, I think whether these are useful or a waste of time often comes down to the amount of collaboration the team does with each other. If I need to coordinate my work with Alex or pick up her task if she’s out, it’s important that I know what she’s doing. If that’s not the case, I don’t particularly care what she’s doing today.

          I think that there is benefit in cross-team discussions about what’s going on in general, blockers and cross-pollination of ideas, but that doesn’t happen at a weekly (or daily) meeting.

      2. Strive to Excel*

        I would imagine that the role for managers in this sort of meeting is share any company-wide updates and provide employees a channel for advocacy as needed, but it would look different to what employees are working on.

    5. Ganymede II*

      Meetings like these can bring value though – especially in teams where the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing, and a bit of transparency will help people connect better and work together more smoothly.

      1. AngryOctopus*

        If that’s the case, I’d suggest a biweekly or monthly meeting for that, framing it as “catching up on what the team is doing”. It is nice to have team members knowing what everyone else is doing, and it can be a bonus when someone is out and you might have to say “since you do X for the Johnson project, can you pick up X on the Howard project when Thumbelina is out?”

    6. AlsoADHD*

      Yes. Unless there’s a really good reason and team members will find value in it (you should ask them what they think in 1:1 and encourage them to me candid—even just ask what they think will improve whatever outcome you’re looking for).

    8. Miette*

      IDK, it depends on the nature of the work. I work in marketing and comms teams where the work is very interrelated. There are often dozens of things going on at once, and as their manager, I may be asked a status at any time, so a team status meeting is the most efficient way to have that information. I also want to understand whether the team is overextended, what requests are coming from other departments, who is having difficulties with vendors, who is in the weeds, etc. so that I can help solve the issues. And because of the interconnectedness of the work, one-on-ones aren’t really as effective, since these things often need to be heard by everyone.

      I would have also advised OP that this is a good opportunity for them to share whatever updates they may have heard of from their own meetings with management, as appropriate. For me, these kinds of meetings are about keeping the communications flowing, which is often a point of contention in many places I’ve worked.

      1. Notmorningperson*

        True, and I think a meeting that looks ahead, like Falling Dipthong describes, is always better up than retrospective. That said, an old boss did this and it was well over an hour of one person relating all their super shiny projects and the rest of us saying ‘it’s out busiest time in four years, we are just hanging on trying to do the basics until it’s over’. Classic ‘could have been an email,’ with 10 minutes of ‘how does this the group as a whole’. Rather like stand ups in Agile teams.

    9. CTT*

      We’ve had bi-weekly meetings like this on my team for years and it’s really helpful to get an idea of everyone’s workload and shift projects of we need to.

    10. Laura*

      One way I like to think about stuff like this is “What’s the outcome I want” then brainstorm a bunch of ways to get there, which could include a weekly meeting. This helps keeps thing goal-focused and you’ll have a decent case for what you do pick. For my team it’s important that we have context for the cases each other is working on incase coverage is needed when someone is out or a case escalates to an urgent issue over a evening or weekend, when we rotate coverage weekly. We document our cases and updates on them as we work on them in our CRM, so that’s where someone can look if a call comes in and they need the details. Separately, it’s nice to be able to talk through tricky cases, or share something new we’ve learned while working on that may help others. We have meetings every other week where we can do this and that’s also when our boss shares updates from leadership.

    11. StressedButOkay*

      I get that, I do. However, I’m a non-micromanaging boss who needs to get updates on deadlines from my folks. In our high deadline season, we have a weekly update meeting so I’m aware – and other team members are as well – where we’re all at with the projects they all have on their plate.

      I have an open “door” policy and they come to me at any time but it’s reassuring to everyone to be able to quickly go through the list of deadlines and hear that everything’s going smoothly. Or, if it isn’t, then I can shift things and people around to make them go smoothly.

      Once we’re out of our high deadline season, we move to bi-weekly and then monthly meetings that can be canceled if not needed.

    12. Ama*

      I have to say it reminds me of a completely useless meeting my last employer instituted, where each of the team leads met with the division head and the CEO to give updates on what we were working on. The problem was that we were given a very restrictive power point template that basically made sure we only talked about positive accomplishments and metrics- there was no real room in the meeting structure to ask for help with a problem, brainstorm collaborations or anything that might have actually been useful. (And the division head and CEO did not present anything themselves.) The entire tone of the meeting felt very condescending, like we were doing class presentations in school. All of us had a decade or two of work experience and we all argued to the division head that it wasn’t a good use of time and we could just write up those updates and send them to the CEO instead, but got nowhere.

      At least our meeting was only once a quarter, though – weekly would have been unbearable.

    13. Annie*

      Yeah, I don’t see the point of “tracking what you did”. I think since this is a new manager, it makes sense that the manager might ask “are there any roadblocks or anything you need me to help out with in the upcoming week” or “are there any deadlines or issues that need to be addressed, or you need help with from the team.”

      It should be about assisting the team rather than asking “what have you done?”

      And no one needs to force themselves to give a report. If they have questions, they can ask.

      If the manager doesn’t know what the teams working on, that can be addressed separately in 1-on-1s or quick emails.

  8. Grizabella the Glamour Cat*

    #2 reminds me of a guy I once worked for who rated me “marginal” on attendance because I had (gasp) used all of my sick days for that year.

    Mind you, none of these absences were unexcused, and I did not exceed my annual allotment. I just happened to use them all, because during the last month of the year, my daughter got chicken pox (this was pre-vaccine). The day care required that she not come back until all of the “pox” were scabbed over, which took an entire week. I had used up my vacation time for the year, so I had no choice but to use up what remained of my sick leave.

    That guy was a buffoon in a number of ways, but that’s the single worst memory I have of his boneheadedness being directed at me.

    1. Falling Diphthong*

      I think the critical message for LW2 might be “You work for a buffoon. And management likes him.”

    2. Don’t know what to call myself*

      In my experience, bosses who get mad at people for taking their allotted time off tend to be bad bosses in other ways too.

      I had an undiagnosed issue that caused me to be sick several times in the same year. I was seeing doctors and bringing in notes to verify that I really was sick, and keeping my boss up to date and she always said it was fine. I finally got a diagnosis and a recommendation for surgery. I didn’t have a date set yet, but I told my boss it was coming and she said she was so relieved for me that I was finally getting answers and I could fix the problem.

      That was Friday. On Monday, she called me in her office and said I was using too much sick leave and accused me of being an “earn and burn” employee who uses up all their paid leave as soon as they get it. That part didn’t even make sense, because I had 8 weeks of unused vacation time in my bank. She always made me feel guilty when I put in a vacation request, so after a while, I stopped taking vacations. She was the kind of boss who really wanted to be seen as a problem solver, but unfortunately for her our staff were pretty non-problematic, so she had a tendency of inventing problems that didn’t exist so she could be seen solving them.

  9. No Achoo for You*

    Dan stinks. I also think he must have helped with the attendance policy at my current job. I’m literally suspended because I’m sick and took 3 days off without finding my own coverage (because I was too sick) so I maxed out my attendance points for the quarter.

    each absence where you don’t find coverage for your shift is an automatic 10 points whether you call off in advance or not. So if nobody will cover your shift your SOL. I already had 10 points for being 3 minutes late twice. 40 points is actually technically automatic termination but because I was so sick I went to the emergency room and was on breathing treatments and IVs they gave me a weeks suspension to be “understanding”.

    So based on how my work schedule is I’m out 3 full weeks of income AND somehow have to not miss any more work at all until April when the new quarter starts. Oh and the scans for pneumonia at the ER found that my spine is so constricted it’s squeezing my spinal cord and almost paralyzing me (urgently needs surgery) and they found my thyroid is the size of a grapefruit, full of possibly cancerous nodules, and constricting my windpipe. (also urgently needs surgery)

    lol I’m gonna get fired for being severely ill. YAY AMERICA!

    Dan can kick rocks.

    1. On Fire*

      I am so sorry you’re going through that! Squishy gentle hugs if you want them. What industry do you work in, with such draconian policies?

      1. WhoCares*

        I’m just going to chime in and say it sounds like a call center, or Walmart, they ALWAYS act like that and punish people for being sick. I really employers would stop punishing people for being sick, it doesn’t help anything!!

    2. Cat*

      So… the punishment for being unable to work… is to be unable to work for even longer???

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

      I am so sorry about this. I wonder if you could talk to an employment lawyer. If you need surgery or your so sick your in the hospital they cannot fire you for having too many points.

    4. Pastor Petty Labelle*

      Time to check FMLA. I’m serious here. The real advice would be a find a new job but right now you have more urgent things. COntact HR and ask for the FMLA paperwork.

    5. Annie*

      That absolutely sucks, but that’s more your company than America. Sounds like crappy policy and they absolutely don’t understand what you’re going through. I agree, the FMLA sounds like something you should look into considering the severity of your medical issues.

      Regardless, best of luck and I hope you heal up and get the surgeries you need without your horrible company messing with your employment.

      1. MigraineMonth*

        It’s America’s lack of labor laws that make No Achoo for You’s situation possible. I hope they are eligible for FMLA, but remember that in the US it isn’t mandatory for all employers and it doesn’t apply to all employees. FMLA also isn’t paid.

        Not to mention America’s… *unique* approach to health care, which I hope No Achoo for You can navigate with minimum bumps and no bankruptcy.

      2. Freya*

        The one bit that sticks out as being very definitely America to me is where No Achoo For You is required to find coverage – that’s 100% Not On here in Australia. Here, the person who does the roster has the responsibility to find coverage, since they’re the person who knows whether other people can do it without going over legal limits for overtime and infringing on minimum breaks between shifts and so forth.

        Also, it’s unlikely that anyone but HR or the boss would even HAVE everyone’s phone numbers to start calling, because it’s only OK here in Australia for an employer to share personal information about employees where it is directly connected to their employment, so good employers just won’t do that – they’ll let the employee do it themselves (like putting your mobile phone number in your email signature. I don’t, because I don’t want anyone calling me for work purposes on anything but a work phone, and we’ve got VOIP set up so I can call from my computer and have it go through the work phone system. I have my boss’ number and maybe two co-workers?)

        Also also, calling around to get coverage is a work-related task, and therefore the time would need to be compensated for. In the same way that any work an employer requires to be done by an employee while they are on sick leave is required to be compensated (if they’re working, then they’re not on sick leave). We have the right to a safe workplace, and being forced to work while sick breaches this right – keeping in contact with one’s boss and letting them know when you’re likely to be fit to be at work again is fine, they’re allowed to contact you (within reason) but making you work while sick is not.

  10. WS*

    LW 4. If you were born before 1990 (especially between 1971-1990) there’s a good chance that you were only given a single dose of measles vaccine and it has now worn off. Whooping cough vaccine should be done every decade. These are not things you want to catch and/or spread to other people. I think it would be a great idea to post a reminder, and doubly so if you’ve got people regularly travelling via airports.

    1. KateM*

      Our family had whooping cough last fall. My husband and I (not having had one after childhoof) coughed for two months each, our kids for maybe a day each and it didn’t even register enough for a school absence. I can safely say I don’t recommend having a whooping cough for anyone.

      1. LL*

        If you haven’t had the whooping cough vaccine since childhood, you really need to update your tetanus vaccine too! They added pertussis (whooping cough) to the tetanus and diphtheria vaccine. (it’s called tdap)

    2. HigherEdExpat*

      Came here to reiterate Elder Millennials should either get an immunity check or a booster! Doctors don’t find it all weird or concerning to order testing for you. :)

      1. Selina Luna*

        In the US, if you’re pregnant and you do regular care through an OBGYN office, they’ll tell you you should get a DTaP or TDaP (same illnesses, different brands) shot during your pregnancy. They won’t recommend MMR, though.
        I got the DTaP shot during my most recent pregnancy, so 15 months or so ago, and during my previous pregnancy (that kid is about 5 years old, so a bit more than 5 years ago).

        1. Freya*

          Here in Australia, pertussis, flu, and RSV vaccinations while pregnant are 100% free.

          (All the vaccinations that are free in Australia if given when you’re a child are also free to adult refugees who didn’t get them as a child)

          They don’t recommend MMR be given to pregnant people because it contains very small amounts of live attenuated virus, and although there’s no risk to anyone around you from the virus that’s been weakened that way, they’ve not done any studies proving whether or not there’s a risk to the foetus (they have proved that it’s possible for the rubella part of the vaccine to produce an immune response in the foetus, but not whether the attenuated virus will cause congenital rubella syndrome the same way that full-strength rubella will. And it would be unethical to try, so no one is going to risk it if they can help it).

    3. PokemonGoToThePolls*

      Elder Millennial here, born in 1986 – I didn’t go to college until the 2010s though, and I’m pretty sure I had to get another measles/whatever else vaccine before I could go (and tetanus, but that’s pretty well-known you should get every 10 years/when you can’t recall your last one anyway)
      So some of us may have gotten a second shot a while ago, still very much worth checking!

    4. learnedthehardway*

      It’s a good idea to get re-boosted or at least get your titers checked when you’re an adult.

      When I got my cancer diagnosis (5+ years ago), the first thing I did was to get ALL my vaccines updated. I figured if I was going to be immune suppressed on the treatment, it would be a good idea to have all the immunity I could possibly have to start with. My arms were sore for a few days, but it was worth it to know that I’d DONE something, and that I wouldn’t likely get shingles (again) during the treatment.

      With the measles thing happening now, I looked into my kids’ vaccinations with our Public Health unit (they keep records for the school system) – I want to be very sure the kids are up to date with everything. Found out that my young adult is missing one dose of the chicken pox vaccine – will be getting that rectified asap, as it’s dangerous in adults.

    5. Frieda*

      My high school had an outbreak of measles in about 1990 (so I fall into your date range) and I got re-vaccinated at that time. I can’t imagine I’ve had another MMR since then. Would it still be useful to get one? (I realize I can ask my doctor as well and you don’t know me/are not my care provider, but in general – what would your recommendation be?)

      IIRC that outbreak was traced to/blamed on visiting German exchange students which seems odd to me now as I’d have expected Germany to also have a robust vaccination program. But who knows.

      1. Hlao-roo*

        From the linked NPR article:

        If you were vaccinated between 1968 and 1989, you likely received just one dose of the measles vaccine, instead of the two doses that are standard today. One dose alone is highly effective and for most people, it provides more than enough protection

        Because you said you were re-vaccinated in 1990, I’m assuming you had two shots total. (One shot as was standard from ’68-’89, and then a second shot in ’90.)

        Also, from the linked CDC page:

        Adults and teens should also be up to date on MMR vaccinations with either 1 or 2 doses (depending on risk factors)…

        One dose of MMR vaccine, or other presumptive evidence of immunity, is sufficient for most adults. …There is no recommendation for a catch-up program among adults for a second dose of MMR (e.g., people born before 1989 or otherwise).

        I don’t think you specifically have anything to worry about (obligatory I’m not a doctor, just an internet stranger). But you can check out the CDC page for more information on at-risk groups and talk to your doctor if you have any specific concerns about taking more measures to ensure you have immunity.

        1. Nomic*

          Great info. Though I wonder how long before the CDC doesn’t recommend vaccines for anything at all.

      2. Whoopsie*

        Current recommendations (who knows how long they’ll last under Oz and RFK) are that you get your titers checked every decade-ish to confirm if you still have immunity. Since you were vaccinated in 1990 that would have still been the single shot which didn’t have as good of immunity rates.

        So ask your doctor and have them check for all the various immunities, not just measles, and then make a plan for updated vaccines from there.

        1. RVA Cat*

          I had a booster when I was pregnant. Kiddo turns 11 in a few months. So should it be routine for moms to get their titers checked or boosted when their youngest gets their Gardisil?

          1. Freya*

            You probably got your pertussis booster while pregnant – it usually comes pre-packaged with tetanus and diptheria (TDaP for adults, DTaP for kids). Your tetanus booster is recommended every ten years, and although pertussis boosters are only recommended for healthcare workers, early childhood educators and carers, and people in close contact with babies (including pregnant people), you might as well get it at the same time as your tetanus – there’s no tetanus booster here in Australia that doesn’t come pre-packaged with at least diptheria and most have pertussis as well.

      3. Freya*

        You can always get your doc to get you blood tests to measure your antibodies – it’s possible for people to have had all their vaccinations, but because of the way their immune system responded, not actually have the lasting immunity they should have. And measles is capable of causing your immune system to forget how to respond to stuff it knew before you caught it, so if you’ve been sick with measles after having vaccinations for other things you might want to get your titers checked anyway.

    6. WhoCares*

      I heard if you got vaccinated between 1957 and 1969 (Me, I fall in that range) you should get a booster. I asked my dr office about it and they said to go get it done at the pharmacy. Off I go on Saturday! I do NOT want measles it sounds nasty, I want to be protected. In fact I have had more vaccines of various kinds in the last 5 years than I did my whole adult life.

    7. Strive to Excel*

      That reminds me to go check my vaccine records & set up an appointment – thank you!

    8. MigraineMonth*

      From the NPR article:

      If you were vaccinated between 1968 and 1989, you likely received just one dose of the measles vaccine, instead of the two doses that are standard today. One dose alone is highly effective and for most people, it provides more than enough protection, says Dr. Adam Ratner, a pediatric infectious disease specialist in New York City and author of Booster Shots, a book on the history of measles.

      Based on that, I don’t think it’s accurate to say that the single dose has probably “worn off” or that everyone who got a single dose needs to get a booster. However, the article does recommend a booster to anyone who got a single shot and is at higher risk, such as: people who are in college settings, work in health care, live or are in close contact with immunocompromised people, or are traveling internationally. Or, presumably, live in/near a current outbreak.

      1. Nightengale*

        A number of people in that age range probably got 2 doses

        I was born in 76, got MMR as an infant per the one dose plan at the time
        In the early 90s they were seeing mumps and measles at colleges and realized there could be waning immunity with only one dose. My age cohort had to get a second dose before college. Which was 1994 for me
        Shortly after this they changed to a standard second dose around age 4-5.

    9. Artemesia*

      We got boosters when our daughter was pregnant since whooping cough can be lethal to babies before they get vaccinated. I think lots of people don’t realize they need boosters in adulthood. I feel safe because I HAD all those other diseases and having had measles am I believe immune for life. But I am wondering about polio since I only had the vaccine for that back when it was the Salk injection.

      1. WS*

        If you’ve actually had measles, it can wipe your immune system memory, so any vaccines or other diseases you had before the measles no longer count for immunity.

  11. pandop*

    Regarding the updates, we have a weekly team meeting, but we only tend to do the updates once a month in the meeting our grand boss attends, and she also does updates. Our grandboss gets an overview of what is going on in the team, and we get to hear some of the bigger picture – yes her work is a lot of meetings, but even telling us who she has had meetings with, and why (eg I fedback your issues to X/we are thinking of trialling a new service from Y) is useful to us.

  12. r..*

    LW2,

    as I understand it you have two separate pools:

    1) Vacation days, which are, well, for vacation.
    2) PTO days, which are for sickness (either for the employee or any other person/loved one they are caregiver for), or other types of personal exigencies

    In such a situation, a company should offer enough vacation days in pool 1) to enable a work/life balance that does not burn out employees, because otherwise the company runs a high risk of burning out employees that are often sick or have to take care of sick loved ones.

    However, if pool 1) indeed is big enough, I personally would not use the “people obviously need time off in order not to burn out” argument, due to the risk of coming back and biting you on the butt.

    (And if pool 1) is not big enough, you have a different problem anyway)

    I’d instead focus on pointing out other aspects, like that the majority of issues are caused by other issues.

    Beyond that, there is also one area where it would be legitimate for management to take a closer look at used PTO even if it isn’t really one of the bigger problems per se, namely the question whether there are business practices that contribute to employees becoming sick.

    For example a company with a culture of people coming into work sick might reasonable look at the situation, and come to the conclusion that they should discourage this, and instead encourage either work from home or simply taking time off under the theory that the additional sick days for the sick individual are more than made up for by not spreading disease at work (and hence cause sick days for others). That’d be quite a reasonable effort in my eyes even if absences were not a large problem.

  13. Flor*

    Re: LW#3. I appreciate Alison asking if everyone on the team really needs to hear everyone else’s work. I’ve worked in teams where yes, this was absolutely helpful, and we had a short daily stand-up so we could all be on the same page. I’ve also worked in teams where our work was more siloed, and ended up with a couple of hour-long meetings each week where I was bored for 58 minutes and had relevant information for 2 minutes.

    If the purpose of the meeting is so the manager can get all the information from their reports, but the reports don’t need to hear what others are working on, then IMO if the team is more than maybe 4-5 people, it’s better to either have that information provided in writing or in 1:1 meetings. Because it’s really not a good use of time for 10 people to spend an hour each a meeting that’s barely relevant to them.

    1. Sara without an H*

      +1. I’ve sat through too many department/unit heads meetings where we were supposed to share what was going on in our sections, and most of it was irrelevant to anybody in attendance.

      People also started using their update time to bring up issues that really should have been submitted in advance to be put on the agenda. As a result, meetings ran longer than intended — I’d have been happy to be bored for only 58 minutes!

      I agree with Alison that, if LW#3 wants to go ahead with this, they need to get very clear in their own mind what result they want from it AND have some sort of standard for deciding if it’s getting the result they want. And be willing to stop if it doesn’t.

  14. Anon. Scientist*

    Regarding #3: My department used to have a weekly managers only meeting and we’d have an all hands meeting less frequently. But the rest of the organization was having all-group weekly meetings and I was told that we really should go to weekly so we did. I generally have everyone say how relatively busy they are (so we can adjust as a group) and then have a prompt for something else. I know that some (many?) staff think it’s a dumb waste of time but:

    1. It allows me to communicate important changes in a timely manner in person so I’m there to answer questions. I also hear about general issues sooner.

    2. Everyone has a better idea what the others are doing/contributing.

    3. As it’s gone on, junior staff are more comfortable speaking up and interacting with managers.

    4. Since the group meeting is immediately after the manager meeting, I have an easy hard deadline to keep the former short (I have some long winded managers).

    It’s a half hour, remote if not in the office, and if someone has another meeting they just skip a week. For us it’s not a big deal.

  15. Apex Mountain*

    I’m confused on #5. If the existing person’s last day is Friday, and your trip isn’t untiil the next week (Sun-Wed), where is the conflict?

    1. Myrin*

      It’s not a conflict, per se, in that OP would be able to overlap with the leaving person no matter what, but it means that as soon as the old person is gone, nobody would be there to do the job for at least three days, possibly even five (except for the part-time assistant).

      I do wonder how crucial OP’s absence (or not) would be in this case, though. She doesn’t say how long exactly her overlap with the old person would be so maybe this would already be her fifth week or so with her being able to be relatively effective already, but if it’s just one week? I understand that it would be inconvenient “in the middle of a big organization-wide project” and that OP is nervous about how this might come across, but would OP’s absence for a few days really make or break the whole thing at such an early state of her employment?

      I’m not really sure how Alison’s suggestion of taking the week unpaid fits into all this since that still doesn’t change the fact that OP won’t be there but I might simply be missing something here.

      2. A Simple Narwhal*

        I believe the idea is that normally with a vacation that close, employers would normally just have them start after the vacation, rather than take a vacation their second week of work. It might be a headache if the system isn’t set up to let you borrow against your vacation, so offering to take it unpaid rather than have them deal with the logistics of it might be an easier sell.

        I could be totally off – I started a job on a Tuesday and then took a week long vacation starting that Friday (negotiated before accepting the offer) and was allowed to borrow against my vacation time without issue (I had offered to take it unpaid but they said to take it as PTO) so who knows.

    2. Falling Diphthong*

      Since you usually don’t ask for time off at the start of a job, the normal thing would be for OP to suggest a start date after the family trip. That won’t work in this case.

      Also I get why “The first three days Lulu flies solo, she actually won’t be doing the job at all” feels like a weird start in the role. Even if OP taking off three days (so no one is doing the job) would presumably not matter 4 months later, it’s a weird starting note.

    3. AlsoADHD*

      The existing person’s last day is the Friday before the Spring Break week (Sun-Wed paid away, planned to take the rest of the week off) that LW had planned.

    4. bamcheeks*

      They have a holiday booked for the 24th-27th March. Normally they would just ask to start on the 31st March. But the company wants them to overlap with the predecessor, who finishes on 21 March. That means they need to start on the 10th or 17th March, and take either their second or third week of work as leave.

      It’s not actually interfering with the “overlapping with predecessor” part, but it means they need to take a significant amount of time off in their first 3-4 weeks and that’s not a great look.

      1. Apex Mountain*

        Ok i got it now :) Yes, it’s not ideal but if you let them know in advance (at offer as suggested) it should be ok at a reasonable company.

        I’ve had to do that before – I started a job knowing I’d be off on week 2 for a pre-planned trip. I asked if I should just start after, but it was fine to work the week, then take off, then come back as normal

        1. A Simple Narwhal*

          Agreed! I’ve done it before and most reasonable companies are fine with it. The only bad look is when you accept the offer, start the job, and then bring up taking time off right away. If you bring it up during the offer stage it’s perfectly normal.

  16. DJ Abbott*

    #1 seems a little creepy to me. Where is this person getting childhood/personal photos of his colleagues?
    I did not save my childhood photos, and they were long before home internet. It would be very weird to have a current colleague trying to get childhood photos of me, especially without my cooperation.

    1. ReallyBadPerson*

      If these colleagues grew up in the US, they very likely have photos in online yearbooks, or if, say, a kid won the pinewood derby in Cub Scouts, his picture might have been in his small town newspaper, which will be archived online.

    3. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

      It’s a startup. They’re probably mostly young enough that high school photos are easily found online.

      1. doreen*

        It’s not necessarily that difficult – when I was working on a family tree I found yearbooks online as far back as the ’60s. Then there are small , very local newspapers which exist even in big cities – it’s not uncommon for them to have photos of people who won some sort of contest or award. And last, there’s social media. I don’t have a load of childhood photos on my social media- but some of my relatives and old friends have some that include me. I guess what I really mean is that it’s not that hard if you know a fair amount about that person – for example, I could find my childhood friend’s yearbook if it’s online because I know where they grew up and which high school they attended. But if I tried to look up a coworker, even if I knew where they grew up, it might be difficult – in some places there’s only one or two possible high schools , but someone who grew up in NYC might have attended any one of over 1000 high schools.

        1. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

          If you’re young enough that social media existed when you were a child, then you’re in the “young enough” here. My childhood photos were on *film*. And yeah, very local newspapers, but again when I was a kid they weren’t online.

          1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

            But the point is that newspaper archives are getting digitalized all the time, so that even Olds Like Us could end up being surprised. Plus all those yearbooks…

          2. doreen*

            No , social media didn’t exist when I was a child in the 60s and 70s and my childhood photos were on also on film. But my relatives and friends have scanned and posted some photos that include me as a child/teenager (including a kindergarten photo from 1968) and my very local newspaper has issues online back to 1913. The photos didn’t have to be online then for someone to find them – online now is good enough.

      2. A Simple Narwhal*

        Heck I’m in my 30s and I definitely have “embarrassing” photos of myself online. It would probably be harder to access outside of social media (which I keep locked down from the public), but if I was facebook friends with coworkers, which I used to do when I was younger/earlier in my career, it would be easy to find just by looking in my old photo albums or tagged photos.

        1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

          Ha, I’m 50 and when non-students got access to Facebook, one of my college friends LOVED to scan old photos and tag everyone. During the entire 15 years I had Facebook, the only notification I opted into was “someone tagged a photo of you.” There are SO few — I’ve been avoiding photos since I was 10 — but he found a couple. I was amused by the one of several of us in a dorm shower fully clothed, dripping wet and holding beers, but it wasn’t the image I wanted to present. Thankfully, he was happy to un-tag.

    4. DJ Abbott*

      Thanks everyone.
      It seems *very* creepy for someone to go to this much trouble to get old photos of coworkers, especially if they’re not consenting to it, and the letter doesn’t say they are. Doesn’t this bother anyone else? I would be freaked out and feeling very disrespected if it was me. Random coworkers need my consent and permission to pry into my early life!
      Also, he has way too much time on his hands.

  17. I should really pick a name*

    #1
    HR told him to take the photos down.
    Did he?

    Is the issue just that people are griping?

    This seems like a weird thing for people to feel strongly about.

    1. Falling Diphthong*

      The coworkers feeling strongly is the aspect that has me making odd eyebrow configurations. I would not go to the mat for the right of Steve to have a wall of shame for departing employees, just as I would not go to the mat for the right of Dorothy to have a needlepointed version, where she makes snarky comments about the departed in sampler form.

      Even if I thought those were funny, I would understand how someone would take it as a weird and mean-spirited ritual.

    2. Phony Genius*

      Theoretically, it’s not for the LW to worry about whether he complied with HR. However, they can learn a lot about their new company based on how the situation is handled by the employee, his manager, and HR.

  18. Susannah*

    What on earth!? Why would an adult (well, anyone, but especially an adult) put up embarrassing photos of co-workers… and then do so only when they are leaving?
    This person is a bully, and like most bully, a coward as well (waiting until someone is leaving the company to post the photos). “All in good fun” for those ridiculing the photographed folks (and really – how much tine is this bully spending finding old school/braces photos? Bizarre…).

    If HR didn’t shut this don, I’d be tempted to take embarrassing photos of the bully – grimacing, eating, whatever – and post them all over the office. Just in good fun, right?

  19. Mouse named Anon*

    #2 – this happened somewhere I worked about 15 years ago. 15 years ago we had a great vacation/PTO policy, especially for then and our field. One of our senior managers said that if anyone was “caught” using their alloted vacation for the year (the full amount). They would be written up/fired. Well she sent this in writing and didn’t run it past HR first. We got an email a few hours later to disregard what she said.

  20. Hyaline*

    Re #2 and Dan the Attendance Jerk: I wonder if making Dan articulate what he sees as the problem might help. “Attendance” and “absences” is actually a really broad claim–so ask “What do you mean by ‘attendance’ is a problem? Can you explain that more?” And then see: does he mean that there isn’t enough coverage? That people should come to work sick? That unplanned absences throw systems off too much? That he thinks no one should take vacation, ever, because work life balance is made up? That vacations are getting approved for busy times of year and he doesn’t like that? I would honestly and sincerely ask him, “What do you mean by too many absences?”

    My guess is that he either doesn’t really know and he’s grasping at straws here so he doesn’t have to actually fix anything, or he would be cornered into saying out loud something that any person who has been in a workplace more than five minutes knows isn’t really going to fly (and HR would be on your side about): “I don’t believe in taking week long vacations” or “People should come to work if they’re sick.” And if that’s what he’s coming down to, again, the confused head tilt and honest question, “That seems like something we really can’t change, though, because vacation time and PTO is part of our compensation. We can’t just tell people not to use it, any more than we can tell people we’re not paying them for Monday afternoons anymore. Or am I missing something?” And he’ll have to admit that, no, you aren’t missing anything.

    And hey, maybe there’s an off chance that the WAY absences are handled is imperfect and if he could articulate it, there’s a rational solution (like better planning for vacation requests or a system of overlap coverage for sick employees).

    2. Science KK*

      I’m willing to bet Dan knows upper management isn’t willing to actually solve the real issues, so he’s throwing the employees under the bus to make himself look better.

  21. Tea Monk*

    This is off topic, but I wonder how managers like Dan are dealing with the plague times. People are off work because they cant keep food down or are unable to get up, but it seems people like Dan are shocked that people can’t come in.

    1. CityMouse*

      As a teenager I worked in food service and had one day where I threw up at work and my manager didn’t want to let me leave. I can imagine people definitely didn’t want someone who was throwing up to make pizzas.

      1. Joana*

        This happened at the fast food place I work. Teenager threw up right down her shirt, and manager told her to clean up and get back to work.

        It was before covid, though; they’ve gotten way better about sick days and sending people home.

        Probably helps (not them, but in general) that my state has really strict labor protections for minors and they’ve already been dinged once because they over-scheduled a minor, who fell asleep at the wheel on the way to a shift and crashed. After she tried to call out and they refused to let her (which is illegal, part of the minor protections is businesses can’t deny minor callouts).

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

        That’s when you go out to the dining room and announce to everyone that you have just been sick in the bathroom but your manager refuses to let you leave.

      2. Tea Monk*

        We work with a lot of kids in my job so when the flu came in, there was a lot of sickness. I might call off today because I think I have the winter vomiting bug that sent my work kid to the ER…

    3. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

      We have an unexcused absence problem. We’re working to address it. *Everyone* caught the flu and had to take multiple days off. We didn’t penalize anyone while it ran it’s course because it was a known issue that the entire company was sick. Sometimes, administrations handle things well because we’re human and can see it would be counter productive to penalize people when it was clearly not their fault.

        1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

          I think it’s a legacy term we’ve kept meaning anything not called in ahead. Probably a better term would be “planned” vs. “unplanned.”

          1. WhoCares*

            I agree. I am over the “unexcused” bit, like we are truants from school or something.

            1. londonedit*

              I was going to say – the only time I’ve ever heard a phrase like that was ‘unauthorised’ absences at school. Absences where your parent/guardian called the school on the day, and you brought in a note explaining your absence when you came back, were marked as ‘authorised’. Anything else was ‘unauthorised’ and was treated as truanting. But that was school! I’ve never heard anything like it in a workplace. These are adults.

              If you have a problem with people being off sick and not notifying anyone of their absence, that’s one thing. Address that. But you can’t penalise people by calling unplanned absences ‘unexcused’, as if it’s the employer’s right to dictate what does and doesn’t count as sickness. People get ill, they have to call in sick at the last minute – that’s how sickness tends to work!

    4. Caramel & Cheddar*

      They’d have to admit we have both an ongoing pandemic and the worst flu season in years (plus the rise in tuberculosis, measles, etc.) if they wanted to actually acknowledged the why of why people are sick much more often and more severely these days, which they’ll never do.

      It feels like when my office mandated return to office in 2022 but got rid of our COVID-specific sick days and stopped requiring masks at the same time. Unsurprisingly, people were maxing out their sick days, but no one seemed to be able to make the connection between these three things.

      2. WhoCares*

        People can be incredibly dumb when it comes to this kind of thing. When everyone masked up the flu season was LOW. And now it’s the highest it’s ever been because NO ONE takes any precautions anymore. I am grateful I work remotely because my co workers never mask, are always going to concerts and ball games and getting sick every other day. I haven’t caught a cold in over 5 years. I did manage to get Covid twice through my husband getting it somewhere (even though he masks up everywhere he goes) SO I can only imagine how many times I would have gotten it if we didn’t mask up.

  22. K2K*

    Re Dan: how much do these repetitive meetings to discuss attendance impact the production schedule? My suggestion at the next meeting would be to stop having those meetings and see if that solves the production issues.
    /s

  23. Apex Mountain*

    On #3, a weekly team meeting is extremely normal, and sharing updates as part of those meetings is also very typical. It’s ok if yours aren’t as concrete, the team will still want to know what things you are doing that may affect them.

    1. Thin Mints didn't make me thin*

      It’s also a good opportunity to share news that affects the team, like “We’ve gotten approval to hire a new llama stylist” and “Congrats to Alistair for finishing his certificate in llama science” and “Sales says we’re going to be seeing more traffic in the grooming salon thanks to the ad campaign.”

  24. CityMouse*

    From what I understand a MMR booster is not recommended for most adults except those who got the vaccine before 1968.

    It’s generally fine to get a booster, though, there are some people who should not get the MMR (because of the nature of the vaccine you should not get that particular vaccine while pregnant). Ask your doctor or pharmacist.

    I know when I was pregnant they checked my Rubella titers (this is a standard thing) and showed I still had immunity to that.

    However, boosters are recommended for your TDAP at least every ten years, those do wear off. I know measles is in the news right now but pertussis is also pretty nasty.

    As always, talk to your doctor.

    1. r..*

      In most European countries the recommendation for MMR changed around 2010 from one shot to two shots as a child. This was accompanied with that adults born after ~1970 who had only received one dose (or no vaccination at all) as a child should receive a second dose as adults.

      The reason for this is that in the 2000s statistical evidence on MMR vaccine efficacy against Measles revealed that a single dose vaccine confers lifelong protection against Measles in approx. 92%, which can be boosted by a second shot to 98-99%.

      Note that the second shot is not intended to extend the duration of the vaccine protection, but instead address the fact that (for various reasons) approx. 8% of all people receiving their first shot do not respond to the vaccine; boostering once reduces this percentage to 1-2%.

      The reason why persons born before 1970 do not need to get a second shot is that they have had a very high chance to have survived a measles infection in their childhood already.

      None of the above is medical advice or qualified information on vaccines. To obtain qualified information on vaccines or medical advice please consult your doctor and/or pursue information provided and vetted by your national health authorities.

      2. londonedit*

        I’m mid-40s and in the UK and we had a round of measles/rubella immunisations at school when I was maybe 12 or 13 – I’m not sure why but it could have had something to do with the recommendations changing to two rather than one dose of the vaccine. I’m guessing there was a concern that children of our age wouldn’t have the full immunity that younger kids would be getting from the two doses.

      3. Nomic*

        Your timeline of “before 1970 assume measles infection in the US” is incorrect. The presumed year is 1957 (based on CDC website). The CDC says:
        “If you received a measles vaccine in the 1960s, you may not need to be revaccinated. People who have documentation of receiving LIVE measles vaccine in the 1960s do not need to be revaccinated. People who were vaccinated prior to 1968 with either inactivated (killed) measles vaccine or measles vaccine of unknown type should be revaccinated with at least one dose of live attenuated measles vaccine. This recommendation is intended to protect those who may have received killed measles vaccine, which was available in 1963-1967 and was not effective.”

        1. Flor*

          r.. specifically said they were talking about “most European countries”, not the US.

    2. mlem*

      Almost a decade ago now, when a few outbreaks hit the news, I asked my doctor to check my MMR immunity levels. She was skeptical but ordered the test … and I had no remaining immunity from my 1970s vaccination. I got reimmunized at that time. My point is that, as r.. notes, it’s not just “pre-1968”; there’s a large adult population whose vaccinations have worn off because we were on a now-outdated protocol.

  25. Dust Bunny*

    I’m not traveling but I’m in Texas and just got the TDAP and MMR vaccines. I know I’ve had them but it’s been forever, and I can get them easily at the local grocery store pharmacy. But I spend a lot of time with my elderly parents and one of my coworkers is pregnant, so I’d like to not spread more germs if I can help it.

    1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

      For sure. I’m also in Texas and also have older relatives I see frequently, and I’m glad I got boosted/second doses/etc. for these, plus Covid and Flu. I have to admit I hadn’t thought about MMR or TDAP, but I’m glad my doctor asked during a routine appointment (last year, not during this outbreak) and was able to just do it in her office. Hopefully it won’t become harder/more expensive to get vaccines during the current US evil clown show, but I have doubts.

    2. nm working mama*

      Also! I live in NM with a nearly 6 month old and if you have concerns about the possibility of exposure, you can vaccinate babies as young as 6 months for MMR – they just have to then have the 12 month shot and the 4 year shot as well. It’s the recommendation for international travel for babies 6-11months – one shot in that age range, and then the full schedule after. We have unvaccinated older kiddos and adults in our extended family who live in areas with regular measles outbreaks and low immunization rates (don’t get me started) and my pediatrician just okayed a dose at 9 months, before we have a big extended family event. If I lived closer to the county where the outbreak is contained, we would most likely be doing a dose now!

  26. Judge Judy and Executioner*

    LW5—After I received an offer for my current job, we discussed the start date. I shared that I could start on Monday the X but would need Friday off due to some long-term plans. They had me start the week after so I would be there for five full days during my first week. I would treat it similarly, and they may have you postpone your start date.

    I really hope you get a job that lets you use your vacation time!

  27. WellRed*

    OP 3. Please reconsider that sort of weekly checkin. We had that for eons. It was a waste of time with no purpose (how does what the sales person is doing help me in editorial? It doesn’t). It turned into people reciting a laundry list of all their tasks, usually the same list every week.

    1. Annie*

      Right. I think it can be used more of a “are there any issues that need to be addressed or do you have anything that you need help from your coworkers with?” rather than a list of things you have accomplished or are working on. Make it brief. Allow the employees to use the time if they need it, and don’t sit there and drone on about everything that’s happening. It should be useful to the employees, and if there’s nothing to discuss, end the meeting early.

      1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

        Yes! If you want to go around the room just so everyone’s informed, do it monthly/quarterly and make it one minute or less per person, depending on team size. My org requires each team member to start the meeting with one professional and one personal success, and it’s like a 12 person team. Painful, even though they’re perfectly nice people.

  28. HonorBox*

    Regarding Dan: While it sounds like anything that might be seen as “disagreeing” with Dan is probably not the best course of action, I also don’t think it is helpful to not say anything. The letter mentions 10 things that could be causing problems. Put together a couple of suggestions to address some of those 10. Get buy-in from others on your team. Then present those to Dan. You and your team likely have a better sense of where there are pinch points because you’re in it every day. Dan may not have the same perspective because he’s probably not boots on the ground day in and day out. If you can outline how the production schedule is a larger issue, or if you can show specific times when production slowed because you didn’t have the necessary supplies, it might open his eyes to other things that could be addressed.

    If that doesn’t work, at least to steer him away from the attendance topic, I’d go to HR. You’ll be in a better position because you can say that Dan was concerned about attendance, and we’ve actually presented him with several other solutions that would increase productivity more. While I think HR would want to know that people are being discouraged from taking their time away or being encouraged to come in sick, it will land differently if you can also say that you’ve presented several suggestions that would have a more positive impact.

  29. RagingADHD*

    That NPR article with birth date ranges and other factors that influence the need for a booster was very helpful.

  30. Caramel & Cheddar*

    The Dans of the world are so frustrating. Years ago, I had an employee who suffered from migraines and would justifiably call in sick on the worst days. When they got to four sick days taken, HR spoke to my boss and my boss spoke to me about talking to them about “getting their sick days down.” Sorry, what?

    Their suggestion was that if this person could find a way to do half days and come in in the afternoon, that would be better. This person’s physical presence in the office was way more important in the morning than it was in the afternoon, so this would never have worked even if it wasn’t a ridiculous suggestion, but I was still annoyed anyone suggested it. If you give your staff X sick days, you don’t get to be annoyed they’ve taken X sick days, or even half of X sick days. If four sick days is the max you want people taking, then put that in writing in your benefits package and see how it impacts your talent pool.

    1. Mid*

      Exactly! If you say I get 10 sick days and 20 vacation days, don’t call me in upset when I’ve taken 5 sick days and 15 vacation days because you have a secret rule that says no one should take all 30 days of PTO they have. Be honest about how much PTO you have. Or better yet, focus on the results of the work. If I’m getting my work done, why does it matter if I also take all my vacation?

    2. Salty Caramel*

      Some people’s biggest accomplishments in grade school was the Perfect Attendance Award.

    3. Thin Mints didn't make me thin*

      In a long-ago job there was Bob, who would take all his sick days in December just to use them up before they reset at the end of the year. That went on for years, and I think the boss was not wrong to be unhappy about it, but there was little he could do.

      1. Annie*

        That’s sort of abusing the system. Sick days aren’t PTO, they are for when someone is sick and is unable to come into work (or has Dr. appointments in some cases). But yeah, not much you can do.

        We don’t have sick days per se. If we are sick, we just let our manager know. If we do have something over 3 days then we have to make sure we arrange it with our manager and may have to take short term disability if it’s something that lingers. But different states (U.S.) have different laws. California allowed 80 hours of sick leave a year, so that wouldn’t be required to have the over 3 days coordinated with your employer. You would just have to officially claim it through HR. I never bothered with that because I wasn’t sick over 3 days (luckily never got Covid when in California).

  31. whatever*

    For all we know, LW1’s coworker could have gotten permission from the former coworkers to hang these photos. It seems strange to me that someone complained. However, that doesn’t stop the fact that someone did complain, and I do think companies have some power to decide whether or not things are appropriate to hang at your desk (former coworkers’ permission or not).

    If the coworker was writing in, I’d say take the photos down and keep it moving – pushing back on this seems like it would take more political capital than it’s worth. For LW1, Alison’s advice is spot-on.

    1. Joana*

      Even if he did get permission for some, it feels like it’s pretty clear he didn’t get permission for all of them, and that’s the reason someone complained. But it seems more likely that he didn’t get permission for any of them, as if he did, he could’ve said “Well Jane and Fergus said it was okay/sent me the photos of them, but I can take down the one of Constance”.

    2. A Simple Narwhal*

      I feel like if he had permission from everyone, no one would have complained? And the approval would have been part of the coworkers’ arguments, not just that it’s in good fun but that everyone involved was in on it.

      I do suppose that even if everyone was enthusiastically in on it HR is allowed to tell you what you can and can’t have on their desk, and if so I could understand their unhappiness at being told to remove something just because they said so.

  32. sekrit*

    We get put on an attendance program before we even get to the end of our sick days. But it isn’t by days, it is by how many separate times we have been sick.

    4 times. Regardless of the length of time. Unless you have a dr note. Until a chronic condition program was put in place it was brutal for people with chronic conditions.

    1. A Simple Narwhal*

      Or people with kids! Not only does your kid get sick but then you inevitably get sick as well. I guess if you’re “lucky” that streak of caring for a sick kid and then getting sick yourself would count as one occurrence?

      1. sekrit*

        We are told it isn’t punitive, but the effects are cumulative.

        Up to and including termination?

        Yeah.

        Anyway, I guess my chronic condition stuff actually ended up being approved because I did NOT get a letter this year.

        I was also emailing the sick time people with “leaving early because chronic condition is flaring. This is the third time this week and the first at work”

        I was NOT taking time off for the chronic conditions because I hit the point where I would not get paid for a single day absence. And that was used to say “your condition isn’t chronic”

        I have no idea who talked to who to reverse that decision, but I owe them a debt of gratitude.

    2. Pizza Rat*

      I hate this kind of bulls**t. I’ve been dinged for using more than half of my allotted PTO.

      It’s laughable that everyone can get a doctor’s appointment the same day they’re sick to get a note. Even if you have access to a Minute Clinic at CVS, you can’t always manage that.

      If I had an employee that had used almost all their sick or PTO time early in the year, I would want to work with them to arrange a leave if that benefit was available to them.

      1. Annie*

        I can see if an employee uses almost all their time early in the year, and mentioning it to them, but not in a penalty capacity, just so they are aware and yes, so you can arrange if there is something that needs to be handled if they need additional sick time off or PTO.

  33. gueditaa*

    Wait, for LW1: how is this guy getting these embarrassing photos of his work colleagues to begin with?

    1. Cupcakes are awesome*

      exactly. I said in an earlier reply to someone else this is just creepy behavior and I would feel as if my privacy were being invaded if my photo were hanging in someone’s cubicle WHO I NO LONGER WORK WITH. Someone should tell these former employees.

      1. Joana*

        While I agree it’s completely creepy to have them, the photos are described as just regular childhood photos to me. Old school photos, them with braces or wearing a costume. So it sounds like it’s innocent enough stuff in any other context, not like, inappropriate pics of them as kids or something like them out partying in college half naked and throwing up on themselves.

        But the fact that he hangs them in his cubicle, does it with the obvious intent of embarrassing them, and seems to feel so strongly about keeping the wall? Yeah that’s weird.

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

          Yeah, they might be regular photos from being a kid but how did he get them? THATS way more creepy to me. He had to go digging through social media or something.

          1. Joana*

            Yeah, I don’t know if I’m in the minority or not, but as long as it wasn’t something like me as a toddler running around in nothing but a diaper on the beach, I wouldn’t be embarrassed or alarmed by the content of the photos themselves. If someone had said they wanted to do a collage of their coworkers and asked people to submit photos of them as kids, I might even give them a copy of a photo like described. So I really don’t get what he’s trying to embarrass people about beyond “Ha ha you’re an adult now and look at this thing you did as a kid, it’s going to be up on my wall FOREVER.”

    2. Joana*

      There are several ways these days, for instance I graduated high school in 2008 and my yearbooks are online. Not because of the school but one of those services that uploads them and spams you with emails about selling you copies. And as someone else pointed out, because it’s a startup it’s likely most of the staff skews young, so there’s a higher chance they have stuff online.

    3. Hyaline*

      I can see a range of options from absolutely creepy (rifling through desks) to borderline creepy/weird (deep diving Facebook), and honestly, even borderline weird is a place to avoid at work. This guy is being weird and he should stop and it’s even weirder that people are huffy about him being told to stop.

  34. Funny story*

    At one of my former jobs, a maintenance supervisor with an office in a back corner of the manufacturing facility had a “wall of shame” on the inside of a large cabinet door where he displayed the ID badges of terminated employees. I think he was given the badges by HR so he could disable the employees’ facility access, but somehow he got away with keeping them. After several years, his wall of shame was discovered by HR and he was forced to take it down. In a twist of irony, he was eventually fired for purchasing supplies for the company from the business he owned on the side.

    1. Bast*

      I worked at a company with an extremely high turnover (I was there about 2 years and was considered a “senior employee” and “long term” if that tells you anything) and at some point, another “long term” employee created a “graveyard” of everyone that quit or was fired over the years. It was essentially a drawing of a cemetery and they’d add a new gravestone drawing every time someone left. It was particularly funny as the high turnover was made extremely apparent when they were all lined up — “Jane S. Jan 2024- April 2024” “John A. Feb 2024 – Nov 2024” etc.

  35. A Simple Narwhal*

    #5 Definitely bring it up after you get an offer, no sense in bringing it up before it’s relevant. When I got my last job’s offer, they had me starting a few days before I was supposed to take a week-long cruise. I told them about the trip and asked if I could start after I returned rather than take time off so soon after starting. I was so nervous because I’d never negotiated a start date, but to my surprise they said it was ok to just start and then take the time off. And as an added bonus they let me borrow against my vacation time rather than take it unpaid! So I started a new job, worked two days, and then took a week-long paid vacation.

    Most companies I find are pretty good about planned vacation time when starting a new job as long as you bring it up before you accept the offer. It also works pretty well for you that your time off would be after the person you’re replacing leaves, you’ll still be able to get the necessary overlap for training. In theory it should be an easy ask that you get the training, take your planned vacation (they even have a part-time person that can cover/make do for a week), and then you’re off to the races when you return.

    Crossing my fingers that you get the job and the full vacation!

    1. Annie*

      Exactly. And maybe the person who is planning on leaving can stay an extra week to cover (the employer should not push this, but can certainly ask) just so there’s no coverage issues.

  36. A Manager for Now*

    LW3 – I echo figuring out what the purpose of these updates would be.

    I’ve been part of groups that do a “Here’s what I did last week and what I’m doing this week” and didn’t have a lot of overlap in task/expertise and were very large in attendance. Those were completely useless other than providing an update for our manager which could have been done in our regular 1:1’s we also had, or honestly an e-mail (ugh DOGE ruined this).

    Now, my fully remote, technical expert team does a weekly meeting similar to this. I’ve found it relatively helpful for collaboration because we’re all doing similar stuff for different branches of the company and regularly have overlap in objectives and projects but being remote means we don’t have the “Hey, come over to Bartleby’s desk for a quick brainstorm” you get when in person.

    The agenda is basically:
    1) Boss: Company Announcements, Project Scope Changes/Major Status Updates
    2) Individuals (including boss): Major Focus for the Week (what we may be setting up calls about, letting people know general topic availability), Escalations (naming things we have questions for the group on or need guidance from Boss that may impact others), Upcoming Work Travel/Time Off
    3) Discussion on Escalations: what it says on the tin.

    1. Annie*

      I don’t think you need to include major focus for the week from individuals, unless there are things they need to collaborate with other individuals, or need help from the manager.

      We have daily check-ins/stand ups, and it’s typically “you have anything you need to cover/discuss”? If it’s a no, then the meeting is over pretty quickly. But sometimes we have discussions on certain issues/projects that take a few minutes, or if they may take longer, we can schedule a meeting to cover it.

      1. A Manager for Now*

        Probably not – It’s in ours because it’s almost always something that affects others in the group in some way. So like, “I will be working on X this week” means “I won’t be able to work on Y for you” or “You’ll be seeing some meetings pop up on this topic”

  37. Space Needlepoint*

    Re embarrassing photos: I don’t think it’s appropriate to have those on the wall. I’ve been in teams that were pretty close and we’ve been asked to submit pictures of ourselves based on a theme (a pic of yourself at a beach, or eating a favorite meal) and these would be shown as part of a presentation. Childhood pictures might be a “guess who this is from the picture).

    Those I consider all in good fun. They were also voluntary. What the LW describes is not that. I find it a bit odd, really.

    1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

      Voluntary is key. I’m surprised reading on here how many companies are asking for personal photos from employees! Also super relieved and happy that none of my employers have ever done it.

  38. Sick of Workplace Bullshit (she/her)*

    OP #1: If the photo wall is all in good fun, find some of this clown and hang them up. He should find that hilarious, right?

  39. Pizza Rat*

    LW3: I agree with Allison. Find something to share. When I do this, I make an effort to find something especially relevant to what your department is doing.

    “I obtained executive approval for Juanita’s new design.” (Juanita might know this already, but the rest of your team will see that you’re working to help them succeed)

    “My reports show that projects are all under budget.) (addressing a collective goal).

    I manage a few people and helping them see their role as something bigger can help with morale and team cohesion.

  40. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

    Situations like OP2 are a great way to distinguish a well-run company from a not-well-run-company.

    There are 2080 hours in a normal work year (give or take leap days). Subtract paid holidays, vacation, and personal leave days from that. For argument’s sake, let’s say it’s 35 days, which equals 280 hours. So 2080-280 = 1800. That’s how many labor hours a manager like Dan has to work with from each employee.

    If he insists on planning for 1900, then it’s not going to work. Maybe he can plan for 1850, hope that not everybody maxes out their days off and a few people work some overtime, and it’ll all work out. If he doesn’t even bother looking at average PTO usage over the last couple of years before before drawing up his plans, then that’s one more sign that he’s a bad manager. If the company doesn’t have that as SOP when planning projects, then the company overall isn’t well run.

    OP, do you have access to project plans at that level of detail? Is Dan just doing this off-the-cuff, or did he plan poorly and now he’s scapegoating the rank and file?

    1. Ellis Bell*

      I think your last paragraph is really key, and if I had to guess, I would say Dan didn’t do any planning regarding staffing at all. He just sees himself as a sort of PTO shame overlord because he doesn’t know what else to do.

  41. MassMatt*

    I think the answer to #2 and many of the comments (I.e.: PTO is part of your benefits/compensation—use it!) are conflating the PTO bank given here for sick days and PTO for vacation.

    Yes, vacation PTO is part of compensation, you should use it, and not have to explain it, and shame on any boss that gives a side-eye to employees doing so.

    Sick days are intended for people being sick. Yes, if you’re sick, use a sick day, and it’s unreasonable to expect illness to be planned in advance.

    But I think this is the drawback to giving a “bank” of PTO for sick days; some employees regard them as no different from vacation days, and you’re foolish if you don’t use them every year. Long ago my former employer switched from having separate “banks” of PTO and everyone was given a certain amount of PTO that was all-purpose, it was used for sick days and vacations and anything else.

    We did get a bit more PTO a than the industry average, but not when you consider the average person was going to need to take some of those days for illness. People in poor health might get very little actual vacation time, which stinks.

    But the advantage here was your PTO was your PTO, you plan vacations and you call in sick when you need to. This letter is not about that kind of policy. I do think Dan seems to be a jerk (what are people supposed to do about other employees taking sick time? Interrogate them about how ill they “really” are? How are they even supposed to know how many days anyone has taken?) but this separate bank of PTO for sick days could bear some scrutiny; it’s inevitable when the leave is given this way and some employees are just going to regard this bank as just “extra” PTO.

  42. toolegittoresign*

    RE: Vaccine — please include a reminder of how long it takes for the vaccine to become effective. I’d hate for the notice to go out when it’s too close to the conference for a booster to be fully effective.
    This happens to be all the time with the flu where I get my flu shot and then manage to catch the flu from someone the very next week before the vaccine is in full effect.

  43. el l*

    OP2:
    Dan’s making a big deal about attendance because he’s got no solutions, either to the Big Issue or the other of the 10 causes.

    He’s picking attendance, perhaps due to his own headspace but at least as likely because it’s an easy way to curry favor with the owner. There’s a common type of big boss who loves this sort of performative old-school butts-in-seats management. It’s very much come back into fashion lately. Capital can’t solve the big problems with their business models, so they pick the low-hanging fruit of wringing the max ROI from employees by doing public WFH rollbacks.

    You’re right, but you’re not going to win.

  44. AAMLurker*

    Re LW2 and absences, if the sick leave is based on state law (which a lot of sick leave is), then an employer cannot discipline an employee for taking the sick leave. All state sick leave statutes have anti-retaliation clauses. Also, aside from the anti-retaliation clauses in the statutes, disciplining employees for absences could lead to a discrimination claim by a disabled employee. Source: I’m an employment attorney licensed in two states in the U.S.

  45. Reality.Bites*

    My office around 2000 was a huge cube farm. People had Velcro’d on nameplates on their cube or office door. And there was a lot of turnover – rarely voluntary. And they never collected the nameplates.

    So after one near me had been up for a good month, I took it down. I amassed quite a collection before it was my turn. My proudest achievement was getting my grandboss’s (on the c-suite level) when it was his turn. I followed him to his new company when it was mine. All told, we worked together in three different companies from 1989 to 2013

  46. The Gollux, Not a Mere Device*

    If you were vaccinated for measles in 1968 or earlier, you may have gotten a less-effective vaccine. Those of us in that group should either get our titers checked, or just get a dose of the MMR vaccine; getting re-vaccinated is likely to be simpler and less expensive.

    Also, anyone regardless of age who isn’t sure of their immune status should either get the MMR or have their titers checked before trying to conceive, and then wait a bit, because the measles vaccine is a live-virus vaccine.

  47. FunkyMunky*

    #1 – I’m surprised noone ripped those all down already. What a dumb thing to have

  48. Just wondering*

    The situation in letter one seems similar to another letter where a rather nasty co-worker made a show of collecting and displaying the door/desk nameplate of employees who had left as “trophys” of the people he had successfully run off from the company, like souvenirs of his most effective bullying campaigns. Not just strange, very unpleasant, and indicative of a bigger issue! HR is right to call a halt to this, and the other people who support this kind of very mean-spirited “fun” bear watching, as well as the perpetrator.

  49. Cookingcutir*

    I have nothing to add, but as I was reading letter three, I was thinking to myself “why on earth would you suddenly introduce these weekly meetings?“ I love that Alison asked that! As someone who formerly had to sit through weekly meetings at my past jobs, I feel like 75% of it was Nonsense and 25% of it maybe, actually accomplished something? but was just more of an excuse for management to feel employees were engaged or for their own socializing.

  50. COHikerGirl*

    For LW 3, I worked at a company that used the Traction method for our meetings, departmental up to company level. So we had weekly team meetings with things we’d put on as to dos and we’d go over what we did. I found them insanely helpful. For our quarterly and yearly goals, they were kind of project management check-ins.

    At another company, we had weekly meetings that were…unorganized. People would frequently be absent and for most of the time they had nothing really to follow. Complete waste of time, even though they definitely would have been helpful if ran well.

  51. Doc in a Box*

    Re #5: I recently used Alison’s advice on this! I had a long-planned family trip, but my new job wanted me to start just before then. They initially suggested I borrow against my vacation bank, but I countered with “can I work part-time as a 1099 consultant for that one week to start getting up to speed, and then start officially when I’m back from vaca?” And they were fine with it! It allows me to wind down/hand over projects at my current job, take a nice long break, and return fresh.

Comments are closed.