I’m inheriting an employee who causes chaos wherever they go

by Alison Green on March 11, 2025

A reader writes:

What do I do about a staffer who has a history of personal drama and blurring professional boundaries who’s about to be added to the department I manage? According to a number of people I know who have worked with “Lee” over the past couple of years, while Lee is okay at their basic day-to-day job responsibilities, they are a bringer of discord on a personal level wherever they go.

A year and a half ago, they were let go from a supervisory position within another organization for sexual harassment. Lee is late 30s and their former workplace had a lot of young 20-somethings just learning professional norms. Apparently, Lee often invited these coworkers out to pub trivia and other social gatherings outside of work. As their supervisor, Lee gave many of these staffers weekends off (not the norm for these positions in our industry), made some positions full-time that were traditionally part-time, and ignored or even encouraged some general bratty behavior among their workers. According to multiple colleagues I know from this organization, Lee truly mismanaged their staffers, creating long-lasting institutional problems. Eventually one of the young employees met with management, said that Lee had made some comments that made them uncomfortable, which led to realizations that the problems extended well beyond one or two ill-chosen remarks. Before Lee could be formally fired for sexual harassment (it was going to happen), they landed themselves a position within my organization, which didn’t bother to call references or check in with their former employer.

I have now been informed that Lee is being moved to my department. Apparently there have been “issues” within their current one. It seems Lee invited coworkers out to socialize after hours and one of their partners (they’re in a polyamorous relationship) ended up hooking up with the partner of a coworker. The coworker and their partner initially broke up, then got back together. That staffer is understandably less than comfortable around Lee, but apparently most of the other people in that department have thrown their hands up about having Lee and their personal drama in the building. It seems Lee just keeps blurring those boundaries between work and personal life wherever they go and has a knack for stirring up drama. Rather than deal with any of these issues head-on, upper admin has decided it’s best for everyone if they simply move Lee.

My department has a really good group of staffers, we work well together, and I don’t want to see things thrown into dysfunction. What should I do? Speak to upper admin and tell them Lee is chaos we don’t want? Pretty sure they don’t care and will park Lee here no matter what. Warn all my staff ahead of time, saying, “I can’t tell you what to do with your free time, but if you socialize with Lee and their friends after hours, you’ll be sorry”? Lee technically wouldn’t be supervising anyone in my department, but they would be mid-level rather than entry-level, which means that they would be senior to our younger workers. How do I handle this situation?

Well, you can try pushing back on the placement of Lee in your department. Who knows, if you lay out your concerns (Lee created long-lasting institutional problems at another organization, was on the verge of being fired for harassment when they quit, and apparently caused problems in your organization as well), it’s possible that you’ll get some traction.

But if that doesn’t work … then congratulations, you get to be the one who manages Lee! For now, at least. And I think it can be done if you keep an eye out for problems and are assertive about addressing them quickly and directly. If anything, you’re ahead of the game compared to their last manager, because you already know the history and you know what to watch for, and so you’re likely to spot problems faster and be able to act more swiftly. That’s a big advantage. (Speaking of which, talk to the person who’s been managing Lee and find out if there were problems beyond the dating drama so that you know exactly what you need to be watching out for.)

As for the risk of your team being thrown into dysfunction, it sounds like there were two big problems with Lee at their last organization: they were a terrible and unfair manager, and they were harassing people. They’re not going to be managing people on your team, so that cuts out a huge chunk of what went wrong previously. On their history of harassment, this is a good time to review with your team what harassment is and how to report it, to make sure people feel safe doing that, and to make a point of watching things closely and checking in with people about how everything is going.

I would stay away from warning your current staff not to socialize with Lee after-hours. It’s undoubtedly good advice, but it’s overstepping for a manager to do that, and it’s also not fair to Lee to come onto a new team where their manager has already warned people to avoid them.

But what you can and should do is to talk to Lee when they first arrive about the culture on your team and your expectations for how everyone will conduct themselves. And then you should keep a very close eye on how they operate. If you see anything that seems off to you, address it immediately — naming what you saw, why it’s a problem, and what Lee needs to do instead.

Again, you have an advantage because you know the history; with a new employee who was an unknown quantity, you’d be more likely to extend more grace over seemingly small things and potentially second-guess yourself about whether something was truly a problem or not. With Lee, you already know what you’re watching for, and you’ll know to address it right away rather than waiting and observing the way you might do otherwise. You can keep them on a short leash from the beginning, which might short-circuit problems before they grow — and will let you act decisively if it turns out you need to.

Basically, embrace and use your authority to say, “Not on my watch.”

You may also like:
{ 240 comments }

{ 240 comments… read them below or add one }

  1. Sloanicota*

    I’d also say (after being clear with your expectations AND while actively managing anything that comes up) start documenting anything that seems of *immediately* – I think it’s fair to say that Lee has already reached Two Strikes at this point, and you don’t have to automatically let them reset to zero just because of a transfer you didn’t even agree to. Lee has lost the benefit of the doubt; the first thing you hear, you need to take seriously, write down and escalate. Most of the time the documentation doesn’t start until there’s already been 2-3 complaints that were written off – don’t let that happen now. I would also request the previous manager to document anything they can now so you have that in hand if you need to escalate. What is the firing process at your company? Onerous is not impossible.

    Reply ↓
    1. Peanut Hamper*

      That was my first thought, as well: document, document, document! Right from day one!

      Lee has lost the benefit of the doubt

      +1000%

      Reply ↓
      1. Pooky Snackenberger*

        Except that many of Lee’s transgressions happened after hours, which you might not hear about. I would make your team know exactly what is not acceptable after hours behavior, what is considered harassment even after hours, and how receptive you would be to hearing anything disturbing that happened.

        You might not be coming right out to say Don’t associate with Lee after hours, but the team will know any concerns wisll be well received by you.

        Reply ↓
        1. Peanut Hamper*

          Well….you can’t really tell your team what they can do with their personal lives though. But I get what you’re saying. If after hours behaviors affect working hours relationships, then that’s something you can address as a manager.

          Reply ↓
          1. StephChi*

            In general, in the US at least, sexual harassment of one employee by another even outside of work is bounds for firing. Therefore, while the LW can’t tell their staff how to spend their free time, they can remind staff about that, to protect the staff and to let Lee know that SH is a firing offense. Obviously calling Lee out in front of everyone isn’t the way to do it, because that would be humiliating for Lee, but there’s probably a way to do it which ensures that Lee understands the consequences. I have to take a training course every year about it, for example.

            Reply ↓
    2. Antilles*

      I agree. Documentation can also often give you more options even as the onerous firing process goes along – e.g., keeping him off of critical tasks, possibly demoting/changing his title so it’s clear he’s not more senior, etc. Not as great as just letting him go of course, but to help minimize the damage while you’re going through the process.

      Reply ↓
      1. CanadaGoose*

        Antilles, I can’t fiend the commenting rules just now, so I may be breaking them by nitpicking, but: Please note that the pronouns used for Lee throughout the letter were they/them.

        Reply ↓
        1. Hlao-roo*

          (Just for reference, the link to the commenting rules is always above the commenting box. If you’re typing a comment, look above the box you’re typing in and you’ll see the link.)

          Reply ↓
        2. Parakeet*

          Not nitpicking IMO (thank you for saying it). Presumably the LW used those pronouns (and picked a very gender-neutral name to use for this person) for a reason, and respecting pronouns and avoiding gender essentialism aren’t just for people that one likes.

          Reply ↓
      2. linger*

        Lee = they/them.
        We have to assume OP’s use of a gender-neutral pseudonym and pronoun are a deliberate choice (and maybe not just about maintaining anonymity). So we need to keep those pronouns, despite the (statistically warranted) stereotype of “sexual harrasser = male” which presumably lies behind the many commenters defaulting to male pronouns.
        I’m going to assume “sexual harassment” here probably *isn’t* merely code for “visibly being nonbinary/ polyamorous”. At minimum, we do have multiple instances of Lee mixing their work & personal life inappropriately. But avoiding any appearance of discrimination is probably going to be an extra layer for OP to negotiate when documenting workplace issues for HR (and this may account for some part of why management has been so reluctant to engage so far).

        Reply ↓
    5. Observer*

      start documenting anything that seems of *immediately* – I think it’s fair to say that Lee has already reached Two Strikes at this point, and you don’t have to automatically let them reset to zero just because of a transfer you didn’t even agree to

      I totally agree with this.

      You know enough that it simply makes no sense to give him the benefit of the doubt. Which means that you owe it to your team to not give him the benefit of the doubt, as well.

      Reply ↓
    6. Ugh*

      Yep, document it all. I suggest showing an HR approved workplace sexual harassment video to all employees after Lee arrives, so Lee is in on it, too.

      Reply ↓
    7. Skippy.*

      Such a good point about documentation. And there can be different formats depending on your company:
      After you have a conversation with Lee, send an email to reiterate what you talked about.
      Keep notes of any 1:1’s you have.
      If someone approaches you with a concern, email them to confirm the details.
      If you have someone in HR who’s aware, cc them on all these things.

      It also forces you to be clear and explicit–you might be tempted to soften it in person, but if you know that this may wind up in HR, that’s a motivation to make sure you say what you mean.

      (This is a memo to my past self.)

      Reply ↓
  3. Amber Rose*

    You can’t tell people not to socialize with Lee after hours, but you can maybe reinforce with them that Lee does not have any authority over their work, their positions, or their hours. He can’t make any promises to them beyond meeting deadlines/doing work.

    There’s a pretty decent chance in my opinion that he’s going to try and exert authority he doesn’t have anymore.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sloanicota*

      I’m trying to figure out how OP can set expectations with their team without immediately seeming to single out Lee in a way that will definitely set them up to fail on OP’s team. I’d love to start Lee’s tenure with an all-staff discussion of sexual harassment and healthy work boundaries, but if that’s never been discussed before it’s going to be pretty pointed now.

      Reply ↓
      1. Southern Violet*

        Lee set themselves up to fail. A good manager would tell the truth about him to his colleagues. If that makes Lee’s work harder on him, that’s his doing. He gets no benefit of the doubt or second chances. I agree with the advice to document. Hard to fire generally just means you need evidence to fire. So, collect that evidence. Other managers were remiss in not doing so. Maybe even culpable in Lee’s behavior continuing, depending on what they knew and what they could have done.

        Reply ↓
      2. Required*

        I’m thinking they could send out an email “welcoming” Lee to the team and very clearly lay out what kind of role Lee will have. That way, everyone should at least know that he’s only a “peer” and does not have any authority over others. It’s not perfect, but it’s still a decent start (in my opinion).

        Reply ↓
        2. learnedthehardway*

          That’s a very good idea, and will make it clear to everyone what the lines of accountability are within the team. Lee will have a much more difficult time of trying to impose unauthorized authority when the team explicitly knows he doesn’t have any.

          Reply ↓
      3. anonymous anteater*

        I wonder about how to communicate this too. But strongly agree with Amber Rose that at least the work part should be addressed.
        “I really value the collaborative spirit of the department, and I hope that Lee can integrate well into this group. Although he has been with the company for some time and is a [mid-level title], if you need clarification on assignments or other expectations, please come directly to me.”

        Reply ↓
    2. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      And they don’t have to socialize after hours; they don’t have to meet up on the weekends, they don’t have to have lunch with coworkers if they don’t want to.
      Lee sounds like a cult leader looking for a cult. You don’t have to spell it out so bluntly, but you can reinforce with your staff about work/life balance and your off time being more about YOUR than off.

      Reply ↓
      1. Sloanicota*

        Ugh, I’m trying to picture what this conversation both with Lee upon their transfer, and with the staff, might actually sound like, and nothing that’s coming to me sounds like anything I’d want to say in a work capacity. I wonder what this script looks like.

        Reply ↓
        1. Amber Rose*

          I mean, Lee is coming in as a new mid-level. So I think it’s not unreasonable to go to at least the junior employees and be like, “Lee will have some seniority but your reporting and work assignments still goes through me” or something like that.

          Reply ↓
          1. A Simple Narwhal*

            That’s a good idea, even if the team was inheriting a non-problematic employee it’s always good to clarify where a new person will fall in the hierarchy and how reporting structures may or may not change.

            Reply ↓
          2. SprawledOut*

            That seems like a safe approach. LW could even approach it as “it’s been a while since we had a new team member, so let’s go over reporting expectations” plus whatever else might be relevant.

            Reply ↓
          3. M*

            Yeah, it’s all about how you frame it. “I know there can be some confusion about reporting lines when someone joins a team in a mid-level role. Lee will be taking on [list of projects], but I do want to make sure it’s clear to everyone that they’ll be an individual contributor, and you’ll all still be reporting to me.”

            And then the same to Lee.

            And then back it up in 1-1s, if/whenever you catch someone relying on Lee for direction.

            And possibly also schedule in some workplace training around harassment and a healthy workplace – after all, a new team member joining is a great reminder that it’s been [however long] since you last did that!

            Keep in mind, the most recent incident sounds explosively messy and was in OP’s company. There’s a decent chance her team hears about that through the rumour mill – OP signalling clearly and calmly that it won’t be tolerated, even without particularly singling Lee out, is going to be very reassuring to anyone who hears about what happened.

            Reply ↓
          4. AngryOctopus*

            That can even be in the welcoming email: “Lee is joining us from X department. Although they are a Y, I will continue to handle everybody’s assignments and the reporting structure remains the same”. That way they can’t claim “Oh, well, since I’m a Y I’m handling your work assignments now”.

            Reply ↓
        2. londonedit*

          I agree; very difficult. You don’t want to put the rest of the staff on the defensive, thinking there’s some kind of awful monster coming to work with them, and you could say it isn’t fair on Lee to have their reputation precede them (though, of course, they could have avoided that by not sexually harassing people in their previous roles). Everyone deserves to start with a clean slate (who knows, Lee could be amazing in this new role) but at the same time, the OP definitely needs to keep a very close eye out for any signs of trouble from Lee, and at that point it needs to be a) shut down from Lee’s point of view and b) made clear to staff that Lee’s behaviour shouldn’t be tolerated. But I’m not sure you can do that before Lee’s even started their new job.

          Reply ↓
          1. MigraineMonth*

            …*does* everyone deserve to start with a clean slate? I feel like there’s a difference between performance-related issues and harassment-related issues in terms of how much of a reset you get.

            Reply ↓
            2. Phoenix Wright*

              Yep, I totally agree. Lee is not an innocent victim of circumstance and misunderstandings, he’s deliberately choosing to act this way. It would be a disservice to LW’s team to pretend otherwise. Heck, he’s already shown himself as a creep at his current company. The benefit of the doubt is long gone at this point.

              Reply ↓
            3. Hello, it's me*

              Agreed! If Lee had “only”
              been making inappropriate remarks/jokes like a silly teenager, you could hope having to leave their previous job would have taught them something. But their behavior and supposed stage of maturation mean they don’t get cut much slack. If any.

              Reply ↓
        3. HonorBox*

          I think OP needs to get clarity on what their management sees for any type of reporting structure. And I hope it is that Lee is there, but doesn’t have specific authority over the staff that is more junior to set rules, provide guidance, control workflow.

          From there, I think a conversation with the team about what that structure looks like, how Lee fits into the team, and what the expectations are for Lee’s role/addition to the team. OP doesn’t need to say anything pointed about anyone not going out to lunch or drinks with Lee or that Lee has no authority over anyone’s jobs. Just something like, “Lee is coming in, and while they have some previous management experiences, the reporting structure is the same as it was. Everyone should still go through me for approvals and decisions. Lee will be working on x, y, z, and they have been briefed on how those projects interact with everyone else on the team.”

          Reply ↓
        4. Not Tom, Just Petty*

          I was leaning toward what the commenters below are saying. Setting expectations with current junior staff about Lee. I like how they fleshed out, expectations about Lee’s position. Requests are just requests. The same as any peer. I’m your manager. And stress that you can come to me…without sounding alarmist that you expect problems.
          So, typical (Ask A) manager stuff!

          Reply ↓
        5. EarlGrey*

          I’d also suggest in a month or two, have a one on one (or use an already scheduled check in, or just a casual chat when you get someone alone, whatever fits the office culture) with your direct reports and ask “and how are things going with Lee?” as part of that conversation. With an acknowledgement that there were issues on their previous team, or just an open ended question to see where it goes. This wouldn’t be a warning ahead of time, but a way to signal that Lee is on your radar and your staff can come to you with any concerns. If they’re feeling hesitant to report something that feels off because it’s not enough to go on or they think it’s just them, sometimes that acknowledgement / validation that someone else is aware of the problem person is enough to open the floodgates.

          Reply ↓
          1. Sloanicota*

            I’ve been thinking about this, and I also wonder if OP needs to resign themselves to *joining any happy hour type events* that go on outside of work, as much as possible, at least in the beginning. OP can be a moderating influence and make it clear that these events are still under work’s purview since Lee presumably enjoys blurring the lines. Ideally Lee will stop proposing them once they see that OP tends to come also, but if not at least you can reference them directly in conversations about professional behavior (both with Lee and your other staff).

            Reply ↓
  4. KB*

    Does this workplace have a probationary period? Does it restart when an employee changes positions? Inform Lee if there is one that you will be watching closely. Make scrupulous professionalism, courtesy, and teamwork part of Lee’s goals.

    Reply ↓
    1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      See pally’s comment below about how the company is moving the broken stair to different floors. Even if they have a step by step process for removing employees who harass coworkers, create toxic environments and do middling work, they are not willing to act on them.

      Reply ↓
      1. sometimeswhy*

        Probation + broken stair might be a helpful lever in pushing back against taking Lee into their team if they are on probation. Something like, “Since Lee is still on probation, I think it makes more sense for the organization to go on ahead and cut ties instead of shifting them around and working around them since this is a continuation of previous disruptive and unethical behavior.”

        Reply ↓
      2. Festively Dressed Earl*

        Agreed. LW needs to couch everything they do regarding Lee in terms of minimizing the company’s exposure to lawsuits; maybe that will get upper management to rethink taking the ‘easy’ route.

        Reply ↓
      3. Ellie*

        Is OP 100% sure though that the company knows the full extent of Lee’s history though? From the above, Lee’s partner had an affair with someone else’s partner in the office. That’s not necessarily Lee’s fault. It’s the added context of the harassment at the other company that demonstrates what a train wreck this is.

        If there’s any doubt about what they know, then now’s the time to tell them.

        Reply ↓
    2. Heffalump*

      Lee may keep their nose clean during the probationary period and then revert to Mr. Hyde once the probationary period is up.

      Reply ↓
      1. Mari*

        Lee got out just ahead of a sexual harassment dismissal, and then promptly reverted to social type in the new job.

        There is zero chance Lee can keep their nose clean in this new slot… it’s just a matter of how fast OP gets it reported to them.

        Reply ↓
        2. Laser99*

          I will never understand how the Lees of this world stay employed. My boss once got angry at me for asking to leave early during a flood. I was doing the work of three people at the time.

          Reply ↓
  5. Berkeleyfarm*

    The missing-stair Lees of this world keep going because of “I don’t wanna” upper management. Thoroughly agree with Alison’s steps – push back up the chain, have everyone in the group do a good refresher about harassment, and actually manage including documenting everything.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sloanicota*

      What stinks is this framing of “causing chaos” in undercutting what sounds like pretty severe sexual harassment in Lee’s previous workplace. And if OP digs a little more, I’m wondering if they’d find more activity like that in the last position at OP’s company. Can OP get to know some of the junior people on the prior team and do a little investigating, or is that really beyond the pale … did HR at least interview the Cute Intern or someone else Lee would have maximum sway over at all?

      Reply ↓
    2. Miette*

      I would also add, that if this were me, I’d be sure my own manager and HR were read in on my plans here, because I wouldn’t want to be caught out if Lee started to feel like they were being singled out and complained to HR. Cover your own butt in addition to protecting your team, OP.

      Reply ↓
  6. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

    Lee enjoys doing this stuff. It isn’t carelessness or high spirits or an incidental personality aspect – it’s a deliberate thing they do because it’s fun for them.

    So OP needs to know that if their plan works, Lee isn’t going to have as much fun as they are used to, and will probably blame OP for it. Which may manifest as other forms of misbehavior at work.

    Reply ↓
    1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

      Or Lee moving on to some place where they can have the kind of fun they want.

      You are correct, Lee is well aware of their actions How convenient they just happen to have a new job lined up just as the old one blew up. Also OP your company sucks for not checking references.

      In addition to carefully watching and documenting, find out what your authority is with regards to firing Lee. If you can have that talk that this is their last chance, it might make more of an impression. If Lee believes they are resetting to zero they will behave one way, if they know it is strike 3, they will behave another. And again, hopefully just go somewhere its easier to behave how they want.

      Reply ↓
      1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

        Came here to say this. I totally agree with Alison’s advice to supervise Lee closely and take action to manage anything that comes up right away and document things as much as is necessary. If you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile. So be prepared to have difficult conversations with Lee, and keep your own manager in the loop about what’s going on. It’s probably going to suck and take up a lot of time.

        The complicating factor is the extent / limits of the LW’s authority. For this to work well, the LW needs to have the authority to impose consequences and go through the disciplinary process. And the LW’s own management will need to back her up. The letter doesn’t say anything about not having the necessary authority, so I’m not assuming this will be an issue. But if it is, I think the best play is to find ways to make Lee (and any fallout from Lee’s behaviour) your manager’s problem.

        Reply ↓
      2. learnedthehardway*

        Yeah – I was thinking that a conversation along the lines of “I am well aware of your past history and the reasons why you are being moved onto my team. Mind yourself!” might be warranted.

        Of course, it would really help if the OP has the authority to get Lee terminated, should Lee stray from the straight and narrow.

        It might also be a good idea to speak with HR about the situation – HR probably already knows, but they may have some good ideas on how to document, when to call for backup, etc. etc.

        Reply ↓
      1. higheredadmin*

        Agree that Lee is intentional drama. I think the nuance with management/HR is that they see all of the “drama” issues as personal, and their system is set up only to terminate someone when it is a work performance issue. So Lee does their job just well enough and then stirs the pot all day with the knowledge that creating mental anguish is consider an individual and not a work problem. (This is from bitter experience.)

        Reply ↓
      2. Gumby*

        Which is mindblowing to me. I get that firing someone may be unpleasant or require lots of paperwork or seven levels of sign off or whatever. But you know what will be even more expensive and labor intensive? Defending the company against a lawsuit! Especially because given what has been described here the company is firmly in “knew or should have known” territory.

        OP, as a manager, can be held personally liable for harassment that occurs on their watch (at least in CA) if they do not handle it appropriately. IANAL but I’d assume being extremely proactive about watching out for problems and reporting them up the chain of command would protect the OP legally speaking.

        Reply ↓
    3. Elbe*

      I worked with a Lee. He was friendly and personable and could be a decent manager, but he was incredibly inappropriate. The social circles that he ran around in had pretty different boundaries than most people do, and he did what felt natural and right to him with complete disregard to how everyone else operates. He never stopped to think that just because his friends may be comfortable with him commenting on their bodies and hitting on their partners, that doesn’t mean he can act that way to everyone. It was deeply, deeply problematic – especially with younger employees that didn’t feel like they had the standing to push back when he was their manager.

      At first I assumed that it was a massive blind spot, coupled with some self-absorption. But as the sexual harassment complaints piled up, I think the truth was that adjusting his behavior was just too much of a cramp on his style. He wanted to do what he wanted, regardless of how it affected other people.

      I hope the LW is successful in being firm about expectations. But – if their Lee is anything like my Lee – I don’t think that this is something that will change. They need to prepare to advocate letting Lee go in order to protect other employees.

      Reply ↓
        1. Elbe*

          Eventually, but not due to his behavior. Unfortunately, he was just the tip of the problematic iceberg and not the only person with multiple harassment complaints.

          Reply ↓
  7. Apex Mountain*

    Lee sounds like a challenge to say the least, but I don’t think you can blame him because someone he knows hooked up with someone else

    Reply ↓
    1. Sloanicota*

      Since OP was careful to be gender neutral describing Lee I think we should try to stick to that in the comments, not that it would change most people’s advice in this case.

      Reply ↓
    2. fancy pants math girl*

      That was one example of drama, OPs are not going to list the whole 243 pages of misbehavior. Please trust the OP.

      Reply ↓
      1. Apex Mountain*

        Trust them about what? The point is there’s enough going on w/Lee that they don’t need to invent crimes to add to the list

        Reply ↓
      2. JSPA*

        Lee isn’t specified as male / isn’t referred to as “he.” All the genders are left ambiguous. But yes, that’s probably why management is treating this as an unfortunate crossing of the streams, rather than Lee using their job to scout out potential new F—-buddies / converts to their (so- enlightened) world of sexual freedom.

        Not dumping on consensual & ethical polyamory (or for that matter F
        — buddies)! But this isn’t that.

        Apparently consistently recruiting in the workplace? And especially among your reports and the youngest and lowest- ranking of your peers? That’s not an “oops.” Especially if you’re encouraging them to get liquored-up, first.

        “Semi-consensual, power-inflected, booze-enhanced recruitment of monogamously-partnered junior coworkers for someone who shares their sexual experiences with you” is more complex than “slapped her on the ass,” but they’re both problematic, and they both involve misuse of workplace status and power for sexual purposes.

        Reply ↓
        1. Apex Mountain*

          I don’t know what you mean by “recruiting” in this case but that sounds what some bigots say gay people do to straight folks/kids. It sounds like a friend of Lee’s hooked up with a friend/partner of OP’s colleague. Sounds messy but not really Lee’s fault

          Either way though it doesn’t matter – Lee has enough real issues!

          Reply ↓
          1. JSPA*

            That’s a pretty odious comparison.

            Lee has a history of encouraging subordinates to drink. Lee scampered before being fired for sexual misconduct or sexualization of the workplace [details unknown]. Lee brought coworker and partner into the same booze-affected (booze soaked or tinged, not specified) with specifics that led coworker not only to deep regret afterwards, but to feelings of enmity severe enough that they can’t work with Lee, and details (unknown to us) severe enough that they’re moving Lee, not the coworker, and also not telling both of them to suck it up. At minimum, coworker feels misused and/or played and/or misled. And even the very half- assed management (who don’t do background checks) is backing them up.

            So, yeah, I think we can lean towards the reading that Lee is using work as a fair place to hunt for fresh thrills; the thrills coming via another partner doesn’t make it unsexual for Lee.

            I’ve been wingpersoned by “connections” of someone with seniority, and I’ve even found myself in an (unwitting) wingperson role. It is a bad dynamic. In fact, it’s a bad dynamic regardless of whether Lee is predatory or merely clueless.

            Reply ↓
            1. Apex Mountain*

              My initial point was that this one incident isnt’ as damaging to Lee as the others b/c it didn’t involve Lee directly. But it really doesn’t matter whether I’m right or wrong about that – there is plenty against Lee already

              Reply ↓
            2. New Jack Karyn*

              Okay. Inviting people to after-hours social events is not ‘encouraging subordinates to drink’. No one said that Lee was pushing shots on their direct reports. The coworker’s partner is an adult, and made their own choices in regards to Lee’s partner.

              You claimed that you’re not bagging on polyamory, but the terms you’re using to describe it are very telling.

              Reply ↓
          2. LaurCha*

            A *partner* of Lee’s hooked up with the partner of a coworker. Any normal person would know that this is a bad look. It’s not just ‘friends of friends hooked up.”

            Reply ↓
          3. Pixel*

            As someone who is polyamorous, I understand JSPA to be using “recruiting” to mean cruising / seeking sexual/romantic partners, not that Lee has some sort of “polyamorous agenda.”

            There’s also a bigoted history of calling the romantic partners of queer people “friends,” so let’s be clear: this is Lee’s *romantic partner*, not Lee’s “friend.”

            It’s possible Lee’s partner made sexual advances completely independently of Lee. But given Lee’s history it seems much more likely Lee is deliberately actively using their workplace as their dating pool and to seek sexual partners – which is inappropriate and unethical, whether polyamorous or monogamous.

            Reply ↓
        2. Festively Dressed Earl*

          100% this. When you’re socializing with a partner’s coworkers, you’re doing so within the power structure of their workplace and need to behave accordingly; if it wouldn’t be okay for your partner to do, it’s not okay for you. That’s not about the parameters of Lee and partners’ relationship, that’s about consideration for the juniors they’re hitting on. Then again, consideration for their coworkers is definitely Lee’s blind spot, to put it delicately.

          Reply ↓
    3. FashionablyEvil*

      No, Lee’s partner came to a work event and behaved wildly inappropriately. It’s entirely understandable that the other colleague is uncomfortable around Lee, especially if Lee had any sort of authority in that situation.

      Reply ↓
      1. ecnaseener*

        It’s entirely understandable, but Apex has a good point that it’s completely distinct from the harassment and other work issues. LW should not be focusing on “Lee’s partner likes to sleep with other people’s monogamous partners, Lee brings drama to social situations,” that’s a distraction from the work-relevant parts.

        Reply ↓
        1. CoffeeTime*

          It’s not distinct when it happens at events where primarily co-workers, especially younger/more junior coworkers are invited though.

          And Lee doesn’t just bring drama to social situations, they’re described as consistently blurring the boundaries between personal and professional life – so those personal issues are a factor here.

          Reply ↓
      2. Nomic*

        It was not a work event. It was an after-hours get-together. Not to mention the co-worker’s partner was ALSO there. Didn’t they ALSO behave wildly inappropriately? I’m not saying Lee is a problem, but this isn’t their responsibility.

        Reply ↓
        1. Pixel*

          If this were an isolated incident that would be true, but together with the rest of Lee’s behavior there seems to be a clear pattern of cruising for sexual partners in the workplace.

          Reply ↓
      3. Susannah*

        And what about the co-worker’s partner, who hooked up with one of Lee’s partners?
        Yes, we have evidence that Lee is a problem (the sexual harassment). But let’s remember that adults make their own decisions about affairs and the like – and it’s on them.

        Reply ↓
    4. bamcheeks*

      I think that’s what’s really tricky here: if Lee’s thing is a pattern of organising social activities and then influencing? normalising? promoting? crossing boundaries between co-workers and sexual partners, that’s really hard to name and deal with, because as a one-off it’s really hard to say that’s on Lee, but if it is a pattern that interpersonal drama repeatedly just happens around Lee, then Lee is disruptive even if it’s super hard to put a finger on what Lee specifically is contributing.

      If I were LW, I would be putting a lot of effort into making sure they and their other mid-level staff are modelling really strong professional boundaries. Part of that might be harassment training, but it would also be stuff like going very strong on “Look, you might not know this, but you cannot come into work and tell me that you’re still hungover from going out last night and expect me to think that’s a great lark.” Be really vigilant about calling out “haha, the japes we got up to last night”, in a kind, professional but very firm way. If Lee is pulling people in the “it’s normal to get drunk with / have sex / play favourites with your co-workers” direction, make sure you’re pulling very firmly in the “this will harm you professionally and it’s a choice you don’t have to make” direction.

      Reply ↓
      1. RagingADHD*

        I think this is well framed – the instances are certainly not identical, but also not totally unrelated in that they are happening in a context where Lee had a great deal of influence over the culture and tenor of the interactions, despite the fact that the social event was not technically work-sponsored.

        There’s also the consideration that Lee wasn’t transferred simply because their partner hooked up with a coworker’s partner. They were transferred because the coworker was uncomfortable continuing to work with them. That suggests there may well have been something about the way Lee handled the incident, or dealt with the coworker afterward, that was either unkind or unprofessional. It’s *possible* that Lee’s behavior after the cheating / hookup was beyond reproach, and the coworker was just so upset about it that they couldn’t work with Lee because of the associations.

        But given the history and the consequent transfer, probably not.

        Reply ↓
      2. Tau*

        I was also mulling this over, if the main problems Lee causes are actually outside the workplace. I like your ideas, and wonder whether a sit-down with staff before or after Lee joins might be called for to basically go “It’s not my place to police your after-hours activities, and I know some people develop friendships in the workplace, but be aware that you will never be *expected* to spend time outside work with others on the team. It’s not required to be a good teammate, and if you feel anyone is pressuring you into spending time together outside work, please let me know and I’ll take care of it.”

        Like, I’m not sure about this and don’t like the wording, but if part of the problem is that Lee pressures/manipulates coworkers into going to their harassment parties, you might be able to defuse that by making it clear that nope, you do not EVER have to attend a coworker’s weird party if you don’t want to and if the coworker is making it hard to say no that’s something to raise to your manager – especially for juniors who might not have a strong sense of work norms yet.

        Reply ↓
    5. Mary*

      Yeah, even with polyam, there are rules- that’s what makes it polyam and not sparkling cheating. Does the LW know – for sure – that what Lee’s partner was consensual? Or did Lee’s partner chest on them too, and now Lee is being blamed for their partner cheating with another coworkers partner?

      Reply ↓
    6. CommanderBanana*

      because someone he knows hooked up with someone else is…not quite the same as “Lee’s partner, who they brought to a work event, got sexually involved with Lee’s coworker, who was in a relationship with someone else.”

      This, coupled with a laundry list of inappropriate behavior, sexual harassment and other sketchy activity with subordinates across multiple employers? Absolutely not.

      Reply ↓
      1. Sashaa*

        Lee’s partner hooked up with a coworker’s partner, I read. I would say at least as much blame lies with the coworker’s partner as it does with Lee’s partner (and I honestly don’t see why Lee is being blamed for this by the coworker).

        Which isn’t to say Lee doesn’t have other faults, but being publicly cheated on in front of subordinates must have been pretty humiliating for Lee too.

        Reply ↓
        1. Pixel*

          Lee was not cheated on. Lee is polyamorous.

          Given the pattern of Lee’s behavior, it seems highly likely Lee brought their partner for the express purpose of their partner flirting with their coworkers, and encouraged them to do so.

          Reply ↓
          1. JSPA*

            Minor but substantive quibble:
            poly people can (of course) also be cheated on. There are all sorts of boundaries, and all sorts of ways to cross them.

            And maaaybe that’s confusing the company???

            However, if Lee hadn’t seemed like they were instigating (or playing matchmaker, or engaging in some sort of mind-f-ckery), the coworker’s intense negative reaction towards Lee would be pretty inexplicable.

            That’s why (like you) I’m not buying, “maybe this was a random thing Lee didn’t help plan and pull off.”

            Reply ↓
    7. MigraineMonth*

      Agreed, the real issue is the sexual harassment of people they had power over at their previous workplace. Stay laser-focused on that, not that “personal drama” happens around Lee.

      Your reports are allowed to hang out together, get drunk and sleep with each other/each others’ partners outside of work. They aren’t allowed to sexually harass each other.

      Reply ↓
  8. pally*

    Does Lee being “senior to our younger workers” mean Lee has any kind of input regarding the younger workers’ tasks?

    That might be something to get straight with everyone BEFORE Lee has opportunity to meddle with their work under the guise of being mid-level to them. Specifically: folks should have defined avenues for receiving their work instructions and not heed Lee’s direction on anything, regardless of his seniority.

    Lee is why being a manager sucks.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sloanicota*

      If I were OP I’d be SCRUPULOUS in making it clear that the mid level person has zero oversight/authority/seniority in whatever ways I can implement the rules for my team … I really hope there aren’t other midlevel people who already have some aspects of authority. I’d make it extremely clear to Lee and structure the position to ensure it sticks (Lee works alone on Lee-specific projects if at all possible, reporting directly to OP) and find a way to communicate that to my whole team both in words and deeds.

      Reply ↓
  9. T.N.H*

    It sounds like there are huge issues with Lee, but it’s not at all understandable that the Coworker is uncomfortable around Lee because their partner cheated. That’s really inappropriate and misplacing blame. Coworker should be told to cut it out if they’re making Lee’s work life difficult.

    Reply ↓
    1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

      Lee organized the outing. Lee should have made sure their partner at what was essentially a work event behaved appropriately, which includes not sleeping with coworker’s partners. I don’t blame coworker for being uncomfortable. Especially is Lee was in any kind if supervisory role at the time.

      See above about how Lee is behaving deliberately.

      Reply ↓
      1. Silver Robin*

        Agreed; if you are introducing people from two different parts of your life, it is your responsibility to ensure that both groups treat the other well. Coworker was responsible for their partner and Lee was responsible for theirs.

        I really really wonder what Lee’s response to that situation was. Because I can imagine a situation where Coworker’s Partner was misleading or unclear and both Lee and Lee’s Partner thought everything was above board; I can imagine one where neither partner asked enough questions; I can imagine one where Lee’s Partner was manipulative or coercive; I can imagine one where each partner told their respective person a completely different story of how it all went down.

        And I can imagine just as many ways for Lee to handle the news that their coworker felt that Lee’s partner overstepped, from nasty to mortified. If the entire team is uncomfortable with Lee, though, I think it is likely a situation where nobody was asking enough questions about consent/relationship status, and Lee is cavalier about other people’s feelings and boundaries.

        Reply ↓
          1. Santiago*

            You are asking us to suspend a lot of disbelief to agree that someone who has a history of sexual harassment, and inappropriate work boundaries is the real victim (and uninvolved bystander!) of their partner’s inappropriate boundaries at an event they organized with coworkers.

            Reply ↓
        1. Lenora Rose*

          They might hold an equal part of the interpersonal blame for that one incident, but I can’t see them holding MORE blame than Lee — and that excludes all the OTHER implied issues with Lee.

          Reply ↓
          1. Lenora Rose*

            Poly people can absolutely cheat on partners, and even if they aren’t cheating, the person they sleep with can absolutely be cheating on someone else. It behooves anyone with any number of partners to ensure not only that they have explicit permission, but also that the person they’re sleeping with is either unattached or attached to people willing to share, and it’s an ethical breach not to do so.

            Reply ↓
          2. CoffeeTime*

            Consent, clear and comfortable communication and respect of boundaries is tantamount in poly communities/relationships – particularly when engaging with someone who isn’t poly, and that goes double when that person is part of a longer standing social circle (ex. mutual friends, coworkers, team members etc.) where one or all of you will have a continued relationship (of any sort).

            Obviously just as with any other kind of relationship there are plenty of crappy people who practice polyamory in disrespectful ways – they’re still human.

            But the point is that being poly absolutely does not absolve them of responsibility here, just because their partner/Lee might’ve been ok with an encounter.

            Reply ↓
      3. L-squared*

        I mean, still, that is a stretch to me.

        If I invite a bunch of same level co-workers out to happy hour (or even my own birthday party on a saturday), it’s not my responsibility to police the behavior of the people I work with, and DEFINITELY not their partners.

        This sounded like a social event more than a work event.

        Reply ↓
      4. Curious*

        I’m really not sure about this. If A’s partner cheats on them, I thought we put primary blame on the partner — not the person (B) who the partner cheated with, and certainly not B’s partner (in this case, Lee). Lee seems to have enough vices of their own, but adding this to the list seems a bit too much.

        Reply ↓
    2. Sloanicota*

      Yeah, if I’m trying to be extremely generous, it sounds like in the second position (the one that is more actionable for the company) it was a messy personal life / inappropriate work boundaries around happy hours and socializing … but something just isn’t adding up there (the whole team is uncomfortable with Lee? To the extent that the manager agreed to transfer them?) and in light of the previous workplace situation it’s painting a very dark picture. It stinks if Lee has learned they can cause whatever chaos they want as long as it’s with coworkers rather than direct reports, and the activities take place outside of work …

      Reply ↓
      1. Librarian of Things*

        Yeah. I’m with TNH that Lee shouldn’t bear the guilt of colleagues’ partners hooking up (if I invite folks to pub trivia, then walk into the restroom to find Kim’s boyfriend snogging Pat’s partner, I’m closing the door and walking away; I saw nothing, I know nothing, and just because I did the inviting, it doesn’t make me culpable for their behavior). If that’s the story the office is going with for why Lee should move, it’s a bad story. But, the whole thing reads like there’s a different story no one is telling — and really probably should.

        Reply ↓
        1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

          But this was Lee’s partner snogging a coworker’s partner. So yeah, Lee is responsible for their partner’s behavior. Especially if it is part and parcel of Lee’s general boundary crossing.

          Reply ↓
            1. zinzarin*

              In private life, yes. In a workplace context, no; you *are* responsible for what your partner does at work events.

              Happy hours after work, attended primarily by coworkers and their partners, are work events.

              Reply ↓
            2. Yaele*

              If you invite a friend to a gathering with a ton of work people that has a history of doing hard drugs, and they do hard drugs and make people uncomfortable, then you share some culpability.

              If you have a history of sexual harassment and ignoring boundaries, and you bring your partner who also ignores boundaries to a social event, then you don’t get to walk away and pretend that you had no idea that your partner was inappropriate.

              Reply ↓
          2. learnedthehardway*

            Lee’s partner and the coworker / coworker’s partner (not sure which one it was doing the snogging) are soley responsible for their own actions.

            Lee is responsible for their own actions – which may include but not be limited to:
            – setting up the situation in which coworkers and personal relationships boundaries are overlapped
            – encouraging junior coworkers to become inebriated
            – whatever authority – perceived or actual – they exerted with their coworkers.
            – generally poor judgment
            – possible predatory behaviour

            Reply ↓
          3. Lisa Simpson*

            Yes. People are always responsible for their guests, whether the guest is at their school, work, group activity, home, or other communal space.

            Reply ↓
        2. Lenora Rose*

          And if you walk in and see your OWN poly partner snogging someone else, whom you have no reason to think is also poly? Still not your business?

          Reply ↓
    3. FashionablyEvil*

      Strongly disagree. It’s entirely reasonable to expect that a colleague’s partner will behave themselves at a work outing aka not make out with another colleague’s partner. Also, the broader context here makes it clear that this is not an isolated incident.

      Reply ↓
      1. T.N.H*

        Oh I agree that everything else is bad. But that particular piece of evidence says Coworker is a bigger problem.

        Reply ↓
        1. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

          Lee has antagonized the whole group with their antics. The current situation is a direct result of Lee’s lack of boundaries. And may be just the excuse the manager was looking for to unload Lee.

          Reply ↓
        2. Lenora Rose*

          I don’t see that at all. The entire summary of the coworker is about being uncomfortable around Lee, which is, I think a completely normal thing to feel. Uncomfortable can include a whole gamut of reactions from “Does work together as needed and is professional in behaviour but has expressed discomfort in private” all the way to “actively rude and avoidant, including causing work issues by requiring extra communication steps to get anything done.” And only the worst case scenarios imply the worker is a “bigger” problem.

          Reply ↓
        3. xylocopa*

          Nah, I don’t see anything there that says Coworker is a bigger problem. It’s possible, depending on what they’re actually doing (if they refuse to work with Lee, for instance, or they’re agitating other employees against Lee) but just “feeling uncomfortable” seems pretty understandable to me.

          If there’s tension between two people and the department decides to move one or the other along, I’m not surprised it’s Lee that they want to kick out. Or maybe that it’s their best excuse to kick Lee out and they’ve been wanting to for a long time.

          Reply ↓
      2. Banana Pyjamas*

        Those are reasonable expectations, but the colleague’s partner still has self-determination, and is the only person responsible for their own actions.

        Reply ↓
    4. Myrin*

      I mean, just because you or I don’t understand something doesn’t mean that it’s unreasonable or even “wrong” (or, indeed, generally “not at all understandable”).

      There are people who are uncomfortable around completely unrelated people who look like someone they associate with bad memories.
      I knew someone who couldn’t be around another person in his friend group who always wore a certain kind of jumper because it was the same kind his abusive mother used to wear.
      Heck, I had to throw away a perfectly good pair of egg cups because I associated them so strongly with my father, who I have a strained relationship with.

      And there’s nothing about the coworker “making Lee’s work life difficult”. The only thing OP says about that person is that they are “less than comfortable” around Lee. It’s entirely possible that the coworker in question (or even just someone who knows about the situation) confided in someone higher up about this without ever behaving any differently towards Lee, so let’s not, as you say yourself, misplace blame.

      Reply ↓
  10. Jessie J*

    Definitely have the harassment meeting with your group before Lee arrives and maybe a revisit with Lee included, saying that they missed the first meeting and you want the new hire to be aware of your policies.

    Reply ↓
  11. Richard Hershberger*

    Hold a harassment training for all your reports. For extra style points, schedule it for Lee’s first day.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sara without an H*

      I was just coming here to say that.

      I’m also concerned about a company that doesn’t check references in hiring AND overrides managers about assigning problem employees within the organization. But that’s a rant for another time.

      Reply ↓
    2. Momma Bear*

      Honestly, not a bad idea. Twice I’ve had to go through training after the fact when someone was revealed to be a problem. Doing a refresher upfront might be a good way to remind everyone what is/isn’t acceptable both in their own behavior and what others can do toward them.

      Reply ↓
    3. Not that other person you didn't like*

      Yes! Not only is it a timely reminder to all your staff of what’s inappropriate and not, it also places you in a clear position to act an ally if something were to occur by letting them know they can come to you ASAP. And the timing of the training is a subtle and completely professional way of hinting that there is a potential issue here.

      I’d be curious whether anyone on your current team knows anyone on Lee’s old team. Never discount the power of the worker’s news network… your team might already have gotten a head’s up on Lee.

      Paired with a “welcome Lee to the team, I know we’ll all continue our record of excellence and collaboration… please note that assignments and tasks will still be coming from me and I’ll be following up with everyone to make sure we’re all integrating well” you’ll be setting your team up to avoid issues while you closely mange Lee.

      Finally, if I’d had an issue with a previous manager, I’d absolutely expect my new manager to bring it up with me: “So Lee, Mgr. Bob indicated that you really struggled with X and it caused an issue with Y… what was going on there? Is there anything we can do to make sure this isn’t an issue here? How can I help you succeed better in this role?” That puts Lee on alert, but also gives them an opportunity to step up and act right (which they’ll likely not take, but you can’t say you didn’t give them a chance, right?).

      Reply ↓
  12. phira*

    Best of luck to you, OP, this person sounds like an absolute nightmare. I’m glad that you’re the manager here, and not just another colleague. Please update us!

    Reply ↓
  13. HonorBox*

    LW, I agree that you’re in a much better spot because of what you know. You can plan accordingly. Part of that plan should, from the start, be to very carefully walk Lee through your expectations. Give them specifics on how you plan to evaluate their performance and what KPIs are important to you and your department. Give them a sense of how your team operates and why you’ve been a successful department.

    This is an opportunity to not only give Lee a chance to be successful, but also should give a sense that you are watching.

    You don’t want to go in assuming that there will be problems. But if there are, the fact that you’ve laid out your expectations completely will help you fend off any pushback from Lee if you need to take any sort of corrective actions. If Lee continues to be an ass outside of the office as they have elsewhere, there may be some pushback inside the office. And again, if you’ve been very specific in how you plan to evaluate work, there is less opportunity for Lee to claim that they didn’t know how they’re going to be managed.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sloanicota*

      Now I’m wondering if “demonstrates appropriate boundaries with coworkers and the team” can be a KPI for performance review … I don’t think that would fly at my org …

      Reply ↓
      1. Silver Robin*

        For the sake of the puzzle – I could see something like “nobody complains about your boundaries” or letting Lee know that there will be a thorough 360 type review of their performance at X months and asking folks about appropriate boundaries then. Not sure either would necessarily fly, but “sterling professionalism” (then defined) is absolutely an expectation that could be set.

        Reply ↓
        1. HonorBox*

          I agree with “sterling professionalism.” And might even add “treats colleagues with respect.” OP has the opportunity to gather information from colleagues about Lee’s actions.

          I was actually envisioning KPIs being very focused on work. If Lee is being less than professional and OP has to intervene, OP would want to ensure that if Lee reacts to that by not accomplishing tasks, or by sloughing off, or any other problems specific to their work, there is no chance Lee could claim that they weren’t aware or that they didn’t receive proper training and documentation. And I’m only saying that because Lee’s been allowed to walk through all of this with very few consequences, so they’re probably a person who has an excuse ready.

          Reply ↓
        2. Great Frogs of Literature*

          I don’t love “nobody complains about your boundaries,” because that’s only sort-of under Lee’s control. Yes, they should behave in a way that doesn’t cause complaints about boundaries. But if I’m Lee’s new coworker, and friends with the romantic drama coworker from the old team (and know exactly why Lee got moved), I now have a perfect opportunity to tank Lee’s next performance review and get them fired, whether they’ve shaped up or not.

          I think it’s very possible Lee *should* be fired, depending on the precise details of what happened on the old team, but I think that the plan forward needs to depend on Lee’s behavior, not on a colleague.

          Reply ↓
        1. Sloanicota*

          I don’t really want to encourage Lee to interact with the OP’s reports any more than completely necessary, TBH!!

          Reply ↓
  14. Parenthesis Guy*

    I’d ask myself how the firing process works at your org. Can you fire a satisfactory employee for interpersonal issues? If so, what’s the process? If it’s a long process or you simply don’t have that power, then your leverage is limited. Given that upper management doesn’t care that you don’t want this employee, I’m presuming your leverage is limited.

    In that case, I’d tell my team about them and try to freeze them out. If things start to go poorly and snowball, there’s not much you can do about it.

    If you do have power, then I’d more inclined to follow Alison’s advice. Because if things go off the rails, you ultimately have the power to resolve the situation.

    Reply ↓
  15. Working under my down comforter*

    Yes, maybe talk with your supervisor about setting ground rules for Lee? And being on the same united front with any issues that he may cause.

    Reply ↓
  16. Cookie Monster*

    I would also be crystal clear on exactly what authority you have to discipline Lee and what steps you have to take to fire someone. Does your org not want you to fire him even though they know he’s a problem? What would it take to convince them he should be fired? You need to know not only what steps you have to take but that the higher-ups will support your decision.

    Reply ↓
  17. Observer*

    As usual, Alison has excellent advice. I would add just one thing.

    Reframe how you think about this, and *how you talk about this*. The problem is not “personal drama”. It was poor management (which is no longer the issue). And it was, and apparently still is, harassment and deeply unprofessional behavior. And apparently *terrible* judgement.

    Reply ↓
  18. TeapotNinja*

    Think of it this way: you get to be the hero who fires him.

    Yes, it’s gonna be a lot of work, but your team members will appreciate you more when that happens.

    Reply ↓
    1. pally*

      Unless management insists upon keeping Lee around.
      Sigh.
      I worked for a company where the CEO insisted there was a place for everybody at his company. No matter how incompetent. He would not terminate anyone for any reason.

      Reply ↓
  20. HannahS*

    I’m curious, since I don’t have much management experience myself: I notice that in Alison’s advice, she suggests talking to Lee and speaking (in a general way) about cultural expectations. Is there a reason why it wouldn’t be appropriate to speak more frankly with them?

    Something like, “Different teams have different ways of relating to each other. Our expectation on this team is that personal interactions should remain professional enough that they don’t negatively impact our ability to work together as a team. My understanding is that finding that line has sometimes been a challenge for you, and I wanted to you know that our EAP offers [resource.] If you need guidance on managing that, I hope you’ll come to talk to me or someone at the [EAP resource] for advice.”

    I don’t want to be unfair to Lee, but if you’re getting someone with this kind of issue, it seems to me that it’s in both your interest and theirs to be explicit, since this is someone who probably doesn’t see themselves as the problem.

    Reply ↓
    1. HonorBox*

      The problem is that in doing what you’ve suggested, there’s plenty of opportunity for Lee to push back on the OP’s understanding. Also, that potentially puts OP and the company in legal jeopardy because Lee is walking in to a job and there’s already a strike against them. So they might make the case that there was someone who was out to get them from the start.

      Even though what you’ve written is very reasonable and not accusatory, I think there’s an opening for a not-so-great-person to interpret it as though they never had a chance to succeed.

      You could certainly describe the team’s culture and how they work together and interact. And you could say that the team gets along very well and you’d like to ensure that there’s smooth sailing for everyone any time someone joins or leaves the team. And then leave it there. Don’t point to any past behavior. Follow all of that with specific metrics you’ll be looking at how you evaluate members of your team.

      Reply ↓
      1. HannahS*

        Oh, thanks for explaining! I can see what you’re saying. If I’m understanding, the worry is that Lee could sue the company because they weren’t given a fair chance? I had thought that this would only hold water if there was evidence that Lee was discriminated against due to belonging in a protected category–but to be fair I don’t live in the US. And also I can see how that would make a big headache for the company, even if no actual discrimination was at play.

        Reply ↓
        1. Great Frogs of Literature*

          It wouldn’t even necessarily be a concern about suing — if OP tries to get permission from HR to fire Lee, and Lee goes to HR with “Manager always hated me and has wanted to get rid of me from the beginning,” and has a specific conversation to point to, that makes the whole process vastly more complicated. And this org has already shown that they would rather shuffle people around than fire someone.

          Reply ↓
        2. a trans person*

          There is a version of this story — and, to be clear, I do NOT think this is happening in this letter and I’m not judging the LW harshly — but there is a version where all of this is transphobia, queerphobia, and anti-polyam discrimination. In that version of the story, the advance “warning” would absolutely be more harassment.

          Reply ↓
  21. Workerbee*

    I guess I’m sure about this piece of the advice: “I would stay away from warning your current staff not to socialize with Lee after-hours. It’s undoubtedly good advice, but it’s overstepping for a manager to do that, and it’s also not fair to Lee to come onto a new team where their manager has already warned people to avoid them.”

    I don’t understand why “not fair” is even a consideration with someone who has been actively choosing to harass people. Or that it would be overstepping.

    Especially when it’s clear that OP is going to have to be extra vigilant about it happening again. And especially since everybody at a supposedly _not_ overstepping level has also actively decided to make Lee somebody else’s problem!

    I’d say OP wouldn’t be overstepping at all to do whatever warnings they can ahead of this waste of a paycheck.

    Reply ↓
    1. Silver Robin*

      Because we do not know what conversations management has already had with Lee. If Lee was told “we are moving you to a new team to give you a second chance, but you absolutely must knock off xyz behavior” then it would be in bad faith to then poison the well and make it harder for Lee to actually try and do better. Or even more generously, if LW is assuming that Lee realizes that the above is the subtext of the transfer, the same would apply.

      Do I, personally, think this happened? No; nor do I think Lee is going to do much better if at all in the new position considering their history. But we do not actually have confirmation either way.

      Reply ↓
      1. MassMatt*

        If upper management had this kind of conversation, the new boss (OP) should have been looped into it.

        Put it together w/ the fact that they hired Lee without the most basic due diligence, and are shuffling this person around rather than dealing with the problems they cause, this is really not a likely scenario.

        Reply ↓
    2. Persephone Mulberry*

      I paused at this advice from Alison, too, especially the “not fair” part. He jumped ship from his previous company before he could be fired for harrassment. He’s getting pushed off the other team because he’s a problem! Why shouldn’t his reputation precede him?

      Reply ↓
      1. Seeking Second Childhood*

        Unfortunately the first employment situation is unofficial knowledge.

        Acting on that would I suspect open a can of worms.

        Reply ↓
      2. All het up about it*

        I would not be surprised if his reputation DOES proceed him regardless of what the OP says. Surely someone on OP’s team knows someone on Lee’s old team. Or knows someone who knows. Office gossip is a thing at various levels, so there is a good chance that some of OP’s team will have an idea of why Lee’s being moved even without OP’s warning.

        Reply ↓
      3. Elbe*

        I tend to agree, but I think it’s a bit of an issue with the dynamic of the LW being Lee’s boss. If Lee gets a reputation through a whisper network, that is 100% on Lee. But that’s pretty different than someone with authority and influence telling their team directly.

        This is a tricky situation that, to me, would depend on the severity of the harassment and the amount of risk the employees were unknowingly taking on. For very severe cases, the LW should warn the employees – keeping people safe is just a higher priority than “fairness”. I think it also depends on how confident the LW is that their team members would report a problem with Lee should one arise. If the team is comprised of people so junior and new to working that they don’t have the confidence to report harassment, they are at a higher risk.

        Reply ↓
    3. HonorBox*

      Because you’re creating the potential for a negative outcome from the jump. And if anything happens that Lee doesn’t like, they could very easily say that the OP set that into motion even before they arrived. They created prejudice. They created a no-win situation.

      And I hate that I’m saying this, because Lee seems like a bad person, but Lee is part of the team, and while they need to be very closely monitored and managed, they shouldn’t have everyone predisposed to thinking they’re a problem.

      I WOULD suggest that if OP hears that Lee is trying to get people to go out, they should check in to see how things went.

      Reply ↓
  22. Momma Bear*

    I would address with Lee upfront what their lane is and that I would be watching that carefully. What grown adults do outside work is not something OP can control, but they can watch interactions between Lee and the rest of the team and address anything that pertains to the office. If at all possible, I would not make Lee the lead on anything until I knew what the dynamic was between them and other team members. Lee doesn’t sound like someone who can appropriately mentor or manage anybody else so siloed work, if possible, or having to report to someone who can handle it may be OP’s best bet.

    Reply ↓
    1. Sleeve McQueen*

      Yeah, depending on your relationship with Lee, I might even be inclined to call it all out as you set expectations. “You have a reputation that precedes you, but I also don’t want to make judgments based on the grapevine. I am prepared to treat this as a clean slate if I can have your assurance that you’ve learned from past missteps and they won’t be repeated here.” And yes, keep an eye on things. I’ve hired back someone who had a reputation (nothing as egregious as Lee) and I had a clear conversation about what I would put up with if I hired them. They had matured and it worked out well.

      Ye

      Reply ↓
  23. MassMatt*

    I agree with everyone saying keep a close eye, find out what autjority you have to discipline/fire Lee, and document document document everything from the start.

    Moreover, I’d be wary of thinking of this just as a “Lee” problem; this is clearly a “bad management at my company” problem. They hired a very problematic person, they didn’t do seemingly any of the bare minimum of due diligence, and now they are causing problems at your company, and they think the best solution is to shuffle this person around. To a department that doesn’t even want this person.

    It’s bad management all the way down.

    Reply ↓
    1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

      100%. The Lee issue has revealed much larger dysfunction in the organization. Especially if it means that they’re essentially forcing junior staffers to share space with a sexual harasser.

      The only way I can think of where this doesn’t reflect extremely poorly on senior management is if they’re not aware of all the issues in Lee’s last job. Do they think it’s an issue of one or two poor decisions in Lee’s current job? If so, I can see the logic of giving someone a second chance, while making it clear that kind of behaviour cannot happen again. Particularly if Lee can argue that it was their partner who behaved inappropriately, not them.

      Reply ↓
  24. YesPhoebeWould*

    Why is this hard? You know Lee is trouble, and that they have to go, and that there is no real chance of redeeming them – this is not a fixer-upper with any chance of success;the only result will be harming your high-functioning team.

    So collect evidence, set Lee up for failure, make life difficult for them wherever possible, put them on a PIP as soon as possible, and if they don’t get the message and leave on their own? Just fire them as soon as you can collect enough documentation to do so.

    Reply ↓
    1. Peanut Hamper*

      Wow, these are not the things a good manager does. Good managers don’t set up their employees for failure, they don’t make life difficult for them. Just no.

      A good manager will document everything from the get-go and put Lee on a PIP sooner rather than later if it’s warranted, but you don’t sabotage your employees. That can eventually come back on you. The result will be harming your reputation and possibly your career.

      I’m guessing from your initial question that you’ve never managed people. This is hard because it’s not a typical situation that managers get trained for, and it seems like upper management would rather just move Lee around rather than get rid of him (we don’t know why, so there’s not point in speculating).

      Reply ↓
      1. YesPhoebeWould*

        Managed people for 20 years, from 3-person teams to large multinational teams, at the levels of manager through VP, from startups through Fortune 500 companies. I care for my good people and protect them, and I get rid of trouble whenever possible, as soon as it becomes evident that they need to go. Every manager hates firing people, but what on earth would be the point of keeping somebody like Lee around for a year, when I know they are going to have to be fired anyway? Is it helping my *good* employees by letting a cancerous employee ruin the dynamics?

        If they have to go? They have to go. And the sooner the better, hence I will “help” them out the door if their behavior warrants it, as it appears to here.

        Reply ↓
        1. Lenora Rose*

          But you’re talking about intentional sabotage. That is much more likely to reflect on you as a manager than them as an employee. If you’re so sure they’re not going to make the cut, I’d suggest do them no favours, cut them no slack, but stay on the bright side of things instead of making excuses for unethical behaviour on your own part.

          Reply ↓
        2. A. Lab Rabbit*

          If I saw my boss intentionally sabotage another employee, regardless of the issues involved, I would be very worried that they would try to sabotage me the minute they decided they didn’t like me.

          This isn’t the flex you seem to think it is.

          Reply ↓
        3. MigraineMonth*

          If you have reasonable management, you are going to be able to fire a problem employee without sabotaging them. Presumably they’re a problem employee because they aren’t meeting expectations, so setting clear expectations (for performance, for behavior, for growth) and holding them to that will allow you to make the case for firing them without deception or cruelty. (Setting someone up for failure and torturing them until they quit, even when that isn’t in their best interests, is cruel.)

          As a bonus, not acting like a villain will mean you don’t get the reputation of playing favorites or illegally discriminating against a protected class).

          If you have unreasonable management above you, they may not let you fire a problem employee even if you have all the documentation in the world.

          Reply ↓
        4. metadata minion*

          If the problem employee is doing things problematic enough to warrant firing, and isn’t just vaguely mediocre, why do you have a problem documenting their poor performance/behavior without deliberately sabotaging them?

          Reply ↓
    2. pally*

      Management may not be amenable to terminating Lee.
      I once worked at a place with a very problematic employee. He was obnoxious in personality, and he would not do his assigned tasks. He decided he knew better how to carry out his work. The result was someone else had to re-do the work (namely me). Plenty of documentation generated attesting to this guy’s mistakes.

      This went on for months.

      His manager begged to have this guy fired. Even tried to have him transferred. Nope! The CEO insisted that there was a place for everyone at his company. So we had to tolerate whatever this guy dished out.

      Then the CEO was terminated. The new CEO terminated this troublesome employee.

      Reply ↓
    3. Observer*

      So collect evidence, set Lee up for failure, make life difficult for them wherever possible, put them on a PIP as soon as possible

      This is a bad list that is likely to cause the LW serious issues.

      Don’t set someone up for failure, because then you wind up being the bad guy. And if Lee can in any way make an argument that they are being targeted because of a protected characteristic (and marital / family status is such a characteristic on some states), then the LW will be in a much worse place. And the thing is that if the LW sets Lee up for failure in ways that they don’t do for anyone else, Lee is going to have a decent case – and the company is *highly* unlikely to fire them.

      Reply ↓
      1. Statler von Waldorf*

        “Don’t set someone up for failure, because then you wind up being the bad guy.”

        In my lived experience, that is only true if you are incompetent at it. If you do it right, the boss will praise you for getting rid of a bad employee and saving the company money and your collogues will praise you for getting rid of a slacker. Sure, Lee will think you are the bad guy, but Lee’s opinion doesn’t really matter once you fire them, does it?

        I also disagree with your assumption that this would be a good case. Anyone can make an argument that they are being targeted because of a protected characteristic, and based on my time in a law office, many people do. Proving it in court to the legal standard of the balance of the probabilities is a much harder sell. Lawsuits against your former employer can kill your professional reputation and your bank account with no guarantee of success. It’s easy to tell a stranger on the internet to take that risk. It’s a lot harder to do when it’s your money and reputation on the line.

        Maybe I’m just being cynical because I’ve seen this kind of bad-faith setup play out three times in as many decades, and every single time the bad-faith actors completely got away with it. I sincerely and honestly wish you were right, but given the state of politics in the world in 2025, I flat out don’t think you are.

        Reply ↓
    4. Seeking Second Childhood*

      One of the classic phrases I’ve learned from this website is “Don’t act like the villain in a Reese Witherspoon movie.”

      And this sounds like an elevator pitch for a movie.

      Reply ↓
    5. phira*

      Setting someone up for failure is really, really not okay. If Lee’s behavior causes problems, then that needs to be handled, but what you’re suggesting is really unprofessional and a little bit cruel. I don’t think your credentials in terms of how many people you’ve managed and how many years you’ve been a manager justify this attitude.

      My spouse was pushed out of a job this way–being constantly set up for failure, put on a PIP for things that no one else was penalized for–and he spiraled into an alcoholic depression that put a huge strain on our family for months. I’m sure that his bosses felt justified in what they did, much as you’ve felt that way, but on our end it was torture.

      Reply ↓
    6. learnedthehardway*

      The problem with deliberately sabotaging an employee foisted upon your team is that it really could come back to bite you / the company.

      In this situation, Lee is apparently trans and polyamory – if their new manager sets them up to fail (rather than holding them accountable for their actions according to the same standards as everyone else), Lee will have a very good case for a wrongful termination case and possibly a human rights case. That could be costly for the company (both financially and reputationally), would be bad for the OP’s reputation as a manager.

      The OP is far better advised to treat Lee fairly while making it clear what the expectations of behaviour are, and to let Lee sink themselves if they are unable / unwilling to behave appropriately.

      Reply ↓
  25. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

    I’m curious how the LW could frame the initial conversation here:

    But what you can and should do is to talk to Lee when they first arrive about the culture on your team and your expectations for how everyone will conduct themselves. And then you should keep a very close eye on how they operate. If you see anything that seems off to you, address it immediately — naming what you saw, why it’s a problem, and what Lee needs to do instead.

    What are the benefits and drawbacks of being clear that the LW is aware of past issues and that kind of behaviour won’t be tolerated? Are these different for things that happened in the LW’s company versus the problems at Lee’s previous job? What are the benefits and drawbacks of being more circumspect?

    Reply ↓
    1. CzechMate*

      I think you frame it as, “Since you’re joining our team, I want to get to know you and give you an orientation to our department culture.” I personally wouldn’t EXPLICITLY bring up past issues, but I’d bring preemptively bring up the expectations as they relate to those past issues, ex. “We want to make sure that you are aware of our harassment policy. This goes both ways–these are the expectations for you, and these are the steps you can take if you feel that you are being harassed.”

      Reply ↓
      1. HonorBox*

        Yes, you shouldn’t be bringing up the past sins because it would be a heck of a lot easier for Lee to be able to make a claim that the OP was never giving them a fair shot to succeed.

        Reply ↓
    2. MourningStar*

      I’ve been a manager in the past, and it has always been my philosophy that there is a difference between expectations and job responsibilities, and while both should be clear, measurable, and concise, they are different. The conversation regarding culture would be worked into (for me), the expectations conversation: “we’re glad to have you join us, I’ll start us off by telling you about our team, how we work together and how your role fits into that and then how your role is expected to perform individually.” Then I’d list the team and then role expectations (“in this office we all stand on chairs and scream together at 2PM”) before going into any specific responsibilities.

      I would give the same onboarding as I would to any other team member starting, I would just likely be far more attentive to my documentation. I’ve learned that if problematic team members get any hint that they have been treated differently they will take that inch and stretch it a mile.

      Reply ↓
  26. CityMouse*

    HR sucks here. They should have done reference checks and they definitely shouldn’t be transferring a problem employee around.

    Reply ↓
    1. Wilbur*

      “Before Lee could be formally fired for sexual harassment (it was going to happen), they landed themselves a position within my organization, which didn’t bother to call references or check in with their former employer.”

      Yeah, that part really stood out to me. Pretty big misstep on HR, probably worth meeting with them to set expectations and get on the same page.

      Reply ↓
      1. Curious*

        Wait a minute — if Lee’s problems were at their then-current employer, would a reference check necessarily reveal that? I thought that it was understood that your job-search is kept confidential from your current employer.

        Now, maybe Lee’s problems manifest themselves at his other past jobs — but maybe not.

        Reply ↓
        1. Ellie*

          Yeah, Lee would have to be an idiot to have provided a reference from that company. More likely he had a good reference from someone else and they just didn’t ask to talk to his latest manager. Lee could easily have spun that as not wanting their job search to be outed. And the latest episode happened outside of work hours.

          I really think it’s worthwhile for OP to organise a meeting with Lee’s former manager, their manager, and HR, and outline the full situation. It’s possible that one or more of those people don’t know just how much of a problem Lee is.

          Reply ↓
  27. CzechMate*

    I’m a university admin, but I do have to manage problem student cases (ex. student was suspended and is now coming back, or the student was previously dismissed for poor academic performance and is known to lie to advisors and professors, and now they’ve been readmitted). How I handle this is pretty much the same as what Alison mentioned above, but here’s how I deal with problem students:
    -Be extremely clear in your communications. Assume that if they aren’t explicitly told “Don’t do x,” they will do it and claim they were never told. It’s good to have an in-person conversation with a follow-up email.
    -Be extremely clear about what consequences will be–i.e. “If you do x, it will result in y,” for the same reasons as above.
    -Talk to your leadership about what abilities you have. For example, with my students, I have the power to say, “You have done x and that is not okay, so you are being dismissed from the university.” If you don’t have the power to, say, put him on a PIP or fire him, talk to the person who will have the power and clarify how they will back you up if that happens.
    -Get your documentation in order. Keep a solid paper trail of communications, but also make sure you have relevant legal or internal policy documents available. With problem students, anyway, it’s not uncommon for them to say things like, “I didn’t know I wasn’t supposed to harass other students or cheat on my exams.” Even though that should be common sense, it helps if you say, “You signed a student conduct form that said you wouldn’t harass other students or cheat on your exams. Therefore…”
    -Assume from the beginning that the person will need to be monitored. I’ve even set calendar reminders for myself like “Check on Fergus” because I know that if more than a few weeks go by with no contact they’ll start doing something they shouldn’t (and then they say, “Well, I did this BEFORE and nothing happened, so why is it an issue NOW?”)

    Good luck!

    Reply ↓
  28. Dinwar*

    In addition to you documenting any problems Lee causes, I would encourage your team to document such behaviors as soon as they start. This accomplishes two things. First, it allows you to gather more information if you can push for firing Lee. Second, it will re-enforce to the team that Lee’s behavior is problematic and not acceptable.

    I wouldn’t make a big announcement about it. Rather, as soon as a team member mentions that something is off tell them to start documenting. Shouldn’t take long, from the sounds of it, for the whole team to be informed.

    And as others have said, have harassment training very, very soon after Lee onboards. And make it clear that you are absolutely not going to tolerate any harassment–be it sexual harassment, professional harassment, after-hours harassment, any of it. Unfortunate hookups are one thing (that’s for the people involved to deal with), but it can easily cross the line into legally questionable territory. (I’m pro-polyamory, the issue is Lee’s history, not any sort of relationship style.)

    Reply ↓
    1. Not that other person you didn't like*

      Hmmm, you know at my org we have teams that are empowered to self organize along with their leads and part of that is creating a team charter that outlines how they team will engage together. This depends highly on the nature of the work and org culture, but it would be amazing for OP to lead their high performing team in a charter exercise (either before Lee arrives if there’s time or after as part of a “as our team grows we want to codify what makes us so strong and effective”). I’m thinking of this as primarily for the benefit of the existing team, who will have the chance to come together and say ‘this is how we operate’. The type of BS Lee types bring is strengthen by unspoken assumptions and hiding in shadows.

      Reply ↓
  29. Confused*

    No advice other than Lee needs to go, but I would love if these longer letters had less he/she/they and more names. I got lost in the middle section on who the partners belonged to and had to reread a couple times.

    Reply ↓
  30. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

    We inherited a similar person once. Theres a LOT of paperwork involved in firing someone in this country and were heavily unionized so we have to have a lot of documentation. We were made aware the person had been reprimanded for harrassment and improper behaviour.

    So, first off we made sure our team was fully up to date on the harrassment (both in person and digital – bet youll find a lot goes on via email too!) policies and when where you report them. The factthis was done before he joined the team did raise some eyebrows but was generally accepted it was just refresher training.

    Then we watched him like a hawk when they started. At first it was all okay, behaviour good. Then little things started – buying gifts for other members of staff (notably only the women) frequently. It was one of my professional mistakes as a manager that I didnt stop it there.

    Always he stayed close to the lines, never quite crossing them. He just seemed friendly! I couldnt note that down in a report!

    It got a lot worse, again always staying just within the boundaries but with a frequency that was being alarming. Did tell him to tone it down a bit but I couldnt order him because he hadnt broken the rules. Because he’d leaned on the borders so long they eventually fell over. He came in, verbally lambasted a client (BAD) for not recognising his genius and then actually punched another member of staff for being of the ‘wrong’ sexual persuation.

    I guess the lesson here is pay closer attention to your gut. And boundary pushing behaviour should be reported earlier.

    Reply ↓
    1. MsM*

      Yeah, I think OP should definitely document any line-pushing behavior as “under other circumstances, I might just issue a warning, but given the history, I consider this escalation and don’t want to wait for it to get worse.”

      Reply ↓
      1. Boof*

        Yes I don’t see a reason to ignore prior history/context – if someone who’s known to have problems starts testing the boundaries let them go and/or lay down the law there and/or move the safety line back a bit if the other two aren’t options.

        Reply ↓
  31. HalesBopp*

    I know it is not the *professional* answer, but if LW’s team is unaware of Lee’s history, I do think some notification is the *right* thing to do. I would find the most senior person on the existing team and share with them the smallest of details about Lee’s behavior, in passing. If it is like any other place I’ve been employed, the team will quickly do its own digging and can draw their own conclusions. Given Lee’s history of harassment, I do not think it is fair to LW’s team to be caught unaware. LW doesn’t have to spill all the tea . . . but could point the team in direction of the kettle.

    Reply ↓
    2. Aggretsuko*

      I’m not sure if it’s appropriate for OP to leak to their team that Lee is a sexual harasser or not, but frankly, I’d want to know and be warned of the missing stair.

      Though I’m guessing that Lee has earned A Reputation and frankly, the team may already know.

      Reply ↓
  32. Porque answer*

    “A year and a half ago, they were let go from a supervisory position within another organization for sexual harassment.”

    “Before Lee could be formally fired for sexual harassment (it was going to happen), they landed themselves a position within my organization”

    Which is it? Were they let go, or did they leave on their own? Being let go is something that actually happened. “Lee was going to be let go” is a rumor.

    As far as “being a bringer of discord wherever they go,” it seems strange to pin the behavior of one of Lee’s partners on Lee. It’d be like saying that Joe was dating Sally and slept with one of Sally’s coworkers, and using that as proof that Sally brings drama to the workplace.

    Reply ↓
    1. CommanderBanana*

      it seems strange to pin the behavior of one of Lee’s partners on Lee. It’d be like saying that Joe was dating Sally and slept with one of Sally’s coworkers, and using that as proof that Sally brings drama to the workplace.

      I knew as soon as the LW used the P-word that a bunch of polyamory apologists would pop up in the comments to defend Lee’s behavior.

      Reply ↓
      1. Anon Poly*

        Maybe I’m a poly apologist, but I did sigh deeply when I read about the conduct of a poly partner at the party… all sorts of ground rules like “this is an afterwork event with Lee’s coworkers, watch out!”, “do no harm”, “negotiate&inform” apply to poly people (including Lee) just as much as to anybody else!
        Dan Savage would have a good deal to say about this.

        Reply ↓
      2. Dinwar*

        There is a huge distinction between polyamory and what Lee is doing.

        I’ve known a number of people in happy, healthy poly relationships. The biggest thing about them is open, honest communication. They’ve all said that poly relationships are hard work, harder than monogamous relationships! It IS possible to cheat in a polyamorous relationship; the issue, just as with monogamous relationships, is the betrayal of trust. (Historically the concern was confusing the issue of inheritance, but that’s getting off topic.) Just because you’ve agreed that monogamy isn’t required doesn’t mean there are no rules!

        Likewise, Lee’s behavior is no less disruptive merely because it happened to a poly relationship. There is a pervasive attitude that because polyamorous people violate the social taboo against non-monogamy they are asking for it (the word “apologist” was a pejorative here), and that attitude is garbage. It’s no different from saying that the victim of assault is responsible for it because they dressed a certain way.

        The history of family styles is a fascinating one, as an aside; if you’re interested I strongly recommend “Marriage and Family in the Middle Ages”, a good overview of the academic literature on family organization at several critical junctures, during the time when our concept of “family” was really solidifying. It really opens your eyes to the reality of how dynamic the concept of “family” can be!

        The fact that the relationship is polyamorous is a red herring and totally irrelevant to this discussion. What’s relevant is a pattern of behavior demonstrated by Lee that is disruptive and not conducive to a well-run team. And if this was a one-time thing, yeah, Porque Answer would have a point–weird relationship dynamics are a thing that happens sometimes. But the fact that this is on top of sexual harassment and other misbehavior means Lee doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt here. The common element in all of this is Lee, and that’s deeply concerning as a manager.

        Reply ↓
        1. CommanderBanana*

          There is a huge distinction between polyamory and what Lee is doing. Yes, I know. I’ve known a number of people in happy, healthy poly relationships. So do I. The fact that the relationship is polyamorous is a red herring and totally irrelevant to this discussion. Yes, which is why the poly apologists like Anon Poly that pop up in the comments any time it’s mentioned in a question are so annoying. That Lee is poly doesn’t magically negate how deeply inappropriate their behavior is.

          Reply ↓
      3. Poly Anna-Anon*

        First off, is that even accurate? I have not seen many of these maligned “polyamory apologists” in the comments – people tend to mostly be offering helpful advice. You’ll always have a few people with bad opinions, no matter the topic.

        Also, would we refer to people as “monogamy apologists”? I wouldn’t. This seems like a strange axe to grind over polyamory. Unnecessary.

        (And for the record, though I don’t think it needs to be said, I’m a poly person who thinks that poly relationships are fine and good when pursued ethically AND that Lee’s behavior is deeply inappropriate.)

        Reply ↓
  33. Gateworlder*

    The manager should also document Lee’s interactions that are deemed as not the norm for their department.

    Reply ↓
  34. Sparkles McFadden*

    I had a situation disturbingly similar to this. One management person felt the person was a “loyal employee” and kept moving him from department to department. When I was told he was going to be assigned to me, I pushed back by saying “Based on what I know of him, it’s likely I will end up firing him.” He got assigned to me anyway. On day one, I told him what my expectations were and he told me none of it applied to him. So…I became a very involved manager, checking frequently to be sure he was meeting my expectations of a competent direct report. By week two he went back to his protector and begged to be assigned to someone else.

    Push back first, but if that doesn’t work, Explain what you expect of one of your direct reports and hold Lee accountable.

    Reply ↓
    1. linger*

      Whoo, that tracks. A “Lee” (they/them), delighting in bringing the drama by outing BDSM practitioners at work.

      Reply ↓
  36. Tiara Wearing Princess*

    Have a refresher meeting/class about sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior in the workplace and do it with Lee present. That will give him a heads up that you are not one to tolerate this behavior. It will also reinforce to the troops that they can come to you for support if he acts up.

    Reply ↓
  37. Fort hiss*

    Because of the way our society is set up, even the Lees of the world need jobs to live. They need a paycheck and you need them to not harass your team because they are all your responsibility. So, you have to be really clear-eyed about who Lee has shown themself to be and manage them closely and calmly. I don’t think Lee’s behavior has been an accident, but with forewarning some it can be nipped in the bud—or their issues are so serious that you’ll have to find a way to get them removed. Alison has given many good pointers here. Just remember that you’re the authority here and your team is counting on you.

    Reply ↓
  38. Susannah*

    I get the concern about Lee, but.. this is a bit over the top, in casting him as a one-man demolition team.
    One, I see no problem going to pub trivia with co-workers, unless there is something coercive about it, or harassing behavior occurred there.
    It’s hard to know if he is by definition bad manager for giving people weekends off. We don’t know the context (are we supposed to celebrate managers who don’t give employees a break?). And as for taking PT jobs and making them FT – if he wasn’t;t authorized to do that, if course that’s a problem. But maybe he was trying to right a situation where PTers were being exploited, denied benefits and such afforded to FTers even if they were working almost that number of hours.
    As for Lee’s partner having a fling with the partner of a co-worker: why is that on him? Maybe on the co-worker’s partner, for cheating? Is Lee supposed to police other people’s behavior?
    The *comment* Lee made that brought him to the verge of being fired are indeed concerning (though we don’t know what they were, or the context, or how bad they were).
    It sounds like LW doesn’t like Lee (though not clear if LW has even met Lee). That may indeed be warranted. But I also feel for anyone who goes into a work situation with the supervisor already against him.

    Reply ↓
    1. New Jack Karyn*

      The giving weekends off part–it sounds like it’s not the norm for that industry, for junior staffers to have both weekend days off. It sounds like Lee was playing favorites–if the juniors aren’t minding the store on the weekends, then the more senior staffers must, yes? That leads to bad feelings from senior staff.

      Turning part-time roles into FT: Every organization has a budget for staffing. If going to full time triggers a lot of benefits, Lee just tanked the staffing budget. I agree that if Lee was taking people who averaged 38.5 hours a week and making them FT, that might have some moral value. But if they were taking roles that were 20-30 hours a week and making them FT, that’s a problem.

      Here’s the part where I’m guessing: If Lee was doing happy hours and pub trivia with mostly junior staff, and those people were the ones who benefited by getting priority scheduling and FT hours (when they didn’t rate it), then Lee was being sketchy. Playing favorites.

      And that’s on top of the sexual harassment that spelled the end of Lee’s tenure at OldJob.

      I’m of two minds on the deal with Lee’s partner. Yes, people have autonomy and are responsible for their own choices. No, neither of the two people who hooked up are employees of the organization. And I do have a problem with how a few folks above are characterizing Lee as a predator who gets their jollies from the sexual foibles of others. If that was a one-off–if it was all we had against Lee–I would agree that it’s not a huge red flag.

      But it IS part of a pattern, one of Lee’s unwillingness to hold firm boundaries between the personal and the professional realms.

      Reply ↓
  39. JSPA*

    Hmmmm…. love to get Alison’s take on being proactive with Lee, rather than the group. I’ve known bosses who could pull this off:

    “Lee, welcome to the Llama hoof repair team. As you may rightly suspect, your reputation from [old job] and [recent department] have proceeded you.

    [long pause]

    They paint a picture of someone who fails to set up or fails to maintain adequate boundaries between their work life and their personal life, to the detriment of their teammates.

    [shorter pause, not allowing for protest]

    Now, I am a strong believer in second chances, and allowing people to actively demonstrate that they have learned from their experiences.

    Going forward, I hope and expect to hear from my team that you are so focused on your work that it’s a bit tough to get to know you; that people find you quiet, private, and scrupulously by-the-book; and that when your name comes up, the first, second and third thing that spring to mind are your considerable, documented abilities in hoof filing, hoof laminating, and hoof beveling.

    I believe that you have it in you to be an asset to our team, and hope that you will prove me right.”

    Reply ↓
    2. Peanut Hamper*

      I used to be a teacher, so I am a firm believer in second (and third, and fourth, etc.) chances, but I never called out specifics. I just told my classes that I don’t know them, don’t know anything about them (some teachers would spend the end of summer reading the files of their soon-to-be students; I never did), and I am not really concerned about anything that happened in the past. I made a point of saying if they wanted a fresh start with school, then here was their chance, at least in my class.

      Some kids availed themselves of that opportunity, and some didn’t.

      I don’t know that I would sit down with Lee and mention specific things about his history. It seems to play too much into the power dynamics inherent in the manager-employee relationship and something he could possibly twist to his own advantage if he decided to be evil in the future.

      I might instead just have a meeting with him and lay out the expectations and list some examples of inappropriate behavior (which would, of course, include things he’s done in the past, without calling him out specifically) and also carefully delineate the command structure of the team (since that’s something it seems he’s had an issue with).

      Of course, a good manager always has a “let’s get to know each other and lay out expectations and boundaries” kind of meetings with new hires. That’s just…good management.

      But I woudn’t mention anything specific from his past behavior. That just seems like you are opening yourself up to some potential liability there. The art is in laying out very specific guidelines without calling out specific behaviors from his past.

      Reply ↓
  40. Raida*

    Ensure that anyone ‘junior’ to Lee is told very clearly and firmly “Lee is not your superior, manager, supervisor. Lee has no sway over you, Lee holds no sway over me and my opinion of you and your work. Lee has no pull. You do not work for Lee, and you should not see Lee coming in not as an entry level staffer as an indicator this is someone to learn from – you have A, B, C to learn from, you have *me* as your manager, and I will (continue?) our 1:1’s and want you to bring up any issues you have with Lee throwing his weight around.”

    Too much? yeah of course, parse out what’s needed – but stress “Hey, Lee was a supervisor, it’s important that when someone changes roles to co-worker only that they don’t fall into a pattern of treating others like *their* staff. I need you to understand this so you can continue to *do well* in your roles and learn good habits that’ll last your full careers. So if you have any issues with pressure from a *former* supervisor person like Lee, you tell me.”

    Reply ↓
  41. Jellyfish Catcher*

    All this information should be back tracked and formally documented, now. The person researching him needs some further training at the least; meanwhile put someone experienced on this trail.

    Then, your hiring department can research and reassess this new information and decide if there is cause to rescind the offer the job, based on the new findings.

    If they are keeping him, I don’t know the laws concerning sexual harassment disclosure that was not dealt with legally, I am pretty confident that it could be a legal liability,
    placing a sexual harasser, without informing coworkers.
    Any staff member of either gender, (or spouse, partner, etc), would be horrified, at this decision or finding.

    If (more like when) he tries or says anything, the company could be in for some legal “issues”, along with some pretty upset staff members.

    Reply ↓
  42. Jules the 3rd*

    LW, be aware that Lee is probably very charming, especially to people in power. The playbook of sexual predators includes gathering a protective circle around themselves. You can play that one of two ways:
    1. Be extra cool towards those behaviors. This will either drive them underground or stop them, you will need your other employees to tell you which.
    2. Go along and witness his behavior in order to document it and build the case against him.
    Your call, but pick one and be consistent.

    Other pieces of the abuser playbook:
    1. Make a lot of ‘jokes’ or ‘friendly banter’, and slowly push that banter into inappropriate intimacy.
    2. Behave fine in a group, saving inappropriate behavior for one-on-one interactions
    3. Testing boundaries in non-sexual ways to see whose may be softer. Things like critiquing food or movie choices, pushing people to ‘just try it!’
    4. Super friendly to start, very helpful, the professional equivalent to ‘love bombing’.
    5. Clique-creation, “us vs them”, things like “it sucks that Dan gets paid more than you do, Jenny! LW must be sexist” or “Wow, why did LW put Jenny on that project, Dan? I thought you knew all about that subject.” One way to resist this is to be extra collaborative with the team, asking for their input on job assignments or other things that might be wedges, and to be transparent about salary decisions.

    Re-emphasize with your current team a few months down the road that you respect, trust, and appreciate them.

    Reply ↓

Leave a Comment

Before you comment: Please be kind, stay on-topic, and follow the site's commenting rules.
You can report an ad, tech, or typo issue here.

Subscribe to all comments on this post by RSS