responding to a nosy coworker, is discussing a march too political for work, and more by Alison Green on March 6, 2025 It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go… 1. Was talking about a march for science too political for work? I’m hoping you can help settle a disagreement a friend and I are having about a situation that came up in my work today. I work as a physician at a large academic hospital, and my department had our monthly faculty meeting today. As part of the meeting, our department chair discussed the current state of NIH funding going to our department. We do a large amount of research and have a number of labs dependent on NIH grants that may be affected by the current administration. He told us that there is a march for science this Friday (they are being held simultaneously in cities all over the country) and suggested that anyone who is interested and able to attend should do so, but not to wear anything that would identify us as employees of this hospital or to give any comments that could be seen as being on behalf of the hospital. On a basic level, losing funding risks labs getting shut down and my colleagues losing their jobs. I would argue that most, if not all, of us work here because of the reputation of this institution and the research performed here is a big part of that. (Trust me, we get paid less than we would at many other similar hospitals because we believe in what we do). My friend thinks that this was wrong for my chair to do because it is mixing politics in a professional environment. I see this as the chair providing us with information about the situation and encouraging us to advocate on behalf of our hospital, colleagues, patients, and research. What do you think? (I’m planning to march.) I’m with you. Your chair was providing information that many of you would find relevant to your jobs, and was also providing info you might not have had otherwise (to not identify yourself as employees of the hospital or appear to be speaking on its behalf). “Don’t mix politics in a professional environment” applies when it’s something like announcing a campaign rally for a candidate or promoting a pro-choice march if your jobs had nothing to do with reproductive health care. It doesn’t apply when the issue in question is so tightly entwined with your labs’ ability to survive. 2. How are these layoffs happening so quickly? I used to work at a large NGO that receives a lot of government funding. With the recent administration change, I’ve seen many of my old colleagues, including many who work in non-government-funded positions, announce that they’ve been laid off. How can these layoffs be happening so quickly? It seems like within one week, funding that took months to secure has vanished. Is the funding truly gone? Or are these companies using this as a reason to let people go? Plus, how can it be affecting non-government-funded positions so quickly? I thought WARN notices were required before eliminating jobs. Yes, it can happen that quickly (and is). First, while a position may not be directly government-funded, it can depend on grants or other sources of funding that have government funding somewhere in the chain. Second, some funders are changing their funding priorities in response to the new administration’s actions. Third, making adjustments in one area can affect a different area; for example, an organization might realize it’s going to lose $X in funding over the next year so they’re reconfiguring staffing and budgets now in order to prioritize programs A and B, even though that will mean cutting programs C and D. The WARN Act requires most employers with 100 or more employees to provide 60 days notice if they’re laying off 50 or more people at once or to pay the equivalent amount of time in severance. If they have fewer than 100 employees or they’re not laying off 50+ people, it wouldn’t be in effect. 3. Responding to a nosy coworker My coworker is well-meaning and big-hearted but doesn’t have a lot of personal boundaries. She shares a lot about her own personal life issues such as past family drama and medical issues, also shares personal life and medical issues of her children and husband, and has even shared very personal information from coworkers. I’ve also noticed her tendency to not just overshare, but pry a bit as well. For example, I had to share the news of a recent death of a distant coworker we did some work with (relevant to our jobs) and she demanded to know who I heard it from (really not relevant). Overall, I like her but she can be really off the wall with certain comments at times. Today, I sent my team a notification letting them know I’d be stepping out for a dentist appointment for my regular, twice-a-year cleaning. After that, she sent me a private message along the lines of, “We both have more medical appointments than the rest of the team! I’m not trying to pry — you don’t have to share any details — but I’m sending thoughts and prayers and wanted to make sure you’re okay!” Not only is this a weird comment, but, frankly, I don’t! This year I had a normal annual physical, two dentist appointments, and then the occasional “thing” that might come up for anybody, like seeing an allergist this year. That’s pretty much it. We have a pretty casual work culture where we’re salaried and free to take off for appointments as long as our work is done, so I’m wondering if she’s confusing personal appointments (car appointments, etc.) for medical appointments? I don’t always give details when I step away for an appointment so she may be assuming what the term “appointment” means. I responded with a quick “Hey thanks but I’m healthy, just good about getting my checkups!” and moved on. But I would love to hear if there’s a better way to handle coworkers bringing up something like this and setting good boundaries. Do I ignore? Eyebrow raise and say, “How odd, what makes you say something like that?” (I’m not sure she’d pickup on that level of subtly.) Go nuclear and say, “Whoa, that’s way inappropriate”? We have a cordial but distant relationship on the whole, mainly on my part because of her tendency to overshare or gossip. Given that, although this was definitely crossing a serious boundary, it hasn’t been a persistent issue and I’m not sure how strong of a response something like that would require. Nah, your response was fine. It allowed you to just quickly move on rather than getting in a discussion of boundaries with her, which is a fine choice to make (unless you want to get into it with her). Sometimes the key with people like this is to just studiously not take the bait. So you also could have just ignored her message entirely (particularly since she said she wasn’t trying to pry! let’s pretend to take her at her word). 4. Should I address a rumor about my company being awful? I am a payroll specialist who processes payroll for over 1,000 electricians. Today I heard that there is a rumor going around one of our largest sites that my company lays people off after 90 days to avoid paying out any sick time (field employees can accrue and use up to 40 hours per year, but can’t use it until their 91st day of employment). This is not true! We are a leading electrical contractor in our state and, honestly, the time and resources it takes to onboard employees would hardly make it financially sensible to be laying people off willy-nilly. Not to mention getting such an unethical practice like this past the union! What I heard specifically was this: a site administrator told me “I heard someone say…,” meaning a current employee. In my experience, these things spread like wildfire among the crew(s). And the admin seemed genuinely relieved when I told her that it wasn’t true so I’m afraid people are actually believing it! Should I say something? I have a good relationship with both my manager and our director of field personnel. Should I tell them what I heard? I don’t think there’s enough here that you really need to act on it … but if you’re concerned that there’s misinformation out there, there’s nothing wrong with sharing that concern with your manager and/or the field personnel director and letting them decide if they want to address it. Just be careful to specify exactly what you heard, so it’s clear that you’re not hearing it from multiple people (which doesn’t mean multiple people don’t believe it — maybe they do — but you don’t want to overstate what you actually know). 5. Can I be told to use PTO for partial-day sick leave when I’m exempt? I’m a salaried exempt computer programmer working from home, which means sometimes I have the luxury of working a few hours beyond the weekly 40 when inspiration strikes. Yesterday, I wasn’t feeling well so I stopped working at about 10 am. My boss asked today if I was going to file for PTO or if I’d be making it up. I’ve read your post here to make sure I was right about the FLSA. It’s come up before, but I’m not sure he believed the bit about how working any part of a week means getting paid for the full week. Anyway, he’s a good supervisor and we have a friendly relationship, but how do I tell him he’s wrong about this? I asked an AI and it said my company could require that I take PTO when I’m sick, but that doesn’t seem right — so I thought I’d ask a real intelligence. The AI got it right. As an exempt worker, you need to be paid your full salary when you work any part of a week (with some narrow exceptions, like your first and last week at a job), but that’s is only about pay. It doesn’t have anything to do with docking time from your PTO balance, and your company can still require you to use PTO for time that you miss. It’s pretty common for companies to do that, particularly when you’re missing nearly an entire day of work. (I’d consider it nickel-and-diming you if they told you to use PTO for an hour here and an hour there when you’re regularly working extra hours, but in this case you missed nearly a full day of work so it’s not that outrageous.) Related: my manager is nickeling and diming me on vacation time while I’m working 27 days in a row You may also like:my relative is lying about race to get a job in my departmenthow do I interrupt a senior colleague's monologue during my meeting?coworker said his boss kneed him in the groin, I feel unappreciated, and more { 18 comments }
Anon4This* March 6, 2025 at 12:58 am #4 – At least your company lets you use sick leave in increments. Mine only lets us exempt people do full 8-hour days which means if I stop working with a migraine midday on a Thursday, I either have to work 12 hours on Friday or burn 8 hours of leave to hit the expected 40. Ugh. Reply ↓
Cmdrshprd* March 6, 2025 at 1:12 am I actually think this is what OP has to do as well, and part of the frustration/reluctance. they have to file for PTO for a full day. In your specific situation do you have to take PTO for leaving an hour or two early. I would say expecting you to make up some time is understandable for 36 vs 40, but if you work 38 or 39 you shouldn’t have to use PTO. do you actually have to make it up on Friday could you do it on Saturday? Reply ↓
Certaintroublemaker* March 6, 2025 at 1:05 am For LW4, is there an all-employee newsletter? Bulletin boards everyone sees? Website? Regular company social get-togethers? What I’m thinking is doing a regular (monthly / quarterly / annually) announcement to say, “Congratulations to [list of people] who have reached their one year anniversary with us! And our other milestone celebrants, 5 years [list of people], 10 years [list of people], etc.” This would make it obvious people do stay! Reply ↓
Cmdrshprd* March 6, 2025 at 1:07 am OP5 IMO you are being given a choice that seems pretty fair. You can make up the 6/7 hrs, I wouldn’t feel compelled to be so strict, like make up 5 or so that plus the 1 hr you already worked is 6, no different than leaving 2 hrs early one day. Or if you have other things going or just don’t feel like making it up, using 8hr when you were out 7 is not a big deal. if you really feel like being even leave 1 hr early another day. leaving at 10 really is missing the entire day. Reply ↓
TimeOffNorms* March 6, 2025 at 1:30 am OP5, every exempt job I’ve ever had required you to hit 40 hours each week or take some form of time off for the missed hours. This is true even if you work 38 or 39 hours. Most are perfectly happy to have you make up time missed one day some other time during the week, but you still need to hit 40. Usually even when you worked 70-80 hours the week before. Reply ↓
Silver Robin* March 6, 2025 at 4:15 am yes and it is the downside of being salaried. You do not really get time in lieu when you work over time. It is just expected that managers be reasonable about this stuff…ha Reply ↓
Nebula* March 6, 2025 at 5:03 am It’s not universal, my experience has always been that it’s flexible i.e. you get time off in lieu. Not that I’ve ever worked a 70-80 hour week, but if I have worked overtime then I’ll work shorter hours the following week. However, starting work and then stopping at 10am would count as a sick day – if you’re going to take a whole day off, it’s still normal that this would have to be approved in advance, unless it’s because you’re ill or whatever – as in this case. Reply ↓
Ellis Bell* March 6, 2025 at 2:08 am OP3’s colleague must be really dedicated to gossip if she’s willing to make someone feel paranoid about the frequency of their medical appointments as a very transparent bait. I particularly liked the forced teaming element of this message. I take OP’s word that this colleague otherwise likeable, but she has a problem; where gossip is concerned, she’ll go quite a way to get it. I can’t think of anything more likely to drive her nuts, than to ignore the message completely, it also sends a message that the bait is not tempting and fools no one. She’ll probably switch to digging for dirt in person and this is where you just respond with grey rocking, and pretending to believe anything useful; “Oh, I know that you wouldn’t pry! Anyway, nothing to report.” But if she says anything about your time off, don’t justify yourself and if you can’t ignore it, put it back on her plate to explain “I don’t think you have that right. What makes you think that?” Reply ↓
supply closet badger* March 6, 2025 at 3:08 am A former boss of mine did something kind of similar to LW1’s boss but handled it much worse (to the point it *was* inappropriate, IMO), so maybe a comparison will be illustrative for your friend: My boss: Snarked in an all-hands meeting about how he’d expected to see more of us at a recent march* LW boss: Calmly (?) informed and encouraged staff to attend if feasible, without the implication that he was keeping tabs on who went and would judge them for it My boss: Subject of the march, while important, was not (or extremely tangentially) related to our work LW boss: Can point to a direct and near-immediate connection between employees’ ability to do and keep their jobs and the subject of the march My boss: Proceeded to take up more meeting time with his commentary about specific speeches, etc. LW boss: Didn’t get into the weeds of what you might call a political discussion (by the sounds of the letter) I hope this shows that there can be an appropriate and an inappropriate way to engage with staff on this sort of matter. *There were a couple of thousand people at this thing, so could it be he just hadn’t spotted us in the crowd, perchance … ? Reply ↓
Nodramalama* March 6, 2025 at 3:49 am Is lw5 some kind of American specific thing, because I’m pretty confused that anyone would expect to not work 90% of the work day, and not take leave for that time. Reply ↓
bamcheeks* March 6, 2025 at 3:58 am In the UK if you come in and then go home later because you’re ill it’s not usually counted as an absence. But if it was, it would be sick leave, not annual leave, and they’re quite different. Also, if you regularly work significantly over 40 hours a week, then I do think the same grace should be extended in the opposite direction. But it’s clearly grace rather than a legal right. Reply ↓
Michigander* March 6, 2025 at 4:20 am I suppose one difference is that in the US you have much more limited leave. I’m in the UK and if I work part of the day and then go home sick I don’t need to take sick leave, but it wouldn’t really matter to me if I needed to, since I don’t have a limited bank of sick leave. Taking a sick day now doesn’t mean I have one fewer sick day to take later. I can see being annoyed at taking sick leave in America because you only have 10 days a year allotted to you for being sick (though I agree with you that 10 am is too early to finish for the day and not expect to use any leave time). Reply ↓
JM60* March 6, 2025 at 3:54 am #5 I think the partial exception is if you live in a state that considers PTO/vacation to be an earned wage (such as California). In that case, they can still require that you use the PTO, but I think they would have to pay you both for cashing out that PTO, and for the (partial) day worked. Reply ↓
Mid* March 6, 2025 at 4:32 am Can you explain further? I’m fairly certain you’re incorrect. You are getting paid, by using PTO hours instead of your time at work. So by your explanation, it sounds like someone would be double paid when taking PTO. Reply ↓
Melisande* March 6, 2025 at 4:21 am #LW2 in the UK it is illegal to operate without sufficient funds to pay employees, so grant-dependent staffing can very quickly be ended to avoid putting the wider organisation at risk. Reply ↓
Earlk* March 6, 2025 at 4:57 am For LW1 management were aware it was a march many employees would be interested in going and needed to tell you that they wouldn’t stop you from going but you absolutely cannot be seen to be representing the company while you’re there. They would’ve included that you were welcome to go because saying you couldn’t is even more political. Reply ↓