It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…
1. Should I apologize for my coworker’s behavior at a conference?
Recently, I attended an industry conference hosted by an important client. People in my field from across the country attended for purposes of brainstorming and networking. I attended with a senior colleague from my company, Jane, who is one of my mentors and has a significant influence on my career here.
On the last night of the conference, after the official events were over, many of the attendees and client representatives met at the hotel bar. A smaller group of us then proceeded to a local bar, and everyone was drinking throughout the night. By the time we reached the final bar, Jane was pretty drunk and engaged in some obnoxious behavior toward another attendee. For some reason Jane repeatedly commented on the other attendee’s appearance, kept implying she’d had cosmetic surgery, and then teased her when she denied it. The comments were completely inappropriate. If Jane had been male, the comments would have been downright creepy and harassing. It was clear that the other attendee was very annoyed and offended. I was embarrassed and tried to acknowledge the incident and apologize to the other attendee as we were leaving the bar.
I’m pretty sure Jane has no recollection of her behavior (she was still drunk the next morning when we flew back) and I have not addressed it with her directly. I don’t believe anyone from the client is aware of her behavior either, and there’s little chance that I’ll ever directly interact with the offended attendee. However, I’m still bothered by what happened and concerned it might affect my professional reputation. The client is circulating all attendees’ contact information and I’m torn on whether to contact the other attendee. Was my acknowledgement and apology in the moment sufficient and I should let sleeping dogs lie, or would it be appropriate to reach out to this other attendee and offer a more substantial apology?
No, leave it alone. You already apologized once which made it clear you didn’t condone Jane’s behavior, and so it’s unlikely to affect your reputation. Emailing the other attendee to apologize again would be overkill.
2. A professional acquaintance messaged me on a dating app and his profile is gross
My field is relatively small, and there is a lot of personal/professional overlap because so many of us went to college and/or worked together at some point in our careers. Due to the nature of my job, many people in my field who work in my region know who I am and communicate with me professionally.
I am also a woman in my late 40s who, after a long period of being happily single, recently created a dating app profile. I received a message on the dating app from a man who stated that he knows me professionally and that we are connected on social media. I don’t know him on a personal level, but we have met in passing and we have a number of mutual friends and acquaintances. I also know I’m not interested in dating him, but I went to peruse his profile before declining the request to chat.
His profile was WILD. There were references to his proficiency at oral sex. He mentioned warming up with Tai Chi before pleasuring his lady. He referred to himself as a God looking for a Goddess. Granted, I’ve only been on this app for a month, but I had never seen anything this blatantly sexual even from the scads of young 20-somethings on their sustained cougar hunts.
I understand the potential for exposing myself to this kind of material on a dating app. Had this been some random man I would have just laughed, deleted, and moved on with my life. But this man knows me professionally and took the time to POINT OUT that he knows me professionally, all the while knowing what I was going to see if I clicked on his profile. That feels intentionally inappropriate to me and I am completely icked out by it.
I’m not even sure what my question is, aside from where do I go from here? I immediately declined the connection on the app, but my instinct is to disconnect with him on socials as well. Is that an overreaction? I know this doesn’t equate to sexual harassment, but I’m utterly creeped out by him now! How do I handle any kind of professional communication in the future? What if I run into him at a conference? If nothing else, just tell me that I’m not the crazy one for thinking he was out of bounds here.
You are not the crazy one. This man messaged a professional acquaintance knowing she would read about his tai chi enhanced oral sex hobby. If you’re going to have a dating app profile that’s so overtly sexual … don’t message professional acquaintances from it. If you must message a professional acquaintance from it, maybe clean it up first.
I don’t think it’s an overreaction to disconnect from him on social media. He grossed you out, and you want to minimize further contact with him.
If you need to communicate with him for work in the future, being scrupulously professional is the way to go, and hopefully he’ll pick up on those cues and follow your lead.
Related:
https://www.askamanager.org/2016/09/i-matched-with-a-coworker-on-a-dating-site.html
3. Asking my boss for a letter to a country that he hates
I happen to be in a profession that is globally in demand, and for a wide variety of personal, professional, and political reasons and because *gestures at everything*, I am considering immigrating to a Commonwealth country. The emmigration process itself, however, is not what gives me pause.
In the later stages of the process, I would be required to get letters from past and current supervisors documenting that I meet certain professional experience requirements. The problem: my boss has called the country I am most seriously considering a “communist nation” and a “failed socialist state” multiple times, in meetings, no less. Alison, it’s Canada! WTF!
I am concerned that I can’t rely on him for the aforementioned letter. I am thinking that, if I get to that stage, I should go to his boss (my department head) instead and leave my boss off of the immigration piece of things. Am I just being unreasonably cautious or does going around my boss sound justified? I could use a gut check here.
I don’t think you’re being unreasonably cautious. It’s possible that your boss would be perfectly happy to write you the letter without his opinions of Canada (!) interfering with what he writes — in fact, that’s probably likely (since disliking a country is very different than trying to sabotage someone’s chances of moving there) — but with something so high-stakes, I can see why you’re concerned. If your boss’s boss knows you well enough to write the letter, there’s no reason you can’t approach him about it.
Obviously there are all the normal cautions about letting your employer know you’re actively making plans to leave your job, but if your work is in demand, that may be much less of a consideration (and it sounds like the letter is required regardless).
4. Is this employer BS’ing me about a salary transparency law?
I was recently offered a job from a NGO based in Colorado. The posted salary range was between $70-80K. The range was below what I was seeking, but the job could be a great fit. At offer, they offered me the high end of the range — $80K. Great!
But, when sending my offer, they also sent the official job description, which showed a salary range for the role that was far larger, between $60-105K. I was bummed out — even though they gave me a number at the top of their posted range, it was far lower than the top of their actual range, and with my experience, far lower than where I would theoretically sit within their full range.
When I attempted to negotiate, they told me due to pay transparency laws, they were unable to do so. Is this accurate? Due to the law in Colorado, are they really unable to negotiate when their stated range in the job description is different from the (more narrow) range they posted publicly?
The Colorado law does say that an employer may ultimately pay more or less than their posted range, as long as when they posted the range, that was what they genuinely believed they would be willing to pay for the job. That said, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if their lawyers have told them they need to stick to their advertised ranges so there’s no room for challenging that.
Possibly more important, though, the larger range you saw in the job description might refer to the salary band for the role itself, while what you saw in the ad might be for new hires. It’s not uncommon for a salary band to go higher than what they’ll start people at (meaning that you can get raises that move you above the range they posted, but they won’t start you above the posted amount).
Related:
how to ask about salary when you’re invited to interview
5. What’s the deal with skip-level meetings with my boss’s boss?
I am scheduled for a skip-a-level meeting with my manager’s manager. What are these for and what do I do at them? Are they useful to me and how do I utilize them?
Yes, they can be very useful! They tend to be general check-ins — a chance for your boss’s boss to hear how things are going from your perspective, spot problems they otherwise might not know about, and offer a chance for you to ask questions, inquire about upcoming strategy, or raise issues about your manager. It’s also an opportunity for you to get to know each other better, which can be helpful if you ever want to, for example, apply for a promotion.
Typically you don’t need to go in with any particular agenda — your boss’s boss will likely drive the meeting — but it’s smart to think ahead of time about whether you do have questions you want to ask or things you want to raise, as well as be prepared to answer, “So, how are things going?”
A reminder: We’ve had a recent increase in trolling here, and you can help me by NOT RESPONDING to it. If you engage, you are ensuring that troll will reappear. Instead, please flag the comment for me (just reply with a link, which will send your comment to moderation so I’ll see it).
A change to previous requests: please don’t reply “reported,” either. Do not engage at all. Thank you.
OP 4 the bigger salary band might also be the countrywide salary band, but I varies by location. In colorado/location A it’s 70 to 80, in location B it’s 60 to 70, in location C its
I worked at a place that
Hit submit early.
in location C its 90 to 100.
I worked at a place that had different salaries levels based on the office/location you worked at. they were transparent that office A was paid at 100%, office B & C were 90% and office D was 80%. it was roughly based on the cost of living compared to the highest being office A.
Good point. I worked at a company that based salaries on what would be competitive in the region, rather than cost of living. That would be splitting hairs, except one of the office locations was in Silicon Valley, where I could have gotten a 50% salary bump that still didn’t pay for the COL increase. (They also weren’t very successful at convincing their US employees to transfer to their offices in India.)
I agree with the answer to OP #1.
I’m just wondering: if OP #1 hadn’t had a chance to apologize in person, would she be obligated to send an apology e-mail?
Letter #1 leaves a bad taste in my mouth, because it seems that OP is asking whether she needs to apologise because it comes off as that she’s doing that instead of calling Jane out. It feels like she’s deliberately avoiding the elephant in the room because she knows that what the correct thing to do is, and it makes her uncomfortable and trying to ‘compromise’ instead when – no, just no.
I don’t expect OP to apologise for someone else’s behaviour. Jane absolutely needs to give an apology still. That is not OP’s responsibility. But what is OP’s responsibility is to call out her coworker, especially since she claims Jane was too drunk to remember.
I actually disagree that she should “call out” Jane herself. Jane has significantly more power in their relationship, which means any sort of confrontation can backfire very easily. If Jane is otherwise reasonable, she should mention it to Jane later and let her handle any apologies.
But anything more than that should be left to her manager. OP just isn’t in a position to shut down such behaviour directly.
I don’t think OP1 needs to “call out” Jane, but if she has a good relationship with her, it would be kind of her to let Jane know what happened so that Jane can try to make things right. Otherwise Jane will just have no clue why people are avoiding her at the next conference.
If Jane has a habit of getting black out drunk, she should have an idea.
If Jane’s getting blackout drunk at a work event, I’m almost certain it’s not the first time she’s overindulged.
I don’t think the LW needs to say anything. If Jane asks why people are avoiding her at the next conference, she can deflect. If Jane insists, she can mumble something about how at the last conference she’d commented on another attendee’s looks in a way that made people around her uncomfortable.
Ding, ding, ding. I doubt this is the first time that Jane did this.
OP, you said Jane was a mentor. You are also worried about how her behavior reflects on you professionally. Rather than apologizing again for someone else’s behavior, it might be time to rethink that mentor relationship. You might want to disengage professionally from Jane so that her behavior does not reflect on you in the future. If she is behaves this badly at a work function — and make no mistake even though the event was over and you were after partying so to speak you were still at a work function — what else is she teaching you that might be quesitonable. because don’t get blackout drunk at a work event is Professionalism 101.
The mentor factor is clouding a lot of OP’s concerns. OP’s relationship with Jane is making her take on more responsibility for Jane’s behavior than Jane. Their relationship is also why OP is downplaying the awfulness “if Jane were a man it would be creepy and harassment.” OP, it still is. And I think you know it. Are you trying to reconcile the mentor you know with the drunken creep you saw and that’s why you are stuck in this situation, not considering it closed?
Hmmm should could have had a reaction to medication or she could have a drinking problem. That doesn’t mean she’s completely worthless
No one is saying she’s worthless, but I think it makes sense to rethink a mentoring relationship with someone who is acting unprofessionally and embarrassing you at networking events!
Most Rx meds that can cause bad reactions when taken with alcohol will state this very clearly on the label. If Jane WAS on such a med, it was on her to read the label’s instructions and follow them.
But there’s a saying that “When you hear hoofbeats, think horses before you think zebras.” More likely Jane either has AUD or very poor judgment or both. Either way, the OP is not in a position to call Jane out on her behavior; if she had been, she could and should have firmly steered her away the first time she saw Jane’s inappropriate behavior.
And while Jane will doubtless be the subject of many a chuckle on the part of the other attendees, her behavior will NOT reflect on the OP. It will reflect solely on Jane – as it should!
This is a very weird flex that has nothing to do with the letter especially because no one said it in the comments. It’s also not helpful to the LW and it doesn’t actually change the advice to the LW. It’s also veering VERY close to armchair-diagnosing, TBH. And–and maybe this is just a pet peeve of mine that I can’t look past–I’d wager that 9.999999 times out of 10*, it is NOT “a bad reaction to a medication,” it is just in fact “being way too drunk, maybe because of a pattern of excessive drinking that is indicative of a drinking problem.”
Again, the latter doesn’t automatically make a person “worthless” (which no one actually said in the comments by the way) but it does still mean that this isn’t actually the OP’s problem–it’s not on them to clean up Jane’s mistake even if Jane is their mentor and they feel more indebted to her than they might to another colleague or boss.
But sitting here and nitpicking about whether or not Jane just tossed back too many Mai Tais or made the mistake of taking Nyquil earlier that night and then having only 1 glass of wine is just obfuscating the actual point–she messed up big time and the OP is disproportionately worried about fixing that when it’s actually Jane’s problem to fix.
*Seriously, I feel like “oh no, I wasn’t DRUNK, I just had a bad reaction because I took some cold meds earlier!!” is such a tired trope in the Alcoholic’s Playbook that your more experienced alcoholic won’t even bother with it anymore. Like in a “this tired excuse is beneath both of us, we both know I am 10 sheets to the wind, like always” way.
Sure, but part of being an adult who drinks alcohol is understanding its effects and being able to gauge how drunk you are, and stopping/controlling your behavior. It’s weirdly infantilizing to imply that a senior colleague level woman shouldn’t be held accountable for her behavior because she didn’t know how alcohol would affect her. Also, the issue is not that she was too drunk. The issue is that she was an asshole.
If she got too drunk and just drank water and tried to hold it together, or ate too many tacos and cried a little in the bathroom, or even just did some horrible karaoke and looked silly, it would be a different issue.
Even if she were stone cold sober, harassing someone would have been out of line.
I’m not saying that Jane is a bad person who should be fired and exiled, but it’s not unfair for this situation to reflect poorly on her judgment.
Possibly, but part of being an adult who drinks alcohol is understanding its effects and being able to gauge how drunk you are, and stopping/controlling your behavior. It’s weirdly infantilizing to imply that a senior colleague level woman shouldn’t be held accountable for her behavior because she didn’t know how alcohol would affect her.
Also, the issue is not that she was too drunk. The issue is that she was an asshole.
If she got too drunk and just drank water and tried to hold it together, or ate too many tacos and cried a little in the bathroom, or even just did some horrible karaoke and looked silly, it wouldn’t have been an issue.
Even if she were stone cold sober, harassing someone would have been out of line.
I’m not saying that Jane is a bad person who should be fired and exiled, but it’s not unfair for this situation to reflect poorly on her judgment.
Isn’t it an explicit rule to take LW at their word, and not to invent completely fictional scenarios around letters?
LW said Jane was drinking heavily. There’s literally zero evidence that she was “on meds” and even if your fictional hypothetical happens to be correct by some wild chance, no one on new meds should be drinking heavily.
I wouldn’t make assumptions based on this one event. Maybe Jane drinks socially, but never did at work before. Maybe she usually drinks wine and this was her first time with mixed drinks. Maybe she’s a raging alcoholic.
We really don’t know based on the info in the letter.
I’m going to push back on the premise of this reply just a *little* – I know it’s probably the most likely scenario, but there are other possibilities. I once had to take a prescription medication for a couple weeks which significantly (and unexpectedly) altered my tolerance for alcohol. It didn’t result in anything horrible or embarrassing, but I was a few sips into my second drink before the first one took full effect, at which point I felt more or less hammered.
Even if Jane doesn’t remember the details, she presumably does know that she got wasted and so that might be part of the problem.
I think this is a difficult one, because it’s hard when a senior colleague is exhibiting bad behaviour and you don’t know how to react. However I would say people do have a slight onus to step in when harassment is being committed at the time, even if it’s just a ‘whoa dude, not cool’ or an attempt to change the subject. It doesn’t have to be a full-blown confrontation, but staying silent when something like that happen does rather give your silent approval. Of course, Jane’s status as OP’s mentor makes the response more complicated, but nonetheless I do think it’s appropriate to mitigate damage when you can.
(It’s why I have an issue with OP providing a caveat that ‘if Jane was a man this would have been harassment’. If Jane’s behaviour was bad enough that it would warrant some form damage control if she was a man, it was bad enough that it warranted some form of damage control as a woman.)
Your second paragraph is my thought, too. OP was making completely inappropriate and creepy comments to a peer at a conference. It is not less creepy, less of harassment, less, well, simply less bad because Jane is a woman. It is also not worse. It is the same thing for either gender. I think and hope that OP deep review her feelings on this perspective and determine if maybe she is seeing Jane’s actions less severely because she knows Jane as a person and realize, this is an old standby “She was just drunk. She didn’t mean anything bad by it. She’s a good person.”
Good people do bad things. The bad things they do are still bad. They are not less bad, less creepy, less sexual harassment because you like the person.
That is correct
That’s not her responsibility at all.
Especially with the power difference inherent. It’s absolutely not OP’s responsibility to call out a co-worker who is (direct quote) “a senior colleague who … has a significant influence on my career”. That’s not the way hierarchies work.
I’m genuinely fascinated that that’s how you read the letter because I didn’t get that impression at all.
Me neither.
I read it as LW genuinely not knowing what to do given that Jane is senior to her.
I totally understand LW wanting to apologize for being associated with someone who behaves as Jane did and not wanting to be painted with the same brush as Jane.
Same here. OP wrote in specifically about what additional responsibility, if any, she has towards the person Jane harrassed.
Whether or not she plans on “calling out” Jane, or saying something to Jane in a less confrontational way, isn’t in the letter at all, maybe because she doesn’t plan to, but maybe because she does plan to, but either way because that’s not what she’s looking for advice about.
Also, when you are a junior person and a senior person has a lot of influence over your career, it’s not necessarily always so clear “what the correct thing to do is”. Jane didn’t kill or physically injure someone; the person she harassed absolutely has the option of reporting her (to the client and/or to Jane & OP’s employer and/or to the police), irrespective of anything OP does or says, and if she chooses to do that, consequences will presumably follow. (OP would then certainly have a responsibility not to lie about what she witnessed.) Depending on what the rest of their working relationship is like, it might be perfectly safe for OP to raise this issue with Jane, or it might be major career sabotage.
I would like to think that in OP’s position I would say something … but I have had enough junior-level jobs in dysfunctional organizations that I fully understand why she might not feel safe doing so.
You think it’s OP’s clear responsibility to call out someone significantly senior to her? OP claims Jane was too drunk to remember? This feels weirdly hostile to OP, who did nothing wrong.
I would agree OP does not have any responsibility to call out a senior employee who is an adult and responsible for her own behavior. Now if things were the other way around and OP was the mentor and Jane the mentee…….OP still is not responsible for calling her out but would have greater standing to do so.
“Call out” is absolutely the wrong frame here, *particularly* given the power differential between OP and Jane. I *do* think OP should probably have a quiet word with someone senior about Jane’s behaviour, in an “I think you need to know this happened, in case this attendee complains to the client” way, but their ability to do that is going to be *very* dependent on the structure of their organisation and Jane’s role within it.
It is not on the coworker to “call Jane out.” She is not Jane’s keeper or her manager. Jane’s conduct is Jane’s responsibility.
I did think that the ideal response would have been to ask/tell Jane to stop that evening. I don’t know that you can stop a drunk person, but that’s the best response.
I do understand why the power dynamic makes it difficult for the LW to do so.
LW shouldn’t apologize (for a second time) on behalf of someone else. Jane or the company should apologize for Jane’s behavior. She was drunk is not an excuse for sexually harassing someone, and despite the genders this found/would be considered sexual harassment or at least harassment and extremely unprofessional. Jane needs to stop drinking at business events if this is what happens when she’s drunk. But Jane’s mentee (LW) is not in a good position to provide that feedback to her.
I don’t think she’d be obligated, it would be on Jane to apologize.
Since she’d never see the other person again, I don’t think she should send an email. An apology from Jane would be appropriate, but an apology from an unrelated person would be meaningless and just dredge up an unpleasant experience for them.
Yeah, the apology from the unrelated person is going to not mean much, beyond “Hoo boy did everyone there remember the specific insults addressed to you. And we’re still thinking about it.”
It might work from Jane’s boss, saying “I want to assure you that this was a one-off by an employee who will be disciplined” and implying “and you probably don’t want to talk to her, so I am not forcing that and am instead apologizing myself.” It doesn’t work from Jane’s subordinates.
I also think these “I said nothing in the moment, because what if your harasser turned on me? But now that they are out of earshot, I am providing an opportunity for you to assure me you are fine” check ins are often not helpful to the harassee.
It may be that Jane didn’t know she had anything to apologize for if she didn’t fully remember the evening. It would have been kind of LW to gently let Jane know that there might be a problem or say, “Wow, you had a lot to drink last night” and give Jane the opening to ask about what happened, but the best time to do that would have been the next day.
I think “apology” is a misnomer here. OP isn’t responsible for Jane’s behaviour, it’s really about acknowledging it was inappropriate so that she won’t be seen as condoning it,
I think this is a very relevant distinction.
If this were a case where the OP was more senior and had the ability to fire/discipline the person in question – in many ways the follow up would still more so being about finding the behavior inappropriate and articulating how they were responding. You see this with businesses a lot when their staff engage in behavior online that goes viral, and the company does not want to be connected to that behavior. It’s very much “We stand for X, do not support Y, they no longer work here.”
I will also add that while generically drinking to such excess at work events is never going to make it on AAM as encouraged behavior ever – there are lots of industries where there are situations where heavier drinking is normalized. In a situation where there was a formal event, after event hotel bar drinks, and then third location drinks – the norm for that would be heavier drinking. I’m not saying it makes Jane’s behavior excused correct, but for the OP – I do think it’s likely for the others attending to have at least some grace to the OP in how she tried to handle it and her reputation.
Obligated? No. But depending on the other people involved and what kind of professional network they represent, it’s possible saying something to distance herself/show disapproval or even just discomfort with what happened could be wise.
Yes! This! I have been in this situation, and while it wasn’t my responsibility to apologize for someone else’s behavior, I wanted to make it clear that I don’t support the drunk person’s behavior.
Other than that, there’s really nothing for LW to do with this situation, beyond thinking up ways to avoid being in this situation in the future. These after conference pub crawls can be beneficial for networking and whatnot. But, LW can work out some sort of balance like going on the pub crawl, allowing themselves X amount of drinks, and leaving as soon as things get sloppy, or whatever system works to keep them involved and sane.
OP did that when they were leaving the bar. It would be weird to do it AGAIN via email. Since OP has already done as much as she can, it’s now on Jane to apologize for her own behavior.
Yes, but Polly is asking if it would be appropriate for LW to apologize via email if she *hadn’t* already done so at the bar.
OP #1: You do not have any (more) apologizing to do to anyone. Your boss, Jane, however, is the one who really messed up. She’s the one who people need to hear an apology from.
Fortunately, Jane is not OP #1’s boss, just a “senior colleague” and “mentor”.
Does this make much of a difference in this context?
Unfortunately Jane didn’t write in.
What do people see as OP1’s best course of action with Jane? Personally I’d be uncomfortable with her after this.
If it were me, I’d just be professional and polite with her as much as needed to do my job, and never go to a bar or happy hour with her again. If she noticed or brought up that I’d pulled back, then I might be inclined to say what happened, particularly as they have a mentor/mentee relationship. But you know, I also wouldn’t be inclined to take further career advice from a person who got that drunk at a work event and harassed someone.
It’s a data point in no doubt many for OP. It’s fine to be uncomfortable about it of course, but then what?
It for sure would not be the highlight of my relationship with a mentor but I also feel like ‘got drunk and nasty once’ is really not enough to become an action item (other than ‘watch yourself when she drinks’).
But then, no doubt this is influenced by the fact that I work with a famously drinking-prone crowd & profession (legal). Drunk people are not exactly rare in my life.
Yes, this does come down to organisational and sector culture. There are plenty of areas where “gets drunk at work events” is not a huge strike against anyone, “got drunk and mean/inappropriate that one time” is only an orange flag, and “always gets drunk and innappropriate” begets the response, “well, how inappropriate are we talking?” There are other cultures where it’s hugely out of line and shocking even one time.
If this is “went to hotel bar after work event, and then went on to a local bar after that” culture, then it’s probably leaning towards the former. Most people are probably familiar with pretending it didn’t happen and moving on, maybe with a bit of “thank god it wasn’t me this time” or “aaaand that’s why I switch to sparkling water after my second glass of wine”.
Absolutely yes to all of this.
I’m in a sector that can really range depending on the event – but I have found that conferences to be a peak “let your hair down” environment. There was one conference where after the final evening event, the conference coordinated a club night after the evening drinks event, and the club night would end around 3am. And this was a conference that still had a 9am session the final day.
None of this is to excuse to bad behavior, but the reality that boorish, unkind, and rude behavior can increase in these environments I do think mitigates the larger ramifications. The OP calls Jane a mentor as opposed to colleague – so if it’s a case where Jane works for XYZ and the OP is now at ABC – then the chance for lasting impact would be even smaller.
And like is said here – knowing that some people are not workplace after party hangs is not the same as needing to completely distance yourself from them.
I agree. Given that most of the attendees went to the hotel bar after the conference, then at least one more bar (maybe 2+ based on the phrase “final bar”), I suspect that drinking is not exactly rare in OP’s profession either.
I would also add that when it comes to work mentors, the fact she got mean when she drinks might not be particularly relevant to their ability to be a mentor. Her nastiness while drunk doesn’t affect the value of her advice on how to handle internal company politics or manage a client’s eccentricities or whatever.
Imo, do nothing. There’s nothing really TO do.
As Allonge said, it’s a data point. Maybe keep their ears open to shifts in perceptions of Jane from others (only with consideration for how that might impact OP), maybe at the next conference excuse themself from the trip to the local bar if Jane is going, but otherwise there’s nothing for OP to do.
OP$#2, it sounds like your industry is pretty small. If you want to avoid offending the offensive dating dude, you could tell him you want to avoid making any kind of friendship or dating connections with people you work with. My experience with men like him who opening brag about their intimate skills and are so over-the-top without realizing how offputting they are is they don’t tend to recognize social cues.
I agree that this is the perfect out.
Not really given that OP likely has friends and may date someone from work. Much better to ignore, and if OP ever meets the guy it’s easy to say that they didn’t seem to have much in common and maybe mention an interest in knitting or similarly ‘boring’ hobby as proof.
I don’t think OP needs to open a discussion, since they hardly know eachother. If it was someone she interacted often with, yes.
I think it’s a good thing to have as a backup, if the guy does mention it to her in the future.
It is not up to OP2 to ‘avoid offending’ a man who is behaving so unprofessionally. It is not a woman’s responsibility to ‘avoid offence’. If he happens to be a poor wickle snowflake who is ‘offended’ by her ignoring, rejecting or even blocking him, that is on him.
pcake made the suggestion to the LW so as to not possibly harm her reputation in her small industry if the guy decided to be weird about it, not because he’s a “poor wickle snowflake”
No it’s not, but it can be a safer option to have in mind if she ever runs into the dude and he starts trying to ask about it. Sometimes that’s the choice we have to make unfortunately.
The best option for this is actually just not replying, if someone thinks it’s apparopriate to have a profile like that and contact people they know professionally from that account they’re unlikely to react well to a messaging pointing out it’s inappropriate.
They’re also about as a far away from talented as they can get, ime. The more a dude brags about a bedroom skill, the worse he is at it. And that’s before we touch on “god seeking goddess” ugh.
A dating profile has failed if it makes people think of Zeus, God of Cheaters.
Or Blackadder’s Baby Eating Bishop of Barton-Wells! “I’ll do anything to anything!”
With the disclaimer that I can’t remember the last time I looked at a dating app, I would just quietly disconnect from him on other social media and not send any kind of communication. If he notices and asks, then use this response.
This was supposed to be a reply to MK. This blog program isn’t awake yet…
That seems like… over-apologizing? I don’t think OP owes this person anything. If he asks, maybe then, but to proactively contact someone who messaged you on a DATING APP is not necessary.
It’s not OP’s job to educate him. Especially when she barely knows him.
Yes! My industry isn’t small, but is is mostly men, and I am one of few women. I have (unfortunately) encountered this situation many times throughout my career. My response has ranged from telling the person IRL that I am only interested in a professional relationship, to ignoring the attention, to escalating to HR because the guy in question would not leave me alone.
My advice here is to document things because who knows what someone else will do if they feel unfairly rejected. Also, LW, this is not your fault, so please don’t blame yourself for the actions of other people.
the salary band could also be something like this:
Level 17: $60k-$105k
then after you are evaluated to see which sublevel you’ll start at such as
17.1: $60-70k
17.2: $70-80k
17.3 $80-90k
etc
OP3: Depending on the immigration stream, you might be able to provide proof of experience through a combination of job descriptions, payroll or tax paperwork, training records, and other documentation. If you’re not sure about asking your boss’s boss, check the rules for your specific immigration stream to see if there is another way of meeting the requirement. Alternatively, ask a registered immigration consultant.
Source: Helping my staff with Canadian immigration and work permit paperwork.
I appreciate the insight! It would be under Skilled Worker, and I do plan to contact a registered immigration consultant prior to submitting, both to make sure I’m not missing something and to ask questions like this one. On paper, the documentation of experience requirement seems pretty rigid, but a registered consultant would know the reality better than I would.
If you consult an immigration consultant, please verify their expertise and experiences. A friend used an inexperienced one and their partner’s application was delayed for a year as a result. Good luck!
+1. We have an enormous problem in Canada with self-identified “immigration consultants” who don’t have the knowledge or experience to do a good job, and are regularly making a mess of people’s immigration processes. Sometimes irreparably. Unlike with an immigration lawyer, where there’s law society complaints etc, you have no recourse with a consultant. For my money, honestly, I’d just pay for a few hours of real legal advice.
Agreed. My husband is from another Commonwealth nation and it’s the same problem there.
He worked for a gov’t. office that liscensed skilled workers before he immigrated here. There were so many people that got taken for a ride by “consultants” and were barely able to salvage their visa application. There’s a predatory element to it so you have to be very careful.
It’s much better to just hire an immigration lawyer and get legal advice. There’s more accountability for the lawyer and it’s safer for the applicant.
I’m still convinced that my husband lost a job because our immigration lawyers didn’t do our paperwork quickly enough.
That being said, I’m happier with the way things turned out without him getting that job, so it’s all good. We’ve been happily in Canada for almost eight years now.
This! My friend is an immigration consultant and they get many clients who have already spent C$2,000-5,000 on shoddy work and are her clients because eventually they realized they had to go for a higher quality/more expensive firm (their minimum retainer if I recall correctly is C$8,000). Just pay for good work once and be done with it. Her biggest complaint is that clients don’t send her the required documents fast enough!
With the caveat that I am neither a lawyer nor a registered immigration consultant, my understanding is that the Skilled Worker stream requires proof of work experience but doesn’t specify the form that must take. A reference letter from your employer is an easy way to do it (since you can ask them to include all the information in one place) but you could provide, for example, tax paperwork to prove you worked there plus a job description and copies of your performance reviews to prove job duties.
Good luck!
I came here to say that in our case a standard letter of employment was enough. You can get it from your HR and big companies even have automated systems. A letter of employment is required in a lot of situations that do not involve leaving the company (applying for a loan is one)…
I agree with the advice to consult an immigration lawyer in Canada.
Also, I would not contact your current company about anything related to your proposed relocation until/unless your lawyer tells you that you need to. There’s no reason to disturb your current employment, if you don’t need to or before you need to.
You can always ask for a letter of employment, and imply that it is for financing reasons. Perhaps you are negotiating a mortgage….
Could you get a letter because you will be looking for a job without telling him it’s Canada? If you actually have to have him submit a reference directly then you would need to tell them that the boss has an irrational contempt for Canada.
There’s no real option to do so on the forms but . . . now might be the time to contact the IRCC as well as an immigration lawyer in Canada and ask about your situation. I think six months ago the likelihood of Canadians perceiving that Americans loathed us was a lot lower than it is today. And I do know that most Americans are lovely and don’t hate us but I think as a nation we are taken aback by the lack of knowledge and regard that some Americans exhibit.
This. I’ve had to get these sorts of letters and while I always included the full information (I need this letter because X country has weird requirements about documenting employment), I could have very easily asked for a very specific kind of letter without specifying it was for working in another country.
Yes! And some provinces have separate programs to encourage people with skills we need to come here, so the province you’re looking at might affect the process too.
OP3, welcome in advance to our lovely failed communist state! We have poutine!
LW5: This can be a ‘know your workplace’ thing but at my skip levels, my bosses boss will say ‘this is your time, what do you want to talk about.’ If you get the floor like that, here are some things that can be interesting:
‘What are you excited / nervous about at X company this year?’
‘When you were more junior in your career (/ in my role if applicable) what do you wish you’d done more or less of’
‘I have X project / event / whatever coming up, I am excited / nervous about Y part. What would you focus on if you were me between now and then’
Excellent suggestions!
The first time you have the meeting it’s also very much ok to ask how grandboss wants it to go in the next occasions – should you prepare an agenda in advance etc.
As for what to put on the agenda (not necessarily in the first meeting, but in general):
– potential stretch projects / goals
– lessons learnt from projects – nice if you can also give credit to other colleagues here, from other departments
– wild ideas on future actions
– monitor any strategic document / discussion coming from the top and bring them up in connection to your (or your department’s) work
Absolutely this. I have quarterly skips and my skip expects ME to drive the call and the agenda. In addition to what others have suggested, I have asked my skip for introductions to other people/leaders/groups that I don’t have connections to, and that has been very successful for me.
Excellent advice from IngEmma and Allonge here! I would add that if you are interested in a certain career path at the company, you should mention it as/when appropriate. Ask them for any insights they may have, advice for a person at your stage in your career, etc.
I don’t know how many times I’ve heard that someone was never considered for a promotion because “No one knew they were interested” in my life! Let them know, if that’s the case! Older f$rts like me like to take others under the proverbial wing. (ignore if that’s not your goal obviously :)
Exactly this. Most of my skips have expected me to have some sort of agenda.
Love the topic suggestions, and will add: know what you want to brag about. Your skip doesn’t have insight into your daily work, so this is your chance to highlight the great work you’ve done. Most of the time, my skip has had no idea what my individual contributions are, and highlighting that can open doors.
Any advice for these meetings when your skip level boss hears only half of what you say, fills in the rest with assumptions, AND doesn’t actually understand what you do?
Some suggestions:
-Just bide your time and grin and bear it
-Forget the content and just do the emotional labor/social bonding aspect so skip boss at least feels positively about you as a person
-Ask your boss or other staff who meet with this boss what they do when they want input on something specific that is out of skip boss’s expertise
-Ask questions more about office politics or org structure and less on the specifics of your work – is skip boss really the right person to be asking these questions if they don’t understand what you do?
For #3 to look into: does your workplace have a standard procedure/template for confirmation of employment letters, and, if so, would this meet the requirements for the immigration process?
Some organizations, especially if they tend to be bureaucratic, have standardized letters confirming employment/experience/salary (e.g. for rental or mortgage applications, for professional certifications) and a standardized procedure for requesting them. (At my workplace, you can do it automatically through the HR system)
If this is an option and if it does meet the requirements in your situation, you may be able to turn what would otherwise have been a debate about the merits of Canada into a routine request for boring paperwork.
Thanks for the tip! I’m sure they do have a process in place (the bureaucracy has expanded to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy several times in the last year) but equally sure that it’s likely to be inadequately detailed. Definitely worth checking, though, both for me and for anyone else in a similar situation.
OP2, I don’t think you’re overreacting at all, and I don’t think you have to accept exposure to any and all kind of sexual content you didn’t agree to, just because you’re open to going on dates. I think we accept it’s probably going to happen on dating sites, but I think that’s a different distinction to accepting that it’s okay and a fine way to behave. You’ve seen yourself that this behaviour isn’t really on the same level as the dating app in general anyway. When its a professional contact, it definitely bounds over many more lines than when a stranger creeps you out. There’s an element of trust that he’ll respect his own reputation enough to not overtly sexual, but I guess he prefers this type of a thrill to having a professional reputation. Anyway, I can completely understand your firewalling your social media here. You are not crazy.
I hold skip-levels with my team. It’s partly to say here I am, I’m not scary, please talk to me if you have a problem when your manager’s out, partly a check for problems with their manager and to get a sense of who’s under pressure.
But it’s their chance to ask me for insight into the wider picture behind their work, express interest in getting involved in other parts of the team/special projects (“I hardly talk to half the division and I love irrational numbers, so I’d be happy to help arrange the Pi day celebrations next year if you give me a ingredients budget” or “I’m actually an Excel expert, would you like me to sort out our horrible leave-planning process”), or make suggestions that might be outside their manager’s remit but in mine.
Sometimes they’re 5 minute conversations. Sometimes we talk about our kids. Sometimes it all pays off 6 months later when team A needs help and I remember George in team B wants to get more experience in Team A’s work.
LW2 no advice just commiseration.
fellow late 40s woman here also recently rejoined dating apps after 5 years of being happily single and ugh. I remember now why I came off them and also it’s a LOT of work. Plus I live in London so people assume that I would be spoilt for choice (spoiler: more men = more weirdos).
I had hoped age would have bought wisdom but nah. That dude sounds like a lot of guys on the apps and is probably pretty oblivious to how he comes across.
PSA AAM readership – if you have male straight friends on apps please help them with their profiles to be less weird and creepy basement guy
Also what’s up with all the 20-something guys?!
When I was doing online dating in my thirties, looking for someone in my own demographic, I could not move for all the twenty-somethings ignoring my settings, as well as the guys in their fifties scolding me for my “ageist” preferences.
If that guy’s so concerned about combating ageism against people over fifty, maybe he should try dating instead of going after people 20 years his junior?
*dating them himself – typing fail
Words right out of my mouth!
Amazing how that works, isn’t it? SHE is ageist. HE simply “has preferences.”
It’s the entitlement that both baffles and annoys me.
I have a few single friends and get to hear about the absolute whackos they encounter on these dating apps. Another friend and I talked about how we didn’t have to deal with that in the analog era of dating – then I realized that we did have to deal with it, just on a much smaller scale.
So there’s probably the same ratio of whackos out there, but when you enounter literally 100x more people, you get 100x more whackos.
OMG I think you’re right!
Man the rose tinted glasses I wear when I look back at 90s / early 00 days of meeting guys through friends in bars
I don’t think the guys in their 20s are all dating, I think they’re harvesting sex partners.
Frankly, this seems to be a theme, particularly on sites where you do not have to pay. It isn’t just men in their 20s however; I am in my 30s and have friends using those sites, and there seems to be a real lack of transparency as to why people are there, particularly men. Now, I am not saying women don’t lie too, but I think there are a good deal of men telling women they are looking for a relationship when all they really want is a hook up. Meanwhile, there are many women looking for a real relationship who are having the wool pulled over their eyes by guys that just want a hook up or FWB situation. It really makes it difficult for those that are open and honest about what they want, because after awhile you become a little jaded about whether someone is “looking for a relationship” or actually looking for a relationship.
I matched with a guy a couple of weeks ago who put in his profile open to long term relationship, wants to take it slow.
In our initial messaging on the app he explains he’s separated a year before, hence taking it slowly. Very upfront and honest.
Brief chat of where in london we live.
Turns out in the same neighbourhood. Within 2 messages he asks me if I want to be a FWB / FB.
Realises he’s offended me (because I said I’m offended).
Spams me 5-6 messages saying sorry / he was joking didn’t mean it etc…
Then ends with ‘so, how annoying are the roadworks at the bottom of the high street right now lol?’
I unfollowed. Have realised that being in my perimeno
Ugh meant to finish saying being in my perimenopausal era – I have no Fs left to give
Yep. They’re mean drunk on Cougar Town and PUA crap and think this kind of behavior is going to lure “desperate older women.”
Sitting sincerely glad I am married and don’t have to navigate any kind of dating ever again.
I used to say that. My husband died a little over a year ago. I am only 59 and feel slightly open to dating. Reading this thread makes me think I will just embrace being a single, independent widow.
If I outlive Husband, I am 100% Single and Loving It from then on.
I am very glad that I married before dating apps became the default way to meet people. But I do have to confess that while I think I am pretty normal, I would have no idea how to communicate that on dating apps. I don’t have a ton of flattering photos of just me (although granted having a family is a big part of that), I’m not sure how to make my hobbies sound interesting and fun instead of obsessive, and it’s hard to think of ways to be witty without being obnoxious in a short bio. Long story short dating apps don’t seem like a great way of organizing the dating scene.
Honestly? I’d much rather someone talk about the hobbies they’re obsessed with than try to make them seem “normal” or fun. That was I can talk about *my* weird hobby obsessions and not feel self-conscious about it! I make a lot of friends at science fiction conventions, because “oo, is that button a reference to [obscure 80s children’s science fiction series]?” is a perfectly normal way to start up a conversation. ;-)
I suspect that some of my interests translated better to real life conversation than they would have just listed out on a dating profile. It seems to me that it is a fine line between making a memorable profile without being too memorable (like the dude in the original letter), but also not being boring and getting lost in the shuffle.
From what I understand, men struggle to get any matches at all on dating sites (and many of the ones they get are bots), while women get flooded with matches, many of whom are deeply creepy. It seems that few of either men or women get many matches they actually like.
I used apps for a years before having the excellent luck of meeting my husband through a mutual friend. It is indeed incredibly hard to write a profile that’s essentially a marketing document for who you are as a person. It’s not a normal thing to do!
The idea is to whittle it down to just a few, if you’re looking for a relationship! Honestly, the reason me and my partner found each other on line is because of weird things on our profile that ruled a lot of people out for us. Process of elimination works! It’s immediately obvious if someone has ignored your profile, (like hookup style messages when you’ve stated you want a relationship etc) and stuff like smoking/veganism/wanting kids is all up front. It’s okay if that stuff turns people off.
This.
I met my wife at an SF&F convention, in the late 80s.
IMO, SF&F fans don’t need to bother with dating apps, they need to start attending their local convention(s). You already have a hobby in common, and you can both make friends and develop romantic interests.
Nothing wrong in having niche (not weird!) hobbies – if anything I would find it interesting. Also ditto for wittiness and self confidence.
The problem is that a few guys just say weird stuff that’s totally socially inappropriate and dodgy behaviour. Like this one saying he does tai chi before foreplay – if you won’t say something as an intro to someone face to face, don’t put it in your profile!
Nah, let the creepy basement guys advertise honestly about being creepy basement guys so people can be duly warned.
I mean, if you’ve GOT non-creepy ideally-female friends and you’re willing to take their advice, you’re probably not one of the creepy guys, basement or otherwise. The creepy guys are creepy because they only listen to other men.
+1
More men = more weirdos reminds me of a friend’s description of online dating sites in the early years. “The odds are good, but the goods are odd.”
I can very much relate to LW1’s urge to keep apologising. I, too, tend to think I should apologise repeatedly and for everything including things others did. But it’s something to work on!
I can’t imagine any good coming from the OP apologizing about her boss in writing in emails to those present. She will tarnish her own reputation doing that. Distancing herself at the time was the best she could do. If she can’t say anything to Jane, then there is nothing left to do here.
#3 you might consider talking to an immigration attorney if you haven’t already.
That is definitely part of the plan!
Was supposed to be a reply to Hiring Mgr above…
For #4, idk about their stated reason for not negotiating further, but the $105k is certainly the band ceiling for the role as opposed to new hires. They don’t want to hire someone at $100k, knowing that they’ll never be able to give more than a $5k merit raise to that employee without a promotion for the rest of time. Now you know that you have about $25k worth of merit and tenure growth outside of COLA or promotion, so do with that as you will.
I’ve never understood this argument.
If the ceiling is $100K and my experience qualifies me for it, I’d rather get $100K all the time than work my way up to it.
But sometimes the $100k is only worth it to the company for someone who is performing at a high level in the role’s context at that particular company. So like, experience elsewhere is only worth $80k, but once you know how to manipulate the internal politics to be more effective in the role, it’s a $100k role.
In other words, “growing into the role” can work both ways – for your pay, but also for the skill and value you are able to deliver. Very few people walk into a new job on Day 1 performing at the level they’ll be at on day 1,001.
Sure that’s what you would prefer- I would , too. But in a world where there is such a thing as a merit raise ( which wasn’t my world) , I know I’d be pretty annoyed to never be able to get one and that’s what employers want to avoid.
Anyway, about the ranges – due to union contracts at my job , there was an automatic minimum raise for a promotion based on a certain percentage per salary grade. Generally, the higher salaries in the range were only available to promotees . If a position was being advertised to the general public , the range in the advertisement would list the range that someone coming from the outside might receive.
I’m guessing that there’s a couple of official or unofficial experience bands within that position, and they were willing to hire someone who had the experience of their 70-80k band. The fact that they weren’t going for the 60k end of the range and that they did bring in the LW at the top of the posted range makes it seem like they’re not trying to be entirely cheap about it. Transparency laws might not be entirely accurate as to why, but there are also equity reasons why a place might decide not to negotiate salary increases beyond their offers.
I think the LW has fair reason to be disappointed, but they already knew going in that the range this place was offering was below their preferred one. If they do discover that they’re being underpaid relative to their peers if they take the job, they should take action on that, but the LW should already have been asking the question of whether the 80k salary would have been worth it when they sent in the application, and while disappointing, this discovery doesn’t change the calculus all that much.
I agree that the ceiling of 105 is not for new hires and that’s fine, but just tell me that then. Don’t try and and pretend it’s a good thing because I’ll have more raise potential
Band ceilings should be changing frequently, if not yearly. No one is going to say that the band for the job in 2000 was $50-$80k so that’s where it should be in 2025. That would just be crazy.
It’s touched on in a couple threads, but I’m wondering if OP1 is considering telling *Jane* about what she did. I think in an ideal world, she would, both because Jane owes an apology to the poor woman whose looks she kept commenting on (and maybe to OP for putting her in an awkward position) and, secondarily, because it reflects poorly on Jane (and so could be a kindness to let her know). But in an ideal world Jane wouldn’t have made those comments, and it’s always fraught to confront someone about something they’ve done, let alone a mentor. Would it be best to leave that also, or is there a good way to let Jane know she behaved badly?
I think you’re right that a lot here hinges on the fact that this is not an ideal world. The line from the OP that Jane “has significant influence” on her career suggests to me that…no, the OP is not in a position to really say anything directly to Jane, and saying something further up the chain may not be possible without repercussions. OP does need to protect her career prospects; she’s learned something about Jane and likely will want to distance herself or find additional mentorship, but formal callout or even gentle conversation may not be in her best interests. I also agree with others that it’s unlikely that this is the first time it’s happened, that Jane has probably gotten sloshed and said things in poor taste before, will quite possibly do so again, and eventually it will catch up to her.
If she was a mentor outside of the sphere of direct influence on the OP’s career, I think that it would be more possible to bring it up–particularly in a “this made me uncomfortable” way, rather than a “calling out a senior person’s bad behavior” way. “This isn’t easy for me to bring up, but the amount of drinking that happened after LlamaCon was unexpected for me, and in particular, I was uncomfortable with how your behavior shifted when you had a few drinks–I don’t think that’s a good position for me to put myself in. I think I’ll pass on future BarCon outings.” But again–I don’t think this is the rapport or professional hierarchy that OP has.
If Jane regularly gets drunk and obnoxious at events, then it’s already well known. Jane’s influence will be lessened by anyone who knows how she behaves. People return home with stories about the bad behaviour of other attendees. The woman she continually insulted isn’t going to forget about Jane.
This. It’s going to come back home as, “we had drinks with the team from Llama Brushes, LLC, and Jane got really sloppy. We felt terribly for her coworker, Lucinda, who had to deal with that.”
OP has already distanced herself from these comments and made it clear they didn’t think them appropriate. At this point it’s nothing to do with them. If they truly thought Jane would be receptive to hearing this, and if it’s something that would make OP’s life easier to avoid repeat behaviour, then maybe it’s something they could risk, but otherwise it’s just really, really not their responsibility to mop up after another grown adult’s inability to behave. Jane might not know what was said, but she should know that it’s not okay to have a foggy memory after a work event anyway.
On #1, I wouldn’t apologize to the other attendee because I think it’s best to just let it go at this point. Depending on your relationship with Jane though you might want to let her know what happened.
If I was Jane, and this was out of character for me (as it appears to be here), I would definitely want to know
Even if it isn’t out of character for Jane, if LW really believes Jane doesn’t remember, it’s only reasonable common courtesy to make Jane aware that she insulted an industry contact!
LW may or may not have occasion to speak with / work with that contact in the future (and the future is a long time, so who knows), but the more senior Jane is, the more likely it is that she has a large network that this could impact.
If we were going to give Jane the maximum benefit of the doubt and suppose that she got spiked, or wasn’t aware that a new medication could interact with alcohol, or didn’t eat, or something like that – then it seems like giving her a heads up is the least LW could do.
And from a pragmatic / self-interested standpoint, if Jane hears of it from another source first, that could negatively impact LW’s mentoring relationship.
#1 – I have been in a very similar spot to OP’s. There’s not really a good way to navigate this. On one hand, you don’t want other colleagues thinking that Jane’s behavior is indicative of your own. On the other hand, the colleague(s) saw Jane with OP and saw that Jane was the one who drank way too much and behaved accordingly. I don’t think OP needs to say anything to the colleague(s) and I also think in the future OP would be wise to distance themselves from Jane at similar events.
(In my case, my “Jane” was junior to me, and got legendarily blackout drunk at a work thing. She was also sharing a hotel room with me and another colleague, and the fun end result was me sleeping in my car that night.)
#3: In my fantasy world of rainbows and unicorns, the people in charge would take one look at your boss’s vitriol towards Canada and grant your visa/residency immediately out of concern for your wellbeing.
OP3, is your boss possessed by the ghost of my late father?!
Seriously, though, as others have suggested, an immigration lawyer or consultant could really help here. Citizenship & Immigration Canada has a page about how to tell whether such a person is legit: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/protect-fraud.html
Good luck!!!
I don’t have advice for LW2, but as a tai chi teacher I had to come here to say that tai chi isn’t a sex warmup? It’s a martial art. Guarantee this guy is doing weird cultural appropriation in addition to general creepiness.
Since he already has displayed bad judgement in several directions, it’s unfortunately not surprising.
I was trying to imagine how tai chi would relate to warming up for that too and not seeing it LOL
Tai chi has a sex warm-up feels like something Otto in A Fish Called Wanda would do.
The mental picture I have of this guy hopping out of bed and doing marital arts to get “warmed up” before intimacy has me dying. I just can’t begin to understand how he thinks that is something girls would find hot. Is he by chance actually a 15 year old boy in disguise?
You’d be surprised by how delusional some men are about what women find hot.
My first thought was similar to this.
They’re making out on the couch; things are getting heated and some clothing is being removed.
Dude: “Hang on a minute. Sit there and watch me do some exercises.”
Dude: [works his way through some tai chi movements]
Dude: “You’re even more hot and bothered now, right?”
Her: [picks clothing up off the floor, gets dressed, leaves]
She’s getting dressed *while* he’s doing these moves. In fact, she probably got up and left and he didn’t notice because he was too busy seducing his true soul mate…himself.
This really made me laugh- thank you!
Hahaha I now have a vision of this guy in some white trousers and a bandana around their head (I don’t know why) and a tribal tattoo doing tai chi at the foot of the bed all whilst making weirdly intense eye contact with his partner.
It would probably be a scene in Anchorman or Zoolander
Sounds like he got his dating tips from Kevin Klines’ character in A Fish Called Wanda.
Maybe he misread “marital arts” as “martial arts”?
Hahaha. I love it!
And that tells you all you need to know about his prowess in bed.
As someone who was on dating apps regularly about 8 years ago, I would block/unconnect with him on all social media except LinkedIn (because it’s a professional connection). I say that because I had people on the dating app who I knew tangentially (friend of a friend, etc.) who, after a decline on the app, then tried messaging me on Facebook and Instagram. People are wild.
I’d feel fine about removing or blocking him on LinkedIn, too. Obviously LW might be in an industry where every connection counts or this guy counts particularly, but if you just have him connected on LinkedIn in a general “we know who each other is and might occasionally work together” way, I’d have zero qualms about removing him. If the fact that every time you see his name you’re going to think “ew” outweighs the value to you of anything he might post, that’s a perfectly good reason to remove him.
Why keep him on linkedin though? He demonstrates poor judgment. Do you really need that muppet in your contacts?
I agree with both of you! I suppose I was leaving LinkedIn because of the professional context. But you’re right–get rid of him everywhere.
I once had someone track me down on LinkedIn from a dating app (via my first name and occupation) to tell me I should check my dating app more often. He then proceeded to explain I was his ideal woman because he loves Indian women as we are bought up in a culture that appreciates the gender roles and we are submissive and sweet and can cook.
I mean one of those things is correct ~\(‘_’)/~
“And stalking turns them on, right?”
LW2 – I know this isn’t the point of the letter, but…how do people like this guy think this kind of profile is going to work? It’s off-putting and reeks of insecurity. I was an inexperienced and stupid 20-something guy once…but I still knew better than to write something like that on my dating profile.
As for advice, I think disconnecting from him on social media is reasonable. I expect he either won’t notice – a lot of social media doesn’t notify you when someone unfriends/follows you – or if he does, won’t say anything.
As someone who has been on the apps a very long time, this kind of profile is pretty common. I won’t speculate why he’s done it because that’s not helpful, but I would agree quietly removing social media connections to him is indeed the way to go. It’s all LW2 will need to do to get her lack of interest across. He probably will notice eventually, but he won’t wonder why, and it would be surprising indeed if he ever brought it up because LW2 would tell everyone what she saw. This man is not owed a thing.
LW1, the only time you should bring it up again is if this person mentions Jane’s behaviour, but I highly doubt they will. Otherwise, continue to be civil and professional.
I can’t be positive, but I feel like we all might be present for the first time “tai chi enhanced oral sex hobby” has been uttered in the universe.
But these days, who can tell.
First time on a workplace advice blog at the very least
This is the only search result for “tai chi enhanced oral sex hobby” on both Google and Duck Duck Go, even with safe search off!
(Which is surprising, TBH – it seems like a good premise for the kinds of content that turn up when you turn safe search off)
Maybe he got tantric and tai chi mixed up?!
Also cannot wait until someone changes their username to Tai Chi Before Sex on the site
Re #4: I suspect it is what Alison suggests where the posted range is where they are intending to hire someone and the full range encompasses everyone in the position including those who have been there for a long time. I’ve seen applicants complain when a company posts the full salary range but won’t offer a new hire anything at the top level —they say that practice is misleading. It sounds like this company is actively trying to avoid that by posting an accurate new hire range!
Exactly! If you’re hiring for say, a data analyst, the person moving from admin who has shown promise but has zero actual experience might get brought in at $60k while they’re getting trained up and educated. $70-$80k could be the band for “entry level but with some experience and direct qualifications” and then $90-105k is actually for “senior data analyst” but they keep all data analysts in one larger band.
My company is hiring for a role and is currently listing the position for $65-80k. I know the most senior person in my company at that role is getting paid around $110k. However, that person has been in that role for a decade and is the go-to person for the entire company for their role. They aren’t looking to hire another very senior go-to person, they’re looking some someone junior to mid level in the role. They don’t need another top banana. It’s not unethical or unfair for them to not want to hire someone at the top of the range of $110k because they don’t need a $110k person. They need a $75k person.
I’ve seen some job postings lately that are pretty transparent on this and I like it. They usually say something like “The full pay band is from $X-Y, and we expect the new hire to be brought in somewhere in the middle, depending on experience.” I like this because you know to expect an offer in the middle, and you know how much you could expect to make eventually if hired.
I live in CO and putting a hiring range and a fully salary range is a very common practice for job postings here. I do usually see both on the position posting though so it’s uncommon (in my experience) that they omitted the full salary band.
LW1, I want to gently push back on this statement:
“If Jane had been male, the comments would have been downright creepy and harassing.”
It may not have given “creepy” vibes, but it was definitely harassing. Don’t give Jane a pass on that.
+1
LW 1, Unless this is normal behavior for Jane, it would be a kindness to fill her in on the broad strokes of what happened, so that she’s not wondering why people may be standoffish or not as eager as before to work with her on things.
For #5: In my department, the employee is the one to set the agenda for the skip-level, not the big boss. If you’re meeting with your big boss and you’re not sure what to talk about, ask your direct manager! They should have good insight into what kinds of thing their manager will want to talk about with you.
For LW #5 – as someone who does lots of skip-level meetings with junior staff in my team, I actually really appreciate it when people bring forward something that’s on their mind. My meetings are open conversations, so it doesn’t have to be a formal agenda. Typical questions staff bring to me are along the lines of talking through career choices, navigating the company, and asking about how I approached different issues in my career.
It sounds like you are having good meetings with your junior staff, but for any other “Big Bosses” out there – please tell your junior staff what you want out of the skip level meetings. There’s a definite power imbalance there and back when I was a more junior employee, I wouldn’t automatically have thought I had any standing to drive the meeting or even bring stuff up. It’s a kindness to the junior employee to let them know what you expect and want out of the meeting.
For LW #5, every skip level meeting I’ve been to has at least partially been about how the team I’m on works together and how working with my manager is. Make sure you think about both of those things prior to going to the meeting, especially if there are issues in either area. If you have any questions about why your department is doing things a certain way or the direction of work/processes, this meeting is also a good time to ask about those. As Alison said, this meeting is a good time to get face time with someone higher in seniority.
Example of how a skip level meeting was great for myself/my team: My grandboss asked what was working well and not working well for my team. I was able to mention that the group as a whole gelled well together and most were great at being collaborative in an environment that really needed that. I also shouted out some of my coworkers for how awesome they were handling their area. Those coworkers have since been promoted, even while having a boss that isn’t singing their praises. I also brought up some issues the whole team had been having with one specific coworker for 6+ months, that we’d all brought it up to our boss, and our boss hadn’t been dealing with it in a way that was helping the team. My grandboss took that piece as feedback to help my boss with coaching problematic coworkers and things changed for the better there.
LW #3, a couple of notes from my own experience that you might find helpful:
– A letter from anyone in your chain of management is fine, they don’t have to be a direct supervisor. In one case a previous boss had moved roles and couldn’t be reached, and her boss had retired, so I had to go all the way up to *that* person’s boss for the letter.
– Employer reference letters for Canadian immigration are *incredibly* specific on what they have to include, and they can and do reject any letter that doesn’t meet every single element. I’m talking going through the letter with a checklist making sure it’s on headed paper, dated, includes contact information for the person writing it, specifies employment dates, job title, pay rate… Missing any of those (in addition to the detailed job specific duties) will get the letter rejected.
– Because of the above, I recommend doing what I did (in conjunction with your reputable immigration consultant), which is writing the letter yourself to include all the elements required and sending it to your letter-writer to sign off on.
In the end I had to submit three letters, and have two of them explain I’d been moved to a different division (and different employer on paper) due to a restructuring but the job stayed the same: one was from a former boss, one was from the aforementioned Very Senior Person (who, horror, I had to bug repeatedly because he kept introducing formatting errors that removed essential tiny pieces of information), and one was from my current boss!
It was A LOT to get Canadian PR, and I wish you the very best as you go through the process!
The comments were completely inappropriate. If Jane had been male, the comments would have been downright creepy and harassing.
I don’t want to pile on too much but the comments were already downright creepy and harassing coming from Jane. That might be something that LW should on a little bit before they find themselves in another pickle of Jane’s making.
I wish our organization would have skip-a-level meetings. It would make everyone feel so much more included and heard.
I have all of my team members do it with my boss. One of the other things I talk up is their ability to go to him with things they aren’t comfortable coming to me about as their direct supervisor. Its the same reason I request peer interviews without a management presence for incoming new hires.
2. A professional acquaintance messaged me on a dating app and his profile is gross
MMmmmm….. I’m going with ‘meh’
He contacted you because he wanted… sex. With you. And his profile is very very VERY CLEAR he is really into getting a lady where she wants to go.
You don’t find it attractive? That’s fine – but would you have preferred that he sees you on the app, then contacts you via some other channel to ask you out on a date? You’re both using the app. If he’s gone into LinkdIn and asked you out, that’d be unprofessional. If he’d tracked you down via friend of a friend on instagram to ask you out, you might’ve found that creepy.
And if he’d asked you out, via a mutual friend, and then told you he saw you on the App but thought his profile would be ‘too much for you’ then… you’d’ve looked up his profile. Or maybe he’s expecting you’d seen the profile and met up with hi because you, indeed, did want a dude doing tai chi to warm up before sex.
So just reframe this – he didn’t set up a meeting at your office and then suggest he crawls under the desk for a growl.
He was on a dating app, and said to you “Hey we both know A, B, C.” where you can see he is offering sex.
That isn’t unprofessional, that’s both of you being on an app and you being recognised. You aren’t interested. That’s fine, leave it.
The most you should do is mention to friends that he really stood out on the app compared to “the scads of young 20-somethings on their sustained cougar hunts.” and it’s just a funny dating app story. The dude didn’t proposition you, don’t go scorched earth on his arse.
It is a wildly bad idea to have hookups in one’s professional circle. Even looking for long-term relationships is a risky process. For every person you meet who met their partner at work you’ll meet another who says to never date in the office. Hookups are a one-way train to a hot mess.