my employee is monitoring other people’s work

by Alison Green on July 24, 2024

A reader writes:

We are a semi-remote team that uses a project management system to keep our workflow organized and distribute assignments. One of my employees, Jane, feels it is necessary to look at everyone’s work on this system and comment on it. She also uses it as a tool to fuel her immense paranoia (“Why is Boss watching my tracker and not Coworker’s)?” when I haven’t even looked at either — Jane misread!

It’s none of her business, and definitely not her job. Every time I have said something to the effect of “Jane, there’s no reason for you to be looking at other peoples’ work, focus on your own assignments and if there an issue I need to handle, rest assured that I will,” this has been met either with self-pity, pouting, remonstrations about how she’s just trying to help, or some combo of all three. Do you have any advice? I cannot set permissions to keep her from viewing other peoples’ trackers.

I answer this question — and three others — over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here.

Other questions I’m answering there today include:

  • Colleague wants us to stay connected in cutesy ways
  • Bathroom breaks during video calls
  • Should I tell my employer my concerns about a friend’s wife who’s applying for a job?
You may also like:
{ 126 comments }

{ 126 comments… read them below }

  1. I strive to Excel (formerly WPX)*

    For #3, and anyone else expecting a long virtual meeting – normalize having a 5-10 minute break at the hour mark! I know it feels forced and awkward but I’d be willing to be that everyone on the call will be better for having five minutes to get up, stretch, grab water or use the restroom.

    Trainings are obv. a little different but my prior workplace would build the break into any trainings we attended virtually (and in person, for that matter) and it was a tremendous relief.

    1. A Poster Has No Name*

      Yes, anyone on a meeting longer than an hour should build 5-ish minute breaks into their meetings.

      The Agile teams I’ve worked on do this routinely for story mapping or other sessions that can get long.

    2. Ginger Cat Lady*

      Had to flat out tell my boss this one time, and his response was “that’s why we have two trainers on the call, so they can switch out and take care of their needs.”
      But the new hires? What about their needs? They are human, too, and this is their first experience with the company. Let them pee!

      1. AngryOctopus*

        We had a training once that was literally about managing meetings. He told us there would be a break in 15’. 30’ later we were all like “ummm and when is this mythical break you promised us?”. Not the only reason that training was useless but a very big one. You can’t run your own meeting by your own ground rules?? Forget it.

    3. Ultimate Facepalm*

      1. It’s very normal at my company (where I have had up to 12 meetings in 8 hours) to type a quick ‘brb’ in the chat window. I wait until a moment in a meeting that is not particularly relevant to me and then duck out.
      2. I have also seen people schedule 20 minute or 25 minute meetings so that there is a 5-minute break in between. If you are the scheduler, you might be able to plan those.
      3. Announce at the beginning of the meeting ‘Hey everyone, just a heads up that I will need to leave this meeting a couple of minutes early’. Or let the meeting organizer know ‘I am going to be a couple of minutes late to your meeting’

    4. samwise*

      Trainings are exactly the same. Any trainer/instructor/professor who doesn’t build breaks into a meeting that is an hour or longer is an insensitive boob (that’s my professional opinion) and deserves a lower rating on any evaluation of their performance.

      Not taking breaks = you don’t understand how people learn, and/or you don’t know or don’t care about the possibility that attendees may have medical needs or disabilities.

      1. Yay! I’m a llama again!*

        As a trainer, breaks are at least every 90 minutes but I always say at the beginning of the session that if you need to pop away (to visit the bathroom, wrestle a cat off a shelf, rescue a toddler) then just switch off your camera and go – you’ll obviously miss a bit, but life happens.

        If I’m on a meeting with loads of other people and I need to deal with any of those myself, I just turn off my camera and do it. I’d be very surprised if someone challenged it. If it’s just the two of you in the meeting, sometimes I say ‘oh sorry, doorbell!’ if I really need to pop away!

        1. Fatima*

          At first, I forgot we were taking about remote meetings, and I thought it was awesome that you might have cats that needed wrestling in the office. When I got to the toddler part, I realized my mistake.

      2. Reluctant Mezzo*

        I was at one which was four hours long and nothing but Powerpoint slides. (shudders)

    5. Princoss Fairy*

      Honey, I just tell the chat that ither I shit here on camera or on the porcelain throne. always does the trick.

    7. 12345*

      As long as there is a moment where I’m not the active speaker in the conversation, I can usually just turn off camera and put “brb” in the chat.

  2. A Poster Has No Name*

    #3 makes me so grateful that the primary group I’m on Teams calls with a) don’t use cameras and b) dropping a ‘brb’/’back’ in chat is how we handle those situations.

    Not that you can’t just drop a brb in chat on video, too, but that could be more awkward, depending on the team/culture/meeting size.

    1. Guacamole Bob*

      Yeah, for day-to-day meetings at my organization this is how I’d handle it – maybe “I need to step away for a sec” or ” be right back” rather than the acronym. We’re mostly cameras-on, but turn off video, type the message, then turn on video when you’re back. I don’t actually need to know if you’re answering the door to sign for a package, letting the dog out into the backyard, using the bathroom, opening your kid’s applesauce pouch because they’ll tantrum if the other parent does it, etc.

      1. Testing*

        Yup, camera and mic off and you’re good to go! Of course, one of these days the presenter is going to ask me a question right at that moment…

        I’d find various “brb’s” in the chat distracting and irrelevant for everyone who isn’t presenting.

        1. Archi-detect*

          if possible I try to have a meeting buddy and tell them only so they can just say I stepped out for a minute, otherwise no one notices a thing. I of course do the same for them

    2. postscript*

      Zoom has a little ‘I’m away’ icon you can pop up. In our environment it’s normalized to use it in long meetings if you need a break. Most folks are camera-off already.

      1. Carol the happy*

        I once heard the joke, “What did Queen Victoria say when she needed to use the loo?”

        Trick question. Because Queen Victoria never NEEDED to use the loo. She went on a regular schedule to “readjust her crown”. (Or “Dust the Throne?”)

    3. I can read anything except the room*

      It’s actually how we handle it for video calls where I work. It works well because you aren’t waiting for a pause in the conversation just so you can verbally announce that you’re stepping away. The presentation or conversations that are happening can continue undisrupted, and anyone who notices your disappearance can see with a quick non-disruptive glance at the chat that you’re just stepping away for a few minutes or you’re turning your camera off while you eat lunch or you had to log off to get to another meeting or whatever the context is that you’d want to provide.

  3. Pastor Petty Labelle*

    #1 – I would drop the I don’t want to hear about it. It just means she won’t tell you when she does it. You need to be very explicit — you need to stop, this is not acceptable, can you do that?

    If she cannot, you cannot keep her. Sounds harsh but you can’t keep someone around who is probably ruining everyone else morale. I bet you dollars to donuts people are sick of hearing her complaints and wondering why she is allowed to get away with monitoring other people’s work. It also reflects on you as a manager that it is going on. The rest of the team is wondering when you will actually put a stop to it.

    1. WeirdChemist*

      For a minute there I misread and thought you were responding to the question about the cutesy team bonding stuff, and I was like “damn that’s a really harsh response???”

      But absolutely spot advice on for the real #1 once I read it properly lol. Coworkers who are nosy and monitor everyone, and the managers who let them run wild make work absolutely miserable. Put a hard stop to it!

    2. Robert in SF*

      I would go so far as to not include “I need….”, just “Stop …”. I need can be spun in their head all kinds of way, based on their personality! :)

    3. Artemesia*

      This. It is worth escalating to a PIP if she is told very clearly not to do it and still does it. Is there any way to block her access to other people’s work without making it impossible for her to do her job? Be clear. Supervise closely. If it happens again, a PIP and notice that failure to comply AND to continue if the PIP clears will mean immediate dismissal. This is at that point gross insubordination.

    4. Silver Robin*

      I interpreted that differently: “I do not want to hear (from other people) about it” with the assumption that LW is getting complaints from Jane’s coworkers. But rereading, it is not clear if Jane is commenting to LW about the tracker or commenting to other people and they are then complaining.

      LW should be very firm with Jane and then follow up with coworkers to make sure she is not bugging them about it. “I have asked Jane to stop the commentary, but if she continues, please let me know so I can address it with her.” or something to that effect.

    5. Reluctant Mezzo*

      I had a co-worker like that who had our mutual manager loving what she did. Sigh.

    6. allathian*

      Sounds like she doesn’t have enough work to do if she has time to spy on her coworkers like this. But I agree that it has to stop immediately.

      I mean, my manager wouldn’t dream of monitoring my work this closely as long as it gets done on time.

  4. Caramel & Cheddar*

    LW 1 – “this has been met either with self-pity, pouting, remonstrations about how she’s just trying to help, or some combo of all three.”

    Alison’s script is perfect as is, but in case she does this again, it might be worth explicitly telling her that she is not in fact helping when she does this. The “this is disruptive to the team” part of the script is functionally the same, but for people who love to “help” it may worth being really explicit about how it’s unhelpful.

    1. dackquiri*

      I can’t imagine narcing on my coworkers like that to begin with, but my jaw fully dropped at the doing anything that could be construed as “self-pity” or “pouting” to the boss!

      My best guess about the type of behavior this is, is teacher’s-pettery. “You don’t have to” is something I say to someone who’s doing me a generous favor that I feel guilty accepting but do plan to accept. I think she’s more likely to obey a direct “don’t”, and a “this is disruptive” might go a long way to conveying that your team isn’t the Survivor game she’s treating it as.

      1. dackquiri*

        PS – I forgot my final point about how self-pity and pouting isn’t normal to begin with, but you definitely shouldn’t have to encounter that when you give a direct report instructions, which is when it reaches a very unquestionable level of “unprofessional”.

    2. Mockingjay*

      I’d leave out the “it’s not helpful.” Because Jane will take the next hour explaining why it really, truly is.

      This isn’t about managing feelings. It’s NOT Jane’s job to monitor her coworkers; it’s OP’s role. That distinction needs to be made very clear to Jane. “Jane, I manage the workflow. You need to focus on completing your own tasks and you are not to monitor anyone else’s status. Can you do that?” OP should make sure Jane knows the consequences of noncompliance – PIP, reassignment, firing.

      1. Space Needlepoint*

        I agree with you. I think by pouting and remonstrating Jane is trying to make her feelings the thing OP has to fix. The focus needs to be on Jane’s behavior, that it’s unacceptable, and that it has to stop, in no uncertain terms.

        1. Artistic Impulses*

          I agree that Jane is out of control, and needs to be shut down hard.
          It is bad enough that she is spying on her co-workers all in a so-called effort to “help,” but the reporting back and the self-pity are way too much.

          Unless there is something egregious that somehow got overlooked, Jane really needs to focus on her own work. She sounds like A Lot.

      2. Despachito*

        “Because Jane will take the next hour explaining why it really, truly is.”

        I think it is fully in OP’s hands, as Jane’s manager, to nip this in the bud and just not let her talk about that for another hour.

        I also cringed when I read about the pouting – it is so unprofessional and should be addressed by the OP as well.

  5. Guacamole Bob*

    For the first letter, Jane sounds irritating… but before you tell her to knock it off, make sure you’re reflecting on whether there’s any validity to any of her concerns or the kinds of issues that she might notice in a tracker. Is her workload on par with others and getting done at the same pace? Are assignments being distributed fairly? Are you scrutinizing her work more closely, and if so are there clear reasons for it?

    I think managers should have a reasonably high standard for when they tell an employee not to access information that would reveal whether they’re being treated unfairly. Transparency on what we’re all working on is a goal on my team, and has a lot of benefits in learning from each other, creating team culture and expectations, etc. Jane sounds like a piece of work and telling her to butt out may be the best recourse, but it’s not one I’d resort to lightly – I might try addressing the complaining and paranoia head-on before telling her not to ever check out how her tracker compares to others.

    1. Guacamole Bob*

      Oh, definitely tell her to knock if off with commenting to other people about their work. All questions need to be directed to you, not her coworkers.

    2. Ama*

      I do think Jane needs to be told in clearer terms to stop paying so much attention to her coworkers’ work, but I also wonder if the OP could just be clearer about how she expects the team members to use the system. I have trained a lot of people on very particular internal systems and I’ve noticed that sometimes coworkers who are already a little nervous about keeping up with a new system will get hyperfocused on features of a system that aren’t important to our workflow unless I say “you might see X data in the system but we don’t actually use that at all, you can just ignore it.”

      1. Coverage Associate*

        Thank you. I understand that this kind of transparency is becoming more common, but I don’t understand why. I suspect lazy software design. I don’t need to know where my coworkers are in workflows that aren’t for projects we share. Why can I find that information?

        Or, like, yeah, I am nervous I have fewer projects than my peers, and I could verify if that’s true, but is that useful information? Or should I just address with my managers, and them with me, if I am behind on expectations or short on work?

        Oddly, it’s the jobs where there was poor management and it would have been helpful to have some numbers to figure out your performance that didn’t have this kind of transparency.

        1. Great Frogs of Literature*

          I mostly don’t need access to Jira projects that I’m not working in, but sometimes I do (and the Jira helpdesk project where we need to manually add anyone who didn’t make the initial request is generally considered to be at massive PITA, but some of the requests are sensitive, so we deal with it). While locking stuff down so that you can only keep your eyes on your own work might seem sensible, for a lot of companies/roles it would cause significant issues, or at the very least cause a bunch of extra work every time people needed to talk to someone outside their team about stuff they’re working on. It can provide significant barriers to cross-team collaboration (which in many companies needs all the help it can get) and make it difficult to figure out what caused incidents.

          While that’s not true in all roles and at all companies, there are valid reasons to make this stuff widely available within a company.

        2. Hannah Lee*

          Sometimes it’s just the nature of the systems/tools that there’s visibility to stuff not all team members are working on. Because it can be a hassle to configure, lock down permissions, visibility if there isn’t any reason to. If the overall network, node, wrapper, whatever has the right organizational security and permissions, there’s no need sometimes to be more granular.

          The stuff being visible in whatever workflow tool they are using isn’t really the issue.
          It’s the This One Employee spending their time nosing around in it, seeing what other people are up to, doing compare/contrasts of work output and assignments and then wading in to other people’s (and her boss’s!) lanes about it. And then *pouting* or otherwise emoting in an inappropriate, unprofessional way.

          I’ve worked with someone who was a nosy-parker about stuff on the shared drive that had nothing to do with him or his job function. At one point boss told him to just knock it off ‘not your job, not something I want you doing, focus on your own knitting”

        3. Guacamole Bob*

          I manage a team of data analysts. If people know what others are working on, there’s a lot more collaboration – someone else on the team knows how to work with one of our lesser-used data sources or has encountered a specific problem before and can answer questions, someone wants to get more involved in analysis related to a certain policy topic as part of their goals for the next year, sometimes you’ll want to to pull up work that someone else did when you get an incoming question.

          Just today someone shared a project in a team meeting and someone else realized that an element of the project will save them a bunch of time if it can be adapted properly. We’ve also had it happen that two different people will get a related incoming request from two different people in other departments, and if we don’t talk to each other and coordinate we duplicate work (and sow confusion if we answer slightly differently) – the fun of working in a large, complicated organization.

          There are plenty of environments where one person’s work is more siloed or assignments are more clear-cut. But we do a lot of collaborative, policy-oriented work for overlapping sets of stakeholders, and a more transparent environment has been healthy for us. It’s unhealthy to use it to monitor and nitpick each other, but an “eyes on your own paper” mentality wouldn’t be helpful in our environment, either.

    3. Rex Libris*

      I think the actual issue is that Jane isn’t anyone’s boss, and needs to stop acting like it. It’s simply not her job, as far as the letter indicates, to monitor anyone’s performance. She needs to be told that in sufficiently blunt language, because that sort of behavior will definitely cause disruption and resentment among her coworkers. If Jane wants to speak with her manager about her own workload and performance, she can do that without monitoring everyone else.

      A surprising number of letters on this site boil down to “Someone who is neither a supervisor nor a manager is trying to supervise and manage things, shockingly, it’s causing problems…”

      1. Lego girl*

        I had a coworker like this when I was a project manager, she was constantly second guessing everything I did with workflow and had experience in the industry, whereas I was new to it but had plenty of relevant to my role experience so it felt like she didn’t think I was able to understand the job, and believe me, if I hadn’t returned to my former company for their way better health insurance plan, it would have become a major issue..

      2. goddessoftransitory*

        I agree with this. I worked with someone like this once, and it was exhausting. She wasn’t a supervisor or team lead, let alone manager, but she was always going over orders and “fixing” them when it was NOT her job or frankly, place to do so. It didn’t endear her to either her coworkers or our managers.

        1. duinath*

          I am consistently surprised by how many people there seem to be out there who think “I thought doing the thing you told me not to do would be helpful” is a believable excuse.

          But LW’s gotta tell her to stop doing it, clearly, and hear Jane acknowledge that LW said that and Jane heard and understood. Really takes the steam out of any and all excuses when you’ve had that convo, I think.

        2. Anonymous cat*

          It’s especially annoying when they “fix” things that aren’t wrong.

          And especially especially annoying when they try to excuse themselves on the grounds they didn’t have the right info.

          “I changed your blue teapots to green because that’s company standard….well, how was I supposed to know paying client prefers blue? So the extra work and ruined teapots I just caused aren’t my fault.”

    4. TheBunny*

      I just said something similar.

      I have 5 direct reports and literally yesterday told them I need them to be on the same page with an issue so internal and external clients are receiving the same messaging.

      I told them the other option was me setting the parameters in place and that, frankly, wasn’t going to happen as I’m just not going to step in when they can absolutely come up with this process and I don’t need to be involved at that granular a level.

      I kind of feel this is where OP is as well. Setting the boundary on how Jane handles the info is one thing, forbidding her to access it is a little more heavy handed than I think I would be.

      1. Hannah Lee*

        It’s not really forbidding her access to tell her to stop poking around stuff that is none of her business, that there is no reason she needs to see, monitor, have input on given her role, job function.

        The info is there if Jane (or anyone else) has a valid work / task reason to need it. But in this case, Jane doesn’t. So seeking it out, monitoring it, running comparisons and statuses, wading in with co-workers and her boss about it AT ALL, never mind on an ongoing basis like she’s the workflow, task allocation czar is way out of line.

    5. HerdingCats*

      This is what I was thinking too. I have been in a situation where I would have been viewed as a “Jane” – I was monitoring a co-workers output without being instructed to do so – but it was because she was doing nothing (we are remote) and leaving me to pick up the slack. Our supervisor was far too overwhelmed to notice. To her, everything was getting done and all was fine. Yes…because I was working overtime to make sure it got done. Thankfully, my supervisor listened to me and didn’t just immediately tell me to butt out of other people’s work. I think the OP of this letter should be very sure all is well.

  6. WellRed*

    Ha! Part of me thinks the company (not the OP) deserves this kind of paranoia if it insists on tracking people’s work.

    1. Jennifer Strange*

      It sounds like it’s a system of tracking where people are with their tasks, which is typical for a project management tool. I don’t think it’s a Big Brother type tracker where you’re tracking key strokes or taking screenshots of their work.

      2. Elle*

        I was reading it as being a ticket based system commonly used in tech. Things like that are helpful for certain types of work and are also very helpful if you need to report on any kind of metrics. This is all very normal and not seen as big brother behavior in my industry (biotech).

    2. Dust Bunny*

      There is nothing here to suggest it’s being abused. Lots of very sane workplaces have systems that track work in some forms, including my own, which very definitely does not Big Brother monitor us.

    3. Admin 22*

      You may have to increase her workload. It sounds like she has too much time on her hands. Also, check if she’s completing her tasks. Sometimes individuals will put down that something is complete, but it isn’t when they are focusing on other things. I had a coworker years ago that left and everyone though she was great. I found 4 inches of filing she had hidden and never did.

      1. Reluctant Mezzo*

        My co-worker was newer than I was, and I ended up taking on extra work because she was so slow with hers (one reason she was so slow was that she spent so much time socializing and criticizing my, and was visibly offended that I was so overloaded because of her I didn’t have time to socialize). But she had my manager convinced that she was great and I was awful. Fortunately grandboss saw what was going on and things quieted down quite a bit after that.

    4. Someone Else's Boss*

      I mean no offense, but if you haven’t done project-based work, you have no idea how important/useful this kind of software can be.

      Signed, a middle manager with 15 project-based direct reports

  7. T.*

    #3, sometimes I’ll say I need to refill my water but that includes a bathroom break too. They have no idea how far my kitchen is from my laptop.

    1. Random Bystander*

      I’ve been known to say I need to get more coffee–but at the same time, I’m going to be “off-loading some coffee”, too.

    2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      We used to just step out of a meeting without comment, or a whispered “back shortly” (we were in office)
      For virtual meetings, I’d say or type “back in a few miutes”

      imo, Specifying “biobreak” or “bathroom” is only for children at school who may need permission to leave the class.
      I’ve never heard anyone get specific about why they needed a break if it was for the loo, just “coffee” or “phone call”

      1. Audrey Puffins*

        I like “comfort break” because it’s a very clear polite euphemism for going to the bathroom, but it also covers people who might just want to stand up and walk around a bit, or stretch out their weary bones, or grab a snack.

  8. Unkempt Flatware*

    I’ve never experienced a high performer with the time or desire to monitor peers’ work. It has always been the ones who are struggling with their role who watch others, IME. My favorite was one bad performer telling me as often as she could that she doesn’t understand how I get any work done with how much I socialized, listened to podcasts, took walks, whatever. I finally got irritated enough to say, “I don’t know why you can’t seem to get any of your work done.” She never spoke to me again.

    For #3, I use “Comfort Break” when I need to be more explicit than, “BRB”. This is usually used when I need to go from one meeting to another. “I need to take a quick comfort break before the next one starts”. This way you’re not announcing what you need to do and it allows for others to take their own comfort breaks.

    1. Dust Bunny*

      We use “I need to stretch my legs”, which could be literal or could mean you need to stretch them on the way to the bathroom or kitchen.

    2. Socks*

      I like “comfort break” more than “bio break,” but I really don’t think “break” needs any qualifiers (except maybe “quick”). There’s not a long list of things people might need a 3-5 minute break for

      1. Georgia Carolyn Mason*

        I’ve never had anyone take issue with “excuse me for a moment.” I’ve used it to get up and leave an in-person meeting, and to turn my camera off and take the break in a virtual meeting. If you’re not presenting or being called on, and you keep it short, ideally the reason never needs to come up. (If you’re presenting, and the meeting’s super long or you’ve just gotta go, you’ve got the power to call a break for everyone! Believe me, you won’t be the only one who needs it.)

    3. Banana Pyjamas*

      IME it’s the opposite. The person who almost single-handedly got our office through state deadlines had beef because management kept a few old timers who spent their time on FB, smoking or chatting (sometimes hiding in other parts of the building to do so). Someone who gets upset about what other people do is an indication of a workload issue and/or mismanagement.

    4. Stew Redman*

      “I’ve never experienced a high performer with the time or desire to monitor peers’ work.”
      +1

  9. Peanut Hamper*

    #1 – I also work remotely, I can see what everyone on my team has been assigned, and have the complete ability to monitor their work. But I don’t! Who has that kind of time? I’m wondering how Jane manages to do that and keep up with her own work.

  10. Statler von Waldorf*

    I remembered #3, as I had to deal with a similar situation once and the advice stuck.

    For anyone wondering the LW for #3 actually responded quite a bit in the comments as Op #3 in the original thread. The short version is that they were more a supervisor than a manager, and they didn’t have the power to impose real consequences on Jane. Jane was on a fixed contract that was ending in a couple of months and wouldn’t be renewed and as a result the actual manager didn’t think it was worth the effort to deal with her. I disagree with that manager, but this was four years ago, so I suspect Jane is gone by now.

    The link to OP’s explanation is here: https://www.askamanager.org/2020/03/gross-webcam-behavior-leaning-on-coworkers-for-emotional-support-and-more.html#comment-2905728

  11. skunkpunter*

    For #2, I have a newish colleague who seems to have taken it upon herself to post a “happy [day of the week]” post on our Teams channel every. single. morning. She includes a “fact of the day” i.e. how much a hippopotamus weighs, a world record for something, etc.

    It doesn’t help that Teams sends the same alert whether someone’s messaged me directly versus someone made a post on our Teams channel. We otherwise use the Teams channel for business-related questions or issues (and happy birthday posts, which I don’t mind because they aren’t every day). There are about 30-40 people on the channel.

    It annoys me but I haven’t said anything because maybe others enjoy it? (however her posts seem to be getting progressively less interaction.) Am I just being a stick in the mud?

    1. Aspiring Chicken Lady*

      We used to do this sort of thing in a special “good morning” chat. Usually first thing someone would tell us what “day” it is — pickle day or whatever — and then there’d be burst and the rest of the day would be normal.

      It could be that you can just wait for it to extinguish itself, or you could ask her to keep it to a particular point in the day (beginning, or lunch time) so that it doesn’t interrupt flow during work hours.

    2. 3-Foot Tall Inflatable Rainbow Unicorn*

      In your shoes it would bother me too – but if it’s really only once a day, I’d just ignore it. That doesn’t count as spamming in my book.

    3. Rainy*

      You can customize your alert settings in Teams so that you don’t get the same kind of alert for a general a post in that channel, or that you don’t get an alert at all unless someone mentions you, or any of a zillion other options. I myself immediately turned all of those notifications off except the badge alert. If I get a message, the Teams icon shows it in my taskbar, and that’s it.

      When we first started using Teams, one of my coworkers appointed themselves the Teams police and chided anyone who posted something they don’t care about or people who were having a conversation in any channel or chat they were a part of, and their justification was that they got a flood of pings, banner alerts, pop-ups, emails etc every time anyone used the channels or general chats and they didn’t like it. Rather than changing their settings to customize their alerts and notifications to their preferences, they attempted to bully everyone else into only using Teams in ways that wouldn’t cause alerts. It was annoying, and it absolutely made me think less of that colleague. Just something to think about.

    4. I Have RBF*

      I try to get my team talking to each other. It doesn’t work. But I do drop a “Good morning” in our chat channel to let people know that I am online and available. I usually get one or two replies back, out of four people, and some days that is the only thing said in our group channel.

      A once-a-day bit of greeting and trivia is not onerous. The only reason that I don’t do something similar is that I am too lazy to look up all the “It’s ABC day, blah, blah” trivia. A nice “Good morning” is just fine.

    5. I strive to Excel (formerly WPX)*

      It sounds like it might be worthwhile to have a “business questions” channel and a “general chat” channel. That’ll let you mute the general chat channel if you don’t want to interact with it and give people a chance to have “Happy Monday/Happy Birthday/check out this bobcat I saw on the road outside the office” without bothering others.

      1. Missa Brevis*

        That’s how my team does it – general chat, fun chat, and a chat for daily numbers updates that we need but don’t want cluttering up other discussions.

        1. allathian*

          This. We have a general work chat, a fun chat, and a work-adjacent chat. Work chat is what it says, all of us can post, but most conversations are started by our manager. The fun chat is also what it says, and posting there is completely voluntary. We’ve used Teams since 2020 and some team members never post in the fun channel. The work-adjacent chat is for things like “I need X, who’s the contact for that?” or “FYI, I had a problem with the VPN this morning, IT said my certificate’s expired.” Notifications help other team members fix minor issues quickly without contacting our overworked IT department, although they’ll generally publish a note on our SharePoint intranet if enough people contact them. We have Teams and SharePoint on our work phones.

          We’re a distributed team, most of us work from head office, including me, but we have team members at 7 different offices. So we have private office-specific conversations for stuff that’s irrelevant to those who aren’t at the same office. This includes things like lunch dates and notifications of snacks that somebody’s brought in, and leftovers from meetings. New people have to be added manually, but it’s a small chore. The channel’s been a lifesaver for those who aren’t at head office, the lunch dates used to spam the fun channel.

      2. Freya*

        Exactly – my husband’s work has a separate channel just for pet pictures. Which encourages people to post them there, because they know it’s not going to annoy anyone (if you’re in there, it’s because you want to be) and the people in the channel are vocally enthusiastic about the various pets people have.

    6. Stew Redman*

      I don’t know if you’re a stick in the mud, but I can’t be the only one who’s now wondering what a hippopotamus weighs…

  12. TheBunny*

    LW#1. I guess I don’t see the issue of her looking at other people’s trackers.

    You can tell her not to bring concerns to them and to only tell you if she’s concerned…but telling her she can’t look at the work tasks and progress of others both feels really heavy handed to me…and will also serve to reinforce her belief that something is being hidden or isn’t on the up and up.

    If the info isn’t public, or it shouldn’t be, then make it private.

    I also tend to disagree that it’s not her business. What people in the same or similar roles are tasked with kind of is her business. Heck if she’s looking at the tracker and realizing she’s got 7 big projects and the others have 4, that’s her business too.

    I’m not saying this is what you are doing, LW, but managers who object so strongly to allowing things like this absolutely put up my antenna and make me ask why.

    1. CB212*

      It sounds to me like Jane may be clicking through and actually reviewing her peer’s work (not just their assignments). I mean I agree with you, I think it’s pretty normal to look at a tracker and tell your boss ‘hey all the new cards got assigned to me while it looks like half our team aren’t ramping up any thing new,’ but this sounds like an Airtable kind of setup with links out to people’s actual projects that she’s decided to give feedback on.

      But even if it’s not that, I can see the boss being exhausted by having one team member who’s the self appointed time cop for everyone else. If Munfred looks like he’s not making progress on something, that’s literally the manager’s problem to see in the tracker – not a peer.

      1. CB212*

        I’m in a collective where everyone wants to do the fun work and nobody wants to do the admin, so I end up picking up a lot of the latter because someone has to. But a few members love to run to me every week to tell me who’s not pulling their weight in a couple of required areas – and I’m like, first of all I am quite aware of that, I own the tracker and also I pick up their shifts; and second… telling me about work that needs doing? Is not actually helping me. You’re just taking up more of my time and attention, monitoring both what your comrades should be doing and what I should be doing about it!

        ..Jane would be in her element with those folks.

        1. Rainy*

          Man if I saw something that needed doing and I didn’t want to do it I would keep my mouth shut SO HARD…

          1. Hot Flash Gordon*

            For sure, it’s the “whoever smelt it dealt it” of the corporate world

    2. Dust Bunny*

      look at everyone’s work on this system and comment on it.

      The issue isn’t that she’s looking at it so much as that she’s making it her business when it’s not. She’s not a supervisor.

      I have the ability to look up at least some of the tasks my coworkers do but I don’t because I’m not responsible for them and I’m busy with my own stuff.

      1. I Have RBF*

        This.

        I can see all of the Jira tickets for our group, and a couple other groups too. If I was a busybody, I could even go into the ticket and see the queue times and all of that jazz.

        But I don’t. Why? Because if it’s not my ticket, either as submitter or assignee, it’s not my job to worry about. Sure, I might have time to bother with it, I’m underutilized, but commenting about the state of others’ work that does not affect me is a waste of time for someone who is not their boss.

        If Jane is monitoring others instead of doing her own work? Shut that down, hard, now. It’s inappropriate use of company time. That’s the boss’s job, and they have not delegated that to Jane.

    3. Reebee*

      Managers are too busy – or should be – to constantly spend energy on something that isn’t anyone’s business but the manager’s. My view is that such a level of distrust in one’s manager means finding the exit door and going elsewhere, regardless of whether suspicions of dubiousness have merit.

      Boundaries exist for good reason. Also, nothing is 50/50. That’s…life.

    4. Elle*

      Supervising her coworkers’ work, the pace of their work, or anything else she can see in Jira/whatever system they use is explicitly not Jane’s job. I suppose there are workplaces where tracking peers’ progress, comparing it unfavorably to her own, and essentially tattling about it to her manager would be welcome behaviors, but those are going to be mostly pretty toxic workplaces. I can’t imagine a balanced, reasonable boss who would want an employee behaving that way.

      1. Great Frogs of Literature*

        I’ll sometimes pull data, once a year, to put in my annual review, to say something like, “John and I are tied for most-tickets-completed-in-2023, at 547 each,” but it’s literally one data point among many. It doesn’t even say that I’ve been doing more work than Jane, who only did 324 tickets — maybe John and I have been grabbing all the easy work and leaving the gross, complicated ones to Jane.

        Tracking what my peers are up to day-to-day and how full their plates are (beyond possibly following an item or two because I would also like to know how to clean the llama hoof zapper) is WAY too much for someone who isn’t managing those people.

    5. STG*

      Yea, I don’t agree with this but I work in IT. The concept of ‘not accessing data that isn’t pertinent to work being done’ is pretty nailed into my team. Just because you can doesn’t mean that you should.

      Jane doesn’t have the full picture to comment on her coworkers’ work anyways. I’ve had slow/no performers use these types of arguments and usually to deflect away from their own work issues or to avoid getting more work because they were dragging their feet on their current projects.

      1. I Have RBF*

        The concept of ‘not accessing data that isn’t pertinent to work being done’ is pretty nailed into my team. Just because you can doesn’t mean that you should.

        This.

        At one job, I had access to everyone at my institution’s home addresses. As I was doing test queries, they would fly across my screen. Did I note them down? No. Did I even pay attention except to note that they were in the correct results for my query? No. Did I talk about them to others? Absolutely not.

        While the letter is about productivity data, it really doesn’t make much difference. In many jobs you have access to data that you should not make use of because it isn’t your damned business. Jane needs to focus on her job, not how much others are doing according to one tracking metric. It’s not her job, or her place, to track the work of other people on her team.

    6. Space Needlepoint*

      It’s an issue because it is not Jane’s job to be monitoring other people’s work and LW clearly stated it was none of Jane’s business. Jane’s not a supervisor, not a team lead, and if it’s not her business, then she shouldn’t be doing it, and definitely shouldn’t be commenting on other people’s work that has nothing to do with her.

      1. TheBunny*

        Commenting on it? No. Blocked from being able to view it on a public database? Why?

        I’m going to stand by my comment. Should Jane tell her coworkers? No. Is it an issue that she looks? I guess that depends on what someone is trying to hide.

        If Jane is spending too much time on this and not meeting her deliverables it doesn’t matter if she’s doing this or watching Jeopardy reruns…it matters that she’s not meeting goals.

        Were I Jane and my boss told me to never look at coworker productivity I’d want to know why.

        1. Wry*

          But nobody is saying that she shouldn’t look at it. If she were just quietly looking at it and not saying anything to anyone, there wouldn’t be a problem here – in fact, OP wouldn’t even know she was doing it. The issue is that she’s commenting on it the way a manager or supervisor would. That’s really bad for team morale and it wastes OP’s time.

          (Yes, the last line of the question mentioned that OP cannot revoke her permissions, but I think it’s clear that OP only has that in her mind as an option because Jane is misusing her ability to view others’ work. There’s nothing to indicate that OP thinks everybody should be blocked from seeing everybody else’s work for no reason.)

  13. learnedthehardway*

    OP#4 – definitely reach out to HR or the hiring manager to share your insights about the candidate, especially if you think she put your name down as the person who referred her. The team will just reject her candidacy without talking to her, or if they already have screened her, will simply tell her they went with a more qualified candidate.

    OP#1 – sounds like you need to be more direct with Jane – as in “this isn’t your job, it is not helpful, and you’re not your coworkers’ supervisor. This monitoring of other people’s work is now a performance issue for you. Stick to your own work and get that done. The only time I would want to hear from you about another coworker’s work is if it is directly causing you a delay on your work.”

    1. Artemesia*

      I got trapped into putting someone’s application in early in my career. It was the wife of a colleague of my husband’s and I had no idea she was such a flake till I saw her resume and by then I was kinda stuck. So I turned it in, but also didn’t push it. She didn’t make interviews and was really pissed at me for not making that happen. Yeah I could have, but I just told her that I didn’t have that much juice with that particular group. It taught me to never promise this to anyone I hadn’t worked with and whose work I knew well.

  14. The Unionizer Bunny*

    Jane is able to see which pages you are monitoring? Perhaps she thinks you aren’t tracking the progress of the group as a whole. That might be what she means by “help”.

    I think you should ask about her prior job experience. It sounds like she’s expecting more of a micro-managing style, and isn’t seeing that from you, so she’s been stepping up (as a “team player”, even!) to provide that.

    Or she might be gunning for a middle-management role. How well-fitting are schedules in the team’s work? Is anyone ever late with work that holds up what other people are doing because they have to wait for that work to be finished? Jane might think that you aren’t monitoring everyone’s work because you don’t have time, and that she can show you that she DOES have time (while still getting her work done), so that she will look good for a potential promotion to supervisor.

    You could address this by telling her that micro-management is not your company’s culture, and other employees are able to perform their work without constant reminders. But this assumes your team isn’t losing time to suboptimal scheduling and that she can let go of an old mindset that may have been worn in over many years. If she insists micro-managing is necessary, you might postpone/reroute her energy from “trying to adjust” to “learning how to be a supervisor”: when she knows how to do everyone’s job, she will be able to figure out where to direct her attention.

    There’s an old (likely apocryphal) story about a manager running a factory where an essential piece of machinery breaks. They call in an expert, who arrives, takes a look at it, swings a wrench, and the machine begins working again. The expert says “that’ll be $800”, and the manager says “But that only took you 5 seconds! What you did isn’t worth anywhere near $800.” So the expert explains “Anyone can hit that machine with a wrench. I took 4 years of classes learning how to know WHERE to hit it with a wrench. That’s what you’re paying me for.”

    Explain to Jane that what you do (as a manager) may look simple, but it’s actually about knowing exactly where your attention – and intervention – is needed, which you know because of experience doing everything the team has done. You can’t rotate her into another role just now because then there wouldn’t be enough people to do the work she’s doing right now, but if she is willing to temporarily take on the extra responsibility of training an intern, she will have an opportunity to demonstrate her leadership capabilities and make sure the team is able to keep on-schedule while she adjusts to another role. This would show her a direction to channel her ambitions in, one more productive than she’s currently exploring. If she wants to be a leader, but doesn’t want to take on the extra responsibilities you tell her it entails, well, she might realize that’s on her and stop trying to act like she’s a supervisor.

    Or she might go in a different direction and try to start a union, but I think it sounds more like she’d like to be in middle-management. Testing whether she’s willing to put in the time and effort to get there may reveal not just whether she’s motivated more by the thought of having power over others, but whether (even if her intentions are noble) she’d actually be any good at it.

    1. Dust Bunny*

      Naw, don’t reward busy-bodies by giving them actual power to abuse. Jane has already demonstrated that she can’t or won’t stay in her own lane. She needs to be told point-blank that this is not her job and she needs to butt out.

      1. The Unionizer Bunny*

        Naw, don’t reward busy-bodies by giving them actual power to abuse.

        Power over an intern? Let’s position this after Jane is told that micro-managing isn’t necessary, and when she evidently doesn’t believe it. At this point LW is probably making plans to replace Jane.

        Just because LW hires an intern, doesn’t mean said intern is new to the workforce. LW could hire someone who has almost enough hard skills to qualify for Jane’s position, but also possesses the right soft skills to notice if Jane is abusing her power, and to report it. If this doesn’t happen, Jane still has potential, and when she’s busy learning a new role, she won’t have the spare time to monitor her coworkers.

        LW wouldn’t have to bring an intern in right away. Take some time to find the right candidate. If replacing Jane outright is necessary, look for equivalent skills. I discourage leaping straight to “they didn’t respond to my first approach, so my only recourse is to get rid of them”, though – good managers will be able to think of alternative solutions to try before they give up. Figure out what your employees are thinking, where they are coming from, then work with them to make sure they can keep doing the work. Since, for most of us, that’s what it’s about. (Once we’re compensated for our time.)

        1. Chuck Finley*

          Where are you getting that Jane is an intern? The letter says “employee.” In your first post you painted Jane as gunning for middle-management, now she’s an intern?

          You also made a fan-fic that Jane is just fighting the good fight against an opaque manager who should really listen to all of Jane’s wonderful ideas. Completely glossing over the issues of Jane using the tracking system “as a tool to fuel her immense paranoia” (when apparently she reads the info there wrong in the first place) and responding with “self-pity, pouting, remonstrations about how she’s just trying to help, or some combo of all three” when told to cut it out.

    2. Reebee*

      I can’t imagine spending this much time and energy on a single employee due to a problem originating from her baseless monitoring of other people’s work.

  15. Clearance Issues*

    about the “I’m too busy to plan team-building”
    unless you want to be added to team-building planning in the future, I would drop the “right now” from the “I am too swamped with work.” Sarah may consider that you will be available for this next week when she has her next idea if it sounds like being busy is temporary.

  16. Knot Another Darn Rewrite*

    For #1 – is there any possibility of having the option of changing whom can see what in the system? IE: only show what someone is working on/if they are free, not if it has been viewed by a supervisor? To me, it feels like Jane will look because it is available to her, even if she was specifically instructed to focus on her own work.

  18. I Have RBF*

    For #3, I just put BRB in chat for most meetings. If I’m presenting or a serious part of the discussion, I do more, but I will try to make it not impact stuff. I have pretty severe IBS-D, and when I have to go I have maybe a minute get to the bathroom.

    I try to put standing meetings in my chat on my phone so at least I can listen, on mute, while my guts are evicting their contents rapidly from my posterior, because that process can take a while.

  19. Hell in a Handbasket*

    Ok, I am not typically a squeamish person but I just HATE the phrase “bio break”. Please for the love of god just say “break”.

    1. I strive to Excel (formerly WPX)*

      While you are not the only person I’ve heard say this, I will note that the implications of “bio break” are “I need to step away for an imminently urgent reason that you legally cannot prevent me from doing”, and as a result the meeting organizer/whoever you’re meeting with is far more likely to say “yes, sure, let’s take five minutes”. Dumb? Yes, absolutely. But I’ve found it effective phrasing.

      1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

        I suppose if there is a need for justifyng your break, then it’s a useful word. However, thankfully I’ve never worked anywhere like that.

        1. I strive to Excel (formerly WPX)*

          I have not had to work in a place like that, but I do want to point out that many people *do* work in places like that, rightly or wrongly, and you can face a situation where you can be correct (I shouldn’t have to justify my break) or you can get a break. We should ideally all be in the former. We aren’t always.

          Also, I am in favor of any phrasing that makes people more comfortable in advocating for their own needs, especially people who are new to the workforce and unsure of themselves. There’s dozens of existing euphemisms already, including things such as “I need to powder my nose”; I don’t see how this one is any more awkward.

      2. Peanut Hamper*

        At my company, we always just say “Excuse me, I need to go to the bathroom” because that’s what you’d say in person.

  20. Mark Greene*

    I guarantee you that this employee is frustrating your other team members. I would try my best to shut this down.

  21. Harper the Other One*

    In my opinion, in addition to explicitly telling Jane she needs to stop, OP1 should also tell Jane a) that they will be checking that Jane is not referencing everyone else’s work and b) that any attitude like self-pity etc. in response is not acceptable (with a model of how to being genuine concerns about things that actually affect her work flow to you.)

    I do second Alison that I’d be surprised if there weren’t other issues with Jane’s work and I think OP should put some serious thought into whether Jane is a missing stair.

  22. Nice cup of tea*

    In the UK we might call it a “comfort break” in a workplace meeting. I absolutely can’t imagine using “bio break” but that’s very clear.

  23. smirkette*

    Heh, if one of my reports came to me with this without a very, very specific reason why they were doing this, I would shut them down re: workflow eavesdropping on their colleagues very explicitly and also think that they didn’t have enough to do and would talk to them about that. “If you’re looking for additional ways to contribute, I’d be happy to look into what projects/tasks/whatever I could switch over to you.”

  24. Caryn Z*

    From the point of view of an employee “unofficially” monitored by another one, it is SO irritating. Let our supervisor tell me if I have an issue. It’s none of your business.

    1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      #1 I’ve noticed a lot of OPs & commenters use “there’s no reason to …” when they want someone to stop doing something.

      It’s too subtle for someone who assumes they are right to do that thing, or is oblivious to polite hints.

      If you want someone to stop doing something then plainly tell them: “please do not do (annoying thing) any more”

      1. allathian*

        I agree that “there’s no reason to…” is too subtle for people like Jane, but I’d go even further than you did. The manager would be well within their rights to omit the please. “I need you to stop (doing annoying thing).” Or even, “You must stop (doing annoying thing).” This is an order, not a request. Jane’s shown clearly that she’s either unable to understand hints or willing to pretend not to understand them so she can continue doing what she wants to do. It’s time to use clear and unambiguous language.

  25. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    #1 I’ve noticed a lot of OPs & commenters use “there’s no reason to …” when they want someone to stop doing something.

    It’s too subtle for someone who assumes they are right to do that thing, or is oblivious to polite hints.

    If you want someone to stop doing something then plainly tell them: “please do not do (annoying thing) any more”

  26. Rosyglasses*

    Just coming to say that sometimes the name aliases amuse me greatly – and today I almost snickered outloud at Sarah Burtlebot… it sounds like something closely related to a Harry Potter character!

  27. Banana Pyjamas*

    My experience with #1 seems to be opposite to a lot of people. One of my previous peers was a Jane, but she was a top performer. She was stressed by non-performers who management wasn’t managing. I usually tried to redirect conversations and encourage her to mind her business, but I would also tell her to bring it up with our manager if she couldn’t be redirected.

    I think first thing is to determine the level Jane is performing at. If she’s a high performer you probably do need to scrutinize other employees a bit more closely. If she’s an average performer, is she underutilized, or does she need to be completing her own work at a higher caliber? Is she an underperforming deflector?

    If Jane’s an average or better performer and always scrutinizes one or two people, it’s worth considering how they perform. If you’re happy with their performance it’s worth considering wether this would amount to workplace bullying or sabotage.

  28. Safely Retired*

    When you said “So now I’m telling you that you need to stop looking at them, period”, I would make one small quibble. I think the “you need” ahead of the “to stop” weakens the message. I think a more blunt “So now I’m telling you to stop looking at them, period.”

  29. Cthulhu's Librarian*

    Lw2 – the least useful and most annoying messages in an email storm seem to be about how “just don’t reply” will stop the email storm, and “set up a rule to delete this” instructions. They’re just such hypocritical sanctimonious rot, because clearly the sender couldn’t follow their own advice, and they fuel frustration and anger, which leads to more people responding to the storm irrationally.

    If the University employees were to send that sort of thing as part of an apology, it would likely cause their institution irreparable harm, which is directly counter to what the goal of the apology should be. Many recruiters would metaphorically (or literally) say “sod off” to them, and find other ways to spend their efforts, instead of at that university.

    It’s one thing to send that out if everything is internal, and you’re an IT person tasked with educating the employees after a storm happens. You have the standing and authority to say “hey, you all need to handle this better in the future”. It’s vastly tone deaf to send it to external stakeholders, especially if your institution was the one which caused the inciting incident.

Comments are closed.