we say grace at team meals, is it unethical to automate people’s jobs away, and more

by Alison Green on October 14, 2024

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

1. We’re supposed to say grace at the start of team meals

I work in government. Fairly new to job, first time in government. Been in private sector and higher education before this. Every time my department has a group meal, they say grace. Led by either the director of the department or the staff member who is also a pastor. This is weird, right? I’m an atheist. We have at least one other on staff who practices a religion other than Christianity. In nearly any workplace this would be weird, but again, I work for THE GOVERNMENT, which makes it even more uncomfortable. Having group staff grace where it’s expected everyone is just fine with this is not inclusive, not considerate, and seems highly problematic. If you personally want to say grace over your meal, have at it! But the expectation of everyone participating or acquiescing and it being led by the director?

If I were to report this to HR or even our EEO, I know it’d get traced back to me for pretty obvious reasons (I am definitely the odd one out in the office on any number of things), and I can imagine it becoming something people will “jokingly” comment on … which again, isn’t a welcoming work environment. I don’t know what to do, or if I should do anything, but every time it happens I continue to just think “WTF.”

Yes, this is weird and inappropriate. It’s also not terribly uncommon in some parts of the U.S. Any chance you’re in the south? Surprisingly, it’s not illegal even though this is a government employer; government meetings are permitted to include prayer as long as they don’t force anyone’s participation in it (Supreme Court, Town of Greece v. Galloway, 2014).

Whether or not to say anything is really a personal decision; you need to weigh any likely blow-back and how much you care about that against how much it bothers you, especially as a new person.

If the director and/or pastor seem like decent people, you might have better luck talking with them privately rather than complaining to HR (since it’s not illegal) and asking them to reconsider the practice. A lot of people don’t realize grace isn’t some sort of non-denominational religious practice and think of it as almost secular in nature; it’s possible that by explaining that it’s not, you could get some traction (and even more so if you’re joined by any other coworkers who feel similarly).

Related:
I’m a public employee and the governor pushes religion at work

2. Is it unethical to automate people’s jobs away?

I’ve recently been lucky enough to snag the kind of job I’ve been looking for over months — relatively stable part-time data science work, which is very rare. Currently this is a side hustle, but eventually this could allow me to quit my full-time job and stay at home with my kids more. I am also going to learn a lot on the project that I’ve been assigned to and pick up some very desirable skills.

Here’s the problem. I am certain that the AI project I’m working on will eventually lead to other part-time workers losing their jobs, or at the very least reducing their hours. I am positive that the work people are doing by hand can be done really well by AI, and I’ve been hired to do implement it. My project manager isn’t so sure — she said it’s a boring task and that whole “I want AI to do the dishes and not make art” tagline I’ve seen on social media — but she’s older and I worry she’s naive about the impact this can have. But maybe I’m younger and naive about the speed of change in public sector contracting.

I am a religious person, and the idea that I may be taking away part of people’s livelihoods is haunting me. But this work absolutely will be done by somebody eventually, and for me it’s my dream job. Is it unethical to do this kind of work?

I can’t answer that without more details about exactly what you’re going to be working on. But ultimately it doesn’t matter what I think about it anyway; it matters what you think. From the oil and gas industry to law enforcement to lobbying and on and on, people have all kinds of jobs that someone else might not feel ethically comfortable with, and many of our actions (both at work and not) unavoidably leave footprints in the world that we might prefer not be there. At the same time, many types of progress that we generally feel good about mean that some types of jobs are left behind as things evolve. (We don’t have knocker-uppers tapping at windows anymore either, although most of us consider alarm clocks an improvement.) But we all draw our lines in different places. You need to figure out where your lines are and what you will and won’t feel good about. I know that sounds like a cop-out, but it’s really so, so individual.

All that said, though, I’m not sure your project manager’s response quite gets at your concerns. Just because it’s a boring task doesn’t mean that people won’t suffer if they’re displaced from it.

3. How can I find out if my vacation time will be paid out when I leave?

My question is about how to give notice when it’s unclear whether banked PTO will be paid out—and there’s no way of finding that out without giving up the game.

My company is very small (nine employees) and does not conform to a conventional (or, really, any) organizational structure. HR is handled by one of our two owners, and by “HR” I mean stuff like dealing with benefits, payroll, and resources. I have virtually no contact with this guy, so it would be highly irregular for me to ask him anything — and all but an admission that I am looking to skedaddle if I asked about a possible PTO payout. There’s no other person I can ask who (A) would know the answer and/or (B) I can trust. (My state does not require vacation payout, so it’s up to individual companies.)

Normally, I’d not sweat this issue: I’d just give my two weeks and either be pleased that I got a payout or bummed that I didn’t. But — malcontent alert! — I am one of three employees who are still on board after launching this company as a startup 11 years ago, and in that time I’ve had ZERO raises despite the fact that the company has been increasingly profitable. Add to that some other cultural/role issues, and my inclination to be charitable here is … right in line with my raises. I’m not sure I’d be comfortable giving two weeks’ notice, learning that I was not going to get a payout, and then just cashing in (some of) my banked time to serve out those weeks. But I’m not sure I wouldn’t. Do you see some option or alternative I’ve overlooked?

Any chance you’re in touch with anyone who’s left who could tell you how it was handled for them? With such a small company, that might not be an option — but that’s one thing to check if you can.

Otherwise, I’d be inclined to simply ask when you resign whether vacation time is paid out. It they say it’s not, you can say, “Ideally I’d like to set my final day for November 6 (or whatever) but if that means I’ll lose all the vacation time I’ve accrued, I’ll need to take it before I leave since it’s part of my compensation.” Do be aware that some companies have policies against taking vacation time during your notice period (especially a big chunk of it as opposed to a day or two) so it’s possible that could become a point of contention — but it’s a reasonable stance to take, and you can try negotiating from there.

4. Am I cheap for seeking mileage reimbursement for business dinner travel?

I’m wondering about mileage reimbursement. Maybe six or so times a year, I have to drive about 60 miles round-trip for business dinners. These aren’t client meetings, but meetings for my professional organization city group. Very much a networking thing on behalf of my firm. I always put in for mileage reimbursement, and my firm gives it to me without questioning, but I’m wondering if this is a “cheap” thing of me to do. Is the mileage cost something that I should just eat?

Nope, you should continue submitting for it. It’s a business expense, not a personal one, and it’s not cheap to expect your company to cover the costs of business activities, as they’ve been doing.

You may also like:
{ 112 comments }

{ 112 comments… read them below or add one }

  1. MaskedMarvel*

    I work at an AI startup and frequently we hear about removing the need for boring work, allowing people to concentrate on more interesting work.
    Cynically, I think this is disingenuous.
    There may not be that much interesting work to go around, and some people have found their niche doing routine work, and more creative work may not play to their strengths.

    I don’t have a solution, obviously.

    Reply ↓
    1. Certaintroublemaker*

      Alternately, I work in higher ed, and employees are actively looking at AI and other process automation solutions so that they have time for higher value work. It really depends on the jobs and what all needs doing.

      Reply ↓
      1. allathian*

        Yes, this. I mean doctors and patients would benefit hugely if they had a genuinely good AI listening in while they talk to and examine the patient and make a diagnosis. I’m in Finland, and medical secretaries have disappeared. Instead, doctors are expected to type up diagnoses and other medical information themselves, and it wastes a lot of time that could be spent seeing patients instead.

        Already AI is better at finding breast cancer from mammograms than human doctors are. I’m all for AI if it genuinely improves people’s lives, but care has to be taken to ensure ethical use.

        Reply ↓
        1. coffee*

          There was an interesting article published recently about AI assisting radiographers which found that some radiographers did better with AI assistance while others did worse with AI assistance.

          Reply ↓
            1. Radio Set Jet (Future)*

              Just a note: radiographer and radiologist are different jobs. One is the person who takes the image, the other is the doctor who analyses it.

              In either case, humans will likely still be required to take and analyse the results to ensure it’s done accurately. AI can only automate so much.

              Reply ↓
        2. MaskedMarvel*

          I’m not saying there aren’t benefits to consumers/patients, companies, pr even society as a whole.

          But for some people it will be largely negative (I once worked with someone who had great attention to detail, knew all the procedures, but who was not very good at big picture stuff, and would get visibly frustrated at being asked to think about it.
          AI (at least in the context of her current job) would probably reduce the amount that she would be able to do.

          Reply ↓
          1. allathian*

            Absolutely.

            I’m a translator, and while my job might be in danger in the long term, I sincerely doubt that there’s any risk that AI will eliminate the need for skilled translators within the foreseeable scope of my career, the next 15 years.

            Sure, I might end up working as a proofreader of translations produced by AI, but they won’t be able to do a decent job without oversight for quite a while yet, if ever.

            Reply ↓
            1. Testing*

              The problem for translators will be that there are not that many people needed to do those proofreading tasks as there were people doing translation (+ proofreading) before. So there will be many people fighting for those fewer jobs.

              And this in a sector that wasn’t exactly swimming in money and recognition to start with.

              Reply ↓
            2. Quoth the Raven*

              So, I was a translator, emphasis in WAS. My language pair (English into Spanish) has been severely altered by AI. It’s mostly proofreading now and while there’s nothing wrong with it in theory, in practice the wages have been slashed to a third of what they are for human translation to the point it just wasn’t a liveable wage anymore (I went from something like 1000 dollars a month to like 350 dollars a month) and I changed careers about a year ago.

              Even considering some translations might still need proofreading (and that can be questionable; AI is surprisingly good in my language pair), clients and agencies just don’t want to pay for it, quality be damned. Some language pairs and subjects might be safer than others, but if anyone asked me, at this point, I would strongly advice them to find another career.

              Reply ↓
              1. Emmy Noether*

                This is unsurprising to me. I read a lot of machine translations (foreign patents – if I need to skim read 50 patents, of which 1 may be relevant, that’s a perfect use case for machine translation. If it wasn’t available, we just wouldn’t read them at all). In the last 5 years, I’ve witnessed f. ex. Chinese -> English go from absolute gibberish to mostly intelligible. Leaps and bounds.

                What did shock me recently is that people are starting to use machine translations proofread by unqualified people for official translations. I shudder, because I don’t want to stake a legal case on that. But it does seem to be the way it’s going. The person who told me about it couldn’t be convinced to see the problem.

                Reply ↓
                1. bamcheeks*

                  This is a bigger question, but it’s still absolutely wild to me that we have no kind of legal framework for liability when it comes to software. We are handing over ever-increasing matters of health, engineering, law and finance to software without having any equivalent of a registered doctor, chartered engineer, licensed solicitor or accountant to sign off and take responsibility, and it’s absolutely wild that there doesn’t seem to be any serious shift towards it.

    2. DJ*

      > I don’t have a solution, obviously.

      The solution seems obvious to me: allow the job to be automated, tax a portion of the income the business ownership gains from this automation, and fund basic income for everyone.

      Reply ↓
      1. Common sense tax control*

        Yep. This is exactly the financial wisdom and foresight I’ve come to expect of the average Democrat voter.

        Reply ↓
      2. amoeba*

        I mean, even if it’s not basic income – make it a 35 h or a 4 day week for everybody! It makes zero sense to keep people busy just for the sake of being busy if the work can be done more efficiently. I mean, the 5 day/40 h week is not a god-given standard, it was something people/unions fought for because it used to be much more. I’m sure automation helped a lot to make this possible, and I also think we should try to continue in the same direction, and not “work as many hours as humanly possible because people are lazy”.

        But yeah, that probably doesn’t help the LW, obviously. But it’s absolutely possible that automation and AI do just make everybody’s life less stressful – we just need to fight for that and not let capitalism do its thing of “oh, but then we can just have fewer people working harder!”.

        Reply ↓
        1. Emmy Noether*

          This is an idea that comes up every time there’s a large automatization push – it has been predicted many times before that humans will just let machines work and be at leisure all the time. And I guess it has partially come to pass – 40 hour work weeks are already less than it was historically.
          It wasn’t as automatic (pun intended) a consequence as some people thought, though. They had to fight for it, and as you say, we’ll have to fight for it too.

          Reply ↓
      3. bamcheeks*

        Yes! The problem isn’t the technology, it’s a political and economic situation that reserves the benefits of technology for the already-wealthy and the risks for everyone else. And you can’t defeat that by refusing to play: the answer has to be political.

        Reply ↓
    3. Anon Video Game Industry*

      Sorry, that’s BS for creative jobs (mine) where part of the only way to get good at the job is to do the “boring” work. It’s bs that it’s even useful, but CEOs who can’t write an email to save their life think that AI can create anything and everything. It’s only plagiarizing others’ actual work and reducing diversity in my field and many others in the entertainment industry. And the kicker is that AI isn’t even fast or good at the work! We could do it faster and better on our own (yes, we have the data!). However, a bunch of CEOs and accountants have been blinded by the manifest destiny tripe that AI companies are spouting, and we’ve mostly all been laid off this year and last to “save money.”

      Make no mistake: without solid policy, most of us will be out in the streets while the billionaires hole up in their bunkers.

      Does that sound crazy? Yes. Has it already happened to me and many artists, designers, and writers whose work is deemed as something that “can be done by AI”? Also yes.

      In five to ten years when you start wondering why nothing is any good anymore, it’s all being generated by a few white dudes punching in algorithmic codes instead of the actual, diverse, human creative forces behind great stories and games.

      Reply ↓
      1. amoeba*

        Eh, I was thinking more of tasks like filling out forms, data entry, whatever. Like, I don’t know, you currently have somebody manually typing out everything from the handwritten forms you get to enter it into the system, and it would now be possible to do all this by handwriting recognition with just a final control by a human at the end.

        This type of task can and (in my opinion) absolutely should be automated, there are so many processes that are just time-consuming grunt work with really zero creative value. AI also isn’t just ChatGPT/LLMs, although that’s of course the first thing that comes to mind for many people!

        Reply ↓
        1. Arrietty*

          But the companies that currently pay people to do that boring grunt work aren’t going to pay those people to do fun creative work once they’ve automated the jobs away, they’re going to bank the profits.

          Reply ↓
          1. Ann*

            Yeah, in theory automatation should mean people get freed up to do other work or/and just have more free time; in practice it just means whoever has ownership over the technology gets a huge amount of additional money and power that the workers lose. It shouldn, but it’s the situation we have, and I feel like going, it’s not inherent to the technology so the technology is unbiguously a positive thing is kind d of a cop-out.

            Reply ↓
      2. Suddenly precarized videogame translator*

        THIS!

        I work as a freelance videogame translator. Many of my clients have already had to shut down due to AI, and the few that still remain won’t take long until they are forced to implement it.

        I used to think AI is no good for the creative work I do, and it certainly isn’t there yet. But we have already been replaced because people seem to think (honestly or otherwise) that it saves time. It doesn’t. I’ve yet to find a usable (printing-quality) translation or text made by AI that doesn’t require so much editing that it takes the same amount of time or longer to achieve a worse result than doing it from scratch. Often I’ll erase the AI version and start from scratch. However, using AI is paid at one-third or half my original rate. No can do.

        Once I helped translate a very technical videogame, and AI was not good even for that one, although there was a lot of repetitive content. I still had to change like 98% of the technical names.

        I have also tried to use ChatGPT for language lessons and I am amazed people think this is good. I have asked it to produce a multi-choice quiz for specific language items. The first test is usually good. When I ask for a second one of the same type, it just mangles the questions it used the first time, producing absolutely nonsensical questions.

        I keep trying to use it, and keep marveling that people believe it is THAT useful for creative work. Not to mention the amount of false information it produces (sorry, “hallucinations”).

        I am already trying to change industries.

        Reply ↓
    4. niknik*

      This is by no means a new discussion, though. And not really related to AI, either.

      Automation has been replacing manual labor since the age of the first mechanical weaving looms, and humanity has been trying to come up with ways to make work easier since the dawn of time.

      Not something that i myself would loose any sleep over.

      Reply ↓
      1. Irish Teacher.*

        To be fair, automation HAS caused massive problems in the past though. While we often think of the Industrial Revolution as a good thing because it massively increased access to goods and increased the wealth of European countries, many of the working class probably ended up worse off. There was some city in England where I think the average life expectancy was 18, due to accidents in the factories, air pollution, etc.

        Not that being a peasant in pre-Industrial Europe was great either, but the loss of jobs due to the Agricultural Revolution did make it easier for factory owners to exploit workers.

        Now government regulation did follow and improve the situation and I do NOT believe that AI is going to lead to a return of child labour or anything like that but just to point out that while long-term, the issues do tend to get resolved, new technology has always caused significant problems for some people in the short-term. There was a reason for the Luddites.

        Reply ↓
        1. Emmy Noether*

          Yes, the industrial revolution, viewed from up close, wasn’t particularly nice. Arguably, some of the things it has made possible today, such as the fast fashion industry, also aren’t nice.

          I forget the details, but I read that one of the first people to invent a sewing machine didn’t make it public due to ethical concerns over making jobs redundant. There was also the first sewing machine factory in France that got burned down by angry workers. (Of course it then got re-invented by several other people – the history is quite fascinating)

          So not a new ethical question either.

          Reply ↓
      2. Emmy Noether*

        Yes, there are historical precedents we can look to. The industrial revolution, the invention of computers, and many smaller events.

        It does usually put some people out of work for a generation (which we shouldn’t downplay! it’s crappy for those people.), and then humanity adjusts and work is redistributed.

        What does feel different this time is that they’re not coming for our hands, but for our minds. Things we are used to thinking of as uniquely human, such as pattern recognition and creativity. It seems certain AI is really good at pattern recognition. Creativity I don’t think so, but it will be a mess until we figure it out.

        Reply ↓
    5. nnn*

      I’ve beta-tested AI for my job extensively, and I’ve found that it actually make it way harder than doing the “boring” work myself.

      Upon reflection, I realized that what happens is the “boring” work is what inputs the material into my subconscious mind, thereby setting me up to draw connections and find innovative solutions while working out or gaming or doing housework.

      In contrast, when the AI does the “boring” work for me, I come to the difficult part ignorant, unprepared and devoid of insight, and it’s a struggle to figure out what’s even going on. (An analogy I’ve heard from this struggle is it’s like being teleported into a room full of arguing people you’ve never met and trying to get everyone to agree on a compromise, versus trying to sort out a compromise among people you’ve known intimately for decades)

      Reply ↓
      1. Kate, short for Bob*

        I saw the perfect description on Bluesky this weekend – Kip Manley –

        “There is no exact version of any work of art ever in any artist’s head
        There is an impulse a drive a kernel a spark
        THE WORK IS DISCOVERED IN THE MAKING OF THE WORK
        The work is constantly rediscovered in the reading of the work
        By everyone for everyone
        Including the artist
        Not AI”

        Capitalisation mine (though the original was all caps) but doesn’t it just get right to the meat?

        Reply ↓
      2. bamcheeks*

        I used to do this when I was still in academia. I hand wrote notes, and then typed them up, and that was the place where I absorbed them, saw patterns, and figured out my next steps. I hope your company is listening to you when you tell them that can’t be automated!

        Reply ↓
    6. DeskApple*

      I also brought AI into my company and I’ve got the job that on first glance you would think AI can do, but as long as it still makes a relatively large amount of errors (and it still does) or the risk is high that even one error could cause a big problem, I’m still in a job. It’s not as completely cut and dry as most people think, but that of course depends on the purpose.

      Reply ↓
  2. Chad*

    To everyone that reads this – please don’t stay at a job for 11 years without a raise unless you have a really good reason for staying that long.

    Get the heck out of there and on to something better. They don’t value you so don’t waste your time with them. I realize there are some exceptional cases in why people stay under those conditions, but those should truly be the exception.

    Reply ↓
  3. West Coast, Best Coast*

    Yes, this is weird and inappropriate. It’s also not terribly uncommon in some parts of the U.S. Any chance you’re in the south?

    So in other words, you’re from the northeast and are OK imposing your values on another region in a crusade to discontinue a voluntary, legal practice. Nice.

    Incidentally, there is no reason why saying “grace” inherently has to be religious in nature. It’s meant as an acknowledgement of gratitude and thanks. The word “gracias” in Spanish literally means “grace,” and figuratively “thank you.”

    Reply ↓
    1. Noodles*

      1. Plenty of us who live in the south don’t want to pray before meals.
      2. The type of grace being said before meals usually involves the word God, or other religious language. Is it possible the letter writer could offer to say grace, then give an atheist thanks, a Buddhist thanks, etc? Sure, though I’ll tell you, that doesn’t often go over well! And, they shouldn’t have to. People can say silent grace in public.

      Reply ↓
    3. anon24*

      Are you ok?

      It’s not really voluntary if it’s happening at work and employees feel forced to go along or be singled out.

      I’ve never heard a “secular” grace. Sure, it’s possible, but it’s always had a Christian connotation.

      Reply ↓
    4. tommy*

      it doesn’t matter what the word means in spanish. what matters is the common cultural understanding of what “grace” — the action taken before meals — is understood to be and to mean. you’re being disingenuous.

      plus, default christianity infuses it with a christian tinge whether or not anyone mentions anything specifically christian during the grace. it’s not friendly to anyone of non-christian religions, anyone of no religion, or anyone who prefers to practice this type of thankfulness privately.

      Reply ↓
      1. Gilgongo*

        I (an atheist) would fine with grace if the person thanked Mother Earth for her glorious bounty or something like that. Or, like, “I’d like to express gratitude that we’re all together eating this meal.”

        But, generally, grace is religious in nature… and it can make non-Christians very uncomfortable. Like how I imagine a Christian would feel if someone stood up to praise Allah (or, heck, Satan) before each meal.

        Reply ↓
        1. judyjudyjudy*

          Also, what if I don’t want to thank anyone, including Mother Earth? Why do I have to be pressured into gratefulness (even secular gratefulness)? I don’t care if individuals do it, but don’t make it a team activity.

          Reply ↓
        2. West Coast, Best Coast*

          Like how I imagine a Christian would feel if someone stood up to praise Allah (or, heck, Satan) before each meal.

          I realize this answer will shock people who confuse freedom *of* religion with freedom *from* religion, or people who forget that the First Amendment has a free exercise clause as well as a no-establishment clause, but:

          1. Interfaith services are a thing. I have no problem with participating in a prayer of gratitude led by an imam, and I have done so.

          2. “Allah” is the same thing as “God.” The theology is different, but the Abrahamic faiths worship the same God. “Allah” simply means “God” in Arabic, just as “Dios” means “God” in Spanish, and indeed Arab Christians use the word, not just Muslims.

          Reply ↓
          1. judyjudyjudy*

            So, if at every team lunch, you workplace led a prayer to Satan thanking His Infernal Majesty for the day’s bounty — sometimes led by a department head — you would not feel any discomfort and would say nothing about it? What if there was an expectation that you participate, which is how the LW feels?

            Also, this specific situation is not interfaith, and I’m not sure how an atheist participates in an interfaith event.

            Other than being Big Mad, do you have any advice for the LW, as a fierce believer in the “freedom *of* religion”?

            Reply ↓
    5. Michelle*

      that is not the meaning of the word grace that is in play here, and I am pretty sure you know that. Or maybe you think that ~thank you in Spanish~ involves closed eyes, bowed head, a prayer often addressed directly to a second-person god, and an amen?

      Honestly didn’t expect the comments section of this particular blog to be a haven for “failure to tolerate intolerance is intolerant!!!” type pearl-clutching… but here we are.

      Reply ↓
    6. Min*

      This sort of over the top defensive reaction is precisely what some of us fear when we’re considering whether or not to speak up about default Christian religious practices that make us uncomfortable.

      Reply ↓
      1. Onomatopoetic*

        This so much. I feel very uncomfortable with many religious practices myself, as a person who many religious people “don’t believe in”. I’m supposed to not “push my agenda” on people, such as mention my partner in a passing conversation. But if I say I don’t believe in any god and could we keep the religion private, I’m suddenly unreasonable.

        Reply ↓
    7. LadyAmalthea*

      I’m Jewish. while I personally do say a blessing before eating, the blessing I say is food specific, really short, and doesn’t speak in the future. I wouldn’t say it out loud around people who wouldn’t typically say it.

      If I were to propose a Jewish grace after meals at a business lunch, which, in its full form with lots of singing along and specifically Jewish theology, that would be both inappropriate and not go over at all well.

      It’s not about geography, it’s about being so used to being the default culture/religion that it doesn’t occur to you that other people might think or worship (or not worship) differently.

      Reply ↓
    8. TheBunny*

      Wow there buddy. Take it down a step. Or 10.

      If the grace being said involves thanking God or saying Amen (and since a pastor is saying I think it’s safe to guess it does) it’s not a secular giving of thanks.

      And it doesn’t sound like OP thinks it’s all that voluntary either.

      Reply ↓
    9. Bessie C*

      Wednesday and Thursday also honour Nordic gods – that doesn’t mean we all have to start sending nanna off to her funeral in a flaming longboat.

      Religion used to infuse our society and there’s hangovers in all sorts of spaces.

      It’s not appropriate in a secular country for that to be actively imposed in the workplace today.

      Reply ↓
      1. West Coast, Best Coast*

        Religion used to infuse our society and there’s hangovers in all sorts of spaces.

        Religion remains an important component of our society, and not just to Christians. The fact that you think it’s a “hangover” says a lot about you and suggests you want to impose your values on others, not the other way around.

        It’s not appropriate in a secular country

        There is a difference between being a “secular country” and having a non-establishment clause. Freedom of religion is not the same as freedom from religion. And if we’re talking the UK (“honouring”), there is an established state church and RE is part of the curriculum in public schools.

        Reply ↓
        1. UKDancer*

          As someone from the UK yes we have an established church but I’ve never worked anywhere with grace before meals and it would be considered very weird. People may say a private prayer discreetly but the only place with grace before meals is a church type setting.

          We just don’t mix work and religion most times. It’s sort of not done.

          Reply ↓
        2. Nesnay*

          A state church does not mean that religious practises in the workplace are to be expected. We have a state church in my country, and it would be seen as absolutely insane if what the LW is describing happened in a government office here.

          Reply ↓
        3. ASD always*

          Even though we did things like (unknowingly) sing Christian hymns at state school in England, I’ve still literally never attended a meal where anyone said grace out loud, and would find it incredibly weird if someone did at a work event.

          Not sure what your point is meant to be about RE lessons – they’re for learning about a variety of major world religions (we focused on Buddhism and Islam, with some lessons on Hinduism and Sikhism), it’s not like “Christian studies”.

          Reply ↓
          1. londonedit*

            Yes; I’d be shocked if RE didn’t include all the major religions. It certainly does here – even 25-odd years ago when I was at school, our RE lessons covered Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Sikhism, Hinduism etc, as well as Christianity. The RE curriculum is absolutely about learning about a variety of different religions, and about atheism/agnostic beliefs too. It’s absolutely not some sort of ‘Christian studies’ thing.

            Reply ↓
          2. bamcheeks*

            I think West Coast Best Coast is mixing up RE with the requirement to begin the school day with ann act of collective worship in schools from the 1944 Education Act, which is still technically law, but if it was ever enforced by local authorities or school inspectors it stopped well before I was at school in the 80s and 90s. I actually think it’s a great example of how we technically have an established church and the the C of E has way more institutionally-mandated involvement in society and government than in the US, but Christian practice is much less visible in daily life.

            Reply ↓
            1. londonedit*

              Ah, yes. We had assembly every day at primary school, which included the classic Come and Praise songs and the odd visit from the vicar, but it wasn’t really presented as Religious, if you know what I mean. Absolutely none of that at secondary school, no ‘collective worship’ at all, despite what the law might say.

              Also completely agree that we’re hugely secular in this country despite having an established church and supposedly mandated religious involvement in society etc. I think that’s something that’s very hard for American people to grasp – you only really understand it if you live here or grew up here.

              Reply ↓
        4. Agent Diane*

          Also UK, and you are talking out of your hat and imposing your beliefs on us.

          1. The UK is predominantly secular. See census 2021.

          2. The only workplaces to have any mention of religion are, well, religious workplaces. Some elected chambers have a daily prayer at the start (eg House of Commons). However, this is before the session starts and people of other religions (or none) are not expected to attend or join in.

          3. Our religious education curriculum covers all the major religions that are popular in the UK not just CoE Christian thought. It also mentions atheism.

          4. I worked in the public sector for two decades: if anyone had tried to lead a team in prayer at a meal there would have been in instant complaint to HR because religion has no place in workplaces. We cannot serve the public without bias if we’re prioritising one religion over others (or none).

          Reply ↓
        5. Nina*

          This may shock you but there are places other than the UK that spell honouring with a u.
          I’m from one of them. We’re really, really, really secular here and starting any kind of business event with any kind of prayer would be Not On.

          Reply ↓
          1. londonedit*

            We’re also really, really, really secular here in the UK and unless your workplace is literally a church starting any kind of business event with any kind of prayer would be very much Not On here, too. Religion is generally one of those things that you keep to yourself.

            Reply ↓
        6. Aunt Lydia*

          The only place I have ever heard “there is freedom to and freedom from” before is in The Handmaid’s Tale.

          That being said, I’m not from the US or a native English speaker, so maybe there’s some context I’m missing.

          Reply ↓
          1. Emmy Noether*

            Freedom to and freedom from is an interesting distinction. I just think that there can be no “freedom to” without “freedom from”. If one is free to practice religion A or B or C or…, then the practitioners of B and C have to be free from A as well, otherwise it’s meaningless.

            Reply ↓
          1. Wendy*

            Who is the LW?

            The person who wrote in or west coast, best coast?

            Because I am referring to Everyone, Not just west coast, best coast

            All of us should just get along instead of figuratively fighting, which is what these back and forth arguments look like

            Reply ↓
            1. Myrin*

              LW is the writer of the original letter.
              And judy’s questions aims at the fact that we’re supposed to give actionable advice to letter writers, so the question is: how does “can’t we get along and not argue about [topic]” translate to advice for the letter writer?
              Because way too often, it’s just a more “enlightened”-sounding form of saying “Shut up about this thing that makes you uncomfortable and don’t rock the boat!”.

              It’s all well and true and nice to say that people of all religions (or no religion) should be getting along but that doesn’t really help OP in her current situation.

              Reply ↓
        2. tommy*

          judyjudyjudy asks the perfect question, Wendy. “all just get along” means christian default flows free and loud while everyone else shuts up. the answer to your “why” is because what LW is experiencing at work is unfair.

          Reply ↓
            2. Fshface*

              I think it’s not saying that “all Christians are like that”, but just the the ones who are like that tend to go unopposed, because the Christian majority don’t find it offensive enough to worry about.

              Reply ↓
            3. But Of Course*

              Got it, you’re the arbiter of who Christians are, and anyone who disagrees based on lived experience with Christians is wrong. Maybe your co-believers should quit inserting your religion into everything because y’all feel threatened and the rest of us can see you as harmless, but for right now, a) you don’t have Christ-like powers to define who’s a Christian and who’s not, and b) by insisting that the rest of us who agree with the LW are just wrong about what we experience, you’re actually also not really repping the religion well.

              Far better to thoughtfully consider this feedback and alter your own behavior than stick your fingers in your ears and shout that we’re all just wrong.

              Reply ↓
        3. Astro-Not*

          Because people are people, and many of those people are judgemental, bigoted and discriminatory in their actions. And that materially affects people like the OP, in negative ways. Your comment attempt to sweep the lived experience and issues of others under a rug because… what? Dealing with the reality of how others are affected by these issues makes you uncomfortable? You don’t care so no one should? What is it that makes you so dismissive and uncaring?

          Reply ↓
    10. MBK*

      I didn’t see any kind of crusade here, just an acknowledgement that practices such as this one are more common (and assumed to be accepted) in the south than in other parts of the country.

      I do love the idea of expressing gratitude for the food. Particularly if that gratitude is expressed through providing living wages, good benefits, and reasonable working conditions to those who produced, prepared, served, and cleaned up after the meal. Thanking a specific religious entity, though? That a nah from me, thanks.

      Reply ↓
    11. Quoth the Raven*

      As someone whose native language is Spanish, there is a world of difference between saying gracias as “thank you” and as “saying grace”. Even if the word is the same (and that’s only in theory, since saying grace can also be translated into “bendecir la mesa” or blessing the table) the intention is definitely not the same.

      Reply ↓
    14. Pastor/Caseworker*

      No because using the phrase saying grace is what is called Christian hegemony. It presumes certain things and that is not ok.

      Reply ↓
    15. Failure to launch detected*

      This comment is disingenuous at best, and appallingly ignorant at worst. If you genuinely believe what you wrote, you have a LOT of learning to do. I’m sorry your upbringing and education has failed you so extensively that you lack both the critical thinking skills to understand this issue and the empathy to reflect meaningfully on the experiences and feelings of others. (And if you don’t? Then you’re just a jerk.)

      Reply ↓
  4. yvve*

    some jobs i feel are actively detrimental to society, but automating is not one I’d put in that category. Ideally we would find ways to soften the landing for people who are out of work, but if the job does not need to be done, then it’s wasting both money and the effort and time of the people doing it. It’s just a very inefficient form of charity

    Reply ↓
    1. Lionheart26*

      Hard agree. we’re entering a difficult transition phase, but the evolution of work is now inevitable. OP I don’t think anyone benefits long term by you stepping out of the loop.
      I have started a business in the last 12 months, and employed 3 part time staff. One is a (short term contract) prompt engineer tasked with figuring out the best way for us all to work efficiently. The other 2 are doing full-time work in part-time hours because of the systems she has set up. You could look at this as taking jobs, but these jobs wouldn’t exist without AI: I simply wouldn’t have started my business because it wouldn’t be viable without the automation. Of my 3 staff, one is doing this as part time side hustle on top of a full time job, one is a student, and one is retired. All 3 are super grateful for the opportunity for flexible work.

      The businesses and employees that are going to thrive in this stage are the ones who adapt. That’s not being callous about people’s livelihoods, that’s supporting people to transition to new ways of working.

      Reply ↓
  5. Patrick*

    Regarding prayer by a government official, I’m sorry to report this because I think it’s appalling, but our Supreme Court has decided any government official can interrupt his duties to lead a prayer, as long as he says the people under him don’t have to participate. Coach Kennedy vs. Bremerton School District 2022.

    Reply ↓
  6. Unkempt Flatware*

    I’ve had luck with group prayer by deliberately doing the opposite with my body. Bowed heads in a circle? I step out as far as I can and keep my hands behind my back. Eyes open but not looking at anyone. Holding hands? Put both hands up with a polite smile while backing away. Or here’s from a recent town council meeting I attended in a conservative area: the mayor tells everyone to rise and bow their heads in prayer for the invocation (?!?!?!), sit and do not bow your head or close your eyes. Wait patiently with eyes open and smile politely but not in a way that welcomes discussion on it.

    Reply ↓
    1. Unkempt Flatware*

      Note: I welcome invocations of all variety but it was the mayor telling us all to rise like it was church that irked me.

      Reply ↓
    2. West Coast, Best Coast*

      in prayer for the invocation (?!?!?!)

      Hoo boy, are you going to have a cow when you realize that the US Congress in Washington, DC, has a chaplain and does a daily opening prayer. This practice goes back to 1789 (and earlier if you count the Continental Congress).

      I realize this argument is a stunner, but hear me out: just maybe consistent practice since the time of the framers, who WROTE the first amendment, means that they viewed an opening prayer as consistent with the no-establishment clause? It has nothing to do with “conservative areas.”

      Reply ↓
      1. Noodles*

        I personally don’t care what a bunch of men from hundreds of years ago felt about prayer. I’m still not comfortable with it as a public activity, and when this sort of thing is done in public I’ll continue to not participate. If they were generally more of a general non-religious gratitude thing, sure. But bringing God, usually Christian god, into it, isn’t for me.

        Reply ↓
        1. West Coast, Best Coast*

          men from hundreds of years ago

          The current chaplain of the US House is a woman, but hey, details.

          Reply ↓
    3. nnn*

      Building on this, sometimes, in some cases, if you’re asked for an explanation about your physically removing yourself from the prayer, “I don’t want to disrespect your religion with false piety” can be a useful script.

      Reply ↓
  7. Christine*

    If my workplace inserted religion into any part of my work, I’d be on the phone to the Freedom From Religion Foundation (https://ffrf.org/) so fast their heads would be spinning.
    Individuals can pray individually. The moment it intrudes on a work event, it’s crossed the line.

    Reply ↓
    1. Kimchi*

      Yeah, I try to keep my religion out of work unless directly asked about it (or it comes naturally in a conversation).
      I’d feel pretty uncomfortable if my manager decided we all had to say a prayer before work. It feels so… public.

      Reply ↓
  8. Gilgongo*

    My old company (in Texas) did a saying grace thing once (complete with praising Jesus), and I was intensely uncomfortable. I left that company (for that and a few other reasons) soon after.

    I’m also currently evaluating a tool that will potentially take away people’s jobs. I dont feel too bad about it as a) I’ve been asking for help with the task that AI will now help me with and have not received it, b) You can’t stop progress. Some people will lose their jobs, but you’re much less likely to if you embrace AI instead of fight against it

    Reply ↓
    1. Artemesia*

      I think we can assume that the OP of that letter will NOT get vacation pay out unless it is legally mandated in their state. A company that doesn’t give a raise in 11 years is not paying out vacation.

      Reply ↓
  10. Junior Dev (now midlevel)*

    To LW 2 (automating jobs) I want to offer a perspective as someone who works in tech and has thought about this sort of thing a lot.

    Years ago I heard a story at church that has stuck with me. The wife of a retired pastor was talking about her relationship with money. She said her husband would always tell churches he would work for the lowest possible salary as a form of altruism. But “he wasn’t the one who had to buy groceries for our three kids.”

    You’re not in a situation where your selfish wants are at odds with your values. You’re in a situation with two competing sets of values—your obligation to colleagues, strangers, and society in general; vs your obligation to yourself and your family.

    I don’t say this with the implication that any one choice is the correct one. Rather, you aren’t being selfish or immoral by putting the need of people close to you first; nobody else is going to prioritize your kids in the way you can. (I suppose my perspective on this is also shaped by growing up with my mom being a doctor and always feeling her career came first; there’s a trend in my extended family of people doing very important, noble work while also not prioritizing time with their family the way they could have otherwise.) It is a moral good for your family to be financially stable, for you to have a career you enjoy, and for your kids to get more time with you.

    I think progressive-leaning people tend to talk about morality and good behavior as though it’s primarily about these abstract obligations to the world as a whole, in a way that can make it feel hard to prioritize your own happiness and stability. I deeply sympathize with the reasons people tend to do this, and I also think it’s counterproductive when trying to figure out what’s right for you as an individual person.

    Reply ↓
    1. Emmy Noether*

      I think you are getting at an important and nuanced ethical question that underlies a lot of how we choose to live our lives, consciously or not.

      As a progressive who lives a life in comfort and freedom, I do sometimes feel quite a bit of guilt at not giving more of myself for the general good. It’s a balance to strike, and it’s a difficult one.

      Reply ↓
  11. TheBunny*

    AI is coming. Heck it’s already here in a lot of ways.

    I understand the concern about it taking people’s jobs, but cars took jobs from people who worked on trains that took jobs from people in the horse drawn carriage industry.

    Netflix destroyed movie rental stores. Each move to something different leaves a piece of what was behind it.

    We aren’t going to stop it. What we can do is our best to make sure it’s done ethically and responsibly.

    Reply ↓
    1. Seal*

      AI research started in the 1950s; ongoing advances in technology and software have allowed AI to evolve and become increasingly sophisticated. These days, AI is more or less ubiquitous and is incorporated into far more things than people realize.

      I’ve been a librarian for many years, long enough to have witnessed the transition from card catalogs to online catalogs. Many of the things I did very early in my career have long since been automated. While this certainly had an impact on job descriptions, it allowed always underfunded and understaffed libraries to work more efficiently. While AI isn’t the answer to everything, it’s definitely here to stay.

      Reply ↓
  12. Dido*

    Is it unethical to automate people’s jobs away? Of course not. Should we still build manual elevators to employ elevator operators and build houses without central heating dishwashers or washing machine hookups so we can employ domestic servants to stoke the fires and hand wash everything? It’s absurd to think preserving these few obsolete jobs is better than automating things and making life easier for humanity as a whole.

    The idea that we must protect every job at all costs is dangerous and is also frustratingly used to push back against transitioning to renewable energy. Can’t stop using because miners in West Virgina will lose their jobs, etc… the world is vastly different than it was a hundred years ago and a hundreds years before that and it will be vastly different in another hundred years and so on. We must adapt society to the world as we progress and make life EASIER rather than invest effort into futiley trying to stop the progress altogether.

    Reply ↓
  13. BW*

    I once worked for a small company that screwed someone out of their vacation pay when they quit. So everyone after that debacle would take a vacation and THEN quit.

    Reply ↓
  14. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

    OP2 (automation) progress and change is inevitable – it isn’t unethical in itself to automate work away in my opinion, but the way this is handled at individual company level can be (and society level, but it’s much harder to change that from the ground up rather than by government intervention…).

    The people whose job is being made obsolete by this AI tool – do they know the project is happening? Is it being kept on the down low? Despite the project manager saying we’d rather have AI do the dishes rather than generate art – presumably the company sees some end goal in automating this and that’s why they have hired OP to do the data science part. Someone didn’t just wake up and think “let’s see what this AI is about”. So I think, potentially, the project manager has been fed the “dishes, not art” line by whoever initiated the project in the first place – make of that what you will.

    Reply ↓
    1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

      I forgot to add – other ways of handling it more ethically (as well as clear communication) are things like support for re-training, maybe additional severance recognising that it will now be harder to get a comparable job, etc. I am torn on how much of this is individual companies’ responsibility rather than “society’s” (government level) though – curious to hear others’ opinions on that.

      Reply ↓
  15. j*

    I went to a work picnic at my husband’s federal government job, and one of his coworkers led a long prayer before we ate, crying tears of joy that people are still allowed to pray in public. He had been drinking. My husband said no one was allowed to bring alcohol to events after that. Even though this is the south, that’s too much for a work prayer!

    Reply ↓
  16. Limdood*

    LW3

    I’d think real hard about bringing up the question to anyone AT your work. If it gets back to management, you can never be sure that they won’t just say “no, we don’t pay out vacation, and you can clean out your desk now,” or cut your position in response to you trying to take vacation time after giving notice.

    You’ve effectively gotten taken advantage of for 11 years (or 10 years, or however you want to look at it). This isn’t a business that strives to take care of its employees, as evidenced by their actions. Unless you can get a definitive answer on whether or not vacation is paid out WITHOUT it getting back to anyone above you (and that includes asking current or former coworkers who you think might let it slip), then just take your vacation time, THEN give notice.

    Reply ↓
    1. BellaStella*

      This is spot on. Can you take two days a week off OP until you are out of PTO? Or a week off then every other Friday maybe?

      Use it so you do not lose it.

      Reply ↓
  17. A person*

    “A lot of people don’t realize grace isn’t some sort of non-denominational religious practice and think of it as almost secular in nature.”

    IIf it’s the case, it’s very much a US thing, not a Christian country thing. This practice might be so anchored in some US regions that it seems normal and almost secural, but let me stress that it is absolutely not in other parts of the world. Where I’m from – a historically Christian country with its own far-right and religious extremism problems -, it would be perceived as very very traditional if done in a private setting, and completely bonkers in a professional setting. It would absolutely never be perceived as “secular”.

    Reply ↓
    1. londonedit*

      Yep. The idea that anyone could think saying a prayer – which is what saying grace is – could in any way be ‘secular’ is bizarre to me. Where I live it would be completely bonkers in a professional setting. We were supposed to say grace before lunch at primary school (most primary schools are nominally C of E here) but if you didn’t want to say it, you didn’t have to, and anyway it was less of a serious prayer and more a load of kids going ‘Forwhatweareabouttoreceivemaythelordmakeustrulythankfulaaaaaahmen’ as quickly as possible before tucking in. And that sort of thing stops when you leave primary school. It would be almost unthinkable for anyone to suggest a prayer in a work setting here, unless you literally work for a church or some other sort of very traditional Christian organisation.

      Reply ↓
      1. Emmy Noether*

        Yes! I had religion lessons and church services in school (Germany – it’s optional, but it exists) and everyone was very clear that it’s not secular. It would also be bonkers at work, unless the workplace is a religious institution of some sort.

        Maybe openly having a state religion makes the whole thing clearer, rather than pretending there isn’t one and then sneaking religious practices in through the back door as “tradition”.

        I can sort of see how one could perceive for example Christmas as secular if one squints REAL hard. Reduced to just the tree, the presents, and the food, one could think the religious aspects had been stripped from it, plus some (culturally Christian) atheists and the like do celebrate it (to be clear, I do not myself think Christmas is secular).

        But grace? GRACE?! It’s literally thanking God! God is often mentioned! It’s adressed to him! It’s a type of prayer! How could this be secular?

        Reply ↓
  18. Palmer*

    LW3: I’m going to be honest with you here. If they haven’t given you a raise since you were on the ground floor of the company, I wouldn’t put it past them to claw back any PTO they can nab on your way out. If you don’t know anyone who left enough to ask them, I’d spend all my PTO and then give notice.

    Not giving raises after ELEVEN YEARS in a profitable situation means that they know they can rake you over the coals and that you’ll accept it because really, you should’ve left long ago in my opinion. Don’t risk a few weeks of pay trying to be nice to the folks who have happily given you no raises.

    Now maybe they didn’t give raises because you didn’t ask for them or negotiate, but after 11 years a good company would be giving you cost of living adjustments.

    Reply ↓
    1. bamcheeks*

      But also, dont get so caught up in your sunk cost fallacy you spend six months longer working for at 2013 rates in order to take four weeks holiday, instead of going straight out and getting a job that pays you 2024 rates and lets you start accruing holiday at 2o24 rates.

      I mean, if you can go and take the four-week holiday of a lifetime and give notice immediately, it’s probably worth it! But if you stay an extra year in order to chip away at your holiday balance just because, you’re almost certainly better off just writing that holiday off and heading off into the sunset to a new and better paid job.

      Reply ↓

Leave a Comment

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

Subscribe to all comments on this post by RSS