I’m angry at my coworkers — can I refuse their apology?

by Alison Green on January 8, 2025

A reader writes:

I was out for a few days recently for personal reasons and came back to discover that two of my colleagues have done something incredibly thoughtless that has completely screwed up a major work product for me and then lied about it to my supervisor, saying I was involved in the decision. I am livid about it, but I don’t know how to cope with this anger in a work situation.

They are desperate to talk it out with me and apologize, mainly to make themselves feel better rather than to help me out at all, but for now I’ve sent a message saying that I’m not able to have the discussion with them.

My instinct is to just stop talking to them because I don’t feel I can trust them again, but that’s not practical in our work situation and would make everyone else in our close-knit, incredibly friendly team really uncomfortable.

Do I just accept their apology and try to get over it, or is there a socially acceptable way to reject someone’s apology? My supervisor (who is not their supervisor) is being helpful with trying to sort out the work stuff but isn’t getting involved in the interpersonal aspect.

Your choices aren’t to just accept the apology or reject it. You can sidestep that binary entirely and instead explain why you’re concerned despite the apology.

For example: “I appreciate you apologizing, but I’m really concerned about why it happened. I of course understand mistakes happen, but you lying to Jane about it could have caused serious issues for me.”

“Concerned” is better framing for most work issues than “angry.” That doesn’t mean you can’t be angry, but the bar is typically very, very high to frame things as anger at work. But you can be deeply, gravely concerned without bumping up against that convention. (More on that here.)

On a similar note, if “lying to Jane about it” feels too harsh for your workplace culture (it will for some, despite being true), you can say “misrepresenting it to Jane.” That’s frankly a pretty BS softening — they lied! it’s a lie! — but in some work cultures it’ll go over better / help everyone move forward if you’re not quite as plain-spoken about it. (Is this is a weird, wildly inauthentic thing about work culture? Yes, absolutely.)

From there, you’re right that you can’t just stop speaking to colleagues, particularly if you need to work with them. You don’t need to trust them again — and it sounds like you’d be wise not to — but you do need to be reasonably civil to colleagues, including ones you don’t trust. That said, you can certainly limit your interactions to mostly work-related ones. (I say “mostly” rather than “exclusively” because you still need to, for example, return a courteous “good morning” and otherwise engage in at least minimal pleasantries in order to be considered professional and because obvious hostility or freezing-out will make people around you feel uncomfortable.)

That doesn’t mean that you’ve forgotten what happened, just that you’re treating them civilly because you are a professional.

You may also like:
{ 146 comments }

{ 146 comments… read them below or add one }

  1. Peanut Hamper*

    Anger is a human response, but concern and civility are professional responses.

    It’s not always easy, but it is always a choice.

    Reply ↓
    1. tina turner*

      And we never know what others were TOLD unless we discuss it. One person can portray facts in a skewed way and others believe it.

      Reply ↓
    3. Sloanicota*

      Also, it sounds like OP is taking this as a personal insult from these individuals towards them. But the more helpful/professional framing is that these colleagues interfered with a work process and caused a work problem. Unfortunately professionals have to dial down their own feelings and ego a lot.

      Reply ↓
        1. Testing*

          Me neither.

          A ”work problem” is still a problem, and sounds like this was a big one. Compounded with the reason apparently being not just basic incompetence or a mistake (”something incredibly thoughtless”) and then the lying on top of it all…

          Reply ↓
      2. HonorBox*

        I feel like it certainly can be taken personally because of the lie. If the coworkers had screwed something up in OP’s absence and OP had to put Humpty Dumpty back together when they returned, that’s purely a work problem. OP can still be angry, upset, concerned. But it would be more easy to let things go following an apology.

        But the coworkers lied and said OP was part of the decision that led to the problem. That’s not only untrue, but it also could make someone question’s OP’s professional judgement. Of course that’s something someone would take personally. Instead of just owning up to the problem that they cause, these coworkers pulled OP under the bus with them.

        Reply ↓
  2. Mango Freak*

    The workplace BS about not dishonesty is so real. Recently in a meeting I said I found something “hard to believe” and the woman I was talking to reacted like I’d thrown a glass of water in her face. It took me a minute to even realize that she thought I was accusing her if lying. (I don’t think I was! It was a situation where there’d been a lot of miscommunication about who’d made a decision, and I more meant that no one was taking the situation seriously enough to be precise about what had happened. But idk, maybe she was lying?)

    Reply ↓
    1. Dust Bunny*

      In my personal experience “I find that hard to believe” is a pretty stock way to imply that you think someone is lying, and I would probably react sort of defensively, too. At best it’s a very vague thing to say that doesn’t make enough distinction about where you think the dishonesty likes.

      Reply ↓
      1. HalJordan*

        But “I find this hard to believe” or “I find it hard to believe we’re at this point” are very similar to “that”–I think the force of the statement really depends on context and really nuanced word choice. “That” is [your statement of events], “this” (to me) is [the events].

        But that level of nuance can also get lost easily, so might be best avoided to begin with.

        Reply ↓
        1. LL*

          There’s a difference between those two statements though. I find that hard to believe sounds like you’re accusing someone of lying, I find it hard to believe we’re at this point is about the situation, not any individual person.

          Reply ↓
      2. Caramel & Cheddar*

        Yeah, I would also interpret that as an accusation. “I find that hard to believe!” Okay, well, that’s what happened so I’m not sure what you want me to do about it.

        Reply ↓
      4. fhqwhgads*

        I disagree. It certainly can mean “I think you’re lying”, but it can also just mean “I think you’re incorrect”. I think tone and context would probably skew which way I might take it in a given conversation.

        Reply ↓
      5. londonedit*

        Yeah…as with so many things, it could vary by area/culture, but certainly where I’m from if someone said ‘I find that hard to believe’ I’d take it to mean ‘that’s bullshit’.

        In a similar situation I’d probably say something like ‘Really? That surprises me’ – something to indicate I’m surprised or baffled, rather than something that indicates I think someone’s lying.

        Reply ↓
        1. Grey Coder*

          I lean on “that’s news to me”, “that’s surprising”, and “that was not my understanding”. Sometimes followed up with “based on a document I saw from Fergus” or whatever.

          Reply ↓
    3. AndersonDarling*

      I had this come up this week! A colleague repeatedly lied about a project being complete. It was amazingly obvious that they were lying. When I had to report to my manager about it, I still cushioned the word with a bunch of fluff, “It’s uncomfortable to say the word, but there really isn’t another way to say it. They lied, and kept lying about it. ”
      I was so frustrated and I stewed for days waiting to have that conversation. All I wanted to do was blurt it out and hand the issue off to my manager. But the word “lie” felt like the worst curse in the language…even though it was the exactly the intended word.

      Reply ↓
      1. Sloanicota*

        Right, because lie basically implies malicious intent in a way “misunderstanding” or “miscommunication” or “misjudgment” or even “exaggeration” does not. It’s essentially an accusation.

        Reply ↓
      2. Trotwood*

        I think “lie” seems like a big accusation because it implies a whole set of motives that we definitely know, or passes judgment on this person as a Liar. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t, but there’s a way to name the impact without saying they must have lied, i.e. “I don’t know why Fergus told the directors the project was complete. It was very clear that Tracy still needed to complete the design review and then Dave and Lucinda needed to give their approval.” Maybe Fergus had two projects mixed up? Maybe he was afraid to ask for an extension on something that wasn’t complete? Maybe he just thought no one would notice the missing pieces? All of those are specific situations that merit specific responses.

        Reply ↓
      3. StarTrek Nutcase*

        I used “fraud” to describe a coworker’s “A” action I had uncovered and my department director “S” was adamant such a word was shockingly inappropriate & the word wouldn’t be tolerated. I did explain in detail that fraud was exactly what Medicaid called such actions, I had already verified that with our local Mcaid office, and repayment was required and our license was in jeopardy. The joy I got for ensuring S couldn’t just cover everything up was some recompense for having to spend weeks fixing the fraud & having that part of A’s work reassigned to me.
        It should be obvious that by that time in my career I no longer cared to dress up crap with so-called professional words, and didn’t fear retaliation.

        Reply ↓
        1. boof*

          uhg well fraud is a very official and professional word and should be used when it is accurate so people react appropriately (to correct it and address as a very serious issue that can’t happen again)

          Reply ↓
      4. MtnLaurel*

        When I have to say that, I phrase it as “that’s incorrect” or ” I didn’t understand it that way. can you help me understand?” It’s focused on moving forward,which is what we all (hopefully!) want.

        Reply ↓
    4. Ellis Bell*

      Yeah, when things don’t add up, I prefer to say “I don’t understand how” rather than “I don’t believe/find it hard to believe”. If something doesn’t add up, it’s still polite to give the person an opportunity to say how the incident happened, and saying you aren’t giving it credence shuts down the conversation too quickly. So, if you say “I don’t understand how the icing from the missing cake matches the icing all over your face exactly”, it sounds like you’re still seeking input. It gives the cake thief an opportunity to say “I thought that cake was for everyone, and I misunderstood which cake you were talking about when you asked me about it.”

      Reply ↓
  3. Targaryen*

    I’m saying this as a hothead myself: step away from this for a few days and return when your feelings have settled. My Doberman mouth has written a lot of checks my candy ass can’t check.

    Reply ↓
    2. CherryBlossom*

      I am adding “My Doberman mouth has written a lot of checks my candy ass can’t cash” to my vernacular, because I am exactly the same way.

      Also seconding the idea to take a day or two to cool off and come at this rationally. OP, you’re right to be angry, but you do have to handle this with care and civility.

      Reply ↓
      1. Polaris*

        I need to convince myself of this. Because my not-a-candy-ass needs to be reminded to NOT cash the checks that my Doberman mouth writes on occasion. I’m a WIP and I admit it :)

        Reply ↓
    3. Strive to Excel*

      I can’t second this enough. Don’t let your anger put you in the position of the aggressor, it will not be helpful in the long run.

      There’s a suggestion about emails: if you’re angry, write the email but do not send it. Come back to it the next morning when you’re feeling calmer.

      Reply ↓
        1. Miss Creant*

          If you don’t put anyone in the to/cc/bcc fields, the email can’t send.

          That said, I do tend to write my angry messages in a notes app for later reviewing.

          Reply ↓
    4. Tio*

      When I was dealing with an issue that I had a particularly strong reaction to, I also have had a coworker or manager read an email before I sent it on occasion.

      Reply ↓
      1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

        I have been this coworker / colleague / friend on more than one occasion. And I’ve also had to ask other people in my life to assess the situation so I can be more confident about where my reaction is landing in terms of how upset the average person would be.

        Reply ↓
      2. InTheWeeds*

        Yes! Whenever I’m mentoring interns or junior staff one of the first lessons I teach is that professional emailing sounds like it should be easy but in reality it can be really hard, especially when things aren’t going smoothly – never be afraid to ask a trusted colleague to read over an email before you send it!

        Reply ↓
    5. CommanderBanana*

      Great advice. The decisions I’ve regretted the most were ones made in anger. I read the expression “you can’t see your reflection in troubled waters” once and I think of that a lot.

      Reply ↓
    6. Goldenrod*

      YES, as a fellow hothead, I have also learned the hard way to TAKE A MINUTE in a work situation before responding.

      If you don’t communicate super professionally, this can so easily turn into a drama about you expressing yourself the wrong way, completing obscuring your very valid concerns. Speaking as someone who has been there, done that!

      “Is this is a weird, wildly inauthentic thing about work culture? Yes, absolutely.”

      I have found that being inauthentic at work is often best. Especially in an issue involving anger! Alison’s advice is perfect – express your concerns but be professional to a fault. So that the focus stays where it should – on them, not you!

      Reply ↓
      1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

        When I worked in retail, I used to think of it as being kinda like an acting job. The character I was playing at work wasn’t really me. It was a more outgoing, cheerful, and less sweary version of me. I didn’t lie about stuff (much as executives might have wanted me to). It’s just that the way I presented myself was totally inauthentic in a purposeful way.

        The older I get, the more I figure office jobs are kinda similar that way. I definitely do not bring my whole self to work. The extent to which people at work get to see the real me depends on a bunch of factors, basically all related to whether it’s going to cause me serious problems if they do see the real me.

        In this case, you have an objective – to express to them that what they did – lying to your supervisor – was absolutely unacceptable. (Which it was! And OF COURSE you’re not going to trust them after that!). And that just saying sorry isn’t enough to repair the damage that they did to the relationship by trying to throw you under the figurative bus. The way to get there is what Alison suggests – use words like “concerned,” “troubled,” “worried,” and other ones that are perceived to be tied to logic, rather than words that are primarily about emotions (e.g., “angry,” “upset”). The point is to communicate in a way where they’ll hear you about the big message – this was very bad and doing it was uncool.

        Reply ↓
        1. Goldenrod*

          “When I worked in retail, I used to think of it as being kinda like an acting job. The character I was playing at work wasn’t really me”

          This is very smart, because it’s a distancing technique – so it immediately removes your emotions. I love this.

          One year, my new year’s resolution was actually, “Be less authentic at work.” Because, honestly…I’ve worked really hard to NOT bring my whole self to work.

          My work self is a version of me – a version that is not super hotheaded and reactive. No one wants that. ;p

          Reply ↓
          1. Six Feldspar*

            I know this as a “worksona” and I highly recommend even if you enjoy your job/work/coworkers. It’s good for keeping your personal and professional selves separate and if you’ve got an anxious little brain like mine, it can help you be confident in a new job or dealing with a tough work issue.

            Reply ↓
          2. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

            Exactly. The retail jobs I had were soul-crushing, even though my coworkers were nearly all great. So this was also a way of distancing myself from that. But it was great motivation to study hard for the Graduate Record Exam and get myself into grad school. (Which I did).

            Reply ↓
      2. AnotherOne*

        my supervisor and i have a deal where when i’m upset/annoyed, i can write whatever i want in an email but i don’t put any email in the to line (or if i do it’s his.)

        than after i’ve cooled down, i review and edit it, than tell him about the situation and he reviews any OG emails and reviews my response.

        it eliminates any really snarky emails from me that i may regret.

        Reply ↓
        1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

          Sounds like a good strategy! You get to release the annoyance without causing any problems / making anything worse. I do the same thing, with no one in the to line. Heck, even if I’m writing a sensitive e-mail I do plan to send, I don’t fill in the to line until it’s ready to go, just to avoid mishaps.

          Reply ↓
    7. Stephany*

      My father used to say, “Don’t let your alligator mouth make a promise your mockingbird ass can’t deliver. ” He had many pithy expressions, most of them unprintable.

      Reply ↓
  4. WantonSeedStitch*

    You could even avoid framing it as either “lying” or the more wishy-washy “misrepresenting” by just naming the behavior: “telling Jane I was involved in the decision when I absolutely was not.” I would also have a word with Jane and say, “I wanted to let you know that I have some real concerns about the X project. Fred and Barney told you I was involved in the decision to [do whatever it was that messed things up], but I had no part in that decision at all. They’ve apologized to me, but I frankly don’t feel like I can trust them at this point.” Hopefully, Jane will be having her own word with them soon.

    Reply ↓
    1. Funko Pops Day*

      I frankly don’t feel like I can trust them at this point.

      I like the rest of your suggestion, but might rephrase to something like “I’m pretty aghast/shocked that they would have misrepresented my role to you” or “I’m pretty gravely concerned about their judgement about this” or even “I have real concerns about relying on them in similar situations in the future”– I feel like “I can’t trust them” has the same unprofessional tinge as “I’m angry”, and slightly different wording makes the same point in a more professional/ “unemotional” way.

      Reply ↓
      2. Observer*

        It’s also helpful in that it focuses on something that is in the realm of the manager. ie This is not just a “personality clash” or some such nonsense. Rather it’s an issue that has potential ramifications for the LW’s ability to get work done.

        Reply ↓
        1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

          This is an excellent point. The LW could also request that the manager put some processes or something into place to prevent similar “misunderstandings” from occurring in the future. Basically, how should they all work together to do work stuff?

          Reply ↓
      3. Smithy*

        Yeah – I feel the challenge with saying “I can’t trust them” is that it can sound awfully close to “I can’t work with them”. And while that doesn’t necessarily have to be true, it presents your manager with another issue they’re tasked with addressing.

        Now, in no way does that mean the OP needs to trust these coworkers again, but the benefit of responding civilly and with an orientation on moving forward – is that the OP also gets the benefit to engage in professional “I don’t trust you” behaviors. Things like making sure there are consistent paper trails – aka “circling back via email from the conversation we just had, I wanted to clarify that we discussed XYZ, is that correct or do you recall differently?”

        Reply ↓
    2. MaskedMarvel*

      i like stating you were told this vs lying but
      “don’t feel like I can trust them at this point” might come across as adversarial… and sometimes bosses could view your not trusting them as a “you” problem.
      I would say “the fact that you were told that is a problem”

      Reply ↓
      1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

        This. And your objective is to ensure that this type of thing doesn’t happen again. You want to ensure that your boss is always getting accurate information and there aren’t misunderstandings like this in the future.

        Reply ↓
    3. CubeFarmer*

      I like naming the behavior rather than worrying about professionally quantifying the behavior.

      Then, I’d also use a version of a phrase Alison taught us, “How can I be assured that this won’t happen again? I’ve already taken time with Jane to clarify my actual involvement in this decision, but I’m concerned that it happened at all.”

      Reply ↓
    4. fhqwhgads*

      This: You could even avoid framing it as either “lying” or the more wishy-washy “misrepresenting” by just naming the behavior: “telling Jane I was involved in the decision when I absolutely was not.”
      is exactly what I was thinking. It avoids any baggage anyone might have over the terms “lying” or “misrepresenting” and it’s more specific.

      Reply ↓
  5. Observer*

    It’s also worth keeping in mind that “accepting an apology” is *not* the same thing as “trusting you going forward”.

    Which means that, in most workplaces, you can make sure to document things, have conversations via email or a chat program that can be recorded, and confirm verbal conversations in email to “make sure everyone is on the same page.”

    They could be the nicest people in the world, and they could really have misunderstood and made a genuine error. And you still would do this, because even if there is no bad intent, they did the incorrect thing, then provided the wrong information to your manager. If they mean well, it protects them too. So, if someone challenges you on the matter, you can simply say something like “I’m just trying to avoid mistakes.” It’s hard to argue that, and it keeps you covered.

    Reply ↓
    2. bamcheeks*

      I always think it’s useful to think about the difference between forgiving and forgetting a debt. You can wipe a debt off your balance sheet and stop expecting it to be repaid; that doesn’t mean you have to extend them a further line of credit.

      Reply ↓
    3. Consonance*

      I think I’d approach an apology with something like, “I appreciate that you feel bad about what happened, but I’m really not looking for an apology. There were some serious ramifications of this, which included misrepresenting my own involvement and [insert bad outcomes here], and it’s incredibly important that we focus on preventing that from happening again rather than just expressing regret.”

      I’ve had people act really badly and then repeat apologies over and over again, and I’m just not interested in an apology at all, rather than refusing to accept one. Real progress looks like what happens next, not rehashing what happened.

      Reply ↓
    4. Sloanicota*

      Yeah I’d like OP to dig a little deeper about “they only want to apologize to make themselves feel better” and the instinct to shut them out. You don’t need to ascribe motives here, you don’t know those and you already have sufficient reason to be annoyed without adding that. I would also avoid them because I’d worry I was too angry / emotional to say what I wanted, but not as a punishment.

      Reply ↓
    5. Not your typical admin*

      I totally agree. I’ve heard it phrased as “forgiveness is not the same thing as reconciliation”

      Reply ↓
    6. amoeba*

      Yeah – and you don’t have to tell them “that’s OK” when it’s not! But you can thank them for the apology or, as Alison suggests, saying that you appreciate it – doesn’t mean everything’s fine, no big deal.

      Reply ↓
  6. tina turner*

    You seem to feel you know a lot already. And I’m the first to advocate for “gut feelings” or intuition. BUT one reason to talk it out is to gain information.

    Reply ↓
  7. Dust Bunny*

    You don’t say so specifically, so have you, in fact, set your supervisor straight on the fact that you weren’t involved? What was their reaction? Is part of your anger that you don’t feel that your coworkers have had appropriate consequences? Because that is a supervisor/manager/work culture/probably-not-but-possibly your expectations problem.

    You’re right that you can’t just not speak to your coworkers, and if what they did was that big a problem for you then someone should be intervening on that. If your place of employment isn’t good about addressing things like that, then that’s the real problem.

    Reply ↓
    1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      Manager seems to understand that OP’s part (or non part) WAS misrepresented – even though she took their word for it without asking OP in the beginning. But as for now: manager is, “yeah, sorry I thought you were involved in disaster. Fred and Barney said you were. Now that you’ve proved you weren’t, I believe you. But any problem you have with Fred and Barney is on you. Fix it because I’m not getting involved.”
      What a hero.

      Reply ↓
      1. Dust Bunny*

        Yeah, that’s sort of what I thought, too. That suggests that either there is a management problem here (which I think is most likely) and possibly that the LW’s expectations are a bit out of line. I had a coworker do something really annoying once when I was out of town. She got a clear explanation of why she shouldn’t have done that, but the overall spirit of the problem didn’t warrant an actual reprimand, no matter how annoyed I was (and I agree that it didn’t warrant a reprimand). However, she didn’t lie about it, either.

        This just feels like a super weird workplace: Is everyone avoidant, lying, and reactive?

        Reply ↓
        1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

          That suggests that either there is a management problem here (which I think is most likely)…
          agreed. I commented below, manager seemed like she didn’t question OP being involved and didn’t apologize herself for not following up. Manager should be doing some damage control to OP’s rep, not stepping our of it and telling her to make up with her coworkers.

          Reply ↓
        2. Smithy*

          I do think that part of this can come from a dynamic where there can be a lot of confidentiality in how people are reprimanded. So the offending party may get told that XYZ will be talked to, but then is largely left out of hearing about the process.

          However, the other thing is that I feel like most supervisors I’ve worked for really won’t engage on issues like this unless there’s been a pattern or the issue at hand is really severe. I think this is really why so much of the recommendations for overall issues at work is to document, because often the majority of “first” offenses are received with more moderate reprimands.

          Reply ↓
  8. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

    Man do I sympathize with you.

    But I have learned never to trust decisions I make when I’m feeling strong emotions. They almost always come back to bite me. Ask yourself “What is being angry going to get me?”

    Reply ↓
    1. MigraineMonth*

      This is such an important question to ask. What do you hope to get out of this, long term? These coworkers are probably still going to be your coworkers in 6 month; what do you want your relationship to be? What do you want your reputation to be for handling difficult situations?

      You’ve learned a great deal about these coworkers, and accepting their apologies/working with them/returning their morning greetings isn’t going to change what you’ve learned. You can do all of that while still protecting yourself against future untrustworthy conduct from them.

      Reply ↓
  9. A Book about Metals*

    I’d hear them out, you never know maybe there’s a more benign explanation. Either way though, you do need to be professional with them if you are going to be working together. Doesn’t mean you need to trust them again.

    Reply ↓
  10. stk*

    I can imagine myself in a similar situation being furious, and I think some of that would be about feeling like I was being asked to pretend it didn’t matter or never happened. I’m wondering if maybe it’s worth discussing it with Jane – not in an outwardly angry or accusatory way, but to give yourself agency. If there’s any possibility that systems could be put in place to prevent the situation you found yourself in, or possibility you could focus on work that has only minimal intraction with these particular colleagues for a while, that’s something your supervisor could maybe help happen and it might also make you feel less like you’re just at the mercy of these lying assholes. You don’t have to make it about being angry, even if you are – concerned that it doesn’t happen again would be true and maybe let you discuss it more productively?

    Reply ↓
  11. Not Tom, Just Petty*

    I think OP would be less furious if manager offered something other than, “yeah, anyway, deal with it.”
    Like if she helped repair OP’s reputation: “Hi, regarding the chaos project, I want to set the record straight that OP was not responsible for X.”
    No throwing other people’s names. just doing right by OP.

    Reply ↓
    1. cncx*

      Yes. A similar situation happened to me and my boss’s reaction was the real problem, my reputation took a hit because I got put in the pot of the coworkers who did the coverup. I wound up leaving that job.

      Reply ↓
  12. All het up about it*

    I think being unable to have the discussion with them – because you are feeling your 1oo% justified feelings – for awhile is fine. As long as you are working with your manager and them as needed to get the work done, you don’t have to do the emotional interpersonal labor at the same time.

    I’ve had bad experiences with co-workers in the past where it’s changed our working relationship and I was definitely less “friendly” with them. But I’d still say hello or smile or nod when passing in the hall and still talk to them on occasion, but it’s pretty easy not to seek them out or initiate things more than needed without making it particularly awkward. Your trust in these individuals might never fully recover, but over time, you won’t seethe with anger quite as much every time you’re near them.

    Reply ↓
    1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

      Plus, the conversation doesn’t have to be that the coworkers say their piece and the LW passively accepts it. Alison’s advice and script allows the LW to tell the coworkers – professionally – that this was a big issue, not a small error that everyone will be laughing about next week. The LW can express appreciation that the coworkers apologized, are taking responsibility, etc., without saying she accepts the apology.

      Reply ↓
  13. Dawn*

    I’m sorry but everyone in this situation sounds weirdly childish. I feel like we’re talking about a school project here, not a business.

    Reply ↓
    1. Pine Tree*

      Eh, I’ve been in a similar situation as the OP. I made a decision that caused a rather large, somewhat expensive problem. BUT, I based that decision on the information that I had from a coworker, who after things blew up said “Oh yeah, I guess I knew that could be a problem. Oops!” and then walked away from the whole situation.

      I was angry like this OP. I had to dance around through many meetings with “yes I made this decision and caused this, but I didn’t have all of the required information….” without throwing my coworker under the bus in each meeting. As much as I wanted to yell “JANE KNEW THIS COULD HAPPEN AND DIDN’T SAY ANYTHING!!!”. I also pushed for some major workflow changes to make sure that info that Jane had (that none of the rest of us had) wouldn’t cause another situation like that again.

      Reply ↓
        1. Skippy.*

          Right! It would make everyone feel incredibly awkward and be out of place with their work culture… Oh, right. They *did* say exactly that. LW recognizes their preference and recognizes that they can’t just act on that preference. “Weirdly childish” would be something like calling names instead of trying to see it from different perspectives.

          Reply ↓
          1. Dawn*

            They still expressed the desire to behave that way but decided that “that’s not practical in this situation,” not that it would be an immature way to behave.

            Reply ↓
            1. Danish*

              If this weren’t a work situation, “never speak to the people who messed up your project then lied to make you appear culpable” would be a fine solution though. It isn’t childish to stop associating with people who abuse your trust.

              Reply ↓
            2. Niles 'the coyote' Crane*

              That’s just a different choice of wording. It’s not practical because it’s not the way professional adults at work behave. They know this.

              I mean, I get what you’re saying. LW is bringing a lot of emotion to this.

              But emotions aren’t inherently childish.

              What is the purpose of calling the LW childish? What do you want them to do with that? Not stop talking to their colleagues? They’ve already said they won’t actually act on this.

              Reply ↓
              1. Dawn*

                I was just pointing it out. Mostly because I literally meant it when I said it sounded like we were talking about a school project. It’s everyone else who wants to project something else onto that statement beyond what I literally said.

                Reply ↓
                1. New Jack Karyn*

                  Feelings are not childish. It’s not immature to want to avoid people who have given you solid reasons to distrust them.

    3. a trans person*

      The last time I was called childish at work, it was because I was very upset and angry over a long pattern of behavior at work. That behavior was repeatedly deadnaming me over a period of many months. The person who called me childish was HR.

      I was forced out of that job by transphobic discrimination. “Childish” is an insult used to minimize feelings, especially of marginalized people.

      Reply ↓
  14. Strive to Excel*

    I would even add to Alison’s apology this: “the result of the last week is that [consequences that OP has experienced] have been happening. How do you suggest we clear this up?”

    Reply ↓
    1. N C Kiddle*

      Yeah that’s the number one response to an unsatisfying apology. “It’s good that you feel sorry but what is your plan to put things right?” And then just wait until they actually come up with something.

      Reply ↓
      1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

        100%. The coworkers screwed up bigtime. What is their plan for repairing the relationship with the LW and trying to re-earn her trust?

        Reply ↓
  15. bamcheeks*

    I get the instinct to “never speak to them again”, but actually working through a process of establishing what happened and why is just as difficult and exposing for people who have f’ckd up. Do it underestimate the power of, “I’m at a loss to understand why you told Jane I was involved in this decision when I wasn‘t?” followed by a long silence and an expectant look! And getting people to work through their reasoning for REALLY BAD DECISIONS is actually incredibly useful for showing you whether this was a) a genuine misunderstanding b) a moment of weakness/blame-shifting or c) actively malicious, and that tells you a lot about how much you should trust them going forward.

    Reply ↓
  16. Sparkles McFadden*

    I think most people think of apologies like an undo button that involves agreed upon scripts in an “Apology Play” and everyone has to follow specific parts. Clods get to say “Oopsy, sorry!” and other people say “Apology accepted.” Nope. When your colleagues apologize, you get to have a real conversation where you start out like this: “How can I rely on information from you in the future?” or “You need to apologize to my boss since you gave her bad information when this came to light.” How your coworkers respond in such a conversation tells you a lot about them. Most of the time, you get confused looks or someone stammering “but I said I was sorry” but, sometimes, you get someone who will really try to fix the damage and be better in the future.

    But wait until you cool off to have that conversation.

    Reply ↓
  17. Elsa*

    It sounds like the coworkers’ apologies seem empty to you, but have they made amends for what they did? In this case I think that would mean speaking to the boss and explaining that they messed up and then misrepresented your role in the project. If they are not willing to make amends for what they did then the apology is pretty worthless and I think you can be honest with them about that. But if they are making amends then you need to be cordial even if you still feel burned.

    Reply ↓
  18. WorkerDrone*

    Would it be appropriate to just not have the conversation? Tell them, “I appreciate the offer to discuss this, but I want to move on and put it behind me, so let’s not” or something like that but maybe more professionally worded?

    If it were me, I would be 1000000% uninterested in having any kind of discussion or apology or conversation about this with the “offenders”. I would be able to move on and be civil and have a professional working relationship with them (if not a close or warm one) but I know myself and I know I would NOT be able to sit through a meeting with them trying to explain themselves or defend themselves without getting even angrier, and I certainly would not trust or believe their apology.

    Would that be an option for OP? Just skip the “excuses and apologies” meeting and go straight to the “professional but not warm” part of their working relationship?

    Reply ↓
    1. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

      Totally fair! Different people are going to want different things in this type of situation. Personally, I think I’d like to look them in the eye and be extremely clear about how their actions harmed me or could have caused even more issues.

      Reply ↓
  19. Jonathan MacKay*

    I find it always helps to view trust as a currency – some people will have a greater amount of ‘savings’ than others, and the value may vary as well.

    Some people will spend frivolously, and as such should only be trusted with very little beyond what is necessary – other people will hoard it, and cash in on very big things – (In this metaphor, it would be the sort of thing one might deem worth risking a relationship (be it professional, or personal) over)

    I find it very helpful to consider it as a currency best left unspent. Being ‘greedy’ for trust doesn’t quite feel like the right way to phrase it, but that is the gist of what I am getting at.

    It is hard to trust people a second time when they have proven untrustworthy.

    Reply ↓
  20. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    I’d tell them that I’d accept a sincere apology – but that the apology is not sincere unless they own up to the supervisor(s) that they misrepresented what happened, in particular that the mistake was theirs and the OP was not involved.

    It’s one thing to lie to your boss that you didn’t make a mistake; it is so much worse to lie that a coworker was involved

    Reply ↓
    1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      i.e. they need to make amends for their lie, not just expect automatic forgiveness because of “professionalism”
      The OP can remain professional by keeping communication with them to the minimum required for efficient working, but is not obliged to say “I forgive you” just to relieve their guilty consciences.

      Reply ↓
  21. CzechMate*

    OP should probably set this aside for a few days because their anger might be clouding their judgement here. Are they right to be angry? Sure. But it is actually entirely possible that it’s not as bad as it seems. Sentiments like “They are desperate to talk it out with me and apologize, mainly to make themselves feel better rather than to help me out at all” and “My instinct is to just stop talking to them because I don’t feel I can trust them again” may cool after a day or two. It’s entirely possible that they DO want to help you out, they DID genuinely misunderstand the situation and thought what they were doing was appropriate (and so they didn’t intentionally misrepresent information to the manager), and now they want to get it sorted out.

    As Alison says, you don’t need to “accept” the apology–you can talk it out and say, “I appreciate your apologizing, but this is an issue because…” But give yourself a few days before you do that so you can have a level, professional conversation about it.

    Reply ↓
  23. Generic Name*

    The last time I was blisteringly angry about something that happened at work that I felt apologies would have been inadequate for (if anyone had offered one to me), I went out and got a new job. :o)

    Reply ↓
    4. cncx*

      Depending on how egregious it is, sometimes the best choice is just to leave. I got lumped in with coworkers’ mistakes in a similar fashion and I realized staying at that company would affect my reputation in my industry and that leaving was preferable.

      Reply ↓
    1. bamcheeks*

      If situations like this are frequent enough to prevent you enjoying time off, that’s a very dysfunctional environment!

      Reply ↓
    2. A Simple Narwhal*

      That’s….not great! Agree with bamcheeks, if this situation is common enough that you are avoiding taking PTO, that’s a sign there’s something wrong with your company, not with taking PTO.

      Reply ↓
      1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

        While that is true, whether or not I take PTO is a criterion I can control. What my peers do in my absence and what Management believes are not.

        Reply ↓
  25. Charley*

    I hope the help your supervisor is providing includes talking to their supervisor! It sounds like your colleagues may need a lot more active supervision if they’re going to earn back any level of trust and responsibility.

    Reply ↓
  26. ShwaMan*

    A rare moment when I kind of disagree with Alison. I would not soften the language quite so much. “I’m glad you are taking responsibility now, but I am frankly still upset about you not being truthful and putting me in this position. It has damaged our working relationship.”

    Reply ↓
    1. Observer*

      Except that Alison is aiming for an *effective* response that helps the LW move forward in a professional and successful manner. Getting to blunt is not likely to work well for them.

      Reply ↓
  28. Festively Dressed Earl*

    Are the guilty parties wanting to offer a faux-apology to gloss things over, or do they want to offer a sincere apology? A real apology:

    *admits specifically what the wrongdoer did
    *acknowledges what effect their actions had on the wronged person
    *expresses real remorse about the wrongdoing
    *outlines how the wrongdoer will make amends for what they’ve done and prevent it from happening again in the future
    *asks for the wronged party’s forgiveness without pressuring them to do so.

    A sincere apology could be a good start to rebuilding trust. If the wrongdoers offer a faux-apology. this would also be a good framework for OP to push back (framed a bit more diplomatically than this.) “In your view, what specific actions are you apologizing for?” “What’s your understanding of how this affected me?” “Going forward, how do you plan to fix this situation?” It might prompt the wrongdoers to actually think about their actions beyond saving their own butts, and it may prevent OP from being seen as ‘unreasonable’ for not just shoving this under the rug.

    Reply ↓
    1. Grey Coder*

      Came here to say this! If you don’t trust yourself to work through this in person without getting angry, you could probably probe for these answers in email. But if you can manage it, the “question followed by silence” technique mentioned above will help you understand if the apology is sincere.

      Reply ↓
  30. RedinSC*

    I appreciate the apology, but you damaged my professional reputation here, and I’d like to know what you’re going to do about fixing that?

    Reply ↓
    1. Old Bag*

      I been musing about this concept a lot lately…

      Sometimes there’s just nothing anyone can do. The horse is out of the barn. There is no fixing it, there is no taking it back. The damage is done.

      Sometimes the closest a person can come is “well, whenever it comes up I will make sure people understand you were actually not involved and it’s my fault anyone thinks you were, and that in actuality you bear no responsibility for this.”

      Now you might say “yes… that’s fixing the problem…exactly.”

      Except… it’s not. Short of going around to every single person who knows and heard about it and pre-emptively announcing what happened and how it wasn’t LW’s fault, it can’t be fixed. Pre-emptively announcing isn’t a fix really either, as it has a very real and likely potential for Streisand Effect. It also has the potential of backfiring entirely — like in situations where someone makes a false accusation, and then recants, and the presumption becomes “that recant was the actual lie. They just did that to save their job / save their ass / because they were paid off / threatened.”

      I mean there’s just… no real way to fix this sort of disaster. Unfortunately, the one who actually has the power to most effectively correct the situation (both in remedying whatever the co-irkers did wrong AND LW’s reputation) is someone wholly uninvolved in the poor behaviour — the supervisor. They co-irkers won’t be credible (any recant will be seen as coerced) and while some might say supervisor is just trying to save reputations and working relationships, they at least have the credibility to be believable.

      This is why people who do stunts like this should be canned / moved elsewhere / put in a position where LW never has to speak to much less work with them again. They did that in my office, with myself and the only other person who has the same position as I do. We have approximately 50 people give or take in our location (about 250 total) and we never cross paths with one another. Any communication for work reasons is done through email ONLY, and she is required to CC my supervisor AND our COO on every single one. It’s great. And it made very clear to the rest of the office what upper management thought of her behaviour… so my reputation never suffered at all. I was also never put in the atrocious position of having to accept any nonsensical apology or trust her again, let alone collaborate professionally. Bliss.

      Reply ↓
  31. Delta Delta*

    I once had someone offer me an apology for a workplace incident. I told her “I accept and appreciate your apology. I will not say what happened was okay, because it was not.” Maybe something like that could help.

    Reply ↓
  32. Kelly*

    When some gives an apology my first impulse is to say ‘oh, that’s ok’. When someone gives an apology and I don’t want to minimise what they did, or I do think they should apologise, or I’m still mad or whatever, I try to say ‘thank you’ in response. I want to acknowledge the apology but not smooth everything over and ‘thank you’ works well for that, I think.

    Reply ↓
  33. Crencestre*

    Personal pet peeve: I am ever so tired of hearing people toss off lying/slander/backstabbing as “a misunderstanding”. This smacks of passive aggression and gaslighting – it’s a way to let yourself off the hook for something you did while trying to convince the other person that they did not actually experience something that they really did. OP, whatever you decide, please do NOT accept it if Jane tries to pass off what she did as a misunderstanding! You understand perfectly well what happened, so does she, and that should clear from the get-go.

    Reply ↓
  34. Niles 'the coyote' Crane*

    I had to have a series of conversations about a former colleague who was very serious and constantly, well, lied.

    I often found myself saying things like:

    “Bob says he didn’t share the information outside our company. This email suggests he did. I’m not sure why he said he didn’t.”

    “Bob says he tried to contact me before he spoke to the client. That isn’t the case. He didn’t.”

    “Bob has said a couple of things this week that aren’t true. For instance…”

    But two close peers and I discussed Bob’s behaviour and openly called it lying. They softened it with senior managers a bit too much IMO. These weren’t confusions or misunderstandings or lack of clarity. He was saying things that weren’t true. He knew they weren’t true.

    (He doesn’t work for us anymore, for this and other reasons.)

    Reply ↓
  35. chocolate muffins*

    It might be helpful to have the meeting with them and document what they say. If they apologize, you could say something like “thank you for your apology,” which acknowledges what they said without indicating that the behavior was okay. If you’re feeling extra spicy you could do something like “thank you for the apology; it is warranted” but that might be too much for work.

    Then listen to what they say, leave the meeting, and write down their comments to the best of your memory. Email those notes to yourself so that they are time stamped. That way if there are additional problems down the line, you can show what has happened before and how it was (or wasn’t) dealt with. I would not tell anyone that you’re doing this, just document for yourself, ideally using a non-work e-mail account.

    Reply ↓
  37. r..*

    I usually tell people that I am not that interested in apologies, and that I’d prefer if they 1) set right what they did wrong, and 2) tell me what they propose so the problem will not re-occur in the future, over acts of personal contrition.

    In this particular circumstance both would probably require LW’s two coworkers to fess up to both LW’s and their own supervisor. This may end up having serious consequences for them, and it is a serious enough issue it should probably go into their file (and hence contribute to prevention of repeat performances), but frankly it should have.

    Reply ↓
  38. NotBatman*

    To bring up a piece of advice Alison has given before: can you focus on something enjoyable and productive that isn’t job related, for the next few days?

    Last time I was dealing with a betrayal at work, I got myself back into a better headspace through diving into a DIY project and teaching myself a new exercise. It got me from “I’m fantasizing about running this coworker over with my car” to “all right, he’s an ass, lesson learned.”

    Reply ↓
  39. HonorBox*

    OP, I’d suggest hearing them out. Let them apologize. Yes, it’ll make them feel better. But it MAY make you feel better just hearing them and telling them that while you appreciate the apology, you’re concerned about the fact that they lied about your inclusion in the bad decision. Tell them it will take you time to trust them again. Tell them you don’t want to talk more about it again and ask them to give you a bit of space while you get through with fixing the problem.

    Reply ↓
  40. Safely Retired*

    Two apologies need to happen, and they should happen together. One to you in the presence of your supervisor, and one to your supervisor in your presence. In fact, lets add in THEIR supervisor as being present, who really needs to be aware of their staff’s conduct.

    Reply ↓
  41. Academic Librarian Too*

    Not really on topic but could someone/anyone address the stance “we do not say people lied” when they did.
    I am still perseverating about an employee that I inherited, put on a PIP for lying about- the work completed, the deadlines she missed, the work that was never completed, errors in action, errors in judgement, where she was when she was supposed to be somewhere else, other people, policies, procedures, when she arrived, when she left for the day, who called, how much time a project took, that I did not give clear directions (yes, they were in writing) that I was abusive (open office- no evidence or witnesses) etc etc.
    I documented, documented, documented. Every meeting about this issues she lied. Then I had to document the lie.
    HR would never let me state verbally or in writing that lying was unacceptable and grounds for firing.
    It was maddening- “there was a miscommunication, a misunderstanding, an exaggeration, a prevarication, a misrepresentation, an omission of fact,

    Reply ↓
  42. Lauren*

    This is one of those infuriating situations where saying the truth out loud does not have a positive payout. “You have profoundly damaged our relationship, working and otherwise. You lied and used my name to do it.” It won’t do the OP any favors to say it out loud despite how true it is. While it seems the coworkers have been busted it doesn’t seem they’re doing any penance. Which gives the impression of being sorry they got caught not sorry they did it.

    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