someone accused me of crying at work — but I didn’t

by Alison Green on January 10, 2014

A reader writes:

I am a graphic designer at a big consulting firm. I have only been here 6 months, so I’m slowly building my reputation. I was working on a big video production project with a managing consultant, and 4 days before their pitch to the client, his boss (a partner at the firm), basically changed everything so I would have to re-do the whole project. Therefore, I needed to sacrifice my weekend (our meeting was Thursday and the pitch was Monday) to work on this before their deadline. I was okay with working over the weekend — I am non-exempt and got overtime. I clocked in 62 hours that week working on this project, and I really do believe I went above and beyond expectations to make sure they got their video in time for the client presentation (I did deliver the video on time and the client loved it).

Here is the perplexing part. Today, my supervisor asked me if I cried at the meeting last week. Because I put in so much overtime, my supervisor connected with the senior partner on the project, asking why they decided to go in a completely different direction so late in the process. I was told that the senior partner replied that if I wanted to work at the firm, I needed to stop bursting into tears when they gave me feedback. I guess the managing consultant I was working with told the senior partner that I cried when I received feedback to change the video completely — which is absolutely 100% NOT true. I am angry that the managing partner lied about my reaction, dragging my reputation through the dirt. I have other coworkers who saw me directly after the meeting who can vouch that I did not leave the room with tears streaming down my face.

I am angry and I want to directly confront the managing consultant about his lie about me losing my professionalism in front of him – but doing just that would probably prove that I am unprofessional. What do I do? Do I just let it go and let my reputation get bashed?

I wrote back and asked: “Do you know why he said that? Was your reaction upset, just no tears?” She replied:

I really don’t. I took a couple of deep breaths, so I was quiet for a little bit (maybe 1-2 minutes?), but after I collected myself, I did start making suggestions and offering what I could do to realistically accommodate their suggestions at the last minute. I suppose this could be interpreted as “fighting tears” minus the moisture of the eyes, but definitely not “bawling,” as it was described to me.

My gut reaction is that the manager didn’t want to take responsibility for going in the wrong direction with the video project so late in the game in the first place, and blamed my reaction as a reason contributing to his decisions, but I’m really not sure why he would just blatantly lie about something like this. Prior to this incident, I actually thought we had a good rapport and he was very easy to work with – so I’m at a loss why he would say something like this about me.

Okay, that context helps. Obviously, you’d know if you were crying, and you weren’t. But the reaction that you describe — getting quiet for a couple of minutes, taking deep breaths, and then collecting yourself — reads strongly as “intensely upset.” Now, it’s not bawling; it’s not even crying. But you know how people sometimes describe someone as “yelling” at them when the person isn’t really yelling but is using an angry/serious tone? I suspect it’s the same thing here. You were visibly upset, and that’s what he was conveying, just with sloppy language.

Really sloppy language, yes. But I doubt he intended to lie; he just described it in bad shorthand.

I would go back to your manager and say something like this: “I was taken aback when you told me that Bob said I ‘burst into tears’ in that meeting. I wasn’t even close to tears, and I’m not sure why he interpreted it that way. I did feel upset for a minute or two, but there were certainly no tears, or anything approaching tears. I realize that I shouldn’t have even let myself look upset, and I’m going to work on that in the future because I know it’s important to project calm, even in the face of frustration — but I really don’t want it out there that I cry at feedback, because I don’t.”

A key piece of this is that you’re making it clear that you do know that calmness in these situations is important and you’re going to work on projecting it. The reason that’s important is that if you don’t say it, your manager may wonder if you don’t get that and so she needs to watch out for it with you in the future. By letting her know that you’re on the same page as her about that — that you’re on top of any issues here — you defuse the need for her to be on top of it.

Beyond that, I’d just let it go. I wouldn’t confront the managing consultant about what he said. I don’t see any good that can come of that, and I really don’t think he set out to lie about you. I’d just make a point of doing excellent work and showing that you’re calm and unflappable when he and others are around … which is going to serve you better than a confrontation with him.

And while we’re on the topic of tears at work, some previous posts on crying at work:

should I apologize to my boss for crying in front of her?
I cried in an interview and later accepted the job
crying at work and smart bosses

You may also like:
{ 156 comments }

do I have to fake passion to get a job?

by Alison Green on January 10, 2014

A reader writes:

I’m getting so discouraged and wondering if I am missing some essential job hunting/interviewing skill. I have had three interviews in the last month (so I feel pretty good about the fact that my cover letter, resume, and networking are in good shape) but no job offer. The first interview I felt was not a great fit, the second one said they found someone with more similar experience (fair enough), but this last one really shook me up.

It was with a faith-based organization that is the faith that I practice, and I was completely and totally qualified. In fact, when I read the job description, I thought to myself: “That’s it!” I worked with a head hunter and went in for an interview. I thought it went really well. I felt comfortable and confident and qualified. The way the culture and values were described to me, in some detail, really got me jazzed. I really thought I had it in the bag.

The day after the interview, the recruiter called to say they were not going to offer me a job or pursue me as a candidate because I did not show enough interest in their mission. They felt I could have been interviewing for any old job, that I just wanted a job. That I seemed focused on what was in it for me, not that I was excited about or interested in their mission.

OK, so — is it my burning desire to work on their particular mission? No. It is my burning desire to use my skills to help an organization that does good, however, and this one seemed like a perfectly good cause, and, like I said, in my faith tradition, which I made perfectly clear in the interview. I talked about how lovely it would be to work for a place with a spiritual focus and faith-based values, how I know the culture and the language. But no, I did not say “I am totally psyched about your mission! I’ve been waiting my whole life to do this!!!”

I’ve been mulling this over and I can’t figure out if they are just a bit out there and asking too much, or if this is excellent feedback for me and something I really need to look at, especially since I am looking for a job in the nonprofit field. I am in communications, by the way. I always say, I’m not a doctor or a nurse or a social worker, but I want to use my communications skills to do good. I have 25 years of experience in health care and nonprofit. It’s what I do. But do I need to go to each interview as if that particular organization’s mission is central to my search? Isn’t it enough to present my skills?

Having said all that, I really do want a job and I am growing weary of the search, so maybe it simply showed. I just don’t know.

You don’t need to fake passion when you don’t feel it, but when you’re applying at cause-based or faith-based organizations, you often do need to show a strong interest in their mission. You don’t need to act as if it’s your life’s mission if it’s not, but you do want to appear particularly enthusiastic about what they do — more so than in other sectors. If they get the sense that you’d be just as happy working at a bank or a zoo as working with them, you’re signaling to them that you might not quite fit in with what they’re all about. Because what they’re all about is working toward some kind of change, and they want people on their team who are pumped about that.

It’s not just about passion, of course. Passion is no substitute for talent and a track record of results, and nonprofits run into serious trouble when they hire highly passionate candidates who aren’t actually well suited for the job. But it’s reasonable that they want people who think the work they’re doing is awesome. (And that’s especially true for positions that will be dealing directly with their mission, like communications. It’s generally less true for, say, I.T. jobs or accounting.)

So, how does all that affect you? Well, it’s possible that you displayed a completely appropriate amount of enthusiasm and excitement and these people are just unusual in how much of it they want to see. It’s also possible that you didn’t seem all that moved by what they’re doing. There’s a difference, after all, between “it would be nice to work here” and “what you’re doing is fantastic, and I’d be thrilled to be a part of it.”

I don’t know which it was, so I’d ask: Does their feedback ring true to you at all? Is it consistent with other things you know about yourself (that you’re very low-key, for instance, and that people often can’t tell how you’re feeling)? Can you talk it over with friends who might have a more objective perspective on you than you have of yourself? Can you experiment with being more openly enthusiastic in your next interview and see if it goes differently?

But beyond that, while you should certainly consider feedback with an open mind and not immediately disregard it as wrong, it’s also true if the feedback is only coming from one source and just doesn’t ring true to you, it’s entirely possible that it’s not on the mark.

And it’s also okay to decide that employers who require unusually intense displays of enthusiasm aren’t the right fit for you — no matter how good other aspects of the job sound — because that kind of thing doesn”t usually end at the interview.

You may also like:
{ 69 comments }

my boss’s kid punched me in the groin, how to factor overtime pay into salary history, and more

by Alison Green on January 10, 2014

It’s five short answers to five short questions. Here we go…

1. My boss’s kid punched me in the groin

I work at a university. My boss has an almost-5-year-old son, and she brings him into the office … a lot. It happens in spurts, but if you were to add it up and average it out, I’d think it would be about once a week. I work in an open bullpen, so even when he’s in her office, he’s usually making noise or listening to an iPad at a loud volume, when he’s not running around the office.

Today was extra fun, however, as I was standing and talking to her and another colleague about social stuff, and her son wandered up and punched me in the groin. My boss immediately forced him to apologize and then let him go to wander off and “explore” the rest of the office and picked back up in the conversation like nothing happened.

I also know that there are hours at work when she has a FaceTime connection between her work iPad and the one they have at home as a sort of remote babysitter. She doesn’t mute it or turn the volume down when someone comes into the office to discuss work items.

I stopped in at HR, and the university doesn’t have a specific policy about children at the office other than “use discretion,” but the HR director wasn’t at all surprised to hear that my boss had been bringing in her kid (indeed, she nailed it right on the head after I asked about the policy and asked for further info). Is there anything I should or shouldn’t be doing to either in terms of documenting what’s happening or better ways to handle what’s going on?

Your boss sounds like an inconsiderate boor — not to mention a crappy boss and probably a crappy employee — but there’s not a ton you can do here. If the HR person you spoke with sounded interested/concerned, you could follow up with them some more, but doing so risks causing tension in your relationship with your boss if it gets back to her (and it’s safest to assume that it would). One way to get cover in that type of situation is to be one of a group who’s complaining, so you could certainly encourage your coworkers to talk to HR as well, if they’re bothered by all this.

The other option, of course, is to say something to your boss directly, at least about letting the kid run around (pointing out that it’s both unsafe and disruptive), but that may or may not go well, depending on what type of person your boss is (and so far she’s not seeming too impressive). And of course, that won’t address the hours of FaceTime situation, which is something her own manager should be addressing.

Basically, your boss sucks and whatever management has let her get away with all this is pretty lame as well.

Read updates to this letter here.

2. My staff complains about having to come in on snow days

I work in a nursing home, and when it snows, all essential staff are required to come in despite the weather. Our company provides the services of the company bus picking people up at a few different central locations, as well as the option of staying over the night before the snow, in order to avoid having to drive in. While I understand that no one likes to sleep at their work place, the facility offers free meals, movie night with games and snacks to those staying, as well as a $50 bonus.

My staff in my department are considered essential. Every time snow is forecast, I meet with them and explain options, even letting them know of other staff who are driving from their area, so that they can hitch a ride if needed. They all have been made aware of the company’s policy. However, every snow day, I get teary phone calls from my staff explaining one thousand reasons why their situation is so much worse than everyone else’s (this is after they’ve refused to stay the night). I explain to them on the phone that it’s policy, they know their options, and if they don’t come in disciplinary action will be taken per the policy. They all act like I’m the devil, even though this is a standard for all essential departments. After so many snowy and icy days, it’s gotten to the point where they won’t even look me in the eye when I speak to them, or turn around when I come in to the office to talk to them about work-related items. While I know it’s not important for them to like me all the time, I feel that their respect and honest communication is key here, and it’s not happening. Am I being insensitive? I hate driving in the snow too, but still manage to get to work without complaint. Any suggestions?

I’d sit down with everyone and talk about this. Point out that it was a requirement of the job made clear when they were hired (it was, right?), they agreed to it when they took the job, and the reasons for the requirement (at a nursing home, it makes sense that you’d need staff there). Say that you know it’s difficult to do but it’s an essential part of the job, and ask for their input on whether there’s anything that would make it easier on people. From there, if it continues happening, I’d talk with people individually who keep resisting the policy, remind them that this is a job requirement, and ask them to decide if it’s something they can commit to doing or not. If they can’t, it sounds like you might need to replace them with people who can.

3. How to factor overtime pay into salary history

My current salary is around $42,000 with overtime. However, I work a substantial amount of overtime — I looked at my cumulative pay stub over the year, and I took in about $20,000 of overtime. When I go into negotiating my salary for my next job, what would be the best way to approach this discrepancy in my salary? I would love to go in at $60,000, but I’m afraid that it looks like such a huge difference on paper.

Well, ideally you wouldn’t be talking about your salary history at all, since it’s no one’s business but yours. Your want to negotiate based on the market rate for the new job, not what you’ve earned in the past. But if you’re dealing with a company that insists on knowing your current salary and you decide to play along, you can say, “I earned $62,000 last year,” which is accurate. If you want, you can add, “with some of that in overtime pay.” (But keep in mind that if the job you’re negotiating for is likely to pay less than that, you might be shooting yourself in the foot by doing that. In that case, you might be better off saying, “My salary is $42,000, plus overtime pay.”)

4. What should I wear when meeting about volunteer opportunities?

I’ve done a few unpaid internships at nonprofits, and for meeting with the people I’d be working under and for the actual internships, I always wore jeans, sneakers, and a plain long-sleeve t-shirt. (I consider them “meetings” and not “interviews” because they always ended with “Well, let us know if you decide that you’d like to intern here” instead of me competing against other people and asking when I’d hear back from them.) At the time, I thought I should be expected to be clean and neat, but that getting dressed up wasn’t necessary since I wouldn’t be getting paid and it all seemed very informal. No one ever said anything to me about it, which kind of reinforced to me that it was okay.

I haven’t been able to get a job despite the internships, so I’m starting to look at small nonprofits to contact about volunteering. I realize now that I should ask about dress codes if I agree to do any sort of work, but what should I wear while meeting with people from the nonprofits to discuss volunteering opportunities? I’d feel silly dressing up, but I’m really not sure if what I was wearing before was inappropriate or not. The only vaguely relevant post I could find on your blog was about what to wear at nonprofit interviews, which I don’t think applies. 

For volunteering, it’s fine to wear something that’s less formal than a suit, but more formal than jeans and a t-shirt — pants that aren’t jeans and a nice top, for instance. For some nonprofits (an animal shelter, for instance), you could go more casual than that — but if you’re not sure, you should err on the more formal side of things. And yes, I know it’s volunteering rather than paid work, but you want to signal that you take the opportunity seriously. These are also people who will become part of your professional network and can potentially connect you to paying work, so it’s smart to be strategic about the impression you give. (I’d say the same thing for your internship interviews, too — jeans and sneakers is too informal, even if the process wasn’t competitive and you weren’t going to be paid.)

5. My company only gives some people website portal access, which we need in order to work overtime

Where I am working, all the employees must have access to our website portal in order to do their job. Well, there are a handful of employees who do not have access, for whatever reason. There has been plenty of overtime offered lately but not to those of us who do not have portal access. Is this legal? I realize the issue for me is that without portal access to the website, I can’t do my job. However, I’m not the reason why I can’t do my job. This falls on the company and their IT department. I feel like I’m being singled out when not offered overtime, because if I did have portal access I would jump at the opportunity to work overtime. Again, is this legal? Can a company offer overtime to certain employees when others aren’t able to do their job due to the company?

Yes, this is legal. If they were basing who did and didn’t get portal access on a legally protected characteristic like race, religion, sex, etc., that would be illegal discrimination. But if it’s nothing like that — if it’s just that some people have it and some don’t — that’s not illegal. However, if you haven’t already, I’d talk with your manager and/or IT about how you’d really like the portal access so that you’re available for overtime work. That might or might not solve the problem, but it’s certainly worth a try.

You may also like:
{ 206 comments }

open thread

by Alison Green on January 10, 2014

IMG_0117It’s the Friday open thread! (I’m experimenting with weekly open threads this month, to see if they make the number of comments more manageable.)

The comment section on this post is open for discussion with other readers on anything you want to talk about. If you want an answer from me, emailing me is still your best bet, but this is a chance to talk to other readers.

You may also like:
{ 844 comments }

you can’t predict your chances of getting a job — really, you can’t

by Alison Green on January 9, 2014

A reader writes:

A job was posted on December 12. I applied on December 16. Got called for an interview on December 17. Then the job was removed on December 18. How big of a chance do I have to landing the job?

During the interview the interviewer said that they will get back with me at the beginning of January being that it’s the holidays, hence, they will get with the recruiter and then get back with me. Are these good signs?

They are neither good signs nor bad signs. They mean, at most, that the interviewer will check with the recruiter and then get back to you. I say “at most,” because it’s possible that the interviewer won’t even do that.

I know that you want to try to read between the lines and figure out what your chances are, but there is no way to do that.

There is literally no way to do that. None. You can’t know. Even if the interviewer says “You’re just what we’re looking for” or “We’re so excited to have found you” or “I can’t wait to have you start.” Even if the interviewer winks at you and passes you a note saying “the job is probably yours,” there would still be no way to know if the job was probably yours, because things change — better candidates appear, budgets get frozen, an internal candidate emerges, the position is restructured and you’re not longer the right fit for it, a different decision-maker likes someone else better, one of your references is wonky and makes them gun-shy, or all kinds of other possibilities.

Trying to read the tea leaves to figure out your chances of getting a job is 100% understandable — but it’s also 100% fruitless.

The only reliable sign that you’re going to get a job is when an employer calls you up and says, “I’d like to offer you the job.”

The best thing that you can do, always, is to assume that the job isn’t yours, so that you don’t slow down your search or otherwise let the possibility of a job — a job that you don’t have — affect your actions or decision-making.

You cannot predict anything, no matter how good signs might appear.

You may also like:
{ 98 comments }

ask the readers: better work habits when you have ADHD

by Alison Green on January 9, 2014

I’m throwing this one out to readers to help with. A reader writes:

I was diagnosed with ADHD two years ago. I tried medication but found it wasn’t the answer for me. I’ve had five jobs in five years, and I’m pretty sure ADHD is a factor. I’m writing because I’m hoping you or your readers may have some tips on being organized and focused at work when dealing with ADHD. I’ve googled for an answer but there is just too many sites to sift through for my unfocused brain.

I started a new job this month and I really like what I’m doing and I don’t want to change jobs again. At some point, this job hopping is going to stop me from getting any more jobs and I can’t afford that.

Readers, what advice can you offer?

You may also like:
{ 133 comments }

I had to prepare a meal and entertain 20 people for a job interview — and so did 19 other candidates

by Alison Green on January 9, 2014

A reader writes:

I recently had a job interview for an entry-level program coordinator position. I walked in and there was a panel of interviewers sitting behind a table but there was no chair for me. This was the third of five interviews as part of an all-day interview process, and every other session had a clear chair for the interviewee. There was a chair shoved into the corner, and after I introduced myself to everyone, I said something along the lines of “If it is alright, I’m just going to grab this chair” and pushed the chair into the proper position. It made the whole interview process feel like a mind game.

As a candidate who had been through two phone interviews and was enduring a 15-hour in-person interview process, games like this just seemed ridiculous. I thought I really wanted this job, but the interview process was full of games like this. They also made the 20 final candidate cook dinner for and entertain the senior staff at the executive director’s house. We were given 2-1/2 hours to plan, shop, and cook for 40. We also had to find the address of the director’s house, which turned out to be a 30-minute drive away.

Do I have the wrong attitude? Are these tricks and games really a good way to test candidates and, if so, what is the best way to respond?

Wait, what?! The chair thing is weird, but the cooking dinner thing is even odder. I wrote back and asked for more information. The letter-writer said:

When they invited me for the final interview, they made it clear that it would be a whole day affair. A few days before the interview, I asked for an agenda/schedule and was told “All I will share is that interviews will last from 8:30 am to at least 9:00 pm, and you will have individual interviews as well as time to mingle with fellow candidates during the day.” When I arrived at the interview, I was given the schedule for the day, which included five individual interviews and said that from 5 pm onwards, there would be a group activity. At 5, they simply announced that our group activity was to shop for and prepare a meal for 40 with entertainment, to be served at 7:30 at the director’s house. We were given a budget of $350 and information about food allergies in the group. No other information was given (we even had to figure out the director’s address) and they didn’t give any sort of reason/context. It wasn’t clear if it was supposed to be an evaluation of our skills, but the senior staff spent the majority of the night drinking and dancing. The evening didn’t end till 10:30 pm, when it moved to a local bar.

(…)

That is the sound of me being shocked into silence.

WTF.

These people are partly insane, partly sadists, partly narcissists. No, this is not a good way to evaluate candidates. Nor is it a good way to treat people in general.

The chair situation is the least of the problems here. It’s weird, sure, but it’s nothing compared to the rest of this buffoonery.

First of all, 20 finalists? This isn’t an audition for drill team. This is an entry-level job. And even if it were senior level — even if it were for the CEO of The World — it makes no sense to have 20 finalists. You have 3-5 finalists. Maybe a few more in some cases. You don’t have 20.

Second, what’s up with the group meal preparation? This isn’t Top Chef. (Wait, was it? That would make it make sense.)

Third, why the hell did they have you cooking a meal at all? The job doesn’t sound like it involves cooking or entertaining.

Fourth … no, I can’t even go on. It’s too ridiculous.

All you can do is accept that you somehow got mixed up into a group of loons or maybe some sort of delusional cult, and count your blessings that you escaped before they made you perform an interpretative dance (choreographed with the 19 other finalists) and give them massages.

These people are whackjobs. Do not engage further.

Read an update to this letter here.

You may also like:
{ 643 comments }

I can’t do my new job’s required travel, family business disasters, and more

by Alison Green on January 9, 2014

It’s five short answers to five short questions. Here we go…

1. I can’t do my new job’s required travel

I accepted a new position with a wonderful agency about two months ago. When the position was posted, there was no mention of extensive travel. If that was placed in the job announcement, I would have never applied, due to the fact that I have small children. During the interview, travel was not brought up and I didn’t ask (didn’t know I needed to, being that there was no mention in the job announcement). Now that I’ve been here for two months, this job requires extensive travel and overnight stays. I haven’t really voiced my concerns, just simply let my supervisor know that if I have to travel, I would need to be back at 5 pm the same day. So far it’s only been day trips, but the overnight travel is a huge issue for me. My manager has asked if I can go on an overnight stay next week, and I told her no and that it was not enough notice. She agreed but told me that I’m “required” in the future. How do I address this?

All you can really do here is be straightforward. Meet with your manager and say something like, “I’m concerned about the work trips you’ve mentioned. It didn’t come up during the hiring process that this job requires overnight travel, and I wouldn’t have been able to accept the job if I’d known that. I have young kids and am not able to do overnight travel. I really love the work here and hope there’s a way to work this out.”

Also, is there anything you can offer to do instead of the overnight trips? Covering for others who are gone? Some undesirable work that no one else wants? Be aware, though, that if travel is truly an extensive part of the job, they might not be able to waive that requirement, which could mean that the role isn’t the right fit for you right now. (And yes, it’s insane that they didn’t mention this during the hiring process — and particularly unfair if you left another job to take this one.)

2. Family businesses are a clusterfudge

A few years ago, my husband and I bought a business from a family member and kept the existing staff. I have 100% control of the business, since my husband has his own business to manage.

The problem I have is with the manager of my stores. He constantly phones his ex-employer, updates him on what’s happening in the business, tells him our sales figures, and complains about changes I’ve made in the business, to mention but a few. This has created problems for me in my marriage, since the family member regularly phones my husband and complains about the changes and decisions I’ve made. My husband who refuses to tell the family member to butt out, takes his frustration out on me. As a result, this has placed a tremendous strain on our marriage.

I need to mention that the business is now a thriving business. We have increased the number of stores from 1 to 3, our staff has doubled, and we have bought our own premises and quadrupled the sales. Surely I must be doing something right?

I have spoken to my manager, but the problem continues. Everything I do and say gets carried over. How do I handle this situation? It’s very frustrating.

Have you told the manager directly to stop sharing information about the business with the old owner? If not, do that immediately. If you’ve already done that, then you need to face the fact that you have an employee ignoring a direct instruction from you and not acting with anything approaching discretion — and that you need to let him go. You can’t have a manager who ignores explicit directions from you and blabs your business to others. And frankly, you need that family member out of your business, and that might mean replacing employees who still have ties to him, if they demonstrate that they’re not in sync with the new ownership.

However, you probably need to get aligned with your husband before firing this guy, because it sounds likely that there could be blowback from him and the other family member.

3. How to talk to a new employee about a dress code violation

Do you have any pointers on how to talk to an employee about their appearance? We have a casual dress code at our office (jeans are OK) but it isn’t clearly defined in a policy. Most people wear nice jeans and tops and we typically don’t have any problems. However, a new employee (this is her third day at work) came in today with dirty hair and a ratty sweatshirt. We may be casual, but management has complained about her appearance. I need to address the situation, but I know it will be awkward. Any pointers you might have would be much appreciated.

She’s a new employee, so you have an easy opening. You can say, “I realized we haven’t covered the dress code yet” and then go over it with her. (You can do this even though it’s not an official policy; there clearly is a dress code, even if only unofficially, and it’s a kindness to be explicit with her about what it is.) After that, if she violates the dress code, you can be much more direct: “Our dress code doesn’t include sweatshirts,” etc.

4. Explaining to staff that they need to let me know if they’re out of the office

I am trying to write a general instructions to my managers to let the know that if they are not able to maintain their regular schedule, it is a common courtesy to let their manager know. I sometimes have managers who schedule appointments during working hours. I understand that everyone has things to take care of that may occur during working hours, but I must be notified in advance. More frequently, lately I will call an office to find out that the manager will not be in until 12:00, when they should have been there at 7:30. Some managers never leave work, and some do. I am looking for a general instruction that I can send to all my managers.

Just be straightforward about what you want them to do. For example: “If you’re arriving late, leaving early, or leaving the office during the day for an appointment, please let me know in advance so that I’m in the loop on your schedule.” From there, if someone continues not to do it, talk to that person individually, just as you would about anything else that you wanted someone to change. (And keep in mind that different workplaces have different cultural norms around this kind of thing, so don’t be annoyed that you have to spell this out for people; just be explicit about your expectations so that they don’t guess wrong.)

5. Asking about future transfer possibilities

Can I ask an interviewer about future location transfer possibilities? I’m looking for a new job in my current (large) city. I plan on working and staying here for another year or two but then would like to move to an even larger city. Ideally my next job will be one where I can transfer to the office in the larger city when the time is right. I usually ask about growth opportunities but moving offices/locations feels slightly trickier and I don’t want them to think I won’t value the current position I’m interviewing for. Is there anyway to gauge the possibility of a move happening or how the company handles that sort of thing?

I’d wait until you have an offer — at which point they’ve already decided they want you. And obviously, make sure that you’re interviewing at companies that actually have offices in the city you want to move to.

You may also like:
{ 243 comments }

my friend doesn’t understand that I can’t meet her for lunch when I’m at work

by Alison Green on January 8, 2014

A reader writes:

I have a friend (a nurse) who has a unique schedule — many night shifts, days off during the week, etc. As someone who works a 9-5 job, I’m quite busy during many of the times my friend is free. In the past, I’ve had a more flexible schedule that allowed me to work from home, take longer lunches, and run more errands during the day. My friend and I usually met for leisurely lunches once or twice a week. Now, I’ve taken on more responsibility and stay in the office more, eating quicker lunches or bringing my lunch to enjoy at my office.

I’ve explained my new role and responsibilities to my friend in the clearest terms: “I can’t take long lunch breaks anymore” or “If we go to lunch, we have to be quick – I only have 30 minutes” or “I’m running to eat a quick bite but must be back before 1.” It’s mildly frustrating to me that my friend still calls during the day to chat and asks me to lunch at least twice a week. On times that I have been free for a quick lunch, she still suggests sit down restaurants or ponders the menu, telling our server to check back in a few minutes. This is after I tell her that I have to prep for an important meeting and MUST be back before a certain time.

Because this happened so frequently, I’ve started ignoring her calls, lying about being in lunch meetings, and simply told her “Sorry, can’t!” But, now I feel like a bad friend. It’s not a big problem in the grand scheme, but I just wish my friend better understood my work environment!

PS: I want to reiterate that I’ve had clear discussions with my friend about not being able to do lunch. She says that she understands and it sucks that my schedule is more strict, but then she calls the next day asking if I’m free. It’s just weird!

It is indeed weird. I think you have two options:

1. Stop going to lunch with her and don’t pick up her calls when you’re at work. You’ve started doing this, but I don’t think you need to get out of the lunch invitations with a lie about being in a meeting. You can say directly, “I’d love to, but I don’t have a long enough lunch break.”

2. Ask her directly what this is all about. Depending on what your friendship is like, I might say, “Hey, I know we’ve talked about how I can’t go to sit-down restaurants at lunch or take more than 20 minutes to eat, and that I can’t chat on the phone when I’m at work. When you keep inviting me to do these things, I get confused about whether I didn’t explain myself well or if something else is going on.” You might get more insight from that conversation — and it’ll be awfully hard for her to still continue this afterwards. But whether or not this makes sense depends on the dynamic you have with her.

One other thought: It sounds like you’ve continued meeting her for lunch when you have time for a quick meal — but it might be worth stopping that altogether, even if your schedule allows it that day. First, you know from experience that a “quick lunch” will probably take longer than you want it to, and second, by agreeing sometimes, you’re training her that if she keeps asking, sometimes you’ll say yes. Consistently saying “I can’t go to lunch anymore” might get the point across in a way that varying the message isn’t.

(Also, make sure that you’re suggesting other things to do with her when you’re not at work. If you start turning down all her invitations and not taking her calls during the day, you want to be sure that you’re reaching out to her in other ways, so that she knows you still want to hang out with her … just not during work hours.)

You may also like:
{ 109 comments }

how to respond to an anonymous note that says a temp is stealing

by Alison Green on January 8, 2014

A reader writes:

Recently at my office I have become “in charge” of the office purchase card, essentially the corporate card for in-office expenses such as paper, ink, coffee, etc. We lost the person who previously held the card and hired a temp in his place, and company policy is that a full-time employee must be the card-holder.

Every month, I review the previous month’s receipts – all receipts and purchases are cleared by the most senior person in our office and I review the receipts compared to the bill to make sure everything is on the up and up. That said, I do not actually sit and make the purchases for office supplies (I have a completely unrelated job and simply cannot be the office manager AND do my own work).

Recently, we began getting anonymous emails from someone within the office accusing the temp of making unauthorized purchases on the credit card. All receipts and all bills go through both myself and the senior person in the office, and nothing has been amiss. The anonymous email accused the temp of not only purchasing several personal items, but doctoring receipts before they got to us.

Unless the receipts were doctored, there have been no purchases made that raised any eyebrows. Personally, knowing the temp — who has been with us for some time (and who has asked for a permanent position in the office) — I have no reason to believe he would be stealing. The anonymous emails most certainly come from within the office (they are too specific with certain physical details about the office to not be), but IT could not trace the IP address, which appears to have been masked. However, whoever is sending the anonymous emails would not have access to any card, receipt, or bill – so unless there was an out and out confession, all evidence seems to be at best circumstantial.

How would you handle these anonymous emails? To be honest, I stepped up to the plate to be a good employee and have checked all the receipts, but this incident is making me re-think that position, as it appears whomever is sending the emails is making unsubstantiated claims, and could easily make them against me. Ultimately, what I and the senior approving person want is for whomever is sending the emails to come forward with evidence that the temp is stealing, if there is any. If he was stealing this is something we would want to know, but this email sender has hidden behind an anonymous email address. Any insight would be great.

Ugh, anonymous emails. They are rarely, if ever, the correct way to handle a problem, and they put the receiver in a really awkward position because now you have to wonder all sorts of things: Is this a real problem or someone with an unsubstantiated ax to grind? Should I spend time investigating this? How much time, if a first look doesn’t reveal any problems? If I stop after that first look and later it turns out there was a problem, will I be to blame for not investigating further? But should I really spend large amounts of time on something that I have no way of knowing is credible? Why wouldn’t the person come and talk with me directly? Is something wrong with me or with our culture that someone thinks they need to communicate this way? And so forth.

In any case, I’d do the following in this situation:

First, let the person in charge of approving purchases know about the note immediately. It sounds like you’ve done this, but I want to make sure, since it’s important that they’re in the loop on this.

Next, you said, “Unless the receipts were doctored, there have been no purchases made that raised any eyebrows.” However, the note-writer did charge that the temp was doctoring receipts, so if you’re going to look into this, you need to find some way of checking that part as well. How you do that will depend on the specifics of what’s been purchased, but you should be able to at least spot-check that too.

From there, if you’re then satisfied that nothing looks amiss, at that point I think you have three options — and you could do any or all of these:

1. Let it go. You’ve investigated and found no evidence of wrongdoing.

2. Depending on your culture, it might make sense for someone in authority in your office to say to everyone: “I’ve received an anonymous report of behavior that concerned me. It’s very difficult to act on anonymous reports, and I believe they can create a culture of fear and mistrust. I’d appreciate if it the person who sent this would approach me privately. And more broadly, there’s ever something you want to raise but you’re afraid there will be consequences to you for doing so, please talk with me and we’ll figure out a way to ensure that you’re not penalized for being the messenger.” (Then, of course, your workplace has to be committed to following through on that.)

3. Talk to the temp. Explain you received an anonymous report about this and that you have no reason to believe it, but that you want to ask if he can think of anything that would have given someone that impression. Maybe there’s some procedure he’s using that’s inadvertently appearing shady to an observer, who knows.

I don’t love option #3, because if the guy hasn’t actually done anything wrong, it’s going to cause him unfair stress and anxiety. On the other hand, most people would want to know if someone was making false allegations about us and he might want the opportunity to defend himself, even if you’ve already decided there’s nothing to the charges. Plus, if there’s something he can change in his procedures to make them more transparent, he might appreciate the heads-up and chance to do that. But it’s going to be a crappy feeling to know that one of his coworkers is making false allegations against him, and since he won’t know which one, he’ll have to suspect everyone.

In any case, you can do any combination of #1-3 above. And then, as you go forward from there, you’ll also have the tricky burden of having to do two things at once: not letting this  adversely impact how you see the temp (because it’s not fair to let his character be impugned by anonymous allegations that you can’t find evidence of), while simultaneously keeping an eye out for opportunities in the future to settle this, whether by noting future displays of integrity from him or by diving in further if you see something a little odd in his receipts down the road (that perhaps you would have ignored previously). That’s an inherent tension, of course — to not let the guy be marred by this while still having it in the back of your head. That’s another reason anonymous reports suck.

Read an update to this letter here.

You may also like:
{ 262 comments }