my boss saw me at a strip club and now won’t talk to me

A reader writes:

I’m a woman and I recently accompanied a group of friends (not coworkers) to a strip club. It isn’t something I do normally and was just a whim sort of thing. I wasn’t on company time and I wasn’t wearing anything that would identify me as an employee. I’m straight and this was a prominent gentleman’s club in the area.

As we were leaving, I ran into my boss (male). I wasn’t embarrassed about being seen there, but I didn’t really make any attempt to acknowledge him so that he wouldn’t feel it was an awkward situation. What he does in his own time is none of my business.

I have avoided mentioning the situation to my boss at all, but he seems to be avoiding me more. I’m his assistant and we use to have morning meetings often to discuss things that needed to be done for the day, and those no longer happen. It has only been a week and maybe I am over-thinking this and he just needs some time to process seeing me there, but he has assigned me almost no tasks this week. I know he has stuff that needs to be done, and I know he is just sitting on it now.

Do I just wait it out until it is forgotten? Do I mention something to him in a joking way to make it better? It honestly is not that big of a deal to me that I saw him there and I won’t tell any of the other employees. I know he could fire me over this, but is it likely that a person would? How do I make this situation less awkward for both of us?

Well, depending on your personalities and the relationship, it’s possible that it would be weirder not to mention the incident at all, especially if the relationship is pretty informal. But if that were the case here, I’m betting you’d know it, so I’m assuming that it’s not. Given that …

I think the best thing that you can do is act completely normal, the exact same way you would be acting if this hadn’t happened.

If this hadn’t happened and he suddenly stopped giving you work for a week, what would you do? That’s what you should do now. So that might mean just walking into his office and sitting down for your morning meetings like you normally do, pulling out a list of things to go over, and launching in. Or maybe it means going to him and saying, “I know you have X coming up — should I take care of A, B, and C for that?” Or maybe it means scheduling a meeting and finding out what he needs from you right now. Or if none of these work in your context, maybe it means tackling a bunch of tasks that have been on the back burner — and dropping by his office to let him know, “Hey, since things have slowed down this week, I’m working on A, B, and C. Let me know if there’s anything I should prioritize.”

The idea is to have contact that is not about seeing each other at at a strip club, so that the incident moves further and further back on the “most recent time we had contact with each other” list.

The other thing that you’d probably do if — without this strip club incident — he suddenly stopped meeting with you or giving you work is asking about it at some point, right? So if this stretches into another week, say what you’d say in that situation … which might something like, “I noticed we haven’t been meeting as much lately. Should I be more assertive about getting those meetings on the calendar?” or “Could we resume our regular meetings? They’re helpful to me in figuring out priorities.”

In other words, find a bunch of work-related reasons to interact and demonstrate that you couldn’t care less about the strip club run-in, and there’s a pretty good chance that that’s going to take care of it.

Now, could he fire you over this? He could, if he’s a huge tool. But it’s pretty unlikely, especially if you just act confident and unbothered and push through on all the work stuff.

is my name holding me back, corporate charity matches, and more

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

1. Would it be inappropriate to direct my company’s charity match toward domestic violence?

My new company proves a 1:1 match up to $200/year for donations made to a qualified 501(c) organization (schools, nonprofits, etc.), provided that the organization is located in our general region of the country. I donate every year to my K-12 school and college, but they are not considered “local” and the company will not match donations to either organization

I would like to donate to another organization in order to take advantage of the benefit and would like to donate to a qualified domestic violence organization that has provided assistance to me in the past. I am sure it will qualify under the 501(c) rule, but was wondering if it’s “appropriate” to donate to. Most of the other employees donate to the local hospitals, homeless shelters, and youth foundations. The charities are not tied back to employees – there’s a list provided at the end of the year that says what charities were donated to, but it wouldn’t match the employee with their charity of choice. I know domestic violence generally doesn’t get brought up in the workplace and don’t want to rock the boat as a new employee!

Go ahead and donate without any qualms! Many people donate to domestic violence organizations without having been survivors of abuse themselves, so it definitely doesn’t reveal anything personal about you, other than that you’re a kind person who opposes domestic violence. I can understand how you started worrying, but I can promise you that no one is going to draw any personal conclusions or find it in any way inappropriate.

2. Can I ask for a second chance at the job I quit after one month?

I started a new job last year with an amazing company whose values align with mine. It was a great company that gave back to the community. I truly felt that I landed my dream job. The job required a great deal of travel, which I typically enjoy, and meeting a lot of new people and developing relationships.

When I returned from training, I felt paralyzed by my anxiety and I ended up quitting. I was so overwhelmed and started feeling clouded by my spiked nerves. It may be because everything was so new and I put myself under my own pressure. When I told my boss how I felt, she told me that my situation wasn’t unique and that everyone has felt that way at one point or another but that things get better, and even offered to help me get over my nerves. I was so grateful for her offer but still decided that it was best to resign. After I quit, I wasn’t even sure I made the right decision and after about a month later, I realized I made a foolish decision. It’s been a year and I haven’t been able to get over it.

I know my original job position is filled, but I truly want to be part of this company once again, even if it is another position. How should I approach this situation, and is it a lost cause since I left only after a month from my start date?

Unfortunately, yeah, I think it’s probably a lost cause. At this point, one of the main things they know about you is that you crumbled under pressure, to the point of quitting after only a month on the job. That doesn’t mean they think you’re a terrible person or anything, but it does mean that they’re not especially likely to take a chance on hiring and training you again. I would stop looking back and second-guessing your decision (which was clearly right for you at the time) and instead focus on moving forward with a different job.

3. How often do I need to check in with my references?

I’ve been in and out of the job search over the past year or so, and when I’m on the upswing of searching for new jobs I always make a point to ask my potential references if it’s okay that I use them. They’ve always happily obliged me.

Because my job search has been rather sporadic (periods of a lot of searching, periods of hardly any searching at all), I don’t feel right going in a cycle of asking my references if they’re okay to be my reference, but at the same time I’m not sure if they’ll see their earlier agreement to be a reference as a green light to put them as a reference without asking them again. What’s the best solution? Is an agreement of being a reference from a few months ago grounds to have them be an outstanding reference every time a job search starts again in earnest, or should a reference be asked each and every time even if they’ve agreed to be a reference before?

If you’ve asked in the 8-12 months, you don’t need to ask again — although if you get to the reference checking stage with an employer, it’s smart and considerate to give your references a heads-up that they might be getting a call.

4. Is my name discrediting me?

My name is Star and I feel like that may discredit me in a way while people are reviewing my resume. When I switched to a sales role at the last company I worked at, my manager suggested I use my middle name instead. What are your thoughts on this?

I don’t think Star is particularly disreputable — I mean, it certainly doesn’t scream traditional or mainstream, but I don’t think it’s going to be a huge issue that requires changing. But names do affect the way people see you, particularly you’re just a disembodied resume, so I’ll throw this out to others to weigh in on in the comments.

5. My availability changed and now my hours have been cut

I’m a part-timer at Sam’s Club and full-time student with a 2-year-old. My job has hired about 20 new employees .. all part-timer as well and of course they’re getting the good hours. About a month and half ago, I had to change my work schedule due to my school schedule. I gave them the days and hours that I’m willing to work with and they said, “Okay, that’s fine.” But they cut my hours from 25-29 to about 9-13 hours per week. I’ve spoken to them and nothing was fixed. Unfortunately, they basically told me those are the hours that are being offered to me, even though I’ve been working with them for almost 4 years. Should I go to the Department of Labor or what can I do?

Well, there’s nothing illegal about cutting your hours, as long as they weren’t doing it because of your race, religion, sex, or other protected category, which doesn’t sound like the case here. It sounds like they cut your hours because they didn’t like your new availability, which is their prerogative. But why not go talk to your manager and say something like, “Since my availability changed, the hours I’m being scheduled for have dropped dramatically. I really need to work more hours. Is there anything I can do to get more hours back?” You might hear that they just don’t need you for the hours you’re now available, in which case you’d have to decide if you’re willing to switch your schedule back, or accept what they’re giving you, or look for a new job.

when should I move education to the bottom of my resume?

A reader writes:

I graduated from college 2-1/2 years ago and have held 2 positions since then, one of which I worked at throughout college. Those 2 jobs and 2 internships are included on my resume.

I’m looking for new positions and am wondering, at what point do I move my education to the bottom of my resume? I still consider myself a recent grad and I’m very hesitant to move it down. My college is one of the top recruited in the country, with a very large alumni base that loves to hire other alums, and I feel it is a big selling point. I don’t think my experience is especially impressive, but it does relate closely to the work I’m looking for. Is it time to move it to the bottom or is it still a big selling point on my resume?

In the vast majority of fields, employers care more about your work experience than they do about the details of your education. Yes, they might require a degree, even a degree in a specific field — but it’s your work experience that’s going to determine how qualified you are compared to other candidates.

Because of that, I’d nearly always lead with your work experience, not your education, unless one of the following is true:

1. Your work experience is really unimpressive (which would mean no internships, no work in your field, and no other substantive work). In this case, your education might be the strongest thing you have going for you, and it would make sense to lead with it.

2. You’re in one of the relatively few fields where education is considered as significant a qualification as work experience. (Although in those fields, work experience is still usually a differentiator between candidates, and education is more of a prerequisite for your application to even be in the mix.)

3. You’re trying to change fields and you have recent education in your field, but all of your work experience is in a different field and anyone looking at your resume is going to be confused about why you’re applying until they see your education section. In that case, you might find it helpful framing to put the education first so that a reader has some instant context about why you’re applying for this job, context that they won’t get from your work experience.

But for the vast majority of people, work experience is what you want to lead with and emphasize.

Turning back to your case specifically, the fact that you went to a top recruited school with friendly alumni doesn’t really trump the above. Employers are still going to see your school, after all — but it’s not the meat of your qualifications, and so I wouldn’t lead with it.

Now, all that said, is it going to destroy your chances if you lead with your education anyway? No, of course not. But if you’re interested in making your resume as strong as you can, talk about work experience first.

what employer behaviors should be deal-breakers for employees?

A reader writes:

I’m new to the working world. While some jobs have inherent drawbacks (long hours, high stress, etc.), what actions or requirements are generally unacceptable from management? In short, what are your “deal-breakers”?

Different people have different deal-breakers. Some people won’t work for a manager who yells, while other people aren’t that bothered by it. Some people won’t work for a micromanager, while others roll their eyes and get on with the work. Some people won’t work for a company that doesn’t provide health insurance, while others suck it up and deal. Some people won’t work for a company that bounces paychecks — something that you might think would be an obvious deal-breaker for everyone — but some people will. And so forth. It just varies.

Moreover, what you will and won’t accept usually changes during different periods of your life. When you have plenty of options (whether because of your excellent reputation and in-demand skills, or your finances, or whatever), you might take a harder line on deal-breakers than when you don’t have as many options. It’s easy to say you’d never work for a company that breaks the law, for instance, but it’s a lot harder to say that when you don’t see other immediate options to pay your mortgage next month.

It’s also really easy to tell other people what their deal-breakers should be, but when you’re not the one paying their bills, it doesn’t really matter.

That said, I’d suggest the following as deal-breakers to people who have at least decent options:

  • a pattern of not being paid when you’re supposed to be paid
  • managers who break clear and specific promises without acknowledging that it’s a really big deal to do so (I added in that caveat because there are times when you might be promised, for example, a raise and then the company needs to freeze salaries … but your manager should show that they take the broken promise seriously)
  • managers who won’t address serious problems (such as not taking on performance problems within your department)
  • managers who regularly make you feel awful (varies by person, but it could include yelling, overly personal criticism, etc.)
  • work environments where you feel unsafe

There are all kinds of other things that could go on this list too — lack of feedback, lack of monetary rewards, treating everything like an emergency, overall incompetence, etc. — but then we’re getting into areas where some people will care a lot and others won’t be as bothered.

What else belongs on the list of things that should be deal-breakers for anyone with options, stuff that doesn’t fall in the “eh, plenty of people don’t get as bothered by that” category?

your parents don’t belong in your workplace

If you hoped that the helicopter parenting trend was on the wane, you won’t be happy to learn that last week LinkedIn launched “Bring Your Parent to Work Day,” an initiative to encourage workers to bring their parents to the office to give them “a glimpse into where their kids work.” LinkedIn says they created the event because too many parents don’t understand what their kid does at work and wish they could learn more.

But while the company no doubt sees the event as a way to better integrate young employees into its workforce, it’s a bad move for this generation of workers.

We already know that today’s 20somethings had – as a group — more parental involvement when they were growing up than any other generation in recent history, from parents micromanaging their kids’ social lives to calling their colleges to complain about noisy roommates. This generation also delays launching their careers longer, lives at home longer, and is more financially dependent on their parents than what we’ve seen previously. But once they enter the workforce, it’s in their best interests to become independent, self-reliant professionals – after all, if not now, then when?

But it’s going to be that much harder to do if employers reinforce the idea that parental involvement should continue into this stage of young workers lives too.

Now, certainly there’s nothing wrong with companies allowing employees to bring a parent by the office in a more informal way, just like an employee might have any other visitor stop by because they were in the area or to head to lunch together. But creating entire programs around employees’ parents sends all the wrong signals.

First and foremost, this type of program tells younger employees that their employer doesn’t see them as fully independent adults, untethered from their parents – or assumes that they don’t see themselves that way. (To be clear, fully independent adults can and do choose to talk about work-related topics with their parents all the time – but they don’t require an employer-planned event to do that.)

Since it’s highly unlikely that 50-something employees are bringing their parents to these events, it’s clear that it’s targeting millennials – and is based on the belief that this generation of workers still finds it appropriate to create the type of parent-focused programs that they had in college and grade school.

When employers coddle younger employees like this, what does this mean for how they negotiate raises, give feedback, delegate work, and otherwise interact with them? Are these employees going to get adult raises, adult assignments, and adult feedback – or will they be condescended to there are well?

And if you think that’s an overreaction, the Wall St. Journal recently reported on one company that callsor sends notes to parents when interns achieve their sales goals and another that lets parents listen in when managers describe the details of job offers.

While these bizarre initiatives are limited to a small number of companies, it’s troubling that it’s happening at all and that the media is reporting on it as anything other than a cautionary tale about the dysfunction that arises when adulthood is delayed later and later.

It’s great for parents to coach their kids behind the scenes if the kids want it, but 20somethings should be entering the workplace as the adults they are, which means interacting with their employers in the same way that other mature adults do.

Parents who get overly involved in their grown kids’ professional lives and the employers who cater to them are performing a disservice – and making it tougher for young workers to fully inhabit their new identities as independent, self-sufficient adults. They’re denying them the opportunity to stand on their own, advocate for themselves, make their own mistakes – and to be seen as competent, thoughtful, mature professionals.

I originally published this at U.S. News & World Report.

applying for a job where my manager’s husband works, is my masters degree hurting my job search, and more

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

1. Is my masters degree hurting my job search?

I graduated with a masters degree in Communications Management and have spent about a year doing various part-time jobs and internships to gain more work experience and am looking for a full-time job. I also applied to a temp agency after I felt like I need some help in the “getting a job” department. I got a call from the agency about a position and they called back saying the company felt I was overqualified. I laughed as I’ve never heard that before and didn’t agree that I had enough experience to be considered overqualified. The temp agency person retorted that I do have a masters degree.

Is my masters degree hurting my job search? Should I leave it off in some instances? I have been trying to apply to more entry level pr and marketing positions since most of my work has been part time or internships for a few nonprofits. I don’t know if I am undervaluing my skills going for positions that only require a bachelors or even a just a high school degree.

Maybe. One problem with getting a masters when you’re seeking work in a field that doesn’t require it is that some employers will think you don’t really want the job you’re applying for, since it’s not in “your field.” That alone can end up being a reason not to hire you—for the exact same job you might have been a stronger contender for before you got your graduate degree.

On the other hand, that’s not what’s necessarily happening here, and it’s dangerous to let one company’s opinion dictate how you present yourself. But yeah, it’s useful to be aware that advanced degrees aren’t always exclusively helpful.

2. My manager is over-scheduling and under-paying me

As a recently transitioning officer out of the Marine Corps, I found myself with several months of “free time” prior to my next career starting up. So, as a means to keep myself physically active and busy, I took a Job for part-time hours working in a warehouse. I specifically asked for no more than 30 hours a week. It is now going into the third month of employment and I have been consistently working 50 hour weeks. Because of these tremendous hours, I have not been able to focus my spare time on my GI-Bill.

As a part-time employee, I am making $10 dollars an hour with no benefits. The full-time employee I work with in the warehouse makes $25 an hour with full benefits. But we are now working the same hours day on stay on.

As a former officer, I knew it was on me to bring this issue up with my manager immediately, and his response was as follows: “Oh, you are such a good employee and we need you here! You working 30 hours a week was just a white lie, I actually expect you to work 50 hours or so a week.”

So basically, because of my work ethic, I have been forced into doing a full-time job (that I am extremely overqualified for) for part-time pay with no benefits. How should I address this with HR, as I know this will come down unfavorably on my manager? And ultimately my next career starts in January, and I fear for the event that they ask for a review from the part-time transition job.

Well, first, try talking directly to your manager. Say something like this: “I’m glad that you appreciate my work. However, we agreed when I started work that I’d be scheduled for no more than 30 hours per week. I cannot work more than that because of other commitments. Will that be a problem?” If your manager says that it will in fact be a problem, then you have to decide if you’re willing to work the additional hours (at which point you should insist on receiving the corresponding benefits and consider negotiating a higher salary) or if you’d rather decline all the hours. It’s not unreasonable to do either of those, and it shouldn’t harm your reference as long as you do it in a pleasant, professional way.

3. Working at a large organization where the rules change constantly

I am new to a position as a state employee. How do I handle being at a large organization that no one seems to have answers to the simplest questions or you get conflicting answers. You don’t need receipts to be reimbursed for travel but when you hand in the travel voucher you are asked, “Where are your receipts?” I am accused of having attitude when I remind the person I was told I did not need them. It is very frustrating and the rules change constantly. They is no leadership and HR is absolutely no help. How do I deal with this frustration on a daily basis? I am reconsidering this position.

You basically have to decide if you’re willing to put up with it because you like other parts about working there well enough or not (whether that’s the work, the pay, or whatever). But one thing I can tell you is that if you’re being accused of being snippy, you’ll get better results if you don’t let your frustration show — particularly at someone who might not be responsible for it. There’s a big difference between “Jane told me I didn’t need receipts” said in a defensive or annoyed tone and “Oh! I’m sorry — Jane didn’t think I’d need receipts — do I?”

4. Applying for a job where my manager’s husband works

I recently saw a position that is a great fit for me — the type of job I am looking for at a great company. The problem is that my current supervisor’s husband (I’ll call him Bob) works at this company. The job is at a very small division of a large company. Bob is in a related department, not the one I am applying to work in. The thing is, he used to work at my current company for several years and just moved to the new company a few months ago. Since it is such a small division and Bob previously worked at my company, I am fairly certain that the hiring manager or the recruiter would ask him about me. I would even expect that he would be part of the panel that interviews for the position.

How should I address this? Bob is very professional and not one to gossip, but not to tell his wife one of her employees is applying for a job at his company seems like a stretch. I am afraid to discuss it with my boss because I am afraid that would limit my future growth opportunities at my current company if I don’t get the other job.

It doesn’t seem like you can apply for this job without your current manager hearing of it — which might mean that you can’t apply for it at all, if you don’t want your manager to know you’re job-searching. That sucks, but it sounds like the reality of the situation.

5. Sending thank-yous to interviewers who said that future communication should go through HR

Quick question regarding follow-up notes – what if you interview with a few people, but they tell you to funnel all future communication through the HR person who scheduled the interview? Is figuring out how to contact them each directly something that goes above and beyond, or does it disregard their instructions? If I do communicate through the HR person, do I ask them to pass along my note?

If your interviewers specifically tell you to funnel all future communication through the HR person, you should follow that instruction when it comes to communications that require a response — such as checking in about the hiring timeline, asking for an update, or asking a question about the position. But a thank-you note doesn’t fall in that category, and you should be fine sending thank-you’s directly to your interviewers. (It won’t count as above and beyond though; it’s not sufficiently above and beyond for it to be perceived that way. But it’s still a good thing to do.)

my coworker constantly cc’s our managers on her emails to me

A reader writes:

I’m a supervisor with not much experience and still learning. I do make mistakes, but I’m pretty good at taking responsibility and rectifying my mistakes.

There is a customer service supervisor who constantly cc’s my department director if she disagrees with the answers I give to the customer service reps. Instead of calling me or emailing me to figure out things, she does not give me the oportunity to review and rectify something if I’m wrong. She emails me and cc’s my my boss, her manager, and even customer service reps This supervisor thinks it is better to cc upper management instead of communicating directly with me, which makes me feel that I’m not capable of handling the situation.

I would really like for this to stop and have her communicate better with me since we are both supervisors, but I’m not sure how to do it.

That’s annoying.

I’d do two things:

1. Wait for this to happen again, and go talk to her in person. Ideally you’d pick an instance where the issue she’s emailing about isn’t black and white (or, even better, where she’s outright wrong, if that’s sometimes the case). Talk through the issue she raised, and at the end of the conversation, say something like, “I really appreciate you raising this so we could talk about it. In the future, if something like this comes up, would you come talk to me in person so we can figure it out more easily? I’d really appreciate it.”

2. After that, stop caring about it. All you can really try is what’s above, and if that doesn’t work, then there’s not much else you can do, other than to not let it bother you. If the people she’s cc’ing don’t want to be in the loop, they’ll either tell her that or ignore the emails (and possibly consider her cc’ing to be a bit overblown, making her a bit of a pain), but that reflects on her, not on you. On the other hand, if they do feel like it’s appropriate for them to be in the loop, then you don’t want to be discouraging her from cc’ing them — that risks coming across like you want issues hidden from them.

One more thing: Since you’re new and making mistakes, and she’s clearly interested in addressing those mistakes, is there any chance you could actually use her as more of a mentor? While this might be a hard pill to swallow, one possibility would be to go to her and say, “I really appreciate you helping me learn this stuff. I’d love to get more feedback from you if there are other things you see that I could be doing differently.” You could even ask her to go out to lunch with you periodically for that purpose.

This is going to disarm her if she’s frustrated, and it’s a really good response to critical feedback because rather than seeming like you just want her to shut up about it all, you’ll be saying the opposite — “I welcome this and want to hear more of it.” People generally love that — especially people who are concerned that you’re not doing things quite right yet — and it’s also a good thing to do in its own right, if indeed you’re making mistakes and she has useful guidance to give. And if you develop that type of relationship with her and she sees herself as a mentor to you, she’ll probably feel less of a need to cc other people rather than talking with you directly.

the salary I was offered was a bait and switch

A reader writes:

I have been talking to another department about an internal move. When I first talked to the hiring manager, he told me the pay would be $83K with 10% bonus. (I am currently making $54k.)

When I saw the offer letter yesterday, it was for $70K with 4% bonus.

The explanation I got was that $83K is the total compensation package with benefits, vacation, holidays, etc.

I told the hiring manager that NOBODY thinks that way. Nobody hears a number and thinks, “Well, my paycheck will be only x% of that stated number.”

I talked to a colleague – who started in April – about this – and she said they did the same thing to her! So it’s not just internal candidates.

Has anyone else ever run into this? I feel as if I have been baited and switched. I am quite cranky.

Hell yes, you should be cranky. That’s absolutely ridiculous — you’re right that no one calculates salary that way.

We’ve heard about candidates wanting to do this on their side — reporting a salary history that includes the value of benefits — and everyone is agreed that that’s not cool to do. But it’s even more ridiculous when an employer tries to pull it, because they’re talking about how much they’re going to pay you. You do not mislead people about how much you’re going to pay them. It’s not okay.

Plus, if that’s how salaries were stated, how would a candidate be able to know how much money they’d actually be making, unless they knew precisely how much the company pays for health insurance, etc. (which most candidates don’t)? They wouldn’t, which is another reason why this is crap.

Either the manager was deliberately trying to mislead you or he’s completely, utterly out of touch with how people normally think and operate, to a pretty unusual extent. The first one makes him a jerk, and the second one makes him a walking red flag if you’re considering working for him. Neither is good.

Since you already work for this company, you’re in a good position to complain to someone about this BS. While I don’t normally recommend going to HR for much, I have to think that they wouldn’t be happy to know that this jerkwad is doing this.

the top 6 ways managers demotivate employees

An employee’s relationship with his or her manager is the single most important factor in how happy that employee is at work – which means that managers have a huge amount of sway over the mood on their team. Here are the top six ways that managers mess up and end up demotivating employees who might otherwise be more productive.

1. Fuzzy expectations. One of a manager’s most important jobs is to get employees aligned around clear goals and expectations. When that doesn’t happen, employees don’t have a clear understanding of what success in their jobs would look like – and it’s hard to excel when you’re not even sure what you should be excelling in.

2. Ruling by fear. Managers who rule through rigid control, negativity, and a climate of anxiety and fear generally operate like that because they don’t trust that they can get things done any other way. But it ends up backfiring because fearful employees won’t take risks or bring up new ideas for fear of being attacked and won’t be honest about problems. Moreover, very few great people with options want to work for a fear-based manager, so over time these managers have trouble attracting strong workers.

3. Not recognizing good work. Imagine spending weeks working on a project or working through the weekend to make a client happy and then see no signs that your boss noticed or cared. When that happens, employees often conclude that since great work isn’t recognized, there’s no point in putting in extra effort or doing more than the bare minimum – instant demotivation.

4. Making unreasonable demands. Holding employees to a high standard is a good thing. But some managers cross the line from holding people to a high standard to pushing them to the brink. Managers who insist that people work over the weekend to complete a project that isn’t time-sensitive, enforce truly unreasonable deadlines, or demand that an employee do the truly impossible are signaling to their staff that a reasonable person’s idea of excellence will never be enough for this manager … and as a result, cause a drop in morale and productivity.

5. Constantly moving goalposts. Some managers can’t stick to a decision about the most important ways for employees to spend their time. One week, you’re supposed to drop everything to work on Project A for the next month. Three days later, your boss has an idea for Project B and so Project A is forgotten. The next week, she wants all your energy focused on Project C. As a result, employees stop taking any of the work seriously, knowing from experience that there’s no point in giving it their all when the priorities will change soon anyway.

6. Neglecting to deal with problems. Some managers avoid conflict and tough conversations at all costs. This often takes the form of shying away from addressing performance problems, reluctance to make necessary course corrections to a project for fear of offending someone, or not intervening when another department is creating roadblocks. Ironically, while these managers are usually just trying to be liked, over time the opposite happens: As problems go unresolved and difficult decisions go unmade, staff members grow frustrated and lose motivation to work at a high level (and the best among them usually leave).

my biggest client is a jerk, changing your resume after a layoff, and more

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

1. My biggest client is a jerk

I own a small advertising firm with one big client. The new exec we work with at that company is a bully, micromanaging our work and using abusive language dealing with us. We had a wonderful relationship with previous managers – this is the first time this has happened. I know they are short staffed and she is the only one they have to work with us, so more than likely, complaining to higher-ups will result in us being dropped for another company in this highly competitive industry. I can’t let that happen – too many people’s jobs depend on it. But my attempts to find common ground and communicate with her have only led to more belittling language. I’m at the end of my rope – and scared. Any suggestions?

You can try meeting with the new exec, saying that you’ve had the sense that she’s been frustrated with your staff, and asking how you can work more effectively with her. And if you were willing to risk her taking it poorly, you could try talking to her about how she can work with you more effectively. And you could ask her to come directly to you with concerns in the future rather than using abusive language with your staff.

However, since she’s your primary client and you’re not willing to risk losing the relationship, this might be a case of needing to suck it up and deal with it, if you know you’d prefer to deal with a jerk than to lose the client entirely. That said, I’d be working actively on ways to diversify your client list, so that you’re not held hostage to any single company. (Which would be a good idea even if this woman were lovely — because being dependent on a sole client is a precarious position to be in.)

2. Must I change my resume immediately after a layoff to indicate I’m no longer employed?

I just got laid off and was wondering how long I can wait to change the entry on my resume from [companyname] [title], [startdate] – current to [companyname] [title], [startdate] – [enddate]. Or maybe I shouldn’t wait?

It would be disingenuous to continue sending out a resume that says you’re currently employed somewhere where you no longer work. You can get away with not changing it for a week or so, but beyond that you risk looking deceptive. After all, if an employer calls you for a phone interview a few days after receiving your resume and it comes up that you were laid off, you’re likely to be asked when the layoff occurred — and if the answer is “one month ago,” it’s not going to look great that your resume you just sent them a few days ago said that you were still working there.

3. Are you obligated to respond to your former employee when you no longer work there?

One of our coworkers came in on the weekend and left his badge and resignation letter on his manager’s desk. He did not give two week notice, so he quit effective immediately.

Upon realizing he quit the next working day, our manager tried to contact him via phone/personal email to make sure everything was okay, but this person did not respond. The debate by the watercooler was “does the former employee have any legal obligation to respond to inquiries from a former employer?” I think that they do not have to answer calls or provide any futher explanation if they choose not to. Is that correct?

That is indeed correct; there’s no legal obligation whatsoever to communicate with your former employer once you resign. Hell, for that matter, there’s no legal obligation to communicate with your employer while you’re still employed (although obviously that would end your employment pretty quickly).

This is an issue not of law, but of convention, courtesy, and reputation — all of which do dictate that your former coworker should have responded to your manager to explain what happened. Not doing so is unprofessional and will presumably impact his reputation accordingly.

4. I don’t want to cover the help desk!

I have been working in a major department store for the last four years for the engineers who cover repairs and maintenance, as a contract support administrator. My role within that time has mainly been raising purchase orders, keeping spreadsheets updated, some accounts work, and dealing with internal and external queries.

The company that I used to work for lost the contract a year ago, and I transferred over to the new company. A year later, they have told me that I need to be trained to cover the help desk. I have no wish to work on the help desk and in fact turned down a job offer to do that job here four years ago, just before I secured my current position. I have told them that I don’t want to cover the help desk and gave my reasons, but was told, “Well, it’s part of your job.” It never has been and has never been mentioned until now. Basically, they are not replacing staff when they leave and are expecting everybody else to cover these positions. What is strange is there is already a guy who enjoys covering the help desk and often comes in on weekends for overtime, but instead of him covering, I now have to train him to cover my job while I cover the help desk!

My job spec makes no mention of working on the help desk but of course does mention “any other reasonable tasks.” Would you advise me where I stand on this? Would a help desk position come under administration?

It doesn’t really matter if it’s in your job description or falls under administration — they can change your job description at any time, and it sounds like they’ve decided to. You can argue with them all you want that you’ve never been expected to do this before, but they’re not under any obligation to go by what’s been done previously. If they want to change the job, they can change the job — at which point you’d need to decide if you’re still interested in remaining in that job.

However, it sounds like it would be worth saying to them, “You know, Bob loves covering the help desk and often works extra hours to do it, whereas I prefer to focus on XYZ. Would it be possible to assign this work to him instead, rather than him doing my work while I’m doing that?” They might not agree, but it’s certainly reasonable to ask.

5. Will my second part-time job interfere with promises I made to my first part-time job?

About a month ago, I interviewed and got a part-time job with an organization that I am very happy to work for. One of the questions they asked me during the interview was about potential changes to my availability, since they really wanted someone who was available to sub a lot, and who would continue to be available. I basically said my mostly-open availability wouldn’t change, and I assume that helped me get the job. I answered that way because I assumed that, after taking a year of looking for the first steady job, a second steady job wasn’t going to immediately appear.

Well… this week I have a second interview for another part-time job. They’ve called my references, and I’m feeling pretty good about my chances. The second job would greatly increase my financial independence, and I plan on taking it if offered (I can’t really afford not to). The hours it’s scheduled for fit nicely around my scheduled hours at my current job, which is part of the reason I applied for it. But I will no longer be available for sub hours two days a week (as well as potential sub hours at the second job, too). When and how do I go about telling my manager about the second job if I get it? Do I address the sort-of dishonesty of stating that my availability wouldn’t change and then continuing to apply for other part-time positions? I don’t think this will be a complete deal-breaker for my current job, since they hired someone else at the same time as me whose availability is open (and it’s only two days a week). Am I worrying about this too much?

I don’t think there was any dishonesty you. You answered what was true at the time, and you didn’t have reason to think that was going to change soon. And I assume you didn’t commit to never looking for another job, given that your work is part-time.

If you get the second job, you can simply go back to your first manager and say, “I’m taking on a second part-time job, which means my availability will now be ___. Does that cause any problems?” If it turns out that it does cause problems, then you can deal with that then — but I’d go into assuming that you weren’t hired solely for your ability to sub.