my coworker gets mad when I follow my boss’s instructions

A reader writes:

I am a receptionist at a radiology clinic. Our sonographers (the techs who do ultrasound) get a bonus every time they do three ultrasounds in an hour. One of our sonographers, Meg, prefers to spend more time with patients so only does two an hour, and seems to be supported in this. I see my grandboss, Victor, sometimes tampering with her appointment times but he’s never given me hassle when I’ve changed them back, and he’s mentioned being reluctant to overwork her before. Because of this, this sonographer is more than happy to do urgent scans when they come, and even does walk-ins on occasion. She knows her limits, moderates her workload, and she takes on extra work when required because of that.

The senior sonographer, Piper, is a different story. She wants the bonus, so I’m instructed to pack her schedule in.

This is not a problem until urgent cases come in and throw the whole schedule out of whack. Piper flat out refuses to do them unless they’re referred by specific doctors, claiming we have no obligation to do them otherwise; Victor disagrees and tells me to schedule them in and tell her “call Victor” if she has a problem with it.

The problem is, Piper knows he won’t budge, so she doesn’t bother; she just leans on me instead. She doesn’t accept “call Victor” as an answer. Other coworkers have even stepped up and told her to lay off me, that it was his call, but she’ll continue staying mad at me for it and demands to know when she’s expected to take breaks, how she’s supposed to keep up, etc., from me and will not bring it up with him. I’m certain that she’s choosing me as a target on purpose.

Victor just keeps saying, “Tell her to call me.” He has said she gets paid a shit-ton of money and if she wants a lighter workload they’ll have to readjust compensation accordingly.

If Piper is burning out, I don’t want to contribute to that, but I can’t go against Victor either. At the same time, urgent patients being turned away is horrifying, and putting them through and delaying less urgent patients is part of the job. And Victor needs to give me better tools to deal with her other than telling her to call him, because she won’t do that, she’ll just keep coming down on me instead. (I look like someone who’s fresh out of school and am learning to stand up for myself; I’m pretty sure she’s taking advantage of that.)

Until I figure a way around this, I’ve been reserving slots especially for urgent cases to keep Piper off my back, but I’m expecting Victor to get rid of them when he sees them.

Not sure if it’s relevant, but I also want to note that while I haven’t worked with both of them long (two months). Victor seems to be a bit of a people pleaser, so it stands out to me that he’s dying on this hill because he’s normally the kind of person who’s very reluctant to say no.

Do you have any suggestions/scripts for how to handle this?

Three things:

1. When Piper complains but refuses to call Victor, call him yourself. Say to Piper, “Victor was really clear that he wants to be looped in when this happens, so I’m going to call him and can put you on with him.” Then do it.

2. Talk to Victor again. Say this: “You’ve told me to tell Piper to call you when she’s complaining about having to take urgent appointments, but every time she refuses and just keeps leaning on me, insisting that I change the schedule and then is hostile toward me afterward. Since just telling her to call you isn’t working, can you talk to her about you want her to handle urgent appointments? Otherwise she’s going to keep pushing back on me every time it happens.” If he again tells you to have her call him, say, “I do and she refuses, so what’s our next step?”

3. Decide you don’t care if Piper is upset. If she seems mad, say, “I can’t ignore instructions Victor gave me. You should raise this with him if you want me to handle it differently.” If she’s still snippy, ignore it (but keep looping Victor in — as in, “Piper got angry again today when X happened but refused to call so I’m looping you in”).

I know you said that if Piper is burning out, you don’t want to be contributing to that — but you’re right that you can’t unilaterally ignore instructions from your boss’s boss. If Piper has concerns about her workload, she needs to address it with management above her (and, if that doesn’t work, decide if she wants the job under these circumstances or not). It’s not okay for her to be hostile to you for doing your job in lieu of the more practical actions she should be taking. And if she is trying to manipulate you because you look young and/or she can tell you have trouble standing up for yourself, that makes it even worse. Piper is not without options; being a jerk to someone without a lot of power shouldn’t be on the table.

updates: the employee missing key details, the needy coworker, and more

Here are three updates from past letter-writers.

1. My employee misses key details in meetings (#2 at the link)

Your advice and that of your commenters really helped. Reading the comments helped me approach the conversation with a better sense of curiosity rather than some more negative assumptions I had been carrying. The commenters proposed a lot of reasons someone who seemed otherwise capable might not be performing that I hadn’t considered. The most helpful comments were about how shadowing can affect a person’s engagement and attention in a meeting, and how a lack of context can impede understanding.

Following your advice, I had a direct conversation with him where I named the pattern and asked for his thoughts on why it might be happening. He was hesitant to respond at first, but I started prompting about possible reasons this could be happening using the examples listed by the comment section. One of them landed, and he actually opened up and revealed that he had been having trouble for months understanding the context of our specific role on projects within the broader context. He’d been getting feedback from his then line manager that he needed to do better but was feeling pretty lost and at sea on how to make those corrections. We work with many different client stakeholders, these stakeholders often have an incorrect understanding of our roles which can create confusion for new starters. He was having trouble separating out items that were in our scope to address from ones that weren’t. We’ve since identified this as a common issue with some other newer members of the team and leadership is in discussions about how to address the requirements of our training and onboarding program to deal with this issue. At the time he was onboarded our training and onboarding program was objectively failing new starters. For him specifically, we ended up solving this together in 3 ways:

1) He and I had a dedicated session to review the timeline and deliverables in projects and our role during each milestone and clear up context confusion that had come in during the less than optimal onboarding
2) I gave him fresh start on a new project with me providing active coaching in the background to build his confidence
3) I stepped back to let him step forward on the new project, in other words I took away the shadowing training wheels

I think the real solve was just having a troubleshooting conversation with him from the perspective of I want to fix this together and giving him the benefit of the doubt that he was making a good faith effort. I’ve recently received a promotion and this person is now my direct report and the time I spent helping him with this issue bought me a lot of trust as I stepped into that role. I’ve since been able to hand off a few of my projects to him as I step into a supervisory role and he’s doing really well with them.

2. How should I deal with an anxious and needy coworker?

I ended up taking Alison’s advice and declining to get involved in any of Patricia’s crises whenever possible. Whenever she would try to rope me into the latest crisis, I would redirect her to her manager. Suddenly, things became less urgent when she would have to go to her boss for them. When it did impact my job, I started documenting issues and sending them to her manager.

I ended up getting a new job and my former coworkers told me Patricia was fired shortly after I left.

3. My coworkers complained I’m not working fast enough (first update here)

I have a really great update to the situation I wrote in about last year. My whole team was eliminated in early January and it really sucked to lose my job, but after a good six months of job searching I landed a really great position. The best part is now I have benefits and I went from a wage of 17$ an hour to 24.50$ an hour. It’s a significant wage increase and I’m really happy that things are looking up, especially with my new role being full time. Thank you again for all the advice on my prior letters!

advice for first-generation college students adjusting to professional work environments

It’s the Thursday “ask the readers” question. A reader writes:

I work with college students looking for co-ops, and was wondering about advice for first-generation college students adjusting to professional workplaces — maybe an “ask the readers” about what they wished they knew? I’m one such person (though it’s been many years since I’ve been in school), so it’s something I try to be mindful of when working with students.

When reading a previous post about lack of ambition, I was struck by the letter-writer’s comment, “It was almost like the follow-up to being a first-generation college student and having no idea what’s going on is just becoming a first-generation professional and having no idea what’s going on.”

I remember being confused and lost while I tried to adjust to a professional work environment, especially since much of my experience upon graduating was in academic research, though I also worked in a bank. The comment inspired me to reach out to you.

Let’s hear from readers who were first-generation college students on this one. Please share your thoughts in the comments.

we start meetings by sharing positive things from our personal lives, is it fair to make employees pay for parking, and more

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

1. We’re required to start meetings by sharing positive things from our personal lives

My company has just been bought by another company and we’re about to start the process of integrating the two. I do think this is a really good thing, apart from one thing.

Their meetings require everyone to start by stating one positive thing that’s happened in their work life, and one in their personal life.

Apart from detesting the forced positivity of this, I’m a very private person and don’t want to talk about my life outside of work, especially not for the express purpose of facilitating meetings. I don’t particularly want to list positive things from work either, but I think I probably have less of a leg to stand on there.

How do I handle this? I don’t have the standing to get them to stop doing it (although I will be raising it with our senior management that it’s likely to be a real blocker to getting the two teams to integrate well), so I really need a way to handle this when I start having meetings with them. Help!

I’m a big believer in just cheerfully and matter-of-factly turning this kind of exercise into something different that you are comfortable with. So for example, when it’s your turn you could cheerfully say, “Oh, I’m too private for that kind of personal sharing, but a positive thing that’s happened at work this week is…” (It’ll especially help if you make sure your work example is good — not just one bitter sentence that exudes “I am saying this part under duress too,” but rather something you seem to enthusiastically offer.)

Also, since you’re a little uncomfortable with the work part too, try mentioning something someone else did that impressed you. If you see it as an opportunity to amplify someone else’s work, you might feel more comfortable with that.

Related:
I’m required to share with my boss a weekly best and worst from my personal life

2. Is it fair to make employees pay for parking?

I work for a large company that is pretty much considered “the only game in town” in its home city — and frankly, the state. Everyone who lives here, for the most part, regards it for its solid pay, great benefits, etc. By and large, it is a good place to work, and I’m generally happy. But I’m starting to wonder if the company is maybe taking advantage of its workforce somewhat.

One thing that has never sat well with me is its policy on parking. If you drive to and from work, workers are forced to pay for parking that the company contracts out from the city’s parking lots. Monthly parking fees are dependent on your job classification, but it generally amounts to around $75-85/employee. It’s not a huge amount, but it’s not insignificant, either.

To be fair, our employer does offer shuttle services to those who live somewhat nearby, and walking, biking, carpooling, and metered parking are always options, but is it right for such a large company — or any company, really — to oblige their employees to pay for parking at work?

I wouldn’t say it’s unfair, really; it’s pretty common.

If the company owned the lot and was turning a profit by charging employees to park in it (at least beyond what it costs to maintain the lot), that would be wrong. But in your case, they’re acting as a sort of a middle man by leasing the space from the city and then passing on those costs to employees who want convenient parking. That’s a pretty typical way to do it. And of course, if charging for parking reduces the number of cars on the roads by encouraging more people to take public transportation or get to and from work by other methods, that’s ultimately a good thing.

One caveat: I’m assuming that “parking fees are dependent on your job classification” means that lower-paid employees pay less; if it’s the opposite and execs get subsidized parking, that’s worth objecting to.

3. Can I opt out of work travel while I’m breast-feeding?

I live across the country from my employer, one of a handful of remote workers. There’s a work trip coming up that I’m expected to attend, which will require me to be away from home for four days. I’m a new mom to a four-month old, and this would be the first time I’ve been away overnight since she was born. I’m also exclusively breast-feeding.

There are a lot of reasons why I don’t want to make this trip while breast-feeding! Including: the ick factor of having to pump in an airport, the fact that I’m likely to deal with some uncomfortable engorgement since the pump isn’t 100% effective, the awkwardness of excusing myself six times per day to go pump, and the challenge of milk storage while traveling and at my destination — to name a few. I won’t be able to pump enough in advance to feed my daughter, so I’ll also need to get my baby used to formula before the trip, which isn’t something I’d planned to do at this stage, though I’m open to it. And this doesn’t even get into the fact that we’ll be staying at a camp with shared rooms and bunk beds — in other words, little if any privacy! Presumably this means I’d be spending several hours a day pumping in a bathroom, and then storing bottles of milk in a shared fridge? All of this sounds awful.

My boss is kind and thoughtful, but while they might be open to my request not to go, I don’t expect them to really get why this would be so hard. (And I’m not keen on explaining the challenges of pumping to them.) I know that people make this work, but honestly, it just sounds so uncomfortable in so many ways. Is it reasonable to ask to be excused from work travel while breast-feeding? How might this request come across?

This is an all-staff event, but it’s not one that I’m involved in planning, nor do I have any particular responsibilities. So my absence wouldn’t create more work for anyone else.

It’s really, really normal to say you can’t travel while you’re breast-feeding. Some people are comfortable doing it; some people aren’t. It’s fine to say travel would be difficult for you while you’re breast-feeding (especially at a camping site, good lord) and you don’t need to get into all the reasons why. People opt out of travel while they’re nursing all the time and you should expect it not to be a big deal.

4. Can I give a gift to one of my employees but not the others?

I am on the leadership team at a remote company. The department I manage has a large number of people, with a few direct reports. One report is one step below me, Roberta, and a few others are technically a few steps below me by title, but I’m their direct manager.

Roberta has a big personal milestone coming up (buying her first home) and I’d like to send a gift. Since we’re remote, this would be mailed and not given in person, so no one else would see this happen. However, I haven’t done this for anyone else before (no one else has bought a home, but have had other milestones, such as having their first kid) and while I don’t have anything against doing this for others, I don’t have any specific plans for always doing this.

Is this an okay thing to do? As one step below me, Roberta is literally a lifesaver for my day to day and I’ve worked with her the longest, which is why it even came to mind to do it.

If you’re going to do it, you should do something equivalent for other employees’ big life events or it will look like favoritism and you risk stirring up resentment. You’re thinking others won’t know since everyone is remote, but all it would take is Roberta mentioning to a coworker how thoughtful it was of you, and then you’ll have other people who report to you will be wondering what it means that you didn’t send a gift for their wedding or the birth of their kid or their own home purchase. When it comes to this kind of life-event recognition, it’s too messy not to treat everyone who reports to you the same way.

5. Improving our company’s work/life balance

I have recently been tasked with being part of a committee addressing work/life balance issues in a very intense field for the company I work for. This company really has a hustle culture, and the top leadership are recognizing that we need to do really support work life/balance for employees. It’s made more complicated by a couple of factors, however. First, we work in mental health in 24-hour crisis treatment, so it’s a very emotionally draining field that absolutely requires we have staff available at the drop of a hat any moment of the day. It’s not an exaggeration to say that people’s lives depend upon this responsibility. In addition, like most social service things, the rates we are paid don’t support high pay or tons of benefits for our employees. I think we do a pretty good job given the resources we have to work with, but it’s not going to be as easy as just giving people more PTO or flexing their hours or allowing them to work from home. Those kinds of things aren’t an option in this kind of work.

Any tips for supporting work/life balance in this kind of field, when the obvious things are made much more difficult by the nature of the work we do?

I’m happy to throw this out to readers for suggestions, but the stuff that really makes a difference comes down to money — because it’s about more staffing, better pay, and more time off. Those are things that have to come from the top and aren’t within your control as a committee (although you can make recommendations about them). You can do other things around the edges — have the company bring in food, relax the dress code (although in that field it’s likely already pretty relaxed), look for policies that make people’s lives harder and suggest ways to change them … but ultimately making a truly significant difference will be about money (and I know that’s tough in health care; this letter was enlightening).

my coworkers want me to turn down my raise

A reader writes:

I work for a company with about 30 employees. We used to have five people in owner/management roles and things ran pretty well, but four left in the last year mostly due to the difficult personality of the remaining manager, Mo. Mo became the sole owner but did not want to pick up the extra management tasks, so decided to distribute these to existing employees without any change to our pay.

I only work two days per week and stay at home with my kids the rest of the time, but the draft plan for who would pick up what work would have required about eight hours of work spread across the other three workdays. I am unwilling and unable to afford three days of childcare for three children to do unpaid work, and the work is also not something I want to do or would be good at (for example, I was assigned accounting and payroll tasks but I have diagnosed dyscalculia).

Mo made it clear that “volunteering” was a requirement of ongoing employment with the company. I reached out to my colleagues to communicate my concerns about the proposed changes and ask whether anyone would be willing to join me in raising these issues with Mo and advocating for ourselves. About half told me they were concerned too but would “see how it plays out,” while the other half did not respond.

I’m usually pretty passive, but I know that I bring more than my share of income into the business and that it would not be hard to go and work for myself if I were fired. So I raised my concerns with Mo and negotiated for only four extra hours of work, all on one workday, with a 50% raise.

The final list of task allocations was recently released to staff. It was very clear that I had a small number of easy tasks while others had several, time-intensive tasks. Apparently, a few people asked Mo for a raise at this point, but were told that one employee had “taken” all the money allocated for raises. People put two and two together and figured out it was me, and that information spread quickly through the company. Yesterday I arrived at my desk to find a letter, signed by almost all the other employees, asking that I volunteer for more tasks and decline the full raise so the money can be distributed more equitably. These people did not help me when I asked for their support, and I risked my employment in talking to our manager to get the rewards I got, so I feel resentful that they want me to sacrifice to help them now. However, I also think that taking on more tasks and less money is the Right Thing To Do, in that it would be fairer. But then if I had to take on many more tasks, I would rather just resign. But if I ignore their requests, I’d imagine the workplace is going to become a pretty unpleasant place for me to work.

Do you think I’m right to be resentful or should I make things fairer? Do I respond to this letter? Will I be able to keep working here if I ignore their requests? Is there any advantage to letting my manager know what’s happening?

Wow, yes, you are right to be resentful. It’s not in any way reasonable for your coworkers to ask you to turn down a raise or take on more work on days you are not paid to do work just because they declined to join you in advocating for themselves when you initially proposed it.

To be clear, your coworkers are getting screwed and they have a right to be upset — but they’re getting screwed by Mo/the business, not by you, and you’re not obligated to sacrifice your pay or your free time to make up for the business’s deficiencies.

(Also, for what it’s worth, unless the business has a had a significant decline in revenue in the last year, I’d be questioning whether there really isn’t enough money to pay them what their work is worth, given that four senior managers are no longer on the payroll.)

So, you are right on the principle of it.

Whether that will matter to your coworkers and how pleasant it’s going to be for you to keep working there are different questions. But what about helping your coworkers advocate for themselves? If you tell them that this is the only way you could keep the job and you’re not able to work additional days or take on more hours without being paid for them, but that you want to help them advocate for themselves as well — and then you really do that (which could be anything from telling them what you found effective with Mo, to helping them craft their case, to lending your voice to theirs when they talk to Mo, to making sure they know the National Labor Relations Act protects employees’ right to organize for better wages and discuss working conditions) … well, it might or might not change how they feel. But it’ll demonstrate that you’re on their side and should make it clearer that their beef should be with Mo, not with you.

Then give it some time to play out. You’re in a good position since you’re confident it wouldn’t be hard for you to leave and work for yourself. That means you can afford both to help your colleagues advocate for themselves and to leave if you ultimately conclude it’s not a great place for you to work anymore.

But don’t back down on your pay or your hours. You negotiated the terms under which you’re willing to do the work, and you shouldn’t compromise on that.

Read an update to this letter

my employee disappeared with our data and won’t answer any messages

A reader writes:

My team employs several part-time remote employees who conduct field research and submit data summaries back to us so that we can report out to our clients. Recently one of them has fallen out of communication before finishing his work — he completed the required field visits but has not turned in the required data. He is now over a month past due and in the last couple weeks has stopped responding to us via any communication method. We are running out of time and if he does not get us the data, we will have to redo the work on an extremely tight timeline. This will look bad to our clients, who will know something went very wrong and who will consider having to redo the visits a burden.

We have tried every type of outreach I can think of, offered additional assistance and empathy, and said that if he can just hand over the raw data we’d be happy to pay him for the time he took to conduct the visits and finish up the rest of the work for him. We’re getting no response back to any of this and don’t know if he’s just avoiding us or having some kind of crisis. Would it be crossing a line to reach out to other members of the field team who he may have a relationship with? Do we have any recourse here, or do we just have to eat the lost time and money and redo the work?

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

Other questions I’m answering there today include:

  • My coworker pounds on the door while I’m in the bathroom
  • Parking space shuffles are taking up too much time

my 2 dating employees are cuddling in staff meetings

A reader writes:

I’m a youngish retail manager and I have two staff members about my age who are in a relationship. I worked with one at a prior location, and then she just transferred to my new location to work with her partner. (This decision was above my level.) It’s only been a few weeks but they are kissing at work (light pecks but multiple per day), cuddling during staff meetings, and generally acting as if they are a unit, not two different people (e.g., one person trying to call out for both of them).

Two complicating factors: they are the only couple in the store so there is really not a precedent, and they are also both trans so I want to circumvent any appearance that setting PDA expectations is about that, but it will inevitably feel personal since they are the only two people who need a PDA policy. The company has no written policy for people at the same level and is too large for us to just make one. What’s the best way to make it clear it’s about the professionalism of kissing/cuddling at work/speaking for your partner, not because of their gender identity? (They are not the only trans staff members by a long shot, just the only staff members in a relationship with someone at the store.) Also, for additional context, I met my partner at our job years ago and so have a pretty good idea of how very feasible it is to keep things professional in this particular context/company!

They’re cuddling in staff meetings?!

You definitely need to shut that down.

You don’t need a written policy to point to. There’s a ton of unprofessional behavior that written policies would never be able to anticipate but which you as a manager still have both the obligation and the authority to shut down. (In fact, I’d argue a written policy could even be an odd thing to have for something like this! It’s unlikely to come up a lot because most people will use better sense, and if it does, you can just deal with it directly.)

Meet with them individually — not as a unit, because you want to reinforce that when they’re at work, they’re not a unit — and say something like this: “I’m very happy for you and (partner’s name). I wanted to talk with you about managing the relationship at work. A few times one of you has called out for both of you, and I want to be clearer that even though you’re a unit socially, at work you’re two separate employees, not a unit. So each of you needs to call out for yourself — other than in an emergency situation, of course, where one of you genuinely can’t. We also don’t allow PDA at work — no kissing, cuddling, hand-holding, or other coupley behavior. It can make other people uncomfortable and is distracting, and we need your relationship to be a professional one while you’re at work. This isn’t specific to you and (partner); it applies to all employees here.”

That language should make clear that you’re not singling them out because they’re trans; it’s about professional behavior across the board. You’re emphasizing that these expectations apply to everyone (and even though they’re currently the only couple, future couples will be held to these expectations too). If they challenge you on that, it makes sense to loop in HR at that point — the way HR should always be looped in for liability reasons when someone is concerned about bias — but this is a reasonable approach to start with and has a good chance of resolving things.

Edited to add:

In the comments, some people are questioning why it’s relevant that the two employees are trans. It’s relevant because it’s really common for gender-non-conforming people to face more objections, and even violence, when they publicly show affection to a partner than gender-conforming people would. So the letter-writer wants to ensure that when she addresses this, it’s clear that they’re not being singled out because they’re trans.

can my employer fire me if I move to a different state, should I take a job working for my husband, and more

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

1. Can my remote employer fire me if I move to a different state?

I’m a remote worker for an all-remote national nonprofit organization. My partner applied for a job in a different state, one we’ve wanted to relocate to for a while. The employer offered the job to someone else but they were so impressed with my partner they invited him to propose a whole new program he could run. They have a solid lead on funding it, but I’m not holding my breath. It would be a good career move for my partner but it wouldn’t replace my full-time income.

So we won’t be moving in the next couple of months but might be in the next year. But when I spoke to my HR director, she said if we move there I have to apply to the board of directors to see if it’s in the organization’s best interest to expand their employment certification to the new state. I would have looked into this earlier but I was under the impression that my organization was already certified to hire nationwide. So now I’m even more stressed about the prospect of the move–what are the chances my employer would actually fire me rather than get certified in the new state? Would I get unemployment if this happens or would my move be considered a resignation?

It depends on how motivated they are to keep you. Setting themselves up to have an employee in a new state can be expensive. They’ll also have to ensure they’re following the new state’s employment laws, which can be a significant difference depending on which states are involved, and can affect how they handle vacation accrual, paychecks, overtime eligibility, time tracking, and more.

They might be willing to do it if you’re highly valued or if they think they might want other employees there in the future. But if they don’t, don’t take it personally, like as a sign that they don’t value you. Again, it’s expensive! And if they’re just doing it for you, it could be the equivalent of adding tens of thousands of dollars to your salary over time.

If they don’t let you work from the new state and you move anyway, they would indeed almost certainly fire you — but it would typically be considered a resignation for the purpose of unemployment (i.e., you wouldn’t get benefits since you chose to move).

Related:
my boss won’t let me move to another state — but I’m remote

2. Should I take a job working for my husband?

I’m struggling to decide if I should accept a new job offer. I enjoy my job, but my company doesn’t offer me benefits. Recently, a few employees have quit/been laid off and I am the only employee still on payroll aside from the bosses (it is a small company). So I am left to do everything. I have yet to get a raise along with these new responsibilities.

I was approached by my husband’s company to come work for them. They offered me $1/hour more than I am making now. They offer company benefits, bonuses, free clothing, etc. The kicker is having to work for my husband, who is the office manager. What do you think I should do?

Don’t accept a job working for your husband. An extra dollar an hour isn’t worth the risk to your relationship, your professional reputation (from people who resent your extra access to him, assume you get special privileges because you’re married to the boss, or otherwise see you differently because of the relationship), the burden of both of you bringing work home with you (you’ll now have a coworker you can’t escape), the weirdness of having your spouse charged with assessing your work and professional value, the power dynamic it will inject into your marriage, and the risk that you could both lose your jobs at once if the company has financial issues.

But your choices aren’t between your current job and the job working for your husband. Look for a third option!

3. I do my coworker’s work while he plays video games

I work in a group that has a shared email for people to place orders, ask questions, etc. My colleague was assigned by a previous supervisor to monitor and deal with these emails and I handle them on days he is off. We now have a new supervisor who is in a different building and does not check to see if the emails are being addressed.

I usually let the messages sit for as long as is prudent and then answer them. My colleague plays video games and watches YouTube for about seven hours of his day, so I know he has time to do them. How do I point out to my colleague that group emails need to be done? I don’t want to “tell” on him to the supervisor and I am not his boss.

If the system is that your coworker is supposed to handle all the emails except on days he’s off, you should stop doing them entirely on days when he’s there! But because this is a change to what you’ve been doing, you should mention it to him — as in, “I’ve been filling in for you with the shared email when I see messages have been sitting there, but my understanding is that I’m only supposed to answer those on days when you’re off. So going forward, I’m going to stop answering them on days you’re here, and you should take them over again. I’ll let (new manager) know that’s the plan as well.”

And then do let your boss know: “(Old manager) assigned Cedric to manage the X email account when he’s here and asked me to do them when he’s out. I’ve somehow fallen into the habit of answering emails there more frequently and realized it’s interfering with my other work, so I reminded Cedric those fall to him on days when he’s here and I wanted to loop you in on that too.” The point of doing this is so that if you stop answering the emails and Cedric doesn’t step up, you’re not blamed for it.

That’s not “telling on” Cedric (although frankly you’d be on solid ground if it were since you’re having to pick up his work because he’s playing video games all day). But if you want to try a step that doesn’t involve your manager first, then just tell Cedric, “Hey, I’ve been covering for you on the shared email account but can’t anymore. You should take over answering messages there again.”

4. I think my intern is a scam artist on the side

This morning, one of my reports showed me a Facebook message that appeared to come from one of my student interns. The message is clearly one that is an attempt to initiate a “relationship” in order to bilk money from a victim.

The name from the FB message is the full name of the intern, who uses an abbreviated version of the name as an intern.

We work for a government agency that has made a number of headlines for the wrong reasons, and if the allegations are true, then I suspect this would lead to another one.

I plan to reach out to the internship coordinator to see what can be done, if anything. The intern does good work and contributes, but I am wary of the blowback on myself as a manager — my unit in particular is already under a microscope, and this would only add fuel to the fire.

Well, wait! You’re jumping to conclusions without any investigation. Certainly if your intern is in fact an internet scammer, feel free to cut ties with him — but lots of people’s Facebook accounts get hacked and then are used for this kind of thing. Or it could be someone with the same name, or someone who “borrowed” his photo and name, or all sorts of other possibilities. If anything, it’s probably more likely to be one of these explanations than that your intern is openly trying to run scams on fellow employees (under his own name, no less).

Talk to your intern before you assume anything.

5. How to get to know a colleague who does similar work when they don’t know I exist

I am a solo designer working in a huge corporate company with a manager who knows nothing about design or what I do. I miss having a design informed manager and lately I noticed my company has an internal design team run by a creative director, just in a completely different part of the company. I would love to meet this director and get to know them a bit just in case an opening comes up on their team. How do I make myself known and set up a conversation without it being awkward? We will never run into each other otherwise and I not sure what to say to start a conversation.

It makes a ton of sense to suggest meeting since you’re doing such similar work! Message them and say something like, “Because I do (describe the work you do) for the X team, I wanted to introduce myself. Given the overlaps in our work, I’d love to grab coffee sometime.” You could add, “I’d really like to know more of the company’s designers.”

our employee retired … but now she won’t leave

A reader writes:

Our employee, “Fiona,” decided to semi-retire after 20 years of working with us. She asked to reduce her hours and work mostly from home, which was approved. Since the start of her official semi-retirement date, however, she still comes to work almost full-time. Fiona hasn’t asked to go back to her full-time salary and would likely decline even if this was offered. She said she hates being at home and prefers to come into the office. I think she’s working at a slow pace and tending to non-urgent tasks.

The issue is that we’ve hired Sally – with Fiona’s blessing – to replace her. While Sally hasn’t said anything, I would feel weird about taking over a role of someone who’s supposed to go on semi retirement but is still coming to work every day. Is this situation potentially problematic or should we leave Fiona to do what she wants?

Yeah, it’s definitely a problem!

First and foremost: potential legal issues. If Fiona’s work responsibilities or pay mean that she’s non-exempt, you’re required to pay her for all hours she works, whether you asked her to work those hours or not, plus overtime if she ever works more than 40 hours in a week. And even if Fiona’s pre-retirement job qualified as exempt, keep in mind that her new, reduced salary might put her below the salary threshold for exemption. (If she’s earning less than $35,568/year, she’s non-exempt, no matter what her job duties are. Interestingly, the law doesn’t prorate that for part-time employees.) You’d also need to make sure she’s earning at least minimum wage when you divide her current pay by the hours she’s actually working, not the hours she’s been assigned. And you might be legally required to offer her health care and other benefits, depending on how many hours a week she’s showing up.

But there’s also Sally! Most people in Sally’s shoes would be uneasy at being hired to replace someone if that person then continues to stick around and not leave. Sally might be wondering whether you’re going to end up deciding you don’t need her after all. She might worry she can’t take full ownership over her work with Fiona hanging around. Are their responsibilities clearly divided, and is Fiona respecting that division or blurring the lines? Is Sally comfortable changing processes or ways of doing things with Fiona hovering?

For a glimpse into how Sally might be feeling, see these letters from people in similar shoes:

the person who used to do my job won’t go away

the guy who did my job before me won’t go away

I was hired to run a department — but the old boss is still there, 10 months later

our CEO won’t let go of a retired employee

And who is managing Fiona now? Does that person have a clear idea of everything she’s working on? (It sounds like maybe not.) They need to!

It sounds like Fiona is having a hard time adjusting to semi-retirement. But she can’t really announce she’s only working X hours a week, let you make plans to replace her, and then continue showing up nearly full-time. At a minimum you can’t let her work off the clock if she’s non-exempt … but you also really need to look at how this is all affecting Sally.

As a next step, sit down with Fiona and name what’s happening: “We’d planned for you to be working X hours a week, and since we’ve hired Sally to replace you, it’s important that we give her space to do the job we hired her for. We’re thrilled to have you for the X hours a week we agreed on, but we need to stick to that to keep the work divisions clear for everyone, and to ensure the company is meeting our legal obligations on pay and benefits.”

Read an update to this letter

a pain-free guide to writing a resume

No offense, but your résumé is probably a mess. It’s not that you aren’t skilled or accomplished, but most people’s résumés are middling at best. It’s understandable — unless you work in HR, you probably haven’t devoted much time to reading or crafting them, and most of us feel weird about trying to sell ourselves.

Fortunately for you, I’ve read thousands of résumés, and I can tell you what makes a small handful of them stand out so that you can use those same strategies yourself. I can’t promise it will be a fun process, but you’ll come out of it with a résumé that will boost your chances of getting interviewed and hired.

1. Start by listing all the jobs you’ve held — or at least the ones that make you a stronger candidate.

This is the easy part: Get the basic facts down on paper. Write down each job you’ve held, starting with the current or most recent and working backward. Note the name of the employer, the title(s) you held, and the dates you worked there (just the starting and ending years — add months if it was a shorter stint). This will be the framework for your Experience section.

Keep in mind that your résumé is a marketing document, designed to highlight the ways you fit the job you’re applying for. It doesn’t need to be an exhaustive accounting of every role you’ve ever held. So you don’t need to include the job where you only stayed three months, or a part-time gig outside your field, or one you were fired from and would rather not discuss. You might decide that it makes sense to add some of these anyway so you don’t have big gaps in your work history, but you can select what to include based on what strengthens your résumé overall. You’re not required to deliver a comprehensive list of everything you’ve ever done in life.

2. Now, create a bullet-point list of what you accomplished at each job — focusing on achievements, not responsibilities.

This is where the real action is on any résumé, and it’s what separates great résumés from mediocre ones: What did you actually accomplish at each job you listed? This is important: You should not just regurgitate your job description here. We’re looking for what results you achieved.

Most people’s résumés don’t do this. Most people list things like “managed a website” or “coordinated events” or other activities they were assigned to do. But that tells the person reading your résumé very little. It tells them you held a job with certain responsibilities, yes, but it doesn’t say anything about how good you were at that job, when the latter is the thing they want to know (and the thing that will give you an edge over your competition and help you land an interview). Instead, your résumé should focus on what you achieved in doing your work. For example:

• Revamped help-desk ticket system, reducing average response time by 25 percent

• In first three months, cleared out previous nine-month backlog of cases
If your job doesn’t have easily quantifiable measures like that, that’s okay! Your accomplishments can be qualitative as well. Here are some examples:

• Acted as a gatekeeper for a busy 15-person department, ensuring all callers felt warmly welcomed and received prompt, accurate answers to queries

• Became go-to staff member for relaying complicated technical information to high-profile clients, earning regular compliments for making complex transactions easy to understand

Those things say more than just what your job description was. They give the reader a sense that you’re good at that job.

If you’re having trouble thinking of your job in terms of accomplishments, imagine a really terrible temp filling in for you — or even imagine if you were checked out at work and not trying to do well. What would go differently? What would fall to pieces? The gap between that scenario and your (hopefully excellent) performance is what you want to capture on your résumé.

3. Add a section for your education.

For most people, the Education section will be just a line or two, listing where you went to college and what degree you obtained. If you’re a recent graduate, include your graduation year; otherwise, it’s fine to leave it off (it’s very common for people to exclude it in order to avoid age discrimination).

Generally your Education section should come after your Work section, since for most people, employers will be most interested in your work experience. (You might be an exception to this if your education is your strongest qualification and you have little relevant work experience. For example, if you’re applying to jobs in academia after receiving your master’s or Ph.D.)

4. Consider adding a Profile section at the top.

Profile sections are a totally optional trend in modern résumé writing. It’s just a short blurb at the top of your résumé — two to three sentences or bullet points — summing up who you are as a candidate and what differentiates you from other people with similar professional backgrounds. The idea is to provide an overall framing for your candidacy.

A good trick to writing one: Try thinking about what you’d want a contact to say if they had 20 seconds to sum you up to someone who was hiring for the work you do.

Again, though, this is optional. You can skip it if you want — and you should skip it if everything you come up with sounds generic. But if you can come up with language that captures how, say, a former boss who adored you might describe your work, without giving yourself over to the utterly subjective, it’s worth including.

5. You probably don’t need a Skills section — but maybe you do.

In most fields, you don’t need a Skills section; your skills should be obvious from the accomplishments you list in your Experience section. That said, highly technical fields like I.T. are an exception.

If you do include a Skills section, limit it to hard skills, like software programs and foreign languages you’re fluent in. Don’t list subjective self-assessments like “strong written communication skills” or “visionary leader” or “works well independently and in groups.” People’s self-assessments are so often inaccurate that these won’t carry any weight with employers and just take up space that would be better spent on more compelling material.

6. Other things you may or may not need.

You might include a Volunteer Work or Community Involvement section if you’ve done relevant or notable volunteer work. But it’s not necessary to include; if you don’t have anything worth putting there, you can skip it.

Some people include a Hobbies section. Don’t feel obligated to. Certain hiring managers find those interesting and others don’t even read them. I don’t recommend using the limited space on your résumé for them; there’s usually stronger content to feature. But some people insist they’ve gotten interviews because an interviewer was intrigued by their mention of bee-keeping or shared their love of puppetry.

If you’re a recent grad, you could also include any particularly impressive extracurricular campus activities, but you don’t need to — and if you do, they should come off within a few years of graduating, when you’ll hopefully have more work-related achievements to highlight instead.

7. Limit yourself to a page or two.

Most hiring managers spend about 20 seconds scanning a résumé initially — if that — which means you need to be concise.

The general rule for résumé length is that you’re limited to one page when you’re still a student or a recent grad, but you can go up to two pages after you’ve been out of school for a while. Exceed two pages at your own peril — many hiring managers roll their eyes at long résumés, and you’ll come across as someone who can’t distill information down to what’s most important. Plus, the more you cram in, the less likely a cursory glance is to fall on the items you most want them to see.

8. With design, less is more.

If you’re tempted to get creative with your résumé design — perhaps thinking that it’ll help you stand out from the crowd — resist the impulse. Hiring managers want to get the info they’re looking for on your résumé as quickly as possible, which means a concise, easily skimmed list of what you’ve accomplished, organized reverse-chronologically … in other words, the traditional résumé format.

Stand out from the crowd based on your content — compelling descriptions that show you’re great at what you do — not your majestic purple header or other design innovations.

Originally published at New York Magazine.