Ask a Manager

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

1. My interviewer scolded me for what I was wearing

I am looking to relocate to a different city in my home state, and a couple of interviews I did with one company were video due to my not being able to do an in-person interview.

I was extremely successful in my first interview with them. A second interview was arranged last minute, three hours before the end of my work day. What proceeded to transpire was a very awkward interview.

After work, I had five minutes to get ready and prepare for my interview. I quickly throw on a dress shirt and tie because I want to be professional, and I jump on Microsoft Teams. As soon as my picture appears and I see the interview panel, the original interviewer from the first interview tells me, “You are wearing the same shirt as last time.” (It’s a different shirt but she basically scolds me. I also didn’t think she would remember what I was wearing a week ago; she probably sees tons of people every day.) Next she tells me to “take your tie off because it doesn’t fit with the company culture.” She didn’t tell me to take it off in the first interview. Is she just posturing for her boss? Safe to say that being critiqued right away killed my whole vibe during the interview.

But the end is where it got really weird for me. One of the interviewers, the president of this branch, asks, “Are you nervous, because you seem like it?” I said maybe a little bit, but unfortunately I didn’t have a ton of time to prepare to calm my nerves. Then he asks the original interviewer if I was nervous during the first interview and she says no. Then they go on a two-minute conversation in front of me about how I am nervous now but wasn’t before. I wasn’t any more nervous during this interview than my first. And I wasn’t so nervous that I was stuttering or not answering questions well. I was just blushing.

I am a recent college graduate with little interview experience for skilled jobs and this is an entry-level position, so I think most people they would be interviewing would be nervous. Was this my fault? Was the president just getting a nice little boost for himself making me feel bad about being nervous? Was this a stress test interview? Were they not very good interviewers?

They definitely weren’t good interviewers, but it sounds like much more than that. Scolding you for wearing the same shirt (whether or not you actually were) and telling you to take off your tie are both incredibly bizarre and rude. The president asking if you were nervous isn’t necessarily a big faux pas on its own, but the two of them having a sidebar right in front of you about your level of nervousness is rude and obnoxious.

These people both sound like jerks. It’s very unlikely this was some sort of deliberate stress test (those are really rare). They’re just asses. It’s a good reminder that interviews are two-way streets; you should be assessing your interviewers just as they’re assessing you, and if they don’t seem like people you’d want to work with, that’s valuable info that the process is designed to draw out (on both sides). So in that regard, the process worked.

2. Is return-to-office anti-feminist?

Like many, my company recently announced it will soon require employees to return to the office three times a week, after just about three years of fully remote work (during which, I might add, productivity improved). It remains to be seen what will happen, as many of us were hired during this period of remote work and don’t live within reasonable commuting distance of the office — but that isn’t why I’m writing.

The other day a colleague said to me in passing that they believe requiring employees back to the office hurts women the most. That it is anti-feminist. Why? Because women are generally the “default parent,” even if both partners work full-time. When a kid is sick or has to be picked up early from school or has a doctor’s appointment, the mother is usually the one who stays home and has to call out of work, or maybe it becomes clear that she cannot work full-time at all — just a few of the many, many examples. As someone who had their first child during the pandemic, I can’t help but agree. Do you see it this way? And, if so, is there anything we can be doing to further emphasize how remote work benefits everyone, but women especially?

I don’t know if I’d agree that bringing people back to the office is anti-feminist, but it’s certainly true in broad terms that it hurts women more than men because women do indeed generally get stuck with far more of the sorts of responsibilities you described. (It’s why far more women than men dropped out of the workforce in the first two years of the pandemic.) The solution to that is multi-pronged: more flexibility from employers, yes, but also better child care options, more societal support for parents, and men picking up an equal share of caretaking. Without the last three — and definitely without the last one — the problem will remain.

I do think that when you’re talking about remote work benefiting women, you have to be careful to be clear that you’re not suggesting companies embrace remote workers caring for young kids at home as a substitute for full-time child care — because it’s impossible to do both well at the same time. But when you’re talking about older kids, or the occasional unplanned or temporary circumstance like a school closure or a sick child, it’s absolutely true that remote work benefits anyone with caregiving responsibilities — and that means disproportionately women.

3. Can I ask to make my job part-time so I can attend graduate school?

I am unsure if I can ask if my current full-time position could be made into a part-time role so I could go to grad school full-time, and how I should broach the subject.

I work as an in-house illustrator for a 150-person company, and I really love my job (it’s honestly top 10% of my specific field in terms of easy, decently paid, and fulfilling) and I know I’m highly valued by my team and supervisor. But I REALLY want to go back to school, and my dream job would be going into academia as a career instead of trying to fit in research on the side (and without the clout of an MFA or being a freelancer). I am full-time and salaried with benefits, but my dream graduate program is full-time only. I am also the only dedicated illustrator in the company that needs new graphics made on a daily basis, and I know if I went part time they would have to either find a full-time person or at least one other part-timer (or worse, the workload would be put onto people who had been really relieved I took the task off their hands). I wouldn’t be going back this year, or even necessarily the next, but how far ahead should I bring it up? Is this a huge faux pas?

It’s a really big ask. If your job could become part-time without someone else needing to be hired, that would be one thing. But you’d be asking them to hire and manage a whole additional person, and they’d be doing that to accommodate you in attending a program that would presumably result in you leaving them at the end of it. If they deeply love you — not just “you do a good job and we like you” but more like “never leave us, you are phenomenal, and we don’t know what we’d do without you” — it’s possible they’d consider it. But even then, it’s a really big ask, and the chances of them agreeing are pretty low.

If you’re going to give it a shot anyway, I wouldn’t bring it up until you have a concrete plan in place (have been accepted to a program and know exactly when you’ll be starting) … and then you’ve got to factor in all the normal stuff about whether it’s safe to give more than a standard two weeks’ notice. If you’re hoping to raise it well before then because their answer will affect whether you pursue the program at all, that’s a lot trickier. In theory you could raise it to your boss earlier as a hypothetical (“just something I’m thinking about at this stage / no concrete plans / wondering whether you’d ever be open to this”) but an answer given to a hypothetical in 2023 won’t necessarily match up with what they decide when it’s really happening in 2024. So it’s tough. Your safest route is to assume they won’t approve it, plan accordingly, and have it be a pleasant surprise if they do.

4. Working when the heat is out

Something happened where my sister works, and I would like your input. My sister works for a credit union, and she works in the loan department located in the basement area of the central branch/administrative office building. Last Wednesday, there was a very bad ice storm and that building lost power. They had a generator, but although it did power computers and at least half the lights, there was extremely limited heat. Where my sister was in the basement, it was tolerable (about 68 degrees). But on the main floor in the actual branch, it averaged between 55-60 degrees. Employees wore their winter coats and were miserable. Space heaters were not allowed since they draw a ton of power and could have destroyed the generator. This mess started last Wednesday morning and power was restored Tuesday at 6:15 pm.

Is making your employees work in these conditions reasonable? (I would like to note that they could have closed the branch and sent the employees to other branches.)

No. OSHA recommends (but doesn’t require) temperatures of 68-76 degrees. 55-60 is really cold.

5. My new job requires me to take an oath of allegiance

I am a PhD student graduating this summer, and I have just signed on to a fantastic job that I am really excited about. I’m moving from the east coast to California, where I will work for the University of California with my salary paid by a federal grant.

I received my onboarding paperwork today, and along with all the normal stuff, it included an “Oath of Allegiance.” I am required to sign it in front of a witness who is “legally authorized to administer oaths.” Here’s the full text:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.”

Am I right in thinking this is insane? On the one hand, it doesn’t bother me that much because I can’t see it ever coming into play. I definitely don’t have the type of job where I’m likely to encounter enemies, foreign and domestic, seeking harm to the constitutions of my state or country (and if they do I’m peacing out, thanks). But I feel weird about signing something this intense, and I don’t really want to. Can they legally require this as a condition of employment?

Yep, they can require it. In fact, it looks like all California state employees are required to take that oath, and all federal employees have one too.

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

1. Should I tell my coworker about our colleague’s criminal record?

My workplace includes a cafe with some volunteer workers assisting the paid staff. Some time ago, we took on a volunteer who is an ex-convict, we’ll call him Cassidy. I am not a manager here, but I am all for people getting second chances and agree that reintegration into society is an essential part of preventing people from finding themselves trapped in a life of crime. Some of our service users are recovering addicts, ex-convicts, or otherwise isolated from “mainstream society.” Cassidy, though, is not allowed around children. He only works here one day a week but occasionally comes in as a customer or service user on other days. We rarely have children come here but on the rare occasions that they do, Cassidy is required to leave.

One of our staff, Veronica, started working here and has developed a good banter with staff and volunteers, including Cassidy, which occasionally could be mistaken for flirtatious although all the relationships are purely professional. I heard a customer joke that the two make a cute couple, I corrected her that they just work together but it felt awkward. The real problem though is that I don’t think Veronica is aware of Cassidy’s criminal conviction. She has a young child, although he doesn’t come to her work. I feel that Veronica deserves to know but it’s a confidential matter. It’s unlikely to become truly relevant but it feels uncomfortable. I’m well aware that I’m not completely able to unbias myself on the matter as I am a survivor of childhood abuse. There’s also the question of what could happen if Veronica discovers this on her own (assuming I’m correct that she doesn’t know) and gets upset that her employer didn’t tell her.

As a general rule, you shouldn’t gossip to coworkers about a colleague’s criminal record … but there’s a difference between gossiping and relaying information to keep someone safe, especially in a situation where the stakes are so high. (Obviously this principle can be abused; I can imagine it being misused when there’s no real safety concern — like someone getting faux-concerned about a coworker with a conviction for, say, shoplifting. But that’s not the case when you’re talking about protecting a young child from someone who has been legally determined to be a danger to children.)

This would be more complicated if you were in a management position because there are laws about how the information obtained in a background check can be used by employers. But that’s not your situation. Ultimately, I don’t think there’s One Clear Answer here; different people will come down on different sides of it. Personally, I’d err on the side of protecting a child and have a discreet conversation with Veronica so she has the info she needs to keep her son safe.

Read an update to this letter. 

2. I deeply regret joining my company’s leadership program

I’ve been performing well enough in my job that I was nominated into a year-long leadership program where teams of individual contributors work on company problems and present to a board of execs and high-level managers at the end. I was told it would be a few hours commitment a week and it would be challenging but rewarding.

So far, it has been infuriating and demoralizing. The team has no cohesion. It calls meetings to talk about our interpersonal issues or to change the focus of the topic, but no one has produced any tangible deliverables related to what is supposed to be the task at hand. People agree to perform tasks and then … just don’t. No one feels like the program has taught us how to gather the information needed to analyze the issue at hand or advise on changes. I am constantly being pinged by one person or another complaining about the process, someone else on the team, or just to shoot the breeze. I feel talked down to by my teammates because I am newer to the company, and when I express that it leads to conversations that drag on for days but still no project work gets done. This is in addition to trainings we are required to complete for the program, monthly all-hands for the program, and twice-weekly meetings to discuss the findings from everyone’s calls and surveys — which have had to be repeated thrice as we keep moving the proverbial cheese. I hate logging on in the morning, and I’m angry that this “enrichment” activity is more stressful than my actual job, which I enjoy and is with a group of people and leader I adore. I feel like I am working on a doomed college group project as opposed to developing knowledge or tangible leadership skills, especially since I already have many years of leadership experience in an adjacent field.

I am at my wit’s end but terrified that if I don’t see this through, I will forever negatively impact my career with this company. I have no confidence my group will produce anything we can even present, and am mortified by the prospect of the final presentation being unprofessional and embarrassing. I have several more months of this and I am nauseous thinking about it. My mental health is a priority for me, and I find myself ruminating about work, crying in the middle of the day, and fantasizing about taking time off, none of which I did prior to this. Can I quit without ruining my career? Am I catastrophizing? Do I need to just suck it up? I don’t know the best way forward to start enjoying work again.

You can almost certainly quit without ruining your career, and it sounds like you should. If this were just aggravating, it might be worth sticking it out for the remaining few months, but it’s affecting your mental health. You should not stick with something that’s making you cry and dread going to work.

Why not talk to your boss about it, especially since it sounds like you have a good relationship with her? You might find out that dropping out wouldn’t be a big deal at all. You could say something like this: “I’m finding that the X program is really different than what I’d thought it would be. We’re constantly changing our goals, people don’t follow through on the work we agree on, and there’s a ton of complaining. I’ve tried hard to find value in it and move the group in a different direction, but at this point it’s been such a difficult and stressful experience that it’s impacting my morale and my quality of life at work. I’ve given this a lot of thought and I’d like to leave the program so I can just focus on my job — which I love — but I wanted to talk to you about any ramifications to doing that.”

Read an update to this letter. 

3. How do I figure out which coworkers to invite to my wedding?

I am engaged and my wedding date is about a year out. My future husband and I work for the same small company in a pretty rural area. Everyone we work with and my bosses know about our relationship and are happy for us.

When we first got engaged, we planned to invite our bosses and our closest work friends only, as our venue has strict capacity limits. But since our engagement, I have been promoted significantly. I skipped at least two full levels to the point where almost everyone we work with is now my subordinate. I would no longer be inviting peers but employees. How do I navigate this? I don’t want to create any problems or perceptions of favoritism by skipping someone, but I’m not sure we can fit everyone we work with on our guest list. Do I go to extremes and invite all or none? Would my employees even want to attend my wedding or would they just feel obligated to? Gifts opens a whole new can of worms (I would prefer no gifts but I know someone will get us something). Any advice?

Your promotion definitely changes things. I’d say don’t invite subordinates at all — some of them will feel obligated to attend even if they’d rather not, and if you only invite some it will raise concerns about favoritism. It’s far cleaner and easier just not to invite people from work at all. If anyone asks about it, your venue’s capacity limits will be easy to cite.

Related:
the etiquette of weddings and work

4. Pushing back on a client’s request for extra work

I have a client who is incredibly needy and nit-picky. For instance, when we make a product — let’s say teapots — we write on the receipt the size, cost, color, and model of the teapot and send it on its way. But she will often send these receipts back with snippy emails that say things like “we expect correct work from you in the future” and outlining that she requires each receipt to list the number of handles, spouts, lids, cost, type of packing, and who packed it. We don’t typically do this, but the person who is in direct contact with this client has been telling us to just make her happy so she’ll stop calling us. To be clear, the things she wants are not industry standard, and it creates a lot of extra work. I just got done changing the description of 48 teapots because she felt the abbreviated descriptors were “unacceptable.”

Is there a good way to push back against this client? And a good way to present this to the bosses in case she turns to them for her specifications to be met? Am I completely out of line for not just accepting that she’s weird and moving on?

It depends on whether you have the authority to push back on the client or not. If you don’t, this is something you should take your boss — explaining what the client is requesting and how much extra time it would take to do what she wants (and what the impact would be on the rest of your workload, like if it would delay other priorities). Then it would be up to your boss to decide whether to accommodate her or not. If she’s a big enough client, they might decide to. Or they might charge her more for the extra work, or tell her it’s not something you can offer. But whoever makes that decision needs to be someone with explicit authority to decide.

If you do have the authority to handle it yourself and you decide to tell her no, you could simply say, “We’ll always list the size, cost, color, and model on your invoices, but we’re not set up to provide the additional info you’re requesting. That’s not something we’ll be able to provide on future orders.” Of course, if you do that, you’d need to be okay with her potentially pulling her business. Sometimes that’s the right move because a client is more trouble than they’re worth. Other times when you do the math, it makes sense to deal with the aggravation. It really depends on how much your company values her and how disruptive the requests are.

5. Stranger wants me to update them on their job application … I’m not involved in hiring

I received the following message on LinkedIn today (identifying details redacted, lack of capitalization left intact): “Hi (name). I hope you are doing well. I have applied for the Business Intelligence Analyst role at [Company]. I have been referred for the role by Ms. [Name]. It would be great if you could let me know the status of my application. your help would be highly appreciated.”

I am not connected to this person, I am not connected to the person who referred him, I am not a recruiter, nothing in my profile indicates I am a recruiter or work in HR or am hiring for this position,and I don’t have any job postings that I am hiring for. We do have one connection in common, who IS a recruiter for my company.

I am speechless at this request (well, maybe not speechless because I typed out this email). Is this a thing now? Reaching out to random people at a company and asking them for status on a job application? For context, my company employs almost 17,000 people.

It’s a thing, for sure. But it’s not new — there have always been candidates who take this aggressively random approach and contact anyone they can find to try to push their application along, even when there’s no indication the person has anything to do with hiring. You can just ignore the message.

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

1. Hairy legs at work

Recently my work started allowing employees to wear shorts. And within the last few years, I, a 30-something woman, have stopped feeling the need to shave my legs. Which I’m fine with in my everyday life, but still feel reticent about while at work. So, I’ve yet to wear anything that would bare my legs to the office. But it got me wondering if the professional norms for women are changing. We’ve seen a well needed lean towards gender-neutral dress codes. Do you think that would allow for it to be more culturally acceptable for women to have noticeably hairy legs in the office?

Yes, it’s becoming more culturally acceptable, although it’s still in the process of changing rather than something that has fully changed.

There are still plenty of people who are squicked out by female body hair and who will think hairy female legs are unprofessional-looking. There are people who will notice, be a bit surprised, and then move on without thinking much about it again … and there are people who will forever think of you as the woman who doesn’t shave her legs (and dares to bare them). You’ve got to decide if you’re okay with that or not.

The culture of your office matters too. It’s more likely to be A Thing in more conservatives fields or regions, or fields that put a high value on gender-norm-conforming appearances.

2. My office sent me a random TV

I work remotely and have never been into my office. A few weeks after I was hired, and well after I received my regular office equipment, I was also sent a 72-inch TV. There is no reason for me to use this in the course of my work, and I believe it was likely sent in error. I do not know if any of my coworkers also received one, as we never discuss non-work matters.

I have never used this TV, as I have no space for it on my desk (who would?), but I have not sent it back as I am unable to transport it to the post office, given that I travel exclusively by bicycle, and received it at the height of lockdown when I did not feel comfortable meeting someone to take me to mail it back. In fact, I have not mentioned the receipt of the TV to anyone. Currently, it is sitting in its box under my loveseat.

The problem comes now that I am soon to put in my two weeks’ notice. I’m no longer worried about delivering it to be posted, but I am worried that I was perhaps never meant to have it in the first place, and that I may be in some trouble for having held onto it for so long. There is also a remote — but not impossible — chance that it was a sign-on bonus, but honestly, if it were, I would still have no use for it.

How should I tactfully ask about the logistics of its return? My first thought was to request a checklist of items to be sent back, but I’m not certain if that would seem odd. This has been my first office job, so any advice is greatly appreciated.

So … you really should have asked about it when it first arrived! An unexpected 72-inch TV is so odd to receive that it’s likely it was some kind of error. (It’s very unlikely that it was a signing bonus; those are usually money rather than random unannounced TVs.) I’m guessing you didn’t ask about it because it’s your first professional job and it’s really common for people in their first jobs not to speak up in situations where they should … but for future reference, if your office sends you something you’re not expecting and have no idea what to do with, ask them about it!

At this point all you can really do is say to your manager, “I was sent a TV when I first started that I wasn’t ever sure what to do with. Is that something I should return, and if so can you help me make arrangements for a shipping company to pick it up since it’s too large for me to transport on my own?”

3. I feel hurt that I was left out of a coworker’s birthday lunch

Four of us used to work together on the same team (with others who have taken redundancy or gone to other locations). Two of us remain on the team (me and Elaine) with new people. The other two (Alex and Beatrice) have moved into other teams, but we all still work in the same office when not working from home.

The other day when we were all in the office, Elaine, Alex, and Beatrice went out for lunch for Alex’s birthday but didn’t invite me. I feel hurt as I get on well with Elaine and felt I’d gotten on well with the others. It was a private celebration. And someone else on my team who started after Beatrice moved on and just before Alex moved on was also not invited. Although equally qualified, I’m a few grades below in a support role and the organization can be hierarchical informally.

What’s your take on this? And should I be expressing my hurt and how? Normally I’d look at arranging a lunch with them to indicate interest in being involved but feel too hurt.

Don’t tell them you’re hurt; that would indicate they did something blameworthy, when they really didn’t.

Sometimes people are just closer with some coworkers than with others. Maybe they’ve all stayed in closer contact since your team split up. Or maybe it came up more casually than you’re picturing (for example, if Alex mentioned it was his birthday in a message chain where they were already talking, the other two could have said “we should take you out to lunch” without it being a more formal, planned thing). It could be hierarchy too since they’re a few grades above you (hierarchy in theory should have nothing to do with who gets lunch with who, but in practice often does).

4. Who should respond first?

I realized recently that in two situations, I put the onus on someone else to respond and was wondering if there is standard etiquette.

Situation 1: Anne emails Brian with a problem. Brian connects Anne to (and cc:s) Carol.
Situation 2: Carol emails Emily with a problem and Emily responds, copying multiple people (including Frank and Georgia) to try and figure out who can help. Frank says Georgia would have more information.

I am Carol, and in situation 1 I thought Anne should reach out, but when I was in situation 2 I thought Georgia should respond! After laughing at myself for this, I wonder if there is an agreed-upon standard for such things. Should the person with the answer always take the initiative?

Ideally yes, since they’ve been put on notice that someone needs information from them. But they could also be busy and not know if the new request is time-sensitive, so there’s nothing wrong with the person who’s seeking the info to reply first to give more context.

5. Can I choose an alternate work schedule when my employees can’t use it in the same way?

I work for an organization that allows flexible work schedules — most commonly either a 4/10 schedule or a 9/80 schedule, though staff have the ability to create their own as desired. There is one catch: while flexible work schedules are available to all staff, exempt staff can choose any breakdown of hours they want. But non-exempt staff — because of the laws around overtime — have to choose an alternate work schedule that doesn’t put them in excess of 40 hours/week. Notably, this means that they can’t do a 9/80 schedule because it would have them working 36 hours one week and 44 hours the next (because the organization would have to overtime for those extra four hours the second week).

I’m a manager of a team of about 10 folks, at varying levels. Some are exempt and some are non-exempt. Several of them already have flexible work schedules in place, including non-exempt staff (who have chosen schedules that work within the 40 hour/week rule). I want to adopt a flexible work schedule for myself … but my preference is to do a 9/80, which is only available to exempt staff. As a manager, is it okay for me to take advantage of this schedule that isn’t available to all of my team? I know this is how I work best, but I worry that it will feel unfair to my staff who can’t do a 9/80. How do I communicate to them that I support everyone utilizing flexible work schedules to the degree possible (while acknowledging that if they are non-exempt, I can’t change the 40 hour/week restrictions)?

Yes, you can choose that schedule for yourself. People generally understand that exempt and non-exempt jobs are governed by different rules (some of them in non-exempt staff’s favor — like not being expected to work unpaid overtime, which exempt staff often are).

It’s not as if you’d be taking advantage of a perk that’s fundamentally unfair or unsupportable (like if senior management were, I don’t know, allowed to spend the first hour of the day at the gym while everyone else was fined for showing up a minute late). It’s not inherently unfair or offensive that different jobs have different rules, when those rules are rooted in something real like the legal requirements around overtime pay, which in this case would mean that a non-exempt employee working a 9/80 schedule would literally cost the organization more money.

Read an update to this letter.