assigning women extra work to “help” them, calling out when you’re in the ER, and more

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

1. To help women, we assign them extra work and penalize them if they don’t do it

I work for a large organization that tries to be proactive about diversity and inclusion. One if their iniatives seems wrong to me. To provide women with better resume building and networking opportunities, the company has a list of projects that they nominate women to complete. The nomination is more you being told by your manager that you have to do this. The extra work is in addition to your day job and if you fall behind because of it, you will likely be penalized. The company tries to make the work high-visibility by showcasing it at the annual town hall. However, I wonder … why do women have to do this extra work when their male counterparts do not? How does this seem fair?

Wow, no, that is not how this is supposed to work. And legally, it can’t work like that.

It is fine to design a program to try to redress systemic disadvantages by making networking and resume-building opportunities available to women in your company who want them. It is not okay — and crucially, it is not legal — to assign women extra work because they are women. And then to claim that it’s to help them! Agggh. (It’s also not legal to assign work by gender, period.)

The women employees in your organization should be up in arms about this.

2. Did I mess up how I called out when I was in the ER?

A few years ago, I worked in a large division of a large company. Although all my job functions had previously been supervised by one person — Maarva, with whom I got along well — a reshuffle meant that I took on a second supervisor, Kino, for one facet of my job.

About three weeks after Kino’s arrival, I woke up in the middle of the night with horrible abdominal pain. At 6 am, I went to the emergency room and was admitted for what turned out to be a terrible gallbladder attack. Around 8 am (an hour before we were expected to be at work), I called Maarva’s voicemail, told her what was going on, and asked her to please inform Kino that I would be out that day. I did not call Kino as well because (a) I was nervous about my cell phone battery running down, (b) I felt horrible and could barely focus, and (c) I figured that Maarva passing along this information would constitute adequate notice. For what it’s worth, I had no particularly pressing deadlines or projects for that day, for either Maarva or Kino.

Once my attack had subsided and future surgery was tentatively scheduled, I was sent home that night and returned to work — tired but functional — the following day and discovered that Kino was furious with me. He told me that I was never to call out without informing him again and he had written me up over it. Later in the day, the managers had a meeting, and Kino griped about my “lack of respect.” Only then did Maarva realize she’d forgotten to mention my call to Kino, who hadn’t even known I was in the hospital — he just thought I took an average day off and failed to inform him. To Kino’s credit, he apologized to me and attempted to take back the write-up, but our horrible division head refused, because the incident “taught me a lesson” (about gallstones? who knows?).

This incident left a really bad taste in my mouth. I still feel that Kino could have at least spoken to me about the incident and gotten his facts straight before writing me up. The division head’s behavior was about what I would expect from him, but it still seems to me that if a write-up turns out to be based on a faulty premise, it ought to be rescinded. But maybe I’m giving myself too much of a break here? Yeah, I was in agonizing pain in an ER, but Kino didn’t know that. If Kino had written in to you, what course of action would you have suggested for him on the day I was gone? The day after? How much did I mess up?

(Maarva apologized profusely to both Kino and to me, sent flowers while I was in the hospital for my surgery, and served as my reference for my next job. She was a great supervisor aside from her occasional absent-mindedness!)

Of course it left a bad taste in your mouth! You were in the ER dealing with excruciating pain, called in as required, and assumed Maarva would handle it from there — and then got attacked by Kino the moment you returned to work. Even if you had neglected to call in, Kino’s reaction was way over the top! When he couldn’t find you the day you were out, why didn’t he ask Maarva — your primary manager — if she’d heard from you? Or start by asking you what happened once you returned, rather than assuming and launching into a furious tirade and write-up? If it turned out you had in fact just blown off work for no reason and without alerting anyone, he could have dealt with that — but you don’t start by jumping to the worst conclusions about someone and raging at them … and as a manager he should be aware that sometimes when someone is out unexpectedly, it’s because something really bad happened, the sort of thing that would make his reaction incredibly misplaced.

You didn’t mess up at all. You alerted your office you’d be out and asked them to notify others who needed to know. You were fine. Kino sucked.

3. Am I supposed to address all MDs as “Doctor so-and-so”?

I work for an organization where I frequently interact with medical doctors in a professional capacity, for specific projects made up of medical doctors and others. Many of my non-MD colleagues exclusively address these individuals as “Dr. so-and-so” forever and always. For me, as soon as they say they say their first name only (“Hi, I’m Jane”) or sign their first name only in an email — which they usually do immediately — I take that as a sign they are happy to be on a first name basis and use that. They are not my doctor. And, we are working together as equals. Also, these are regular work meetings often in groups so it would be weird to ask them in front of everyone “May I call you Jane?” Last, no one ever calls me “Mrs so-and-so.”

For comparison, at my kids’ schools, everyone addresses me as “Mrs” and I use their titles as is appropriate. In that case, it’s mutual and reciprocal.

Am I wrong here?

Nope, that is in fact the long-time etiquette rule: If someone introduces themselves with only their first name or signs off using it, that’s a signal that you should address them by their first name. That’s what it means!

4. New colleague keeps blaming a coworker for missed deadlines

I work for a large company. My team collaborates with several different teams on various projects. One of these teams has a new structure with a new point of contact. Since the new contact came on board six months ago, we have noticed that the team is often late on deadlines, even those they suggested. The contact person consistently and proactively blames their tardiness on one specific member of their team, calling them out by name and noting what a burden their time out of office has caused, is causing, or will cause. That named team member, whom we have worked with for years and have found to be excellent, has taken a total of about three weeks of PTO, scheduled well in advance, during this time frame. They are not in the meetings where their absence is discussed. (For what it’s worth, we have not seen evidence that this “named” team member is assigned to any of the late work, but rather the suggestion is that her absence causes stress on the rest of the team which in turn affects their work.)

Our team has grown increasingly uncomfortable with how often this person’s PTO is used as an excuse, not just because our timelines are not met but because it seems to unfairly target one person for the productivity of a full team. Is there anything we can or should be doing to address this situation?

Ideally your team’s manager would speak to the manager of the new point of contact about what’s happening — explaining that she keeps blaming a colleague for late deadlines, it doesn’t seem to be true, and it’s making your whole team uncomfortable.

If for some reason that doesn’t happen or doesn’t solve it, the rest of you should feel free to speak up when this contact person blames the other team member. For example: “That doesn’t sound right. Jane has always been on top of deadlines and hasn’t taken an unusual amount of PTO.” Or, “It’s not sitting right with us that you blame Jane when this happens. She has always been on top of deadlines and hasn’t taken an unusual amount of PTO.” And consider adding, “Maybe you can sit down with us, Jane, and (this person’s manager) and hash this out.”

Read an update to this letter. 

5. Interview travel expenses

What expenses is it appropriate for a company to cover when you travel to their location for an interview? In my field, people often interview with organizations that are located in different cites than their own. Typically, the schedule is to fly in the night before, interview the entire day, have dinner that night with the interview committee, and then fly out the next day.

However, I was recently offered an interview where they wanted me to fly back right after I interviewed — they were not willing to cover a hotel for that night. That would have meant interviewing from 9-5 (there was no dinner, I guess, another bad sign), then an hour or longer ride to the airport in rush hour traffic, and flying another 1.5 to 2 hours to get home. That sounded like an exhausting day, so I declined to continue on with the interview process.

They did mention that things would have been different if I lived on the opposite coast from the organization’s location, but since I was located on the same coast they would only pay for a hotel the night before. Is that standard for interviews? I was kind of offended and it honestly felt a bit ableist, like they were looking for the candidate with the most stamina vs. the one who would be the best fit for the role.

There’s no real standard across fields; some organizations won’t pay to fly candidates out at all, some try to keep their expenses as low as possible, and some pay more to prioritize candidate comfort and will happily pay for that second night. But more often than not, with an organization that’s already flying someone out, it’s reasonable to expect they’d cover a second night, given the schedule you described — or would at least agree to it if you asked, even if it wasn’t their first proposal. (A lot of people would prefer to fly home that night since the flight was short, and they might have assumed that was your preference … but there should have been room for you to explain it wasn’t.)

I doubt they were looking for the candidate with the most stamina; more likely they were trying to save money (although the effect could be the same).

as a manager, should I not wear a “childless” shirt in my off-hours?

A reader writes:

This is a low-stakes question and one that’s more philosophical than imminent, but I’ve been curious about your take on it for a couple weeks now and decided to write in.

A women-focused satire site has been advertising me a pullover sweatshirt that says CHILDLESS in big letters across the front. Could this get me in trouble at work, or appear discriminatory against colleagues with children if I ran into a coworker in town in my off hours?

My personal context that has me thinking about it —

Two years ago ago I was promoted to my first management, surpassing a few colleagues with 5+ more years of tenure. While I believe my promotion was based solely on work quality, and in the past two years I think I’ve proven my worth as the right person to lead our team, I’m also someone who generally falls into the “preferred” side of societal biases — e.g. youth, physical appearance, health status, family status (not having to flex time for child care). To be clear, I don’t think this makes me a better person and I’m continually working to diminish my own acceptance of these biases, but I am aware of my privileges and the potential appearance of colleagues being passed over for discriminatory reasons.

I would feel pretty awkward if I ran into any of my colleagues with kids while wearing a sweatshirt championing childlessness (and already feel pretty awkward in meetings when they’re talking about kids/pets and I have to repeatedly say that no, I have none and won’t be getting any). But is that awkwardness a me problem or a potential work issue? How far does a management role extend into someone’s off-work personal expression?

For what it’s worth, I do ask my colleagues with kids about them, pass on notices about local family-friendly events, and always make accommodations for them to take off work or flex hours as needed to care for their families (which is the most important bit, I think).

I’m not seriously considering buying the sweatshirt. I just can’t get it out of my targeted ads and I think about this every time I see it!

Ooooh, this is an interesting question (and I will be answering it as someone who is also childless by choice).

I think you’ve got two competing principles here. On one hand, what you wear on your own time should be your own business (within some reasonable limits — if you’re wearing racist slogans, don’t be surprised if your employer takes an interest, especially if you manage people). And this sweatshirt doesn’t say that people with kids suck — it’s a statement about you, not anyone else. Is it that different than if you wore a shirt that said ITALIAN? Or for that matter, MOM? So from that perspective, this is no one’s business.

However … you’re a manager and that can change things. You don’t want anyone who reports to you to wonder if you think it’s somehow better not to have kids, or if you look down on people who do. You don’t want them to wonder whether you favor people who never need time off for a sick kid, or how you really felt about their maternity leave, or whether you’ve got biases that affect who gets what projects or promotion opportunities.

And to be clear, maybe a sweatshirt shouldn’t make them wonder any of those things. But given how very weird we are in this country about parenthood, and about motherhood in particular (it’s the highest calling a woman can aspire to! the most important job you’ll ever do! so selfish not to! oh, but don’t expect any support from society as a parent! you’re completely on your own! if it’s hard or messes up your career, well, you chose this so how dare you expect help) and the reality that many women do get penalized professionally for having children and that society is outright hostile to working moms in many ways … well, I sure could see an employee running into their manager wearing that sweatshirt and not feeling great about it.

So while you could wear it around town, I think it would be kinder and wiser not to, as long as you’re managing people, and I think that’s what your awkward feelings about it are telling you. But by all means, buy it and wear it around the house if you want to.

(As a side note, it’s interesting that you categorized being childless on the ““preferred” side of societal biases! It definitely can be at work, as detailed above … but holy wow, there’s some weirdness out there toward people who don’t have kids. Which is what gives the shirt its subversiveness. Society cannot be satisfied! If you are a woman, you’re going to be told you’re messing it up one way or another.)

Read an update to this letter

should I be so emotionally drained by managing?

A reader writes:

I manage in a manufacturing environment, leading a team of about 40 headcount altogether. I love my job and my company, and most of the time my work feels rewarding. I work hard to be an effective coach, identify the needs of my team and help them to achieve success. Like anyone else, I have my struggles and learning opportunities, but they don’t often weigh me down.

But the biggest issue I have found is managing my emotions and reactions when I have to deal with certain personnel issues. Twice this year I have had employee issues turn into compliance investigations. In one case, the investigation showed that there was no wrongdoing, which was an enormous relief. In the second case, it resulted in the (warranted) termination of a long-term employee. In neither case was I personally being investigated, nor was there any accusation of wrongful behavior on my part.

What I’m struggling with is that in both of these situations, as the investigation and interviews were ongoing, I felt horribly depressed and exhausted, to a degree I have not often experienced. I could hold it together just fine at work but I would go home and be unable to eat, crying, feeling like the world was just an awful place to be in. Both times I found that I couldn’t even cope with social media or listening to the news as it made me feel even more hopeless.

Is it normal for managers to be so affected by wrongful behaviors or the process of uncovering whether wrongful behaviors have occurred? What have your or other managers done to cope?

I answer this question 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.

I supervise a manager who falsified an employee write-up … but I don’t think she should be fired

A reader writes:

My manager recently overruled me on a firing decision and it is not sitting right with me. I’m a division manager. I manage all the teams within my division. I report to Manny, the departmental manager. He manages all the divisions in our department.

Our office employees were all remote from March 2020-September 2022 before our new space opened. Our warehouse staff were never remote because it’s not possible. The warehouse is about 20 minutes from our old office on the same bus route.

Although my company did not renew the lease on our building when it expired, they renovated and opened office space at the property that houses our warehouse since some employees had expressed an interest in returning to the office. Before the renovation, everyone was asked if they wanted to be remote or in the office so there would be adequate space. It was made clear to everyone that their choice was their own. An employee did not have to be in the office because their manager was, and managers didn’t have to go in if they had any staff on site. The question was only asked for planning purposes regarding space; the company wanted to have enough room plus extra for any future new hires who want to be on site.

One of the teams in my division is managed by Rachel. All of Rachel’s staff elected to work from home save for one — Jason. Rachel was not happy with his decision to return to the office. He got written up for it, which affected his annual review. It came out when Jason quit for another job and during his exit interview he said Rachel’s anger about his decision was the reason. This was news to HR and me, because we were told the write-up was for another reason. Jason had a different copy of the write-up than the one in his file. Rachel believes work from home is the gold standard and was not happy he chose differently, even though it did not affect her at all.

When Manny found out, he fired Rachel. I was not consulted or included in the process. While I understand that Rachel was wrong, I would not have fired her. I would have made sure she knew that she was out of line, I probably would have put her on a PIP, and I would have taken over co-managing her team until I was sure she would not do something like this again. But this was Rachel’s first infraction in her entire time working here. HR interviewed the rest of her staff and all of them spoke positively about her.

In all my time being a manager at multiple companies, I have never had my manager interfere in hiring, firing, or other employment decisions. Manny fired Rachel immediately and did not consult me. He says she had no excuse and her statement that work from home was perfect for someone like Jason (because he is single, lives alone, and has no parenting/caregiving duties) was out of line.

I agree Rachel was out of line, but Manny not consulting me and overruling me when I said I wouldn’t fire Rachel isn’t sitting right with me. Am I wrong to be upset about this?

I don’t see how you could keep Rachel on after what she did: She put a fake write-up in an employee’s file so that you wouldn’t see the real one she gave him. That’s a massive breach of trust. She deliberately falsified documentation in order to make sure you didn’t know about something she was doing to an employee.

This isn’t PIP/coaching/warning territory. It’s firing territory. You cannot have a manager on your staff who is willing to falsify documentation and lie to get away with something that she was clearly and deliberately trying to hide from you.

That would be true in any situation, but it’s all the more outrageous that Rachel did this for such an utterly ridiculous reason — because she didn’t like that Jason was working in the office and wanted to penalize him for it?! And rather than advocate for her viewpoint to management above her to try to get the policy changed if she felt she had compelling reasons, she chose to engage in this bizarre and complicated deceit.

I’m guessing that Manny fired Rachel without consulting you because the decision seemed so obvious — the same way he might have fired someone on the spot for punching a client without first running it by you. He figured it was egregious enough that there was no other option.

Now, that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t have looped you in first, but depending on exactly how it all went down, I can imagine scenarios where that wouldn’t have been practical. Yes, in an ideal world, Manny would have huddled with you, explained Rachel couldn’t remain, and heard you out if you disagreed — but ultimately he does have the standing to say nope, we cannot keep someone who does that.

If this surfaced a difference in philosophies between the two of you, as it sounds like it did, then that’s something the two of you need to hash out further … but that hashing out might mean Manny needs to make it clearer what offenses warrant termination. If I were Manny, I’d be pretty taken aback that you didn’t think falsifying an employee’s write-up warranted firing, and I’d want to dig into that with you.

The subject line of your email to me was “how much authority should a manager have over hiring/firing decisions on their own teams?” so I want to speak to that too. Generally, as a manager you should have a lot of control over those things (unless you’re fairly junior-level, in which case it’ll often make sense for you to have less). But while your own manager shouldn’t be dictating those things as a matter of course, there are times when it’s appropriate for them to step in and overrule you if they feel strongly that you’re making the wrong call — just like they might with a strategy decision or anything else at work. It shouldn’t be something that happens all the time; it’s a power they should use sparingly (and if they find they’re having to use it all the time, there’s a problem somewhere — either the higher-level manager isn’t giving enough autonomy, or the person they’re managing needs more training and coaching or possibly isn’t right for the role). So one question for you here is what Manny is like as a manager in general — does he frequently step in and overrule you, or was this a pretty rare occurrence? I’m guessing it was rare since you were taken aback by it and didn’t mention a pattern of meddling … and I’d see that as additional affirmation of how egregious Rachel’s actions were.

Read an update to this letter

getting out of shared intern housing, why are so many executives condescending, and more

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

1. Getting out of shared housing for interns

I’m about to graduate from college and I’ve been looking at internships targeting recent grads, as well as entry-level jobs, Some of these, including one I’m very interested in, ask interns to share a house and do group activities beyond work-related training (cook meals together, go swimming). Which sounds unprofessional, I know, but is sort of reasonable since these internships are often linked to an undergraduate summer program (or even a high school program!) and are marketed as halfway between a job and a gap year.

For a lot of people, I’m sure this kind of thing is super fun and rewarding (I have a friend in one of these programs and it’s great for her). However, sharing a kitchen is an absolute no-go for me — I have celiac disease, which is an incredibly sensitive gluten allergy. Even using kitchen utensils that have been used with gluten risks making me sick for weeks, I can’t eat many items labeled “gluten free,” etc. I’m willing to live on my own or with roommates I personally vet and who know that they’re opting in to a strictly gluten-free kitchen, but I am not going to spend months of my life negotiating kitchen space with random teenagers who might forget that soy sauce has wheat in it, or absolutely need to bake a cake or they’ll go crazy, or think I’m making the whole thing up for attention.

Do you know if internships that expect this are legally required to let me find alternate accommodations? I’m worried that since this isn’t a traditional job, they’ll argue that living in a community with other interns is in some way a core part of the program. And how should I handle asking about it? My current plan is to ask in stages:
– by email before I apply, disclose that I have a disability that would affect housing arrangements but not any other aspect of the job, and ask if the housing component is considered a requirement, a perk, or part of compensation
– in an interview, disclose fully, and ask how they’ve handled disability accommodations for interns in the past
– during salary negotiations, ask how much they’ll subsidize alternate housing or raise my pay, since the posted offer plus rent-free housing is obviously a much higher rate of compensation than simply the money on its own.

It’s very, very likely that you’ll be allowed to find your own alternate accommodations; programs like this typically see the provided housing as a perk but not a strict requirement … and especially not a requirement so strict that it would trump a participant’s health needs. I can’t say with certainty whether they’re legally required to let you opt out of it, but I’d be surprised if they aren’t. Regardless, from a practical standpoint, they almost certainly will allow exceptions.

The most likely complication is that they might not be willing to pay for alternate housing for you, since that won’t be budgeted into the program’s finances. So go into it knowing that might not be on the table.

I wouldn’t send the pre-application email asking if they consider housing a requirement, a perk, or part of compensation — the person answering those emails might not know how it will impact compensation and it’s getting more into the weeds than you need to at that point. Instead, apply and include a note in your cover letter explaining you have a health issue that would mean you couldn’t live in their group housing. In the interview, explain what you’d need and ask how they’d handle that. And then if they offer you the internship, see if you can negotiate a stipend for housing, which may or may not be doable but isn’t unreasonable to ask about. (Or, if the housing stipend would be a deal-breaker for you, you could ask about it at the interview stage or even before accepting an interview.)

Also, you mentioned salary negotiations so be aware that a lot of these programs don’t do any salary negotiation; participants are all paid the same. But even if that’s the case, you can still ask about housing assistance.

2. Would I be a jerk for turning down lunch with my successor?

I just found out that the person who became my successor for a previous role is now my successor again for a job I left a few years ago. What are the chances? She got in touch with me to ask to take me to lunch to learn more about her new role.

I am normally very happy to talk to those taking over previous roles. However in her first time succeeding me, she ended up being let go by the board of directors after a disastrous few years were she burnt through half the surplus I had worked hard to build, alienated the staff, and fired (and then hastily rehired when the board found out) a key senior manager who was on sick leave.

Now she wants to meet with me and I have such trepidation about her being unleashed on another beautiful nonprofit that I adored leading. It would be out of character for me to turn down this meeting, but I’m also livid. We work so hard to build organizations but it always shocks me how quickly they can be dismantled.

Weirdly, our offices are in the same building so I will likely bump into her. And who knows, maybe she’s different now? Although I note she has not held a full-time position since that role. So, WIBTA for saying no to a lunch? If I said yes is there a kind way to be honest? Or is it worth saying anything at all?

You can turn down down the lunch without being a jerk; being a good person does not require spending your time in ways that you object to on principle or that feel unlikely to pay off in the way the person requesting your time wants. And really, since it’s been a few years since you left that job, you might not even be able to provide terribly useful insights at this point anyway (and you won’t know what has changed since you left).

Don’t get into the real reason though; there’s no constructive way to say, essentially, “You were a disaster at the first job and I’m concerned you’ll be a disaster at this one too.” Just cite busyness — “My schedule is packed and I’m trying to be disciplined about not putting anything else on my calendar, so the timing won’t work, but best of luck with the role!” And if you run into her in the building and she tries to waylay you with questions, you can always cite the passage of time (“It’s been so long that I don’t remember much that would be helpful, and things have changed since I was there”), which is probably true.

Also! If you can, try to move away from being livid. Her work was presumably a disaster because of incompetence, not intentional malfeasance. And if she’s a disaster in the second job, the organization that hired her for what sounds like a senior role bears some responsibility for that, particularly since she has a track record that could be examined.

3. I don’t want to tell coworkers my time off is for plastic surgery

I’m booked to have cosmetic surgery later this year and I don’t want my colleagues to know about it. I’m lucky enough to have a manager that doesn’t ask for details about time booked off, but any leave of a week or longer will always result in my colleagues asking about where I’m off to, holidays, etc., and I don’t know what to reply when this inevitably happens before my surgery.

I’ve been told that I’ll need two weeks off from work to recover, so I can’t just brush it off with “oh, just chilling at home and catching up with chores” and any mention of surgery will prompt a whole load of chatter about the state of the NHS (I’m in the UK), and if I mention that I’m paying for private medical care, then this just opens up a huge can of worms. So what’s the best way for me do deal with this? A blunt “I’m having two weeks off for private reasons” will NOT satisfy my colleagues and will likely just fuel gossip.

Is it an option to just say vaguely, “Just some medical stuff I have to take care of”? And if you’re asked for details, “Nothing I want to get into, but nothing to worry about”?

If not, then you are having a staycation, or your sister/cousin/college roommate is visiting, or you’re visiting family … whatever you’re most comfortable saying. You don’t owe people total honesty about things that are none of their business, and any of these answers qualifies as an allowable white lie when you’re dealing with nosy people who would otherwise push you for information they’re not entitled to.

4. I’m suspended without pay — but still getting work calls

I made a horrible decision and got a DUI after celebrating a recent promotion. I am full of remorse and recognize what a terrible decision this was. I was traveling for work and, while off duty, I was in a rental car paid for by the company. I called my supervisor the next morning, told him what happened and expressed my remorse. He shared that while disappointed, he did not believe this would result in termination and thanked me for notifying him. I have an extremely strong record with my company and am well respected within the organization and by our customers.

I’ve since been notified by HR that they are revoking my promotion and suspending me for 30 days without pay. However, I am continuing to receive calls — there are several big projects slated for when I return, of which I would typically be planning for now. Can they ask me to plan and work for these while being suspended without pay? I don’t want to be difficult and am fully accepting the consequences of my actions. I am taking every step necessary to ensure this never happens again. But is working for free a legal consequence? I am a salaried, exempt employee.

Nope, they can’t legally have you work while they’re not paying you. Is it possible the people calling you don’t realize you’re suspended? Either way, message your boss (and cc HR) and explain people are still calling you with work and say, “I assume that legally I can’t do work while I’m suspended so I’m going to explain to people that I’m on leave and redirect them to you, but I wanted to let you know it’s happening in case you want me to handle it differently.”

5. Why are so many executives condescending to workers?

Why are so many company executives so condescending to employees? I just sat through a town hall meeting where the CEO revealed that they changed the rules for this coming year to make it much harder to get a bonus than it was supposed to have been. He actually told us that it was better for us this way, like we’re stupid and don’t understand that they just want to pay us less. The whole time, he used a voice like he was a parent talking to a small child. Then the HR director stood up and did the same thing. Do they really think we’re that stupid? Why would they employ us if they think we’re idiots?

Power makes many people weird and out-of-touch and gives them an inflated sense of their own importance relative to others.

Responsible, thoughtful people with power will actively work to counteract those effects, but not everyone falls in that category (and even when they do, it seems to be tough to completely insulate themselves from power’s effects — it can be very Frodo and the Ring).

interviewer fake-rejected me to see if I would “fight for the job”

A reader writes:

I have a question about a weird interviewing situation for a sales role.

I had gone through a few interviews with a company as I was evaluating a new sales role, and the entire interview process felt standard and professional (phone screen, in-person interview, tour of the branch, and next step would be to shadow a cold call).

After the in-person interview and tour of the branch, I got a call a few days later from a VP I had met (not the recruiter) telling me that they decided I wasn’t a good fit and wouldn’t be moving forward in the process. I did the standard “thank you for the opportunity, I appreciate your time, wish you the best,” after which the VP said, “Just kidding, I got you! I wanted to see if you’d fight for the job.”

I kind of awkwardly laughed, he told me they’d want me to do the cold call, and I told him I would get back to them about scheduling next steps. I eventually emailed and said that I didn’t think it would be the right fit (partially because of the weird joke, but I also decided to stay in my current role).

I guess my question is … what? Is that a legitimate tactic? In my experience, getting a “no” from a recruiter is not the same as getting a “no” in a sales transaction. Should I be fighting back whenever I get rejected for jobs?

Noooo.

What on earth!

It’s true the norms in sales can be different, but what? Wanting a candidate to fight back against a rejection? Wanting a candidate to refuse to hear “we’re going with someone else” and instead push to be reconsidered? That’s pretty much universally considered obnoxious candidate behavior that no employer wants to deal with and which will often get you blacklisted.

I realize there are some sales strategies that encourage salespeople to try to push past a no, but (a) many people consider that approach a huge turn-off in a sales context too and will never buy from someone who does that, and (b) even if we set that aside, generally people understand that tactics for one type of situation aren’t always appropriate in others.

I suppose if they are screening for candidates who will run roughshod over people’s boundaries and ignore clear “not interested” statements, this is a way to do it. But I’m guessing that’s not a place where you want to work … and by withdrawing, you rightly screened that behavior out.

(For the sake of thoroughness, I will also note that it’s not 100% clear that it was a screening tactic from them, as opposed to just a bad joke, given the VP’s weird “just kidding, I got you!” and interest in moving you forward anyway. Rejecting you as a joke would be a whole different problem, though.)

should I tell the truth in my exit interview?

A reader writes:

I’ve gotten a new job offer and have put in notice at my company that I’ve worked at for 10 years now. HR has contacted me saying they will be doing an exit interview. I already know the format will be a list of questions rating the company 1-5 on how they do things (like pay, communication, etc.), with the potential for comments to be passed along to management.

I’ve only ever had one exit interview, over 10 years ago at my first “adult” job, and it was with the manager I had the most problems with so I didn’t have enough confidence to tell them the truth of the issues and why I decided to leave.

Now with this current job, there’s no issue of worrying about potential references blowback since the company I work with laid off all management that directly worked with me, and a ton of coworkers who would be useful references (I’m one of seven on a team that was 30 strong pre-layoffs, and which needs at least double our current amount to function). My managers are all new and we’ve spoken maybe 100 words since the last layoff, so they wouldn’t really be valuable references in the future beyond “yes, she worked here, I worked with her for three weeks, her previous manager said XYZ.”

My reasons for leaving are extensive, ranging from being underpaid according to industry standards, horrible corporate decisions that punish staff and get us yelled at by clients constantly, removing medical benefits, constant layoffs (while also bragging days later about getting prime seats for massive sporting events for potential clients and sales staff) and forcing in-office work despite our contracts stating we would be remote (even pre-Covid).

I’m wondering if it’s worth speaking my mind and bringing up the issues that caused me to decide to leave (for a lower paying job, no less!) or if it would be wasting my breath. Friends and family are all saying I need to speak up since anything I say may help my current coworkers. But the pessimist in me thinks nothing will change since it’s a big company and things have only gotten worse over the years, never better, even with complaints from staff and clients alike.

Additionally, I know the remaining staff are all looking for jobs too and are ready to jump ship, so there might not even be any coworkers left if they all get job offers, which makes me wonder if it’s even worth speaking up about the issues I see.

It’s almost certainly not worth telling the truth in your exit interview.

The reasons you’re considering it are noble — after all, if there’s a chance that you can make things better for your co-workers by speaking up now that you have nothing to lose and when your feedback is being actively solicited, why shouldn’t you? And there’s also just the principle of it; you have profound concerns about how the company operates, and what better opportunity to share those than when they’re inviting your candid opinions?

The thing is, though, it’s highly unlikely to make any difference.

Companies that truly want to hear employees’ input will solicit that input while you’re still working there, not just once you’re walking out the door. Respect for employees’ opinions will be woven into the fabric of how they operate; they’ll make a point of making it safe for people to speak up, even when voicing criticism, and you’ll see changes result from workers’ feedback. When a company doesn’t operate that way, it’s telling you it doesn’t really value honest evaluation, and the exit interviews are more likely to be an exercise in bureaucracy than anything resembling meaningful dialogue. Your candid feedback is likely to go nowhere, and you might even be written off as disgruntled or someone with an ax to grind.

Plus, the issues you’re thinking about raising are deeply entrenched ones; they’re about the culture and leadership of the organization, and those don’t get solved unless someone at the top with actual authority is committed to investing significant energy into changing the culture (and even then, it often takes years or doesn’t work at all). It would be different if you were thinking of providing easily addressed feedback like “We need a more streamlined expense-approval system” or “The parking lot needs better signage” or even “Our salaries and benefits aren’t competitive for the field.” That last one might not be easily addressed, but it’s more in line with the kind of info companies are typically interested in collecting through exit interviews, especially if they hear it from multiple people.

That’s not to say that genuine change never results from exit interviews that delve into tougher or more substantive issues. Occasionally it does. But it’s rare enough that, as a general rule, you shouldn’t look at exit interviews as an effective avenue for driving culture change.

Moreover, while it can feel like being forthcoming in an exit interview is low risk since you’re leaving and can’t be penalized for what you say, that’s not always true in practice. When someone’s exit-interview feedback is particularly frank in an office where management bristles at unpleasant truths, it can burn bridges and affect what kind of references that person gets in the future. That doesn’t mean that an A+ reference will suddenly turn into an F, but it can affect the way you’re talked about when potential employers inquire about you. A reference that would have been glowingly enthusiastic can become significantly less so, and that matters.

Now, that’s less of a worry for you than it would be generally; since the managers who you’ll turn to for references in the future have already left, your chances of negative repercussions are lower. But that doesn’t insulate you entirely, because you don’t always get to choose your references. If a hiring manager happens to know someone at your old company personally, for example, they might call them to ask about you regardless of whether they’re listed as an official reference or not. So it’s still something to keep in mind as a possibility, even though it doesn’t carry as much risk as it could.

Despite all this, if you really feel strongly about speaking up, your best shot at making an impact is to pick one clear issue and give feedback on that. Choose something that you think has a realistic chance of being changed (so not “all the new managers suck” or “what’s with all the terrible decision-making?”) and focus on that as unemotionally as you can. It still might not get through to anyone, but it’ll have better odds than a long list of complaints would.

Beyond that, though, focus on moving on. You’ve found a new job, you’re escaping this bad one, and you no longer have a professional obligation to help this company find solutions to its problems.

Originally published at New York Magazine.

my boyfriend’s manager told me I could date someone better

A reader writes:

My boyfriend, “Joe,” and I work in different divisions for the same company and for the last two years it’s been wonderful. That is … until two days ago when I was blindsided by my boyfriend’s new supervisor.

Joe had the day off so he asked me to grab his phone charger off his desk and bring it home. When I went to grab it, his supervisor, “Cora,” called me into her office, then shut the door and proceeded to engage in a weird conversation. She asked me if I was happy with Joe and told me that I could do so much better than him. She actually said, “Sometimes ‘big girls’ can feel like they have to settle but you can certainly do so much better than him.”

It made me extremely uncomfortable. I was so taken back and flustered. I can’t for the life of me imagine why this person that I barely know thought discussing my weight or personal relationship would be appropriate. It took me a second to compose myself enough to respond. I told her that her comments were intrusive, rude, and frankly just plain odd, then quickly left.

I was so angry and upset that I went straight to my supervisor and told her what happened. She called in the HR director, who wrote out an incident report. They were both very kind and super apologetic. I was told that Cora was recently promoted a few months ago and still has a lot to learn but this is unacceptable and she’d be strongly reprimanded.

It’s made Joe feel very uncomfortable, so today they moved him to another section but it’s in a position that is less enjoyable and with far less promotability. He’s decided to just find another job. He’s worked hard and up until this was enjoying his work life. I feel like he’s the one that’s being punished. He has never had a bad evaluation or any indication that his job was not being done well. He said Cora has always been brusque with him but he thought that was just her personality.

It’s so uncomfortable for me to simply move on from this though. I very much love my job, I enjoy who I directly work for, and I have been promoted twice. I want to stay and advance in my career with this company, but I feel like Cora has gotten away with being tactless and atrociously unprofessional. I don’t feel like a reprimand is sufficient. She needs to be let go or at a minimum removed from a supervisory role.

Joe says to just let it go and it’s not worth the trouble to talk to HR further. He’s a very easygoing, non-confrontational, “let bygones be bygones” kind of person, but I feel like there should be serious consequences for her actions. She made an egregious error, yet he is the one having to move positions. I don’t feel like this was resolved properly at all.

Joe said no matter what happens, he just wants to just move on to another company that’s a better fit for him personally. He says that I shouldn’t rock the boat on his account. I, however, am angry and still very uncomfortable with how it was resolved. Do you think I should I go back to HR or talk to my supervisor? Is this the best outcome I should expect in this situation?

It does sound like Cora doesn’t belong in a management role, but that’s not something you can really insist on.

To be clear, you’re absolutely right that she was atrociously unprofessional, boundary-crossing, rude, and out of line with her insinuations about your relationship and your body.

You just don’t have the standing to insist she be fired or demoted. You can certainly say you don’t feel comfortable staying on unless it’s handled differently — but that can’t be a bluff, because most of the time that’s going to elicit “we understand and you’ve got to do what’s best for you,” not a change in Cora’s job. Your company has presumably handled it in the way they think best, and they’re not likely to let you dictate a different outcome. (And we don’t actually know what they said to Cora. It’s possible that they made it clear she’s on thin ice and has a month to prove she can handle the position, or who knows what. They sounded sufficiently horrified when you spoke to them that it’s likely they did handle it as a serious issue and that she’s under a lot more scrutiny.)

What there is standing to push back on is what happened to Joe. The consequence of Cora being horrible to Joe should not be that Joe gets moved to a less desirable job. If he wanted to, he could absolutely push back on that. But Joe is the one who would have to do that; you can’t do it on his behalf, and it doesn’t sound like he wants to take it on.

So I think, ultimately, the question for you is: Can you find a way to make enough peace with the situation that you can stay reasonably happily? Maybe you can’t! But since you love your job, like your manager, and were eager to continue advancing there before this happened, it’s worth giving it at least a few weeks before deciding anything (or better yet, a couple of months) because it’s possible that your answer after some time goes by will be different than it is right now in the immediate aftermath (and who knows, it’s also possible that Cora won’t make it in her position long-term). Either decision is legitimate — but there’s no real path to insist on something else.

Read an update to this letter

new CEO keeps talking about diet and exercise, coworker asks me to cover for him when he’s not really off, and more

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

1. Our new CEO keeps talking about diet and exercise

Our company recently got a new CEO who is very big on health and fitness and has made it his mission to make our employee population healthy in order to reduce the company’s healthcare costs. However, making people healthy translates to making people thin without providing real resources to do so (like subsidized healthy food, extra breaks for walking, access to weight loss medications, etc.). The delivery of his messaging often comes across as fat-shaming. For example, in our holiday employee communication, he wished everyone a happy holiday and then encouraged us to get some exercise. He patrols the lunch room and comments on peoples’ meals. He went on a leadership call and told everyone that they should eat three tangerines a day. He hired an ultramarathoner with no experience in employee health to lead the employee health initiative. This isn’t just some mom and pop company. This is a Fortune 500 healthcare company where people should know better. It is bringing down the morale of my team and making people very uncomfortable.

When I’ve addressed this with my boss, the response is that he’s the CEO and can really do what he wants. Is there a way to encourage change or at least make my team feel better?

Realistically, there’s probably not a lot you can do. You and your coworkers can certainly pass your feedback up through the chain; feedback from one person won’t make a lot of difference but if a bunch of you are all saying the same thing, it might have more on an impact. You can raise it when you’re given opportunities to provide input on the company culture (like if you have regular employee surveys). If you have an equity and inclusion team, you could try raising it with them. But otherwise, it sounds like most of this is just this guy making inane remarks (three tangerines a day?) and yeah, there’s not a lot you can do about that when it’s coming from the CEO, unless at some point he starts crossing legal lines re: discrimination.

2. We still had to work after our coworker died

This situation happened a few years ago, but it is still bothering me. One awful day, while I was at work, we received a phone call that one of my coworkers had unexpectedly died. To say we were devastated was an understatement, as several of us were very close to this coworker. (I, for example, worked right next to her, and also associated with her outside of work.)

My job is NOT the type of industry that is essential and has to remain open — for example, we close in bad weather. However, during this event, they made us stay to work the rest of our shift. It was awful — we had to serve customers while sobbing.

Would I have been justified in refusing to work for the rest of my shift? I chose not to, as I didn’t want more work falling on my other coworkers’ plates but … I wish I had.

Yeah, if the nature of the work didn’t require that you stay open, they should have either closed for the rest of the day or let the people who were most affected leave and run with reduced staffing. And really, even if they didn’t care as empathetic humans, they shouldn’t have wanted customers being served by people who were crying — that’s not good for anyone. And even if they didn’t initially understand how people were affected, they should have changed course once they did.

In a situation like that, it would have been reasonable for you to say, “Jane and I were very close, and this is devastating. I’m not in any shape to work right now and I’m going to need to go home for the rest of the day.” Don’t kick yourself for not doing that though — it can be hard to know what you can and can’t do when you’re dealing with something terrible.

I’m sorry about your friend.

Read an update to this letter. 

3. My coworker is asking me to cover for him on days he’s not really off

I’m hoping you can advise me on how to resolve a situation where I am essentially subsidizing extra PTO for a coworker.

I and another coworker, “Sam,” both report to the same manager. We work in the same function and support the same product family. Sam supports older generations of the product and I support newer ones. We work heavily with our respective project teams for the day-to-day activities and really only work with our manager for performance reviews and occasional updates. Our manager is very hands-off and does not help us get coverage when we take time off.

Whenever Sam takes PTO, he will send me an invite in Outlook letting me know so that I can be back-up while he is out. Typically, if Sam takes a week off, I end up spending about five hours working on his projects. Sam does not back me up when I am out of office because he does not know and does not want to learn the additional functionality for our newer generation products. I have begun to suspect that Sam is reporting less PTO than he actually takes, which is leaving me feeling upset because I have essentially been working extra so that he can have more time off.

When we request PTO, our request system shows the calendar of everyone under our direct manager. When I requested my time off for the Christmas holidays, I noticed that Sam’s requested time on the team calendar was shorter than what he had included on the Outlook invite to me, but I dismissed it as a one time mistake. I recently got an Outlook invite from Sam for his upcoming PTO. That reminded me that we’re getting close to the expiration date for our annual PTO and that I should request my own time off. I opened up our request system and saw that although Sam is planning to be out for five days, he only requested two days.

I have now started to wonder how often this has happened in the past and honestly, I feel used. What should I do here? Should I just let this go or try talking to Sam or our manager?

Start by talking to Sam because that might solve it and also because, if you do need to take it to your manager, it’ll be useful to be able to say you asked Sam directly about it first. Say this: “Do I have the dates of your vacation wrong? I’d thought you needed me to cover you March 6-10, but I saw on the time off calendar that you’ll be gone March 6-7. Do you just need me covering you March 6-7 then?”

If that doesn’t solve it, then you should indeed talk to your manager because it’s directly affecting your workload.

4. If I give months of notice, I can’t take any time off from that point forward

I am a medical professional working at a community health center. I have been there for almost 10 years. Because of personal/family issues which have nothing to do with work, I have decided to relocate to another city in six months. I know that this will happen, it’s not just a “maybe” thing. I am a well-liked provider at the clinic and take on several roles in admin aside from seeing patients.

To give my clinic, coworkers, and patients the maximum amount of time to manage my leaving, I want to tell them as soon as possible. The problem? Organizational policy says that you cannot take any leave “from the time of resignation” and any previous leave that was approved is canceled. I didn’t have any major trips planned or anything, but I don’t want to commit to taking no leave (personal, vacation, medical education, or scheduled sick) for the next six months! The policy states that you must submit resignation at least two months prior to leaving.

I can’t help but feel the incentives are all messed up here. I don’t want to be seeing patients and not be able to tell them my plans. My clinic has a high transition rate, and many of patient patients have had providers “leave on them” before.

The paths forward I see are (1) say nothing and resign two months prior to leaving as per policy, (2) try to have an “off the record” discussion with my manager to navigate the situation (we get along pretty well, but I know she will not be happy I am leaving), or (3) just suck it up and resign and know that the good karma is my reward. Any advice?

Yep, this is a terrible policy because it disincentivizes people from doing the thing that would actually be the most helpful to the organization, other employees, and patients. You should not just suck it up and give up any possibility of taking leave for six months. (Two months is bad enough.)

Whether to do #1 or #2 on your list depends on what you know about your boss and exactly what you mean when you say she won’t be happy you’re leaving. Disappointed or angry/punitive? With some managers, you could have an off-the-record conversation about the situation and know it wouldn’t be held against you in any way. With others, you couldn’t. Unless you know for sure that your manager is in the first group, stick with following the policy that they’ve laid out — give your two months notice and nothing more. After all, that’s what the policy they’ve chosen is telling you they want.

Also, even if your manager is someone who would handle it well, it’s worth asking yourself what she could really do with the info if she has to keep it off the record. If she can’t act on it in any way, there may not be meaningful benefits to having the conversation anyway.

5. I have a great work history but nothing else to put on my resume

By all accounts, I’m a high performer with a wildly successful 20+ year career with a Fortune 50 company. For most of my career, I’ve been fortunate to work on high impact projects, being selected for roles based on my reputation and without really having to interview or even have an up-to-date resume. (I know, I only have first-world problems.)

I’ve been in my current role for about 5 years, and am starting to think about moving on. For the first time, I really need to have a proper resume. However, there’s a problem: I have some gaps that I don’t know how to address. For example, the Education section – I don’t have a college degree, although I have several prestigious industry designations and professional certifications. I also don’t have much in the way of extracurricular activities like mentoring, volunteering, church, or clubs to highlight. I’m just the kind of person who keeps to myself outside of work. I have a few interesting hobbies like travel and crafting, but that doesn’t feel right to include in my professional profile.

So my resume seems overly heavy on job history and results, but it feels light or non-existent on everything else. I want to come across as well rounded, but I’m not sure how to do that based on my situation. Am I thinking about this the wrong way?

Job history and results are the most important thing! In most fields, they’re vastly more important than the other sections. You can skip the outside-of-work stuff entirely, and for education just list the stuff you do have. This isn’t like college applications, where you want to seem well-rounded; you’ll be fine keeping the focus on your work history.

Read an update to this letter.

can I compare attending college to working a full-time job in my cover letter?

Since it’s a holiday, here’s an older post from the archives. This was originally published in 2016.

A reader writes:

I have recently graduated from college. I currently have no job prospects, but I am applying to jobs on a daily basis. I feel that if I can write a really good cover letter it will give me that extra boost, as I did not work very much during college due to having scholarships. I have been trying to spin my college years as actually working a full-time job in my cover letter.

What I mean is comparing attending college full-time to having a full-time job. For example, showing up to classes on time is just like showing up to work on time. Also, what you learn in the classroom is giving you experience in what you might encounter in your chosen field of work. For me, it was working with all the laws (i.e. FMLA, Title 7, COBRA, etc.) and how they might apply to situations. My courses also taught me indirectly the tricks of Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, and Excel.

I view my college years as my main job for the last four years. Here is what I have so far for my cover letter concerning my college years: “Attending college has been my full-time job for the last four years. Attending a full schedule of classes is very comparable to being employed full-time. I had to meet the expectations of solid attendance, completion of projects within expected parameters and prioritizing various assignments all while maintaining a good relationship with an ever-changing set of diverse classmates. My assignments were viewed as miniature performance reviews with the grade being the equivalent to a performance rating.” Is this a plausible way to go for my cover letter?

Yeah, no, don’t do that. Attending college full-time is actually not like having a full-time job, and you will come across as naive if you write that.

There are lots of differences between school and work that employers find significant. For example:

* If you mess up or neglect your work in college, it will only impact you. In a job, other people are counting on your work. (And yes, college has team projects, but the stakes aren’t the same.)

* In school, the emphasis is on exploring your subject and learning how to think. At work, the emphasis is about getting things done, often as quickly as possible. Learning is good, but it’s not the point.

* At school, you have someone guiding your learning. At work, you’re often expected to figure most things out on your own.

* In school, you have a whole cadre of people who are there to help you succeed — professors, advisors, counselors, etc. At work, whether or not you succeed is basically on you and you alone, and if you’re not succeeding, you’re probably not going to keep that job.

* At school, you can get away with a certain amount of slacking — skip a class you don’t feel like attending, throw a paper together at the last minute. You might not do as well as you otherwise would, but you can get away with it to a point. But if you try that at work, slacking will often affect other people, and it can get you fired.

* At school, effort often matters a lot. At work, effort doesn’t matter; results do. You’ll be judged by the quality of what you produce, not by how hard you worked to produce it.

So no, don’t compare attending school to working a full-time job. Also, don’t include that list of what you needed to do to succeed in school; employers know what school entails. Moreover, most or all of the candidates you’re competing with have probably had that same experience, so it’s not setting you apart from them.

Instead, talk about what makes you particularly qualified. Look at it from an employer’s perspective — when faced with a sea of candidates who all recently graduated, and some of whom worked jobs during that time too, what is it that should make them interested in hiring you? That’s what you need to talk about in your cover letter and resume. (There’s advice here on how to do that when you don’t have much experience.)

This is going to be more challenging because not working much during school is going to put you at a disadvantage when you’re competing against people who did (and it’s why I strongly encourage people to work and intern while they’re in school, although I realize that advice is totally unhelpful to you now). So the challenge for you now is to figure out what you have to offer employers and present that in a compelling way. Hopefully “didn’t work very much” does mean “did work a bit” — and you can mine those experiences for cover letter and resume fodder.

Read an update to this letter here.