should I let someone who no-called no-showed come back to work?

A reader writes:

The last two weeks have really made me question myself as a manager. Without getting into details, I had three of my staff of six quit within 10 days without notice. They’re for unrelated reasons, but we were already down one staff member so our schedule was devastated. One of the employees had no-call no-showed for a shift last week, and all attempts to contact her failed. I assumed she got more hours at her other job and didn’t have the heart to tell me. It was decidedly uncharacteristic of her. We decided to proceed as if she were not coming back unless we heard otherwise. Five days passed without a word.

I got an email from her this morning and I’m not sure what to do. She says her phone got stolen on the bus, and her car got repossessed (information that was confirmed by one of my other employees) so she had no way to contact me or get to work.

The old me would have fired her without hesitation. I have always had a strong work ethic and a sense of personal responsibility, but I have fallen on my fair share of hard times and am now more empathetic. I want to give her a chance, but I also don’t want to set myself up for more large unexpected holes in the schedule, especially when there are people out there who want a job with us who can be reliable. Am I wrong to want to give her another chance?

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

Other questions I’m answering there today include:

  • Should we keep people less than 100% busy?
  • My intern wants to leave her internship early

my company will only give me a raise if I quit first

A reader writes:

I work for a small company within a very niche field. The owner has been running it for decades and is an expert at this craft, and is in very high demand. The service the company offers is so specialized that the job takes about six months to a year of training, even with relevant prior experience. It was a perfect fit for me in a lot of ways. The only red flag I saw when I first accepted the job was seeing how high the turnover rate was. Only one coworker I saw on a 10-person team had been there for longer than a couple of years.

Well, I’ve passed the two-year mark of working here and I’ve hit my limit too. While the day-to-day work is pretty good and satisfying, the communication style and conflict resolution from management/owners are incredibly stressful. It’s hard to summarize since it’s a bunch of tiny miscommunications and friction in otherwise perfectly normal work days. Little mistakes are taken personally and, while it isn’t super frequent, you never know what will trigger a random hostile and accusatory reaction from management or the owner. It seems that it takes about two to three years for all those little moments to build up enough for employees to leave. While I’m disappointed to be at this point, I am ready to move on too as I am bordering on burnout from constantly walking on eggshells.

The problem I am having now is that the company also has a history of offering massive 20-30% raises, but only to employees who are already out the door. To almost everyone else, these desperate offers are too little too late, as previously dedicated star employees already exhausted all other options before they even considered leaving. But for me, as stressed as I am working here, there is a price where I can be bought and convinced to stay.

Unfortunately, I can’t ask for a raise outright. The owner has emphasized many times before that they only offer raises based on merit, not need. I have been working myself into the ground for the past year to try to hit that point. I have taken on the responsibilities of other positions, I have been put in charge of training people. I have anticipated needs and worked ahead on projects to meet deadlines. I often stay late, and I haven’t taken any time off for vacation all year. When I sat down for my two-year review, my boss praised all these things about my work ethic and dedication, describing me as an essential part of the team and someone they have “big plans for” … and then offered me an insultingly low pay bump to cover inflation. I had already brought up to the owner that the ratio of my workload to pay is unsustainable for me, and that I am actively looking for side gigs and part-time work to supplement my paycheck. I have asked if there is anything more I could be doing to justify a merit-based increase in base pay. All I got was some hemming and hawing and a vague suggestion about showing more initiative. (Which is a personal quality of mine that they had praised before.)

So, it is clear I am not going to be getting a raise unless I turn in my two weeks’ notice. I am the second most senior member of my team and the only one other than the owner qualified to help train new employees. I know they need me, but in my 2+ years here, quitting is the only time I’ve ever seen them offer raises to anyone. To me it feels scummy to look for other work and accept another job somewhere else, only to potentially turn them down when my current office offers me a big raise to stay with them instead. Obviously, I am looking for another job that I would be happy at and well compensated, but if I can’t, would it be wrong to accept another random job just to hear what my current company would counteroffer? Is this situation I am in more normal than I thought? Am I missing something obvious?

I really want to convince you not to stay — when you get another job, take it rather than trying to leverage it into a counteroffer!

You’re nearing burnout, constantly walking on eggshells, going above and beyond only to be told to “take more initiative,” and dealing with a manipulative owner who’s trying to convince you that what sounds like a massive amount of overwork doesn’t quality for you for anything more than a cost-of-living bump.

Until it affects them, that is. Because that’s what “you’ll be offered a huge raise but only when you’re walking out the door” is all about. They don’t care about paying you what your work is worth to them when you’re the only one who’s affected. Once it looks like it’ll affect them, they swing into action. And you know what, sometimes an otherwise decent manager falls into that trap — but this is their system. They designed it this way. They’ve had plenty of chances to realize, “Oh crap, we’re losing people because of money over and over and then we end up needing to swing big to keep them at the last minute” but they don’t care. They’re perfectly happy to wring every ounce of energy out of you that they can while underpaying you, until the literal last minute they have to do something about it.

This is not a place to stay. That kind of mindset is going to permeate all kinds of other parts of your daily life too (and indeed, it sounds like it does).

But none of that answers what you asked. You want to know if you can ethically line up another offer if you just want to use it to get a counteroffer. Some years back, I would have told you no, you can’t ethically do that. But with a greater appreciation than I used to have for how much capitalism screws over most workers and how much you’re on your own within that system, I’m less inclined to tell you that you shouldn’t play the game in a way that benefits you. You’d be wasting the time of the other company, but it’s not like companies never waste applicants’ time.

However, the ethics of the situation really only come into play if you’re dead-set against taking another job and would never seriously consider an offer somewhere else. But I don’t think that’s the case! A better way to look at it is this: You should be job-searching and you should be open to other offers. Your current company sucks! You should go into those interviews with an open mind, and you should be willing to take an offer if the job is right for you. You can balance any offer you get against any counteroffer your current company might make, and make the best decision for yourself. That’s a normal part of job-searching and it’s not unethical.

(But really, leave that place.)

I’m missing out on a lunch break because I’m vegetarian, coworker calls his girlfriend during projects, and more

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

1. I’m missing out on a lunch break because I’m vegetarian

Once a month my office has an all-hands meeting that ends around 11:30, then my team has our monthly team meeting at 1:00. Most of the time people on my team will go out for a lunch that takes up the full time between the all-hands meeting and our team meeting. It isn’t a mandatory event or a “working lunch,” just a social gathering, but there’s no expectation that those who attend make up the time for the longer lunch (our standard lunch is 30 minutes). I’ve stopped attending because, as a vegetarian in “meat country,” I usually have a hard time finding anything to eat at restaurants in the area, and I’m not keen on sitting with a soda and watching others eat. The last two times, while others have gone to lunch, I have been given tasks to prepare for our team meeting “since [I’m] not going to lunch” and I’ve had to work through that full hour and a half (including my actual lunch) to complete them in time for the meeting. This seems rather unfair to me, as they all essentially get a free hour off. Should I be entitled to the same amount of “free” time as the rest of the team, or is this just an expected price to pay for choosing not to take part in socializing (even if the lack of available options to accommodate my diet is a significant factor in that choice)?

There are two places within the “reasonable lunch zone” that I could have a real, adult-sized meal, and I’ve suggested them several times, but they always lose the vote for where to have lunch (they usually go to the same barbecue chicken place every month). My team knows I’m vegetarian, but I don’t know if they realize that so many places have nothing vegetarian except maybe a kids’ grilled cheese. Our team director said she won’t get involved since it’s not an “official” outing, but she’s also the one assigning additional, time-sensitive tasks to me (specifically: preparing the agenda and materials for our meeting after lunch) through that time (and my normal lunch break) on these days since I’m not going out with the team.

Yeah, you’re getting a raw deal. It’s not that unusual to let people take a longer lunch for a team outing like this, even an unofficial one; the idea is that there are benefits to the group socializing. From that perspective, it makes sense that you’re not offered an extra-long lunch yourself when you’re not participating. But it’s unfair that the reason you’re not participating is because you can’t. And your manager sucks for saying she won’t get involved, when she’s piling assignments on you during that time.

When you talked to her about it, did you explicitly say, “I’m being assigned extra work that means I have to work through lunch while everyone else takes a 90-minute break, purely because I have dietary restrictions that mean I can’t go with them”? If you haven’t, point that out because otherwise she might think this is just about the restaurant choice and not about everyone else getting a long break while you get no break at all. But if that was part of the conversation you already had and she just doesn’t care, you might be stuck.

However, it sounds like you’ve haven’t clearly explained the problem to your team, and that’s worth trying: “Could we go to X or Y at least some of the time? I’d like to eat with you but there’s literally nothing on the menu I can eat at Z, which means I’m never able to join you.” If that doesn’t work, would you be open to bringing your own food on those days and joining them but eating whatever you brought from home? Not every restaurant will allow this, but often if you’re with a large group and explain there’s nothing you can eat on their menu, they’ll let you. That’s not ideal, obviously, but if your team won’t budge, it might be the least-bad option.

Otherwise, you could try announcing your own plans before your manager has the chance to assign you work — “I can’t eat anything at Z so I’m going to head over to X and will see you after.” And if she assigns you work anyway: “I need to eat lunch, but I’ll be back at 12.” You still won’t be getting the extra hour everyone else gets, which isn’t reasonable, but it might be the reality of it and at least you’ll get some lunch break, unlike the current situation.

2. Coworker calls his girlfriend during projects

I have a coworker who I work very closely with, Bob. Our work is very hands-on and sometimes involves the two of us sitting in a room together while we work for most of the day. Due to the nature of our jobs, sometimes there will be periods of 5-10 minutes where Bob has to sit and wait for me to finish doing something or vice versa. We often have other work we will do during this downtime, but we don’t always.

Occasionally while Bob is waiting during these short waiting periods, he will call his girlfriend. He doesn’t put her on speaker, but I can generally hear what they’re both saying due to the volume of his phone/the small size of the room. They will both talk in detail about their days and upcoming plans. I understand why Bob does this — there is not always a lot of other stuff to do during these periods of downtime. However, I sometimes feel like I’m intruding on these conversations. Even though I know Bob is choosing to make these calls in my presence, they feel to me like conversations I shouldn’t be part of.

Am I right to feel uncomfortable with this, and should I try to do something about it, or is it something I should just try to ignore?

It’s not inherently weird for someone to take a personal call in front of a coworker; people who share an office do that all the time because it’s unavoidable.

I suspect it feels a little different because you don’t normally share an office; you’re just sharing a space at that particular moment because you’re working on a project together.

Still, though, how “occasional” are these calls? If it’s a couple of times a week for five or 10 minutes, that’s not a big deal and you should try to ignore it. But if they’re more regular — like daily — and it’s interrupting your focus, it’s reasonable to say, “Would you mind taking that in the hallway so I can focus and finish this up?”

3. Wearing pimple patches at work

The post the other day about the manager who kept pointing out their staff member’s acne made me think of this question. Would there be any major red flags about wearing hydrocolloid patches at work? They have been useful to me when I have one or two pimples about to burst, and are the difference between having a painful blemish last for days versus nearly gone in a day. They have clear ones, but also I have seen stores carry fun sticker-like ones too.

I’ve been getting away with wearing them for years due to wearing a face mask almost all of the time (plus using clear ones). Would this be something that could be a big no-no? Or could it be considered as innocuous as wearing a band-aid on a face for a scratch or wound?

In theory they’re bandages so they should be okay. In reality, it’s office dependent. There are certainly offices where the clear ones would be fine, but there are also plenty (particularly in more conservative fields) where it would seem a little unprofessional. You’ve got to know your office, which I realize is not terribly helpful.

One thing to think about, though — hydrocolloid patches are designed to draw out whatever’s in the pimple and if they’re transparent, they can start looking pretty gross as the day goes on. The “icky stuff visibly trapped under this translucent patch” stage isn’t well-suited for work.

4. My coworker won’t stop doing my job

I returned from maternity leave to find out that my coworker just won’t give up my job duties and go back to his role prior to my leave. I’ve been back now since June and my management has discussed this with him. I have discussed with him frankly and directly. I thought that we had come to an understanding in August, but I found out that he is still doing my work duties behind my back — answering questions that should be forwarded to me or correcting errors in programming when people mention them. Basically just doing the duties because he knows how.

I’m baffled. He isn’t actively malicious in our day-to-day conversations. He isn’t a terrible person. But he’s undermining my job. I really don’t know what to do at this point. Do you have any suggestions?

This isn’t something you have the power to solve; it needs to come from someone with authority over him. Go back to your manager and plant this squarely in their lap: “I know you’ve told Carl he needs to stop doing things I’m responsible for like X and Y. However, since you spoke with him, he hasn’t stopped — (insert recent examples, preferably ones that caused problems). I’ve discussed it with him multiple times and nothing has changed. Can you help?”

You might be thinking you’ve already tried this — but your management might have no idea that their first talk with Carl didn’t solve the problem, and could be assuming everything’s fine now. Let them know that’s not the case and that you still need their help. (And do it now — don’t let it fester because it’s likely to get harder to fix the longer it’s allowed to go on.)

Read an update to this letter

5. Subject lines for a post-interview thank-you email

I’m probably overthinking this, but what do you put for a subject line when sending a post-interview thank-you email?

You are indeed overthinking it! Anything like “thank you” or “llama groomer role” or “thanks for your time Tuesday” or “a thought about your llama initiative” are all fine.

I get angry when I’m praised for doing work I don’t like

A reader writes:

Sometimes when receiving positive feedback, I feel irrationally angry about it. This is always when I’m doing a task I dislike. This, of course, causes problems at work when I’m doing a task I didn’t want to do in the first place and a supervisor tries to give me some encouragement. It’s not that I’m uncomfortable with praise. It’s that I want to tell the praise-giver, “Thanks, I hate it, please go away.”

I don’t say that, for obvious reasons. Usually I find silence is the safest response that allows me to feel like I’m being honest with my feelings. I’m not going to thank someone for giving me praise that resulted in me feeling negatively. But I don’t feel like I can politely communicate, “Thanks for trying, I know you mean well, but I don’t appreciate receiving praise right now.” Does such a script exist? Or do I just keep my mouth shut?

For what it’s worth, I’ve been like this since I was a kid. Like, if my Dad knew I hated cleaning the windows, but I did it anyways, and he’d say, “Wow! Those windows look great,” that would make me pissed off, even if I wasn’t before. If it’s a task I feel good about, or I’m neutral about, I love hearing positive feedback. But some reason I just get angry when it’s a task I don’t like and someone tries to tell me how good I am at it.

I completely understand that this is stupid, and I have no idea why I’m like this. I’ve been googling this to come up with ways of managing this emotional response, but come up with nothing. It’s like nobody else seems to have this problem.

I wrote back and asked, “Is it because you feel the person is trying to manipulate you? Patronize you? What is it that makes you feel angry?”

I think it’s that I see it as a form of control. Like, I think the person is just saying I’m doing a good job because they want me to feel good about doing things I hate. It’s as though they’re trying to change my mind or feelings about it.

Which, in a dynamic where one person has power over another, my mind and feelings are the only thing I get to keep, and now my boss is trying to take that from me as well. Which makes me want to push back and say, “Nope, I might have to do what you say, but you don’t get to positively reinforce me into feeling good about it.” Might sound stupid, but I think that’s what it is.

Well, it’s possible that people giving you positive feedback about work you dislike are indeed trying to make you feel better about doing it. But they’re probably not trying to make you like the thing you dislike. They’re probably trying to make you feel appreciated for doing it — because they do appreciate it. That’s especially true if they know you don’t like it! It’s a way of saying, “I know you’d rather not be doing this, and I appreciate that you’re doing it anyway. Thank you.” If they used those words, would it bother you as much? If it wouldn’t, then I’d try to convert whatever they say into that in your head, and see if it relieves some of your aggravation.

I also think you’re seeing this is a lot more adversarial than it is or needs to be. You’re being paid to do a job, here’s some work that needs to be done as part of that job, and we’re all better off if we have reasonably good will toward each other as part of that transaction, rather than assume anyone is trying to manipulate you or control your feelings. People just want a pleasant atmosphere at work because we’re stuck there eight hours a day. (Obviously there are exceptions to this, but if you have a boss who you genuinely think is trying to manipulate you, that’s a bigger issue than whatever positive feedback they’re tossing your way.)

As for how to handle it … you said currently you just stay silent, which might be fine in some situations but seem odd in others. And “I don’t appreciate receiving praise right now” isn’t really something that will land well in most work situations.

Frankly, I think you’re putting too much emphasis on needing an honest response. There are lots of situations at work (and in life in general) that are just about completing your side of a social ritual, rather than baring your soul. Think about “how are you?” for example — in a lot of cases an honest answer to that would be inappropriate and jarring, and it’s not what’s being sought. It’s just an “I acknowledge you” ritual. You might look at praise for something you don’t like as a similar social nicety that doesn’t require anything more from you than politely closing the loop. Exactly what that response looks like will depend on the feedback being offered, but some pretty neutral examples are:

* “Thanks.” (I know you don’t want to thank someone for praise that annoyed you, but truly this is a “how are you / fine” level of neutral response.)
* “It’s not my favorite task but it needs to be done.” (This one might satisfy your desire to be honest.)
* “I’ll be glad when it’s done!” (But you’ve got to say this cheerfully, not resentfully, and you can’t use it every time.)
* “Yeah, it’s coming along.”

I do wonder what this might be rooted in! Did you grow up in a family that demanded you put on a positive, sunshiney demeanor no matter how you were really feeling? Or that ignored your feelings when you were unhappy or wanted something to change? Or where appearances mattered more than what was really going on? Family dynamics can play out in weird ways when we’re older — you can end up stuck in a mindset that made sense for what was happening in your life decades ago but doesn’t make sense anymore, as well as seeing dynamics around you that are rooted in things from your past rather than in what’s playing out in your life currently. If that resonates with you at all, therapy is a really good place to explore that stuff, and sometimes seeing clearly where it came from can help drain whatever power it still has over you.

Otherwise, though, I’d work on seeing it as as appreciation rather than an attempt to control your feelings, and on having some go-to neutral responses to default to.

Read an update to this letter

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

A reader writes:

For eight years, I have been a fully remote employee. I am an outstanding employee, even winning Employee of the Year last year.

After a year of great loss, I felt the need for a change of scenery and told the entire executive team that I was going to California to see if I wanted to live there. They all encouraged me to do so and I worked remotely during my month-long test.

During meetings from the first week on, I told everyone how much I loved it and that I had even put a deposit on an apartment. No problem!

Until I returned and my boss told me that they looked into it and I can’t keep my job as a full-time employee and work from California. No such policy in the company existed; of course, one is being written as I write this. Further, when I mentioned being a consultant, I was told that I could do no more than a few hours a week.

While I know California presents its challenges for employers, something doesn’t feel right here. Also, I am of an age that is a protected class, but I have loved this company and I’m not a litigious person so I don’t want to invoke the law to make them let me do this. What do you think is going on?

I think what’s going on is what they told you is going on: They looked into it and realized that letting an employee work from another state isn’t as easy as simply saying yes.

People often don’t realize that letting an employee work from a state where other employees aren’t already based has significant financial and legal ramifications. When you’re already remote, it’s easy to think, What difference does it make to the company whether I’m working ten miles away or across the country? I could move anywhere and keep doing the work I’m doing right now. In fact, as more and more companies went remote over the course of the pandemic, my inbox filled up with letters from people who wanted to do exactly that … and then, later, from people who did do exactly that but learned afterward, after they had already relocated, that their companies wouldn’t permit it. So, while frustrating, it’s better you found out now.

Here’s the reason, which a lot of people aren’t aware of: If an employer lets employees work from a different state, it creates what’s called nexus in the new state, and it may be required to pay taxes, set up workers’-comp insurance (which isn’t cheap), and even charge customers sales tax in that state. Those can be really significant expenses.

On top of that, the company will be required to follow the employment laws of that state. It can be a not-insignificant burden to monitor and comply with an additional state’s employment laws, particularly if they’re very different from the laws where the business is headquartered. California’s laws in particular happen to be a lot more complex and employee-friendly than many other states’. For example, if your job is classified as nonexempt (the government classifies every job in the U.S. as exempt or nonexempt), you’re required by law to be paid overtime when you work more than 40 hours in a week. In most states, that’s the end of the requirement. But in California, you also need to be paid overtime for any hours over eight that you work in a day — so there’s a whole different tracking requirement and a whole additional pay requirement. Moreover, if you’re exempt from overtime currently, you might not qualify to keep that exemption in California, which has more restrictive standards for that than federal law does. So your company could end up needing to track and pay your overtime when it doesn’t currently. California also treats vacation accrual and payout differently than many other states and requires that different information be provided on your pay stub (with monetary penalties for not complying) and a whole host of other differences.

To be clear, you wouldn’t see differences only with California; every state has its own set of laws that could differ from the ones governing your work now.

I suspect that what happened is that the managers who originally supported your plan to move didn’t know any of this — because a lot of people don’t. Once they looked into it, they realized the financial and legal consequences of okaying the move, and that’s why they’re backtracking now. They should have explained this to you in more detail so you weren’t left to assume something nefarious was afoot. But I’d bet money this is what occurred because it’s happened to so many other people in the past few years.

They’re also right that you can’t solve these issues by just working as a consultant instead of an employee. The federal government has strict rules about who qualifies as an independent contractor and who doesn’t, and your company can’t legally convert you into a contractor without changing fundamental things about how your job is structured. Letting you continue to work there full time in the same role and just calling you a contractor would open the company up to legal risk and fines. (It also wouldn’t withhold and pay payroll taxes for a contractor as it does for employees. You’d be responsible for paying those taxes yourself, so you’d take a financial hit unless the company paid you more.)

I also want to point out that in many states, even just working from there for a short time (as you did during your monthlong trial run) can trigger tax obligations for both the employee and the employer regardless of whether you’re a resident. In practice, a lot of employers turn a blind eye to that, and most states don’t pursue short-term working visitors, but it’s worth being aware of.

It’s natural to assume that working remotely means you can work from anywhere. It sounds as if your managers themselves didn’t realize the business implications until they looked into it more closely. But now that they know, it’s not unreasonable for them to conclude it doesn’t make sense for the business to take on all the expenses and administrative burden that would come with your relocation.

Originally published at New York Magazine.

should I get rid of remote work because our in-office staff thinks it’s unfair?

A reader writes:

I am a department head for a state government agency. During Covid, our agency was considered a critical service. Our department has two distinct areas. To keep this anonymous, I’m going to use llamas as a stand-in. So let’s say we have one area where we accept llama farm documentation, record it, and put it on permanent record (Farm Services), and another where we record llama birth, marriage, and death records and sell copies of those to people who need them for various purposes (Registry Services). Our Farm Services staff have very little in-person interaction with customers and most services can be managed online or via mail. Our Registry Services have limited online capabilities to avoid llama identity theft, so during lockdown customers could mail in applications, drop them in a dropbox, or use a certified online service that charged extra but used special identification software to ensure safety and avoid identity theft.

Now that our office has been reopened to the public, our Farm Services division has a rotating work-from-home/in-office schedule where staff work in the office for two weeks, then have two weeks working from home. While working from home, staff are able to handle all of the online services and database entry, while in-office staff help counter customers and phone calls. Our Registry Services staff are all in-office all the time because the work that they do is not able to be done remotely. 100% of their work is customer-facing, and there is little to no back-office work.

This scheduling system has been in place for almost two years. I do regular meetings with staff to find out how things are going and get feedback on ways we can improve. Our agency also has anonymous surveys (done by an outside company) twice a year where staff can give feedback about work environments, scheduling, benefits, etc. In a recent one-on-one with a staff person from the Registry Services division, the staff person said that they think the remote/in-office schedule for the Farm Services division should be eliminated and all those staff should be required to come into the office every day. When I inquired further, asking how the remote schedule impacted this employee (was there a communication gap, was it causing issues with customers, etc.), the staff person simply said, “It’s not fair that they get to work from home and we don’t.”

Recent survey comments have said that staff appreciate the remote/in-office rotation and without it they would look elsewhere for work. Being in government, while we have decent benefits and our salaries are within market, they certainly aren’t at the top end of the market now and, with inflation, we are certainly at a disadvantage with salary bands being the way they are until our legislature takes action to increase them.

Do I take away the remote option for the other division as a matter of fairness? I can’t implement a remote option for the Registry Services division — it’s simply not possible. When staff are hired into this division, it is made clear during the interview and offer stage that these are in-person roles, 100% customer-facing. I will lose Farm Services staff if I eliminate the remote option.

Nooooo. Do not eliminate the remote option for people whose jobs allow them to work remotely just because people whose work must be done on-site don’t like it!

And really, you don’t even know that it’s “people.” It’s “person.” It doesn’t make sense to contemplate revoking a major benefit because a single person finds it unfair.

But for the sake of argument, let’s say it’s more than one person. Let’s say a bunch of people on the Registry Services team find it unfair that their jobs can’t be done remotely while other people’s can.

You still don’t eliminate a benefit in that situation.

Some jobs can be done remotely. Some can’t. That is the nature of reality. Different jobs have different needs. You don’t yank a benefit because someone is upset that they don’t qualify for it. You shouldn’t, for example, yank family health coverage just because someone without kids doesn’t need it. You wouldn’t stop people from traveling to conferences that are necessary for their work just because other people’s jobs don’t necessitate work-related travel and they complain about it.

Different jobs have different needs. Fairness doesn’t mean “everyone is exactly the same.”

But let’s also think about where your employee who complained is coming from. Some people resent anyone who gets a perk they don’t, even when there’s a logical basis for it, and maybe that’s all this is. But it’s also true that a lot of employees who have been on-site throughout the pandemic are rightly upset that the burden has been significantly higher on them — whether it’s wondering where the concern has been for their safety while others stayed home, or dealing with members of the public who have become increasingly aggressive, or taking on more work in the office so others could stay home, or feeling invisible in conversations about changing work norms, or even just commuting when their colleagues haven’t had to. It’s also hard to watch one whole class of workers suddenly be handed something that can significantly increase their quality of life, while a separate set of workers is left out of that, even when there are logically sound reasons for the difference.

The solution to that isn’t to take away remote work for people whose jobs allow for it. It’s to think about ways to improve life for the people whose jobs don’t. Think about things like flex schedules, commuter benefits, paid parking, relaxed dress codes, and free or subsidized lunch (or breakfast!). Is your on-site staff taking on more work to make it possible for others to be remote? If so, recognize those things (including with money). And you can get creative with it — for example, what about additional sick days for in-office staff so they don’t feel pressured to come in sick (when remote colleagues might not need to use a sick day in the same situation)? Hell, let those days be used for bad snow too and call them Commuter Days or something; you’d be recognizing that people who work on-site have different circumstances from remote employees, but to the on-site workers’ advantage this time.

Different jobs will still have different needs. That’s just reality. It doesn’t make sense to pull a benefit from people whose jobs allow for it. But it does make sense to look for ways to maximize quality of life for everyone.

can I ask my new employee to babysit, my boss thinks I lack confidence but I don’t, and more

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

1. Could I ask my new employee to babysit?

I have a question that is currently hypothetical, but may be reality soon. We are looking at hiring our fantastic college intern onto our team, and I would likely be managing her. She also loves kids, and I have two of my own. I’ve had a hard time finding and keeping babysitters; the ones we used to have have since graduated from high school and moved out of the area, and most of the high school and college students I know now don’t have the time or interest.

Would it be completely inappropriate of me to offer her babysitting opportunities if I end up managing her? These would be occasional, outside of work hours/events, and paid the normal going rate for babysitters in our area.

Don’t do it! The potential for conflicts of interest is too high. First, no matter how much you make it clear that she can say no, you won’t know if she feels pressure to say yes because you’re her boss. Second, what if something goes wrong while she’s babysitting? There’s potential for it to bleed into work, and that’s not fair to her. Third, babysitting is really intimate, and you both need to have some distance in order to work together effectively. You need to be able to give her impartial feedback (will you really feel comfortable criticizing her work if you know she’s going to be at your house taking care of your kid that night?) or even let her go if her work warrants it. And other people need to trust that you’re able to do that; perceptions of favoritism or special treatment can be a big deal on a team.

It might go fine, but the potential for problems is too high.

2. My boss thinks I lack confidence, but I don’t

I’m a first year teacher, though this is not my first job — teaching is my second career. I know that the first year can be rough, and there’s a high learning curve. I try my best, knowing that inevitably I will screw up sometimes because it’s my first year. Overall, things have been going really well!

The problem is my principal, who has somehow gotten it into her head that I lack confidence in my abilities and that she needs to help me build up my self-worth as a teacher. I don’t know where she got this impression, but confidence is pretty low on my list of growth areas. I think I’m pretty good at what I do, all things considered! It’s getting to the point where she brings it up whenever we speak, even about entirely unrelated issues, and I’m getting offended.

I know she probably means this kindly, but it feels like she’s making a lot of assumptions about me, especially because I look younger than I am. I understand she wants to support me, but the constant talk about my confidence is only making me doubt myself.

It’s possible she does this with all new teachers, but it’s also possible something gave her the impression that you in particular need it. It’s okay to ask about it! You could say, “You’ve been talking about my confidence level a lot, which surprises me because that doesn’t feel like an area where I struggle. Have I done something to give you the impression that I lack confidence?”

At some point in the conversation, you could also say, “I don’t think I need a boost there, but what I’d love your help with is…”

3. We’re returning to the office and I have a disability that means I can’t stay awake 8 hours in a row

I was hired early in the pandemic when my company went to Emergency Remote Mode, and have remained fully remote since then. My company has more recently been discussing returning to the office, and I have reason to think they might try to announce this on short notice.

While I’m still trying to figure out with my doctor exactly what is going on, I have trouble remaining fully conscious for eight hours in a row. It’s very likely if you stuck me in a desk staring at a computer for eight hours straight, I would either fall in and out of sleep or have spurts of appearing very visibly confused / having slurred speech. At the very least I would probably be a lot less productive. I generally describe the feeling as being like my brain spontaneously feeling like it’s in molasses.

Because I’ve been remote and most of my work is pretty asynchronous, I’ve been able to get away with working weird / fragmented hours, like two four-hour sections of a day with a three-hour break. Because my work gets done, no one seems to mind (and I have explicitly asked how I’m performing and gotten decent feedback) … but I also have not explicitly told coworkers exactly how wonky the hours I’m working are, beyond what they might be able to deduce by the occasional 2:30 am timestamp.

Is it worth telling my company about this if they try to do forced return-to-office? I feel embarrassed about it and I don’t super want to tell coworkers, but also, like, I think the company will probably get a lot more productivity out of me if I’m in an environment where I can physically run around or nap when I get sleep attacks / work non-traditional hours. And considering I’ve been doing this job remotely for years with good performance reviews, I think (hope?) they might take that as reason to believe I can successfully do this job remotely?

What you want is an official accommodation to work from home because of your medical condition. Your condition likely qualifies under the Americans with Disabilities Act because it interferes with a major life activity (sleep/staying awake). Because you think your company might announce a return on short notice, it makes sense to start that process now rather than waiting. Talk with your HR department, let them know you’re making “an official request for accommodations under the ADA” (use that exact term — in fact, put it in the subject line of your email), and find out what they need you to do to get the ball rolling.

4. Former boss is keeping tabs on me on LinkedIn

My former boss, an executive director at a nonprofit, has been routinely viewing my LinkedIn profile since I left four months ago. I know from former coworkers that the executive director has stalked their LinkedIn pages as well. The executive director views the pages around once a week to every two weeks, far more often than necessary to see where employees went or to get a sense of how employees are doing. They view in “private mode” but with their title and company showing up in my weekly report of who’s searches I’ve appeared in, it’s pretty easy to determine who it is.

I’ve blocked the executive director on LinkedIn. To me there is no good reason to view my page that often, but I don’t know if I should bring it up with the board of directors. I think the behavior is concerning and reflects poorly on the organization, but maybe I’m being too sensitive.

That’s weird behavior, but it doesn’t rise to the level of something you’d alert the board to or that they’d typically get involved in.

5. Duo cover letters

I recently attended a career presentation to students where the presenter showed an example of a trend in cover letters that they had learned at a career counseling workshop. It’s called duo cover letters. After the traditional business letter greetings and an introductory paragraph, the text follows a two-column format where the left column is the job requirements and the right column is the applicant’s response. There is the traditional closing paragraph and signature. From the example shown, there was no room for individuality, creativity, or voice. Having been on ad infinitum search committees, I admit that I would have a less-than-favorable reaction if I received one of these do cover letters.

Afterwards, I sent the students examples of the excellent cover letters you featured on your website. At least they now have a comparison.

Are duo cover letters truly a trend?

It’s not a new trend! This format has been around for at least a decade, and it’s a bit … gimmicky and unsophisticated. The idea is to make it easy for the person reading your resume to match your qualifications with the job requirements, but hiring managers can figure out if you’re qualified on their own; they don’t need a chart to show them. Plus, that format makes it really hard to do a lot of other things a cover letter should do, like flesh out who you are as a candidate beyond the basic facts from your resume and show how you communicate in writing. It’s too limiting.

my new boss scolded us about our private chat messages

A reader writes:

I’m wondering how to address a doozy of an email my new boss sent yesterday, which has left my coworkers and me uncomfortable and a bit panicky. In this email to my whole department, she stated HR and senior leadership had informed her about a private chat group connected to our team which often “contains negative and unproductive conversations.” She then went on to remind us that chat conversations are monitored and to make sure our messages are work-appropriate.

The thing is, I am 98% certain I know what chat group she is talking about because it’s the only major chat group my whole team uses, and the only negative comments made recently are about my boss. In my opinion, none of these comments are malicious or cross a line, and there really aren’t a lot of them. For example, after our boss invited the whole team to a meeting with another team where it turned out our department were not the ones who needed to respond to the issue, there was understandably some frustration briefly aired in the chat. Other than those very few and far between criticisms, the chat is very productive and positive. Believe me, I’ve been part of toxic work chats before, and this ain’t it!

A lot of people on my team feel a bit blindsighted and uncomfortable that they are being spied on. There is also a lot of confusion about why HR and upper management are involved and why they would be looking at our chats specifically. My boss is new and has only been in this role for about a month, so this on top of a general lack of communication on expectations and changes she has implemented, has left people very uneasy. Do you have any advice on how to handle something like this? Should I just let it go and let things fall where they may?

Assuming you’re using something like company-run Slack for the chat group, it’s true that you should be aware that anything you write there could be read by your boss or someone else at the company.

It’s also true that monitoring employee chats is really heavy-handed unless there’s some specific reason to look at them (like allegations of harassment or bullying).

I wish we knew if your boss had looked at the group herself before delivering this message, or if she just heard about it from “HR and senior leadership” and was just passing along the message from them at their request.

If she was just passing along the message rather than speaking for herself, I’d be less concerned. Who knows, it’s possible that HR had a legitimate reason to look at the group at some point, were concerned by what they saw, mentioned it to her, and she just dutifully passed on the message to the rest of you without doing any particular investigation herself. You might think the content of the group is mild enough that HR shouldn’t have been concerned, let alone alerted your boss, but sometimes complaints can sound a lot sharper to an outsider than they’re intended within a group.

But if your boss looked at the group herself and the message is her own, I don’t like it.

Any manager should be aware that sometimes people are going to air frustrations about them. People blow off steam and vent, and sometimes managers do things that are genuinely annoying and people are going to talk to each other about that. It doesn’t feel great to come face-to-face with it, but as long as it’s not malicious or so constant that it makes the culture toxic, it’s just something you’ve got to accept as a manager.

And frankly, if it is malicious or so constant that it’s making the whole culture toxic, the first thing a manager should do upon discovering that is some self-reflection about how that situation has come about. Now, maybe your manager has done that (you wouldn’t necessarily know), but ideally she would have taken it as a flag that she needs to be talking to people more and getting a better feel for how things are going, not just issuing a “stop it” edict. If the concerns people were sharing are serious ones, a “stop it” edict won’t help — and if their concerns aren’t serious and this was just light venting, she’s going to look overly heavy-handed.

So if this was your boss’s message to you — as opposed to passing it along at HR’s request — it’s useful information about her style and instincts. Not encouraging information, but useful nonetheless.

But where does that leave you, when you don’t know which of the two scenarios it is? All you can really do is take it as a reminder that private chats on company systems are never private, and if you wouldn’t want your boss to read something you write there, don’t write it. It’s not necessarily that anyone is spying on you, but these are work programs and your employer can have reasons to look at them that have nothing to do with you. (And keep in mind that even if your manager never has any reason to look at your communications, if they’re looking at the messages of someone who was talking to you, they’ll see your side of conversations too.)

The bigger problem, I think, is that you’ve got a new boss who’s not communicating well, while making a bunch of changes. Throw something like this in the middle of it, and of course it’s going to leave people rattled. But she is right that you should remember the company can see everything you do … and there’s not enough info here to know whether this incident says anything beyond that (like that she’s thin-skinned or spying on you, etc.). I’d try to move on from this and just pay a lot of attention to what else you observe from her.

Read an update to this letter

how can I stop my office’s “I’m sorry” culture?

A reader writes:

Do you have any advice on how to stop the “I’m sorry” culture in the workplace?

I’m finding my colleagues have created an extreme case of this culture, saying they’re sorry for being out sick, sorry for asking a question, sorry for needing to leave early to pick up their kids. Even when I tell them they don’t need to be sorry for these things, it continues. Surely they’re not sorry for life happening, but it creates this cloud of guilt in the office that’s difficult to shake. Do you have any advice on dealing with this?

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 work at Twitter … what do I do?

A reader writes:

I work at Twitter and have been there for many years. As I’m sure you’ve seen, Twitter was just bought by Elon Musk and ever since the deal closed two weeks ago, the company has been literally falling apart.

I was fortunate enough to survive the round of layoffs in his first week that cut 50% of the company, but since then things have gotten exponentially worse day by day. We learn of new changes when Elon tweets them. We were told just before midnight on Wednesday that we were required to be in the office at least 40 hours per week — starting Thursday. My manager resigned this week, along with several other managers and members of the senior leadership team. I’m a manager and I don’t know how to support my team — our partner teams are all gone and I no longer have the resources to lead the team the way that I need to.

I’m now realizing that the folks who got laid off and received severance packages may have been (in general) the more fortunate group.

My question is, a lot of people are resigning right now, but I’m wondering if it would be better to wait to be laid off.

If I wait, is there a risk that I could get fired (without severance) instead of laid off (with severance) because I cannot meet the demands of our new owner? I’ve been a high performer during my entire tenure at the company and have never had a negative performance review, but that was under our former leadership. Could current leadership simply decide to fire me to prevent me from receiving severance? As much as I want to resign, I’m trying to stay until I have another job lined up since my family is on my healthcare plan.

First, for any readers who haven’t been following the situation at Twitter, some background:

Inside the Twitter Meltdown
Two Weeks of Chaos: Inside Elon Musk’s Takeover of Twitter
Elon Musk Has No Idea What He’s Doing at Twitter
Twitter’s Content Moderation Head Quits As Departures Alarm the FTC
Here’s How a Twitter Engineer Says It Will Break in the Coming Weeks
Twitter Is in Grave Security Danger Right Now
A Day of Chaos Brings Twitter Closer to the Brink

Okay, back to the letter. This is a complicated question.

Let’s take the “what could Elon do?” parts of the question first.

Anything! The answer, he’s made clear, is that he could do anything! He could demand your team create a product that charges users $8 to turn them into actual flying birds and ship it next week, and then fire you if you say you can’t do it. He could parachute nude into your cafeteria tomorrow and demand you all bow before him while singing Gregorian chants. Really, to any question about whether there’s a risk Elon will do X, the answer at this point has to be yes.

Which is utterly unhelpful to you, so let’s answer this in more pragmatic terms.

In general, at any company, there is always a risk that you could get fired instead of laid off because you can’t meet the demands of a new owner. At this particular company, you also have to worry that those demands will be unreasonable and that the decision will be made without thought. Is it likely? I don’t know; I wish I did; I’m sorry about that. Is it possible? Yes. Might you have legal recourse if that happens? Possibly. Is legal action a pain to pursue? Yes, although sometimes it’s worth it. Will you be the only one this happens to, if it does happen? No, and that would make legal action easier to pursue.

Could you be fired simply to prevent you from receiving severance? Yes, in theory. In practice, there is a huge spotlight on your employer right now and it would be much harder to pull that off. (On the other hand, Elon seems to enjoy flouting the law … although it does seem like he mostly attempted to follow it with the first round of layoffs … and there are still some questions about the legality of some of those details, so one would assume he wouldn’t want to add additional legal problems … although it’s not nearly as easy to be confident about that with a chaos goblin in charge as it would be with a more prudent owner.)

In a normal situation, I’d say you’re unlikely to be fired rather than laid off unless your performance changes drastically. In this situation, if I had to guess, I’d say chances are better than not that you won’t be randomly fired (as opposed to laid off at some point). But that’s a guess, and it’s heavily informed by how this stuff normally works … while you’re in a situation that won’t necessarily be governed by those norms.

There’s also the risk that even if you’re laid off, the company might be in so much financial trouble at that point that they won’t have the money for severance that they have right now.

As for whether it would be better to resign now rather than waiting to be laid off (which may or may not happen) or waiting until you get another job … If you can stomach it, you’re probably better off waiting, especially because your family depends on the health insurance. And really, if you’re weighing (a) resigning now (no severance) against (b) the risk of being fired without severance … well, in both of those cases you’d be out of work with no severance. Staying at least gives you the option of severance down the road (if you’re part of a future layoff) and gives you an ongoing income and health insurance.

Assuming, of course, you can stomach it. But as long as you’re not actively doing harm, there’s no ethical imperative to quit on the spot and no shame in staying if you need to.

Good luck, and I’m sorry something you helped build is being needlessly destroyed.

Read updates to this letter here and here.