Ask a Manager

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

1. I manage someone who’s bored and grumpy at work

I work on a small team and manage one person, A. The nature of A’s work can often be quite monotonous and she knew this might be the case when she joined.

A is the type of person who wears her heart on her sleeve. We’ve gotten used to adapting to her moods, but it does mean she can be quite negative during a particularly monotonous period. For example, during team meetings, she will be grumpy or moody. She will agree to do certain tasks, but then complain about them. Of course we’ve all been known to make comments like this, but her tone can be quite negative or brusque. My manager and I usually try to comment about the other valuable things she does, or lighten the mood by sharing our boring tasks too, but I’m not sure if it works and to me it feels glaringly obvious that we are trying to pacify her and she knows it.

We’ve also tried to encourage her to let off steam by messaging in Teams if there’s a particularly annoying/repetitive set of emails to respond to, and by offering to take on some of them. She has started venting a little over Teams, but usually brushes off offers of support. At times like this or when she’s having a difficult time personally, she has also seemed disengaged or demotivated in wider staff meetings or on one-to-one calls.

Though it’s not the best working environment to have a grumpy colleague, I’m glad that she is making her feelings known. However, we wonder if there is more we could do to support her. Unfortunately monotonous work will always need to be done! Do you have any advice on coping strategies for this type of work, and how I can best support her? I am not very good at being direct!

It’s true that everyone vents about their job occasionally, but most people manage to do it in a way that doesn’t regularly bring down the mood of their entire team. That’s the issue here — not that A occasionally lets off steam, but that her routine negativity is affecting the work environment for everyone else.

It also sounds like you might have inadvertently encouraged some of this — in an effort to be supportive, you’ve encouraged her to vent more. I think that’s counterproductive. If A is unhappy with her job, the solution isn’t to make everyone engage in extra emotional labor to help her manage those feelings. As her manager, the solution is to have a straightforward conversation with her along the lines of: “You’ve seemed really unhappy with your work. I want to be up-front with you that XYZ isn’t going to change; that’s the nature of the job. If you decide the job isn’t for you anymore, I’ll support you in figuring out what you want to do next. But I do need you to be realistic that as long as you’re in this position, this is the work.” That’s ultimately more supportive because it’s more realistic. Your role isn’t to coax her into liking work that she doesn’t like; it’s to be clear with her about what the job is, and what can and can’t change about it, so that she can decide for herself if it’s something she’s up for or not. You can do that kindly, but you do need to do it.

You also need to let her know that being openly grumpy on anything more than a very occasional basis isn’t okay because it makes everyone’s else’s work environment harder. That’s going to be a shift in tone from what you’ve been doing so you’ll need to think about how to navigate that in a way that doesn’t give her whiplash — but you really do need to more actively manage what’s going on.

2. My company let me buy a house, then laid me off — then pulled the rug out from under me again

I’ve had a bit of a whirlwind month at work and am feeling extremely demotivated from the fallout. I was previously a remote worker, but management encouraged me to relocate to be more competitive for promotions. I discussed this at length with both my direct manager, Sara, and others in management, who all suggested this move. I had some reservations because we are undergoing a large restructuring and the worst case scenario would be to commit to purchasing a house and then be laid off. I was reassured that there were no layoff plans for my team and ultimately purchased the house and started relocating.

Less than a full workday after I closed, Sara brought me into a meeting with some higher-ups and let me know the entire team is being offshored and all employees will be laid off at the end of the year. Internally, I was furious. It felt like management had misled me for months as I considered whether to relocate. I did not express this at the time, wanting to stay professional. In later meetings, Sara and her supervisor indicated the restructuring had created a new position that they wanted me to take. I had been doing my due diligence and applying elsewhere, including some internal transfers, but I kept in close communication with Sara about my status. I was waiting to hear from one internal position and let Sara know I expected a response on Monday and could decide then which offer I was more interested in. She seemed supportive and relayed it to the others involved, all of whom said that would be fine and they would contact me if anything changed before then.

On Monday, I was blindsided again. The other position decided to go with the other finalist. When I reached out to Sara to update, she said they had decided to offer the position to someone else because “we couldn’t wait another day.” It felt like a huge insult — they couldn’t have let me know they needed an answer sooner? Why did they tell me they would make a decision Monday and then go back on that?

I’m now stuck on what to do next. I know another position on the other team is coming open soon, and that since I was in the final two candidates before I would be a likely choice for this round. But can I really trust my workplace at all after they’ve pulled the rug out twice? Should I chalk this up to an issue with my direct manager, or should this be a red flag to get out now?

Well, we know you can’t trust Sara, who has behaved abominably. It’s true that companies usually can’t tip people off about layoffs ahead of time, but when you know someone who’s being considered for a layoff is buying a house — specifically because you have encouraged them to move — and they’ve discussed their worries about that with you at length, you can find ways to subtly hint. And then not bothering to tell you she needed your answer on the other position a day earlier, after assuring you she didn’t? There’s no excuse for that.

That’s all about Sara. I can’t say from the outside whether you should get out of your company altogether. To answer that, I’d say to look at what else you know about them: have you seen other managers treat people well and with transparency? Does this feel like an aberration for the broader company culture or is it on some level unsurprising?

You could always take the other position if it’s offered without calling off the rest of your search, and if an external offer comes along after that, your company has forfeited any expectation that you wouldn’t take it.

3. I saw an anti-union training on our CEO’s credit card bill

I work in accounting for a nonprofit. My workplace is not unionized, and I am not aware of any current efforts to unionize. Our CEO’s credit card expenses recently included a union prevention training. As I said, I’m not aware of any current efforts to unionize, but am I allowed to share this information with fellow staff who I know are pro-union and would be interested to learn this? I’m not asking about our internal policies, but rather what regulations exist regarding what kinds of information people in certain positions can share. Does the answer change if it’s just me talking with interested staff versus actual organizers for a current unionization effort? If a unionization campaign were to happen at my organization, is there anything else I should know as a pro-union person with access to all the financial data?

There are no laws that protect your right to share confidential information that you’re given access to as part of doing your job (with the exception of whistleblower laws, which this wouldn’t fall under). Your employer almost certainly expects you to not to shit-stir on the basis of what you see on the CEO’s credit card bill, and could legally fire you for abusing that access. That is true regardless of whether or not there’s an active unionization effort going on; in both scenarios, employers can require people in positions that require confidentiality and discretion to maintain that confidentiality.

For what it’s worth, you sent me the name of the training and the organization hosting it, and I don’t think it’s particularly egregious — it’s pitched as how to maintain positive employee relations so employees don’t feel they need to organize. (And yes, lots of anti-union stuff uses that framing, but I don’t think it’s the sort of thing that warrants risking your job, or that it’s a sign your CEO is actively looking to bust up unions — at least not any more than most CEOs are, which is a non-zero amount.)

4. Asking to work from home more often after a traumatic workplace event

Warning for gun violence

I got my dream job recently (thanks for your cover letter help!) and I’ve been here for five months now. This job has a really, really great hybrid policy — basically, you need to come in at least one day a week, but you can choose when that day is. It really attracted me to this job. However, employees have to work there at least a year before they can go hybrid. And I was fine with that, until recently.

I work in an office building, but the first floor is connected to a food court/mall/train station area that’s open to the public. The first floor isn’t owned by the company that employs me, so it’s not technically a part of our company, but most every employee uses it, whether it’s for the train station or for getting lunch at the food court.

There was an incident a few weeks ago where someone came in to the food court and started shooting. Thankfully, no one was killed, and the injured people will all recover. I wasn’t present (I missed it by 30 minutes) but we did have a shelter in place order for a few hours while the police arrested the guy. The shooter never came anywhere near our offices. Even if he wanted to, he would have had to get past a locked gate, two security desks, and an elevator that needs a key card (and each key card can only go to a specific floor).

I feel silly for it since it really didn’t affect me, but I kind of want to ask if I can start the hybrid work early. But at the same time, I worry that I’ll come across as trying to flout the rules or like I’m taking advantage of what happened. After all, it’s not like it’s likely to happen again. My experience with my boss and HR has been good so far, but I don’t want to push it. Would it be okay to at least try and ask? I do have a diagnosed anxiety disorder, but should I disclose that? Or would it be best to wait out the remaining seven months?

It’s okay to ask. They might say no, but any compassionate person would understand why you’re raising it, in light of what happened. You don’t need to mention the anxiety disorder; this is a reasonable thing one might want to ask about regardless.

However, you could also try the formal accommodations route, given the anxiety. There are reasons to be cautious about doing that, but it’s another avenue if you want it.

5. Firefighters aren’t being fed enough food

I work as a contract paramedic on wildfires. I’ve been doing this for three seasons now. Each year, I go out there and it feels like the food quality from our contractors gets worse and worse for everyone in fire camp. I’m genuinely concerned about the nutrition of the firefighters I serve. Firefighters work so hard — they need ~4,000+ calories a day to compensate for the work they’re doing — and I’m appalled at the state of the food they’re served.

To explain, catering in camp is contracted out by the federal government to the lowest-bidding private companies. In theory, this is fine. In practice, it means bidders cutting every corner they can to pocket an extra penny. 60-70% of the time, food is not great but fine. But the rest of the time, I’ve seen full-grown firefighters forced to sustain themselves on prepackaged snacks (e.g., goldfish crackers, cheap protein bars, etc.) and/or receive raw/moldy/otherwise inedible foods for breakfast/lunch/dinner in often remote locations where there are no other food options. Us medical staff get ~6-8 GI complaints per fire, and those are just the ones being reported.

How do I change this?? I’ve complained every year to my medical bosses, who all agree with me and complain up the chain as well. But barring a few specific fires that get viral attention (a Tweet about raw chicken or moldy bread getting a caterer fired, for example), I have not seen structural change. Even though there are guidelines as to what caterers have to cook, I’ve seen them violate it time and again without experiencing any consequences. Beyond my bosses, who do I contact to address the issue? It affects both me and the firefighters and I can’t figure out how to improve the situation.

I know this isn’t your typical workplace and it’s fine if you don’t have any answers, I’m just not sure where to turn for advice at this point.

I’m not sure but I bet some reader knows, so I’m printing this in the hopes that you get useful suggestions in the comment section. The inspector general for the federal agency that oversees the program? Members of Congress on the appropriate subcommittee? Someone out there knows. (And if nothing else, I suspect some reporter might be really interested in writing about it.)

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

1. I reported a manager, who’s now trashing me whenever my name comes up

I need a gut check here. This has been really bothering me but I’m not sure it’s really a big deal or if I just need to be more resilient. I previously worked on Manager A’s team. He engaged in some fairly blatant EEO violations against me. The violations were substantiated and my company’s solution, which I agreed to and found satisfactory, was to move me to Manager B’s team. I do not know whether there were additional disciplinary actions taken against Manager A (nor would I expect to know). The nature of my work dictates that I still must work very closely with Team A, despite reporting to and being evaluated by Manager B.

Since then, Manager A has continued to disparage me to my coworkers, ranging from the innocuous (e.g., facial expressions when I am talking or when my name comes up) to direct statements to them intended to question my judgment and competence. Usually I hear about this from peers on Team A, and often from multiple people saying the same thing. These coworkers mean well and are trying to keep my apprised (not intentionally stirring up drama), but I have recently asked them to stop sharing this information with me for my own mental health. I have also directly asked Manager A to address any concerns about my professional actions to either me or Manager B, to no effect. If it matters, some of the previous EEO behaviors leading to my changing teams involved Manager A threatening to poison my references in retaliation for my participation in a protected activity.

I am not overly worried about damage to my professional reputation — unsurprisingly, Manager A is widely known to be a terrible person and a terrible manager — but there is always a possibility. The primary problem is that despite my best efforts, I feel awful at work and second guess everything I do. Is this worth bringing up to HR? Manager B is alright, but extremely conflict averse and unlikely to intercede in a meaningful way. Our HR department is generally solid, which is why right now I feel like that is my only option/a good option, but I am afraid of coming off as a whiner.

It’s not whining to point out that Manager A is actively engaging in illegal behavior against you! And it is illegal — federal law prohibits managers from retaliating against employees for making good-faith complaints of harassment or discrimination (which I assume covers the EEO violations you mentioned). In fact, lawyers generally have a field day with retaliation cases, because retaliation is often much easier to prove than the original charge of harassment or discrimination would have been. If your company’s HR is even mildly competent, they’ll want to know that Manager A is opening them up to this kind of clear-cut liability.

Go back to HR and frame it this way: “I appreciate your handling of the EEO issues I raised about Manager A. Unfortunately, since then he’s been actively retaliating, such as (fill in with details of what he’s been doing). I know that federal law says managers can’t retaliate against employees for making harassment or discrimination complaints, so I wanted to bring this to your attention and ask for it to stop.”

2. How can I get team members to contribute equally to group tasks?

I am on a team of eight where some people have varying degrees of motivation to get work done. A few members end up doing way more work, including routine, maintenance, and other unsavory (but very necessary!) work that everyone is responsible for helping out on but they end up doing the lion’s share of. Another subset will spend endless hours doing personal things (reading news, Reddit, etc.) and will do work but only when prompted. My other co-lead and I have gotten some comments and have directly observed this dynamic get worse over the last few months and have decided that we need to change how things are done. Are there different ways we can track and make sure people are contributing? And how can we do this without being overly childish or demeaning towards our group?

I can imagine us implementing a chore wheel or some other type of schedule based on different tasks, but I also want to be sensitive that we’re all adults and not bleed into micromanaging.

Do you and your co-lead have the authority to simply assign work? Because that’s what you should be doing. You’d of course like to think that you could count on people to take equal shares of the work simply because the need has been pointed out to them, but what you’re seeing is that that’s not happening. You could try a meeting with the whole group where you explain the problem and ask what solutions people can suggest — and that meeting itself might prompt some people to take more of their fair share, just by calling out the issue — but unless that results in a fairly immediate realigning of who’s doing what, you need to just start assigning it.

Don’t use a chore wheel; people will find that infantilizing. You could use a work version of that, though, where you rotate tasks throughout a month or quarter — but you need to be prepared to actually assign the work rather than waiting for people to claim it voluntarily. The latter just punishes your most conscientious team members, who will step up when they see no one else is.

Related:
my manager delegates to the group rather than to a person

3. My company wants me to start a new job without a raise for a “test period”

I have worked at my company (fintech startup) for three years in a primarily “soft skills” role and have recently been “promoted”(I use quotation marks because it is not finalized even though I have already taken on new responsibilities) to a more technically-focused position. I do not have official, resume-based experience relevant to this job title but have demonstrated aptitude over the past few years, hence the transition. This new role comes with an increased salary and requires cross-country relocation. Relocation, while difficult, is something I am willing to do.

I’ve just been advised that my new compensation, which is on the lower end of the industry standard for the position but higher than my current salary, will not be effective until I’ve been in the role for four months, contingent upon a successful “review.” I have been given no indication what a negative review would mean. Meanwhile, I am meant to start in my new role next month.

This seems outrageous to me. I’ve been doing the work for my new role, in addition to my existing responsibilities, for months as we are a small startup. If we hired a new employee, they’d be paid right out the gate, not given a reduced salary for four months as a trial, and no new hire would accept this salary for the position. I have not had many white collar jobs. Is this normal, or are my employers trying to take advantage of me and save some cash because I’m already bought in to the company?

They are trying to take advantage of you because you’re already working there, they know you want the promotion, and they think they can.

To be fair, they might legitimately have concerns about how you’ll perform in the new position; you’re untested and they might be taking a risk. They might figure that if they were hiring externally, they’d be hiring someone with a more established track record who wouldn’t be untested, and that they’re paying you less at the start because they’re giving you a chance they wouldn’t give otherwise.

But you also are taking a risk, with a cross-country move! And there are better ways for them to handle this; they could, for example, start you at the lowest end of the salary range and say that they’ll move you to a higher number after X months, as long as you’re performing well. And they could spell out specific metrics they want you to meet first, so that everyone is on the same page about exactly what will warrant the higher salary.

On your end, it’s reasonable to say that you’re not prepared to undertake a cross-country move without a firmer commitment from them, and that if you’re doing the work, you need to be paid fairly for it, just as they would do with an outside candidate. I would not get on a plane to make that move unless you’d be okay with finding yourself still paid at your current rate five or six months from now.

Read an update to this letter. 

Related:
can I refuse more work without a raise?

4. My boss and I both respond to the same email requests and duplicate each other’s work

I have a coworker who will need something from a vendor and it’s my job to get those things as needed. She will email our boss and copy me, asking for it, but she does not place either of our names in the body of the email — she will just say, “I need X.” Then, if anything is unclear, my boss and I (who are in different offices) ask the same questions and we both reach out to get the thing.

Since I am his direct assistant, it makes more sense to me that she should ask me and copy him, freeing him up to do more important things. I have asked her to email me and just copy him so that he is in the loop, since he likes to be copied on everything, but we trip all over each other to get things.

Please help! If she emails him and copies me, do I ignore it? Then he may think, “Why is my assistant not getting this?” He also admits that he “gets in the way.” Maybe I should ask him what we should do when both of us are emailed so that we are both not fetching the same things or emailing the same people for the same things. Or maybe when she emails us both, I should reply right back and say, “Do you want me to get this or you?” But I think this is not a good use of time.

Everyone knows me as the one who loves to assist and be a team player. I just find this annoying as it happens a minimum of 15 times a day!

I think you’re looking to the cc field to solve this — thinking that if only your boss were cc’d instead of being in the To field, this would all get clearer — but I doubt your boss is paying that much attention to whose name is where, and he sounds like someone who’s going to rush in regardless.

Instead, you need to talk to your boss and come up with a clearer delineation of labor so that it won’t matter who is or isn’t cc’d, because there will be a clear system for who handles what. Ideally, through that conversation, you’d reach an understanding that you will handle all the requests this coworker sends unless you specifically flag for him that you need his help with something — and that he should assume you’ve got it handled unless you say otherwise. Even more ideal would be if you proposed that he not be copied on these requests at all, since including you both is causing confusion and duplication of energy! Can you point that out to him and ask if you can experiment with a week where he’s not included at all, and see how that goes? He might not agree to this, since he apparently likes to be included in everything, even while admitting he gets in the way, but it’s reasonable to propose and, who knows, he might be willing to try it if you present it as a short-term experiment rather than a permanent change.

5. How can I get people to spell my name correctly?

I have a really common name that has a couple variations on how it can be spelled (think Ashley/Ashleigh, Erica/Erika). In my professional career, I have had many people misspell my name. I don’t make a big deal out of it, but more and more often I’m seeing people who seem to consistently use the wrong spelling of my name, especially in emails (FWIW, my name is my email address, so it’s not like they don’t see it). I even had one guy who I worked with for over a decade who never once spelled my name correctly.

As I’ve said, I’ve never made a big deal out of this, but I started a new position in the last year and I’m seeing this kind of thing start again with my new coworkers. I’d like to professionally nip this in the bud without seeming like I’m going to be a pest about it. What’s the best way to put this forward (particularly in an email setting)?

You can try. Some people will just never get it (I say this as the possessor of a similar name), but you can try.

The first time it happens, you can write back, “By the way, it’s Erika with a K.” If it keeps happening, you can try, “Please note my name is spelled Erika.” Most people will make a good-faith effort to at least try to spell it correctly after that. But some just won’t — maybe they have someone in their life who spells it Erica and it’s ingrained in them that way, or who knows what — and there are only so many times you can correct people before you start looking like the infamous “don’t call me Liz” person. Obviously it’s your name and people should get it right, blah blah. And yet this is still the case. (As evidence of this, you spelled my name wrong in your email to me about name misspellings! I don’t care at all — but it underscores how common it is.)

You should certainly expect and insist that your name be spelled correctly in printed materials, but in casual emails … well, life as a one-L Alison tells me that sometimes it’s going to be wrong, and it’s much better for your peace of mind if you can choose not to care that much.

(Personally I never bother correcting people unless it’s from a close friend or relative or if it’s on something official, because to me it becomes more annoying if I have to put any energy into it. I did once correct my then-young niece because family should know better, and then for years she insisted on writing “Allllllllllison,” which she found extremely enjoyable.)