let’s discuss territory-marking at work

Let’s talk about territory-marking behavior at work: people with a high need to make sure you know they they own this work area or this desk or this project (whether or not they really do).

Think for example, of this person who left ridiculously excessive “rules” for the person covering her maternity leave (including “do not make any new contacts without my express permission”) or this man who engraved his name on his stapler and freaked out when someone borrowed it, or this turf war over coffee makers.

Please share your story of workplace territorialism in the comment section. Was it you? Was it a colleague? Spill all.

can you be fired for making a pass at your boss’s spouse, volunteer dropped the ball, and more

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

1. Can you be fired for making a pass at your boss’s spouse?

I am a longtime watcher of the CBS soap The Bold and the Beautiful and recently a plot line came up that I thought would be fun to run by you!

On the soap, Steffy runs Forrester Creations (an international fashion house that seems to only have three rooms in its office space). She has long-standing enmity with her stepsister Hope, who is the main designer of one of their fashion lines. Steffy and Hope have fought over men in the past (and have been married to and had children with the same guy), and Hope is now single and was crushing on Steffy’s husband, Finn (who’s a doctor but seems to spend a lot of time at his wife’s work). She made a pass at him at a non-work event and he turned her down, but everyone found out. Steffy told Hope that if she made another pass at Finn, she would be fired.

Hope moved on to a new guy (Carter, who’s the COO — this place has terrible work boundaries) and while attempting to have sexy times with Carter at work, she accidentally ended up in a compromising position with Finn in her lingerie due to mistaken identity. Steffy walked in on them and fired her on the spot, despite Hope saying it was a miscommunication and she wasn’t attempting to seduce her husband.

Many of the characters are saying it’s wrong for Steffy to fire Hope for a personal non-work reason and I’m wondering how you would advise Steffy or Hope if they wrote into you!

Of course it’s reasonable to fire your sister for continually hitting on your husband. There is no obligation to continue to employ a relative who tries to personally betray you in that way. Steffy would also be on solid ground in firing Hope for stripping down to lingerie at work and attempting to have sex in the office, regardless of who she hoped to have the sex with.

It would also be reasonable, and legal, for Steffy to fire Hope if Hope tried to kidnap her child, was secretly sheltering an evil twin, or was blackmailing their long-lost uncle after he came out of a coma. (I watched Days of Our Lives as a child; I know how this works.)

2. Volunteer dropped the ball and wouldn’t respond to any messages

I belong to a professional organization that has a national branch as well as state chapters (sometimes more than one per state). For my state, we have three chapters and we hold one large statewide conference every year. I am a chair of a subcommittee of the main chapter. These aren’t paid positions (it’s more something that looks good on resumes).

The same woman has always handled our submission to the statewide conference every year. This year, she was going to record a podcast with former chairs of our subcommittee and then post them to the chapter’s social media so everyone attending the conference (not just our session) could listen. (She also hosts a professional podcast related to our profession in her spare time.)

About a month before the conference, we still had no work product from her, despite this starting three months prior. She emailed a week or so later, saying she had never imagined her work would be this busy this year, but she would make the deadline.

So we went on to assign co-hosts to eight tables, telling the co-hosts where the podcasts would be posted and to listen so they would be able to help direct any conversations.

Not only did this woman not post anything to the social media accounts until the morning of the conference, she would not answer any phone calls or emails asking where these podcasts were, or what she needed help with, despite several of us inquiring.

I’m wondering how we could have best handled this situation. Looking back, I think more check-ins might have helped, especially with hindsight, knowing we should have taken stuff off her plate. I just don’t know how to handle it when people are not answering any communication — for all we know, she could have had a family emergency and not been able to handle any of this, so we were also worried.

Yes, more check-ins! If you’re counting on having something by a particular date, you don’t want to just leave it for months and not check in until the end; you want to check in at least a few times throughout so that you can ensure things are on track and course-correct if they’re not.

If someone in this context (an unpaid volunteer) isn’t responding at all to inquiries, then at some point you assume they’re not doing the work and make other plans — and you let them know that with a message like, “Since we haven’t hear back from you about X, I’m guessing you don’t have time to do it this quarter. Because we’d need know for sure by the 15th, if we haven’t heard from you by next week, we will assume X isn’t happening this year and will make different plans.” And then the next week, if you haven’t heard from them, you send another message confirming that you’re moving forward without their work on X.

3. My coworker road-raged at me and now she’s trying to be BFFs

Last year I was involved in a road rage incident. I cut someone off (not my proudest moment, mea culpa) and she followed me closely, occasionally pulling up next to me at intersections to scream threats and obscenities at me, until I pulled into the parking lot of a police station. I made a report but there was never any follow-up. It was really scary, but I was unharmed.

Recently, I changed jobs. On day one, I was being introduced to my new team, and wouldn’t you know it, the woman who road raged at me is on my team! She didn’t recognize me at first, but a few days after I started, she told me she’d recognized my car in the employee parking lot. She apologized and let me know that the incident had been part of a very low point in her life that she’s been working hard to recover from. I thanked her for apologizing and have since been polite to her at work.

However, she seems to have gotten it into her head that this has brought us closer together, and is now making overtures of friendship towards me (asking for my socials/contact info, asking me to hang out after work, etc.). I appreciate that she apologized but I’m really not interested in being her friend. I’m worried that not going along with this will set her off somehow. What do you think is the best way forward here?

Treat her like you would any other colleague who was making social overtures you weren’t interested in — meaning set clear boundaries and politely decline: “You’re kind to ask but I keep work and social media separate.” / “I’m not able to socialize after work.” / “No, thank you, but I hope you have fun if you go!” / etc. Alternately, you can say more directly, “I appreciate your apologizing for what happened last year, but I prefer to leave it there and simply work together as colleagues.”

It sounds like you’re worried about a volatile reaction because you’ve already seen her have a volatile reaction once before. Hopefully we can take her at her word that she’s working hard to not repeat that behavior, and she has more incentive not to blow up at a colleague than at a stranger … but if she does blow up again, you’ll have more recourse this time and can escalate it to your employer to manage.

Related:
I don’t want to be friends with my coworker

4. How to ask people who want free advice to pay me for it

I am a technical expert in a niche field and have accumulated some contacts from a previous position who I assisted with some brief, but free, advice in the months after I left, knowing that it was very hard to fill my spot. My previous employer hasn’t replaced me in a year (and counting).

Things were quiet for some time but they came back with a very big issue and copied a number of high level staff, attached documents, and asked me for help beyond a few quick questions. I’ve also had other people I’ve previously worked with ask me questions regarding my expertise to use for their own jobs for paying work for other clients. This is work I would need to be paid for, not free advice.

How do I either politely deflect freeloaders who are profiting off my niche experience, or potentially broach a discussion of having them pay a consulting fee? I was a public employee previously, but I am not willing to work for free now that I have moved on to another position, but am interested in a consulting side job.

“The scope of this is more than I could answer quickly, but we could set up a short-term consulting agreement if you’re interested in that.” Include an estimate of what you think they’d need and what you’d charge.

Alternately, if you’re not interested in doing a particular piece of work even if you’re paid for it: “The scope of this is more than I could answer quickly. I sometimes do this kind of thing on a consultant basis but realistically wouldn’t have the time to take it on right now — my apologies!” If you can easily refer them to someone else who might do it for pay, refer them for the good will it will generate on both sides.

5. “Gotcha” instructions in an applicant’s cover letter

I’m a hiring manager for the first time and wading through applications and cover letters. Today one of the letters had a postscript: “I’m not sure if recruiters read these until the end. If you did, write ‘Booyah’ at the beginning of my follow-up email. Because you did what most don’t!”

I understand that job seekers are frustrated with the rise of AI and job application systems that seem like black holes. But yes, a person reads the applications at least some of the time — especially at smaller places, or for jobs where writing is important. And I’m not sure if there is a job or company where a statement like that would help your case for getting the job. At the very least it seems like a big risk to turn people off.

I put this applicant in the no pile for not only this reason, but wonder if I should respond, not with “booyah” but with some version of feedback that their P.S. was unprofessional. Or is it not worth it and I should just move on and let them get the form rejection email?

It’s not worth it. They’ll figure it out from the lack of employer response, or they’ll find the one employer who thinks it’s amazing, or they won’t figure it out and will just stay bitter … but it’s not your job to coach them. (I understand the impulse! I used to have it myself. To the point that I started a blog to try to help. But it’s really not your job.)

Interestingly, occasionally employers have used this tactic too — including instructions in ads like “please put ‘kumquat’ in the subject line of your email in order to be considered.” It’s as infantilizing (and a bit insulting) when they do it too.

our new boss is ruining the organization and is upset that I’m pushing back

A reader writes:

I really need an outside perspective on somethings happening at my work. I am the assistant director at a small organization where there are 10 full-time staff (including the director) and two part-time. About a year ago, our longtime director left. She basically built the current version of our organization from the ground up and her management style could best be described as “trust your people to do their jobs.” She was pretty hands-off but would address issues as they came up, even though we didn’t have a formal system for reviews. Our vibe could be described as “Chaotic Good” (to put it in Dungeons & Dragons terms) and a place where we take the work seriously but not ourselves. We have done a lot of work in the community to overcome the negative feelings many folks had about previous iterations of our organization.

Once the director left, not being interested in applying for the director position, I stepped in as interim director while our board conducted a search. One of the things that the board made very clear to every candidate they interviewed was that the staff was great and did not need an overhaul — they were not looking for a fixer but rather someone to continue the great work that is already being done. Staff had an opportunity to meet the finalists and the board asked for our feedback. Every single staff member had reservations of some degree about the candidate they ended up hiring (mostly that she wouldn’t fit our culture) but were open to being proven wrong.

Well, Marcia has been here just under six months and the wheels are falling off. In this time frame, she has imposed a strict service desk schedule, changed the job descriptions of our three front-line staff members, reorganized all of our storage, updated our calendar system, and changed the workflow for several of our processes. Additionally, she demonstrates in small ways that she doesn’t quite trust staff to do their work and does not like the way we are used to doing things. Feedback I have received from many staff indicate that they are unhappy with the direction things are going and the speed at which change is being implemented. Change is not the problem — we are used to change — but it is being imposed without a lot of staff input and very quickly.

I have spoken with Marcia a few times about my concerns and the concerns of some of the staff and other staff have spoken to her as well. It finally came to a point where I sent her an email suggesting that we engage an outside facilitator to help us work through the communication challenges that we have been experiencing so that we can continue in a positive direction. I really do think it is possible to salvage this, but I know we don’t have the skills to do it ourselves.

After two weeks of radio silence, including in-person, I received an email 15 minutes before we closed on a Friday that said no to a facilitator because she does not trust my judgment. She then listed the reasons why she believes I have done more to tank staff morale and said a formal communication outlining my plan for improvement was to follow.

At this point, I have no idea what to do next. Mostly, I’m wondering if this is as weird as I think it is. Is her response reasonable? Was I out of line making that suggestion?

I think you’ve got two options here: start planning to leave or go to the board. Or both!

Your boss told you she doesn’t trust your judgment and thinks you’re responsible for tanking staff morale and said she plans to put you on a formal improvement plan.

These are very bad signs about your future in the organization. This is a manager who doesn’t want you around, doesn’t respect your work, and may be laying the groundwork to fire you.

You weren’t out of line in suggesting an outside facilitator, but I’m guessing Marcia took that as one more sign that you aren’t on board with the direction she’s taking things in. I suspect her perspective would be: “I see things that need to be changed, I’m changing them, the person who was doing my job on an interim basis before I got here is fighting me on them, I’ve heard her out several times, but when I didn’t agree with her, she wanted to bring in an outside facilitator to continue to push me to see things her way. Oh, and I think she might be stirring up discontent on the staff under the guise of ‘concerns.’”

Now, is Marcia wrong about all that? Very possibly! It’s also possible that some of what she’s changing are things the board asked her to change — or things she told them she would change and got their blessing for. The board stressing to candidates that things didn’t need an overhaul doesn’t mean they’d expect a new director wouldn’t change anything. It’s also true that while “Chaotic Good” may have been an improvement from how things were before, it’s not necessarily the place an organization should stay permanently.

I don’t know which it is — or whether it’s a mix of both — but what I do know is that the person in charge of your organization is telling you pretty clearly that she sees you as a threat to the organization’s stability, and that bodes badly for your future there.

Normally I’m not a big proponent of going to the board because nonprofit boards generally shouldn’t get involved in day-to-day staff issues, many will reflexively back the executive director and are judging them on things other than staff morale, and if it doesn’t work you’ll have a target on your back. It’s a high-risk move that rarely pays off except in the most egregious situations. But in this case, you were the interim director so probably know the board members and your word has some weight. It might be worth a discreet conversation with one or two board members about what’s going on, including that you think Marcia may be laying the groundwork to push you out.

I don’t know what will come of that. That way definitely lies drama! But it sounds like things may be at that point, unless you prefer to just leave altogether (which is absolutely a path you should be thinking about too).

job candidate says she would need to work for us secretly

A reader writes:

We interviewed a candidate for a part-time position who had been out of our line of work for 10 years. I interviewed her because she had some other things on her resume that seemed really interesting (from a business she’s been running with a family member). Still, we are a quickly-changing industry and it is unusual to grant an interview to someone who isn’t up on the latest developments. So I thought she would be happy when we decided to check references and most likely offer her the job.

However, she told us she could not provide any work-related references — none at all — because (a) the ones from our industry were too old; and (b) it was important that nobody she deals with via her current business knows she would be also working for us, as they had to be under the impression that she is at her online job and available to them at all times. She offered us two personal references, both close friends. We asked again for anybody who could speak to her work ethic, attitudes, demeanor, etc. (a vendor, for example, if she’d rather not have customers know). She again refused. So we moved on with another candidate.

The other candidate is great, but I can’t help but wonder how the first person thought this would work if she did get the job. Is it normal for people who are running small businesses and have a side job to maintain this kind of secrecy between their two jobs? She did not even name her business on her resume — just put “family business” and mentioned the key elements of it. I figured out what it was as I am interested in the topic her online platform covers. They have a solid platform, but she’s not running Microsoft. Why the secrecy? Would people she deals with for her online business care if she had a job with us a few days a week? How could it possibly be damaging?

The best explanation I’ve come up with is that she is embarrassed that the business is not as profitable as she would like, which I assume is why she interviewed with us. But that is such a normal thing in family businesses, it’s hard for me to see how it could be important enough for her to lose a job over. What’s your take?

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.

our ex-CEO’s son can’t do his job and is overpaid

A reader writes:

I took over a new job about eight months ago, and knowingly inherited an abundance of issues, ranging from minor (previous CEO of 20 years did not believe in pest control so there were mouse remnants everywhere) to complex (ex-CEO had hired their unqualified child, Jasper, into a role that has large organizational impact).

As the old CEO’s replacement, I’ve been untangling the nepo baby situation over the past six months, and it is nothing but a mess. Jasper was directly supervised by the ex-CEO and was never held to any kind of workplace expectations. No one had a job description, including Jasper, and there was no enforced personnel handbook. I’ve addressed both of those and, to his credit, Jasper has been taking feedback about his work to heart, if not executing it as well as I’d expect. From what I hear from other staff, Jasper shows more personality and initiative than ever before (but still a LOT less than I would expect from that role). All that’s to say, I now have the documentation in place to work through his performance in a specific, unbiased way that may or may not lead to a future for him with the organization.

The bigger issue is that he is being paid disproportionately for his job. His rate of pay would imply that he has supervisory responsibilities and an advanced degree, neither of which are true. He is being paid more than other, more qualified and effective employees both in similar roles and even those who would be above him in the chain of command. I’ve just completed a comprehensive wage review to ensure we are competitive and equitable within our industry, and it all balances out … except for Jasper. He is being paid 10-15% over what is appropriate for his role, where other employees are being paid as much as 20% under their market value.

What should I do? I hate the idea of docking anyone’s pay, but at the same time, I can’t afford to up everyone else’s pay to keep it in line with Jasper’s. Do I keep paying him more than he’s worth? It’s not exactly his fault that the ex-CEO/parent put him in this situation, but yet we are there.

P.S. To complicate matters further from an emotional standpoint if not a technical one, Jasper also still lives at home with the ex-CEO and receives a ride to and from work from one of his parents. So it’s not like there’s a ton of breathing room for this situation.

Parents are doing their kids no favors with this kind of special treatment, as this situation illustrates. Now Jasper has a job he can’t do, a professional network that probably doesn’t think highly of him, and extra scrutiny because he’s being overpaid.

I’m always curious about what parents who set up these situations think will happen to their kid when they’re no longer there to champion/protect them! In a lot of cases, the parent’s network ends up taking over and finding them their next gig, and obviously there are tons of other ways society advances people based connections rather than merit … and as a result a lot of Jaspers go through life without even realizing that’s what happening … but isn’t it a parenting failure (if not a character failure) to want that for your kid?

Anyway.

It sounds like you need to have a really straightforward conversation with Jasper where you lay out the facts: he’s not currently performing at the level you need, he would need to be doing XYZ to meet the job requirements, and currently his pay is out of sync not only with his performance but with the job itself.

Leaving the pay aside for a minute: realistically, do you think Jasper will be able to perform at the level you need within a reasonable amount of time (months, not years)? If not, the kindest thing, and the best for the organization, is to be frank with him about that. Explain the gap in what’s needed with his current performance, and tell him you can’t keep him the role. You could consider setting an end date that’s a bit in the future (maybe the end of the year) to give him some time to job-search … but if you wouldn’t do that for anyone else you were letting go, it might not be the right move here. (I tend to think that’s always a decent thing to do when you have to let someone go through no fault of their own — someone who’s trying hard but just isn’t well matched with the job — and it can make things feel more amicable, but if the organization has never done that for anyone else, you don’t want it to become yet one more way Jasper is getting special treatment. That said, political considerations might mean it’s the best course of action regardless.)

But if you do think he can reach the level of work you need from his role and it’s really just the pay that’s at issue … level with him about that. Give him some notice because it’s not fair to cut someone’s pay without warning, but it’s fair to say, “We’re both in a tough situation. You were hired into a role and at a rate of pay that normally would require supervisory responsibilities and an advanced degree. I’ve completed a wage review for all positions to ensure we’re equitable internally and within the industry, and your salary is the one salary that’s out of sync with that structure. You’re being paid 10-15% over the market rate for the role, while we have other employees paid as much as 20% under their market value, including people above you in the chain of command. The best your role can fairly pay is $X, and so I need to give you notice that we need to change the salary for the position to $X effective on (date). I understand you might not want to remain in the job in light of that, and if that’s the case, we can work on a transition plan. For now, though, I want to give you notice of the change and some time to think about it.”

Will that be messy? Yes! But the situation is already messy, and addressing it head-on and candidly is your best shot at cleaning it up.

However, don’t go through all of that if you don’t think you’ll ever be satisfied with Jasper’s performance. It’s not fair to slow-roll that news over months, with first a salary cut and then a continuing stream of negative feedback. If he’s just not the right person for the position, no matter what’s he’s being paid, cut to the chase and move him out of the job.

Alternately, you could skip all that and lay him off with severance, explaining that you simply need a different skill set for the position (which is true). That might be cleanest all around.

manager dislikes his new employee, firing an employee who went viral for attacking football fans, and more

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

1. I manage a manager who dislikes his new, qualified employee

I run a small nonprofit. I’m less than six months into the position and have inherited some HR challenges. One of the directors I manage, Dave, is, frankly, a terrible manager. He only manages three people, but in the six months I’ve been here, one person quit and one was fired after a dramatic meltdown. Dave just hired a new person, Julie, who he wants to fire within the first 45 days. She has excellent experience, more than he does in the program he is running. She has raised some concerns directly to him about the quality of the work via email; I saw the message, and she approached it professionally.

He said she has been late three times and refuses to do the data entry that is a part of her job. She says she hasn’t been adequately trained. My assessment is that they just don’t like each other and are now looking for things to justify their positions. She thinks he’s incompetent and he thinks she’s rude and undermining his authority.

They both came to me about this situation last week. I’ve been sitting on what to do next because I do not want to lose the new employee. While Julie is not perfect, she does have excellent skills that we need. How do I deal with this situation?

You need to manage Dave much more closely — and you need to lay out for him very explicitly that you’re concerned about the situation in his department and that, having just lost two people in quick succession, you’re not going to fire a third simply for being late a few times. Moreover, given that you know Dave is a terrible manager, I’d be inclined to believe Julie that she hasn’t been adequately trained and that her frustrations with Dave are well-founded — which means that you’re going to need to get much more involved in the situation than you’d normally be doing, including reviewing the training plan with both of them and coaching Dave pretty intensely on your expectations for how he manages people. Plan to spend at least a few weeks intensively involved with both of them, so that you’re setting expectations about how you want things to go and also so that you’re getting a more detailed sense of exactly how Dave operates and what’s going wrong. Stay open to the possibility that you shouldn’t have Dave managing people at all, but you’ll have a better sense of that once you spend a few weeks more enmeshed and have a stronger feel for exactly what’s going on.

If you’re thinking you don’t have time to roll up your sleeves and dive in like that, the alternative is letting Dave keep cycling through employees, which will slow the organization down more in the long run. If you absolutely can’t make time for that in the next few weeks, consider having Julie report to someone else temporarily until you do have time to dig in more.

Related:
how do I get my direct reports to be better managers of their own teams?

2. Firing an employee who went viral for attacking football fans

I just saw an article about a Baltimore Ravens fan who was seen in a video attacking two men who supported an opposing football team. He was identified and fired from his job the next day.

This happens regularly when moments go viral. But can companies do this? Is it because there is video proof? I thought we couldn’t necessarily let someone go even from an arrest. They are still innocent until proven guilty, right? In this case, the guy hadn’t even been arrested, just had a really stupid, violent moment go viral. Can he come back and say he was unfairly fired, as the moment didn’t even happen at work?

In most states, employers can legally fire you for behavior you engage in outside of work, as long as the firing doesn’t violate a specific legal protection you have. (For example, most people couldn’t legally be fired for attending a union protest, because unionizing is a protected right.) There’s no legal protection for physically attacking an opposing team’s fans. In this case, the company likely figured that they don’t want to be associated with someone who publicly engaged in vile behavior that went viral, and that’s their legal prerogative.

You mentioned laws that prohibit firing someone for being arrested, but federal law actually doesn’t prohibit that; it’s dependent on state law. Some states do limit what an employer can do in response to an employee’s arrest, depending on the nature of the crime and how it might relate to their particular job. But in this case the firing was about the behavior itself, not an arrest.

3. My employee is accessing files from our previous employer

In my industry, movement between companies is fairly common. So I am now supervising someone who used to be a peer at OldCompany, which is a direct competitor of NewCompany.

Today, my direct report shared a “helpful” reference document that I know for certain is a proprietary document from OldCompany. We are working on a project very similar to what we worked on at the previous employer, so it’s sometimes tempting to bring in ideas from our old work. However, this was not simply referring to an idea, but sharing a link to an internal, unpublished document from OldCompany. The relative obscurity of the file she shared makes me think that either she somehow saved everything we worked on at the old job, or else she might still have access to her old account somehow.

I told her right away that we cannot have access to documents from OldCompany at NewCompany. I also let my current boss know, since I don’t want there to be legal issues with it somehow coming out that NewCompany employees are accessing competitors’ IP. Do I need to notify my old boss from the previous employer that my current employee still has access to their files? With my employee, does this warrant more than one clear conversation about this being not okay?

To me, this feels like a big violation, but my current boss didn’t respond as if this is a huge deal. For example, my boss didn’t ask which employee of mine it was, just told me to make it clear it’s not okay. In my mind, though, this is a serious judgment issue with my employee. My employee apologized and said it won’t happen again, but I’m not sure if this is something I should drop. What do you think?

You addressed it and she said it won’t happen again. You don’t need to go back and repeat yourself unless something about her response made you think she didn’t take you seriously or didn’t understand that you meant all OldCompany documents, not just this one. If either of those is the case, then yes, go back and say you want to make sure you were clear about the scope of the prohibition and how seriously she needs to take it … but otherwise, it sounds like you’re equating repeating yourself with pounding in the seriousness of the message and, assuming you communicated clearly the first time, you don’t need to do that.

4. I don’t want to be called by a shortened version of my name

I’ve been at my job for over five years now and everyone there calls me by a shortened version of my name. I didn’t say anything at first because it was only some people, some of the time. Gradually everyone shifted to the nickname, even people who were meeting me for the first time. Is there a way I can get people to call me by my actual name?

Yes! “I actually prefer Valentina, thank you.” You’ll have to say it a lot, but eventually it will stick with most people. Just be straightforward and prepared to have to reiterate it. If you want, you can also acknowledge that you didn’t speak up earlier — “I don’t know why I didn’t say this earlier but I go by Valentina.”

5. Should I tell a recruiter I’m pregnant?

I’m currently 16 weeks pregnant (yay for secondary fertility!) and in a job where I’m really not happy. A recruiter from a placement agency reached out to me for a general interview. I know talking to a recruiter doesn’t mean I’ll actually be offered a job, but I was wondering if the advice to not tell an employer before you’ve received an offer still stands if a recruiter is involved.

I feel like if I tell them they’ll be less likely to try to place me, but I also don’t know if having them involved would change what happens if I do get an offer. If I were to get an offer and then disclose my pregnancy to the company, is it easier for them to pull the offer and say it has something to do with the agency even if the real reason is I’m pregnant? Not sure how to proceed but I would really like a new job, even if it means changing while I’m pregnant.

Nope, working with a recruiter doesn’t change the advice. Wait to disclose until you have an offer. The company will have the same legal risk pulling the offer at that point that they’d have without a recruiter involved.

a team whose boss was AWOL for 2 years is angry and resentful now

A reader writes:

My department had a manager, Beth, who spiraled into a drug addiction crisis post-Covid. The details of how that happened and how long it took to remove her from her position could make up several letters, but I will leave out those details as it’s not what I’m writing about now.

Beth’s team did their jobs (or did not do their jobs) while their boss was in the midst of this crisis for close to two years. Now Beth is gone and the team is in chaos. After she left, it became clear that over this period Beth was not checking that anyone was actually doing any work. She ignored almost all emails expressing concerns about her team. She also approved many hours of late night overtime, during which it is very unlikely any work was actually being done. Some new people joined the team during this time and got essentially no training, so have been just making it up as they go along, with no one checking in. Like I said, chaos.

Beth’s director, Janet, has decided that instead of going back two years and trying to pick apart this web of problems, most of which cannot be proven at this point, they are just going to start fresh. People are now held to working the right schedule, they’re no longer allowed to clock overtime without prior approval, and customers are getting served appropriately.

The problem is that there is a handful of employees who are VERY angry over this issue. These are employees that did everything “right” over the last two years and are very upset there are no consequences for those that didn’t. My impression is that these are great workers who got so fed up during this time that they can barely stand to be in the same room as the people who took advantage of their manager’s breakdown to not do their jobs. These “good” employees are so hostile that it’s a terrible work environment for everyone.

I feel bad because I know that under a different manager, this ball of hate would not have developed. These employees have been around for years and I know under their previous manager they flourished. I am not directly involved in this situation at all, but I am currently training Beth’s replacement and have shared the same details I‘ve shared here with you, and I’m not sure whether there are any further tips I could give them. Any advice would be much appreciated!

I mean, it is pretty unfair. It’s understandable that people are upset. Apparently they too could have kicked back for two years, not done any work, gotten paid for overtime they didn’t work, and in the end received no consequences for it. It makes sense that they’re irritated. I’d also bet that they ended up picking up the slack for their lazier coworkers during that time, and now they’re not being recognized for it.

I’m not saying Janet’s solution is the wrong one. Maybe there’s no practical way to sort through what happened, and maybe just moving forward is what truly makes the most sense for the business. But it’s unrealistic to expect people won’t have feelings about that.

I do wonder if there’s no way to reward the better employees now. If there’s any way to tell who kept the department afloat during that time or went above and beyond to cover for others, ideally they’d be recognized in some way — a bonus, better positioning for future promotions, whatever it is. Instead of looking at it as “give consequences for people who slacked off,” the right lens might be “reward those who didn’t.” But I also realize there might be no practical way to do that at this point — or no practical way to do it without missing some people, which would risk demoralizing them even further.

It’s going to be particularly tough for Beth’s replacement — who sounds like she’s coming in new to the situation — to sort through all that, even though she’s stuck dealing with the aftermath. In her shoes, I think I’d do a couple of things: First, talk one-on-one with each team member about their sense of how things are going and what the top priorities for stabilizing the department should be and, as part of those conversations, create room for them to air any grievances or frustrations. She should be open to hearing them out, while also being clear about what they can and can’t expect going forward. If it’s clear that someone was instrumental in keeping the department functioning during Beth’s chaotic reign, she should be openly appreciative of that and say that going forward she’ll be rewarding that kind of initiative/responsibility/effort (assuming that’s true, which it should be). She can’t go back and retroactively manage a situation she wasn’t there for, but she can assure them that the team will be managed effectively from this point on, which includes recognizing good work and addressing problems forthrightly.

That might not be enough for some people, but that’s the piece that’s within her control. And from there, it’s reasonable to hold everyone to a basic expectation that they will operate professionally. They’re allowed to feel demoralized or discouraged (what happened was demoralizing and discouraging), but they do need to work civilly with colleagues. If they don’t do that, she’ll need to have some hard conversations with people about the reality of the situation — yes, things were mishandled in the past … we don’t have a way to undo that now … we’ve got to move forward and that includes being civil and professional even to people you’re unhappy with … and we’re at the point where you’ve got to figure out whether you can do that or not because we are moving forward.

But it’s also very likely that as she gets to know the team better, she’ll get a good feel for who slacked off over the last two years and who didn’t. Chances are good that those same tendencies will show up in their work now, just perhaps in less dramatic ways, and she should watch for opportunities to reward the people who carried things.

All that said, unless you’re senior to Beth’s replacement, I don’t know if it’s your place to give this sort of advice to her. But this is what I’d tell her if I could.

this is how to write a good cover letter

Over the course of my career, I’ve read probably tens of thousands of cover letters. (And yes, that’s as boring as it sounds.) What I’ve learned from doing that is that most job applicants’ cover letters are truly awful – and as a result, if you’re willing to put in the time to write a good one, you can stand out from your competition in a really effective way.

A great cover letter won’t get you the job if you’re not qualified, but it can make a hiring manager notice you in a sea of applicants and encourage them to interview you when you otherwise might have been overlooked. In fact, a good cover letter can be such an effective way of boosting your application that I’m always amazed by how many candidates don’t bother to take advantage of the opportunity they offer.

At New York Magazine today, I wrote about how to get cover letters right.

my boss treated me like her therapist … and it blew up

Warning: contains mentions of a suicide threat.

A reader writes:

I had an insane boss situation a few years ago that still lives rent free in my head and I’d love to see if there’s anything you think I could have done differently. While I don’t think I’ll ever be in a situation quite like this ever again (one can only hope), I probably spend more time than is healthy thinking about how I should approach it if I’m ever thrust into a similar situation in the future.

My old manager, Lily, was originally a coworker and friend. We had both left the original job we worked at together, and I was miserable in my current role. So when she became the general manager for a new retail installation, she reached out about me joining her leadership team and I jumped at the opportunity to start fresh somewhere new.

Initially, our working relationship was good, albeit with very few boundaries. I realized pretty quickly that Lily had some narcissistic tendencies as a leader, and I was clearly her Golden Child. Another member of our leadership team was her scapegoat, who always got the blame for anything bad, and the last member got lost in the shuffle. It was a mess, but at the time I leaned into being the favorite because I was the only person who could talk sense into her and whose suggestions she would take seriously. This favoritism caused the boundaries to blur even more and I also started feeling anxious about what would happen if I fell out of favor, so I picked my battles very carefully and ultimately enabled a lot of very bad behavior.

Unfortunately for everybody, Lily’s partner left her, and she had to navigate a messy divorce and custody battle. Her mental health completely tanked, and it caused everything negative at work to ramp up tenfold.

I was still the favorite and the confidant, and this turned into me becoming, essentially, Lily’s work therapist. We spent hours locked in her office with her crying and telling me every detail of her personal life, and my anxiety reached a new high as I tried to navigate supporting her erratic and turbulent emotions while also picking up the slack of things she wasn’t doing at the store — things that were technically beyond my role and ability. Lily was terrified of losing her job and she knew she was dropping balls, so I felt like it was my responsibility to keep everything running smoothly. I was also terrified that if I upset her, she would turn on me and fire me. At the time, I thought that I was doing the kind thing, the right thing. I now recognize that I was in an impossible situation, and I was setting myself on fire trying to keep everyone else warm.

Lily eventually shared with me that she was suicidal and said the only thing keeping her going was my support and friendship. So now, on top of feeling responsible for my job, her job, the store, and her emotional well-being, I found myself in a position where it was my job to literally keep her alive. I was wildly stressed out, so afraid that I’d say or do the wrong thing and then she’d die, and it would be my fault.

The culmination of all of this was that one day, on her day off, when I was in charge of the building, she texted me and said that if I didn’t get to her home immediately, she was going to kill herself. She needed me to come stop her. I didn’t have a car that day, my husband had dropped me off, so I gave the keys to the building to one of my employees, and called an Uber to rush to her home.

I should have called 911, but the state we are in has some pretty intense laws around wellness calls, and I worried that if I called and she got put into an involuntary hold, it would financially ruin her and make her life crumble even more. So I rushed over, broke in through an open window because her door was locked and she wasn’t answering, found her unharmed, removed all of the pills from her general vicinity, and then pulled her sobbing, terrified child out of the closet she had barricaded herself in when her mom’s episode started. I stayed for hours watching Disney movies, trying to take care of and soothe both of them.

Lily ended up going on a forced paid medical leave because her out-of-state boss realized something was off and called me, and I spilled everything. She was appalled that I hadn’t raised things with HR sooner.

The end of the story is kind of anti-climactic: Lily went on leave, I took over as temporary GM, my mental health improved some because I wasn’t seeing her every day, and she was finally in intense daily therapy instead of relying on me. She ended up coming back after her leave but immediately leaving for a new job because she felt betrayed by the company for forcing her on leave. Once she wasn’t my boss and didn’t hold my livelihood in her hands, I let her know via text that while I wished her the best and genuinely hoped she’d be okay, I couldn’t continue our friendship to protect my own mental health. We haven’t had contact since.

Typing this out, I wouldn’t believe any of that had actually happened in real life if I hadn’t lived it myself. I recognize that I had a lot of missteps along the way and that I shouldn’t have let things go as far as they did … but I’m having a hard time determining exactly what I should have done differently. I still have a lot of guilt and anxiety around that period of my life. What would you have advised I do had I reached out while this was happening?

HR, HR, HR.

This was all so above your pay grade, and you got drawn in at a level that an employee should never be expected to take on.

I suspect there was a frog-in-the-boiling-water effect here, where things escalated gradually enough that it was hard to spot when you needed to send up a cry for help to someone above you … which is often how dysfunctional workplaces evolve (and dysfunctional relationships too, for that matter). If you’d been dropped into that final terrible day out of nowhere, you likely would have realized immediately that this wasn’t something you should or could handle on your own … but things deteriorated gradually enough that by the time that day came, you had already been primed and wired to see your role as Save Lily.

But really, once Lily had shared with you that she was suicidal, that was a sign that you were in over your head, that she was looking to you for things an employee absolutely cannot provide, and that you needed to loop in someone else in your company (presumably HR). Since you’re struggling with what to do if anything remotely similar happens in the future, hopefully it’s good news that you can simplify it all dramatically: it was not your role to fix what was happening with Lily, and the right step in the future would be to alert someone whose job that actually was.

It will also never be your role to do someone else’s job for them on top of your own to cover for them; if you’re ever in that situation again, you can let those balls drop. If your presence is the only thing keeping someone else stable (or employed), that’s a sign that the solution you’ve landed on is the wrong one.

I do think it’s worth noting that you fell into this role not just because you believed your job was to save Lily, but also because you thought your job was to save everyone else too: you stayed in a bad situation because you were the one who could talk sense into Lily and who she would listen to — no matter the personal costs to yourself, and no matter how many indications that you’d never be able to fix the fundamental conditions there, only small things around the edges. I strongly believe there’s a certain personality type that is way too willing to walk into that role — to embrace it, in fact — while most other people would take a look and nope out of there. So I do think it’s worth asking whether there have been other times where the pull of being The One Who Can Fix Things has led you to stay in bad situations longer than you should have (and perhaps whether your family dynamics early on set you up for that assignment), and to spend some time thinking about how you want to handle it the next time you feel that pull.

asking to change desks because you don’t like someone, are typos in a draft a huge deal, and more

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

1. Is it unprofessional to ask to change desks because you don’t like someone?

Two years ago I started a job as an engineer at my current company and was assigned a mentor, “Rob.” My cubicle is directly adjacent to his. For various reasons related to his behavior towards me, Rob will no longer be my mentor going forward. I’m not sure yet who management is going to assign as my mentor, but I’m confident they’ll be better than Rob, who has caused me a lot of stress over the last year.

Would it look unprofessional or immature to ask to move seats? Rob’s behavior has mostly consisted of giving me really bad feedback to the point of gaslighting, not anything like harassment, but I’d still like to move seats to make it a clean break.

Can you come up with a reason that’s not related to Rob? Ideally it would be something like there being less noise at the open desk down the hall, sitting closer to someone you collaborate with a lot, preferring not to sit right under a vent that blasts cold air, or so forth — not “I’d rather have a clean break from Rob.” The latter isn’t impossible to say, but there’s pretty high risk of it reading as more drama than you’d ideally want. Exceptions would be if (a) “for various reasons related to his behavior towards me, Rob will no longer be my mentor” means Rob behaved so egregiously toward you that anyone would understand the discomfort of remaining where you are, and/or (b) you have the kind of rapport with your manager where you could say, “The situation with Rob has been rough; any chance I could move into that open desk in the corner just to have a clean break?”

2. Are typos in a draft a huge deal?

I work at a not-for-profit that relies heavily on volunteers. I manage one staff member and around 30 volunteers across two sites. Recently, our on-site graphic artist designed a sign for one of my sites, and I sent it to one of the volunteers to get her thoughts on it, and also as a second pair of eyes as I was slammed.

This volunteer called me and went off about the design, saying it was sloppy and had two spelling errors (typos) in it. To me, typos in a draft are not a big deal — that’s why we check drafts before they go to the printer. Also, we are seriously understaffed and I know everyone is doing several people’s worth of work, so small things are bound to slip through the cracks (I have no power over staffing). I’ve been guilty of forgetting to do small things because I’m constantly trying to stop the sky from falling in, so I’m not going to criticize someone else for the same thing.

I told the volunteer this and it all seemed fine — but then I was telling the story to someone else, and they said any spelling errors/typos are unacceptable. I just don’t think they are a big deal unless, of course, they get printed.

Basically I’m looking for a third opinion! Are typos in a draft unacceptable, or are they not worth getting stressed about?

It’s a draft! In most contexts, typos in an early draft are not a big deal, as long as you have a reliable process in place for proofing and ensuring any errors (typos or otherwise) are caught before it’s finalized.

Did you proactively make it clear to your volunteer what stage things were at when you sent the draft and what kind of feedback you were looking for at that point in the process? It can help to say, for example, “This hasn’t been proofed yet and is in rough form but I wanted to get your thoughts on the content and overall framing.” Or, conversely, “This is close to being finalized so if you see anything we missed, please flag it.”

But also, any chance your volunteer was reacting to something more than this one draft — like that they feel there’s been a problematic amount of sloppiness overall and they’re getting fed up with the big picture, more than truly thinking typos in a not-yet-proofed draft are a big deal? That might explain what’s otherwise a pretty intense reaction.

3. Did I put my foot in it about my company’s post-election plans?

I work for a large consulting firm that mostly works in the U.S. We do a lot of work for all levels of government. People are tactful about not crossing professional lines about politics at work, but our office has a pretty relaxed and friendly culture, and lots of people do express their feelings to other like-minded people in indirect ways. As someone who at different points in my life has been in both major parties and has in both cases been at times a minority in the office, I appreciate the importance of maintaining a fairly neutral environment, though I believe some things are beyond the pale.

The morning after the election, our area manager, who I have have a very friendly relationship with, sent out a thoughtful and appropriate email acknowledging that this may be a stressful moment, reminding us that there are different views in our company, reiterating our commitment to being a client-centered company working to improve humanity, and inviting us to follow up with any questions. I thought this was a perfectly good precautionary email to send out, but I did reply directly to just my area manager to ask about how to get a better sense of what our leadership’s bright lines are for maintaining our commitment to both the client (the government) and our moral obligations. I have pretty mainstream politics, and there’s nothing specific worrying me about any of my company’s current work, but my concern is just to know that senior management has some sort of plan or internal moral standards to limit what kind of things we will work in support of, should the incoming administration go in a worst case scenario direction.

The response I got from my manager was very nice and replied to my questions in a way consistent with the original email — but on reading it, it immediately became apparent that she hadn’t actually answered any of them, and in fact the responses were so indirect that I now am worried that I am talking to the hand, and that maybe I put my foot in it and caused offense. I’m unsure how to follow up, because while I didn’t have any expectation that my concerns would actually come to fruition, the response’s lack of candor by absence of substance has now made me worried that I do have cause for concern. I’m curious about your take, and before you reply, yes, I am aware that I am an overthinker with an anxiety disorder.

You asked a question she couldn’t really answer, and you got a response consistent with that. They don’t know what’s going to happen yet, and they probably don’t know how they’ll respond when it does because the climate is shifting rapidly. Moreover, to the extent that they do have plans for worst-case scenarios or bright will-not-cross lines, they’re unlikely to put those in a casual email (and she may not be the right person to supply those answers anyway).

It sounds like you emailed her hoping for some general reassurance and you got … general reassurance, which is singularly unhelpful in a situation like this. What you really want to know is specifically how they will respond to specific individual events, but they’re probably not there yet — or since you didn’t ask about those specifics, they’re not getting into them, or the answers are ones you wouldn’t much like if they did.

You asked how to reply and I don’t think you necessarily need to; you asked a general question and she gave a general answer. I also don’t think you put your foot in it; she’s undoubtedly aware lots of people are feeling similar anxiety right now.

Depending on the nature of your concerns, it might make sense to refine them more narrowly with your colleagues and ask for strategy planning on those in particular, but that’s something bigger than a casual email exchange.

4. New manager wants me to travel and I can’t

I work fully remote, and it’s quite possibly the only thing that has allowed me to keep working. I am disabled, with chronic pain, poor mobility, and all of the fatigue that comes with that. I love being able to take a 30-minute nap at lunch! My whole team is remote, but most of them are concentrated in the same state, fairly close together.

I have a new manager, who has had one quarterly meeting and is planning the next one. For the first, he had all of the semi-local folks meet in person, with the five of us outside that area on Zoom. For this next meeting, he has gotten permission to fly all of us outliers in for the six-hour meeting. I just … can’t. Traveling is super hard for me, and flying in one day, the six-hour meeting the next, and flying home the next day may damn well kill me. The time to recover from this will be insane.

I tried gently bringing up that it would be difficult for me, but he brushed me off, saying how important it was to meet face-to-face. I’m facing the whole “not a team player” thing here, but I just can’t do it. How do I frame this and stay in his good graces?

“I have a medical condition that means I can’t do this sort of travel. Should I seek a formal accommodation with HR or is simply letting you know enough? I’m of course happy to attend over Zoom again.”

Depending on your sense of your manager and this company in general, it may make more sense to start with HR — but either way, that’s the framing you want. Since you’ve been doing your job successfully this entire time without traveling, it should be hard for your manager to argue that it’s an essential function of your position. (That doesn’t mean he won’t try, but that’s part of the legal framework around disabilities: can you successfully perform the essential duties of the job with or without accommodations?)

5. Charging extra to add a spouse to health insurance, if the spouse has insurance through their own job

My husband works for an insurance company (ironically) and it’s open enrollment season here in the U.S. for health insurance. I have good insurance through my own job and have my husband and our toddler as dependents. My husband was going to add both of us to his insurance as well, so we can have some double coverage as we’re planning to have another kid and we’ve had some health troubles recently.

Because I am employed and insured on my own, his company will charge him an extra fee each paycheck to add me to his insurance. It is not a small fee. It would significantly impact our monthly finances. If I was unemployed and/or uninsured, it wouldn’t cost him extra. Even with insurance, healthcare is freaking expensive in this country and double coverage can be life saving, and has been for us in the past. It feels like his company is essentially penalizing those employees who have families. Is this really allowed?

It’s legal, and it’s common. It’s called a “working spouse premium,” and it’s because employers don’t want spouses running up their costs if the person could instead get insurance through their own job, and they don’t want to make adding a spouse an attractive option if that person has other coverage available. (In fact, some employers won’t let you add spouses at all if the spouse has the option of being insured through their own job.)