I lied to my interviewer about being employed

A reader writes:

I got a job offer last week that I’m really excited about, especially because I was let go in mid-January and it’s been stressful to job hunt. I was recruited to apply for a few different positions, and one ended up with an offer. I told the recruiter I wasn’t currently employed, and he said I shouldn’t tell the company I was interviewing with. Everything online said the mostly same thing — don’t tell anyone you’re unemployed when interviewing.

I’ll admit I didn’t have my resume updated with an end date of my employment with my previous employer, because I was always told it looks better to be currently employed, and I figured the difference between January and February wasn’t that big of a deal. I also work in an industry where it’s standard to be locked out the second you give notice, so telling potential employers that I’m available to start immediately isn’t a red flag for anyone.

However, I was trying to avoid actually lying and saying I was currently employed when I wasn’t. In the interview that lead to my job offer, they directly asked if I was currently working at my last company, and I said panicked and said yes. (My after-the-fact justification is that I am working a bunch of side gigs to make ends meet while I look for something permanent and full time. But, still. I lied. And I feel terrible about it.)

I’ve never been laid off before, and my savings are dwindling rapidly. I’ve never lied to an employer before either. My previous company doesn’t provide references, only confirms dates of employment when asked, which is also industry standard. I don’t think this new company will check with my previous employer, since they believe I’m currently employed.

Should I come clean to my possible new employer? I have an offer letter, but the job offer is contingent on references and background check, so it’s not set in stone. Should I tell them after I start? Take this to the grave? Is this something everyone does (which is what my friends have told me) or is it actually a big deal to lie about this?

It can be a big deal. If they find out about it, it’s the sort of thing that’s very likely to be a deal-breaker, because if you lied about something as concrete as whether or not you’re still employed somewhere, they have to wonder what else you might have lied about in the interview or what you might lie about on the job.

And even if they don’t call your old employer for a reference, there are other ways they can find out — like they’re talking to one of your other references who says, “I was so surprised when Jane was laid off in January” or otherwise mentions it.

It sounds like people really steered you wrong with their advice to consider your layoff a dirty secret that needed to be hid at all costs! It’s really, really not.

It’s true that employers sometimes are biased toward people who are employed … but that’s usually a case of more extremes, like they’d prefer to hire the employed person over the candidate who hasn’t worked for the last three years. Someone who’s been unemployed for a month? That’s barely likely to register.

The advice not to say you’re unemployed when interviewing generally means: don’t go out of your way to mention it, but don’t outright lie. In other words, you don’t need to proactively announce it, but if you’re directly asked, “Are you still at your last job?” you need to tell the truth. I don’t know if people were telling you to outright lie (if they were, don’t take advice from them anymore) or if they just were saying you didn’t need to advertise it and you took that to mean “lie.”

As for what to do, what’s done is done. Coming clean about it now is likely to make it into a bigger deal, when it otherwise could fly under the radar. Hope it doesn’t come back to bite you this time, and just don’t do it next time.

I can’t carry coffee at work, employee refuses to do a critical duty, and more

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

1. An employee forced an unwanted kiss on my employee — and now they want to do mediation

I run a nonprofit. Six months ago, a male employee of another nonprofit began kissing my female employee on the lips at the end of a series of remote events when they were closing down the day’s activities. Both are married. My employee was deeply upset because she thought the guy was her friend and was afraid she had encouraged him in some way. She finally told me what was going on, and I contacted his boss and told her that my employee will no longer work with her employee, and why. This keeps him away from my employee, but also forces my employee to give up projects she has invested a lot of time and effort in.

Most of my employees are women, and I’m not comfortable asking them to risk similar behavior from the man, but the two organizations have several joint projects that we have equal responsibility for.

My wife believes that the unwanted and non-consented kissing is assault, and that the person who should be removed from the projects is the male from the other organization. The manager at the other organization has suggested mediation between the two employees, but that seems to imply there is some middle ground to achieve, and I can’t see what that is. Our workplace policy is clear that any non-consensual touching is out of bounds and grounds for termination, but that has no power over the employee of another organization. What do you suggest?

Listen to your wife. Your employee shouldn’t be removed from projects she’s invested in because of this man’s behavior; he’s the one who should bear the consequences, not her. It’s true that you don’t have power over another organization’s employees, but you have control over what situations you send your own employees into. You should tell the other organization that you won’t send any of your team members to work on projects where their problem employee is present, so they’ll need to staff your future joint projects differently. (Be clear about this: It’s not just “Jane won’t work with him again.” It’s “I won’t subject any of our employees to that.”)

And mediation? Mediation?! Absolutely not. Their employee harassed and assaulted someone. They need to deal with him on their own, not expect your employee to somehow work through this with him.

2. How to handle an employee refusing to do a critical duty

Our team is required to work on-call after hours to handle client emergencies. It’s an eight-week rotation, so one week out of every eight. Everyone hates it, but we do it. It is unpaid; we are salaried.

Our newest team member claims that he had no idea this was expected, despite the fact that we talk about it all the time. He has stated that this does not suit his lifestyle and he will not work on call.

Whether he was informed about this before he was hired is a point of contention. He says no, but it is in the job description. The way he was brought on was odd in that he never met with our manager; HR interviewed and hired him and then assigned him to our team.

Our manager asked for his resignation. He essentially refused, sending an email that equated to “I won’t resign; fire me.” Outside of regular layoffs, no one ever gets fired. He has called in sick every day for the last two weeks, since this happened.

How would you handle such a situation, especially knowing that the rest of the members of the team would surely also refuse to work on call, if that’s allowed for one person?

I’d be willing to believe HR never discussed it with him during the hiring process, given how strongly opposed he was once he found out. Sure, it’s in the job description, but it’s pretty common for people not to scrutinize those (or to assume there’s more to it, like that they’d only be on-call rarely, like once a year versus every eight weeks, or that the time would be paid). Either way, with something like that, an employer should make sure anyone they’re considering hiring is fully aware of the requirement and on board with it … because otherwise you end up with the situation you’re in now.

As for what to do now, your manager really only has two choices: hold firm on the requirement and fire the guy if he won’t comply (which doesn’t need to be punitive; it can be a civil discussion where she explains she’s really sorry if he wasn’t informed but she can’t bend on the requirement), or exempt him from it and figure out a way to keep it fair to everyone else who’s still doing the on-call shifts (which presumably means adding some kind of incentive, like extra pay or extra vacation). There aren’t really other options at this point.

3. I’m not allowed to keep coffee with me at my job

My work has a coffee machine that we’re allowed to use. I’ve been making my coffees on break, and then leaving it in the staff room to take sips of throughout the day. I’ve been told I can’t do this, and I’m not allowed a coffee in a flask, but I can have water or juice in a bottle/flask I can carry with me throughout the day. Can my work forbid me from drinking coffee?

Legally? Yes. But it would be interesting to ask why they object, if you’re allowed to carry other beverages with you throughout the day.

4. We have to cover for another team’s weaknesses

At the beginning of last year, I was hired into a brand-new team to work on a new project. A month later, a new team was also hired to do the same work, as there was quite a lot to do.

I’ve met people from the new team, and they’re all incredibly friendly, nice and seem like generally good people but their manager is a lot more laid-back than ours. I get the impression that they’re struggling with a number of the tasks that we do on a regular basis, to the point where my team often has to redo their work alongside our own. When we’ve approached our manager about this situation, separately in our one-to-ones, she first explains that the team is new, which is true, but only by a month, and that she doesn’t have any say over that team since they have their own manager. I also get the sense that she doesn’t like talking about the other team with us, which is understandable, but it leaves us feeling a bit demotivated because it seems like they could really do with some additional coaching, and it feels as though our concerns are not being taken into account. Is there anything we can do as a team to approach our manager, or is she right in her view that she can’t discuss another team’s performance with us.

Her view that she can’t discuss another team’s performance with you is a bit of a cop-out, because you need to be able to discuss things that have an impact on your team’s ability to do its work. Sure, she shouldn’t say, “Yeah, Gene is really a crap manager” — but she does need to hear you out about problems you’re encountering and figure out how to manage those things (which should include her speaking to the other team’s manager if necessary, or to her own manager).

On your and your coworkers’ side of things: Focus on the impact on your work. Bring her the specific problems the other team’s work deficiencies are causing for you (like that you’re having to spend time redoing their work) and ask for her help in solving that.

5. An organization for helping job-searchers sucks at responding to job-searchers

Over the last decade plus, I’ve been a full-time student and a stay-home parent. I haven’t had a full-time job in over decade. Now, pushing 50, I have my degrees, my kids are at an age where demands on my time are fewer, and I’ve begun looking for casual or part-time work as I try to transition back into the workforce.

In my town, there’s government-funded nonprofit that help folks find work. They offer resume services, interview training, career counseling, all that stuff. I wandered in last autumn and they were very helpful. My early attempts at plugging back in to the workforce had been met almost exclusively with radio silence from employers. Working with them, for the first time I felt encouraged, supported, and optimistic. In November, my caseworker let me know a part-time position in their organization was opening up and encouraged me to apply. I didn’t even get to the interview stage — it went to an unexpected internal candidate. Disappointing, but the hiring manager let me know a casual position was opening up and would I like to apply? Yes, I would!

I was told in December to expect an interview the first week of January then … silence. I sent a follow-up in early January, then again in mid-January. I received an apology and an interview for late January. The interview went well. I was nervous, a bit rusty, but prepared. There was much smiling and nodding on the part of the hiring team throughout. I left feeling positive. A few days later, the hiring manager emailed me that another candidate’s interview had been delayed but I would hear from her the following week. Then, again, complete silence. Fair, perhaps. People are busy! Still, in my insecure little heart, I am annoyed and discouraged. I sent a follow-up yesterday and discovered the hiring manager is on vacation. My caseworker reached out this week for a general update so I mentioned I was still waiting to hear about this job but was optimistic. She, also, hasn’t responded.

I’m a faithful reader of this site and I appreciate employers can be notorious for delays. I’m trying to keep my frustration at bay and have an open mind but this is an organization that specializes in helping people get jobs. What I see is that they’re behaving like every other place that has ignored, ghosted, or put me off me since I started looking for work. Am I the problem? Are my expectations unreasonable? I’ve held this organization to a higher standard because of the work they do and because they encouraged me to interview but maybe I’m wrong to do that? If I’m not wrong and they’re being legitimately flaky, is their lack of reliable communication and follow-up a red flag? I know I’m not entitled to this job; maybe I’m not a good fit for them and that’s okay! But I’d like to know one way or another where I stand.

You’re not wrong, but yeah, your expectations probably aren’t realistic. Hiring gets delayed. Higher priorities get in the way. People go on vacation. They’re not deliberately ignoring you, but it’s really common to wait to respond to candidates until there’s something concrete to say. And they don’t have that yet because they’re waiting to hear back from a decision-maker, or waiting for another candidate’s interview to get rescheduled, or there’s some snag with the budget, and on and on. Should they know better, since they deal with anxious job-seekers as part of their mission? Sure. Are they still subject to all the pressures and conflicting priorities that other hiring orgs deal with? Also yes. Is this so common in hiring at organizations of all sorts that you can’t conclude anything from it about what it would be like to work there? Also yes.

The best thing to do is the same thing as when you’re waiting to hear back from any other job: assume you didn’t get it, put it out of your mind, and let it be a pleasant surprise if/when they do contact you.

update: my boss is abusive and blames it on PMDD

Remember the letter-writer whose boss was abusive and blamed it on PMDD? Here’s the update.

I have an update for my boss who was blaming her abusive behavior on PMDD. It ended how I was starting to suspect it would.

After your response, my husband and I started working on moving our kids onto his health insurance. Katherine’s behavior was getting worse and I’d started having heart palpitations along with the weight loss and dangerously high blood pressure. Your response and the comments opened my eyes that HR and Corprate weren’t actually working on a solution for this problem. I started applying for new jobs almost immediately after you posted and got to a few final round interviews, but never got an offer.

By Halloween our team was down to 7 people. By Thanksgiving the HR generalist assigned to our department quit because of Katherine’s behavior had gotten much worse. They hired a new HR generalist to sit and watch Katherine but he didn’t do anything other than laugh at Katherine’s outbursts and play on his phone all day. We used to share workspace with another department, but they were moved not long after my question was posted. This movement fueled a lot of rumors that there would be company layoffs by February. The rumor was true, but Katherine’s final outburst hastened the layoffs by a month.

One morning just after the holidays, Katherine went off without warning, doing her usual throwing things and screaming.The only other senior employee left told her to leave or we’d call the police. That seemed to hold a suspicous amount of weight with her and she left without a peep. As a team we asked the new HR generalist why he didn’t anything and he said “female issues” were out of his pay grade and the “department’s days were numbered anyway.” When everyone cooled down, which was less than 20 minutes after the incident, we went to HR as a group.

Katherine beat us there and told HR a different version of what happened, saying my colleague threatened her for asking about the progress of an important project. HR tried to do a weird mediation kind of thing with us all and we were all mostly speechless as we have security cameras in our work space.

I had your response open on my phone during the mediation and used it as talking points during the conversation. Katherine kept denying that she’d ever behaved in a way that was unprofessional and even backtracked saying, “I’ve never mentioned anything about having any medical diagnosis, let alone something as private as PMDD.” It became pointless to continue after that and we all knew it, even HR.

HR thanked us for our candor and sent us back to work. An hour later, we got an email from corporate saying our department was being closed and that we were laid off. We were told we could apply to other departments if we wanted, but we’d have to do it competitively as outside candidates and our company time and grade would start over from entry-level, we’d lose all accrued sick and vacation time, and our salaries would be knocked back down to entry-level (like a $30K a year pay cut).

The rumor going around is that that allegedly corporate stopped trying to find a solution to Katherine’s behavior almost a year ago when they realized they’d have to lay people off due to company finances. They saw our department’s high turnover as an opportunity and told HR to stall so the department could be phased out once enough of us quit. Other departments had been distributing our duties amongst themselves for months. Corporate wanted Katherine to drive people out so they wouldn’t have to pay severances which is weird because they paid a lot of severances when Katherine fired people without cause. What’s even worse that Katherine wasn’t fired but moved to another department, still in a management role. If social media and LinkedIn are any indication, that caused a ripple of more people quitting. It was pretty obvious that Katherine was just a symptom of a bad company in general.

On a positve note, my husband’s employer apparently took major strides to improve their healthcare so our kiddo’s medical needs now have better coverage than before. I made a career change and am much happier with outcome.

video calls are the worst way to do job rejections

Imagine you’ve interviewed for a job you really and have been waiting to hear back. When the hiring manager messages you to invite you to a video call, you’re thrilled—this must be the offer, you think, so you clear your afternoon, make yourself look presentable, and log into Zoom … only for the hiring manager to reject you on live video.

At Slate today, I wrote about why rejecting candidates on live video is a spectacularly bad idea … but one that’s gaining in popularity. You can read it here.

company asked me to spend an hour giving feedback on their hiring process

A reader writes:

I recently went through a lengthy interview process (five interviews, one of which lasted over two hours, plus two assessments) for a position, and after the final interview, the company asked me to join them for a feedback call. Interestingly, the feedback call was an opportunity for me to tell them how they could improve their hiring process; there was no real value in the call for me.

The position wasn’t high level. It was not a management or director role of any kind, and not even a niche, high-level, extremely experienced individual contributor position.

Everyone I met with seemed extremely happy with their job, except that their teams were all understaffed and it was taking the company a long time to fill positions. (I’m suspicious that this and the really intense hiring process for relatively low-level positions may be somehow related.)

They did end up rejecting me after the feedback call, so I’m not evaluating whether to work for a company that can’t connect those dots.

I have a few questions:

1. I’m sure that I was still being evaluated as a candidate on the feedback call. But is there a reliable strategy for giving a company feedback on their hiring process while you’re still a candidate? I didn’t feel like it was possible to tell whether they wanted actual constructive feedback or just for me to talk for an hour about how excited I was to work for the company.

2. Are candidate feedback calls before making a job offer becoming common, or is this company an oddball?

3. Would there be a way to decline to give feedback until after the company had made a hiring decision, without necessarily forfeiting my candidacy? I think the answer to this is no, but I feel slighted — I gave the company what I think is really practical, easy-to-implement, and insightful feedback on how the hiring process could have been made more pleasant for me and candidates like me (something I imagine a consultant would charge them a lot of money for!), and they declined to give me any feedback at all. I know it’s normal for companies to not give feedback, but it’s not normal for companies to ask candidates who are trying to get a job to give them an hour of feedback after five interviews and two tests for a low level position.

Yeah, this is bonkers.

First, five interviews is way too much for most positions. Five? Three is about the maximum I’d want to see unless the position is extremely senior or there are extenuating circumstances that they explain and acknowledge (“we’re so sorry to ask you to invest more time; the hiring manager left/the position changed significantly/etc.”).

And then to ask you to spend your time giving them feedback on top of it? I could see maybe doing that as part of the process for a job that was heavily focused on giving others feedback — like if you were applying to be a coach of some sort — but otherwise they were simply taking advantage of you while you still felt pressure to agree. I’m sure there were useful things they glean about candidates from those calls, but not enough to justify the misuse of your time and the abuse of the power dynamics.

Plus, they’re not going to get candid feedback from people who believe they’re still under consideration. If they really want candidate feedback, they should do it after people have been rejected, and ideally anonymously and with a low time commitment (like a survey, not a phone call). If they want something more than that, they should compensate people.

To your questions:

What they wanted: I don’t think they wanted you to talk for an hour about how excited you were to work for them. They just don’t understand the power dynamics would keep people from being candid, or they were assessing something else about you on the call (diplomacy, insight, ability to critique a process while speaking to its stakeholders), or they genuinely thought this was a reasonable thing to ask you to spend your time on mid-hiring process. My guess is a bit of all three.

Is this becoming common: Nope.

Was there a way to opt out of giving feedback until after they’d made a hiring decision without affecting your candidacy: Maybe, but you couldn’t have known for sure. If you were a top candidate and you said something like, “I’ll be frank — I’ve done five interviews with you and two assessments, and it’s a crunch time for me at work; it would be tough to carve out time for another meeting” … they might have been fine with it. Would you have been at a disadvantage compared to candidates who agreed to the calls? If you were already one of their top picks, not necessarily. But they shouldn’t have put you in a situation where you had to wonder about that.

candidate said “you shouldn’t hire me,” inappropriate music in a family-friendly store, and more

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

1. A candidate said “you shouldn’t hire me” at the end of our interview

I wanted some feedback on the interview I conducted with a candidate earlier today. Overall, the candidate performed exceptionally well during the interview process, showcasing their skills and experience effectively. However, towards the end of our discussion, they made a surprising statement that gave me pause.

During the closing remarks, the candidate said, “I’ve got to be honest — you shouldn’t hire me. I am not the perfect candidate for this job.” I asked for further explanation, to which they cited concerns about competition from other candidates and mentioned feeling awkward. While I appreciated their honesty, it left me uncertain about how to proceed.

On one hand, their self-awareness is commendable, and it’s important to consider their perspective. On the other hand, I believe the candidate has a lot to offer and could potentially excel in the role despite their concerns.

I would appreciate your input on how to interpret this feedback. Should we take their advice into account and reconsider their candidacy, or should we proceed with our evaluation, considering their nerves and lack of confidence during the interview?

That’s a pretty weird thing for a candidate to say. It would be different if they were raising specifics — like if they’d said, “It sounds like you really need someone with strong skills in X, and that’s not an area of strength for me. To meet the goals you’ve laid out, I’m concerned you’d need someone with significant experience in Y and Z.” That’s the kind of honest conversation that can make for a great interview — not necessarily one that leads to an offer, but one that leads to a good outcome for both sides: the employer doesn’t hire the wrong person for the job and the candidate doesn’t end up in a job they’ll struggle in … and if X, Y, and Z actually aren’t so important, it’s an opportunity for the interviewer to clarify that.

But if this person was just feeling awkward about who they imagined the competition was, that’s different.

So: My advice is to think about whether someone without a lot of self-confidence will be able to thrive in the job. In many jobs, it wouldn’t matter. In others, it would make things hard on everyone. This is a situation where I’d bet a nuanced reference check would tell you a lot more. (As might an additional conversation with the candidate where you ask to hear more about what they’re thinking, saying explicitly that you thought they’ve done well in the hiring process so far and you want to hear more about their concerns.)

2. Manager plays inappropriate music in a family-friendly store

I work in a store meant to be family-friendly. Parents bring their children in all the time. I’m a stocker and help unload trucks and put things on the shelves. My shift ends when the doors open for business, but I’ve stayed over a time or two, and even come back in during business hours to shop for myself.

Our stock manager is an absolute piece of work. She has thrown fits at employees for not working as fast as she wants them to. I had to report her to the company hotline for demanding that we do unpaid overtime as “punishment for not working fast enough to get your job done in the allotted time of your shift.” A corporate bigwig personally paid a visit to the store to reprimand her.

She got really quiet for a while, but now a new problem has come up. This manager has access to the store’s music system, and she puts in her own music. Some of it is okay, and you wouldn’t raise an eyebrow walking into any other store. But one particular song is on the music list, and it’s a doozy. Once an hour, every hour, a guy starts singing about how he spotted a random beautiful woman. He has no relationship with this random woman; she’s just someone who is attractive and who rejects his advances. So he spends the entire song blaming this woman for making him want to kill himself so now it’s all her fault, how could she do this to him, and he wouldn’t be like this if she would just date him. The song is sick, manipulative, and downplays real depression and mental health issues.

The manager refuses to remove the song from her playlist. She insists that corporate okayed the music, despite complaints from staff and customers alike. Several parents with children have made their opinions known and have been brushed off. Those who ask for corporate numbers are refused with, “You don’t need the corporate number because corporate okayed the music we play here.” Then she walks away from them and refuses to discuss it anymore.

I have serious doubts that corporate okayed the music, but I also am not sure if I’m being overly sensitive, since it’s a single song. Having already filed a complaint over things that I know for sure are illegal, it might sound like I’m whiny to file a complaint over store music. Customers seem willing to complain to the manager in person, but are not offended enough to Google a phone number on the internet when a direct request is denied. (The information is there if you bother to take 10 seconds on your phone.) I’m afraid to hand that hotline number out myself since the manager has been giving me the side eye through most of my shifts and none of the other managers will lift a finger or even acknowledge the issue themselves. Am I being overly sensitive, or is this wildly inappropriate?

It’s wildly inappropriate. You’re right, she’s wrong, no question. But you’re also not really in a position to do anything about it. You’re feeling like this is on you to solve, but it’s not. It’s the definition of “above your pay grade.”

But this manager is so deeply out of her gourd that something’s going to blow up at some point.

3. How do I set boundaries with my building’s cleaner?

How do I maintain boundaries with my building’s cleaner? I started a new job at a university as an office assistant. The building cleaner is very nice but she has started to try to spend a lot of time with me at work. I am a private person but also a people pleaser and feel a lot of pressure to make sure people walk away from conversations feeling comfortable and happy. However, it has many times caused people to monopolize my energy and time, and my alone time is very precious to me.

The cleaner asked me to have lunch with them one day but then asked to go for a walk during my lunch the next day and to do something else the day after that. I only have an hour lunch and they want me to spend it with them every day and will constantly visit my office throughout the day asking if we are still on for our plans. I feel a lot of pressure and they seem to get their feelings hurt easily if I seem less than happy. I want to be left alone but I don’t want to hurt their feelings or to discourage them from being friendly. I am frustrated as I really value having alone time to myself to read or listen to music and to decompress from masking all day. I don’t know what to do. Can you please provide me with some tips or key phrases that I could use to set up certain boundaries without hurting their feelings?

The easiest way to set a boundary is to cite a different commitment — which can include commitments to yourself. For example:
* “I made plans with my sister to call her at lunch today.”
* “I need to start using lunch to get caught up on reading for my book club.”
* “I made other plans, but I’ll see you later!”
* “I’ve got a bunch of personal stuff I need to take care of at lunch.”
* “I can’t today, sorry!”

Since they’re asking you daily, it will help to come up with a reason that covers you indefinitely, not just for one day (so the reading one or a new standing call with a friend/sibling could be useful).

In an ideal world you’d get comfortable saying, “Most of the time I use my lunch hour to decompress on my own and if I don’t, I have a harder time later in the day.” But for now, whatever lets you set a boundary will get the job done.

Caveat: You can’t guarantee this won’t hurt the person’s feelings. If that’s your measure for “actions I’m allowed to take,” you’ll always be at the mercy of other people and your time will never be your own (especially when you’re dealing with anyone who’s more assertive about what they want than you are). Instead your goal should be “I’m polite and respectful and asserting something I’m reasonably entitled to assert.” How other people feel about that is up to them.

4. Should I bring up that our in-office rule is enforced inconsistently on our team?

I was hired in the pandemic and have worked in my position remotely for two and a half years. This year we were required to return to office two days a week.

My team is only five people, and everyone except one other person is based out of a different location than me. I do not work directly with anyone in my office day-to-day. My manager does not go into an office location even though, according to them, they live within a reasonable distance to commute. The one teammate who is also in my location only comes in once a week. No one else on my team is close enough to an office to reasonably go in.

I know there may be arrangements going on that I don’t know about, but when I tried to bring up a different arrangement with my manager they quickly shut it down and said it was above their head.

Performance reviews are coming up and we also get to review and have a discussion with our managers. I’m thinking of raising this issue that there seem to be differing expectations for in-office attendance across the team. Is this inappropriate? Should I just deal? I’m finding it hard to take this policy seriously when management will not follow it or appear to enforce it equally across the team.

It’s not inappropriate to raise it — you’re being held to a rule others aren’t being held to — but you might not be reading between the lines correctly. It sounds to me like your manager is saying they don’t have the authority to make any official arrangements for differing schedules, but they’re also clearly not enforcing the in-office days with your team. So you could just see what happens if you go down to once a week like your coworker has.

Obviously that’s not ideal since you could potentially be called out for breaking the policy. But it’s not unreasonable to conclude your team has different norms, based on what you’re seeing, and to just quietly follow those norms yourself. (Frustratingly, if you take this route, you’re better off not raising it with your boss again, because then it can become “we specifically talked about this several times and I told you that you couldn’t” … whereas if you just follow your boss and coworker’s lead, it’s “I was calibrating myself to the rest of the team.”) This doesn’t work if your job involves tasks that truly require more in-office time, but it doesn’t sound like that’s the case.

5. What to say in an email that has your resume and cover letter attached

My boyfriend is applying for jobs. After a lot of work, he’s ready to email his resume and cover letter to his current first choice. As his cover letter will be an attachment, does he need to include anything in the body of the email besides:

Dear hiring manager,
Please find attached my cover letter and resume.

He should say what position he’s applying for. And it’ll look more polished if he adds a closing sentence and a sign-off. For example:

Dear hiring manager,

Please find attached my cover letter and resume for the X position. I hope to hear from you.

Sincerely,
Barnaby Plufferton

weekend open thread – February 24-25, 2024

This comment section is open for any non-work-related discussion you’d like to have with other readers, by popular demand.

Here are the rules for the weekend posts.

Book recommendation of the week: Good Material, by Dolly Alderton. Reeling from a breakup with his girlfriend, a struggling stand-up comic tries to figure out why she left and how to move forward. Like everything she writes, it’s funny, relatable, and a good time.

* I make a commission if you use that Amazon link.

open thread – February 23-24, 2024

It’s the Friday open thread!

The comment section on this post is open for discussion with other readers on any work-related questions that you want to talk about (that includes school). If you want an answer from me, emailing me is still your best bet*, but this is a chance to take your questions to other readers.

* If you submitted a question to me recently, please do not repost it here, as it may be in my queue to answer.

management talks to us like we’re children, napping in the wellness room, and more

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

1. Management talks to us like we’re children

I am a healthcare professional who works for a home health agency. We are all nurses, rehab therapists, or social workers — educated people with specialized skillsets. We rarely meet in-person but have daily phone calls, so I hear from the office staff very frequently.

There seems to be a culture in the office of using infantilizing language — referring to everyone as “friend,” as in “hi friend, have you finished your documentation?” and the use of “we” when the speaker actually means “you” — e.g., “did we finish the evaluation we started yesterday?” (The main offender of “we”-ing is not a clinician; this may be why this irks me so much.) I don’t know if this is intentionally condescending, but it certainly comes off that way. I have verified that I am not the only one who is bothered by this.

Is it worth it for me to mention it to my manager? I have thick skin but for some reason this REALLY rubs me the wrong way!

Nope!

It sounds like you’re taking that use of “we” as akin to saying to a toddler, “Can we finish our milk?” … but it’s far more likely that it means “did we, the team, finish the evaluation?” That’s a pretty common workplace usage of “we,” and complaining about it will look excessively nitpicky. That doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to be annoyed by it; you are. But it’s more of a pet peeve than something worth bringing up.

However, if there’s something I’m missing about the tone — like if it’s said in a patronizing way — that’s different, and that could be worth raising. But what you’d be raising is the condescension generally, not that one specific linguistic construction.

As for “hi friend” … I’m not a particular fan, but again, it’s the “pet peeve” category of annoyance, not “this is unacceptable.”

All that said, it’s interesting that you’ve found other people are bothered by it too, and that makes me wonder if there’s more infantilizing going on than just the language itself.

2. How can I make sure my coworker isn’t left in the lurch when I leave?

I work at a usually small and rural branch of a global company. It’s open seven days a week and closes on two major holidays a year. I only have one full-time coworker, with our manager being off-site and visiting once a month at most. I’m planning on moving in with my girlfriend in July, which is very exciting, but due to the distance I’ll no longer be able to keep this job. I’ve been heavily considering quitting for a while now, so this is a good chance for a clean break — but I have one major concern (outside of the painful purgatory of finding the next job, of course).

Before I was hired, about two years ago, my coworker was the only desk employee at the branch for a period of several months … meaning for those months he did not get a single day off. This was obviously awful for him! The company had such trouble finding a candidate for his position that he was the one who ultimately recruited and recommended me to management, in a large part so he could finally get a dang break.

I know ultimately this isn’t my responsibility, but I’d hate to wreck his vibe by indefinitely leaving him without weekends when I leave, and the guilt over the thought has kinda discouraged me from putting in the time to send out new job applications. I highly doubt that the standard two-weeks notice will be enough time to find a replacement, but don’t trust in my continued job security if I mention these future plans to my manager any earlier than that. (It’s also pretty awkward now when he makes jokes along the lines of wanting to keep us happy and reliably running the branch — he’s great, my disgruntlement is with the broad company and the specific work not being a great fit for me.)

In the time since my coworker’s awful unbroken string of work, we’ve had changes in our two directly higher levels of management, so it’s entirely possible the new guys will be able to actually arrange people to cover his shifts, and I’m worrying about nothing. But if not, is there anything I can do to make this transition smoother without jeopardizing my existing income? Or any leverage he can pull to make it clear working seven-day weeks is unacceptable even with the overtime pay?

First, assume that your coworker is aware that you could leave (or be hit by a bus or trapped at the bottom of a well or all sorts of other disasters) and what happened last time could happen again. He knows! He’s choosing to stay regardless. If he wants to, he can hold a firmer line about his availability this time (like by saying that he has family commitments outside of work that he can’t move). He will have a ton of leverage because it’s really unlikely they’ll want to replace him right after they replace you.

That said, if you have time between now and when you give your notice, you could think about whether there are things you can do to smooth the workload if he does end up covering both roles for a while. Are there things you can automate/clean up/simplify? If the answer is “not really,” then so be it — sometimes this is just how it goes.

3. Can I use the wellness room to nap?

My office is now requiring everyone to be physically in the office at least three days a week. Before the end of last year, I was working primarily remotely. When working remotely, I’m expected to be available from 8:30 am – 5:30 pm, which I have no problem with, even though I have a lot of trouble getting to sleep at night. However, generally I took my lunch break from 11 am – 12 pm, and I would go back to bed during this hour. Only after I got up after my lunchtime nap did I dress and actually get ready for the day. Now, I have to be up and dressed and out of the house during a time period when I’m used to still being in my pajamas. As a result, on my in-office days I’m up earlier and miss the lunchtime nap.

My office offers a “wellness room” that nobody else ever seems to use. It’s an empty room with some lockers and a recliner. I assume it’s mostly intended for nursing mothers. I was told about it as an accommodation for my ADHD and autism — I can go there if I’m overwhelmed. But if I don’t get my lunch break nap, I become overwhelmed much more easily. Is it a misuse of that space to reserve it for a 30-45 minute nap on the days I have to be in the office?

It really depends on your office culture. There are some offices where this would be fine, and others would it very much would not be. If no one else is using the room at all, I’m worried your culture is more likely to be on the “not all that okay” side of things.

However, since the room was mentioned to you as a possible accommodation for your ADHD and autism, there’s probably some space to experiment. Could you wear headphones while you’re in there, so that if anyone comes in you don’t necessarily look like you’re napping but rather just zoning out/centering yourself (which is close to what was offered to you)?

4. People get my name wrong in email

People get my name wrong. Often. The last letter of my first name is the same as the first letter of my last name, so in person this error makes sense to me. (Think “Elena” getting mistaken for “Elaine” when I’m introduced — a different name, not really a nickname.) That’s easy enough to address in the moment, but email is what I find troublesome. People keep addressing me as “Elaine” in their response to my email, where I’ve clearly signed off as “Elena.” How can I politely correct this? When I email back, I usually say something like, “So you know, I go by Elena. It’s a common mistake, so I wanted to point it out.” I may be overthinking it, but tone feels hard to get right in email, and sometimes I have to make that correction in the context of an otherwise unpleasant email (it’s the nature of my job!).

Too many words! Shorten it to, “It’s Elena, not Elaine!” Or in an otherwise unpleasant email, you can warm it up a little: “By the way, I’m Elena, not Elaine!” Throw in a smiley face if you’re not an emoji-hostile field.

can I bring a friend-with-benefits back to my hotel on a work trip?

A reader writes:

Next month, I’ll be attending a professional conference with several of my coworkers. This will be my first work trip.

I have a friend-with-benefits who lives in the city that the conference is being hosted in. Would it be inappropriate for me to invite her to stay with me at my hotel? If it is, can I stay at her place instead of at the hotel? My coworkers know I have a close friend there (though obviously they don’t know the full nature of our relationship), so me spending time with her during downtime won’t come as a surprise, but what are the ethics/optics/norms of sleepovers specifically?

Don’t parade her drunkenly through the lobby while any colleagues who think you’re married are likely to be milling around, but otherwise you are fine.

You’re an adult, and it’s fine to meet up with a friend in the city you’re visiting. If that friend hangs out in your room with you, it’s no one’s business what you’re doing in there. (In case anyone is wondering why this is different from the guy earlier this month who brought sex workers back to his room, it’s because the details of your situation are different. Most notably, you’re presumably going to be reasonably discreet about your intended activities, and you’re not making your coworkers think you’re drunkenly cheating on your wife.)

If you happen to run into a colleague in the hotel, introduce her the way you would if she were a platonic friend — “This is my friend Jane — she lives in town, so we’re going to have a glass of wine and catch up.”

Two caveats: First, make sure your evening is truly free before you finalize any plans. Sometimes on business trips there’s an expectation you’ll do work socializing in the evenings. Especially at conferences, that can be where some of the most useful networking happens. (Obviously if you don’t plan to meet up until midnight or similar, this is less of an issue.)

Second, you need to be reasonably well rested the next day — and also need to avoid giving anyone else a reason to think you’re not (like a coworker staying in the room next to you who hears audible evidence that you’re up until 5 a.m.). You don’t want to give anyone the sense that you’re prioritizing something social over the reason you were sent on the trip.