Skip to main content

“coworker wants a bigger retirement party than we want to fund, really intense job listings, and more” plus 3 more Ask a Manager

“coworker wants a bigger retirement party than we want to fund, really intense job listings, and more” plus 3 more Ask a Manager


coworker wants a bigger retirement party than we want to fund, really intense job listings, and more

Posted: 16 Jul 2018 09:03 PM PDT

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

1. Coworker wants a bigger retirement send-off than we're willing to fund

I work for a state government organization, which means we have no budget for anything extra or perks. When people retire, their office generally comes together to do something for them. It's very usual to have cake and punch in a conference room open to the entire organization. We are a smaller office; there are eight of us working right now. The last person who retired got an engraved vase and a dinner out, which cost about $20 per person. We now have another person retiring (who is not a great coworker and has a very difficulty personality) who wants a lunch out, and a reception in the afternoon, and a gift. When it is up to us to fund our coworkers parties, what is reasonable? How do we manage her expectations when we can't, or aren't willing, to do a full-day retirement extravaganza?

It's not great to treat people significantly differently with stuff like this, even when you're funding it yourselves. If you know you won't want to do a big hurrah for everyone, that's an argument for keeping it relatively low-key for everyone. Sometimes people think "but if we're funding it ourselves, why shouldn't we be able to do something fancy for the good coworker and something smaller for the difficult coworker?" But this is work, and it's unkind to do that, even if theoretically you have the right to.

Luckily, it sounds like that fancier retirement send-off was an aberration, and your usual mode is cake and punch. I think you can lean on that with this latest retiree. Say something like, "We realized after Jane's send-off that we couldn't sustain that because of the cost per person, and that the money involved meant people really wanted to stick to our traditional cake and punch like we'd always done before. Will you let Bob know what kind of cake you'd like to have, or if there's another dessert you'd prefer?”

(But then you really do need to stick to cake and punch for future retirees, too, to keep it relatively consistent. That's not to say, though, that people's close work friends can't take them out to lunch too, but that would something they do on their own, not the official send-off.)

2. What's up with really intense job listings?

I’m job searching at the moment and have come across more than a handful of listings that are rather aggressive in tone. For example, they say things along the lines of, “Be prepared to work harder AND smarter than anyone else to get this position" or “This will be the hardest job you’ll ever have” or “You absolutely MUST have a lot of grit and a willingness to do WHATEVER is needed" (caps and all). I’m switching fields, so I’m not sure if this normal. These positions are all full-time in-office marketing positions and I’m unsure as to why the listings are so intense.

I consider myself to be a hard worker, but this kind of language leads me to believe that they’re one of those places where everyone is expected to be incredibly competitive and work themselves to death and … I’m just not interested in that environment. I’ve talked to some friends currently in the industry and they’ve got mixed opinions. Some agree with me and think I should continue to rule them out and others say I’m being too sensitive. I’d love any thoughts or insights!

Yeah, it's fair to assume that a company that uses decidedly not-neutral language in their job postings is doing it because they want to create a certain image / attract a certain audience. And it's reasonable for you to take what they're saying about themselves at face value, and be turned off by it.

Since you're switching fields, it might be interesting to interview for one or two of these positions so that you can check or confirm your assumptions. But you're not alone in being turned off by this kind of language.

3. I'm still working at the job that fired me

I’ve worked for a company for seven years, and they recently let me know that I didn’t have a future there. Rather than firing me, they told me to resign. (I’m still eligible for unemployment, since it’s known that’s how my company fires people.) What puzzles me is that the company told me to resign within three months.

On the one hand, this seems generous since it gives me a chance to continue to receive a paycheck while I search for a new job and try to learn skills that will make me employable at other companies. On the other hand, it is exhausting to do an intense job search on top of a 40-hour work week, and it has been very difficult emotionally to continue to come to work everyday for a company that already fired me. I offered to help train my replacement to ensure a smooth transition, but my manager told me that wouldn’t take long and we could do that in the last week (ouch).

In the meantime, I’m in a weird limbo. I’m expected to continue meeting weekly with the manager who fired me to receive assignments, attend meetings about things the company will do in the future and welcome new team members. On the other hand, my manager can’t assign me large projects (since I won’t be there to complete them) or time-sensitive tasks (since I’ve been taking off so many half-days for interviews). Also, it’s not a good idea to assign me anything important, since in my job losing track of details or putting in less than maximum effort will affect safety, and I’m currently pretty distracted and unmotivated. (My team has cautionary tales about previously-reliable workers who did the bare minimum during their last months and caused huge problems.) I don’t even have the incentive to continue working to receive a good referral, since by company policy all my manager can do is confirm the dates I worked.

What’s your opinion on “delayed firings” like this? I appreciate the salary, but it seems like giving me a severance instead would have put me under a lot less stress and protected the company from risk.

It depends. Sometimes this can benefit both employee and employer. It can be a reasonable way to go if the person just isn't the right fit for the job but isn't terrible, and if they're trustworthy enough that they're not going to deliberately sabotage things on their way out, and if they're mature enough that they're not going to make those final weeks toxic for people around them. The advantage to the employer is that they get more time to transition the work and search for a replacement while the work is still being covered, and the advantage to the employee is that they have time to job search, can say they're still employed, and often receive more in salary than they would have in severance. And when both parties are open to it, it can be a pretty fair and transparent way to handle it — saying, essentially, "let's recognize this isn't working out and set an ending date, but things aren't so bad that you need to leave immediately, and as long as you keep up with the basics of the job, we'll give you time to job search and accommodate you in going to interviews.”

But a lot of the time it plays out the way your situation is — with the employee feeling so demoralized and disengaged that it negates the benefits. So it really depends on the specific details of the situation.

4. My coworker is angry that I poached someone from her team

I’m new to management and want to know the best practice for recruiting staff on other teams. I had an opening on my team and before the job posted, my boss suggested I ask someone on another team to apply. When she did so, she closed her door and indicated that this could get awkward with his current supervisor (who also reports to my boss). I had limited interactions with this employee but knew he had some valuable skills and seemed to have a great work ethic, so I did approach him. We had to change the job posting to make it possible for him to apply, which my boss signed off on.

It was not until he was the final candidate that my boss told us that the employee would have to let his current supervisor know what was happening. This seemed reasonable. Once he had accepted the offer, I tried to work out a transition plan (offering a full month to make him available for training the new person) but was met with hostility. This was not a surprise because the supervisor is not known for being a nice person. What was unexpected is in our recent supervisor meeting, several of the other managers lashed out at me and told me that I had poached the employee. They demanded that moving forward, if someone was interested in another employee, we should reach out to the supervisor and let them know. My boss not only agreed this sounded like a good idea but failed to own up to her part. (I later had a very good discussion with her and she genuinely forgot that she had suggested him. She has agreed to have a meeting to make this known.)

Please weigh in on this. Was I out of line to not reach out to the supervisor before I approached the employee?

Nope. Different companies have different policies and practices on this. Some do require the current manager to be in the loop from very early on, and others only require a heads-up once things progress to a particular stage (generally because letting your boss know you're thinking of leaving your job can have repercussions). But you were following your boss’s lead on this.

It's true that when you're a manager, learning that someone else who's on the management team with you has been trying to lure away one of your people can be frustrating (because of the impact it can have on your team's work and the increased work it can cause you in having to find and train a new person, who may not be as good as the first person) — but sensible managers understand that they're not feudal lords and their employees are free agents, and that it's better to keep someone really good within the company than to lose them to an outside employer (which is what will happen if managers block internal transfers).

Your boss definitely needs to get people better aligned on how she wants them to approach this kind of thing.

5. Employer is legally obligated to disclose their salary range — but won’t

In California, a recent law requires companies to inform job candidates of the salary range of that position upon “reasonable request.” I’m interviewing for a position at a California-based company. The manager I interviewed with refused to give me the salary range. The internal recruiter I spoke to similarly refused. I would think saying something like, “by the way, you’re legally obligated to give me that information” would not endear me to the manager. What are my good options here, if any?

Yeah, the key is to note that the law requires it without sounding adversarial. I'd say it like this: "Oh, I'm not sure if you know that California now requires the salary range to be disclosed!" Say it in an upbeat and cheerful way, like you're assuming they don't know and that they'll appreciate being tipped off. If they have a problem with you politely mentioning a legal requirement, that is a huge red flag about them as an employer.

coworker wants a bigger retirement party than we want to fund, really intense job listings, and more was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

can I nap on my break?

Posted: 16 Jul 2018 10:59 AM PDT

A reader writes:

I work for a large company that has a large common break and dining area, which has dining tables and booths like a restaurant, along with many televisions along the walls showing various network and cable shows. They also serve food and beverages. This area is an employees-only area and isn’t accessible or viewable by our customers.

I typically arrive to work early to cover myself in case of traffic or other issues, and on days with no problems typically arrive 15-30 minutes early. For the past couple months, I’ve sat in one of the booths with some coffee, and while sitting upright, relaxed and closed my eyes until it was time to head to my work area. I typically don’t fall asleep due to the coffee and the fact that I’m not tired, but someone seeing me might think so. Well, someone did and told my boss and my boss told me not to take naps during my breaks.

That doesn’t seem right. I’m allowed to eat and use the restrooms, but I can’t take a nap? Even if I’m not sleeping, does that mean I’m not allowed to close my eyes and not move for long periods of time? My work is hard but being able to rest and relax beforehand is really helpful to my day’s productivity. How much pushback should I give on this or should I just let it go?

In theory, you should be able to nap on your breaks or before work. That is, by definition, time that you're not working and thus your employer should give you wide leeway in how you use it.

That said, in practice, "don't fall asleep at work" is a very common office expectation. Some of that is about perception — people don't know that you're on a break or not officially on the clock yet and it can look like you're sleeping when you should be working. That can look really bad for you, and even for your boss (who appears to have an employee who’s openly slacking off). It would be nice if people assumed that if they spot you sleeping (or appearing to sleep), it's because you're not on the clock … but the reality is, people don't always default to that assumption.

Some of it, too, is just convention. We're not generally used to encountering sleeping colleagues at work, and it can be jarring.

All that said, though, there might be some room here for you to give some context to your boss and see if that changes anything. You could say, "I haven't been sleeping in the dining area, but I do sometimes sit with my eyes closed before work because I find it makes me more productive once the day starts. I'd like to be able to keep doing that — is that okay with you, since I'm not actually sleeping?" (Hell, you might even be meditating during that time. Who's to say? And your boss might be more open to that.)

But if the answer is still no, I'd leave it there. The perception stuff is real, and if your boss is opposed, this isn't a battle worth fighting. You could, however, do this in your car rather than in the dining area, and might have more privacy there. (Or you could go all-out and pitch your office on napping pods! But at that point you might look overly invested in naps and resting your eyes.)

can I nap on my break? was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

should I go around HR and contact the hiring manager directly?

Posted: 16 Jul 2018 09:30 AM PDT

A reader writes:

I’m currently job searching and when I learn about an opening, I’ll often reach out directly to department heads as opposed to HR. However, sometimes after these directors/VP’s email me back saying they’ve forwarded along my resume to HR, it goes no further.

I like being proactive and cutting out the middleman seemed to make sense to me. However, I don’t want to offend anyone or burn bridges with these companies. Should I re-think my approach? Is it wrong to reach out to department heads regarding a position instead of HR?

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.

should I go around HR and contact the hiring manager directly? was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

my coworker dumps emotions all over us and wants to be coddled

Posted: 16 Jul 2018 07:59 AM PDT

A reader writes:

My coworker, Dionne, and I are struggling with our other coworker, Amber. We are all the same level, but in charge of different departments. Dionne and I are young to have the positions we have, but we’ve both worked extremely hard and actively pursue opportunities to address any skills gaps we have. Amber is older than we are, very insecure, and has boundary issues.

We’ve tried addressing these issues with Amber directly, and that actually seems to make things worse. For example, she was complaining about our administrative coordinator and saying that she, Amber, annoys our admin, and the admin doesn’t like her, and so on. We said, "We’d prefer not to talk about the relationships you have with our other coworkers.” She started crying, and said that’s not okay, that we need to be nicer to her, and that we need to respond with "Oh, I’m so sorry. That sounds so hard. I’m sorry you’re having such a hard time. How can I help?"

Another time, Dionne had to tell her during a meeting that she didn’t have an answer for Amber and would have to ask our boss. Amber kept rephrasing the question to get the answer she wanted, but Dionne wouldn’t give in. Over a year later, Amber is STILL bringing up “the time Dionne was so mean to her in the meeting."

People generally walk on eggshells around Amber, and don't like to ask her to even do small things like put her appointments on the calendar so we can schedule meetings, or ask her to close her door when she's on the phone, and her team is hesitant to bring up problems with her, because they're afraid of making her cry.

We’ve noticed a pattern developing, where when one of us has to say “no,” set a boundary between work stuff and personal stuff, address an issue, or go to our boss for an answer to one of her questions, she essentially responds by saying her reaction is our fault, and wouldn’t happen if we were “warmer.” Recently, during yet another conversation to address a flare-up that she admitted was directly a result of her feeling insecure, she told me “the problem is your face" — that my expression is too neutral, so she imagines I’m thinking all sorts of awful things about her, and I need to be more effusive and start my responses to her with “I’m so sorry…”

Our boss highly values collegiality and respect in the workplace, and evaluates us on this specifically every year. I understand having two younger coworkers is really striking at the heart of Amber’s insecurities, and I am trying to be sympathetic to that, but it feels like we can't address issues directly and have to work around her (and her feelings), and it's leading to a lot of frustration, especially when she says we need to be "warmer" and less "work-focused." Is there a way to nicely communicate that we can’t manage her feelings for her, or is this just one of those times when we should start everything we say to her with “I’m so sorry…” to keep the peace, and let the behavior go?

Amber sounds exhausting. She's asking you to do some very weird emotional work on her behalf, and it’s not a reasonable request — anywhere, but especially in a work situation.

If you give in to her, she'll have essentially made it impossible to work with her. If you can't ask her to close her door because she'll cry, or to put a meeting on the calendar because she'll cry, or decline to hear gossip about other coworkers because she'll cry … well, she's holding you hostage with her emotions. You can't do normal work things because she might emote all over you. And it goes even further then that — when she doesn’t get answers because you don’t have them, she's accusing people of being mean to her a year later?

There isn't a perfect solution here. If you give in, you won't be able to do normal work-related things that you have to do. If you don't give in, a flurry of emotions will rain down on you.

Neither of those is good, but one is significantly better than the other. It's not an option to stop the normal work-related things that you have to do as part of your job, so that leaves you with having to accept that she's going to have Feelings, and not let yourself get manipulated by that.

That means that all you can do is to treat her like you would any other colleague — be polite and professional with her, but don't coddle her. If she has a reaction to that … well, that's going to be on her to handle. It's not yours to fix. Say what you need to say to her briskly and cheerfully and don't get drawn in beyond that.

It's possible that once she sees that you're just not going to engage on this stuff, she'll tamp it down. Or maybe she won't — but you'll be minimizing the impact on you by not getting drawn in.

I'd also stop trying to address all the flare-ups with her. She's shown that's not likely to work, and it sounds like it's making things worse. Instead, you're better off limiting your interactions with her and ending conversations as quickly as you can. It's not your job to explain to her that what she's asking is unreasonable or to talk through how her insecurities might be influencing her reactions. Stay out of all of that. If she has an emotional outburst, let her have it — on her own. You don't need to engage with that, and letting her draw you in is signaling to her that it's okay for you to be involved in managing her emotions. You're better off disengaging completely and just letting her have whatever reactions she wants to have. Those don't need to be your problem.

I think it's feeling more like your problem because of your mention that your boss values collegiality and respect and evaluates you on those things. But you know, most good managers value those things — and still wouldn’t be at all okay with Amber's behavior or expect you to accommodate it. If the problem is that your boss values those things at the expense of literally everything else, and is someone who would see this situation as Amber deserving respect and collegiality while the rest of you aren't entitled to any from her … well, then you have a boss problem. But unless your manager has specifically stepped in here and told you to accommodate Amber's issues — and even then, unless you've responded by explaining the work-related impacts her behavior is having and why accommodating it would cause additional issues — I wouldn't assume that's where she stands. That would a highly dysfunctional stance — and until you see clear evidence otherwise, you should assume she'll find this as ridiculous as everyone else does. (Or at least that she would if she knew the full situation. If she only sees bits and pieces of it, she may not — but that would be a sign that she needs fuller information, not that you shouldn't count on her to respond reasonably once she has it.)

One other thing: I'd leave the age stuff out of it. I can’t tell if Amber has told you herself that having younger coworkers is making her insecure, but even if she has, that's not an excuse for her behavior and it's not something that you need to cater to. If she hasn't told you that and it's more of a guess, you could be off-base with it. But either way, it doesn't really matter and I worry that by framing it that way you're playing into the idea that the age thing would somehow justify some of this … or are inadvertently being a little ageist, which obviously you don't want to do either. Her behavior is wildly inappropriate regardless.

my coworker dumps emotions all over us and wants to be coddled was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

loading...

Lexo edhe:

Postimet e fundit






Popular posts from this blog

Trajta e shquar dhe e pashquar e emrit

  Trajta e shquar dhe e pashquar e emrit Trajta themelore e emrit është rasa emërore e pashquar.  Nga trajta themelore ose parësore i fitojmë format e tjera gramatikore të emrit (trajtat). Emrat , si në njëjës ashtu edhe në shumës, përdoren në dy trajta: a) në trajtë të pashquar dhe b) në trajtë të shquar shquar. Emri në trajtën e pashquar tregon qenie, sende ose dukuri në përgjithësi, në mënyrë të papërcaktuar. P.sh.: një nxënës, një punëtor, një mendim , një mace, një laps etj. Emri në trajtën e shquar tregon qenie, sende ose dukuri të tjera, të veçuara nga gjërat e tjera të llojit të vet. P.sh.: nxënësi, punëtori, mendimi, macja, lapsi etj.   Formë përfaqësuese (bazë) e emrit është trajta e pashquar, numri njëjës, rasa emërore : djalë, vajzë, shkollë, lule, letër, njeri, kompjuter, lepur, qen, piano etj. Trajta e shquar e emrit formohet duke i pasvendosur formës përfaqësuese nyjën shquese, përkatësisht mbaresën: a) për emrat e gjin

Ese të ndryshme shqip

Ese dhe Hartime '' Ese dhe hartime të ndryshme shqip dhe anglisht '' Ndalohet rreptësisht kopjimi dhe postimi në një faqe tjetër.  Redaksia Rapitful ka lexuar disa ankesa në emailin e saj të bëra nga disa arsimtarë dhe profesorë ku janë ankuar se nxënësit po i kopjojnë esetë dhe hartimet nga faqja Rapitful dhe me ato ese apo shkrime po prezantohen gjatë shkrimit të eseve dhe hartimeve. Pra redaksia Rapitful kërkon nga nxënësit që të mos kopjojnë esetë dhe hartimet dhe me to të prezantohen para mësimdhënësve por le të jenë këto ese vetëm si një udhërrëfyes se si duhet të shkruhet një ese apo hartim dhe asesi të kopjohen. Ju faleminderit për mirëkuptim. Ese dhe hartime do te shtohen vazhdimisht keshtuqe na vizitoni prap. Nëse dëshironi Analiza letrare të veprave të ndryshme kliko mbi Analiza Letrare Kliko mbi titullin që ju intereson Ese për Diturinë   Për Mjekët! Fakultetet e sotme po kryhen me teste 6 arsye për të mos studiuar mjekësinë P

Tekste shqip: ““Ah Kjo Rruga E Gurbetit” - Shaqir Cërvadiku & Fatjon Dervishi” plus 21 more

Tekste shqip: ““Ah Kjo Rruga E Gurbetit” - Shaqir Cërvadiku & Fatjon Dervishi” plus 21 more “Ah Kjo Rruga E Gurbetit” - Shaqir Cërvadiku & Fatjon Dervishi “Du Me T'pa” - Gjyle Qollaku Nora Istrefi “Kercejna” - Sabiani Feat. Denis Taraj Getoar Selimi “Du Me T'pa” - Lori Bora Zemani “Million” - Melissa
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Labels

Show more