A reader writes:
I'm young (19) and work for a video store chain. My store manager has told me she thinks I'm too young and too "emotionally immature" to become a manager. I'm not sure what to think of that. She's said some seriously inappropriate things to me in the past, such as berating me about my lack of religious beliefs and the like.
I'm not sure what to think. I'd really like to become management, I'm more than ready for it performance-wise, I've shown that left right and sideways. She's actually going to hire outside the company and train them from the ground up to be a manager (which is very rare in our company, which promotes within, very very few managers are hired from outside) as opposed to promoting me.
I hate to constantly put her down, but everyone saw it coming, because she's the kind of person who would put the store in a bad place just to be cruel/make a point. I know it'd be better for me to NOT seek anything UNDER her management, but I'm trying to make due with what I've got.
I figured I'd ask what you thought of the situation, and let me know: Is it ageism? Cruelty? Just a wish to keep someone from moving up?
There are a few possibilities:
1. The problem is her. She's not a good manager, has an unwarranted personal issue with you, and/or believes age matters more than abilities.
2. The problem is you. Maybe you are too "emotionally immature" for the promotion, although that kind of explanation is unhelpful in the extreme -- if there are real issues here, she needs to explain to you exactly what behaviors are problematic and what you should change, not just slap a vague label like that on you.
3. Some combination of the above. In fact, if the answer is indeed #2, she still sucks as a manager for not providing you with better feedback.
Now, you're pretty sure that it's not #2. But keep in mind that when an employee is part of the problem, they very often don't see it -- especially when there's a crappy manager around who it's easy to attribute everything to. So keep an open mind about whether she might have any sort of valid point underneath her crappiness.
So how to proceed? Talk to your manager. Drop any defensiveness (I'm not saying you have any, but many people would in this situation ... and if you do, getting rid of it before this conversation will increase your chances of a good outcome here). Tell her that you really want to move up in the company, if not immediately then in the future, and that you'd like her help and advice on figuring out what you need to do to lay the groundwork for that to happen. Ask her to give you candid feedback on how you can begin preparing yourself for eventual increased responsibility.
If she gives you vague, unhelpful answers like "emotionally immature," ask her to help you understand what that means with specific examples. If she just tells you that you're too young, ask her to help you understand how that affects your work performance so that you can work on whatever the obstacle is.
A key point: Be truly open to hearing what she has to say. Don't write her off just yet, no matter how tempted you may be to do so. Even if she's a terrible communicator (which seems pretty likely), it's possible she actually does have useful input to give you. And even if you end up deciding it's not useful, it's still helpful for you to know what she's thinking, so you can make your decisions with fuller information.
Of course, you do have another option, one I probably don't recommend: You could go over her head to your regional manager or whatever system the company has set up for that sort of thing, to explain that you haven't been able to get useful feedback from your manager. But that can potentially backfire on you, so you'd want to proceed very, very carefully with something like that.
By the way, a side note: Berating you about religion is a huge problem -- depending on the specifics, it's probably illegal (there are laws against religious discrimination in the workplace). She apparently doesn't realize that and it would be reasonable to point it out, either to her or someone above her. But again, proceed with some diplomacy on that one.
Good luck!
Showing posts with label advice about your boss. Show all posts
Showing posts with label advice about your boss. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
helping a boss manage his time better ... my time management rant
A reader writes:
How do you put order/structure to a boss’s calendar that is out of control with constant meetings and no time to get any work done? Due to downsizing, etc., he oversees three departments now instead of just one. My boss has meetings on top of meetings on top of meetings, many of which he requests. I block off “Office Time” on his calendar and those times only get bumped for more meetings. I simply must help him take control of his work days, but can’t figure out where to start. HELP?
You've come to the right place on this one. I'm obsessed with this topic.
At its core, good time management is about clarity – clarity about what the person is there to accomplish. I'm assuming that your boss has important things he must accomplish other than sitting in meetings, right? But his schedule indicates that he is not being honest with himself about how he allocates his time and that he's not applying the necessary level of rigor required to have his time reflect his priorities. He has a lot of company in being that way.
Obviously, there's only a finite amount of time in the day. That means that people with lots of demands on their time need to pick and choose what they will and won't do. When people refuse to make those decisions, often because they aren't being honest with themselves about the fact they can't do it all, they still end up not doing it all -- but since they won't make deliberate decisions about what won't get done, they instead end up letting those undone items get picked by default. And that's no good. If some things aren't going to get done, it's far better to choose those things strategically, not just wait to see what's undone at the end of the week.
People who mismanage their time are people who aren't thinking clearly and logically about this. Just because there are a lot of things you'd like to do, or that you should do, doesn't mean that you can do them all. People who refuse to recognize this reality will find themselves overextended, stressed out, and often neglecting high priorities in favor of lesser ones. This can turn someone who should be a high performer into a weaker performer, all because of fuzzy thinking about priorities, time management, and what's realistic.
Ultimately it's about being brutally honest in response to this question: Since we can see there isn't time to do everything, what things can you decide to cut out? Most people in this situation initially respond, "I need to do it all." But what they keep forgetting is that they aren't doing it all now. It's not happening, because it's not possible. Like with your boss, they're not getting to everything, and often some of what doesn't get tended to is more important than what their time is getting spent on. So since you can't do it all anyway, you need to pick consciously and deliberately, not leave those choices to chance.
So. Where does that leave you with your boss? You have the right idea about scheduling your boss appointments with himself -- work blocks that are deliberately built into his schedule. But your boss is then overriding this by letting those work blocks get bumped. So you need to sit down with your boss and talk straightforwardly about what's happening.
Your boss needs to be honest with himself and decide whether or not he's committed to having room in his schedule for this. If he is, point out to him that he's been routinely sacrificing that need and that you're both going to need to more strongly commit to protecting that time from intrusions. This is a painful concept for people when they first grapple with it, and if he agrees too quickly, it means he's not fully processing it -- so tell him, "Look, this sounds easy now, but in practice, things are going to come up that will tempt you to backtrack. I think we need to agree that we will protect these work blocks at all costs, except in very unusual cases."
If he's logical, he's going to see the reason in this. If he's not logical, well, good luck with that. You may not be able to change him much.
(By the way, I also wonder whether your boss really needs to be in all those meetings. I'm skeptical of most meetings, let alone a day or week packed with them to the exclusion of all else. Your boss may need to delegate more, or say no more things, or teach his staff to use his time better. And if all the meetings truly are necessary, then it sounds like your boss's job is more than a one-person job, which means that either his job description needs to be pared down or he needs to compromise on issues like how much he'll involve himself in certain areas. But trying to magically do it all, when it can't all be done, guarantees he'll fail at some of it.)
How do you put order/structure to a boss’s calendar that is out of control with constant meetings and no time to get any work done? Due to downsizing, etc., he oversees three departments now instead of just one. My boss has meetings on top of meetings on top of meetings, many of which he requests. I block off “Office Time” on his calendar and those times only get bumped for more meetings. I simply must help him take control of his work days, but can’t figure out where to start. HELP?
You've come to the right place on this one. I'm obsessed with this topic.
At its core, good time management is about clarity – clarity about what the person is there to accomplish. I'm assuming that your boss has important things he must accomplish other than sitting in meetings, right? But his schedule indicates that he is not being honest with himself about how he allocates his time and that he's not applying the necessary level of rigor required to have his time reflect his priorities. He has a lot of company in being that way.
Obviously, there's only a finite amount of time in the day. That means that people with lots of demands on their time need to pick and choose what they will and won't do. When people refuse to make those decisions, often because they aren't being honest with themselves about the fact they can't do it all, they still end up not doing it all -- but since they won't make deliberate decisions about what won't get done, they instead end up letting those undone items get picked by default. And that's no good. If some things aren't going to get done, it's far better to choose those things strategically, not just wait to see what's undone at the end of the week.
People who mismanage their time are people who aren't thinking clearly and logically about this. Just because there are a lot of things you'd like to do, or that you should do, doesn't mean that you can do them all. People who refuse to recognize this reality will find themselves overextended, stressed out, and often neglecting high priorities in favor of lesser ones. This can turn someone who should be a high performer into a weaker performer, all because of fuzzy thinking about priorities, time management, and what's realistic.
Ultimately it's about being brutally honest in response to this question: Since we can see there isn't time to do everything, what things can you decide to cut out? Most people in this situation initially respond, "I need to do it all." But what they keep forgetting is that they aren't doing it all now. It's not happening, because it's not possible. Like with your boss, they're not getting to everything, and often some of what doesn't get tended to is more important than what their time is getting spent on. So since you can't do it all anyway, you need to pick consciously and deliberately, not leave those choices to chance.
So. Where does that leave you with your boss? You have the right idea about scheduling your boss appointments with himself -- work blocks that are deliberately built into his schedule. But your boss is then overriding this by letting those work blocks get bumped. So you need to sit down with your boss and talk straightforwardly about what's happening.
Your boss needs to be honest with himself and decide whether or not he's committed to having room in his schedule for this. If he is, point out to him that he's been routinely sacrificing that need and that you're both going to need to more strongly commit to protecting that time from intrusions. This is a painful concept for people when they first grapple with it, and if he agrees too quickly, it means he's not fully processing it -- so tell him, "Look, this sounds easy now, but in practice, things are going to come up that will tempt you to backtrack. I think we need to agree that we will protect these work blocks at all costs, except in very unusual cases."
If he's logical, he's going to see the reason in this. If he's not logical, well, good luck with that. You may not be able to change him much.
(By the way, I also wonder whether your boss really needs to be in all those meetings. I'm skeptical of most meetings, let alone a day or week packed with them to the exclusion of all else. Your boss may need to delegate more, or say no more things, or teach his staff to use his time better. And if all the meetings truly are necessary, then it sounds like your boss's job is more than a one-person job, which means that either his job description needs to be pared down or he needs to compromise on issues like how much he'll involve himself in certain areas. But trying to magically do it all, when it can't all be done, guarantees he'll fail at some of it.)
Saturday, March 21, 2009
how to tell your boss he's breaking the law
A reader writes:
I am the tech supervisor for a pharmacy. I am responsible for completing the monthly tech schedule. I also work only on weekends and Monday evenings.
Today, I told my boss that I was going to try and find coverage because I wanted to spend my daughter's first Easter with her. He told me that if I could find coverage then it was fine, but he then said, "We have to have coverage, so if it is between Easter and work, which one is it going to be?" I did not answer the question and just looked at him.
In previous situations where an employee requested a day off and nobody would volunteer to cover, my boss would step in a talk to some of the employees and get the day covered. I would like for him to do the same for me for Easter, seeing as how I worked Easter last year, thinking I wouldn't have to work it this year. But, my boss seems to think that Easter is not a true holiday and like it is not going to be a big deal if I do not find coverage.
I know that most people don't make a big deal out of Easter, but my family does, and spending it with my family is VERY important.
So, if I do not find volunteer coverage, how do I politely tell my boss that I would like for him to talk to some of the employees and push for coverage for me? How do I politely convey to him that the answer to the question he asked me (Easter or work) is Easter with my daughter and family? Do you feel it was inappropriate of him to ask me that question? I was kind of offended and shocked when he asked me that. Should I say something? How do I approach this whole thing?
I wrote back to this reader and asked who the other techs report to. She replied, "I am their trainer and conduct their evaluations. I also manage them as far as minor/moderate personnel and performance issues go, but ultimately, they report to him. He is the director. I cannot demand that they work Easter and them have to do it."
Federal law requires that employers "reasonably accommodate" an employee's religious practices, unless doing so would cause undue hardship to the business. In a situation where an employee wants to take off a religious holiday and other employees can easily be scheduled to work that day, allowing you to take off Easter would fall under the "reasonable accommodation" portion of the law, assuming that you're asking for the day off for reasons of religious practice.
Your boss is likely not even thinking of the law. He may not even be thinking of Easter as a religious holiday. Your job, then, is to point this out to him without coming across as overly aggressive or litigious. I would start out without getting into the law at all and would escalate only if it becomes necessary. First, I'd say something like this: "We talked recently about Easter and you asked me to pick between Easter and work. Generally work comes first for me, which I think you know, but in this case we are talking about my religion. Easter is a religious holiday for me, and I know there are many employees who don't feel their religious practice requires them to observe it. I'd like to ask that we schedule them on Easter. In the past, you've asked people to work on days that someone else wanted off. Can you do the same here?"
If he refuses, then I'd say: "I think we're actually required by federal law to make those sorts of accommodations for employees' religious practices." Note that use of "we" rather than "you." The tone here is that you're making a helpful, neutral observation about the law, and you are looking out for the store, not making a legal threat -- say it the same way you'd say it if you were talking about another employee's request. You do not want to sound like you're hinting at any legal action. (You have the right to sound like that, of course, but it's rarely good for your career.)
If he still refuses, you have a decision to make about how far you want to push this. If you want to push, I'd then say, "I hate having to frame it this way, but there's actually a law about this. I think you know I'm not the legal action type, but we're talking about what's required by law."
Now, some people will disagree with me about that "I'm not the legal action type" disclaimer, arguing that employees should assert their legal rights more forthrightly. And you're absolutely entitled by law to do so -- but your goal here is not just to assert the law but also to keep a good relationship with your employer. It is possible to do both, but not if you wield the law like a weapon. Fair or not, the reality is that few relationships are unaffected when legal threats are made. There are times when an employee may have no other choice, but when the question is "what is the best way to handle this in order to maximize my chances of a good outcome?" and not "what am I legally entitled to do?" then outright threats should be a last resort.
The law, by the way, is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
I am the tech supervisor for a pharmacy. I am responsible for completing the monthly tech schedule. I also work only on weekends and Monday evenings.
Today, I told my boss that I was going to try and find coverage because I wanted to spend my daughter's first Easter with her. He told me that if I could find coverage then it was fine, but he then said, "We have to have coverage, so if it is between Easter and work, which one is it going to be?" I did not answer the question and just looked at him.
In previous situations where an employee requested a day off and nobody would volunteer to cover, my boss would step in a talk to some of the employees and get the day covered. I would like for him to do the same for me for Easter, seeing as how I worked Easter last year, thinking I wouldn't have to work it this year. But, my boss seems to think that Easter is not a true holiday and like it is not going to be a big deal if I do not find coverage.
I know that most people don't make a big deal out of Easter, but my family does, and spending it with my family is VERY important.
So, if I do not find volunteer coverage, how do I politely tell my boss that I would like for him to talk to some of the employees and push for coverage for me? How do I politely convey to him that the answer to the question he asked me (Easter or work) is Easter with my daughter and family? Do you feel it was inappropriate of him to ask me that question? I was kind of offended and shocked when he asked me that. Should I say something? How do I approach this whole thing?
I wrote back to this reader and asked who the other techs report to. She replied, "I am their trainer and conduct their evaluations. I also manage them as far as minor/moderate personnel and performance issues go, but ultimately, they report to him. He is the director. I cannot demand that they work Easter and them have to do it."
Federal law requires that employers "reasonably accommodate" an employee's religious practices, unless doing so would cause undue hardship to the business. In a situation where an employee wants to take off a religious holiday and other employees can easily be scheduled to work that day, allowing you to take off Easter would fall under the "reasonable accommodation" portion of the law, assuming that you're asking for the day off for reasons of religious practice.
Your boss is likely not even thinking of the law. He may not even be thinking of Easter as a religious holiday. Your job, then, is to point this out to him without coming across as overly aggressive or litigious. I would start out without getting into the law at all and would escalate only if it becomes necessary. First, I'd say something like this: "We talked recently about Easter and you asked me to pick between Easter and work. Generally work comes first for me, which I think you know, but in this case we are talking about my religion. Easter is a religious holiday for me, and I know there are many employees who don't feel their religious practice requires them to observe it. I'd like to ask that we schedule them on Easter. In the past, you've asked people to work on days that someone else wanted off. Can you do the same here?"
If he refuses, then I'd say: "I think we're actually required by federal law to make those sorts of accommodations for employees' religious practices." Note that use of "we" rather than "you." The tone here is that you're making a helpful, neutral observation about the law, and you are looking out for the store, not making a legal threat -- say it the same way you'd say it if you were talking about another employee's request. You do not want to sound like you're hinting at any legal action. (You have the right to sound like that, of course, but it's rarely good for your career.)
If he still refuses, you have a decision to make about how far you want to push this. If you want to push, I'd then say, "I hate having to frame it this way, but there's actually a law about this. I think you know I'm not the legal action type, but we're talking about what's required by law."
Now, some people will disagree with me about that "I'm not the legal action type" disclaimer, arguing that employees should assert their legal rights more forthrightly. And you're absolutely entitled by law to do so -- but your goal here is not just to assert the law but also to keep a good relationship with your employer. It is possible to do both, but not if you wield the law like a weapon. Fair or not, the reality is that few relationships are unaffected when legal threats are made. There are times when an employee may have no other choice, but when the question is "what is the best way to handle this in order to maximize my chances of a good outcome?" and not "what am I legally entitled to do?" then outright threats should be a last resort.
The law, by the way, is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
being asked to "fix" a coworker
A reader writes:
I work for a very large company, on a very small team of specialists that does a ton of work. About a week ago, my boss pulled me aside for a one on one. I have a really good relationship with my manager, I can say without hesitation that I really enjoy working with the guy and he's very fair - and understanding to a fault.
A while ago I actually sent in an inquiry to you about a slacker employee on my team, and how to bring it up to my manager. Well, let's just say that this individual finally dropped the ball on something pretty big, and I had no choice but to clean up the mess. Let us also say that I suspect my manager took a fair amount of heat for the mistake once it was made, and came to a realization about how severe the nature of this person's slacker-hood is.
My boss moves my team around sometimes, and we basically had a conversation about how I would be moving next to this individual in hopes that my stellar work ethic and leadership skills will somehow rub off on this less than effective employee and make him a better worker. This happens to me at jobs. People assume that because I work hard, I am going to be able to help them make poor performers better at their job. It's never worked thus far, probably a reflection of my less than stellar leadership skills, but here I am again in this same situation, being asked to help this person who frankly has been in their position much longer than me and who is much older than I am better at their job.
I expressed this concern and frankly some doubtfulness to my boss that I could accomplish this given my track record, but he seems confident I can do this, yet has assured me he will not hold me accountable if this tactic does not have the desired effect.
Can you offer me suggestions on guiding this guy? The conversation between my boss and myself was definitely a confidential one, but I do feel I need communicate to this guy that if he doesn't shape up, he's shipping out - how can I accomplish this without letting on how much I know about his performance issues? I want to do this right (if possible) because I am trying to view it as an opportunity to develop some leadership skills and frankly, some cajones myself, but I have absolutely no experience with making this "Good Employee Fixes Bad Employee" thing work, so I am hoping for some expert advice on doing it in a tactful, clear, and concise way - IF it can be done.
Hmmm.
First, unless your boss has specifically told you that you can talk to this guy about the fact that his job may be in jeopardy, you shouldn't address that with him. That's the manager's job, not yours.
Speaking of things that are your manager's job, addressing poor performance is one of them. I hope that your manager's plan for this guy is something more than asking you to mentor him. A good manager would be addressing his concerns frankly with the guy, telling him what the issues are, the ways that he's falling short, and what the consequences are of not improving. I hope your manager is doing all that, and that having you model good behavior for the employee is just a bonus, but I have a feeling that might not be the case.
Your manager should not be putting you in a position where you feel responsible for a problem employee's success, because (a) that's his responsibility, and (b) you don't have the tools to make an impact -- because you don't have the authority that you'd need to address this head-on.
What exactly is it that your boss wants you to do? Just be a good role model? Or something more proactive? If the latter, you need to find out exactly what your role is supposed to be and what you have the authority to do. Without some authority over him, the most you can offer is help and guidance on specific projects. But if this guy is a slacker, I doubt he'll care to benefit from that, and that brings us back to your manager needing to manage.
For the love of god, what is up with managers who try to avoid managing? That's what it sounds like you've got here.
I work for a very large company, on a very small team of specialists that does a ton of work. About a week ago, my boss pulled me aside for a one on one. I have a really good relationship with my manager, I can say without hesitation that I really enjoy working with the guy and he's very fair - and understanding to a fault.
A while ago I actually sent in an inquiry to you about a slacker employee on my team, and how to bring it up to my manager. Well, let's just say that this individual finally dropped the ball on something pretty big, and I had no choice but to clean up the mess. Let us also say that I suspect my manager took a fair amount of heat for the mistake once it was made, and came to a realization about how severe the nature of this person's slacker-hood is.
My boss moves my team around sometimes, and we basically had a conversation about how I would be moving next to this individual in hopes that my stellar work ethic and leadership skills will somehow rub off on this less than effective employee and make him a better worker. This happens to me at jobs. People assume that because I work hard, I am going to be able to help them make poor performers better at their job. It's never worked thus far, probably a reflection of my less than stellar leadership skills, but here I am again in this same situation, being asked to help this person who frankly has been in their position much longer than me and who is much older than I am better at their job.
I expressed this concern and frankly some doubtfulness to my boss that I could accomplish this given my track record, but he seems confident I can do this, yet has assured me he will not hold me accountable if this tactic does not have the desired effect.
Can you offer me suggestions on guiding this guy? The conversation between my boss and myself was definitely a confidential one, but I do feel I need communicate to this guy that if he doesn't shape up, he's shipping out - how can I accomplish this without letting on how much I know about his performance issues? I want to do this right (if possible) because I am trying to view it as an opportunity to develop some leadership skills and frankly, some cajones myself, but I have absolutely no experience with making this "Good Employee Fixes Bad Employee" thing work, so I am hoping for some expert advice on doing it in a tactful, clear, and concise way - IF it can be done.
Hmmm.
First, unless your boss has specifically told you that you can talk to this guy about the fact that his job may be in jeopardy, you shouldn't address that with him. That's the manager's job, not yours.
Speaking of things that are your manager's job, addressing poor performance is one of them. I hope that your manager's plan for this guy is something more than asking you to mentor him. A good manager would be addressing his concerns frankly with the guy, telling him what the issues are, the ways that he's falling short, and what the consequences are of not improving. I hope your manager is doing all that, and that having you model good behavior for the employee is just a bonus, but I have a feeling that might not be the case.
Your manager should not be putting you in a position where you feel responsible for a problem employee's success, because (a) that's his responsibility, and (b) you don't have the tools to make an impact -- because you don't have the authority that you'd need to address this head-on.
What exactly is it that your boss wants you to do? Just be a good role model? Or something more proactive? If the latter, you need to find out exactly what your role is supposed to be and what you have the authority to do. Without some authority over him, the most you can offer is help and guidance on specific projects. But if this guy is a slacker, I doubt he'll care to benefit from that, and that brings us back to your manager needing to manage.
For the love of god, what is up with managers who try to avoid managing? That's what it sounds like you've got here.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
repulsed by office culture
A reader writes:
I work in a corporate setting within the Technology department. My direct supervisor who is a Vice President chews tobacco during business hours. The fact that he chews tobacco doesn't necessarily bother me. It's the spitting in a cup during departmental meetings that does. The only saving grace from me not puking is that the cup is coated with print and you cannot see the mucous.
Just for a moment’s time can you picture the following: "Now for this data set we are going to *SPIT* replicate this to the backup *SPIT* server then on every last *SPIT* day of the month the data should go *SPIT* off site."
His repulsive habits are not only disgusting, but it challenges my ability to take him seriously or even respect him as a superior. Furthermore, during said meetings he constantly checks his Blackberry for calls or emails with no regard to the persons actually talking to him. This type of behavior comes across as arrogant and makes you feel irrelevant.
This type of childish behavior is rather common place within my department. On a regular basis I deal with co-workers who don’t wear belts and bend over often, cuss at the top of their lungs, slam objects in their office as if mommy didn’t buy them that special toy, and computer equipment named after genitals (not kidding).
This is a small company with tight-knit relationships. I don’t feel comfortable confronting the issue head on and even contemplated talking to the President. However, he is friends with the offenders and is aware of the situation. I’ve overheard him making comments in a jokingly manner like “That stuff will kill you” or “Does your wife know you do that stuff?"
I take my job very seriously. I am very proud of my work ethic and quality of work. However, I feel as if I work for frat boys that only want to play in a sandbox. Am I just nitpicking or should I head for the hills?
I don't think you're nitpicking, but I don't think you can change this stuff.
This isn't a matter of one or two things that you'd like to see change; you're talking about an entire culture. And it's a culture that most other employees apparently like, including the president. Whether or not they should like it is beside the point; the fact is that they do. You can't singlehandedly change an office culture. And in this case, it's not really yours to change.
The thing you probably have the best hope of changing is your boss' habit of checking his blackberry while talking to you. This won't necessarily work, but you can try saying to him, "I've noticed that when we meet, it's usually at times when you need to be monitoring your blackberry. Is there a time we could meet when you wouldn't need to?" Might work, might not.
But it sounds like you simply don't like the office culture, and there's nothing wrong with that. No office culture will be right for everyone. My advice is to figure out if you can find ways to live with it and be reasonably happy. If you can't, you can't, and you need to proceed accordingly. But I wonder if there aren't ways for you to live in it peacefully.
I work in a corporate setting within the Technology department. My direct supervisor who is a Vice President chews tobacco during business hours. The fact that he chews tobacco doesn't necessarily bother me. It's the spitting in a cup during departmental meetings that does. The only saving grace from me not puking is that the cup is coated with print and you cannot see the mucous.
Just for a moment’s time can you picture the following: "Now for this data set we are going to *SPIT* replicate this to the backup *SPIT* server then on every last *SPIT* day of the month the data should go *SPIT* off site."
His repulsive habits are not only disgusting, but it challenges my ability to take him seriously or even respect him as a superior. Furthermore, during said meetings he constantly checks his Blackberry for calls or emails with no regard to the persons actually talking to him. This type of behavior comes across as arrogant and makes you feel irrelevant.
This type of childish behavior is rather common place within my department. On a regular basis I deal with co-workers who don’t wear belts and bend over often, cuss at the top of their lungs, slam objects in their office as if mommy didn’t buy them that special toy, and computer equipment named after genitals (not kidding).
This is a small company with tight-knit relationships. I don’t feel comfortable confronting the issue head on and even contemplated talking to the President. However, he is friends with the offenders and is aware of the situation. I’ve overheard him making comments in a jokingly manner like “That stuff will kill you” or “Does your wife know you do that stuff?"
I take my job very seriously. I am very proud of my work ethic and quality of work. However, I feel as if I work for frat boys that only want to play in a sandbox. Am I just nitpicking or should I head for the hills?
I don't think you're nitpicking, but I don't think you can change this stuff.
This isn't a matter of one or two things that you'd like to see change; you're talking about an entire culture. And it's a culture that most other employees apparently like, including the president. Whether or not they should like it is beside the point; the fact is that they do. You can't singlehandedly change an office culture. And in this case, it's not really yours to change.
The thing you probably have the best hope of changing is your boss' habit of checking his blackberry while talking to you. This won't necessarily work, but you can try saying to him, "I've noticed that when we meet, it's usually at times when you need to be monitoring your blackberry. Is there a time we could meet when you wouldn't need to?" Might work, might not.
But it sounds like you simply don't like the office culture, and there's nothing wrong with that. No office culture will be right for everyone. My advice is to figure out if you can find ways to live with it and be reasonably happy. If you can't, you can't, and you need to proceed accordingly. But I wonder if there aren't ways for you to live in it peacefully.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
receiving critical feedback
A reader writes:
I have a really messed up situation at work. Yesterday, I found a paper in the photocopier (which is in a public place). It was on the department director's letterhead (I report to the associate director). It was a handwritten list of errors I have made (relatively small and inconsequential), or things that annoy her about me. Among them are small errors from July 2008, my 6-month in advance request to use my vacation time + sick family leave to take care of a sick aunt. NONE of these have ever been brought to my attention as problems. I have a feeling the list was intended for my supervisor to put on my evaluation.
After finding the list, I brought it to my supervisor. He had a short meeting with the director and now we all have a meeting together on Monday. He is not one to support his employees, and rarely contradicts the director.
Should I request that an HR person be there? I feel like this is harassment. Am I being too sensitive?
My advice: Go and listen with an open mind.
It's normal to feel upset and defensive in this situation. Resist that impulse as much as you can. It will not do you any good, and it may escalate the situation.
The director seems to want to talk to you about things she is concerned about. It's almost beside the point whether you think these are small, inconsequential things or not, because she doesn't, and she's someone who you're going to need to satisfy in order to work there happily. The absolute worst thing you can do in this situation is be angry or defensive. Rather you need to listen to what her concerns are and figure out what you need to be doing differently.
Really, there are two possibilities here: (1) your director is being irrational, or (2) she's being reasonable. Either way, you need to hear what it would take to make her happy with your performance. If you hear her out and decide she's being irrational, nothing says you have to stay in that job forever. But you're still better off knowing where she's coming from.
Do the following:
* Really listen. Often in this situation, people immediately start thinking of how they should respond, which keeps them from hearing and processing the input. Maybe she has a reasonable point, which you'll never pick up on if you're focused on how to defend yourself.
* Use responses that indicate you're open to the feedback. For instance, saying something like, "I'm really glad you're telling me this. I didn't realize that this has been an issue, and I'm grateful to know" can dramatically change the nature of the meeting -- diffusing any adversarial feel and making it more collaborative.
* It's fine to present your side, of course, but do it in a non-defensive, unemotional way. For instance, you might say, "You're right that I didn't focus a lot of that project. I had thought that projects x and z were higher priorities and was more focused there. But am I looking at this wrong?" That last sentence makes you come across as open and non-adversarial.
* Try your best to be genuinely glad to get the feedback. It's far better to be made aware of concerns your boss has than to be blindsided by them one day when it's too late. Repeat as needed: "I hadn't realized it was coming across that way, so I'm glad to know."
* Know that it's not the end of the world to get critical feedback. I can't tell you how many meetings I've had where I've been the one talking to an employee about things I wanted them to do differently -- and only a very, very small percentage of those ended up with the employee losing their job. So don't freak out. Go, listen, be receptive, and try not to let your emotions get in the way.
By the way, after the meeting, talk to your immediate boss (the associate director) at some point on his own and let him know that you value feedback and ask if he'd bring you concerns directly in the future. It's possible that he shared these concerns himself all along and just isn't a good manager so didn't bring them up with you. That's bad -- you want a boss who will give you feedback as concerns arise so that you're not hit with them months later. Tell him you would welcome more immediate feedback in the future so things don't build up.
I think this will be okay. Good luck!
I have a really messed up situation at work. Yesterday, I found a paper in the photocopier (which is in a public place). It was on the department director's letterhead (I report to the associate director). It was a handwritten list of errors I have made (relatively small and inconsequential), or things that annoy her about me. Among them are small errors from July 2008, my 6-month in advance request to use my vacation time + sick family leave to take care of a sick aunt. NONE of these have ever been brought to my attention as problems. I have a feeling the list was intended for my supervisor to put on my evaluation.
After finding the list, I brought it to my supervisor. He had a short meeting with the director and now we all have a meeting together on Monday. He is not one to support his employees, and rarely contradicts the director.
Should I request that an HR person be there? I feel like this is harassment. Am I being too sensitive?
My advice: Go and listen with an open mind.
It's normal to feel upset and defensive in this situation. Resist that impulse as much as you can. It will not do you any good, and it may escalate the situation.
The director seems to want to talk to you about things she is concerned about. It's almost beside the point whether you think these are small, inconsequential things or not, because she doesn't, and she's someone who you're going to need to satisfy in order to work there happily. The absolute worst thing you can do in this situation is be angry or defensive. Rather you need to listen to what her concerns are and figure out what you need to be doing differently.
Really, there are two possibilities here: (1) your director is being irrational, or (2) she's being reasonable. Either way, you need to hear what it would take to make her happy with your performance. If you hear her out and decide she's being irrational, nothing says you have to stay in that job forever. But you're still better off knowing where she's coming from.
Do the following:
* Really listen. Often in this situation, people immediately start thinking of how they should respond, which keeps them from hearing and processing the input. Maybe she has a reasonable point, which you'll never pick up on if you're focused on how to defend yourself.
* Use responses that indicate you're open to the feedback. For instance, saying something like, "I'm really glad you're telling me this. I didn't realize that this has been an issue, and I'm grateful to know" can dramatically change the nature of the meeting -- diffusing any adversarial feel and making it more collaborative.
* It's fine to present your side, of course, but do it in a non-defensive, unemotional way. For instance, you might say, "You're right that I didn't focus a lot of that project. I had thought that projects x and z were higher priorities and was more focused there. But am I looking at this wrong?" That last sentence makes you come across as open and non-adversarial.
* Try your best to be genuinely glad to get the feedback. It's far better to be made aware of concerns your boss has than to be blindsided by them one day when it's too late. Repeat as needed: "I hadn't realized it was coming across that way, so I'm glad to know."
* Know that it's not the end of the world to get critical feedback. I can't tell you how many meetings I've had where I've been the one talking to an employee about things I wanted them to do differently -- and only a very, very small percentage of those ended up with the employee losing their job. So don't freak out. Go, listen, be receptive, and try not to let your emotions get in the way.
By the way, after the meeting, talk to your immediate boss (the associate director) at some point on his own and let him know that you value feedback and ask if he'd bring you concerns directly in the future. It's possible that he shared these concerns himself all along and just isn't a good manager so didn't bring them up with you. That's bad -- you want a boss who will give you feedback as concerns arise so that you're not hit with them months later. Tell him you would welcome more immediate feedback in the future so things don't build up.
I think this will be okay. Good luck!
Friday, March 13, 2009
when you disagree with your boss
A reader writes:
I have a very aggressive boss who is confrontational. He works for the short-term.
I am “relationship oriented” and work for the short-term AND the long-term. Up until now, it’s been okay (15 years).
However, he is stressed out by the current financial crisis and is pushing me to call clients 2-3 times a day until I get outcomes. He says, “if you can’t get outcomes, I’ll need to hire someone else” (another bully tactic).
I refuse to bully my clients and potential clients. Is there a business protocol written somewhere which indicates a general rule about how often to call a client or potential client?
I don't know if there's a written protocol out there explaining that it's rude to call people several times a day, although you might find one with an Internet search or on sites about your field.
But even if you don't find something, you need to sit down with your boss and talk about this. I've noticed that when people disagree with their boss about projects or tactics, they often don't just address it forthrightly and instead simply resist -- through their actions -- what the boss is asking them to do.
It's fine to resist what your boss is asking you to do (up to a point, which I'll get to in a minute), but that resistance must be in the form of an explicit conversation. It can't be in the form of just not doing what he asks and not talking about it. (And I'm not saying you sound like someone who would do that; you don't. I'm hijacking your letter to go on a tangent about a point I've wanted to make for a while.)
When you feel strongly that you don't want to do what your boss is asking, you should sit down with him and openly discuss your differing opinions. You want to do this in a polite and collaborative manner, of course; I'm not advising being a jerk about it. Ultimately, though, your boss makes the call. If his final decision is one you still disagree with, you can say things like, "I really feel strongly about this. Would you be willing to allow me to try it my way and we can see how it goes?" But if he refuses, you can't just ignore that and do it your way. This is the nature of having a boss. (You also can't keep the debate going forever; more than two separate conversations is usually overkill, depending on the specifics.)
Of course, if you disagree with his call strongly enough, you can always exercise your independence by leaving -- but just ignoring him isn't an appropriate option.
The whole point is to be open and candid. Figure out your differences, see if they can be resolved, and if they can't, decide if you can live with that.
Now, in your specific case, what your boss is asking you to do is ridiculous. So I think your instinct to find expert materials that back you up is a good one, and you can use them as part of your conversation. The fact that you've worked together reasonably harmoniously for 15 years also bodes well. However, his threats about replacing you aren't a sustainable way of interacting, so the two of you are going to need to reach some sort of understanding -- no matter what it is -- soon. If he holds firm in the face of you explaining that what he's requesting is counterproductive and that you don't want to harm your employer, relationships, and reputation, then you're back to the formula above: figure out if you're willing to live with it or not. Ultimately that's a lot more satisfying than a constant struggle.
I have a very aggressive boss who is confrontational. He works for the short-term.
I am “relationship oriented” and work for the short-term AND the long-term. Up until now, it’s been okay (15 years).
However, he is stressed out by the current financial crisis and is pushing me to call clients 2-3 times a day until I get outcomes. He says, “if you can’t get outcomes, I’ll need to hire someone else” (another bully tactic).
I refuse to bully my clients and potential clients. Is there a business protocol written somewhere which indicates a general rule about how often to call a client or potential client?
I don't know if there's a written protocol out there explaining that it's rude to call people several times a day, although you might find one with an Internet search or on sites about your field.
But even if you don't find something, you need to sit down with your boss and talk about this. I've noticed that when people disagree with their boss about projects or tactics, they often don't just address it forthrightly and instead simply resist -- through their actions -- what the boss is asking them to do.
It's fine to resist what your boss is asking you to do (up to a point, which I'll get to in a minute), but that resistance must be in the form of an explicit conversation. It can't be in the form of just not doing what he asks and not talking about it. (And I'm not saying you sound like someone who would do that; you don't. I'm hijacking your letter to go on a tangent about a point I've wanted to make for a while.)
When you feel strongly that you don't want to do what your boss is asking, you should sit down with him and openly discuss your differing opinions. You want to do this in a polite and collaborative manner, of course; I'm not advising being a jerk about it. Ultimately, though, your boss makes the call. If his final decision is one you still disagree with, you can say things like, "I really feel strongly about this. Would you be willing to allow me to try it my way and we can see how it goes?" But if he refuses, you can't just ignore that and do it your way. This is the nature of having a boss. (You also can't keep the debate going forever; more than two separate conversations is usually overkill, depending on the specifics.)
Of course, if you disagree with his call strongly enough, you can always exercise your independence by leaving -- but just ignoring him isn't an appropriate option.
The whole point is to be open and candid. Figure out your differences, see if they can be resolved, and if they can't, decide if you can live with that.
Now, in your specific case, what your boss is asking you to do is ridiculous. So I think your instinct to find expert materials that back you up is a good one, and you can use them as part of your conversation. The fact that you've worked together reasonably harmoniously for 15 years also bodes well. However, his threats about replacing you aren't a sustainable way of interacting, so the two of you are going to need to reach some sort of understanding -- no matter what it is -- soon. If he holds firm in the face of you explaining that what he's requesting is counterproductive and that you don't want to harm your employer, relationships, and reputation, then you're back to the formula above: figure out if you're willing to live with it or not. Ultimately that's a lot more satisfying than a constant struggle.
Monday, March 2, 2009
thanking boss after getting laid off
A reader writes:
I have been at my job for 11 months and the company laid off everyone but 2 people because of the slow economy (22 people in all). I was one of the ones laid off. I absolutely loved the job. Would it be proper to write a thank you note to the boss/owner thanking him for the employment opportunity that I had with them? (It is a family owned business.)
It's certainly not necessary, but it would be an incredibly kind and gracious thing to do.
Laying people off is very hard, and I can only imagine how it feels to have to take one's family business from 24 people to 2 people. Generally laid-off employees are understandably focused on the impact on themselves -- of course -- but if you're thinking of your boss as well, I'm sure he would be really grateful to receive a note like that right now.
And not only is it a really nice thing to do, but it might actually pay off in the future, in terms of him helping you with job leads or being the first on his list to call if business picks back up ... but mainly it's just really nice.
I have been at my job for 11 months and the company laid off everyone but 2 people because of the slow economy (22 people in all). I was one of the ones laid off. I absolutely loved the job. Would it be proper to write a thank you note to the boss/owner thanking him for the employment opportunity that I had with them? (It is a family owned business.)
It's certainly not necessary, but it would be an incredibly kind and gracious thing to do.
Laying people off is very hard, and I can only imagine how it feels to have to take one's family business from 24 people to 2 people. Generally laid-off employees are understandably focused on the impact on themselves -- of course -- but if you're thinking of your boss as well, I'm sure he would be really grateful to receive a note like that right now.
And not only is it a really nice thing to do, but it might actually pay off in the future, in terms of him helping you with job leads or being the first on his list to call if business picks back up ... but mainly it's just really nice.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
boss threatening to contact prospective employer
A reader writes:
I have been working at the job from hell (people always burp, cuss, yell at each other, etc.) since mid-November. Even though the job is outside of my educational training, I took it because of the poor economy and it's the only job I could get. Since I knew I wouldn't be there long-term and that other employers would laugh and question my sanity for taking a job at this company, I decided to leave it off my resume.
One day I read my personal e-mail from work and discovered that an employer that I applied to was interested in me coming for an interview, so I set up the appointment using my work computer. Well, my employer discovered that and I overheard her saying that she is going to contact this employer to let them know that they discovered me applying for jobs at work. I overheard this clear as day.
My conversations with the new employer were going well up to this point and I believe that my current employer did contact my potential employer. My current employer has no idea about labor law or illegal actions or anything. I haven't heard anything from the new employer, and it has been a week since our last positive contact with each other. How do I handle this ? I have already decided to leave my current job, but what can I do to make sure that the potential employer is still considering my application favorably?
You may not be able to. The fact is, you were probably in the wrong to be using work time and your employer's computer to set up an interview for another job. Is this pretty common? Sure. Does that make it okay if you get caught? Not really. If you want to job search, you should do it on your own time.
Now, is your boss in the wrong for contacting the other employer? Yes, if she really did. (It doesn't sound like you know that she really did; she could been have been blowing off steam when she said that.) But if she actually did contact the other employer about this, she'll look a little crazy to them. It's overkill. If she has a problem with what you were doing, she should deal with you directly. Hell, she can fire you for it if she wants. But trying to sabotage your chances with the other job crosses a line (and a lawyer might even tell you that it's potentially risky legally, but I'm not a lawyer).
But here's another side of this: You took a job because it was all you could get, you don't plan to stay there long, you believe it's beneath you, your email makes it sound virtually impossible that your feelings aren't coming out in your attitude at work, and you're spending your work time looking for other jobs. You're not really acting in good faith.
You may think it doesn't matter because you plan to leave this job off your resume and you're just there for the paycheck-- but the world just isn't as large as we sometimes think. What if you're applying for your dream job and the hiring manager turns out to be friends with your current manager? What do you think she's going to say about you?
It sounds trite, but while you're stuck there, do the best you can do with it. You just don't know where that might lead you (or what obstacles you might be creating for yourself otherwise).
I have been working at the job from hell (people always burp, cuss, yell at each other, etc.) since mid-November. Even though the job is outside of my educational training, I took it because of the poor economy and it's the only job I could get. Since I knew I wouldn't be there long-term and that other employers would laugh and question my sanity for taking a job at this company, I decided to leave it off my resume.
One day I read my personal e-mail from work and discovered that an employer that I applied to was interested in me coming for an interview, so I set up the appointment using my work computer. Well, my employer discovered that and I overheard her saying that she is going to contact this employer to let them know that they discovered me applying for jobs at work. I overheard this clear as day.
My conversations with the new employer were going well up to this point and I believe that my current employer did contact my potential employer. My current employer has no idea about labor law or illegal actions or anything. I haven't heard anything from the new employer, and it has been a week since our last positive contact with each other. How do I handle this ? I have already decided to leave my current job, but what can I do to make sure that the potential employer is still considering my application favorably?
You may not be able to. The fact is, you were probably in the wrong to be using work time and your employer's computer to set up an interview for another job. Is this pretty common? Sure. Does that make it okay if you get caught? Not really. If you want to job search, you should do it on your own time.
Now, is your boss in the wrong for contacting the other employer? Yes, if she really did. (It doesn't sound like you know that she really did; she could been have been blowing off steam when she said that.) But if she actually did contact the other employer about this, she'll look a little crazy to them. It's overkill. If she has a problem with what you were doing, she should deal with you directly. Hell, she can fire you for it if she wants. But trying to sabotage your chances with the other job crosses a line (and a lawyer might even tell you that it's potentially risky legally, but I'm not a lawyer).
But here's another side of this: You took a job because it was all you could get, you don't plan to stay there long, you believe it's beneath you, your email makes it sound virtually impossible that your feelings aren't coming out in your attitude at work, and you're spending your work time looking for other jobs. You're not really acting in good faith.
You may think it doesn't matter because you plan to leave this job off your resume and you're just there for the paycheck-- but the world just isn't as large as we sometimes think. What if you're applying for your dream job and the hiring manager turns out to be friends with your current manager? What do you think she's going to say about you?
It sounds trite, but while you're stuck there, do the best you can do with it. You just don't know where that might lead you (or what obstacles you might be creating for yourself otherwise).
asking boss for a loan
A reader writes:
I started working for my new employer on September 15, 2008. I was pregnant and I had to go on maternity leave on January 1, 2009. The company did not pay me while I was on maternity leave. I have financial problems and could not pay rent. The owner switched off my electricity and I decided to go back to work. I started working again in mid-February, with my baby one month old. I would like to ask my boss if the company can help me with a loan to sort out my financial crisis. Is it right to ask this of a boss?
First, I'm sorry to hear about your situation.
Do you have any other options besides asking your boss? Family, friends, others you could ask for help? In general, I don't think it's a good idea to ask your employer for a loan or pay advance, especially when you're new to the company.
Of course, if you're truly desperate, you're desperate, and you've got to do what you've got to do -- but I would exhaust all other options first (including looking into public assistance programs and bank loans, if you're eligible).
But I'll be honest: I've never been in this situation (on either side) and I might be wrong about this. What do other people think?
I wish you the best of luck, and I hope things turn around for you soon.
I started working for my new employer on September 15, 2008. I was pregnant and I had to go on maternity leave on January 1, 2009. The company did not pay me while I was on maternity leave. I have financial problems and could not pay rent. The owner switched off my electricity and I decided to go back to work. I started working again in mid-February, with my baby one month old. I would like to ask my boss if the company can help me with a loan to sort out my financial crisis. Is it right to ask this of a boss?
First, I'm sorry to hear about your situation.
Do you have any other options besides asking your boss? Family, friends, others you could ask for help? In general, I don't think it's a good idea to ask your employer for a loan or pay advance, especially when you're new to the company.
Of course, if you're truly desperate, you're desperate, and you've got to do what you've got to do -- but I would exhaust all other options first (including looking into public assistance programs and bank loans, if you're eligible).
But I'll be honest: I've never been in this situation (on either side) and I might be wrong about this. What do other people think?
I wish you the best of luck, and I hope things turn around for you soon.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
boss makes schedule without checking with employee
A reader writes:
Since I have worked at the company where my stepfather and stepbrother also work, my boss has written me in for shifts without asking me if I am available. Occasionally he asks a family member rather than me, but lately he has not even been doing that. I'm 17 and have been working there for over a year now. I am wondering if it's actually allowed as I can't even back out when I have other commitments as the boss claims he "needs" me to come in.
You need to sit down with your boss and get clear on how scheduling is supposed to work. There are some businesses where the boss simply makes a schedule from week to week, and employees are expected to be available for the shifts they're scheduled for. You need to find out if your company is one of those.
If it is, ask him what you're supposed to do if you're scheduled for a shift you can't work. Will he let you find someone else to cover your shift? Will he let you tell him in advance when you can and can't be scheduled for the upcoming schedule period?
First, get clear on this so you understand what the expectations are (and can decide if they're conditions you want to work under). Next, tell him that you understand the temptation to ask your relatives about your availability but that it causes problems because they don't always know your schedule like you do. Ask him to talk with you directly, like he would with any other employee.
You're 17, so you might not be sure quite how to open this conversation or how it should go. It should sound something like this:
Since I have worked at the company where my stepfather and stepbrother also work, my boss has written me in for shifts without asking me if I am available. Occasionally he asks a family member rather than me, but lately he has not even been doing that. I'm 17 and have been working there for over a year now. I am wondering if it's actually allowed as I can't even back out when I have other commitments as the boss claims he "needs" me to come in.
You need to sit down with your boss and get clear on how scheduling is supposed to work. There are some businesses where the boss simply makes a schedule from week to week, and employees are expected to be available for the shifts they're scheduled for. You need to find out if your company is one of those.
If it is, ask him what you're supposed to do if you're scheduled for a shift you can't work. Will he let you find someone else to cover your shift? Will he let you tell him in advance when you can and can't be scheduled for the upcoming schedule period?
First, get clear on this so you understand what the expectations are (and can decide if they're conditions you want to work under). Next, tell him that you understand the temptation to ask your relatives about your availability but that it causes problems because they don't always know your schedule like you do. Ask him to talk with you directly, like he would with any other employee.
You're 17, so you might not be sure quite how to open this conversation or how it should go. It should sound something like this:
You: Joe, do you have a few minutes to talk to me about our scheduling?Basically, be straightforward, and don't be demanding. And if you don't like his answers, you can politely ask if there are alternatives (keeping in mind that there may not be). Your goal is to get clear on what you should expect, and then from there you can decide if this works for you or not. Good luck!
Boss: Sure, what's up?
You: I've noticed you've been scheduling me for shifts at times when I'm not always available, and I wanted to get clear on how this works. Can I tell you in advance about times when I won't be available? Or do you need me to plan to always be available during certain slots? What's the best way for me to handle this?
Boss: I generally assume you're available any time except Saturdays. It's hard for me to accommodate everyone's preferences, so I've ended up just doing the schedule and expecting people to follow it. (This is the worst case scenario response, but he may say something far more accommodating.)
You: Okay, I understand. Is there any flexibility, if there's an occasional outside commitment that I really need to keep?
Boss: Well, you can check with me ahead of time, but make sure you check before Mondays, because that's when I do the schedule, and I don't like to change it after that.
You: Thanks, I appreciate it. Also, by the way, I know sometimes you've asked my stepfather or stepbrother about my schedule, but they often don't really know for sure -- so would you talk with me directly, so we can avoid them accidentally giving you bad information?
Sunday, February 8, 2009
boss vacationing while business struggles
A reader writes:
I am an office manager of nine years in a small doctor's practice. I have one other co-worker, who is going on her 11th year. With the failing economy, our boss cut our holiday bonus in half, most recently took three months to deposit our simple IRA contributions and matches, took our paid holidays for 2009, and cut our hours.
Now he is thinking of taking a vacation. How do I address the situation without attacking him personally? He has asked his dedicated employees to sacrifice and said he "can barely pay bills," and now a family vacation is in the pipeline. When the doctor is away, there are NO patients and no income coming in. HELLOO??? Is it just me?
Well, ultimately this guy owns the business, and it's his to run as he sees fit (aside from the delay in depositing your IRA contributions, which may not be legal in your state). So I think you've got to keep that in mind as you think about the situation.
Regarding the family vacation, you presumably don't know all the details. Maybe his wife is paying for it. Maybe he promised her he'd go for reasons too personal too share with employees, despite the hardship it may cause the business. We don't know. Plus, he may quite reasonably feel that he needs to get some time off in order to do his job well; most people do.
All that said, I do think you can talk to him about the situation, but it's important that you keep all the above in mind, since that will influence your approach. You could say something like, "I don't know if you realize this, but Sharon and I are both very stressed out about the financial troubles we're having, and we couldn't help but get concerned when we realized that we won't have any patients during the time you're on vacation. Do you have ideas for other things we can do with that time that will help contribute?" Keep in mind that the last thing this guy may need is his employees pressuring him about a situation he may not be able to do anything about; keep the focus on how you can help, not on nagging him.
All that said, please start looking around for other jobs. The signs you're seeing are ones of a struggling business, and you would be smart to start looking for escape routes now.
I am an office manager of nine years in a small doctor's practice. I have one other co-worker, who is going on her 11th year. With the failing economy, our boss cut our holiday bonus in half, most recently took three months to deposit our simple IRA contributions and matches, took our paid holidays for 2009, and cut our hours.
Now he is thinking of taking a vacation. How do I address the situation without attacking him personally? He has asked his dedicated employees to sacrifice and said he "can barely pay bills," and now a family vacation is in the pipeline. When the doctor is away, there are NO patients and no income coming in. HELLOO??? Is it just me?
Well, ultimately this guy owns the business, and it's his to run as he sees fit (aside from the delay in depositing your IRA contributions, which may not be legal in your state). So I think you've got to keep that in mind as you think about the situation.
Regarding the family vacation, you presumably don't know all the details. Maybe his wife is paying for it. Maybe he promised her he'd go for reasons too personal too share with employees, despite the hardship it may cause the business. We don't know. Plus, he may quite reasonably feel that he needs to get some time off in order to do his job well; most people do.
All that said, I do think you can talk to him about the situation, but it's important that you keep all the above in mind, since that will influence your approach. You could say something like, "I don't know if you realize this, but Sharon and I are both very stressed out about the financial troubles we're having, and we couldn't help but get concerned when we realized that we won't have any patients during the time you're on vacation. Do you have ideas for other things we can do with that time that will help contribute?" Keep in mind that the last thing this guy may need is his employees pressuring him about a situation he may not be able to do anything about; keep the focus on how you can help, not on nagging him.
All that said, please start looking around for other jobs. The signs you're seeing are ones of a struggling business, and you would be smart to start looking for escape routes now.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
is my boss wrong to consult with someone else about my work?
A reader writes:
I work in an 8-person field office of a major national nonprofit. Our office is currently in the midst of a major collaborative initiative which has placed increasing demands on our Executive Director's (my boss) time. My boss is so busy cultivating relationships with volunteers and funders that he spends less time on the day-to-day management of the organization. I would say that the amount of time he spends on these activities is too high, even by nonprofit organization standards. Morale is low as people are feeling spread too thin.
Over the past few months, he has increasingly leaned on one of my colleagues to oversee his day-to-day management responsibilities. In many ways, my colleague has become a de facto deputy director. I respect my colleague, but I was angered to learn that my boss gave her a draft of my annual work plan for feedback without telling me first. I was particularly upset that my boss gave me additional responsibilities based on my colleague's feedback with involving me in the discussion. Work plan development has always been an employee-manager activity in the past. Am I out of line for feeling upset that he shared my work plan with her without first telling me? I don't mind her input, but I'm upset at the lack of communication and now have questions about about how my performance will be monitored and by whom.
It sounds like your boss, at least for right now, needs someone in a deputy director type position. It's not good for anyone if the executive director doesn't have enough time for day-to-day management. And it sounds like this colleague is someone whose skills he respects, so it's not unnatural for him to be leaning on her in this situation.
However, clearly he could have done a better job of communicating that. There's a good chance your colleague is thinking the same thing; she's been put in a potentially awkward position herself, by being asked to share pieces of the managerial burden without the boss explaining that to anyone.
My advice to you is to approach your boss and say that you hadn't realized he'd be bringing your colleague in on your work plan, and although you didn't mind it, you'd like some clarification about how you should view her role. You must be non-defensive when you say this, both in tone and wording. Do not sound like you're objecting to it; you're just seeking information. (If you sound defensive and he's actually about to announce that she's becoming the deputy director, things are going to get off on the wrong foot. Plus, you don't want to give your boss the impression that your ego is getting in the way of your ability to appreciate that this may be a smart way to help him manage his time.)
Frankly, if you respect this colleague and think she could do a good job as a manager, you might even suggest that to your boss as a solution. You mentioned that he doesn't have enough time to do his job properly and that people's morale is suffering, this might be something that could help. (That depends hugely on her skills as a manager, however. Don't suggest it if you don't see potential for to be good at it.)
I actually once got promoted into a job that way. My boss had way too much work on his plate and desperately wanted to get out of his day-to-day management responsibilities, which he was always giving short shrift to anyway. I was in the process of figuring out that I really liked managing, and so he created a #2 position and put me in it. It turned out that I loved all the stuff that he had hated and paid attention to the things he had avoided, so it was a win-win for everyone ... except the people who didn't adjust well to having a peer become their manager. Don't be in that group, if that ends up being the direction this goes in.
But really, just talk to the guy and ask how you should relate to her.
I work in an 8-person field office of a major national nonprofit. Our office is currently in the midst of a major collaborative initiative which has placed increasing demands on our Executive Director's (my boss) time. My boss is so busy cultivating relationships with volunteers and funders that he spends less time on the day-to-day management of the organization. I would say that the amount of time he spends on these activities is too high, even by nonprofit organization standards. Morale is low as people are feeling spread too thin.
Over the past few months, he has increasingly leaned on one of my colleagues to oversee his day-to-day management responsibilities. In many ways, my colleague has become a de facto deputy director. I respect my colleague, but I was angered to learn that my boss gave her a draft of my annual work plan for feedback without telling me first. I was particularly upset that my boss gave me additional responsibilities based on my colleague's feedback with involving me in the discussion. Work plan development has always been an employee-manager activity in the past. Am I out of line for feeling upset that he shared my work plan with her without first telling me? I don't mind her input, but I'm upset at the lack of communication and now have questions about about how my performance will be monitored and by whom.
It sounds like your boss, at least for right now, needs someone in a deputy director type position. It's not good for anyone if the executive director doesn't have enough time for day-to-day management. And it sounds like this colleague is someone whose skills he respects, so it's not unnatural for him to be leaning on her in this situation.
However, clearly he could have done a better job of communicating that. There's a good chance your colleague is thinking the same thing; she's been put in a potentially awkward position herself, by being asked to share pieces of the managerial burden without the boss explaining that to anyone.
My advice to you is to approach your boss and say that you hadn't realized he'd be bringing your colleague in on your work plan, and although you didn't mind it, you'd like some clarification about how you should view her role. You must be non-defensive when you say this, both in tone and wording. Do not sound like you're objecting to it; you're just seeking information. (If you sound defensive and he's actually about to announce that she's becoming the deputy director, things are going to get off on the wrong foot. Plus, you don't want to give your boss the impression that your ego is getting in the way of your ability to appreciate that this may be a smart way to help him manage his time.)
Frankly, if you respect this colleague and think she could do a good job as a manager, you might even suggest that to your boss as a solution. You mentioned that he doesn't have enough time to do his job properly and that people's morale is suffering, this might be something that could help. (That depends hugely on her skills as a manager, however. Don't suggest it if you don't see potential for to be good at it.)
I actually once got promoted into a job that way. My boss had way too much work on his plate and desperately wanted to get out of his day-to-day management responsibilities, which he was always giving short shrift to anyway. I was in the process of figuring out that I really liked managing, and so he created a #2 position and put me in it. It turned out that I loved all the stuff that he had hated and paid attention to the things he had avoided, so it was a win-win for everyone ... except the people who didn't adjust well to having a peer become their manager. Don't be in that group, if that ends up being the direction this goes in.
But really, just talk to the guy and ask how you should relate to her.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
bosses who yell
A reader writes:I'm hoping you can help a friend of mine who is stuck in a tough situation. After a long job search, my friend has found his dream job--it's what he wants to do, in the field he wants to do it in, it pays the salary he wants to make, and he feels like he's making a positive difference in the world. But his manager only has one way of talking: SCREAMING. Peppered with curse words, no less.
At first, my friend just thought this person had high standards, or was trying to "break in the new guy." But it has been months and it's not getting any better. Although my pal tries to respond to the feedback that is buried somewhere in all the shouting and swearing, none of his efforts to give his boss what he wants have been met with anything but rage. The few times this manager has tried to give my friend a compliment about a job well done, he still somehow ends up angry and yelling! It is so bad that I would not be surprised if this person has some sort of undiagnosed mood disorder and should be on medication. With the economy the way it is, quitting the job is not an option. Is there anything my friend can do to improve his work environment?
That's the question I answer in today's post at U.S. News & World Report. To read my answer and leave your own comments, head on over there.
Monday, January 26, 2009
can boss deduct the cost of a mistake from my paycheck?
A reader writes:
Last year, I overcharged a customer by approximately $1500. No one caught it and the customer paid the bill. In reviewing what the customer wanted to purchase for this year, they saw the mistake and requested a $1500 credit.
My boss has decided that I must cover this loss for the company and is taking it out of my paycheck. I found out that this is illegal but I am afraid that if I confront him he will fire me, as he has all the power and I have none. Of course, if he does fire me, I could go after him legally but I am not big on doing something like that. So it comes down to this: Do I stand up for my self and risk getting fired (knowing I stood up for myself and did the right thing, and also knowing in this economy I will have to find a job that may be non existent), or do I eat the $1500 and get on with my life with my tail between my legs (and keep my job)?
Ugh. What a horrible situation. People are human and from time to time they'll make mistakes. A good manager will see something like this as part of the cost of doing business. Of course, if an employee makes a lot of these mistakes, you have a pattern and that needs to be addressed, through coaching, warnings, termination, whatever is appropriate. But one mistake? No, not unless it's far bigger than this one.
Regarding the legality: I'm not a lawyer and laws vary from state to state, but in general, most state laws prohibit an employer from deducting this sort of thing unless it was the result of willful, deliberate misconduct.
Here's how I'd handle it, with the caveat that I know nothing about your boss or your relationship with him. I'd sit down with him and say something like: "I feel really awkward about this, but I'd like to talk to you about this $1500. I'm mortified that I made the mistake, and I've been reviewing the procedures I use so that I can put safeguards in place to ensure it never happens again. However, we both know that mistakes happen in the normal course of business. In fact, sometimes people make enormous mistakes that we can't even put a price tag on, such as when a strategic decision goes wrong. Generally people aren't asked to pay the company back for the costs of those mistakes, because they're part of the cost of doing business. I know that this mistake reflects on me, and I'm holding myself accountable to making sure it doesn't happen again, but asking me to pay the money back doesn't seem right to me. Does the company generally ask people to reimburse the cost of mistakes they make?"
Hopefully, your boss just hasn't thought this through clearly and this will inspire him to. On the other hand, if he's a jerk and not very bright, this may get you nowhere. I'd try it though.
Last year, I overcharged a customer by approximately $1500. No one caught it and the customer paid the bill. In reviewing what the customer wanted to purchase for this year, they saw the mistake and requested a $1500 credit.
My boss has decided that I must cover this loss for the company and is taking it out of my paycheck. I found out that this is illegal but I am afraid that if I confront him he will fire me, as he has all the power and I have none. Of course, if he does fire me, I could go after him legally but I am not big on doing something like that. So it comes down to this: Do I stand up for my self and risk getting fired (knowing I stood up for myself and did the right thing, and also knowing in this economy I will have to find a job that may be non existent), or do I eat the $1500 and get on with my life with my tail between my legs (and keep my job)?
Ugh. What a horrible situation. People are human and from time to time they'll make mistakes. A good manager will see something like this as part of the cost of doing business. Of course, if an employee makes a lot of these mistakes, you have a pattern and that needs to be addressed, through coaching, warnings, termination, whatever is appropriate. But one mistake? No, not unless it's far bigger than this one.
Regarding the legality: I'm not a lawyer and laws vary from state to state, but in general, most state laws prohibit an employer from deducting this sort of thing unless it was the result of willful, deliberate misconduct.
Here's how I'd handle it, with the caveat that I know nothing about your boss or your relationship with him. I'd sit down with him and say something like: "I feel really awkward about this, but I'd like to talk to you about this $1500. I'm mortified that I made the mistake, and I've been reviewing the procedures I use so that I can put safeguards in place to ensure it never happens again. However, we both know that mistakes happen in the normal course of business. In fact, sometimes people make enormous mistakes that we can't even put a price tag on, such as when a strategic decision goes wrong. Generally people aren't asked to pay the company back for the costs of those mistakes, because they're part of the cost of doing business. I know that this mistake reflects on me, and I'm holding myself accountable to making sure it doesn't happen again, but asking me to pay the money back doesn't seem right to me. Does the company generally ask people to reimburse the cost of mistakes they make?"
Hopefully, your boss just hasn't thought this through clearly and this will inspire him to. On the other hand, if he's a jerk and not very bright, this may get you nowhere. I'd try it though.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
boss paying under the table
A reader writes:
I work for a very small company that is having cash flow problems. For the past few months the boss has been paying the employees our net wages in cash, not giving us payslips, and not paying any tax to the government. He simply expects us not to report this income on our tax returns.
We are all unhappy about this, concerned that it might get us into trouble, but he said the alternative was to fire one of us so he can afford the taxes. He says he’ll return to regular paychecks when he can.
What do we do? If one of us is audited, will we be in trouble or does he take all the blame?
What your boss is doing is illegal, and unfortunately, if you and other employees go along with it, you will be breaking the law too. Specifically, your boss is breaking the law by not paying payroll taxes or withholding taxes, and you and your coworkers would be breaking the law if you don't report the income.
His reasons aside, what he's doing opens you all up to criminal prosecution, fines, and even the possibility of jail time. Plus, if you or your coworkers ever need to file unemployment, workers comp, or disability claims, your benefits could be denied because you won't have a way to prove your earnings -- and it could also affect your Social Security earnings down the road.
I recommend that you and your coworkers approach the boss as a group and tell him that you know that he's trying to avoid a difficult staffing decision, but that he's jeopardizing himself, the business, and all of you with his current "solution." Perhaps there are other alternatives to laying someone off that you could suggest -- maybe you're all willing to work four days instead of five, at four-fifths your current salary, or other things along those lines. Ultimately, though, it's your boss' responsibility to figure out what to do without breaking the law.
I'd also start job-searching, as these aren't good signs.
I work for a very small company that is having cash flow problems. For the past few months the boss has been paying the employees our net wages in cash, not giving us payslips, and not paying any tax to the government. He simply expects us not to report this income on our tax returns.
We are all unhappy about this, concerned that it might get us into trouble, but he said the alternative was to fire one of us so he can afford the taxes. He says he’ll return to regular paychecks when he can.
What do we do? If one of us is audited, will we be in trouble or does he take all the blame?
What your boss is doing is illegal, and unfortunately, if you and other employees go along with it, you will be breaking the law too. Specifically, your boss is breaking the law by not paying payroll taxes or withholding taxes, and you and your coworkers would be breaking the law if you don't report the income.
His reasons aside, what he's doing opens you all up to criminal prosecution, fines, and even the possibility of jail time. Plus, if you or your coworkers ever need to file unemployment, workers comp, or disability claims, your benefits could be denied because you won't have a way to prove your earnings -- and it could also affect your Social Security earnings down the road.
I recommend that you and your coworkers approach the boss as a group and tell him that you know that he's trying to avoid a difficult staffing decision, but that he's jeopardizing himself, the business, and all of you with his current "solution." Perhaps there are other alternatives to laying someone off that you could suggest -- maybe you're all willing to work four days instead of five, at four-fifths your current salary, or other things along those lines. Ultimately, though, it's your boss' responsibility to figure out what to do without breaking the law.
I'd also start job-searching, as these aren't good signs.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
using a different title than your real one on your resume
A reader writes:
I currently work as an IT professional for a company that is contracted by a larger company to provide IT support for their organization. I was originally hired two years ago to provide desktop support services. Due to the elimination of the job of the only other IT employee at our site, I have taken on the responsibilities and duties of a much higher level IT professional.
During this time - approximately 18 months - I have been subjected to "trial by fire." I have been asked to deal with IT issues that I previously had zero experience with. I have consistently come through with flying colors by researching and learning on the fly the skills necessary to handle these situations. During the last 18 months I have also earned two fairly high level IT certifications (MCSE and CCNP).
During my year-end review, I asked for a substantial raise and a title change. My boss has offered a five percent raise (which I have yet to accept or reject) but told me that a title change was out of the question. I am stuck with the label of "Desktop Support Technician" despite the fact that I handle the duties of a Senior Network Administrator and Senior Systems Administrator singlehandedly.
I feel that I am qualified for a much higher paying position - likely double what I make now. I want to start applying with other companies, but I do not want to list my current position as "Desktop Support" as this does not reflect the reality of my current role.
Can I list my current role as "Systems & Network Administrator" but explain during my interview that I actually only hold the "Desktop Support Technician" title despite the duties I perform?
Unfortunately, no. When the prospective employer calls to check your references, they'll likely uncover the actual title and it'll raise a red flag for them about your honesty. They'll also wonder what else you may have inflated.
However, there's an easy solution to this that will accomplish what you're trying to do: Don't list a title. Just list your responsibilities.
Now, some advice on topics you didn't ask about:
There are two ways to respond to the situation you're in: You can be resentful that you had to take on the responsibilities of a higher-level IT staffer, or you be glad that you've been in a situation that made you develop your skills -- developed them so much that in fact you now think you're qualified to double your salary! That's an career development opportunity, not a bitter pill.
(Plus, in my experience, it's pretty common for good IT people to need to learn new skills on the job. IT is a constantly evolving area, and researching and learning new things goes with the territory in many IT jobs.)
Regarding your boss' offer of a five percent raise: You said you haven't decided whether to reject or accept it yet. I'd accept. There are a lot of employers who aren't giving out raises at all this year because of the economy, and plenty more who are having to go a step further and lay off staff (which you mentioned your company has already had to do). A five percent raise is generally considered a decent raise in even good economic times. Take it. Job-search if you want, but take that raise meanwhile.
And if you haven't yet, ask your boss why he's resistant to changing your title. There may be factors you don't know about that will help you make sense of his decision. Of course, maybe there's aren't and he's totally in the wrong, but at least ask (nicely and non-defensively!). Good luck!
I currently work as an IT professional for a company that is contracted by a larger company to provide IT support for their organization. I was originally hired two years ago to provide desktop support services. Due to the elimination of the job of the only other IT employee at our site, I have taken on the responsibilities and duties of a much higher level IT professional.
During this time - approximately 18 months - I have been subjected to "trial by fire." I have been asked to deal with IT issues that I previously had zero experience with. I have consistently come through with flying colors by researching and learning on the fly the skills necessary to handle these situations. During the last 18 months I have also earned two fairly high level IT certifications (MCSE and CCNP).
During my year-end review, I asked for a substantial raise and a title change. My boss has offered a five percent raise (which I have yet to accept or reject) but told me that a title change was out of the question. I am stuck with the label of "Desktop Support Technician" despite the fact that I handle the duties of a Senior Network Administrator and Senior Systems Administrator singlehandedly.
I feel that I am qualified for a much higher paying position - likely double what I make now. I want to start applying with other companies, but I do not want to list my current position as "Desktop Support" as this does not reflect the reality of my current role.
Can I list my current role as "Systems & Network Administrator" but explain during my interview that I actually only hold the "Desktop Support Technician" title despite the duties I perform?
Unfortunately, no. When the prospective employer calls to check your references, they'll likely uncover the actual title and it'll raise a red flag for them about your honesty. They'll also wonder what else you may have inflated.
However, there's an easy solution to this that will accomplish what you're trying to do: Don't list a title. Just list your responsibilities.
Now, some advice on topics you didn't ask about:
There are two ways to respond to the situation you're in: You can be resentful that you had to take on the responsibilities of a higher-level IT staffer, or you be glad that you've been in a situation that made you develop your skills -- developed them so much that in fact you now think you're qualified to double your salary! That's an career development opportunity, not a bitter pill.
(Plus, in my experience, it's pretty common for good IT people to need to learn new skills on the job. IT is a constantly evolving area, and researching and learning new things goes with the territory in many IT jobs.)
Regarding your boss' offer of a five percent raise: You said you haven't decided whether to reject or accept it yet. I'd accept. There are a lot of employers who aren't giving out raises at all this year because of the economy, and plenty more who are having to go a step further and lay off staff (which you mentioned your company has already had to do). A five percent raise is generally considered a decent raise in even good economic times. Take it. Job-search if you want, but take that raise meanwhile.
And if you haven't yet, ask your boss why he's resistant to changing your title. There may be factors you don't know about that will help you make sense of his decision. Of course, maybe there's aren't and he's totally in the wrong, but at least ask (nicely and non-defensively!). Good luck!
Sunday, December 21, 2008
new boss ignoring traditional schedule
A reader writes:
I work at a company where the company handbook clearly states that the office hours are 9am to 5pm. We do not offer flex-time and everyone in the group works a straight 9am to 5pm.
Recently, we got a new senior manager (not our direct boss but rather the boss's boss) who is quite a micro-manager and who has decided that from now on every Monday for the next year that she is going to come over to our group (she works in a different building) to hold a staff meeting from 3:30pm to 5:30pm.
She is an Executive Vice President and a complete power hungry control freak and she is purposely scheduling the meeting to end after office hours to make some sort of point --- seeing as though she never goes home, has no family, and lives to work.
My issue is such: I have a daycare situation where I MUST leave at 5:20pm each day and not one minute later in order to pick up my daughter in daycare on time since the daycare closes and that is the latest I can leave in order to get there on time.
The problem is that I am being made to feel as though I am a poor performer because I can not do the meeting when in fact this meeting is not one of urgent nature (it's actually a boring, inefficient drawn out waste of time to be honest) --- but rather just a power-tripping micromanager who likes to abuse her power by making her subordinents listen to her every word.
Do I have a leg to stand on if I bring this up to HR? It clearly states in our handbook that the office hours are 9am to 5pm but not sure if that is any argument that is winable. It always seems that the employee never wins.
How do you know that she's purposely scheduling the meeting to end after your regular hours in order to make a point? Is it possible that you're projecting an agenda on to her that isn't actually there? You note that she works longer hours than most, so it's possible that she doesn't realize the impact of her meeting time.
Rather than approach this with the assumption that she is "a complete power hungry control freak" who "has no family, and lives to work" -- a charge rarely leveled against men in the same circumstances, by the way -- you'll likely have better luck if you drop the anger and assume that there's no evil motivation here.
Instead, talk to your boss and explain that this meeting is impacting your daycare situation and ask if there's a reason this meeting must be scheduled at that particular time. Ask if she can intervene with the senior manager to have it rescheduled to start half an hour earlier.
And really, do what you can to drop the animosity toward this senior manager. It's not going to take you anywhere good.
I work at a company where the company handbook clearly states that the office hours are 9am to 5pm. We do not offer flex-time and everyone in the group works a straight 9am to 5pm.
Recently, we got a new senior manager (not our direct boss but rather the boss's boss) who is quite a micro-manager and who has decided that from now on every Monday for the next year that she is going to come over to our group (she works in a different building) to hold a staff meeting from 3:30pm to 5:30pm.
She is an Executive Vice President and a complete power hungry control freak and she is purposely scheduling the meeting to end after office hours to make some sort of point --- seeing as though she never goes home, has no family, and lives to work.
My issue is such: I have a daycare situation where I MUST leave at 5:20pm each day and not one minute later in order to pick up my daughter in daycare on time since the daycare closes and that is the latest I can leave in order to get there on time.
The problem is that I am being made to feel as though I am a poor performer because I can not do the meeting when in fact this meeting is not one of urgent nature (it's actually a boring, inefficient drawn out waste of time to be honest) --- but rather just a power-tripping micromanager who likes to abuse her power by making her subordinents listen to her every word.
Do I have a leg to stand on if I bring this up to HR? It clearly states in our handbook that the office hours are 9am to 5pm but not sure if that is any argument that is winable. It always seems that the employee never wins.
How do you know that she's purposely scheduling the meeting to end after your regular hours in order to make a point? Is it possible that you're projecting an agenda on to her that isn't actually there? You note that she works longer hours than most, so it's possible that she doesn't realize the impact of her meeting time.
Rather than approach this with the assumption that she is "a complete power hungry control freak" who "has no family, and lives to work" -- a charge rarely leveled against men in the same circumstances, by the way -- you'll likely have better luck if you drop the anger and assume that there's no evil motivation here.
Instead, talk to your boss and explain that this meeting is impacting your daycare situation and ask if there's a reason this meeting must be scheduled at that particular time. Ask if she can intervene with the senior manager to have it rescheduled to start half an hour earlier.
And really, do what you can to drop the animosity toward this senior manager. It's not going to take you anywhere good.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
crazy, shouting, crying, bullying boss
A reader writes:
I am a working for a 69-year-old woman (owner of a small company) who feels threatened by me. She is highly insecure, and though I have been kind to her, she consistently tries to bully and manipulate me into confrontational (and totally irrational) conversations. The partner in the office noticed her feeling threatened and thinks she is trying to get me to leave. I have only been with the company 5 months and have had great successes with the partner in the short time I have been there. The partner gave me a raise after 3 months.
It seemed to have escalated after I witnessed her and the partner having a shouting match and her in tears. She cries a lot, takes everything personally, shared too much personal information with me, badmouthed the partner to me, all in spite of my asking her to respect those boundaries several times.
How can I handle a crazy boss and maintain my cool? Everyone seems to walk on eggshells around her or roll their eyes. I would love your insight on how to handle this.
There aren't a ton of good options. My first piece of advice is probably the hardest to swallow, and it's this: It's her company; she's the owner. This means that she's entitled to be as crappy of a boss as she wants (and it sounds like she's a pretty crappy one), if that's the sort of business she wants to run. But you are also entitled to choose not to accept those conditions and go elsewhere.
People who bully and manipulate and generally behave like asses are highly unlikely to change, especially with no one above them to insist upon it.
Of course, in this economy, it may be harder to just walk away than at other times. So if you can't leave quickly, the following may help:
* Ask the partner who likes you for advice on handling the situation.
* Ask the owner herself for feedback and things she'd like to see you do differently. If nothing else, you might get some insight into her thinking, which is useful even if her thinking is utterly insane.
* Accept you have a crazy boss and that you need to play along until you can put the real solution into action, which is to leave. Sometimes simply accepting it and realizing that you won't get anywhere by struggling against it can actually make situations like this more tolerable. But it's an unhealthy environment to be in for a long time, which is why ultimately, you probably should plan to find a boss who doesn't cry and bully people.
I am a working for a 69-year-old woman (owner of a small company) who feels threatened by me. She is highly insecure, and though I have been kind to her, she consistently tries to bully and manipulate me into confrontational (and totally irrational) conversations. The partner in the office noticed her feeling threatened and thinks she is trying to get me to leave. I have only been with the company 5 months and have had great successes with the partner in the short time I have been there. The partner gave me a raise after 3 months.
It seemed to have escalated after I witnessed her and the partner having a shouting match and her in tears. She cries a lot, takes everything personally, shared too much personal information with me, badmouthed the partner to me, all in spite of my asking her to respect those boundaries several times.
How can I handle a crazy boss and maintain my cool? Everyone seems to walk on eggshells around her or roll their eyes. I would love your insight on how to handle this.
There aren't a ton of good options. My first piece of advice is probably the hardest to swallow, and it's this: It's her company; she's the owner. This means that she's entitled to be as crappy of a boss as she wants (and it sounds like she's a pretty crappy one), if that's the sort of business she wants to run. But you are also entitled to choose not to accept those conditions and go elsewhere.
People who bully and manipulate and generally behave like asses are highly unlikely to change, especially with no one above them to insist upon it.
Of course, in this economy, it may be harder to just walk away than at other times. So if you can't leave quickly, the following may help:
* Ask the partner who likes you for advice on handling the situation.
* Ask the owner herself for feedback and things she'd like to see you do differently. If nothing else, you might get some insight into her thinking, which is useful even if her thinking is utterly insane.
* Accept you have a crazy boss and that you need to play along until you can put the real solution into action, which is to leave. Sometimes simply accepting it and realizing that you won't get anywhere by struggling against it can actually make situations like this more tolerable. But it's an unhealthy environment to be in for a long time, which is why ultimately, you probably should plan to find a boss who doesn't cry and bully people.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
boss cut hours by half
A reader writes:
I am my boss' only employee and he cut my hours to 20/week a few weeks ago. I was surprised, to say the least. I thought he did it because he didn't want me there anymore so I asked him if that was the reason. He said it was solely because of money, so I have continued working my regular hours and get paid for only 20. I have been with him for 3 years and he has been good to me. I know business has been slow and that he has kids in college.
However I can't help but be a wee bit paranoid that he will axe me for someone new and cheaper (and make me train her on my way out). People always say bosses cut your hours in an attempt to get rid of you. Is it just moronic to think that he'd actually tell me if he was going to get rid of me? If he does, I'll really be screwed - if I only worked the 20 hours a week it'd be easier to find a new job, but I've kept my regular hours helping him dig out of this hole. He just got a $100,000.00 equity line on the office - I don't know if that means anything.
Would I have any recourse if he does leave me high and dry?
You need more information.
Some people may find this naive, but I'm a big proponent of just being honest about what you're wondering about and simply asking him. In order to make good decisions, you need to find out more about what he's thinking -- for instance, does he foresee the cut in your hours being temporary, or is it for the foreseeable future? Is it an interim step that might eventually lead to needing to eliminate your position altogether? Is he offering you 20 hours because he feels he needs to offer you something, but he'd really prefer not to have any staff at all right now? What kind of commitment, if any, is he realistically able to make to you right now? These are the kinds of questions you need to know the answers to.
And when you have this conversation, let your three years of working with this guy inform your thinking too. Is he a generally ethical and open guy? Or have you seen him break his word, deceive others, or trample over someone else to protect himself? Of course, even if you know him to be an upstanding person, keep in mind that financial circumstances beyond his control may cancel out his best intentions -- so you should always have a safety net ready, no matter what.
Also, if you are going to work twice the hours he's paying you for out of loyalty, you really should protect yourself. For instance, tell him that you understand the position he's in right now, that you feel loyal to him and want to help, and that you'd be willing to continue to work full-time with a half-time salary if he's able to offer you an employment contract locking in work for you for __ months. (You fill in the blank.) What you don't want is to work half your hours for free out a sense of a loyalty and a feeling that you're both in it together, only to find yourself let go with no warning at some point down the road (in which case, without a contract, you would indeed be left without recourse). So by all means, make the offer if you think he's earned it, but protect yourself too.
Good luck!
I am my boss' only employee and he cut my hours to 20/week a few weeks ago. I was surprised, to say the least. I thought he did it because he didn't want me there anymore so I asked him if that was the reason. He said it was solely because of money, so I have continued working my regular hours and get paid for only 20. I have been with him for 3 years and he has been good to me. I know business has been slow and that he has kids in college.
However I can't help but be a wee bit paranoid that he will axe me for someone new and cheaper (and make me train her on my way out). People always say bosses cut your hours in an attempt to get rid of you. Is it just moronic to think that he'd actually tell me if he was going to get rid of me? If he does, I'll really be screwed - if I only worked the 20 hours a week it'd be easier to find a new job, but I've kept my regular hours helping him dig out of this hole. He just got a $100,000.00 equity line on the office - I don't know if that means anything.
Would I have any recourse if he does leave me high and dry?
You need more information.
Some people may find this naive, but I'm a big proponent of just being honest about what you're wondering about and simply asking him. In order to make good decisions, you need to find out more about what he's thinking -- for instance, does he foresee the cut in your hours being temporary, or is it for the foreseeable future? Is it an interim step that might eventually lead to needing to eliminate your position altogether? Is he offering you 20 hours because he feels he needs to offer you something, but he'd really prefer not to have any staff at all right now? What kind of commitment, if any, is he realistically able to make to you right now? These are the kinds of questions you need to know the answers to.
And when you have this conversation, let your three years of working with this guy inform your thinking too. Is he a generally ethical and open guy? Or have you seen him break his word, deceive others, or trample over someone else to protect himself? Of course, even if you know him to be an upstanding person, keep in mind that financial circumstances beyond his control may cancel out his best intentions -- so you should always have a safety net ready, no matter what.
Also, if you are going to work twice the hours he's paying you for out of loyalty, you really should protect yourself. For instance, tell him that you understand the position he's in right now, that you feel loyal to him and want to help, and that you'd be willing to continue to work full-time with a half-time salary if he's able to offer you an employment contract locking in work for you for __ months. (You fill in the blank.) What you don't want is to work half your hours for free out a sense of a loyalty and a feeling that you're both in it together, only to find yourself let go with no warning at some point down the road (in which case, without a contract, you would indeed be left without recourse). So by all means, make the offer if you think he's earned it, but protect yourself too.
Good luck!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)