job application asked if I’d accept the job, muscling in on a volunteer project, and more

by Alison Green on August 9, 2024

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

1. Application asked, “If offered this job, will you accept?”

I am applying for jobs. One application asked the question, “If offered this job, will you accept?” Yes and no were the only options. Obviously, I clicked yes. I assume this is not legally binding. But is it a red flag? Another possible red flag is that this job has been posted for 10 months.

Ha, that’s a ridiculous question — as ridiculous as an applicant asking, “If I apply for this job, will you hire me?” Who knows, on both sides; that’s what the interview process is designed for both parties to figure out. You could discover the work is different than you’d envisioned, or you hate the manager or the culture, or the salary or benefits are too low. The question is absurd.

That said, is it a red flag? I’d say it’s a yellow one. It could have been stuck in there by some deranged HR person who’s sick of having offers turned down, whereas the actual manager would be fine to work for. But that in combination with the fact that they haven’t been able to fill the job for 10 months (if that’s what the long posting means; it doesn’t always) isn’t super promising.

Related:
when an interviewer asks, “If I offered you the job, would you say yes?”

2. A colleague we don’t want to work with is trying to muscle in on our volunteer project

I work in tertiary education, and we have an informal community of practice that unites some of us who feel kindred (people with a shared experience that puts them at a disadvantage in society and education and a desire to help people who have similar experiences). For the third time in four years a small group of us are organizing a symposium. The first was in 2021, when I partnered with a colleague, Summer, and we hosted 12 presenters over a half day. Summer was really keen but wasn’t particularly good at organizing and “lost” room bookings. They were not particularly good at the tech, managed to video all the presenters speaking from the waist down, and wasn’t particularly good at social stuff. I am autistic and even I noticed that. While it was good to have someone to bounce ideas off when we planned, it was hard work to run the event.

After the first event, Summer said that they didn’t want to organize another one. I was keen and another colleague, Zoe, wanted to work with me to organize a second event. A third colleague, Lisa, offered to help. Zoe and I worked really well together, but Lisa drifted off and stopped attending meetings a few months into the planning. Our second event had 350 attendees, had two big sponsors, flew in an international keynote and two national keynotes, we had 64 presenters, and afterwards we received a staff award at our institutional celebrations. Organizing all this was voluntary, with our managers’ and institutions’ blessing, rooms, and tech support but over and above our allocated workload. In the meantime, Summer presented a research paper about our community of practice and made some of us feel othered, and which really upset Zoe.

Now Zoe and I are planning a third event, with the blessing of our wider volunteer community. Lisa has decided to join us again, which we said was okay as we both thought she would drift away once the work began. But Lisa insists Summer be part of the team, because Summer wants to be. We have said we are working with a smaller team for now, and when we need help we will reach out and ask more people to join to team. But Lisa adds Summer into our meeting invites, and both send us emails offering their help and insisting we share our planning with them. All this has really upset Zoe, who avoid the meetings.

Lisa has accused us of not being professional because we don’t want to work with Summer and has suggested we need to learn to get along. This is a volunteer event, one we have put a lot of energy into. Are we being unreasonable to want to work with a team of our choosing? Do we have to accept everyone who wants to be part of the planning, no matter how much trouble they have caused in the past? Is there a polite way to say, “Actually, we did this last time, it was wildly successful, and it’s ours to do again this time”?

You do not need to agree to work with Summer. You and Zoe have put a ton of work into organizing these events, and you’re right to want to ensure they go well, which means paying attention to how you’re staffing them. Just because a project is a volunteer one doesn’t mean you have to allow anyone who wants to work on it to help in whatever capacity they want. You decide who to involve based on the needs of the project and your assessment of potential volunteers’ strengths and weaknesses (just like with paid work).

It’s entirely reasonable to say to Summer, “Thank you so much for offering, but we already have all the work covered.”

The bigger issue is Lisa. You and Zoe need to have a direct conversation with her where you explain that Summer was difficult to work with last time and struggled in the areas they were responsible for, and based on that experience you’re not going to be including Summer in the planning again. It doesn’t sound like Lisa has any sort of authority here; she can’t just decide on her own to involve Summer. You and Zoe are the ones who have been organizing these events and you have standing to tell Lisa no, it’s not happening, and that if she wants to help, she’ll need to understand that the two of you aren’t working with Summer again.

3. I proved my coworker wrong — did I handle this right?

I work for a small organization and very occasionally process refunds. If the person receiving the refund is to get a paper check. I hand off those requests to a teammate who has access to our bill paying software. Recently I did just that, and the person receiving the refund contacted me to complain that she had to fill out a bunch of stuff, including her Social Security number, in order to receive her refund. A legitimate complaint in my book.

I sent an email to our team (only four of us, two of whom are on point for accounting responsibilities) to let them know of the complaint and to question why it was necessary for her to jump through that hoop. A more senior team member, Eric, told me that “everyone is set up in the system as a vendor and they need to supply a SSN or EIN in order to process all payments.” I pushed back because this was a simple paper-check-issuing request, and represented a refund, not a payment to a vendor. There was back and forth, with Eric insisting that there was no way around it and that our accounting department absolutely requires such information because every vendor needs to receive a W9.

I replied again stating that this person is not a vendor, does not need to report this as income, and therefore does not need a tax form, which negates the need to collect a SSN or EIN. Eric and I got on the phone to discuss it, and he was adamant that all of this was absolutely necessary.

I was confident that he was wrong, so I researched it further on my own. I contacted the help desk for the billing software system, as well as our internal accounting department. The billing help desk confirmed that to issue a simple paper check, the system only needs a name, email, and phone number. The accounting department assured me that they do not need a W9 for end-of-year reconciliations.

I hate to be an “I told you so” kind of person, but in this case I thought I owed it to our clients to get it right and not ask for unnecessary personal information. I took this information to our manager. I felt this was the better route than emailing the team or contacting Eric directly because the message hopefully wouldn’t glaringly look like I did an end-run around them, and my manager is obviously more authoritative in communicating these things. She stated that she would confirm it with our accounting department and then deliver the message.

Did I do this right? Should I have accepted Eric at his word? Should I have told him up-front that I was going to research this myself? And finally, should I have gone directly to my manager with the info, or addressed it with Eric first once I had the answer?

You handled it fine. Eric’s claim made no sense, and you were right to look into it further, particularly as a person who has to process refunds.

If Eric hadn’t been so adamant that he was right when you talked to him about it, you could have gone back to him and said, “I looked into this a little more and billing and accounting both confirmed that we don’t need SSNs or EINs for refunds.” You could have done that even after his bullheadedness, but it’s understandable that you didn’t want to at that point and instead handed it off to your manager to deal with. (After all, you could have done that and been met with continued insistence that you were wrong and he was right, regardless of what your research found.)

I’m guessing Eric will be well aware that you were involved anyway, but since he kept insisting on something wrong, it makes sense to have someone with more authority than you correct him.

(Also, it’s weird that Eric thought you’d need W9s to issue refunds. Unless he never deals with anything involving payments or taxes, it’s useful for your manager to be aware he may have some pretty surprising gaps in his knowledge.)

4. Is my new job just not for me?

I was internally recruited and promoted to a new role that began in June. My onboarding has been terrible and I have walked into a completely dysfunctional team dynamic. My new boss is universally hated and oblivious to her lack of skills. She actually brags about how much people like her and how effective she is, when the truth is almost everyone we work with internally and externally has gone out of their way to tell me privately how much they hate her. The team I took over is being obstinate and uncooperative and claim everything I ask them to do isn’t actually their job.

In theory I have the skills and track record to work through problems like this, but I am finding this level of dysfunction overwhelming and I feel surprisingly apathetic and struggle not to be short / negative with my team. Advice on recognizing the signs personally and systematically that this just isn’t for me?

In these seven short sentences, you’ve already got strong signs of that, particularly here: “I am finding this level of dysfunction overwhelming and I feel surprisingly apathetic and struggle not to be short / negative with my team.”

Feeling overwhelmed, becoming apathetic, and feeling short with people are all very bad signs — and it’s only your third month there. If you’d been there a few years and were feeling this, I’d have other suggestions, but when it’s that bad by month three? Listen to that.

You may also like:
{ 247 comments }

{ 247 comments… read them below }

  1. Brain the Brian*

    LW3, you handled this better than I would have. Our accounting department themselves insisted for years that they needed SSNs to generate W9s for refunds exactly like the one you describe here — an obvious misunderstanding of the purpose of W9s. Several coworkers and I spent years telling them it was ridiculous, and last year they finally checked with our corporate counsel, who basically told them to pound salt. I sort of get it in my company’s case, because the department that handles vendor setup in our accounting system is located overseas and often doesn’t understand things like how sensitive SSNs are, but the fact that they wouldn’t take the word of multiple of us based in the States on this topic was infuriating to say the least. Kudos to you, LW3, for not completely losing it. I came very close numerous times.

    1. Yvette*

      Stupid question doesn’t generating a W9 mean that this refund is being reported as income to the IRS? What if it was a big refund like $3000 as a deposit for something that didn’t happen so that got refunded? Would that person then be liable for the taxes on $3000 worth of income?

      1. BigLawEx*

        Not really…unless a 1099 or other income form is issued. If it gets that far (and I see this every year among freelancers who work for places like Amazon which often has several different commercial relationships with the same person).

        This is not a joyful conversation to have if the discrepancy gets flagged.

        1. Brain the Brian*

          The way our system is set up, 1099s are only generated for expenses paid to US vendors under certain G/L codes. Central accounting (again, based partially overseas) used to insist that they needed a Social Security Number on file from the moment every U.S. payee was set up in our system in case we ever paid them for work requiring a 1099 to be issued at any point in the future. Corporate counsel was eventually like “Yeah, no, that’s ridiculous. You can’t use that as an excuse to needlessly email someone’s SSN to an office in a foreign country in unencrypted files. Stop it.”

          1. Observer*

            Corporate counsel was eventually like “Yeah, no, that’s ridiculous. You can’t use that as an excuse to needlessly email someone’s SSN to an office in a foreign country in unencrypted files. Stop it.”

            I can imagine that counsel was not happy. I wonder what the IT folks had to say about that. All of the security minded ones that I know would have been having conniptions.

            1. Brain the Brian*

              I’m not sure IT knew it was going on, honestly. They don’t usually need to issue refunds to anyone…

              1. Observer*

                I get that. Whether they would know about this would depend a lot on which systems were being used, who set them up and how.

          2. Jack Russell Terrier*

            I was canceling a life insurance policy with Met Life. They wanted me to email this sort of info to them – including my SS#. When I talked to them on the phone, they confirmed they had no secure portal. Yes, you read that right – I was told Met Life had no secure portal. And the person on the phone basically let it be known I was being ridiculous.

            I have no fax machine and work from home. Fed Ex etc scans in faxes. In the end, my broker faxed it over.

            My mind still boggles.

          3. HooDoll*

            Devils advocate, it’s pretty impossible to get people to send w9’s, so I get why many places make it a condition to enter the payee into the system.

            1. Owlet 101*

              And that would be why you make it a condition when they become a vendor. Not because they might become one one day.

      2. HonorBox*

        I think the difference is that this is just refunding money that was paid to the company, not payment for any sort of goods or services. It isn’t income because it is basically just routing the check receiver’s money back to them.

      3. Kristin*

        I can see why you would ask this (it’s not a “stupid” question at all), but they’re only being repaid what they spent – it’s not new income, so no new taxes (oops, did I really say that?).

        1. Minji*

          This principle doesn’t hold universally in the US, though. For example, if I’m an employee of a company and I buy a flight to a business trip which the company then reimburses, that reimbursement is currently taxed.

    2. Hannah Lee*

      I am very confused both about that question and what this company is doing. Why is a company that’s issuing a payment generating a W9 at year end for vendors they pay?

      Isn’t the W9 the US IRS form a *vendor* would complete and submit to the paying company to certify their taxpayer information? And that’s what the paying company would refer to at year end to generate and issue 1099 forms to vendors where required? And a 1099 form is only needed for certain payments?

      I kind of understand how an inexperienced person could misunderstand a vendor onboarding process to think *anyone* being paid needs a tax ID (though not why they dug their heels in when offered info about why that’s not true) But not why they are issuing W9s

      1. doreen*

        I think either the LW or Eric has mixed up the numbers assigned to IRS forms , which is something I see/hear people do all the time

      2. KatieP*

        Yes, a W9 is what the vendor submits to the payor in order to satisfy S-OX/verify TIN for tax reporting. I think there’s been some general confusion about IRS document numbers. A payor may send a blank W9 to a supplier/payee and say, “Please fill this out and return it to us.” It doesn’t automatically trigger a 1099 every spring if 100% of payments made were either refunds or reimbursements that satisfy the IRS rules for being non-taxable.

        That said, I’ve seen some accounting software that have flaws in their design that require SSNs for every payee. That’s a different kettle of fish from what LW3 seems to be describing.

      3. Observer*

        Isn’t the W9 the US IRS form a *vendor* would complete and submit to the paying company to certify their taxpayer information?

        Yes, it is. Which is why Eric was way off base, and someone should be looking at his overall competence in this area. He didn’t just make a mistake, but one that indicates a lack of understanding of the process and system.

      4. Brain the Brian*

        The accounting department at my company (note I am not LW3) used to make us collect the SSN from someone and send it to them so they could generate a W9 complete except for the signature section, which they would then send back to us frontliners to send back to the payee to get their signature. The payees were then supposed to send this file back to us frontliners, who would then send it to our accounting department to set up the payee in our acccounting software. I they would not even take an already-completed W9 from a new payee. It truly was among the dumbest things I have ever encountered, even for people whose SSNs we did legitimately need to keep on file — let alone for those we did not.

    3. Nicosloanica*

      Our accounting team will always say “because audit” and flounce as if that’s a mic drop. I have struggled for years to try to deal with them when necessary (we all try to avoid it).

      1. MsM*

        As someone who has to deal with yearly and occasionally government audits to maintain our nonprofit status and funding, I can promise documentation of refunds beyond receipts and/or email correspondence is not something they have ever asked for.

        1. Learn ALL the things?*

          I’m a government auditor and yeah, if we’re looking into a payment that doesn’t have the same documentation as the other payments, but there’s other documentation available that explains why, like an approval for a refund, we’re just going to move on to the next payment. If you have the supporting documentation that verifies this is different, that’s all we need.

          Contrary to what some people believe, we’re not big meanie-heads who live to get people in trouble. We just want to make sure you’re doing what you do for a reason and you can back it up with policy, procedure, and documentation.

          1. Brain the Brian*

            This all aligns with my experience from the auditee side. The problem we have is an incompetent accounting department who can’t properly explain the differences between types of payment. Project staff well outside of accounting usually get a whole slew of requests dumped on us to explain because the accounting folks didn’t bother to keep some of the documentation we sent or make note of our explanations when we set something up. It is — to put it mildly — extremely frustrating.

      2. KatieP*

        As an accounting-adjacent team lead, sometimes, “audit,” is a mic-drop. This is particularly true if their rules or processes were created as a result of an external/regulatory oversight agency’s audit finding. It may be worth asking if there was an audit finding related to the issue you’re having.

        Sometimes, it’s a power trip. Sometimes, it’s because they’ve already gotten their hand slapped once and they know if they don’t fix it, the next audit will involve penalties.

        1. HooDoll*

          It’s usually more the IRS than the auditors that are the issue here. If you pay someone and issue them a 1099 and find out OOPS we don’t have their tax id, it’s a huge headache.

      3. Observer*

        Our accounting team will always say “because audit” and flounce as if that’s a mic drop.

        Fortunately, my accounting team has always been competent. And good auditors are absolutely *not* looking for a eid / tin for “every payee”. And in fact, I’ve had the occasional experience that makes me think that at least one auditor would have dinged us for collecting that kind of information unnecessarily. They had a whole protocol for assessing our information security, including what data we collect.

        Also, I would have come back, “Yup. Audits. Our security auditor, and probably our program auditors are *not* going to like this.”

      4. Bitte Meddler*

        As an actual auditor, I would write OP’s situation up as a control deficiency. Accounting shouldn’t be collecting PII that they don’t need.

        1. Seeking Second Childhood*

          On the half of people coming in from other languages: PII Personally Identifiable Information

        3. iglwif*

          Yes, big big GDPR and CCPA violation! Bad Eric, no biscuit.

          Also Eric made an enormous amount of work for himself and others. Why do this?!

    4. Trout 'Waver*

      I worked for a company that did it this way. They also did everything else stupidly. It’s a sign of poor management and processes.

    5. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

      I’m honestly side-eying Eric about whether he’s trying to get access to people’s SSNs.

      1. TheBunny*

        I think that is a leap, especially as he likely has access to countless others in his role.

      2. Sparkles McFadden*

        I doubt it. There are people who are only superficially competent at their jobs. Such people think there’s only one way to do anything. If that one way includes an important looking form, then they’re going to make everyone fill out that form.

      3. Kenough*

        There are way easier ways for him to commit identity theft.
        He’s just either being an idiot about a core aspect of his industry or a stickler for unnecessary and far-reaching rules. Both are far more concerning than him going through all these hoops to access identification numbers that we already are forced to share willy nilly from the time we’re born (Social Security numbers weren’t meant to be used as a be-all, end-all identification number).

    6. Ms. Eleanous*

      LW3,
      yet another reason why outsourcing accounting overseas is a very bad idea.

      CPA’s and tax lawyers in the US know this stuff. It is complicated even if you were educated in the US.

      1. Brain the Brian*

        I should clarify — I am not LW3; I just happened to comment first last night.

        At my company, it makes sense to have some accounting functions overseas because we have actual offices in several countries. But — as I’ve tried repeatedly to argue with no success — payee setup and payment entry for each country need to be based locally so everyone knows the local tax implications of the way everything is entered into our accounting software and we’re not sending extra information through unencrypted channels. Fixing mistakes in this category eats up more time than I can possibly describe.

    7. southern interloper*

      This happened to me – a museum flew me and a colleague out to make a pitch for some business – they covered the hotel and then reimbursed us for airfare and Ubers. Got the reimbursement, no problem. Then the next January I got a 1099. I went around and around with the museum staff, supposedly they even finally got their accountants involved, I even took an extension on our taxes to try and straighten it out – they finally said no, they were right, I was wrong, too bad, so sad. At that point we gave up and just ate the taxes on the $2500 reimbursement check. It was really frustrating (not to mention that my company didn’t seem to care either…)

      1. Brain the Brian*

        I don’t work at a museum, but I can see this happening where I work. In my company’s accounting system, the G/L codes for taxable IC / presenter / speaker fees and nontaxable reimbursements to ICs / speakers / presenters / etc. are only one number different from each other, and people commonly do not grasp the difference between the two (including me, when I first started — it took me several years to finally get a straight answer out of our accounting department about it). Our fiscal year is different than the regular calendar year, and if something is coded to the wrong G/L code and not caught before the final fiscal year close, it can be really hard to move it so it’s correct when the calendar year ends. It’s still crappy and a sign of poor management and process control, of course.

  2. ChattyDelle*

    LW2: this conference is yours & Zoe’s. Lisa has no standing here & certainly does not to decide that Summer can come back. If you want Lisa’s help, please make extremely clear that Summer’s “help” is neither wanted nor requested. Make sure Lisa’s not forwarding your meeting agenda and such to Summer. If Lisa cannot abide by your requirements (not request, requirement), then she is not welcome to help. I know this sounds harsh, but it sounds to me like Lisa (and Summer) are going to push in unless you set strong clear boundaries

    1. Knitknitfrog*

      We are doing all our organising in MS Teams, so agendas and notes are not emails that can be shared, and we have only added Lisa as a member not an owner of our planning team, so she isn’t able to add anyone to the group or share things from the group. Of course she could copy and paste info – but we both plan to grey rock all approaches, with an ‘all good here’ & ‘we dont need help now, we have things covered, and we will sing out if we do need help’. One idea we had was to allocate them the task of organising some small off to the side event that we are too busy to do and is low stakes, which might keep them busy and also feeling useful.

        1. BigLawEx*

          LOL. ‘Here, why don’t you organize welcome flowers.’

          Not a single person would miss welcome flowers but might be delighted to see them.

          1. Sleve*

            I like this. They could generate a list of optional nice-to haves like custom printed lanyards, welcome flowers, an attendee signature book etc, and assign Zoe and Summer those tasks.

          2. TheBunny*

            I commented down below more fully but my “get this person to stop bothering us” was sparkling flavored water. Great to have but not going to be missed with the water, soda and coffee already being planned

      2. Kella*

        It sounds like a big part of the problem here is a lack of chain of command, since it’s a volunteer effort initiated by the two of you. If you saw yourselves as managers of this event, rather than contributors, you wouldn’t need to do all this sidestepping to avoid hurting feelings, you’d just set the expectations you have for doing it and leave it at that. Bringing on Lisa only because you expect she’ll flake out so she’ll cease to be a problem; grey rocking; offering them a nonessential task to keep the peace– this all seems like a lot of emotional management for an event that you ultimately get to call the shots on. Is that really necessary?

        1. Agent Diane*

          It also sounds a lot of work with Summer skulking around the edges hoping to pick up enough to claim all your efforts as hers again.

          Have you been clear with Lisa that Summer was basically claiming credit that wasn’t hers to claim when she did the research paper? Because Lisa might not realise that, and be thinking you’re cutting the originator of the conference out.

          Overall, though, you need to be creating a bigger team of volunteers you can trust. Right now it sounds like you could lose Zoe because Lisa wants Summer involved. That’s a situation where you end up with no good team at all and the whole conference lands with you.

          I’m also concerned that your workplace gets a lot of kudos from your voluntary effort: do they recognise the scale of the ask on your time?

          1. blah*

            Where in the letter did it say Summer’s paper was claiming credit? She did a research paper about this community group, whom the LW and Zoe are a part of. There were other negative results of Summer’s paper, since it upset Zoe, but LW never said Summer tried to take credit for the symposium.

            1. sparkle emoji*

              I can see how Agent Diane may have read it that way? The letter was vague about what the issues were with the paper and how that related to this project. It seems like that’s Zoe’s reason to say no Summer, so I also kind of wondered if the event was discussed somehow in the paper and misrepresented Summer’s role, or if the paper was offensive about the group the event serves?

        2. jasmine*

          Yes, this. If Lisa is creating more work, remove her from the project. There is so much sidestepping here to avoid hurt feelings.

      3. WellRed*

        Just be direct. I also agree with another commenter that this seems to have tipped from volunteer to a big job.

      4. AVP*

        It’s very much professional to say that you only want to work with who you want to work with!

        But that said — please think about protecting yourself and Zoe here in general. This conference must have a recognizable name by now, which means you have a brand. You’re booking travel and sponsors, which means you’re handling money. Does it have an LLC or any other corporate structure? Depending on how your institutions are supporting it — can you get that and do a 50/50 split (or whatever makes sense) with Zoe?

        It seems like you may need to formalize this a bit more in the future, which would necessitate a lot of conversation with Zoe and a friendly business lawyer that you hire as a team. But having those conversations would be extremely normal at this point in your existence, and formalizing the structure more would make it very clear who is on the organizing committee and who isn’t. And maybe you put Lisa and Summer on a board or name them advisors or something as thanks for their contributions thus far.

        1. Knitknitfrog*

          We had internal and external funding, so the finances were set up as a allocated fund in our college system with all the usual rigour that accompanies institutional spending, and we reported to our sponsors at the wrap up. Everything financial was handled with due diligence.

    2. Clorinda*

      Honestly, it’s time to cut Lisa loose. You don’t need her, you let her participate on the assumption that she would drift away, and she isn’t drifting away–she’s actively making your project more difficult. This is a hostile takeover.

      Stop inviting her to things. Tell her you’ve decided to streamline your team.

      1. Slow Gin Lizz*

        I agree with this and also with the comments to be more direct. Grey-rocking is for situations that you have little or no control over, but you are in charge here! Have a direct conversation with Lisa in which you tell her that Summer isn’t going to be involved in the planning and you would like her to stop forwarding meeting invites to Summer. Is there a way to prevent attendees from inviting other people to those meetings? Probably worth finding out.

        Heck, why not have a direct conversation with Summer too, in which you talk about exactly what you want from her. If she volunteers for other things that would require more work from her, tell her directly that you’ve got that covered and if you need her assistance you’ll reach out.

        I get that this is a new event and it might seem like you’d want every volunteer who signs up and that you don’t want to turn anyone away who could help, but sometimes you do need to turn people away if their ideas or work styles don’t match what you need from them. Lisa is correct that you need to work well with others but not that you need to accept everything that people are offering to give. Let people play to their strengths; you said Summer isn’t very tech savvy so find a volunteer who is to do the videography and if she says she can do it, you can say you’ve got Autumn for that. If she wants to do the social media, say that you’ve got a social media person already. Ask her what her strengths or focus areas are and see if you can have her do something related to that.

        A warning that if you do decided to “let Summer go,” so to speak, you may very well antagonize Lisa to the point that she will also quit. But since it seems like you and Zoe know what you’re doing, losing those two probably will be ok. It could, I suppose, cause a rift in the org if word gets out, but if you are very diplomatic about everything people will hopefully understand.

      2. rebelwithmouseyhair*

        yes exactly. She’s taking up a lot of emotional energy here and making things difficult. Simply stop looping her in on anything. You and Zoe have a good thing going and work well as a team apparently, you need to keep Zoe happy. Given the success of this even, it’s maybe time for this to become more official, with Special Conf Coordinator being added to your job titles and descriptions. You probably also deserve a pay rise. If it’s officialised like that then Lisa can’t strongarm herself and Summer into it any more, or they would need to be officially hired into the role.

    3. br_612*

      I think it’s pretty clear both Summer and Lisa just want in on the praise OP and Zoe got after the last event. The truth is, OP NEEDS Zoe to pull off another event on the scale, but not Summer or Lisa (indeed I think they’d drag the whole thing down).

      If Lisa and Summer’s attempts to Kool-Aid Man themselves into this are making Zoe pull back, OP has two choices 1) kick them both off the project (I guess you could give Lisa another chance but I wouldn’t) and have a successful event with Zoe or 2) lose Zoe and have to plan this whole thing with one person who is clearly doesn’t have the skills for this and a flake. Which means not only would OP have to do all the work, that work would be multiplied having to fix Summer’s mistakes.

      1. Slow Gin Lizz*

        Yes! Since Zoe is obviously pulling back RN b/c of Lisa and Summer, the choice does appear to be keep either Zoe or Lisa and Summer. And it’s also obvious which choice you should make, but of course when you make that choice you risk offending the other party. I will say, though, that if you don’t make a choice, you are still making a choice, because Zoe will self-select off the team if things continue down the path they’re going, which means that by default you are choosing Lisa/Summer and opting away from Zoe. What appears to be tricky here is that Lisa and Summer are strong-arming and guilting their way onto the team (saying that OP needs to get along with everyone? guilt city) and seem like maybe they are more outspoken than Zoe, which is why the non-choice default choice is them over Zoe (if you know what I mean).

        OP, on top of my previous comment about talking to Lisa and Summer, it probably would also be worth having a discussion with just Zoe and see what her thoughts are. Tell her you absolutely want to work with her and perhaps the two of you can come up with plan, a unified front, as it were, for how to handle Lisa and Summer. It’ll probably be a lot easier to deal with them as a team than for you to try to do it all on your own.

        Best of luck! I can’t wait for your update about how you managed to pull off another fantastic event!

    4. Momma Bear*

      I agree. Lisa needs to go if she keeps adding someone to meeting invites who is not welcome. She’s alienating the other members of the team. We all want things, but that doesn’t mean we get them.

      1. Kit*

        Repeatedly adding someone to meetings after being asked and/or told not to is actually unprofessional, Lisa! Much more unprofessional than… not making nice… with a coworker who is trying to muscle in for credit on a conference about a marginalized population she has offended in the past? Seriously. Lisa needs to be told clearly to stop, and if she refuses, drop her, too. It’s that simple.

  3. The Prettiest Curse*

    #2 – I’m very impressed that you’re organising your event with such a small team! I would suggest recruiting an additional volunteer for your planning team. Make sure the volunteer has a skill set that Summer doesn’t have. That may make Lisa the exit the committee in a huff – in which case, problem solved.

    1. The Prettiest Curse*

      I should also mention – adding an additional volunteer or two would help to ensure that your event is sustainable in future years. Considering that it’s primarily done by 2 people on top of your regular jobs, it could get very overwhelming very fast if one of you gets burned out or has to withdraw close to the event for some reason.

      1. Knitknitfrog*

        Our team is now 3, not counting the unhelpful wannabe volunteers, and we do pull in useful people as we need them – just not those two, but yes – balancing out sustainable with doable. Too many chefs can make for a nightmare.

        1. Knitknitfrog*

          And follow up – we have a lovely HR person who is our standby and keen to help without jumping in and causing waves, and the people we have asked because we needed their specific help have been amazing.

          1. The Prettiest Curse*

            I’m glad that you have additional support folks you can tap for help when necessary – there’s nothing worse than not having enough staff when you do a big event! This also makes Lisa surplus to requirements, so I think you could just straight out tell her that you don’t feel you need her help any more, especially given that she wasn’t vital to this event the last time you held it. Good luck with your next event and I hope the rest of the planning process goes well and is Summer-free.

          2. Momma Bear*

            Can the HR person help you yeet Lisa and Summer from the group? Give you the tools and tips to professionally say they’re off the team and back you up if they say it’s unfair?

            We do a big event every year and it’s spearheaded by one point person. If you don’t have a specific point person, then you and Zoe should decide who will be the “buck stops here” person.

    2. Knitknitfrog*

      We actually have a team of four, we added a new member with significantly serious tech skills, and with the workload things come in over 14 months so the workload is quite spread. We book rooms, then we get funding then we have the call for paper and reviews (with a much wider review team), then we open registrations, and then we host – at which point our team expands to be around 15-20 people. I loved Alisons reply that as a volunteer event it’s fine to say we have this covered.

      1. Academic Librarian Too*

        First of all, congratulations for all your success.
        And yes, keep it simple.
        Lisa does not have standing.
        Summer is not a helpful addition.
        We have this covered. Thank you for your offer.
        We don’t have the capacity to add to the committee at this time.

      2. I Have RBF*

        I loved Alisons reply that as a volunteer event it’s fine to say we have this covered.

        Having chaired a convention committee, I will say that if you are recognized as the chief cat herder (chair) of that committee, you have the absolute right and responsibility to “fire” a volunteer that is causing strife with one or several other volunteers who skills you actually need. In my case, it was fire a wannabe DJ trying to use someone else’s stage name, or lose my entire professional grade tech crew. I called the wannabe DJ and told them they would not be DJ for the evening session, but that they could attend and DJ in their own room party. Yes, I fired them.

        If a person doesn’t pull their weight in a volunteer capacity, you have to have an alternate plan, that includes things like replacing them and telling them that they are welcome to attend, but their volunteer services aren’t needed, you have it covered.

        1. Slow Gin Lizz*

          Definitely! I know there are several past questions here on AAM about how to “fire” a volunteer or how to ask a participant in a leisure activity to please not return and I think OP would find the answers to those questions helpful too. The one that I’m thinking of atm is the one where the LW had to ask someone to leave their board game group (I’ll link in another comment) but there are a bunch more of them too.

  4. Nodramalama*

    For LW3 I wonder whether LW asked Eric why he thought this was the required process. It doesn’t really change LWs actions, and I think its good you did your own research, but it might be less Eric has gaps in his knowledge or is stubborn, and more this is what our process doc says, or this is what someone from accounting has previously told us.

    1. Hyaline*

      I wondered if the reason was the curse of institutional knowledge—that he’s more senior, and years ago someone else insisted it had to be that way, so he’s accepted that as true.

      1. Daryush*

        Yeah, I remember someone pointing it out here a couple months ago, most people have no idea what their job actually does or how it fits into the larger organization. They have their process memorized but never think critically about whether it actually makes sense.

      2. MigraineMonth*

        My money’s on it being the procedure he was taught (or at least the one he learned, which isn’t *always* the same) and therefore the one he’s been doing/telling others to do for years now. Which tips this from “quick correction” to “I’ve been screwing up my job for years” and therefore much more likely to get ego involved.

        There are procedures at my job that I follow to the letter despite them making very little sense, so I understand how that can happen. It’s one of the benefits of having new people come in; they sometimes ask “Why do we fill this out in triplicate?” and it turns out no one actually has an answer.

        1. Hyaline*

          Yes! “Why do we fill this out in triplicate?” “In case the mimeograph eats one copy” yeeaah time for an update!

          1. Kit*

            The domestic equivalent of this sort of institutional knowledge failure is the old joke about a kid on their own looking at mom’s recipe for roast, which specifies cutting off a few inches at the roast. They call mom, who admits she’s not sure why that’s on there, but it was grandma’s recipe, so let’s call her! Grandma listens to this whole story, laughs, and says, “Because a full-size roast didn’t fit in my pan.”

    2. Sparkle llama*

      This is a fairly common thing. I work for a government agency and need to collect checks from applicants for either application fees or escrows that will be returned upon successful completion of the regulated work and we get several every year that tell us they can’t issue a check to us without our W9. Since it is an EIN and not an SSN I just send it without argument but there seem to be a lot of people that don’t think it is possible to cut a check without a W9.

      Heck in college I was sent a 1099 for a reimbursement of mileage or some other expense for a student org which is clearly not supposed to get a 1099. Seems like a lot of people don’t get that while the accounting software calls everyone that gets checks vendors they aren’t all actually vendors for tax purposes.

  5. Zeus*

    For #2, I notice that Summer is “they” in the letter and “she” in the answer – is that an oversight?

    2. Hlao-roo*

      Probably just an oversight, and it looks like the pronoun in the answer has been corrected now.

      In the future, there’s a link above the comment box to report “an ad, tech, or typo issue here.” I think mixed up pronouns/names/etc. in answers roughly fall into the “typo” category, and there’s a much higher chance they’ll be corrected if they’re reported though there than mentioned here in the comments.

      2. Zeus*

        Thank you for that! I’ve somehow skipped over that every time. I thought we had to do the put-a-link-in-the-comment thing (which I did in a reply).

  6. Adam*

    The problem in #2 is so common that more than twenty years ago it was described as Geek Social Fallacy #1. It’s fine to exclude people from things they want to be a part of if they’re not a good fit for whatever reason. You can explain that to Lisa, and if she can’t deal with that, you can tell her that she’s not a good fit either. Being interested isn’t enough on its own to justify being involved.

    1. Awkwardness*

      Those Geek Social Fallacies have been mentioned several times here. I think I really need to look them up.

      3. Rebecca*

        I believe Captain Awkward is the originator. If she is not the originator, she certainly popularized the term. You can find her blog with Google.

          1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

            Not a pseudonym, but yes she certainly amplified it, and also showed how it could be expanded to look at dating behavior.

      4. Knitknitfrog*

        I did look them up and the fallacies provided much mind fodder, I feel better infomred

    2. Ellis Bell*

      I had to smother a smile when Lisa described OP and Zoe as unprofessional simply for not including someone on a project. It sounds like her judgement is not exactly on target. She already misjudged the potential success of the events, which is why she drifted off and stopped helping (which isn’t unprofessional by her rules?) and now instead of coming back to learn, she’s here to teach.

      1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

        She got bored when the planning wasn’t as exciting as she thought it would be. Then when OP and Zoe got an award, she wanted in on the action. And she’s mad they aren’t letting her as in as she wants.

    3. Irish Teacher.*

      I think this was also a thing in education at some point, so I guess some people may have grown up with teachers who pushed the idea on them that “you can never exclude anybody, for any reason; it’s bullying.” There was a book at one point, “you can’t say you can’t play,” about a teacher introducing that rule to a bunch of kindergartners.

      I think the point of the book was that that was a good rule that both made things fairer between kids – nobody gets to decide who can play with who – and made people feel included, but my immediate thought on seeing it was “what about the bullies?” The whole concept of the book assumes kids are only excluded for the reasons kids are left out in coming of age movies, that they aren’t “cool,” when sometimes kids don’t want another kid playing with them because the kid bullies or takes over or otherwise behaves badly. And yeah, with kindergartners, the teacher can step in to deal with situations like that pretty easily, but the point of the book seems to be that teachers should build a culture where kids learn never to exclude anybody which is over-simplistic and I can see it contributing to people developing views like Lisa’s.

      Whatever about kindergartners, at some point, people do have to learn that there is a midpoint between excluding a person from everything because they are unpopular and welcoming everybody even those who are there to take advantage or cause trouble. Not that Summer seems to fall into the latter category, but she is still somebody who should not be included here. And people also need to know how to leave others out respectfully – with kids, this could be, “we’re in the middle of a game now. If you wait, you can join in the next one” – and also how to accept not being included in everything,

      Just to agree that yeah, this is fairly common.

      1. Nicosloanica*

        That said, it’s true that if the purpose of the event is to lift up a certain disadvantaged community of practice, assuming Lisa and Summer (who I will try to use they/them for) are in that community, you ideally want to have an overall-welcoming atmosphere. You don’t have to have everyone on the planning team but ideally there would be a role for everyone in the community, and not two people who can block participation. Again, they don’t have to be on the planning team. I can say from experience other people will probably find it clique-y no matter what you do, and founder’s system sets in easily.

        1. MD aware*

          As a BIPOC woman, when OP said that Summer included things in her research paper presentation that ‘other’ed individuals in the community, I think that was a subtle way to say that Summer is not part of the marginalized community and is instead a member of a privileged demographic who is (unintentionally) offending and marginalizing the community.

          1. TheBunny*

            I wondered this too. I’m not a POC, I couldn’t be more white and while I love the diversity events that are scheduled and am willing to help as I can, I am not going to be leading them nor will I be writing a paper on “my” experience.

          2. br_612*

            I definitely read it as Summer is white, even though they may be part of another marginalized group (given the pronouns, perhaps LGBTQ+), and their paper was . . . less than intersectional when it comes to race. It’s a common thing where white people that are part of one marginalized group (women, LGBTQ) talk over people of color in the same group and try to speak for the entire group without considering the very different experiences of black and brown people.

            1. Knitknitfrog*

              almost – it is a neurodivergent community. So marginalised and somewhat historically invisible in higher education ( if they could just sit still, listen, follow instructions, be normal). And staff who wan to make students experiences better.

              1. Kit*

                That’s what I assumed when I noticed that you mention being autistic – especially if Summer is allistic, I’m not surprised that she stepped on toes in her paper, but you have every right to say that your existing team is full up and her assistance is not needed, thanks for offering!

                It is not actually rude to do so, and Summer (and Lisa) will probably insist that it is, but they’re the ones being rude by trying to butt in after getting multiple nos.

          3. Visually Impaired Guy*

            I imagined a situation where Summer was part of the community but was making comments about some and not others (for example in the disabilities community there can be some people who focus on invisible disabilities and not physical ones, or vice versa). In my experience, someone within a community has the ability to ‘other’ part of the community.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              Or respectability politics. “The problem isn’t a system that denies us forces us into poverty and unemployment, it’s that some of us are unemployed welfare bums!”

            2. Knitknitfrog*

              This is the situation , invisible disabilities, with a lot of masking. And mostly we all understand and accommodate each other. I think every one has legitimate reasons to be there in the community, but not everyone is alert to the politics of the situation or how their actions might read.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        I don’t think it’s a bad rule for school or work, depending on how it’s implemented. Leaving just one person out of something can go quite wrong in that situation. You’ve just got to differentiate what is actually exclusion and what is and when it’s appropriate. it can’t be a blanket rule.

      3. jasmine*

        People have the right to be friends with or hang out with whoever they want, and we do a disservice to children by forcing them to be friends with each other. Bullying and exclusion are real problems, but telling kids you can’t say no isn’t really a solution. Kids can tell when other kids don’t really want to hang out with them but are being forced to by adults.

        1. metadata minion*

          Yes! There’s a children’s book (“Sweetie”) about an autistic kid (well, an autistic anthropomorphic naked mole rat, which is the other reason I love it), which I like particularly for its message that, while it’s lonely to not fit in with your classmates, there are people out there who will get you, and meanwhile, it’s also ok not to want to play with someone. You can do that without it being mean or bullying; not everyone likes the same things. And it models polite ways of saying “no thank you” when someone asks you to play in a way you’re not into.

      4. Humble Schoolmarm*

        I feel like there’s been a big move in the last decade or so to cushion kids from social consequences. That’s an overall positive, I think, because those consequences come from a society with so much baked-in inequality. I’m also glad that we’re starting to see social skills as something that can be taught and developed (although I’m not sure that ‘you must include everyone all the time’ is exactly that kind of teaching). The only problem is that the Lisa and Summers of the world never get the chance to learn that if you ghost on a big project, overpromise and underdeliver, or publicly other the group you’re supposed to be supporting, there are going to be social consequences ie. you can’t participate in the planning, even though you want to.

  7. Rez123*

    My instinct of number 1 was that people who are being forced to apply due to some benefit rules get weeded out with that question.

    1. Audrey Puffins*

      I used to work in secondary education in the UK, and the understanding is that if you get to the point of physically going into the school for an interview and sample lesson then the successful applicant will be offered the job that day and will be expected to say yes or no on the spot. It startled me a bit when I interviewed for my admin position to be asked if I intended to accept the role, but once I was in it and got a clearer understanding of how teacher recruitment worked, I understood why asking the question seemed entirely normal to my interviewers.

      I am happy to be back in the private sector, which operates by more broadly societally understandable rules than schools do.

      1. Sparkles McFadden*

        Yup. I saw this in civil service. They have a large candidate list, so they want people who aren’t interested in that particular opening to self-select out.

        The reason for the yes/no choice is that my county requires a response to keep you on the hiring contact list. If you fail to respond at all three times, they knock you off of the hiring list.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        TBF you’ll know what the pay and hours are before the interview because teaching is so standardized, but there’s more to consider than compensation. This is why teachers most commonly move to schools were they know a lot of people, or do recon through agency work.

    2. Peanut Hamper*

      How, though? They can just say “yes” and then never bother to return a phone call.

      1. ecnaseener*

        But they don’t have to, if they’re just trying to hit their required number of applications – they can mark “no” and still truthfully report that they applied.

        1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

          Nah, because they are asked why they didn’t accept a role that is offered.

          This is just someone’s zealous idea of making sure someone really wants to work there.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            Not sure I’m following. I imagine the way this would work is:

            1) Person on unemployment fills out application, but marks “no” they wouldn’t accept the role if offered.

            2) The hiring manager does not interview them or offer them the role.

            3) The person on unemployment reports that they applied to the company but were not offered the role, which wouldn’t trigger any follow-up questions.

            So the person doesn’t get kicked off unemployment and the company doesn’t waste time interviewing people who don’t actually want the role.

    3. Cat Tree*

      When I was on unemployment and had to go through this dance, I would not have been allowed to turn down an offer anyway unless it met specific hardship criteria. So I don’t think this is that.

      It’s probably just someone who is mad that multiple great candidates decided that they won’t work for peanuts.

      1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

        Actually, I think that’s exactly it. It’s a barely-opaque way of asking “are you just applying to meet a quota?” and allowing someone to self-select out while still being able to count an application submitted.

      2. JB*

        I wouldn’t assume that much thought went into it. I’ve seen this question many times over the years on similar-looking online application systems.

        I think it’s just built into the form options of some particular hiring software and there are some less-than-experienced HR folks who see it and go “great question, let’s add that to the application”.

      3. Quill*

        Yeah, the dance of ducking out of role consideration BEFORE an offer if you are on unemployment but also could not do the job is kind of wild.

        Either you learn that the offer is for peanuts during the process, it’s at a location you can’t do, or in the case of one place I interviewed at, considers a 70 hour work week “normal” there are so many things that you can’t screen for at the application stage that would also be a production to explain to unemployment.

    4. Nicosloanica*

      That was my guess as to the intent, but it’s obviously not going to work on people who are operating that way, and it will confuse everyone like OP who’s applying for the job in good faith.

    5. Learn ALL the things?*

      I think it’s more likely to be what Alison suggested in her response. The posting has been open for a long time, and I’m guessing they’ve had a few people they offered the job to who turned it down, and HR is tired of it.

    6. Observer*

      My instinct of number 1 was that people who are being forced to apply due to some benefit rules get weeded out with that question.

      This possibility is one of the reasons that the question is an orange flag to me.

      The reality is that those people are not going to answer no. But there are going to be good prospects who just decide to nope out of this.

      Which does the exact opposite of what they would have been aiming for.

    7. Mango Freak*

      More likely it’s a psychological thing where they think people are more likely to take the job if they check yes, even if they think they’re just being pragmatic when they check it. (Which is correct–people are more likely to do what you want after they say “yes” to you for any reason.)

  8. Ganymede II*

    LW5, it would be completely fair for you to decide this isn’t the place for you and look at moving on.

    That being said, I have one been part of a team like the one you describe. Our team lead completely turned us around and made us into a happy, effective team. He did so by following a lot of principles from Brené Brown’s Dare to Lead. He basically set aside the work for a month and focused on building the team’s relationships and ways of working. He got a lot of raised eyebrows for the “setting aside the work” but it absolutely paid off.

    This may not be for you, and maybe you’re seeing that the discontent in the team is too far gone to be fixed. But if you want to give it one last shot, consider trying that.

    2. bamcheeks*

      I would want to do that IF there was supportive management. But poor management + a needs-lots-of-work team sounds like a disaster. You need at least one place to go where things aren’t on fire.

      1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

        Yeah if manager had her back, it might work. But the boss is out of touch.

        Caveat: If everyone is telling you boss is a nightmare, make sure its not just malicious gossip. Like boss is horrible because she expects us to actually work and not scroll our phones. what is your own sense of the boss?

        1. Learn ALL the things?*

          A few years back, I got a non-voluntary transfer to work for a manager I’d heard nothing about. She was the only manager in our whole organization that nobody talked about, and after I’d worked for her for a few days, I realized why. She was incredibly abusive. I asked to meet with my previous supervisor to tell her what I was struggling with and ask for advice, and she said she hadn’t wanted to tell me before the transfer because the manager wasn’t like that with everyone and she didn’t want to give me bad expectations before I’d even started. She’d actually tried to keep upper management from transferring me to that team and been shot down.

          So sometimes a lack of gossip can also be an indicator.

      2. Humble Schoolmarm*

        Agreed. Being the rogue manager/coach/teacher that turns around a failing team is the dream for a lot of people, that’s why they make movies about it (well, maybe not for the managers). The problem is, even your hardest and best informed efforts don’t always make it happen, especially if upper management is actively causing problems.

      1. Uxbridge*

        The manager being awful is valid. She’s an out of control micro manager, meddler, completely rigid and inflexible. Very black and white thinking, incapable of dialogue. She will literally talk at me without breaking for 40 minutes during our one on ones and mostly talk about herself. I am a Director on a pretty big project and she gives me menial tasks like adding peoples job titles beside the names of meeting attendees on an agenda. I have worked here for a year and a half and I have mentors and allies outside of my vertical who are trying to help me and advocate for me, but the grand boss in our vertical seems reluctant to take action. I have been getting coaching from HR about how to work on the situation but its not helping (maybe I am not being patient?). I have made some progress with the interpersonal dynamic with my new staff, we laugh about stuff and commiserate. But anything they perceive as coming from the boss is radioactive and they won’t engage it. I think I feel a bit sad and defeated because this was a huge promotion for me – I never expected to be at this kind of salary or leadership role in my career. It isn’t my dream job but its a massive opportunity that will open doors. But something is just feeling off for me. Maybe I don’t love the work enough to push through this? Fixing the team right now doesn’t feel rewarding even though I am getting positive feedback about my own interpersonal skills and approach. I have two direct reports but I work with a broader group of maybe 15 who are consultants or internal SMEs and they are giving me decent signals despite the actual work flow being stifled and painful. Ugh I could go on! Maybe I am just in a trough right now.

  9. Awkwardness*

    #2: You and Zoe are the ones who have been organizing these events

    This sentence is key. You might believe that you should allow everybody the same responsibility because it is volunteering. But your second second event was wildly successful and well received, so Zoe and you have – per lived experience! – more authority to decide how things are done. And you two sound like thoughtful people who woukd not use this authority to put other people with less experience down.
    But Lisa has no place to tell you how staffing should be done or what it means to be “professional”. Maybe it is easier for you to focus on your responsibility to make sure the event is running smoothly when finding arguments for/against certain behaviour? Including people against the will of the key staff certainly belongs to those things and needs to be addressed too.

  10. Sheworkshardforthemoney*

    No.2 Even though it’s a volunteer run project, you need a formal chain of command. Create one with clear responsibilities for each person. Volunteers must be vetted and approved before being allowed to join with written respsonsibilities that they must agree to. Otherwise you run the risk of someone noticing how high profile and successful your event has become and swoops in to take over the glory while the original organizers do the grunt work. Create a history/background of your event with making it clear who the original contributors are and their role.

    1. Knitknitfrog*

      Thank you, noted I am off to write the prolog to our next symposium program and position key players in the timeline … no one should be invisible unless they choose to be.

  11. I should really pick a name*

    I don’t understand while LW2 is willing to say no to Summer’s help, but not Lisa’s.
    The expectation that Lisa will drift a way seems like an excellent reason to say no, not yes.

    1. Peanut Hamper*

      I think it was a combination of LW trying to be both polite and hopeful — in the short term.

      But yep, it would have been easier — in the long term — to just say no.

    2. Mairead*

      I assume because Lisa may have provided little help, but wasn’t actively making things worse.

      1. MsM*

        Or dealing with the follow-up from giving Lisa a direct “no” seemed like more of a headache than accommodating her. Which I sympathize with, but this appears to be a no-win scenario.

    3. Academic Librarian Too*

      So this is NOT an uncommon situation in academic circles. I have this with a guy has been been a committee member. Has done zero work (or takes up all the air in the room) and takes credit for the success of the project.
      Now in my personal life he has volunteered for a community service project that I am involved with and I dread his actual participation. I am relieved that he has shown up for only one meeting, volunteered for tasks that have nothing to do with me. I don’t know whether to let the others know that this is typical and to not have expectations.

    5. Ellis Bell*

      I think it’s easier to put up with someone who stops helping than it is to put up with someone helping in a way that costs more time because you’re redoing things etc. I agree with you it could have been a good idea to pass on them both though.

      1. Knitknitfrog*

        This is why we said ok to Summer, we assume they would drift off….we miscalculated badly.

    6. Knitknitfrog*

      Yup … agree, we goofed up on that one, expecting drift which may not happen. I think Zoe and I are much better at delegating and organising this time around and slipped up on that, we thought we could handle it but didn’t see the twist coming

  12. Irish Teacher.*

    That question in Letter 1 is particularly ridiculous because…who is going to answer “no”? If one is applying for the job, I would assume they are at least open to the possibility of accepting it. People don’t usually apply for jobs with the intention of getting offered it and turning it down (unless, I guess, they are just trying to prove to a spouse or parent they are applying for jobs, but I doubt those people are that common). I just really don’t see what they expect to learn from it.

    I guess maybe it’s some kind of attempt to put pressure on people to accept the job if offered. Like it makes it sound like they are working from the assumption you will accept it so people might feel awkward about doing otherwise?

    1. Daryush*

      I’d put it in the same bucket as job app questions like “can you complete the duties listed in the job description” and “do you like people.” They don’t mean anything and probably came pre-canned as part of the job application software, and nobody ever bothered to remove them.

    2. Bast*

      It’s so strange to me especially at the early stages, because there’s so much you don’t know yet. Sure, if you’re a finalist and something seems off and/or you lose interest you should withdraw your candidacy, maybe tell them you don’t think it’s going to be a good fit, but you wouldn’t know that information in the very initial application. Even on the off chance someone is applying for jobs for a reason other than to get a job, who is actually going to fill in no? People will lie and say yes because they know nothing good will come with checking no.

      1. Despachito*

        The only reason why this question would make some sense to me would be if it is posed at least AFTER some sort of interview (and then I would assume it is meant to weed out those who found something offputting during that process).

        To ask it at the very beginning, before the applicant had an opportunity to learn any new information apart from that they had when they applied… just does not make any sense at all. Why would anyone apply to a job they do not want?

        1. Kyrielle*

          Yeah, the only time I was asked a question that even vaguely resembled that one, it was actually right before the formal offer – a verbal check that I was interested, because why waste the paperwork if I wasn’t? (I was, thanks, it was a good offer.)

      2. Ozzac*

        Exactly. Even if someone is applying due to external pressure (relatives, benefits) and has no intention to accept the job offer they are still going to answer yes.

        1. Irish Teacher.*

          Yeah, that was my thought too, a person who is lying to their family, or at least attempting to deceive, by pretending they are trying to get a job, is hardly going to be above lying on the application too. So…what is the point here?

    3. FrivYeti*

      Yeah, I’m about 90% sure that the purpose of that question is twofold:

      1) It puts social pressure on applicants to accept a job offer that is a little bit less than what they actually want after they see the salary and benefits, on the theory that the applicant knows they said they were all-in and won’t want to back out, and:

      2) It causes people who have a willingness to negotiate and hold out for better offers to get annoyed and back out of the process, making it less likely that they will be around later in the process to negotiate over salary.

      Some managers absolutely think that that either #1 or #2 will get them better (read: more pliable) employees. Others are just annoyed and not thinking it through, and of course, as noted, there’s the possibility that the person who wrote the question doesn’t have any real hiring input and no one who does noticed or thought about it. I’d consider it a strong yellow flag, to be kept in mind very carefully as I advanced in a process.

    4. MigraineMonth*

      So, I’m guessing by your username that you haven’t dealt with US unemployment benefits. Remember that the US cares about the “deserving” poor (who for some reason are always white) but care a lot more about not being scammed by the lazy/degenerate/immigrant/[other implicitly or explicitly racist label] poor.

      Therefore, in order to receive any money from unemployment insurance after being fired or laid off, you have to prove that you’re “doing enough” to find a new job. While this can include job skills training, the usual way you prove that you’re trying to find a new job is by proving that they have sent out at least a certain number of job applications every week.

      As a result, people who have already applied to all the jobs they are qualified for/willing to take/able to take will continue to apply for job openings so they won’t starve while waiting to hear back.

  13. Peanut Hamper*

    If Eric doesn’t understand the difference between a payment and a refund, then he is really bad at that aspect of his job. That he does not understand how basic accounting works or, apparently, how their accounting software works is a huge red flag to me. Why is he even involved in this decision? What is his role in this organization? What other kinds of bad decisions is he making?

    Oof, my mind is spinning right now.

    1. Paint N Drip*

      I’m actually extremely interested in his thought process. As Daryush mentions above, “most people have no idea what their job actually does or how it fits into the larger organization. They have their process memorized but never think critically about whether it actually makes sense”
      This combined with gumption (or the audacity of a white man, perhaps) is maybe the reason?? Personally this seems less like he doesn’t know accounting, and more like he doesn’t know accounting software (and isn’t interested to learn)

    2. Benihana scene stealer*

      It sounds like it’s something that doesn’t come up too often, so it does make some sense that Eric wouldn’t know the best process. Plus it sounds like nobody else knew either, just that Eric was the one who tried to help, even if he was wrong here.

      I don’t think there’s any reason to conclude he’s all around terrible at his job.

      1. Hyaline*

        Yeah I didn’t get the sense that this was directly tied to Eric’s job, just that he was convinced he knew the “rule” for dealing with it–possibly because he was told it had to be that way eons ago and he never questioned it. (I feel like there are people who like clear rules and it’s very hard to disabuse them of a rule they learned once and believed was hard and fast even if it is being misapplied or is outdated or whatever. Then there are other people who ask “but why” and dig into the supposed rules and discover they were never really rules at all or the rule is outdated and needs to be updated or is not being applied correctly–but sometimes they push back on real rules that need to stand–and suffice it to say these two personality types tend to clash a bit.)

    3. Observer*

      Why is he even involved in this decision? What is his role in this organization? What other kinds of bad decisions is he making?

      All of this.

      I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around this. Someone definitely needs to be looking over his shoulder.

    4. Ama*

      I used to see these kinds of knowledge gaps in new employees at the smallish (40 employees) nonprofit I worked. A lot of the finance employees we hired came from much larger finance departments where roles would specialize in one specific kind of payment (one person in charge of refunds, someone else in charge of vendor payment, for example) so when they switched back to a position where all kinds of payments were their responsibility they struggled. The other problem was that the person in charge of our finance department for years was a terrible manager and did the bare minimum training (our specific internal processes only, no so we usually didn’t find out a new employee didn’t know something until they screwed something up.

    5. MigraineMonth*

      I doubt it’s this serious an issue. I don’t think he thought through “What would be the most reasonable way to set up this process?” from first principles and came to this one. I would put a lot of money on him just following the process he learned; if he’s been at the organization for a long time, it’s probably the process he’s used for years.

      So from his perspective, he’s probably been diligently following the process he learned, which never had any issues until LW3 started complaining about something outside of their area. Should he have gotten ego involved and dug in rather than listened? No, and I hope his manager addresses that with him. But I don’t think “employee who dutifully follows prescribed processes without questioning whether the process makes sense in all circumstances” is exactly a loose cannon. (Though I’m not exactly seeing leadership potential, either.)

      1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

        The bit about Eric not being willing to even consider that they might be wrong (about something that is not their primary focus) is what worries me.

  14. Falling Diphthong*

    LW3, it’s a valuable heads up to someone if things that should have been issued as checks are being counted as “income paid to vendor, which shall be reported on the W9 at end of year.”

    I’m still salty about the time I discovered my and the client’s reckonings were off by $7, which was the fee my bank charged when the client paid me with a check from a defunct account. The client realized the error and reissued checks to the freelancers on the project for the original amount plus any penalties, but someone entered that refund as taxable income.

    I noticed this just before taxes were due, and the effort of raising a fuss didn’t seem worth the potentially recouped money when I added in “… and what if they screw it up again?” But this was for paying about $2 in taxes–the larger the amount misclassified as income, the more likely that someone will insist on raising that fuss.

    2. Llama mama*

      I had something wonky like this happen when I was in grad school. As part of my salary, my tuition was covered by the department in which I was employed, but one year I was awarded a scholarship for tuition. So in order to balance the books, the University recorded the returned money as a payment in excess funds to me…but I never saw any money! It was just moved from one pot to a different pot in their books. This meant when they issued the 1098 for my tuition, it looked like I had received cash payments that needed to be taxed.

      It was a headache and I was eventually advised that reporting the 1098 on my taxes was optional. That may or may not have been true, but at that point I couldn’t see another way to fix it without arguing endlessly with the bursars office and accounting over procedures (it took me several calls just to figure out the issue in the first place because the two departments wouldn’t talk to each other, so I was having to call back and forth with new information).

    3. yay*

      I was a low paid seasonal worker misclassified as an independent contractor once. I’m in Canada so I’m not sure how different it is, but I found out when I went to do my taxes and the difference was thousands of dollars (for a job I maybe made 20k at). I did make a stink, and my employer lost extra thousands of dollars in fines because they didn’t take the easy way of just fixing it themselves when asked to. If issuing a W9 is doing the same thing to customers getting refunds, OP did their company a huge favour by correcting them before the s hits the fan.

  15. MistOrMister*

    OP2 – why even have Lisa as part of the planning team? It sounds like she basically didn’t contribute anything the first time. I wouldn’t count on someone who didnt participate abd therefore didn’t cause any headaches the first time to act the same way. I realize you don’t want to work with Summer and that is where all your focus is right now, but Lisa is now as big a problem as Summer and both need to be addressed. Given she is insisting Summer be included and you don’t actually expect a contribution from her, it would make more sense to tell Lisa she is off the committee and then you have no issues with Summer being invited to meetings and whatnot when it’s just you and Zoe. I assume the conference was such a hit last time that Lisa and Summer want to be part of this solely because they want the accolades and therefore they are more likely to insist on having a say in how things go, which is going to lead to a huge headache for you.

  16. Cat*

    LW 2 – it sounds to me like Lisa and perhaps Summer want to be involved because it was so successful last year. They just want some credit and want to advance their careers would be my guess. I would get rid of both of them, frankly.

    1. Paint N Drip*

      That was my absolute thought as well. It went okay, then it went GREAT – perfect resume addition to be on the first few years of a fairly large (and growing) event for your niche industry. Interesting though, because those ‘in the know’ who presumably wield the power of hiring and high-level networking will know.. they didn’t do anything!

    2. Ellis Bell*

      Yeah, I think my response would be “Thanks so much for helping last year but by (the time we got recognised for it’s success) we had streamlined the roles and managed to get the main duties covered by myself and Zoe”. Keep phrasing it is “thanks but no thanks” as though they’re offering help, instead of glory hogging; they’re not going to admit it.

  17. HonorBox*

    OP2 – Two suggestions:

    1. While you are volunteering to organize this event, it has grown exponentially and quickly. Kudos to you for that! But because it has grown, it probably makes a ton of sense to establish some more formal roles and responsibilities. You and Zoe are basically co-chair of the event. You can add some additional volunteer positions with specific responsibilities outlined. Then as you need to bring new people in or have people raise their hand to help, you can plug them in to very specific areas. You and Zoe are still in charge, overseeing everything, but if you outline expectations, it is much easier to remind people what their lanes are and keep them in their lanes.

    2. Have a very clear conversation with Lisa, both about her involvement and Summer’s. I think it is worth pointing out to her that Summer’s work was less than stellar in the first year. And point out that in the midst of planning for the second event, Lisa faded away. You need to ensure that your team is available, present, and does good work. Offer specific things Lisa can do, and maybe there are some specific things that can be offered to Summer. But you need Lisa to understand that, given her actions last year, she isn’t going to be included in the major decisions and overall planning. That may sound harsh, but you need to protect yourself in the event she fades away again.

    1. Knitknitfrog*

      Lisa has asked to meet with me, and yes I will be discussing some specific reasons why the team that organised it last ti e will be key players this time. I will be mentioning that last time they drifted off and saying that was a problem ( except it wasn’t … so I am thinking how to work that in).
      This year we added tech- person, who is young and has tech knowledge to offer in terms of software for handling abstract reviews and digital programs, so the wannabes are seeing us add to the core team and want in on the action. I need to be firm that we each have clear roles, and the heavy lifting is covered.

      1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

        It turned out to be a blessing that Lisa drifted off, yes, but that behavior is still problematic. She demonstrated unreliability to you and thinks that was not a problem. She might get 2nd chances in a work setting, but this isn’t that. Event work is very different.

        1. rebelwithmouseyhair*

          yes that’s a good point. Zoe and OP can’t count on her, ironically because of her lack of professionalism. It’s so weird how people always accuse you of what they themselves are guilty off.

      2. rebelwithmouseyhair*

        It wasn’t a problem that she drifted off last year, because her skills are obviously not needed. And so logically it’s not a problem to not have her this year either. Your only mistake was agreeing to have her on the team this year, expecting that she would drift off again. Now that she’s seen that it would look good on her CV she doesn’t want to drift off again.

  18. JMF*

    LW #1: I was asked this question in an interview for a government job. I got the job and was later on an interview panel for an open position in my department. I asked my boss why they would ask a throwaway question like that and he said that they often get really useful responses. Sure enough, one of the candidates we interviewed responded ‘probably not’ when asked that question. It also gave the candidates a chance to ask questions, clarify things about the role within a constrained/set list of questions.

    I don’t doubt the power of a bureaucratic system to identify a useful interview question and then turn it into a checkbox on an application form. Even if that reveals something about the overall organization, it might not reveal anything about the people you would be working with regularly, who are the ones that really impact your work experience.

    1. Mairead*

      I can see how someone could respond ‘probably not’ due to something that had emerged during the interview, but it doesn’t make sense to me to ask the question at the very start of the process. Even if someone is applying because they have to (for unemployment benefit etc), they aren’t going to answer no.

    2. Governmint Condition*

      We have asked this question in interviews at our agency. When we select a candidate to hire, the paperwork is long and tedious. If the selected candidate turns down the job, the paperwork starts all over again. Weeding out all of the people who answer no helps reduce delays caused by uninterested candidates. We treat most maybes as yeses. (The answer is not legally binding.)

      Salaries here are fixed and non-negotiable, so people know what they will get if they accept. I understand how this question is problematic in the private sector.

      1. AJ*

        I guess the better way for the recruiter to frame the question would be basically the same as Alison’s magic question for interviewees to ask – “Would you have any reservations about accepting a job offer, were we to extend you one, that I can clear up for you today?”

    3. perspex*

      This is my experience with just about every interview question that seems super obvious or pointless: It’s amazing what people will actually say. Amazing, and extremely useful.

      As a check box question on an initial application, probably less useful but I’m sure some people do check “no”!

  19. Benihana scene stealer*

    For #2 is there any sort of overarching structure to the group? If everything is volunteer it might be that nobody realizes you and Zoe are “in charge” but rather just the ones organizing things but not really in authority.

    Also, while it does sound like Lisa and Summer aren’t helpful here, you do want to make sure in general you’re not monopolizing the event – as successful as it sounds like it’s been you may want to keep things fresh as well.

    1. Nicosloanica*

      Yes I actually want to riff on your last point because it’s something my org has been wrestling with for years now. When one or two people start things, are doing a ton of work, it’s perfectly natural to create systems that privilege efficiency and give yourselves max power/control. That may be totally fine depending on what your goal is. But if you truly want the event to be about this community, and you want it to be sustainable over time (which you may not! That’s also fine!) you’ll have to spend (difficult, often frustrating) time trying to create systems that let people in. That don’t give yourselves and your immediate second all the authority. If you haven’t looked up “Founder’s Syndrome” take a look at the research there. You might have to think about a board or something. And keep in mind, your own attitude is *always* going to be “well, we don’t have time for that kind of thing, we’re always operating in scarcity and crisis.”

      1. Nicosloanica*

        To be clear I am in no way saying you have to let Lisa and Summer on the planning team. In future, there may be a process to decide who is invited to the planning team and if they are allowed to stay or not.

      2. jasmine*

        I don’t disagree with either of you, but I do think these comments aren’t helpful to the LW, because both her and Zoe seem to be so worried about being authoritarian that they’re developing private strategies on how to deal with Lisa and Summer without removing them outright. Since there are other volunteers involved, I imagine Lisa and Summer being around makes their lives harder too.

        And honestly, I don’t think Lisa and Summer would see it this way, but I do think it would be kinder to them also to remove them than to pretend to let Summer participate when you’re not letting Summer participate at all, even if you don’t say it out loud.

      3. Knitknitfrog*

        Off to look up founders syndrome, interestingly Lisa sees herself as a founder, but didn’t want to be part of ongoing organising, which is why they wrote the research article. Their interest is as an educator trying to do good, rather than as a marginalised individual, and their approach is a bit tunnel vision to their hopes and dreams not those of others.

      4. Knitknitfrog*

        Ok, clarification, we have a Community of about 100, and a steering group of about 8-10 who meet every second month, we have a chair, and secretary/minutes, and vote, and regular reports from people on things we are working on, people are free to bring ideas and ask for help, and we support things that support the community. Pretty much any member can initiate a talk or project and elicit help. There are some projects I don’t understand, so I don’t help on – but I don’t stop others working on them, The over riding approach of the committee is ‘sounds good, who wants to help Barry on that?, right, sorted, let’s hear from you next meeting with an update’. It’s all volunteer stuff, but various pairs have contributed all sorts of achievements.

    2. Awkwardness*

      Generally, I would agree. But I do not see LW in risk of monopolizing the event. Quite in contrary, I think they need to give themselves more authority in order to avoid people that have shown to be not reliable come back and try to take over in telling others how to behave.
      Also, depending on the research paper, the content and how it was discussed beforehand with the community, Summer might have brought this upon herself.

      1. HonorBox*

        Agreed! I think in setting up some sort of structure and giving themselves specific authority, they actually can do a better job of not monopolizing the event. There can be clear division of labor, tasks that can be volunteered for/assigned, areas for others to chime in.

        1. Hyaline*

          This exactly. There’s a form of monopolizing that can come from loosey-goosey structure and a lack of clear authority. Formal authority and structure takes it from “Denny and Babs make all the calls” to “the co-chairs will make XYZ decisions” and people are making those decisions *in their position as chair.* Someday, someone else could be chair and it’s clear that they would make those decisions. Without that in place it can seem like a regime of personality, and people (like Lisa, even, maybe) pitch in to help not clear on how decisions are made and who’s in charge…and then make unhelpful suggestions that are outside their scope and get cranky when they’re not listened to as an equal and make others cranky that they’re butting in.

          And to be clear, you can establish these things in a new org and it takes a while to stick. Maybe LW is well on their way on this and this is growing pains. People have a hard time seeing that it’s not “Denny and Babs” anymore, it’s “the co-chairs.” Honestly, sometimes you have to get to second generation leadership before the structure sticks IMO.

          1. Sloanicota*

            Or, as in our case, you can never quite establish the second generation of leadership because the systems/personalities never quite allow for it …

      2. Knitknitfrog*

        Trying not to give the game away here, Summer wrote that volunteer communities made up of marginised peoples were a useful way for educational institutions to manage serving marginalised and disadvantaged groups in education. My take was they suggested voluntary communities of practice solved the problem of professional development towards helping educators better work with those types of people. The politics of suggesting minority voluntary groups replace professional development and institutional support sat uncomfortably. Others didn’t like that the research had ethical approval and that was gained without much discussion with the community by presenting that they as authors were part of the community, I am an ethicist and the ethics application was a tad sneaky IMO, not enough to raise formal questions but more as an ‘watching so it doesn’t happen again’ mode.

    3. Knitknitfrog*

      So the symposium organising team is a sub team that reports to the community of practice steering group. Our wider CoP has over 100 members, our steering group is voluntary and has representation from most colleges/facilities and some management/support areas. All the players written about are on the steering group. Some are aware of the tensions and keeping quiet, others are supportive but privately, many blissfully unaware. Zoe is currently chair of the steering group, which Summer and Lisa might interpret as controlling, but every semester we ask if anyone else wants to be chair and they don’t volunteer. To be clear the chair has no decision making role, merely reporting and documenting, and chairing.
      And a wider response here, yes I do believe that Summer and Lisa want in in the success this time, Lisa is open about ‘needing’ successful projects as they are worried about job security ( but they teach on a key professional development qual all staff are required to hold so while they might not be amazing at their job they are probably safe), Summer remembers volunteering to help last time but says they don’t know why they didn’t stay involved, and has gone from wistful to adamant we recognise Zoe’s request to join. I need to pull all my neurospicy skills into channeling ways to be diplomatic about the need for a functional team who work well together and have the skills needed, nd who are not disruptive.
      I guess that’s a tricky conversation for next week.

      1. Bird names*

        Thanks for the background, especially the second paragraph. Either way, it seems you have a good eye for all the moving parts of this situation and hope you can resolve soon.
        Just a final question:
        I may have gotten the names mixed up, but was it supposed to read Summer here “recognise Zoe’s request to join”?

  20. Jam on Toast*

    LW2: I would put money that Summer and Lisa are using your event as a way to pad their own CVs. They don’t want to do the work, but as you already experienced with Summer’s skewed post-event writeup, they want to be involved just enough that their names will appear on the program or official event photos as ‘Organizing Committee Member’s and then they’ll be able to spin the event as all their own idea/work/effort when they’re interviewing for other jobs. This is a career strategy and unfortunately, joining committees just to pad a CV is so, so common in tertiary education. Honestly, having worked in higher Ed for most of my career, it’s almost more shocking when I find myself on a committee with reasonable, competent people who divide work equitably than not. Understanding their motivation may help you feel more confident about rejecting their ‘help’ or their claims you are being unfair. They are the ones that aren’t being fair. They don’t care about the event itself, only the cachet that claiming involvement would bring them.

    1. I Have RBF*

      Managing volunteers is like herding cats. This is why you need a “chain of command”, even for a volunteer committee. Otherwise everyone will decide that they are “in charge” and “of course” their work is the best, even though they do little work and what they do often has to be redone. I’ve also tried those flat “consensus” things, and nothing actually gets done unless someone goes outside of the kumbaya consensus clusterfuck and just gets things done.

      The LW and Zoe are co-chairs. They need to establish that they are co-chairs, and also establish roles and areas of responsibility under them. Yes, you might need to establish some “roles” that don’t actually do much or have good backups, just for the prima donas that want to be a part of it but don’t do any work.

  21. Former Lab Rat*

    For LW#3 – thank you! A simple refund should NOT require a SSN. How many businesses are hacked and personal data is taken each year? I try to limit who I give things like SSN and drivers license info to for anything. It’s just become an automatic request/response far too often and leaves your data hanging out in multiple data bases.

    1. Nicosloanica*

      I’ve been accused of being paranoid but honestly I am always trying to keep my info private. So many things require an address and phone number, or require you to download an app, for a simple one-time-use that should in no way need it. I give fake info when it’s truly required and not necessary. I understand why the accountant *thinks* (incorrectly) that they need a W-9 but I would also really balk at being required to give it for no reason, when it will hang out forever on some unsecured server.

  22. Trout 'Waver*

    I feel like the question in letter #1 is designed to kneecap applicants when they try to negotiate later in the process. “Well you already said you’d accept so we’re not going to negotiate further”. Which is crap obviously.

    But, more than that, it’s a sign that the company isn’t treating recruitment as a two-way street. Do with that information as you will.

  23. TheBunny*

    LW#2

    Maybe the answer to this is no, but is there some small task you could give Summer? I know she didn’t succeed when she helped before, but can you have her order extra snacks or something that gives her a task, puts her in a non essential role so if she fails who cares, go from there?

    To me it solves the issue completely and she’s happy and quiet doing her (to you) non essential task?

    I have a coworker who thinks she is much better at planning things than she is. A while ago for an event I made her in charge of the sparkling and flavored waters at the event. We were already having still, coffee and soda so if sparkling water didn’t make an appearance it wasn’t the end of the world.

  24. jasmine*

    LW2 reminds me of a non-work community I was once a part of. I’m sensing a lot of conflict avoidance here, especially with Zoe skipping meetings instead of removing the people creating a problem! Y’all have the right to refuse Summer’s help, and you have the right to remove Lisa as well if she continues to forcefully add Summer.

    The community I’m talking about was run by really nice people. But when the one person who wasn’t afraid of making people upset stepped away from it, a lot of conflict devolved in bad ways because the people who were creating drama weren’t reigned in. In the end, being “nice” just made everyone suffer.

    You and Zoe want the event to be a success. You don’t need to apologize for making the decisions to make that happen.

  25. Sneaky Squirrel*

    #1 – My suspicion is that this is either to eliminate people who are applying for the job to meet a quota (unemployment or the likes) or they’re trying to demonstrate compliance with a reporting requirement.

  26. Sharvey007*

    Reg #2 It almost seems like Summer has seen how successful these event have become. Especially with all the recognition y’all receive. She likely wants to attach herself to some of that goodness. I agree with the feedback, you can be selective and let her know.

  27. Cookie Monster*

    LW4 – I don’t mean to blame the victim, but you said you were ‘recruited and promoted’ to this other department. Did you do your due diligence to find out more about this department before accepting the new job? Did you ask anyone who had worked with that manager, talk to anyone in the department, etc.? It sounds like a terrible situation and I’m sorry you have to deal with that, but I’m wondering if you were basically forced to accept this new position or if you just sort of went along with it.

    1. Uxbridge*

      I did talk to lots of people about my boss, and I knew she was difficult. She was only promoted into the role a month before I started so my take on her was based off of her performance in her previous position. So it wasn’t really possible for me to gather extensive insight on how she was in her new role. It is significantly worse than I expected and its going much worse by all accounts than how she acted in her previous position. I am definitely caught off guard by other staff reaction to her and didn’t see that part of it coming. I wasn’t forced to take the job but I was heavily encouraged and I definitely went along with it. It’s a huge promotion and massive opportunity for me that I never expected to get.

      1. Cookie Monster*

        Uxbridge – Oh, that’s so tough. Sometimes you do everything right and the situation still doesn’t work out in ways you couldn’t have predicted. Do you have a mentor or someone you above you trust at work to seek advice from? Good luck and please update us in the future with how it goes!

  28. Hyaline*

    LW2, are you 100% sure that Summer wanted to be out forever after the first conference? Because it sounds like there is a possibility for a misunderstanding there–a lot of people say things like “Man, I’m never doing that again!” after a stressful event when they have every intention of doing so again, or maybe believe it at the time but come around later after the stress has worn off. I ask because it’s weird that she would be totally out, but be hovering on the edges and seemingly using Lisa as an in to become involved again. It’s almost as though, in an alternate universe, Summer would write in and say “I’m being pushed out of a conference I founded by the cofounder and her new co-chair!” Is it possible she’s a conniving jerk using this to benefit her career without doing work? Yeah, but giving people the benefit of the doubt, she may be feeling pushed out of something she helped found (even if, rationally speaking, she excused herself originally).

    I’m also noticing something in your interaction with Lisa that I’d point out as potentially a flag for you and Zoe to pay attention to. She “drifted away” during the planning last time but does still want to be involved now; you were ok with it but only because you assumed she’d flake again. It seems like you and Zoe make a great team, but there’s a possibility that your great cohesion made Lisa feel like an outsider or shut out. It’s also possible she’s a total flake! But given that your hope was “that Lisa flakes again and we don’t have to deal with her” rather than “that Lisa really steps up and is more involved” it’s worth taking a look at how open you are to other peoples’ involvement, especially on a high level. It’s ok if you and Zoe are a two-person leadership team and don’t want others on that tier, but you should be really aware of that dynamic and avoid bringing people in only to shut them out.

    I’m not saying you have to change anything about how you handle this–neither Summer nor Lisa need to be involved and you can absolutely set that boundary–but understanding where people may be coming from could help you navigate the situation better. It can also help to explain why despite the boundaries and decisions seeming absolutely logical, feelings may (will probably) still be hurt and relationships within the community may (probably will) experience some strain.

    1. jasmine*

      LW has mentioned in the comments that there are other volunteers involved besides the four mentioned in the letter

    2. HonorBox*

      I agree with you regarding the approach to Lisa. If you’re bringing someone in with the assumption / hope that they’ll fade away again, that’s probably not the right frame of mind. If she was interested again, I think I’d have recommended really checking with her before bringing her in to ensure she wouldn’t flake. Set expectations and assure yourself that either you’re not going to have things left undone or she’s not going to try to take over.

      But in regards to Summer, it sounds like Summer wasn’t good at what she was supposed to do. There’s good reason not to have her back. Maybe she feels like she was pushed out, but that’s hers to deal with. If she was a detriment to planning and execution of the event, there’s no reason to bring her in at the same level. It isn’t OP’s job to manage her feelings. OP’s job is to ensure the event goes well, and Summer wasn’t helpful in the first run.

    3. Ellis Bell*

      My impression was that it’s not Summer’s level of interest that’s the problem, it’s her competence.

      1. Hyaline*

        I agree that she sounds incompetent, but I also think the question would have to be handled very differently if she had never stepped back. People who start organizations of any kind including conferences usually can’t just be bumped aside because they stink at it without a lot of drama at the very least. So if she sees herself not as someone who willingly stepped aside but someone who’s being edged out, it’s a different problem (at least in her mind) than saying no thanks to your average volunteer—and depending on how the community views her, the conference, and the actions of everyone involved, it can lead to some ick. The LW can and imo should run the conference however she feels it’s best—but should be prepared for some potential fallout and blowback.

    4. Knitknitfrog*

      In that group conversation Summer summarised the first event as a one off and the rest of the community expressed a desire for a repeat event. That was where the change over happened. I do see a track record of people working with Summer once.

  29. EngineeringFun*

    LW4 I was in a similar situation last month. I am long time reader and went above my bosses head and got moved to a different team. They wanted to keep me rather than quitting. I’m actually in a much better place now!

  30. Juicebox Hero*

    Eric belongs on the list of “people who dig themselves into a hole and just keep digging” from the other day.

  31. a clockwork lemon*

    LW2 – make sure when you explain why you won’t be accepting Summer back, you focus on the performance issues with running the event, rather than whatever intracommunity discourse Summer may have caused. It’s reasonable to say this person sucks at the practical aspects of executing this job so we won’t be including her this year.

    Any discussion of potential “othering,” especially if there’s not a community consensus around Summer’s research, will open the door to philosophical/ideological debate that’s a distraction from the actual problem you’re trying to solve (Summer’s incompetence at this kind of work).

  32. RagingADHD*

    #1, I have encountered HR folks who asked this after a first or second interview as a (somewhat awkward) way of finding out what questions I might have or opening a salary discussion. Putting it as a yes/no on the application is so odd.

    Maybe they get a lot of people who have to do a certain number of job applications for unemployment? I suppose if anyone does ever say no, at least it would be an easy way to cull the list.

  33. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain*

    #1 Sounds like the flip side of the job seeker advice to specifically ask for the job at the end of the interview…as if filling out the application and coming into the interview isn’t enough.

  34. Ex-prof*

    LW 1– I bet the job pays peanuts, or possibly just the shells.

    There’s a desirable-looking job near me that has gone unfilled since last October. They want a master’s degree, doctorate preferred, and you have to do a bit of googling to find out they’re offering one dollar above minimum wage.

  35. Dawn*

    I have a suspicion that Eric’s insistence on collecting SSN is less a sign that he doesn’t know what he’s doing, and more that he wants to throw up roadblocks in the way of customers trying to collect a refund.

    1. Jam on Toast*

      I agree, @Dawn. It could also be a little of column A and a little of column B. If he isn’t competent, setting up that onerous process gives him the added benefit of reducing the very work he doesn’t know how to do!

    2. HooDoll*

      I feel the need to defend the bureaucracy a bit… (as an accountant). Once a payee is in the accounting system, that’s it… so the risk is that the first time you pay them, it’s a refund, but what if 5 months later you pay them for services? It’s much easier to get a w9 from a payee at the beginning then later on. Accounting procedures need consistent process – having exceptions to rules is where things fall apart, or fraud can happen. We always remind people that even if they give us a w9, they would only ever a 1099 if they provided services over $600.

      I think what Eric’s procedure could change to, is only requiring w9’s for services, but again, anything that requires subjectivity can be problematic.

  36. So they all cheap-ass rolled over and one fell out*

    The “other question” link in answer #4 goes to a question from someone who’d been at their job for only 5 months, not years like implied in this answer. It doesn’t otherwise seem relevant to question 4, at least not to me.

  37. anonymouse*

    re #1, I was once offered an interview for a job that I would have had to relocate for and they said “we’ll only interview you if you’re sure you’d accept the job if you got the offer.” I’m supposed to decide that before I even have an interview? Uh, hell no?

  38. Anon in Canada*

    #1 – does anyone know whether an employer could sue someone for turning down the offer, because the application is considered a legal document and the applicant would be in breach of something they stated in a legal document?

    It seems wildly unlikely that any employer would waste time doing that, but I’m just wondering from a theoretical perspective.

    Most likely all the company would do would be to permanently blacklist the person from the company.

    1. Observer*

      does anyone know whether an employer could sue someone for turning down the offer, because the application is considered a legal document and the applicant would be in breach of something they stated in a legal document?

      I’m not a lawyer, but I suspect that if a company brought this to an actual lawyer, the lawyer would have a hard time not falling out of their chair laughing.

      An application is not some sort of contract or legally binding document.

  39. Jenster*

    I’ve (quite literally) worked with a Lisa, and, as a warning, be aware that there could be pushback from telling someone like Lisa no.

    Since you’re in higher ed, there probably isn’t much you can do to protect yourself. In my case, Lisa went on tear the project apart, it was death by a thousand unfounded cuts; made my life a nightmare for a couple of years until I left. And, since it is impossible to tell a lot of people in higher ed that their behavior is wrong and could be detrimental to their career, there are no repercussions for Lisa.

  40. RCB*

    LW3, you were 100% in the right, not only in your knowledge, but in how you handled it. I am a nonprofit accountant and it’s shocking how little some accountants (bookkeepers, mostly) know about how to process stuff, they have a procedure they follow but they don’t know WHY something is done, just how. So when something abnormal comes up they don’t know how to handle it because it’s not one of their procedures so they try to fit it into one of the procedures they do know, and it usually screws things up, just like this case. I have gone many rounds with the accounting teams at other organizations (everyone would die of shock and demand that the United Nations be disbanded immediately if you saw how ridiculous their fiscal procedures are) to correct them when they ask for stuff that they absolutely do not need, it’s very frustrating.

    Back before I was in accounting I did nonprofit fundraising, and after our big fundraising event for the year, right after I joined the organization, our CPA and I had a disagreement on what is tax-deductible on silent auction items. The CPA insisted that nothing is tax deductible because the fair market value of a silent auction item is what you pay for it, but common sense says that at a charity auction something has a fair market value and people often pay way more than that for something because it’s for charity, and that difference is tax deductible, but the CPA was adamant I was wrong. This is basic common sense, but here we were. My husband was a CPA at a big 4 firm, so he set a meeting for us with one of the partners who advises nonprofits and he did the polite, professional equivalent of laugh in our CPA’s face when told about the suggestion that nothing is tax-deductible, and it tested every bit of my resolve to sit there and not scream “TOLD YOU SO, TURN IN YOUR CPA LICENSE RIGHT NOW!” but I sat there quietly and enjoyed the schadenfreude as our CPA was educated, in front of our boss, on the proper way to do their job.

    1. HooDoll*

      Fellow nonprofit accountant here and I agree with you, but it’s also true that subjectivity and making exceptions are typically big no-no’s, because they can lead to mistakes or fraud. I totally get why lower level accounting folks freak out when asked. I also wonder if Eric is pushing back because he’s commonly asked for exceptions? It might be a response to something bigger than this one incident… as a cfo I can make exceptions (and will, with documentation) but I ask my reports to not go rogue.

  41. blood orange*

    OP #3 – I used to work with someone who sounds like Eric. She was the head of our finance and HR functions, and had a way of making declarative statements that made most people feel like they had no option to question or push back. Looking back, this started to develop some standards and guidelines in my head which – had I been earlier in my career working with her – could have been more detrimental. She was a CPA so I’m sure she was competent in the finance role, but the tacked on HR role was more concerning. I realized that more after she left and I took over just the HR piece.

    People like that really need others to push back on them, and sometimes go around them to find the right answers!

  42. Grumpy Elder Millennial*

    LW4, it sounds like you have 3 general options:

    1. Status quo, where you are clearly miserable. Do not recommend! Absent some big, unexpected change, this is not going to get better on its own. The only way to survive this type of environment is to shut down and decide you just don’t care anymore. And it sounds like you won’t be happy in that type of situation.

    2. Moving to another job, either internally or externally. Solid plan, totally reasonable.

    3. Giving it a real go to try to change the whole culture and dynamics of the team. Starting with going back to the person who recruited you and having a serious conversation about what you see. Trying to turn the whole thing around will be a TON of work, which may or may not be successful, and there’s nothing wrong with deciding you don’t want to do it.

    Whether or not you have a chance of being successful is going to depend on whether you have the power / authority to make changes and hold people accountable and whether more senior leadership is going to back you up. Because you not only have a staff problem and a boss problem, you have a grand-boss problem. Your grand-boss is either unaware that your boss kinda sucks or is choosing not to do anything about it. Both of those are bad! And I’m assuming you don’t have much authority to impose consequences, since the other staff are persisting in being difficult and uncooperative. Or at least no consequences that won’t be undermined by the manager. That’s an impossible situation.

    So, ask yourself, is the type of work you’d get to do on this team if it was functional something you’re really excited about? If no, definitely move on. If yes, consider how much work will need to go into making this better and the roadblocks in your way, including whether some of these are insurmountable. And remember, you can always start down the path of trying to fix things and bail out later if it becomes clear the type of change you need to see just isn’t going to happen.

    1. Uxbridge*

      Thanks for the advice. The grand boss is the person who recruited and promoted me, and I have told her I am struggling and the dynamic is really bad. I have spoken to her twice and have another one on one this coming Monday. I have also sought coaching from HR on how to deal with this. I can impose consequences on my staff and broader consultant / SME team (I have two direct reports but I lead a broader group of almost 15 who provide inputs for the project) but I feel hesitant (week 8) because the boss is tormenting them and undermining me and it feels unfair right now. I am encouraging them to take a different attitude, validating their frustration and upset, but also reminding them that eventually refusal to do work will come back on them one way or another. I am also seeking a lot of support from a former boss and mentor in a previous vertical I was in. This is not my dream job, however, it was a massive promotion and big opportunity and I am excited to learn some new stuff. It has been a really long time since I was in a role where I know I will be pushed and have to navigate new challenges and I felt excited for that. I think I am just frustrated that its all around dealing with a horrible boss right now and not the actual work.

  43. Kristin*

    “If I apply for this job, will you hire me?”
    And that wit, friends, made me laugh with delight on a stressful Friday! Thank you, Allison.

  44. Esprit de l'escalier*

    I’m in the middle of sending paperwork to several financial institutions to transfer ownership from me and a now-deceased account co-owner to me and a new co-owner. They each have a different set of requirements ranging from minimal paperwork to A Lot for the same change-of-ownership transaction. One requires a W9, the others do not. It’s pretty clear to me that processes are often not based in external legal or fiduciary requirements but were dreamed up by someone, probably years ago, and were then fixed in amber.

    This causes so much unnecessary effort and aggravation, but it would be very difficult to try to change it from the outside. LW3 is in the fortunate position of being on the inside where they have a real opportunity to get their company to fix this dumb process. Thank you, LW3, for taking this on!

  45. Donn*

    Late to the party for OP3. I work in legal, and law firms understand that payments to some individuals aren’t for goods or services.

    For instance, legally required payments to deposition witnesses. And the time we reimbursed a visitor who’d parked in the wrong building, so we couldn’t validate.

    OTOH, one of my past employers could be super-insistent on certain things. Sometimes reimbursements were delayed because it took a while to get proof of who actually made a payment, and/or that the money had actually left their wallet. And Accounting absolutely wouldn’t reimburse until one or the other was provided.

  46. Just Me*

    I feel like a W9 for refunds would have a disproportionate affect on certain groups of people. For example, people with mobility challenges may be more likely to purchase items online, and due to the issue of not being able to see an online item prior to purchase, these items are less likely to be exactly what the person is looking for, so the pickier people will have a lot of returns, whereas those same people if able to shop in store would require far fewer refunds…not all of the law makes sense, but this is a part of the law that seems pretty important to get right…(and lol, can you imagine the legal chaos of a refund processed because a person was inadvertently charged for an item they didn’t order? or the security deposit on a hotel room?…oh my would a tax on refunds complicate life)

Comments are closed.