helping an awkward new employee, boss asked me to talk to a coworker about her cleavage, and more

by Alison Green on November 5, 2024

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

1. How can I help an awkward new employee connect better with coworkers?

I am a senior team member. Reporting to me are Bill (mid-level — seven years of experience), and three people at the junior level (one to three years of experience). Bill is the newest hire on my team, hired because we really needed someone to take some stuff off my plate and also hopefully act as a resource and mentor to the more junior staff.

Bill’s work is good and I am happy with the hire, but without fail, he says the perfectly wrong thing. It is harmless, socially awkward stuff: trying to join a joke but the delivery is loud and the reference is obscure, or unknowingly suggesting something that is a pain point. Think of Michael Scott’s cringiest social moments and you will have an idea.

This is compounded by the fact that two of my junior level staff applied for this role when I announced we were hiring. I discussed with each of them that the move just was not right, they were too junior for the responsibilities, and they understood, I think … but it for sure makes interacting with Bill extra grating. Bill has noted to me that it is hard to join a new team where there are established relationships so I know he is picking up on it. The two staff members will text and grab coffee together sometimes, though they are certainly cordial to everyone. I have organized a weekly lunch, but it winds up just adding to the awkwardness because Bill kills the conversation with a disconnected statement about a topic we all finished talking about 10 minutes ago.

I think Bill’s attempts to make social strides, especially with everyone but especially with these two is just adding to the pressure and awkwardness of it all. It is painful to watch! Any suggestions of how to coach someone on connecting with coworkers, but to just the right degree? Should I be taking any other action to make everyone like each other more?

It’s not really your role to coach Bill socially. And he may just be an awkward guy, which is okay — people are allowed to be awkward! There are probably some places where you can coach around the edges (“when you made that reference to X, people were confused because X is pretty obscure and most people don’t know what it is”), but I wouldn’t count on it making a significant difference. I’d also lay off the weekly team lunches, or at least do them much less frequently — they don’t sound like they’re working and might be making things worse, and either way that’s a lot of organized togetherness.

What I do think is your role, though, is looking for ways to set up Bill where he can do better. What’s he good at? Can you look for opportunities where it would be logical to pair him with one of your junior people to collaborate, in an area where he has expertise and is comfortable? Can you keep an eye out for times where a junior employee is struggling with something and you can genuinely suggest Bill as a resource? And then set Bill up for success there as much as you can — for example, letting him know that he’s great at X specific nuance of Y and asking him to collaborate with Jane on that specific element of it. You’ll need to keep an eye on how those interactions go — you don’t want to increase everyone’s aggravation if he doesn’t handle those well — but the hope would be that if people have more positive interactions with him, it might change their comfort with him and he might start feeling less awkward too.

The goal should be less about revamping Bill’s personality — some awkwardness and quirkiness is totally okay in most roles — and more about getting everyone more familiar with each other through the work itself and helping the rest of your team see Bill’s value.

2. My boss asked me to talk to a coworker about her cleavage

I am the office coordinator for the school where I work, and my boss asked me to talk to a coworker/friend of mine about showing cleavage at work. My boss has been approached my parents as well as other staff members about this coworker’s clothing. I don’t know how to approach this. She’s an educational assistant and most of the EA’s here are fairly dressed down, as it can be a pretty physical job. She does have a large chest and I know that that can be an issue when buying clothing, as I have the same issue.

I just feel uncomfortable speaking to her. I think the reason my boss asked me to speak to her is because I am friends with her and so that it’s not an “official” reprimand and could be dealt with discreetly.

Her direct supervisor is a man, but the principal (the one who asked me) is a woman. I do have some authority within the school but it’s mostly organizational; I have some administrative responsibilities and have been asked to sit in on these types of meetings in the past with other employees, but I am in no way a supervisor of anyone and I am not in HR.

You should decline to do this. It’s not your job to give dress code feedback, and it sounds like you’re being asked to do it so someone else can avoid an awkward conversation, which is not a good enough reason. And if it’s really true that they want to avoid it being an official reprimand, they can easily accomplish that by … not making it an official reprimand. Managers can give feedback without it being memorialized as formal discipline; it can simply be a conversation/reminder about the dress code.

If your coworker isn’t in compliance with the dress code, that needs to be handled the same way your employer would handle any other dress code problem — which presumably means a reminder by someone with the authority to issue that kind of reminder, not asking a friend to pass along a message.

I’d go back to your boss and say this: “I thought more about your request that I talk to Jane about her clothing, and I don’t feel comfortable doing that. It should come from someone with the authority to discuss the dress code and answer questions if she has any. I think she’d feel very awkward hearing that from a peer, and I’m not comfortable delivering that feedback to a peer.”

Related:
my employee’s clothes accentuate her chest — how do I talk to her about it?

3. Left out of a group chat

I work in an office of eight (one manager, me, and my six coworkers), which is then part of a larger division. For the past week or so, my coworkers have all been discussing different New York Times games. I normally play Wordle myself, so I jump into these conversations too. It’s been a fun thing to chat about in the mornings.

However, my coworkers will also discuss these games in a Teams chat that I’m not a part of. I was out sick one day earlier this month, and I’m thinking that might have been the day they started it. I guess I’m just confused by the fact that I’m part of these regular conversations, and for some reason all six of my coworkers (even the guy who started three weeks ago!) have not thought to add me? My coworkers are all very nice people who treat me well, respect my time, etc. — my point being that I have no reason to think they’re purposely excluding me as some sort of schoolyard bullying tactic.

Do I bring this up to them? Do I bring it up to my manager? Thinking about it, I don’t think I care, but it does seem a little hurtful. I mean, what would my manager even do? Wag his finger and tell them to add me?

It sounds like there’s every reason to believe it was unintentional — it’s likely they did start it on the day you were out and then haven’t thought very deeply about it since. You can just say, “Hey, can I get in on the games chat on Teams?” and that shouldn’t be weird (particularly if they’ve talked about it in front of you) and should take care of it. The only way this would be weird is if your coworkers were a bunch of exclusionary asses and it doesn’t sound like that’s the case.

Note: the New York Times tech union is currently on strike and asking people to honor their picket line by not playing Wordle and other NYT games during the strike.

4. My organization doesn’t post job openings until the old person has already left

My organization seems to have a policy of not posting a staff member’s position until that person has left. Is there any way that this makes sense? I don’t know why they want four weeks notice if they don’t use that time to find the replacement. Hiring is slow anyway, so this routinely means that positions are open for months, which I cynically think maybe they like because they are saving money while everyone scrambles to cover the workload. Anything I’m missing here?

I’m curious whether this is actually their policy, or whether it’s just what happens in practice because they’re slow and/or disorganized. If it’s their policy, it’s a bizarre one! Generally a notice period (even a four-week one) isn’t long enough to hire a replacement and have them start while the departing person is still there to train them, but there’s no reason to squander that time; generally you want to move forward on filling soon-to-be vacancies with some sense of urgency. (There are some exceptions to this, of course, like if questions need to be worked out about the position before you post it, but typically you’d want to begin recruiting pretty quickly.)

By the way, four weeks notice is two weeks longer than the standard in most industries, and you might consider whether you really need to stick to that:

can I give 2 weeks notice when my employer says they “expect” 4 weeks?

5. I’m ready to retire young but don’t want to burn bridges

I’m a mid-career manager of a small team of experienced individual contributors involved with fairly high-profile projects for my organization. The organization consistently struggles to prioritize work and provide the appropriate resources; we often are trying to do too much, all at once, with too little. Despite this, my team is well-respected and gets things done. However, I’m tired and have been vacillating in and out of burnout for years. Vacations offer only a short-term fix. I suspect that I have undiagnosed neurodivergence that makes my set working conditions especially challenging.

My company does not offer sabbaticals. I have been focused on FIRE (Financial Independence, Retire Early) for years and I’m finally at a point where I feel like I’ve accumulated enough that I can take an indefinite break and am planning on resigning within the next six months. I’ve worked for this organization for a long time and, as I’m still relatively young, I’m sure my resignation will come as something of a surprise. I don’t want to leave my small team and my manager in a bind, but for the sake of my own best interests, I’m not comfortable giving more than a couple of weeks notice.

I have not yet determined if my mini-retirement will turn into full-blown retirement and mark the end of my corporate career. How do I frame my resignation and deal with questions from colleagues during my notice period when I’m not leaving for another job? I want to leave on good terms, but I’m not open to being convinced to stay with the organization while they figure things out. I want a clean break on my terms.

You’re overthinking it! You’re allowed to resign any time you want. It’s true that people might be surprised to hear that you’re not going to another job but you can say, “I’m taking some time off before deciding what I want to do next.” That’s true! “What I want to do next” doesn’t need to mean a job, necessarily. Or if you’re up for sharing more, you could say, “I’ve worked for a while to be able to take a long break from work, and now I’m able to do that.”

If you’re pushed to stay longer since you don’t have the deadline of a start date somewhere else, just hold firm: “I do need to stick with X as my last day because I have some immovable plans for right after that.”

This isn’t bridge-burning! You’re not an indentured servant; you get to decide when you’re ready to leave a job. And leaving a job for any reason nearly always creates some inconvenience for the team you’re leaving; that’s just part of the deal with resigning, not a reason not to do it.

You may also like:
{ 293 comments }

{ 293 comments… read them below }

  1. Pink Sprite*

    OP #1: Oh goodness, please stop the weekly luncheons. I guarantee that pretty much no one enjoys them – unless you’re paying a a favorite restaurant. And even then… IDK.
    In any case, it’s definitely uncomfortable for ALL of your employees. I can’t imagine Bill doesn’t realize that he’s is awkward as far as being a conversationalist – whether about work or general life stuff.
    But please stop the weekly luncheons.

    1. amoeba*

      I mean… where I have worked before, those have been really normal (in other places, everybody actually went for lunch together almost every day, so once a week seemed low!) They were, however, optional, so most people joined but it was also fine if you didn’t feel like it – mandatory would indeed annoy me (even though I basically always jpined).

      1. Falling Diphthong*

        Yes, when I worked in house, people opted in to have lunch together while playing euchre, or kibbitzing the euchre. It is definitely not the case that everyone loathes having an occasional lunch with their colleagues and feels dreadful and awkward about it.

        I do feel for Bill and OP, as this seems a good example of actual social awkwardness.* Where human interaction is awash with subtle things that some people pick up reflexively (like that the group has moved on from that topic), some after conscious practice, and some continue to struggle as the layers of nuance keep piling on.

        My brother-in-law observes that if you have the choice between standing in the line for being able to get on in any group of people, and the line for raw intelligence, the first is going to bring you more professional success. (He is both very smart and very socially adept.)

        * As opposed to “I followed you home and then hid in your sock drawer, because I have social awkwardness and so can trample boundaries with impunity.”

      2. Emmy Noether*

        This has also been my experience with office work. Not as an Obligatory Official Luncheon, more just that everyone went to the cafeteria or the breakroom at the same time anyway, so may as well go as a group. (Would it really be less awkward to keep bumping into each other in line for the weekly special or the microwave and then try to find seats sufficiently far away to not have to make conversation?) And occasionally someone would say “who wants to go to the Thai place?” and whoever wanted to would join.

      3. Myrin*

        Yeah, I wouldn’t like mandatory lunches like that simply because I don’t like mandatory-without-a-good-reason stuff in general, but at my workplace, I’m definitely the odd-one-out as the one person who brings lunch from home 98% of the time. Everyone else goes somewhere in “loose” groups (in the sense that it’s mostly people in adjacent offices going together but others are free to join and officemates are free to do their own thing respectively) of, indeed, around five people, the size of OP’s team, so this really doesn’t strike me as something that’s guaranteed to be disliked by everyone just on principle.

    2. ToEachHerOwn*

      I’ve worked at plenty of places that provided a paid group lunch once a week. And many others where most (voluntarily) had lunch together every or nearly every day. I am pretty socially awkward myself and I still consider group lunches a pretty nice perk. So not everyone hates them.

        1. Matt*

          Yes. In my hybrid job (3 days home, 2 days office) everybody who’s in the office go to lunch together without any formal group lunch. I’m the only one who prefers a quiet hour alone at my desk (that’s the most quiet place at noon) with my lunch from the nearby supermarket. So I guess I’m the awkward one here (and yes, I can be sort of a “Bill” too).

      2. Your Former Password Resetter*

        I’ve seen it a lot too, often in smaller and more tightly-knit offices.
        Don’t make them mandatory, but they’re generally well-attended.

    3. Ana Gram*

      I think that’s a pretty strong point of view. I worked in an office that ate lunch together basically daily and it was nice. Totally voluntary, just gathered in the conference room at 11:30 if you wanted to join. Fine to skip or eat elsewhere or whatever. We played Bob Ross and sometimes had a backgammon game going and it was lovely. But we all enjoyed each other and liked to connect in a low key way.

      1. JustaTech*

        Honestly I miss the communal lunches. Between a much reduced team size, moving the lunch room and COVID-time habits, hardly anyone ever eats lunch together anymore.

    4. Wilbur*

      I wonder if Bill has trouble getting a word in, sometimes with certain personalities and established teams there can be a tendency to dominate the conversation. If that’s the case OP1 could make some space for Bill in the conversation.

      In terms of the jokes, I’d give the same advice I tell people who are giving any speech (usually for a wedding). It’s usually better to be sincere than try to be funny.

      1. bamcheeks*

        Golly, I did the speech at my brother’s wedding and I feel that’s very personality dependent. I wrote three funny stories in about fifteen minutes. The sincere bit probably took two hours.

    6. Tippy*

      Umm, I like the weekly luncheons both my current work and my previous work has. Both were informal and optional but also pretty well attended.

    7. HannahS*

      Yeah, I’d chime in and say that my department has a free communal lunch and it’s really nice! It’s opt-in, and while not everyone goes every week it’s a really nice chance to socialize with people you might not see that often. Obviously having it be mandatory in a department of four (and not sponsored by the employer) is a different story, but weekly opt-in lunch isn’t the end of the world.

    8. Nicole Maria*

      Personally I would very happy if I were getting a free weekly lunch and time to connect with my co-workers, it doesn’t sound like that’s the issue

  2. Msd*

    I think it’s odd that the OP even considered escalating to their manager that they were not included in a group chat. Seems a bit if not red flag then maybe pinkish.

    1. allathian*

      Yeah, it does sound a bit odd, to be honest. Ask to join the group chat, with a tone that suggests that you think being left out was an oversight rather than exclusion on purpose and that should be that.

      1. UKDancer*

        Yes we’ve had group chat at work and if someone wasn’t there when we set them up they may be omitted because theyre not in the moment. Just asking to join has always been fine in my company.

      1. Sloanicota*

        I guess it’s more just that they haven’t tried the most obvious solution, which is nicely asking to join the chat. I think there’s been letters here about colleagues who go to happy hour and don’t ask OP to join, and we’re all like … have you asked to join? It’s that to me.

    3. Myrin*

      I don’t think it’s any-colour flaggy so much as it’s just a strange direction for your thoughts to go.

      Basically the whole letter is about context and reasons it’s unlikely the coworkers did this intentionally and OP even acknowledges herself that she doesn’t know what her manager would even do, so why does this feel like a viable alternative in the first place?

      I mean, I can guess why – it’s always more comfortable to have others do things for you instead of doing them yourself, especially if those things have the potential to be awkward, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes, we simply have to do those things.

    4. Emmy Noether*

      I think if it was purposely exclusionary, and part of a pattern of bullying, that would be something to take to management. Which doesn’t seem to be the case here, but may be where the impulse came from.

    5. Your Former Password Resetter*

      It might just be a default response when they don’t know how else to handle it?
      Definitely not the right approach though.

    6. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      I’m wondering if maybe other things happened that may have caused them to feel excluded.

    7. Margaret Cavendish*

      A red flag for what, though? OP didn’t do anything wrong. They weren’t sure how to handle the situation, and wrote in to AAM for advice.

      Lots of things that seem obvious to some people are not obvious to others – or maybe the answer is obvious, but someone may need a courage boost because they’re not used to advocating for themselves like this. Isn’t that what the site is for?

      1. Tiger Snake*

        But when you’re going to the boss for something that’s between coworkers, its inherently asking for intervention. You’re telling your boss that there’s a behaviour problem.

        And what OP would be saying in this case “They didn’t include me in a group chat. I didn’t ask, but they didn’t include me. I haven’t spoken to them or tried to resolve the issue, but they didn’t include me.”

        That’s petty, and it shows that you’re unwilling to even try to resolve your own problems. At worst interpretation or as part of a pattern, it makes OP so easily offended that she’s actually actively insulting the character of her coworkers.

    8. Grimey*

      Our division’s (ten people) main Teams chat started as three people- one person asking another person and me for advice on a project she knew we had some experience with. We gradually brought other people in as other topics came up and, after a few weeks, we realized everybody in the division had been added except one person. So it was mostly an oversight. We added her and gave the chat a formal name (well, it’s “The Group”), and we’ve all lived happily ever after. It’s probably 50% work related and 50% other stuff- mostly kids and pets.

    9. Spencer Hastings*

      The way I read the last paragraph, it sounds like the LW is just spitballing — they seem to recognize that asking the manager won’t realistically solve anything.

    10. Roeslein*

      I don’t know, I was bullied in school and this sort of thing really triggers me – anything to do with feeling excluded from the group really. I recognise it’s my own issue to work on, but I don’t think it’s unusual.

    11. Waiting on the bus*

      I don’t think this was in any way a serious thought for OP. They acknowledged themselves that there’s nothing for the manager to do.

      Calling it spitballing as someone suggested in this thread seems far more fitting to me.

  3. SociallyInept*

    OP1, as a socially awkward individual who has been known to make more than my fair share of gaffes, your letter made me cringe. I have 30+ years of experience and I still have moments like you describe – not as frequently as it sounds like Bill does, but often enough. I’ve worked with folks who are closer to Bill, though, and you’re not going to coach it out of him (or the milder form out of me). It can be awkward and sometimes annoying when you’re the one dealing with a Bill (even when you are a Bill), but it’s not something that we’re doing deliberately to annoy people and while it’s likely the edges will soften over time, some people are just not good at picking up on social cues. This is especially true if there’s neurodiversity involved (I don’t know if it is in Bill’s case but it can be a factor).

    If he’s good at his job, be happy he’s good at his job. If social lubrication winds up being an important aspect of this job, it may be that Bill isn’t a good fit. But give him a try 1-1. The most severe Bill I ever worked with was great at explaining the minute details of how complicated stuff worked – for me, that was worth putting up with someone who was somehow even more socially inept than I am.

    1. Slow Gin Lizz*

      It can be awkward and sometimes annoying when you’re the one dealing with a Bill (even when you are a Bill)

      As a socially awkward person myself, I will say that it can be awkward and annoying dealing with a Bill when *you* are the Bill in question. I get so tired of not being able to deal with a lot of social situations. I really wish I could be the opposite of a Bill. So imagine how Bill feels; unless he is completely oblivious, he probably knows that he’s not reading the room right and I bet he too gets tired of not being able to deal with social situations.

      So, yeah, OP, stop trying to manufacture situations to try to put him at ease socially and instead focus on your work and his work. Hopefully your junior employees will come around when they see how competent he is at his work and forgive him for being awkward in social situations.

      1. Paint N Drip*

        Right?? Being Bill actually sucks. It’s no mystery, even to myself, that things are falling flat – if I had the grasp to do better, I certainly would.
        Create opportunities for Bill to shine in all the ways he is excellent, and quit making him perform in the ways that A) are not mandatory work tasks B) have historically NOT created the outcome desired

      2. Dayna Thomas*

        Strong suspicion that this person is neurodivergent, as those things that “bug” other people can be directly attributed to “it takes them longer to process what they hear and form a response”, “saving it up until there’s a break in the conversation because interrupting is bad”, “obscure references, I can quote from books, movies, tv shows, etc. that may be 20+ years old but I see the connection even if no one else does”.

        Stop pushing the social things that aren’t part of the actual job, and let him shine where he can. Take the strain off Everyone, and ask for a bit of grace where necessary. We can’t help being who we are, it’s exhausting trying so hard to fit in and never succeeding, please don’t make it harder.

    2. Your Former Password Resetter*

      I would say that you want to be sure this isn’t impacting his ability to coach the junior employees. He doesn’t need to be a social butterfly, but he does need to be able to coach people without being off-putting or communicating badly.

      1. Margaret Cavendish*

        Yeah, it sounds like that’s an explicit part of the job he was hired for. So a certain amount of social awkwardness might be fine, but if it’s getting in the way of his ability to mentor the junior staff, then there’s a mismatch here.

        Maybe OP can coach him through it, with explicit instructions on how to be a mentor. Maybe they can decide that mentoring isn’t a key part of the role, if they value his other skills enough to keep him on. Or maybe it is a key part of the role, and he can’t be coached through it, in which case they’ll need to have a different conversation about what to do next. But one way or another, it’s not something they can just ignore and hope things will get better on their own.

      2. MigraineMonth*

        Good point. It sounds like the job requires relationship building and clear communication, so focus on those parts, OP. Bill doesn’t need to be friends with his colleagues or for them to understand his jokes, but they all need to demonstrate respect for each other.

    3. Corrvin (they/them)*

      If you want someone to fit in you put them in lots of social situations and hope they either do well or learn to do better than they did. If you want them to be appreciated, you put them in situations where they can shine, which means talking about things they’re good at, or insightful about. Those are two different things and they can both make someone happier.

      You can put very-severe-Bill and all his similar colleagues (like me) in as many work lunches as you want where people talk about TV shows but it’s not gonna make him good at watching TV in the quantity that would put him on an even cultural footing– or you can give him 10 minutes at a staff meeting to explain something. And then people learn that thing plus that he’s really competent, and he gets to know that he’s appreciated and people can interact with him a bit more on his terms.

    4. learnedthehardway*

      I would say that the manager should do things like make Bill aware of the culture at the company, particularly things like pain points. Now, that might not be possible ahead of time, but the manager should at least run some interference for or inform him if he innocently hits on a paint point, at least ones that are business-related. Eg. if he suggests a particular process improvement that was tried and turned out to be a disaster, then someone should tell him so. Or if he asks a question about why something is the way it is, and the reason is that the CEO has a bee in their bonnet about that, make the guy aware. Like any other new person, he doesn’t know the institutional knowledge.

      As for social stuff / pop culture – well, he has different interests than the team, and that’s okay.

      I would make sure that the team behaves professionally, doesn’t exclude Bill, and treats him collegially. Nip any complaints about Bill in the bud, if they aren’t directly related to his performance.

    1. Hroethvitnir*

      Thank you for that! I looked into it, and the union *is* asking people to boycott the cooking app and games. That is not always the case, but I’m happy to do it!

      1. RabbitRabbit*

        I saw a graph that showed the vast majority of their traffic is due to those two items so it makes sense. The union is specifically not striking against the news end so (if you’re still a fan of that) they are not calling for a boycott of the journalism.

        1. Wayward Sun*

          You’d think they’d want MORE traffic during the strike, so the website collapses and shows how needed they are.

          1. fhqwhgads*

            A sudden plummet in usage can be clearly correlated to people not wanting to electronically cross the picket line.
            The uptick needed to crash the site is unrealistic, unless you do it in a very black hat way.

        2. Best Coke Ever*

          The article linked in the question says the workers are responsible for the entire website, not just the games. Shouldn’t the boycott be for all of it?

        1. Nonsense*

          Well, is maintaining your streak more important to you than the tech union getting liveable wages?

        2. LynnP*

          I’m a union member and I don’t cross a strike line so it’s an easy choice to abandon my wordle streak.

          1. Lorikeet*

            Same, I won’t cross a picket line, not even a digital one. Power to teh union, I hope they win!

        3. Soft Green Elliptical Grass*

          I’ll be giving up an over 6 month crossword streak if this isn’t resolved by tomorrow evening. (Crosswords post the night before and then you have until some time the night after to finish in time to maintain your streak.) I had already done Monday’s puzzle on Sunday night, before I knew about any of this. And I did Wordle in bed yesterday morning before I knew about the strike (or anything else – shining a bright light in my eyes and thinking about words is a good way to wake up my brain.)

          My crossword streak is longer (if I don’t do Wordle first thing I am likely to forget to do it at all) and a lot harder earned. Happy to start from scratch because I don’t cross picket lines (at least once I know they exist – oops about yesterday’s Wordle) and as if that weren’t a good enough reason I am obviously a person who values their work way too much to not support them.

        5. rebelwithmouseyhair*

          It doesn’t count during the strike. You can continue the streak afterwards. Solidarity over streaks.

        6. TeaCoziesRUs*

          Thank God one of those nasty could-be-more-than-5-word letter combos got me a couple weeks ago. (Think _UNCH with no hints for the first letter and 3 guesses remaining.) My streak is only 17 days…. and my daughter will get to learn about supporting unions today, too. :) She plays in the morning, I play to unwind.

    2. Artemesia*

      I think they were offered an incredibly generous 2.5% raise so I don’t know what their problem is.

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

          Artemesia is apparently going to have to lay it on a lot thicker if they want to be bestowed with a raise that keeps up with inflation next time.

          1. Kyrielle*

            …a ‘raise’ that either does not keep up with inflation, or only just does, so that you have less or the same buying power as before and not more, is ‘generous’ how?

      1. Arts Akimbo*

        I wish this comment were higher up. I hope Alison will add a postscript about the strike.

        I played word games on a different site this morning, and it made me so very much more appreciative of the IT that goes into the NYT Games. They deserve fair labor practices.

      2. MelonMerengue*

        There is an app called Everyday Puzzles that has a similar game and many others that I recommend!

    6. JustaTech*

      Yes! I posted about it in my group Wordle Teams channel and I’m very pleased that at our not-even-slightly union workplace no one posted their Wordle (so I’m going to assume that they weren’t playing).

      Would I really, really like to get to use my brain for that today? Yes, but there are other games to play and supporting journalists matters more to me.

    7. Festively Dressed Earl*

      I had no idea; glad I saw this before I did my daily Connections. Any suggestions on other games to try until the strike resolves?

      P.S. Here’s my nominee for anyone else looking: https://redactle.net . You’re given a blank Wikipedia article about a topic, and you guess words until you can guess the topic.

    8. Scoody Boo*

      If you’re looking for alternatives for your wordle fix check out quordle, octordle, sedecordle, and worldle!

  5. Agnes A*

    #2 LW is right because you never know how someone would react. I had a friend who was dressing inappropriately to her classes, and I thought of saying something. But then a professor spoke to her about it in a really nice way and she didn’t take it well (got very frustrated and defensive about it).

    2. Person from the Resume*

      Yesterday we probably had a manager (Jane) not wanting to manage (John).

      This (dress code) is a more minor issue, but this manager is completely abdicating any attempt at management and passing the buck.

      What the LW should not do the managers jo, but she should be there to talk to her friend if she asks/complains to the LW about it. LW’s choice. These are annoying, but the LW did say that parents and other staff members mentioned the coworker’s clothing to the manager so it’s likely that there is an issue. Not 100%; LW needs to decide because some people/parents make ridiculous complaints, but the numbers support otherwise.

    3. 2024*

      When I worked for a S Baptist church years back, another admin assistant wore short skirts and very low cut tops. The male administrator of the church had his wife and a female pastor talk with her. She… did not take it well.

    4. Dr. Prepper*

      But what would you do if you felt the employee literally did not know how to dress appropriately for work?

      I was the senior manager on the floor and a male. They hired a new junior admin, female, at least approaching 40. This woman in the past could have been described as a “blond bombshell.” She would dress in business clothes, but would arrive to work in a top with literally no bra, and deep cleavage with her nipples frequently visible to anyone standing to either side of her. This went on for a few weeks, and the men on the floor were all coming to me asking me to say something to her, because the HR culture at the time was extremently punitive and they were afraid of being reported if they tried to avoid interacting with her. In the early 2000’s a man could get a formal HR admonishment in their file for admitting that they even noticed that a woman had nipples because that would be catagorized as “leering.”

      My personal experience with this admin was she was once adding paper to a printer/copier. She was wearing some sheer white slacks, and had black thong underwear on. When bending over you could literally see her genitals.

      She was not my direct report, and I said nothing, but asked (begged) a female director on another wing to ask the employee to coffee and explain what a bra or camisole was, the proper pairing of colored underwear to slacks and where inexpensive business clothing could be found if cost was a concern.

      I don’t know how the conversation was received, but the admin started showing up to work in nice work clothes with a bra or other undergarment, and we never saw her underwear again.

      1. Hlao-roo*

        I think what Agnes A is saying is that non-managers should not take on the responsibility of those conversations because of the potential for a bad reaction. Part of a manager’s job is delivering feedback that employees may respond poorly to.

      2. metadata minion*

        It’s a horribly awkward conversation, and is one of the many reasons I’m glad I’m not a manager, but it’s not that logistically difficult to explain what business attire involves.

        1. Dr. Prepper*

          I mean had the HR risks to the men on the floor not been that serious, it literally seemed like a bad parody of that Seinfeld episode. How ANY woman in today’s business climate could have been THAT clueless about proper business clothing remains a mystery to me. I mean, a 36DD or larger, and NO BRA??! But for some reason to her, this seemed normal and appropriate.

          1. she breasted boobily across the office*

            Are you as deeply scandalized by male nipples visible through their shirts as you apparently are by women going about their business with “NO BRA??!”?

            Also, the way you talk about poor innocent men living in fear of overzealous HR is deeply silly and reeks of MRA rhetoric.

            1. Dr. Prepper*

              We all could give a rat’s ass whether women wore bra’s or not.

              What would occur is WHEN they wore no bra’s, they would complain to HR that male co-workers were “leering” at them. Female co-workers also would notice, sometimes even comment about the bra-less colleagues, but they NEVER got reported or written up. ONLY the male co-workers. And there was absolutely no quarter, no defense; the only criterion necessary the bra-less women had to do was point a finger and complain, and the male was formally written up.

              It finally took a labor lawsuit that the company lost at significant expense for the company to instill a policy that see-through clothing and obviously visible nipples or genitalia was prohibited in the workplace. I guess it applied to men as well – no man ever wore see-though clothing in my career experience.

            2. Emily of New Moon*

              Yeah, I don’t want to see the outline of anyone’s nipples at work, regardless of their gender. I also don’t want to see the outline of anyone’s genitals at work.

    5. Viridian*

      IMO a professor talking to college students about showing too much cleavage would be wildly out of line. They aren’t a manager, and as long as it’s not a hygiene or safety concern, it’s none of their damn business.

      1. tina turner*

        If it’s a Business class it’s esp. OK but even if not, I’d speak to her or him if it was glaringly inappropriate. Just as I’d say don’t whisper loudly during class, don’t be disturbing, show up late every day, etc.

    6. tina turner*

      We don’t always look in a mirror at how our clothes fit, either. At the store or after we buy them. We don’t/ can’t see us MOVING in them. I’ve seen too many v-necks that slide & reveal more than is good at work. Often I think she really SHOULD know if she thinks about it at all; it’s someone showing off her assets. But many women don’t see how much they show as they move around during the day. How do you look from behind, too? Walking? Fit is another issue but you can see that easier.

    7. Tiger Snake*

      I note LW#2 doesn’t ever actually state whether she agrees with the feedback they want her to give her coworker in the first place. There’s only; ‘this is what other people think’.

      Is there a problem and LW#2 just thinks they’re exaggerating the severity/how easy it is to fix, or does LW#2 not even think her clothes are wrong in the first place?

  6. Artemesia*

    I retired at 67 and I had half a dozen people ask me ‘why are you retiring so early’ and ‘wow, this program really needs you, why are you leaving so soon.’ While they thought I was younger, there is no way they thought I was younger than say 62.

    Live your life. You need to resign to resign beyond ‘this is the right time (or move for me) right now.’ Enjoy.

    1. allathian*

      Given the way the world is today, I suspect there’s a lot of envy involved that someone can retire when they’re obviously still capable of working. Lots of people will be forced to work until they’re no longer physically or mentally able to do so.

      I work for the government in Finland, and at least for now, my current mandatory retirement age is 68. I suspect that by the time I get there (if I do), things will have changed. Several of my former coworkers have celebrated their retirement and their 68th birthday party at the same time. Many of them continued working as contractors at least for a while after retirement. It’s not an option for all positions, but for key employees it’s an alternative.

      1. Doreen*

        I’m sure there’s some envy but that’s not the only thing. My husband is retiring soon and what his customers and coworkers are asking is what he is going to do and won’t he get tired of being home with me all day. Apparently, they have no hobbies or activities at all.

        1. Jay (no, the other one)*

          Yup. I was lucky to retire at 61 and everyone asked what I was going to do and wouldn’t I bored and how was I going to fill my time? Oddly enough, this included my husband who is the same age I am and who retired four years before I did. I don’t think those comments were motivated by envy. There were people who said “oh, I wish I could retire!” and they were not the same people who thought I’d be twiddling my thumbs.

          For the record, there has been minimal twiddling.

      2. Paint N Drip*

        I agree that there is envy or even disbelief when someone retires before they MUST. Sooooo many people are not prepared for LIVING in retirement, either financially or as a person with hobbies/family/goals but no job.

    2. Beary*

      OP5- I’m also part of the fire movement and was able to take “mini retirements” in my late 20s and mid 30s – basically a year off work. I absolutely did not frame it as retirement or being financially able to not work- I just said I was planning to travel or was thinking of pivoting career after a short break to recharge. Sadly there can be a lot of jealousy from friends and family- and most people assume you will be bored (!?!)- but honestly just go for it and do what’s best for you! One more year syndrome is very real. Good luck OP!

    3. Falling Diphthong*

      I think OP might frame it, to themselves, and others, as “I can take a one year sabbatical, so that’s what I’m doing.”

      It leaves open doors if you eventually decide you want to return to this very job. Or do similar work. Or do work (paid or charity) that is only tangentially related, but your existing network might have leads. Or decide to never return to work. “I’m taking a one year sabbatical, and then I will think about next steps.” (Where OP can suspect “lifelong sabbatical” is the answer, but it can be good not to have firmly defended your “right for me this year” decision as “my new and unwavering path for life.”)

      1. OP5*

        Yes! This is exactly how I’m looking to frame things for myself and others. Thank you for your perspective.

    4. Sloanicota*

      If OP is really concerned about blowback they could also just say that they are thinking of taking up freelancing. It does sound like they may be open to something like that in the future anyway. I left a job under circumstances where I kind of just hated the job and kind of wanted to freelance and it leaning into the former definitely cut down on awkward conversations.

    5. Abundance mindset*

      For whatever reason at my current employer, a lot of people have left to take some time off. I don’t know exactly what they told their managers, but to me and their other peers, they said things like they were going to take six months to travel, take some time to think about their next move, spend time with their family, etc. Some have gone back to work eventually and some have not, or at least not yet. You don’t have to frame it as retiring.

    6. America's Next Top McGuffin*

      I am not in the corporate world at all, but can someone use FMLA to try out retirement, couching it as ‘mental health’ or is that not done?

      1. Silver Robin*

        I get the impression you would have trouble justifying that. Like potentially you need a doctor’s note.

        Also, FMLA is 12 weeks. That is not nothing, but I am also not sure it is enough to simulate retirement either. And it is not just a thing for the corporate world, either. My understanding is it applies to any organization with at least 50 employees.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          My surgeon wishes it was just “a note” needed. There’s quite a lot of paperwork about each of the job duties that the employee will/will not be able to do on what expected timeline, and the doctor is putting their reputation on the line when they certify that the leave is a medical necessity. Then (for the non-intermittent kind) they have to do more paperwork so the employee is allowed to return to work.

      2. Hlao-roo*

        My understanding of FMLA is that there needs to be some sort of documentation of the health condition from a doctor. If someone could get their doctor to say they had a condition that required leave, then maybe? But the doctor would have to be on board.

        And regardless of how feasible this is or isn’t in general, it doesn’t sound like it would be a good path for OP5 because they don’t want to continue working at their current org even after some significant time off.

        1. Sloanicota*

          IMO it’s just not being the done thing to take FMLA under specious conditions – as it erodes the opportunity for people who do actually need it. The OP said they were burned out, but didn’t indicate they have a medical condition that requires it. Also FMLA doesn’t have to be paid. They just promise to hold a comparable job for you when you get back. It’s really not that valuable.

      3. OP5*

        I’ve considered exploring this, but I don’t want to deal with the paperwork and trying to justify that my mental health is suffering enough to be granted FLMA. Additionally, I don’t believe I would get the stress relief I need knowing I’m coming back after 12 weeks. I’d probably sit and worry about what I’d be coming back to after the break.

      4. MigraineMonth*

        FMLA requires pretty extensive documentation from a medical professional documenting your mental illness (a diagnosis is not required, but the medical professional needs to certify the requirement for leave) and the extent of your incapacitation. If you take it as a chunk (rather than intermittent), then when you return, the medical professional needs to again document that you are recovered enough to handle the duties of your job.

        Even if you found a medical professional willing to lie on the forms so you could “try out” retirement, FMLA isn’t generally paid; you’d have to use PTO or unpaid leave, and all you’d gain is the ability to go return to your job at the end of the 12 weeks.

    7. ScottW*

      I retired early a few months ago and I was so burnt out that I didn’t have much filter left. People asked me the same thing (“Why are you leaving so early? Are you unhappy?”) and I just said “I’m ready to do something else”. I’m very much enjoying my “long weekend” as someone put it. It’s wonderful!

    8. Slow Gin Lizz*

      I would retire tomorrow if I could and I’m only in my 40s. If you are financially able to retire, OP5, do it and don’t worry about what others think. One way to avoid burning the bridge with your current workplace would be to make sure you leave things in a way that your replacement will be easily able to pick up and get the work done. So start documenting what you do now and your current coworkers and your replacement will be extremely grateful after you leave and they’ll think fondly about you once you’re gone.

      I also don’t know how a notice period might work in this situation…would it make sense to give a longer notice period since you know you’re leaving? I’m not saying tell them today that you’re leaving in May, but maybe tell them in March? I don’t know, honestly, I’m just thinking out loud (well, in writing) here. I guess maybe play that part by ear. If in March they say, “OP, we have this GREAT six-month project for you!” maybe that will be a cue for you to tell them that you probably won’t want to be involved in a long-term project because you’re leaving. OTOH, if you tell them early, they might then say that they only want you for two more weeks so I suppose that would be a risk if telling them early. Also, I don’t know about you, but my notice periods have been really stressful and I get even more annoyed about my job when I know I’m on my way out the door. Ok, maybe I’ve talked myself out of recommending you give a longer notice period.

      TL, DR: do your early retirement and enjoy it, OP! Have a great time, please report back in a year and tell us what you’ve been up to!

      1. Hlao-roo*

        TL, DR: do your early retirement and enjoy it, OP! Have a great time, please report back in a year and tell us what you’ve been up to!

        Seconding this! Even if it’s a short “resignation was drama-free and I’m enjoying my retirement”-type update, I’m still interested in hearing from you, OP5.

      2. OP5*

        I am doing everything I can from a documentation perspective to put my team members in a position to be able to pick up my day-to-day tasks. I’ve also been coaching my highest tenured team member to put them in a position to be a viable candidate for my role.

      3. Loz*

        55 here. My plan is to “come clean” and offer 1 up to 3 months notice (no more) as flexible as needed. There’s no particular deadline on my part. They can walk me out the door or take as much or little as they like before I disappear into travel, hobbies and sports. Same with my partner. Not going to another job or commitment just makes it a bit easier. I’m certainly not going to get stressed about it! If they start getting pushy I’ll just leave.

    9. Boggle*

      I’m retiring at 59, when I tell other employees they say one of two things, “No, you can’t!” or “I’m so jealous”. Just laugh and shrug. I’ve been planning this for years, I’m done. No guilt, no anxiety.

      1. StarTrek Nutcase*

        I retired at 63.5 yo despite always planning to do it at 67. But at 4:55 pm, I had a conversation with my manager and decided I just didn’t give a shit anymore (mainly her boss issues) so packed up and was gone by 5:10 pm. I never regretted it, but by week 2 was amazed to realize how stressed I actually had been – only noticeable by its absence. My family & friends also made comments but I recognized most were caused by envy. I did have to be careful not to engage in “how” I could but they couldn’t – apparently my choices that permitted it were up for review but not theirs that didn’t. Anyway, retirement is wonderful!

  7. WS*

    She does have a large chest and I know that that can be an issue when buying clothing, as I have the same issue.

    And I think that’s why you have been tapped to ask! But I agree with Alison – if it’s a dress code problem, they need to deal with it. If it’s not a dress code problem (she just has a large chest) then hinting and “friendly reminders” are terrible. When I was in my 20s I was told off for dressing too provocatively (vague waves at my chest) but in fact I was covered from collarbones to ankles to wrists, and wasn’t wearing tight or provocative clothing in any way, but happened to be female and low ranking in a mostly-male workplace.

    1. Boof*

      I think LW2 has room to push back on this request if they think their colleague is dressed appropriately too – it’s not really clear from the letter if they think they’re dressed just like everyone else, but they have a large chest, or if they’re actually having some kind of problem with clothes fitting really badly or something. If the clothes are normal and just don’t “hide” their body well enough I think LW2 should really push back “maybe these complaints aren’t justified and it should be pointed out [colleague] is following the standard code” to anyone who complaints

      1. Falling Diphthong*

        Yes, if the employee is dressed normally, then hoping OP will somehow come up with the exact shirt that magically alters her body shape is unreasonable, and someone (OP has more standing in this group) should push back against the people complaining.

        If the clothing is in violation of a dress code (and just more evident on her body than it would be on a flat chest), that’s a manager thing to address.

        If the teaching aide is quite young, I will point out that media gives us a very skewed idea of the normalcy of cleavage in professional dress. Like you would guess that all female lawyers and doctors are wearing very low cut tops, very short skirts, and/or very high heels all day long every day.

        Also if the young person is younger than the rest of the staff, then she might reasonably interpret the rest of the staff’s norms as “What someone one role up in their 40s would wear.” We’re not always joining a professional group that is rife with women of our own age, position, and body shape to model the norms. (And even when you are, some people are Bill and miss the cues.)

        1. Neptune*

          “If the teaching aide is quite young, I will point out that media gives us a very skewed idea of the normalcy of cleavage in professional dress.”

          Oh man, there is so much “what I’d wear to work as XYZ” content on tiktok that is just completely delusional. I think it’s mostly produced as clickbait by influencers who have never worked in an office, or by literal teenagers based on what they’ve seen on TV, but going by the comments a lot of people do take it as actual advice.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            I don’t think it’s new. I grew up with Ally McBeal, and I’m going to go out on a limb that most trial lawyers don’t dress the way the show’s female characters did.

            Or who can forget the magazine spreads on “Day-to-Night Looks” that told us we could just wear clubwear to work but with a blazer thrown over it and be “professional”?

      2. Nicole Maria*

        The letter pretty clearly says it’s the cleavage that’s the issue. I don’t have a large chest but I wouldn’t wear something low-cut to the office, even if it wouldn’t show cleavage on me, it’s just not the time/place for that.

        1. TeaCoziesRUs*

          Congrats on your chest placement in relation to your preferred collar style. If I wear a crew neck or turtleneck, I feel like I’m choking. Give me that one extra inch lower from a crew neck to a rounded or V-neck and I am showing cleavage, particularly if I’m sitting down and the observer is standing up. Not all of us choose to dress in low-cut tops – that’s simply what we can find to wear.

          Now I make my own tops, which means I can create boatnecks that don’t make me feel choked… and they still show the cleavage line.

        2. MigraineMonth*

          If you have a medium/small chest, you generally need a low neckline in order to show cleavage. If you have a large/very large chest, particularly if you’re wearing a bra, you can show cleavage even with high-cut necklines.

          People with large breasts have large breasts. They’re going to have them in turtlenecks, v-necks, button-ups, and any other type of professional shirt. They’re going to have them in sports bras, fitted bras, no bras, corsets, etc. If they’re wearing the same clothing other people are allowed to wear, leave people with large breasts alone.

          Just let people exist with the bodies they have, okay?

    2. Ellis Bell*

      Yeah, I think they’re hoping OP’s superior shopping and dressing skills, and general boob wrangling experience, will translate automatically to the colleague, especially since they’re friends; maybe they’ll go shopping together! Nope, nope, nope. It’s not a simple set of skills to simply pass along, and it’s an unfair extra burden on busty employees to expect them to dress over and above the dress code. If it’s actually just a simple breach of the dress code? Easily avoided? Great, then it should be simple for a manager to explain the rules, rules that have nothing to do with her body, and hold her to it! But, it sounds like there actually isn’t one and the manager is hoping that the magic of body shaming will do the job. If that’s at all true, I might even say “I don’t even have a dress code to point to, or advice to give as a friend, and I’m concerned that she’s simply being complained about because of her body”. My sister worked at a school were a busty classroom assistant was given a tabard to wear when she bent over; simply because of some juvenile boys. It’s worth stamping the idea out that this okay, early on.

      1. WS*

        An especially unfair burden on an educational assistant, a typically poorly-paid role, which is also pretty physical and hard on clothes.

      2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

        “boob wrangling experience”

        I love that :)
        I’m just visualising a job ad including this

          1. Statler von Waldorf*

            It’s not just preschoolers. I just had a smoke break, and during it I asked seven of our straight male mechanics if they would apply to be a professional boob wrangler.

            I got six yeses. The only guy who said no insisted that going pro would take all the fun out of it. They were all very disappointed when I told them this was a hypothetical question and that the job didn’t really exist.

            1. linger*

              One literal boob-wrangling scene from “Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About S*x (But Were Afraid To Ask” comes to mind. But I’m stopping short of recommending it, because Woody Allen.

          2. Sir Nose d'Voidoffunk*

            I have such a vivid, hilarious memory of being a teenager and helping my friend watch his young nephew. There was a commercial at the time that involved bras going by on a clothesline, and the kid would just sit there and go “Boobies, boobies, boobies, boobies…”

    3. Person from the Resume*

      Whether the friend is violating the dress code or not, it is not a coworker’s job to talk to a coworker about the problem. It’s the management’s job; that’s why they pay them the big bucks. (Ha!)

      She can and should just say it’s management’s responsibility to have that conversation.

      1. Observer*

        She can and should just say it’s management’s responsibility to have that conversation.

        Agreed 100%

        This is not the LW’s job regardless. And she would do well to stay out of it.

        1. Anonymous Cat*

          Real question: what if management then says they’re assigning the task to coworker? That it’s no different from relaying other info?

          1. Paint N Drip*

            My opinion is that management can delegate some tasks, but some just need to be done by management. What they’re asking OP to do is LITERALLY management (managing the coworker’s appearance or approach to the dress code) so it would fall in the ‘unacceptable to assign’ category.

          2. Starbuck*

            I’d ask for an explanation on why this specifically was being assigned to me as someone not their manager. Sometimes when they realize they don’t want to explain their (terrible) reasoning out loud it’ll change their mind.

      2. duinath*

        Yeah. The *look* I would give you if you asked me to address a coworkers bust. The long icy silence.

        It would be a bad day for everyone. Use the script instead.

    4. Observer*

      if it’s a dress code problem, they need to deal with it. If it’s not a dress code problem (she just has a large chest) then hinting and “friendly reminders” are terrible

      I think that this is it in a nutshell.

      I do think that this is a dress code violation. I don’t know of any school where actual cleavage showing is acceptable. But that means that it’s *still* not on the LW to deal with this. It should be dealt with by management that way any other issue should be dealt with. And that is not officially unofficially deputizing someone to casually suggest they the person adhere to the dress code, but in a way that shows that it’s not really a suggestion.

      And if that sounds like a plate of spaghetti, well, that’s just how convoluted the thought process winds up being. Just play it straight and professional.

      1. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

        Ugh, I hate dress codes that are about people’s bodies and not about people’s clothes. Some people show cleavage in anything lower-cut than a crew neck and it shouldn’t be a dress code violation if other people can wear those necklines.

        1. Nicole Maria*

          That doesn’t totally make sense to me if I think about it differently — so for example there are low-waisted pants where if a thin woman wore them, it really wouldn’t show anything, but if I wore them you’d get an unfortunate eyeful of buttcrack and the surrounding areas (and trust me nobody wants that lol).

          To me, it wouldn’t make sense to ban all low-rise pants, because for many people it would be appropriate to wear (as long as your shirt is long enough) but for me they’re not appropriate because I have a different body type, and that’s just how it is

          1. MigraineMonth*

            There is a limit to the “everyone should be able to wear anything allowable” rule. If I showed up at work in a work-appropriate sundress sized for a 6-year-old, that would violate the spirit of the dress code (and I would need scissors to get back out).

            I think there’s a reasonable middle-ground where the item of clothing must fit fairly well and cover one’s privates. One’s lower boobs and butt cheeks, while not genitals, would probably count as private areas in most US businesses.

            However, I think that changing the definition of where one’s “private” areas are based on one’s body type is NOT okay. A large-breasted woman shouldn’t have to cover herself up to the collar bone if other women don’t. A tall employee shouldn’t have to wear skirts that go below their knees if others don’t. A large man shouldn’t be forbidden from wearing low-rise pants (that fit him and don’t slide down when he leans over) if skinnier employees are allowed to. It’s supposed to be a *dress* code, not a body code.

      2. ScruffyInternHerder*

        And is it though? Because I’d agree on the face of it, but I also have cleavage in a plain round neck tee shirt so…

        1. Flor*

          Same. By the time I no longer have cleavage in an ordinary t-shirt bra, the neckline is approaching throttling levels. Something people with smaller chests (and male bodies) tend not to be aware of is that things like the bust point are in the wrong place for larger busts, and the higher the neckline goes, the harder it is to fit. In my case, between having a large bust and broad shoulders, anything with a high neckline digs into the front of my throat as the fabric strains around my non-standard body shape.

          I never button blouses all the way, and often end up wearing a blouse that is designed to be worn buttoned to the throat with a camisole underneath, which conceals my bra but not, always, every last hint of the existence of the *contents* of the bra.

      3. Dahlia*

        I mean that depends on what you define as “cleavage” and how big the boobs are. I have “cleavage” going up to my collarbone and I think we could all agree that’s not exactly low-cut.

      4. Resentful Oreos*

        I once worked at a school (in the office, not the classroom) and cleavage was never mentioned in the staff handbook, but open toed *shoes* were forbidden – no sandals. The reason was safety. The idea was that either a kid could stomp on someone’s foot, or the sandal get caught in something.

        But then there’s no societal awkwardness or iffiness around telling someone “Jane, you can’t wear sandals to this particular workplace; the dress code states closed toe shoes.” I think even a peer could mention that it’s in the handbook and “the reason is safety.” I can’t think of anyone who *has* to wear sandals.

        The issue that the LW was mentioning is more sensitive, and something that a lot of people can’t help, and not the job of a peer anyway.

  8. Disappointed Australien*

    For some reason my mental image was a door to door sales type “I’d like to talk you about your cleavage”.

    Maybe it should be re-roofed, or possibly just needs a new vacuum cleaner?

    1. Strive to Excel*

      No no, that’s the old generation of door to door sales.

      The current generation would add solar panels.

      1. Festively Dressed Earl*

        “I’d like to talk to you about installing solar panels on your cleavage.” Cool, I could power one of those LED-display backpacks!

    3. MigraineMonth*

      As my friends with ample cleavage (even in a v-neck shirt) will tell you: yes, it does frequently need a vacuum cleaner.

  9. Racingboo*

    Re #4 I think two weeks may be a US specific thing. I’m in Ireland and four weeks is standard in contracts afaik, though the legal minimum if you don’t specify in the contract is one week.

    1. AcademiaNut*

      Europe/UK is totally different; most jobs in the US have no contracts, and there is no legal minimum for notice. Two weeks is a convention for most jobs although some fields may have different standarda.

      1. MigraineMonth*

        The fields with different standards are often the ones with either a hiring cycle of less than a year or short-term contracts. So if you’re a primary or secondary school teacher, for example, the standard is to finish the year. If you’re in TV production, the expectation would be to finish the contract for the season.

        Note that retirements are often handled differently. An organization may know about an executive ‘s plan to retire a year or more in advance, and 3-6 months is common for rank-and-file members if the organization has a track record of honoring the proposed retirement date (rather than trying to push the employee out early).

    2. Cinn*

      I came here to say something similar. I’m in the UK and all my notice periods have been four weeks, and am pretty sure most non-manager people I’ve known have had the same.

      1. Ellis Bell*

        But weirdly, even though our longer notice periods here should actually help get replacements in a timely manner, I’ve experienced the exact same thing OP is talking about in certain workplaces. Four weeks notice goes by and they don’t bother advertising to replace the role until the person has left. It’s considered to be a slight budget saver; just let the remaining staff work a little bit harder in the interim – a replacement is definitely being considered and probably sought very soon! It doesn’t happen now that I’m in a field where appropriate coverage is legally required, but in ‘stretch the workforce’ places, I’ve seen it happen.

      2. londonedit*

        Mine’s three months, but where I work it’s a month for junior employees. Notice periods here in the UK tend to be at least a month, and increase depending on seniority (my dad’s was two years by the time he retired!)

        Even with four weeks (or three months!) it’s still rare for us to replace someone before the end of their notice period. First off it takes a while for the job advert to be agreed and signed off by senior people and HR, then you have to advertise for a few weeks, then there’s first interviews and second interviews, and then of course the person you hire will most likely also have a notice period of at least a month. So unless there’s some sort of special circumstance, like the person you hire has been freelancing or they’re coming back from maternity leave or something, it’s very unlikely that you’ll manage to hire someone and have them start the job before the departing employee goes. Notice periods really are about tying up as many loose ends as possible and trying to leave things in a decent state for colleagues to fill in until the new person starts.

      3. pandop*

        It’s also pretty standard where I work for the recruiting not to start until the previous person has left.

        1. Lexi Vipond*

          It seems to take most of that time where I work to get the various approvals for the post (I think we’re in a hiring freeze again, which seems to mean that you can recruit the same number of people but at a quarter of the speed) and approve the job description and get it posted.

          But it did seem a slightly odd thing to bring up – nothing in the question was about people leaving after two weeks regardless, or anything else that would make the four weeks relevant.

        2. Cinn*

          This is true. I only know of one person who was hired before their predecessor left, and they were a couple of management levels up. So there was a longer notice period there.

          And also I think I may have misread the letter this morning, on rereading it it sounds like four weeks is unusual to the LW, and I only mentioned the four week thing as a “maybe they’re not US based”. Which I think was my misunderstanding.

      4. MsSolo (UK)*

        I think the difference between the US and UK is it’s more common to be paid fortnightly in the US, and monthly in the UK, and notice periods are historically dictated by the finances (you’d stick around to pick up your last pay packet because it’d be challenging to collect it once you were spending all your time at your new job). As you get more senior, and there’s more need for an active handover, the notice periods do get long enough for a recruitment campaign, but you’re talking exec suite level – I don’t know how that’s handled in the US beyond convention, because that’s definitely spelled out in UK contracts.

        1. Emmy Noether*

          Oooh, I hadn’t considered that link. Contractual notice periods here (Germany/Switzerland/France) tend to be “x months to the end of a calendar month” and that does correspond to the timing of pay!

        2. Clisby*

          I hadn’t even thought about that! Although, I’ve had a couple of jobs where I was paid weekly, and 2 weeks’ notice was still typical.

        3. Person from the Resume*

          Such a good point.

          How changing technology changes things without us even realizing. Because it makes so much sense that I’m going to give my notice and work until the next pay day where I will pick up my check on my last day of work.

        4. Loz*

          Most people seem to round to end of week but not always. It mostly seems to depend if you want a Friday send off.
          The “pick up the last pay” thing is kind of outdated – surely everyone has payroll packages that do all the pro-rata and PTO payout calcs? Also, I can’t remember last time I didn’t get paid via EFT – probably the 80s. Maybe 90s for the paper slip but certainly not the actual money (and postal services exist for the bits of paper if required!)

      5. Trick or Treatment*

        Yeah, very different to the US, but also apparently industry-dependent in the UK? It always seemed like everyone preferred to do what their competitors are doing. I had 6 weeks notice back in the UK and heard from colleagues that they had the same at [well-known company in our field]. My partner in another field had 8 weeks.

        We moved to a country now where 3 months to the end of the month is standard for most professional jobs. My god, it’s so looong!

        The funny thing is always that in no way does that change anything about finding (or let alone training) a replacement. Because anyone external you could hire will also have the same long notice at their current place. It only works if they’re currently jobless.

      6. Sloanicota*

        Well, isn’t there also that “gardening leave” thing where you would also be *paid* four weeks if you were fired? We don’t get that. Plus, to be able to offer four weeks to your old employer, a new employer would need to accept a four week delayed start, which isn’t the convention here (you *can* get it, but it’s not guaranteed; I had multiple jobs press me to start as soon as humanly possible when I was more junior).

        1. londonedit*

          Hmmm, no, gardening leave isn’t for when you’re fired. It’s usually used in big business when someone’s leaving to join a competitor – the idea is that you’re required to leave the office immediately and stop working for the duration of your notice period, so that any knowledge you had will be out of date by the time you start with the competitor. Your employer basically pays you to stay at home during your notice period instead of working it out (hence, gardening leave, because you’re paid to stay at home pottering in the garden in between jobs). If you’re fired, you may well be paid in lieu of a notice period, but I think that’d depend on your employment contract (and if you’re fired for gross misconduct then I’m pretty sure your employer doesn’t have to pay you anything).

          1. bamcheeks*

            Can also be for something like an investigation if you are suspected of fraud, abusive behaviour, or some other kind of serious professional misconduct, where the allegations are serious enough that you can’t leave someone in post whilst you investigate them but you also don’t want to just cut someone off from their earnings before you’ve established whether they are true or false.

        2. Person from the Resume*

          US doesn’t say “gardening leave,” but it is the equivalent in the US of resigning and being told to leave immediately but being paid through the end of the notice period. they don’t want you around for *reasons*, but they very professionally keep paying you because you are not fired and you did give notice.

          Gardening leave (also known as garden leave) is the practice whereby an employee leaving a job – having resigned or otherwise had their employment terminated – is instructed to stay away from work during the notice period, while still remaining on the payroll.

    3. Smurfette*

      I’m not in the US or the UK, and the standard notice period here is a calendar month. So you resign and then work until the last day of the following month. If you’re very senior or difficult to replace it might be 2 months.

  10. Nodramalama*

    LW2 I agree with alison. Either your coworker is not complying with a dress code that can be pointed to, and then it should be official. Or there is nothing and it’s literally just that she has a large chest and that is noticeable when wearing normal clothes, in which case you DEFINITELY do not want to be involved

  12. Artemesia*

    I have been asked to do the dress appropriately thing as the highest ranking woman in my department because the chair felt it was inappropriate for a man to do. It is not fun. If you can push back and it sounds like in your position you might given your lack of authority over the employee, I would.

    1. amylynn*

      I think there might be a case for having a female manager sit in on a conversation like that, just for legal cover, but no, male managers should not get to totally dump those conversations on women.
      I have generally found dress code issues deeply fraught, especially around non-males. There just is not a widely agreed-upon standard for professional dress for non-male-identifying people. The problem I have encountered is that managers and execs assume that their idea of professional dress is the standard and don’t communicate their expectations until someone violates them.

      1. Anonymous Cat*

        I would appreciate a woman in the room so I knew this wasn’t some kind of weird come-on. A witness would be embarrassing but show this is a business meeting, not personal.

        And re: dress codes, I’ve noticed that some men’s descriptions of appropriate clothing are actually whatever was stylish when they were young, which can be decades out of date! Think boxy suits from the 80s. Or the 90s suits that always had a fancy pin.

        Yes, they were nice suits but not what people wear now.

  13. Aam Admi*

    Re #4 Many times, I don’t post the position until the departing employee has left the organization. My organization is large and prospective internal candidates tend to reach out to departing employee to find more information about the job. If the departing employee was a not particularly good at the job or was disgruntled, I do not want them to be feeding information to candidates. Also I may have plans to change how the job was being done.

    When I post a job, I always instruct all my staff not to talk to anyone about the job and to direct all questions to me. This ensures candidates receive accurate and consistent information.

    We require one month notice but it takes 3-4 months to fill a vacancy as the professionals I hire are in high demand. Many times, I have got to the end of the hiring process and the one good candidate I had has dropped out because they had a better offer (We are a government organization with great health benefits, pensions and work life balance. So our salaries tend to be lower than the private sector). Then I have to repost the position and start all over again.

    1. Lisa*

      This is the only good reason I think to delay the hiring process until the person is gone, to prevent them from having influence one way or another on who is hired. Now, where I work the HR process before you can even post the job takes almost as long as the typical 2-week notice period, so a manager might go ahead and start that process, but I can understand not posting it or making it public until the previous person had left.

    2. Pay no attention...*

      Also I may have plans to change how the job was being done.

      This is why is takes forever in my org to post a job. It seems that the only time job descriptions are reviewed and made accurate is when there is turnover in the position — so it takes time for the hiring manager to write an accurate job description, get it approved by their boss, submit it to HR for their review, Finance gets to review the budget for salary/wage/benefits, if necessary Legal gets their review… 4 weeks would be lightening speed.

    3. not nice, don't care*

      I work for a state agency. Open positions have to be reviewed then parked for months to reclaim some of the salary, and even jobs designated operationally necessary face long posting delays because every petty badmin wants to slice and dice positions descriptions to ensure wringing every bit of labor from a new hire.
      In the meantime, front desk coverage is a nightmare and folks from other units have been unwillingly drafted into the work.
      Since badmin thinks all staff level jobs could be done by toddlers and monkeys, they never prioritize handing off institutional knowledge or even basic training.

      1. Hazel*

        Some (government) organizations don’t allow two people to hold the same position at one time. So you can’t overlap their tenure. I think you could still start the hiring process though.

  14. RW*

    LW5 – I left a job without anything lined up earlier this year at age 30. I knew for a fact that I can’t retire, but that I could comfortably go for a year+ without working and that I was at risk of changing life track altogether. People LOVED hearing about my plans to take time off, chill, not do anything in particular!
    I found it helpful to have a couple of answers down pat about why I was leaving, especially since I was in an exceptionally client/customer facing job so I was having the conversation all day every day for a bit (mine were “I’ve been here 5 years and it’s time to move on” and “I’m looking forward to a bit of a break and then I’ll figure out what next” – I had a stereotypically stressful job so I got a lot of nod oh you must need it, but I think this could work in any job). I also got good at deciding who got which information – the whole changing life track altogether bit remained with friends and didn’t make it into work circles, they got a vague “might do something a bit different.”
    (I’m still off now, still at risk of changing life tracks entirely as well! Although planning to go back to something similar to oldjob very part time (think 1 day/week) next year sometime since it’s well paying and easy to find a job in while I do the study that’s what’s really getting me excited atm)

    1. Sloanicota*

      I took a year between my last (unpleasant) job and my new one. I did a lot of freelancing, then took a part time job and freelanced on the side, then went back to FT. It took me a lot of time saving up and thank goodness my state has a decent insurance exchange, but it was totally doable. The only bad thing was that I didn’t feel like I could really take a nice trip or anything, because I didn’t know for sure how much I’d end up making with my freelance work / how long it would take me to re-enter the workforce, so I had to be conservative with my spending. Now that I’m back working I think I’d focus on saving for a big trip rather than a year spent mostly at home, but I was glad of the opportunity.

    2. ScottW*

      Yes. The only negative reaction I had was from a 20something who looked at me with something like pity. I guess she thought I was about to die or go into a home or something. Everyone else said “I wish *I* could do that. Congratulations.”

    3. Jezebella*

      I took a year off after leaving academia and called it a “self-funded sabbatical.” I didn’t get any pushback about it.

  15. ChurchOfDietCoke*

    My notice period is three months, and that’s reasonably normal for roles at my level. If they didn’t even start recruiting for my post until after I’d left it could be fully half a year before the role was filled.

  16. bamcheeks*

    LW1, there are two good ways a strong working relationship can develop:

    1. you get on well socially, build a rapport, and that translates to a good working relationship

    2. you work with someone who is reliable and good at their job and who makes your life easier. You develop respect for them, and that makes it easier to tolerate quirks and differences that would be a barrier to a friendship if you met them in other circumstances.

    I think you’re focussing on Method 1, and it’s not really working, so focus on Method 2 instead. Give Bill opportunities to shine at his work by providing feedback, being an SME, leading projects, revamping processes — whatever makes sense for his skillset and your vision for the team. Someone who is a bit socially awkward and misses the joke but great at his job and supportive of others becomes “ahh, that’s just Bill, love him!” But you’ve got to give him the right space to shine.

    2. TQB*

      Yes! These things take time sometimes – like years, even. #2 often leads to a better working relationship in the end, because everyone involved actually has to put thought and effort into it. Don’t force people to be pals, just encourage them to be excellent at their jobs. Reassure Bill that he was hired to be WORK support, not everybody’s buddy, and that his awkwardness is not a reflection on his success.

    3. Sparkles McFadden*

      This is so well put.

      I have had so many great working relationships with all different sorts of people while in jobs where management stressed work quality above all else. They would have hired a werewolf if the werewolf did good work. We’d just be saying “The howling is just Bob the werewolf. You’ll get used to that. He’s really good at troubleshooting.”

    4. fhqwhgads*

      In my experience, #2 is the only way to build good working relationships. I’ve actually had a few coworkers who – on a social level – I connect with and get along great. But loathed working with them because they were just not up to snuff at the job. They quit and went somewhere else. Now we’re friends. If we kept working together, we would never have been.

      I always groan internally when management talks about social activities to build good working relationships because my experience is that people develop good working relationships by working together. “Mixing up the teams at the annual retreat so you get to know people you don’t work with” does eff all. Great, now I did a “bonding” exercise with someone I will again not talk to for a year. Or I did a “bonding” experience with someone I worked with every day and already know to be incompetent. We both like tennis. Doesn’t made me dread working with them any less.

  17. Keymaster of Gozer (She/Her)*

    2. As a fellow possessor of large forward facing system attributes I know it’s so often seen as ‘our job to keep the others in line’ but the fact is it isn’t.

    Based upon the fact you haven’t said she’s actually violating any decency standards I’m guessing the management haven’t got anything concrete behind this and are just going on ‘it makes us feel funny’ or ‘nebulous complaints’.

    So they pawn it off onto someone else. And I’ll add another guess that they are going to imply that anything that’s cut below the collarbone or is form fitting is somehow inappropriate.

    Now if it’s a case like she’s trying to wear button up shirts and there’s visible strainage you might be able to approach her on the grounds of ‘hey mate, you got a fault in that item of clothing’ and offer a fix/solution – same as if you’d do if the back of her skirt had torn.

    (I pinged a lot of buttons across rooms before a kindly woman pointed me toward Bravissimo)

    1. Lish*

      “large forward facing system attributes”
      Thank you for that, I laughed hard enough that my coworkers are wondering about me. :-)

    2. Festively Dressed Earl*

      Hah! Stealing that! And I wish someone would start a website featuring button downs for those of us with aggressive airbags.

  18. Fed4Life*

    #4 – in the Federal government by policy we cannot post a job until the incumbent has left. Mostly because things could change and the person’s departure could be delayed or not happen and we can’t have two people in the same position. Fed hiring takes forever anyway so adding a couple of weeks isn’t going to delay anything too much.

    1. amylynn*

      I get that but I remember having once to explain to an exec about why everyone was so salty about having to cover the phones while they searched for someone to replace an admin that just quit. It was because the admin had given about a month’s notice and they hadn’t even prepared to post the position until well after she left. The failure to use the notice period well is what really annoyed us, not that she hadn’t been replaced by the time she left.

      1. Person from the Resume*

        I agree. It’s pretty much never meant to allow enough time to train the replacement because whatever the “standard” notice period is an employed person accepting a new job is expected to give that same notice period to their employer.

        On the other hand if filling the position is important, along with making sure the departing employee trains current employees on their tasks if needed, wraps things up, and leaves notes, the management should get everything ready to post the job opening as soon as possible. There’s prep to do even before the job is posted. The sooner you start, the sooner you get a new hire onboard even if the process is long.

    2. Not Marian Still a Librarian*

      Also a Fed employee. We had someone give 3 months notice and even after we did get the posting ready it was over 4 months before it was live. And then we went into a hiring freeze, so we’ve been short a person for almost a year now.

      1. Person from the Resume*

        I feel like my organization had been in a hiring freeze for 2-3 years. We’re finally starting to hire again, but there’s so many empty spots we’re having to prioritize where we start. I have no idea when or if we’ll ever fill all the vacant slots.

  19. Dog momma*

    For the early retiring person. That’s great if you can do it. However, what’s your plan for after? Part time or nothing at all? Health insurance is expensive, and private pay even more so unless you have a job with continuous coverage til Medicare at age 65. I had to pay foe my own at 61@ $350 / mo. which sounds cheap..til you got the Dr bill , which meant I was responsible for almost the entire amount of what was submitted. And that was when the IRS was dinging people if you were uninsured .Plus, if there’s more than a 63 day break in coverage, everything is considered a pre existing condition for the next 12 months and not covered. My brother ran into that for his family of 4 & it was awful bc they had a lot going on medically

    1. Cj*

      I’m really confused about the pre-existing condition thing, because I thought the ACA prevented that?

    2. But Of Course*

      Did they ask for advice about how to manage their retirement or was it something else they wrote in about?

      1. OP5*

        Thank you :)
        As a lifelong overthinker, I’ve considered health insurance (and early retirement) extensively and have a solid plan.

    3. ecnaseener*

      Respectfully, did you really think as you wrote this that it would be helpful to the letter-writer — that over several years of financial planning centered around retiring early, they had somehow forgotten about health insurance — or did you just want to talk about your own situation?

      1. Peanut Hamper*

        Two things I see a lot on advice sites are:

        1) “Whoa, I have thoughts about this, and of course I must share them even if they aren’t relevant.”
        2) Projection. All sorts of projection. (I.e., “Well, yes, that’s about you and your situation but what about me and my situation?”)

        The weird thing about the internet is that it’s easy to think the whole thing is about us. I’ve created a couple of mental (albeit imperfect mental) filters corresponding to those two items that I run potential responses through before hitting the “Submit” button.

        sighs in tired-personese

    4. merula*

      Continuous coverage and pre-existing conditions requirements were eliminated with the introduction of the Affordable Care Act in 2009. The ACA also introduced the tax penalty on the uninsured, but that was eliminated in 2019.

      I’m confused as to how you are concerned both about problems the ACA did away with, and a problem the ACA introduced. Either way, if you spend some time on FIRE sites, you will find plenty of discussion about this topic, as everyone who plans to retire early in the U.S. deals with it. The most common approach is to target specific marketplace subsidies for healthcare plans by converting traditional IRA funds to Roth (if you need to raise your income to qualify for subsidies), or by keeping income-generating investments in tax-advantaged spaces (if you need to lower your income to qualify).

      1. Slightly Less Evil Bunny*

        @ merula (and @ OP5 too) – do you have any particular FIRE sites you would recommend? I’m someone who is hoping to retire early, but I think I’m a bit closer to retirement than most FIRE devotees.

    5. Spooz*

      Mate, I think the LW has got this. if you read anything about the FIRE movement, you will see how insanely conservative they tend to be and how they model umpteen different scenarios before doing anything. They track their expenses to the penny for years in order to forecast spending and the savings they will need. Health insurance is practically the #1 topic for American FIREers. They will not have forgotten about it.

  20. HailRobonia*

    Off topic but the word “cleavage” suddenly reminded me of a story from my youth. My father was a geography professor and as a kid I spent a fair amount of time hanging around in the Earth Sciences department at his university. There was a female geology grad student who wore a geology-themed t-shirt that said “ask me about my cleavage” – of course referring to mineral cleavage.

    The thing is, at the time that was the only kind of cleavage I knew because I was a nerdy little kid. And also gay (but didn’t know it at the time) and boobs were of no interest to me. My dad explained the joke to me and I was sooooo embarassed.

    1. AnonAnon*

      HAHAHAHAHA! I love it! Where can someone get a shirt like that? (Asking for a friend?) I’m a huge rock nerd. LOL

  21. Twisters*

    “ also hopefully act as a resource and mentor to the more junior staff.”

    Okay so it seems like Bill definitely isn’t doing that and whether he’s ND* or not, just plain socially awkward or not, etc, that’s kind of a big flag in my opinion. LW1 told both junior employees they didn’t have the necessary requirements to nab this role so that’s why an outsider was hired (and probably at a higher salary than if either junior person was just promoted). And now there’s friction for various reasons. Is Bill actually taking anything off the LW’s plate, work-wise? Are the junior employees getting any mentoring from Bill? Is he doing any actual mentoring with them (actual work mentoring, not just trying to cosplay Social Interaction 101). TBH, I’m side-eyeing the response to this letter and the LW about how they’ve NOT handled all of this so far. Those 2 junior employees are probably using their coffee breaks and side chats to help each other with resumes and networking and I wouldn’t blame them. So if, in the coming months, you get reference check requests for either of them, the best thing you can do is not stand in their way. Not after everything else that’s been done.

    *I’m trying to head off the inevitable 1000 apologia about “but neurodivergence! But ASD! But anxiety!!!” armchair diagnosing these types of letters always get. Just stop it. No. Get help, as the Michael Jordan meme says.

    1. DinoZebra*

      Why are you assuming that Bill isn’t doing that part of his job? Someone can be social awkward in unstructured situations and still be brilliant at answering work related questions and giving task specific advice.

    2. Martin*

      Where is all of this coming from?

      You are reading way more into this than what LW1 actually wrote.

  22. Three-Eyed Minion*

    #5: If someone is financially able to retire comfortably I feel they should strongly consider doing so for moral reasons: give someone else a chance at the table.

    My org has several directors who could easily retire (and are 65+) but don’t… so their positions are not opening up any time soon. There is little hope for upward mobility for the rest of us.

    1. Sloanicota*

      That is an interesting perspective! I suspect most people would almost feel the opposite, “guilty” that they weren’t contributing when they could/”should.”

      2. Silver Robin*

        I hear that, but then again, there are also multiple ways to contribute, not all of them involve working for pay.

        I have never really considered the question of retirement in moralistic terms though, this will be interesting to think about.

      3. Boof*

        I think it depends a lot on the field but in theory work* is generating something of benefit to society, rather than some kind of bottleneck blocking off other workers
        * work can certainly be volunteer etc etc – enshetification / dilution of overall value for short term profits is certainly a thing, I’m aware it’s way more complicated than job = product. Just don’t see that early retirement is a particularly moral question, more of a personal goals and means question

        1. Angstrom*

          I think it could go either way — are you just filling a chair and coasting along while drawing a comfortable salary, or are you really adding value?

          1. Boof*

            I know you mean that as a general “you” but where are these positions that people draw a nice check for doing nothing? I’m an oncologist – probably the earlier we decide to retire, the worse off for society; there’s already a shortage and it’s gonna get worse.

      4. Person from the Resume*

        I don’t know. Many people I know would retire if they could as soon as they could. They are not at the top of their professional, though. Unfortunately some of my friends have said they think they will have to work until they can’t anymore/die. Because they fear they have not been able to save enough for retirement.

        I myself hope to retire before 65. I do actually like my job, but I sure wish it was part time because full time eats up too much of my time to allow me to enjoy all my personal hobbies and be decently rested. At 50+ now I seem perpetually tired.

      5. Caramel & Cheddar*

        I would say although that’s a common feeling, that’s probably the source of a lot of the ways workplaces become toxic. I look forward to retiring one day and getting to contribute to myself and my hobbies!

    2. OP5*

      I’ve absolutely considered this perspective! If I have “enough”, why shouldn’t I free up a higher level position to give someone else the opportunity.

      1. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

        Bit different because I’m retiring early on medical grounds but also because I can afford to but having said that I am doing my best to use my notice period to pave the way for someone else to step into my place. As a woman in a very male dominated environment I want to make sure as many bumps and cracks are removed so someone like me can have an easier time getting the role than I did.

    3. HannahS*

      That’s a very interesting perspective. I often think about that in volunteer settings–I think it’s good for organizations to have the board of directors change regularly, both to keep the organization fresh and to allow others to try leadership. But I’ve never thought about it in a workplace.

    4. ScottW*

      Yeah, when my company had layoffs I was happy to be reducing the pressure by leaving on my own. That said, there were lots of people older than me, including people in their 80s. I don’t know their financial position so I can’t judge, but it would be nicer for the 20somethings if older people would leave when they could.

    5. Jezebella*

      See also: Academia. Long-tenured professors well past retirement age who are teaching maybe 2 classes, using the same notes they’ve used for 30 years, while half of teaching PhDs are stuck in underpaid contingent positions. Tenured folk over 65: GO HOME. Please.

      1. Boof*

        Honestly, kinda gross/ageist, come on. Some of my best classes in college were from elderly folks who were national treasures of japan for their knowledge of kabuki, and who had great history lessons having lived through the pacific theater / WW2

        1. Boof*

          Honestly most phds need to go into things OTHER than academic teaching positions or you’re basically just a glorified pyramid scheme

      3. Resentful Oreos*

        I would put the blame on the institutions who want to fill as many positions as they can with adjuncts, rather than the horrible old people who just don’t have the grace to go away where nobody has to see them.

        When these folks retire, I guarantee you that the college or university will just hire adjuncts.

        1. Wayward Sun*

          We’re fighting that in the department I’m in. The official rule is, when someone retires, that position goes away and you have to beg to get funding back for it. In a department that’s already understaffed, that makes retirements a net negative.

    6. Another Kristin*

      But the OP isn’t a normal retirement age, they specifically state that they are at an age where retirement is unusual (so presumably 40s or 50s). If I were so lucky to be in a position to retire at that age, I would also have weird feelings about it and not be sure how to talk about it with others, because it is a pretty unusual thing to do! Fully agree that some people have a hard time letting go of their jobs and should let the young uns have a kick at the can, just that’s not what’s happening here.

      OP5, FWIW, I quit a stable job mid-pandemic because I burned out trying to parent/homeschool and work simultaneously and was not sure I would ever return to the workforce, though I framed this more as becoming a stay-at-home mom than retiring. It was great at first, but after about six months I got incredibly bored and got another (incidentally much better) job. YMMV of course, but personally I really need some kind of structure and purpose in my life, and looking after my family plus doing crafts (pretty much what I was doing for those six months) wasn’t enough for me. Still glad I had the option to take the time off, just be aware that your feelings might change after some time out of the office.

    7. On notice*

      “5: If someone is financially able to retire comfortably I feel they should strongly consider doing so for moral reasons: give someone else a chance at the table”

      That’s all well and good but if LW5 retires when they plan to, there is no site chance that their role will be filled by someone else having a chance at the table. It could sit empty while the various duties are spread out among the remaining employees. The LW shouldn’t let that keep them from leaving but like, “well this person SHOULD retire” arguments don’t reflect the reality that most C suites don’t want to replace employees after they leave anymore.

    8. Happily Retired*

      This is exactly why I retired from FT federal employment* and I said that this was my reason for the timing when I announced my retirement.

      *I worked PT as a contractor at a lower-paying related job for a few more years before hanging it up for good.

    9. Anon for This*

      I’m in that category – not at full retirement age yet (remember it’s now 67 for most) – and am working hard to make sure that the people who work for me have the training and experience to step up when the time comes. But none of them are there yet in the few key areas where one cannot just learn on the job (e.g., the way our budget process works.) So if I left today we would probably hire from outside the organization – I doubt that is what you want. And if my retirement accounts take another hit post election, I may not be able to afford it either. So please don’t assume your directors can do so. Trust me, while I like my job and will find it hard to give it up, I am more than ready to hand over the reins when my team is ready.

    10. not nice, don't care*

      Maybe you should advocate for a return of mandatory retirement, but hopefully without the threat of age discrimination, which is why mandatory retirement was ended in the US decades ago.

    11. Resentful Oreos*

      This is called the “lump of labor fallacy” – that work is a fixed pie, and that it’s a moral benefit to give up your slice of the pie so someone else can have some. In reality, except for some high-demand and low-turnover professions (Congress! Working actors) there really isn’t such a thing as “well if only all the Olds would die or retire, voila, there’d be jobs for everyone!”

  23. AnonAnon*

    #3 Teams Chat: I can’t tell you how many times I have been in a teams group and had no idea who was in the group. Teams makes it hard to easily see who is in the group. I would bet people just assume you were invited instead of clicking through to make sure everyone’s icon is in the chat.

    1. Silver Robin*

      +1 exceedingly likely they do not realize you are there. Keep your tone light and just ask, “the chat sounds fun, can I join?” or something. Chances are you are going to get surprised reactions that you are not already there

    2. Grey Coder*

      Absolutely. People I work with have a terrible habit of setting up Teams chats for one purpose, then re-using them without checking if the right people are involved. So many conversations along the lines of “where is that information?” “oh I shared it in the Teams chat” “which one?” “ah, the one you’re not in”.

  24. HannahS*

    OP1, I don’t really see Bill’s social skills as your job to manage. If the issue was that his poor social skills were causing work problems–like if he was a manager and his reports didn’t trust him, or if his comments were so out of place that they were offensive–then sure, you’d have standing to say something. But it sounds like the main issue is that he’s just kind of awkward, maybe to the point his colleagues don’t want to be sociable with him; that’s not really your problem to solve.

    Bill is a full-grown adult who has obviously managed well enough in life to become employed at your organization. If he wants help with his social skills, he can ask for it (from Google, from a social skills coach, from a psychologist, from a friend.) If he ASKS you about it, like, if he asked about the path to becoming a manager then yes, I think it’s worth talking kindly about how he would need to develop his social skills in order to advance. But otherwise I think you have to let it be.

  25. Cat Lady in the Mountains*

    #4: it’s typical at my company for jobs to get posted 4-8 weeks after the person leaving put in notice. As the hiring manager I want to get them up quickly, but I might need time to debrief with the person leaving the role to figure out if the JD has to be changed, reassess our needs, look at the market and determine if the salary band still makes sense, etc. After I do all that it needs to go through a budget approval process, then an HR approval process – so if either the folks with approval power over our salary budget or our small HR team are at low capacity, this can add 3-4 weeks to the timeline. It’s always slower than it seems like it should be.

  26. shoryl*

    #4 – You’re not alone, and it is policy at my fortune 500 company to wait to post the job until 45 days after the departure of the previous person.
    I have theorized that they do this instead of spending the time on capacity planning to know what positions don’t need to be filled.

  27. Annony*

    #1: The comparison to Michael Scott was a little alarming. Socially awkward is fine, but if the jokes are straying into inappropriate territory then you do need to step in or if there is oversharing of his personal life. Inappropriate needs coaching/correction while awkward does not.

    1. I guess my entire company was the real work wife the whole time.*

      Yeah, I wondered about that too. I couldn’t make it through the first season because of just how awful that character was. I was hoping that the LW just…didn’t notice how, for example, racist this character was (at least in the first season — I couldn’t stomach much of it). Although that’s pretty bad if they LW didn’t notice, they might need some gentle coaching themselves.

      1. Annony*

        Most of his “jokes” were racist, sexist, homophobic or mean. And his awkward interactions tended to be him involving his reports in his romantic or financial problems. The examples given in the letter seem to be very different. Bringing up a topic everyone else was done with 10 minutes ago is a very different type of awkward.

      2. fhqwhgads*

        I think there’s two categories of people: those who watched The Office a lot and/or recently and remember the actual things that were said, and those who maybe watched The Office occasionally, or barely watched it at all but remember liking Steve Carrell in general, had a sense that his character was generally presented as a cringe idiot but harmless and do not recall any of the details.
        I interpreted the letter to be name dropping Michael Scott in the latter sense.

    2. 1-800-BrownCow*

      I didn’t read OPs letter as comparing socially awkward Bill to Michael Scott in the sense that Bill’s awkwardness is 100% like Michael Scott. The sentence before OP describes it as “harmless, socially awkward stuff”, harmless being the key here. I think the Michael Scott reference was more to give the sense of the level of awkwardness, to the point that everyone notices and no one knows what to say in the moment.

  28. I guess my entire company was the real work wife the whole time.*

    I love the idea that when someone has probably spent their entire life struggling a bit socially, that their boss can just give them a few gentle tips like “don’t make obscure references” and “don’t be loud”, and fix it all. Actually, I think that’s the dream for all of us weirdos! Give me my few gentle tips so I can do better! Please! Lol.

  29. Tony Howard*

    #1. I appreciate what Alison said at the end . I was once described by a favorite CEO as “Tony is quirky….in the best sense of the word!” I would forget about “coaching” Bill on social skills and focus on the work. But I also agree the weekly lunches should stop. I used to do monthly with my team of direct reports – focused around a “professional development” book study. We would read a chapter every month, then discuss. I also gave a pop quiz complete with tie-break answers, and prizes for the monthly winner. They seemed to enjoy them, and I believe it was a very effective team-building exercise.
    #2. On the dress code, word to the wise. If you are a male supervisor NEVER EVER EVER discuss apparent dress code violations with your female direct report behind closed doors UNLESS you have HR or another witness present. Lesson learned the Hard Way!

  30. Throwaway Account*

    OP 4, I just realized that every job I’ve had they don’t post the job till after the person is gone. They might prep and have it ready to go. But they don’t post it till the role is vacant. Some were govt jobs but not all.

  31. Nilsson Schmilsson*

    OP5, I doubt anyone on their deathbed wished they had worked more. Retire and never look back. From personal experience…it’s awesome.

  32. Another Kristin*

    OP1, this really stuck out at me:

    “Should I be taking any other action to make everyone like each other more?”

    Why??? I get that it’s nice when everyone is buddy buddy and getting along in the workplace, but IME you will never like everyone you work with on a personal level and it’s a bit…I don’t know…meddling to think that everyone should have these personal connections. It is absolutely 100% OK for your coworker to not be your cup of tea, as long as you treat them with professional courtesy and respect.

    Also, my 10 cents on the weekly lunch – I would really resent this. I need my lunch breaks to take care of personal business, relax, do some crafts, otherwise be a person, not a worker. I like my coworkers fine and the OCCASIONAL lunch or happy hour is great, but more like once a quarter than once a week.

    1. Myrin*

      Regarding your first paragraph, it also doesn’t seem like the team members necessarily dislike each other. Obviously OP is the one much better equipped to have a feeling for this but just from the way the situation is described in the letter, the reports might be liking each other just fine and liking each other more wouldn’t eliminate the awkwardness.

    2. blueberry muffin*

      To me, it comes across as a major overstep on the part of LW. It feels ick.

      Unless, I am actively ostracizing a co-worker (which I would never do) nor does it sound like the junior employees are, this feels like an attempt to “manage my personal life.”

      Somethings are just out of the purview of supervisor.

  33. nnn*

    Alison’s advice in #1 aligns with my own experience as an awkward employee.

    When we started working from home, my interpersonal relationships with my co-workers drastically improved, because “awkwardly trying to make conversation because we’re in the room together” was removed from the equation, and the signal-to-noise ratio of our interactions shifted dramatically in favour of “being helpful and useful about work-related matters.” And, after some time passed with that shift in balance, my reputation evolved towards “Helpful and reliable (and maybe a bit quirky?)” rather than “The person who says awkward things every time you talk to her”

  34. essie*

    OP2: I would definitely decline to do this. Once, while my own manager was out on extended leave, another manager asked a junior staffer to tell me she wanted to see me “out of the office” more. I had no idea what that even meant, I had a bunch of questions that the junior staffer obviously couldn’t answer, and more than anything, I was very upset that another coworker was now aware that this manager felt there was some issue with the amount of time I spent in my office. It felt so odd and undermining! Our work did not overlap in any way, and she did not have any authority over me or my department. It left a very bad taste in my mouth, and it definitely made me question the judgement of both her and the junior staffer who’d agreed to pass on the feedback.

  35. Corporate Refugee*

    WARNING***** Non-Thread related *****WARNING

    Alison, Your BLOG was just mentioned on the WGN morning news TV show in Chicago.

    Congratulations!!!!

  36. CubeFarmer*

    LW#1: I wonder if the forced-togetherness lunches compound the awkwardness, “Oh, great, better clear my calendar so we can listen to Bill make weird jokes for an hour.” Especially if a couple of these people also applied for Bill’s position, they might see you as trying a little to hard to squeeze Bill into the team.

    You also might need to consider that Bill’s simply going to take a long time to fit into the team’s, and/or might never be a good fit for the culture–even if he’s a stellar employee on paper.

  37. Kara*

    OP#5
    What I’m getting from your letter is that you’re not sure if your retirement will be permanent. That maybe after 6 months or a year or some indeterminate period of time, you’re going to want to resume your career – or maybe even start a new one. But you’re not sure and you don’t want to find yourself in a position where someone says “well I thought you were retired” or worse “what if we hire you and you ‘retire’ again”.

    First of all, I’m with Allison that you can retire anytime you like and don’t have to justify it to anyone, but you also don’t have to call it “retirement”. Just because your company doesn’t offer formal sabbaticals, doesn’t mean you can’t call your time off a sabbatical. Plenty of people take time off for personal enrichment, travel, education, kids, or just to *not work* for a while. So if it makes you feel more comfortable, you could tell your co-workers who ask that you’re taking a long term personal sabbatical, that you haven’t formalized your plans for your time off yet, and that you’re not sure where the future is going to take you but you’re looking forward to finding out!

    That way you’re not committing to being fully retired and you don’t have to give them details about what you’re doing next – because you’ve already said you don’t fully know. Of course if you do have some plans for your time off (travel or spending time with family or whatever) you can always tell them that, too, if you’re comfortable doing so.

    1. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      I agree with you. Unless you are taking advantage of some sort of retirement program at work there is no reason to call it an early retirement. I wouldn’t go into what the plans are, but I would make it clear that Xdate will be the last day and there wont be any change in that

    2. OP5*

      Thank you for your perspective! I do believe that I’ll likely go the route of framing my resignation as a sabbatical.

  38. Retired lawyer*

    OP5. My situation was somewhat similar to yours. I was a partner at a small-ish law firm and not at all near retirement age when I realized that I did not have to keep doing what I was doing. I told everyone I was retiring and the reactions were universally positive. As others have said, a few people said they were jealous and a few wondered if I would be bored. All were happy for me and sorry to see me go.

    It is definitely true that my leaving had effects on the firm, but if anyone was upset about those effects, it hasn’t affected my relationship with any of them (I still keep in touch with a number of my former partners). In my experience, most people realize that when people leave, the business has to adjust — there’s nothing special about that. People who get upset because people leave are all too often people who are going to get upset no matter what you do.

    The only mistake I made was that I extended my notice period WAY too long. I was extremely burnt out, but stuck around to finish up some things that were pending. We are talking months. If there is anything I regret about the process of retiring, it was that. I don’t really think the long notice period ended up leaving either me or my firm in a better place than we would have been if I’d left quickly.

    Oh, and I see that people are suggesting FMLA. YMMV, but I suspect that’s not going to really help. I took a five week vacation before I retired to try to see if that would help me recover and get back into it. I found it exceedingly hard to completely disconnect. But also, I found that when the five weeks were over, I REALLY didn’t want to go back. For me, a long break just be delayed the inevitable.

    1. OP5*

      Your experience with a long vacation echoes my own thoughts on taking the FMLA/long vacation route, in that I don’t believe I’ll get the recovery I need and would just be delaying the inevitable. You’ve also given me extra resolve to not be talked into a longer notice period, so thank you! I hope you’re enjoying retirement!

      1. Jack Russell Terrier*

        I think there’s also that it’s ‘hanging over my head’ – you’ll wonder how you’ll feel when ‘my time is up’. It doesn’t set up the best healing situation.

  39. Anne*

    #3 Filling job only after person left…our organization did that. It was hard.

    Supposedly it was something about the way funding worked. There were FTE (Full Time Equivalent) caps that were legally binding. Many agencies – especially smaller ones – ran at full capacity. So if someone leaves, they can’t hire the replacement until a spot is available. (Doesn’t necessarily have to be the same position. For instance if you are allowed 65 employees, you cannot have 66. But if you have some vacant positions elsewhere, gives you some wiggle room for an overlap with 2 people filling same position during turnover.)

    Makes for rough transition. Larger agencies have enough turnover that there’s a little flex in the numbers.

    I wasn’t in payroll or HR but I have to believe there are work-arounds. Likely the numbers are averaged. But if there’s even a chance of being out of compliance, they don’t want the risk.

  40. xylocopa*

    OP 2 – Oh man, don’t do it. Alison’s script is good.

    When I was an intern I was on the receiving end of a politely paraphrased “too much cleavage” conversation from a coworker. It would have been uncomfortable in any case, but this was someone outside of my (informal) chain of command, probably tapped for it because she was the youngest staff member, and the result was that I was never sure if this was coming from someone in authority–or just her own idea–or she had heard other people talking about it–or what. So I ended up feeling incredibly weird at work wondering who was thinking about my chest, when no one had ever given me that impression before. If it was from the boss I would still have wondered, but it would have cut out at least one of those worries.

  41. Smurfette*

    OP1

    >two of my junior level staff applied for this role … they were too junior for the responsibilities … but it for sure makes interacting with Bill extra grating

    OP needs to address that right away. Not getting a promotion you want should not affect how you interact with the person who did get the job.

    1. Resentful Oreos*

      I think this is a good point. Resentment – and even if it’s “hidden” it’s never as well hidden as the resenter thinks it is – can really interfere with team relationships and cohesiveness. If the junior staff people who applied are thinking “Why did this joker Bill get the job *I* wanted and deserved?” It will make things worse and more awkward for Bill and everyone.

      Maybe time to explain, if LW1 hasn’t done so already, that Fergus and Jane were too junior for the responsibilities, they needed a more senior person, and that’s why they were not hired. This could do a lot to clear the air. Saying “This position requires 10 years of experience, it’s in the job requirements, and it’s something we have to hold firm on” can take the sting out of being turned down, and they won’t be thinking “I could do the job sooo much better than Bill” if that’s the aura they are giving off.

  42. H.Regalis*

    LW1 – Stop putting any effort into this. You can’t make people like each other, and the more you push this, the worse it will get. If he’s awkward, then he’s awkward. Don’t try to force things. As long as everyone is getting their work done and people are reasonably polite to each other, that’s enough for a job.

  43. puddlejump*

    For Pete’s sake, let Bill be quirky. Open your heart to other ways of moving through the world. He could have many fine qualities that you are missing because you are so uncomfortable with his social awkwardness.

  44. George*

    #4 sounds like most tech jobs I’ve been in. 4 person team has someone leave, job is posted a month or two later after a lot of discussions to get approval. about 2-3 months after they leave, we get a new hire that adds even more to our workload as we train them for a couple months. Seems to be the norm in tech for me anyway.

  46. RHinCT*

    About #2, I kept hearing mention of dress code, dress code, dress code. If OP specified what the dress code was I missed it. That assumes, of course, that there is a dress code. I’m willing to bet that the dress code is ambiguous at best. Anyone want to be that it is rarely enforced?

    1. Resentful Oreos*

      The best dress codes are 1) not ambiguous, 2) fairly enforced (nobody singled out) and 3) there for a reason. For instance, requiring closed toed shoes on everyone, from the CEO on down, due to safety reasons. Or food service jobs requiring nets for long hair. Medical office jobs having everyone wear scrubs. These are the kind of clear, enforceable and gender and body-type neutral dress codes that are there for a reason.

  47. fhqwhgads*

    Here’s what generally happens when someone resigns where I work:
    Some ad hoc committee of managers get together to discuss if they want to replace the role exactly as it was, or shuffle the responsibilities around, maybe take something off that role’s plate and onto an existing person, take something from an existing person and put it on that role, completely revamp the nature of the role, not replace it as all and just reshuffle responsibilities, not replace it and replace it with something we don’t have at all right now, etc.
    It’ll take them anywhere from 2-4 weeks to decide that. — btw I’m not saying this is any kind of official, intentional process. It’s just what always friggin’ happens.
    Once they decide, then they write up a job description, submit it to HR, go through the usual internal steps, approval to post. That’ll usually take a couple weeks. Then it’s posted internally for a week, then it’s posted externally for a week.

    So yeah, unless someone gives at least 6 weeks notice – which no one other than VPs or higher does – pretty much no role is going to be posted before the person’s notice is over.

    I’m not saying my experience is universal, but given how often I’ve seen that pattern at every job I’ve had, with multiple employers, my perspective is that it’s not remotely surprising for a role to not be posted until after the departing employee is gone. Even if it were the intention to do it that quickly, hiring stuff ALWAYS takes longer than anyone thinks.

  48. Resentful Oreos*

    Regarding LW2 and dress codes: someone mentioned upstream about how TikTok and other social media platforms give a completely unrealistic idea of what to wear to work. Rather like the TV shows giving unrealistic ideas of what kind of shoes you can afford on a journalist’s salary, or apartments affordable on the wages of a barista.

    Back when women started entering the workforce outside of the usual nursing, teaching, retail, and secretarial work that employed most white-collar women until the 70’s, there were a lot of books like John Molloy’s Dress for Success and so on to offer guidance. This was when there was such a thing as wearing suits to the office! Molloy would probably be horrified to know that yoga pants are In for many of us at work, but, at least he and his imitators gave realistic and basically sound advice about what constituted work wear.

    I think Corporette used to fill that niche in the internet era, but it’s a bit of a Wild West now that most offices have relaxed their dress codes. In any case, I don’t think a peer such as LW2 should be responsible for telling a coworker to dress “more professionally” or whatever, especially *especially* when it comes to a sensitive topic like body type. “You’ve got spinach in your teeth” is fine. “The office manual says closed toe shoes only” is also fine. Stuff that can be fixed in the moment (spinach) or is clearly in the manual but a newcomer might have overlooked (shoes) is fine. But don’t send a peer to broach the kind of subject that is better handled by management, and gingerly.

  49. Me*

    #5: if you are in the United States, make sure you have medical needs taken care of – insurance, copayments, out of pocket costs. I have read that most people who retire early do not take into account how much they will really need for health care costs.
    I wish you well and hope you enjoy the fruits of your labor.

  50. hello*

    LW3 here – I want to echo Alison’s note after her response!! I wrote in before the strike started, but I have been respecting the picket line the entire time! And I believe my coworkers have as well (or at least they haven’t talked about the games in the last couple of days).

    If you’re looking to scratch the itch of brain teasers, LinkedIn (I know, I know) has some extremely simple games that are fun to get out of the way in the morning.

  51. Vg*

    On #4, firms will do this when they are trying to save money and so they will slow the progression of rehiring. The very large financial firm I work for does this during tight times.

  53. Betty Beep Boop*

    As a person who a) has to buy bras in Good God and Holy Hell, and b) has done some jobs that involved a lot of climbing around, there is one situation where LW2 actually SHOULD quietly have that word:

    If the issue is that her current work clothes are gapping or shifting revealingly while she moves around as she works.

    In THAT case, yeah, tell her.

  54. teapot community manager*

    LW1: if Bill himself agrees it is an issue and wants to change it, perhaps you have the discretion to let him spend professional development time and budget on some social coaching. Or if you don’t have much discretion send him to something like Toastmasters. But if he doesn’t agree you can’t shift this.

Comments are closed.