should I have called campus police, my coworker is constantly away, and more

by Alison Green on June 24, 2025

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

1. Should I have called campus police?

I’ve retired for a while now, but I have a question about the past. I worked in a science laboratory that didn’t interact with the public, in a field that attracts individuals who seek confirmation of their diagnoses and treatments.

One day, I was having lunch when a peculiar man entered our lunchroom, looking for our laboratory. Our building has robust security measures, including guards and visitor vetting, so I assumed he was there for official business. He requested to speak to my principal investigator, who was out of the office. He appeared restless, evasive, and somewhat uneasy. He asked if I could relay any questions since I wasn’t sure when she would return.

As it turned out, he was one of those individuals who firmly believed they were “infected” and sought “treatment.” I explained that our laboratory conducted only pure research and did not handle patients. I collected his contact information and he left. Other people in the lunchroom soon approached me to inquire about him.

When my boss returned, I informed her about the incident. She expressed some concern and suggested that I should have called the campus police on him. I explained that I had considered that, but he was polite and I felt no threat and I believed it would have been excessive to involve the police on someone who was polite and compliant. I felt I was physically stronger and faster than him, and as the son of a law enforcement officer, I was more than capable and determined enough to protect myself from an unarmed individual.

Now, I should add a few more factors: I was a rare Black researcher in science. In 35 years, I never met my racial counterpart in another lab. As I mentioned, my late father was in law enforcement, and my brother and I had a distressing experience walking to our elementary school. Two policemen stopped us and made us stand with our hands on a fence while our classmates walked by until a woman arrived to identify us. She looked at us puzzled and told the policemen we were kids and didn’t match the description at all. We were gruffly let go. My dad contacted the police department, found out who the officers were, and made them come to our house and apologize. My brother and I spent the rest of the year fearfully walking to school, afraid of revenge. I think of calling the police like drawing a gun: you only do it when you fear enough that you’ll ensure the other person has a very bad day.

Another wrinkle was that the lab was predominantly female, and I understand that safety is a top priority for women. Hence, I understand her caution, but I’m not sure she fully comprehends my own caution. Calling the cops is the ultimate option for me, but is it the most prudent business decision?

I’m not going to second-guess your decision; you were the one who was there and had to assess the situation based on everything you were picking up about it. For all we know, your calm, respectful response even could have been what kept things from escalating. I will quibble with “I was stronger and faster and could protect myself from an unarmed individual” since you presumably couldn’t know for sure that he was unarmed. But it ended peacefully, so I’m not going to say you made the wrong call.

That said, I do think your employer’s security procedures matter and generally should be followed. For example, if it was a secure area and an outsider shouldn’t have been able to gain access at all, that’s something I’d report (even if for no other reason than that they need to know it happened so it can be better prevented in the future).

2. How can I stop feeling resentful about all the vacation time my coworker takes?

My coworker Annika and I are the only two full-time employees on our team, and one of us will cover for the other when needed. My issue is that Annika always seems to be on leave and I’m left trying to juggle everything.

Annika is currently in her home country. She was supposed to be back this week but requested an extension of her leave from our manager, Kathryn. Kathryn approved the request but said she did tell her it wasn’t ideal given she was also away for a conference the week prior to her leave and has taken leave several times this year.

We do have quite generous leave entitlements, but feel like I can never take mine. Annika demands detailed handover notes from me if I’m away for two days (even though I don’t think she reads them properly) but I don’t get any from her when she’s away for six weeks. I’ve often gone to work while feeling sick because I know she’s away. When I had Covid, she gave me two minutes’ notice that I would need to run a Zoom meeting she had scheduled because she was busy and lost track of time (she “forgot” I was unwell and I did say I could keep working from home since I wasn’t bedridden, so that’s probably my fault). There have been several times where I’ve mentioned wanting to take a week off at a particular time, and she’s told me I can’t because she’ll be away.

Annika is obviously entitled to take her leave, but how do I get over my resentment?

By advocating more assertively for what you need!

First and foremost, take your leave. Annika doesn’t get to tell you that you can’t; take whatever leave you want to take, just as she does. If you can’t both be gone at once and she books the whole year up early, start booking yours earlier too … and if that doesn’t solve it, tell your manager you’re unable to take your own leave because of Annika’s schedule and ask for her to help so you can use the time off that’s part of your compensation.

Second, if your workload is too high because Annika is gone so frequently, dump that squarely in the lap of your manager: “I’m not able to do my own job plus Annika’s this frequently. I can do X and Y, or Y and Z, but not all of it. How do you want me to prioritize?” You don’t need to just do it all.

And if you want detailed handover notes from Annika the way she gets from you, ask for them! Or if you don’t want them and don’t think it’s a good use of your time to provide them to her, take that to your boss as well.

Right now you’re letting Annika call all the shots without speaking up for what you want and need. Start speaking up!

3. When should I tell my boss I’ll be resigning after my maternity leave?

I’m pregnant and due this fall, and my employer offers 12 weeks of paid parental leave. Recently my husband and I have been researching daycare options and reviewing our budget and have realized it will make the most sense financially and logistically for me to leave my job and take a few years off to care for our child until they’re eligible for preschool. Childcare is really expensive in our area, and while my organization offers good benefits, the pay isn’t great.

I’d really like to utilize my paid leave, so I’m struggling to decide when I should notify my supervisor that I’m not planning to return. I’m a crucial member of my team, and I feel guilty allowing them to think I’ll be back to work after my leave and make plans accordingly. However, I’ve been warned by my family that if I tell them ahead of time, they might terminate my employment preemptively to avoid having to pay out leave for an employee who isn’t coming back. I’ve worked really hard at this company for subpar pay for eight years and have never taken leave before or even used all my sick days, so I sort of feel like I’ve earned this paid leave. Is it better to let my supervisor know in advance that I’m planning to resign after my leave is up so they can adjust their plans and start looking for my replacement, or should I come back to work briefly after my leave expires to formally give notice and tie up any loose ends?

Don’t tell them you’re not planning to come back after your maternity leave. First, it’s always possible that your plans could change between now and then (your husband’s work situation could change, you could find you dislike staying at home, all sorts of things); there’s no point in locking yourself in early. Second, at some companies if you don’t come back after parental leave, you’ll be responsible for paying your health insurance costs from those three months, and the paid leave itself may be contingent on agreeing to return for some length of time. (Check your employee handbook on this.)

Employers are aware people don’t always choose to come back after leave. Prioritize protecting yourself and your family.

4. 60% of my team are family members and they all want to go on vacation together

I am a manager of a five-person parts department (split between two office staff, two warehouse staff, and myself).

Three staff members (both warehouse people and one office person) who are all family, and they have all asked for the same dates off to go on a family holiday. This will leave only me and one other person. What should I do? Do I refuse the holiday?

It really depends on what the impact will be on the ability of your department to function. Will it leave you with enough coverage? Will it bring work to a complete halt / leave important functions undone / leave customer needs unfilled, or just be slightly less convenient? If it’s more toward the “less convenient but doable” end of the scale, I’d try to make it work (while also telling them it might not be something you can approve again), but if it’s more toward the “truly unworkable” end of things, it’s okay to explain that you can’t approve it because of coverage needs. If there are modifications that would make it work, like a shorter time away, mention that.

For what it’s worth, having three members of a five-person department be family members is not ideal, for a whole bunch of reasons. This is definitely one of them.

5. Citizenship delay has cost me a job offer for the second time

Thanks to the triplicate bureaucracy here in Germany, my citizenship application has taken years. Finally, last month I had my second to last meeting and was told I could in good faith apply to the jobs I wanted to (at the only big employer within an hour’s drive, across the border in Austria). I was given a date to reach back out to the foreigner office to make my last appointment and wrap everything up, five weeks ago. Today was that date, and in the meantime I secured a job offer at the big company.

Except, of course, today I was told “it could be two weeks more … or a month.” And, the kicker is, this is the second time I’ve had to do this to this employer in six months, having had another offer before. This time I believed my citizenship officer who said, “I am 99% sure everything is fine, this looks great, I’m sending positive energy for your job interview!” Fool me twice, right?

Now I can’t think of a script that won’t burn the last bridge with the only employer around, and I want to put the blame squarely where it belongs: “Hi, I can’t believe I have to share this, but my immigration officer encouraged me to apply, stating it was a certainty that everything would be processed by this week. I’ve now been told it could be another month.”

They can’t hold that job, I’m sure, and while there are others, I worked in recruiting myself and wouldn’t hire myself based on this. I needed this job so bad that once my citizenship does come through I’m having to consider moving to another EU country with a lower cost of living if this company won’t be able to hire me.

Ugh, I’m sorry. All you can do is be straightforward, and your proposed script would be fine to use. I might add, “I of course understand you may not be able to hold the job until then, particularly when they’ve shown we can’t rely on their estimated timelines, and I’m so sorry about this.”

They might be perfectly used to dealing with this and not surprised or put off at all. Either way, though, just explaining what happened and apologizing is the only way to go.

You may also like:
{ 253 comments }

{ 253 comments… read them below }

  1. ACN36*

    OP #2 – Let me get this straight – a colleague at the same level as you is trying to tell you when you can take your leave? That’s a huge red flag right there, in my opinion. She’s not your boss!

    I agree that a discussion with your boss is needed. It sounds like Annika is abusing the benefits – especially if her coworker (you) are having to consistently take up her slack – and as a result, feel like you can’t take your leave and utilize your own benefits.

    I agree with Allison. Put your requests in as early as you can and take leave when you need to.

    While I’m a huge supporter of work-life balance, Annika sounds selfish and inconsiderate, and she shouldn’t get to tell you what to do, especially if you are both of equal standing position-wise.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      I don’t think Annika is directly telling OP when to take leave, it’s more that OP feels they can’t because they have too much to do.

            1. happybat*

              I was – although truthfully, I do think standing up to this Annika (in a quiet, firm sort of manner) would be No Bad Thing.

            1. Storm in a teacup*

              And the jeep!
              I was today years old when I learned the US version of the show was hosted by Erin Brockovich!

      2. Your Local Password Resetter*

        Right, it sounds like OP is always trying to make things work regardless of what Annika and Kathryn are doing, but nobody explicitly told her to do all of that. It’s just very convenient for everyone else, and she never really pushed back.

        There is a very good chance that if she schedules her own time off and doesn’t automatically pick up all of Annika’s share, then everyone will just deal with it another way. And if they do push her, that’s an opportunity to directly address these problems with Kathryn.

        1. Momma Bear*

          I think Kathryn needs to bear the fallout if OP really needs the time off. She’s letting Annika have an extended leave perhaps without having to deal with the consequences. OP needs to take time off and let the boss deal with Annika…or not.

        2. Nobby Nobbs*

          If I’ve read the codenames right…be B’Elanna, not Harry, OP. Stand up for yourself.

      3. WheresMyPen*

        “There have been several times where I’ve mentioned wanting to take a week off at a particular time, and she’s told me I can’t because she’ll be away.”

        Kinda sounds like she is… But yeah OP, it’s your manager who should be deciding when you can and can’t take leave, not Annika.

        1. nerak*

          She should not be discussing her plans with Annika at all, she only needs to run it past Kathryn, who should be the one who determines if there’s an issue with coverage.

          1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

            This. OP, Annika is not in charge of approving your time off, Kathryn is. Stop discussing your leave with Annika and just request it. If Kathryn says can’t do it, Annika is off, ask when can you take your leave?

            Also be very sure that boss is aware of the issues her frequent absences are causing. Boss might not see a problem with extending Annika’s leave because the work is getting done. But if that stops happening, or you make it boss’s problem not yours, boss will start being less lenient with Annika — hopefully. If she dumps it all back on you as a problem to solve yourself, well you have your answer. Time to polish up the old resume because your boss sucks and isn’t going to change.

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

            unless Kathryn has directed them to work with each other for coverage. Thats what I have to do. But in my case I have a great boss who if the other person is not able to cover will find coverage for me.

            1. Spreadsheet Queen*

              But then the department can have a shared vacation calendar set up by IT. We’ve done this at multiple employers. You put the leave you’ve had approved in the calendar (or your tentative leave – marked as such – if you’ve requested it but not heard back yet). Then if you’re trying to schedule something, you can just look at what’s already in there and request time that isn’t already scheduled. If you need to overlap a day or two, then you might have a longer conversation with your boss on how to make that work. This stops all the “but I was thinking of taking that other week…” that is happening here. Plus, the supervisor has a fuller picture of what all is happening if one person is taking all the “good” weeks or using a much larger than “normal” amount of leave (if this is an “unlimited” leave kind of place – otherwise, your leave is your leave!)

          3. Momma Bear*

            I agree. Let the boss approve/not approve. If she doesn’t approve because Annika will already be away, that is an additional conversation to have re: workload and scheduling time off – with Kathryn. Annika doesn’t get to call the shots here.

        2. Hyaline*

          It kinda sounds to me like OP is approaching this like “We should discuss among the two of us the best way to divide time and take leave so that it’s not too burdensome on either of us” and Annika is like “I’m looking out for number one” and in reality–this should all just go through the manager who can approve time away and balance workloads (or can’t, but that’s a separate issue). OP needs to stop silently managing and let the manager manage.

      4. Seeking Second Childhood*

        She has:

        “There have been several times where I’ve mentioned wanting to take a week off at a particular time, and she’s told me I can’t because she’ll be away.”

        1. Ray B Purchase*

          Not to overly read between the lines, but this could just be that Annika is telling LW that she’s already going to be out so for the sake of coverage LW wouldn’t be able to also go, and not explicitly disallowing LW to take leave. I definitely relate to how frustrating it is in a 2 person department where your ability to take PTO is predicated on your coworker not requesting it first.

          Either way, it’s something LW should take up with Kathryn and not just take Annika at her word because there might be more options than LW is aware of.

      5. ACN36*

        OP typed, “There have been several times where I’ve mentioned wanting to take a week off at a particular time, and she’s told me I can’t because she’ll be away.”

        That tells me ‘Annika’ is telling her when she can/can’t take leave.

      6. Cookie Monster*

        But she kind of is: “There have been several times where I’ve mentioned wanting to take a week off at a particular time, and she’s told me I can’t because she’ll be away.”

      7. H3llifIknow*

        I beg to differ: “There have been several times where I’ve mentioned wanting to take a week off at a particular time, and she’s told me I can’t because she’ll be away.” Annika is pretty clearly telling OP when they can/cannot take leave. Something I learned in my 25 years of experience is, “If you lay down and stencil WELCOME on your ass, people WILL walk all over you.”

    2. Alison but not that Alison*

      Yeah…It could be that but I also think LW should consider if she is making her needs/wishes known. I am pretty proactive about using my benefits- I give my colleagues the heads up before I submit leave requests and am generally happy to shift for personal events, school holidays or alternate important holidays…but my benefits are gonna be used and I am not waiting until Christmas Eve to book my interstate/international travel “just in case you want it”. I am also pretty open about the kind of handover I need if they want things to be done. I am happy to provide the same in return but if you don’t tell me what you need I am not gonna spend hours writing a document that you don’t even read.

      Anika isn’t blameless- Ideally she would be emotionally intelligent enough to notice LW isn’t taking her leave and ask about it and ask about handover expectations…but it is a leap to say it is a red flag and totally in the wrong. If anything I am giving the boss the side eye for approving additional leave without consulting LW and/or discussing work load

      1. ACN36*

        If just one of her many leaves is 6 weeks long, and she doesn’t give OP instructions that Annika demands of OP when she goes on leave, that shows how inconsiderate Annika is, at the very least.

        YES, use your leave – Of course! But 6 weeks is more than many people get all year, and that’s just one of Annika’s leaves, it sounds like. I’d be curious how many days a year Annika takes on average – and how that compares to other Staff at their company.

        To me, if Annika is taking 2-3x the leave as everyone else (which no doubt affects her work performance and creates a burden on OP as her co-worker), that’s abuse of the system. I agree that part of this is on the manager. However, one shouldn’t need your manager to make you a considerate and decent person.

    3. Rogue Slime Mold*

      OP2, two thoughts to adjust your framing:

      • It’s good for the default to be operating as though everyone is reasonable. However, you do need to be able to pull out some other responses when someone is unreasonable, which Annika’s insistence on unbalanced leave has become. (And you don’t have to parse whether the person is twirling a villainous mustache or just clueless.)

      • Sometimes people don’t realize there’s a problem because one person is pulling out all the stops to fix things so the problem won’t impact anyone else. You need to stop doing that–it’s possible that Annika and your manager are unaware that there’s a problem they need to address effort to fix, because from their perspectives it all works out.

      1. AnonInCanada*

        Bingo! Kathryn doesn’t see the problem with Annika taking all this time off because OP’s cleaning up the messes she’s leaving. OP: You need to stop doing that, so Kathryn understands the impact of Annika taking all that time off. You need to put yourself first, and if Annika doesn’t like it, tough. You’re levelling the playing field, and any good boss should see that.

    4. Sheworkshardforthemoney*

      Yes, Annika has too much control over the department, not just the LW because the responsibility for doing the extra work is falling on her and no one else.
      I had a similar issue and my response was to refuse to work extra hours to cover for my co-worker. It was hard but I deliberately left their work unfinished and when asked, explained that I didn’t have the time to do their job and mine. That shifted the responsibility back to my co-worker who then had to plan their time off more strategically and not assume that someone would pick up the slack especially at the last moment.

    5. Hyaline*

      I don’t think Annika is abusing the benefits by *taking the time off that is part of her compensation.* Annika is not a very considerate or thoughtful person, per the way OP describes her, but *taking her PTO* does not make her the bad guy. This is a management issue. Kathryn should not be approving leave if it’s at a bad time, too much at once, whatever–but OP also should not be abdicating her right to take PTO just because Annika takes so much of it. Much of this needs to be punted right back to the manager to deal with it–and there may be issues to deal with. Maybe the organization can’t actually function if both of their employees take their allotted leave, which means they’re understaffed, or maybe the manager isn’t appropriately allocating work while Annika is away (either is clueless, is a jerk who thinks people can just magically double their workload, or is getting pressure from above–see option one again). But Annika taking her time isn’t the real issue–the real issue that the manager needs to actually manage and won’t do that if OP doesn’t make this her problem.

      OP needs to stop taking the burden on herself for whatever reason and make/let the manager manage!

      1. ACN36*

        I believe that if Annika takes so much leave that her coworker is affected regularly, and that her work isn’t getting completed by her, then there’s a potential issue with abusing leave. OP mentioned one of her leaves being 6 weeks. How many people in the US even get that for the entire year, let alone for one trip/leave. OP also mentioned her taking several leaves. So, exactly how much time off is ‘Annika’ taking? Meanwhile, OP feels like they can’t even take a few days or a week here and there.

        I do agree that the manager needs to get involved though.

        1. Starbuck*

          Yeah, all of that is on the manager, not really Annika. If it doesn’t actually work, boss needs to grow a spine and tell her no, not this time. If it were you… wouldn’t you take as much paid leave as your boss would let you? I would. It doesn’t seem to have any consequences for her.

          1. ACN36*

            Starbuck, I see your point, but exactly how much leave is she taking? Just one of her leaves is 6 consecutive weeks, one of many, it sounds like. That 6 weeks is more than most people in the US get in an entire year. How much time are others taking in the office?

            Yes, the manager needs to step up, and OP should “pretend Annika doesn’t exist”, so to say, when scheduling her own time, but at what point does Annika’s decision cross a line? We shouldn’t need a supervisor to act ethically.

            YES, use that leave you earned! I’m a big proponent of that. But, no, I wouldn’t use more than my share. Our team communicates, and we all (almost always) get the leave we want.

            1. Starbuck*

              And that is great (I do the same), but some people work to live, ya know? From Annika’s end, the amount of leave she gets is what she’s taking, clearly! Some of it might be unpaid, who knows, but that seems her choosing. My point is more, why would Annika change what she’s doing when LW has helped make it SO EASY for her to do this? Add some friction already!

              1. ACN36*

                I mean, I work to live, as well. However, when one accepts a job, one agrees to the job description and to meeting certain standards and fulfilling tasks. The supervisor needs to be made aware that there is an issue, and her leave is affecting her performance, and her tasks and responsibilities have been falling onto her co-worker (OP).

                Yes, friction needs to be added. Perhaps Annika would then be forced to re-evaluate things. Also, I’d be very surprised if she had that much paid leave, unless some is unpaid or perhaps it’s FMLA (which is a different situation), etc.

  2. seven of nine*

    hi #3!! i did exactly what you did, back when my kid was born. it went absolutely fine. i actually emailed AAM because i was totally in a panic about the same things as you, and she gave me the same good advice, which i took (via email, i should say! there’s no post to refer to). i left detailed notes & documentation before my leave, and 3 weeks before it was set to end i contacted my boss & HR rep and put the wheels in motion. didn’t have to pay back any of the leave $$ and the department has been just fine without me, i’ve heard.

    it was the best decision i could have made for myself & my family. go for it!!!!

    1. Lalchi11*

      I would just caution OP to be careful about reading all the leave policies before taking action. Unfortunately, there are many many companies where benefits and even leave pay need to be paid back if you don’t return. Also, OP should be careful about timing the notice. Some companies will just cut off pay and benefits as soon as you give notice. So, if she gives notice a couple weeks ahead of the end of her leave, she should be prepared to not be paid going forward.

      1. soontoberetired*

        yes, you do need to be careful. At one time my company would expect payback if you did not come back. They’ve changed that somewhat, but I am pretty sure you still have to come back for at least a couple of weeks. The leave is much more generous than it once was (at one time if you weren’t back after 4 weeks, they’d terminate you. 4 weeks!!).

      2. Sloanicota*

        Yeah, I feel like I more commonly see people return from leave but immediately give their two weeks and deal with the handover (does require you to secure 2 weeks of childcare though).

        1. Hyaline*

          FWIW this is one reason I’ve seen new parents split parental leave–they both take the first couple weeks, then Parent One takes the rest of their leave while Parent Two goes back to work, then Parent Two takes leave when Parent One goes back–sometimes just long enough to fulfill those return to work policies.

          1. Momma Bear*

            The other thing OP may need to consider is health insurance. She should find out exactly when it would end if she quits – is it an end of the month thing or immediately?

            1. Sar*

              And the best way to find this out is by asking people who have left the office how transitioning insurances went, NOT HR. DO NOT TIP YOUR HAND, lol.

    2. Kay*

      I would also caution OP about notifying them prior to leave being over. While it is great that it worked out well in your instance, there are plenty of places can and have been known to be less accommodating. Unless OP is sure her company won’t require the leave to be paid back, and is ready to hear “today is your last day”, wait to disclose.

      1. seven of nine*

        yes, of course, to everyone’s added comments! i didn’t want to write a novel in my original reply, but i did reach out to several trusted colleagues first, and did my research thoroughly into our leave payback policies, health insurance coverage, etc. i wasn’t in a position at the time to secure 2 weeks of childcare, so i knew i’d be using the end of my leave as my notice period. definitely not advocating for trusting HR and flying on a hope & a prayer! do your research but if everything checks out; GO FOR IT!

    3. Laura Ingalls Wildest*

      LW 3, look at it this way – while you are a crucial member of the team, they’re going to find a way to get the work accomplished while you are out. So it can be done. Make your decision at the time that is right for you.

  3. Viette*

    #5 Immigrating is a destabilizing and vulnerable position to be in (I know). You sound like this feels like is a catastrophe and potentially like the loss of everything you have planned (job, residence in Germany). You sound desperate for certainty and a concrete outcome, neither of which are in your control or grasp.

    I do think you need to follow AAM’s advice. I don’t think this is torpedoing your chances at ever getting a job at that company. That company hires in Germany. The German immigration process is like this. They may have seen this play out before. If you applied again without citizenship, it would be very reasonable for them to decline to proceed. However, if you wait to apply again until you have citizenship, I would not expect them to reject your application on the basis of this past experience.

    Companies in very bureaucracy-heavy countries are typically used to the consequences of the bureaucracy. I would advise to avoid getting locked into the idea that this company is going to be disgusted with you personally and think less of you as an applicant for being unable to control or predict the immigration process.

    1. Lottie*

      I totally agree. I work in an office in Berlin. On several occasions there have been freelance workers from abroad who have confidently told us that the tax office has promised them their freelance tax number will be there in two weeks. As an office we are not at all surprised when that’s not the case and do not think that reflects badly on them.

      1. Tau*

        Also in Germany, and I swear every single one of my friends and coworkers going through the citizenship process (or more generally immigration processes) has some horror story often stretching across multiple years. The bureaucracy is bad here in general, but *that* part is especially bad. Anyone who’d blame the people caught in the wheels of it is being unreasonable, IMO.

    2. WS*

      +1, I’m in Australia, where all kinds of visa processing are getting longer and more complex every year. I also work in the healthcare sector, meaning we have a lot of international staff applying. This kind of delay is an extremely common occurrence, and while it’s incredibly frustrating for everyone, it’s absolutely not the applicant’s fault. The only time we’ve had real problems is when people have tried to cover up delays or lied, meaning we’re left with last-minute staffing gaps rather than ones we could have planned for given time. Be direct, blame bureaucracy, apologise but not excessively. They will have been through this before.

    3. OP#5*

      I wrote that letter and am so grateful for Alison’s and your response because they are reassuring. Ultimately this all played out last week and I ended up taking a different approach after a lot of evaluation. Because of my desperation, the job I had applied for both times was an assistant position to a large 20+ person team. The thing is, I have project management and team lead experience and an MBA and was wildly over experienced/qualified for both positions. So I declined this position based on that, sending the following email:

      Dear Susie,
      I wanted to write and thank you very much for the opportunity to interview again and for considering me for the assistant position at TeaKettle Co. I truly appreciate your time and the positive interactions I’ve had with your team throughout both this and the previous process.

      While I remain genuinely enthusiastic about TeaKettle Co. as a company and would be excited to work with you in the future, I’ve come to realize that the assistant role isn’t the best long-term fit. When I first applied, personal circumstances made me more open to assistantship positions; however, those circumstances have shifted, and I’ve decided to refocus on roles that more closely reflect my experience leading projects and contributing across departments.

      With that in mind, I’ve decided to step back from this opportunity and continue my search for roles better aligned with my background in project coordination and strategic work. Thank you again for your consideration. -OP 5
      —

      To this email they replied and said they would be happy to consider me again in the future, which is lovely, but at the moment I’m of course having to see if my unemployment lasts long enough to meet the citizenship situation. Otherwise I will move. At least I wasn’t motivated by panic or frustration in my reply and maybe I will get a chance at a job that is more suited to my background.

      1. Kay*

        It sounded like you need to take anything once you get citizenship or you will have to move. I would think your email closes the door to taking a “foot in the door” kind of position at the only employer around and it might have just been better to have gone with Alison’s truthful option.

        As someone who hires, I am not going to hold bureaucracy against you, but I will think twice if you decline a role citing a lack of fit alignment but apply for anything that isn’t a perfect fit. I don’t mean to be harsh, but I say this to prepare you for what a hiring manager will be thinking if you apply for something other than a project coordinator role in the future.

        1. OP #5*

          I can absolutely appreciate this perspective. Between writing Alison and when this letter was published, my spouse secured a miracle, better job, so I no longer had to apply for assistantship positions that paid slightly more than minimum wage out of desperation. I also spoke to several neighbors that worked for said company who said if I were to take the assistantship positions, I would be locked in with no track out otherwise, other than assisting higher executives, and no chance for project management, so I had to weigh this advice too. But I completely understand your point of view and take it quite seriously.

    4. Nebula*

      Came here to say this! I’ve never even lived in Germany, I just have friends there and have something of an interest in German culture as I speak the language, and I know that the immigration process and any dealings with German bureaucracy take forever. The company will be aware of this, and it doesn’t reflect badly on you to have believed what the immigration officer told you.

      Also, you know your situation better than I do, so this is probably redundant: are you sure they won’t hold the job? I’m just thinking if you’re American and thinking of standard American time frames here, then you might be under the impression the extra time is too long to wait. An extra two weeks, or even a month, just means that they’ll have to wait a similar amount of time to if they’d hired someone with a standard four-week notice period. I wouldn’t assume that they won’t hold it for you – but I do understand that probably you’ve taken all that into account and there’s a particular reason here why they won’t.

      1. Emmy Noether*

        Standard notice period is actually three months to the end of a calendar month, so hiring timelines are typically 4-5 months. So, yeah. Usually a lot of willingness to wait a bit for a good candidate. (The uncertainty is the problem here – they’ll probably wait an extra month if it’s a sure thing, but if there’s a chance of more delays, they may want to cut their losses and get a jump on finding someone else).

        1. Nebula*

          Right, I just googled standard notice period Germany and it came up with four weeks as a minimum, but suspected it was probably longer in reality. Thanks for clarifying!

    5. Cam*

      Yup also in Germany and this is definitely the norm. Can work remotely from Germany as a freelancer in the interim?

      1. OP #5*

        OP 5 here, thanks for the question, my original reply to all of this isn’t posting for some reason. Unfortunately, freelancing makes German and US taxes an absolute nightmare and would void me of my unemployment benefits, which, because of where I live in a very rural area, would be devastating. There are no other jobs that would give me as much back after taxes as I get from my unemployment thanks to my experience. But that unemployment still also isn’t enough to live on in this high cost area for the long term. But I appreciate the suggestion!

    6. Foreign Girl*

      Am a US citizen in Germany myself.
      I’ve applied for dual (US-German) citizenship several months ago, and even the form stated processing would take 18 months.
      German news even talked about two years.
      And shortly after I applied several bureaucrats in the local citizenship department were arrested for selling residencies and work permits. So it’s gonna take a long time.
      However, the lack of qualified workers in Germany is so bad that companies will work with you on the problem!

      1. ButterBrezeln*

        Oh hello, fellow Münchner! Yes, our bureau is mayhem now. My partner had to pay a lawyer to help him get a residency extension that they just handed me. Why? No idea. Our applications were basically identical.

      2. Indisch blau*

        I also applied for German citizenship recently – after living and working here for many years. I was told to be patient and that I would hear from them in over a year. I’m hoping for around 15 months.

    7. MK*

      Do non-“bureaucracy-heavy countries”. It’s true that some are worse than others, but some level of goverment bureaucracy is inevitable in modern societies (and as someone who has worked for the goverment for close to 20 years, I must say that a lot of the time there is actually a reason things work the way they do, no matter how opaque and irrational it feels like from the other end). Even in countries with very streamlined processes in general, a beaurocratic delay is always a possibility, the immigration process is particularly prone to this, and most people understand that things are just the way they are and often there is nothing to be done but do what you are told and then wait.

      2. Emmy Noether*

        I will say I was pleasantly suprised by Switzerland (compared to Germany, for example). Obviously there’s still some bureaucracy, but the Swiss are surprisingly pragmatic.

        As much as I dislike bashing my country, I fear that characterizing Germany as relatively bureaucracy-heavy is accurate. On the upside, people will absolutely understand and commiserate with you if you get a particularly bad case.

      3. bamcheeks*

        I don’t think it’s necessarily about size of bureaucracy so much as who the bureaucracy sees itself as in service to, or to put it another way, whether they consider you their customer. Something feels bureaucratic when it is not oriented on meeting your needs as an individual, whether it’s healthcare, student service, immigration or whatever, and demands you fit into their processes. You can have just as much paperwork and risk management and six-step sign-off processes happening behind the scenes, but it will feel more bureaucratic if the system doesn’t give a shit how long you wait and how inconvenient (or actively dangerous) it is for you, vs being designed to be convenient or at least transparent and straight-forward to navigate.

        (signed: someone whose job is currently to re-design processes to make them less bureaucratic and more customer-oriented!)

        1. Great Frogs of Literature*

          bamcheeks, I’d love to hear more about your job sometime. Friday? Email Alison?

          1. bamcheeks*

            I am actually relatively new in this job and I should probably wait until I’m sure I know what it is! :D

        2. MK*

          I wish you the best, but I think you are overestimating how much the average citizen cares about the intention behind the process, if the process itself is frustrating and time consuming. Also, it very often is the case that “who the process is in service of” is a complicated matter. Healthcare and student services should have clear priorities, because their mission should be serving patients and students; immigration’s sole goal isn’t to help people immigrate, they operate, at least partly as gatekeepers.

          1. bamcheeks*

            I think you are overestimating how much the average citizen cares about the intention behind the process

            That’s the opposite of my point: I wasn’t saying that average citizens should care about the intention behind the process, but that bureaucratic systems should care how well they operate for the user.

            And yeah, it is absolutely the case that most immigration systems aren’t designed without the intention of being fair or navigable for migrants. That’s actually a very bad thing. It is entirely possible to design a process which excludes some and includes others and still make it user-oriented.

      4. GreenApplePie*

        Can’t speak for immigration related procedures but in China it’s possible to get around low-level bureaucracy with bribery or family networking. My dad has lived in the US for 30+ years now and he’s still frustrated that you can’t throw money at the DMV to make them go faster.

        1. Annie*

          Isn’t that a good thing, or are you just joking around? I admit I might hand a DMV worker a $10 to get things done more quickly and get at the front of the line. :)

  4. I lost a friend to campus police*

    OP 1- I just wanted to say that I agree with your assessment of when to involve police. And I’m really glad you didn’t have to. They also don’t have the best track record with mental health issues (which- I’m not sure if that’s the case here, but it feels like this is what you might’ve been implying).

    1. JSPA*

      Let’s not bypass the risk to a (self-described) muscular, self-assured large black man, being on the scene of a police response. Even after disclosing to dispatch that you (the caller) are black. Dispatch sometimes finds that sort of information extraneous (?) and does not pass it to the responding officers.

      Also, while Alison is possibly right that (despite layers of security) it’s not certain that the outsider was unarmed, it’s almost a certainty that the officers are armed, with the “friendly fire” risk that entails.

      And even if the police “only” overpower the “intruder” (who, in his own mind, was probably not intruding, given his arguments and demeanor apparently carried him through security?) that’s going to be pretty scarring for people who witness it.

      Letting in-house security know about the lapse after the (uninvited but compliant) person leaves is a reasonable way to go, IMO.

      The other option would be to call in house security to “help someone back on their path to the exit.”

      I was escorted to the exit of a non-public / restricted wing of the hospital after I entered a door that should have been locked, while following bad walking map directions to surgical check-in. Reaching a badge-only inner door, I’d pressed the intercom to apologetically ask what to do. A two-person response team politely walked me back out, with directions to the correct entrance. Likely armed, but much clearer on how and why a confused person might end up in the wrong place.

      1. Lady Danbury*

        This! The incidence of a Black person who reported a crime being treated as if they were the criminal is not zero. I’m sure the OP is well aware of that risk and it also informed his assessment of the situation.

      2. robmossmobboss*

        “Dispatch sometimes finds that sort of information extraneous (?) and does not pass it to the responding officers.”

        i’ve learned the past 2 years that we’re all on our own. no one cares if you’re suffering at work for reasons that can be changed and are illegal. they just think you’re whining. even moreso when you’re a woman.

        i’m sorry ALL of what you described happened to you. you did fine.

    2. NotBatman*

      Yes! I think OP1’s lab manager was armchair quarterbacking — it’s all too easy to go “what you should’ve done…” when you’re not the one who was actually in the situation. OP, you managed to address this person with compassion, to recognize that he came out of distress rather than hostility, and to end the interaction peacefully but without letting him see private data.

      What exactly could a cop have done that goes beyond that? Arrested this person for the crime of being sick and scared? Escalated a tense but sensible conversation?

      1. Butterfly Counter*

        When I was in my 20s and living alone with my dog in Chicago, I had a similar, but kind of opposite experience.

        I (young-at-the-time white woman) was out walking my dog late at night and a Black man walked up to me and started walking with me, asking questions (Do I have a lighter? Do I have a cigarette?) and his vibe was way off. He even started petting my dog as he was pooping. He had tagged along for about 1/3 a mile before I got to a junction, asked which way he was headed and said, “Well, I’m headed this other way, so good luck.”

        On my way back to my apartment, I saw the same man following another woman walking her dog. I didn’t have my phone on me, so when I got back to my apartment, I called the local precinct to give a description just in case. The officer I talked to got a bit frustrated with me and asked why I didn’t just stop and start screaming.

        Because I knew the gender and race implications of a white woman screaming in fear at a Black man? If someone came to my rescue, what would I say? His vibe was off?

        Like, I know I didn’t misread the situation. His actions were truly weird. But screaming seemed like such a dangerous escalation that I really don’t think that was the right action, either. I know the officer was taking the “better safe than sorry” approach, but I really second-guessed the whole situation as a result.

        1. GTG*

          What a truly ridiculous response from that officer. Like, tell me cops get no training whatsoever in de escalation without telling me cops get no training in de-escalation whatsoever… and people wonder why we don’t want to call them!

    3. Beth*

      Came here to say just this. I wouldn’t trust the police in my area with anything, tbh.

    4. Beth*

      I agree. Escalating to the police–even campus police–is likely to escalate the situation. It’s one thing to do that when it’s unmanageable and you have no other option, but if you can escalate yourself, it makes total sense to do that. I also want to note that while you’re right that women are often more concerned about safety, you also have safety concerns to take into account. Even if cops reliably produced safety for women (which they don’t), we know they’re routinely a safety threat to black people.

      It might be useful to loop campus police in after the fact, in a “this person showed up, we handled it and there was no threat, but FYI that our secure access system might need a check up” kind of way. That might reassure your boss that security protocols are being followed while avoiding a confrontation.

    5. ferrina*

      Completely agree. It sounds like OP had the situation well in hand, and did better to handle it than campus police could have done. OP had more familiarity with the situation (i.e., understood the misconceptions and motivations) and was able to make the person feel respected while ensuring that they removed themselves from the situation. That’s the absolutely best outcome.
      Campus police would have absolutely escalated the issue. They likely don’t know the lab or the common misconceptions about it, and I absolutely second JSPA’s post about the extra risk of simply being a black man who happens to be on the scene.

      I get that the boss was worried about OP’s safety, and there may have been insurance implications if anything had happened to OP. OP’s job wasn’t designed to cover mental health issues (if that’s what was at play), but it sounds like OP handled this perfectly in the moment. Beautifully done, OP!

    6. spiriferida*

      It also highly depends on what you know of your campus security. I would absolutely be comfortable calling my campus security for help, because 1. I know they’re not armed, 2. I’ve seen their response to situations like the one you’ve described, and their primary tactic is monitoring and de-escalation, and 3. I know they could actually arrive in a quick enough time to provide support! That said, I probably also wouldn’t have called for campus security either, based on what you’ve described here (and I’m a small woman myself).

      I think the tactics you took of taking the person’s contact information were also a good de-escalation tactic yourself. I know at my lab we have a policy for ‘stranger in lab’, which doesn’t involve campus security except as a last resort. Most of it involves politely redirecting people if they’re somewhere they’re not supposed to be, and verifying someone unfamiliar even if they say they’re supposed to be there and we didn’t have advance notice from the lab manager. If you’ve got the standing to suggest something to your manager, it might be worth it to come up with a policy so that you have a formal system to follow before hitting the call campus security step.

    7. TM*

      While I agree with this, I also agree with Alison’s further advice that someone (the manager) needs to follow up with security or building management or whoever it is that will be able to ascertain what went wrong to allow a random person to wander around a building unaccompanied.

      That’s great the individual ran into someone who could handle the situation calmly, but there are many, many ways in which things could have gone wrong.

      From what the office security sounds like, the person should not have been able to make it so far that whether or not to call the cops needed to be a decision at all. If I were the LW, though, I’d “lose” that person’s contact info before the boss follows up. Since the “visitor” left calmly, there should be no need to follow up with them specifically.

  5. deesse877*

    I likewise agree that #1 made a good choice. My experience is that campus police and security can be less professionalized than large public police forces, and therefore a bit riskier to deal with. I have literally never had a pleasant interaction with police on my own campus, for example, and I honestly cannot tell you why; they seem to be primed for suspicion and obstructionism. I know for a fact that they’re paid poorly, and (because we’re in a major city) have duties both to campus and to the neighborhood, which likely causes extra conflict regularly.

    I would also point out that, with the person’s contact info in hand, and likely camera images of their face available somewhere on campus, all the info that campus police could gather on a first encounter is already in hand. All that really **could** be done by calling police is to scare the person, threaten them, pat them down–escalate, in other words. Escalation for its own sake, without any defined goal other than the display of power, is categorically bad.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      Yeah, I totally agree. OP’s risk assessment of the situation is far more likely to be the right one than his boss, because she wasn’t there. (It might be worth OP taking a look at the Gift of Fear for an outline of how we make these sorts of risk assessments in the moment). Plus OP was right! The person left as quickly and painlessly as possible, which is all I would want if I were a woman working in OP’s lab. I really can’t see how waiting around for campus police, and for an escalation in tension could possibly help, unless there were no alternative and the person was not compliant. OP doesn’t say if his boss harped on about the use of campus police, but it may be she only mentioned them as an option to consider.

    2. Christopher Franklin*

      As writer #1, I would like to add a few points. First, I still can describe what the visitor was wearing so I can pretty much rule out that he was armed since I probably could guess how many keys he had in his pocket (if I were to arm him, it would involve taping a scalpel or stainless steel garrote to his back but that would involve him stripping off his shirt and sweater vest while I resist stabbing him in the liver or orbital eye socket while keeping the rest of the people at bay). The event happened in a public accessible location (we have tours of the world class art in our building), the visitor was quirky (more nervous about interrupting us than anything else), polite, and as well behaved as a job interviewee. I wasn’t nervous about him at all so I would be lying if I told our campus police that I felt threatened. My dad was in law enforcement and taught me how to defend myself up to deadly force (someone racist threatened to kill me when I was six) so I am still able to remember what he looked like, how he was dressed etc…
      Yes, our campus police are dreadful. I was in grad school at another campus of the same university. My lab had the only two Black students in our building (me and a student who had fled apartheid South Africa). Our campus police would stop him at least a few times a week as he walked up to the lab a night. Finally, our department had to tell the police that we have only two Black grad students, you should be able to memorize his face. Unfortunately, the police in our building were not better, and I am probably the only one who was in the lab who had the unpleasant experience of being interrogated, patted down, or otherwise having to deal with them so people don’t understand how perilous an experience it is.
      I don’t believe that experience is covered by any policy that our campus police deals with. I find it more akin to how you deal with the awkward and non neurotypical. You appreciate the variety of humanity since the experience was pretty much no inconvenience.

      1. Ellie*

        Have you told your supervisor about the incidents you’ve had with campus security? It makes your reluctance to call them a lot more understandable. It sounds plausible that they may even have started questioning you as the potential intruder.

        Personally, I would have reported it after the fact. But if you really don’t want to have any contact with them, could you have reported it to your supervisor instead? Then they could have informed security and you could have stayed out of it.

        1. Numbersmouse*

          In my experience as someone who gets questioned and searched more than the average white yuppie (but definitely less than the average black man), describing those incidents to someone who doesn’t experience them doesn’t typically come across the way I want it to. When it comes down to it, you only experienced a few minutes’ delay, they’ve just asked you a few questions, it was a routine search, etc. There’s not usually a clear violation you can point to, or an easy way to explain how humiliating it can be.

          1. Llama mama*

            Yes, my spouse (a white man) draws more police attention than average, we laugh it off, but being repeatedly stopped and questioned or having guns drawn on you when you’ve done nothing wrong is wearing. It’s hard to trust a group of people (cops) who clearly don’t trust you. I’m sure OP’s experiences are worse, and not escalating the situation seems like it was the correct choice.

        2. CHRISTOPHER FRANKLIN*

          I have but that is the problem… she was a postdoctoral researcher at the same campus I was a graduate student and viewed it as cases where they meant well but didn’t understand the degrading nature. The problem with reporting is that there isn’t really anything to report. The visitor was in a location open to the public; the lunch area is in an open area outside the labs to foster communication, he didn’t actually do anything wrong, I wasn’t scared, and we had a polite discussion. He entered our building with proper credentials, seemed coherent if a little neuro-atypical though not more than the average scientist.

          2. Peacemaker*

            If this comes up again or seems worth raising for clarification with your boss, I would focus on what she thinks you should have said in a report and why.

            Tell her something like, “I could have called campus police and told them there is a visitor in a public area who politely asked about services our lab doesn’t offer and left without incident after he found out we can’t help him. I don’t know of a policy that requires me to do that and I’m not sure how it would have helped. Can you help me understand more about how you would have liked me to respond so I can take it into consideration for the future?”

            You could also raise the concern about calling the police making an unpleasant incident more likely if that seems useful in the conversation.

            1. Ellie*

              I don’t think there was any need to call campus security while he was there – he was in a public area, as OP said, and didn’t cause any harm. I probably would have just sent an email after the fact, letting them know I was questioned and where it happened, just in case they want to tighten their security. One incident isn’t going to change anything, but if it happens multiple times, then it might be important. But I work in a secure environment, so my perspective is skewed. In fact we’re supposed to report all questioning of this nature to the security desk, even if it happens on the weekend, in a public place, well away from the office.

              I’m sorry you’re in such a tough place OP. I’m having trouble wrapping my head around the fact that there are still people who can see being racially profiled as just a series of innocent mistakes. That is weird.

        3. hello*

          I was also thinking of reporting after the fact though from the original post I got the impression the person was not in a publicly accessible area but it sounds like they were. if not in a publicly accessible area I’d cash the police afterwards because some security protocol was breached or not effective. if in a publicly accessible area I would not necessarily call

          2. Parakeet*

            Looks like, from the LW (Christopher Franklin)’s comments in the thread, that the visitor was in an area open to the public. If that hadn’t been the case, though, I feel like it would be better to follow up with in-house security (if there was any, but there often is in a building like that) than campus police. If only because the situation would then indicate what you said, that a security protocol was not effective.

      3. Just My Imagination*

        if I were to arm him, it would involve taping a scalpel or stainless steel garrote to his back but that would involve him stripping off his shirt and sweater vest while I resist stabbing him in the liver or orbital eye socket while keeping the rest of the people at bay

        Uhh, okay, Jason Bourne.
        Do you know what your female colleagues would want if the guy had turned out to be a problem? (or for any other visitor that pops by who shouldn’t be there?)
        For someone–whether that’s you or someone else–to call security to do their damn job (aka come over to deal with the person). Your colleagues do not want you trying to pull a “Mac from It’s Always Sunny” on this guy and then getting yourself hurt or killed. And possibly getting your colleagues hurt or killed.

        How is this any different than when there’s a mass shooting and people come crawling out of the woodwork all, “I could have stopped it if I’d been there! Me and my trusty Desert Eagle would have dropped that dude right quick!”

        1. MigraineMonth*

          I think you skipped over the important part, which is that LW did assess the man for the possibility that he was armed and has reason to believe he wasn’t.

        2. Parakeet*

          I mean, Christopher Franklin was actually there and was the one dealing with the situation. That already makes his comment very different from the armchair quarterbacks after mass shootings.

          1. Ellie*

            Yes, the guy didn’t seem like a threat and he wasn’t – OP’s instincts were proven correct. But the next person who wanders into the lunch room might not be. That’s the only reason I’d have reported it. As a short woman with no defence training whatsoever, I wouldn’t have called security while he was standing in front of me either.

  6. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey EyebrowO*

    #1 I’m a small elderly female, so likely more vulnerable than the OP as described, but I also wouldn’t call the police on someone who is polite and compliant.
    Just for trespass, very possibly inadvertent – what is the point?

    I would inform security after he left though, to inform them they need to tighten things up, in case the next breach is not so harmless.

    1. Christopher Franklin*

      As I mentioned above, the location was one where the public is welcome.

      1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey EyebrowO*

        Oh, I didn’t understand that from the OP, because of the “robust security measures”. However, the employee lunchroom is normally out of bounds anywhere, so I’d have been disconcerted even back in my student retail jobs if a stranger wandered in there – although not enough to call security on someone who wasn’t threatening.

      2. Ellie*

        Yeah, but maybe it shouldn’t be? Or maybe they need to post a security guard there, or even an information desk with a button underneath the counter. You shouldn’t have had to deal with this rando, particularly as the next one might not be so polite. As a woman, your supervisor is probably feeling this side of it more than you are, while completely failing to understand your point of view as a black man who knows he can’t necessarily trust campus security to deal with things like this.

        There are multiple ways of dealing with security incidents. For example, we have training on things like hiding our swipe cards when we’re in public places, how do deal with questions, etc. Your office might benefit from that too.

    2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey EyebrowO*

      Security at all the R&D establishments I worked at was helpful and pretty good, so I’d never worry if I did need to call them – they were completely unarmed because that was the law in all those countries (EU & UK), which is probably why I personally never came across an unduly aggressive security guy.
      I’d hesitate to call armed security, because imo carrying guns could make them less likely to use their words first and the consequences of misunderstandings can be so much worse

    3. Irish Teacher.*

      Agreed. I’m in Ireland where our law enforcement is not armed (not exactly sure what campus police are, whether they are security guards or police officers assigned to the school or what) and generally seem more inclined to deescalate. In my experience, their response to something like the above would be to tell the guy, “come on. You can’t be here. You’ve been asked to leave.”

      And it still wouldn’t occur to me to call the police. I’m…not even sure what I’d be calling them about. It doesn’t sound like he broke any laws?

      1. Insert Pun Here*

        In general in the US, colleges and universities will have a security force and some may, additionally, have campus police forces. The latter is not universal. Campus police are generally sworn officers and have some responsibility or accountability to the jurisdiction in which the university is. They are usually armed. They do have the authority to arrest, investigate, etc.

        1. ScruffyInternHerder*

          As was explained to me at my Midwestern USA large state university:

          Campus police here are THE police. City in which university is located police do not have jurisdiction on the grounds of the university. Treat them exactly as you would treat any police officer because they are the police.

          Mileage, again, varies depending on your location.

        2. ThatGirl*

          It really varies – the campus security where my husband works are not sworn officers, but they do work closely with the police in town.

          1. Insert Pun Here*

            That is the difference between “campus security” and “campus police.” Pretty much all campuses have security; not all of them have police forces.

          2. Ex manager*

            It varies by state and jurisdiction. My small (less than 3000 undergrads at the time) private university had and still has a fully certified, recognized police department with full jurisdiction to enforce state and municipal code on campus under state law, with an agreement with the surrounding municipalities for cooperation for crimes which span on and off campus. Our Campos were/are real LEOs. Not every university goes through the rigmarole to do that, though.

      2. londonedit*

        Yeah, it may be cultural as we also don’t have things like campus police here and our police aren’t usually armed (except at e.g. airports and some major events) but my thought was ‘Is a crime actually being committed here?’. Generally where I live you don’t call the police unless a crime is actually being committed – you certainly wouldn’t call 999. There is a police non-emergency number, 101, and I *might* consider reporting it that way…if there was a sort of ‘this guy keeps hanging around and causing a nuisance and harassing people and I’m worried it might escalate’ element to it. But I’m not calling 999 because someone’s a bit odd. If he seemed generally harmless I’d probably leave it because I’m not sure what I’d actually be reporting!

        1. Storm in a teacup*

          I guess the equivalent at my work would be our security guard but that would
          A) probably not be that helpful and
          b) in this case sounds unwarranted anyway.

      3. Salt and Soda*

        Campus police have full law enforcement powers on the physical grounds of American universities, and are a step above security staff in terms of powers of arrest, etc. There is simply no equivalent in Ireland, because the guards are the only police force besides the harbour police in Dublin or the military police. The closest thing I can think of is the British Transport Police.
        We had a university police department where I studied, and I didn’t particularly trust them by the end of my time there.

    4. Sheworkshardforthemoney*

      Yes, I was recently approached in public by an individual. He saw my work clothes and asked if I could help them. After a few minutes talk it was clear that he had issues. I directed him to the correct department for assistance, he was pleased that someone listened to him for more than 30 seconds and the encounter ended. Sometimes, that’s all it takes.

  7. bay in a bay in a bay*

    OP 1 – I once chose not to call the police after someone pulled a knife on me at work. It was a scary and stressful situation but at the time and even now years later I still feel I made the right decision for my own, and others’, safety. I understand that sometimes we work within organizational policies that leave us no choice, but I truly believe that in the overwhelming majority of instances our own instincts are some of the best tools we have for keeping ourselves and our communities safe. People love to remind us to trust our guts when we wonder if we should call the cops but until we address the very real systemic issues with policing it’s so important that we also honour the decision not to call them.

    I’m sorry you had that experience as a child, and I hope your colleagues and campus eventually learned to consider what safety for -everyone- can look like.

    1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey EyebrowO*

      I’d definitely call the police if someone pulled a knife on me, or otherwise threatened my safety – totally different situation to trespassing, where I normally wouldn’t. However, I’m not in the US so I understand YMMV.

        1. Seashell*

          Calling anyone safely might not be feasible while a knife is out, but I’d definitely report the crime afterwards.

          1. metadata minion*

            Unless I had reason to believe the person was following me, I probably wouldn’t. The one time I had to call the police because of actual assault, they pretty much made things worse at every possible opportunity, and other peoples’ encounters with police have not led me to think my experience was an unfortunate anomaly. If I called them about someone pulling a knife, they’d ask me lots of stressful questions, probably find some way to blame me, and get deeply frustrated at the way I wouldn’t able to give a better description than “a white dude? …not young? He had hair, I think maybe brown?” unless I was lucky enough to be threatened by someone incredibly distinctive-looking.

            1. Ellie*

              Yes, I must admit, the one time I went to the police after a particularly nasty road rage incident, they were completely unhelpful. In fact I’m fairly sure they lied to me (they said I got the number plate wrong… but I’m sure I didn’t. I looked it up on the public registrations page when I got home, and it matched the vehicle I saw). In the end they let me give a statement, and looked more and more uncomfortable as I gave all the details.

              I’m still optimistic enough that I’ll give it another go if it happens again though. They can’t all be bad. If it was serious, I’d go to multiple stations to report it. But I don’t have a lot to fear from the police, other than being frustrated at their incompetence. I can completely understand how some others just can’t risk it.

    2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey EyebrowO*

      I trust my gut and I put my safety above my concerns on sytematic issues, maybe partly because I experienced a lot of racial abuse in my younger days – not from the police but from members of the public. So I know I can get hurt if I don’t look out for myself.

    3. bamcheeks*

      Fully agree with this. If you have a formal policy that says you must call the campus police on intruders, then I would say yes, abide by it. But if it’s a judgment call, then absolutely use your judgment and trust it, especially if you come from any kind of minoritised groups. Security policies often aren’t made with our safety and security in mind, and we get a lot of noise telling us to doubt and second-guess ourselves. It sounds like you have some solid situational awareness and that’s a good thing!

    4. Nyla*

      I had an experience kind of similar to bay in a bay in a bay, and all I wanted to do was go home. I did not want to talk to the police because from my experience, doing that was very uncomfortable and pointless. I’m now very careful who I talk to about the situation because I found out pretty quickly that some people are certain they would would make different decisions, and that I basically handled it all wrong. I don’t need that BS.

    5. Leenie*

      Some years back LAPD officers shot and killed a woman who had a knife to her neck in order to shoot the perpetrator. I remember how horrified I was hearing about that on the local news at the time. I believe it occurred at an encampment, and didn’t get the public outrage that one might expect. But really… in their minds they had to shoot that lady because the guy with the knife was dangerous? Anyway, I will never judge a person for deciding not to call the cops in almost any situation.

  8. Ty*

    OP1, I have a family member with schizophrenia and you did the right thing, because it was the thing you can live with based on what you saw and your experience with the police. There is no one right way to handle this with the way mental health systems work, there are just multiple right ways that all make you feel guilty and second guess yourself.

    If you called the police, it would have been a traumatic experience for him. But it may have been the intervention he needed. You didn’t call the police and were polite and treated him like a normal person and offered him as much help as you could. That would have been a good experience for him that would make him less distressed even if just for a short period of time. You handled it one of the right ways and it was the right way for you.

    You also didn’t make a naive or unrealistic call on the threat assessment – people with psychosis aren’t automatically violent just because they have psychosis and they aren’t going to be polite first if they are. Just like a hypochondriac, conspiracy theorist or someone on hallucinogenic aren’t going to be automatically violent. People with psychosis are just normal people whose senses are lying to them. The horrible reality is that sometimes makes them dangerous to others, but it’s not always the case because every one of them is a different person with different delusions.

    Absolve yourself of all guilt and know you did a right thing.

    1. Anonymous Family*

      Thank you for writing this. I have two family members with mental illness. I took a screenshot of your post, highlighted a couple of the sentences, and will keep it to remind myself and use it in speaking with others.

  9. Sara*

    I think the fact that the location was publicly accessible also makes it more reasonable to assume that the visitor did not realize they were doing anything wrong, and there was no need for escalation. I am very sorry to hear about your horrid experiences with the campus police, it is difficult to imagine. As an Asian woman it would not even occur to me that the police may see me as a criminal for no reason other than my appearance. I am guessing it may be similar for your boss, so you may have to educate her on this topic by sharing what you wrote here.

  10. No creative name yet*

    OP #3, just a note that when you’re calculating the costs of child care vs. working, keep in mind that for some people it can be challenging to find work after a gap at the same pay level as what they were at. Think of not just the lost wages from the time when you’d be out of work, but also the potential hit to lifetime earnings. Over the long run, it can often be worth it to take the temporary hit of child care costs to maintain a foothold in the workforce. Of course, it still might be the best decision for your family, but something to consider if you’re making the decision purely based on costs. It’s unfortunate and shouldn’t be that way of course! It just seems that in many competitive fields where employers have their pick between several qualified candidates, the candidate who hasn’t worked for a few years is often at a disadvantage. Good luck and congratulations!

    1. MsSolo (UK)*

      Yes, you do want to factor in stuff like retirement savings, and the fact that not only will you miss a few years of income (potentially more than you’re planning for with the difficulties in re-entering the workforce) but you’ll probably go in at a lower level than you left, and a high chance it’ll be part time. So it’s not just what makes sense for your family financially now, but what makes sense for your family in forty years time, which can be much harder to figure out!

      https://careerreturners.com/employers/facts-figures/research-data-summary/

    2. Emmy Noether*

      Absolutely! The thing is, it’s not just a financial calculus, but also an emotional and personal one, so I don’t want to second guess the LW’s decision, who knows their own mind and their own budget. But the financial aspect of it should really take into account not just current monthly wages, it should consider lifetime earning* And that includes:
      – loss of promotions and raises (and consider that raises have a “compounding interest” effect)
      – potentially trouble finding work afterwards that is at the same level as currently
      – retirement benefits, insurance, etc.

      Also plan for various worst case scenarios. Get a postnup, get insurance for anything happening to your sole earner.

      Women are way overrepresented in elder poverty, and this is why.

      1. Jay (no, the other one)*

        When our kids were little, a friend of mine told me that child care is a family expense. She was the lower earner in her family and didn’t feel that her salary had to cover child care. They looked at the their finances overall and decided it was worth it because her mental health was better while she was working (plus a variety of other things).

        I’m a cis woman in a hetero marriage and have always earned at least twice and often three times my husband’s salary. If we’d had more than one kid, our day care costs would have been significantly more than his salary; with the one we had, it was a near thing. Oddly enough, no one has ever suggested that it didn’t make sense for him to work. Wonder why.*

        *I don’t wonder at all.

        1. doreen*

          I have always hated the articles and such that question whether it’s worth it to work when you only take $X home after child-care is deducted. First, because as you said child care is a family expense – we didn’t need to pay for it because I worked, we needed to pay for it because both of us worked. Second, even just looking at finances, take-home pay is not the only thing involved. When my kids were born, I probably only took home a couple of hundred a month from my paycheck – but that job provided practically free health insurance and the experience I needed to qualify for the next job, which paid more and provided a pension that allowed me to retire and working those years increased my future Social Security benefit . If I had taken years out of the workforce, my life would have been very different. And that’s just the financial benefits – there were non-financial benefits as well. I’m not trying to second-guess anyone’s decision , but it’s not as simple as ” I’m only bringing home $100 a week after paying for daycare. “

          1. KateM*

            Well, even if you are bringing home only $100 after paying for daycare, you still are in positive, that is, using daycare makes financial sense even.

    3. Wednesday wishes*

      So right! I was going to say the same thing! I left my job to stay home with my kids (and honestly I am 100% sure that was the right decision, since that time was wonderful and never to be regained). When they were old enough I got a PT job (paying basically minimum wage even though it was a a skilled white collar type job) and then some time later when I was divorcing, couldn’t find a decent full time job even answering phones! Note that I am a GenXer and had a 2 year degree (which would have been fine had I stayed in the same career), and although my experience was deep and vast, the lack of 4 year degree meant I was basically unqualified for ANYTHING- because suddenly everyone required that 4 year degree. I ended up starting my own business because it was the only way to make enough money to support myself and 2 kids. I would always recommend spending those young years with your kids if you are able, but use the time well, and maybe use it to learn a skill you can freelance.

      1. Hlao-roo*

        I agree with you and No creative name yet.

        This letter is old but I think it’s a worthwhile read for the letter-writer: “how can I manage an impending gap in my resume due to caring for my kids?” from December 9, 2011.

        This letter is more recent and the comments have some good perspective on how easy/hard it is to transition back to working after taking a few years off: “how much will it hurt me to take a few years off from my career?” from May 30, 2024.

        And I think this one could also be a helpful read, though it’s focused on someone who has been off work for years and it getting ready to transition back into the workforce: “how much will it hurt me to take a few years off from my career?” from January 13, 2015 (and an update on December 2, 2016).

        I’ll link to all three letters in a follow-up comment.

    4. TGIF*

      This is one situation where the company needs to pay for childcare, and if possible have it on site. If more companies did that women wouldn’t have to be in this dilemma all the time!! Free childcare would solve so many problems.

    5. Pat Patti Pattie*

      This is absolutely correct. Claudia Goldin, who recently won the Nobel prize in economics, built her research career around investigating the causes of gender disparity in income. Her research has shown that one of the top two factors in the gender gap in income is the amount of time women take away from the working. It can have a significant long term impact.

      I often cringe when I see back-of-the-envelope analyses stating that it would be cheaper to forgo one income since it wouldn’t even cover the cost of child care. This is short term thinking, and should instead look at lifetime earnings. Sometimes it makes sense to go into the red for childcare if it would keep the current earnings path on track.

    6. Lady Kelvin*

      Also remember that as your baby gets older, your daycare costs will go down. So your take-home pay will go up even more. It might be tight the first year or two but the increase in salary over time plus decrease in daycare costs may make it more worth your while to stay in the workforce.

  11. Cinn*

    I’ve worked really hard at this company for subpar pay for eight years and have never taken leave before or even used all my sick days, so I sort of feel like I’ve earned this paid leave.

    LW3, did I read this right? In eight years you’ve never taken a days leave? If that’s right I’d be looking to add your total annual allowance for this year to extend your parental leave as well (and any rollover if that’s a thing where you work). Otherwise I agree with Alison, make as much documentation before your leave and don’t tell them until you get back and you know your plans haven’t changed.

    1. Nameo*

      I came to the comments for this – use that time off!! If your PTO doesn’t roll over year-to-year, schedule ALL of your PTO and sick days to have a 15+-week parental leave :)

  12. Michigander*

    LW2: Talk to your boss! If you’ve never told her about your issues, she may think that Annika takes a lot of leave but it’s okay because you never want much time off. She needs to know that you do, in fact, want more time off as well but feel like you can’t take it because Annika is always gone. And remember that Annika is not your supervisor, she doesn’t get a say in whether you take time off. Get your time off approved from your boss and then just let Annika know after the fact. That’s all she needs as a colleague.

    1. WS*

      Yes – if you don’t say, they may not realise. I am usually happy to work over Christmas, but one year I had family members flying in from overseas who I hadn’t seen in years, so I put in to take Christmas off. My manager assigned me Christmas without checking, and then when I asked why I had been assigned Christmas when I had worked the last six (most people rotate through), she said, “Oh, but you prefer that day!” She worked it out, but she was unbothered by her assumption and said I should have alerted her.

      1. Beany*

        I’m glad that got worked out, but … did your manager not bother looking at that year’s requests before making the assignments? Or did she think your request was a mistake?

    2. Antilles*

      And remember that Annika is not your supervisor, she doesn’t get a say in whether you take time off. Get your time off approved from your boss and then just let Annika know after the fact. That’s all she needs as a colleague.
      I agree and I’ll add one more thing that you shouldn’t let Annika push back on your plans or try to argue or complain that actually she wanted to take that week or etc. The instant she tries to start any of that garbage, you respond with a very bored-tone and a statement like “Kathryn approved my time off on starting next Wednesday, I will send you an email summarizing my project statuses and I’ll see you when I’m back in office on July 7th”. Then you just refuse to engage further; if Annika doesn’t take the hint then you go back and talk to your boss again to explain it.

    3. it's happened before*

      Seriously. This is one of those letters where I very much wish I knew whether they talked to their boss, and what their boss had to say.

    4. el l*

      Yeah, this is why we have bosses, and this is why ensuring basic job coverage is part of their job.

      Kathryn is able to more realistically see these things and do something about them than Annika, or for that matter OP.

      Kathryn is not doing her job, and needs to begin managing this. But a crucial part of that situation is…OP isn’t putting this on Kathryn’s plate when they really should:

      They’re working when sick; did they tell Kathryn when they do that?
      They covered for a Zoom meeting where Annika messed up; did they tell Kathryn about it?
      They didn’t take leave because Annika vetoed it; did they tell Kathryn about it, and give her a chance to render a different judgment?

      Etc. If Kathryn continues to do nothing, then OP has a bad boss. But gotta try first.

    5. Starbuck*

      Also LW, don’t ever do this again!

      “When I had Covid, she gave me two minutes’ notice that I would need to run a Zoom meeting she had scheduled because she was busy and lost track of time (she “forgot” I was unwell ”

      If she had time to remember and send you and email about it, she has time to do the dang thing herself, or message the attendees that she has to cancel/reschedule because she forgot and was busy. Sheesh. Two minutes notice? Sorry, I just would not have seen that email in time, sadly. Too bad!

  13. Apex Mountain*

    On #1, I don ‘t really see why you would have called police in the first place. As you’ve said, this was an area open to the public, and it sounds like all the guy did was ask a question or two and then left.

    Unless your company call sthe police on everyone who comes into a public area I don’t get it.

    1. Scott (the grumpy one)*

      I read the letter as LW1 stating it was their supervisor who told them they should have called. They never said it was something they considered doing until the discussion with the boss.

      1. Scott (the grumpy one)*

        Ugh, nevermind. I just re-read the letter and LW1 did say they told their supervisor they considered calling campus police and decided it was not warranted. I’m changing my reply to agree with Apex Mountain that I don’t get why you would consider calling the police if the person was in a public area.

    2. Hyaline*

      I’m reading that it wasn’t an area open to the public—he says they did not interact with the public and security measures were supposed to prevent the public from wandering in. I’m reading that the people who were “attracted” to the research were not welcome or being invited to come to the lab but had an interest in the pathology studied.

      1. Apex Mountain*

        The LW commented above as Christopher Franklin: “As I mentioned above, the location was one where the public is welcome.”

        1. Beany*

          Agreed. And I read the following sentence:

          “Our building has robust security measures, including guards and visitor vetting, so I assumed he was there for official business.”

          … to indicate that the individual must have reached said “public location” after satisfying standard security procedures; they hadn’t actually trespassed or done anything that objectively warranted any security intervention. It was just what that individual said to the LW, and his mannerisms when he was saying it, that triggered any concerns.

          1. Hyaline*

            See, I read “visitor vetting” as meaning you couldn’t like, just drop in–you would HAVE to be there on official business! That is–visitors would be pre-approved or invited and given clearance, no walk-in randos.

            All to say–clarity in representing work situations is an imprecise art!

            1. Apex Mountain*

              I agree, it wasn’t clear. It said that about the vetting, but if it was open to the public anyway, maybe that means just a sign in sheet or something?

              1. fhqwhgads*

                I interpreted that bit of the letter as “if this guy got through security, I felt safe enough continuing the interaction until/unless given evidence otherwise” and then there was no otherwise.

              2. CHRISTOPHER FRANKLIN*

                I should clarify: to enter the building, a guest must present id which is scanned, and they are issued a name tag. There is an annotated reason on record which might be as simple as looking at the art. The university skimped on putting art on other locations so our campus is filled with notable art, has lounges to promote social interaction, and interactive lunch areas to encourage a connection with people outside the lab. It is not unusual for outsiders, other researchers, guests, sales people, etc to interact at the common areas. One of my duties was keeping our controlled substance inventory which was in a locked box in a locked cabinet, in a locked room that could only be accessed through two more locked doors with only my boss and I having the appropriate keys to access them. Our campus police are a true police force with their department treated as separate from the city. The guest was not in an inappropriate place, did nothing that was inappropriate, and I thought of him as more quirky than disturbing. I was surprised how unnerved my boss was by something I found more picaresque.

                1. Anongineer*

                  Thanks for this comment, which makes the situation much more clear.

                  You’re describing a secure access-controlled location with a very permissive visitor policy, which is not uncommon in certain types of university and government labs.

                  Your letter describes the building as both access controlled and “open to the public,” and since these are opposites, many commenters made the reasonable assumption that you’re describing two different locations within the building, and their responses reflect that.

                  I was also confused since you originally said visitors are “vetted” and are assumed to be “there for official business,” but it appears (1) the guard doesn’t (and perhaps can’t) determine if the visitor is telling the truth when they state their reason for visiting, and (2) persons on official business (i.e., invited guests of the facility) are only a small portion of visitors, so it’s as likely as not that anyone with a visitor badge is there to view art, lounge, conduct casual unannounced meetings, and otherwise use the common areas for their own benefit.

                  I think your actions make a lot more sense with this new context – this person was visibly agitated but not violating any rules about the space they were in, so your decision to listen to them and de-escalate seems well within the bounds of reasonable judgment.

    3. Allonge*

      Eh, in an out of norm situation – in the end the person was not in the right place – you can consider a few options within a few seconds. It’s part problem solving, part risk assessment and can be pretty automatic.

      Is this a problem? Could be. Who is around? Jane, Bill and Toni. Call campus police? No, I got this. Call supervisor? No, I can do what we can do for him. Is there anything else I can do? Not really. Is there a problem? No, he is leaving.

      This is way less than a minute, and goes parallel to saying hello, how can I help you. My point is that LW considering calling the campus police does not need to have been a long internal discussion.

      1. Apex Mountain*

        Yeah but he’s still wondering about it now, even after retirement. He didn’t do anything even close to wrong imo

  14. Ganymede II*

    LW5, as a fellow immigrant, I would highly recommend being explicit about how complex the citizenship journey is. First, truth is definitely the best policy. You have been honest and transparent the whole time, now is not the moment to change that. Second, the company might just wait for you! Hiring is long and tedious, and they might prefer to wait a couple months for you rather than going through a five months hiring process.

    Also, many country nationals (not just in Germany, but across Europe and the rest of the world) think that citizenship is super easy to get due to constant misinformation campaigns from anti-immigration voices, so a reality check lifts everyone up.

    1. Beany*

      Agreed. I’m an Irish immigrant to the US. I was never undocumented, but I’d been living here nearly 19 years before I could naturalize. I get frustrated when I read comments by people saying “well why did they never become citizens” when they never had to go through the expensive, complicated, and most likely very, very long process — assuming it was possible at all.

      2. Elizabeth West*

        I always tell people to go watch John Oliver’s segment where he talks about going through the process. He’s a white British man, is a whole-@ss celebrity, and is married to an American veteran, and it STILL took him forever and was a huge pain.

    2. GreenApplePie*

      It took my parents nearly a decade to get their US citizenship even though they were doing everything “right” and already had their green cards. And the green card itself requires at least 5 years of proof that you’ve been living in the US.

      1. CMOT Dibbler*

        I sat in on a meeting with my employer’s immigration attorney. The Indian folks who move here on H1-B visas with small children are being encouraged to plan ahead for what to do when their kids turn 18 and are no longer eligible for whatever F visa they start on.

        Because applying for a green card can take 20 years or more!

        1. Ganymede II*

          The country where i live used to have birthright citizenship, but no longer does – for more than a decade. Yet, people still think my child who was born here less than 2 years ago is a national, and literally do not believe me when I say she is not. As if, surely, I must be mistaken abou what nationality my daughter has. And it is absolutely the same people who claim that “they just let anyone in the country these days”. It’s mind-boggling.

  15. Apex Mountain*

    ” at some companies if you don’t come back after parental leave, you’ll be responsible for paying your health insurance costs from those three months”

    Companies can do this?? First, that’s disgusting. Second, what do they do – bill you retroactively for the portion the company paid during those three months? I don’t see how they can do that if you were working there at the time

    1. Jay (no, the other one)*

      They make the leave contingent on your returning to work for a specified amount of time. Same thing happens if you get a signing bonus or moving expenses when you start a job – if you leave before a certain length of time, you have to pay them back.

    2. Lula*

      you weren’t working there – you were on leave from your job, obtaining benefits on the assumption that you would resume working there when your leave ended.

      1. Apex Mountain*

        No, you are still an employee even if you’re on leave. Personally I don’t think it’s a good look to demand health insurance payments from new parents

        1. doreen*

          It might not be a good look – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t legal or common. Under the FMLA , an employer can recover its share of premiums if the employee doesn’t return to work for at least thirty days ( There are exceptions, but simply changing one’s mind is not one of them)

        2. fhqwhgads*

          You do know that employers that don’t offer paid leave, only FMLA unpaid, still charge for the health insurance payments? Because you’re not getting a paycheck for it to be taken out of. So you’re on the hook for your premiums.
          No one is saying this is GOOD.
          But it is very much legal and happens literally every day in the US.

    4. Kimmy Schmidt*

      It’s explicitly allowed in the FMLA law language. Because US and so so few employee protections.

      “an employer may recover its share of health plan premiums during a period of unpaid FMLA leave from an employee if the employee fails to return to work after the employee’s FMLA leave entitlement has been exhausted or expires, unless the reason the employee does not return is due to:
      (1) The continuation, recurrence, or onset of either a serious health condition of the employee or the employee’s family member, or a serious injury or illness of a covered servicemember, which would otherwise entitle the employee to leave under FMLA; or
      (2) Other circumstances beyond the employee’s control. Examples of “other circumstances beyond the employee’s control” are necessarily broad. They include such situations as where a parent chooses to stay home with a newborn child who has a serious health condition; an employee’s spouse is unexpectedly transferred to a job location more than 75 miles from the employee’s worksite; a relative or individual other than a covered family member has a serious health condition and the employee is needed to provide care; the employee is laid off while on leave; or, the employee is a “key employee” who decides not to return to work upon being notified of the employer’s intention to deny restoration because of substantial and grievous economic injury to the employer’s operations and is not reinstated by the employer. Other circumstances beyond the employee’s control would not include a situation where an employee desires to remain with a parent in a distant city even though the parent no longer requires the employee’s care, or a parent chooses not to return to work to stay home with a well, newborn child.”

  16. Still*

    LW#5, even if they can’t hold this job, you should be able to apply again when your citizenship has come through and tell them “I’ve been offered a job twice and haven’t been able to take it due to delays at the immigration office. Now I have my citizenship and am able to start working immediately”.

    They might not be willing to extend a third offer while you’re still applying, but once the process is done, I don’t see why it should affect your application negatively going forward.

    Could you maybe explain the situation to the hiring manager, say that you’ll apply again when you have your papers, and ask if they’d be willing to put in a good word for you at that point? They’ve offered you a job twice, you should definitely be a shoe-in the next time around, once the process is done.

    Good luck!

  18. I should really pick a name*

    I’ve worked really hard at this company for subpar pay for eight years and have never taken leave before

    That’s very concerning.
    Presumably Annika is in the office sometimes, so I’m very curious why the LW has never taken leave.

    1. Desk Dragon*

      The line you’re quoting is from the third post (not coming back from maternity leave), not the second (Annika).

      1. I should really pick a name*

        *facepalm*

        Though the question “why has the LW never taken leave?” still stands

        1. doreen*

          Some people distinguish between “vacation” and “leave” and I suspect the LW means they’ve never taken parental leave (or any other lengthy leave, like a long period of sick leave) but not that they haven’t taken any vacation in eight years.

          1. My Doctor Said Mylanta*

            I only have a couple years of experience with Human Resources (I’m in the USA), but leave and vacation time are different where I am. Leave refers to FMLA, personal leave, medical leave, that may be paid or unpaid. Vacation or PTO is a separate benefit.

            The LW needs to use the benefit. It’s part of the compensation they earn.

  19. Scott (the grumpy one)*

    LW3 – If you are not 100% certain that you will not have to pay back anything to your company, and that you will be able to leave with a good recommendation, I would not make any mention of leaving until the end of your mat leave. I suggest you plan to work for three weeks after your leave ends. Have a plan for someone (spouse, mom, MIL) to care for your child during that time. Go back to your job and after the first week you tell your boss that it isn’t working out and you’re giving them two weeks notice. No payback and no bridge burnt (unless they are unreasonable). This also leaves the possibility that you change your mind about returning to work and all is well.

  20. Melissa*

    OP #2: How do the managers treat Annika when she’s in the office? If they are treating her like a high value employee? If so, their assumptions might be obsolete.

    Is the work measurable in any way?

    Unless she’s some kind of work ninja, her output is probably less than yours, maybe by a big margin.

    It might be worth spending a little time measuring to see what percentage you’ve consistently managed vs hers. Not to throw her under the bus, but to show them you’re actually the higher value employee.

    That research might be helpful if you get pushback when you request leave, or if you are at the point of telling them the current situation isn’t going to work long term…

  21. Insert Pun Here*

    I work at a university in a non-lab/non-science-y role that similarly attracts interest from a small subset of the public. Our office is similarly not generally open to visitors but people do sometimes show up and want to talk to someone. I wouldn’t consider calling security unless they refused to leave or were otherwise threatening in some way. Usually this is a Gumption Issue (“if I show up, they’ll talk to me!”) and nothing more — annoying, but not harmful.

  22. Geranium Now*

    #2 – I recently heard a person refer to their PTO as “protected time off” and now that I’ve heard it phrased that way I cannot stop thinking about it.

    OP needs to reframe her thinking and think about her own vacation time as protected, and she needs to work with her manager to take her time. Pretend Annika doesn’t exist, and let the manager deal with Annika’s antics. The company isn’t going to fall apart if you take a week off.

  23. Old Lady*

    FOR LW#3: As others have piointed out it’s just not the immediate cost of day care. Don’t underestimate the impact on your mental health and future earning power. You may find after two months of leave you’re longing for work and adult conversation. I love my kids dearly but I was a much better mother and person for working.

    1. Colette*

      Yeah, I have a friend who is a teacher. Before she had kids, the plan was that she would stay home with them and home school when the time came. She barely made it through her year of maternity leave with the first one; she hated being home all day with an infant. She went back to work as soon as she could reasonably do so.

  24. police are scary too*

    #1, as a woman I don’t think I would have felt threatened by that guy –unless there was something you haven’t mentioned that would have set off my creep alarm. But your situation as a black man calling the police would have felt hazardous to me. I once didn’t call the police in a (non-crime) situation where I needed assistance… because there were POC around me and I was afraid they’d get hurt.

    In the US, at least, the police are about 20 times more likely to commit homicide than the average person, and their targets are disproportionately black men.

    1. Elizabeth West*

      This, absolutely. I won’t call unless I have to. Every time I’ve seen a stop where the person being detained is a POC, I hung back and eyeballed it where they could see me watching. (They hate it but they can’t do anything about it.) I will keep doing it, and I don’t care if it makes me late.

    2. The OG Sleepless*

      Totally agree. I can absolutely understand why a Black man in particular wouldn’t want to call the cops, and it didn’t sound like law enforcement was needed anyway.

    3. Phlox*

      My last job – I wrote staff policy that required staff to consider this context for themselves, their colleagues and any neighbors around if there was a decision to call 911. The person harmed had the agency to make a decision for themselves but staff had to consider larger context and risks. State violence was a serious risk for staff and neighbors in our context – especially for the Deaf folks on staff. Which is to say, having a nuanced policy is something you can see in the workspace and very possible.

  25. HannahS*

    OP1, I think you were in the right. I’m guessing from what you wrote that you thought the person was maybe mentally ill. Being mentally ill doesn’t make someone dangerous; it actually increases a person’s risk of being a victim of violence. What you did–being respectful to him, explaining why you can’t help him, not challenging his delusion–was exactly the right thing to do, and it sounds like you were being thoughtful about assessing how much of a risk he presented to you.

    A few thoughts about your supervisor: on the one hand, a lot of people overestimate the risk that someone with an obvious mental illness poses to them (and overestimate how helpful police will be.)

    Second, some people (ill or not) treat men and women differently and the risk assessment of violence can change depending on who they’re talking to. Ultimately, it was your call to make and it sounds like you made a thoughtful one.

  26. HonorBox*

    OP2 – While I can appreciate the suggestion of scheduling your leave further in advance, I do also appreciate that you might not want to or be able to. I think everything I suggest can be prefaced by showing appreciation for your generous leave allowance, too. But I think the fact that you have a generous leave allowance when you’re a very small team, can create some larger issues that a boss might need to proactively solve for.

    You may not feel like you want or need handover notes from Annika before she leaves, but I do think highlighting the fact that she doesn’t provide them gives your boss an easy place to step in. At the very least, it will at least provide a road map so that you and your boss can prioritize your workflow during Annika’s absence. If someone is gone for a couple of days, it is much easier to go with the flow, let something else slide, and shift priorities. But when Annika is gone for six weeks (!!), which is a REALLY long time when you’re part of a two-person team, those notes ensure two things. First, that you and your boss can see where projects are in the process so you can discuss how you will need to shift things. And second, it ensures that Annika is leaving with things in a reasonably good spot. Your boss needs to have the discussion a couple of weeks in advance of an extended leave to make sure all the plates can stay spinning. Having that conversation far enough in advance enables Annika to have time to do some extra work should it be necessary.

    Second, I think you need to show your boss how Annika extending her leave by a week – made even harder because she was at a conference the week prior – affects you. You might have had a perfect plan laid out for how you were going to handle things. But adding another week might adversely affect what you are able to do. Show examples of that.

    And ask your boss how she’d prefer you handle your time off requests. If you don’t want to schedule multiple weeks out super early in the year, mention that. But it may be that you do need to do that in order to protect your time and ensure you don’t have any disruptions to your own plans. Annika couldn’t have extended her leave if you already had leave scheduled for this week.

    And finally, I think you should point out that you’ve had to come into work ill while she’s out and had to cover a Zoom that Annika just forgot about while you were out. The former is certainly something your boss needs to think about. If both of you can’t be out of the office at the same time ever, that’s a problem that needs to be addressed. And if you’re expected to jump in when you’re out to cover Annika’s lapse in memory, also a problem. Because you can’t be expected to cover her extended absences with zero help from her and she expects you to drop everything to cover her. Sure you were able to cover that Zoom, but the request should never have been made because you were not in the office…no matter what the reason.

    1. Tradd*

      Thank you for posting this. I’m also part of a two person team (I’m the manager). The folks who are the “I’ll tell you when I’m taking off, not asking” mindset never seem to allow for the fact that you being going could affect coworkers. Maybe they have work that doesn’t need to be covered while they’re gone. But if your work has to be covered while you’re off, you have to take into consideration how you being gone affects your coworkers.

      1. Pescadero*

        The folks who are the “I’ll tell you when I’m taking off, not asking” mindset largely believe employers should actually staff adequately to allow everyone to use their compensation, and if they don’t – that is the employers problem and not theirs.

        1. Tradd*

          At least with my department, a third person is not needed at this time. What we do has seasonal highs and lows. Staffing for the highs and vacations means the third person would be twiddling their thumbs for months on end. I don’t think any employer is going to have an extra person just to cover vacations that account for 4-5 weeks out of the year. And temps aren’t a possibility. What we do requires too much time getting up to speed.

          1. ProductMarketing5Eva*

            Totally understand that the dynamic is different when you’re working as a manager and you have one direct report. But the issue I have with “you have to take into consideration how you being gone affects your coworkers” is that… taking coverage into consideration for a team is the manager’s job. It absolutely should not be the responsibility of an individual contributor to work their PTO out around coworkers. That is part and parcel of the people and project management work that is being a manager. In a medium or large team, the average individual contributor doesn’t even have the visibility or access needed to cover their work for PTO. (Work and personal schedules, project loads, project priorities, etc.) Company leadership needs to develop a plan for coverage based on historical trends on an annual basis – major holidays, significant events (ex: annual conferences), high seasons and low ones. And if leadership won’t justify the resource coverage within one team, or hiring temps or contract workers, they need to cross-train employees and, as leaders, take on the management responsibilities that are needed to keep a firm running, rather than relying on workers to burn themselves out.

  27. it'll happen again*

    All I want to know about #4 is if they talked to the three family members about the situation.

    1. I NEED A Tea*

      Hiring temporary staff could be helpful for this one instance, but I don’t think they should make a habit of taking vacation at the same time.

      1. Elizabeth West*

        I was going to suggest this — if the vacation isn’t too long and they’re mostly caught up before they go, someone could cover the phone and maybe one or two could do some basic work in the warehouse. I agree, however, that they do need a better plan in future.

  28. Tradd*

    I’ve written about my direct report, John before. He’s been here more than double my time and gets 4 weeks vacation to my 2 weeks. There are only two of us in the department. Last year he wanted to take something like 5 weeks straight of only working Tuesday through Thursday. I told him no. I would never have gotten caught up myself. He got very pissy but our boss backed me up. John always wants to take the big holidays off and pouts like a toddler when told no. Our work can’t be ignored while the other is gone. Freight doesn’t stop moving.

    1. Sar*

      Honestly? I would look for a new job. It sounds like the workflow doesn’t really allow for John to take his 4 weeks without negatively affecting you, but he has to be able to take his time or else his job is exploiting him. So assume he is going to take his 4 weeks, at some point, over the course of the year. If there’s no way to do that that doesn’t become untenable for you (e.g., the M/F off for 5 weeks plan was untenable, but would four straight weeks off also be untenable? What options for taking 4 cumulative weeks off are left that * wouldn’t * be untenable? A week off once every three months?), but the workflow doesn’t allow for either a third person or a temp/seasonal worker, then you’re in a position where the only way your work life works is if the person who works for you doesn’t get to be fully compensated as they’ve been promised. That’s not an ethical role to be in, as that person’s manager. And in that scenario, I would look for a new job, because I wouldn’t want to be in a role that only worked if things were unethical.

      1. Tradd*

        Four weeks in a row wouldn’t work either. Taking a week at a time is fine. His expectations are unreasonable. To give you an idea, he bitches big time whenever he has to cover for me, doesn’t matter if it’s a day or a week. If I have to take a half day for a doctor’s appt, he whines. I generally take a one week vacation and then the rest of my time is scattered days. There are other issues we have with him that I’ve posted about in the Friday open thread. We have occasional stuff that requires staying late or working from home briefly on the weekend. He always tries to push his weekend stuff off on me. I make him do it. When I left several hours early recently for a doctor’s appt, he got something that had to be done immediately, that would have required him staying a bit late. He left it and went home at 5. I was gone so didn’t know about it. It was a freight shipment that ended up with thousands of dollars of storage at the airline because he didn’t do the customs clearance before he went home and it couldn’t be picked up that evening. We had to eat the storage. He’s on a PIP now.

  29. Alex*

    #1, What would the police have accomplished? I certainly would not have called unless I felt that they were a threat. I probably would have said, “Oh, I’m so sorry, but this area is not open to the public. Let me show you the way out.” And made my way towards the security point with them. If they were uncooperative with that and wouldn’t leave, sure, call the police. But there’s no sense calling the police without trying a calm response first, which usually works with most situations.

  30. Ann O'Nemity*

    I totally get why someone might want to maximize the benefits available during such a life-changing time, especially when paid leave is often hard-won. But if someone knows for sure they’re not coming back and still tells their manager they are, that puts the team in a really tough spot. I really wish we had stronger, more humane parental leave policies so that new parents didn’t feel like they had to choose between honesty and financial security.

    1. JustKnope*

      But the thing is, the OP doesn’t know for SURE she’s not coming back. Situations change, as Alison pointed out. The husband could lose his job during that time, or the OP could realize that staying home full time isn’t good for her mental health/sanity and decide to come back to work at the end of the leave. If she had quit already, she’d be starting from scratch on finding a job. She knows she’s highly likely not to come back, but nothing is guaranteed yet. And sure it puts the employer in a tough spot but employees leaving usually puts employers in a tough spot. It’s barely more tough than an average departure … plus they’ve already been operating without her for 3 months.

  31. B Wayne*

    No cops! You’d have a fortune a dollar at a time for all the stories out there of calling the police where seconds later it escalates to “terminal”. Only if it is your life and death should you call.

  32. Jules the 3rd*

    OP3: Wait to make any irrevocable decisions until after you’ve parented for a bit. What makes short-term financial sense may not be the path you choose. In the end, your call and no judgement, you know yourself and your family best. I’m just advocating for keeping your options open while you gain knowledge and experience.

    As part of that, consider the possibility that going back to work after 5 years out may be challenging. This is especially true if you’re considering a second child, which makes it 6 – 8 years out of work.

    Maybe also consider a flexible alternative, like asking if your job could go part-time for a year or two. Some day cares will do morning only for a discounted rate, especially for younger children. It may be worth the financial (and emotional) cost in order to stay active in the job market.

    As a parent: you may not want to stay home after you’ve done it for a while. I was bored after 4 weeks. The first six months, they sleep a *lot* and aren’t a lot of work, it’s just that they need 15 minutes of care every 2 – 4 hours. You get maybe an hour of play in there, an hour of cleaning, and hour of cooking, and then you have to find something to fill the time with. After 6mo, there’s a little more playing, a little more cooking, but they still nap 2x/day.

    CONGRATULATIONS! Babies (and kids) can be so much fun, and I hope yours is a pure delight.

    1. Desert Rat*

      Congrats to you on having such an easy baby, lol. My first was colicky and never slept more than 15 minutes at a time, so my leave was spent trying to find a spare moment to eat something or go to the bathroom while pacing back-and-forth across the apartment with a baby who would.not.stop.screaming. I do hope the OP’s experience is more like yours!

      1. allathian*

        I had an easy baby who started sleeping through the night at 4 months when we started him on solids. I ran out of milk at 3 months and he wasn’t gaining enough weight for some reason on formula, his colic also stopped as soon as ge started eating solids. No sleep for months is my nightmare. Even with an easy baby I’m glad I didn’t have to return to work after 12 weeks.

        I also hope

    2. KateM*

      My babies were boring the first four weeks, too. Then they started to be awake, they started to smile, interact, play. Don;t dismiss being home with your child based just on the very first weeks.

  33. Pocket Mouse*

    #3 – Look up “motherhood penalty”. The financial aspect of the decision isn’t just about the first few years of your kid’s life, it’s about your long-term earning potential and the impacts your working income has on your retirement income. On the flip side of the motherhood penalty is the “fatherhood bonus” (barf) so if someone needs to not work during the next few years, at least discuss whether it makes sense for him to be the one not working some or all of that time, as he may be able to bounce back from a gap much easier than you can.

    There are of course other aspects to figuring out what makes the most sense for your family to do, but please take a much closer look at the financial piece, especially if it is a deciding factor.

  34. Tom Ace*

    “I felt I was physically stronger and faster than him, and as the son of a law enforcement officer, I was more than capable and determined enough to protect myself from an unarmed individual.”

    Oh FFS.

    1. New Jack Karyn*

      If you look up OP1’s comments, he explains a little about his background. I’m not sure what you’re upset about.

      I’m old now, but when I was in my 20s, I was reasonably confident that I could defend myself from most female unarmed individuals (I’m a 6′ tall woman).

  35. Tired Mom*

    LW3: If you are in the USA – are your 12 weeks of paid parental leave, “really PTO” or a combination of PTO and disability coverage? My company offers 6 weeks of paid parental leave (for both dads and moms), and disability coverage offers an additional 6 weeks of paid time for the birth parent. We don’t require parents to pay back the PTO from the company, but our insurance carrier will absolutely want their money back for the disability payments if you don’t come back to work.

  36. H.Regalis*

    LW1 – You were the one in the situation, you were standing there talking to the guy and interacting with him, so you were best positioned to assess if the guy was dangerous and meant harm.

    Like Alison said, if your building is supposed to be locked 24/7, it’d be good to give security a heads-up so they can remind people not to prop open doors, not to let other people in when you badge yourself in, etc.; but I don’t think you need to second-guess yourself on the call you made.

  37. not neurotypical*

    OP 3, if you’re not coming back, then you are not entitled to that leave, which was created to make *staying* at their jobs more possible for parents. Even if it’s legal, it’s immoral.

    So what? Well, if your employer is a small business or a nonprofit, then it’s a real burden (and, in the case of a nonprofit, a misuse of donor dollars) to give you an extra six weeks of paid vacation on top of whatever sick or vacation time simply resigning would allow you to cash out.

    You’d also be, however legally, contributing to the unfair and discriminatory preference for parents. Will any of your non-parent co-workers be able to claim six! weeks! of paid! leave when they resign? Why should you get such a bonus? Do you believe that your impending parenthood makes you more worthy? An inherently more valuable person?

    Finally, as Allison says, women do this all the time. Fairly or not, that action contributes to the notion that mothers are unreliable employees.

    Don’t do it. If you know that you’re not coming back, resign and take whatever banked sick and vacation time any other person who is resigning for whatever reason would be entitled to.

    2. Alexis Moira Rose*

      I want to respectfully say “Not neurotypical”‘s comments here are VERY off base here!

      Whatever kind of paid or unpaid leave benefits an employer provides to employees are meant to be used and using them according to the employer’s specifications is not dishonest or selfish in any way.

      “OP 3, if you’re not coming back, then you are not entitled to that leave.” No, that’s not how leave works. OP 3 has no way of knowing if something will change in the interim in their family/financial situation, so it is not wrong for them to take the leave.

      “Well, if your employer is a small business or a nonprofit, then it’s a real burden (and, in the case of a nonprofit, a misuse of donor dollars) to give you an extra six weeks of paid vacation on top of whatever sick or vacation time simply resigning would allow you to cash out.”
      You cannot make personal choices about employment and taking leave or not based on what’s “best for the company”. If we all made choices this way, we would work for free and for no benefits! You have to prioritize yourself over the company, and in this case this paid leave is part of her compensation as an employee in the same way that medical insurance or paid holidays would be. Employee compensation would NOT be a “misuse of donor money”.

      “You’d also be, however legally, contributing to the unfair and discriminatory preference for parents. Will any of your non-parent co-workers be able to claim six! weeks! of paid! leave when they resign? Why should you get such a bonus? Do you believe that your impending parenthood makes you more worthy? An inherently more valuable person?”
      There are so many things wrong with this. This employer believes there is value to providing paid leave to new parents, and therefore provides paid leave as part of their compensation package. They are the ones who decided this benefit was merited, not the OP. By saying she believes she’s an inherently more valuable person, you’re guilting her and making a lot of assumptions about what she feels or does not feel.

      OP 3, don’t let anyone make you feel guilty for taking the paid leave you’re entitled to. The only thing that should affect your decision is if the employer has an explicitly stated policy about having to pay back the leave money if you leave within a certain amount of time.

      1. Sar*

        Yeah, my actual response to this (latent-misogyny-laden) screed is that “not neurotypical” needs to fix their (his?) heart.

    3. Magdalena*

      I live and work in a country with paid parental leave. Yeah, employers can be a bit grumpy about it. BUT.
      As a society, we grant parental leave NOT because parents are inherently more valuable but because we decided to protect the most vulnerable – children and new parents. When we begrudge parents parental leave the entire society becomes less friendly overall. I’ll gladly pay a higher tax to make sure our society is humane.

    4. Laura Ingalls Wildest*

      To be blunt, this is a silly take. If parental leave is one of the benefits that goes along with the job, then it’s part of the job, not an imposition. Companies are not forced to offer paid parental leave (although IMO they should be), and they are aware that sometimes people do not return to the office post-leave. They also are aware that not offering paid parental leave can make them noncompetitive and have made their decision accordingly. Would you tell someone to forego medical leave and get themselves to the office after having major surgery, or to stay on the job post-medical leave no matter what?

  38. HalesBopp*

    LW #3 – Others have mentioned this, but please double-check your company’s leave policies. For our organization, if you are utilizing PTO for the full duration of your leave (in conjunction with FMLA, STD, etc.), then your premiums are paid from that PTO. However, if the leave is unpaid, the company still pays for the person’s benefits, but those premiums must be paid back once the individual returns from leave. This is typically done via payroll deduction if the person is going to remain with the company. It is something that has to be sorted if the individual is going to resign following leave.

  39. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

    #3 – if your husband is entitled to parental leave (paid or not) you can stagger the leaves. Meaning you could come back to work for a period of time needed to wrap things up, and he could take his leave starting when you go back to work so you don’t have to find daycare you do not intend to keep.

  40. NotARealManager*

    LW3,

    I say this is as a working mom who was making less than the cost of daycare with my first child and now (with two kids) my paycheck is probably still more than half taken up by childcare costs.

    Make sure you’re factoring both salaries into the daycare cost when deciding if you should stay home with the kid. A lot of people factor it as a 1:1 (usually mom’s check is less than the cost of daycare ergo she should stay home until the kids are school age). But childcare is a shared burden AND a shared cost.

    Additionally, it’s true that in the short-term daycare may eat all or close to all of your paycheck, but if you stay home for 3-10 years, long-term you will be losing retirement savings, job skills, future earning potential, health insurance (depending on how you cover this), mental health, etc.

    I can’t say that staying in the workforce would be the right call for you or not, but the calculus is can be a lot more complicated than “daycare costs more than my paycheck”.

    1. KateM*

      Childcare is a shared burden but if you make that decision based on financial cost only and also raise your baby in a family where the finances are shared (all income and bills in one bit shared pot), it makes sense compare it with the salary that you’d drop in favour of that parent taking care of the baby. Or (where you live) will the other parent be paid more when they have a child in daycare? If not, then, if one parent earns X, the other parent earns Y, and daycare costs Z, then it doesn’t matter if you calculate it (X-Z)+Y, X+(Y-Z), or (X-0.5Z)+(Y-0.5Z), the sum is going to be the same.

      1. Hlao-roo*

        You’re correct that it doesn’t matter if you calculate it (X-Z)+Y, X+(Y-Z), or (X-0.5Z)+(Y-0.5Z). I think NotARealManager’s point is most people don’t calculate X + Y – Z in the first place. Instead, they just look at Y vs Z (I’m assuming salary Y is less than salary X), and if Y < Z, then Other Parent quits their (usually her) job and becomes a stay-at-home parent (mom). But couples could look at X + Y – Z = W and then decide if W can cover all of their other non-daycare expenses.

        And, to reiterate another of NotARealManager's points, W may be less than X this year, but if both spouses stay employed then both of them have the chance to get raises/promotions/bonuses/etc. so that after three years (for example), X3 + Y3 – Z3 = W3 and now W3 is greater than X3, so the whole family is financially better off than if the lower-earning spouse had been out of the workforce for three years and daycare expenses had been 0 for those three years.

      2. NotARealManager*

        No one is saying you’ll come out ahead by doing the math differently. You’ll still be paying for daycare and your take home pay will still be less than it was before having a kid. But the reasoning is not as simple as “Mom’s take home pay is 20k and daycare costs 24k so mom should just stay home”.

        For example…(annually)
        Total combined take home pay before kids: $120k
        Total combined take home pay if Mom works, baby in daycare: $96k
        Total combined take home pay if Mom is SAHM: $100k

        You’re going to be out the 20k either way. Is it worth it for Mom to stay part of the workforce for 4k a year? That question will vary a lot based your other expenses, where you can trim your budget and where you can’t. Some people have that $330 a month, others don’t. On top of that, even if you save the $4k annually now, how much will that cost Mom later? Potentially a lot more. And that’s all not considering if Mom even likes being a SAHM. I have friends that love it and want to do it forever. Others cannot stand it and the theoretical $4k a year is lifesaving for their mental health alone even if they have to trim every other expense in their life. Unfortunately, it’s hard to know which kind of mom you’ll be until the kid arrives.

        And of course this math changes a lot if the other parent is not out earning Mom by as much as they are in my example or if you decide to have more than one kid. But if the financial margins of daycare vs SAHM are close, it’s not a simple decision.

        And LW3 may have considered all the factors I and other commentors have pointed out. But I didn’t initially think of it that way when the question came to my life, so I wanted to invite her to think of it differently if she hadn’t already.

  41. NobodyHasTimeForThis*

    OP1 – The only thing I would say is if you are still in academia, get to know your campus police a bit. I have worked on 3 campuses – one of them the campus police were police like and I would not have called even though I am a tiny woman. One of them the campus police were a mix so I kind of knew the ones I could trust more and once put in a call to see “Is Fergus around today, I wanted to follow up with him on something” because I knew Fergus was a “diffuse a situation” officer. My current campus, I would not hesitate to call because they approach situations from a perspective of diffuse. I’ve never seen them over react and I have seen them gracefully remove people from situations without escalation.

    1. CHRISTOPHER FRANKLIN*

      Unfortunately, I have had more experiences with them than probably anyone on my floor hence my contempt. Ignoring my undergrad experience at another campus, my grad student experiences, I have had to deal with things like lab thefts which almost made me feel more amiable about the thief. Campus police does not get the most choice of candidates and there is little interest in improving them.

  42. Free Meerkats*

    For #4: These are warehouse and office jobs; it’s not like those jobs are difficult (yes, I know they are hard work.) Approve the leave and hire temps for the duration of the leave. Any staffing agency will have a pile of people available to fill your short term need.

  43. Daisy-dog*

    #3 or others in a similar boat: At my former employer, the paid parental leave was contingent on staying at the company for 1 year after returning.

  44. Belle8bete*

    I hate to be the one to say this, but in the unlikely situation that something goes wrong with your birth, you may want/need that job and that insurance. I’ve been down that road, and it’s beyond horrible. It’s unlikely to happen, I was on the wrong side of statistics…but it is wise to keep your situation as “safe” as possible when it comes to things you can actually control.

  45. Loomsly*

    #2: Can I say I find these questions the most enthralling? My coworker drags her muddy shoes over my shirt every week. I’ve tried clearing my throat loudly when she does it, offering her boots instead of high heels, and even asking her to stop (she said no). I know she’s entitled to brush the dirt off her shoes but how do I get over the petty part of me that wishes she wouldn’t do it on me?

    LW2, I think you somewhat knew the answer as you wrote this. Alison’s advice is great, but you have to actually do it, not just feel validated by commenters agreeing your coworker is a jerk. You, specifically, are at great risk of facing this kind of issue for the rest of your life if you don’t.

  46. EmmaPoet*

    #1, I work in a public library and we often deal with people who are in some kind of distress. You handled it the way we were taught to. You didn’t argue, you told him what you could do for him, and you treated him politely and respectfully. He left without an issue, so I think you handled it just fine.
    In general, I think organizations should have some guidelines on when to call law enforcement. We generally err on the side of not calling unless a situation is escalating to the point of danger. That is, of course, a judgement call, but it’s part of our job. Another job may have very different criteria.

Comments are closed.