should my boss message me before calling on Teams, how to accommodate an autistic meltdown, and more

by Alison Green on April 3, 2026

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

1. Should my boss message me before calling on Teams?

My boss recently called me very early in the morning (7:50 am) through Teams without notice. I was working already; I got online at 7 (my work hours are 7 am – 4 pm) but it bothered me and got me a little anxious. I let it go as a missed call and wrote to her immediately after saying that I was ready now. Was that okay or is it okay for her to call without messaging me first to ask if I’m available? Or just because she’s the boss is accepted?

The fact that was so early caught me by surprise, because she’s usually online later, but I think it would have bothered me regardless of the time because she didn’t message me first.

Many offices have a cultural expectation that people will message first to check if you’re available before calling, but even then there are still times where your boss may need to just call you and won’t message first. If it’s during your work hours, that’s not an overstep. The assumption isn’t necessarily that you’ll be available on the spot (you might be on another call or away from your desk), but it’s not wrong or inappropriate for her to call without warning. (That would also be true if she were a peer, not your boss, but your boss in particular has the leeway to do it.)

2. How to accommodate people who have outbursts for medical reasons

I’m asking a question on behalf of my community of autistic folks. Some people with autism experience violent panic attacks when exhausted or profoundly overstimulated. Within the autism community, these attacks are called “meltdowns.” Most people with relatively mild autism don’t suffer from these attacks to a debilitating extent, but some autistic people, especially those who are more profoundly impacted by their autism, do. These attacks are involuntary and often cannot be controlled. Sometimes they can sometimes be lessened or managed with therapy or medication, but not always.

Because these attacks are violent and potentially dangerous, and because there is so much misunderstanding around them, people who experience regular meltdowns are frequently unable to work, even if they are otherwise highly qualified. Autism community boards often feature posts by people with meltdowns trying to figure out how to make a living in spite of these attacks.

What advice would you give people in this situation? Is it legitimate to ask for accommodations to deal with these attacks–perhaps remote work, or off-hours/night work? Are there any other accommodations that might be possible? Is there anything else to suggest?

It’s absolutely legitimate to ask for accommodations, and remote work sounds like it could be one of them if it’s feasible for the job. Also, if a person’s meltdowns are likely to be triggered by something in the work environment, an effective accommodation could be minimizing or removing that trigger (for example, if a noisy environment or disruption to routine can cause them, you could look at accommodations geared toward avoiding those triggers — like a quieter workspace or at least a more sensory-friendly space you can move to when needed, the understanding that you sometimes may simply need to get up and leave, or advance notice when there will be changes to a routine).

Not every accommodation will be possible for every job, but an employer should be willing to enter into the ADA-mandated interactive process to try to find a solution, and there are lots of options between the extremes of “coworkers are exposed to violent outbursts” and “otherwise qualified person who has autistic meltdowns just can’t work.”

3. Mentioning in an interview that a good friend works on the team

My partner was invited to an interview for a supervisory position in their field with a new organization where a mutual friend of ours also works. As it happens, we both know this friend from a previous job all three of us worked at about eight years ago. The role would make my partner and friend co-supervisors to a shared pool of employees, which actually kind of mirrors the job situation we were in all those years ago (it’s a small industry!).

Should my partner disclose the friendship to the hiring committee? On one hand, this doesn’t seem like it raises any conflict of interest issues, it’s just a job where they’d be working with a good friend. On the other hand, would a hiring committee think it weird if they don’t mention it at all, and it comes out on the first day of work that two of the supervisors are good friends and have known each other all along?

To be clear, we haven’t sought out our friend’s advice on how to prepare for the interview, or asked anything of them to help my partner out in any way, so we’re wondering what you would recommend as the safest choice in this situation.

It should really come from the friend — because it would be pretty weird if your partner’s friend knows their good friend is interviewing for a job where they would be co-managers and doesn’t mention that to anyone else involved in the hiring. The hiring committee deserves the opportunity to be aware of the dynamic and think about how it might impact things, and if the friend has any input into the hiring decision, it would be a problem not to acknowledge a personal relationship with one of the candidates.

So it’s primarily the friend who should be doing this. But your partner should also find an opportunity to mention in the interview that they worked closely in a similar role with Valentina Warbleworth eight years ago.

4. I work different hours than my boss

My job doesn’t pay very well for my skills. It is sales and I have good results, but my company doesn’t make enough money to pay me accordingly. I put in an honest effort, and try to limit my time at work to what is reasonable given my salary. As a result, I leave work to work out earlier than others.

I arrive around 8-8:30 and leave around 3:30-4. I probably work a little less than others, though am typically the first in the office and I don’t know when others leave.

I have a new manager, and he comes to the office 1 to 1.5 hours later than I do. This results in me leaving way earlier than he presumably does. I’ve been honest about my salary and time approach (I actually have discussed with my former and new bosses that I don’t think I should be working full-time given my pay, and they didn’t object), but I don’t want to look like I leave ludicrously early.

How can I get credit for the time and effort I put in earlier in the day? Or should I just get a new job that I can feel good about putting more effort into? I generally like what I do, and less working out isn’t an option.

People work different schedules, so the fact that you’re in earlier and leaving earlier than others shouldn’t be an issue as long as your boss is fine with your hours. If you’re working less overall, that could be an issue, but it sounds like you’ve been straightforward with your boss about your schedule and the reasons for it and he hasn’t objected.

You can certainly make a point of ensuring he knows you’re there at 8-8:30 even if he’s not — like by sending timestamped messages around 8 and so forth. But it sounds like you have reasons for what you’re doing, you’ve laid them out, and you can continue on with it until and unless he expresses concern. (Of course, it’s possible that he doesn’t like it and just hasn’t told you — and that you won’t find out until you’re suddenly on a layoff list or something like that — but you could also ask him directly if he foresees your schedule being an issue or not.)

Whether you should get a different job is a whole different question but, based on what you’ve said, it doesn’t sound like this schedule would need to be a reason to.

{ 501 comments }

{ 501 comments… read them below }

  1. RedinSC*

    LW 1, if you’re on the clock from 7am on, then your boss didn’t call you really early. they called you after you’d been working for nearly an hour. While some people do check to see if you’re available for a call, many really don’t. My thought is, if I’m on the clock I can expect to be contacted any time I’m logged in for work. Sometimes my boss or colleagues drop in my office, other times they IM or teams call me. It’s all the same. They’re paying for my time, and I take the calls and drop ins if I’m available to.

    1. Les*

      Same. I’ve worked remotely since 2019 and receiving unexpected Teams calls during my work hours are a normal part of my day. Getting a heads up is nice but is definitely not an industry standard. At least for my setup if I am already on a call or in do not disturb it can’t go through, but if I’m in an available status it is fair game.

      1. Zelda*

        With the caveat that if I’m WFH and you Teams me without notice, I’m not turning my camera on, because I’m probably in my PJs and haven’t brushed my hair.

        1. H3llifIknow*

          I’ve been lucky that in 6 years of WFH, I’ve never once turned on my camera or had anyone video call me–only audio. The only video calls are All Hands, etc..and the only video is the conference room/host. The rest of us are cameras off. If a colleague video called me, I’d be very annoyed, TBH. THAT I might let go to “missed” while sending a “No camera, audio only” and then calling them back on audio. But I 100% agree that if I’m working and available, people should feel free to call me, just as they would have on an office phone w/o telling me first back in the day.

          1. Spreadsheet Queen*

            You can call in TEAMS without using the video. Most people I have worked with don’t use the video when they call.

            As to the OP, some people message first and some people don’t. Even with those who generally message first, there are certain situations when they might not. If they are on a call with someone else and realize they need your expertise, they’re going to just try to get you into the call. And sometimes people will just call when you’ve already been messaging back and forth about something and it’s reached the point that a call is needed – the assumption being that if you’re actively messaging back & forth, you’re probably available for a call.

            1. H3llifIknow*

              I’m not sure if that was a nesting fail? Nothing I said contradicted what you responded.

              1. Elizabeth H*

                it might have been a nesting fail but it’s always possible that someone is responding in your thread bc they AGREE rather than disagree!

          2. amoeba*

            Huh, I never considered that, just because I have my camera on doesn’t mean you have to, as well? I might have it on or off, depending on where I am, how presentable I look, whatever. But zero expectations for the person I’m calling to do the same.

            If you replied like that, I’d be seriously confused why you didn’t just… answer the call with your camera off?

            1. Spiderling*

              Yeah, my workplace does a lot of Teams calls, and it’s totally normal for some people to have their cameras on and some audio-only. (My work computer doesn’t even *have* a camera, so mine is never on!) Some workplaces expect people to turn on their cameras whenever it’s an option, but I wouldn’t assume that’s the case just because the other person’s camera is on.

          3. mary w*

            question 1 today (shocked that their boss called during the work day without notice) and the one a few weeks ago about interns who created a petition objecting to the dress code make me so, so glad I retired 15 years ago.

            1. CJ*

              The interns petitioning the dress code was 10 YEARS ago. I looked it up just yesterday because I was talking to someone about it and was shocked it had been that long.

      2. Corn on the cob*

        When I first started a hybrid schedule I was worried about getting random Teams calls while I was doing something inconvenient. Turns out the bigger issue is people trying to call me while *they’re* the ones driving, cooking, exploring abandoned tunnels etc.

    2. The Dread Persephone*

      This is VERY workplace dependent. I have worked remotely at the same place since 2019, and in that time have received a single Teams call without forewarning; it turned out to be a mistake on their end (wrong button clicked).

      It’s very much against our department culture (IT group with several thousand people at a university) to just call without notice first. I wonder if there’s a common difference between mainly remote teams and in-office or hybrid teams in the way unexpected calls are handled. Before I was remote, I was in the office full-time and still never got a Teams/Slack call without warning, though I got a lot of cubicle drop ins.

      1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

        I’d be very wary of saying that remote work lets you be less available. This perception – which is sometimes the reality – is one of the main drivers of RTO.

        1. Matt*

          My understanding would be remote work demanding *more* availability, since there’s always the perception of someone not actually working if you can’t see them AND not reach them.

          1. The Dread Persephone*

            I didn’t say it makes me less available, just that it’s our culture to do the courtesy of making sure someone can stop what they’re working on to take a call. We do a lot of focused, detailed work that can cause issues if interrupted. People generally answer messages pretty quickly.

        2. Beekeeper*

          Agree. If you must be forewarned for a call, some folks will think it’s because you’re not at your desk working.

          1. Charlotte Lucas*

            On the flip side, where I work you are expected to be concentrating or prepping for a scheduled meeting. People check to see if it’s a good time to call first, then if the call might be long, they schedule it to block off calendars. (My organization has a very meeting-heavy culture.)

            I think this is definitely dependent on the way your organization works.

            1. The Dread Persephone*

              Yes, this. We have a lot of meetings and do a lot of work that can be problematic to just drop in the middle and come back to if interrupted. Think dealing with long, very detailed processes that have to be started over if you miss something in the middle, and they’re not always the same (think having to customize a part in the middle based on the situation).

              People answer messages quickly, often with a “sure, I can meet now” or “please send me an invite for later, my calendar is up to date”.

            2. mlmlm*

              You might even be unavailable because you’re in an unscheduled video call with a different peer! (My organization uses Google tools; I don’t know if other tools would indicate that status.)

              My org’s culture is check-first and I deeply appreciate that.

              1. amoeba*

                Yeah, if you use teams, you’re red if you’re either in a call (scheduled or not), have something on your agenda, or manually set your status to red. Generally, if you’re green, it means you’re available (and probably at your computer as well, as it turns yellow relatively quickly when you’re away – like, within minutes, anyway)

          2. Jackalope*

            It depends on how much forewarning you need. If it’s several minutes, I can see your point. If it’s a few seconds so you can plug in headphones, finish your thought on what you were working on, etc, that seems more reasonable. Even when I have people drop by my desk in person I’ll sometimes ask them to wait a few seconds so I can finish a sentence I’m typing or what have you; that makes sense to me with calls as well.

            1. KateM*

              And how soon do you get the answer. If you answer at one that “Let’s have this call in fifteen minutes” then you are obviously at your computer.

      2. Technically Australien*

        Culture in my company is very much random calls without notice. My team leader especially will decide that he’ll get a faster result with a voice call so just hits the button. Which means I have to rush to find the USB camera and plug it in then answer the call, and often there’ll be screen sharing so we can all see the same stuff.

        I’m 100% WFH, the rest of the team is in the office at least some of the time.

        1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

          Same. At my company, Teams IS the phone. IT removed desk phones. If you need to talk to someone, you call through Teams.

          2. Aitch Arr*

            Same.
            I actually had to make a special request for a “soft” phone so that external parties (e.g., candidates, former employees) could call me.

      3. Bast*

        I agree that it really depends on your workplace (although when the boss is calling, you don’t really have much of a choice but to answer). I was the office early bird in at 7:00 am at my old job. Most other people wandered in between 8:30-9:00 am. That being said, even though technically 9:00 or 9:30 were standard work hours within your work day, it was A Thing that you did not set up any meeting — intercompany or with clients– prior to 10 am. Preferably later, but 10:00 am was the absolute earliest for any type of meeting. Could you do it? Sure, I suppose, but coming in and seeing anything on the calendar for 9:00 am would be extremely weird, because it was out of sync with company culture. I’m getting the idea that’s what happened here — not really that this is a “can my boss do this” type of situation, but more of it being unusual in this particular company for anyone to be calling at this time — even if yes, technically it is during work hours.

      4. Cat Lady in the Mountains*

        Yeah, at my workplace I’m expected to be available for ad hoc phone calls, which doesn’t bother me at all, but an unexpected Teams call would be highly disruptive/not done. I’m not really sure why it feels so different, but it does. We’re fully remote but strong cameras-off culture.

        1. H3llifIknow*

          I see no difference in an unexpected cell phone call and an unexpected Teams phone call. The LW didn’t indicate it was a video call, which I could see might throw me off if I were in pajamas, but a Teams audio call shouldn’t be wildly disruptive, any more so than any other call. Just turn camera off or answer the call w/o turning it on, etc.. If the other person chooses to be on camera, meh.

        2. Smithy*

          Just from my office experience, I think the “just call first” feels more disruptive, if not rude, is that it can display a bit of a power imbalance and lack of consideration.

          My employer is global with lots of different offices. And for the most part, all offices have a mix of folks in solo offices who are more senior, as well as shared offices adn open office plan spots. There’s also a flexible hybrid policy, so there’s no formally knowing when someone is or isn’t in the office, as well as knowing if someone does or doesn’t have a private office.

          Therefore, the surprise Teams call can feel presumptuous in regards to availability beyond simply being free. If I’m in the open office plan, getting my headphones out and plugged in or dashing to a phone booth is an inherently different dynamic to older phone culture where the person answering didn’t have to do extra work to not be on speaker phone.

          Now if it’s your supervisor, that power differential at play is one that it’s probably best to just personally adjust to. Even just getting used to answering and saying “just a minute, I need to xyz”. However, among peers or cross department, I do believe it’s off putting specifically for those dynamics. I will also note that the people at my current employer who’ve used that tactic have also never regarded my calendar to see if I’m otherwise busy or in cases where I have a meeting in one or two minutes.

          1. amoeba*

            Huh, ok, where I’ve worked, the headset was definitely just plugged in all day, anyway – the most I might have to do is just put it on if it was just lying on my desk. But that’s not really more effort than taking up the receiver. Also, short calls at your desk were always fine in the open space – yeah, for longer ones, you’d go and find a cubicle, but not sure how that would differ from a phone? Like, it’ll disturb others either way. That seems more of a private vs open office issue.

            But then I’ve also never actually had a desk phone, it’s always been Teams for everything for me.

        3. Pi314*

          Teams has the ability to toggle camera on/off at will, someone calling through teams doesn’t necessarily mean their camera will be on, and even of it is, you don’t have to use yours.

          1. Another freelancer*

            I’m in a camera-on meeting. So when someone calls me unexpectedly (exceptions are made of course), I chat them in Teams and say “I’m finishing up an email, can I call you in 10 minutes?” right away. Because maybe I need to finish my thoughts/grab my headphones/make sure I look OK/ need to decompress from a meeting I just had.

            I have a few coworkers who wear hearing aids, and their Teams messages all say something to the effect of “Please contact me via chat before calling me.” Because they need to take out their hearing aids and put them somewhere secure.

      5. Guacamole Bob*

        And even dependent on role and department within a workplace. My team does more strategic, longer-term work where we may be very busy against urgent deadlines but those deadlines are for things like meeting materials, and we nearly always warn about calls with a message first. Our operations teams are running busy public facilities, and they call each other all day long without warning, and just call when they need something from one of us, too.

      6. NotRealAnonForThis*

        Indeed.

        While I’m in the office, I’m in the line of sight from my boss’s office. He doesn’t have to “see” me to know that I’m working, but he’s also not going to wander over here to talk about a project if he can see my chair is empty, if I’m on the phone, or if I’m clearly in the middle of something.

        When I’m in my home office, he can’t “see” me at all. He typically will ping me before calling, because he can’t see if I’m on the phone, if I’m not at my desk (sometimes this happens in the course of the day, be it a bio break, needing a refill of coffee, or sometimes I just need extra space to accomplish a task – all things that are true in the actual office as well), or if I’m in the middle of something that I can’t be interrupted during.

        His expectation is that I respond as quickly as I am able to the ping, and if I can’t take a call, to be truthful about when I can based on my schedule.

        1. Slow Gin Lizz*

          Yes, these are all the reasons why pinging someone to see if they are available before you actually call them is generally considered a good idea. And not only is it different for every company but also for every employee. Everyone on my current team and at my old company (both fully remote, used Teams for calls and chats) would check first before a call, with the notable exception of my grandboss at OldJob. She would call me the second she noticed something she needed me to fix and it was jarring to say the least.

          Now, I’m diagnosed ADHD and possibly AuDHD, and phone calls are the WORST for me. Task switching is difficult most of the time, and having a conversation with someone that I’m not prepared for really flusters me in a way I can’t rightly describe. If she had messaged me something like, “I noticed an issue with the TPS reports, can I call you?” it would have benefitted us both because I would have been MUCH better prepared to answer her question. As it were, I often did what OP did and let the call go unanswered as I needed a few minutes to collect myself after being interrupted. I would then message back a couple of minutes later and say I was away from my desk and what did you want to talk about? Most of the time it was something so easy to answer in a chat that we never even bothered with a phone call. But some people far prefer phone calls, which, again, would have been completely fine if she had taken a sec to message me first.

          1. Elizabeth West*

            For years, I worked front desk jobs where ALL the calls were unexpected and never understood why I would sometimes get incredibly flustered even when it wasn’t busy. I just had to deal with it, but it could be really hard sometimes. Then I discovered my ASD, and it was a huge light bulb. Being off the front desk is such a relief.

            At my current job, I put a notice in my email signature to please give me a heads-up before calling to give me time to prepare. I asked our ND network peeps for help on the wording.

            Even if you’re not ND, it’s still good practice because people are often busy. And they do engage in face-to-face conversations even in my industry where people are notoriously introverted, lol. So they might be over at someone’s desk having a discussion.

            My boss never does that, by the way. She always pings or sends an email, and if she really, really wants to talk with you, she’ll book a meeting.

      7. Lusara*

        It doesn’t matter what your workplace culture is. If your boss calls you during your regular working hours, you answer it unless you have a really good reason not to. And “it’s 7:50 and I’ve only been working less than an hour” isn’t a good reason. It’s your boss, not a coworker.

        1. What_the_What*

          Yeah, right? The whole “oh I have to be mentally and emotionally prepared for this phone call,” is so… weird. You’re working. There should be no reason to not talk to your BOSS about work. Like, if you were in an office and boss walked to your desk w/o a heads up, would you be like “uh come back in 10 mins; I have to do some deep breathing first”?

          1. AngryOctopus*

            Or, I’m in the middle of making slides for a presentation in two days/putting together a protocol for today/reading six papers to figure out our next step, and you calling me out of the blue is jarring and takes me out of the zone, not to mention now I have to figure out what you need, pull it up, and be prepared to talk about it (and not what I was concentrating on before). I appreciate a heads up “when is a good time” message, and that includes in office stopping by. I’m not suddenly prepared to pivot to discussing data just because you came by in person instead of messaging.

            1. Spiderling*

              In that case you can say, “I’m right in the middle of making slides for the presentation on Wednesday. Can I call you back when I’m done, or do you need an answer now?”

              A lot of the time, people don’t mind waiting if you tell them you’re busy. Other times, the thing they need from you actually *is* more important than whatever you’re working on. That’s especially true when your boss is the person calling.

          2. Tea Monk*

            LOL, probably. I do get random phone calls and do take them but I may have to take a few minutes afterwards to readjust and I might not be at my best simply because I didn’t have time to prepare.

          3. Zelda*

            The whole “oh I have to be mentally and emotionally prepared for this phone call,” is so… weird.

            It’s *different from you*, anyway.

            1. What_the_What*

              It’s a work call. At work. It shouldn’t need therapy beforehand. So, yes I contend that it’s a little weird. Either the job isn’t right for you, or you aren’t right for the job, if it’s sooooooooooooooooo shocking and anxiety inducing to get a work call…. at work… while working… about work.

              1. MtDoom*

                Yes! At my last gig we had a problem with people just not wanting to answer phones at all. They’d let everything go to VM and then answer it later. That resulted in a whole house meeting when everyone was told if you are at your desk, you are expected to answer your phone. Our business was customer service! Answer the damn phones! That was when I learned of the generational differences re: phone calls. I had no idea how alien it was to people a lot younger than me.

              2. Zelda*

                Good grief, nobody said anything about therapy or anything close to it. Just a couple of minutes to switch modes from deep focus to external, or from ‘dealing with facts & figures’ to ‘dealing with people’. Maybe for you those aren’t separate modes, or maybe your job has you in ‘people’ mode nearly all the time. But that doesn’t make people who benefit from a minute to switch “weird” or “in need of therapy” or anything else but Different From You.

            2. Spiderling*

              You don’t have to like unexpected phone calls, but that doesn’t mean they’re inherently rude or unreasonable. It is entirely reasonable for your boss to expect you to be reachable by phone during working hours.

            3. Mbs001*

              It’s not only weird it’s totally unprofessional as well. If you’ve got an issue with not be able to handle this sort of thing, then you shouldn’t be in a job that requires it, which is most office jobs.

        2. Crone*

          Agreed.

          Even taking into account this is a work advice column, I found myself wondering is this a cultural shift? I am older than most commenters.

          The examples posted saying did not change my perspective, but I were interesting to read.

          1. The Dread Persephone*

            It’s just different company cultures, and some people in this thread seem shocked that it’s not the same at every company, which is odd.

        3. The Dread Persephone*

          If my boss called without a heads-up during normal working hours, I would be incredibly worried that I was getting laid off or something else terrible. It’s just not done at our company without extreme circumstances. My boss is kind enough not to terrify her employees by sending a short message and making sure we’re not working on something we can’t stop in the middle of. In our office, it’s common courtesy.

          1. Captain Swan*

            After a particular situation I had where people thought a coworker was being let go based on a pop up meeting that he was asked to attend last minute, I make sure my direct reports no they don’t need to worry.
            (Coworker was not being let go, we needed his expertise and didn’t realize it until after the meeting started.)

            If I send an IM asking for a quick call right now or to stop by my office, I usually add something about its not negative or nothing to worry about or similar.

          2. amoeba*

            Huh, I mean, that kind of sounds like a company culture/boss thing though. My former boss wasn’t calling without warning super often, but I’ve never ever been worried about it being anything bad! (Also, if he did message before, it was as generic as “do you have 2 minutes”, so… not really very reassuring at all if I had, in fact, been worried? Could still be bad news!)

            But then it was also never an issue to just decline and call back later if it was a bad time for me.

        4. Parakeet*

          No it really is culture-dependent. Just like in some workplace cultures, while you’re expected to be working on Friday afternoon, the expectation for individual contributors would be that that was almost entirely focused individual work, and only meetings if absolutely necessary. My workplace is not that; meetings on Friday afternoons are fine. My workplace is, however, one where there is a culture of individual contributors doing focused individual work early in their mornings, with meetings during that time minimized and (in what is usually a cameras-on culture) cameras-off.

          Calls also have different cultural connotations in different workplaces. In some, an unexpected call from your manager would be unremarkable. In others, it would mean you’re about to get some drastically bad news, because anything else would be a message or email. Many are somewhere in between.

          Workplaces have different cultures on everything else, we talk about this all the time on this blog. I’m not sure why anyone is surprised that this is also cultural.

        5. IDK*

          Agreed. The expectation at every office job I’ve ever had, whether in-office or WFH, is that you answer a call from your boss during work hours.

    3. Myrin*

      I’m German, so 7:50am is really, really not in any way early to me and certainly not “very early”, but I think in this case OP meant it in the sense that the boss is usually online later.

      My boss typically arrives at work between 7:30 and 8 so when I recently crossed paths with him in the stairwell at 6:50, I was indeed surprised (and even commented as much; apparently his wife had an appointment and he saw her off and then thought “well, I’m already up, might as well go to work”).

      1. allathian*

        I’m Finnish, and 7.50 wouldn’t be too early here, either.

        That said, my employer doesn’t really do unscheduled Teams calls, even if the scheduling is just a quick “Hi, do you have a moment to talk about X?”

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        In Ireland, it definitely would be. Work here is usually 9-5 and I think in some places, it can even be more 9:30.

        1. Amateur Linguist*

          Yeah but OP is scheduled at 7.00am, so she’s supposed to be available by then.

          1. Irish Teacher.*

            Yeah, that is fair. I just meant it might be considered an early time to be at work in general. Definitely perfectly reasonable to contact somebody within their working hours even if they start work earlier than most people in their field/area though.

      3. amoeba*

        I mean, I’m German and it would be early for me, haha. But yeah, definitely not unreasonable.

        But for me, the main point is – when I’m green, I’m working and available, so it’s ok to call. If I see a colleague’s green icon, I’ll assume it’s ok to contact them. If they’re not, in fact, available, I’ll assume they’ll just… not answer and call me back/message me later. Guess I’m a bit simple with that, lol?

        1. Myrin*

          Sure, I know enough people for whom it would be early, too, but I feel confident in saying that culturally, it’s absolutely not.

          And yeah, that’s how it works at my job, too. Lots of angst about something that just seems like not that big of a deal to me, in either direction.

    4. The Original K.*

      My boss loves a pop-up Teams call. My previous boss (same org) would ask first; my current one doesn’t. It’s a bit out of the norm for our team (we mostly ask), but it is what it is.

      1. AngryOctopus*

        I had an awful boss my last job who was very micromanaging. I was in on a Sunday morning once because cells wait for no man, and I just had to get something done. I sent a teams message saying I had noticed something a little off with the cells so we’d have to adjust our tomorrow plans. He teams called me right then (on a Sunday AM!!) along with another colleague who ANSWERED, and then we somehow took 30′ to talk about this thing that I literally would not be doing until Monday and so we could have talked about it Monday, but he told me that it was “easier to do it now”. Even after I was like “guys it’s Sunday I don’t want to be here for much longer”. He didn’t care.
        Anyway, I really don’t like calls out of the blue. Send a quick message asking if I have time! I might not! I might have to get back in the lab! I might be in the middle of something! It might be Sunday and I don’t want to talk to you!!

    5. Overeducated*

      I completely agree in theory, but I seem to be very unlucky in that 90% of the time my boss calls me without notice, it’s when I’ve gotten up for a bathroom break or walk during my mandatory unpaid lunch. (I usually put up an away message during lunch but not every day since it doesn’t seem to be common.) I’m not even remote, I’m at my desk 8 hours a day, it’s just nowhere near boss’s and I seem to be really unlucky! So I do appreciate a quick “available for a call?” chat.

      1. UKDancer*

        Yeah my last boss had an unerring ability to Teams call when I’d gone to the loo. No big deal, I would just message when I got back a few minutes later and we’d speak then.

        1. H3llifIknow*

          If I’m taking a bathroom break or getting coffee, putting the dog out, whatever, I simply switch my Teams status to “BRB”. If I show “Available” then I am fair game for a call. It’s very simple to indicate you are not “call ready” on Teams.

      2. amoeba*

        Huh, doesn’t your Teams turn yellow when you leave your desk? For us, it does pretty quickly, so I don’t bother doing anything for lunch break – it’s obvious from my status that I’m not there.

    6. inkognyto@gmail.com*

      This could be re-phased into a different context to see what they did.
      “My boss walked over to my office, but I ignored them for a few minutes until I was ready.”

      This is the part of phone etiquette that is missing from not having a physical office phone.

      If my boss called I answered, heck unless I’m really busy, if anyone called I answered.

      If I needed 1 minute to wrap something up, you can always say. “I need to complete this thought can I have a few seconds”

      finish the thought and give them full attention.

      1. Lily Rowan*

        I was thinking about this, too – pre-pandemic, I might be in a one-on-one meeting in my office and the desk phone would ring. If my boss, I’d probably pick up — if she called from her desk, it was probably something quick and/or urgent. If someone else, I’d call back. Actually, that boss would Teams call me even if I showed up “busy”/was in another call.

        Anyway, asking before calling is definitely an office culture issue.

    7. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      The OP states that the boss starts later, so I think thats what she means by “really early.”

    8. GDUB*

      Exactly. If my Teams dot is green, you can call me. If I’m in the middle of something I might not pick up, but I almost always do.

    9. ThatGirl*

      In general I agree, but I had a manager who would semi-regularly call me via Teams without a heads up first, and I always wished she’d give me a minute or two heads up — primarily because half the time I was in the office and didn’t have headphones plugged in, so I needed to scramble for those to not disrupt the people around me. And honestly a brief heads up just meant I could be a little more mentally prepared.

      It wasn’t that I objected to her calling me, it was that it was a bit disruptive in a way that a normal Teams chat, email or drop-by would not have been.

    10. HR Exec Popping In*

      I think it always nice to send a short, “have a moment to chat” message prior to calling someone. But I honestly don’t see the difference with calling directly vs. popping by someone’s desk in an in person environment. If you are there and working I don’t see the issue with someone calling.

    11. Pi314*

      I definitely don’t mind being called without warning. I also expect the person calling me not to mind if I don’t answer, or tell them I only have a minute, or have to get back to them later.

  2. Vique*

    LW1 I don’t see an issue, your boss called you when you were already working, it was not outside your work hours.

    1. Resume Please*

      I don’t see the issue either.

      Most times whwn I’m WFH, my boss pings me “Got a minute?” which is essentially asking if they can call.

      Othertimes, it’s just a phone call. Maybe it’s generational, but this is fine, I grew up with it. However, part of ‘growing up with it’ was the understanding that, unlike now, you weren’t always available and at your phone. A missed call and having to call back a couple minutes later (getting coffee, bathroom, etc) is not a big deal.

    2. Analyst*

      even if it’s outside work hours, who cares? you would just presumably not be logged in to teams, and would see the missed call when you were working…

    3. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      I think the issue is with pop up video calls is that it is video, and you might not be camera ready.

      2. What_the_What*

        OP said nothing about it being a video call. Just a Teams call. I’ve never recieved a Teams video call, thank goodness. But my camera has never been enabled, so even if I got one, they’d be the only one on camera. And since I also “disable incoming video” I wouldn’t see them either!

        1. Sillysaurus*

          Wow, workplaces are so different. I very occasionally receive a Teams call without video, but 99% of the time it’s a video call and it would be very strange for me not to have my video on. I’d need an excuse, like my camera not working.

        2. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

          Usually a teams call is a video call, at least one person is on video.

          1. What_the_What*

            That’s like saying FaceTime calls are more common than voice calls. Simply not accurate. There is an option for video call or audio call on Teams–either people don’t know that or they select video by default for some insane reason. I’ve never once received a video call, and neither have the other people on the very large DoD program I work. It’s audio. Video is for large conferences, program reviews, etc.. And if I were told to turn my camera on, I’d refuse. It causes lag and connection issues, and it’s a cyber risk to my home network. But, since video calls are very uncommon, it doesn’t matter.

          2. amoeba*

            That’s just not true.

            My last workplace used Teams for any kind of calls – there was literally no other option to call somebody! So yeah, all voice calls were by definition also Teams calls. I’d say it was about 50/50, but also, even if somebody called with their camera on, nobody blinked an eye if you just left yours off when answering.

      3. LureKing*

        I would think if you’re unable to pick up, you fix your hair or change or whatever you were going to do… and then call back or message.

        I don’t personally need the message before, though I can understand the reasoning behind it. A missed call at least for me serves the same purpose. My manager doesn’t seem to have an issue with missing a call.

        If they were upset about missed calls (which OP doesn’t mention), that would be a different problem…

        1. Allonge*

          This. There are options here, people!
          – take the call right then but do not turn your video on
          – call back when you are ready
          – take the call, turn video on and resign yourself to being seen not perfect
          – keep a reasonable standard of grooming when you are working

      4. Turquoise Cow*

        You can have your camera off on unscheduled one on one calls just like on group calls, just don’t turn it on.

    4. Lacey*

      Yeah – at my work people generally just make the call if it’s going to be a short conversation.
      If they’ll need more of my time, they check ahead to make sure there isn’t going to be a conflict. But either way, I’d consider it totally normal and still far less intrusive than random interuptions in the office.

  3. General Socks*

    LW 2, getting accomodations for the meltdown is helpful. Like a private space, going to your car, going home early. A psychologist can help with accomodations.

    I think it’s even more important to have accommodations before the melt down. Things that can help prevent it. Things like emailing instructions, headphones, light sensitivity glasses, loop ear plugs, predictable work, own work space, flexible scheduling, or set breaks is even better. The key is to prevent the melt down from happening in the first space.

    I know we autistics tend to blame everything on ourselves, but it’s also important to realize that work places can be toxic and it’s okay to find a new job. I’ve seen too many of us, including me, stick it out because we hate change.

    1. Andrew*

      Seconding all of this, as another higher-functioning ASD patient. My workplace actually has a couple of designated spots to retreat to if someone is feeling overwhelmed, and some people like to take their schedules breaks in them routinely. But I know as a majority-neurodivergent workplace that specifically recruits ASD folks, we’re kind of unusual (in a good way) there.

      1. Wearing the pants of a banana*

        @Andrew, that sounds like a great setup! My workplace does…not have that. It’s a job that requires a lot of constant collaboration, so the entire floor is open plan and it’s generally low-level noisy, but at other times there is yelling. In those cases, Loops don’t help and listening to Enya over headphones doesn’t help. I’m very good at what I do but noise is my worst sensory trigger and it is rough.
        Thankfully I can tell when I’m getting close to an actual meltdown and can take myself somewhere private, like my car, but I will be short to the point of rudeness up until then because my fight-or-flight response is screaming at me (I suspect a lot of non-autistics don’t realise that that is what is happening).
        It’s actually harder at home — I try not to yell because it gives my cats a fright.

    2. General von Klinkerhoffen*

      Another autistic chiming in to say that accommodating meltdowns is rather like putting a crash mat at the bottom of the stairs instead of installing a handrail.

      1. anon for this*

        This!!
        My well-meaning boss always asks what she can do to help once the very-preventable cyclical barrage of impossible demands hits me.
        I keep answering that helping me wipe down while the firehose is still active is not helpful. Preventing the firehose, or at least providing some shelter from it is what I need.

    3. PurplePeopleEater*

      I’m a friend and colleague of ASD folks with mostly low support needs, thirding that meltdowns have the biggest impact on the person experiencing them. Framing the question through impact on coworkers is probably better received by a lot of managers and is very thoughtful, for sure. It is important to have an “in case of emergency” spot to melt down. But I hope workplaces make it possible for people to work in an environment less likely to cause or aggravate overwhelm. Take care of yourself as best you can! And a private place to decompress (or meltdown) helps both autistic and allistic employees.

    4. April is Autism ACCEPTANCE month*

      I agree that the accommodations around managing sensory needs in order to prevent or minimize meltdowns is key.

      Two things about (my experience with) meltdowns that might be helpful for allistics to keep in mind:

      1. Meltdowns are exhausting.

      2. Meltdowns are humiliating.

      For these reasons, I will do absolutely anything to prevent having meltdowns in front of people.

      I’ve found it helpful to work with an occupational therapist; she has helped me identify both triggers and possible accommodations. Not everything that bothers me bothers other Autistics; not everything that helps me helps other Autistics.

    5. Pidgeot*

      Asking out of curiosity — we’ve had letters before from people with service dogs that can alert them when they’re going to have a medical issue like fainting or a seizure — and workplaces can accommodate that so that the person can get to a safe place. Would a dog be able to be trained to anticipate a meltdown and get their person to a safe place? I don’t know how sudden onset of these meltdowns would manifest, but if it’s something where the person themselves couldn’t take themselves to a safe space as Andrew mentioned, perhaps a dog might help notice signs and be able to take care of their human. (This might not be how any of this works, and if so, I apologize).

      1. Insulindian Phasmid*

        In my case, they happen VERY quickly and in response to my own emotions most of the time. It’s possible a dog could notice the buildup of stress that makes a meltdown more likely, but generally if I melt down it’s within a minute or two of something stressful happening and then requires (ideally) 5-15 minutes alone to calm down.

      2. Nightengale*

        there are services dogs that can be trained to do some of these things
        and there are some people for whom the benefit of the dog outweighs the inconveniences. Probably not the majority of autistic people who could benefit from more neurodiversity friendly workplaces or specific accommodations, though.

      3. Lilian Field*

        I am the OP. My dog does notice when I am close to a meltdown, but usually what she notices is that I have started speaking in a louder and more strained voice to the people around me. She comes and collapses on my feet. Ideally, I wouldn’t even get to the point where my dog notices something is off. I also don’t really, personally, have a severe problem with meltdowns; I am more prone to “shutdown,” which manifests a bit like an absence seizure (though the neurology is very different). I do think that service dogs are a great option and very helpful for many autistic people. It’s a very good suggestion. But maybe, given what others have said here, it’s not always a direct solution to this problem in particular.

    6. emily.ackert05@gmail.com*

      Agreed – I also have an issue with meltdowns being characterized as “violent”.

      A better way to describe this would be “agitated”.

      Some people are violent when melting down. Most are not.

      1. Wearing the pants of a banana*

        That bothered me as well — I think most meltdowns are more likely to resemble panic attacks, although they can certainly include screaming or crying, and in severe cases self-injurious behaviour (which can absolutely be disturbing to people on the outside, I’m not discounting that).
        But as far as I’m aware it’s fairly rare for meltdowns to be directed at objects and even more rare that they’re aimed at other people. IMO the use of “violent” here is unnecessarily stigmatising.
        I also bristled at the use of “with autism” but I understand that it’s not universally frowned upon.

        1. Lilian Field*

          I am the OP. To clarify, and for context, I really wanted to ask this question in a way that would include the experience of people who do experience involuntary violence as part of their meltdowns–I mean throwing things with full force and sometimes even hitting people who come within reach. If your experience and observation of meltdowns doesn’t include these things, or if you find the question in its current form to be exaggerated, it might be that most autistic people of your acquaintance are relatively low support needs? I don’t know. I’m not trying to say that you don’t know what you’re talking about; I’m just saying that there are lots of these people around, but lots of them choose not to be in public very much, and it could be that you haven’t run across them. People who experience severe versions of this problem can have a very difficult time even staying housed. (If you want to learn more about the question from a clinical perspective, you could google the phrases “challenging behavior” or “severe challenging behavior,” along with autism). There are a lot of people, especially with higher support needs, who really can be a danger to themselves and to others when they are in the throes of a meltdown. These kinds of meltdowns are even more stigmatized and humiliating than other kinds, and they make it even harder to find employment. But lots of these people also do not receive enough benefits to survive without working, especially in the U.S. So they are in a really, really tough situation.

        2. Lilian Field*

          I am the OP. According to my understanding, the question of “with autism” vs “autistic” is really person-dependent. Some people strongly prefer one option; others strongly prefer another; some people (especially in the higher needs community) are concerned that it’s a distraction from some of the more substantive and pressing equity issues faced by autistic people. I myself see all sides of both questions and tend to use whatever phrase comes to mind. In this case, I suppose, because I was writing in part about members of the autistic community who are most subject to dehumanization and stigmatization, I wanted to emphasize the personhood and humanity of these people. But to be honest my choice in this case was instinctive, not deliberate. I didn’t make a conscious choice either way when I wrote to Allison, because this particular question of language is not a big part of my own practice of advocacy or self-advocacy.
          Even in the autistic community, there can be a tendency–by people who can avoid violence as part of their meltdowns–to blame or stigmatize those who can’t. (Here’s one example from Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/AutisticAdults/comments/1p32apj/popular_post_on_aio_autism_and_violent_meltdowns/ ). There are lots of autistic people whose meltdowns are so severe that they end up in institutions. Many receive lifelong courses of ECT. If it would be helpful, I can post links to the medical literature about these people and the treatments they undergo. I would post links to relevant first-hand posts, too, but I wouldn’t want to do that without getting permission from the people involved first.
          One helpful stat: the autistic community is more or less evenly divided among so-called support levels, with about a third of us being pretty low support needs, a third being moderate support needs, and a third being high support needs (i.e. needing round-the-clock care, usually nonspeaking). But the relatively low-needs among us are by far the most visible.

          1. Marvel*

            Just want to say that I really appreciate this context and I apologize for my own snap judgement in a thread below. Some circles of the internet I run in have problems with trolls posing as friends/family members of autistic people to post sensationalist stigmatizing garbage, so I’m particularly paranoid about it. That clearly wasn’t the case here!

      2. RedinSC*

        I did wonder about the word violent. In, is the melt down causing the person to lash out and be “violent” either towards other people or themselves? As in hitting or something physical? So, that was confusing to me.

        1. Amateur Linguist*

          I’ve experienced that kind of meltdown — the casualty was a dictaphone. I’ve also felt angry and overwhelmed at people and prevented myself from lashing out at them, but it was hard. So yeah, some of us do experience it that way and need to maintain control — sometimes the tsunami of frustration will manifest in a destructive manner, and I know my mum was actually quite frightened the first time she saw it happening when I was ten.

          I’m much better at handling it now but the experience was quite upsetting for all concerned.

        2. bel*

          Hi, daughter of an autistic father here. A person may hurt themselves or others. But most people having meltdowns are not physically dangerous to themselves or you. They are very distressed.

        3. Anonny*

          From the outside, they can look like (and often are mistaken for) tantrums – loud, seemingly over-dramatic displays of emotion. This can involve yelling, crying, rocking, throwing things, pulling hair, hitting self. It’s basically the desperate attempt at someone in a lot of distress to self-regulate. It is also something that anyone could experience, but autistic people are more likely to due to our different sensory needs and lack of understanding of our differences.

          Most of us don’t want to hurt other people during a meltdown, but under the circumstances, the more ‘advanced thinking’ part of the brain isn’t very accessible to us. It’s kind of similar to how someone who is in extreme amounts of physical pain will verbally snap at medical staff who are trying to help them, and be uncooperative – their brain simply will not accept additional stimuli, even if under more rational circumstances, they know the medical staff are trying to help them.

      3. The Unspeakable Queen Lisa*

        The LW isn’t saying all autistic people have violent meltdowns. LW knows the people they are referring to and you don’t. If they used “violent” you shouldn’t argue about it.

        The people LW is writing about do have violent outbursts, which would be the hardest to accomodate and they would struggle to keep employment. Yelling at others, hitting others, hitting themselves, punching walls, etc. are all things that can happen and would be very scary to witness and would get them fired. Autistic people not doing that don’t need the help that the LW is trying to find.

        In your effort to prevent all autistic people from being labeled violent, you are glossing over the autistic people who do melt down violently and yet still need to eat and live and pay rent.

      4. Cow Whisperer*

        That concerned me as an educator.

        If you tell me a person behaved violently, that means a person’s actions were in imminent danger of causing serious harm to self or others. That’s not behavior that can be solved through accommodations once the violence has started.

        There’s a huge difference between someone having a meltdown that isn’t causing danger (and can be accommodated extensively) and a person who becomes violent during a meltdown.

        1. Lilian Field*

          Yes, I agree; I think that’s the problem. Some people do have dangerous meltdowns. Sometimes people are prone to self-harm (head-banging is not uncommon; pounding one’s legs is a milder form of the same thing). Others can lash out at others. These people sometimes have a very hard time getting by in the world even though their experience is uncontrollable. It’s a bit like suffering from severe PTSD (and in both cases, a hyperactive amygdala is involved). I think that the accommodations challenges are probably pretty similar in some cases.
          In general, I think that your phrase “once violence has started” is really helpful because it points the way to a solution: taking precautionary measures. Other people have made the same point. The solution might be to get the workplace to see that safety measures have to be put in place, first. I don’t have dangerous meltdowns, or even meltdowns at all, in the workplace, but I do have shutdowns, which pose safety risks of their own (because of fall risk, etc.). Over many years of working with my employer, I’ve managed to convince them that it’s ok for me to get accommodations to *prevent* a dangerous medical event. I’ve used the precedent of people who have to manage seizure disorders. But it’s tough because awareness is not always great. I have more severe autism than most people who work full-time. As a result, I face things like fall risk, aphasia, etc., which lots of autistic people don’t. HR used to think that I was exaggerating or making up my symptoms because “other autistic people work here without those problems.” But autism manifests in people in a lot of different ways. Some people need different health and safety precautions put in place.
          In many of these cases, remote work is by far the best option. But the post-pandemic emphasis on in-person working can make that tough. Sometimes people think the autistic person is just malingering when they want to be at home solely for precautionary reasons.

          1. Kirakaoru*

            The thing is, even with peak awareness, the solution has to be individualised in environments where individualisation to that extent is generally discouraged or not possible. A good part of the solution isn’t making a job fit someone, but that person and/or their support network and care team targeting and achieving a job that has a chunk of what they need baked in, and nobody can advise for that without looking at the individual, the same way we can’t know whether people would even be eligible for ADA accommodations (even if the chances get higher the more support someone needs) as to whether pursuing accommodations is even a valid route to look at. You have all the general pieces to put together a pathway towards a solution but it is up to each individual to identify their priorities, needs, must-haves and find a way to get those, part of which is why recruiters and service providers exist in disability spaces to place, assist and advocate for people who want to work and also happen to have a brain and/or body that is disadvantaged by social and structural norms around “work”.

            The solutions for preventing a meltdown will be different for different people and more possible or variable in one place than another, and the only way to account for that is individual knowledge applied individually. No amount of advocacy or internet awareness will change that.

      5. Sillysaurus*

        It really depends on the autistic person. I work with individuals with high support needs. Sometimes the meltdowns are violent. I have been injured from them many times. The person is not targeting me or intending to harm me, but that doesn’t stop the harm from occurring. I think it’s completely reasonable to acknowledge that reality.

      6. Dragon_Dreamer*

        My meltdowns tend to consist of huddling into a ball while crying and rocking. My mind goes utterly blank and I can’t think or remember much.

    7. spiriferida*

      Agreed. It’s probably never possible to eliminate meltdowns entirely for people who struggle with them a lot, but they suck and any workplace that’s going to actually be good to work at will want to work with an employee to make sure they happen as little as possible. It’s not always possible to eliminate the overwhelming sensory inputs in the office – I’m thinking of the air vents in my building which /always/ have a background hum, but being able to get away from those overwhelming inputs when needed can make a huge difference.

      1. Anonny*

        It’s kinda like having a good fire safety system in the office – it needs to have both ways of preventing the thing from happening in the first place, and reducing the impact of the thing if one happens. Sometimes these will be the same system – having no-questions asked decompression breaks and a quiet place to have them will both reduce the stress that triggers a meltdown, and means the employee has somewhere to go away from people if they feel a meltdown is imminent.

    8. anon for this*

      Had to deal with a PTSD meltdown recently that was caused by intentional understaffing and refusal to right-size service expectations accordingly. Since my employers aren’t willing to support me in filtering an impossible intake load, I have gotten better at just noping out. I use my generous leave time and take a day to recover. I ignore my inbox once certain criteria are met for ’emergency’ responses.
      I hate the feeling of letting people down, but then again I really hate the feeling of being let down by people who are paid well to be supportive.

      1. Capybara*

        Doctor-diagnosed Level 1 ASD here.

        I didn’t know that meltdowns could be accommodated. I thought they made me a less valuable person who had to put up with anything and everything while being grateful to have the privilege of participating in society like normal people.

        Thank you, Alison and Lilian, for this letter today!

        1. Desert Rat*

          Doctor-diagnosed Level 2 AuDHD here (that’s a combination of Autism Spectrum Disorder and ADHD for anyone not familiar with the term).

          I just wanted to offer a little solidarity. I have felt that so many times in my career, especially since I’m of an age where mental health issues and disabilities were way more stigmatized at the beginning of my career. I hope you can begin to shed some of that shame. We all deserve better.

    9. Turquoise Cow*

      Yeah I have an autistic daughter who thankfully doesn’t often have meltdowns but we talk a lot with her teachers and counselors about strategies for preventing them, like learning what might trigger your kid getting upset and preventing that. Like if they get stressed out when their sensory needs aren’t met, how do you make sure that happens – if they’re overwhelmed by sounds or light, can you bring headphones or limit the time in the bright space. If they need to move or bounce, can you take breaks to do that, or have them run around outside before you go into a quiet space where they might need to sit still. Sometimes explaining what the new experience will involve can help, because a lot of new information can be overwhelming.

      For an adult navigating a workplace maybe this means they have a quiet workspace or the ability to take frequent breaks to walk around, or maybe they can vary tasks between different kinds of things. Each individual is going to be different and hopefully will have an idea of their triggers before they get to adulthood, so they know what accommodations might be helpful. My kid is sensory seeking so she wants to move but other autistic people are sensory avoidant and will want to sit in a quiet dark room when they’re stressed out.

    10. Dragon_Dreamer*

      I’ve had meltdowns at work. They always, ALWAYS happened because a manager and/or supervisor yelled or screamed at me.

      Usually it was because I got multiple conflicting instructions from multiple people at once, all of whom wanted me to do those things RIGHT NOW. No matter what order I tried doing those tasks in, I would get yelled at by someone whose tasks I wasn’t doing. And yes, that included prioritizing by seniority of the manager/supervisor.

      I’m a lot more emotionally stable since leaving retail. Sometimes too much so. Apparently one of my professors thinks I don’t show enough emotion. They were worried I’d snap until I went to the counseling center and proved that I have healthy outlets. 9.9 Can’t win for trying.

  4. Matt*

    #1: I have a passionate dislike for cold calling, but yes, if it’s the boss, you have to go with it.

    When I started workforce some 25 years ago, it was way worse. There was only the phone (old-fashioned phone which didn’t even have a display who called then) and email, and most coworkers preferred phone over email and called for basically everything. This has got a lot better with the existence of IM. I now push back against cold calls from coworkers if I’m deep in focus work (developer), however my boss has made it clear that he wants us to be reachable by phone (he is about the only one who still uses the phone instead of Teams, so you don’t even have to look at the caller ID, lol). Sometimes I get angry when he interrupts my focus work for something that could have been a Teams message or an email (and wonder if he does it deliberately to check if WFHers are at their desk), but sigh, he’s the boss and again, I have to be glad that not everyone does it anymore.

    1. Mary*

      It is great that teams have the focus function and a normal person can see the status and respect it. If I want to speak to a colleague and see they a focusing I just drop them a message to call me when they are free. But as a manager if I need something now I will contact someone who is focusing on their work to get what I need as I have a greater overall view of the whole programme of work and have different priorities that my individual staff member who is focusing on something important may not be aware of. That is work.

      1. allathian*

        Yes, indeed that is work. But I also hope that you’re sincerely apologetic about interrupting them during their focus time to show that you aren’t doing it as a power move.

        Normally I wouldn’t expect my boss to apologize for calling (I’d be astonished if she did!), but I’d certainly appreciate an apology if she had to interrupt me when I was in deep focus mode. It hasn’t happened yet because we have a strong Teams culture. We also work in written comms or comms-adjacent, so most if not all of my team prefer written media in any case.

        Sure, a meeting or a call is often faster with less back and forth than a long Teams IM chain (we’ve almost completely stopped using email) but a work request doesn’t count unless it’s submitted in writing per employer policy, so a call would only be a heads-up about an incoming urgent request and to put us on notice to check the ticketing system more often than usual (at least twice a day is typical).

        1. Malarkey01*

          That’s interesting and no I would not sincerely apologize for having a business need that I determine is more important than your focus time. If my teams think I’m running around calling them as a power play we have a much bigger problem.

          Sounds like you have a very different work culture though if a boss has to put everything in writing to assign work.

          1. Kara*

            That is an interesting question: how sure are you that your employees DON’T see your calls as a power play, or as Matt perceives their boss’ calls? If they did, how would you know? What bigger problems would that perception cause, and what telltale warning signs would there likely be to look for?

            1. Amateur Linguist*

              Most of the time humans aren’t power-playing each other, so treating everyone as doing that will end up with people being a little bit afraid of you and not producing a great work environment.

            2. Curious*

              I’m thinking about this orthogonally to y’all: I would apologize simply to express regret that the exegiciencies of the situation required me to do something that would cause the other person frustration.

              1. Lacey*

                Yeah, I think that’s pretty normal. If I have to request someone do an extra thing, I say, “Sorry, we just found out we need X for this project and we need it by tomorrow”

                It’s not my fault that we need X. It’s probably not my fault that we found out late. But I say sorry anyway, because I am letting them know that I know this is annoying and inconvenient.

            3. Irish Teacher.*

              I know that I would never assume something was a “power play” without reason to do so. A reason to do so would be a pattern of behaviour, such as always calling at times they person should know was inconvenient along with deliberately putting me out in other ways unrelated to calling (if it were just calling at inconvenient times, I’d more likely assume they just didn’t remember my schedule or that the convenient times for them didn’t match with convenient times for me or something) or a personality that clearly loved power.

              It would be weird, I think, to assume “power play” just because somebody called at a time I was trying to focus and didn’t apologise. The most likely explanation would that they didn’t know.

              1. Annie2*

                Yeah, I would never think this was a power play. It’s certainly polite to open with “hey, sorry to interrupt you, but -” but I don’t think the average contientious manager needs to be overly concerned about this kind of thing.

            4. Malarkey01*

              It would come out in the way they interacted with me, in their lack of understanding about hierarchies and professional norms, and understanding of office culture. It really isn’t that hard to tell when you have a normal respectful reporting relationship and when it’s strained or when people are confused about how they interaction and down the chain.
              People who think their boss has time or the interest in engaging in power plays are going to display that misunderstanding in a lot of ways.

              1. Amateur Linguist*

                Yeah — therein lies the rub. What goes around comes around — it’s hard for others to trust you if you don’t trust them *by default*. It can also mean people keep their guard up around you lest you accuse them of malicious intent when they simply need some information quickly and it can’t necessarily wait until you’re ready.

            5. Spiderling*

              If there are other signs that your boss is on a power trip, then sure, the phone calls might be part of that – but they’re also probably the least of your worries in that case. Otherwise, it’s safe to assume that they made the call because they simply needed to reach you and a phone call was the fastest way to do it.

          2. allathian*

            I rather meant an acknowledgment of the inconvenience you’re causing your employees, no more than that.

            But this varies a lot depending on the job, as I said elsewhere, my manager typically doesn’t assign me work or set deadlines.

        2. DJ Abbott*

          I don’t think it’s a good idea to use Teams chains for discussions and instructions. Where I work the teams search function doesn’t work very well, and it also tends to just stop when I try to scroll up to see something previous.
          Luckily complex instructions are still given to us by email or in meetings. If there’s anything in teams I want to save, I take a screenshot and print it out or save it.

        3. Lacey*

          I don’t know if I’d consider it a power move, but interupting without acknowledging that it was an interuption (Sorry for interupting, but we need – ) would probably make the manager unpopular to work for.

          I work with a lot of people who inconvenience me one way or another, but I feel a lot better about the ones who acknowledge it.

    2. Amateur Linguist*

      It’s not really cold calling — you’re being paid to be available to your colleagues, not receiving random sales calls at home.

      1. Farewell bear facts*

        But not universally available the second someone wants something. Are you also ok with people walking up to you and launching into a conversation without asking if it’s a good moment?

        1. HQB*

          That’s not analogous; you can accept or reject a Teams call, and the OP did reject one.

        2. Amateur Linguist*

          Yes? I used to be a receptionist, now I’m team admin. I’m supposed to be at my desk 9-5, deal with what comes in a prompt manner and while obviously there are bathroom breaks and so on, if I’m at work and available, then a random phone call or someone coming up to my desk is NOT cold-calling; it’s asking me to do my job.

          If I am in another meeting I can drop a teams message and say that but 9 times out of 10 I’m not.

          OP is on the clock so she’s up, breakfasted, done her grooming for the day and should be ready to take calls.

        3. Rags*

          If only there was a red button you could press when a Teams call came up that allowed you to send the call to voicemail if it’s not a good time to talk…

        4. Annie*

          When it’s your manager, yes, you should be good with it. They set the priorities, and their priority becomes your priority.

          I prefer a quick “are you available for a call” but if the manager just calls me out of the blue, well, that’s their prerogative.

        5. Spiderling*

          If it’s my boss and it’s about something important or time-sensitive, then yes, it’s entirely reasonable for her to expect that I’ll take a pause from whatever I’m doing to give her my full attention.

    3. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Cold-calling is cheeky when someone is trying to sell me something, but not when I’m being paid to be available. You are angry at a normal job duty.

      1. Matt*

        “Cold” is unannounced, out of the blue, no matter the reason.

        Even as far as “job duties” go, for me it’s a cultural way of being respectful to other people’s time to choose the least invasive method of communication. And therefore I’m also in strong support of initiating phone (or Teams) calls by IM message first. (As far as my job duties go, I’d argue that my main duty as a developer is focus work, and if I answer every call I won’t get much actual work done, but as I wrote, I have no standing about it if it’s the boss – but I don’t have to be enthusiastic about it.)

        1. Myrin*

          It’s always interesting to me how this stuff differs, both workplace- and general culture-wise, and what all goes into determining what is considerate/respectful and what isn’t.

          I work in local government (not in the US), meaning citizens can (and do) call us at any time and we’re supposed to be available. At the same time, it’s not a huge deal if we aren’t – everyone needs to step away from time to time or will already be on another call – but in general and overall, we need to be reachable.

          It’s also the norm to call your coworkers if you need something. It’s not weird or rare to write an email, especially if it’s something that can sit a while or where you’ll need documentation, but something that I immediately clocked when I started working here and which has absolutely borne out in the years since is that basically everyone, no matter their age or years of service or position, is more likely to call than to email. I’ve found that this is the case with other government agencies, too, as well as with every cultural institution I’ve had to deal with in my time here. I obviously don’t know how people feel about it privately in their own heads but outwardly, that’s what it’s like.

          Probably one important part of this is the thing I already mentioned above, which is that we’re free to not answer the phone if there’s something else going on. We can put them on silent if we need to concentrate, send the thing straight to voicemail (which is what I personally do if I don’t want to be interrupted), or make it so that we can’t be reached at all and the caller will hear the busy signal. So if someone really does have to do “focus work”, there’s an easy way to prevent disruptions, which I feel like from the discussions I read on this topic here is key.

          1. Amateur Linguist*

            It’s not differing, it’s just people being obtuse. Most of us in most workplaces in most companies recognise that if we’re on the clock we’re able to take phone calls or drop a message in Teams. Some people are just being weird.

            1. Sand Viper*

              It is not being obtuse. It is company-culture specific. In our organization, where teams have replaced phones, the expectation is that you ping someone to ask if they are available for a call before calling. We’re not discussing customer-facing roles where phones must be answered immediately. We’re discussing normal business day interactions between coworkers where a heads up before a call is much appreciated by many people, particularly when they are deeply focused.

            2. Katie A*

              But it is differing. No one is saying you shouldn’t be available for teams messages or to take a call at all, but there are definitely differing norms around sending a message first.

              For example, in my workplace, it’s very much the norm to message before calling. So much so that when people call without messaging first, they almost always apologize.

              There are also different norms and needs based on different workspaces. When I work from the office instead of from home, I’m in an open office where a phone call interrupts other people’s quiet. So a message before calling is good so I have a minute to move to a call room, so the conversation won’t be annoying to other people. The length of time that Teams rings isn’t quite enough to do that. It wouldn’t be a big deal if someone called without messaging first, I’d either answer and tell them I needed a moment, or just let it ring, but it’s such a norm where I work that it’s never happened while I’ve been working in office.

              It all varies by workplace and individual and that’s okay.

            3. Annie*

              I agree Amateur Linguist. I think it’s a little different with co-workers. They usually ask if I have a minute for a call.

              But if my manager wants to call me because he has something to discuss with me, they set the priority, they can give me a heads up if they want, or they can just call me.

              I’m expected to be available throughout the day in my working hours. If I happen to be AFK for a minute, that’s fine, I can explain that if I don’t answer right away. But for the most part, if my manager calls, I should be answering (unless I’m in a meeting, which I’d probably reply via IM right away saying “I’m in a meeting right now, can I call you in 15, or is there something I can answer over IM?”

            4. Parakeet*

              People on this blog understand that different workplaces have different norms when it comes to nearly every other topic. So I’m not sure why so many are insisting that this topic is exempt from that and anyone who disagrees with them must just be obtuse.

              1. Spiderling*

                I think part of it is that the call came from LW’s boss. If it was a coworker, and they were the only one in the office who didn’t give a heads-up before calling, that would be one thing. But bosses have more leeway with this kind of thing.

          2. ThatGirl*

            Teams is not quite analogous to a landline or cell phone, even though it’s replaced those in many businesses. There’s no voicemail (I guess IM would be the replacement), it can be unexpectedly loud, and you can’t easily walk away with your laptop to a quiet corner to chat if it’s sensitive.

            Yes, your boss especially has the prerogative to call you any time, but I do think the nature of Teams means a short heads-up is polite.

            1. Annie*

              ThatGirl, yes, I believe it’s polite and definitely my coworkers and I ask if the other person is available for a call, and my manager may do that most of the time, but if they just call out of the blue, you’re absolutely right, that’s their prerogative. I’m expected to be available for their direction and instruction during my work hours, of course, unless I’m away from computer for a minute or two for natural reasons or in a meeting.

            2. Leenie*

              Your Teams doesn’t have voice mail? Mine does. I thought that was standard but maybe there are different set ups. We don’t always use it internally (someone might try to call and then send a message asking for a call back and sharing a brief description of what is needed, if they didn’t ping beforehand). But voice mail is absolutely essential for external callers. That’s what is kind of funny to me about this whole discussion. We can all feel however we feel about our colleagues’ and bosses’ communication styles. But external people aren’t normally going to be able to ping us before calling. So it seems best to not be overly invested in our own preferences.

              Personally, I prefer a ping but will answer if I have a good idea of what is needed, or if it’s a colleague who I work with frequently. But I have no problem letting something go to VM if it’s unexpected or inconvenient,

              1. ThatGirl*

                No, the companies I’ve used it at had no ability to make or receive external calls.

                1. Leenie*

                  Oh interesting. Our entire phone system is Teams based, so it has fully functional voice mail. But, in any event, external people can’t send me Teams messages to let me know that they’re about to call. They have to just call.

      2. Annie*

        Absolutely Vulcan. Your boss sets your priority. I don’t see how this is an issue. It might be annoying, sure, but your boss has every right to contact you at any time during normal working hours without having to ask if you’re available (pending any meetings, obviously)

    4. EllenD*

      I think this may be a generational thing. As Matt says, 25 plus years ago, it was phone or e-mail, or in-person chat. When I started office work 40 years ago it was phone or in-person and you just rang someone. If it wasn’t a good time, you’d say you’d ring them back later, or ask a colleague to answer your phone and take a message. As options for communication have widened, the expectations have changed. I was surprised pre-Covid when a colleague said there was no point in ringing their mislaid phone, as they have calls on silence all the time and only answered calls, when pre-arranged by text. To me sometimes phone is just quicker and easier to talk through issues rather than prolonged IMs or e-mail chains.

      1. Pastor Petty LaBelle*

        Yeah when I started working in the late 1980s, you answered the phone if you were at your desk. There was no advance warning. Sometimes your boss even popped in without warning you. That’s just how it was.

        I think I would be very surprised if my boss took the time to send me a message to ask if now was a good time to chat on the phone. Like in the time it took to send the message and get a response, the chat could have been held.

        1. AngryOctopus*

          Whereas for me that would be a great thing for the boss to do, because I might say “Oh, I have to get back in the lab and set up those plates, so it’ll be like 90′. How is 2pm?” or whatever works.

        2. Kirakaoru*

          In the 2000s I had a boss who refused to answer their own phone (everyone else at the same level handled their own calls even if they had an assistant), and made me not only take all her calls and triage them, and if I deemed it was urgent, I had to go ask permission in person to put the call through; if it was a new client I had to get all their information – including the full new client interview – and have the person make an appointment so she could ask all the same questions then give them an answer, which would usually be we couldn’t help them and had wasted their time and eaten up a week or so of a very short time in which they could file; if it was anything I could personally deal with as someone with the same qualifications but no licence, I was to deal with it.

          I got a formal warning for not answering the phone when she called to see if I had received the four emails in two minutes that she had sent me to print this one email she received – I was standing at the printer at the printer room.

          I got a formal warning for telling someone our client was unavailable, because my boss had never told me not to say that our client was unavailable and as the person with formal conduct, she should have taken that call anyway. She claimed to be very generous in fixing the “damage” from illegal disclosure – not a thing.

          One time I “pressed a wrong button” and the call went through to her instead of me. She was straight up to the general manager’s office to complain that I had not screened the call, it was so distracting because she had to answer a call without knowing who it was and she didn’t have the file (we did have digital file management at the time, but I had to print everything and put it in a paper file in her own special preferred format or she couldn’t read it) and then she started in on how she couldn’t work with me because I was so emotional. The general manager was not able to see the issue with her answering her own phone like everyone else so I did not get a formal warning, but she went back to micromanaging me on basic admin because she decided that it proved I was not able to understand instructions. This included things like if she sent me the same email to print for the file four times, I was instructed to print it four times, put all of them on the file, add four copies of the email to the digital file and everything she sent between when I left at 8pm and arrived at 7am had to be printed, filed, actioned and on her desk by the time she arrived sometime between 8:20 and 8:45am, and she would tell me this via code on a post-it at the end of each day. (I officially worked 9-5, and because of all of this, most of my work was completed after she left at 4pm and before she arrived, at which point I would get my only meal of the day and throw it up from the stress before the micromanaging started again at 9am. Including her calling me to make sure I received her email that she sent while she was pressing my speed dial and repeat the instructions in the email to me, and the idea that just an email – one email only – or that other people might prefer to know who is calling before they accept a call or to schedule a call for when they do not have to babysit her, simply never occurred to her.

          She lasted about six months after I left because everyone else ended up refusing or being instructed to not work with her (for real – the accounts department literally did stop processing her billing, with the accounts managers’ blessing).

      2. Kara*

        Think how many communication norms must have changed when businesses started getting phones installed, and started calling one another instead of writing a letter! I’m sure a great many people were unhappy that people these days didn’t take the time to sit down and carefully think through what they needed to say, but instead recklessly dashed off a phone call!

      3. Asloan*

        A call is certainly much quicker to solve lots of things, but in my work culture it takes only a few minutes to quickly send a chat first so the other person can prepare or ask to push it if they’re caught up. A call out of the blue wouldn’t be typical in our culture. (But if my boss did call out of the blue, and I was there, I would certainly answer it! In fact, if my boss did that outside her usual hours I would assume she was checking to see if I was really working).

        1. Amateur Linguist*

          Or she needed something Urgent with a capital U. Bosses tend to have overspill between office hours and if you’re on the clock, then you probably should be somewhere in the vicinity of your phone, but I’m not sure that assumption would be more likely than she thought of something and then realised you were on the clock and might be able to answer her.

      4. SB2*

        This is what I was thinking too. I’m an elder millenial and my Gen X boss will absolutely call me without texting first. I answer if I’m available. If not, I message him and let him know. Growing up, we did not an answering machine for the majority of my childhood. You just answered the phone and you got what you got, although you usually had a general idea of who might be calling you. That said, late night calls were scary as they were usually bad news. Dinner time calls got ignored as they were rude. Other than that, you answered unexpected calls if you were available.

        A lot of my colleagues are Gen Z or young millenial. They text/message me first with questions. If it gets too complicated, I ask to call them because it’s easier than typing it all out.

        And I’ve found some older colleagues never answer their messages or their email, so I just call them or go find them in person if I need them.

    5. What_the_What*

      But IMing you and receiving a prompt reply would ALSO valdiate that you are, in fact, at your desk and working, so it sounds more …generational, maybe? Than trying to catch you not working…

  5. Mary*

    LW#1 It is very normal for staff working in an organisation to need to speak to other staff members for a myriad of reasons. To fact check, to ask an opinion, to get an update, to give instructions, to share news and so on. There are multiple ways to communicate, in person, email, messaging, or calling, voice, video or both. When I am working I expect communications. I don’t work in a vacuum, and it is up to the others to decide how to contact me.

    If I phone a staff member on my team and they don’t answer I assume it is because they have stepped away from their desk for a few minutes. I expect them to call back when they are free. I can see from their teams status if they are free so have no issues calling them, but don’t get knotted up if they don’t answer. Same as if I stop by their desk and their, gasp, not there. In both cases they were not expecting the call, stop by, but I expect them to connect with me shortly when they are free.

    I think you need to reflect on why you think it is so unacceptable in a work environment that someone should phone you. And why did you not call her right back once you had gotten over the “shock” of being communicated with during working hours via a perfectly normal
    medium of a teams call? Why write a message in place of calling right back? That seems very odd.

    1. Chocobo*

      It’s not the calling, it’s the calling without asking if it’s a good time first over IM. Different offices have different cultures around this, but it’s a very, very common expectation that you will do so outside of an emergency.

      1. Mary*

        I don’t agree it is very very common outside of an emergency. Why should simple method of communication, speaking to someone via teams be considered to be reserved for only emergencies. It is just another form of communication. The over and back form of conversation allows for checking others understanding, getting into nuances and generally progressing work stuff forward.

        1. KateM*

          Where I worked/work, it has been not for emergencies but for preplanned meetings. I don’t think we had any unplanned/unannounced teams calls, but also unplanned phone calls in my life are either emergency or spam.

        2. Antilles*

          Sure, but that’s not the argument that’s being made. It’s not about the calling. People aren’t arguing that phone calls should never ever happen or the only time you ever pick up a phone is for an emergency.

          The argument is about the heads-up before the call. It’s very common for people to send that message rather than a complete cold-call. To cover the cases where someone is in the middle of something that they don’t want to stop mid-way or is about to head to a meeting or any other reason where I don’t have time to talk now.

          1. Nayme*

            But if the person is busy, they can simply decline the call. A “got a sec?” IM is just one more ping I have to respond to. If you want to have a call with me…then call me.

        3. fhqwhgads*

          I read that as “it’s very common for the norm to be IM to ask if it’s an OK time for call, except in emergencies when the IM first step is skipped”.
          I agree that scenario is common in many companies.
          It’s also common to have a “calls exist, people will call you sometimes” with no pre-call IM.
          It’s a know your company culture thing.

      2. mreasy*

        This is the norm in my current job and was in the one before it (about 10 years). That said, our CEO cold calls and I always pick up!

      3. Beekeeper*

        Messaging before calling is duplicative and slows down work. You’ve taken a one contact communication and turned it into a three contact communication, and have likely slowed yourself down by 30 minutes at a minimum waiting for responses. Any process designer or efficiency expert would say to eliminate the unnecessary steps.

        1. Marcela*

          I have a job where we’re expected to be on the computer at all times except for breaks/lunch and our coworkers can see if we’re active. People typically message before calling and I’d be surprised if that takes 3 minutes to result in a call, let alone 30 minutes.

        2. Kara*

          Ah, but you’re leaving out the efficiency savings on the worker end when they aren’t constantly being interrupted while trying to concentrate!

          Genuinely curious but not sure how to ask without coming across as rude, do phone call people tend to cluster in work environments where multi-tasking is more common and long periods of concentration aren’t needed? I’ve noticed that i never hear phone call people talk about the cost of interruptions, or just plain calling someone and it turning out that it actually wasn’t a good time to reach them? Any ideas on why that might be?

          1. Myrin*

            I’m neither a “phone call person” nor a “no phone call person” – I’m genuinely okay with any and all ways this shakes out – but I definitely work in a “phone call environment”, so I’ll give my take on your questions (as it pertains to my workplace and my job, of course – these aren’t objective facts or overall rules or anything!).

            “the efficiency savings on the worker end when they aren’t constantly being interrupted while trying to concentrate”
            => It’s generally not “constant”. I might go hours without a single phone call, I might get three calls from coworkers and two from external people in one single hour, or I might spend one hour on the phone with one person, but it’s not like my phone is ringing all day every day.

            Also, phone people, too, can set their phones on Do Not Disturb or an answering machine or whatnot.

            “do phone call people tend to cluster in work environments where multi-tasking is more common and long periods of concentration aren’t needed?”
            => That’s an interesting thought but I honestly don’t know how that would ever happen/work. Do people generally ask about “means of contacting coworkers” in interviews unless they feel incredibly strongly about it? Otherwise I feel like that’s something you’ll simply found out once you’re already on the job.

            I also don’t think the category “people who prefer phone calls” automatically and necessarily maps neatly onto the category “people in jobs where long periods of concetration are needed”.

            “i never hear phone call people talk about the cost of interruptions”
            => I feel like this part is somewhat crucial with how it gets talked about whenever this topic comes up – even if a call interrupts my concentration, I’m usually annoyed for about five seconds and then it’s “*shrug* yeah whatever”. And then it’s another short burst of irritation when I try to get back into the thing I had tried to concentrate on before but that, too, is generally more of an “Oh bother! Anyway.” type of thing. (Also, interruptions can be all kinds of things, to the extent that I don’t see why phone calls in particular should be singled out.)

            “it turning out that it actually wasn’t a good time to reach them”
            => Definitely happens sometimes (although not often) but isn’t a big deal – the recipient of the call simply says “It’s not a good time now, can I call you back in [time]?” or doesn’t answer the phone in the first place.

            Not sure if that was helpful but it’s my personal experience of the situations you’re asking about.

          2. Allonge*

            I guess my thing is: a chat message interrupts me already. There is zero difference, for me, between getting a ping and seeing that notification, and getting a phone call.

            If I am not available, I set up a do not disturb. Otherwise, interrupting me via this channel or that makes no difference whatsoever.

        3. Silver Robin*

          a minimum of 30 minutes?? Not in my experience. At my workplace, it is common for folks to either be deep in focus work or communicating with clients. So if a call is needed, my boss or my coworkers will send a message first. It has never gone more than 5 min before being resolved, either with a call happening or a time found for it later that day; it is usually immediate.

          If you call someone without asking first and they are unavailable, the call is not answered and you sit there waiting until the ringing stops. You are going to get a response once the person is available. Same with a Teams message but writing that out takes less time and eliminates phone tag since you can confirm availability beforehand. Basically, if it is taking you 30 minutes to figure out if a quick call is feasible, I do not think a quick call was actually feasible at that moment!

          1. Beekeeper*

            It’s fine for folks not to answer a call when they’re busy and can’t afford an interruption. It’s fine to set DND. There seems to be a small group of people like LW1 who just get flustered at an unexpected call and need some undetermined amount of notice prior to accepting a call. Do they need 5 minutes notice? 15? I’d suggest people desensitize themselves to unexpected calls – teams or phone – in the name of skipping unnecessary steps and delays.

            1. Silver Robin*

              People are allowed to get flustered and ask a question about how to handle it. Other people are allowed to be kind and reduce the fluster.

              Asking “how long of a warning do they need” to the suggested message of “are you available for a call?” feels disingenuous. If you choose to send the message, you send it when you want the call. The person then lets you know, generally within a moment. The exchange looks like this

              Caller: hi, are you available for a call? [optional: I have a question about X]

              Coworker: oh sure! *call proceeds*
              OR
              Coworker: yeah, just give me a second to finish this one thing. *call proceeds within a few minutes*
              OR
              Coworker: actually, I am neck deep in [task], can I call you back around [time]?
              OR
              Coworker, once available: sorry, I was not available then but I can now! Or [time] if that works for you?

              Yes, folks can call without checking first and that is also normal and fine! You are at work and people can contact you in any of the available ways. But making it out like there is some complicated, unknowable song and dance about sending single sentence request is unfair and smacks of disdain.

              1. Beekeeper*

                I manage a large team and see many situations where work is tangled up and slowed down because people will not simply pick up a phone and speak to each other. There seems to be a growing desire to characterize calling as impolite, driven by people having a kind of phone phobia. This pre-call warning business is related. I have to tell people to just speak to each other 1:1 at least weekly. Please people, for the love of all things bright and beautiful, desensitize yourselves to speaking directly to each other. Your work and your life will be infinitely better.

        4. Antilles*

          For me, the reason I’ll often send messages before calling is that it’s often not truly drop-everything urgent. Here’s an example that I encountered this very morning:
          I have a team member who’s in the field on a job site. If I call him, he’s going to stop what he’s doing and pick up immediately. In some cases, that would make sense, but my need this morning is not high-priority. If he’s in the middle of something, we don’t need to talk immediately, any point within the next four hours is fine.
          So I sent him a message of “let me know when you have a minute to talk about next week”. If he’s free, he replies immediately and we chat right then and there. But if he’s been doing something important (in this case he was, FWIW), he replies that he’s about to do an inspection, will call afterwards.

          1. H3llifIknow*

            That’s a very very different scenario than on Teams where you can SEE the person’s status “Available” “Away” “BRB” “Do Not Disturb”. If someone is in the field and potentially focusing, up their elbows in whatever, doing physical labor, it makes sense to text first because you simply don’t KNOW.

            1. Spencer Hastings*

              Maybe Antilles’s colleague really is doing physical labor, I don’t know. But that sentence could have been written about me and my colleagues, and we’re accountants. Sometimes we go out to audit a particular client — if I’m doing that, at any given time that day I could be interviewing client personnel, doing some testing/observation, or maybe I’m in the client’s conference room by myself working on documentation or looking at files that the client doesn’t have to be there with me for me to test.

              Usually, I don’t get Teams calls or messages from people back in the office while I’m out on an audit, unless it’s fairly urgent. But when I do, people usually ask me to call them when I have a minute. Because they see that my Teams light is on, but that could mean I’m doing an observation and I’m “at my computer” because I’m typing my notes into a workpaper. If that’s the case, I’ll call them when I’m back in that conference room after this thing is done.

              I haven’t yet gotten any messages while out on audits that are like “drop everything even if you’re with the client right now, Other Client’s audit is on fire” or whatever. Knock on wood.

              1. H3llifIknow*

                “Because they see that my Teams light is on, but that could mean I’m doing an observation and I’m “at my computer” because I’m typing my notes into a workpaper.”

                That’s on you though, if you’re showing “Available” because…how do they know that your “Available” isn’t REALLY “Available?” If you are offsite, you can put that in your status notes/work location and you can be “Away” or “Busy” or “DND” or whatever if you are in a place where taking a Teams call is inconvenient or simply not possible.

                1. Spencer Hastings*

                  That’s why the culture at my firm is ehat it is, though! In general, when we’re offsite, our status is “out of office”, but our light is still green.

            2. Silver Robin*

              Yeah I am not going to assume Teams is an accurate status. I have been marked “away” on Teams because I was doing something else that was still interruptable. I have also been doing a task that got more involved than expected and I did not change my Teams status to DnD, so it says available even though I would actually prefer not to get messages. Or I am *about* to get into something. I also have plenty of folks who are “busy” in meetings but actually that got cancelled because the client call got moved or the meeting wrapped up early or whatever.

              Sending a message checking availability is still helpful, even in office jobs.

              1. Kirakaoru*

                I use my Teams status, but people don’t log in or look at it so they have no idea when I’m working and assign me urgent tasks I don’t know about because… I’m not working. They are supposed to SMS if they need something when I am not working, otherwise I get to assume it’s not important and I can get to it when I have time.

                One person is terrible for sending me work and not messaging, then dropping ‘it has to be done ASAP’ on me a couple of hours before a deadline they knew about and never conveyed. I have gotten to the point where I email everyone every week with when I am working, what to do if I am needed and not working, and all of my private appointments are in my freely available work calendar so people have no excuse to not know whether I am available or not. So far, this person has only SMSed me to stop an urgent task I was assigned instead of walking 3m to tell me in person, then drop detailed instructions including colour coding via SMS instead of emailing or including me in the conversation (again, from 3m away), and wanting to know if I got his email because if I didn’t he would have to do his work himself… while I was in hospital. I returned to work after that to find that he had not actually done it himself because it was over 3k pages worth of a task he’d previously forgotten and been pulled up on.
                The matter currently rests with the managing partner because my line manager went ‘what the actual f…’ when I tried to explain that I’m currently working overtime to keep up with all of this and wasn’t sure whether it was formally approved or not.
                Meanwhile, if he’d SMSed when he sent the email, I could have at least taken it to hospital with me for something to do instead of stressing that I was going to lose my job for NCNS because apparently they didn’t get the message I was admitted.

        5. aerial*

          From a process standpoint, I don’t actually think eliminating steps here is a unilateral efficiency gain. It’s very workplace dependent.

          In a message-first cadence, the typical scenario might look like this:
          – Caller messages, receiver responds, call is made. 3 touch points minimum. Potential for delays between each step, but both caller and receiver can switch to other work while waiting.

          In a call-first cadence, I can see a few common scenarios:
          – Caller calls, receiver is available and picks up. 1 touch point.

          – Caller calls, receiver is away or offsite. Caller spends X minutes waiting for receiver to pick up instead of working. Receiver returns and sends message, caller responds, call is finally made at time available to both parties. Minimum 4 touch points + caller time spent waiting for receiver pickup.

          – Caller calls, receiver is in a meeting or doing deep work. Receiver has to divert to decline the call (which is more disruptive than a message), and respond to the caller to reschedule. Caller responds, call is made at available time. Minimum 4 touch points + disruption to receiver.

          In a call-first cadence, 2/3 scenarios have more baseline process steps than the message-first cadence. So I think it depends on how often the first scenario happens. At my global tech company, between differing time zones, 90-100% leveraged calendars, and people fighting fires, it’s relatively uncommon, so this communication style would be a net productivity loss for us. In addition – I’ve found that messaging first improves the productivity of the eventual call – you can add context like “can we discuss X” which cuts down on time getting the receiver up to speed, having to pull up files etc.

        6. AngryOctopus*

          And that works for your workspace. In mine, my boss might call six times in a hour your way, because I’m in the lab, I don’t have my computer with me, and I can’t take a call anyway because I’m wearing gloves and splitting cells in a sterile hood. He’ll get much further messaging me to say “LMK when you have 10′ to discuss X”, and then I’ll get back to him when I’m back at my desk and/or prepared to talk (I might just send a message that says ‘Does 2pm work” or “Let’s cover this at our Monday meeting, I’m busy all afternoon”).
          The point is, there is no one definitive answer to this, it depends on how your office/workspace functions. Further to that, a consensus does seem to be that it’s polite to send a heads up so that the person being called is prepared to talk about the topic, rather than scrambling to pull up the file and change gears because they were working on something else when the call came.

      4. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

        I think the kind of job may interact with this issue, too. If someone has a task-based job where they process widgets in the order they arrive, unplanned calls seems highly unnecessary. If you have a job that is fast-moving, project-based and has a lot of moving parts, that’s not as true. I have had times in my working life where I could barely keep up with the work, had a frequent need for quick communication (partly driven by the higher-ups frequently wanting updates or press inquiries) or other types of info. Having to Teams someone before calling them and then waiting for a response would have added Just Too Much to my day. “Sorry, boss, I can’t update you and you can’t update the Executive Director because my report hasn’t told me it is ok to call” would make people ask what happened to my brain.

      6. H3llifIknow*

        I work for DoD/Air Force and ad hoc calls Teams (audio) calls happen All.The.Time. If you are green, you are available. If you are NOT ready to accept a call, set your status to Away or Busy. But the idea of being *so shocked* that one simply could not answer a simple Teams call –from the BOSS–after being at work for an hour, is just wild.

    2. Katie A*

      Nah, it’s not that weird to respond with a message. It might be a little odd in this case since it was right away, but even so, writing back when you miss a call makes sense because they may have stepped away, taken off their own headset, gotten into another task, etc., after you missed their call. This way, they know they can call you back at their convenience.

      Calling back and sending a message are both well within the range of normal reactions.

    3. el l*

      I’ll put it this way:
      1. Especially when it’s a platform like Teams where you can message and call, IDEALLY it’s polite and effective to let them know you need a call and to ask if they’re free.
      2. But ideal’s often not possible or realistic. Is somebody rude if they don’t do this? No, doesn’t rise to that level, IME. (a) If it’s an emergency – no, period. (b) If you’re in a situation where you’re working closely with them, sure, go ahead and call, no problem.
      3. Now, if they have a habit of calling you without warning when not an emergency, like one of my mid-senior colleagues does – well, it’s okay to not pick up and to feel a twinge of annoyance. Because busy people.

      1. Nayme*

        That is absolutely not ideal to me. Pinging me with an IM to ask me if I’m free for a call is extra work for me. Just call me if you need to talk to me; if I’m busy, I simply will not answer. If you IM a person before every single call, they have to respond to both the IM AND the call. It’s so utterly unnecessary.

      2. green beans*

        eh. my boss calls. so do multiple other contacts.
        I answer if I’m available. I don’t if I’m not. They’ll follow up with a text if they need to or leave a voicemail. I’ll get back to them when I can.

        I treat it exactly like IM, actually.

      2. a*

        Mary is the voice of scolding! I don’t even disagree with her that you need to pick up the phone when your boss calls during working hours. But, if she talks to her direct reports like recalcitrant five-year-olds, there are probably letters on here about her.

    5. Sunflower24*

      I think people need to be honest with themselves sometimes about what is an actual hinderance to work and what is just simply annoying. If you boss calls you every so often without a heads up, is it really impacting your work product in a real way?

      I understand there are some workplaces and roles where interrupting people is generally determinantal to work but I don’t think a majority of desk/computer based workplaces fall under this and I’d argue multi tasking and being able to jump between things is a core part of many desk roles.

      Also as far as office culture- you boss sets part of that. If your boss wants to be able to call without pinging you, that’s part of your job now (within reason ofc). And no, you absolutely don’t need to be available right away every time your boss calls but if you are never available, you’re going to raise some eyebrows.

      And if your boss calls and is dragging on about something that doesn’t seem urgent, just ask when they need it by because you are deep in X project and would like to focus on that if timelines allow.

      1. Kirakaoru*

        If interruption is genuinely detrimental, it’s on the workplace and the people in it to have and use a system where interruptions can be minimised or managed, such as away settings, providing and encouraging email/IM, and establishing policies around those and what someone should do if there is a genuine need for interruption (noise cancelling headphones not drowning out the fire alarm? good. everyone has to stop work due to immediate danger? force a notification and shut down relevant equipment/systems. urgent higher priority task comes in? you’re going to need to communicate anyway, try in-person). If it’s not detrimental to everyone and is a matter of individual work style, it’s on an individual to communicate that to people who need to know – e.g. tell your assistant you check emails at 9am, 1pm and set up and end-of-day appointment for catching the mail and checking on deadlines, and tell coworkers to send an IM if it can’t wait 4 hours; use your status on internal systems and make your calendar and task management systems work for you. If coworkers can’t or won’t do that because it clashes with their systems or there are situations where it’s not working, use your words and sort out an alternative that does, either as a one-off “I’m working on a depo due at 4pm, can we make a meeting time for this?” or a long-term “hey, this isn’t working because you do this and I’m usually focusing on something else and don’t have the background available to engage with you at that time, would it be easier if we had a [shared file for stuff we work on together/private IM channel/system where we check in regularly/you email me ten minutes before you call so I can exempt you from my DND and read up in time] so we can communicate more easily? “

  6. Tradd*

    #1 – I wonder if the LW doesn’t like regular phone calls without warning, either. I work in an office. Phone calls and Teams calls without warning are very common. They’re not a problem. And yes, customers call me without warning and I do the same. I have asked coworkers to at least give me warning about an unscheduled Teams call so I can get my earbuds in (I’m not on Teams calls a lot).

    1. Dark Macadamia*

      Yeah, there’s a big difference between unexpected personal calls vs work calls during work hours. The reason calling has become more disruptive/socially unacceptable is because we always have our cell phones with us! Back when there were only landlines it wouldn’t matter if someone randomly called while you’re at a concert or a dentist appt or something because you wouldn’t even know until you got home later, if then. It’s totally reasonable to expect an “is now a good time?” text for a personal call but pretty weird to be upset about it at work, like would you just ignore your boss and wait for them to leave if they walked up to you in person?

    2. Peanut Hamper*

      This is where I landed, as well.

      I mostly work from home, and people will generally send me a message on Teams before calling me, and I’m fine with that. But if I were in an office in the early 1990’s when phones were the only means of communication, people had no way of messaging you first. They simply rang you up.

  7. ElliottRook*

    re: LW2- I feel like there would be a lot more autistics (perhaps myself included) in traditional office jobs if there was a move back away from open-plan offices/cubicles and into fully enclosed offices. A big problem for me trying to work an office job was that if anyone anywhere in the room was having any conversation whatsoever (work-related phone calls or idle chitchat), I really couldn’t do much of anything. I could probably do the same job(s) where I crashed and burned if I could have a private space where I could control the environment (light levels and temperature) and only heard speech if it was directed at me. (My wife has a more traditional emails-and-spreadsheets sort of job and she kicks ass at it, and listens to audiobooks when she’s plugged in. I could NEVER.)

    That doesn’t really help you as you seek accommodations, but if any managers are scrolling though wondering how they can be more accommodating- this is it. Fix your workspaces, or let people be fully remote permanently. So many of us autists could be rockstars at repetitive jobs if we could just be left truly alone to get the work done. I would LOVE to get really good at some kind of repetitive task and just do it for 40 hours a week with COLAs until I can retire. “Dynamic workplace” “fast-paced environment” “merit raises/achievement bonuses” no thank you. Just pay me enough to keep up with inflation.

    1. Elizabeth West*

      All of this. Also, if you have to have a private call, you have to go find a booth or a huddle room or something instead of just closing the door.

      Funnily enough, I discovered how good Bose headphones are because of open plan offices and being seated next to a sorta loud coworker. With my music on, I can’t hear a thing!

    2. Amateur Linguist*

      Unfortunately for us over here in the UK, shared or open plan offices have been a norm for a long time; certainly since I’ve been in the workforce (since 2001). The problem isn’t necessarily any particular environment (because as someone with ASD but having spent my whole career in an open or shared office, I’ve simply been able to adapt to it) but being able to ameliorate the environment is probably easier than redesigning an entire office space. (In fact I think I’d get a bit claustrophobic in an individual office, and TBH the other issue is that people with ASD aren’t all alike, so what works for some people won’t work for others, and there’s a certain amount of adaptation that we also need to be able to do to to fit in that isn’t totally impossible for us with accommodation.)

      There’s definitely a lot that people can do in terms of office design but this is so dependent on individuals and individual needs.

      My meltdown happened while I was alone in the office and was caused by my internal thoughts racing and ruminating on something other than work that I had zero control over and even less relevance to my individual, personal life. My objective in therapy and mental health treatment when I was sacked for breaking an expensive dictaphone (I was an audio typist) was how to get that problem in check so I could hold down a job and actually leave entry level/reception work for more stimulating office work. But in the UK, insisting on a private, fixed space would be an undue hardship in a lot of offices, and so understanding what’s possible and what’s not is also a consideration in terms of what is a *reasonable* accommodation.

      And yes, I totally still get antsy when things are not perfect. Lately I’ve been doing a lot of cross stitch and using cheaper Aida cloth drove me nuts! It was a brand I’d bought and used successfully before but this particular packet was starched beyond reasonable use. (And don’t get me started on starchy hotel bed linen.) But some of that is my job to get comfortable with ambivalent situations or less than ideal circumstances, because as a facilities worker I know how much it costs to refurbish offices and how it’s only undertaken when the building needs a refit and there’s capital money to do it properly and to a safe standard, not just at the drop of a hat.

      It’s always give and take. I doubt anyone has a perfect office space for their needs, and I sympathise, but ultimately some of this has to come from the individual and their own functionality, because the outside world isn’t infinitely flexible.

      1. ElliottRook*

        I agree that not all autists are the same, if you’ve met one autistic person, you’ve met one autistic person–but on this I believe a majority of them agree with me to the point that my statement that “a lot more of us could work in office jobs if this norm was changed” holds water.

        I also agree that office floorplans are not easy to change, but the information is there for anyone who has the power to remodel or who is researching a new space. (Or who could be doing better regarding remote work!) For every autist who is fine with an open floor plan or can at least be accommodated enough to make it workable, there’s another who’s completely shut out of these jobs by them no matter how skilled they are.

    3. Insulindian Phasmid*

      Right? In my time working in offices, the only times I was disciplined were when I had meltdowns that distracted other people. An actual private space where I could just have a cry for three minutes without anyone caring would have solved so much.

    4. Glitsy Gus*

      I don’t think everyone having a full office to themselves was ever really a common thing; most buildings just aren’t able to accommodate that. Typing pools and other admin jobs were almost always a cubicle/open plan situation (see Mad Men/ All the Presidents Men, etc.). I do agree that everyone is happier with at least a little bit of privacy and control over their environment, but a full room with a door for every person isn’t ever going to be practical.

      1. anon for this*

        A room with a door for max 3 people, and down to two is extremely practical and common. My company that just took this setup and removed a while bunch of walls to “encourage collaboration” by which I assume they mean “encourage people to work from home and then leave without us having to pay severance when we start RTO policies.”

        It’s just so blatantly unhelpful, and companies DO have choices here and they consistently make ones that make life worse for workers. When they’re not in layoff mode, it’s so obviously a terrible idea my only possible explanation is that it makes execs feel like they’re doing something trendy and therefore earning their x10 paycheques.

        1. Who Plays Backgammon?*

          in my experience, the people (at all levels) who think open plan = collaboration tend to be social butterflies who talk constantly. even if they’re talking all work, they never want to give the soundwaves a rest. or as mama used to say, in love with the sound of their own voice.

          when i do research/create reports/organize records, i don’t need collaboration, i need sufficient peace and quiet to focus on pulling together data and presenting it in the proper spreadsheets, slides, and charts. too bad for me.

        2. ElliottRook*

          >companies DO have choices here and they consistently make ones that make life worse for workers.

          100%!!! And then they’re *gasp* so shocked that “nobody wants to work”!!

      2. ElliottRook*

        It was a thing everywhere my father worked throughout my childhood, and I’m only 40.

        Typing pools were a thing, sure, but I feel like that was an uncommon job, as a relative percentage of the total number of office jobs?

    5. Who Plays Backgammon?*

      true up to a point. but even back in the day, it was the higher-level people who got offices and support/lower-level staff worked in cubicles or an open area. even keeping it businesslike, people were talking, phones were ringing, sometimes visitors came in.

  8. nnn*

    Answering what I think is the question behind the question in #1:

    If you want people to message you before a Teams call (or otherwise get accustomed to a potentially non-immediate response) and/or don’t feel that the idea that you may have stepped away for a moment would be well-received, one thing you could say is “Sorry, I wasn’t expecting a call and didn’t have my headset connected”

    A lot of people use headsets for Teams calls. (It’s polite in an office or any other shared space! It provides better call quality and audio privacy! Many onboard mics are poor quality!). There are all kinds of reasons why your headset might not be connected to your computer at a given moment, and it does take a moment to sort it out.

    Especially if it’s your boss, it might be useful to ask “If there’s ever a time that you call me again and it takes a moment for me to get my headset connected, do you prefer if I disconnect and call you back? Or let it ring?” That at least prepares them for the possibility that you might not answer immediately and also are en route to answering.

    1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      I thought it was the wish some people have to decide when they want to answer and to avoid interruptions – but accepting calls from coworkers or boss is likely a job duty rather than an interruption!

    2. Farewell bear facts*

      I don’t think this is good advice. Your boss might just tell you to have your headset connected and stop randomly unplugging it.

      1. KatStat*

        But if my headset is connected then all computer sounds go through the headset including any IM or email pings or meeting notification alarms. And I don’t want to have my headset on all day when I don’t have many calls expected. Leaving the headset plugged in means I miss so many other things.

        1. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

          Yes this! My boss has missed urgent messages from me because they didn’t realize their headset was still connected (Like there is a student crying in the front can you please come out here!). Also as someone who never gets teams calls it is jaring for it to just pop up if you are not expecting it.

        2. ThatGirl*

          Yeah, at my last job I RARELY got unplanned Teams calls/meetings. It just wasn’t part of my role or company culture. Most calls/meetings were scheduled and if I knew I had one coming I could find a quiet space to take it. So when my boss did occasionally call unexpectedly, it startled me and I had to scramble for headphones.

      2. Dahlia*

        I feel like it’s not typical to be expected to wear a headset all day in a job where your duties are not to take calls. Maybe I’m wrong, but that seems odd.

    3. H3llifIknow*

      My headset is alway plugged in and has been for over 5 years. It is plugged into my docking station and hangs on a little 3M hook on the side of my desk. I am trying to imagine why I’d ever unplug it. Even if I take my laptop to go somewhere, the headset is still in the docking station and I have a smaller USB one in my laptop for travel. And if one does unplug, say at the end of the day, I’d say part of setting up for the work day is plugging in headphones when you log in and being “at the ready”.

      1. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

        Because if your headset is plugged in then all your notifications, pings, etc would go through the headset and you wouldn’t hear them. Maybe you’re one that doesn’t have your teams messages set to ping or you don’t need the audible notification sound, but many people do. Especially if you have multiple screens you might not notice the notification.

        1. Allonge*

          In a lot of software you can choose separately which sound system is used for notifications and which for calls.

  9. Mbs001*

    What the heck is it about people needing a warning about getting a phone call for goodness sake? Teams is no different than a telephone – you don’t have to have your camera on. If you’re at work, you’re at work and need to be available. I don’t get the issue people have with taking phone calls. It’s frankly ridiculous.

    1. London Calling*

      I’m glad it’s not just me thinking that. Do people demand a call to warn them they’re going to get a call to warn them they’re going to get a call? I’m trying to imagine the reaction of some of my past managers if I asked them to warn me that they wanted to phone me.

      1. Van Wilder*

        It’s just cultural and varies by office. In my workplace, it’s the norm to ping first to make sure the person is there and not on another call. I personally zone into whatever I’m working on, so I appreciate not being interrupted by calls unless it’s truly urgent.

        1. It's your boss*

          By your peers, yes. But I would think long and hard before I tell my boss (or his boss) that I am inconvenieced by calls and that they need to check with me before calling.

          1. Van Wilder*

            I don’t need to tell my bosses that. They just ping first because it’s what we do here. But yes, if they cold called me, I would generally answer.

      2. AngryOctopus*

        If I’m sitting at my desk crunching a large amount of data for aspect A of our project and my boss suddenly calls me to talk about the data I sent for aspect B of our project two days ago, I am in no way prepared to talk about aspect B, not to mention this call is going to interrupt my data crunching, which can be a real pain in the butt to pick back up depending on where I am in the process. If my boss pings me to say “hey, do you have a minute to talk about aspect B from those slides?” I can say “Let me finish this data and call you in 20′”, or if it’s urgent I can say “give me a minute to pull up those slides and refresh my memory and I’ll call you.”. We all feel more organized and he’s not watching me scramble to rearrange my brain onto what he needs to talk about.

        1. Samwise*

          If you get an unexpected call and are not prepared to discuss the topic, maybe just say, “I’m in the middle of some gnarly data crunching about A, ok if I finish it, get my stuff together on B, then call you back? Probably in an hour ?”

          Sometimes the boss needs to talk about B right now — I ask for ten minutes or so to get the material together, then follow up

          If I really need to be uninterrupted, I mark my status as busy, silence everything that will ring or ping or chirp. Follow up with missed communications when I’m done.

          I’ve been working office and professional jobs since 1982. Never had an issue with this course of action. Plus it’s better for my mood not to get revved up about people communicating with me.

          1. Samwise*

            Yeah, I know, ok boomer. Being this old and working this long —I’ve learned that you’ll drive yourself bananas, or rev up your blood pressure, if you get angry or feel aggrieved about normal interactions with other human beings at work.

            1. Annie2*

              I don’t think it’s that generational – I’m a millenial and I’m solidly with you.

              1. Squishy*

                Me too. Millennial who had a desk with a phone for the first 10 years of my career. I now work with a lot of people 10-ish years younger than I am and there’s definitely less of a muscle around live communication.

      3. fhqwhgads*

        This is realllllllllly common in many workplaces. I personally don’t care if I’m in a “call if you want a call” vs “slack to ask if OK to call” company, but I’m surprised so many people are surprised that both exist?
        It’s 100% the norm in my last 3 employers that people, of every level, IM first before calling someone. No one demands it. It’s just the culture. It’s the accepted social contract in that environment. Like a senior VP wanted to talk to me for 5 minutes and still slacked first and said “ok if I call?”
        Other employers, and SVP wants to call you, they call you and you deal.
        I don’t personally think one is objectively better than the other. I do understand the reasons why some folks prefer one over the other.

        In my head this isn’t all that different from being in a culture where you tell your boss you’re taking PTO vs asking them if it’s OK that you do. In both scenarios, the boss still gets a request and has to approve it in the system. But in one culture the norm is to always frame it as a question and the other the norm is to frame it as a heads up.

    2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Yes.
      At FinalJob I was a global SME for an aspect of R&D engineering, so as well as having deep focus on my own research projects, I had to be available within my working hours for questions from around the world – they chose their preferred medium, which was usually phone calls initially with sometimes a screen share or detailled EM in parallel for reference.

    3. Katie A*

      In a lot of work cultures, and in a lot of larger society for that matter, it’s normal to send a quick message before calling because it allows for better coordinating. We have easy non-calling methods of communication now, so ensuring someone is available and has the time to talk is sensible. It’s also fine to call without asking.

      So yes, because it’s common now to send a quick coordinating message first, getting a call without that message can be jarring for some people. Add in the anxiety that some people feel around calls (yes it’s bad that’s it’s so common, but it is what it is), and it makes even more sense. Is that really so difficult to understand even if you don’t feel that way?

      1. London Calling*

        What has caused this anxiety around calls? admittedly I’m old, but I can’t recall it ever being an issue. The phone rang, you answered it or it went to voicemail and you picked it up later.

        Perhaps it was and people just dealt with it because for years phone comms were all we had.

        1. KateM*

          Yes, you are probably right – it was either that or a letter that you received three days later.

        2. Katie A*

          I’m sure there’s actual research on this that we could both find, but I’ll just go off the cuff.

          One is that yes, I think there were always people with phone anxiety (I’ve seen older people here say that), but there wasn’t another way to check for availability first, so people just had to deal with it.

          Some other possible reasons: calling has become less common as other modes of communication have become available so people have less experience with it, a lot of the calls people get in their personal life are spam so people are used to not answering the phone, and unfortunately, social anxiety in general seems to be more common these days and a phone call is more likely to trigger that than a text-based message.

          1. Spacewoman Spiff*

            I think this is right. I had intense phone anxiety when I was a kid–I could make calls without a problem, but probably for a solid decade never answered the phone. But when I started working, there was no option other than to answer the phone, and one of my first jobs was actually manning the phones at my county board of elections and making/answering countless calls to confirm address changes, so I was forced to overcome the phone anxiety. Now, I think it’s so easy to avoid the phone…I have younger friends and colleagues who have never had to use phones at work, who have never called to place a takeout order because you can do that online now, so it’s natural that they might find it hard to pick up an unexpected call even when they can see who’s calling.

          2. Elizabeth West*

            I agree with you, but I still prefer verbal calls if I want to discuss something with someone. Texting is physically difficult for me, and sometimes it’s easier to talk than to type in Teams, especially if you’re trying to brainstorm.

            For non-work calls, catching up is easier verbally, and there’s a more personal connection to hearing someone’s voice. If it’s a long text exchange, I’ll either ask if they can call or cut it short.

          3. Kirakaoru*

            Also, whenever I see someone on a telephone call in a current-setting TV show, it’s 99% a video call. The only recent instances of audio-only or landlines have been in offices for very quick administrative things, usually only to signal someone is putting the phone down or picking it up as a subtle means of conveying their attitude towards whoever else is in the scene (e.g. a person picking up a landline to convey that their conversation with the person in their office is over). As we all ruminated over ad infinitum during the pandemic and after measures were withdrawn, video calls come with different pressures and expectations than just speaking on an audio call. Additionally, moving from predominantly landlines in a fixed location means that proximity to a work location no longer factors into availability for a call – I can be on the toilet and still receive a call, whereas when my work phone was locked to a desk, if I was in the toilet or out to lunch or at the printer or in a meeting room, I could not answer a call, whereas now people have access to me in all of those spaces. I can be dealing with a sensitive client issue on an entirely different floor and someone can still ring to ask me where the TPS reports are, whereas before they would have had to wait until I returned. I can manage that to an extent by using my phone settings to drop the call or silence notifications, but they can still get to me in a way that they couldn’t when my phone was an actual machine attached to a cable and could not be moved without disconnecting and reattaching and systems involvement. These all form part of the always-on culture that just slipped into modern workplaces by way of the evolution of technology – smart phones, smaller computers, tablets, wearables, things that enable people to reach us easily at all times, outside hours, and in ways that just weren’t previously possible. Hell, if you worked on a farm in the 1990s, once you went out from the homestead nobody could reach you until you came back in unless you carried a radio and stayed within range (just not always possible), or maybe a sat phone if there was coverage. Now you can get phone coverage in the middle of the outback and horses are trained to not startle at ringtones (if you even use a horse any more instead of an ATV or dirt bike) – there are still pockets where there are no service due to geographical features or limited investment due to low populations or low socioeconomics making coverage unviable financially, sure, but there are also many more satellites available to cover those with sat phones, which are now much cheaper and available than they were, so if someone’s likely to head into one for work, they’re likely to still have some degree of contactability. As such, the idea that someone isn’t available is far less likely to even occur to someone, just because… well, technically, they are, and things like right to disconnect laws just haven’t kept up with technology and still usually contain outs and exemptions for genuine emergencies (e.g. I can choose not to check my emails, but if I get an SMS it’s urgent and if I don’t respond knowing that it’s an urgent business need, that may not be considered reasonable if a court looked at the evidence. If I was being paid to be on call, even less so!)

            1. Allonge*

              People used to not pick up landline phones before there was voicemail or caller ID, so when there was no way to figure out who called. Just because you are in principle contactable it does not mean you have to be!

              And TV shows show a video-on conversation because it’s visually interesting, not because audio-only calls don’t exist any more.

        3. WS*

          I’m in my early 50s and I’ve had phone anxiety since I was a teenager. I’m actually a lot better at work than outside of it because I can put on my work persona and deal with it. Even so, it’s nice that there’s more options now and people can use them!

        4. Morning reader*

          Interesting you should say that. We had answering machines in the 70s. You could listen to the message being left and decide whether or not to answer. I miss that. Sure there is voice mail, but a) no one ever checks it, they just call back when they notice missed call, and b) you can’t hear the message as it’s coming in. (there is some new weird screening function happening lately on my iphone since latest phone upgrade, but I almost never notice it while the call is coming in, so it doesn’t work like the old answering machine.)
          All that refers to mostly social communication, though. In the rare event of working from home in those days, you would definitely have been expected to pick up the phone during work hours. Now that we have other means of communication, it is fine to text back saying you are available for that call now, or just call back.
          …remembering the days of lolling in bed long mornings, listening to the answering machine squawk and deciding whether to get out of bed…

          1. Silver Robin*

            I actually love that screening option because it *should* also give you a transcript of the message that pops up with the missed call notification. So it does actually work a bit more like a voicemail! So if I do call back, I have a sense of who and why and what.

          2. Liz*

            I still have an answering machine at home! I chose it on purpose, rather than voicemail, because I’m more likely to notice a flashing light quickly than to notice a change in dial tone…

          3. Dahlia*

            I still have my answering machine on my landline. It’s honestly quite great, except people leave messages asking you to call them back without leaving you a number to call back on.

        5. badgerdog*

          It was. I’m in my 40s and have dreaded the phone ever since it was a boxy beige thing with a twirly cord that sat on a shelf in our hallway. People like me just had to deal with it but it was always miserable.

        6. Kimmy Schmidt*

          I have no proof, but I think part of it has to be related to the enshittification of technology. I hate the phone because I can’t HEAR

        7. FishOutofWater*

          My question is when did anxiety around phone calls become an accepted status quo? When did people start to view it as an immutable thing about themselves rather than something to work on changing? Anxiety can be normal, but becomes a problem when it interferes with activities of daily life. Not being able to comfortably answer an unexpected phone calls seems very much like interfering with activities of daily life.

          People can me anxious about all sorts of things, but according to every single piece of research I’ve read (and I’ve read about, both professionally and personally), avoiding the thing that makes you anxious will make anxiety worse, not better. Every time someone who is anxious about calls avoids a call and then feels less anxious, their brain has had the feedback loop that this really is dangerous and avoiding it kept them safe reinforced. And reinforcing one anxiety feedback loop just opens the door for others.

        8. Lacey*

          I’m pretty old myself, but I’ve always had anxiety around phone calls. Which was truly horrible back when it was the only way to contact people quickly.

        9. Nightengale*

          I was born in the 1970s and had phone anxiety my whole life. I coined the term telephonophobia and thought I was the only one. For me it was largely the uncertainty, not knowing what to say. Why yes, I was undiagnosed autistic. . . my biggest fear was not knowing what to say when I called someone. Did I just ask for the person I wanted? What if there was a high chance I would also know the person who answered the phone. Did I have to ID myself and talk to that person first? This was all land lines. It was all made worse by a number of prank calls I got as a young teen, kids would call and ask for me and say explicit things. No one my age ever called legitimately. If someone called for me I made my mother stay on the line so she could hear what was being said. We got an answering machine and so then when I was home alone I could hear who was calling and decide if I was going to pick up or not. I knew from books that kids my age chatted on the phone all the time and it was just another aspect of adolescence that felt so alienating to me. I did chat with my grandparents on one side and had a weekly very scripted conversation with my grandfather on the other side. His scripts more than mine.

          Eventually I started going over to my father’s office after school. He worked in hospital administration. Sometimes he would leave me in his office to go to a meeting. He didn’t have a secretary and I started answering his phone. That was so much easier than dealing with the phone at home! The call was always for him. I could just say “Hello, Mr [lastname’s] office” and then “I’m sorry he’s not available, can I take a message?” and then write down the message. I didn’t know the people calling. I didn’t have to figure out how much chit-chat to make.

          I still hate the phone. I call my mother. I make calls for work. I might call a business and ask a question. I don’t call friends and chat even though I have friends now. Mostly my friends prefer asynchronous text based communication as do I. Cell phones help because I know I am reaching or not reaching the person I want, rather than trying to guess who might answer the landline and what I might have to say to them. Mostly when I call people for work, I am returning their call and they want something from me and I can deploy scripts for that. But I will probably always hate the phone.

      2. Mary*

        Sure getting a call without a heads up can be jarring for some people. But you are being paid to work and one very common aspect of work is communicating with other people. Co-workers, bosses, clients. This is part of what you are being paid to do so I fail to understand why it is so egregious to answer a call.

        1. UKDancer*

          Yeah I mean where I work it’s etiquette to send someone a message asking if they’ve got a minute for a call first so you’re not calling when they’re in the middle of something else but it’s not unknown just to call people especially if it’s an urgent issue and it’s not a problem if they do so during your core hours.

          If someone rang me at 7.50 Id be surprised because I don’t start work that early and am usually on the tube or train so not always able or willing to talk but if it’s during the times I’m working then I’d certainly not be worried by someone ringing without messaging first.

      3. Asloan*

        Sadly in my personal life I find this now, and it didn’t used to be that way. Calling even a good friend or a loved one “out of the blue” would come across as a bit weird in my circle / generation and would probably only be done in emergencies. I feel a bit rude calling my parents outside the appointed time! I do call my sister on her birthday with no pre-plan but I do often miss her that way – more people screen now or don’t answer the phone, don’t have VM on, cells are on silent etc. Calls became obnoxious when spammers became the majority of the traffic, just like mail is 99% junk now so it’s rarely the source of good and exciting things in my life (unlike packages) – just fliers and crap mostly.

        1. Kirakaoru*

          My mum used to make me and my brother call my dad at work if we came home with a good grade or won a prize because she didn’t want him to think that if he got a call it was an emergency and panic. We still had to wait for management to go home before we did it so he didn’t get in trouble, and sometimes his manager would tell us to call back at tea time rather than go find him because he was busy or off not near a phone, but without regular use of phone calls for normal interactions a lot more people may associate unscheduled calls with emergency than perhaps even they realise.

        2. aebhel*

          I think there’s also much more of an expectation of availability now. Back when everyone just had a landline, the phone only got answered if you were at home (and letting it ring out and go to the answering machine was not, like, uncommon). Now everyone is carrying their phones around on their person at all times, so it feels more insistent and invasive.

          Add that to the fact that the vast majority of unexpected phone calls are spam these days, and it’s no wonder people have developed a reflexive distaste for them even if they don’t otherwise have phone anxiety.

    4. Matt*

      Wow, that’s harsh. While it’s not about “needing” or “demanding”, I’m a big supporter of announcing a call in a less invasive, asynchronous way, if it’s not really urgent. It’s just polite and friendly. Of course you can make everything feel absurd by exaggerating it (“warning about the warning about the warning …”), that’s not a great way of acknowledging different opinions however.

      (I agree that Teams or phone doesn’t matter, it’s the immediate, synchronous nature of the call that demands immediate answering, no matter what the actual hardware/software used is.)

      1. London Calling*

        Well yes. If someone’s calling you, they want an answer; and if someone’s calling me to ask if they can call me later, that’s two interruptions to my time and work flow and focus instead of one.

        1. Glen*

          where are you getting “call to ask about a call” from? This is a ridiculous straw man of sending a message to check if it’s a good time to call.

          1. Bathyphysa Conifera*

            This touches on another culture aspect, which is the belief that “Phone calls are a harsh interruption, but text messages are not.” If you experience both as pretty equivalently interrupty–you’re at work, you’re expected to see the notification and respond–then the separate message exchange through one medium to prepare you for an immediately following message exchange in a second medium looks pretty interrupty.

            1. penny dreadful analyzer*

              I definitely do not see them as equally interrupty, because when someone IMs me on Teams I get a little notification at the bottom of my screen and a single “ping” noise, whereas when someone starts a call with me a whole new window shows up in the middle of my screen on top of whatever I was working on and it makes multiple ringing sounds. So when a coworker IMs me with “got 5?” I can at least finish reading the sentence I was on before replying, whereas when they call me I now have a different thing right in front of my face where the sentence I was in the middle of had previously been.

              1. Spencer Hastings*

                Yeah, and if I’m the one who wants to call someone, I pretty much always ping them first if it’s a Teams call. I feel like it’s more intrusive than a phone call, precisely because the “ringing” is taking place on their computer screen and not just the sound of the phone. So I don’t want the Teams call to be a surprise to them.

              2. AdleyP*

                And I’m the opposite!

                If someone’s calling me, I feel like I can determine if I’m available to answer the phone and do so or call them back when I have more time. Even better, while I’m talking to someone on that call, my status turns to busy and I’m visibly wearing my headset, so nobody else interrupts me.

                Similarly, if someone comes to interrupt me at my desk I can let them know if I’m working on an urgent project, or spend some time talking to them. I do occasionally end up with a queue of people waiting for me, but it’s a queue and usually pretty straightforward to manage.

                But when someone’s messaging me with actual questions or discussion, I get overwhelmed really quickly when there are multiple things going on while I’m on green. I feel like I’m often expected to have multiple conversations at once because I look available, especially when I’m conversing with one person and then get interrupted with a higher-priority issue. I know that’s not what the other person is necessarily thinking but, when I try to create my own queue, I lose track of the messages because neither activity nor my list of chats are easy to scroll through. I don’t have this same problem to the same extent on my phone or with previous chat software, so I really think that part of it is the way that Teams works but part of it is also my colleagues expectations. (And that said, this just made me go in and adjust the notifications again so I can see if that helps more going forward.)

        2. English Rose*

          Yes that’s where I’m landing. I’d rather just answer the call to find out what it’s about and deal with it. Sure sometimes it interrupts flow in the same way in-person drop-bys do on in-office days (I’m hybrid) but that’s work life.
          I do think there’s some practical difference between Teams calls (may need to put headphones on) and calls to a mobile but that’s all.
          This topic does always arouse lots of conflicting views from the commentariat though and I don’t suppose we’ll ever agree.

        3. badgerdog*

          Well yes, but no one calls to ask about a call. They send a chat message, which is much less disruptive.

        4. fhqwhgads*

          There is no call to ask to call. There’s an IM or email to ask if it’s OK to call. eg an intentionally asynchronous communication method to confirm if a synchronous method is OK at that particular moment.
          For a lot of people a call equals “drop everything and talk to me now”. Whereas the IM first is the “do you have a moment now?”

          Is there an implicit “if you don’t have time now you can ignore the call?” sure. But it’s a cultural thing.

      2. Asloan*

        This must vary greatly by field. In a field with frequent collaboration and great urgency, calls must be more common and expected. In fields with mostly individual contributions and low urgency, there’s probably less reason why you can’t send a message asynchronously and ask for a call.

    5. KateM*

      Do you have such kind of job where you never need to concentrate and being ready to answer a customer as soon as a phone rings is your job description? Then it is understandable that whether it is customer or coworker, not much difference. But there are jobs where you need to get deep into the subject and then suddenly be expected to pull yourself out and do something totally else is jarring. That’s all there is to it.

      1. DataBod*

        99% of my work is coding (the 1% is stand-ups) that requires focus and at my best, almost a flow state, and I would say complaining about being called by a boss or co-worker just being precious. Especially if it’s not a pattern of being bothered all the time.

        A teams message would still have you looking away from your work, same as a call, unless you’re just blanket ignoring messages unless you choose to deal with them which could (not always) also be an issue for your boss.

        1. KateM*

          If you choose to let an asynchronous communication tool to disturb you during your deep focus, it’s on you.

          1. DataBod*

            Well yes, because there can be situations where my input is important and time critical to my superiors.

            Perhaps, as you noted yourself by accusing people who disagreed with you of ‘having the kind of job where you never need to concentrate’, your job may be one where your work is such that you to haven’t come across situations where your input is important and time sensitive. Hence the need to check communications in a timely fashion.

          2. mreasy*

            This is actually why I think a message is better – it’s quicker for the person asking to call than calling, letting it ring, and leaving a voicemail. I’m in meetings around half of every day. A colleague could look at my calendar on Outlook, determine I’m available, then call – with the risk I may be away from my desk for a minute – or they can send a Slack saying, “can I call you in a sec? otherwise let me know a good time” and that saves them doing the above and me listening to a voicemail. It’s actually more efficient, but that’s within my type of role.

        2. Bespoke Budget Formatting*

          For me, glancing at a message and typing out a quick response is far less disruptive than getting a call and having to dismiss it, answer to say I’ll call back, or listen to it ring. Maybe they’re equally disruptive to your flow, sp it makes no difference to you, but generally people who prefer a message before calling find messages less disruptive than calls.

        3. AdleyP*

          DataBod, I just commented above, but I’m like you with my perception of calls. I’m in a job where I’m both expected to do focus work and be available to be interrupted about urgent/priority issues, and I have zero experience with Teams messages being less of an interruption than a phone call.

      2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

        As a global SME I was required to do both: deep focus on developing bleeding edge engineering tech – my projects – plus answering calls from around the world on other projects.
        I found it easy to switch, just 2-3 seconds to pick up my thread again.

    6. Farewell bear facts*

      I take it you don’t have staff or colleagues who do focused work, then.

      1. HQB*

        I’m not the person you are responding to, but I agree with them and most of what I do is focused work. I have no problem with people calling, texting/messaging, emailing, or stopping by. Sometimes I am immediately available and sometimes I am not, but if I am not I just respond later.

        1. allathian*

          If I’m in deep focus, it’s the interruption itself that bothers me, so if I get a call I’ll answer, and hate the interruption and resent the interrupter for about five seconds before I shrug and move on.

          On my personal phone I reject calls that I don’t want to answer but I can’t really do that on my work phone. I’ll only let it ring if I’m in the bathroom.

          Teams calls are at least a bit better in that I can see who’s calling because I don’t reliably catch names on the phone, and my org doesn’t have an automatic internal caller-ID set up.

          My employer also requires all work requests to be submitted in writing, so that helps with avoiding unnecessary calls.

          There’s also some research into the effects of interruptions on productivity, in that it takes an average person some 20 minutes to get back to deep focus after an interruption, and with some forms of neurodivergence this period can be significantly longer. And given how often interruptions occur, it’s no wonder people find it hard to focus…

          In my case it helps that I’m a senior SME with a great deal of autonomy in setting my own deadlines and prioritizing work. I’ll consult with my manager if I have too much work, but she isn’t looking at my and my close coworker’s ticket queue and assigning tasks, we do that ourselves. And her requests don’t automatically get top priority just because she’s our boss. But she’s the point of contact for the wider organization if there’s an emergency that requires us to reprioritize our to-do lists completely.

      2. Allonge*

        If someone from our team needs to do urgent, deep focus work, they put on a do not disturb that mutes all calls, messages, email notifications and so on.

        But part of our work is also to be available to each other. So yes, people are expected to respond to messages and calls and knocks on doors and meeting requests.

        Also, I am one of the many people to whom a message is just as much of an interruption as a call. So ‘message me before a call’ would not help at all.

    7. Nodramalama*

      Sorry, what? Being available at work isn’t the same as being available of anyone for any task at all times. That’s like saying you should never have a closed office door.

    8. Silver Robin*

      Others have covered much of what I was going to say, but I do want to underscore how much more intrusive a phone call is. The notification is louder, it goes on for longer, and it requires *immediate* response, whether that is to decline or to answer. If you do answer, you need to get yourself into “talking to coworker” mode which is different than “answer emails” mode or “deep focus” mode. I, personally, do not find that too arduous to do and plenty of folks can handle it smoothly, but plenty of folks find it is a bit more of a conscious effort.

      So it is not a warning, like “watch out, stressful thing is happening!!!!” It is consideration to ensure that everyone is actually available and ready. Like how we say, “Good morning, how are you?” before launching into the question about TPS reports; it acknowledges people’s humanity and gives them a softer on ramp to the conversation. Actually, I find that I am slightly more likely to skip those niceties in a phone call when I have confirmed availability first, because I feel less like I am interrupting.

    9. A Single Piece of Feral Rice*

      Teams really does feel different than the phone to me. Maybe it’s because my company has a fully cameras-on culture and it would seem weird for me to answer without the camera. Also for my boss this may not apply, but for calls from anyone else, I need to rank that call in order of importance versus whatever else I’m working on at the moment.

    10. amh*

      This is so clearly workplace and job type dependent that I can’t believe how stridently people feel their way is The Way. In some workplaces, a heads up is normal. In others, its not. It’s not a big deal to prefer one or the other, what the heck is happening here?

      1. Bespoke Budget Formatting*

        Nothing can be a matter of preference or company culture. There is simply One True Way to handle communication and everyone who disagrees is Wrong and must be told they are Wrong.

        (FWIW, my company culture is to message before calling outside of emergencies because the answer to “Is now a good time for a call?” is almost always either “Give me five minutes to reach a good break point” or “No, can we schedule a time for later today?” When 99% of the time the person you’re talking to won’t be available right this second, messaging is more efficient than calling and having them tell you they’ll have to call back. In different workplaces, the calculus is different.)

      2. EHS Compliance*

        That’s where I’m at. We have some *very* strong opinions, and it’s a little silly. This is *sooooooo* office dependent! And person dependent! You’re allowed to have preferences, but so are others!

        I’ve worked in both kinds of offices. I will freely admit I’d rather someone message me first if 1) it’s not an emergency (and I’m in EHS, there are legit emergencies) or 2) they want to have a lengthier discussion. It makes sure I can get in the right train of thought for the conversation. But sometimes I’m just going to get phone calls, and while it might not be my favorite, I can’t get worked up about it. Especially if there’s a power differential – if the CEO calls me to ask some inane question about work boots, I’m just going to answer if I’m not already in a meeting/on the phone/driving/what have you.

        There’s a lot of people spending a lot of emotional energy on this without suggesting ways for the OP to reframe this interaction.

        OP, what I’ve done before if I’m not mentally ready for a call is blame Bluetooth. My headset is Bluetooth. Teams is known for doing strange things and legitimately sometimes it just refuses to allow me to hear through my headset. I’ve absolutely declined a call, took two minutes to get ready, then called or messaged back with a “oh Bluetooth wasn’t working, sorry, had to reset it and now I can hear you :) what’s up?” I have yet to have someone not tell me they too had connection/mic/speaker issues recently.

        1. Amateur Linguist*

          Well said. It undoubtedly irritates some people more than others, and that’s ok. But like anything, it’s give and take. With many different preferences out there, you have an easier time of it, generally speaking, if you accept differences in working and other people’s responses and build a more grounded take on it, even if it’s ‘needs must as the devil drives’.

          Like, the guy who called me from Accounts Payable yesterday morning should have had his ducks in more of a row when he phoned me, because he took five minutes trying to explain what he needed and eventually we worked out that I wasn’t the person I needed to speak to as it was about a property in London and I work in the Thames Valley area (which may sometimes sound like London, but it’s actually the upstream region between Windsor and Oxford rather than downstream towards London itself and the estuary). But I can’t control other people’s behaviour, only my own — and knowing that actually helps ease the frustration — and understand how I come across if I get things wrong on occasion.

      3. ThatGirl*

        It’s wild to me how many people (who, to stereotype for a second, are probably GenX and older) are so sure there is only One Correct Way. Teams is not the same as a phone call. It just isn’t. And so many people are trying to explain why they prefer a quick heads up about it, and yet… the digging in of heels is fascinating.

        As my mom used to say “it’s just personal preference!” People are allowed to have those! (Plus office and role culture, of course.)

        1. Amateur Linguist*

          People are allowed to disagree with each other. Characterising one side of a debate negatively only hurts your position rather than helping it.

          1. ThatGirl*

            Of course they’re allowed to disagree – that’s my point! I’m seeing a lot of people who think their way is the Only Way and how dare anyone think differently.

        2. What_the_What*

          We aren’t saying there is only one way. We ARE saying, if you are at work, and the boss calls on a TEAMS PHONE CALL, you answer. You CAN have preferences, but at work they may not be met. If the boss prefers an “I will call when I feel I need to” approach, is that a hill worth dying on because “OH NO A PHONE CALL.” … and yes they are PHONE calls on Teams, unless it’s video which the OP didn’t indicate it was. The difference is headset versus handset. It’s wild to me that if this site is representative of the , I and about 5 other people are the only people on earth w/o some form of anxiety or ADHD–much of it self-diagnosed.

          1. What_the_What*

            .. I’d kill for an edit button: ” It’s wild to me that if this site is representative of the population at large….”

          2. aebhel*

            Your capslock rage isn’t really selling you as a calm and reasonable person on this subject, just fyi.

          3. ThatGirl*

            Just to clarify, because I think this is getting lost a bit –

            When I have had “calls” on Teams it comes through the same as a video call regardless of whether the cameras are on or not. It has never gone through a headset; it pops up on my laptop screen all of a sudden making that loud Teams Call noise. I am understanding that this might be set up differently at other companies, but that’s the perspective I’m coming from. It’s also always been internal, because my boss was internal, and she had the ability to message me first but chose not to.

            Of course I always answered when I could. But I was also explaining why that might not be convenient or easy and why having a brief heads up would allow me (and others in the same situation) to be ready for it.

            1. ThatGirl*

              And I don’t have anxiety or ADHD – it was a mild annoyance when it happened, not a panic attack.

            2. Allonge*

              Sorry, but is it not possible to set a different volume level for calls? I don’t use Teams so I cannot confirm this but all the videoconferencing tools I have seen have a different audio setting for calls and messages. Even if for whatever reason this is a company-wide setting, you can ask to have it changed.

      4. Parakeet*

        I’m getting strong undertones of the cultural swing that seems to have happened with the shift from workers’ market to employers’ market, in how willing and quick people are to tell LWs that they’re being unreasonable because your boss gets to tell you what to do and you need to suck it up or you’re clearly ridiculous and don’t understand jobs and hierarchies.

        1. Unpopular_Opinion*

          Ummm a boss DOES get to tell you what to do within work boundaries. That’s kinda the definition of a boss…and a job. If you don’t want hierarchies and don’t want someone telling you what to do, maybe a commune or a cult is more your jam?

        2. Spiderling*

          Your boss does get to tell you what to do. That’s always been the case, regardless of the state of the job market. Sure, your boss shouldn’t make you do things that are unethical or overly burdensome, but “your boss should expect you to be reachable by phone during work hours” is entirely reasonable.

      5. amateur seamster*

        Thank you! I’m a bit surprised at how strongly people are reacting to (and dismissing) the question.

    11. B83*

      It’s because it’s an interruption. Especially when people are working in different locations, you can’t know their availability. They might be in another call, deep into another task, in a noisy area that isn’t conducive to a verbal conversation or just briefly occupied with a household chore or an errand. Or, they’re working on totally different stuff and aren’t mentally prepared to discuss the topic you want to call about. It’s not a productive conversation for either person when there’s a surprise call that one party isn’t prepared for. You end up with a lot of hemming and hawing and “I’ll have to get back to you.” The polite thing to do is to ask if they’re available first. You’ll both get more out of the conversation in the end.

      1. Unpopular_Opinion*

        …and that’s different than the boss stopping by your desk to ask a question about another project you aren’t focused on, or stepping out and saying, “B83, come into my office for a sec? I want to talk about the X project,” and you’re focused on the Y project? It’s not like interruptions or distractions are new to the workplace.

    12. General Socks*

      Y’all are both being silly. It’s not early to have you boss call you 50 mins after the start of the day and it’s not “frankly ridiculous” to need a heads-up about a phone call.

      We went from a culture where no one expected to you to respond every day to a culture where if you don’t reply same day then you’re an issue.

      It’s polite to give people a heads up and it’s mature to know that sometimes your boss does have to call without a heads-up. I say that as a person who rather not talk until 10 am.

      This isn’t an either or situation.

      1. What_the_What*

        It is “frankly ridiculous” to NEED a heads up. It’s not ridiculous to PREFER one. But when it comes to the boss, it’s the boss’s preferences that matter, so it needs to be sucked up.

    13. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

      Concur. Never used Teams, but the Huddle feature in Slack is equivalent. I know who is requesting the huddle, I can reply “sorry give me 2 mins” if I need to, etc.

      This isn’t the same as a phone that can be spammed.

      1. fhqwhgads*

        For me, a huddle makes sounds like a ringing phone.
        A plain ol slack message does not.

        One is more disruptive than the other.

        I don’t super care whether people ask me if it’s ok to huddle before pushing huddle, but I do think there’s a difference between replying to a slack message “sorry give me 2 mins” and replying to a huddle-ring with the same. The effort to send that response is the same. But how interrupty getting the thing I’m responding to is different.

    14. What_the_What*

      100% agree. Maybe I’m just old but I don’t get all the “I need to be mentally prepared for a call” and “calls give me such anxiety”.. YOU ARE AT WORK, working. It’s part of work to be in communication!

      1. ThatGirl*

        Many people don’t work in roles where regular phone calls ARE a part of workplace communication. My last two jobs literally did not have desk phones. It was email or Teams, and I RARELY got unplanned Teams calls, which are in fact very different to most people than a normal phone ringing.

      2. AngryOctopus*

        If you interrupt my data analysis on A because you need to ask a question about B, I need to be mentally prepared for that call so I can talk about it instead of spending 3′ stumbling around, opening the file, and reminding myself of what that was about. Especially if the call will only last a minute if you let me do so!!
        Again, no one way works for everyone. Maybe you need to be prepared to talk to people because you’re at work, and yet a heads-up/2′ warning that you need to discuss B is going to let someone get in the right headspace to talk and make the meeting far far more productive than if you just call out of the blue.

        1. What_the_What*

          But if I send an IM asking a one minute question, or ask if you’re available, that will also cause you to look up and make sure it isn’t urgent, right? And if you’re THAT busy, why are you not in DND status, so I know to hold off? Also the OP didn’t indicate she wasn’t mentally prepared to talk about project X … she was “shocked” to get a phone call and wasn’t “ready” to talk, even generally about work, apparently. Teams has ways of indicating you are NOT available for calls/comms, and if people don’t use them, they leave it up to others to interpret their availability for a call *shrug*.

    15. Jennifer*

      It’s really common at my job – we don’t know everybody’s deadlines and some folks work remote while others are hybrid. Usually before I call anybody I send a teams message along the lines of, “Are you available for a quick chat about X?” Or if it’s something that I know will take longer I will say, “Hey – I think we need to have a call about Y today, are you available now or is there a time that works better for you?” It’s just an acknowledgement that your coworker has other stuff going on and may not have the time to deal with something else at the moment.

    16. Sunflower24*

      I agree with this and also agree there isn’t One Correct Way as many others cited. And while your office expectation may be to ping before calling, that doesn’t make it egregious or wrong to not do that. Especially when it’s rare- which is the key here. I think these unplanned phone calls are really a rarity and it’s only happening every so often and folks complaining about it are acting as if they’re coming in daily.

      Is it impacting their work in that moment. Sure. Is it happening so much that it’s impacting their overall work product? No. Because if it was, there would be a legitimate case to have a conversation about it.

  10. Amateur Linguist*

    LW1 — if you’re on the clock then people can phone you! I spent almost ten years on reception, so I’m used to taking random calls, but although I generally email or Teams someone first, sometimes there’s no way round having to speak to someone directly to get some information in a timely manner. My job is very reactive and immediate and I’m effectively contracted to be available 9-5, so people can expect to be able to phone me and get an answer or, if I am on a short break, for me to phone them back if necessary. It’s part of the general covenant of employment — that you can definitely prefer to message people beforehand to check they’re available, but I think you need to let this go and answer any calls when they come in. Part of what you’re being paid for in a job with fixed or core hours is availability, and not taking calls because someone hasn’t checked you’re free even when you’re showing as available on Teams is going to be taken poorly, particularly when it’s your boss on the other end of the line.

    LW2 — I lost my job over something like this (I broke an expensive pieces of equipment and I hadn’t been mentally present for a while) but it was a wake up call to get diagnosed and therapy for it. There was nothing anyone could have done because it was based on my own anxieties rather than external overstimulation. I’m open about being autistic because I am a very WYSIWYG person and have tics and stims that seem bizarre to other people but are understandable once you get to know me. My family is probably all some flavour of neurodivergent (takes one to know one — I’m the only one with a formal diagnosis but there’s definitely traits in the three others, and people coming in to the family circle noted the mild quirkiness of our mealtimes in particular) and so perhaps it was just being able to be accepted within that framework the made it more difficult to mask when I flew the nest.

    I think there’s a balance between workplaces having to simply accept it and doing as much as you can to prevent it or give people a heads up. My boss knows about my anxiety triggers and shared bad news with me before it was made public because she knew it would set off those anxious thoughts and cascade downwards. Likewise, I made her aware earlier in the year about my anxiety over politics — I didn’t necessarily need to come in to the office to escape distractions, but I recognised when there was a trigger for me and gave her a heads-up that I was struggling and that I was trying to work through some turbulence in my own head.

    She is very good about letting me take a break if I need to ‘reboot’ my brain. In return, I try CBT methods of powering through things that might lead to a breakdown. But then I’ve been dealing with this for aonf time — at 46 I had to learn some coping mechanisms on my own and work with less than ideal environments to adapt, so that colours my perspective. I know I’m bad at masking, so I’ve definitely struggled, but I also think that it’s not fair to let other colleagues have to put up with more trivial things — compassion fatigue is real and they have a right to a workplace suited to getting their job done.

    So it’s give and take. Use accommodations to get a better environment — being at home by default in a job that is spread over a wide geographical area means I can control the environment I work in. I don’t like bright light (it was an amazing difference when the office I used to work front desk in for got LED lights — same brightness, maybe even brighter, but less flicker and thus less migraine-inducing for all three of my team who suffered from them) and open or shared offices are pretty much the norm here so the solitude can help focus (although I do like some background radio/YouTube noise if I’m doing something that involves data entry etc).

    But ultimately…I think the social and medical models of disability co-exist and complement each other. Yes, society should be more sympathetic to neurological challenges we face. But they’re also human beings who get tired, anxious, have needs for safety in the workplace (as per that old ‘get off my foot’ script posted on John Scalzi’s blog). We need to meet our employers in the middle and make sure we’re doing our best to understand our triggers and ameliorate what we can and get accommodations on file. No workplace can really tolerate any kind of violent meltdown very often, and we’re the ones who can learn to recognise the build-up and excuse ourselves if necessary.

    Other people may not be neurodivergent but they do have their own struggles, and understanding their concerns and their needs goes some way to having our own understood, not just on a legal level but on a human level.

  11. Katie A*

    LW 1, to answer your question at the end of your first paragraph, both are okay. It’s okay for her (or anyone, really) to call without messaging first and it’s also okay for you to not answer a call and then call back or send a message saying that you’re now available.

    I get why it bothered you, especially if the norm in your workplace is to message first. Calls are more of an interruption than messages in my opinion, so they are more distracting.

    As far as I can tell, there isn’t some on going problem to deal with, right? Everything worked out. She called, you didn’t answer because you weren’t ready to answer, and then you messaged back and you had the call. Presumably she wasn’t mad about the missed call, so in the future, you can just do the same thing if you’re not ready for a call.

    1. Myrin*

      “to answer your question at the end of your first paragraph, both are okay.”

      Yeah, OP sounds quite young and/or insecure to me – the “Was that okay or is it okay for her to call without messaging me first to ask if I’m available?” part especially – so I really want to emphasise this quote from your comment because that’s basically the answer to this letter in a nutshell.

      OP, neither you nor your boss did anything wrong here, so please don’t let this situation cause you any further anxiety!

    3. GDUB*

      If you message me to tell me you’re going to call me, you’ve interrupted me twice. If you just call me, you’ve interrupted me once. Please just call.

      1. Van Wilder*

        Hard disagree. If I’m in the middle of something, I can ignore your ping until I take a break (I have notifications off.) If you call, you’ve just interrupted my work. Which is fine if it’s truly urgent.

      3. What_the_What*

        This! If you can answer, answer. If you can’t, don’t. (It’s a pet peeve of mine when my husband will answer a call to say, “I can’t talk; I’m in a meeting.” Like THEN DO NOT ANSWER!) But, also, keep your status up to date and accurate. If your status indicates that you are available for a call, then that’s on you if you aren’t “ready” (whatever the hell THAT means) and if you aren’t put yourself in Busy, Do Not Disturb or Away status.

    4. fhqwhgads*

      I think also, it’s probably productive for OP to separate in their mind the anxiety bit form the cultural norms bit.

      Some companies have a cultural norm to message before calling. Clearly OP prefers this type of culture, but it’s not right or wrong compared to one where people call unprompted. So nobody’s wrong in terms of should boss have messaged first or not.

      Many people find calls more disruptive than messages, which can lead to preferring one culture over another. It’s not right or wrong have this preference, but you do need to know what culture you’re in to set expectations for yourself. It’s OK to prefer one culture, but if you’re in a job with another, it’s reasonable for people to do the other thing.

      Many people have anxiety about unexpected calls. Our anxiety is ours to manager. (I’m using this term in the generic sense, not in a medical sense.)

      Then there’s the timing thing. I think the timing fed the anxiety. OP starts work at 7 and the call was 7:50, but OP’s boss usually starts later. This is not all that different than if OP started work at 9am and boss usually started at noon, and boss called at 9:15. The call was within OP’s working hours, and thus reasonable to call at that time in a broad sense. But it’s still a surprising call, not because of the absence or presence of a “message before calling” culture, but because it was a surprise that boss was in at all. An unexpected call from the boss when boss is expected to be OOO can be unnerving. It’s OK to be rattled by that. It doesn’t make the call itself unreasonable, but having a surprised reaction to a surprising thing is human.

      It all worked out ok. No one made a huge faux pas here. No one’s being unreasonable, as far as we can tell from the events in the letter.

  12. Marvel*

    Whoa—meltdowns are NOT always (or even usually) violent, and to suggest otherwise is pretty harmful. Maybe I’m paranoid, but based on some other language in the letter (“people with autism” rather than “autistic people,” talking about autism like it’s something outside of us that we’re affected by instead of something intrinsic to our person), I’m skeptical that this LW is in any way an ally to—or even particularly familiar with—the autistic community.

    1. UV*

      Agreed on the stigmatizing aspects of the letter — very curious about the role the LW holds and their own relationship to the autistic community.

    2. Ask a Manager* Post author

      The question is from someone autistic who does advocacy work in the autistic community (they included a bunch of additional info for context that wasn’t part of the question).

      1. Marvel*

        Just goes to show the community’s not a monolith! Thanks for responding with this context, I appreciate it. It’s really nice to know this is coming from a place of genuine advocacy and not some internet troll’s attempt to stir up a narrative about violent autistic people.

    3. Tea Monk*

      I’ve seen some bad meltdowns but they were never in autistic adults. I think being able to be flexible about accommodations would probably work for most people. ( I don’t think I have autism)

    4. Van Wilder*

      Interesting. I was taught to use “people first” language but I guess that’s not appreciated by the autistic community, at least from your view.

      1. Amateur Linguist*

        I don’t mind how you refer to me as long as it’s polite! I think getting too focused on the language and not fixing the attitudes that lead to language usage makes it more, not less, difficult for other people to understand the bigger picture. Nitpicking and pedantry get exhausting, but bigger changes in attitude lead to more lasting if slower change.

        (Case in point — the way the word ‘spastic’ has become taboo in the UK happened because attitudes to neurophysiological disabilities like cerebral palsy changed and developed to the point where we recognised that it wasn’t ok to use the word as an insult, and SCOPE, which does a lot of work with neurophysiological disabilities in general, changed its name from the Spastic Society to reflect the change in linguistic circumstances. It wasn’t changed with people fingerwagging on the internet; it changed because they did a lot of outreach and explanation and development work for the people they cared about, and that helped lasting change that then helped Weird Al see sense about his use of the word in one of his best songs.)

      2. Irish Teacher.*

        Yeah, I think the majority of autistic people prefer identify first to people first language. The latter is generally suggested by professionals, who are not themselves autistic and some autistic people feel it can be kind of patronising or that it suggests autism is a bad thing. After all, you wouldn’t say “person with tallness” because it’s person first language. So it can sometimes be a “tell” as to whether the speaker has gotten their information from autistic people or from professionals who are not autistic. Not always though, as obviously, autistic people can have different views and can also have different first languages, etc.

        But it general, you are better to default to “autistic person” than “person with autism.” While there are some autistic people who prefer the latter, they are a minority.

        2. I like big tubs and I cannot lie*

          “Not always though, as obviously, autistic people can have different views and can also have different first languages, etc”

          Example: I, a person with autism, hate the term “neurospicy” (and its cutesy derivatives like “neurojalapeno” or whatever). If someone wants to use that to describe themselves, then okay, whatever. But it sets my teeth on edge and I do not want people using it to describe me. Living with autism (and ADHD) has made my life really difficult at times, and constantly seeing this tweet AF phrase is very belittling (in my opinion).

          1. Amateur Linguist*

            Agreed. My condition has strong physiological consequences, meaning I’m undergoing somewhat of a progressive issue in my joints as well as having been lamed in an accident some people might have simply limped away from. My hands are going from hypermobile to gnarly at 46 because of that impact.

            The problem is that neurospicy tends to mean personality quirks and other things that the person thinks makes them neurodivergent without the actual physical experiences, as well as erasing the experiences of those people with high support needs who can’t advocate for themselves but have a more extreme version of the symptoms some of us have. It erases the very real and very traumatic experiences people with ASDs go through and the struggles of the people around us as well. So, ok, I broke a dictaphone at work. Next time it’s a coffee pot, which means that instead of a thud there’s a shatter and glass goes everywhere. Other people in the office don’t know what’s going on inside my head and have to clear up the glass. At best, no one got hit by a shard flying out.

            So even if the issue is caused by a build up of stress in a neurodivergent brain, it has serious consequences for other people at work even if it’s not directed at them.

            I’m sorry to be blunt but denial of this actually being an issue is just hurting us and hurting the people we love and work with, many of whom also have their own struggles, mental, physical, legal, social or familial. It’s incredibly selfish to dismiss what actually happens with platitudes about destigmatising if you’ve never actually experienced it either first or second hand. I was able to get help and support and am now back on my feet, but I really hate the way so-called allies dismiss any attempt to discuss the way how people like me actually do have problems beyond being mildly quirky in our personalities.

            That’s not helping ANYONE.

      4. Lilian Field*

        It really varies. I think, if you want a default, person-first language is most widely accepted, so you’re not wrong. Some autistic people have very strong preferences. But lots of autistic people really don’t see the issue as important, or they make context-dependent choices. I am in the second category.
        I know a lot of people who are higher on the support needs spectrum because I have some higher-needs traits myself: I sometimes have to use a talker/AAC, for instance, and I have severe and prolonged shutdowns. I find that, the more impacted a person’s life is by their experience of autism, the less they are likely to care about person-first language…many people, for instance, can’t communicate at all without an AAC device, but they are sometimes denied access to their AAC in some institutional settings, especially if they are dealing with a spike in meltdowns, because the institutional staff doesn’t want them to throw and break the device. When people have communication challenges on this level, questions about the finer points of usage are less urgent. I hope I am not sounding tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic as I write this; my intention is 100% sincere. I really don’t think most people know a lot about the circumstances or challenges faced by people who have higher support needs. I myself am kind of only at the margins of this community because I can work with accommodations, I can control my risk of meltdowns, and I am fully speaking about 85% of the time. I sometimes have trouble eating but I’ve never had to have a feeding tube. Etc. But I have gotten a lot of help and good advice and friendship from people whose challenges are greater than mine, so I know a bit about what they go through, and it’s really really tough.

        1. Lilian Field*

          Oops–I said person first when I meant identity first! I’m sorry!
          The most widely accepted default is “autistic person,” not “person with autism.” That’s what I meant. Lots of autistic people, themselves, don’t really have or use a default, either because they don’t care or because they consider the question to be context dependent. But if you want to know which is the safer option, on balance, as a default, “autistic person” is safer. It’s just also good to know that it’s not universally used (or even universally accepted as preferable) in the autistic community.

        2. Amateur Linguist*

          Well said, Lilian. There are more severe issues even with my low support needs condition than what I call myself.

      5. fhqwhgads*

        No group is a monolith. There are people who will die on the hill of “people first” language, people who think it’s weird and othering, and people who DNGAF, in every community.

      6. Dahlia*

        Most disabled people* find “people first” language a little condescending at best. The idea is that you need to be reminded that a disabled person is a person first, which… you shouldn’t need to be reminded that.

        And think of it this way – you don’t say “people with tallness”. You just say “tall people”. You can just say “disabled people” the same way.

        *people with Down’s Syndrome and people with albinism are exceptions.

    5. Amateur Linguist*

      I’ve been in one and I broke a Dictaphone. I’m sorry, but it’s better to be frank and honest about what happens and how it impacts other people than sweep it under the rug and hope people just put up with it.

      The more we discuss it, the better understood it is and the easier it is for others to handle. Having had that surge well up in my mind recently (I lost my phone on holiday in Stockholm and while I wasn’t violent outwardly, I wanted to hit something and was angry enough at myself for being a wally that it could have manifested very badly), it’s not fun for anyone, but if we always suppress the reality of it we’ll never get anywhere with people’s actual needs.

      1. Marvel*

        I’m not trying to sweep anything under the rug and I think the question they’re asking is a good and important one. The only thing I object to is the idea that all meltdowns are violent or destructive in nature, which their second paragraph implies.

        1. Lilian Field*

          I gave more context in my original note to Allison, which would have helped, but I also asked that the context not be published, because it identified me and also potentially some other people. I am grateful to Allison for editing my letter as I requested, and I’m sorry that it created this additional problem of clarity, which I didn’t foresee.

    6. spiriferida*

      It read to me like the LW was focusing on those folks who do have violent meltdowns mostly because they’re the kind of autistic people who are most likely to struggle getting accommodations.

    7. Kirakaoru*

      Person-first is very much still part of accepted and preferred language in many places. It’s premature to judge without knowing the culture and community the person speaks from and what they personally prefer for themselves, especially where the general prevailing advice for people working with people in various minority communities is to use the language people choose to use for themselves, even if you personally have a different preference or philosophy.

    8. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      I took the phrasing violent to not mean physical violence but more explosive or intense.

    9. Sillysaurus*

      Hm, I think you might be a little bit behind on this one! Person first language is the preferred now, and has been for at least 10 years. Lots of great reasons why if you delve into the neurodiversity advocacy space. I have worked in this field for many years, diagnose autism as part of my job, and my husband is autistic. It was very clear to me from the letter that the LW was a member of this community, an ally of this community, and really knows their stuff.

      1. Marvel*

        I’m not outdated on my own community.

        This insistence that person-first is the preference is something I only ever hear from people who aren’t autistic. If you go up the thread a bit, you will find several autistic people confirming that in their experience, identity-first language tends to be the majority preference (though there is plenty of debate).

        It’s not something I would consider a red flag on its own, but gave me pause combined with the other things I mentioned.

    10. badgerdog*

      They didn’t say all meltdowns are violent, they asked how people who DO experience violent meltdowns could be accommodated.

  13. Farewell bear facts*

    #1 Well we’ve already seen some strong opinions in the comments, but there isn’t one universal truth here. Nobody can tell you what your boss ‘should’ do, or what you ‘should’ do, because it will depend entirely on the culture and norms in your workplace and on the wishes of your particular boss.

    I prefer not to have people call me without warning. I might be just finishing something off or about to go to the loo or deep in thought. Asking ‘free for a call?’ is quicker and more efficient than calling, missing me and waiting for me to call back, or throwing me off whatever I was doing.

    That’s not an unusual way to feel these days. People saying how a Teams call is just like a phone call are forgetting that the only reason we all used to call each other without warning was because we didn’t have other asynchronous means by which to communicate.

    And calling without warning is a disruption. For those of us who feel that way, it’s like someone walking up to us in the office when we are working and starting to speak to us without saying “Got a minute?” Some people think the ringing part is the equivalent of asking if you’ve got a minute. But it’s not, as you’ve already been distracted and disrupted at that point.

    But your boss may have their own feelings. Mine called me without warning a couple of times, and each time I asked him to message first. Had I not asked, I could perhaps have assumed he wanted me to always be available for a call. Turned out he meant to message first but forgot. Other bosses may indeed expect this.

    1. Stardust*

      Some people think the ringing part is the equivalent of asking if you’ve got a minute. But it’s not, as you’ve already been distracted and disrupted at that point.

      Now I’m confused–someone asking “Got a minute?” has also already distracted/interrupted you by doing so. So in that way they do indeed seem equivalent.

      1. Irish Teacher.*

        Now I’m confused–someone asking “Got a minute?” has also already distracted/interrupted you by doing so. So in that way they do indeed seem equivalent.

        This reminds me of my really terrifying secondary school principal. Before she became principal, she taught me Irish and one day, some older girls came to the class to give a message. In our school, the norm was that if you had to speak to a class, you began by asking the teacher, “please, Miss/Sir, may I interrupt the class?” Her response was to snap, “you already have!”

        So yeah, I agree that asking “have you got a minute?” is already a distraction if somebody is in deep work mode and honestly, a call is probably easier to ignore than somebody coming over to ask you something.

        I agree the whole thing is workplace dependant (and also probably dependant on the kind of work being done) but it’s really not a huge deal one way or the other.

      2. You move diagonal*

        Yes, the initial messsage can also be an interruption. That’s why I like to send an email letting them know I’m going to send an IM letting them know I’m going to call.

          1. London Calling*

            That reminds me of the one job I actually physically stood up in and said ‘Right, I’m done here’ and walked out (contract role). It was a tiny training company and I was doing payables, largely by myself in the office except for the sales guy. The MD would wake up in the middle of the night, send me an email. If I didn’t reply ASAP she’s meesage me to ask if I’d seen it and if I didn’t reply to THAT ASAP she’d call. Then she wanted to know why I had a backlog of work. (Because I’m answering all your calls, missus).

        2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

          That’s 3 disruptions.
          And other people may be held up because they need that answer quickly, instead of hoping youn notice the first 2 warnings within not too much time, so they can finally ask their question/make their work request.

        3. Schmuzzin*

          I like to start off dropping by their desk to see if it’s okay for me to send an email about sending an IM to see if they’re free for a quick call.

      3. badgerdog*

        The ‘Got a minute for a call?’ message is widely used at my company and I think it works well. You can generally catch the chat message and reply ‘Give me two minutes’ without losing your train of thought. Then wrap up the sentence/ticket/whatever you were focusing on, and call the person back when you’re able to give them all of your attention. Whereas picking up a call and getting into a conversation makes it easier to lose that original train of thought. And once you’re on the call you tend to just have the conversation the call was about, rather than asking for those two minutes and calling back, because, well, you’re both here now and your focus has already been lost so you might as well.

        That said, working with other people means being flexible with communication styles. We all have to do it, and if it’s your boss calling, it’s probably on you to be the most flexible. So it’s not an outrage to call without warning – but it’s also not precious, or pathetic, or illogical, or some kind of generational thing to prefer a chat warning. It’s genuinely a good system.

        1. badgerdog*

          (I meant to add: and while you always have a choice about picking up a call, ring tones are designed to grab your attention urgently and not let it go, so are hard to ignore and work through.)

      4. fhqwhgads*

        Yeah it’s a weird comparions.

        A call both shows up in a box in the middle of my primary monitor and rings like a phone.
        A DM makes no sound, and makes an icon show up in slack on my tertiary monitor, which I have to look at to notice.

        So a “got a minute” via DM is significantly less disruptive than a call.

        If the comparison is a person showing up at your desk and saying “got a minute” then that is totally equivalent to the disruption of someone calling.

    2. WishIWasATimeTraveller*

      I also prefer a quick message asking if I’m free, because if you’re in the middle of something it’s easy to reply “give me 5” but it feels rude to ignore a call, and it’s stressful because there’s something urgent about your computer ringing.
      I especially appreciate a heads up what it’s about, e.g. “Are you free to discuss the risks in the Q3 report” so I can get the documents on hand and not be caught on the back foot.
      But that’s a personal preference and I too had to adjust to a manager who would randomly call.

    3. Bathyphysa Conifera*

      An emerging cultural aspect is whether the pre-call warning is also an interruption, pretty much equivalent to the calling interruption. To some people these are starkly different, and to some the same thing.

    4. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

      I don’t like talking on the phone at all, but the idea that people only called because there was no asynchronous means for communication is silly. Some issues are way better suited to a short discussion than to written communications. I understand not liking to talk on the phone. I don’t understand making one’s dislike of talking on the phone into some sort of universal etiquette code.

      Also, sometimes when I would call reports, they would DM me back to ask if they could call back later or why they couldn’t talk now. That’s the same thing just starting on the other end.

    5. hello*

      These examples aren’t similar at all. If I walk up to someone’s desk and see that they are actively working, I won’t just start talking at them. If their Teams status says they’re available, I’ll give them a call BECAUSE THEY’RE AVAILABLE. If you’re in the middle of concentrating on something, set your status to busy or do not disturb temporarily.

      1. Farewell bear facts*

        “If you’re in the middle of concentrating on something, set your status to busy or do not disturb temporarily.”

        This is wildly impractical to always do.

        I’m so glad I work with people who don’t call without warning!

        1. Myrin*

          “This is wildly impractical to always do.”

          And yet I do so every time I so much as leave my desk to the extent that it’s become an automatism and I sometimes do it on muscle memory alone even though I’m actually only getting up to go over to the cabinet a few metres away from my desk.
          It’s literally four clicks in our phone system’s programme’s which everyone here has open all the time anyway (and two of those clicks is activating the voicemail setting; a simple DND in the programme is two clicks, and on the phone itself, there is one single button for it).

          So can we maybe accept that different people (and workplaces) do things differently and there’s no universal “this is impractical” or “this is easy to do”?

        2. Spencer Hastings*

          It also depends a lot on the hierarchy.

          Microsoft Office used to actually give you suggestions to “schedule focus time on your calendar!” — I haven’t seen those in a while. But some of my coworkers did that and had “focus time” blocked off. These were all more senior people; I, on the other hand, always felt like if a partner or manager was going to call me, they were going to call me, and it would have seemed rude for me to preemptively say no to their calls by marking myself unavailable for 1-2 hours without a specific reason.

        3. Schmuzzin*

          I’m glad I work with people who can use simple tools like Teams statuses to convey their availability.

        4. Allonge*

          So instead of using the technology as intended or getting used to the idea that sometimes people may expect to talk to you on their schedule and not yours, it’s better to have everyone work double?

          Because it’s not just a ping: people will type ‘hi’ and wait for me to answer, then tell me they want a call then call. Please don’t pretend this is a huge difference to having a call interruption-wise.

      2. Matt*

        Teams really needs a “dark green” or whatever status for “available for IM, but not for calls”.

  14. Irish Teacher.*

    LW1, I don’t think anybody did anything wrong here. Your boss called. You missed the call. You let them know you were now available and everything worked out fine.

    Seems like a normal course of events to me, although of course, I grew up in the days prior to text messages or online messaging or even answering phones being common, so missing calls and somebody calling back was the norm. I get it is a bit different today but this still doesn’t seem in any way concerning on either side. People miss calls.

    LW4, I don’t think your boss needs to be physically present in order to notice and value what you are doing. After all, some people work from home and don’t physically meet their bosses at all. If your work is getting done, your boss should be satisfied.

    I really don’t think you should quit your job just because your boss isn’t physically seeing everything you do.

    I realise that leaving at 3:30 could look pretty early, if they assumed you were starting at 9, but given that you have spoken to your boss and he hasn’t raised any concerns, it sounds like it is OK. 8-3:30 isn’t that much off the stereotypical 9-5. If your boss were making comments about how early you left or even giving you looks when you left or something, I’d be more concerned.

  15. Det. Amy Santiago*

    LW 3, wouldn’t you want your former coworker to recommend you to their workplace? If I were the hiring manager, I would find it extremely odd to learn that a candidate had a strong former working relationship with a current employee, but the current employee wasn’t recommending the candidate. I would want to know why and it would definitely give me pause!

    1. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      It might be an optics thing, especially since they would be co supervisors and are already friends. It might look like the he just wants to get his friend in.

  16. Nodramalama*

    Yeah LW1 I do not love a cold call on teams, but a lot of people will just call rather than message. I don’t think you can reasonably be annoyed by it, or ask it to stop, especially to your boss

  17. Lusara*

    LW1, it is absolutely appropriate for your boss to call you during your regular working hours.

  18. Pat*

    Clearly I’m not fully awake yet, because I read the title as “should my boss massage me before calling on Teams” and was VERY confused…

  19. You move diagonal*

    My job itself is an interruption from my deep focus on Netflix and sports. I wish my bosses would respect that but what can you do

  20. Antigone*

    LW1, the way I was able to talk about this with my manager was by framing it as “I know it’s not always possible, but when it is possible, a heads-up from you before calling really helps me keep from losing focus, by giving me a minute to wrap up a thought or finish a quick task before we talk.” She was absolutely fine with that and has been messaging me before calling ever since. You’ll know your manager relationship best, but I think it’s absolutely worth asking about. It may be no big deal at all for her to slightly tweak the way she works with you.

    But that said, if this is just the way she works, you do need to accept it. People are allowed to call you without notice during your working hours. (That said, sure, sometimes you can let it go to voicemail and call back a couple of minutes later if that’s better for you – you’re also allowed to be stretching your legs, using the bathroom, on another call, etc. – but I wouldn’t recommend letting it become the most common way you respond to a call.)

    1. Saturday Manager*

      I manage a team that before I joined used to feel very comfortable telling our hardworking boss what “little tweaks” they should do to make everyone happier at work. The boss hated it, and remembered every one of these speedbumps people put up as the boss was urgently trying to get important work done. My first assignment was getting people back to an understanding that the boss was actually in charge, and not looking for helpful tips. I would not suggest taking this approach.

  21. Lula*

    Anyone else super confused by Letter 4? Does LW work the number of hours they are expected to or not? I see clearly in their letter that they don’t think they make enough money to work full time and openly say so, but I don’t know what full time is at their company.

    Also, if I were someone’s boss and they made a point of sending me an unnecessary message every morning at 8, I would be irritated and probably LESS inclined to look the other way if they weren’t working enough hours

    1. Asloan*

      As someone with a unique schedule, the move is not to send a message every morning, but also not-never do it. Just make a point of answering an email your boss is cc-d on right when you first start work at least once a week or so. And (lumping together two letters) if your boss calls outside their work hours but in yours, please make a point to pick up!

    2. Silver Robin*

      i do not think the advice meant to send a message every morning at eight, much less an unnecessary one. Just every so often and with content that makes sense. They could hold off on sending a message until the morning just for the sake of letting it fall in that time frame (all else being equal). Or, Teams let’s you schedule messages so I have done that when sending a message at the end of the day for it to pop up in the morning instead. Not often, but once or twice that has been handy to make sure the message is seen “live”. LW could do that so they do not forget to send the message.

      The point is to just add normal work person behavior to the earlier hours a little more consciousnesly so that the manager is more likely to remember LW is actually doing stuff before manager gets in, rather than slacking off until the boss shows up and then also leaving early

    3. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      It is sales, so they probably are more flexible with the schedule. OP is working roughly 7-8 hours (not including a lunch break), so it’s probably fine. Also it sounds like he might be salary and doesn’t have to punch in/out so it might be one of those places where you don’t always have to work 40 hours a week to get paid the full amount.

      1. Asloan*

        Different workplaces are so different with this. Some jobs are actually fine with someone (especially someone like sales) actually only working 30 or 35 hour weeks, or even less, as long as their overall annual metrics are good. Many jobs are also not fine with this and want minimum 40 no matter what else. If you’ve only ever worked in one type of job it’s quite surprising to find that the other exists. I trust OP to know their own culture though.

    4. Hlao-roo*

      I’m pretty sure the LW is working fewer hours than whatever “full time” is considered at their company, based on the following:

      I put in an honest effort, and try to limit my time at work to what is reasonable given my salary. …

      I’ve been honest about my salary and time approach (I actually have discussed with my former and new bosses that I don’t think I should be working full-time given my pay, and they didn’t object)

      I think it’s a situation where (using some numbers for examples), if the LW worked full time, they would make 50 sales per week. At any other company, they would be paid $100,000/year for making 50 sales per week. At this company, they are only paid $90,000/year. So the LW works 10% fewer hours per week, only makes 45 sales per week, and so far both the LW and their bosses have been happy with this arrangement.

      Assuming 40 hours for a full-time week and using my example numbers, at any other company, the LW’s salary would work out to an hourly wage of $48.07/hour. If the LW works 40-hour weeks at this company, their hourly wage is $43.27/hour. By only working 36 hours per week, their hourly wage is now $48.07/hour.

      Hourly wage math breakdown here:
      $100,000/year ÷ (40 hours/week * 52 weeks/year) = $100,000/year ÷ 2080 hours/year = $48.07/hour
      $90,000/year ÷ (40 hours/week * 52 weeks/year) = $90,000/year ÷ 2080 hours/year = $43.27/hour
      $90,000/year ÷ (36 hours/week * 52 weeks/year) = $90,000/year ÷ 1872 hours/year = $48.07/hour

    5. AvonLady Barksdale*

      It confuses me too. It sounds like the LW was hired to work from, say, 8-5 but decided that because the pay was so bad, she would work fewer hours. Maybe there’s a metric she’s using but she didn’t share it. Anyway, if it’s worked for her, great. I have just never been in a situation where that ultimately works out well for anyone.

      1. Lee Plum*

        Bless her heart is all I can say. I wonder how much the other sales people make and how many hours per week they work, and whether the pay & hours scale within the company or whether LW is an outlier.

    6. Sneaky Squirrel*

      I’m not sure I’m following the logic but I’m interpreting the situation to be that LW’s not working full time but is working to an arrangement that is understood and has been agreed to by the company.

      My interpretation is that LW has some concern that their boss won’t see the same value in their skill set and may be unaware of or may question the arrangement. Not unreasonable to be concerned about, especially if LW has peers doing similar work full time.

      1. Bathyphysa Conifera*

        I read it as, rather than respond to the low pay by going elsewhere to do the same hours of work for more money, OP worked out a deal where they work fewer hours and still get their assigned work done and old salary. But probably as an understanding with the old manager rather than formalized agreement, so the new management has added unknowns to the equation.

    7. Burn It All Down*

      I don’t understand the issue for LW4. Maybe because I have always worked a different schedule from just about everyone else in my office. I start later (by 2 or more hours) and work later (by the same). I coordinate with the night shift and am available to them for the first hours of their shifts.

    8. A Significant Tree*

      At my last job, I asked for (and got) several schedule modifications. One was working between 32-40 hours (salaried but time card, so I was effectively paid for the hours worked), and another was working a late-shifted schedule. Between the two, it frequently appeared that I arrived late and left early, but I carried a full workload and was considered very reliable/productive.

      I had a rotating slate of direct managers, and for every new one I would meet with them and discuss the schedule thing. I made it clear at first that the schedule was necessary for (reasons), and later when those reasons had lessened, I made it clear that I preferred the current schedule but could go back to a more regular schedule if needed. Every manager agreed to it without issue. (I will note that the last manager didn’t *say* he had a problem, but I ended up on a layoff list where 4 of the 6 people were also women with alternate schedules like mine.)

      All that to say, it sounds like LW4 worked out a similar arrangement where they accept a salary that is comparatively low and work hours commensurate with a good hourly rate. I think they should just have a conversation with the new manager and find out the expectations – does the manager want some sort of early-morning work proof or is the overall work sufficient?

    9. Irish Teacher.*

      I assumed she was salaried and that the company had a culture where people manage their own time and that she figured it was reasonable to work slightly less than a 40 hour week, given that the pay is so low and she could get her work done in less, and that her bosses are OK with that.

    10. The Unspeakable Queen Lisa*

      I used to have a terrible boss. Our company’s core hours were 10-3, so some people worked 7-3, some 10-5, etc. He would come in at 10 and if anybody left before 5, he gave them a hard time. But those people had been in hours before him. LW is worried about that kind of boss.

  22. Names*

    TBH, if I were LW’s boss, I might be having questions about whether she was really keeping hours starting at 7, or just rolling in whenever she wants to and taking advantage of the fact that people won’t notice. Not just because she missed a single call, of course, but because she is acting so evasive and put upon about the whole thing.

    1. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      Wow that’s a really harsh take. We don’t know anything about the hours except that the OP starts at 7 and the boss is online later. And there are plenty of ways the boss could see if the OP wasn’t working at her designated times. IT would be able to tell when she logs into the computer, onto teams, etc. And the OP was not being evasive. And if someone missing a call and then a few minutes later says they are ready makes you question their productivity and if she is actually working, then maybe you should look more at yourself and your manager skills.

      1. Schmuzzin*

        Or I could hire someone who doesn’t see an impromptu phone call as a personal affront.

        2. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

          You’re reading a lot into this. I don’t see anything in the letter that says that she feels like the call was a personal affront. If anything she’s afraid that not picking up right away looks bad.

    2. muffs*

      I don’t think it is a harsh take to ask a question and provide the rationale. I especially appreciate the rationale being included. Being exposed to other perspectives is valuable to me.

    3. Enn Pee*

      I worked with some folks who were on the “earlier” schedule, always talking about how they would be in at 7am and were soooo busy.

      Once I had to get into the office early (7:30am) and saw them doing their morning constitutional as I was walking in. They didn’t get back to their desks until 8am.

      Like you said, it was one of those “the boss isn’t in until 9am so we can do what we want until about 8:30…and then leave at 3pm” situations.

      While that isn’t what’s going on with the letter writer, it’s good to keep in mind that this is where your boss’s mind might go, especially if you are complaining that they called “early.” If you’re working, it’s not too early for you!

    4. Spiderling*

      I don’t think LW’s boss was unreasonable for expecting them to answer the phone, but I also don’t think there was anything wrong with how LW responded. They messaged their boss right away to say they were available, and then took the call – which wouldn’t raise any red flags for me about their working hours or their dedication to the job. They sound put off in the letter, but that doesn’t mean their private feelings about the situation are evident in their interactions with their boss.

  23. Rebpar*

    I’m shocked by the first question. You are working. Your boss calls you. And you ignore it because…your boss didn’t “notify” you first? What? You’re working! Sometimes you have to talk to people at work, like, on the phone. This is the kind of generational difference that I truly don’t understand. When you go to work there are multiple ways people will contact you about…work. Email, Teams, Slack, and…the phone. Just pick up the call and say, “hello.” Not hard.

    2. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

      While I agree with your outcome, it obviously IS hard for the LW to answer the phone.

    3. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      We don’t know how old the OP is! This is not a generational thing!! People are making this out to be a bigger thing than it is. There are loads of places where people will message first. For example, I work at a front desk, I really appreciate if someone asks if I’m available first because I could be working with a student or not even at the desk right that minute because I have to walk someone to another room! My mom works from home and they use teams but they also have a phone system, 85% of her job she is talking with clients. If she is on a phone call it’s not going to reflect on teams. And it would take more time to turn teams status on and off between calls!

    4. Shynosaur*

      My favorite advice of Alison’s is not to attribute individual preferences to generational differences. This is manifestly not generational. There are plenty of people in every age bracket who find it disconcerting to have to answer an unexpected call.

      And frankly, “I don’t find it disconcerting, so stop finding it disconcerting, LW” is something that any number of people could (and admittedly do, lol) respond to almost any letter that gets sent in… it’s pretty unhelpful?

      1. Apex Mountain*

        I know what you mean but it can also be helpful for LWs to see what the average person’s reaction is to something

    5. Sabrina in FL*

      While I don’t attribute this to a generational thing (I’m Gen X and I hate talking on the phone), when you’re on the clock that time is your company’s and if you can pick up the call (not on another call, not meeting with someone, not in the bathroom), in whatever format, you pick up the phone, most especially if it’s your boss.

    6. Spencer Hastings*

      Recently, I was preparing a tax return for “Katherine Jones” and reviewing another tax return for “Kathryn Jenkins” (names changed, obviously). I was in the middle of working on Jenkins when the person who was reviewing my work on Jones called and wanted to talk about something. While I was thinking through that, I was like “wait, that was Jones, right? Or am I thinking of Jenkins?” If I can get a chance to look at Jones for a few minutes before the call, then I can be more confident that I’m actually thinking about the right client, remember everything I need to, etc. That’s the ideal, but of course it’s not always possible.

  24. TrueTalesFromHR*

    I can not understand this newer trend in which people think they need to grant permission for someone to call them by phone or Teams. As others have noted, it was during work hours and it was on a company platform. I fail to see anything wrong with this.

    1. Schmuzzin*

      This thread is making me think that asking about this exact thing (heads up before a call, or go straight to the call?) would be good during interviews, for both sides. Nobody is “wrong” here per se. But honestly, I don’t want to manage someone who wants a heads up request before a call. And a person who wants that probably would not love working for me. It’s just a culture and fit issue.

      1. Saturday Manager*

        I’m encouraging all the young people I know to be diligent about growing their people skills for this reason. This is a differentiator among the people who work for me. The ones who excel at in person and 1:1 direct communication are getting hired and promoted in my organization. There are so many who have decided it is okay to avoid direct contact, and that it is “common courtesy” to feed into telephone anxiety by treating a call like a Major Event are struggling.

  25. Too Old to Say Rizz*

    LW 3, why *wouldn’t* you ask your friend for interview advice? As in: “I’m not asking for secrets or preferential treatment, but what should I know about the people, the employer, and the role?” If she’s part of the decision process she might opt not to answer, or she might have some responsibility for publicizing the position and be happy to engage. But no matter how she’s involved, if at all, you’re allowed to ask. And you might learn something about their needs that nudges you to highlight your relevant experience, approach, interests, etc. during your interview.

    1. Lula*

      Yeah, I was confused too. if you’re applying for a job where someone you know works, it’s extremely normal to get the scoop from that person.

  26. hello*

    To all the “it’s not hard to send a chat and ask if I’m available first” commenters, it’s also not hard to just say, “sorry I don’t have the time to talk right now. Can we do this in 10 minutes or so?”

    The person calling LW1 is their boss and is calling within their work hours. The boss isn’t out of line.

    1. willow*

      The problem is that when I am focusing on a project, I usually have a mental structure I’m balancing. A Teams message is less disruptive for me and gives me time to mentally set the structure aside or get to a stopping point before letting them know when I’m available for a longer chat. I can then pick back up where I am without much effort.

      A call though can cause me to drop the whole mental structure and it takes longer to put it back together again, so once I’ve answered I might as well deal with it since I’ve already lost my train of thought.

    2. Matt*

      But it’s harder for the “callee” than for the caller. The first is in focus on their current task, the latter is already in communication mode.

  27. throwaway for this one*

    I’d love to hear Alison’s thoughts on how to by an empathetic manager when a direct report experiences a meltdown. My office has a zero tolerance policy on any kind of violence. One instance and they individual is terminated. Should managers fight to exempt their autistic teammates from those policies? Ask their teammate for a list of triggers? It feels like a challenging balance between respecting an individual’s privacy and autonomy while also being prepared for a serious situation.

    1. Lee Plum*

      “ Should managers fight to exempt their autistic teammates from those policies?”

      No.

      “Ask their teammate for a list of triggers?”

      That is more reasonable, if the intent is to create an environment that does not trigger the meltdowns. It is not under any circumstances reasonable to expect employees to be subject to violence in the workplace. Not even if the perpetrator is autistic and is having a meltdown.

      The autistic person needs to be able to manage themselves in the same way that anybody with any kind of condition is expected to manage themselves. A diabetic person needs to identify what their blood sugar needs are NB given sufficient breaks to give themselves food or insulin as needed, even if they have to suddenly step away from their job to do so, so they don’t pass out. An autistic person needs two identify when they are feeling overwhelmed and be given breaks to manage their overwhelmed, even if they have to suddenly step away from their job to do so, so they don’t melt down in the presence of others.

      1. Amateur Linguist*

        Agreed. The laws in both the UK and the US stipulate that conduct cannot be accommodated away, and UK law at least states that someone’s accommodations cannot impose unreasonable burdens on colleagues. That is, my rights to accommodation end where others’ health and safety at work (and we include mental health in that H&S resignation) begins. It’s like the Jack v Liz situation over the phobia — his mental health played a large part in damaging her physical health, and that’s not a legit way to treat any employees (who could also be neurodivergent or disabled or have their own struggles).

        People who can’t function at work without angry outbursts need help. And this is from someone so far on the spectrum that I’m somewhere beyond ultraviolet, and for whom getting sacked after a meltdown was the best thing that could happen, because it helped me get the assistance I needed. It took a long time — almost ten years — but I got back on my feet thanks to family support (which was also exhausting for them at times, and I owe them big time for sticking with me) and therapy.

        I know such therapy is hard to come by at times but the problem is not that of the other employees or even the employer.

        2. Lilian Field*

          I am the OP. I appreciate your perspective, but I also feel like it’s helpful to recognize that, for many, effective therapy to manage violence and self-harm doesn’t exist yet. These people–people with treatment-resistant aggression and self-injurious behaviors (SIB)–have the hardest experience of autism of any I know. I hesitate to give relevant details here without a trigger warning. In many cases, autistic catatonia is a factor; in other cases, it’s not clear what the root causes are.
          I know about the circumstances of these people partly because of people I have met in the autism community and also in part because my sister has been a clinician, for 25 years, specializing in working with people who have so-called “severe challenging behaviors.” I don’t want to say more without making myself too potentially identifiable.
          In the U.S., these people are often at risk of homelessness. It is difficult even to find institutional settings in which they can thrive. There are a few specialized centers, often with 1:1 staffing, that specialize in offering this kind of care and intensive inpatient therapy, but waiting lists for these centers are very long.
          These people face an extreme version of the problem I wrote Allison about. Many others have meltdowns that would get them instantly fired but that have also not proven amenable to treatment. If it would be helpful, I can do some research this afternoon or tomorrow and find some statistics from peer-reviewed medical journals about the problems and challenges faced by these people. A quick Google search brings up this article, which provides some general statistics: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9324526/ .
          That said, my question was not really about helping people with meltdowns THAT severe; people who have those experiences really need round-the-clock support. There are lots of other people in the middle: people whose meltdowns have not responded fully to OT, behavioral therapy, or medication, but who have lots of other really valuable skills and really want to be working. In many cases, they could work, and add lots of value to an organization, if they had a clear pathway through seeking accommodation. Lots of the comments here have provided a lot of great suggestions and ideas.

          1. Amateur Linguist*

            Daniel Larson is the ur-example of someone whose struggles were compounded by online trolling and was in need of help, but his uncontrollable outbursts often ended up with him being thrown out of group homes for the safety of others. Now he’s ended up in prison, which, unfortunately, is probably the best place for him — not in the sense of the regime but in the sense of being housed somewhere where his rage can be contained.

    2. I'm Just Here for the Cats!!*

      I think it depends on what they mean by violent. I don’t think they mean violent as in hurting other people but in an extreme or explosive way, not in a physically way. In my (limited) experience meltdowns might include screaming, yelling, hitting themselves, crying.

  28. Apex Mountain*

    In #3, if this is a good friend that already works there, you should 100% ask him to refer your partner and also pump him for as much info as you can to help you prepare for the interview

    If I was hiring and knew you had a connection but didn’t do any of this I would wonder why not

    Ae you under the impression this is against the “rules” somehow? It isn’t!

    1. Salsa Verde*

      I know I had this impression, that reaching out to someone with inside info was “cheating”. It wasn’t until someone was shocked, probably because of your second paragraph, that I did not reach out to them when applying to their team.

      I think this is one of those things that is very commonly understood to people of a certain professional class, whereas those of us who have had less professional experience often hear a lot of derogatory talk about how people above us got their job because they know someone, and how that feels like cheating to those of us who would like to move up from more menial labor into management but don’t feel like they got a chance because someone who the boss knows was hired from outside the company.

      So while it might not seem like it, i think this is one of those things that people who have not been in the professional world very long might not know.

      1. Apex Mountain*

        That could be, though in my experience it works the same in blue collar or service jobs as well. If you know someone that works there you talk to them about the job, ask if they can put in a good word etc

        1. Salsa Verde*

          oh, it absolutely works the same, but I think that is what leads to people thinking that it is “cheating”. They see people being hired from outside and then find out the person is friends with the boss, so it feels like that person “cheated” to get the job.

  29. Someone Else's Boss*

    Personally, I prefer (and appreciate) when anyone (my team, my boss, her boss, etc.) “warns” me before video calling. However, its not unreasonable for them to do so out of the blue. Its not ideal to get into the mindset of work hours being your time. Its the company’s time.

  30. knitting*

    I’m autistic in what is fortunately a quiet office job, doing work that many neurotypicals would find mind-numbing but I find pretty soothing. Meetings are tough—I don’t sit still well without a task, and I know stimming can annoy and distract. My magic solution: KNITTING. I always have a sock going in my purse for meetings. It’s a great, soothing stim—repetitive motion with a soft clicking sensation—it bothers no one, it lets me concentrate on the meeting rather than on holding still, and it produces scripted, predictable interactions with coworkers (“Is that knit or crochet? My cousin does that I think!” “Oh, I can’t stand German short row heels; flap heel all the way!”).

    As an additional bonus, it produces socks.

    (A professor I work with once insisted this wasn’t even very ‘autistic’ behavior, as she sees people knitting through academic conferences all the time. I pointed out that this might not be a particularly random sample …)

    2. Amateur Linguist*

      My boss and one of the maintenance managers had an open and honest conversation over him using his phone in meetings. Both came away with renewed understanding of each others’ positions. I’m not sure I would openly knit in meetings, because I’m generally there to provide input myself, but her being able to acknowledge the needs of the team that differed from her own preferences is the sign of an open and well-trained manager.

    3. A..*

      I do not spend workplace capital on this issue.

      I find knitting to be distracting and unpleasant in the office or at meetings. I prefer meetings to be knitting free.

      But I get that the world does not operate according to my preferences so I say nothing. I just don’t think this is the neutral thing most people think it is.

  31. Sneaky Squirrel*

    LW1 – Neither was in the wrong. There are people who will prefer to call out of the blue and there are people who will prefer a message first. Ultimately, your work is set by the company. Your boss can decide the working norms for your role. Most decent bosses will accommodate reasonable working preferences for their staff. Just make sure your asks are flexible and tied to a work related reason. It’s reasonable to ask your boss to teams message you first especially if your job involves project work that would benefit from uninterrupted focus. It’s less reasonable to suggest to your boss that you will never answer a call without a teams message first if you are generally expected to be available to respond to your colleagues.

    2. Parakeet*

      This is the way. In many workplace cultures in my experience, a boss will be flexible on issues of preference like asking “do you prefer a 1:1 every week or every two weeks?” when you start the job (but if you said “never” or “once every six months” that wouldn’t be considered reasonable). Similarly, in many workplace cultures, a boss will accommodate something like this as long as you’re flexible about it.

      Note, however, that “many workplaces” and “all workplaces” aren’t the same, and always get a sense of what your own workplace’s norms are. A classic situation of YMMV.

  32. What_the_What*

    I really don’t get why LW1 let the call go unanswered. If you are on the clock and working, and had been for almost an hour, then IMHO, you are available for a call, unless, of course you were in the bathroom or something. But you weren’t, you just…watched it go to voicemail? That’s so weird to me. I get calls all day on Teams. Some people IM “Hey got a minute?” but others just call because they can see I’m green and theoretically available.

    1. Coverage Associate*

      I can think of a couple reasons why someone might be seriously working but unable to take a call, but they’re not LW’s situations. One would be a sleeping family member. If I wake up early, I might log into work early, but I might not want to speak on the phone.

      The other is the focus time asked about earlier in the week. If you have blocked off time for concentration, and that’s a respected thing in your workplace…it’s a respected thing.

      But I think in either setting, I wouldn’t set myself as “available” in Teams.

      1. Amateur Linguist*

        If she’s on the clock, though, she should have thought of that issue before taking the job.

  33. GDUB*

    If you message me to tell me you’re going to call me, you’ve interrupted me twice. If you just call me, you’ve interrupted me once. PLEASE JUST CALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  34. mc*

    I personally hate unscheduled phone calls. I find it disruptive to my work, and sometimes people are calling me for information I have to email to them, like a link or file. If they provide a heads up, I can sometimes address their inquiry without even having to hop on the phone! However, I’ve accepted that its Just A Thing that happens a work and it’s near impossible to get away from. I find if I am on a deadline or need to focus on something, I block my calendar for that hour. My coworkers are great at checking my Teams status before calling. I will also leave my camera off for unscheduled calls. If you want cameras on, I appreciate a heads up!

  35. Apex Mountain*

    I don’t really have advice for #2, but I would not want to be exposed to violent outbursts at work so hopefully there’s an accommodation that is doable. Obviously WFH/independent roles would be preferable.

    1. Who Plays Backgammon?*

      thank you. i have had concerns along this line myself, but have felt if i express them, i will be seen as hard-hearted and discriminatory. behaviors at work that cause disruption, unnecessary distraction, or extra work for other people. but you need to be able to count on your teammates.

  36. Who knows*

    #2: Please be careful using the word “violent.” I worry you’re giving people the wrong impression. I’ve never seen a meltdown (by myself or others) that put other people in danger, even if it might look kind of disorienting and scary. Of course a toddler having a “temper tantrum” might seem “violent” in an adult, but it’s still harmless.

    1. TotsPotato*

      Some autistic people responding by hitting themselves in the head, clawing their own self, or hitting their head against a wall. This is violence, even to themselves. I suggest searching more about this on the internet. Some online groups have countless of stories like this.

    2. bel*

      Hi, my dad’s autistic. Have you ever been in a small space like an elevator or car with someone during a meltdown? A car that they were driving?

      While most people aren’t dangerous to themselves or others, meltdowns can be violent occasionally.

  37. delle*

    LW4,

    As a boss, I really like having employees that get there before me and leave before me. Unless your boss has somehow indicated they have a problem with your schedule there’s no reason to think that they do! Any decent manager would address it with you if they had a problem with it.

  38. Darcy Mae*

    Two thoughts on Letter 1:

    1) “He who pays the piper calls the tune”. In other words, if your boss wants to call you on Teams without a warning text/IM, they get to do that because they are your boss and you need to answer that call. Obviously, you get to take bathroom breaks but if you are otherwise logging work time, you pick up your Teams calls from you boss no matter what.

    2) If your boss is even the tiniest bit anti-remote work, and they notice that you never pick up the phone when they call, they are going to think that you are goofing off at home. See #1 above.

    As for others in your organization, “to pick up or not to pick up” is less clear and more organization-norm driven. But for your boss, PICK UP THE PHONE. Really, it won’t kill you!

  39. Art3mis*

    LW1 – I don’t like cold calls from Teams because I don’t have my headset connected. That’s the whole reason. If it was a regular phone it would be different.

  40. Insulindian Phasmid*

    It’s been a long time since I considered that I could request work from home as a medical accomodation for autistic meltdowns. I’m curious if anyone’s done this, how did you frame it to the people involved? I can’t think of a good way to explain why I’d need it that doesn’t totally undermine me as a professional.

    “I need to work from home so that in case my emotions overwhelm me and I start crying or screaming, I don’t completely derail the office environment for everyone else.”

    1. CubeFarmer*

      I’m trying to see both sides of this, and I agree with you that it’s a fine line where someone might think of you as less able to work. On one hand, if you know that XYZ is a trigger and that you’ve tried ABC and it’s been better, but you’re still worried about the following things happening, then that seems reasonable.

      There are probably more people with direct experience with this, but I’m honestly trying hard to imagine how you would do that that without sounding like, “I sometimes get uncontrollably angry and I’m worried about lashing out, so I need to work remotely just in case.”

    2. thelettermegan*

      what if it was something like ‘requesting WFH accommadations as typical office distractions cause intense anxiety and reduce my productivity, as well as possibly being disruptive to my in-office cowokers.’

      Framing things as ‘makes work go faster’ and ’causes work to slow down’ speaks to the core values of capitalism, and doesn’t really require details. When HR asks how disruptive it’ll be, the answer is ‘disruptive enough that WFH is preferable’.

  41. Friends at work*

    LW3-
    I have a friend applying for a job at my org. Our hiring team is very sensitive to appearances of cronyism, so I don’t think it would help her–and might make things awkward–to drop my name in the application/interview process. It would be seen as inappropriate for me to reach out to the hiring manager–especially since we have never really worked together. (I can’t even remember if we had shared college classes.)

    I did advise her to use the “what makes you want to work here” question to say a friend who is a long-term, happy employee who recommended she apply for the role. Our interview structure means they won’t ask for a name, but at least it’s a chance to mention a connection. This may not apply to your partner’s situation but it’s an idea.

    I also think it would be totally appropriate and a good idea to ask for your friend’s read on this matter alone because it could affect them, too. When my friend asked me if she should mention my name in the application, she thought it was because I might get a referral bonus (ha!) so you could always frame it that way.

  42. Head Sheep Counter*

    I hope violence has more than one meaning in reference to LW2. I’m in the camp where no violence at work is ever ever ok. I do not care. There’s no accommodation that makes violence ok.

    MW:
    violence
    noun
    Synonyms of violence
    1
    a: the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy
    b: an instance of violent treatment or procedure
    2: injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : outrage
    3
    a: intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force the violence of the storm
    b: vehement feeling or expression : fervor also : an instance of such action or feeling
    c: a clashing or jarring quality : discordance
    4: undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)

    1. Dahlia*

      I think there are plenty of comments addressing this, and it would be a good idea to read them.

    2. Mimi*

      I think the accommodations they’re asking about would ensure that no coworkers are exposed to dangerous or frightening behavior. LW2 knows it is unreasonable to expect coworkers to put up with potentially being hurt or even just having to witness hitting, screaming, throwing, and other distressing behaviors that can be part of meltdowns for some autistic people. I would go so far as to say that most autistic people would be distressed by this and unable to work in an environment where it occurs, even if they understand better than most that it’s out of the melter-downer’s control. But there are accommodations that could 1) prevent a meltdown from happening (noise-cancelling headphones for example) or 2) provide a private place to calm down so no one else is affected (working from home, an onsite quiet room, etc.) The feasibility of that is going to be dependent on each autistic person’s triggers and thresholds, and by each job’s environment and needs, but it’s not 100% off the table that there are completely WFH jobs without lots of meetings and interruptions, where one independently produce’s one’s work in an environment within their control.

  43. FunkyMunky*

    #1 I don’t answer unexpected phone calls from bosses or otherwise. no message, no answer. that’s my boundary – I message first, always, myself

  44. CubeFarmer*

    LW#1, and maybe readers. I’m a manager who sometimes buzzes my employee to ask either immediate or inconsequential things without emailing first. It’s never seemed to be a big deal for me when the tables are turned (i.e. when my manager has done this to me,) so I never thought twice about it. Sometimes I’ll just pop over to her desk so I can check in and see if there’s anything happening or be a little social.

    Ooops. Do I need to reconsider?

  45. SB2*

    OP4 – are you skipping your lunch? Or do you get paid for it? 8:00 -4pm is 8 hours. 8:30-3:30 is 7.

    Is your question that you’re worried you’re not aligned with company culture or just not aligned with your new boss? The second is mostly fixable, but the former could be a problem because it’s harder to defend. I’m just curious how it works (not in a judgmental way) because at my workplace, you wouldn’t be hitting 40 hours.

    For instance, I’m salaried. The expectation is that my core hours are 9am -3pm, which means I have to be available at those times. How I get to 40 hours for the week is mostly up to me, with agreement from my manager. Even though we’re salaried, we’re not allowed to skip our lunch. You have to take at least 30 minutes.

    But, if you’re not breaking “rules” or company norms, you might just tell your boss that you’re an early bird because you like to have your late afternoons/early evenings free.

  46. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    #2 I recommend applying to jobs that are either advertised as 100% remote or where ALL essential duties could be performed remotely as an accommodation. This is the ideal, it the person can cope with ft wfh and has appropriate skills.

    When applying for in-office or hybrid jobs, I recommend applying only to medium or large companies, because small companies may not be able to provide an individual office as an accommodation and might also not have a room that could be permanently reserved for meltdowns. Of course, if sufficiently small (often <12 employees in the US), they may be exempt from being required to offer accommodations.

    I remember the OP whose office mate had meltdowns and then kept throwing pens etc at her to drive her out of their shared office – it was a small company with no empty rooms readily available, so she was eventually fired iirc.

    1. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Also, have full documentation available from their doctor.
      Many (very reasonable) organisations will first require this before they can act, if the accommodations require more than minor changes to normal working.

    2. Lilian Field*

      Yes, there have been a couple of letters here about people behaving really disruptively at work, from other people, who I thought might have been having meltdowns of one kind or another. One person was working in a library-like setting and would pound her thighs and berate herself right before she had to speak to a group (which was part of her job). This person wasn’t aggressive toward others, and they weren’t actually putting themselves at risk of significant physical harm, but it was still disturbing to witness. Another person would talk to themselves, hum, and swear (I think at themselves). Both situations were completely untenable for their colleagues and office-mates. There was no direct indication in either letter that the person was dealing with unaccommodated autism, but both situations made me wonder: if the person *was* autistic, and if they had received a reprimand, would it have been possible for them to request accommodation? In other words, I wondered what advice those disruptive people would have gotten, if they had been the ones to write Allison. (In the case of the first letter writer, it seemed obvious to me that public speaking was a trigger for some kind of meltdown, autistic or not, and that the person’s job duties either needed to be reconfigured or that the person needed to move on. So much would depend on whether public speaking was a core responsibility of the job or not. But they were not the ones writing in, of course.)

    3. Holly.*

      We’ve got a small prayer/meditation room at work, so if you’ve got time to feel you need space away from everyone, that’s a really useful place to hide out for a bit.

    4. EchoGirl*

      AuDHD person here, I get what you’re saying but I’m hesitant on the idea of using remote work as a blanket accommodation. If the person wants to WFH I’m all for it, but when that’s the only tool in the kit (as opposed to one option among several), it feels like it’s teetering on the edge of suggesting that certain people don’t belong in a workplace. Not everyone — not even every ND person — is a good fit for WFH (hi, it’s me), and some who might be in theory don’t necessarily have an ideal space to work from or the means to get one. This feels like the quintessential example of something that’s been discussed before of the company using WFH to shift a burden they would normally carry to the employee, except even worse than the across-the-board cases we’ve discussed in the past because it targets a specific class of people.

      If a workplace truly lacks the ability to offer in-office accommodations (or the specifics of the person’s condition is such that there’s no realistic way to make it work), then I understand. But if a company could make in-office accommodations but instead just chooses to push anyone who needs them into WFH, that still seems like a form of discrimination. (For comparison, I think we’d all see the problem if a workplace told a wheelchair-using employee to work from home rather than make a building accessible. If there’s a reason that making the building accessible would be overly burdensome then one would understand even if it’s not ideal, but if they could do it and are simply choosing not to and brushing it off by saying the person can work from home, that’s a problem.)

      Now, from a practical standpoint, if the only alternative is not having a job at all, I understand how this may be the route they have to take. But from an employer’s perspective, they should ideally offer WFH as one option along with options for whatever in-office accommodations they have the capacity to offer, not just assume they can shuffle any accommodation-needing employees into WFH and therefore never have to deal with their needs at the office.

      (To be clear, “accommodation” does not and should never mean “other employees have to deal with a screaming coworker in their space”. I’m talking about actual, company-provided accommodations — like a private office — not the “force all the other employees to deal with it and call it accommodation” thing that some companies try to use as an alternative.)

  47. Holly.*

    2. Our office has an area with lower lighting levels, specifically advertised as such.
    We’ve also celebrated Neurodiversity Celebration Week 2026, and offer awareness training (very useful in showing how different ways of working and thinking benefit the team as a whole) and have mental health first aiders, as well as the more traditional physical health first aiders (I’m in Europe). We also have flexible hours, so some people start early/later and there’s a couple of days a week when we can work from home. There’s a lot of possible accommodations. :-)

  48. Mcs*

    LW3, definitely reach out to your friend and just make sure they know your partner is applying. I’ve been in a situation where a former coworker got to the end stages of an application process. I was of course asked what I thought of them. We both have resumes and LinkedIn accounts – it’s no secret that we worked together. The candidate had not reached out to me at all and it did not help my referral for them. They did not get hired.

    Your partner doesn’t have to be asking for a preview of the interview questions, just a heads up and maybe a softball question like “what do you like about working there?”

  49. Coverage Associate*

    Re LW1. At the beginning of the pandemic, when people were unexpectedly working from home, didn’t have childcare, couldn’t get haircuts, etc, it became normal to check before calling, especially for video calls. The pandemic also switched scheduled calls to video calls. I hardly ever have an audio only scheduled call.

    The checking first habit stuck some places and didn’t stick other places.

    Besides the increase in video calls, the increase in scheduled calls meant that people prepared for most calls. 15 years ago, opposing counsel calling me out of the blue often understood that I might not even remember the case name if nothing had happened recently. Calling out of the blue meant I might not be able to really discuss anything but basically take a message. More files were paper too, so even if I had the important things in mind, written details might be in the file in a different room.

    Now files are electronic, so we think we can access them “instantaneously,” but lots of times my boss asks me for a detail on a scheduled call, a call I prepared for, that will take me several minutes to find. The disconnect between the electronic access and the human memory can be awkward. So there are higher expectations for all calls and fewer opportunities to respond to cold calls, which compounds the awkwardness.

    This can be alleviated with reasonable expectations. Just because files are electronic doesn’t mean that I can discuss a case in detail any time I am at my laptop, especially when the caller got to prepare for the call and I didn’t. Just that I had a chance to prepare doesn’t mean I have every detail right in front of me. A lot of people have forgotten these things though.

  50. Talking still has value*

    You don’t get to be mad if your boss calls you during work hours. Regardless of your opinion on its utility, some people prefer to talk over texting or chatting. Some things your boss might need to say should not be put into a chat window. Whatever the case, messaging first is a “courtesy” that has its place – even with my subordinates I usually check if they’re available before calling – but getting annoyed when it doesn’t happen is not reasonable and if you’ve developed your expectations to the point that it feels like an unjustifiable trespass, you probably need to reel that in.

  51. Lisa Simpson*

    I’ll approach the “meltdown” letter from a different angle.

    I worked in a number of dysfunctional work environments. The sorts of ones where people did not get weekends off, had to work long days split into weird hours, come in to work sick because there was no coverage, take abuse and disrespect all day and have a smile on their face while taking it or else, with no regard for any “hard” stuff that may have been going on at home at all.

    Inevitably, EVERYONE cracked at one point. Literally everyone. But the most “violent” we saw was maybe, someone slamming a door or shoving a chair in too hard.

    If someone’s regular reaction to day-to-day overwhelm is beyond that, it is going to be a problem in the workplace.

  52. louvella*

    So it’s not taking everyone else up to 5 minutes to get their bluetooth headphones set up?

    I usually have to remove device and add them back.

  53. Xennial*

    On the #1 issue, I think the crux of the it would be what that Teams call *is*. If it’s a virtual ‘leaning over the cube wall and getting a 3 min sitrep on a job’ then yeah, I don’t think you have a leg to stand on about wanting warning about boss-calls. But if they want something which is more akin to being ‘a meeting’ you message ahead or better, book a slot for it.

    I don’t think OP’s assumed dislike of surprise calls is automatically ‘a young person thing’. I once had a boss who I hated ‘dropping in’ because they were time burglars extraordinaire and I’d usually have to spend a good 10-15 mins afterwards getting ‘back in the zone’.

  54. Regina Philange*

    Re: accomodations. just wanted to share my experience. I have panic attacks that are not necessarily triggered by something at work or something in that moment, they’re just from general anxiety.

    I work in public service so unless you’re on lunch, you’re expected to be in the building.

    I got an accomodation that I’m allowed to go to my car, outside, or otherwise leave the bldg as long as I: tell my manager where I’m going, and use sick time for the 30 minutes or whatever.

    It’s not really much, but it prevents me from getting yelled at for “sleeping in my car and forgetting to punch out for lunch on purpose.”

    And it prevents my coworkers from complaining to my boss that I said no to covering the desk bc I needed to run outside.

    Another “accomodation” I got was that I’m allowed to use sick time to come in an hour or two late if I’m having an anxiety attack in the morning. this seems like, duh, of course you can do that, but I got in trouble for “being late” (even though I was calling and saying I didn’t feel well and I would use sick time time come in a little later), so I got my therapist to write an accomodation letter saying I sometimes need extra time in the morning and I will use my sick time for it. (which I was already doing.) sometimes they just want proof that you’re not, like, abusing the system. Again, it’s not much but it prevents me from getting yelled at or written up.

    Just thought it might be helpful to hear about an experience with this kind of thing.

  55. Anon autistic with violent meltdowns*

    I’m an autistic adult and my meltdowns are usually violent – eg throwing objects, hitting walls, hurting myself, yelling. Dangerous meltdowns can also include what’s called elopement, which is where I try to escape the environment with no consideration of safety, so I may run across traffic or climb out a window.

    ‘Challenging behaviour’ is the euphemism used for these behaviours, and many many higher support needs autistic adults struggle with them.

    They feel awful, are humiliating and scary, and are totally out of my control once they start. They also are one of the reasons why police violence against autistic people is much higher than against allistic people; we can’t stop in the middle of a meltdown to explain its a medical issue.

    Many of us live very isolated lives and often aren’t visible to the wider community because of the need to stay in safe controlled environments.

    I don’t work because I can’t guarantee that one won’t be triggered by an environment that’s out of my control and that I’m not allowed to leave. Getting qualifications is also very difficult even though I could pass exams or do the coursework. I think the only accommodations that would be helpful is working from home, but jobs that allow that usually require qualifications.

  56. Slugcat*

    Re: meltdowns, an attentive boss who knows you well can be a lifesaver. I have never had a meltdown at work, and that is at least in part because the one time I got really close, my boss said, hey, I’ve got this, you go home. It was half an hour from when I would be leaving anyway, I had been running around nonstop all day and there had been a bunch of sudden changes and time-sensitive problems I had been crazily trying to fix in the last 45 minutes, and he caught me in a quick conversation about what was going on and made that decision.

    Later he told me he stepped in because he noticed I had started talking really fast, and “you only do that when you’re really overwhelmed.” Because I’m autistic, I don’t visibly show many other signs of distress in my face or body language and generally seem much calmer than I am. But that was something he noticed about me, so he caught that sign and stepped in. Honestly, it startled the shit out of me to hear him say that, because usually my partner is the only person who can tell I’m about to melt down (apparently my other sign is my neck and chest will get really flushed though my face looks normal?). Not everyone can be as perceptive as him but I’m so grateful he is and cares about that kind of thing.

    Also seconding the prevention, my boss exempts me from a lot of big loud social events without me even asking, because he knows they’ll be extremely overwhelming for me. No one on my team is upset by this because I handle all of the long, tedious government meetings that everyone else hates. Give me a 5 hour long government public hearing to a fundraising party any day! This doesn’t mean I never have to do those kinds of events but it lowers how often it happens. I’m there if it’s necessary for me to be there, and if not I’m probably in some government building listening to a representative make a motion about an incorrectly placed comma in last month’s minutes. My coworkers think they’re the lucky ones, but I genuinely love this stuff because, well, autism.

Comments are closed.