Ask a Manager

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

1. How do I talk to my employee about sleeping in and missing work?

I have a direct report who is not a morning person. We have a hybrid schedule (two full team in-office days, remainder WFH). Our day starts at 8 to accommodate half day Fridays, which she takes. She is always last to arrive to the office, typically around 9:15, blaming traffic despite living 10 minutes from our office . She isn’t communicative/visible on Slack until late morning on WFH days. Our team has a very flexible/be-an-adult vibe, which we all appreciate and factor into planning our days/lives — it’s truly great. The issue is, she will miss meetings or join late (often still wearing her nightguard/retainer), turn in incomplete or hurried work, and has been open about accidentally sleeping in on numerous occasions (when she was “caught”). She will be managing our intern this summer, who is working hourly and thus will need to be “in” during typical work hours. Is it possible to change somebody’s sleep habits?

You’re asking the wrong question! Instead, how clear have you been as her manager that she currently isn’t meeting the requirements of her job and about specifically what needs to change? How much she is or isn’t willing to try to change her sleep habits is something for her to manage; the way she shows up at work is yours. Focus on the latter.

Tell her, as bluntly and clearly as possible, that she needs to arrive on time on in-office days, cannot miss meetings or join late, must be communicative and responsive on Slack at the start of work hours, and cannot turn in incomplete or hurried work (and that last one is a really big deal). This needs to be a serious conversation, where it’s clear that these aren’t suggestions or hopes; they’re requirements. You’re doing her no favor if you downplay that; she needs to understand that this has the potential to jeopardize her job — which it should — so that she takes it seriously.

If she has a sleep issue that makes it impossible for her to meet those expectations, she should raise it and you can figure out what to do at that point, and whether there’s a way to structure her job and her schedule that she’s not turning in rushed or incomplete work. But right now, at this stage, your job is to be clear about what needs to change.

2. A business lunch at an ethically shady restaurant

I work for a large Fortune 500 that has multiple locations in five states. My line’s VP is coming in from out of state to do a visit. The visit itself is very low concern, just a basic “Hey! How are you? How’s life? Are you happy here?” etc. However, she’s taking about a dozen of us to lunch. And here is where I have an issue. Morally, I do not spend any money at this restaurant. I used to, until they supported a person convicted of child sexual assault (multiple victims). The perpetrator was employed by them before, during, and after the trial (he’s a cousin to the owner). They did term any employee under 18 and do not hire anyone under 18. Unfortunately, we do not have a lot of “nice” options open at lunch and this place is just down the road from the office. Would it be wrong of me to bring this up to the VP, essentially stating many of us do not support this restaurant? She’s not from our area and would have no idea about this situation.

Since you said many of your coworkers feel this way too, raise it! You have relevant info that she doesn’t have.

For example: “You have no way of knowing this, but some of us prefer not to eat at X because of their support for a cousin of the owner convicted of really awful crimes against children. Could we go to Y or Z instead?” It’s okay if Y and Z are further away. Or if they’re unrealistically far: “What we usually do if we want somewhere nice is ____ (whatever you usually do in that situation).”

3. Break room etiquette

My office has a little break room in the basement that is honestly pretty depressing. As a result, not many people tend to use it, which I think has skewed how some people use it.

Within the past month, I’ve never shared it with more than one coworker at a time and these coworkers all seem to act like they’re alone. One would loudly talk to their partner on the phone the whole time, then later broke up with them while I was there! Another had a significant other make a surprise visit and they made lovey eyes at each other with me stuck as an awkward third wheel. And currently another is watching videos loudly at the table next to me.

I just started sharing an office so I need to use the break room now and I dread it every day! Am I being overly critical of how they use the room? How do I learn to handle this?

Someone broke up with their partner while you sat there! Amazing.

I don’t think you’re wrong in thinking people should be more considerate of others who are using the space … but I also don’t think it’s unreasonable for someone to take a call in the break room or sit with a visitor there, particularly if there aren’t other logical spaces to do those things. It’s actually more awkward because you’re the only other person there; it there were 20 people in there, those things would be less noticeable.

The person playing loud videos is more out of line. And technically you’d be on solid ground if you wanted to say something like, “Would you be willing to use headphones while you’re watching those? My head is killing me and I came here to try to get a break from noise.”

But it does seem like the culture in your office is for people to use that space for whatever kind of break they want, noise included. Any chance your office would be open to setting up a quiet room for people who want it? That sounds like it would get you more of what you want.

4. Can my younger coworkers read cursive?

Recently, I’ve signed a going-away card for a colleague and I’ve passed a handwritten note to a direct report during a training. I used cursive on both, because that’s what I default to, but now I’m wondering if I should stop using cursive as a default? I really like using it because it’s pretty, but obviously I really like people being able to read what I write, too. The colleague’s a peer, age-wise, but my direct report is a recent college grad. Should I only use it with people my own age? Is there a cut-off where people are going to be more unlikely to be able to read it? I’ve been complimented on my handwriting a lot, so it’s legible if you can read cursive, but I realize that’s a dying skill.

I honestly have no idea. I think cursive is pretty readable even if you can’t write it yourself, as long as it’s neatly written (and messy cursive was never all that readable to anyone anyway). But I’m incredibly old. Let’s toss this out to readers who still have more of the bloom of youth upon them and see what they say. (Also, the idea that we all used to learn basically a second font to write in is pretty fascinating.)

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

1. A conversation about kittens led to a lecture from HR

Yesterday I was called into a meeting with HR where I was reprimanded for an inappropriate sexual comment that I made. I did make the comment, it was absolutely inappropriate, and I am mortified! I apologised to Joan, the coworker who raised it with HR, and I will make sure nothing like that ever comes out of my mouth again.

There was some context for the comment that Joan didn’t share with HR, and neither did I because I was too ashamed to say much. Another coworker, Beth, saw the whole interaction and thinks I should provide the context to HR now, and she has offered to verify what happened. I don’t think I should because it doesn’t unmake the comment, I don’t want to come across as blaming Joan, and I got the impression that HR considers the matter closed.

Here’s the context: it is well-known in the office that my partner and I foster kittens until they’re old enough to be spayed/neutered and adopted. Coworkers sometimes ask about the cats as break room small talk. Yesterday, Beth and I were sitting at the table having lunch and chatting, when Joan walked in to make coffee.

Beth: How many kittens do you have at the moment?
Me: Four little bottle-fed ones
Beth: Oh, so tiny! What have you named them?
Joan: I hate cats.
Me: Oh … we can talk about something else?
Joan: Cats are a menace and kittens should be drowned, not bottle fed.
Beth and me: …
Joan: Cats are disgusting, they walk over every surface to make sure everything is covered in their urine and feces germs. If you live with a cat, you’re basically walking around covered in urine and feces.
Beth and me: …
Joan: And they come and rub their face all over you after they’ve spent the whole day licking their own anuses.
Me: I mean, humans lick other people’s anuses, at least cats mostly lick their own.

Joan walked out of the kitchen and the next thing I know, HR is telling me I can’t make jokes about anal sex in the break room. What Joan said wasn’t okay either, but I wish I’d just continued to sit there in stunned silence. I think I should just mentally file her comments away under Joan being rude, as they’re not HR-worthy. But do you think I should give this context to HR so maybe they don’t think I brought it up out of nowhere? Or just let it go, learn from it, and try to move on?

Well … if we had a time machine, I’d want you to explain it in the initial conversation with HR — not as “so therefore my comment was OK,” but to explain that you didn’t just pop out with a analingus comment out of nowhere (in fact, Joan introduced the concept) and that Joan herself had opened with an alarming non sequitur advocating animal abuse, and if we’re reminding people of what is and isn’t okay to say in an office, perhaps there’s one more topic here that should be addressed.

But now, after the fact … well, I don’t think you have to go back and correct the record. They’ve probably moved on and don’t think it’s a huge deal. But it would also be fine if you wanted to go back and say, “I was too mortified in the moment to share this, but I did want to give you further context so you understand that I didn’t just make a sexual reference out of the blue, which I would not do.”

2. How to politely not compliment weight loss

I saw your answer to “Coworkers want to ask about my weight loss” and wondered from the other side — is it impolite of me to not mention a coworker’s weight change?

I am uncomfortable discussing weight and body size with most people (not just a work thing!) and would rather skip the topic if I notice weight change. But if everyone else is complimentary about it, does it look impolite for me to not mention it?

No, it’s not impolite not to mention someone’s weight loss. There are people who are excited about losing weight and hope people will notice it — but there are also a lot of people who don’t want to talk about it, especially at work, and/or who aren’t happy about the weight change (particularly if it’s from illness or other not-pleasant circumstances), and their right not to feel their bodies are being assessed at work trumps the first group’s pleasure in hearing compliments. Sometimes you might know that a particular person falls in the first group (because you’re close enough to them to know, or they’ve clearly indicated it) and that would change the calculation — although even then, if you prefer not to talk about other people’s bodies, it’s not impolite to opt out!

In general, when in doubt, err on the side of not making people feel like their bodies are being scrutinized at work.

3. Are sleeveless blouses “tank tops”?

Our company recently sent an email “reiterating” our dress code (business casual), scare quotes on account of they slipped in some language that definitely was not there before: specifically, a ban on tank tops. In the “allowed” column, for shirts, it only mentions “short and long sleeved shirts/blouses.” I’m wondering if, as communicated, you would consider sleeveless blouses to be in compliance, or if I would be better off steering clear of anything that shows my shoulders.

I’ve attached an example of what I mean by sleeveless blouse. I have enough shirts like this in my rotation that I honestly am wondering if I’m what triggered this email, though in my opinion this cut is perfectly professional!?

Nah, those are sleeveless blouses. Tank tops have straps.

If you want to be sure, you can always ask them to clarify that; send a photo like the one you sent me. But sleeveless blouses are a common businesswear item, and they’re typically considered much more professional than tank tops, which read more casual. (Whether or not this makes sense is a different question, but lots of fashion rules have evolved in ways that don’t make sense. See also: skirts vs. shorts.)

4. Does my employer need to raise my salary if I’m not using their health insurance?

I work for a super small nonprofit that only started offering health insurance as a benefit a few years ago, where my employer covers half my health insurance as a benefit and the other half is taken out of my salary pre-tax. My husband is getting a new job with great benefits that will allow me to also be covered for way less than I’m currently paying, so we plan to switch as soon as he’s eligible.

My husband believes that, once we switch, my employer should automatically increase my salary to include the half of the health insurance they were paying, since that won’t be an expense for them anymore. While I think that would be nice, I don’t believe they have any legal obligation to do so, and am worried I would risk some political capital there if I brought it up. Are they under a legal obligation to increase my salary the amount they were paying for my health insurance?

No, they have no legal obligation to do that. Some employers have a policy of offering it anyway, but a lot don’t. You can ask though!

5. Handling multiple company name changes on a resume

I’ve been working at the same company since getting my degree six years ago, and I’m thinking it’s time to move on. However, the company has undergone two name changes since I was hired, and I’m not sure how to handle that on my resume. For example, when I was hired, the company was called Llama Shearing Systems. Then a few years ago we were bought by a larger company, Big Wool, and became Big Wool Llama Division. Now our parent company is rebranding and changing its name to Wool International, making where I’m working Wool International Llamas.

Do I list each name individually with the dates I worked during those particular name changes? Or do I write something like “Wool International Llamas (formerly Big Wool Llama Division, formerly Llama Shearing Systems)”?

Also, since this was my first job out of college, all of my references will likely be managers from various times during my employment at this company. Do I need to specify what name my company had at the time my reference was managing me?

You don’t need to list each name individually with the dates you worked under that name. Just use one name heading for the company and make it this:

Wool International Llamas (formerly Big Wool Llama Division and Llama Shearing Systems)

You also don’t need to specify which name the company had at the time your references were managing you, although you can. If a manager only managed you under Big Wool Llama Division, then list their affiliation as Big Wool Llama Division. But if they managed you through numerous name changes, just list the most recent name.

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

1. Employee said awful things about a coworker … while on the phone with them

I’m writing about an incident that happened to my coworker, “Jane.” Jane was out of town over the weekend and her corporate lodging card wouldn’t work. She called an admin, “Elvira,” for assistance. Elvira does not like Jane. When Jane explained her situation and asked for help, Elvira turned to her boyfriend (another coworker) and said some awful things about Jane. Elvira either failed to mute her phone or didn’t think she could be overheard; unfortunately, Jane heard everything. It started with “Oh my God, it’s Jane f***ing Smith. I can’t f***ing stand her,” and it went downhill from there. Apparently Elvira got very worked up, to the point that her boyfriend could be heard telling her to calm down.

(Side note: Jane indicated that, based on Elvira’s slurred speech, she might have been drunk during the call. That could explain why she became so worked up. In Elvira’s defense, it was the weekend and she was not on call, so whatever she does on her own time is her business.)

In the end, Elvira did end up assisting Jane, but Jane’s feelings were obviously hurt. Jane is not confrontational and is not likely to tell anyone in management about the incident, especially because Elvira and the HR manager are close friends outside of work.

I am a manager, but not to any of the parties involved. Do I have an obligation to speak up about Elvira’s behavior? I am privy to the fact that Elvira is currently being coached (by her friend, the HR manager) to be less abrasive in the workplace. But the information from Jane is just secondhand. And I worry that my own distaste for Elvira is clouding my judgment. What is the right thing to do?

As a manager, even though you’re not Jane’s manager, you have some obligation to speak up if you’re aware of an employee being abusive to/about a colleague while on the phone with them. This is also an employee who’s already known to be problematic in the way she talks to people. It’s hard to argue that you should keep that to yourself; being a manager gives you a higher degree of obligation to escalate things that are obvious problems for your team/the organization. If Jane strongly doesn’t want you to, that complicates things — but you could point out that the issue being reported is Elvira; Jane just happened to be a bystander, and if Elvira is willing to treat Jane that way, who else might she be targeting abuse toward, including people with less power/influence than Jane and who might not tell anyone about it?

(Also someone, presumably not you, needs to talk to the HR manager about how her close out-of-work friendship with Elvira is a conflict of interest. At a minimum, it’s going to give people pause about reporting concerns with Elvira.)

2. Interviewing at a company where the executive team is only white men

I (a woman) am currently interviewing for a new position. I do have a fairly stable position that I am currently in, so it’s not super urgent, but I’m pretty miserable and would prefer to move on sooner rather than later. Last week I received an invite to interview for a company that at first sounded like a dream. They use a new up-and-coming technology that I’m passionate about, and they use it in a way that both makes the world a better place and makes them a lot of money.

While researching the company in preparation for my interview, I found that every single member of their executive team and board is a white man. The position I am interviewing for is a senior position and a step down from where I am now, so seeing a valid path for growth is important to me if I’m going to take the position. My gut feel is that I would very quickly hit the glass ceiling at a company that has no diversity on their executive team, and isn’t even ashamed to show that on their website for the world to see. Is there any possible explanation for this that is not what it looks like? Is there any way to have the conversation with them without them feeling like I’m accusing them of something? Is it even worth attempting to have a conversation? I’m sure their response is not going to be, “You know what, we never looked at it that way, you’re right, we’re going to fix that!”

No, it’s what it looks like. It’s not an accident.

That doesn’t mean that they’re flagrant racist and sexists who twirl their mustaches while plotting to maintain their grip on power. It does mean that something’s up in their decision-making, culture, and worldview that has somehow led to only white men having a voice at the top of their organization. Will that change at some point? Maybe. Will it be a frustrating path for the first woman or non-white person who makes inroads into their top leadership? Probably. Some people are up for doing that, and others are not.

But you can definitely go to the interview and find out more. It’s very reasonable to say, “I noticed your executive team is all white men. Can you tell me about what the company is doing to bring other voices into leadership and to create paths for advancement for women and people of color?” If they bristle at that or just give you empty corporate pablum, that will tell you a lot.

3. Is this too many interviews?

I’m currently hiring for an entry-level role at a nonprofit. We’ve had issues before where entry-level candidates think they will be doing substantive policy research with a touch of project and stakeholder management, when actually it is the other way around. My team has spoken to HR about how we are advertising the position (but that is a whole other issue).

My team has organized the following interview process:
1. Screener call with HR from a list of 10 candidates
2. 45-minute call with hiring manager (me) — short list of six candidates
3. 30-minute written assessment. We make it clear that they should spend no longer than 30 minutes on this. Expected to send to 4 candidates
4. 30-minute call with another member of the team — narrowing to 2-3 candidates
5. 30-minute call with executive director (1-2 candidates)
6. Offer

HR wants to skip steps 3 and 4 entirely, saying it’s too much for an entry-level position. However, our executive director does not have the time to speak to more than 1-2 people as anything more than a final confirmation before we make the offer. We’ve struggled with retention in part because I think the interview process has been rushed and not allowed sufficient time for the candidate to get to know the team and the role, particularly before meeting our (wonderful) but at times intense executive director.

Am I off-base? This is my first time leading a recruitment process and I want to be respectful of people’s time and attention.

If these are all separate steps (as opposed to several of them occurring in the same appointment), and I’m guessing they are since you’re narrowing down the field at each stage, this is too much for an entry-level position. That’s not to say you shouldn’t be rigorous in entry-level hiring; you should be. But this is too many separate steps.

Don’t get rid of the written exercise though! At least, not if it gives you a direct look into how candidates actually perform. That’s often more valuable than an interview is. I’d get rid of steps 4 and 5, or at least combine them into one step (so you schedule a one-hour meeting and they spend the first half with a team member and the second half with your ED). I’m curious how much value you and candidates get from those last meetings though, and if you’re looking to pare it down, that’s the obvious place to cut.

If you’re struggling with retention, I’d look at how you’re assessing candidates and how you’re communicating the job and culture to them. That’s not likely a “need to add interviews to the process” problem; it’s a problem with how you’re using the time you have with people in the early steps on this list. (Or it’s a problem with the position itself, the salary, or the wider organization.)

4. Company asks about my financial goals for the upcoming year

I work for a small professional services company (~25 people), and overall I love my job. I’m a higher-level individual contributor, and have been a fantastic performer in my 10-year tenure with the company. Our annual review process is quite detailed and time-consuming, but is taken very seriously by managers, which I appreciate – but there is one question on our self-reflection form that always stumps me. The form asks, “What are your financial goals for the upcoming year?”

I think it is generally understood that this question is meant to give associates a space to ask for a raise, or otherwise negotiate compensation, if they choose to. (After all, my personal financial goals such as “pay off a credit card” or “save for a down payment on a house” are not really any of my boss’s business.)

While I appreciate the sentiment behind this question, I never know what to say in years where I am not asking for a merit-based raise or promotion. In the past I’ve written something along the lines of, “I am happy with my current level of responsibility and financial compensation.” But in truth, I do expect the standard 2-3% cost-of-living raise (and it’s always been given, even though I haven’t asked for it explicitly). Is this a common question to ask in end-of-year reviews? If so, what is a professional way to answer?

It’s a badly worded question because it does sound like they’re asking about your financial goals outside of work, even though you know they’re not.

But since they’re raising the question, why not ask for more money every year? You say you do expect it each year (and it’s not unreasonable to expect your salary to go up each year — at a minimum to keep up with inflation), so let’s be explicit about it. And don’t limit yourself by citing a “2-3% cost-of-living raise.” Say you’d like to see your salary increase “commensurate with my increased contributions, as well as the cost of living.” They’re asking! See what happens.

5. Do employment laws not apply to indigenous tribal employers?

A friend works for an indigenous nonprofit in our state, and made a complaint to HR about harassment they were receiving from coworkers. HR is now retaliating, which I understand to be illegal. But when they contacted an employment lawyer, they were told that none of the usual HR rules apply to indigenous organizations. Complicating matters is that this nonprofit receives federal funding. They have spoken to several lawyers and have heard the same thing each time, but I find it impossible to believe that HR just ceases to exist when an organization serves indigenous populations, particularly when they’re federally funded. Is this true, or have they just spoken to lousy lawyers?

I’m guessing this is a tribal employer. Most federal employment laws, including Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (the federal anti-discrimination statute), don’t apply to tribal employers, even if they receive federal funds. (This is because the tribes are considered sovereign nations.) Someone working for a tribal organization won’t have recourse in state or federal courts; they’d need to seek redress from the tribal council (and likely would need a tribal law attorney).