source stringlengths 620 29.3k | target stringlengths 12 1.24k |
|---|---|
Potential job offer and dealing with current employer I have been contacted by a potential employer with a role that looks very suited to my background. I am the CTO at my current role. The CEO is a good friend of many years standing, and we have been involved with this business for almost 20 years. However,for various reasons, I am receptive to this possibility. I have been through several rounds of technical and other interviews via Skype, and now will be required to take a couple of days to go for a series of interviews in person. As the role is in another country, there is some travel involved. So at this stage, I will either need to be vague (i.e. lie) about what this leave is for, or discuss this with the CEO. I live in a country where it is reasonably difficult to be dismissed without fairly extensive workplace process, so I am not overly concerned about the security of my role. I am somewhat concerned about how this will affect my relationship with the CEO generally, and the most professional way to handle this. What is the best course of action? <Q> Nobody other you can judge the value of the personal relationship you share with the CEO. <S> 20 years is a long time to be associated with someone, at which point many personal and professional boundaries can blur. <S> If you value the relation at a personal level , I would suggest to spend some time reflecting on your motivations and your CEO's plausible reactions here, to avoid souring the relation. <S> First, your motivation: <S> Are you looking out because of any work related problems? <S> If yes, have you discussed them with the CEO? <S> Is there even a shred of it? <S> Is your motivation for interviewing that this is too good an opportunity to resist? <S> What if another one came your way that offered same terms? <S> If you fail at converting this one, will you continue searching for other opportunities ? <S> Do you have any other motivations - like better growing up environment for kids <S> etc? <S> Would you want to come back to the organization after some amount of time? <S> Next, your CEO's reactions: <S> Is the CEO the rational type, or will he flip out? <S> Will he consider it a betrayal if you moved out without giving him any clue? <S> Is there enough transition time available for the CEO if you decide to leave? <S> Based on these, and how much you value the relationship with the CEO (completely professional to workplace friends to best buddies), you should decide the quantum of hints/actions you need to take. <S> If the CEO will flip out or the relationship is completely professional, this will be 0 hints/actions. <S> You just inform travelling outstation with limited connectivity. <S> If the transition time is low but you value the relationship, you can take some actions like training an replacement from amongst your subordinates etc <S> But if the relationship is one of best buddies, and the CEO can rationally process their emotions, I would suggest to have an open conversation with the CEO about why you are interested in the opportunity, and what would happen in cases when you fail and when you succeed. <A> The standard practice is not to discuss with the current employer without a solid offer. <S> What happens if your interview doesn't go good and they don't want to offer a job? <S> The downside is that you will effectively ruin the relationship with the current employer. <S> They might put you as risk and might withold salary increments and possibly looking for reasons to let go. <S> Take a leave saying that its for personal reasons you don't want to discuss. <S> It wouldn't be lying. <S> If you are looking to be reachable over phone, activate a roaming pack or similar, even if it is bit expensive. <A> Unless this new business is a direct competitor of your current business, I see no reason to be exceptionally secretive with the CEO. <S> Twenty years is the better part of an entire career, and being a CTO is so far up the ladder that you may not ever have an opportunity like what you're getting. <S> Be honest. <S> Twenty years also sounds a lot like "I've grown a lot, <S> my kids are grown, spouse and I are thinking about changing our entire lives as we look towards retirement. <S> " You are friends with the CEO, you should be able to be open and honest about this as well. <S> Your current employer will need to perform an executive search for your replacement, I'd start looking at the list of CTO candidates you know, or senior-level leaders in the business who you can recommend to replace you. <S> Go to the CEO with that information, as well as your intention to explore other opportunities. <S> Basically, openness, honesty, handling this in a responsible manner, should all work for you.
| If you are expecting a better salary or any other arrangements, its better to discuss with current employer first before searching for new job.
|
Can I ask for a company car for 1 week from my work when they are sending me to a different site So I work at Location A in the UK and have done for 2 years, it is about 10 miles from home so each week my commute is roughly 100 miles. I have been told for 1 week I need to go and work at a different site at Location B which is 40 miles from my home so the commute would be around 400 miles. Can I ask my company for a company car for 1 week so that I am not adding extra wear and tear to my vehicle and adding extra mileage? Can I ask my company to reimburse the fuel costs for the extra 300 miles I will be travelling as well? Location B is another company which is unrelated to my company. During this week my company at Location A will still continue to pay my salary with no input from the company at Location B. My contract says that I will be based at Location A most of the time but it may be required for me to travel to other locations as part of my job. I don't have an issue with going to Location B but I'd would rather not have to use my vehicle for it. <Q> It's not practical to ask for a company car for a week. <S> The distance could, depending on travel time, be considered beyond what might be expected as reasonable. <S> For example, a 40-mile drive from say St Albans to Reading, that's a lot of heavy traffic and very busy roads and would easily take 90 minutes or more each way, more if there was a problem en route. <S> That's 3 hours added onto your day which could be considered unreasonable. <S> You should either: <S> Stay in a local hotel during the week and the company pays for it. <S> Drive your own car, but claim mileage on your expenses of up to 45p per mile for each trip - under HMRC guidelines (see here) , as the travel is to a temporary workplace you are allowed to claim expenses for it <S> (note this would work out at around £360 for the week in expenses, not including sustenance (ie lunch etc) which you would also qualify for); <S> If you are there to support a customer (as could be the case here), then the customer should be billed for any expenses you incur, by your employer. <S> Edit: <S> Need to add the excellent comment by Smock which I meant to include and forgot: If using your own car, check that your car insurance covers you commuting to a place of work that is not your primary place of work. <S> (It may be classed as business use). <S> If it doesn't cover you or is prohibitively expensive to add this to your policy, then your workplace will definitely need to sort out an alternative option as listed above. <S> Best option is talk to your manager about it. <A> You forgot to mention your country, so I assume it is the U.K. <S> Your company should reimburse your travelling cost which is 45p per mile <S> driven, tax free. <A> In this scenario in the UK it would be common for your employer to provide you with a rental car (either they have an account with a rental company or you pay and claim back through expenses). <S> They may offer to reimburse at 45p/mile <S> providing you have business insurance (commuting to another a place of work other than your usual fixed location may require you to have business level insurance and your employer may request a copy of your insurance certificate before paying.)
| Request that your employer provides you with a Hire Car for the week, and you claim back fuel used as an expense; Request use of the company pool car for the week, if they have one;
|
(How long) Should I indulge my new co-workers? I started in a new position, in a new company last week, after 5 years in a similar position in an other company. There are two other guys, both twice my age, doing the same job, and a manager in a remote location. My job is a new addition to the team, it has been just the two other guys for years Moreover, there is an intern, who arrived the same day I did. The problem is that my co-workers behave as if they were my superiors, asking me to allow them to check some documents before I send them (for example, the form to ask for a second monitor...). For now, I have been indulging them, because I don't want to start on the wrong foot. However, it is really starting to get on my nerves, and I would like your opinion on how to navigate this. <Q> It's not uncommon in some workplace cultures and systems, for there to be unofficial rungs on the ladder. <S> In addition, it is not uncommon for existing employees to give directions to new employees. <S> You have been there a single week. <S> You're the new guy. <S> In addition, you need to make sure you're not mistaking helpful advice for direction. <S> You also have a manager who is not colocated. <S> Where as usually the manager may assist you in getting settled, they may have delegated that over. <S> I do not subscribe to the notion that this is one of those things you need to "stamp out" in the first week. <S> Nor do I think you should quit your job over something so trivial. <A> Should I indulge my new co-workers? <S> In this scenario, it is definitely time to stop indulging them . <S> The longer you do this <S> the harder it will be to break them of the habit. <S> One thing to consider <S> : Are you certain they are not following your manager's instructions? <S> After you verify that point, simply start saying " I get my tasks from our manager ". <S> In short, be helpful, be courteous as you don't want your coworkers to dislike you, but not subservient . <A> Seniority is a big thing in some of the cultures. <S> Seniority can be determined by multiple criteria: years in the field, at the company or physical age. <S> The more complex the system the longer it takes to get used to even a little. <S> A week is a short time in a company that has had multiple mergers and the intertwined systems would require their own subject in a college to make the new people useful even in the first months. <S> This feeds also the culture of seniority to be about years in the company. <S> So basically it boils down to: <S> Are you just used to different? <S> For me it would seem so: they are twice your age having worked there way longer <S> and it has been only a week <S> and you are already questioning things. <S> And for example, we consider validation quite highly because you have the power to tell them to redo their work and it is, therefore, the work of the manager, or a really senior people. <A> You may be experienced and highly skilled in the general area, but there's a lot you don't know about your new company, where they keep things, how they like things done, and the office politics. <S> It's easy to make a mistake if you just assume that everything should be done like it was in your previous job. <S> It may take a few months before you know enough to work without needing to ask about the things you know you don't know - and a few more until you stop being tripped up by things you don't know you don't know. <S> Even after a year or two, there will be areas of 'ancient knowledge' that the old guys handle because it's hardly ever needed. <S> One week into a job, there's a huge amount of company specific stuff that you won't know. <S> Think of their offers to check your work as offers to help you, rather than to interfere with your work. <S> This is especially true of stuff like requests for monitors and so forth; your co-workers know how to write those requests so they get approved. <S> Once for easy things, maybe a few times for more important stuff. <S> For others, company policy may be that work is always reviewed. <A> Dev with management minor here. <S> The problem is that my co-workers behave as if they were my superiors, asking me to allow them to check some documents before I send them (for example, the form to ask for a second monitor...). <S> This is a time when they are possibly introducing forms and procedures of the company to you, which is a good idea. <S> That is something you need to learn. <S> But watch for a pattern of behavior. <S> Later your training should get more technical and focus more on the tasks you should be doing. <S> They will possibly be very easy tasks, ask that might be the only thing they have for you. <S> Don't assume things before you know the whole picture. <S> In some cases training for the new guy can be slow. <S> If you want, you can talk (or email) <S> your manager to get a general timetable of your training. <S> Be aware the manager may not have an official time table for that yet, especially if it's a small company. <S> In the beginning, for my current job, my manager just handed me jobs that were short and easy, just to get more familiar with the software we use. <S> I also started during the company slow time <S> so there were sometimes several days when I had nothing to do, which I used to research tools, and designed processes, to help the department.
| If the most egregious thing you can find is them saying you should validate a form before you send it, maybe you should wait to see if there is a pattern of behaviour. Before you decide to indeed get off on the wrong foot, find out what your expectations are from your manager. For some things, I'd expect them to stop checking your work after you've proved that you can do it.
|
We suspect colleague is stealing company code - what do we do? Context I work at a mid-sized company, where everything is proprietary. As with all software companies we use distributed version control, meaning all employees have all the code on their computer at any time. Recently the team lead for our mobile product hired a poorly performing junior dev. Eventually this team 'lead' has left the company, let's call it mutually. Theft Today the junior he hired was overheard saying he figured how to do something after he sent github links to someone - we (his colleagues, not managers) assumed he was applying for other jobs since the lead who was protecting him had left. Out of interest one of us looked at his public github profile and we discovered he has released two libraries which are helper classes from our project (which I wrote and the company owns). They even aren't his work at all. Equally worrying is the contributions for his page show a lot of heavy committing in private repos at the same time he stole the helper classes - first when he was first given access to our company code and again since his friend/lead was let go. What next? We are all sure he is stealing all of the company code now that he is applying elsewhere. We've all had conflicts with him in the past but have not been able to prove anything as he is very sly. What should we do? (If anything). How should we bring this up to company management? What proof we we need? Is there a way for us to prove when a local repo is pushed to a new remote, if he did it that way? <Q> What should we do? <S> Since it appears that you can back up you claim, take all the evidence you collected to your direct manager and let them deal with it. <S> In short, report it to the appropriate officials in your organization and then move on. <S> Update : <S> As pointed out in the comments, other officials (government) may become involved, but let your company's management team deal with that. <A> Despite your best intentions, you have exposed damaging information about your employer. <S> It takes about 30 seconds to determine who you work for. <S> By posting this information on a public forum without adequately protecting your own (or your employers) identity, you have potentially opened up yourself and your employer to serious consequences. <S> Not only does it expose a potential breach of your product(s) <S> it shows an amazing lack of awareness of information security and the proper response to a breach. <S> Your immediate actions should be: Print this page to PDF for documentation. <S> Delete this post. <S> Contact your manager and security department. <S> Inform them of the code breach and your post. <S> Do not publicly discuss the incident or this post without written permission from your employer. <A> First off, Mr. Positive has already succinctly answered your question. <S> I’m compelled to add a separate answer mainly because a comment alone doesn’t underscore the issue here. <S> If you do not report this, you are missing the entire point of what Information Security is and your company is an InfoSec company! <S> As a part of the development team, you are expected to be more of an expert than the graphic designers and accountants. <S> And if your company has anything close to the rules that any company should have, much less a mid-sized InfoSec, even the non-technical staff are supposed to report things that look less suspicious than what you’ve laid out. <S> As to how to report, you indicated “We are all sure he is stealing all of the company code”. <S> I would hope you could get the backing of some of whoever constitutes “we.” <S> If you're concerned about how it might come across, you could try to downplay a bit with terminology like, “it seems possible” vs. <S> “there’s no question.” <S> But what you've described doesn't sound like you should have to worry about that. <S> Though it’s a hard situation, this could even be good for you. <S> If the direct manager’s manager is going to think anything but positively of you for raising such a security concern, he has no business being in a company that provides InfoSec tools, and it’s a very good indicator you should look for better management. <S> I’d also add that if you have an InfoSec department, they may be worth considering as a different or additional resource to whom to report this activity. <A> Is the git account managed on your company's servers or are you a private repo on a public profile? <S> The reason I ask this is because at my previous company we all had public git accounts that held private repos. <S> Until my company got their github enterprise and managed the accounts and repo access from within. <S> Basically it removed the need to maintain a public github account and simply used a internal enterprise account that is managed by a admin. <S> Many of our public git profiles had helper classes and projects that are available internally but not publically. <S> Yet because they pushed their changes to their public, it is. <S> I also forked a lot of people's internal project. <S> One comes to mind is a VIM profile that my coworker had on his profile. <S> I'd fork it, modify it for my local settings, and pushed the commit upwards but never PR it to his main repo since it wouldn't make sense. <S> I also copied a lot of API callers that I modified for different projects that required RESTful APIs. <S> So there can be a lot of reasons outside of malicious reasons. <S> I would first establish if his public account has anything that is absolutely sensitive. <S> Don't assume malice where it can be explained by simple ignorance.
| Report this and do it now (or as soon as you can reasonably pull the information together). Depending on your companies structure, you may optionally wish to copy an HR person as well. If your company has a security officer, that would be your best option.
|
How do I effectively conduct interviews for adults with special needs? Recently when the company I work for released an advertisement for a software engineer, we had an applicant indicate that he was on the spectrum (autism) and would require a safe space for participating in the interview. Since its a very small company (No HR (receptionist doubles up)) we were not prepared for this and had to put on hold the recruitment process as we are not fully aware of what we can do to provide a safe space for an interview. In all honesty - its a usual software company with no elements of danger. We note that the spectrum is a wide word. What can we do to effectively conduct interviews for adults with special needs ? Edit : We did not speak with the candidate as we are hoping we will be able to find a resource which can broadly be applicable for most candidates. Once we know we are able to cater to special needs, the next step would be to ask for individual requirements. <Q> If it's a long interview, I'd suggest scheduling a short break after every hour or so. <S> (A good idea in general, honestly.) <S> The lack of background noise is because autism can include auditory processing issues with speech, as well as stress caused by loud or confusing auditory environments. <S> Limiting the number of people helps with social stress. <S> Expect to talk at some point about accommodations, including work from home options. <A> First things first, if it weren't for ADD/ADHD and people at various positions on the Autism spectrum, there'd be a lot fewer software engineers. <S> Asperger's is "on the spectrum" and I've worked with a significant number of developers with Asperger's, as well as many with ADD/ADHD. <S> I'm not convinced that the whole "flow state" thing, along with "leave me alone, I'm coding" isn't shorthand for "I have ADD" or "I have Asperger's". <S> The fact that your candidate isn't too cognitively impaired, based on their career field, suggests they are towards the "High Functioning Autism" end of the spectrum. <S> I'd stick with the standard "small format interview" in a private room with just one or two interviewers. <S> I'd definitely avoid the "group interview" or any interview format which is closer to an oral thesis defense where interviewers are free to ask a wide range of questions. <S> The goal of an interview is always to ensure there is a "fit" between the employee and the employer. <S> This is no different in that regard, it's merely different in the sense of what is required for that fit. <A> As someone who is on the spectrum myself, it can be very difficult to pin down <S> exactly what is needed, as autism can mean anything from a fully functioning adult with a few eccentricities to a 40 year old who will always need full-time care. <S> Generally speaking, a quiet room that's free from distractions will work well for most autistic people. <S> Beyond that, just ask. <S> They (or their carer, if they have one) will be able to tell you about any specifics. <S> Sometimes these specifics can feel...nonsensical. <S> It's usually more about mental and emotional comfort that thing represents than anything intrinsic to the thing itself.
| Their request for a safe space also suggests that they have a high enough level of self-awareness as to what works for them, that you're not going to have the interview go very badly. Once you get that set of requirements you and others can look at your working environment to determine if you can make "reasonable accommodations". I would let them tell you what they require. While talking to the person would be recommended, my guess would be a room with very little background noise, (both equipment and chatter) and try to keep the number of people in the room to, say, five or less.
|
Leaving a job that I just took based on false promise of a raise. What do I tell future interviewers? I was approached to fill a position in an organisation, and during salary negotiations, I was told that they wouldn't budge on the salary because employees were expected to get a pay raise in April the following, and if you were to add up the bonus, the annual package would be sufficient. Given this, I took up the job, but when I started, HR told me that I wouldn't actually be eligible for the salary raise NOR the bonus till April 2021. Which would meant that I took a severe pay cut taking up this job. And the organisation + job isn't turning out like what was mentioned in the interviews/job description at all. People are stubborn and are not willing to change what I think are serious breaches in governance (e.g. finance and procurement lumped together). It's only been 2 weeks, but I feel that because I was misled into the job, it would only be right for me to leave. To what extent should I tell my future job interviewers about my reason for leaving? <Q> It's only been 2 weeks... <S> I'd argue that you don't have to mention this job at all. <S> If for any reason you can't omit a job from your work history no matter how short (locale, the type of job you're applying for, etc.) <S> , you can be honest without going into details: <S> I'm leaving my current job because the position changed significantly after I started. <S> This is true: you took the job because you were expecting a raise and now that raise isn't going to happen. <S> But this wording allows you to avoid saying it was about compensation if that's what you're concerned about. <S> This is a common enough situation that I think some employers will leave it at that. <S> However, it's been pointed out in the comments that others will worry that what you consider significant might be normal to them. <S> So if you're asked to elaborate, you'll need to say that the significant change was to your compensation. <S> Borgh and Bilkokuya have already suggested alternate scripts in the comments. <A> I have been in a similar situation quite a few years ago. <S> I lasted 4 months with company X before I reached tipping point and called short on my probation. <S> A few years later I was looking to switch jobs again (not out of choice this time) and the recruitment agent that was contracted by company Y insisted that my 4 month tenure with X looked bad on my CV and removed it without my knowledge. <S> I got the job (still there today) <S> so no harm, no foul. <S> My take is; employment is a two-way street. <S> You get something out of it and the boss makes money out of your skills. <S> You should be able to defend a situation like this in an interview with the simple words <S> "It didn't work out for me" Elaborate on why if asked. <S> But unless your CV is full of short tenures, I don't think you have anything to worry about. <S> If anything it shows your prospective employer that you want something out this employment. <S> And that you're talking to them today in that interview <S> means that you figured they have something to offer that sets them apart from other employers. <A> The other answers give good advice on how to present the 2 weeks at this company in future interviews. <S> I won't repeat what they say. <S> Instead let's go to the general lesson from this: <S> you weren't cheated , what actually happened was you failed to negotiate the deal you wanted. <S> Let's look at the known facts here <S> I was told that they wouldn't budge on the salary <S> I took a severe pay cut taking up this job <S> And now the hypotheticals & conditionals employees were expected to get a pay raise in April if you were to add up the bonus, the annual package would be sufficient Notice how the second list is everything you want, and the first list is everything you don't. <S> You were more naive than misled here. <S> The deal was what it was. <S> The things you think you were promised weren't really promises, because they weren't written into the contract with specific dates and amounts. <S> Next time, if you have minimum requirements to be happy with a salary package, be very clear what these are and that you need them written into the contract. <S> It's actually win win - if the company truly has the intention of fulfilling promises on future salary they'll of course do that. <S> If they don't, they won't, and you can walk away. <S> Nobody's time is wasted, like it was in this situation. <S> Good luck in your next move!
| When asked why you're job searching you can explain why you left your previous position.
|
Recruiters pushing for interview without sharing important job basics first Asking for a friend who is an IT-professional based in Germany, who just finished his vocational training/apprenticeship 6 months ago. My friend has been receiving job offerings via XING and LinkedIn for over a year, however during his apprenticeship he was not interested in switching to a new company. Now he is looking for “new opportunities” and took a deeper look into the latest companies that contacted him. Many of the offerings were pretty vague and seemed to be just copy-pasted-messages the companies seemed to send out to a broad spectrum of possible candidates. Most of them also included the URL leading to their company website. However in many cases the websites where just as vague, as the messages, describing the offered services in a very broad manner, using mainly what felt like catchphrases and buzzwords. My friend was primarily interested in two things: Where is the jobsite located What kind technologies are used None of this could be found on the company websites and there where also no open positions listed on them. He often got back to the companies via e-mail, said he was interested in their company, but was unable to find any helpful information regarding the mentioned position and asked where the position would be based and what kind of technologies would be relevant. In pretty much all cases, he received a standard e-mail back, not containing any new information, instead asking him to schedule an interview or at least a phone call. What is the best way to judge the reliability of these offerings? Is it worth following through with a phone interview? I initially would have advised him to just stay away from those kinds of companies, since the lack of relevant information already would raise a big red flag in my book. However, I am pretty old-school when it comes to business and have been working in a very old school field (petrol) for over a decade. <Q> Generally, I would ask recruiters that contact me in this manner for a job description. <S> They should be able to provide that, without giving away specific details like the name of the company. <S> Failing that, they should, at the very least, be able to provide some basic information about the position that would allow you to determine if it obviously a non-starter (i.e. location, general type of work, level of seniority). <S> If they can't do that, then I personally wouldn't waste much more time with them. <S> I certainly wouldn't go to an interview if I had literally no idea where or what the job was, as it could easily be a complete waste of my time. <A> Having dealt with exactly the same issue but UK based, here's how I tackled it: <S> Ask directly for a job specification (spec) or description. <S> That document will generally be what the recruiter is summising in their emails and messages. <S> Asking for that document is not rude. <S> "Sorry there's no spec available" . <S> Then there's no job. <S> Would you want to work for a place that can't summarise or list the reasons they're hiring you? <S> Or perhaps be represented by a recruiter who lies about not having a spec, or whatever reason? <S> "Sure, if you pass me your phone number we can discuss the role" . <S> No thanks, pass the document over and if I'm intersted <S> I <S> 'll happily have a phone call with you about it <S> (Reason being they'll bombard you with calls/texts). <S> The important part is about saying no and meaning it. <S> Recruiters are in sales, so they want to close your friend's job application as fast as possible. <S> Your friend wants to find the right job , not necessarily find a job right now . <S> You, the applicant, have to manage that expectation and set the pace of the exchange. <A> It could be a number of reasons, not all of which are red flags. <S> I've encountered three distinct groups of situations. <S> The best case is that the website and contact email could be handled by a third party, who defers all questions to the actual company. <S> The person you emailed doesn't know the answer, but they instead schedule time with you to discuss everything you need with someone at the company. <S> Mediocre case is that he is being contacted by lazy recruiters who are going for volume, and not answering his questions because they either don't know or can't be bothered. <S> These are the most annoying to deal with. <S> The worst case is that they're trying to gather your information for other purposes, and there is no actual job offer. <S> To specifically answer your question: the only way to know which one it is is for your friend to follow through with an interview. <A> If they won't commit in writing, I assume they are not serious. <S> If you don't get more detailed job specs in writing, that could also mean the recruiter (even if he is a valid recruiter with an actual job opening) may not know what he's doing, and the importance of fitting applicants with detailed job responsibilities, and I'm not interested.
| Ask for more detailed job specs in writing before you waste your time with an interview.
|
Should I avoid writing a LinkedIn recommendation for a terminated employee? A former employee who was a direct report of mine, and who I recently terminated, is asking for a LinkedIn recommendation. The individual was fired because the quality of his work (software engineering) was not up to the standards we need, and we are unable to provide the time and support/mentorship structure he needs in order to grow. He may well succeed if allowed to grow at a slower pace, in a larger company, with lower responsibilities, and a good mentorship network. As a small startup, we cannot provide that type of role right now. I indicated to him that I would serve as a reference to potential employers, and I am happy to make a verbal recommendation, highlighting the type of role for which I think he may be suited. I am, however, reluctant to put anything in writing, especially on a social platform. Can anyone familiar with regulations around this sort of thing educate me as to whether I am right to be cautious? I am afraid that I could open myself to claims of withholding relevant information if I write a positive recommendation with no note that he was actually terminated. <Q> If this person were a "bad" employee and was terminated as a result then you could simply deny their request. <S> BUT It sounds like they were let go because they were too inexperienced for the role. <S> That's not a fault. <S> It's not a deficiency. <S> None of us are born with any skills or experience. <S> We were all in this persons shoes at one point or another. <S> So... write about their good qualities. <S> Surely there are some? <S> You need not mention their termination at all because it's not relevant. <S> Again, they were terminated because they lacked experience, not because they were a poor employee. <A> I am, however, reluctant to put anything in writing, especially on a social platform. <S> Can anyone familiar with regulations around this sort of thing educate me as to whether I am right to be cautious? <S> There may be a corporate policy - check with HR. <S> That said, if you are uncomfortable putting things in writing, then don't. <S> You would indeed be withholding relevant information. <S> But that's your choice to make. <S> There are no rules and requirements surrounding LinkedIn comments/recommendations. <S> Remember that it's your reputation, though. <A> I don't recall ever seeing a Linkedin recommendation that put negatives or qualifications on the endorsement like, 'only good if you train him' or 'might work out if you have good onboarding tools'. <S> Probably because that kind of thing will actually reflect poorly on your company's hiring process if not training. <S> Anyhow, if it's not a thing, you probably shouldn't be doing it. <S> "Many states regulate what an employer may say about a former employee... <S> some states give employers who provide this information immunity, which means that the former employee cannot sue the employer for giving out the information as long as the employer acted in good faith. <S> " <S> See https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter9-6.html
| I am afraid that I could open myself to claims of withholding relevant information if I write a positive recommendation with no note that he was actually terminated. So there's no reason for you not to write a recommendation given that you admit the employee failed because your company didn't support them well enough(!) There are no relevant regulations.
|
How to exclude myself from informal activities with colleagues? This may sound bad but please consider that I'm truly uncomfortable with these kinds of activities. I'm a junior software developer, I work with an amazing team and I get along with everyone. I'm very thankful for the knowledge that everyone has shared with me. However I do not feel the desire to have anything but a formal business relationship with my colleagues. Colleagues do not push for informality but management does push for "team building" activities, which to me seem really informal and unnecessary(think of beach volleyball). All my colleagues seem to understand that not everyone likes these kind of get togethers and some do not like them themselves but they find excuses not to go. I've so far been honest with my manager about the reason I do not go to events with activities but I'm facing increasing pressure to go.... My performance and work is good, "exceptional" even, if I were to quote that specific manager. Which adds to my guilt when declining his invitations.... I'm pretty sure they cannot force me to attend since these activities are always outside of working hours, but how do I stop these requests/demands for my attendance? All advice is very welcome. EDIT Edit to the original question (in reaction to some welcome comments and answers, thanks!) to make clear that I do not skip all meetings outside working hours. Especially dinners or talks that do not require me to engage in some kind of activity I will attend.My colleagues know this and seem to respect my honesty, however my managers increased their efforts to make me attend. To the point that one of them will walk into our shared office after I declined an invitation and be like "ConfusedEmployee you don't like X I'll make it Y think about it please!".Which on one hand makes me feel apreciated since to me it seems that his intention is good hearted. However it also gives me increasing guilt to turn it down a second time and besides that I also do not wish the activities to be changed for me since I will never truly enjoy them, so it seems more logical to me to find activities that my colleagues will actually enjoy. <Q> You're under no obligation to go, especially if the activities are after work hours. <S> If management is organizing events then you can simply decline, but they will keep including you, not much you can do about that. <S> If coworkers invite you, once you decline a few times they will eventually get the hint, if not just say you'll pass. <S> I would refrain from giving an excuse as that means you would go but can't. <S> If you say something along the lines "Thanks, but I'm going to pass on this" means you're not interested in the activity. <S> That being said, if you plan to stay around with this company, not going may hurt your chances of moving up, especially if you want to be a manager which requires people skills. <S> Management may be more inclined to promote someone they know everyone else is comfortable with. <S> Additionally, it may benefit you to go as that is how you build a network. <S> Your work may be excellent but if I don't know much about your personality I may have reservations referring you to someone else. <S> Don't think of it as creating a social relationship, but more of as a way to help your career. <A> how do I stop these requests/demands for my attendance? <S> You probably cannot stop this. <S> If the company continues to hold events, they will likely continue to invite everyone. <S> The fact that you may have declined every event so far does not matter. <S> From the company's perspective you may change your mind one day. <S> Also, if they selectively invite employees they could be accused of favoritism or discrimination. <S> No reason needs to be given for doing so. <A> I've so far been honest with my manager about the reason I do not go to events with activities <S> You already have the solution, just continue being honest. <S> All advice is very welcome. <S> My advice would be to actually attend one just to see what it's like, they can be fun sometimes. <S> It doesn't obligate you to attend them all, but it may make you shift your perception of whether you want to attend or not. <S> If you go in with the attitude that you want to have fun, you usually do. <A> Do not underestimate the value of team bonding exercises, they can help build valuable professional relationship that you can rely upon later. <S> If you don't enjoy the activities planned, you can always find activities that you enjoy, and propose it to the team that this is what you would like to bond over. <S> It could be anything that you enjoy, which you think others may enjoy as well - like visiting a museum, watching a movie, or a trail hike. <S> So if you don't want to join some, that should be fine - bail out, but don't be that guy who skips all of them. <A> All my colleagues seem to understand that not everyone likes these kind of get togethers and some do not like them themselves <S> but they find excuses not to go. <S> So find a similar excuse not to go. <S> Keep it simple. <S> Something like "Sorry, I'm busy then." <S> or "I don't do [whatever the activity happens to be]" or even " <S> I can't." should work. <S> Eventually, folks will stop asking. <S> Presumably, that's what you want. <A> You should go to half of them because management does push for "team building" activities, <S> I'm a developer, a management minor, but also an introvert. <S> Team building is a goal of management. <S> You should go to some of these events, or at least show up for an hour, have a beer and do some smalltalk. <S> This is part of the corporate world. <S> If you do not meet one goal of management (team building) <S> this could look bad on your employee review, you might be passed up for pay raises as "not being a team player", passed up for bonuses, or advancement. <S> While I'm an introvert, and used to be very shy, I got over my shyness, but I will still need "down time" because I'm still in introvert. <S> So I go to functions, try different things, and try to have a good time. <S> I go there on my terms, but I still go there. <S> I'm just lucky that my coworkers share my sense of humor <S> so we do have fun. <S> :) <S> If you are not good at smalltalk, then you can practice doing that, as I did. <S> My shyness was due in large part to insecurities <S> so I fixed them. <S> It was a multi-year process.
| All you can do is politely decline when asked to attend. Also in some ways it can be a career boost further down the line to have some informal networking with those in charge. If pressed just say you're going to pass.
|
How to arrange candidate lunch break during interviews? We typically arrange interviews without a lunch break but have realized that is too tough on our candidates. Interviews are about 5 hours long. What is the best practice about coordinating lunch with your candidate? Do you take them out to lunch/order in and eat together? Or give them space and let them eat alone. <Q> You could take them out or bring food in, whichever works best for your setup. <S> That way you won't provide a pepperoni pizza to someone who only eats Kosher, or a sub sandwich to someone who is gluten intolerant. <S> That also lets them know that there will be food, and whether they will be going out to eat or eating in. <S> Letting them know can ease some of their stress. <S> And how they handle themselves while eating, hopefully while more relaxed, can help you assess them better as well. <S> The company should pay for the interviewee's meal, of course. <S> And if you go out to a place and the interviewee orders the most expensive item and treats the wait staff poorly, you have learned something valuable, much more valuable than the cost of one meal. <A> Assuming your team is large enough, lunch should be with team members that aren't involved in the interviewing process (and it will be great if this will be people at the same level you are considering this candidate for). <S> This will be an opportunity for the candidate to learn more about what working at your firm is like, and to be told things, and ask questions, that might not work in the more formal interview process. <A> Encourage your employee(s) to allow the candidate to relax and use it as an opportunity to give them an idea of the company culture and what the lifestyle working for the company and in the area is like in a positive way. <S> The candidate will of course not let their guard down 100% but they should not feel like they are actively being interviewed, they need a little time to relax. <S> After, pay, come back to the office and the employee(s) can discreetly report how they felt about them. <S> If there were any red flags etc. <A> Depends on the position. <S> But if you are interested in them and keeping them for so long then I think it is in your interest to treat them to lunch and get to know them better. <S> Lunch can reveal a lot about someone from their manners to how they treat the wait staff. <S> You could have a great candidate on paper <S> but if you can’t stand eating lunch with them, would you want to work on a project with them?
| I recommend getting one or two employees who the candidate is not directly interviewing with but are also responsible to show the candidate the general area next to the company and the lunch spots in the area then bring them to one of the places you would recommend as this is also a setting point of the company. But whatever you choose to do, let them know ahead of time, and ask if they have any food preferences or allergies.
|
How do I get an internal transfer in a large company? I (28, female) work in a very, very large software development company. I've been in my current team for over 2 years and feel like I want to change. My current manager (since August) knows I want to change. He told me wants me to stay here but also that he supports my decision and he offered to help in any way he can. I looked at the internal job board, talked to various managers & teams, and the following was the outcome: Team #1: did an internal informal interview loop, got accepted, but manager told me his financial request for the position was denied so he told me I had to wait. This was in July. I haven't heard back. Team #2: did an internal interview loop. I got rejected. The manager told me he saw problems with my problem-solving skills and because he noticed my pull requests had quite a few back and forths. Team #3: had an initial talk with the manager. I sent him some artifacts of my work, he gave me some feedback (both positive and negative) but he told me he was going to schedule interviews. He promised this 2 weeks ago, I haven't heard back. Team #4: I did an interview with a principal engineer, I felt it went well. But manager let me know that after talking with the engineer, they decided to pause the hiring. I asked him for how long they were going to pause and he never replied. (I'm very confused that he didn't say whether I did good or bad, just that he was pausing.) I'm at a loss here. Imposter syndrome is kicking in and I'm worried that managers #1 and #4 lied to me, and that managers #3 is hoping I will forget about the interviews because in reality he didn't want to hire me. I had no idea internal transfers were this complicated and I don't know who to talk to about this, I feel embarrassed that I can't find a team that will accept me. What do I do? <Q> Internal job transfers are just like external ones with additional risk for the employee. <S> The risk is that your current manager may be aware of the attempt much earlier in the process. <S> Other than the risk stated above; the processes, procedures, budget changes, and seemingly randomness of the final decision is exactly the same. <S> I have been denied an interview where my resume matched the job description. <S> I have been ghosted by the process. <S> One time they posted a position on the internal job board, and I applied the same day. <S> Six months later my resume was still at "submitted", not even reviewed, and the position was still on the board. <S> I have even been lied to when the job was listed as funded and they needed the person selected to start in less than two weeks; but then waited 2 months for the actual contract award, plus one for funding the contract, and then a few more weeks before on-boarding. <S> Of course with any job search some applications move quickly, some move slowly, some have movements that don't make sense. <S> Even if you get to the interview that doesn't mean you will be selected. <S> They have multiple serious qualified candidates. <S> You have to treat these applications the same way you do external applications. <S> Don't invest too much emotionally in any one application. <S> Make multiple applications if multiple ones look good, you don't control the speed they move through the hiring process. <S> That can make it more likely they will select you for the position. <A> Team #1: Could take along while <S> but it does not hurt to mail to inform about the status so you can let the manager know you are still interested. <S> Team #2: Work on the feedback you got. <S> But I think this is not an option for now Team #3: Maybe you can find out if they did have interviews with others? <S> It is not unrealistic that they have not been planned yet. <S> Just mail the manager (now or in a little while) and ask when the interviews might take place (in general not yours specifically) Team <S> #4: It can be that the manager simply forgot to reply. <S> But it can also be that this manager does not want you and doesn't want to tell you somehow. <S> Be glad in that case because such a manager would be horrible to have anyway. <S> In general: Find someone with an overview of the different teams that can help you find something that suits you well. <S> And maybe ask someone who you know transferred internally to get some tips. <S> I once moved internally and it took some time for me as well Just be honest and let them know (if true ofcourse) that you will be looking elsewhere if there is nothing for you with this company. <A> I don't think that internal transfers are necessarily more complex but you are more likely to get messed around like this. <S> When people recruit externally, they generally have already got definite approval for the additional cost, and a firm idea of what they want. <S> Thanks to the approval process, they probably needed this additional person months ago and want to move quickly. <S> They also know that there will be a few months while a new hire learns the system. <S> Internal recruitment can be a lot more informal. <S> Managers might look around before getting approval, or talk to people who are more junior that they'd ideally want, or just before they really need you because they're not competing against other recruiters. <S> Internal candidates can be very attractive because you know the company culture and systems (and there's no recruiter commission to pay!) <S> so managers will interview you even when you might not be a perfect fit for the job, in the hope that it could work out. <S> (by contrast, in external recruitment, you talk to people who should have all the relevant skills, looking for someone who would fit the company culture). <S> Don't worry about not finding an internal vacancy, they're always rare. <S> It's much easier to find a job with another company.
| Sometimes the best thing is to know people on other projects who can tip you off to a potential opening, or who can recommend you to their manager.
|
Should I disclose a disability that requires me to use a medical Bluetooth device during the application process? I'm in the process of applying to jobs where security is a significant concern and foreign Bluetooth devices are often not permitted on site. However, I use such a device daily to manage a disability. It is removable, but it can be inconvenient and costly to do so. In general, I'm of the opinion that a potential employer does not need to know about my disability at the application phase of the hiring process. My disability does not affect my job performance and most people would not know that I had it at all unless I tell them. As I see it, my alternatives are Disclose my disability when I submit the application and potentially be rejected outright due to unintended bias. Do not disclose my disability and show up to the interview with the device, potentially creating a security issue and an overall awkward situation. Do not disclose my disability and endure the cost and inconvenience of removing the device on the day of the interview. My question is not when I should disclose the disability, I've already decided that I won't do so until after I'm hired. My question is if refusing to do so will have implications regarding potential security incidents. Does any one have any experience with a similar situation and/or suggestions? <Q> In the US, the ADA essentially states that employers must make reasonable accommodations for disabilities. <S> This extends to interviewing. <S> However, some people choose to not disclose disabilities because they are afraid of discrimination even though such discrimination would be illegal. <S> That said, you also don't want to end up in a position where not disclosing causes you an issue. <S> Otherwise, it may become very awkward if they assume the unknown bluetooth device was an attempted attack. <S> The ADA also essentially leaves it up to the employee (or candidate) to disclose their disability and specify the accommodation they would like. <S> In your case, it may make sense to ask for an offsite interview, or it may simply be enough to inform them of your device <S> and it's purpose so they can be aware when it shows up in their monitoring tool as unknown, <S> and/or so they can take any steps they need in order to certify that it is safe. <S> Of course, none of us know how sensitive your employer is to unknown bluetooth devices. <S> Even given the ADA, an employer is still allowed to be selective in terms of choosing employees who are able to perform job duties. <S> It's hard to conceive how this can play out in unknown and potentially highly secure environments, for instance if your employer's bluetooth restriction is extremely strict, they may not be able to reasonably accommodate you continuing to use the device you're currently using. <S> Even if you get around the interview phase (by holding the interview offsite, for instance), it's possible that a different accommodation may be required to actually work there, which - again - necessitates disclosure upfront. <A> Does any one have any experience with a similar situation <S> I have a disability that actually can affect my performance as an employee, and carries a lot of associated prejudice. <S> It's fortunate <S> it's easy to conceal, and I completely understand your desire not to disclose it for interview process. <S> If the company policy explicitly states you have to declare bluetooth devices and you are mentioned that fact (or implied to know that fact) at the very interview, you have little choice but to explain you wear a bluetooth device. <S> However If there is a chance this policy doesn't apply on interview site, you may play that chance <S> If this apply to interview site, you can declare wearing a device, get it checked by security, but not by your interviewer directly <S> If your interviewer insists on knowing why you wear such device, you can disclose having a medical condition, without disclosing it is a permanent disability <S> If your interviewer somehow manages to guess what disability you have <S> (I know I don't, but some may) there is still high chances it won't affect his judgment. <S> Chances are you are overestimating the chances that your disability get in the way of having a job. <S> They are in fact extremely slim. <S> What you should do, however, is at your discretion, and should be respected by your employer as long as it complies with the rules. <A> My question is not when I should disclose the disability, I've already decided that I won't do so until after I'm hired. <S> My question is if refusing to do so will have implications regarding potential security incidents. <S> It likely will have implications. <S> If you are going to wait until you are hired, then you should at the very least bring up your device once you are required to sign any documentation that mentions company policies on bluetooth devices.
| If you have a disability which requires a bluetooth device, but you're interviewing in a company where an unknown bluetooth device may be perceived as a security threat, it's likely in your best interest to disclose your disability (and the device). You can refuse to mention that you have a disability, but I think this will give you less leverage towards being allowed to use the device (assuming it is against company policy).
|
Should I answer honestly if asked why I was late one day when I was actually in an interview? I had an job interview today that went well and I accepted the job offer. The interview was in the morning during work hours so I had to make an excuse about why I was late coming into my current job. I just said that there was an issue with my car. I said this because I know that you shouldn't tell that you are interviewing somewhere else and I didn't know what else to say about why I was late. Anyways, that is in the past, and now I am wondering, since I am usually very punctual, and I accepted the job on the day I was late, people will naturally assume that I was lying and that I was late because of the job interview. Now what I want to know is if someone asks if I was late because of the interview, should I continue the lie and say that my car was really out of order, or should I come clean and be honest? I feel like either option has the potential of burning bridges. I will immediately burn bridges if I say right away that I lied. But I could burn bridges in the future if they later find out themselves that I went for an interview at that time. <Q> Next time this happens, I would let your manager know beforehand. <S> That will cause suspicion. <S> If you contact your manager and explain that you're going to be late for work due to "personal obligations" , that would be a good reason. <S> Saying "personal obligations" isn't lying, it's ambiguous but it'll let the manager know that you rather not discuss it. <S> Hopefully, they'll respect your life and won't need to follow up with what your reason may be. <S> With some life experience, lying will eventually cause some issues as time moves on. <S> Once you're confronted with the lie, you might resort to lying again to get out of the first lie and then you have to remember what you lied about, which then could cause some inconsistencies in your testimony. <S> As Judge Judy once said, "If you tell the truth, then you don't have to have a good memory," meaning that if you tell the truth, knowing what to say will become natural and easy. <S> If you get hired by this other company and you accept their job offer, then you'll have to explain to your current company that you lied about being late. <S> I think you will eventually burn that bridge whenever you have to reveal the truth. <S> However, if I was you in this situation, I would say, "I wasn't trying to lie with bad intentions and I apologize. <S> I just wouldn't know how you would react if I told you that I was interviewing for another company. <S> My intentions were not supposed to be rude towards you or the company. <S> " Then they would probably ask you about why you thought about leaving, etc. <S> Good luck with this situation. <S> Someone's feelings will get hurt eventually but hopefully you were lying with at least good intentions, meaning that you weren't trying to hurt anyone's feelings. <A> I usually would recommend taking a PTO day if you're interviewing, going over a lunch break, or going during the day and letting your manager know in advance that you need to be out for X hours - If you need an excuse for why, I don't necessarily think there's much harm in saying something like a dentist appointment or needing to be there for the cable guy to come in etc. <S> They'll realize after the fact that this isn't true if you leave.... <S> but that shouldn't matter. <S> You're leaving, <S> oh well - part of the process of finding a job is interviewing.... and - especially if you're using personal time - it doesn't matter, not nearly as much as the fact that they need to find a replacement. <S> Don't worry about 'bridges' being burned - If you did the job, well enough to not get fired, you're probably fine. <A> Lying is rarely the best option. <S> (Obv.) <S> Saying nothing, or as little as possible, is easier. <S> The problem here is that a colleague might be interested in cars, or just want to make conversation and start asking ("what was wrong? <S> did you try this? <S> what car do you have?"). <S> If they ask, don't add more lies (avoid, for example, saying that you had a flat, or that your car wouldn't start) because that just invites more questions. <S> Either come clean (for example, say "The car is fine. <S> I had to deal with a personal matter, I'd rather avoid talking about it, which is why I mentioned the car in the first place."), or stay vague (for example, " <S> It was nothing, really, but it still took me a bit of time this morning"). <S> Not sure if staying vague will work very long, though, as it sounds very mysterious. <A> Perhaps your best option is to not actually answer the question if answered. <S> Most people will jump to the conclusion that you were actually interviewing, as you were. <S> So many may not even ask. <S> But if they do ask, a simple "Does it matter?" <S> and then changing the subject could be a reasonable answer. <S> Unfortunately, the way interviews are set up, and the way it's not recommended that you let anyone know you're interviewing until you have a job offer in hand, giving a lie for why you were out (dentist, car problems, etc), is a very common option. <S> The answer by KingDuken has a good way to handle it in the future, instead of lying. <S> But you already lied, so now <S> what? <S> Holding on to the lie, digging in, however, seems to go too far. <S> That takes it from a commonly expected white lie to something darker. <S> And for what? <S> A strong lie <S> so they don't think you used a white lie? <S> It's much better to admit to the white lie than to dig in.
| It's not a good idea to not show up for work and then suddenly have an excuse as you arrive for work. There are ways to tell the truth without revealing what the truth is and you don't have to create deception either. Lying is not the best option to avoid confrontation.
|
Can my former employer sue me if I don't give them the photos I took (taking pictures was not part of my job description)? I was hired by a company to run demos and do merchandising for their product. Managers found out that I have experience as a photographer and asked me to run a photoshoot for them with the promise that, if they like the end result, that would become my responsibility. I thought this was an amazing way to grow at the company and accepted. I took the pictures during my work hours, but I worked on the photos out of my work hours. A week later they let me go. Now I'm getting messages asking for the pictures and I think it is only fair that I get paid for them, since their promise fell through. I texted back with my rates and they are talking about taking legal action because they "own" the photos. What is the right thing to do? Just because of the threat e-mail, I immediately want to delete the pictures for good. <Q> I am not a lawyer but generally speaking, here in the US any work done while on the clock (i.e. being paid by your employer) is the property of your employer: work-for-hire . <S> Had you taken the pictures while not on the clock you would be considered the owner. <S> If the editing was done off the clock <S> you're probably not under any legal obligation to provide your previous employer the edited photos; if you can provide the original un-edited photos. <S> That editing and post-processing work was yours. <S> You should more than likely reset the RAW images (you do shoot RAW <S> don't you?) <S> to the default imported version and provide those to your employer. <S> If they are already threatening legal action then I would deliver them via certified mail or some electronic means where you can prove that they have received them. <A> Once your employer asked you to run a photoshoot for them and you accepted, taking pictures perforce became part of your job description. <S> Since you took the photos as part of your job, the result is probably classed as "work for hire" for copyright purposes. <S> Only a copyright lawyer can tell you for sure who owns the copyrights, but it's probably your ex-employer. <S> Since you have now been put on notice that the photos are wanted, and you have quoted a rate to provide them, it might be illegal (a malicious tort, I think) to delete the pictures for good. <S> If you are concerned about the ethics of your position, consider that you should have left at least the developed negatives behind when you were dismissed. <S> By taking them away you removed company property. <S> Your ex-employer is probably not ethically nor legally entitled to the work you did on the pictures out of work hours. <S> But check your employment contract. <A> On your employment being terminated, under most western legal systems, you would be obligated to return any physical property belonging to your employer that was in your possession, and if asked at or before the time you were dismissed , to transfer any data residing upon any of your own devices that would be considered to be work product to your employer. <S> Regardless of whether your employer asked you for your electronic work products, you would typically be obligated to destroy any of their data residing on your devices upon your ceasing to be employed by them, unless they gave you explicit permission to retain said data. <S> So, if you don't want to give them the photos (or even if you do), you simply say, "You didn't ask me for them before I was fired, and I deleted them so that I wouldn't have your data on my equipment." <S> If they argue or threaten, you just say "It was your data, you didn't ask me for it, and I had no right to retain it once my employment with you was terminated. <S> If you had wanted it, you should have asked me for it before or at the time my employment was terminated." <S> If you have told them that you could send them the photos, but have not yet done so, I would advise informing them that you were mistaken, that you had actually deleted all of your work product owned by them upon being dismissed, and had simply forgotten that you had done so. <S> No judge could blame you for "protecting your former employer's interests" by deleting data that you no longer had a right to use or possess, that your employer had not asked you for while you were still employed or being off-boarded. <S> If they really want these photos, you could then tell them that the deleted photos may be recoverable, but they would have to pay you for your time and expense - in advance <S> : get them a quote and add your own margin on top for your time and trouble - to have a data-recovery firm undelete them.
| If you are able to transfer the photos to your employer, and actually did so, subsequent to the termination of your employment, this could be considered evidence that you illegally retained possession of their data.
|
Promoted to Supervisor "line manager" of peers (new position) but don't seem to have any authority in practice - how to address with boss? I was a de facto 'senior' member of a group of 5 - not recognised by title or salary but I knew much more than the others, was the "go to" person for everything, etc. Then this was formalised by making me Supervisor (with explicit line management responsibilities) with an increase in salary. This was in response to me having an offer from a different company. But it was really just a recognition of the role I had been carrying out anyway. On the org chart you could say I was "inserted" as supervisor between the others and my boss. So now the others would report to me. Now I am the line manager of my former peers, and (unlike in most of these situations!*) they have accepted it, and they look to me as their 'boss' to set direction for them, etc. (*I say unlike most situations, as I've more often seen it that former peers refuse to accept the authority of the 'new boss', which is a much easier problem that I would be able to handle!) My problem is that my boss - who was the boss of all of us, but is now just my boss and their "boss's boss" - doesn't seem to give me the authority to make decisions as a manager. A couple of examples: I needed to invoke the disciplinary process on one of the people who report to me, for a relatively minor infraction but still one that needs to go through HR (I would rather prefer to deal with it informally if possible, but it reached the HR-involvement level of severity). My boss insisted on carrying out the process and cut me out of the discussion. That's pretty undermining to the report's perception of me as their manager isn't it? One of my reports (different person from 1) asked if they could leave 1.5 hours early due to "specific unusual circumstance" to which I agreed having taken into account the surrounding circumstances. My boss then called me out over it saying I should have turned it over to him and he would have refused, I didn't have the right to approve that and the report should have made the time up instead of just leaving early and being let off. (In response to this I worked the extra 1.5 hours rather than ask her to make it up, to make the point to the boss.) How can I talk to my boss, (or HR, maybe?) about this situation? I want to be able to exercise responsibility as a full manager, but if not possible I'd like to get some acknowledgement from my boss. <Q> Have a talk with your boss about it. <S> Goal of the meeting would be to clarify your new roles and responsibilities and write them down. <S> Typically the responsibilities (and authorities) of a real manager include hiring, dealing with problems, career development, administrative approvals, salary management, performance reviews, work processes and procedures, determining work break down and assignments, etc. <S> Make a list of these that are relevant for your line of work and go through them one by one with your manager. <S> For each one you can determine This is your responsibility <S> This is your manager's responsibility <S> This is transitioning, i.e. it's eventually yours <S> but at the moment needs oversight and confirmation until you can do it well on your own. <S> "Transitioning" is perfectly normal and typical helpful. <S> All new skills need some learning so it's a good idea to keep the training wheels on for a while, but it should be clear what the criteria of self sufficiency are. <A> There is often a difference between a Supervisor and a Manager. <S> Just with your examples <S> : <S> Once a matter reaches HR, typically full managers get involved. <S> There are a few different reasons, but it comes down to things like the fact <S> they may have undergone specific training to deal with these issues. <S> Maybe this could have been your responsibility. <S> Or maybe the manager is trying to make sure you are not being exploited. <S> How can I talk to my boss, (or HR, maybe?) <S> about this situation? <S> I want to be able to exercise responsibility as a full manager , but if not possible I'd like to get some acknowledgement from my boss. <S> You're not a full manager. <S> You're a supervisor. <S> As you said: Then this was formalised by making me Supervisor ... <S> But it was really just a recognition of the role I had been carrying out anyway. <S> If the discussion was around formalising a role that your were already filling then <S> I don't understand why you'd expect to have additional duties beyond what you had before. <S> Firstly, you should really decide if you want to be a manager or a supervisor. <S> Dealing with salary reviews, and HR, and leave etc., are not things that everybody enjoys or everybody wants. <S> Just as a background, I have served in quite a few roles, and even within the same organisation different managers will delegate different levels of responsibility to supervisors. <S> It's not always down to the capability of the supervisor, it can be managerial style, or based upon what the team needs. <A> Spent a few years in a similar situation. <S> There are many responsibility of a leader, identify what your manager will provide the team (disciplinary action and time off approval so far) and fill in the rest (coaching, skills enhancement, part time psychologist, strategy, communication). <S> Provide your team with what they need to thrive in the situation they are in. <S> This includes learning exactly how your manager performs the services they provide to your team so that you can help increase the odds of getting the time off they need approved. <S> Use value as your north star. <S> The value you provide your team will dictate how they perceive you. <S> The value your team brings to the organization will dictate how leadership sees you. <S> The value you bring to your manager by doing the things they don't want to do or don't have time to do will dictate how your manager sees you.
| If you are unclear what your roles are now, you do need to approach your manager and seek clarity.
|
Should I always counter a salary in a job offer? I received a job offer in writing. The salary amount is either within the average or above average for the city the job is in (depending on the source of information), for someone with my experience. I was encouraged by some people that I should always counter any offers with a higher one. In this case, would it be advisable to counter an job offer from a company? Would circumstances related to countering a job offer change if the company was large and highly profitable, vs. a smaller company that is trying to expand their business and profits? <Q> I was encouraged by some people that I should always counter any offers with a higher one. <S> In this case, would it be advisable to counter an job offer from a company? <S> Only do so if you are not satisfied with the offer given. <S> You say in comments that you are satisfied with it, given the position and your experience, and that it is on or above average, <S> so I see no point in you asking for more if you are ok with that. <S> The key here is that one does not ask for more "just because". <S> You have to be sure of the reasons <S> why do you think you should be paid more, so you can justify asking for more salary. <A> “Always” is rarely a good idea. <S> If you are given an offer that you feel is too low to accept, counter offer with an amount that you feel is ok. <S> Nothing to lose. <S> If you are given an offer that is so good that you want it, don’t take risks. <S> Same if you are safely employed but were looking for something better: Make a counter offer that would make the offer good enough to leave your old job. <S> As long as you have something safe to fall back on, you can make counter offers. <S> Otherwise, you are taking perhaps too large a risk. <A> Whether one should always counter or push back may primarily depend on the business segment. <S> I could imagine some lines of business where not countering is seen as weakness. <S> If this is the case, one is probably best advised to follow the culture. <S> In general though, the relationship-building between employer and employee starts during - and especially after - a successful job interview. <S> So - it pretty much comes down to which sort of relationship you want to build; one where money is the ultimate yardstick or a more 'frank' relationship with little to no posturing. <A> If you're willing to risk the company retracting the offer and going with another candidate instead because they're unwilling to negotiate (or rather give in to your demands), go ahead. <S> If you consider the offer a reasonable one <S> and you're unwilling to take that risk ( <S> and it's a very real risk), accept the offer and work hard to gain a raise or promotion. <S> If I were to make someone an offer I knew was reasonable and at or above market rates for the candidate, and he rejected it, demanding more, I'd probably not bother to negotiate but just pick someone else for the job <S> (unless of course there are no other candidates, in which case I'd seriously consider not expanding my staff for the moment).
| If you have one offer that you feel is safe: make a counter offer for all offers that you feel are less good.
|
How to deal with a toxic coworker? So, our main tech lead is a very knowledgeable guy who’s apparently been keeping the place afloat for years, but he’s quickly becoming my least favorite person. He just won’t stop speaking badly about LITERALLY all the people we work with. It’s become so routine that he regularly calls me to his office under the guise of work only to end up trash talking a coworker for half an hour for not knowing something he thinks is “basic”. I’m fairly new and inexperienced so I’m sure he unloads on me just because he knows I don’t have the social capital to do or say anything about it. But he will regularly and openly mock two or three people he REALLY dislikes (one of which is actually my best friend). Obviously, if I try to defend anyone’s action he will get mad and attack them even worse. Because of his track record the management team apparently trusts him a lot and even choose him as the guy to do everyone’s technical evaluations. With that kind of power and knowing how petty he is, I’m pretty worried about retaliation if I speak to the manager. So how could I proceed? <Q> Tell him that you greatly appreciate his knowledge, help, and his trust to confide in you, but that you really need to focus on the positives of each person in order to better work with them and know which people are good at what things. <S> You can add that even if what he says is true, as long as they work here you wish to find a positive way to work with them productively. <S> You can also engage him and bring him down the path to positive vs. negative by asking if he can identify the strong points of your peers so that you can be mindful of those things when interacting with them in order to best learn correct things as you progress. <S> If he says only come to him, which it sounds like he might be arrogant and do, then tell him you don't mind running things by him, but you need the skills of working in a cohesive team and would like his help in trying to work with every part of your team. <S> Then go to the other team members and work with them and take stuff to him as well. <S> Any feedback he provides turn into something actually constructive and actionable and share with the team member and ask them why he would indicate to do things that particular way. <S> People need to feel valued and this approach will help you value each persons opinion by asking them, the open communication back and forth will avoid triangulation as you are sharing the constructive stuff and allowing them to respond in a way that you can learn about them and indicate you value their perspective as well. <S> This will also give you a gauge on who actually knows what they are talking about to ask questions to in the future. <S> Don't go to the manager unless it becomes a "hostile work environment". <S> You can google that to get guidelines. <A> Next time he starts trash talking, you need to nicely cut him off and let him know you have no interest in having negative conversations about your coworkers and friends. <S> If you join in the conversation in any amount, it will only encourage this behavior. <S> We spend too much time working to allow workplaces to be and stay toxic. <A> I went through the same situation. <S> I mainly ignored him when he started to speak badly about other employees because, imo, confronting him was not in my advantage since we were in the same open space <S> and he was a good friend of the CEO. <S> Although, you might want to be careful for something else. <S> In my case, this person was behaving like this because he knew he was becoming obsolete (technologies evolved, not him). <S> Everyone thought he was the guy that kept the company afloat. <S> While that was true, it was only because problems were caused by his lack of knowledge in new (and what is now common) security practices and good code practices.
| So by speaking badly of everyone else, he might try to manipulate you (consciously or not) into thinking he's the only one who can solve everything and that, if there's some problem, it's the other employees fault.
|
What does permanent full-time position mean in Sweden? What does permanent full-time position mean in Sweden? Does that mean it is a lifetime guaranty for the whole working life period? Or such a work is rare in Europe? <Q> Full time mean 40 hours a week (unless you have a better ”kollektivavtal” a contract between the union and employer, in that case it might be a little bit less) <S> Permanent Job (in Swedish ”Fast anställning” ) means that there is no time limit on your employment <S> (the official term is ”tillsvidare” meaning ongoing). <S> Unless you are badly missbehaving (in which case you might be fired, rare in sweden) <S> the only way to lose a permanent job is if the company is reducing its workforce. <S> If that happens a negotiation with the union takes place to protect the workers rights. <S> If the layoffs continue despite this employers will be laide off in order of shortest employment time with that employer. <S> This means that even if your role is made redundant you can remain with the company if there are other roles you qualify for that are filled by people who have been employed more recently than you. <S> Source, I live and work in Sweden <A> What does permanent full-time position mean in Sweden? <S> Does that mean it is a lifetime guaranty for the whole working life period? <S> I strongly doubt it. <S> I am not from Sweden but <S> the "permanent" term is not rare to see in Workplaces across the world, nor is the "full-time" term. <S> My understanding of "permanent full-time position" is: <S> Permanent means that it's not a fixed-term contract . <S> Some contracts are fixed-term, meaning that after a period of time (usually 6 months, or a year) the contract has to be renewed or not, point at which the employee could find themselves unemployed if it's not renewed. <S> Full-time means exactly that. <S> Each day the employee will have to work full working hours, which are usually 8 per day (40 per week). <S> Contrary to, say, half-time jobs, which are around 4 hours per day. <S> Taking into consideration those points, we can see that a permanent full-time position is one that expects you to work 8 hours per day <S> and that is not subject to a time expiration. <S> The only way that such employee can end up unemployed is if they quit or if they are fired/laid off. <A> I would suggest read this https://www.oresunddirekt.dk/en/find-a-job-in-sweden/term-of-employment/employment-contracts-and-terms-in-sweden <S> Looks like it is not for life, but pretty stable, depending on the company you work for <A> Disclaimer: I have never lived or worked in Sweden but a little bit of googling made me believe it is similar to the Netherlands and Germany: http://www.nymanrudenstam.se/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Broschyr-General-Labour-Law.pdf <S> No, even in Europe a permanent contract doesn't mean that you cannot be dismissed, but Sweden like other European countries mandates that you cannot be let go without a reason and if you let go you have a minimum notice period that depends on how long you are with the company. <S> Valid reasons for dismissal usually are: 1.) <S> You are misbehaving (e.g. acting inappropriately towards colleagues, or stealing from the company) or not doing your job 2.) <S> Your job has become redundant and you cannot be retrained. <S> You should be pretty safe though, as long as you are working in a role that the company will rely on in the future, the company is healthy and you can keep your act together. <S> And the longer you work for a company the harder it will be to get rid of you.
| Permanent positions, on the contrary, do not "expire" and don't have to be renewed, and they are in place until the employee quits or is fired by any reason.
|
As a now self-employed consultant, should I apply for work at a company I was previously let go from? Context A recruiter is advertising a role, and I can tell from the description that it is a previous employer of mine. This is an employer that "let me go" in the past. It's a consultant position, so I would be going in on behalf on my own limited liability company. It would be paid each day that I work. The Role The role itself is within a department that I previously worked and know well. That department was my first position in that company, I moved around the company three times after that. I was there for around 5 years. The specific role the recruiter is looking to fill is within 'xyz' area. I had some involvement with 'xyz' when I was working there, but at a junior level. Now, I am a freelancer consultant mostly specialising in 'xyz' and similar areas, having helped other clients improve their 'xyz' processes quite successfully. The problem: I was let go by this company following a year of absence due to serious health problems. I didn't appeal the termination at the time. My health issues are now being successfully treated, and I am no longer affected by them to the extent that I am unable to work. My Dilemma Would it be unwise to submit my CV to the agency regarding this role, given my history with the company? They are looking for somebody available within 2 weeks, and I will be available by then. I feel like I would be able to pick up the role quicker than any other candidate, (I worked with large chunks of it in the past). But, I feel a bit ridiculous even asking, maybe that's justified? <Q> Would it be unwise to submit my CV to the agency regarding this role, given my history with the company? <S> Furthermore, you suspect it <S> may be your past employer, but you are not 100% sure about that... <S> Best case you land the job, and worst case you don't and have to keep job-hunting... <S> but if you never submit your CV you will never know. <S> You were let go because, as you said, you were absent because of sickness and surely they needed someone to fill the role and be able to perform their business. <S> It's not like you did something terrible or bridge-burning. <A> “Fired” sounds so negative. <S> You were not fired, you were laid off. <S> And not for a reason that any reasonable person would hold against you today. <S> No reason not to apply. <A> You make some good points. <S> Yeah, there's a little bit of a negative history. <S> On the other, you have insights that another candidate doesn't have. <S> If it's a short-term gig, it might be a good idea to apply. <S> You won't be there long and they don't have time to spend working with someone to explain the company. <S> If it's long term, they might be hesitant to restart a relationship that they chose to end. <S> Or, you might simply decide to leave the past in the past and move on. <S> I think it depends on the scenario and the tone of how your relationship with them ended. <S> They could let you go but were sad they had to do it, or they let you go and couldn't wait for you to get out.
| I don't see a reason why not to send your CV and apply.
|
Should I provide my employee company-paid training/conferences for non-work-related skills? I am a manager of a software developer whom I really want to retain because he is a high performer and a joy to work with. In our 1:1 meetings, he has expressed the desire to learn a skill which is not quite applicable to his job at my company, but nevertheless I'm considering asking my company to pay for him to attend this training so that he can develop the skills he's passionate about, even though it isn't directly job related. On one hand, I believe he'll really appreciate this gesture and may stay with us longer because he's getting to scratch this itch without changing jobs. On the other hand, I may very well be expediting his departure from my company by training him for another job! So, my question: Is it a good idea to provide non-job-related training as a perk to an employee I wish to retain? <Q> It might give them new perspectives. <S> You never know what new techniques or approaches they could learn and start applying in their current role. <S> More knowledgeable is always better. <S> Would you rather have under-skilled or over-skilled employees? <S> As long as the training is not disrupting regular work. <S> If your employees are leaving as soon as they can, you have a different problem, IMO. <S> And if you don't offer training, competent employees will leave because "company B gives me a chance to learn X" <A> Is it a good idea to provide non-job-related training as a perk to an employee I wish to retain? <S> Yes it is. <S> It's always good to try invest in your employees. <S> It makes them happy and better prepared, and that is always beneficial to the company. <S> Who knows if what they learn there results in a good business opportunity you had not thought about. <S> If what worries you is that this person will leave after getting the course/conference, then I suggest you put some clause on it. <S> Say, if the employee leaves the company within a year of taking the course/conference then that employee will have to pay it back. <S> This is not rare thing to see in the Workplace. <S> Now, even though employees are happy that does not mean they won't switch jobs, but it's less likely. <S> Anyways, that is something out of your hands, and at most you can secure the company's interest by (1) improving the knowledge of your workers and (2) including such clause when paying the course to this person. <A> When I was managing large teams <S> I'd occasionally get unusual training requests whilst meeting with employees for their learning and development planning. <S> I used to emphasise to them that we need to balance three things: <S> Core skills the company needs because it's our bread and butter <S> , there's strong demand or a strategic direction to cover certain technologies. <S> Skills needed to to deliver on customer needs. <S> Skills to help the employee in their professional development; something they're interested in that will help them take that next career step. <S> If/when I got requests for skills that weren't "useful" within the company <S> I'd tend to have to decline (it's not a charity after all) <S> but if I sensed some potential mutual benefit even if it was a bit of a longshot then I'd explain to them that it's bonded over 12 months. <S> So if they leave immediately after the training then they have to pay it back, via a sliding scale (e.g. pay back half after 6 months) or pay nothing back if they leave 12 months or more after the training. <S> I also found it encouraging and quite common if/when a high performer had the initiative to self study to give themselves a leg up before a full training course. <A> No, you're in business <S> your focus is the businesses needs not philanthropy. <S> The potential benefit of retaining versus leaving are unknowns and very flimsy to my mind. <S> and I'd be asking some very hard questions of you if I was your boss. <S> Unless you're the boss you shouldn't take risks with company assets where you're not sure of the outcome, it can become a career limiter for you. <A> How much money is involved for this training? <S> If the employee is paid well, perhaps it isn't the money but getting the time off to attend the seminar/training. <S> Also, if the company pays, consider that others may want to take advantage of such a generous offer to improve their knowledge base. <S> If the employee pays for the training and what is learned works out to significantly benefit the company - then consider a raise. <S> No, I think it would 'open a can of worms' to single out an exemplary employee in this way. <S> Perhaps a 'merit bonus' at the end of the year to subtly offset a pretty expensive training course? <S> If the employee doesn't have enough PTO to cover being paid while attending training, consider: <S> Can I Allow Employees to Have a Negative PTO Balance? <S> https://gusto.com/blog/payroll/negative-pto-balance <S> P.S. <S> What if the employee doesn't finish the training for some reason?
| Yes, if the company has the budget, you definitely want your employees to enhance their knowledge. I would advise against using business resources and time for such a thing
|
How do you deal with an office worker passing gas in a corporate office This happens regularly, once, every morning around the same time without fail, right before he goes to the bathroom for a while (not hard to guess why). He makes no secret of it, lifts one leg, does what he feels he needs to do without any regard for people around him and continues like normal. Within 5 or so minutes he's gone. The sound and the smell make me nauseous. We're in an open plan office with "activity based desks" and he's been coming and sitting next to me for the last few weeks (he has no particular reason to sit here and has every right to choose where he sits - its first come first serve). I don't want to move from my seating as I prefer it here. Manager doesn't see any of this happen as he comes later in the day. None of the other workers are saying anything or outwardly acknowledging this behaviour. What would be the professional way to deal with this behavior other than just accepting this as my life (or finding another job) EDIT: This is not a duplicate of an office culture where there is a "chummy culture where people fart as a joke" this is a corporate office where I barely know this guys first name. This obviously makes what he is doing very out of place and awkward. <Q> Be direct - if no one's said anything to him then he probably thinks no one cares. <S> Mate, that's really gross, you need to do it somewhere else. <S> If you're worried that it might be perceived as offensive then speak to your manager privately first and get their input. <A> The average person farts 15 times in a day; some as many as 40 times per day <S> Yeah, I can kinda understand finding it disgusting - I had a coworker that did the same thing. <S> But at the end of the day, it's ultimately an unavoidable biological necessity, and chances are: everyone around you is also farting... <S> they're just quieter about it (and possibly eating a diet that doesn't result in as offensive of odors.) <S> Realistically, you've got two avenues you can go down: <S> Ask them if they can go to the bathroom before they fart. <S> Take a break and leave the physical area after they fart. <S> Personally, I chose option 2. <S> Because I knew the guy well enough that option 1 wasn't going to work <S> (if anything, they'd be proud about it) and I wasn't silly enough to escalate the issue into management's ring. <A> Alternatively, sometimes a fart is just a fart. <S> They could be uncomfortable talking about it, or they might just not care about it. <S> There's no need to go into long detail about how offensive the fart is with them, just mention it's noticable (noisy, smellwise) because they might think they're getting away with it and appreciate a private heads up before someone else shouts about it. <S> If they seem to not care & carry on regardless, consider moving desk. <A> I'd imagine it'd be really awkward to confront them in person making a show in front of everyone else, especially since you mentioned you work in an open area. <S> Does your company use any collaboration software like Slack or Mattermost? <S> If so, I'd start there. <S> You can always approach them directly as a plan B. Find the person by their name (or ask around if you only know the first name) and DM them in private. <S> Explain why it bothers you, just like you laid it out in your question. <S> Perhaps they could be a bit more considerate and do their business in the proper place, i.e. the washroom. <S> The wording is up to you. <S> If you want to be more empathetic, you could ask them if they might be having digestion issues. <S> I know first hand that compounds like gluten lead to excessive gas with certain people. <S> It may be rude to instruct them to switch diets, but you could hint that eating less carbs (as in keto) helps eliminate odors. <A> Put a jar on your desk labeled "Fart Jar 25 cents" and insist that he drop in a quarter every time he lets one go. <S> Of course I mean after you have talked to him and he's agreed to stop <S> but he keeps forgetting (he will) and apologizing but then forgetting again.
| Either way as others suggest, approach them about it, but respectfully and in private if you can rather than loudly outing them to the whole team. The fart could be a sudden "get to the bathroom" warning shot. Your colleague could have some kind of bowel condition (Chron's, IBS, whatever else) and might have less control over their farts than they'd like to or realise.
|
Insisting on a job description before directly applying to company This is very similar to the question below, except that I'm curious if people feel that it makes a difference if it's coming directly from a company instead of a recruiting firm. Insisting on a job description before submission to company Essentially, the setup is the same: a company's internal recruiter will send an email saying they came across my profile and think I might be a good fit for one of their jobs; would I be willing to talk to a recruiter? I always think it's best to have a job description, for the same reasons as the other question, even for the actual company. But is insisting on a job description when it's the actual company just being a stickler for rules? <Q> a company's internal recruiter will send an email saying they came across my profile and think I might be a good fit for one of their jobs; would I be willing to talk to a recruiter? <S> When people drop off their resume at a job fair, and then are asked to talk to a recruiter they generally have started the process without knowing exactly which jobs they would be perfect for. <S> The internal recruiter could be trying to gauge your interest in one of several positions. <S> They may vary is experience level, focus, or location. <S> They may also need to determine at an early stage if you can meet a requirement that generally isn't included on a resume. <S> This requirement may be so important that not being able to meet it <S> makes you undesirable in the eyes of the company. <S> The difference between the internal and external requiter is that the external recruiter is trying to fill their resume bank to be used to submit to multiple companies, while an internal recruiter is trying to fill the resume bank used to hire people to their company. <S> If you have any interest in the company you should at least talk to the recruiter. <S> You can ask them questions. <S> It you don't feel that they have possible positions for you, then you can end it there. <A> Some recruiters are better than others. <S> However, think practically: is the recruiter going to put you in contact with the company at the time of your choice? <S> Definitely no. <S> So you will get the job description from the recruiter anyway. <S> You cannot know if the recruiter altered it or not. <S> There are many examples on the net, but I have one of my own. <S> A recruiter on LinkedIn (claiming that she had awards for best recruiter and other merits) asked me to update my CV in order to include experience I did not have. <S> I stated firmly that the CV will keep its contents, but she can update it as she wishes - protecting myself for lying. <S> She had the guts to insist that she cannot modify the CV, and that I have to state false information, from some benefit she might have had. <S> So, if the info goes strictly through the recruiter, you cannot know what you get anyway. <S> What you can do is that when you finally get in contact with the company, you ask them if the job description that was given to you is the real job description, or it was altered. <A> Depending a little bit on the company (size, business) <S> I don't think it is very weird that there is no job description. <S> It could very well be that there is an opening but no proper profile or exact description yet when someone stumbled on your profile. <S> It could be that they are looking for an addition to a team with a skill set in either this or that direction (a research team for instance). <S> That ofcourse does mean that they should atleast be able to tell you roughly what they are looking for, either on the phone or by email. <S> You will be investing time (by going to meet them) so it is not weird to ask. <S> So <S> yes I think there is a difference when it comes from the company directly. <S> They could be still in the early stages of looking for someone new and it is more reasonable and believable that they do not have a proper job description yet.
| So, the answer to the other question is your best option: be happy if you at least have a job description.
|
As a junior engineer I have been put in charge of a project outside of my capabilities. How can I communicate this to my management? I am currently working as an electronic/software engineer at small Australian company. I started here as a part of my work experience required by my university. After I graduated, I have continued to work there for around a year and a half. I was mainly hired on to assist the company's sole electronic engineer develop an electronic access control system.My role was to mainly focus on software as my degree focused on more computer systems and network engineering, while he focused on the hardware as he had a more pure electronics background. My supervisor (the electronic engineer mentioned before) has recently left the company. This now leave me as only person in the company with knowledge when it comes to anything electronic or computer related. (The majority of the product development team are mechanical and manufacturing engineers). When I ask management about their plans to find a replacement, I am told that they don’t plan on finding a replacement and that they believe that I am capable of handling both software and hardware. As part of my studies, I was introduced to the fundamentals of electronic hardware design, but anything more than the fundamentals I am still currently trying to teach myself. Recently I demonstrated a functioning prototype of the system as a proof of concept. I stressed that it was just a prototype and it still requires a lot of work and testing, but management now consider it complete and sales have started giving customers quotes. Most of these quotes have been for large installations where the customer also wants considerable customisations and additional features. The more this project grows the more difficult it becomes for me to manage on my own. When I try to communicate this, the responses I typically get usually are things like “I know you can do it because you are a genius at that computer stuff” or “I don’t really want to hear that, we need those orders to make the budget. Just make it work”. Are there any better ways I can communicate my situation to without appearing either lazy or incompetent to my management? <Q> First of all, don't stress. <S> This kind of thing is common in a first job. <S> You feel overwhelmed because you suspect your capabilities don't match the demands being asked of you. <S> They probably do, actually, but it's also entirely possible <S> they don't yet. <S> The point is to test your capabilities in a real situation which will stretch them way beyond anything that's come before, and learn. <S> Everyone who's good or senior at anything did that thing for the first time. <S> They felt the same pressure you're feeling. <S> This is your time. <S> Now, from what you've written it sounds like one of two things is true <S> Your management are fully aware you might fail but have decided to push you into the deep end anyway, and take the risk on you. <S> Maybe making the best of a bad set of circumstances. <S> Your management are genuinely in denial about how bad the circumstances are and are ignoring the risks of failure. <S> Either way you've done the right and responsible thing in communicating your concerns early and clearly. <S> Should it fail, it's now mostly on them , assuming you really do try to the best of your abilities. <S> They know the risk and are continuing regardless. <S> There's not a lot more you can do. <S> I would actually now just recommend using this as an opportunity, get on with the task and really do try to make it work. <S> You'll learn a lot! <S> Good luck. <A> Regardless of having or not studies in electronics design, you need to agree with the management of the company a training plan for yourself as an employee. <S> These topics can be (and are not limited to): <S> communication busses; eletro-magnetic compatibility; amplification vs. oscillation; signal reflection and noise management in communication lines; for very high frequencies: microwaves; and so on... <S> Some obvious ways for training: books; videos on the net; collaboration with a local university; training on the job - learning by doing. <S> Of course, you will need very good tools, to compensate for whatever you are missing. <S> Since you are not able to calculate some things in the circuit, it might be easier to buy a software to run some automatic tests, see if the system fails or not. <A> Firstly, congrats on your promotion. <S> That is what this is whether they call it such or not. <S> Tell them you are now doing the job of a mid level engineer <S> and they need to pay you accordingly or they need to hire on a second engineer to help with the workload. <S> That way either you get a second engineer which will lower your work related stress level or you get more money which will lower your outside of work stress level. <S> Making this a money thing to your boss will incentivize them to take action far more than simple recommendations from you, and as the sole EE for the company you have far more power right now than you think. <S> check out the EE stackexchange if you need help with specific EE projects btw https://electronics.stackexchange.com/ <S> I think you'll do great, and remember finding failures in a project is just another step to launching a fully functional product.
| You need to go through the following steps: asses your current level of knowledge; asses the company's needs of engineering; based on the delta, make a list of topics on which you need more training.
|
How should I address an interviewee who is more experienced than me? I'm working in India and have been asked to take an interview of someone for a particular post. I was asked as I am the only one here who uses the technology required. I wish to know how I should refer to the interviewee considering that they are quite more experienced and older than I am. Please note that using the first name of you senior is considered quite rude here while last name is too formal/awkward. Normally, I'd go with sir/ma'am, but I am afraid of how the interviewee might perceive it (I don't want to go down the "please dont call me sir" spiral). I don't wish to botch this up as this is an opportunity in the end and because the interviewee might become my colleague in the future. <Q> I'm going to take a bit of a counter-answer on this one. <S> You're approaching this situation from a perspective of "He's better than me, he's more senior than me <S> , I better not do anything that might make him look down on me." <S> What? <S> No. <S> You're conducting this interview because the company respects your abilities in the technical field. <S> They're relying on you to tell them whether he is up to snuff. <S> Keep in mind, if the company knew for certain <S> the guy was technically competent and an expert in the field, would they bother scheduling a technical interview? <S> Your job is to make sure that he really is as proficient as you hope and his resume indicates. <S> So if you go into the interview with a deferential attitude, you actually hinder your ability to do your job - or put it another way, a good BS-artist could probably snowball you since you're visibly deferring to whatever they say. <S> Be confident in your abilities. <S> Don't get me wrong <S> - I'm not saying to be disrespectful, condescending, or anything like that. <S> Instead, approach the situation like he's your equal, and you're simply out to make sure that he'd be a good technical addition to the company. <A> I don't wish to botch this up as this is an opportunity in the end and because the interviewee might become my colleague in the future. <S> That simply requires you to be professional during the interview, don’t make any judgements etc based on preconceived biases, and simply keep yourself to the technological questions. <S> Calling a person older than you by their first name is the normal during an interview (yes, in India as well). <S> In fact, I would caution you against using Sir/Ma’am type of titles in interview, they are a direct signal that you are an inexperienced interviewer, and an experienced candidate can use this inference to their advantage. <S> Rather, take it as an opportunity to present to this person that they are going to be working with technically competent people after clearing all the rounds. <A> You can probably get away with not using any title/name at all and just carry on with the interview. <S> Start with something like <S> Hello, nice to meet you. <S> How was your journey? <S> The interviewee will also probably recognize the social/cultural aspect of this interaction and be glad to avoid any uncomfortable exchanges.
| So in that vein, treat them the exact same way anyone applying to the position your age/experience would be.
|
Manager told a colleague of mine I was getting fired soon My line manager has told one of my colleagues that I am going to be fired soon. This manager has already been verbally warned about undermining me and spreading malicious untrue rumors' about me and things I apparently said, which cause major arguments within the team. I have plenty of witnesses who can vouch for the fact he has been trying to drive me out. Is this misconduct on his part? <Q> Is this misconduct on his part? <S> Surely he shouldn't be saying that.. <S> However, I fear that the point here is that you were hinted that you may be getting fired soon, so I would be preparing my resume and start applying to jobs ASAP . <A> Is this misconduct on his part? <S> Yes , it is. <S> He most certainly should not be discussing that with his subordinates. <S> But at this point does it matter for you ? <S> Surely you will be fired regardless if the information being shared with you is accurate ... <S> My advise to you would be to ask your line manager directly , without revealing your source. <S> If you are not 100% comfortable with the response given, then it is time to find a new job immediately . <S> Based on the OP's comment below, I would look for a new job regardless of what is said ASAP . <A> While I agree with some of the other answers that depending on the situation it would be wise to start looking for other work opportunities, I would like to address another point that you have in your question. <S> Keep in mind <S> this will depend on your organization's culture and structure, so you will have to judge that for yourself. <S> You say he has been verbally warned about spreading rumors about you. <S> If this was from his boss, he may very well not have the authority to fire you. <S> If you report this to the people who reprimanded him, there is a possibility that he will be the one who is let go, or one of you will be moved to another department. <S> If he is clearly out of line, and has a history of similar behavior that is not accepted from his superiors, then it may be in your best interest to report this to them. <A> Is this misconduct on his part? <S> Surely he shouldn't be saying that.. <S> This all depends on whether or not your colleague will be taking on your responsibilities after you are let go. <S> I have seen many cases where managers will speak to employees directly affected by a firing before the soon to be fired knows. <S> Sometimes it is to get ahead on knowledge transfer while other times the colleague has a more direct role in your firing <S> ( e.g. they are tasked with locking your account ). <S> Now, if your manager simply told a colleague and your being fired has no direct effect on them I would agree that it is definitely unprofessional behavior. <S> Regardless, you should polish up your resume and start looking for a new place to work. <A> Yup, totally unprofessional and in many cases consideration for constructive dismissal - in that he expects you to find out and resign, saving the company the trouble of firing you or his personal preference to get rid of you without any means of firing you. <S> So, start keeping a diary of all the times he has been like this, all the things you've heard or been told. <S> Then go to HR with this evidence (even if it feels circumstantial and hearsay to you) and demand something be done to stop it now, and stop it in the future. <S> Take someone with you to act as a witness, and HR will understand you are serious (and they also give you "got your back" support that really helps deal with a HR who will want you to just go away and stop giving them a hard time) <S> HR will instantly recognise this as a serious legal problem for them, and their job of protecting the company will ensure they deal with it (this applies even if you have no intention of going down the legal sue-the-company route, just leave that hint hanging) <S> Working in a place where your manage is undermining you will cause a great deal of stress, you don't need that. <S> Don't think it'll sort itself out, it'll only get worse if unchecked.
| Don't know if "misconduct" is the word but surely this is something unprofessional to do.
|
Team member trying to take over management of team I'm the line manager and lead developer of a small team of 4 people. I am new to the role and currently ramping up my knowledge of the domain and internal technical architecture. I'm very laid back in my management style. As long as we're delivering new features and the code is to what I consider to be a professional standard then I just let people get on. One team member is trying to take over management of the team. I have nothing against them personally, they're very smart, they've been very helpful to me and other colleagues and I've given then good performance reviews. However they're young, mid 20s, and seem to have a very black and white view of things and very fixed ideas of how things should be done. I've noticed them trying to take over the management of the team. Trying to take charge of delegation, trying to run meetings and standups and just generally over stepping what I consider to be boundary of their role in order to implement a team dynamic that they feel is appropriate. I don't want to crush anyone's sprit or good intentions however I don't want this to continue. We have bi weekly one to one meetings where I would like to make it clear this should stop. What is the best way to approach this ? <Q> Trying to take charge of delegation, trying to run meetings and standups <S> If this is occurring it is only because there is a vacuum with regards to someone being in charge of delegation, running meetings, and running standups. <S> If you want to lead that team, if you want to be a manager, you need to fill that vacuum. <S> Otherwise, other people will, and very quickly you'll either no longer be a lead/manager, or worse <S> , you'll be a lead/manager which no one listens to or respects. <A> What is the best way to approach this ? <S> Outline and define their role so that you're both clear on the issue. <S> Then take charge of your team and manage it, don't allow your responsibilities to be eroded in future. <A> It's hard to tell if they are taking over because there is a power vacuum, because the team is functioning well, or because your employee doesn't understand that self-directed teams don't need managers climbing all over everything. <S> You have to answer that question. <S> If there's an actual vacuum and you need to step in, click the "Accept" checkbox on dan.m's answer. <S> If the team is working well on <S> it's own and <S> this young employee doesn't get it, you sit them down and have this discussion -- <S> Some teams can function just fine with the manager taking a hand's off approach. <S> This team is doing that. <S> There is a way to become a manager. <S> Their approach isn't that way. <S> Then, you ask if they want to become a manager. <S> And I hate to say "then you move them out of your department", but that would be my advice. <S> Not out of spite, but because they aren't going to learn to be a leader in a department which is self-directed. <A> Who is supposed to be running the stand ups? <S> Usually it's a scrum master. <S> Do you have a designated scrum master? <S> Who is supposed to be delegating work? <S> Is that not happening? <S> Use that to develop their leadership skills.
| Seems to me like they are motivated and want to get stuff done.
|
I’m having problems with coworker, should I quit? Okay, I’m just trying to get through college, and I work full time at a gas station during overnights. I get along with all my coworkers except the new girl. She is just absolutely out there. She is constantly talking about weed as if it’s a fix for everything. She hands out her number even though she’s married. And worse of all, she doesn’t take criticism well. Problem is, she is constantly talking about how terrible her life has been with a meth addicted father. I have a sister who’s struggling with drugs herself. I shared that with her after I tried to connect on that to try to ease the tension. She then found my sister and told her I’ve been talking about her to literally everyone about her addiction (which is not true) So not only has she possibly ruined what little relationship I had with my sister, she’s been trying to get me fired since she started. I don’t do anything to be fired about. My boss is setting up a meeting, and I just want to transfer stores because it’s getting to be too much with school and now drama in the work place. I only have a few months left in this place until I can find a job as a pharmaceutical technician in training, but I can’t handle it. Should I just quit (two weeks notice for sure) or should I just transfer? Edit: To how she’s been trying to get me fired; she’s been trying to spread horrible lies about me to my coworkers and even to my boss about how I was trying to “fight” a customer. Yeah, I don’t fight, I’m a coward. And then she also makes comments to my boss that I’m lazy and she has to do all the work (clearly not true), and my other coworkers are getting frustrated with her too <Q> Seems like you shouldn't be the one considering moving, since you're not the one at fault here. <S> As Kilisi said in a comment, you're gonna meet all kinds of people in your working life - some will grow to be your friends, others will just be straight up assholes. <S> That's life! <S> Anyway, if you only have a few months left at this job, I'd just sit it out if I were you. <S> Her tattling to your sister about what you said was a very nasty move. <S> I'd advice you to keep it simple. <S> Disengage from the druggy girl, restrict your conversations with her to simple niceties. <S> Talk to your boss about your complaints. <S> Your boss might not act on it right away, but at least he/ <S> she would know how you feel and how the new girl has acted. <S> This could give you some cover if, at some point, something happens. <S> Remember that you're probably not the only one who has noticed the new girls attitude and behavior. <S> If she keeps acting like a total dick, your co-workers will back you up if a conflict arises. <S> 'she’s been trying to get me fired since she started' <S> I think that it's probably obvious to everyone involved that she's spreading nonsense. <S> While I can't judge your boss from my computer, I don't think you should be afraid of getting fired. <S> I think it's more likely that your boss wants to talk about the rumors the new girl is spreading and ask what's up. <S> Just honestly tell him/her about the new girls actions and that you'd rather be transferred than work with her. <S> If you do get transferred to another gas station for your remaining few months, where are you being transferred to? <S> Just another comparable gas station with a comparable distance from your place of residence, or a tacky gas station in a bad neighborhood miles away? <A> First of all, there are some things that are not your concern at all : if she's married and cheats <S> it's not your problem <S> and it's not your place even to judge , it's her private life and you are not part of it. <S> The only concerning thing about this could be the unprofessional behaviour, especially if flirting with the customers is frowned upon (how it is serious may depend on local culture and type of job). <S> I think you made also a big mistake in trying to connect with her : I can perfectly imagine you acted out of good faith and/or frustration, but one could also say that you "used" your sister's story, which is very private, to your personal advantage. <S> Worse than that, she is depicted as having a quite unstable and dramatic personality, I've learned the hard way that oversharing with those people is only going to get you into trouble. <S> So, she may have twisted your act in an exaggeration, but you have also a part of responsibility towards your sister. <S> It's unclear how she's "trying to get you fired", though: if there are serious issues, mention them in the meeting. <A> Should I just quit (two weeks notice for sure) or should I just transfer? <S> Don't quit without having a job to go to. <S> Quitting because things are difficult is not always the best solution and could get to be a habit. <S> Besides, I would assume you are working because you need the money. <S> Seek a transfer. <S> Or find a new job first, work out the notice period, then leave.
| If you are planning to leave this job not far distant in the future, I think it's worth just trying to ignore her or be transfered; or, if she is actively doing unprofessional things or sabotage you in any way, talk with your boss right away.
|
Should I be honest telling my current boss why I want to move? Some background story:I moved a couple of times always to big cities, due to my last and current job I moved in a small city. My first year here wasn't really a pleasure for various reasons (racism, different cultures, people not open minded, prejudices about other's provenience, poor public services and transports but really expensive).. I improved some of these, but still some of them keep going bad after 5 years. If everything sucked, I wouldn't even ask this question.. I'd not have any doubts about quitting and leaving. The issue is that the company I'm working for and my current team... I think I've never had such great experience in 8/9 years of employment. EVERYONE so positive, polite, lively and everything you could ask for in a team.. I'm not saying it's perfect but everyday when I wake up I'm happy to go to office and enjoy my job and my colleagues. Not everyone has such a lucky situation as this one. But, life is not made only by work and office, my colleagues are great but they're not my friends and I prefer to keep it as this way. I really don't want to confuse personal and work stuff, people in particular. I sincerely don't know if they're so positive just because we're in a workplace and we care to keep it a good place to work or if it's in their nature. I'm saying this because other people, outside of my work environment, are terribly and incredibly TOXIC (like I said above), and apart from this the city doesn't offer much in terms of locals, transports and similar stuff. In short: I don't want to live in this city anymore, I'm exhausted by it. I tried to solve this problem by traveling around during weekends, meet some friends in close (but not so close) cities around.. this solution I think would fit for good in the short period. But I'm starting to thinking in something to build, buy a house, have a family and where I live now (that has been 5 years at this day) I don't feel at home, accepted, safe or whatever positive thoughts a normal person could have about the place where he lives. I'm usually not a person who speaks without trying, I know that things not always go how we want or how we imagine them, I'm not the kind of person who gives up at the first issue... I always try to fight back and overcome bad situations. As I said before, if everything sucked I would quit and leave. My current company doesn't allow any remote work, and as we had some discussions about this topic, it will never do. Honestly now I'm really afraid of what they'll think of me when I'll soon leave. I've been always lively and smiley and happy with my job, but leaving anyway? I'll sure look weird or fake to them. Maybe lose their trust... I don't like to burn bridges BUT i have to fight for my life/work balance... I have to be happy inside and outside my office and I tried various solutions but none of them is fitting well to my person. Then, my question is: should I be honest with my team and my boss about what I'm feeling and why I don't see other choice? Or should I just let it go and say that I've received a good offer and i would be a fool to not accept it?Money is definitely not in my interest, I want just to keep my life as healthy as possible. Previous companies were really, REALLY, stressful.. but not this one.. that's why I don't know what to do. Other colleagues left my current company before me: some were seen bad, some were seen good. This is happening in the UK, but I'm not from the UK. <Q> First off: Is there a particular reason you don't want to be friends with your colleagues? <S> Some of my best friends now are ex colleagues because we became such good friends on work socials. <S> I'd recommend looking outside your department for people you don't really work with day-to-day. <S> Maybe offer to be social sec? <S> To answer your question though: Yes be honest. <S> Explain that you love the role and you've loved working there but that it's just not the city for you. <S> There is no need to go into as much detail as this post has, but I'm sure your boss will understand. <S> Make sure everything is in order to make it as smooth a transition as possible, maybe offer to train up your replacement? <S> There is no way the company can hold this against you. <A> Then, my question is: should I be honest with my team and my boss about what I'm feeling and why I don't see other choice? <S> While your reasons for disliking this city clearly affect you deeply, they are personal, and have nothing to do with your work. <S> There's not really anything your boss could do to make your city better, so it probably doesn't make sense to dig into that as you give your notice. <S> Perhaps that would make you feel better. <S> Since you wrote "my colleagues are great but they're not my friends and I prefer to keep it as this way", this doesn't seem the case. <S> Just find your next job in a city you'll enjoy, give the appropriate notice, and put this all behind you. <S> Opening up about why you hate this city so much is unlikely to make anything better. <S> And it might make things worse, since others likely won't share your opinion and will still live there. <S> You would almost certainly be better off with the generic <S> "I've found a better opportunity for myself" reason. <S> Find a better, non-toxic locale where you aren't exhausted all the time. <S> And try to make friends both inside work and outside. <S> Having friends you can be honest with can help make things better. <S> I wish you luck. <A> You don't have to give any reason for leaving. <S> Giving the vagueish reasons that you have would seem like whinging to some and offensive to others. <S> You're basically putting down their locale and everyone outside the office. <S> You're not close to anyone so suddenly spilling your heart out would come across as weird. <S> I've left lots of jobs, best to just leave quietly with a smile and goodwill, thank those that have helped you, ignore anything bad and focus on your future.
| If you were personally very friendly with your boss or teammates, you might wish to express your feelings. In any case it's not a good look. You don't owe anyone an explanation of why you are leaving.
|
How can I politely request that my colleague reduces the number of trivial help requests? Background: A colleague of mine has recently been moved to my team for which I have been given a more senior role in. The colleague is a very friendly and enthusiastic individual that I get on quite well with. Situation: Now that the colleague is in my team, they seem to be calling me over to take a look at the work that they have done and to ask for my thoughts. I have no issues with offering help in the workplace, however, these tasks are easy and minor and I know that they are experienced enough that they don't need my input. I'm not sure whether this individual is making an effort to impress by making me have a look at all the work that gets completed or whether they are showing respect by asking for my input but regardless, this is becoming time costly and I am working a busy schedule. Question: How should I go about raising this issue politely with the individual in a way that addresses the time cost on my part but also the willingness to help if they are truly stuck or seek my approval? <Q> The idea is that they should save up their questions for this time so that you deal with them all at once (and hopefully, they'll have solved a few of their questions by themselves before the meeting happens). <S> Set times for the meetings also helps you to dedicate time for these requests and give one-to-one time to the team member. <A> There are two reasons why the colleague requests your assistance. <S> The colleague really needs help. <S> This case is simple to understand, the work is only partially, done, and the questions are specific for getting information. <S> Potential solution: ask the colleague to create a list of questions, and interrupt you only XY times per day. <S> At that time, all questions will be dealt with. <S> The colleague is insecure, or needs to brag. <S> This is again easy to spot. <S> The work is (mostly) done, no obvious problems... <S> Potential solution: <S> Provide feedback that he is doing a good job. <S> Tell him that as a result of all the "reviews" done together, you are now confident that the colleague can deal with problems by himself, without the need to interrupt you. <S> Of course, make yourself available in case of real problems. <S> With this approach you get to your target, without hurting your colleague's performance or feelings. <A> It's not a negative opinion, and you can just request to limit those interactions because you can follow them properly because of your schedule. <S> Another solution would be also allotting some specific time to go through everything, reducing the time disruptions and having the possibility to review more things at once. <S> So, maybe, think about regular meetings or specific time frames in which you are more "reachable" as a rule.
| There is no harm if you express your feeling about this, as a personal feedback. Organize regular meetings with this new team member with the express purpose of going through their queries and how they're progressing.
|
Should I be payed for overtime? I'm an Italian junior developer at my first work experience, I was hired barely 1 year ago. I'm currently working in a project for a start-up, one of my company's clients. I joined this project a few weeks ago, but there are some of my co-workers who are on this project since the beginning of the year. The project is immense, there are a lot of things to do and management is quite demanding, plus the client is very very in a hurry. There are deadlines to meet. My contract states I have to work from 9am to 6pm, but it happened once that I had to stay 1 hour longer, so I left at 7pm. The next day, I left on time but I had to work 1 hour from home, always because of a close deadline. Both times I didn't request to be paid extra for my overtime, also because the process is quite difficult. To be paid for the overtime, it needs to be approved from my line manager, who isn't at the client office, but in my company headquarter. Also, I talked about this with one of my coworkers, who is also a junior developer, and he puts a lot of unpaid overtimes. He often leaves at 7pm, sometimes even at 8pm or 9pm, but he didn't get paid for this, because he simply didn't tell this to my line manager. He said "If I need more time to work on my task, from the manager's perspective it could mean that I'm not good at doing my job, hence why I need more time. So, I shouldn't be paid, because it's my fault if I couldn't leave the office at 6pm" Should I do the same, aka not request to be paid for my overtime whenever there is a deadline and I can't complete the task on time, and there is need to stay longer? What should I say or do the next time it happen? <Q> Should I be payed for overtime? <S> Yes! <S> You are working extra hours so you should be paid for this extra work that you are performing for your company. <S> Not being paid for overtime means that you are working for free. <S> If you have to stay extra hours then you should be compensated for it. <S> If you are having issues completing tasks on time then you need to determine the cause to prevent this in the future. <S> Even if you are being paid for overtime, working extra hours is not healthy and may lead to burnout. <S> You should focus on not working overtime <S> but if you absolutely have to, make sure that you are paid or compensated in some other way ( e.g. time off ). <A> I'm an italian developer too, and have been in your situation before (and it's more than likely that I'll be there again in the future). <S> The short answer is yes, you should be paid for overtime . <S> The sad truth is that it's not going to happen. <S> I don't know what's your CCNL (for non-Italians: <S> CCNLs are standard contracts, set up and periodically updated by the government, along with major trade unions and company associations - you can deviate from them, but most companies just copy and paste their industry's, changing maybe the paycheck), but basically all the CCNLs have similar rules for overtime: it should be approved by the line manager prior of the overtime. <S> While there is a clear rationale for this rule in most traditional jobs (you have some warrantees, like you can refuse the overtime in certain situations and it should be equally distributed in a team), it also allows the most common dirty trick in our industry: you plan for the best and, if the employees cannot meet the deadline (which is the default, since your planning is overly optimistic), it's their choice doing unapproved overtime. <S> Technically this could land you in troubles with HR, but obviously your company does not have any problem with you working for free. <S> In any other industry, I will suggest you to contact your trade union, but union coverage in this industry is very low (and, in fact, most major unions just don't have a section for IT). <S> In this situation, the only thing I can suggest you is to move away from consulting companies to a company with an internal dev team (like your current customer), since they tend to treat their developers better. <A> I would like to add to the already good answer. <S> Say you get a task for 8 hours. <S> It costs you 10 hours and you work the 2 extra for free. <S> Then there is no record that the task took you longer then the given 8. <S> So next time you will again get a task too large for 8 hours. <S> If you work overtime for free, atleast let them know so they can adjust their scedule and/or deadlines. <S> If they can't they should hire someone extra or start paying you for extra time (but preferably the former especially for the long run). <S> Otherwise you will end up working longer hours for free structurally and that is not something you want. <S> It leads to stress, less personal time, a possible burnout and no extra dime to show for it. <A> With software development, occasional overtime is sometimes happens to hit a deadline. <S> In these cases as an employee, I wouldn't normally expect to be paid overtime. <S> If this ceases to be occasional, and becomes expected, routine, part of the job <S> then I would either expect to be paid overtime explicitly or have a salary rate significantly (20%) above market rates. <S> Without either of these, find a better employer and leave. <S> Don't hang around to gain poor quality experience. <S> You can gain better experience elsewhere. <S> This is what I am seeing here: <S> Your employer is selling the time of yourself and other junior developers to a company, and at that company there is continual pressure for unpaid overtime. <S> If, its because you are all junior developer and are being given "stretch tasks" that are triggering additional learning to complete, that more experienced developers would not need, then an experienced team lead would both factor that into the schedule, and also organise for some support and guidance to assist in the delivery. <S> This should not lead to you needing to work overtime - and if this seems like the closest match, talk to your manager for guidance on how to manage this customer. <S> It's possible that the customer is trying to "extract maximum value" simply pushing the schedule hard and seeing what happens. <S> They are probably paying a fixed daily rate, and want to get as much as they can done for their money. <S> If this is the case, your manager may put a stop to it, but if your manager is happy with this - look for a different job. <S> Working in IT body shops is the worst place to be a software developer. <S> It's quite possible that the customer has bitten off a bigger chunk of work that they can do, hence why you have been added to the project. <S> If this looks like it is a case of poor project management, flag this up to your manager, he may be able to sell project management services to this customer as well.
| In fact, if you do unapproved overtime, it is often stated in the contract that you are not entitled any compensation for it .
|
Applying for a job and grad school at the same time, knowing I would leave for grad school if possible I'm currently two years out of undergrad. I will be laid off soon as a result of my previous employer being acquired. Really unfortunate timing as I had already been planning to apply for Fall 2020 masters programs this year before knowing about the layoff. Now, I plan to look for temporary employment that will last me until Fall 2020 masters programs begin, in addition to continuing my grad school applications. I was wondering what people's opinions were on whether I should be upfront with recruiters and companies with my timeline and possibly look for contracting work or an extended internship, or whether I should apply for full time positions without letting possible employers know that I plan to leave in under a year. <Q> Your plan is to leave for graduate school next year. <S> But what you don't know is if you will be accepted, and if you will be accepted to a particular program. <S> I had a coworker who had to delay med school for a year because of a difficulty passing the MCAT. <S> You have no obligation to work forever for your employer. <S> So unless the required training for the position is so long that you will not be a productive employee long enough to justify the time and money spent on training, then the non-guarantee of grad school means you have no requirement to tell them about your plans. <S> Being upfront with the recruiters and companies is great when you are 100% certain, but when there is significant uncertainty narrowing your options just makes it hard to find a job. <S> And finding a job when you are facing unemployment is your main concern. <A> If you're sure you'd leave a job after a short period, then only applying for temporary or contract work would be appropriate. <S> You could leave without feeling that you've upset anyone and done the right thing. <S> OTOH, I think it's nearly a year, and new graduates often get better offers once they've got a year of experience. <S> If you did leave a permanent job, the worst that's likely to happen is that you'll have to explain it in future job interviews, which might make you look unprofessional. <A> You can start working full time and IF you will be accepted for a master degree program, you have at least two ways: quit your current job work parallel part-time
| Unless you know that you are leaving in August 2020, then looking for a job that will expire around the same time may lead to having to deal with unemployment next summer if the grad school plans change.
|
Compliance: Boss asked to buy software for team, that i built privately I work in Germany in the private sector, medium size: 2000-5000 employees. I work in an IT Department. Short Version: Boss asked to buy software for team, that i built on my own time I didn't build it with any intention to sell it to my Company and it is not written for the specific Needs of my company I responded that I feel honored but have concerns regarding compliance We have a team which deals with compliance Possible solution: A friend mentioned that its not a regulatory issue, but only company internal, so a subjective view that can be decided internally potential issue could be that Budget is used for private gain without benefit for the company we could show an overview of potential software on the market and show why mine is better for the company to the compliance team Question: Does anyone have additional ideas for the section "Possible solution" or (optimally) was in a similar situation? Background: For some Tasks we use software we buy from external firms. It is not my focus of work, but I saw that a colleague is using a software that is pretty expensive and seemed not really well written. I was curious if it is really badly written and if one can do better. So I worked for around 3/4 year in my private time and built a tool myself. Last week my boss told me about a bottleneck/problem they have with the software and that they struggle for weeks to reach the desired results. I told him I could have a look and showed him a way how to reach the desired results a few hours later. He was impressed and I showed him how I came up with the solution (including my tool). Next meeting he asked me if he can buy the tool somehow. I said, I feel really honored, but I am not sure, because of potential compliance issues. <Q> Does anyone have additional ideas for the section <S> "Possible solution" or (optimally) was in a similar Situation? <S> Yes. <S> You REALLY need a written contract for this type of thing. <S> Any details that need to be worked out: payments, support, access to source code, bug fixing, liability, rights to distribute, IP, etc. need to be written down and agreed on by both parties. <S> Than the contract needs to be reviewed by the company's HR team and legal teams to make sure it's fully in compliance with any policy or legal requirement. <S> Depending on the complexity and the amount of money involved, you can consider having your own lawyer look it over. <S> It <S> if's all good, then you can sign and everyone just does what's written in the contract. <S> It's easy to make reasonable rules when you are all still friends, it's a lot harder to do this in a conflict situation. <A> Here are some potential issues you can think of: <S> Is the ownership of the software clear? <S> Can <S> the manager / company claim at a later date that the tool was developed with company resources etc, and so the company is anyway the rightful owner of it? <S> From your description, it doesn't look like the manager is coming from this direction, but Legal/Finance definitely can. <S> What are the numbers involved? <S> Are they significantly larger than your annual pay, or a fraction of it? <S> Is it a significant amount for the company? <S> Depending on how large or small the numbers are, this will attract different kind of attention from others involved in the whole process. <S> Is there a precedent within your company where someone did it before? <S> It is much easier to overcome internal inertia when there is an example for a similar situation for the other folks to follow. <S> What are the post-sale expectation once you sell the software? <S> As pointed in comments, think if the company expect you to work on issues in it, on your own time later, or it is being sold as is. <A> On top of the previous answer, please consider that this smells of "Conflict of Interest" which is probably why you're (correctly) pointing it as a potential compliance issue. <S> Since you'll be acting as a supplier to your employer and the person with the decision-making power has what can be considered a close relationship with you, this situation can be interpreted as a conflict of interest because of the following factors: <S> You're directly benefitting from a company decision to invest in efficiency <S> Your boss' decision to buy your software might be interpreted as favoritism <S> Your boss buying your software - especially if there were no "due diligence" or a neutral party involved - might be interpreted as collusion <S> Depending on the company and how active and strict the controls are, this can get very ugly very quickly (I come from Latin America, which is regarded as a hotspot for fraud, so bear with my paranoia a little). <S> As a suggestion, I'd advise the following: Standard COI countermeasure: disclose it as soon as possible to a neutral party <S> so it gets documented and the appropriate measures are taken. <S> Usually the chain is your manager, then more specialized functions like HR, Legal or Finance, and then a specialized Compliance team (if you have it) <S> If you have a Purchases, Procurement or similar department in your company, advise your manager to get them involved as soon as possible. <S> It is their job to find the best possible supplier and do due diligence on why that's the best possible supplier including payment conditions and technical review of the code by a neutral party. <S> Pretty Wikipedia Link for further reading on conflict of interest.
| It is VERY important to work through all contingencies & potential conflicts BEFORE agreeing to something like this.
|
Being asked to give notice of resigning when I am only transferring to another department Is it common or Legal for a Company to ask an employee to put in their two weeks in to resign just to apply for a job in a different department within the same company, in the same building? <Q> It's not normal, length of service is important for lots of things. <S> Social Security and many other statutory benefits depend on lengthof service in many cases <A> In some countries, it's not very uncommon. <S> For example, in Germany, you are asked to resign before you get to sign your new contract. <S> I had this two times already, one time for a change of working hours and the other time for a promotion. <S> In both cases, I added a restriction to my resignation letter to just resigned for a new contract to take effect. <S> It was in both cases needed because you basically have to resign from your current position to get the new contract because of the size of our company in addition to the regulations by the union. <A> It's unusual. <S> Once you have a signed contract, you can resign. <S> But not before. <S> But even then there is downside. <S> An internal transfer is better. <S> Do they do this for external people that they hire? <S> Demand that they resign from their other job before they are able to sign the contract? <A> I'm in the US, but not in Texas, and I've never heard of a situation where a company asks you to resign to take another position in the same company. <S> Having done it myself, I'll say that the normal procedure (at least that I've observed and been through) is that you ask to be considered for a transfer - presumably with your supervisor's knowledge - and interview for the job just like another candidate. <S> If you get the job, you just transfer; if not, you stay in the job you're in. <S> (Depending on your boss and the situation, the latter possibility may be awkward, but that's getting off topic.) <A> You are doing things out of order. <S> You need to apply for the job, and secure the job first. <S> Once you have secured the job, then you should resign from your current position, so you can work the new position within the company. <S> Do not ever resign from a job without having one secured already, ever. <S> I have done this once in the past where I landed a job in the same company, and then I resigned from the current position I was working at the time. <S> The only difference is the new position was in a different building. <A> I have known of only one situation were somebody had to quit the company for what many would view as a internal transfer. <S> In that case there was a publicly known parent company but the two jobs were in two different subsidiaries. <S> The issue was that the benefit packages for those two companies were vastly different: one still had a pension, the other didn't; one had a small 401(k) match, the other had a large 401(k); one had unlimited sick leave the other one had 3 days per year. <S> The parent company spent 3 years merging the two parts of the company due to the vastly different benefits. <S> The rule to resign only kicked in when you were accepting the new position. <S> In all other cases I have either experienced, or observed, a person moving internally wasn't required or even asked to quit the company. <S> I have never heard of having to tell the current manager when applying for a position. <S> That notice would only happen after accepting the position.
| I've certainly never heard of requiring someone to resign just to pursue such another position within the company. This is very unusual in my experience. It may or may not be Illegal that does depend on country, it's not asign of a good employer in any case.
|
What to learn about a large company to prepare for interview questions for an Intern position? I have got an interview tomorrow. I am told that they will surely ask questions about the company. The company is one of the world's largest investment management firms so it's hard to learn everything about it since there is just so much data out there about the company. I'm an MBA Finance student and applied for role of Intern - Business Operations. What kind of questions should I expect about the company in an interview? And how could I prepare for them? <Q> There is no exhaustive list when trying to learn what a company does, but I've found below helped me in my search <S> Every large company has a unique culture, and they normally put information about that on their hiring website - you can use it to learn about the company. <S> Most largish companies tend to use a mix of approaches based on different teams preference to achieve the objective at hand - so you can pick up the top X hot trends for the role you've applied to, and ask questions around that. <S> This will be a conversation opener and allow you to learn about them. <S> You could get insights around this from extended network who already works there. <S> Finally, if the company produces some white papers/ blogs/ articles, you can have a look at the recent ones to ask questions around their content. <A> Collect some facts of the company that are related or somewhat relevant to the specific role you are applying for. <S> Also collect some general facts and link them with something related to you <S> (e.g. maybe the company has released a new product and you use this product / have written a thesis about something related). <S> Then during the interview bring up these facts proactively. <S> Because you have linked the facts to your specific resume / position, this will be possible in a natural way. <S> Also they may appreciate that you did not simply learn some key facts by heart but that you actually dealt with what that means for you and your new position. <S> By bringing up these points proactively you might decrease the probability of being asked something specific where you do not know the answer to. <S> However, if time permits, it is probabably best to also learn the most important key facts (even if they are not directly related to you or the vacant position) because you may be asked nevertheless during the interview and also because it is probably good to know at least the basic facts about a company you will potentially work for. <S> Also do some research on those aspects of the company that you are most enthusiastic about (e.g. a cool algorithm recently developed) <S> : If you are able to speak about some aspects of the company with genuine enthusiasm, this may improve the improssion you make during the interview significantly. <A> I run the interviews for interns in our departments and will often ask them what they know about the company. <S> The main thing that I'm looking for is that the intern has taken the time to research the company and produce some interesting knowledge. <S> I don't dig too much into detail, after all an intern generally is only just in their first starting position. <S> I would recommend these areas: <S> Where their offices are based Other companies they have worked with What their business generally deals with If the company has a mission statement, what it is (Roughly, you don't need to recite it by heart) <S> So don't panic too much, but make sure you have some knowledge about them and have checked their about page on their website. <S> If you have heard some positive news stories, that can also be a great boon to add to the conversation.
| Large companies also tend to have unique cultures within various teams at times, so you can try learning about the culture of the team etc that you will end up joining.
|
Don't have the hiring manager's contact info. Should I send a thank you email via LinkedIn? I learned from the recruiter that the hiring manager is the CMO, who I presented to (along with two would-be peer and a Director) a couple days ago. But I don't have the hiring manager's info. Should I send a LinkedIn message thanking, or just to the recruiter asking her to pass it on? Also, how soon should I send it? The interview was Friday. <Q> It's pretty easy to deduce someone's work email address. <S> If you have the recruiter's email, you could work out the pattern to email the CMO directly. <S> As opposed to the other two answers, I see the thank you note as a very valuable tool for a few reasons: 1) Showing appreciation is a good thing (however, LinkedIn is not always the right method of communication) <S> 2) <S> It reminds the interviewer about you and gets them thinking about you as a candidate 3) <S> You can use that thank you letter to remind them why you're the right candidate. <S> Thank them for the interesting conversation about "X" and how your experience with "Y" can directly help solve the problem they have with "X". <S> Another option, if you can't track down the email, albeit slower, is to send a thank you note to the office addressed to the CMO. <S> Best of luck,— Ask Tigress <A> Don't thank the managers directly unless you get another interview or get hired. <S> If I or another manager had thank you from all the people we interviewed I might just delete my LinkedIn account. <S> Honestly mutual appreciation is implied to me as you want a job <S> and they want a good employee. <S> Keep the appreciative attitude, but don't seat the missed thanks. <S> I was on your side before and felt similarly, but <S> after being on the other side, it's not that big of a deal to thank or miss the thanks. <S> If your in the interview good idea, but after you leave wait on them and deal with the recruiter. <A> The good time to thank is the end of the interview. <S> This is the time to show your attitude towards the interview. <S> Any contact later, except for another round of interviews or replying to accept/reject the contract is considered overreaction and may raise a red flag <S> - it may seem you are stalking on them. <S> In the excptions above, you can thank for being promoted to the next step or for them informing you about the result. <S> And again; the thank, if you want to thank, should be part of the immediate response from you. <S> As mutt already stated, if the hiring manager was to get thank-you from all people interviewed, they will block any LinkdeIn traffic and blacklist all the interviewees.
| The sentiment is nice, but either thank at the end of the interview or after hired.
|
I'm working remote and company may want to change that I joined this company around 1.5 months ago on a contract basis. They are mainly based in the USA but there are 2 other employees in the UK including me. We have been working remotely and just meeting on Mondays to discuss the upcoming week of work. They've just hired one more person who is starting soon and now the lead person in the UK (London) says we will get an office (very small one in WeWork) in around 1 month. (I think the lead is just lonely at home and wants an office to see people to be honest). Why I do want to stay remote? My life is 10x better without commuting, more sleep, less stress, easy to go the gym right after work, I don't have to pre-prep my lunch, and more. My home office environment is unbeatable, it's quiet and I have a giant monitor ultra-wide monitor, very good chair (all equipment is beyond the price that company would pay for btw). I have a very high body temperature and I cannot regulate this in an open shared office (sounds made up but this is a fact). They are very happy with the current level of work I'm putting out. The other employees are Data Scientists so it may make sense they're in the office to collaborate with ideas on whiteboards which seems common in that role. I'm the only engineer in the UK and I don't see any value being stuck sweating in a tiny open office. How do I politely tell them I'd like to keep my current working setup if/when they move the rest of the UK people into that small open office? I do not have any worry about them saying "no" as I can find another contract within a month or so. <Q> If your contract don't state place (or method) of where work should be performed then adding such requirment would require appendix to your contract. <S> And that leave you open for negotiation. <S> Requiring you to commute to workplace means your income will be lower. <S> You agreed on X pay based on the fact that you will work from home. <S> Commute will change that pay to X - cost of commuting. <S> And that should be your first argument. <S> Second would be price of matching office equpiment to yours. <S> In my personal opinion is always good to show increased cost on employeer side that can be held against "feeling of better productivity". <A> I joined this company around 1.5 months ago <S> They've just hired one more person ... and now the lead person in the UK <S> Your company has hired 2 people in less than 2 months, can it be on an expansion mode? <S> Since the newest member is a lead, maybe he knows about these plans more than you would? <S> Now the lead person in the UK (London) says we will get an office (very small one in WeWork) in around 1 month. <S> Given this is WeWork, the lead is probably looking for a place for all to work together when required. <S> And in case if newer employees join who want an office, then they have a place to do so. <S> If so, the expectation from his behalf may not be that no more remote allowed (because they can end loosing a good resource like you). <S> I think the lead is just lonely at home and wants an office to see people to be honest <S> That looks like a personal opinion, which is not more than a conjecture at this point without supporting data :) <S> How do I politely tell them I'd like to keep my current working setup if/ <S> when they move the rest of the UK people into that small open office? <S> You can set up a 1 on 1 meeting with him, and discuss his plans around the future at work. <S> You can even broach the topic of <S> are we expanding with him in this discussion, and let him know the reasons that you've listed in your post to continue the remote arrangement. <S> I would suggest to do this in person on the Mondays <S> you go to meet them, and try to avoid mentioning Pay changes for commute as that doesn't seem to be your primary objective. <A> How do I politely tell them I'd like to keep my current working setup if/ <S> when they move the rest of the UK people into that small open office? <S> You just talk. <S> You explain, as you have here, that you would prefer to continue working from home, and you explain why. <S> I do not have any worry about them saying "no" as I can find another contract within a month or so. <S> That's good. <A> How do I politely tell them I'd like to keep my current working setup if/ <S> when they move the rest of the UK people into that small open office? <S> The most polite way is referring to the non-existing location in your contract. <S> When they first approach you about moving, you can say you are willing to renegotiate the contract if they plan on incorporating a fixed office in it highlighting that one of the reasons you joined them was home office . <S> The renegotiation terms, given your conditions would include: Being paid for commute time as worktime, as that is an additional invested time that wasn't in your initial contract Being paid for commute costs that weren't in your initial negotiations Getting your own office with brand model chair, separate AC controls, etc. <S> Being paid for your further lost comfort, say 20% raise on the spot <S> Then they will evaluate their options and depending on how much you are worth to them and how much office presence is worth to them choose one of the following: <S> Let you go as the office culture is an integral part of the company <S> Let you work from home regardless what the general rules are Grant you what you asked for, in which case you need to be absolutely sure you can hold up your end
| It seems that they are going through a fair amount of work and will expect you to join the others in the work space.
|
Stop engineer from planning "bully projects" I work for a enginering company where a few senior engineers got into a large fight that caused a lot of concern. The more senior engineer "stone walled" the not as senior engineer apparently, and the junior engineer now runs an "automation team", whose job is to find inefficencies in the company, and improve or automate them. The junior engineer gets to pick any part of the company to improve, but he is holding a grudge against my division's most senior engineer, and keeps automating tasks for just my division. It has a lot of engineers nervous that we'll become redundant, and some of our best engineers have either transferred to other units, or quit. Our team leaders have talked to this engineer, and he insists he's not being a bully, but he's just "fixing whatever problems come to mind first". We all agree on my team that he's trying to single out our division (most of the Windows developers in the company) first in order to get our most senior engineer fired (due to not enough people under his management). How can we approach human resources to stop this bullying behavior, or get him to automate stuff that isn't our work exclusively? My boss keeps telling the team not to worry about layoffs, but we don't believe him, and since the project is saving the company money, we don't know how to properly ask for help. <Q> Based on the details in the linked question, your division lead, "Chan", acted against his employer's interests in order to ensure his team continues to be paid for work that (based on the information available) is easily automated (how can a team of 200 developers be replaced with a script? <S> Is the company <S> that inefficient?). <S> Also, your division lead sounds like he's resting on his laurels and is averse to retraining for either himself or his division. <S> He sounds like a terrible leader that has effectively branded his entire division as inefficient, untrainable, and outmoded. <S> Personally, I would recommend updating your CV/resume every night and prepare for the worst. <S> Remember: "HR IS NOT YOUR FRIEND" . <S> Complaining about someone saving the company money (millions of dollars potentially) to HR in this way might likely won't help you out, especially if this much money is involved. <S> Is your company offering re-training programs for your division? <S> It sounds like Chan may have precluded this, based on his comments in the linked question. <A> You can't stop Automation. <S> When automation occurs in general, its aimed at increasing productivity by removing easy and repetitive tasks and allowing an employee to focus on more important work. <S> If its the case that these automation procedures are being targeted at making people redundant, I would go back and look at any team which are under performing or struggling due to a high work load and have the automation team focus there, because there will be noticeable profits when increasing productivity, instead of trying to make people redundant. <S> For example, if sales is having a hard time processing orders, automate that. <S> It creates more work over all. <S> If engineering is having a hard time completing all the work. <S> Automate parts of that to increase the number of completed projects. <S> As your team is currently being automated then your going to have it tough. <S> Automation usually requires there be a very well defined procedure in place, <S> because Robots have a hard time accounting for the unknown or exceptions (there are so many exceptions). <A> How can we approach human resources to stop this bullying behavior, or get him to automate stuff that isn't our work exclusively? <S> You don't. <S> This employee is not exhibiting any bullying behavior, he is simply doing his job and doing it well enough to have some others worried apparently. <S> If you approach HR with this "problem" you will only hurt your career within this company. <S> You are essentially telling the company that your team's inefficient and costly method of work is better for the company than what the automation engineer is doing. <S> HR will almost always side with the company on these matters. <S> I would recommend that you polish up your resume and start looking for a new place to work because your team's resistance to progress does not bode well for your future at this company.
| If your team is actually doing tasks that are very easily automated, I would personally look into retraining, as all industries will be looking to automate their work force (like if your job is literally following a manuscript, you should be slightly concerned that your aren't developing many skills or could be made redundant fairly easily).
|
How to advance career into an advanced management position when no opportunities exist? I'm a software engineer but want to advance my career into management, ideally in something like a senior architect role. However, I have no idea how to do this, because the company I work for is very small and there are no such roles available. I feel like I have kind of worked myself up to and am trapped at a ceiling where I am highly valued by my employer, but not able to move up any more or increase my salary to what I feel like I would be commensurate with the contribution I could make in a more high level role. The typical advice I hear for advancing and earning more money is to switch companies. But how can you switch jobs and jump into a management / software architect position when you haven't had a lot of formal management in your current position (aside from the occasional "wear many hats" roles common in many small companies)? Also, at a new company I feel like I would basically be starting over. Maybe not from scratch, but I would be "doomed" to continue doing the same sort of work that I feel I have already outgrown for more years "paying my dues" as I watched for opportunities to show initiative and position myself for a promotion, whereas in my present job I have been there many years and were there any management opportunities it would be a lot easier to work my way into one already. I have done a lot of work in my spare time which could be considered the domain of a senior software architect (I have literally written hundreds of pages of notes, analysis and other documents including some formal specifications on the architecture and implementation of software systems, but it's not anything my employer is even interested in or has a use for - other than bits and pieces here which have proved useful and valuable.) I really want a role that would let me utilize my abilities in this regard, ideally in managing a team of software engineers to provide leadership and vision. But I don't know if this really transfers well beyond looking impressive in an interview into an actual job of the type I would like to have. If I had the connections and the wherewithal I would actually be seriously interested in something entrepreneurial, but being part of a company helps to ground me as to what people really want and will pay for as opposed to what I could ideally create. Additionally, my annual review is coming up in a couple of weeks and I'm looking for advice on how I should approach it. In my last review I put out feelers and subtly touched on my long term goals, and the general feel I got was one of support and accommodation with the caveat that I'm pretty much already being paid at the top end for the job description I'm doing and that my long term goals don't really align with company objectives as it's not quite in the same industry. I don't want to burn any bridges, as I can't really afford to just jump ship, and I'm happy to be a loyal and valuable worker, but at the same the same time I feel somewhat discouraged by the fact that my actual job sometimes seems more like a distraction which takes time and prevents me from accomplishing something more remarkable. I feel underutilized by easily meeting or exceeding what is expected of me while still having enough spare time (I work a 40 hour week and working more isn't really encouraged) to put effort into architecting systems which have the potential to be far more valuable and useful to a much greater number of people. I can't give up my vision or my job, the only alternative - how to advance into a position where they are one and the same? <Q> how can you switch jobs and jump into a management / software architect position You apply for those sorts of positions. <S> And it's correct that often it's best to switch companies. <S> Perhaps invest in yourself, take a management course, two major benefits to this are that you learn whats involved, and you get a fancy certificate. <S> Management is a skill like any other, the courses don't teach a great deal, but they're almost impossible to fail and you get the paper. <S> I feel somewhat discouraged by the fact that my actual job sometimes seems more like a distraction which takes time and prevents me from accomplishing something more remarkable. <S> Welcome to the 99% of the World which is earning a living in an office. <S> If you really want to accomplish something remarkable, in my experience you invest in it yourself while your daily slog pays your bills. <S> Very few people get a free ride to 'remarkable'. <S> But some truly amazing things can be accomplished if you commit yourself to them. <A> I understand you're bored, looking for more responsibility and looking for a bigger paycheck. <S> Software architecture is one road. <S> Management is another. <S> Increased salary and being less bored are actually not directly related to either of those. <S> "Managing a team of software engineers" is quite often not the same as "provide leadership and vision". <S> Places tend to group them together, but in reality a lot of management is just boring paperwork and dealing with things your underlings / other people in some other part of the company have broken. <S> If you want truly want to "provide leadership and vision", then you're looking for a team lead role or possibly a mid-level architect role. <S> You'll be able to extend your current knowledge and improve your people skillz. <S> You need lots of people skillz to be an effective architect. <S> Or manager. <S> And you need years of practice to get good at them. <S> Otherwise you'll be one of <S> those managers , you know, the ones that real engineers try to get away from. <S> So, my suggestion is you improve your people skills. <S> Build good working relationships with people in other areas of the company. <S> Or if it's really small, start going onsite and visiting customers and building your people skills there. <S> Learn how to connect and deliver what people want. <S> If you really want to be a senior technical person, then you're going to have to leave your current org. <S> And yes, you may have to "pay your dues", but hopefully at a bigger company that has growth opportunities. <S> In any scenario, you'll need better people capabilities, so go and do it. <A> Could it be that you're trying to make too big of a jump at once? <S> Without knowing the specific role requirements, but going from a Senior Engineer role into an advanced management role sounds like quite a leap. <S> I know some places expect their Senior Engineers to have act as a mentor to Junior and Mid-level Engineers, but this is not the same kind of personnel management that a Lead or Team Leader performs. <S> As mentioned in a comment, you could move sideways into Senior role at a larger company, and then work up from there. <S> You could also look for a Lead role as a stepping stone to higher management. <S> Either way, you should easily be able to do this without taking a hit on your income (in fact, moving to a similar role another company will usually increase your salary) - especially if you are not in too much of a hurry to move on/up.
| If you don't want to go the people route (ie, you don't want to be a manager), you can try the project management route, and get better at planning work.
|
Are there drawbacks to first releasing all features, and then fixing bugs? It has been decided that the software engineering team I work in should: write code for all the features our product should include by date X after date X , only fix bugs I want the best for my team and for my project, but have some doubts about whether this is the best approach. There are plenty of bugs in our existing features, and I feel we should fix them before thinking about adding new features. Also, I fear that having a deadline after which no new feature can be introduced will incentivize developers to write code with lots of technical debt. Are my fears justified? If so, how can I best communicate my concerns? <Q> It has been decided that the software engineering team I work in should: <S> write code for all the features our product should include by date <S> X <S> after date X, only fix bugs <S> On my engineering team, we don't consider a feature development complete until all of the automation tests have check-ins and running on our daily builds. <S> Your automation tests will catch the bulk of your bugs, but you should still allocate time for manual exploratory testing and stress testing your feature. <S> We don't release the feature until both manual testing and stress testing have been completed and the critical issues addressed. <S> What would trouble me if by write code for all the features our product should include by date <S> X <S> You really just mean the application code, and then you all manual test all of the components of the feature together. <S> You really need to have unit testing on the individual pieces of the feature and integration/system tests to tie them all together. <S> Manual testing should really be just reserved for exploratory testing or a last resort for tests that cannot be easily automated. <A> Are there drawbacks to first releasing all features, and then fixing bugs? <S> From a consumer perspective, nothing drives me crazy like buggy software, especially when it comes with a high price tag. <S> A lifetime ago, I also worked in tech support for a company that took this approach and it was a nightmare. <S> I must have said, "We're aware of the issue and our engineers are working on it" 100 times a day. <S> I get that management has a lot of pressure to start generating revenue as quickly as possible <S> but they call it technical debt for a reason. <S> In addition to making future development more costly and time consuming, nothing will make customers flock to your competitors faster than software that doesn’t work and <S> once you lose their trust it will be very hard to earn it back. <A> There should be some sort of QA process with your new code. <S> Your developers should be writing tests for their code, and those tests slowly become part of a larger regression database to prevent currently working features from failing. <S> It is impossible to tell you if fixing current bugs or implementing new features should be the focus without more information. <S> Sometimes, feature releases are contract-driven, while bug fixes are not. <S> Other times, critical bugs necessitate pushing back features. <S> You can bring up your concern to your management or try to organize better QA practices to minimize the technical debt, but ultimately it may not be your decision.
| It's important to note that you'll likely never ship a feature that's 100% bug free, but at the very least you'll have high priority bugs addressed and a roadmap on when to fix the other issues.
|
How to maintain composure when a dedicated employee gets fired without any proper clarification? This can happen in any workplace especially in those workplaces where a collaborative mindset suddenly gets invaded by autocratic and top-down mindset and new rules are forced on people, with examples being made of those who disagree. This can happen to anyone and I know I don't have enough composure myself to remain calm and so cool as other people. What are the tips and psychology tidbits I should keep in mind to be mentally ready to face any situation myself in future? <Q> When treated unfairly, the most important thing to remember is that you have done nothing wrong. <S> False accusations, and abusive management can cause us to question ourselves. <S> The first thing to do is to avoid asking your self the question "Whatcould I have done differently?" <S> or "What did I do to provoke this". <S> Sometimes managers are just bad people. <S> Organizations can go in different directions, things go wrong, and the regime needs a scapegoat. <S> Pack your bags, it's time to leave. <S> Look to your peers for guidance. <S> This will help keep you centered. <S> Keep things positive. <S> Remember that you are the same person you were yesterday. <S> While your time at this given job/organization may be over, that's a reflection on THEM not you. <S> start networking. <S> You'd be amazed at what kind of help can come from nowhwere <A> If it's you who got fired, you look for a new job or get professional legal advice if you think it's both unfair <S> and you can win a legal battle. <S> If it's someone else, then you don't know the full story, and mind your own business. <S> Many places anyone can get fired at any time, some places with no reason given at all. <S> They may have legal recourse, but observers usually don't. <A> where a collaborative mindset suddenly gets invaded by autocratic and top-down mindset <S> You need to understand that, if you give your time and work to a company, the product of the work belongs to the company. <S> The company does not owe you anything. <S> What are the tips and psychology tidbits I should keep in mind to be mentally ready to face any situation myself in future? <S> That said, it is also true that the relationships you build, the experience you had is yours. <S> As well as is the decision whether you keep working for said company or not. <S> And while the company does not owe you anything, you don't owe the company either. <S> You decide for yourself, whether you are still happy at that place, or whether you want to move on.
| Know when to walk away: if upper management is behind the decision, there will be no appeal to reason, no fairness, and no mercy. If you are being reassured by your peers, you will be less likely to blame yourself. A CEO I once knew gave me this advice: Collect people and ask for help.
|
Being told that I can't have a raise because of contract restrictions I work at a large international company, but technically sent here as a contract worker for a 3rd party. Initially, this job was basic phone tech support. There is also a "second level" that they can promote employees to when there is an opening, but it's still very basic troubleshooting. Two months ago I was about to be laid off with a lot of other people after 6 months working there, but interviewed and took a programming test for a programming position. On the last day of the two week notice that they had given me, I was told they wanted me to stay on for the new position. I was extremely excited because my goal was to eventually get my foot in the door for this type of work. When I asked about a pay raise, they said they couldn't give me one because this is a brand new position that's not in the ongoing contract and I'm technically still first level. Eventually they decided to say I was second level for the $2 dollar raise. They always send a department wide email around when a new person is promoted too. So people are asking me in the halls, "aren't you the developer?" because they're surprised that I'm just now "second level", which means I've been making a first level salary for two months, and now still only making a second level salary. This is obviously embarrassing because it's like finding out your lawyer is being paid barely above minimum wage. In reality, I'm not even at the low end of what an entry level developer would make in my city. Is it possible that a contract like this couldn't be changed? I'm thinking about just doing the work for 6 months to a year, then applying to other jobs with my new experience. <Q> Polish your CV and start looking for new opportunities. <S> In IT industry with some skills and experience you will find a good job pretty quickly. <S> If you want to stay at your current company, I would recommend to prepare yourself first(list a points why you should get a raise) and discuss it with your manager. <S> Wish you all the best! <A> In fact, I would say that if your goal is to become a programmer, this may be your only practical path. <S> It's hard enough to get a programming job if you already have experience; trying to get hired if you can only put technical support on your resume <S> will probably not net you any offers for programming positions. <S> I was actually in the exact opposite position from you at one time. <S> I was working as a developer and the company decided to lay off all their programmers and farm out the code to a company in India. <S> They told me I was being "vertically transferred" to 3rd tier technical support. <S> So I was supposed to do technical support for the rewrite. <S> I told them I wasn't interested and got another job. <S> I have never for a moment regretted it. <S> It would have been a career-killer move. <S> My advice to you would be to not worry about the salary for now. <S> The experience which you are getting is far more valuable, and will translate into a much bigger salary hike once you are able to cash it in on another programming job. <S> Dig in and become a programmer. <S> Learn new skills. <S> Find out what languages and tools are "hot" right now and go through the tutorials. <S> Then, once you have a year of that which you can put on your resume, hit the job boards and find something better. <S> Of course, you don't have to wait a year, but be cautious about your job search. <S> If your current company puts you back on the termination list that you just escaped, you will have lost an opportunity that may never come again. <A> Terminology: You have the Client (the company where you are actually doing work) and you have the Shop (the company that employs you and rents you out to the Client). <S> You don't say who told you that you couldn't be given a raise because "the contract doesn't allow it", but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts it was the Client. <S> The Shop can't just unilaterally raise your rate, without approval from the Client. <S> The Shop most certainly CAN ask the Client about raising your rate, given that your job description has changed to a MUCH higher level. <S> The Client most certainly CAN ask the Shop to modify the contract to give you a higher rate, if they want to, and it is in the Shop's best interests to go along with the change. <S> (There are two sub-possibilities: <S> the Shop's fees on you stay the same, or the Shop's fees go up as your rate goes up. <S> If their fee goes up when your rate goes up, they make MORE money off of you by getting you a better rate. <S> Even if their fee DOESN'T change, by getting you the higher rate, they retain you and they keep making money off of you. <S> They win either way.) <S> Talk to your Shop. <S> Ask them to discuss raising your rate with the Client. <S> Meanwhile, get the experience, and update your CV. <S> It sounds to me as though the Client is taking advantage of an opportunity to get a Developer for the price of a second-level Tech Support guy, screwing the Tech Support guy in the process. <S> Oh, and another thing. <S> When you talk with your Shop, point out that you are now doing a Developer's job, and, if they don't get anywhere with the Client on getting you a raise, ask them to consider moving you to a Client who needs Developers, as opposed to basic phone tech support. <S> Their profit on a Developer is likely to be a lot higher than their profit on a basic phone jockey. <S> (What you DON'T say, but is implicit, is that they are not the only Shop in town.)
| I would say this is a great opportunity for you to be able to get some experience as a developer, and to be able to put development experience on your resume.
|
Feeling bad about going home at the end of the shift Does anyone also feel like they should stay extra hours at work or feel bad if leave on time while others are still there?I don't have a shift sheet to fill or any control of my arrivals/departure at work. My bosses told me I'm doing 9am to 6pm and that they want us to have a life outside work. It's not the office culture to do extra but I'm always the first one to leave at 6pm sharp. I feel bad about going home at 6pm even if I finished everything for the day or if there isn't any urgency that can be postponed. Also I am one of the first people to arrive everyday at 9am while they are usually late. Does anyone feel like that also? Should I ask them for feedback/how to do that without sounding suspicious and guilty or insecure? Can it be a bad thing to leave on time, career wise? <Q> Does anyone also feel like they should stay extra hours at work or feel bad if leave on the time and others are still there? <S> When I first started my professional career, I used to feel that way. <S> I was in a carpool, and had to leave in order to get a ride home. <S> Most of my co-workers were still working. <S> Eventually, I learned not to measure myself based on what others do or don't do. <S> That said, after a few years I decided I wanted to get ahead quicker. <S> I stopped using the carpool, I put more effort into work and typically stayed later. <S> Further on in my career I always got in early, often stayed late, and often worked extra from home. <S> I enjoyed my work a lot. <S> Over my career I averaged a 50+ hour week. <S> In the early years it was less. <S> In the later years, more. <S> I wouldn't suggest that everyone needs to do that. <S> But it worked out great for me. <A> Can it be a bad thing to leave on time, career wise? <S> This is entirely dependant on the company. <S> I've worked in places where if you left on time you would be considered "not a team player". <S> I've also heard from friends places where it was almost like a race every day to see who left last as if they were hoping to get a pat on the head from management. <S> Current place I work is extremely flexible and no one is watching you. <S> It varies. <S> Some places will expect you to be "dedicated" others will have "work-life balance". <S> I've found the shallower and more narrow-minded the workplace (and boss - especially more so if they are not from an engineering background) <S> the more they will expect you to stay longer hours (especially if they are paying you a lot of money). <S> In these places you will need to go with the status quo and if you are unhappy look for another place to work. <A> Also I am one of the first people to arrive everyday at 9am while they are usually late. <S> Well, there you go. <S> They are arriving later and staying later. <S> You are arriving earlier and leaving earlier. <S> You're working the same amount of hours. <S> Why would you feel bad leaving earlier when you started earlier? <S> Makes no sense. <A> If you want feedback on the impact of leaving early, I would suggest you talk to your colleagues to see what their thoughts and ideas are. <S> Chances are there will be a couple of stories about some people who leave early and the potential condition of their careers now. <S> People stay back because there is a culture of staying back. <S> Your boss seems to want to support a work-life balance so this could just be a result of a previous employee or manager who enforced this policy. <S> Talk to your colleagues because chances are, there is a reason they stay back. <S> Even if it is as trivial as "I stay back because I don't want to look bad". <A> Sounds to me like this is a company that might have a "flexible working hours" policy, where they don't care so much about when you get there and when you leave, as long as you put the hours in. <S> You get there earlier, you get to leave earlier - get there at 9am, leave at 6pm; get there at 10am, leave at 7pm; get there at 7am, leave at 4pm. <S> You can check this by consulting your contract and/or company handbook; if it doesn't say anything about it, you can bring it up with your boss to check whether or not this is actually the case. <S> If it is, you have nothing to worry about, and nothing to feel guilty about, either. <S> It's just the system working as intended.
| This could be because of your boss or because a colleague wants to get a promotion, or because there is a correlation with people leaving early and them being fired, etc etc. We each need to find our own way, without regard to what others do.
|
Can I reuse the code of an application written in my spare time if it has been deployed and used in the internal company network? I have written a small application to offer a service to all employees where I work. This was done outside of work almost 100% using my personal laptop (only small fixes were done at work mostly related to deployment on company's servers). This application is used by several dozens persons, but it is just out of convenience (it aggregates some information from multiple systems in easier to consume format). Since this was done outside of existing projects and it is far from being important, there is no paper trail related to copyright, documentation or similar for this application. Some presentations were made, but it basically just works without any copyright information. I am wondering if I can reuse parts of this application's code base. The context is an European company operating in an Eastern European country within European Country. Question: Can I reuse the code of an application written in my spare time if it has been deployed and used in the internal company network? <Q> I am wondering if I can reuse parts of this application's code base. <S> Given the information presented, I would just go ahead and use it. <S> Legal problems over it seem very unlikely and easily met if they occur. <S> If not then you're safe. <A> Rewrite it. <S> This is typically one of the most rewarding exercises for a developer because you can revisit all your architectual choices and hopefully make an even better application. <S> To be sure you do not accidentially copy from the existing application, don't look at the old sources and use a newer implementation language. <S> Learn C#. Or <S> F#. <S> Or a web framework. <S> Have fun <A> tl;dr Have a conversation with your supervisor and ask. <S> "It won't be a problem if I provide versions of that XYZ program to other people, will it? <S> " If your supervisor says, "go for it.... <S> " <S> you're done. <S> If your supervisor balks, then you have some really strong arguments in your favor. <S> You made it on personal time to "scratch a personal itch", to make your own work life a little easier <S> It was a gift from you to <S> your co-workers "hey, hey, try this ... <S> you'll get the thing done quicker. <S> " and it has spread. <S> That's good! <S> It doesn't relate to your company's core businesses, only to its handling of necessary administrivia. <S> People outside the company have heard about it and want it too. <S> (say this one subtly) "Boss, is it really your preference to get into a legal arm-wrestling contest about this? <S> It isn't my preference. <S> Let's just say OK and move on. <S> If you still don't get the OK, you probably never would have gotten it from this company. <S> They've told you they're rigidly possessive. <S> It's better to know that about them now rather than five years from now. <S> If they say "go for it" you can just jump in. <S> If they don't go for it, you can think through how to proceed knowing they lay a claim to some of the intellectual property (the source code). <S> Finally, a suggestion: Please consider releasing your stuff under an open-source license, and uploading it to github or somewhere. <A> Disregard all the other answers posted and immediately consult a copyright lawyer before you do anything. <S> Have him or her review your employment contract. <S> You may be perfectly in the clear. <S> However, wording in your employment agreement, that you agreed to by signing,and the fact your work is using the code might give them a legitimate legal claim that they own it. <A> Disregard all the other answers and talk to your manager. <S> It seems you wrote an application in your own spare time which would make you the copyright holder. <S> You then took your code to work, fixed a few bugs at work, and my be your colleagues will fix more problems. <S> So now this is a bit messy. <S> The best outcome would be that you and the company agree that you are the copyright owner, and <S> by using that code at work you gave the company an irrevocable license to use it. <S> Anything where you don’t agree might become ugly, for both sides. <S> Best to talk to your manager before this happens.
| Check your contract though, there may be something along the lines of 'all code you produce during your term of employment belongs to the company'. This is a "small application" written by you so it should not be that much work to rewrite from scratch.
|
Is it unethical to take a can of soda from the kitchen fridge after work hours? At my company there are three kitchens that are stocked to the brim with sodas and seltzer waters. They're there for us and we're allowed to have as many as we want. Prior to leaving the office I'll make a pit stop to the kitchen and will fill up my water bottle, but on more than one occasion I've put a can of soda in my backpack and have taken it home with me. Is it unethical of me to do so? I mean, it's true that the drinks are for us but deep down I feel like they're really for us during work hours. <Q> I think as long as you're not filling a sack of them, you're ethically fine. <S> That being said, you could find yourself in hot water if it's written somewhere that they're for you during work hours, and then find yourself on the wrong side of someone. <S> You could be terminated for theft. <S> I'd trust your gut on this and leave the sodas where they are instead of stashing one for home. <A> Is it chintzy of me to do so? <S> I mean, it's true that the drinks are for us but deep down I feel like they're really for us during work hours. <S> I think existing answers are way too harsh here. <S> Is it technically speaking against the rules? <S> Maybe, that depends on what the rules are. <S> But what are the chances anyone will chastise you for taking a free can of drink for the journey home? <S> About zero. <S> And yes, if you're chucking 10 cans in your bag every evening so you've got a nice stash for the weekend party <S> , obviously that's much more of an issue. <S> But essentially a can for the journey every now and then? <S> It'd take a right stuck up sod to make an issue over that. <S> If it's really weighing on your mind, check with your boss. <S> But if I saw an employee doing this, it wouldn't even cross my mind they were doing something against the rules. <A> Yes, it's chintzy. <S> But you're asking because you know it's also unethical. <A> It's bad form, stop doing it. <S> While there's nothing illegal or even more than a tiny bit unethical, it just plain looks bad, and can actually come back to bite you hard. <S> Management may not act directly against you, but they may pull the benefit from everyone. <S> And when they announce that they are no longer providing complimentary beverages due to abuse of the program, your coworkers will find out who the culprit was. <S> If there are times when you are that thirsty at the end of the day, get the soda and drink it at your desk instead of taking it with you. <S> If for some reason you really need that soda "to go", ask your manager if it's okay. <S> It may seem like a small thing, but your character is made out of a collection of small things. <S> Now, this approach also helps you to be beyond reproach. <S> EDITED TO ADD (with a hat tip to Leon, for inspiring this) <S> If someone else is taking more than the occasional soda, but taking a bunch and depleting the supply, they might blame you for all of it if someone sees you taking it without telling someone. <S> However, if you ask your manager and let him know that you are taking one every time you do, and they notice a bunch missing, your manager will know you are not the culprit. <S> Which sounds better? <S> THIS <S> Huh? <S> Bodrov? <S> No, he took one home last week, but he hasn't been sneaking them out. <S> He always tells me when he's grabbing one. <S> He's not the thief <S> OR THIS <S> Hmmm, A whole bunch of soda has been disappearing. <S> I think someone said they saw Bodrov grabbing something out of the fridge before he left... <A> Is it chintzy of me to do so? <S> Yes, because instead of using your own money, you're grabbing free drinks from the office. <S> I mean, it's true that the drinks are for us but deep down I feel like they're really for us during work hours. <S> I agree with taking 1 drink home on your way out of the office <S> isn't a big deal. <S> Every company is different. <S> I used to work for a startup that offered drinks and snacks. <S> One day the COO's young children came to visit. <S> She gave them a plastic Trader Joe's shopping bag and told them to fill 'er up. <S> Then they took the bag home. <S> Your mileage may vary. <A> The risks (if someone will ever search for a reason to fire you, that might be used as a pretext, also you may make a greedy impression) are much more severe than the gain (free sodas). <S> Admittedly, it is unlikely that it will ever have the consequences above, but even if the probability is small, it is not worth it. <S> Also it doesn't seem to be partcicularly ethical if, as you assume, the drinks are intended for during working hours. <A> If the company needs to lay off someone they could accuse you of theft, and then you’re stuck. <S> So better clarify with your manager first. <S> From an ethical point of view: If you have the choice between leaving on time, getting a drink from a shop which takes five minutes, and getting your bus, or staying five minutes later, grabbing a drink from the fridge and getting your bus, your employer will prefer the latter. <S> Or say you work without a break and take a can on your way out, while your colleague takes two drink breaks during their work time. <S> Your employer should prefer what you do (although some superiors lack the necessary brain power).
| Yes, if you find yourself in really hot water over something else they might feasibly choose to use it against you. Stop taking the sodas on your way home. If you become the guy who won't even take a soda at the end of the day without asking management, you are going to earn a reputation of being extremely honest which this day and age is a HUGE plus. Unless there's an explicit rule written down, it's really up to each individual to determine what they are comfortable with. First, it is risky.
|
As external consultant, how to deal with client employee who can't deliver? I am in a bizarre situation. I am working as an external consultant on project basis. I am not a standalone consultant and I am an employee of a company providing consultancy services. I have talked with my direct manager as well as with my team colleagues with which I am working on the project. Team colleagues are all client employees. Client employee with which I should tightly work and cooperate, either is not capable to deliver the solution or he is not the best match for the position. However, all the team members and I believe the client as well, are aware of this situation. I, personally don't care. But... The problem starts to rise up as I am waiting for his tasks to be done, so basically he is a blocker for my tasks. I have organized an approach to tasks so we are not in conflict, but now the client starts to doubt that the solution (technical) which my company proposed to the client is not the best choice due to the significant amount of time needed to finish the task. I have been aware of that, so, basically, I have took over his tasks, working in parallel, to deliver the solution. In easy wording, I am two or three steps ahead just in case, as I have significant experience in the field. I have discussed the problem with colleagues, I have tried to involve the subject in discussion and working together, but none of this hasn't created any success. As I don't have direct contact (I mean, I have, but that would be highly unprofessional) to the client, how good or bad is approach described bellow? I have finished my tasks and client employee tasks as I need to deliver. The only way I can increase traction and visibility is to post a group message with a detailed explanation of what I have done, why and how. This will be obviously 'pointing finger', but I need to make clear how much effort is really needed to accomplish the tasks. Again, the technology is pretty common and we have good documentation. <Q> I am in a bizarre situation. <S> No you're not, this is common enough. <S> Only bizarre bit is that a pro consultancy doesn't have procedures in place for exactly this sort of issue. <S> As a consultant you cover your back. <S> Keep the requests polite and professional and their manager should always be in the loop or yours. <S> Really, you should already have clear communication channel protocols as part of your training. <S> If the client fails to pick up that there is a an issue that needs to be addressed, that's not your concern. <S> If the client feels that your company is not producing the best solution that's not your concern either. <S> It's your managers, and you have already informed him/her. <S> This is precisely one of the things a consultant firm manager should always be looking for and have strategies in place to deal with. <S> Because at the end of the day it's part of their role/responsibility. <S> Larger companies will often have people specifically assigned to handle client/staff relations and oversee progress. <S> All you need to do is cover your back and do the work professionally, don't get personal or take anything personally. <A> The client sponsor should at least be aware that the quality of the work is at risk. <S> It’s up to him or her to change the structure or membership of the team. <S> Additionally, you might consider digging in to why your colleague struggles to complete work - if you can address the root cause, you can make things better for the whole team: <S> Is it a skill issue? <S> Can you invite this person to apprentice you and teach the skills <S> he/she needs to complete the work? <S> Is it a prioritization issue? <S> Does your colleague have other demands on his/her time, or perhaps not understand the importance of the project? <S> Is it a formal mechanisms issue? <S> Are there rewards or consequences that encourage this individual to work on something else? <S> Is it a will issue? <S> Is this person unhappy or dissatisfied in their role? <S> Can you help your colleague to see the value of his/her work and work on more interesting tasks? <A> I have discussed the problem with colleagues. <S> Your colleagues likely have no power or authority to do anything about it. <S> What you should do is to speak to your manager. <S> You need to explain that your tasks are being blocked because of the client and that meeting the timeline goals is being adversely impacted. <S> Why would it be unprofessional for you to directly contact the client? <S> You have tasks that need to be completed. <S> You cannot complete them due to this issue. <S> You need management involvement. <S> Whether that's your manager or the client manager.
| If this is an issue that impacts the quality and timeliness of your work, you should encourage your manager to discuss the challenge with the client sponsor of your work.
|
What happens if employment cannot be verified because the company went out of business? What happens if employment cannot be verified because the company went out of business? <Q> For most employers, this won't be an issue or seen as a negative in reviewing your resume/application. <S> There are a variety of ways that background-checking agencies can verify that you were employed even if the business is no longer operating. <S> If you're concerned that you won't be able to provide a reference, you should consider asking a previous manager to act a reference, even if they are no longer employed at the same firm. <S> You might be able to reach previous managers on LinkedIn if you don't have recent contact info. <A> You should be able to show your old pay stubs, as well as state and federal tax records that prove your previous employment. <A> You can get a verification letter from your previous manager and colleagues , with a proof of pay.
| There is no reason you cannot prove your employment at a company.
|
Given a second assignment for job interview. Big no or not a big deal? It seems to be a mini version of the first job interview assignment, for which I submitted a huge document and turned into a huge presentation, presenting it over an hour to the CMO. I was told this may be the last round, but am now given this assignment. Honestly, it hasn't bothered me. It seems like they want to get more details on one part of my first assignment to fill a gap about me as a candidate. And I'm excited about the company. But it's important to me that I feel good if I do get offered the job and I know job interview assignments are a bit sticky. And I've been given two. And this one is asking for more details. More than anything, by doing this assignment I feel like I'm communicating that I don't have another option which could hurt in future negotiation if I get there. Are multiple interview assignments common or should I be concerned? Should I address with recruiter? Edit- the fact that it's multiple assignments is my main concern, not the mere inclusion of an assignment. <Q> I submitted an 18 page document and turned into a 35 slide presentation, presenting it over an hour to the CMO Unless you're going for a high level senior level executive type job, that's just ridiculous. <S> If they've still got gaps to fill in "you as a candidate" after an interview and an hour long presentation on a specific task of their choosing (that took days!) <S> , then their interview process sucks. <S> Smells very much like free work. <S> If it were me, I'd thank them for their consideration but say you haven't the time available to complete any more work for this interview, so you'll have to pass. <S> You can then likely spend your time much more efficiently applying elsewhere. <A> If they can’t evaluate your application on that huge amount of work then they are asking for work for free. <S> Ask to be paid and if they don't want to pay <S> , say you are busy. <S> Depends how much you want this, but if that is their attitude be careful... <A> You're working for free. <S> They've found a way to exploit your skills and experience for free without paying. <S> I've had many interviews including various competency tests and technical interviews <S> and I've never had an interview assignment before nor has anyone I've worked with nor has any of my friends or family. <S> Sorry <S> this might sound harsh but there are people who don't feel bad about exploiting others for their own personal gain.
| Asking for yet another task after that is, in my view, rather unprofessional.
|
Working for a big company "through" another small company. Can I say I'm working for the first? Scenario : I'm 20 (pursuing a degree in Computer Engineering) and a self-employed IT consultant with VAT number and everything needed here (Italy). For the past 2 years, I've been working for BigCompany (very big company), but in reality my invoices are being sent to SmallCompany (very small company), which is the actual provider of consultants for BigCompany. The fact is, I have basically no contact with SmallCompany and have been there just a couple times. As far as I'm concerned, it's like they don't exist. They're just the mean by which I got to work with BigCompany after a successful internship: I talked with BigCompany, they reached an agreement with SmallCompany, I work for BigCompany and send my invoices to SmallCompany. Now, the question is, am I wrong in writing on my resume that I'm a consultant for BigCompany? To me, it's great because having that big name there makes a really nice impression, but I also know that technically there's a third party in between. But then again, I even have a BigCompany email address and have never been told anything about what's written on my LinkedIn (and I have more than a couple contacts from BigCompany). <Q> You can say you're working on projects for Big Company, but not for them as a consultant. <S> This is a direct untruth. <S> Always be scrupulously honest whenever there is a grey area. <S> Small company is paying you, you work for them. <S> Any background check would find this out pretty quickly and put your CV at the bottom of the pile if not discard it altogether. <A> Keep in mind, telling the full truth will only take up a few extra words on your resume. <S> Seriously, there's nothing wrong with: 2017-2019 - Data Analytics with Disney, through <S> Smalltown Consulting Co. ... or something similar. <S> This isn't a choice between A) <S> Say you worked at Smalltown Consulting Co. or B) <S> Say you worked at Disney. <S> Just tell the truth - you worked at Disney due to consulting through Smalltown Consulting Co. <S> And an additional reason you really want the Smalltown Consulting on there in relative prominence <S> : when the company does your work history check, how confident are you that Disney would have a record of you, since you weren't an actual employee but a contractor of Smalltown Consulting Co? <A> Been there, done that. <S> Most consultants in Italy say that they work for the final customer (in your case, BigCompany) and, at the same time, for their real employer. <S> I was employed by SmallCompany which leased me to BigCompany which leased me to BiggerCompany and, at some point, I was approached by my line manager in BiggerCompany and told that I should update my LinkedIn profile, because "it doesn't show you as part of our team". <S> In fact, all the recruiters and HR people I know, when reading a resume, can understand that overlapping work periods in different company are consulting, because it's common practice. <A> Not sure whether it works in Italian, but in English I've described my previous contract employment as "working at BigCorp", which is not the same as working for them. <A> @Rupert Morrish beat me to the answer (upvote) <S> If you want to keep you conscience clear(ish), you could always say "I work at BigCompany, Inc" and let others draw their own conclusions. <S> I will enlarge a little. <S> I have been a software contractor for much longer than you have been alive, and use "I work for" since BigCompany gains from my work (more than the middle-man); they use the software that I develop, while the agent only takes a cut. <S> But, the important part here is where you ask <S> Now, the question is, am I wrong in writing on my resume that I'm a consultant for BigCompany <S> You could do that. <S> 2017 - 2109 BigCompany, Inc, <S> Position: consultant <S> Personally, I put 2017 - 2109 BigCompany, Inc, Position: senior software engineer <S> But I would never, ever, ever name an agency on my CV. <S> The reason is that hiring managers in the industry can gauge your suitability from companies where you have worked. <S> So, having experience at British Aerospace is of interest to a hiring manager at Boeing, etc. <S> That only leaves you to worry about your position. <S> I doubt that anyone cares about positions when you apply for consultancy positions, only experience, so put whatever seems reasonable. <S> You don't have to mention consultancy, as, when you have more experience, anyone reading your CV will think "this guy has a string of 6 to 18 month jobs and is applying for a contract position <S> ... must be a contractor". <S> tl;dr company name on the CV, never agency & <S> whichever position seems reasonable <A> Can I say i'm working for the first? <S> You definitely can . <S> You can even say that you are best buddy with the Mars Rover and together you hit pubs and strip clubs on Jupiter every evening. <S> But if you want to the completely true - and the information in the CV MUST always be completely true, even if presented in a favorable light - then you should go like this: Work experience <S> 2017 - present: self employed, working for BigCompany, billed through SmallCompany am I wrong in writing on my resume that I'm a consultant for BigCompany? <S> It depends on who reads it. <S> But it might not be completely true in the eyes of everybody. <S> I even have a BigCompany email address <S> It is not really relevant for anybody, except maybe for yourself, as a token of self-achievement. <S> have never been told anything about what's written on my LinkedIn <S> LinkedIn was not relevant even when it was "good". <S> To me, it's great because having that big name there makes a really nice impression <S> I agree, having big names in the CV makes a nice impression. <S> That is what I did myself. <S> However, I wrote that I worked at company ABC in projects for customers X, Y, Z... <S> instead of simplifying and saying that I worked for X, Y, Z. (X, Y, Z are world-wide famous companies).
| You don't need to say that you worked for the large company. If you do not have a direct relationship with BigCompany, some people might have problems accepting your statement as true.
|
Should overtime be evenly shared amongst employees? I work in the hospital industry. My question is, is my boss in all her rights to offer extra hours to the same people and not all her employees. It’s not evenly spread out to all my colleagues including myself. <Q> is my boss in all her rights to offer extra hours to the same people and not all her employees <S> Some of these reasons may well be quite reasonable - it can be a reward for good performance, or that particular employees have shown themselves to be more productive during overtime than others. <S> Others aren't quite so reasonable - giving perks to friends or relations etc, but reasonable or not there's nothing saying they have to spread it out evenly. <S> If you suspect the manager is abusing their power for personal reasons rather than acting in the best interests of the hospital you might be able to take it up with them and see what happens - but I think you'd probably need to take something concrete about how the manager's behavior is actually hurting your employer rather than just the "fairness" of it all. <S> If you have a union available to you it may be worth having a conversation with your rep before you do anything - there may be specific union rules that come in to play for you here. <A> What do you mean by “boss”? <S> You can ask for more overtime. <S> If you are refused, and you think for no good reasons (say only your manager’s good friends get overtime), you can complain to the manager’s manager. <S> Or they don’t care. <A> Unless there is a union contract, or some other legally binding document stating otherwise, your Boss is perfectly withing the legal and ethical purview of the job to do so. <S> The only exception is if it is either due to discrimination not based on performance, or a punitive act of retaliation for some sort of whistle-blowing or job action. <S> i.e., racial bias, union busting, cutting hours due to a complaint filed. <S> Even if it is one of these exceptions, the burden of proof remains on you to bring any sort of action.
| In general yes - unless you can prove they are excluding certain people from overtime offers because of some characteristic (e.g. gender, race) that is protected by law where you live then they can offer the extra hours to whomever they like for whatever reason they like. What your manager does is not illegal, but if it is unfair, someone above them might care and fix it.
|
Email suggestion for a rogue email from my manager Following scenario happened with me and my manager. Please suggest what should be the reply-email. Recently, I fell sick on a Sunday eve and had to drop a sick leave email to my manager stating that I won't be available on Monday for work, due to personal health issues. On that, his reply was: "Leaves should be planned accordingly and should be informed upfront so that we can plan the project activities. Take care of this in future." Note that, this is not the first time he has dropped an email like this. Most of the time he thinks, the employees are bluffing. Earlier when I fell sick, he replied that, please be on leave with genuine reasons only. I mostly dont reply on these and keep shut. But this time I have decided to make him listen me. How would one know if they are going to fall sick! P.S I'm a UI developer at one of the small tech company, have decided to resign from the job. <Q> Make it clear. <S> I'm sorry for not being clear. <S> I am not well enough to work on Monday and will be off on sick leave. <S> I don't intend for this to be taken as vacation time. <S> I hope to be well enough to work in the next day or two. <S> By staying silent, you're silently agreeing with your boss's misunderstanding. <A> I think the key point is that you did not know until Sunday that you would be ill on Monday: <S> I will indeed inform you as soon as I know I will be unable to work. <S> On this occasion I fell sick on Sunday evening, and e-mailed you as soon as I knew I would be unable to work on Monday. <A> 1) Yes, definitely resign from this job (or look for a way to resign ASAP). <S> A manager who gets angry with his employees for being sick is not a manager, or a company (who supports this manager) <S> you want to work for. <S> 2) Inform your manager that you didn't know you were sick until Sunday evening, and that you could not have made plans earlier. <S> If your manager demands you work despite being sick, then you should do so, but this should be an extra sign of getting out of there ASAP, as your manager has no care for the well-being of his subordinates. <S> You may want to raise this issue with HR as well, as this could be a company liability (as a company that does not take reasonable health-related precautions); HR is not your friend in general, but in this case they might be depending on your locale.
| Depending on how cheeky you want to be, you may want to suggest to your manager that despite being sick, you can come into work anyway, although doing so would put the manager and everyone else in the office at risk of becoming sick as well.
|
Does a company have to pay a new hire to fill out new hire forms off the clock? Just curious if it's justified for a company to have me fill out all new hire forms (including job specific forms) without compensation and on my own time. I'm used to filling these forms out during work hours when I begin a new job and was under the impression that this does count as "work". EDIT: Obviously this is not the biggest deal and I am not going to go in ranting and raving about it, I am only curious if this is actually legal or not. <Q> The bigger question is if it's worth having a fight with your new employer over it. <S> I've had situations where it's been done both on or off the clock. <S> Whether you are prepared to wear the $5 is a decision you will have to make. <S> It's a once-off and part of the onboarding process, so making a fuss about it probably isn't useful :) <A> You would probably be pleasantly surprised to know that a lot of decent companies will offer you lunch on your first day, or some other means to compensate and welcome you. <S> If not your employer, then one or multiple of your coworkers. <S> Other means of compensation will certainly present themselves. <S> As for entitlement to compensation, the answer to your question is <S> I've had that before, in the form of transportation vouchers. <S> As for whether or not it counts as work, the answer to your question is maybe - under §785.11 of the Fair Labor Standards Act , as the FLSA counts anything "suffered or permitted" to work as payable, as long as it reaches certain criteria. <S> If they made it clear that you can do it when you get there, then the answer is no, as a criterion is that it must be mandatory and outside of work hours. <S> Otherwise, then maybe. <S> But I'd advise against it as it's minimal and rocks the boat. <S> On another note, in the future, might I suggest free services, or at least free trials of services, that offer signatures? <S> I use SmallPDF and PDFEscape, which allow you to insert text and draw signatures. <S> If a company requires a fax then I find a fax service online where I upload the document <S> and it's faxed for me. <S> I've found free services, but the last service I used was a dollar. <S> If the forms are not sent to me digitally, then I simply go get a copy of those forms online since the IRS offers them anyway. <A> justified for a company to have me fill out all new hire forms without compensation and on my own time <S> Sure, if you do it. <S> Unsure <S> if they wanted you to do it on your own time or not. <S> If it was a hassle for me <S> I'd just take the forms in on my first day and use their resources.
| If it were me, I'd let it go and just get on with my new role. no unless you have it in your job offer that they will compensate you for any fees that you have to incur in order to finalize your employment. Any form of compensation will certainly be a nice gesture.
|
How to start pursuing a "developer" path? I am currently looking at possibilities to doing developer type jobs but I realize I dont really have a real "portfolio" per se, so I was thinking of what projects I can do to demonstrate my skills. Just to give a little background: my last job was in the visual effects field, and for the last couple years I was writing a lot of tool sets for software we use via Python, but i just found development to be pretty interesting. So really other than this i have no real "experience" in development. My knowledge in C++ and Javascript are suuuper novice (though currently trying to learn). I have basic HTML and CSS knowledge. Im currently also looking into what MySQL is. The other thing is I have no idea what i want to pursue in a development type job, only that i dont want to do anything website based, but i assume its probably good to know how all of that works. Ive been looking at a bunch of job ads too and ive seen "full stack developer" or just "developer" on its own and i dont have a clue on what it is i need to know to be even remotely employable. It just seems like the answer is "you have to know EVERYTHING" and that sounds unrealistic. So what I was thinking was doing some projects to demonstrate what i can do, but i dont have a clue on what to do. should i go try to make a simple program? like what? should i make a website? what kind of website? should i look into writing an app? im kind of lost with what i should be doing to at least get into the whole "developer" route... can anyone provide some feedback...? I understand that my knowledge in the field is lacking in general, I just want to know if it is viable for me to start doing something to pursuing that type of career at my current level... EDIT: Thank you all for the great feedback, i think what I have decided on and take the advice of "doing something I want to do", rather than trying to "prioritize" what and what. Hopefully by creating what I want can be utilized to demonstrate my skillsets... Thank you all again! <Q> Hobby project <S> : Do what you like (and what you want to do) is it webdesign, make a website; apps, make an app; programs, make a program. <S> But do something you like. <S> Follow courses: <S> and I do not mean tutorialpoint or the like <S> (they are useful to start) <S> but I mean courses as on coursera or another MOOC (massive open online course) platform. <S> This will also help you with the basic terminology Focus: I do not think it is handy to know a little c++, a little python a little <S> ... Make sure you know atleast one a lot better before you invest in other languages. <S> SQL is an exception since that is complementary to all. <A> You obviously want to show something close to what you are applying for. <S> If you want to develop Iphone applications then you'll want to show that you'are able to developp an IOS one in Swift. <S> If you want to become a Python developer then write Python programs. <S> Always be aware of the trending frameworks / library <S> , so you don't learn deprecated stuff. <S> If you don't know what you want to do then try to learn the basics of a few languages and you'll figure out what you like. <S> As other answers suggested, you can first use some tutorials and then some MOOC and courses (Coursera, MOOC of top universities once you master the basics etc). <A> You sound like you could use an internship at a company that interests you, to get to know current tool kits, workflows, tasks, etc. <S> While yes, there are some bad companies out there that abuse interns for (almost) free labor or ask for years of experience for an internship, there are also good ones where you actually can learn a lot, and if you are good they might be happy to offer you a full time job (possibly only after you get a degree or further education). <S> From your answers it seems like you are not desperate to get a job right this instance, so you can take your time to talk to different companies and find the right one for you. <S> The content is not that important, what matters is how you structure your code, if it is readable, etc. <S> If you plan to use it for applications and, for example, send your github to recruiters, it might also be worth to invest in a proper documentation and not only do the minimal comments needed for yourself to understand things. <A> Often the easiest way to transition into a developer job is to be doing something related, and to gradually take on development tasks, as you did. <S> The company knows you, and you know the 'business rules' and requirements, which is half the job. <S> Ideally you'd stick with that for a year or so before applying for a developer job, to prove you have development experience. <S> If you can't do that, I'd recommend web sites like CodeWars.com or CodinGame.com <S> that set little coding challenges for you to solve. <S> For me, collecting 'meaningless internet points' by solving a specific puzzle is more motivating than a hobby project with no real goal. <S> You can build up an account with a history and a rank that you could show a recruiter, and they'd have a good idea how you compare to other developers. <S> An interviewer could look through the list of things you've done and ask you to talk about it. <S> Also, I'm an experienced programmer, and I still regularly learn stuff when I spent hours on a challenge and find someone else managed it in a few lines!
| If you prefer doing your own projects, just pick a language that is relevant to what you want to do later, as already pointed out in other answers, and do something in it.
|
Should I tell now my company my intention to quit in 3 months, though my notice period is only 2 months? I have a notice period of 2 months with my current job (in Germany, if that should matter). I've already signed the contract for a new job starting on the 1st of January, so a bit less than 3 months from now. Should I already tell my company my intention to quit at the end of december? I guess this could be a valuable information for them, and I would like to leave in good terms but I'm afraid it could have negative effects on my last months here. Also, I need to have a salary the whole time, so I wouldn't want them to find a way to terminate me before fearing a decrease in my productivity due to my resignation (can they even do it?). <Q> Go ahead and tell the boss now. <S> Keep in mind, the reason companies like having a long notice period is that it gives them more warning about personnel problems they need to solve - because there are typically a lot of hurdles that have to be overcome (to the point where, no, they're not solving all of them in the notice period and having a replacement in the door the day after you leave.) <S> The reason employees try to avoid very long notice periods <S> is because they're worried about being immediately let go... <S> but that's not really an issue here: you're simply giving an additional 3 weeks of notice. <S> That's not necessarily say to make your public notice and let everyone else know. <S> You can do that at the standard time if you like. <S> But giving your boss an extra 3 weeks would likely be very appreciated. <A> I've already signed the contract for a new job starting on the 1st of January <S> I wouldn't want them to find a way to terminate me before fearing a decrease in my productivity due to my resignation (can they even do it?). <S> I do not know what the legal situation is in Germany. <S> I have direct and indirect experience of this situation in the United States. <S> If you have a signed offer letter to work for another company, particularly a competitor , then your current company may quite reasonably view you as: a strategic or security risk; they reason that you might be using your current position to gain information of advantage to your next employer. <S> a morale risk; having a known "short timer" is often thought to be bad for coworker morale. <S> In particular, you might attempt to take a few coworkers with you. <S> Believe me, it happens all the time. <S> a worker who cannot be expected to have the usual level of productivity, and who cannot be assigned long-term work. <S> a worker who is playing a particularly hardball form of salary negotiation; if they want to keep you, knowing that you are 100% able to walk out the door today enormously weakens their position in any negotiation. <S> All of this is incentive for your current employer to walk you out the door the moment they find out that you have signed a contract with another company. <S> You must be prepared to leave at any moment . <S> Over the next week or so, quietly take home anything you would not want to leave behind. <S> Under no circumstances should you give them any information that is not required by your current employment agreement. <S> If you are asked a direct question do not lie but remember, you don't have to answer the question either. <S> I know you want to not burn bridges and be nice, and that's great; your coworkers will appreciate that. <S> The company will not; the company as an entity cares nothing about you as a person, and it is the company that you're dealing with. <A> I'm from Belgium, not sure if this is the same in Germany, but at least you'll get some food for thought and check if you have similar laws in Germany. <S> It can be shortened, but the employee has to agree to it, the company can't choose to shorten it on its own. <S> I think it also can lengthen it (but again, both parties need to agree). <S> The way you give your notice is also important : it is only valid in written form, signed by both parties (often your manager), with the end date in your notice. <S> In your case, if you have a good rapport with your manager and knew they would be grateful to have the extra notice, there would be no harm to inform them unofficially that you'll be starting a new job January 1st, and give them your official notice three weeks later. <S> You'll be protected and have your job until the next starts (since you haven't given your official notice yet) <S> and you're able to give an earlier warning to your boss.
| When giving your notice, there's a notice period your company has to respect (depending on how long you've been working there, is set by the government).
|
My company wants to hide the fact that I'm leaving by announcing I'm on a sick leave I'm working for company A. Company A is outsourcing me to company B, and company B is outsourcing me to the company C, where I work on a project for a client. I'm leaving the company A soon, and my boss does not want me to talk about this in company C. Instead, he wants me to continue working as usual without mentioning anything, and then he will somehow announce (or company B will) to company C that I'm on a sudden and long sick leave and someone else will continue my work. However, everyone in C will know that I've just changed jobs, because I want to update my public LinkedIn profile when I leave A. This is a very niche field I'm working in, so I will certainly work with some of the people in company C again in the future. It's not a big team, but I'd like to say a proper goodbye to the people I've been working with, which is a professional behavior for me. If I leave without a word, and they will see that I've changed jobs, and they are told that I'm sick, this could be suspicious for some people. On the other hand, I'm still employed at company A and I don't want to part on bad terms with them by doing exactly what my boss tells me not to do. What should I do to be professional and not risk my reputation? Maybe I should talk to my boss and try to convince him that people at C will learn that I left anyway? <Q> Short answer: Don't lie. <S> Longer answer: <S> Your professional reputation has value If you participate in this fraud, and yes, it is fraud, by "Company A", you will be in the very least tarnishing yourself as being a liar, untrustworthy, and unprofessional. <S> You could expose yourself to legal troubles <S> IANAL <S> and you should check with one as depending on the contractual arrangements, you may actually be exposing yourself to civil liability, possibly even criminal liability if lying about your status allows them to manipulate a contract, or circumvent some employment law. <S> Again, I'm not a lawyer. <S> To be certain, consult with a lawyer who focuses on employment law. <S> BE HONEST <S> Any hit you may take in the short term from company A will be bragging rights on your next interviews, where you can give a quick story about how honest you are. <S> A risk-taking honest employee is one that honest employers will take a risk on. <S> Plus, you'll sleep better at night. <A> Maybe I should talk to my boss and try to convince him that people at C will learn that I left anyway? <S> I think that is your best strategy. <S> I suggest pointing out to your Company <S> A boss that Company C people are going to see the update to your LinkedIn profile after you leave A. <S> Claiming you are on sick leave is going to look really silly when your LinkedIn profile says you are working for Company X. Company C people are going to suspect they are being lied to, which would make them less likely to want to continue working with A and B. <S> It would look much better for A and B to treat your departure as a routine, manageable matter with no drama required. <S> They should be saying something like "AbstractObject is leaving on date XYZZY. <S> Here is ConcreteStructure who will be handling AbstractObject's work in the future." <A> I was in a similar situation once - I was employed by a parent company to work at a client company, and when I resigned my manager asked to say nothing, so the company I was body-shopped out to would stay happy. <S> I did what my employer asked. <S> I stayed in contact with some of my ex colleagues from the client company, and when they found out that I didn't work for the parent company anymore they understood completely what had happened. <S> The result for me was that I kept a great relationship with my former managers (one of whom employed me again later at a different company), and a great relationship with the people at the company I was contracted out to.
| Don't lie, and don't start a fight that you don't need to have.
|
Misclassified as part-time when working full-time Background: Working in the US in Wisconsin. Started at Company X as part-time (9am - 2pm) Transitioned to full-time hours (9am - 5pm) Recently discovered that I was still classified as a part-time employee According to Company X's employee handbook, 40 hours a week is the requirement to be considered a full-time employee I have been working 40 hour weeks for over a year and a half This was discovered when I talked to HR about missing PTO Had a HR and manager meeting to instate medical benefits and vacation I was given 4/10 vacation days to use for the rest of the year, calculated based on time left in the year, and denied payment for previous claimed "PTO" due to them saying they can't add it on past paychecks? Given the above information I'm struggling to figure out what to do. Obviously management knew, I was screwed over intentionally by not classifying me correctly. This is 100% against Company X's handbook. What I'm trying to figure out is if the PTO I took in the previous calendar year wasn't paid, the PTO I took this year wasn't paid can be recuperated as well as my full 10 days of PTO that I have been cheated out of. All I have done so far is have had that HR meeting with my manager to get my medical benefits, nothing more has been signed done or otherwise sorted out from my end because of these looming issues. I feel like they are trying to pull a fast one over me for what I am owed. Question: Should I approach this as a back-pay issue or a labor classification issue. Do I need a lawyer or can I draft a letter on my own? Advice on what direction to go and how to proceed would be amazing! <Q> See a labor law attorney, and check the laws of your state. <S> You may or may not be entitled to back pay or benefits, but it varies wildly from state to state. <A> You will have to gather all the information you have regarding time cards, employee handbooks, and any correspondence between you and the company. <S> The timeline will be vary important. <S> Many companies say that a part-time employee can occasionally work 40 hours in some weeks if the is a temporary need. <S> They may specify a threshold of hours in a year, or some other metric before the employee is automatically re-classified. <S> While you mention 40 hours a week in your question, you have to also realize that the threshold for some benefits are lower by federal, state and local laws. <S> This can include health insurance, vacation, sick, holidays, access to the 401(k)... <S> They can determine when the various provisions kicked in. <S> In some cases those events can help or hurt you. <S> For example you may have qualified for health insurance months ago, and it may be determined that you have to wait until the next open season to get the insurance. <S> This is just a possible example <S> I am not a lawyer. <S> You may have to disconnect the idea that your manager knew about this oversight. <S> It is likely that they don't have insight into what appears on their employees paychecks. <S> They generally don't see the costs of benefits unless they also have budget responsibility. <S> But it is also possible that they should have been aware of this. <S> Moving from part-time to full-time does cost the company money, so it is possible your manager was supposed to keep you under the threshold, and they failed to do that. <S> You may see pressure to switch you back to part-time. <S> I have known companies where they watched the hours very carefully, so the part-timer would have their hours scaled back at the end of the quarter to keep them under the threshold. <A> I was screwed over intentionally by not classifying me correctly. <S> It is a very dangerous sentence, because you cannot prove it, and it actually might be false altogether. <S> What you may be able to claim is: <S> I was classified incorrectly, possibly by mistake. <S> But I am now intentionally screwed, because the company does not want to repair the damage, to the best extent realistically possible. <S> What you can / should do: <S> make sure you have proof that you were transitioned to full-time; it can be a new contract, an appendix to the contract, an e-mail... <S> anything written by the company that the decision was made; keep talking with your manager that you are not after creating trouble, but you only want what is fair: to have the mistake corrected; if the manager cannot / does not want to help, go to upper management; HR will do nothing without approval from upper management; if they were not friendly enough from the beginning, they will not be friendly suddenly afterwards - it means that you need to talk to upper management; seek to solve your problem, do not seek revenge, or guilty parties; <S> If you have proof of transitioning, and talking inside the company does not work, a lawyer is the best bet, unfortunately.
| Talk to a local labor law attorney.
|
Is it appropriate to screen out a job candidate because I had a past sexual encounter with them? I'm hiring for a contract position through an agency. We're a small investment company and I am one of the people this position will report to. The agency sent me the resume of a candidate that looked great on paper. However, after reading more closely I realized that I once had a couple of one night stands with the candidate. He was a nice enough guy, but had an alcohol problem and things did not end well (I had to ask him to stop contacting me after our second date.) This was 5+ years ago, so maybe he's changed. However, I am inclined to "pass" on him. What valid reason can I give, if any? It's the very first resume the agency sent me, so in some ways it makes sense to wait until I see more resumes. That said, I don't think we'll have a huge pick of candidates in this job market. <Q> That might include things like not respecting peoples boundaries or being verbally aggressive or a poor communicator or any of a million other reasons. <S> I would not exclude someone because of the nature of those encounters though. <S> That seems unaligned with the goals of recruitment. <S> Now if you have a reason like that, then I don't think it would be weird to state that you have met this person previously and your interaction then led you to think that they might have problems fulfilling this or that requirement. <S> If I was angry with or resentful of someone for personal reasons i might ask a colleague to help me with the hiring process for this specific candidate though. <S> Not sure if that applies in your case or not. <A> I think people are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. <S> If I had someone that, say, bullied me during highschool was applying for an opening on the same team as me, I would simply say: <S> "I've had personal interactions with them in the past - and they weren't of a positive nature. <S> I don't believe the two of us would work well on the same team <S> and I would highly recommend that we do not hire them." <S> ... and leave it at that. <S> You don't have to elaborate, or try to find an 'efficiency' based answer. <S> You don't have to justify a prior experience that means you wouldn't work alongside them well. <S> A good portion of a work environment is interpersonal relationships between coworkers, and if you know that the interpersonal dynamic between the two of you in the office is going to be bad - that's relevant information to anyone hiring . <A> It's not appropriate to screen them, but it is appropriate for you to recuse yourself from his hiring process.
| If there are things about someone that I know from past encounters with that person that might interfere with them doing the job I would absolutely take those into account.
|
What's a good way to foster an environment where colleagues feel free to express their opinions, if I'm not in a management role? I'm a developer working in a team of around 10-15 people, with almost two thirds of them working remotely. We use scrum, and have daily standups, sprint plannings and other meetings over conference calls. Sometimes during these meetings there are open-ended questions posed to the room which tend to be met with silence. For example: "This user story does not seem very clear. Does everybody understand its scope?" "Is everybody happy with the level of effort assigned to this ticket?" Usually no one speaks up, but later I hear from colleagues that they did have something to say about it. At least from my part, I believe that the reason why people don't answer questions or express opinions is because they feel they may be challenged, or that if they speak up they will be 'volunteering' for some task. I don't want to just assume this is the case, though. So I would like to know what might be a good way to ask them how they feel about these questions. What's a good way to ask this without feeling like I'm challenging them? I don't want to just ask "why don't you speak up?" if there's a better way to communicate that I'm just trying to understand if there really is a problem. I feel there's willingness to improve communication and cooperation within the team, but we just don't quite know how to do it. So I thought a good place to start would be to ask around specifically about the silence after open-ended questions. I'm open to other suggestions, though. edit: to clarify, I do already tend to speak up to try and lead by example, while trying to be careful 'not to overdo it'. Also, the team has been working together for less than 2 years, and we do have good relationship with management. edit 2: I am not usually the one who is asking these questions. <Q> What's a good way to foster an environment where colleagues feel free to express their opinions, if I'm not in a management role? <S> This responsibility, to participate in a collective spirit , falls on the entire team. <S> I think you definitely should on occasion ask, when met with silence, say something similar to: " <S> Hey person XXXXX, what are your thoughts about this? " <S> Ultimately though, if this is a pattern for the whole team, it falls mainly on the Scrum Master to call the team out a bit and say "Why aren't you engaging in the grooming of this story? <S> " <S> You could also suggest to the Scrum Master to set up a team meeting where the topic is <S> How do we increase participation . <A> There is a lot of background information missing : how "old" is the team; when did OP join the team; what is the relationship of the team with the management; what is the management style in the company; etc; <S> All these things are important. <S> Forcing the people to speak will actually mean hurting those people. <S> However, if you think that things are not that bad, then you can take the advice already given elsewhere on this page, and start answering yourself. <S> To not shoot yourself in the foot too hard, you should answer very light and low risk questions - in the beginning. <S> If everything will be fine, you can get more courage to get more involved, and your colleagues might follow your tracks. <A> We use scrum, and have daily stand-ups, sprint plannings and other meetings over conference calls. <S> That is the 1st problem. <S> Conference calls especially large one tend to be met with silence. <S> This is across the board. <S> We have the same problem but you can make some strides to change this. <S> What's a good way to ask this without feeling like I'm challenging them? <S> One tactic we use at my work is to ask direct questions to individual instead of asking a question to everyone. <S> We call it our "Round Table" . <S> This serves 2 goals. <S> One is to make sure people are taking some kind of notes as they will be ask what is their take away or action items at the end of the meeting and two people will be more prepared with questions or information at the end. <S> This works very well for us <S> and we have a very large company and meet with many people over many different cultures and <S> this still works well. <S> I would give that a shot. <S> Maybe bring the idea to management. <S> Typically we end our meetings like this: " <S> Ok so starting from the left <S> , Sara what have you got... <S> Ok thanks Sara. <S> Bob what have you got... <S> Ok thanks Bob. <S> Jan what about you... <S> Oh you are having an issue with such and such well <S> Bob is working on a similar issue and he has some resources you might not. <S> Get with Bob after the meeting to see if you can help each other. " <S> This has be very good at including everyone without feeling like we are targeting a specific person and it serves as good clarification without others having to feel "dumb" for asking so they don't have to stay silent. <S> Personally I do not understand the need to stay silent. <S> I don't care what others think if I ask a question. <S> I have a job to do and if I don't know something I need to know. <S> Does not matter to me if someone thinks its a dumb question. <S> For me I just need the info so I can do my job well.
| The way we do this is by letting it be known we plan to ask everyone at the end of the call/meeting if they have any thoughts or questions and what action items they took away from this. If the management style "punishes" any error and overloads with work anyone who dares to speak, then the silence is well placed.
|
Worked a Job, but wasn't paid, what are my options I started a new job, worked over 48 hrs, and then they rescinded their offer for employment. I signed their offer before starting work. Are they still required to pay me for the hours that I worked even though they rescinded instead of "firing" me? If so, how can I go about getting the money they owe me? Who do I need to contact about this? <Q> Are they still required to pay me for the hours that I worked even though they rescinded instead of "firing" me? <S> Assuming you are in the US, they are absolutely required to pay you for all hours worked. <S> Once you have started working, there is no difference between "rescinded" and "fired", as far as whether or not you should be paid. <S> If so, how can I go about getting the money they owe me? <S> First, ask them when you can expect your pay. <S> If that fails, talk to your state's office of the Attorney General and/or the Department of Labor. <S> Who do I need to contact about this? <S> Whoever will help you from these government agencies. <A> Yes, of course you are. <A> Yes absolutely they do. <S> If they offered you a job and you accepted then a contract is made, and once a contract is made it cannot be arbitrarily cancelled by either side. <S> If you actually started to work then that confirms it. <S> So they unquestionably owe you for they days you have worked. <S> They may also owe you pay in lieu of notice, since in general someone cannot be fired without notice even after two days. <S> That said it may be tricky to get what you are owed without spending more on legal fees than you would get. <S> Many places have a way you can get unpaid wages without needing a lawyer, and you should definitely try that. <S> You might also like to do everyone else this company might try to cheat and go after them full throttle.
| They are obliged to pay you for all the hours you worked.
|
My department was culled, not sure what to make of this situation I am the lead developer in a team of 7 (inc. business analyst and a digital designer) for a multi-million pound turnover company in London. The company itself has around 100 employees. My team just finished a major project successfully, the relevant departments have been singing our praises; and apparently out of nowhere the directors of the company decided to terminate the employment of the whole team bar myself and my manager, the head of IT; also cancelling a number of projects in the pipeline. We are told this does not relate to performance and that the company is financially sound, this is not happening to any other department. My manager will be tendering his resignation as soon as he finds a new role elsewhere because he was not consulted in any way about this basically meaning I will be responsible for anything and everything developmentally for the company, which for a firm this size is simply ridiculous. I am not sure what to make of this with regards to my own position, should I seek to move on myself or try to exploit it for my own gain? I certainly don't feel at risk but this literally came out of the blue. <Q> If the whole team except you is gone, then you are at risk. <S> Check out what payments others received. <S> Look out for new jobs. <S> You don’t want to quit yourself because that means zero redundancy pay, but you want to be able to go into a new job as soon as pushed. <A> In my experience many corporations tend to have stupid processes, when it comes to layoffs. <S> They are all made for the worst case senarios when an employee goes berserk. <S> Nobody involved actually wants to be involved in the process. <S> Usually this is why they don't talk "about it". <S> And everybody wants it quickly over. <S> Whatever You need to fulfill the role adequately. <S> Motivate your requirements that: You proved Your worth for the company <S> You have not created this situation, which You feel unsafe in <S> You need to feel safe, Whatever decisions the company makes, whichever manager changes, whatever! <S> To feel safe <S> You need it on all on paper. <A> I had a similar problem about 8 years ago and the result was they eventually let everyone go including myself (laid off) from the department after the initial let go of several others. <S> Weather or not you decide to stay with the company it is a good idea to keep some prospects open <S> so you are not blindsided. <S> If you are going to be the only developer for a volume of work that just is not possible <S> you need to keep your options open and start at least looking into other work. <S> You don't have to take another job right away but have something in the works <S> just in case is a good idea. <S> We are told this does not relate to performance and that the company is financially sound, this is not happening to any other department. <S> I cannot believe this sentence. <S> Either it was performance and the company is good financially or it was not performance <S> and the company is not doing well financially. <S> Especially when your manager of those people was never consulted. <S> Being in management in the past myself this is very strange to fire a group of people without even letting management know. <S> This in itself is a bad sign. <S> A company doing well financially does not randomly and without warning lay off or fire <S> all of a department save 1 or 2 people. <S> From personal experience in a situation almost identical to yours <S> I would at the very least keep an eye out for a new position elsewhere. <S> If you find something you like then go for it and don't look back. <A> The biggest issue here seems to be the uncertainty of the why this happened and what it means for you. <S> This sounds like the perfect time to negotiate for a big raise! <S> First of all you just had several successful projects. <S> Then you are now alone responsible for everything. <S> But that aside, it's also a perfect strategy to test the waters: <S> If they really want to keep you, they will agree, otherwise they might have to find a replacement soon, as no one else knows what you do. <S> If your position is threatened they can, and will, flat out refuse. <S> That would be a good indicator to rather look for another place as they might be looking for how to replace you. <S> In principle, this could be an opportunity. <S> Perhaps you will get other bigger tasks with a team dedicated to and fitting for these new challenges. <S> But it could also mean you are marginalised, most of your responsibilities will slowly be restructured away, outsourced or otherwise replaced until your services are no longer needed. <S> P.S. <S> This assumes that they otherwise stone-wall you to their plans and what's to come. <S> If they are open about it, just ask and decide based on what they tell you and how reliable/realistic and fitting you think that sounds.
| Maybe they are restructuring, they know your value and therefore kept you. In your case : the company has proved that, WHEN they want to let you go, You will the last person to know, You must prepare Yourself for changing a job, cv, letter of recommendation from your current boss, looking at offers, if they want You to stay, negotiate terms such that You can survive a few months without having a job from the moment they decide to let you go, if You decide to stay with a promotion, negotiate a period of more lenient evaluations or request trainings, education, a manager as a coach,..
|
What is the proper etiquette if a person unexpectedly meets someone he fired? What is the proper etiquette if a person unexpectedly meets someone he fired? For example, if a person is at Starbucks and meets a former employee that he fired what should he do? <Q> What should he do? <S> What would he do if he met anybody else at Starbucks? <S> Whatever that is, do that. <A> For example, if a person is at Starbucks and meets a former employee that he fired what should he do? <S> Say something like "Hi. <S> How are you doing?" <A> Sometimes situation may dictate not saying anything but <S> in most cases a simple "Hi how have you been?" is all that is required. <S> It is impossible to know what is going on in that person mind and at that point just be normal like anyone else would. <S> Now if the firing was for something egregious or deplorable then staying silent is probably best. <S> That said if they engage you don't be rude and ignore them. <S> I would like to end with this. <S> People make mistakes that end their career in a company but that does not make them bad or any less human. <S> People often regret their mistakes and just want to move on. <A> Depends on the person and the circumstances. <S> Obviously if they're drunk or drugged that could create an issue. <S> But in the normal run of affairs, just ignore them and let them initiate any greeting. <S> You'll be better able to judge the correct reaction based on that. <S> Obviously a bunch of swear words while they roll up their sleeves is probably a bad sign. <S> Some industries would have different things to watch out for. <S> If you sack a bouncer for example, there is a chance of a violent reaction at some point.
| If they say hi then say hi back and just be polite and move on. Just because you fired someone, that doesn't mean you should act any differently than you would with any other former employee.
|
Worried about getting fired, but would like to give 2-3 months notice I’ve been at my job as a junior copywriter for nearly two years. The standards where I work are very high and I’ve been struggling to keep up. They are concerned about my lack of progress (despite my efforts to improve up to this point) and have said they may need to lay me off in a few months if they don’t see a noticeable improvement. They would like to see me reach a middleweight position based on the advice & suggestions that they’ve given me, but I myself know that I’m just not capable of working at the level that they require. I am therefore thinking it may be best that I just leave so that I don’t have a firing on my employment history. If I were to stay and attempt to reach a middleweight role in the ways that they’ve suggested, I could see it being very stressful and would make my performance even worse as a result. I am considering doing what I’ve always wanted and pursuing a more artistic / self-employed endeavour whilst having a part-time job to help with my cashflow. I'm also considering looking for another copywriter role at a different agency (one that isn't so high-profile). Would it be unreasonable to say to my boss that I think it’s for the best if I just hand in my notice? I think both me and him know that I’m not good enough to be working there, and any attempts for me to improve would only result in a lot of stress and disappointment. However it would be a lot easier on my finances if I stayed for another 2-3 months. I’m considering suggesting to my boss that I’d be happy to carry on working there for this period, and for me to just continue working the really basic kinds of projects that I’ve been given over the last few months (the kind where it’s a waste for them to be passed to the senior writers). I would even be happy to work there part-time if that suits them. I feel something like this would benefit both me and them, but would it seem rude / unprofessional like I was trying to bargain with them instead of trying to improve as they’ve suggested? <Q> This really needs a country tag! <S> But anyway, here is another angle you could take: You can offer to leave voluntarily. <S> In many countries and Legislation this makes it A LOT easier for your employer and can be a good bargaining chip. <S> Then you offer to keep going as a freelancer for the type of work that shows up occasionally and that would be a "waste of time for the senior writers". <S> This could be a win-win: the company doesn't have to fire you, you are off their payroll and they have a convenient way to get grunt work done "as needed" without permanent staff and infrastructure by someone who already knows his way around the company. <S> It's good for you too: you have a freelance gig lined up, you are already familiar with their style and processes, you get the work arrangement that you want and this setup looks good on the resume and is easily explained to a future employer (if needed). <A> However it would be a lot easier on my finances if I stayed for another 2-3 months. <S> I’m considering suggesting to my boss that I’d be happy to carry on working there for this period, and for me to just continue working the really basic kinds of projects that I’ve been given over the last few months (the kind where it’s a waste for them to be passed to the senior writers). <S> Only you know your boss well enough to guess how well received such a suggestion would be. <S> However, given that your performance so far has been inadequate, that they have already indicated they would get rid of you if you don't improve, and that you are proposing to just cruise along with the easy work for a few months <S> - I can't see why they would agree. <S> I suspect they would just terminate you after the required notice period. <S> If that means working hard and dealing with the stress for 2-3 months, then that's what it takes. <S> I would even be happy to work there part-time if that suits them. <S> Unless you are talking about working part-time in a different role, it's not clear why this would suit them. <S> You have already decided you aren't capable of working to the level they want. <S> Going part-time wouldn't seem to change that. <A> I would suggest that you have an open discussion with your boss: <S> Explain your concerns, together try to find a solution that works for both of you (this depends on what you want and what the company wants). <S> Even if this discussion does not yield a good result, it's still better than just quitting, because if that is the alternative, you do not have much to lose. <S> And it is a professional thing to do, as it gives the company and you the chance to find a solution that may work for both. <S> However, do not underestimate your ability to learn. <S> Sometimes things seem impossible but after some training and routine it is possible. <S> So a bit stress in order to improve your skills may well pay off in the long run. <S> It is always useful to improve your skill set. <S> If you decide to quit, then try to sign at a new job first. <A> In the UK, with almost two years, your first goal is to finish the two years for the right to redundancy pay. <S> After that, I see no reason why you would be fired. <S> Being laid off and being fired is not the same thing. <S> Obviously look if there are other opportunities all the time.
| I think you would be far better served to decide what you want to do after this job, get everything in order, give the normal or required notice, then leave. Let someone look at the financial impact of quitting vs. being laid off; quitting can cost you thousands.
|
Manager keep on voicing general opinions which I don't share at work, what would be an appropriate reaction? I used to have a very chatty manager that wanted to spend some time at work chatting about all kind of stuff. This is more or less normal I think. What was a bit weird was that my manager used to hold a lot of opinions that I would consider somehow common (at least in the region were I used to leave) but quite wrong. Most of his opinions were not against law, but were what I would describe as "backward" and especially common among old uneducated people living in my area. Some of his opinions for instance were: cyclists should not be allowed on the road and cycle paths are a waste of space the "mission" in life of a person should be to have kids and grow them properly. If you don't you are just wasting your life at the same time when you are young and not married yet you should spend your time "having fun" with girls a cheap car makes you look ridiculous climate change is probably a hoax and any effort to improve the environment is a thing for idiots the perfect holiday is his kind of holiday, which is on a beach resort getting tanned. Every other type of holiday destination was just a waste of your holiday time You got the idea I think. This gave way to a kind of environment were his opinions ended up as the baseline of any discussion since some of the people working with this manager just tended to (genuinely) agree with what he said, other people didn't agree but never voiced any different point of view and tried to talk about different subjects, and, more importantly, people openly disagreeing were often sidelined and saw their career progression stop, up to the point were they just preferred to leave. My first reaction was to try to discuss some of these topics in a more light-hearted way, making him notice that different point of views may exist and be valid (such as by making passing remarks on what was on the news), but it never worked. I ended up just avoiding any discussion and eventually leaving. Is the behaviour that I've seen from this manager somehow acceptable? Do you think there could have been a better reaction? An important addition to this question is how I would describe most of the topics discussed by said manager as non-political, at least not directly. The main common characteristics of his point of views was to be very judgmental, in some occasions without any specific target and in some cases addressed towards someone (as in "You went to and spent all your days there in museum? You really don't know how to travel mate" or "you are getting salad again? You must be fun at parties" at the canteen). <Q> When I encounter this type of person my main response is to just nod and give verbal affirmatives until they tire themselves out of the subject. <S> Bobbing your head and giving a soft "uh huh" or "oh, sure" gives the look that you're listening, but don't want to engage. <S> Eventually, they run out of things to say on the subject and will change it naturally, or just end the conversation. <S> This prevents you from getting engaged in an argument or debate, but also does it in a way that makes you seem like you're listening. <S> People like this aren't looking to have their views changed. <S> When you're talking about someone who is so ridiculous that they think their style of having fun is the only viable way to have fun, you won't convince them otherwise and it's just best to ignore it. <S> On occasion they might press for your opinion, and the best advice I can give there is <S> don't engage even then. <S> Just say something like <S> "I'm not well informed enough to make an opinion on that" or "honestly, I've never thought too much about it". <S> Something neutral that doesn't confirm or deny, but still pretty much shuts it down. <S> Is the behaviour that I've seen from this manager somehow acceptable? <S> No, definitely not. <S> Politics are one of the major things you generally shouldn't bring up in polite company. <S> Making open judgements about others by insulting their choice of vehicle and their number of (or lack of) children certainly isn't professional either. <S> But at the same time, it's not <S> so big of a deal <S> it's worth bringing up. <S> It's just a social situation. <S> A bad one that your manager shouldn't be putting you into, but still just social regardless. <A> The best you can do is to remove yourself from the conversation. <S> Trying to change someone's long held believes is a losing battle. <S> Technically you could complain about it and may be able to stop it, but this is certain to hurt someone's feelings <S> so you need to decide if it's worth to you to pick a battle or if you can live with just ignoring it. <A> Some people are quite happy to have their views challenged and will enjoy the back and forth banter if you can broach the subject in a friendly way. <S> Don't expect them to change their opinion on the topic <S> but you can both enjoy exploring each others "crazy world view". <S> Other people won't enjoy having their view challenged. <S> The first thing you need to figure out is if you are the first kind of person or if you are the second. <S> If you don't like having your world view challenged and/or expect the other person to change their opinion <S> then you should avoid opening up this kind of conversation. <S> It will upset you and to an extent it will be your fault you are upset. <S> If you decide that you are happy to have this kind of conversation then you can test the waters. <S> A good way to do this would be to adopt an obviously silly position.... <S> maybe counter his hatred of bicycles with a suggestion that "wouldn't it make more sense to ban cars?". <S> Adopting a silly position like this is a good way of signalling that you are open to some friendly banter on the subject. <S> If they respond well then you found yourself a new friend! <S> Obviously, if they respond poorly to this then you know to keep your mouth shut in the future. <S> Is the behaviour that I've seen from this manager somehow acceptable? <S> It isn't professional. <S> People will be people. <S> It is normal for them to commit thought crimes and often speech crimes, even if they shouldn't. <S> If possible you should live and let live.
| Chances are they feel the same way about your opinions than you do about theirs, so it's unlikely that any good can come of trying to challenge each other. It's not professional of your manager to do this at work, but it's also not the end of the world either. The correct response depends on the person in question.
|
What is recommended “good” attire for a male in management at a tech company? I am not asking frivolously. I’m starting a management role in a mid-sized business software company in Philadelphia. I come from a finance company where I wore a suit and tie every day. The younger staff there were very focused on the brands (Alan Edmonton shoes, Freeman suits, or something like that). I never cared about such things, but I certainly knew the uniform and dressed the part. I noticed during my interview future colleagues wearing trousers and dress shirts—the fairly straightforward “tech” look I see people on the street wearing. Especially and exclusively, I noticed brown shoes and brown belts. Except for suits, all my clothes are old jeans and t-shirts and sweatshirts. I’ll need to buy new clothes but don’t want to spend $1000 buying the wrong things. Therefore, a few questions: Are black dress shoes “out”? I rarely see tech types wearing them. Almost always brown. Cotton trousers, or wool? Does it matter? Are there certain clothing brands that are popular with tech business types? What sort of briefcase? <Q> Different tech companies have very different standards of attire. <S> Some of the more modern companies (or those who pretend to be modern) pride themselves by how lax their dresscode is and that even the CEO comes to work wearing a polo shirt. <S> This trend was set by successful tech company managers like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg who rarely appeared with suit and tie in public. <S> But I have also worked with companies which are a lot more conservative and still expect everyone to wear a suit and a tie. <S> And then there are companies everywhere in between. <S> The general trend appears to be that companies with a more consumer-oriented image try to be more casual while those with a more b2b-oriented image appear more formal. <S> But even that's not a very hard rule. <S> So we can not tell you what's expected at the particular company where you got a job. <S> If in doubt, ask about any written and unwritten dresscode rules and observe how others dress and then duplicate them. <S> If you can not get information like that before your first work day, look how the company presents itself in public. <S> Do the images on their website show people in suits or in t-shirts? <S> How do their representatives dress when they speak in public? <S> But when in doubt, it's almost always more acceptable to overdress than to underdress. <A> future colleagues wearing trousers and dress shirts <S> This would appear to be the acceptable attire. <S> Don't worry too much about overdressing at the start, it happens. <S> But ideally you fit in fairly well from day one. <S> So trousers and dress shirt, worry about the shoes later. <S> The more casual the culture, the less they worry about brands I would think. <S> I've never seen it as an issue. <A> Deviate slightly in the direction that you prefer. <A> IT tends to be relaxed. <S> I have had bosses who wore flip-flops and shorts in the day to day office life, dressing fancier to visit clients. <S> I would drop the suit and the tie and overdress a little just to get the feeling of the company. <S> You can always go shopping after you leave work.
| You can always start with your current outfits, then joke about how you’re overdressed, then buy clothes that match the standard. It varies wildly from company to company.
|
Is it OK to call company for more details about a job post (not an application)? I would like to ask whether it is generally considered OK to call the HR department of a company to ask for further details regarding a job post (not a job application ). I work in the Civil Engineering sector. I am currently looking for new opportunities in the Netherlands. Unlike in the US the job posts often have a number listed for the HR department and something along the lines of: "Please send your letter of motivation and CV to ... or contact HR via ..." Since I am not an EU citizen I have taken on a habit of calling these numbers before I even try to apply and asking a number of questions: Is the job open to non-EU citizens? How important is mastery of Dutch language for that particular position? Further questions if the job description is unclear on technical level. I never try to place myself or discuss my personal eligibility directly or whether I am a good candidate. I try to frame these questions as generally as possible and even avoid giving my name or the contents of my CV. Of course I am not seeking to interfere with their hiring process. Rather I am trying to assess beforehand if me applying is worth the time and effort. I would like to avoid spending hours on an application for which I will be immediately eliminated for one of the above reasons. So far I have not gotten any negative responses to these "cold" calls, but I do wonder whether I am putting them on the spot because I would like to avoid doing that. <Q> Yes, this is very OK. <S> As an expat working in the Netherlands, I'd just add a point of caution: make sure that the information you're asking for clarification is indeed not written in the posting somehow. <S> You can be dismissed as not having sufficient English skills to comprehend the text. <S> Is the job open to non-EU citizens? <S> If the posting says the company is not sponsoring work visas, or that you must have a valid Dutch work permit, that means that the job is for EU citizens only OR you must already have a Dutch visa if you're going to apply for that position. <S> Sometimes is not that the company is not willing to pay for the visa process or the moving - both of which are very costly, they might not be on the list of companies that are authorized by the government to sponsor work visas. <S> You can find the list here in case you want to double-check. <S> How important is mastery of Dutch language for that particular position? <S> The Netherlands is a very international country and one of the most expat-friendly I've seen, especially because a lot of people speak English, very good English. <S> Especially in big companies or companies that work in international settings (like logistics, technology, etc. <S> ) <S> if they list Dutch as a requirement it is because the job you're going to do: Will involve communication that needs to be done exclusively in Dutch (especially true for jobs that involve legal matters or dealing with authorities / local bureaucracy) <S> You'll work with a workforce that doesn't have that good mastery of English (especially true for jobs that involve a "lower-educated" workforce) <S> You'll have to deal with subjects that are not easy to convey in English or that people do not feel comfortable discussing in a second language (especially true for health / HR) <A> If an employer provides contact information, it's done with the expectation that you may want to contact them. <S> And, given the example questions you've posted, it seems like you have a legitimate need to contact them - these are typical questions that a candidate may want to clear with HR prior to applying for a job, and if the answers aren't specified in the job description, it makes sense to ask beforehand. <S> Think of this from the other side of the equation - the employer's HR department doesn't want their time or resources wasted reviewing a candidate who isn't even employable, so <S> they are probably happy you called to clarify, as well. <S> And, in any situation, it always makes sense to evaluate the evidence at hand, even if anecdotal - the fact that you haven't received any negative response would reinforce the notion that it's OK to ask these questions ahead of time. <A> The company (if a sensible one) will appreciate your efforts for calling them to confirm the eligibility, which saves a lot of time and effort for both the sides. <S> If I get a negative response / vibe for calling a prospective employer up for legitimate reasons, I'll think twice to even make an application. <A> Is it OK to call company for more details about a job post (not an application)? <S> If the job posting is unclear, it is better for everyone to clarify things before going into the interview process. <S> This avoids wasting anyone's time. <S> Don't consider your calls "cold calls", the company posted a position and you are merely inquiring about it. <A> Is it OK to call HR for additional details on a job posting? <S> In short "Yes" it is OK to call. <S> Is the job open to non-EU citizens? <S> This is definitely within the wheelhouse of HR. <S> They should be able to answer this question. <S> That is what they are there for. <S> How important is mastery of Dutch language for that particular position? <S> This one should also be easy for HR to answer but if they are not 100% sure you can always ask to speak with the hiring manager. <S> Further questions if the job description is unclear on technical level. <S> This one will likely be harder for HR to answer and this is where I normally would ask to be transferred to the department in question to get some clarification. <S> Most of the time this is not an issue to do so. <S> Sometimes I have been told they cannot transfer me. <S> That all said you may or may not get any new information. <S> The HR department gets the details of the position from management and the HR personnel you would speak to often will not have a deep understanding of the position itself. <S> Sometimes they do and <S> you get the info you need but in the case they don't <S> then I would ask if you could speak with the hiring manager. <S> It is fine to ask but not all places will allow this. <S> When I have encounter a position I was interested in but wanted more details I would simply call HR and ask some questions. <S> If they say they are not sure or I am not satisfied with their answers <S> I ask to speak with the hiring manager. <S> Honestly I have gotten through to the manager more often than not so it should not be an issue. <S> That said if you cannot get through then the next best thing is to just apply and ask those questions during an interview if you are accepted for one.
| If you have any questions about the post, it is better to ask for more information than submit an application and it ended up being a waste of yours and the recruiter's time. Yes this is always OK. Rule of thumb: When in doubt, always ask. The manager could be very busy or it is just against policy.
|
In the process of redundancy - shall I disclose this to potential future employers? There are cuts in the company I work for and I've been one of those selected for redundancy. In my case it is going to take a few weeks. Both before learning about it and afterwards I applied to positions at other companies. These application procedures are ongoing right now - for some I already had interviews, for others the interviews are yet to happen. My questions is - shall I disclose the ongoing process of redundancy to these prospective employers? I feel torn on this. On one hand, I am technically still an employee. On another, if an offer is made this may be after the end of my current employment so any reference supplied my current employer is likely to list the employment as having ended a short time (maybe even just days) after the prospective offer. So, a future employer may realise that I have been in a process of redundancy. However, disclosing the process of redundancy would make my negotiation hand weaker - if a prospective employer knows that my current employment is coming to an end they might try to offer a lower salary. I'm not sure how to proceed in this case. <Q> The only thing to worry about in this case would be the potential red flag that might pop into a recruiters mind: " is he being let go because he's the weakest team member " You will need to position yourself to address this as it probably won't be asked but will be an obstacle. <S> However, disclosing the process of redundancy would make my negotiation hand weaker - if a prospective employer knows that my current employment is coming to an end they might try to offer a lower salary. <S> This is a real possibility and probably not a lot you can do about it. <S> It would take a very highly moral man to not hold this against you in some way and try to take advantage of you and unfortunately such bosses are rare. <S> Having been through a redundancy myself <S> these are the top two tips I can give you. <S> It becomes a case of "any port in a storm". <S> If you need to be underpaid for a while <S> then it's definitely better than being unemployed. <A> shall I disclose the ongoing process of redundancy to these prospective employers? <S> DEFINITELY <S> NOT! <S> That will be a huge leverage against you during the negotiations. <S> Since you will lose your job anyway, you will have to settle for less - and your potential new employer will surely force you into it. <S> I am technically still an employee <S> So what? <S> Most of the people changing jobs are still employees while searching for better alternatives. <S> So, a future employer may realise that I have been in a process of redundancy <S> So what? <S> Their problem. <S> You may even claim ignorance, that you were not aware of the redundancy. <S> Or even better, that you had plans to change jobs anyway - the redundancy being just a coincidence. <S> However, disclosing the process of redundancy would make my negotiation hand weaker <S> Actually, it is even worse: it will make your hand practically paralyzed. <S> I have been through this kind of negotiation <S> - it was a take it or leave it - and what they offered was a terrible disaster, I refused it without any regrets ever. <S> Bottom line: the less the new company knows, the better. <S> Sell yourself to the best - that is the shape of the job market today. <S> Companies are NEVER your friends, regardless of how nice they talk. <S> If you happen to find an exception, just enjoy the new place and be thankful. <S> You need to learn from the rules of writing a good CV: <S> present every information which benefits you; omit all information that might hurt you; don't lie. <A> My questions is - shall <S> I disclose the ongoing process of redundancy to these prospective employers? <S> Yes - disclose. <S> You don't need to go into details, other than what you put here. <S> Make sure they know its not just you. <S> I like @solarflare's answer, but wrote this as I felt it didn't give an answer to the specific question you asked - <S> although, it's my opinion and what I would do (in fact have done more than once). <S> Yes, they might, and as @solarflare says "any port in a storm" is better than unemployment. <S> If they do this to you, turn it around and leave them later (not weeks! <S> months/years) <S> when it best suits you. <S> My feeling is that this is less likely to happen if you tell them you got a good severance package. <S> Again, don't go into details. <S> You should aim for "I want a job now, but don't need one" in your attitude and negotiating stance. <S> You shouldn't lie, but you don't need to give them all the facts.
| However, disclosing the process of redundancy would make my negotiation hand weaker - if a prospective employer knows that my current employment is coming to an end they might try to offer a lower salary.
|
Do you celebrate paying your mortgage off with colleagues? Where I work it is normal for colleagues to bring in treats on their birthday or when they return from holiday. I'm in the situation where I've just paid my mortgage off, at the age of 31. Obviously I'm really proud of this, but also modest enough to know that I've been very fortunate and not many people can become mortgage free at 31. I've never seen someone celebrate by bringing in treats for meeting such a milestone, but I don't know whether that is due to etiquette or whether it's because it's a rare occurrence. My question is, is it appropriate to bring treats in to celebrate paying off your mortgage? <Q> Although I congratulate you on your achievement, IMO it's not appropriate. <S> The same would apply to winning the lottery, receiving an inheritance, hitting a jackpot in the casino, getting a big chunk of tax-returns or buying a house on the Cayman Islands. <S> Financials should be kept private and shouldn't be rubbed under the noses of coworkers. <S> The reasons for keeping it private are quite obvious: They could be jealous If they are not as priviledged they could feel bad about themselves <S> Others could get the impression that you are bragging That doesn't need to necessarily create a toxic work environment, but definitly has the potential for people subtly turning against you. <S> However, sharing it with your family and close friends should give you enough confirmation of your success and monetary skills. <S> The only exception I would personally make is when a coworker is a close friend of mine as well, but in this case I would celebrate it with him/her/them outside the office though. <S> In addition, as mentioned by @delinear in the comments, you don't necessarily need a reason to do something nice and bring in treats for your co-workers. <S> Take the treats in anyway, and just tell everyone you were in a good mood and wanted to share it. <A> I've only experienced this once in a workplace, and it was from someone of a more typical age to pay off a mortgage (about 55 as I recall), but it struck all of us as somewhat unusual. <S> [ Edited to add: our culture was also that there are "cakes in the usual place" for birthdays etc. <S> I have been in the workplace (various companies) about 20 years. ] <S> In your situation -- being that much younger <S> and it's a relatively unusual achievement <S> Another consideration is that if it gets out that you no longer 'need' the job as much (as it will probably be perceived) <S> I don't think that would be positive for how committed you are seen in projects etc, or <S> indeed when it comes to review/promotion time whether you are unconsciously passed over due to not 'needing' the money. <A> Why not? <S> Marriages, children, birthdays … <S> You don’t have to mention how much money the mortgage was. <S> You can simply say that you’ve finally payed back your mortgage and because you feel happy and relieved about being debt free you want to celebrate with a cake. <S> I’m from Austria <S> but I can’t imagine it being different in the UK. <A> It depends on the environment you have at work. <S> If your coworkers are just casual acquaintances you happen to see on a daily basis, then I'd say no, for reasons others have stated (bragging, etc). <S> However, if your coworkers are more like friends, where you share personal stories, things about your lives, hang out outside of work, and so on <S> , then I see no problem with this. <S> It's another life milestone, like getting married, having a kid, etc that you may normally celebrate in the office with coworkers. <S> Plus, who doesn't like free cake, for any reason? ;-) <A> There are two answers right now: <S> yes and no. <S> So I'm going to be contrarian and say: it depends! <S> How did you raise the money? <S> How fast? <S> If it is luck or something out of your control (lottery, inheritance, bitcoin) then you are celebrating "look at how lucky I am" which is not something to celebrate outside your closest family and friends. <S> If you worked hard for it, lived soberly and this is the culmination of a dream for you (especially if you mentioned it to coworkers before) <S> then yes, of course, celebrate away. <S> And of course you can take the middle road: <S> toast the good times in general and if people ask mention that you had a windfall lately and wished to spread the mood.
| -- I think it would be perceived in most cultures as either bragging, rubbing other people's noses in it (as a couple of the other answers suggested) or possibly worse, a kind of crass virtue-signalling where you are implicitly saying "look at the sacrifices I've made, that you haven't!" I see colleagues celebrating happy things in their life with their coworkers all the time.
|
Contacting 'references' that are not on the reference list I found out that the CEO/hiring manager finds non-listed 'references' (generally via LinkedIn) for the later-stage candidates, and contacts them without asking permission. These non-listed references are generally strangers to the CEO/hiring manager. Is contacting references like in this situation allowed and/or ethical? I'd hope my LinkedIn/social media contacts had positive things to say about me, but I'd be offended if I knew the company did this while I was interviewing. <Q> In my experience the right way to go about it is to ask the candidate if they can provide additional references if you need them. <S> Contacting non-listed references is, in my opinion, a violation of privacy (I don't mean this in a legal way, it's perfectly legal). <S> If you need more references to make a decision, you contact a candidate and ask them to provide additional references. <S> This shows respect to the candidates privacy. <S> This is because a resume asking that non-listed references not be contacted automatically seems suspicious. <S> It might be different in the US or other countries, it mostly is, but that's how it is in Switzerland from my experience. <A> First, I find this practice incredibly distasteful and unprofessional. <S> All job applications should be submitted in confidence. <S> As a hiring manager, you (we) don't know if the candidate is leaving a job quietly, or not. <S> And by contacting "backdoor references" or "non-listed references" you could jeopardize their situation even more. <S> This puts the candidate in an unfair position, especially should they (worst case) get terminated from their current position for looking for work. <S> Now, if you found the references unacceptable or unsuitable, as a hiring manager it is your prerogative and reasonable to ask for more - or why a person/position was not utilized. <S> However, this too, often puts a candidate in a less than ideal position. <S> As this conversation can lead them to "bad mouth" their current employer inadvertently (or what they say can be perceived as such) - which is also an interview "no-no". <S> If you must ask "why" do so, expecting a response which may be less than apolitical about their current employer, and take into account your question with their response - in terms, of tone, reasoning and adequacy. <S> This way you are not penalizing them and negatively affecting their application for a difficult and (depending on your wording) distasteful question. <S> Is it ethical, that I believe is a "no". <A> Is contacting references like in this situation allowed and/or ethical? <S> Unless a candidate has explicitly indicated that they did not want certain organizations/individuals contacted <S> then this is OK. <S> Considering that they are using publicly available information to contact these people ( i.e. social media ) there is nothing unethical about this practice. <S> With regards to lack of transparency, I think it is understood that any good business will perform their due diligence in determining whether a candidate is the best choice for their company. <A> Is contacting references like this situation allowed and/or ethical? <S> Yes, it's allowed. <S> My boss used to call this "back door references" and it was routine. <S> I'd hope my LinkedIn/social media contacts had positive things to say about me, but I'd be offended if I knew the company did this while I was interviewing. <S> I have no idea why this would offend you, but you can always decline any offer from a company that did this if you found out. <S> And presumably the contact would give you notification about it.
| Expecting a candidate to explicitly ask for non-listed references to not be contacted is, in my opinion not good practice. IMHO, it's perfectly ethical to talk to anyone who might know about your abilities before offering you a job,, other than someone at your current employer. As far as your question if this practice is allowed, yes it is.
|
Is it reasonable to negotiate adding "senior" to a job title? I have an offer for a Ph.D.-level research job from a top company. The compensation package is attractive, but I'm thinking about whether I should negotiate the job title. From my research, roles that require similar qualifications and experience both outside and inside that company typically have "senior," if not "principal," in the title. Additionally, I would have easily met both the necessary and desired job requirements four years ago when I finished grad school. Now that I have another four years of experience, they're getting quite a lot more than their requirements. Would it be reasonable to ask if they can change the title to include "senior," without any changes in compensation? And if this is not possible, at least get an explanation of the reason behind it? I'm trying to leave ego out of this and think purely in terms of career progression. Thank you for your help! <Q> As is already mentioned. <S> Just ask. <S> Make sure they understand that it is not a secret way of getting even more money. <S> You are just thinking about the title. <S> It could be though that it is coupled to you salary. <S> Many companies job titles (although this is probably cultural) are coupled to certain salary scales. <S> So that could be a reason for them not to agree. <S> In the end. <S> Remember that it is the job and the salary that matter. <S> You can always explain on a cv that you had all the responsibilities of a senior. <S> A senior in one company does not mean the same in another company anyway <S> so it matters not too much IMHO. <A> Of course you may negotiate your job title. <S> Generally, it costs your future employer nothing to give you a title that reflects your level of responsibility. <S> You certainly should ask. <S> If you'll deal with customers or the public, or submit papers to journals, a "higher" title can help your credibility. <S> That's why banks have so many vice presidents. <S> Be sensitive though, to the possibility it does cost them something. <S> Maybe a whole bunch of your future colleagues have the title without "senior" added on. <S> In that case, if they give you "senior" they'll have to explain to the others why you have it <S> and they don't. <S> Some big companies, and governments, have Byzantine compensation plans with titles tied to pay scales. <S> Think vast spreadsheets with lots of pay ranges. <S> For such a company it may be hard just to tweak your title to meet your need. <S> But, at such a company you should push to have a "higher" title and be at the low end of the pay range for that title: It will be easier to get pay raises if they can do it without changing your title. <S> (Careful with this: don't assume you understand their compensation plan. <S> They probably don't. <S> These things are really Byzantine.) <S> If your company does have a problem like this, they should be willing to explain it to you. <S> Also keep in mind that titles don't necessarily mean much. <S> In its heyday Bell Labs employed Nobel-prize-winning scientists with the title "Member of the technical staff." <S> Sometimes after the call from Stockholm they were promoted to "Distinguished member of the technical staff." <A> Would it be reasonable to ask if they can change the title to include "senior," without any changes in compensation? <S> Your specific request is reasonable. <S> But that doesn't mean the company will make the desired change. <S> Some companies are very flexible with titles, others are very structured. <S> And if this is not possible, at least get an explanation of the reason behind it? <S> You can always ask for an explanation, although there is no requirement that the company actually grant one. " <S> Because that's the standard title here <S> " is a typical reply. <S> Be prepared with what you will do if the answer is "No, we can't change the title to include 'senior'". <S> You could live with it and accept the position anyway, decline the offer and walk away, or ask about future promotion possibilities.
| You can attempt to negotiate anything that is important to you.
|
How to handle discussions about 401k in the workplace I work for a company that offers 401k plan with a solid match. 6% but it vests over 3 years. Anyway, people always tell me to contribute and they discuss amongst each other how much they contribute. Usually they say they contribute maybe 2-5-10% to their 401ks. I'm very quiet when people start discussing 401ks because I don't want to sound arrogant or like I'm bragging. They always tell me, "You should increase your 401k contribution by 1% every year." Sounds good, but I can't do that, per IRS limits. I'm maxing mine out with to the IRS limit of $19,000 for 2019. I have been maxing out since I was 23 at previous employers too. My previous jobs offered the after-tax option too, this one does not, but I maxed that out as much as I could too. So pretty much I have it maxed out pretty well. I want people to talk about it so maybe people who are uncomfortable with investing could normalize it and see it as something they should do. On the other hand, I don't want to discuss the details of how much I contribute because it usually results in people think I am making a lot of money even though they can infer that I'm not (these are people with very similar roles to me and the band is not more than $10-15%). So how do I handle conversations about the 401k? <Q> Only you can judge whether your coworkers would hold maxing out your 401K against you. <S> I've never worked with such people, nor have friends. <S> I believe there are plenty of advisers who recommend maxing out if you can afford it. <S> Perhaps bringing up these advisers would at least give you a starting point on discussing it. <S> Or simply don't discuss actual amounts and merely agree that trying to put as much as you can into pretax retirement plans is good. <S> Only HR knows how much you're contributing. <S> Note, if you are perceived as extremely frugal, then you may get unwanted advice along the lines of "you should live a little" and such instead. <A> So how do I handle conversations about the 401k? <S> You talk to them about their 401K, in percentages, and never about your own. <S> So: You should increase your 401k contribution by 1% every year. <S> That is really great advice that I try and follow, and it might hurt a bit <S> but it is a great strategy. <S> Are you doing that? <S> What do you think about the ROTH option? <S> Its tough, because you not only lose the contribution but also have to pay taxes on it. <S> It is far easier to do the non ROTH option. <S> But I try and put at least some of my savings in ROTH as it is a great long term strategy. <S> What are you doing? <S> What percentage do you contribute? <S> Most people won't ask this. <S> However: I always try to do at least the match. <S> 15% of your income is better, but really hard. <S> What do you contribute? <S> In no case did you lie or dismiss the conversation. <S> Also you validated the other person, and made them feel like they have given you sage advice. <S> Being that most people like to talk about themselves, they will have a very positive feeling about the conversation and most won't notice that you gave almost no information. <S> Some more thoughts: <S> What do you invest in? <S> Here I would talk in general terms about age based asset allocation and the risks associated with being too conservative. <S> You might give some numbers like "age in bonds" type thing. <S> (At 30 years old you should have 30% in bonds, or whatever number you like.) <S> How do I increase my contributions? <S> Talk about budgeting and talk about some good budgeting tools/financial gurus. <S> Pointing them to Dave Ramsey is fantastic for the uninitiated. <S> You can always say you do a version of D.R. <S> (dump a bunch of money in your 401K). <S> Good work! <A> You disclose as much information as you want to disclose, not more, not less. <S> You don't want to give too much detail <S> so your colleagues don't think you're bragging or that you are minted (it doesn't really matter whether you are or not <S> , it's about perception in this case), and that's perfectly fine. <S> I'm like that too, in the sense that my personal finances are personal, no matter if they are good or bad. <S> You said: I want people to talk about it so maybe people who are uncomfortable with investing could normalize it and see it as something they should do. <S> What you can do is give advice or your opinion without going into details of your personal finances. <S> For example, you could say: "Yes, I agree, increasing your 401k contributions by 1% every year is the right thing to do, because of X, Y and Z. <S> " <S> You are not disclosing any personal information, while still participating in the conversation, hopefully encouraging those who are uncomfortable to feel safer to discuss these topics. <A> By maxing out your 401(k) contribution, you're doing a smart thing. <S> Specifically, you're starting early in life to save for later in your life. <S> Why is it smart? <S> (You know this answer). <S> It's the power of compound interest. <S> What you save in your 20s and 30s will grow. <S> If your plan invests your money wisely the growth over decades will astonish you. <S> I'm just retiring, and wow, a few mill! <S> Much more than my kids will need to buy a box and rent a backhoe. <S> People who don't use the 401(k) system are, bluntly, making a big mistake. <S> Two things about talking about this in public. <S> Some people need most of their pay to handle current expenses. <S> Those folks can't max out. <S> People who say, "increase your contribution by 1% a year" offer really good advice to the folks who can't max out. <S> They're saying "gradually arrange your household budget to allow you to save more money, and use the 401(k) system to save it." <S> I don't think you need to be embarrassed by your choice. <S> Pitch it proudly. <S> Just be sensitive to people who can't max out. <S> They are likely to be embarrassed by their situation, and "add 1% per year" is useful advice for them. <S> It offers a path for them to get the retirement savings they need.
| You handle conversations about your 401k in a similar way you would handle any other personal finances chat.
|
Office space bait and switch I've worked at my current job for about 4 months. My previous stints are 10 years and 6 years. After my interview, I asked to walk through the office and see what it is like. Unfortunately, my now-boss walked me through a completely different part of the office from where we sit, on another floor, which is quiet and well lit. I accepted the offer and for the last 4 months have been working in an area with no lighting, no windows, and constant loud hyena laughter/shouting/yelling for 6+ hours a day (these conversations are not work related). On top of this, the company does not allow working from home. I'm not allowed to work from any other part of the building either- such as the patio outside, the cafeteria (which has a full wall of windows), or any other space that is more functional than the office. Additionally, my desk is nearly at shoulder height and my chair is very short - it's not broken, they are all like this - leading me to have shoulder and neck pain from holding my arms up at an awkward angle all day. I'm basically unable to get any work done. I've addressed all these issues with my boss over the last 4 months and every time he just shrugs it off. His primary solution is to assign everyone less work to account for the "distractions". My predecessor, the last person to have this job, left after 4 or 5 months. The position was open for two years before my company hired me. I should think the 2 year wait should give me some additional leverage. What can I do to make clear to my boss that (a) l I'm on the verge of resigning over these issues (b) he has to fix this, with the solutions I have proposed to him in the past or with some of his own ideas. <Q> my now-boss walked me through a completely different part of the office... <S> His primary solution is to assign everyone less work to account for the "distractions". <S> Your boss is a deceitful moron and deserves none of the respect and restraint you have so far shown. <S> I would normally advocate communication and everything suggested by Sourav Ghosh, but in this case, if everything is as you described, I think you should look for another job. <S> Take your time to get it right <S> and most importantly learn from this experience. <S> It's probably a bit much to demand to see the specific equipment / location, but you'd have to be quite unlucky to get this again. <S> Don't bash your current employer; that just looks bad, but if they ask for specifics, mention the environment and ask if theirs is similar. <S> Good luck with everything. <A> Healthy workplace == <S> Healthy and Motivated workforce == <S> Productivity. <S> There is no two things about it. <S> Bring it to the notice of your superiors immediately (this time officially , by setting up a proper meeting through email invite, for example). <S> After all, it's your organization's responsibility to provide you with proper working conditions. <S> If you immediate boss does not provide enough attentions to it, have a meeting with the HR people - this is not an issue that should be taken lightly. <S> Do not bring up the topic of resignation into the discussion (i.e., don't sound like a ransom call). <S> Just mention how the present condition adversely affects the productivity and the physical and mental health of the employee (you). <S> Be clear and frank about the unhealthy part of the environment and provide a couple of suggestions (again) on what and how things can be changed to make it a better workplace. <S> Basically, before taking the final call, ensure you have raised concerns, suggested ways to improve the same and it did not work. <S> Leaves a positive sign from your side. <S> Finally, even after the attempts if the situation does not change, you need to take a call. <S> Unhealthy work conditions are not to be overlooked. <A> What can I do to (a) <S> make clear to my boss that I'm on the verge of resigning over these issues (b) that he has to fix this, with the solutions I have proposed to him in the past or with some of his own ideas. <S> Your projected outcomes are unrealistic. <S> Neither of these will eventuate. <S> They're not happening for your colleagues, your predecessor or you. <S> Your best way forwards is to find a more suitable job and then quietly resign. <S> Write this off to experience.
| Prospective employers will ask why you're leaving after such a short time, and I would be honest; job and environment were not as described.
|
Reducing neck and shoulder pain while at the computer I recently started a job in assisting my company with operations. This essentially is a software job, so I spend my 8 hours at a desk. I sustained an upper back strain before starting this position that did not fully heal before starting. I now find that sitting at my desk for 8 hours a day is really bothering my neck and shoulders. I get up every hour and try my best not to slouch. Stretching too frequently aggravates my injury, so I am in a tough spot right now. Does anyone have any other tips to alleviate the tension in my upper spine and neck? <Q> Get a Standing Desk and an Ergonomic Chair <S> In several countries in Europe, you even can get it paid by the medical insurance if a doctor can prove that you have a pain problem. <S> Do take this problem seriously and see a doctor. <S> Some light gymming after work also helps. <A> In addition to @Jishan's answer , you can also: use a heating pad (bought from a store or a reusable rice one on your neck and/or shoulders. <S> take regular breaks using the pomodoro technique or a program like Workrave <A> In addition to the other excellent answers, and to obtaining and following medical advice, check the relative heights of floor or footrest, seat, arms, keyboard, head, and screen. <S> See Office ergonomics, Your how-to guide . <S> If your work involves thinking time as well as typing, close your eyes or otherwise disconnect from the computer while you are thinking. <S> A lot of us get into the habit of staying in typing position while thinking because that makes it clearer <S> we are working.
| In particular, having the top of the screen too low can cause neck strain - at least, that was what an ergonomics person told me when advising ordering a monitor riser to lift a monitor up an inch.
|
When describing my skills, what is the short form of "I'm sensitive to others in the office and help them work together"? I am very sensitive to how other people are doing in the office. In the past, I have helped people having a bad day, listened to their wild and fantastic and angry stories about coworkers and management etc. (not by request, they always initiate).I don't insert judgement (as best possible ;) ) and I try to say "Well" and "I see" and "How do you feel about that" rather than "Darryl! That's absurd and rude!"... I HATE judgemental people... we hurt each other every day. I listen, I care. It's extremely important in an office whether it be very professional or completely unprofessional environment. Kyla: Sharon is such an awful awful person. I hate her. She's always telling people I'm terrible.Me: How long has this been going on? Have you talked to HR? That's terrible news. Ya know I've felt that way so many times and what I did was.... Maybe it will pass, come on over an talk to me if you need to...etc. I know very well how to TRY to help too because after all, I've made so many unbelievable gaffes myself. What is that skill called? I feel like its extremely valuable and I want to wave it around so that the hiring manager knows something important about me AND we can also quickly find out how much THEY care before I waste time with an interview ;) <Q> Any and/or all of the following apply Teambuilding Conflict resolution Mentoring Soft skills <A> What is that skill called? <S> Based on your description, I would describe that skill or attribute as empathic . <S> From Oxford's : <S> The ability to understand and share the feelings of another. <S> This is a valuable skill in some careers and jobs. <S> In a way, this is also a bit related to "being a team player" , something that is also valuable in a candidate, as you are caring and helping your coworkers. <A> Training classes for this skill often call it "active listening." <S> You are right <S> , it's a valuable skill and rare talent. <S> Cultivate it in yourself. <S> (Maybe find one of those training classes?) <S> And be careful to avoid "triangulation," which is a ten dollar word for "getting caught in the middle."
| Empathetic people have a tendency to put themselves into "other's shoes", meaning they can perceive and understand well the feelings and postures others have.
|
How do I "dress in layers" when I need to stay business casual indoors? Winter time is coming soon, and that means having to wear a lot of sweaters outdoors. At the workplace, I can usually get away with a nice sweater without any patterns on it, thanks to being in a programming field with little client contact. But I am still expected to keep a business-casual level of attire. The problem is, the office kicks up the heat throughout the building during the winter, and it can get unreasonably warm - at which point I need to remove my sweater. Most of the time for warmer weather I wear a polo shirt for business-casual, but these all have collars and buttons that bump up against a sweater, so I can't just wear one underneath. What other options do I have to wear under a sweater that would still keep the same business-casual level of professionalism as a polo shirt? Preferably, I'd also like to avoid having to switch shirts in the middle of a work day. <Q> I wear polo shirts and cotton shirts under a jumper/ sweater without any problems with the buttons or collars. <S> You just need to make sure your jumper has a wide enough neck to accommodate the shirt collar. <S> V-neck style jumpers are also good, especially if you're wearing a tie underneath, but as you can see in the image, round necks shouldn't be a problem. <A> The general answer to that will be: ask your manager what is appropriate for your workplace culture. <S> There is no strict definition of business-casual . <S> Sometimes in winter I prefer set of 3 layers that looks like: <S> White t-shirt Button-up shirt without a tie, probably something patterned as plain shirt is more formal Blazer / sports coat <S> This set seems to be gender-neutral, at least in the US. <S> Sweater can be replaced with a fleece vest (pretty tech-y ) or a cardigan (pretty old-styley): <A> The interwebs are full of style advice. <S> Personally, depending on the quality of the garments, I think you could get away with it sometimes.
| Here’s an article that recommends wearing an oxford or dress shirt under your sweater, or using a blazer over your polo, but not combining polos and sweaters.
|
If an offer has several contingencies and clearing them takes longer than 4 weeks, can I back out of the offer? I was offered a position with several contingencies (drug test, background check and management interviews). It's been more than 4 weeks since I was given the offer and I'm still waiting on the background check to clear (I passed the management interview and drug test). I've heard little of nothing from the recruiter for two weeks and I now have another offer from another company. Can I back out of the first offer without consequences? <Q> Can I back out of the first offer without consequences? <S> The only consequence may be some hard feelings on the part of the employer. <S> In many locales, you can even quit a job at any time without any repercussions. <A> Unless you signed a contract with a penalty clause, there is absolutely no reason why you should not back out of an offer. <S> A future application to the company may not be looked upon too favourably, but that's about it for consequences. <A> Yes, you may back out of this offer. <S> Having two offers gives you some power. <S> It is good to use that power to advance your personal career. <S> The best way to use that kind of power is subtly. <S> To exaggerate, think "iron fist inside velvet glove. <S> " You can be polite without being weak. <S> The wise / subtle thing is to give the first employer a last chance to get their act together. <S> Call your point-of-contact in the company (not the recruiter unless she is a company employee), and say, "You gave me a contingent offer on --date--, and I haven't heard anything since --date--. <S> I have another job offer in hand, and I need to get to work. <S> When can I expect you to complete your background check <S> so I can start working for you?" <S> You can expect a professional and clear response to your question, and you can decide whether it meets your needs. <S> If you don't get a clear response, or it doesn't meet your needs, move on to the other job. <S> The first company will know why they lost you. <S> That's what you will want when you are a hiring manager one day. <S> (They'll finish background checks on time on your watch!)
| You can back out of a job offer at any point in time before you start the job.
|
Heard back from recruiter 20 minutes after a thank you email, with no discussion of next steps I had the final round of a long interview process with the hiring manager Tuesday and was told he would discuss with the team and get back to me after a couple days. It’s been a couple days, and while I’m trying not to read into this obviously, I sent a thank you letter to the recruiter. “ Thanks again for chatting with me over the last few weeks. I've enjoyed speaking with everyone, and it's clear that -‘s only getting started. Please send my thanks to the team!” She kindly replies after 20 minutes: “ Of course! Really enjoyed chatting with you as well. All the best,” It seemed so final and didn’t touch on next steps, although I didn’t explicitly ask. Is there anything I can glean from this? Based on miscommunication in the past, I went down a mental tunnel thinking that since she didn’t mention anything, I’ve already been rejected and that it seems by the text of my email that the word has already been sent. I’m curious if this is normal- ie, replying to be kind prior to a final decision made. I feel like if I email asking for clarification that I’ll come off as overeager. But as I’m sure you can imagine, I can’t think clearly and am concerned I won’t hear back about anything now. Is there anything I can do? Edit- question is different since I sent a thank you email (albeit a bad one) and got a reply, wanting to know how to interpret. Thanks for your answers. <Q> With recruiters, you never know which. <S> You have not signed anything, so you do not want to fixate on that particular job yet. <S> Keep looking, and if something comes up, you ask the recruiter again if anything has developed so far, because now that you have two leads, you need to coordinate a bit so you don't waste anyone's time. <A> Is there anything I can do? <S> Yes. <S> Wait a few more days to see if you hear anything, and if not follow up next week. <S> As I mentioned in a comment, you didn't actually ask the recruiter a question, you just said thanks for their time. <S> So why are you expecting an answer? <S> If you wanted to know next steps and timelines, you should have asked the question in your email. <S> I'm not trying to read into this obviously <S> But.... you are doing. <S> You want the job, I get it, and I would be the same in your shoes. <S> But you're massively overthinking this. <S> Have the other candidate(s) <S> even had their final interviews yet? <S> You have no way of knowing what else is going on behind the scenes. <S> The hiring manager said he wanted to discuss with the team - you don't know if that's happened yet, and the recruiter will only be told of the decision once one has been reached. <S> As others have answered/commented, the recruiter was indeed just thanking you for your email. <S> Could she have given you an idea of timeline? <S> Sure. <S> But you didn't ask for one, so <S> she was just being polite. <S> "All the best" could be her way of saying "Good luck!". <S> It's not final, you haven't been rejected, and you shouldn't think that you have. <S> Just... bide your time for a few more days <S> and if you don't hear anything else, follow up and ASK those questions. <A> Today is friday, you posted your question 4 hours ago <S> so I assume you sent this email yesterday, which was thursday (so 2 days after the interview) <S> , it is pretty common <S> that HR need / take more than 2 days to decide if they actually want to hire or not someone. <S> Taking that into account, to me her answer just means be more patient, we will get back to you . <S> I know it's annoying <S> and I've also been facing long processes when I was looking for a job <S> but that's how it works. <S> You should have at least waited end of afternoon of next monday. <S> So don't overthink and wait for the real answer <S> , there is nothing you can figure out from this one. <A> You are correct in surmising that you should wait a fair bit longer before sending a second email. <S> One email is probably fine to show that you are keen <S> but I don't think you can justify sending more than one in the space of a week. <S> If you have an urgent reason to contact them (e.g. because you have an offer from another company) then it would be reasonable to do so <S> but if that were the case you should probably phone them instead. <S> "Is there anything I can glean from this?" <S> No. <S> You didn't ask any questions and they didn't provide any answers.
| That sounds like a standard noncommittal reply and/or actually being friendly.
|
How can I make sure colleagues do not feel like I accuse them of doing something wrong? I work in a small company in Thailand, SE Asia. I am originally from Europe. I live and work there since many years, we all speak English in the company, and normally communication works fine. I am responsible for IT and IT security. Some time ago a hacker tried to hack our email accounts. Since then I check regularly all email activities from all users (I don't see the body of the emails, just the header). I check when each user (tried to) logon to which email account from where (IP address) and when. I look for multiple failed login attempts, unusual locations (IP addresses), etc. If I find something strange like i.e. logon attempts from a different continent I ask the relevant user(s) if they have any idea how this could have happened. I.e. maybe they opened an attachment with a virus but they didn't think anything bad happened, so they didn't report it. Or maybe they downloaded something bad or something like that. Or maybe the users didn't do anything unusual and the hacking attempt is random. My intention is to find out what happend and to make sure nobody hacks our system. But when I see something strange and ask users if they know why this might have happened then some users, especially one woman, think I accuse them of doing something illegal like giving out her password. I try to make sure everybody understands that I don't accuse anybody. I just try to find out what happend. We all make mistakes from time to time and if a user opened i.e. a bad attachment then I want to know so that I can minimize possible problems. But it seems some people think I accuse them, however I formulate my request for information. How can I make sure users understand that what I do is in the interest of everybody and in the interest of the security of out email system and reputation of our company. I have the support of the boss. But obviously it would be good if people don't misunderstand my intention. <Q> Failed login attempts from remote locations are nothing new... as long as they have FAILED . <S> This simply shows someone is trying to gain access to your account, however, many hackers will simply attack a very broad range of email addresses in the hopes that one of then has insecure access. <S> Once they are into your emails, they run a couple of scripts, and your left with the aftermath to clean up. <S> Their job is done in a fraction of a second, so manual checks won't prevent this. <S> Onto the Workplace Broad Emails <S> Board emails are addressed to everyone at the company. <S> You can mention an attack, or just go on a general spiel about security and how its important to keep your passwords safe and secure. <S> Whoever the offender is, should read this and understand that you know what they are doing, and hopefully fix the issue. <S> Of course, it might have been a legitimate attack in which case they won't even notice. <S> You can also use this to link users to different training material and courses so that they can understand the importance of keeping their password security and not clicking on suspicious links. <S> Specific Person <S> In this scenario, you have a meeting with the person and discuss your findings with them. <S> This is basically pointing fingers, so I would recommend you send out those broad emails first to make sure everyone is aware of the issue. <S> Basically you have a meeting, ask her about the unusual activity. <S> In General <S> Your average user will not know about hacking or the importance of password security and having multiple different passwords. <S> You shouldn't ask them if they know why this happened or how something happened. <S> You should ask them to verify facts that you have, not help you solve them. <S> Ask them "Did you login to your email at XXX from XXX?". <S> Don't ask them "Why did you log into your email at XXX from XXX?" <S> because then you are accusing them of an action. <A> Try to detach yourself from the questioning as much as possible. <S> Don't mention that you are personally going through the logs looking for things. <S> You can say something like: <S> The logs indicated that there was a login attempt for your account from country X <S> ... <S> or The logs recorded several failed login attempts on <S> X... <S> This way, even if they are sure they did nothing wrong they are less likely to feel like you are personally accusing them of anything. <S> You are simply relaying what "the system" is telling you. <S> One other thing is not mentioning that they may have opened an attachment or downloaded something when inquiring about suspicious activity. <S> Conduct your investigation, determine what the cause of the breach was and then send a global email reminding everyone of safe practices. <S> You could also reach out to your boss to see if some sort of basic security training is a possibility for all employees. <A> I work as the team lead in the IT Security team of my employer. <S> I frequently have encountered similar, if not identical, circumstances as you describe. <S> We understand why we are doing what we are doing and its importance in protecting the company. <S> However, the average non technical user outside of IT most likely does not. <S> My experience supports this conclusion. <S> If these users see unusual events happen on their computer, rather than thinking of the many different reasons as to why, they may just conclude its an IT employee "looking to hack". <S> Hence, you need to remove the personal element from what you do. <S> I know your company is small, but does it have a documented incident response procedures as to what is expected of IT security employees when researching security logs? <S> Having such a document allows you to transform your communications from one of personal suspicion to simply following an approved process that applies to all security incidents encountered by all company employees. <S> The universalism of the policy and the implicit management support should help your cause and alleviate any complaining that come from end user employees.
| Make sure to reassure them that they are not going to be punished, just that you have noticed unusual activities and wanted to confirm if they were legitimate or an attack. Give them a scapegoat which is not yourself.
|
Are there any disadvantages to taking my employer's increased offer, even if I am likely to leave soon? My employer is about to make me a new offer, giving me a promotion and a raise. Based on what I've heard unofficially, it's good but lower than what I was hoping for (and they know this). Meanwhile, another company is about to give me a much better offer and, assuming we work out some final details, I'm planning to take that one. My current employer knows nothing about that other offer. What are some ways to handle this with my current employer? I'm concerned that it's going to look bad if I sign a new contract (even one of indefinite time) and then give them my resignation less than 4 weeks later. On the other hand, I'm concerned that if I don't immediately sign the new contract (i.e. if I say "I need time to think" while they offer me a strictly better contract than the one I currently have), I will automatically be giving away that I'm evaluating an external offer. I'm not sure it's a good idea to reveal that before being 100% sure that I'm taking the other job. What other considerations might there be? <Q> Always act as if you are staying unless you are absolutely confident you will be leaving. <S> There are many reasons something like that might fall through: <S> Company runs out of money <S> /hiring freeze <S> Company can't get you the money for some reason Until you quit, you don't have confidence you won't be at your current employer for years <S> You might have something problematic in a background check you don't know about or know the company cares about (worst case, someone stole your identity and SURPRISE! <S> you find out about it) <S> There's a lot of details that need to be finalized from "might get actual offer" to "actually signed an offer." <A> I'm concerned that it's going to look bad if I sign a new contract (even one of indefinite time) and then give them my resignation less than 4 weeks later. <S> If your current company wants to give you a raise, they have business reasons for doing so. <S> Be assured your employer would not be too concerned about "looking bad" if they determined the relationship was not working out. <S> So neither should you. <S> On the other hand, I'm concerned that if I don't immediately sign the new contract... <S> I will automatically be giving away that I'm evaluating an external offer. <S> If you just accept the offer, this is not really a concern. <S> At any rate, sometimes it can be good if the company suspects you might be leaving, because it forces them to think about what it might take to keep you. <S> Ultimately, these are two completely separate concerns -- there is your current salary (regardless of when it was increased last), and there is the new potential salary. <S> Once you have a firm, actual offer, at that time you can evaluate which position looks more appealing. <S> Until then, why turn down more money? <A> Take what enderland said (it's always possible that you stay).
| But even if you leave, it's always better for you to leave with a promotion and a higher salary; this can only be useful when you negotiate a new contract with a new company. With at-will employment (and assuming that's what this is), both employer and employee assume the risk that either party can end the relationship at any time. Companies are generally not that perceptive when it comes to employees looking around, because people are generally pretty good about hiding that sort of thing.
|
Insomnia, first shift. Should I quit without two weeks? So a little backstory to this (little personal but I'll spare most of the details). I just graduated high school and I work at McDonalds (This is my first job). At home, it's just me, my dad, and my little sister. I have to babysit my sister as my dad works 12 hours a day, 6 days a week. With that being said, I have to work first shift. I work from 4:45am-2pm which is super overwhelming for me because I have really bad insomnia. Before I started working, I'd stay up until I needed to sleep and then sleep until my sister got home from school. So I'd fall asleep around 6am and wake up around 3pm. That means I'm trying to fall asleep around 9pm (which doesn't happen) and wake up at 4:45am. I normally fall asleep around 3am so I go to work on 1 hour of sleep and work 8-9 hours. This whole ordeal is really messing with me and I decided that I want to quit so I don't keep messing my "life"? up. I've only been working around 2 weeks. Another thing: I currently ride my bike to and from work. It has started getting cold where I live (around 30-40 degrees outside when I leave for work) so its difficult to get to and from work now. I don't have my drivers license and won't be able to for another month or two from now. Do I need to give a two weeks notice or can I tell my manager about the situation I'm in and quit? Edit: When I quit, I'm going to wait until I get my license to find another job. I plan on finding an overnight job that works with my insomnia. Edit 2: I apologize if this post is jumpy and has grammatical/spelling mistakes. I'm currently really tired haha <Q> To your direct question: you could probably just walk out ( or be a no-show). <S> You might not be able to work at McDonald's again, but if you think you can find other work easily enough, then that's up to you. <S> However, I don't think you should - because I don't think any job is something to just give up: <S> A few years ago I found myself having a small career break (for a couple of reasons - one of which being to move to another country). <S> Over that break, my daily rhythm shifted to going to sleep about 3 or 4 am and waking up at 10 am. <S> (I'd had a similar pattern as a university student - luckily I didn't have many 9 am lectures over those 3 years) <S> After I moved to Australia and began a new job search I shifted my clock back a couple of hours - and then a couple more when I'd got a new job so that I'd be able to get up at 6 am to start work. <S> It wasn't easy - it took more than a couple of weeks to get used to the new rhythm, but I managed it after while. <S> I even ended up going further <S> so I would sleep from about 11 pm to 5 <S> am <S> so I could get a run in the morning. <S> I strongly recommended turning off all screens (TV, computer, and phone) at least an hour or so before your planned bedtime. <S> Make a ritual of your bedtime - mine is pretty simple <S> : turn on a low powered bedside lamp, get ready for bed, and then read (paper book, not screen) a little. <S> Sometimes I don't get through more than a page, sometimes I have to put the book down after a chapter. <S> But the point is the ritual - it signals your brain that it should be getting ready to sleep. <A> If you are sure you are going to quit, I suggest discussing the matter with your manager. <S> Hanging on for even a day or two might make the manager's job a lot easier than if you walk out immediately, and keep the possibility of working there again in the future. <S> The question suggests that you attempted to shift 6 hours earlier in one jump. <S> That is not likely to work well. <S> It is much easier to get to sleep a little earlier each night, until you are getting a full night's sleep. <A> Do I need to give a two weeks notice or can I tell my manager about the situation I'm in and quit? <S> Just quit. <S> There is no need to give two weeks notice (unless McDonalds is the only employer where you're located, which you make it sound like it isn't). <S> There is no need to explain anything.
| But if you explain things, the manager may be able to find you a different shift. And even if you give two weeks notice, your duration at McDonalds will be too short to put on your resume anyway. I'd also avoid caffeine for about 8 hours before bedtime. Your time-shift is more significant and more drastic - however, since most of the world works around "core" hours, it would probably be a good idea to try and stick it out a bit longer than the two weeks you already have.
|
My former employer doesn't count training as part of my time with the company..? I was with my previous employer for one year and within that one year they have a four month training period. After leaving the company I've applied for another position at a different company. I received an offer letter and I am now in process employment verification and background check phase. I provided my references and contacted one of my former colleagues and he informed me my previous company doesn't consider those four months of training as part of my employment. I've listed on my resume I was with the company for a full year as I was never informed otherwise when I left my previous employer. This may come up during employment verification, what should I say/expect? <Q> I was with my previous employer for one year and <S> within that one year they have a four month training period. <S> [...] I was paid for those four months. <S> Then you were employed (and had presumably signed a contract saying so if you were paid), so this was part of your employment, and your colleague is wrong. <S> "Whenever you're doing training we're still paying you <S> but you're not technically employed" is just lunacy. <S> It could be that this was considered your probationary period, and your colleague is confusing the two. <S> This may come up during employment verification, what should I say/expect? <S> If it were me, I'd make sure I had my previous employer's (signed & dated) contract to hand <S> so I could prove in black and white that they were wrong, then follow it up with a comment akin to: <S> My colleague mentioned something like this when I asked him for a reference, so I pulled out my contract to double check - my start date is definitely (x). <S> I can only think he might be getting confused with my probationary period. <A> This may come up during employment verification, what should I say/expect? <S> I don't think it will come up. <S> But if it does, just be completely honest <S> You were employed at the company for a year That year includes a paid 4-month training/probation period Based on your contract, you feel that you were employed by that company for those 4 months <S> You were never informed otherwise while you were employed or when you left Despite paying you, and despite the fact that you worked exclusively for the company during that period, the company is now saying that you weren't employed by them for those 4 months Your future employer will most likely understand the foolishness of your former employer's opinion. <A> Regardless of whether you were training or on assignment, you were on that company's payroll. <S> And that's generally the determining factor for whether you worked for another company or not. <S> As long as you explain it properly, you should be fine. <A> Ideally, the date on offer letter from the previous company shall be ground for final decision. <S> However, it is considered a grey area because companies/managers do treat/twist training period as per their benefits in many cases. <S> If your appointment letter is including start of training period <S> then there should not be any problem regardless of what your ex-colleagues have given as feedback. <S> Try to be honest with the new employer without any fears because if they are running background checks then they can surely understand and opinion this in your favour. <A> It sounds like your previous employer is a little bit petty. <S> They won't be the last petty one you encounter. <S> You're going to want to keep documentation to back up everything you put on your resume. <S> It might be difficult to imagine why an employer would claim you didn't work for a time period based on a technicality, but just assume there's a reason they would work against you in every situation and you won't be left surprised and unprepared. <S> As a side note, it would be a great idea to document everything an employer promises you. <S> Everything. <S> Get it in writing no matter how much they try to act like they're your friend, they are not. <S> You're just a human resource to them. <S> Watch your back and the backs of your co-workers. <S> Try to lift each other up. <S> Don't compete. <S> Know how to say "no" to your manager and identify when you're getting pushed toward burnout. <S> Your manager has read stacks of books about how to get the maximum productivity out of you regardless of the cost to your mental health. <S> Don't allow a toxic situation to get you stuck in a rut... or worse.
| I think your former colleague is mistaken.
|
I'm an engineer with no experience of managing people but will be in charge of hiring help soon. How can I prepare for it? I am a mid-junior-ish engineer who joined the right startup at the right time as their first employee. I do various embedded software related things for the products we develop but as most of what we develop is currently contracted out I also help with quite a bit of soft-engineering and product strategy stuff. It's quite clear to me that I'm on a trajectory for some kind of technical product management / owner role, and I'm pretty content with that. The most imminent part of that will involve our team expanding by a few people. My boss encouraged me to start thinking about what kind of folk I'll be looking to hire to help me with the technical development and scaling up of our system. I have no experience with managing people, not to mention hiring, but I want to make sure I do as good of a job at that as possible. What can I do now to best prepare for this hiring process? What to keep in mind when leading a search for a technical person who is likely to be more technically experienced than me? Are there much quality resources I can find to prepare for managing our product once more people are on board? I appreciate those are pretty broad questions, but hopefully not too much so! <Q> Start with listing the company's needs in this field. <S> Analyse <S> what is being outsourced and figure out what it would take to do it in-house. <S> Then, with that as a base, work on the details. <S> The hardest part is compiling the list thoroughly. <S> The rest you can pick up as you go, so long as you have a solid idea of what's needed going forwards. <A> Your questions hit at something I've long considered to be odd--someone is very good at skill basket A, so they are promoted into a position that requires skill basket B. <S> They have no idea how to perform skill basket B, nor does the organization have any reason to believe that they'd perform well in the basket B role. <S> That's your situation, it seems to me. <S> In my experience, your best approach by far would be to search out classes in supervisory skills. <S> Those may be offered by an employers' association or a local community college. <S> You might also find online classes. <S> They should provide you with basic skills for managing people, but it would also be critical to find someone who can assist with tough situations so you can learn good lessons not bad lessons. <S> That person could be a superior, a lawyer, a mentor. <S> There are many retired or even still active executives and HR folks that would be willing to mentor someone. <S> Good luck. <A> My first port of call in this situation would be your manager. <S> You lack management experience, they have it. <S> Instead of you having to focus on both the technical and managerial aspects of hiring someone more technical than you, share that load with your manager. <S> In an interview situation, your manager will be able to delve into the kind of responses they expect in getting an understanding of whether this person will be the right kind of fit personality-wise for the organisation. <S> Meanwhile, this takes a lot of pressure off of you and allows you to just consider their technical ability. <S> Once you have some new hires, continue to lean on your manager for support in how best to manage the team. <S> It's their area of expertise, and as I'm sure they would have no issue approaching you with technical questions, you should take the opportunity to do the same in reverse. <S> Of course ask the question if the company is willing to invest in upskilling you in these areas, too. <S> It never hurts to ask, but the above at least gives you a fallback plan if the resources for training are not available (or, alternatively, a plan of attack to follow while you are also undertaking the training). <A> Managing a team, and hiring for it, are skills. <S> Like all skills, if you want to develop them, and get good at them, you'll need to devote some time to learning. <S> Learning can take many forms. <S> For instance, you might want to read a book or two on the topic (one I recommend is "Leading a Software Development Team" by Richard Whitehead). <S> You might want to attend some formal training: local universities often will offer relevant courses ( this or this ) and the good software development conferences will often have a relevant track . <S> There might be a local meetup or group focused explicitly on new technical leaders, like this . <S> They should pay to send you for training and make sure there is time in your schedule for it. <S> You should ask your boss to help find you a mentor - someone you can meet for an hour or two a month over coffee and discuss the challenges you are facing.
| While you are the one who needs to do the learning, you should ask that the organization help you.
|
Respect and Code Reviews How do you respect your boss when he asks you to write the code in his fashion for no objective reason other than he likes it that way? I submitted my code for review and passed all lint checks and presubmits. I got throttled by a code blocking code review. I got no accolades on my success with the app. His first review had a few decent comments, some inconsequential bad advice, a serious mistake, and the comment: "I would appreciated it if you would rewrite the code as [example]". Rewrite was no small task. I explained the objective problems with that example, addressed the bad advice, explained the problem with his serious mistake, and finally, explained why I written the code in the way I had, and, on top of that, I also rewrote it, just to try and appease him. I ended up taking over an hour to rewrite it. I further provide an explanation of the pros and cons of solving that problem different ways, as I'd analyzed it. Being the author of the code, I'd already analyzed it and made assessments on how to solve that problem. After that, I had to work on another task that I was to complete that day. I stayed until 8 to do that. He'd pushed back my productivity on that to refashion the code in a style that he prefers with no objective reason given. I worked 11 hours that day, after a follow up of a 10 hour day prior. Manager complained about the rewrite I'd done. How do you handle that? If I rewrite it his way, which is objectively worse, and if he cannot provide any objective reasons for why, I won't respect him. I sense he is playing power games, testing me, and trying to find reasons to fire me. As childish as this sounds, I sense that he is disrespecting me on purpose to create an issue. What I want is to keep my job there and maintain workplace respect. <Q> I think you're taking this way too personally. <S> I used to get pretty annoyed with a "thumbs down" of my PR (Pull Request / Peer review). <S> but it's not meant to be that way. <S> It just means the code is not yet ready to merge. <S> How do you respect your boss when he asks you to write the code in his fashion <S> Your boss has been tasked to provide a solution - s/he has chosen to use you as the designated coder. <S> Your boss - effectively your client - wants it done a certain way. <S> If you feel strongly otherwise, get another job, or make your complaints beforehand. <S> I also rewrote it, just to try and appease him <S> Your attitude is at fault. <S> What if you were a chef in a diner and had to cook eggs the way the stupid customer asked for, rather than your way? <S> I stayed until 8 to do that.... <S> I worked 11 hours that day, after a follow up of a 10 hour day prior. <S> Yeah, that's a mistake. <S> Don't do that. <S> I probably won't get many thanks for this, but I think you're wrong, Garrett. <S> You come across as immature. <S> Get over yourself, grow up. <S> You're being paid by the company to do a job required by the company - not what you think is required. <S> (40 years experience as a developer tells me this. <S> And I've been where you are more than once). <S> Also Garrett, do me one favour. <S> Bookmark this page somewhere and reread it in 5 years. <S> Give an update if you still feel the same way. <A> In development, the hierarchy of needs is: <S> It works correctly <S> It is readable/maintainable Performance <S> An objective problem is either 1 or 3. <S> Performance (3) only trumps readability and maintainability (2) when combined with (1), <S> ie when you have a functional performance requirement that you aren’t meeting. <S> While 2 is subjective, your boss is the eye that beholds. <S> Which means if your boss thinks the style is wrong, the style is wrong. <S> Really, anytime someone does a code review and has a problem with either the style or understanding what you are doing, take it as a given that they are right. <S> They may be wrong on style, but by definition they are right about understanding. <S> That said, there is a cost to doing the rework, and you should make your boss aware of it. <S> You should be doing a normal days work, and rework due to comments from a code review is part of that, not an emergency or something you should take on to fix outside of normal hours. <S> If there is a task that will be pushed back to the next day, tell your boss about that, don’t try to paper over the issue with overtime (paid or unpaid). <S> It may or may not change the priority given thee task, but at least then the right person is making the call. <A> Making changes due to a code review doesn’t reduce your productivity. <S> It’s part of the job. <S> You made one mistake though: You stayed late that day. <S> Instead you decided to pay the price yourself. <S> Don’t do that again. <A> You have two problems: You get emotionally attached to your code. <S> Feedback comes late. <S> Let me explain: <S> The code that you write isn't your code and it certainly makes no sense to think of it this way. <S> You can get reassigned – even to a better position – faster than you might think, and the code you wrote will be perfectly fine. <S> If you think about it: Any and every company code that you see and modify <S> was "someone else's code" at some point. <S> Pull Requests are part of the GitHub flow . <S> While it is the best work flow for many organizations and certainly the one your company chose, it does have some serious drawbacks. <S> Feedback will always come when you think you're done <S> and it will be mostly negative. <S> Change requests (GitHub) and tasks <S> (Bitbucket) are just lists of things that are not good enough in the reviewed code yet. <S> There's no built-in way to high-five someone, though. <S> So you'll have to emotionally detach yourself from the torrent of negative feedback that is inherent in this process. <S> Now, there are other development processes, like trunk-based development, where you commit to trunk – under the assumption that you will continuously refactor your code anyway. <S> Or pair programming, where two developers program together. <S> I hope you can see that these provide feedback earlier, but argueably require more resources and/or trust and that is why your company didn't choose those. <S> In any case, your company is highly unlikely to change its ways upon request by a single junior. <S> You can always ask your boss to provide you with adequate learning materials and/or introduction to the domain of your software in the hopes of understanding his reasons for why the code looks as it does. <S> Or ask him, or someone else more familiar with the code base, about feedback way before even thinking about opening a pull request. <S> In the end though, your manager is responsible for your work output anyway, so if he wants to make you objectively more unproductive, that is none of your concern. <S> You get paid by the hour, remember? <S> Overtime is a different topic and you'll find a lot of advice regarding this issue on The Workplace. <S> As a very last resort, you can always vote with your feet and walk to a different company. <S> But do expect the GitHub workflow and its drawbacks again.
| Assuming that your boss requested these changes for no good reason, you should have shown him that there is a price to pay: A delay in other work. If you're asked to rework something do it on their time (unless you were previously given contrary instruction and you did it "your way").
|
How much transparency about runway should I expect from startup employer? I work for a startup as a senior s/w developer (2 years). The company recently made some people redundant and re-focused on a smaller product set because of lack of investment.As part of a "get everyone fired up" meeting, the management shared some details of what we should focus on. Some very tight (some would say unrealistic) timescales were put in place.I have been offered a big salary increase in return for a longer (5 month instead of 3 month) notice period. Somewhat reluctantly, I've agreed.My question - Should I expect the management to be completely honest about the burn rate and runway length? Is it normal to "protect" employees from these details so as to avoid attrition and loss of morale? <Q> My question - Should I expect the management to be completely honest about the burn rate and runway length? <S> You should expect management to be exactly the same way they have been so far. <S> If they have been completely honest and open about the burn rate so far, if they were completely honest and open about the upcoming redundancies, then you should expect them to continue to be honest. <S> Check in with yourself <S> : Do you know the burn rate and runway today? <S> Is it normal to "protect" employees from these details so as to avoid attrition and loss of morale? <S> Some companies are honest, others are not. <S> I've been there and done that. <S> A "We can't promise we'll succeed, but we can promise that we are all in this together and that you will be kept in the loop" feeling is empowering. <S> To me, it makes no sense to lie to folks who are trusting you by sticking around during a re-start. <S> I can't imagine bothering to stay if you don't have trust. <A> It's pretty normal to keep the hard and fast details of burn rate and runway from employees, especially if you're trying to turn it around and secure more funding. <S> View yourself in the shoes of the startup founder. <S> They've hit a tight spot maybe and need everything to go right to proceed. <S> To have a viable pathway towards more funding and eventual success, they need their employees giving their very best. <S> That means they need them to be motivated. <S> You know what's the very opposite of motivating? <S> To know that it might all be over in a year if you don't secure more funding and the logistics of that. <S> That is the founder's job to deal with. <S> It's their responsibility and imperative to provide employees with sufficient notice and have the funds to effect that notice if they do go under, but it's also their responsibility to shield their employees from the woes of management - exactly what this is. <S> The good thing though - the employer requesting a longer notice period is a strict plus for you, unless you were planning to leave soon. <S> It means that if the startup goes under, you won't have to serve the notice. <S> But if it doesn't, you continue to get the (increased) paycheck. <A> It’s normal. <S> On the other hand, you know what’s going on anyway. <S> If the company runs out of money and can’t pay your salary, you can leave without notice because that is breach of contract, so the longer notice period doesn’t hurt you that way. <S> Changing jobs is slightly more difficult, but I assume the notice works both ways, so you can give notice today <S> and then you have five months to find a job. <S> And “big salary increase” should compensate for this. <A> This is a dangerous way to frame this situation. <S> You have a valuable skillset that can get you employment in any number of places. <S> If your management is making decisions or exhibiting behaviors that make you wary about your future, and they're refusing to give you concrete assurances about that future, starting thinking about jumping ship now. <S> Remember <S> - These people don't gain anything material by being honest or treating you fairly. <S> They have no material incentive to do these things. <S> So if it seems like maybe they are being dishonest, or treating you unfairly, chances are pretty good <S> that's true. <S> This is true of all employers, but it goes double for a startup, because if they make the wrong call, they don't have to worry about the reputation of their brand - They'll be dissolved anyway. <S> Protect yourself and your career first, because these people aren't going to do that for you.
| I can tell you that there is nothing more motivating to those who choose to stick around than complete honesty. If you were surprised by the redundancies, if they haven't shared all the financial details so far, then there is no reason to expect them to suddenly become open and honest.
|
What is the best way of dealing with a work colleague who triggers my anxiety? I am in the unfortunate situation where a colleague who literally sits at my bank of desks constantly triggers my anxiety. This has progressed over time and can be anything from: commenting negatively on emails sent, passive aggressive responses to reasonable questions, and trying to micromanage the team - which sets my anxiety off. At this point I should mention that this colleague isn't a manager and doesn't have any greater experience than anyone else in the team. After speaking with a few others there appears to be a common theme arising, everyone feels the same. I have raised this with my line manager but nothing has come from this, in fact I feel this has made things worse. Paraphrasing him, he said "I'll have a word with him [the colleague] but at the end of the day unfortunately you just need to deal with it; please push back to me if you start to feel stressed again". I've not mentioned it again. My line manager (who is based in the office) is retiring in 6 days (and counting). This is going to leave the team with a remote manager in the interim until a replacement is hired. Hopefully there is some course of action I haven't thought of that I can deploy here. I really enjoy my role, but if this continues I feel I'll need to start looking for a new role, for the sake of my mental health. <Q> The unfortunate fact is behavioral issues are best dealt with by the people in the room at the time. <S> That means being assertive and making comments like the following in the moment: <S> "Let's please avoid negative comments." <S> "There's no need for passive aggressiveness. <S> It was a reasonable question. <S> " <S> "We have a good plan here <S> and I think everyone knows their tasks. <S> No need to belabor the details." <S> Often, people are aware of how they are received in general, but have trouble recognizing specific instances in the moment that are problematic. <S> These sorts of comments are often enough to gradually change the behavior for the better. <S> Also, you having a plan to do something specific can help with your anxiety about the situation. <S> Also, sometimes this sort of behavior is a result of not having a more productive venue to provide feedback. <S> If there is a more productive process, point it out to him. <S> "Why don't you add that frequently asked question to the documentation, so it won't come up as often?" <S> "That criticism would have been more appropriate in the design review." <S> "Could we wait to talk about that until the retrospective? <S> " If there isn't a more appropriate venue, push to create one. <S> When is it helpful to involve a manager, and how can you make that intervention more fruitful? <S> When you have tried things like the above and can bring specific examples of ongoing push back you are receiving. <S> " <S> Bob is insisting on this change even though it was discussed and dismissed in the design review which he skipped." <S> "Bob keeps responding angrily when I point out his passive aggressive comments." <A> The most important thing: you should check this with a professional. <S> Mental health is important and conditions can be treated. <S> My answer below will focus on your approach at work, since I'm not a mental health professional. <S> Based on the details you provided in your question, there are two fundamental problems here: 1) <S> It seems it's not just you, and the behaviour of your colleague is impacting other people. <S> 2) <S> Your manager thinks that at the end of the day, you just "need to deal with it". <S> Your manager here needs to understand the first problem above. <S> I don't know if you communicated that already, but if you haven't, you should, because it's a vital piece of information, and you should highlight it. <S> That, in a way, will invalidate the response you were given. <S> You don't "need to deal with it". <S> Your manager will have to deal with it, especially because it's not just you. <S> It's the manager's responsibility to ensure the team works as a team, and that everyone feels comfortable. <S> One rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel. <S> Your manager told you to talk re-raise it if you start feeling stressed again. <S> In the end, your mental health is more important than anything else, so if you are not getting the support you need from your manager, finding a company that will support you is most likely the best option. <S> Edit after your last comment: <S> The fact that your manager is retiring in 6 days is not trivial. <S> I'd still re-raise the problem with your manager. <S> But if there are no actions, you can try with the interim remote manager or the replacement, when this person is hired. <S> Hopefully, the interim or new manager will be able to properly tackle the issue. <A> It sounds like a member of your department has been commenting negatively on emails sent, making passive aggressive responses to reasonable questions, and trying to micromanage the team. <S> These are behavioural issues, and are just the kind of thing a manager would want - and would be able - to address. <S> What might have confused the issue here, based on the way the question was phrased, is that the manager could be responding to the idea that this is about 1) you and/or 2) your colleague. <S> If you were to frame the question as being about behaviour, your manager would have a clearer path to establish professional norms in their department. <S> It's easy for a manager to see something as an interpersonal problem between staff when there are a lot of pronouns flying about - to the extent that they could miss a behavioural issue that needed addressing. <S> Meanwhile, look after yourself. <S> If things have got as far as it seems, talking to a medical professional would be a useful thing to do. <A> Speak to a higher manager along with the rest of the team Considering that your manager is retiring in 6 days and that they are unwilling (or unable) to help with this problem, your best option may be to speak to the person one level above your manager. <S> Perhaps the best way to do this would be to arrange a meeting with this person along with all of the other members of the team who feel the same way as you do. <S> They can back you up on this individual's behaviour. <S> This should prompt a gentle warning to the person causing problems, and disciplinary action if they persist. <S> If this doesn't work, I'd recommend you take your skills elsewhere. <S> It sounds like a toxic culture in this case, which no one needs.
| If your manager doesn't act and try to solve the problem, you can escalate it one level, but that's a conversation that might bring you undesired results. Talk to your manager and highlight more people are impacted by this.
|
How to respond to a passive aggressive implication of gender bias I work as a research assistant for a woman who has a Ph.D., when we first met for my interview she introduced herself as (First Name) and since then I have always referred to her as (First Name) in emails. She has never corrected me or asked that I called her "Dr. (Last Name)" in the three months I have worked for her. Recently another professor who has a Ph.D. came up in an email who happens to be male and I referred to him as "Dr. (Last Name)" because he has never introduced himself using his first name. Several days later I received an email from my boss asking me why I called him "Dr. (Last Name)" and then she suggested I "look into research on gender bias and the meaning of Dr ". She has not directly said I am being biased and maybe I am misconstruing her words. How should I respond to this? I don't want her to think I am calling her by her first name because she is a woman, but I also don't want to come off as standoffish or confrontational about it. Edit: I know it is generally advised to wait 24 hours before accepting an answer, but I wanted to make sure I responded to her before the end of the day. I will accept the answer I used as a framework for my response (apology included). <Q> How should I respond to this? <S> You should tell her that you referred to the male doctor the way you did because he has never introduced himself using his first name. <S> Some (in comments) suggest that an apology is in order. <S> Then you should follow through on however she would prefer to be addressed. <A> Ask your boss, ideally face-to-face, what she meant by her remark. <S> As long as the accusation is implied, it isn't possible to answer to it. <S> Make sure it doesn't appear confrontational, but you show that you are genuinely interested in learning what you did wrong. <S> It is very likely that there is another issue. <S> But if it is indeed the situation your described, your boss took offense in, explain your side of the story and then offer what you can do differently. <S> You can offer to always call a PhD a doctor, to call everyone by their first name. <S> Your boss might or might not agree with your approach and paddle back. <S> Either way, as she is your boss, you better do what she prefers. <A> You didn't state either way whether this happened or not, but I would add to the other answers that even if you call her by her first name when speaking to her privately, you should use her title when referring to her in the third person, and when addressing her directly in other group settings when you are not speaking one-on-one. <S> An email is an example of the latter. <S> In other words, most people would find it inappropriate to say something like, "That's a good idea Dr. Jones. <S> Alice, what do you think?" in an email, even if saying "Alice, what do you think?" would be perfectly acceptable when conversing privately. <A> Solid answers already. <S> My approach would be to sidestep the whole apology/asking/mind-reading thing and just start referring to the boss as Dr as that's the implied preference. <S> She'll let you know if that's not what she meant, but more likely the issue is fixed. <S> with minimal fuss. <S> This is a written communication potentially accusing you of misconduct,. <S> not something you want to get involved with if possible. <S> If she follows up with another email then reply along the lines of ' <S> Sorry Dr XYX, there was no gender bias intended in any way, thank you for the 'heads up'.'
| You should tell her that you meant absolutely no gender bias at all, but if she would prefer, you would be glad to refer to her as Doctor as well rather than using her first name.
|
How to ask for re-evaluation of salary and conditions when you are paid much less than the job market standard? I'm a software developer working remotely for a company in a very developed country. I started working for them for a very minimal amount of money, because I just wanted to get started and hoped that once they see what I'm capable of, they will offer me better conditions. When I say minimal amount of money, I mean 20% of what would be an acceptable amount for someone doing what I do, based on my research. Although I've gotten a raise after 6 months, the payment continues to be very low compared to the overall standard. Recently, they hired another software engineer who I've had to teach for the first two months about how we do things at the company. I checked her UpWork profile (she told me that the company found her on UpWork), and I found out that she was paid at least 3 times more than I am. I thought she was a good developer and she deserved it, but 6 months have passed and she still counts on me about many things, while I am kind of the leader of the team now, after one colleague left. I don't want to leave this company because the organisation that the development team has is amazing, and the people are great and I learn a lot from them. Still, I feel like the company it taking advantage of me. I know I should ask for a raise, but the problem is that at this point, I think it would take something like a 70% raise to my current salary, to be close to job market standards. I don't want to come out as arrogant for asking for such a big raise, but on the other hand, I feel like I'm being taken advantage of, and it's becoming very stressful. Furthermore, I'm paid on a daily basis, meaning that if I want a day off, I don't get any money, and that is also very inconvenient, so I've been thinking of asking for something like 2 weeks paid days off a year. Has anyone ever been in a similar situation, where people doing much less than you are being paid 2-3 times more than you and given better conditions in general? What would be a good way to solve this without breaking the relationship with the company, because I really like the development team, so I want to stay here. <Q> What would be a good way to solve this without breaking the relationship with the company, <S> Unfortunately, in most cases the only way to solve this is to break the relationship with the company. <S> The company received a bargain when they hired you at well below the market standard. <S> You might receive small raises every now and then, but you will always remain under market value. <S> You can certainly ask for a raise, but as you have pointed out it is very unlikely that the company will give you a 70% raise in one shot even with added responsibilities. <S> In the future, you need to make greater emphasis on salary when considering any new job opportunity. <S> Your initial salary is your best opportunity at receiving the pay that you desire. <A> Anecdotally, I used my first job to gain experience, and my second job to get paid what I wanted. <S> What you're describing would be criminal or at least highly suspicious here in the US. <S> Are you comparing to salaries for a similar job in your area? <S> I know wages can vary widely between countries. <S> I don't want to leave this company because the organisation that the development team has is amazing, and the people are great... <S> This is your attitude about the company and people you work with. <S> Good for you! <S> You've been able to see the bright side of a bad situation. <S> Keep the same attitude when you move to a new job, and you'll feel the same way about them. <S> If your co-workers are great at their jobs, they'll be able to find a better company to work for. <S> If they are not, then you'll probably meet an even better team when you move to a better company. <S> What about the company's attitude toward you? <S> If the company valued your contribution fairly, they would pay you a fair wage. <S> If your boss does not have the budget, it means your boss' boss is not valuing your team fairly. <S> If your boss' boss doesn't have the budget, it means the CEO is not valuing their team fairly; if the CEO does not have the budget, it means the company's product is less valuable to their customers than the amount of work it takes to create the product, and they might go out of business soon. <S> ... <S> and I learn a lot from them <S> This is the biggest actual benefit to you, but don't learn too much! <S> Learn enough so that another company will say, "Yes" to hire you with a fair wage. <S> You will still learn new things at the new job, and you will get paid more to do so. <A> Your salary is basically the result of a negotiation between you and your employer. <S> Their aim in the negotiation is to get you do perform your role for the least amount of money possible. <S> (If they are smart, they'll be aiming to pay you enough so your head isn't turned by roles elsewhere). <S> Your aim is to get them to pay you as much as possible to do the role. <S> What you are willing to do the job for - i.e. your current salary - is your market value. <S> In any negotiation, knowledge is key. <S> You wouldn't go to buy a car and let the salesperson know the upper end of your budget - any more than they would let you know the minimum they can afford to let a car go for. <S> When it comes to salary reviews, the company has knowledge of your current salary giving them the upper hand. <S> The know how much it takes to make you 5% or 10% better off. <S> Typically annual salary reviews are small increments. <S> To break this cycle you need to prove your market value has increased. <S> The most effective way to do this is to get a better offer somewhere else. <S> (You could go with market data etc. <S> but another job offer adds some urgency with regard to time, plus it's not what you could get if you looked, it's what you have waiting for you right now). <S> If you're confident enough - don't reveal what the other salary offer is. <S> This just gives them a number to beat. <S> Tell them you want to be paid what they think you are worth (and not what they think will be enough to make you stay). <S> One final thing... you need to be prepared to take the new job in the event they don't match or come close.
| From what I've seen and read, getting a job with a different company is the best way to increase salary even if your company is not ripping you off that badly.
|
Posted negative review of an employer on social media, manager replied saying I have sexual harassment accusations I work for a company that does marketing. They send me around to different stores to give out samples of products. This particular company has been unfair and dishonest in the past. I have reduced my time spent with them to only once a week. I was on a social media group and someone had posted about the same company. She said she was having trouble getting paid. I replied that they had been very dishonest in my experience. My manager saw my post and texted me saying she had reported me to HR for it and wont be assigning any more shifts. I shouldn't have done this but I put a screen shot of this text on the group (without any personal information) and she replied by putting screen shots of my text messages she interpreted as rude* and saying there have been multiple sexual harassment claims made about me. First off, I'm only aware of one incident that could even remotely be considered "sexual harassment". I was never really given the details regarding it. It seemed to have blown over. Second, I made a public criticism against a company. My manager responded by making a criticism about me personally. Let alone sexual harassment is a serious accusation. As it is now I only have one more scheduled shift but I would really like to work it. I really like the job, just not management or the politics. How should I proceed? I've got most of this documented. I took a screen shot of my managers social media post but forgot to take a screen shot of my own. I have already deleted my post and her replies to it, I didn't want it to escalate into anything further. Option 1) Have a calm conversation with my manager and say I would be disposed to work my scheduled shift and then resign. Option 2) report her to HR for saying I have sexual harassment allegations with the company. Also play hardball and say I need two weeks notice to be fired. I would also like to know if there were any "sexual harassment claims" made about me and their details. I certainly do not believe I was or intended to "sexually harass" anyone. (*she posted a text message of me telling her that she is not my manager and I didn't think it was appropriate for her to be telling me what to do. This did happen because management changed and when she had initially introduced herself to me she said she was just helping out, and I didn't know she became the manager) This is a large company which makes heavy use of it's social media presence and surprisingly many people assume they are ethical. Added: I have no need or desire to use this company as a reference or continue working for them past one more shift. Something that seems suspicious to me, a few days ago my manager and her manager contacted me about a report I needed to urgently complete. It didn't make sense to me and I said I already did this. They then simply ignored me and wouldn't respond to any of my communications asking if it was resolved. <Q> My manager saw my post and texted me saying she had reported me to HR for it and wont be assigning any more shifts. <S> I shouldn't have done this <S> but I put a screen shot of this text on the group (without any personal information) and she replied by putting screen shots of my text messages she interpreted as rude* and saying there have been multiple sexual harassment claims made about me. <S> As it is now I only have one more scheduled shift <S> but I would really like to work it. <S> I really like the job, just not management or the politics. <S> How should I proceed? <S> You have burned your bridges by publicly criticizing your company, using enough information so that your manager knew it was you, then publicly exposing that your manager reported you to HR. <S> You were already warned to be careful due to your prior incident. <S> But choosing to make your criticism public wasn't being careful at all. <S> Now, there are consequences. <S> Meanwhile, you should make sure you are in a position financially to lose all future shifts with this company. <A> Dude. <S> Get out of there. <S> Don't even bother to use them as a reference. <S> I would also say 'lawyer up' <S> but it looks like you've deleted the evidence required to prove your case, if you had one (airing HR-related stuff like this can lead to a hostile working environment, which can be illegal in some jurisdictions, but it's also not like you didn't throw the first stone in this regard.). <S> Either way, they (and you) have shown how low they are willing to sink and you capitulated. <S> They posted that there because they wanted you to delete the bad comment. <S> They now know they can do the same thing with the same result. <A> While your manager has acted quite unprofessionally (and depending on your laws publicly lying about sexual harassment cases might allow you to sue her), criticising the company on a social media group can be a legal reason to end your employment. <S> Normally your manager cannot fire you, someone in HR has to agree. <S> So talking to HR might be worthwhile. <A> We like to give advice of changing job. <S> In this case the manager should known that "claim" should be make to HR and you would know about it. <S> If it's not made to HR then it's a gossip and deflamation. <S> And this is what she basically does. <S> It should be reported to HR as such, especially if a company try to have certain image on SM. <S> And also change jobs. <S> Having one with manager who use make up accusation for leverage is a bad thing.
| You should do nothing, and hope that the currently-scheduled shift stays scheduled.
|
What options are there for getting help with job hunting? Especially abroad 2 months ago I decided that I didn't like the life I have in the town I moved to a year ago for my current job. So, I dusted off my CV and submitted it to every site I could think of, expecting to get a phone call in the next fortnight. I got over 40 emails in the first week and my phone went off in meetings at work 3 times a day. I had to stick a call forward to my voice mail for all numbers just to curb the disturbances. This goes against all my expectations for job hunting. I am far too tired in the evenings to spend more than an hour or 2 every other night just replying to everyone. Replying to everyone means I don't have time to actually look and apply for jobs I want; I worry that I'm forgetting or missing followups between all spam I'm getting; and I feel so pressured that I don't have time to think whether I actually qualify for, or whether I even want any of the jobs recruiters are telling me about. I don't feel that I have time to put any real time to focus on any one application, and now the emails and phone calls are slowing down, telling me people are starting to not bother with me because I'm too slow to react. I feel like I need to quit my current job to have time to deal with it all, but that's going to make me less attractive. I need a second pair of hands to help me. Who is out there that can help me, and what are the options for someone in my position? P.S. I'm a firmware engineer in the UK looking to go to Europe, probably the Netherlands. Learning dutch while I job hunt was the plan, but the job hunting leaves me no time or energy. <Q> You have presented your situation in a somewhat contradictory way. <S> You say you want to change jobs/countries <S> but you also say that in the evenings you have no time/focus to reply to follow up emails about potential jobs. <S> If a company has gone as far as contacting you back on an application you should at least respond to them in a timely manner. <S> Who is out there that can help me, and what are the options for someone in my position? <S> If it's a recruiter who is pushing for you to interview for a role then make extra sure they're not just trying to shoehorn you into any role they can. <S> Recruiter's just want to make commission they don't care about you. <S> It's better if you can do this yourself <A> You need was is commonly called a Headhunter, you can look around for agencies that provide such service. <S> They usually go about handling a lot of the organisational stuff for you. <S> You get in Contact <S> describe what exactly you are looking for and in a few days they usually come back with some positions and you can decide which ones you want to follow. <A> Use Google Voice (it's free and now available in the UK). <S> a) <S> It's easier to forward calls on a schedule that way. <S> b) <S> They transcribe all the calls in real time and send them to your email. <S> c) <S> Google Voice also makes it easier to work with an assistant. <S> Use a separate gmail address as well. <S> I suppose you could hire an intern to be your assistant. <S> Do not go through 3rd party recruiters that were not recommended to you. <S> Or if you must go through a 3rd party recruiter, only go through 3rd party recruiters that have an exclusive relationship with their client. <S> In other words, only respond to ads that contain the name of the company that's hiring.
| Contact a recruiter, they can be annoying but they will do this work for you.
|
How can I ask for help with my handicap not being able to write? I'm a software engineering student that will be starting an internship soon. But I got a big disability that can't be seen. I can read text perfectly but I can't write on paper (which is usually not a problem as a software engineer). Most importantly my orthography is really bad (like it's more or less phonetic) and I pretty much miss any accord that can't be heard (which is something that happens a lot in French). Technically I was recognized as a handicapped worker in France. But since it would nullify any chance of me getting any internship, I just don't disclose it during the interview and get my resume/motivation letter reviewed by a friend. How can I ask for help with a proofreading thing I will put on the website that would be trivial for normal people? Should I "out" myself? <Q> If you can type sentences that are halfways understandable, it shouldn't be a problem, but I would not put it on the application. <S> It is for selling your skills, so there should be no negative things in it. <S> During the interview if they ask about something negative, you could mention it and the what you are doing to make it better, getting training, visiting courses, idk, how badly it influences you. <S> If they don't ask negative questions and the interview goes well <S> , I would personally mention that I really like the position, but they should know blah blah blah ... <S> I work as a software engineer and there seem to be a lot of people around with a little dyslexia <S> , you see wrong spelled variable names, code comments, but as long as the code works and is properly debugged nobody really cares. <S> Discussing some software architecture you might draw stuff on a whiteboard, but there you usually just abbreviate component names, so correct spelling doesn't matter. <S> If you have to write a lot of documents that will go to the customer, that might be problematic, so try to ask if you will get those tasks too as an intern, but usually there is already a person who likes doing that. <A> How can I ask for help with proofreading thing I will put on the website that would be trivial for normal people. <S> Should I "out" myself? <S> Yes. <S> You need an accommodation. <S> You must tell potential employers about this. <S> It might make finding an internship more difficult. <S> But at least it will result in an internship in which you can succeed. <A> But since it would nullify any chance of me getting any internship, I just don't disclose it during the interview and get my resume/motivation letter reviewed by a friend. <S> You did nothing wrong. <S> I don't know the legal system in France, but in the US, you're not supposed to disclose your invisible disabilities during the interview process. <S> With that in mind, here are your options: <S> Use automation. <S> I personally use Grammarly. <S> In French, you'll want to use one of these . <S> Not everyone needs to know. <S> Tell the person who's job it is to check the output of your work. <S> Either your manager or Quality Assurance. <S> You might as well tell them this now before they discover it on their own. <S> In either case, I'd like to reiterate that you did nothing wrong not disclosing this disability sooner.
| Ask a friend at work or a fellow intern to proofread your work.
|
I'm struggling. Burnout over years and multiple companies - now come to a head at current company & not their fault - how to finally get ahead of it? (I'm a contributor here already but created a throwaway account because I don't want it to be associated.) Background: I've worked here for about 18 months as a 'subject matter expert' in Technology X (a role that's new to the company, as technology X is central to their strategy but they didn't have a single person to be the design and architecture 'authority' about that, so people from other teams with various levels of interest and experience in X were muddling along). As such I am expected to be the 'Subject Matter Expert' for most things related to Technology X and to work on various strategic and tactical projects related to Technology X (not really as a developer myself, but more like e.g. "investigating and then rolling out new features of the new version of Technology X to help the dev teams move forward with their developments".) My issues: Although I am enjoying the job in general and feel it is a good fit (culturally; matches what I can contribute to the role and so on) I feel like I'm "slacking off", "unmotivated", can't seem to get anything finished or to properly push people for things I need them to respond to, I can't contribute as much as I think I ought to be, or that I would like, to team discussions where they need the 'expert' (which should be me) to guide them and make a decision / give my opinion on what to do. In the past I've almost always been a high performer and gone above and beyond expectations and all that. But now I feel like I'm underperforming.. (I have had that discussion with my boss, who didn't agree particularly, but I think he has relatively low expectations as I know I am capable of a lot more.) so I'm low-key worried about PIPs (an officially documented process with HR whereby you have to shape up or ship out, ultimately), not sure if it's warranted or not. Ultimately.... I just don't care about any of this. I just can't bring myself to feel anything about that -- when everyone else has the privilege to take 2 weeks off to visit the coffee shops of Vancouver (or whatever) and I was lucky to take 1 day to go to 'seaside resort 20 miles from me but better keep my phone switched on and dial in to emails and so on'. Context: Prior to this role... I've come from a background of about 15 years, give or take, of never actually taking a real break. I have never in 15 years taken more than a week off at a time, and those weeks were pretty rare, and even when I was away made myself available. I've been called in to work (in previous companies) on a day I was supposed to be moving house and agreed to go in for an hour that turned out to be a day, been called back from a (rare) actual trip away to go in to the office, and so on and so on. But none of this is the fault of my current company. Right now I'm at the end of a period of about 4 years (previous company + this company) over which I've felt I could never really take more than a couple of days off at a time, had to be "on call" on days I did take off (not at my current employer, but at previous ones, etc). Ultimately it has all now come to a head and taken a toll on my mental health and I feel like I can't carry on this way. I am exhausted every day, I feel like "what's the point in anything", every day is just yet another day to get through and there's nothing to look forward to and nothing will ever change and I'm just so tired... ... but I can't go off "sick" with my current company with this, because it really isn't anything to do with them, it's just the accumulation of everything that came before. I still haven't been able to take time off with this company because of projects which would normally be fine if I'd had a break before (I guess normally people take a break between jobs -- I could have afforded an unpaid break but didn't get the chance). Each day now I go to work, step through the motions, do the minimum I need to do to get through... and this isn't me at all, I've always been enthusiastic about these things (I'm a Technology X geek!) but nowadays all I can do is the minimum and I feel constantly irritable, on edge, tearful (!) overly sensitive to anything people say as a joke and anything like that. People here talk about holidays, their plans etc and I can't help thinking "must be nice!" (in a snarky way) and feeling resentful. I wish they'd be more considerate but I realise that isn't a reasonable response (it's just an emotional one as I feel angry and embittered every time I hear yet another person going on about their own holiday, how relaxing it was, how "you really ought to visit New England in the autumn!" or whatever it is. Yeah, I wish I could!) Question: How can I address burnout with my current company, when it isn't really my current company's "fault" but is rather the accumulation of things that have been going on for years but finally reached a head? [I can't help thinking that it's come to a head now because I finally have a position I feel comfortable with and have 'breathing space' but I think that is just speculation]. And are there strategies I can use to recover from what I described above without having to take extended time off or call in 'sick' ? PS. I really hope someone can help and that it isn't off topic, I think it is about "navigating the workplace" in this circumstance. I don't know where else to turn for rational advice! <Q> And are there strategies I can use to recover from what I described above without having to take extended time off or call in 'sick' ? <S> If you are indeed burnt out, then you absolutely need to take time off. <S> Whether you take it as vacation or sick time is irrelevant, if you do not rest then things will spiral downward. <S> If I were you I would, seek the help of a psychologist so they can understand the entirety of your situation and offer you the best advice as far as taking time off from work. <S> I would then follow whatever their recommendation is and if that means taking time off from work then do it. <S> Your health is more important than any job, take the necessary steps to stay healthy. <A> You are not the only in these case of having a delayed response to being long-time overloaded. <S> I'd say that after long time of bending, you allow yourself from breaking, now you are in an environment that makes it possible. <S> This doesn't make the need for a rest less necessary. <S> Do so without guilt toward your current employer. <S> Provided you give them a notice, they will be just fine. <S> While you are in this long time off, reflect on your relationship with work, and how you could improve it. <S> Taking appointment with a therapist could help you in that regard. <S> You probably need to break preconceptions and die hard habits that are poisoning your well-being. <S> And are there strategies I can use to recover from what I described above without having to take extended time off or call in 'sick' ? <S> None that I would advise. <S> How you currently are, you'd work at a reduced rate for quite some time, and possibly repeat accidental mistakes. <S> Your employer would not be very pleased. <S> All the best for your recovery. <A> If your boss is happy with your work, there is no reason you should be worried about PIP's and things. <S> There's not many people who can write such a detailed, well edited chunk of paragraphs about burning out - are you taking adderal/vyvanse? <S> That could be responsible for your feelings. <S> Vacations are nice, and you should take one. <S> Tell your boss that you are burning out and you need to go. <S> When you get back, change your habits. <S> Every day, try and accomplish something that is not work related. <S> It doesn't have to be big - some days, go to the gym, other days, try and pursue a hobby. <A> How can I address burnout with my current company, when it isn't really my current company's "fault" but is rather the accumulation of things that have been going on for years but finally reached a head? <S> A company that doesn't make you take a break in 15 months is at fault. <S> Where I live, they'd be legally liable if you were to burn out and become unable to work as a result. <S> And even if the company weren't at fault, taking a break before you break down is in the company's best interest. <S> I am not a trained psychologist, but from what you write I see only two possible outcomes: Either you stop working voluntarily, or your emotions will make you stop. <S> If you stop voluntarily, the company can plan for your absence. <S> If your emotions make you stop, it will likely be at the worst possible moment, surprise everybody, and take you far longer to recover. <S> So take that break. <S> In June. <S> At least two weeks. <S> Without interruptions. <S> You deserve it. <S> Going forward, I recommend seeing a psychologist about how to better set boundaries in the workplace, because it seems to me that it is very easy for a company to guilt trip you into sacrificing yourself, and it would be good for you (and ultimately the companies you work for) to learn how to better stand up for yourself. <S> In particular, having also worked as a technology expert, I can tell you that it is possible to take vacations in that role. <S> Just announce them up front to everyone you're coaching, so people know to bring pending issues now, take care of the major ones, and go. <S> Also, my work phone is turned off during vacation. <S> As an aside, vacations are not just indispensable for maintaining mental health. <S> Just like absence makes the heart grow fonder, your absence will remind your company of the value of your contributions. <S> In addition, vacations serve as an important fire drill for unplanned absences of any sort. <A> I’ll let you in on a secret: Your company won’t be thanking you one bit for your donation of 15-20 working days every year to the company’s bottom line. <S> It doesn’t make you a valued employee, it makes you a mug. <S> Take two weeks off. <S> Without a phone. <S> If they don’t like it, tell them it’s that or four weeks sick leave. <S> I remember a time where I was a bit overworked, arrived at a beach on Crete, laid down and watched a cloud going from the left of the sky to the right, taking two hours. <S> Then I got up and felt a lot better. <S> Thats what you need.
| If you are financially comfortable, have earned vacation days (I hope you have, after all this work !), or if somehow burnout is covered by your medical insurance, you should definitely look into the possibility to take a long time off.
|
Employer masquerading as recruiter to decide which employees to lay off I work in the Canada office (Ontario) of a large US tech firm. The firm has had a few lackluster quarters, and appears to be preparing for a few rounds of layoffs. My company, AwefulCorp Inc. (made up name), apparently created a new company (i.e. separate incorporated company, FakeInterviewers Inc), and is reaching out to people at AwefulCorp Inc. requesting phone/Skype interviews with them to see if they'd be interested in a career opportunity. However, it appears these job offers are not necessarily sincere (I can't be 100% sure), and they are strictly being used to identify disgruntled employees that are "flight risks", so those employees can be targeted for layoffs. Edit: we can confirm by looking at the business registration and domain name registration for both companies, and we personally saw an HR employee at our office answering a phone and claiming to be an interviewer from FakeInterviewers Inc. We are dead sure of this. Is this allowed in Canada or the US? We created some fake LinkedIn profiles with silly/obscene-sounding names, claiming to be employees of this company (even got into a couple Skype interviews, surprisingly). They talk about "great benefits", and after a lengthy discussion, low-ball on the salary by a lot . <Q> Companies with competent management typically don't do muchlaying-off of their workforce. <S> Companies that don't have competent management typically aren'tgood at identifying their valuable employees. <S> If a company is laying people off, and they don't know who thevaluable employees are, there's not really any good way of knowingwhether you'll be cut or not. <S> Layoffs don't typically solve any long-term problems. <S> A company doing a layoff... <S> well, they'll typically have more than 1 round. <S> I'd say your problem goes far beyond "avoid this particular trap" and more into "are you sure you want to risk staying there? <S> " <S> I mean, do you think you've got long term prospects working there? <S> That the company is good, decent, worthwhile, and fiscally-sound? <S> If I were in your shoes, I'd ignore the trap, start polishing the resume, and talk with an actual recruiter. <S> Because I can't see a long term future where you're at right now. <A> I don't know if the procedure you described is legal. <S> But if for some reason you think that these approaches are fake and only made to identify employees that consider to leave, then you should politely answer that you are not interested. <S> Also you should start looking for a new job, since your current employer doesn't seem to play fair; however, this is based on the assumption that these calls are actually initiated by your employer, so you should be rather sure about that. <A> It's a stupid strategy. <S> There are always employees who are confident they will find a job elsewhere, and others who feel it's better to cling to the job they have. <S> The company apparently tries to get rid of the first group. <S> Reality is that these are most likely the people that you want to keep. <S> It's also very low as far as company behaviour goes. <S> I'm quite sure it's not illegal. <S> It's expected behaviour of any employee and nothing wrong with it. <S> So in those places if you were laid off, an employment lawyer would be very happy to take your case. <S> With "at will" employment, laying you off would be legal. <S> As I said, stupid, but legal. <S> What should you do? <S> Look for another job. <S> Take it if it pays better. <S> If you are asked for an interview with this fake company, you might play with their heads a bit. <S> When the low-ball offer comes in, your reply should be "You must be joking. <S> I rejected offers for (current salary + $5,000) because I love this company <S> , I'm not leaving for (their low-ball offer)". <A> You should look at the "truth in advertising" laws in Canada. <S> They seem to also apply to telemarketers, not just advertisers. <S> https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/04255.html <S> In addition to that, I would consult with a local employment lawyer to make sure you leave no stones unturned. <S> We're not Canadian employment lawyers on this forum. <S> And even if we were, we wouldn't be able to give you good legal advice anyway. <S> Also, if the law doesn't work for you. <S> Don't underestimate the power of naming and shaming them in public. <S> For that, look for investigative reporters that have broken similar-sounding stories in the past, but that protect the anonymity of their sources.
| In places where the company needs a good reason to lay you off, an interview with another company is most likely not a good reason to lay you off.
|
How to proceed with salary negotiation offer? I applied for a job and passed multiple interviews that went well. Last Thursday I had the last interview until now. It was with HR department. I know in some countries salaries are double checked at the very beginning of the hiring process but in the place I am applying to, that is not the custom and is only done at the very end. So it was a video call (no email) and we both gave our numbers. So they gave a number A and claimed that was the maximum amount they had allocated for this position. I gave a number B = 120% A that was over their numbers. So they said that they will need to discuss with finances department what they can offer me. I just said OK. So they claimed they will check with the finances department and come back to me. That was on Thursday. Now, reality is for me I would be ok to accept a salary C = 110% A. So let's say I am ok to accept a salary that is right in the middle between my original expectation and their maximum offer. My questions here are these: Should I wait passively until they come back to me and tell me their offer? This has for me the disadvantage that I see some risk they will come back and say they cannot come close to my offer so they won't hire me. Or even worse, they won't even answer me again. (That happened to my in previous hiring processes, when the offer did not match my expectation they did not go into any negotiation, just stopped there). Should I proactively contact them and tell them I am cool with a salary right in the middle of their offer and my expectation? That has the advantage in my opinion that they will see I am totally ok with it and might still want to hire me, provided they are also ok with that salary. The only disadvantage I see is that, they might actually have offered what I originally asked, but I think it would be too akward since is 20% above what they offered. So I would feel uncomfortable knowing they feel they are over paying me. And actually I feel comfortable with only 10% more than what they offer. If proactively contacting them... should I use email or should I make a phone call? The whole process went through email + interviews face to face online. The salary negotiation went through face to face interview too. <Q> Should I wait passively until they come back to me and tell me their offer? <S> Yes <S> This has for me the disadvantage that I see some risk they will come back and <S> say they cannot come close to my offer so they won't hire me. <S> That is the risk. <S> Should I proactively contact them and tell them I am cool with a salary right in the middle of their offer and my expectation? <S> Why would you do that? <S> Why would you proactively tell them that you'll accept less than you desire? <S> Why would you let them know that you're not willing to hold firm to what you believe you're worth? <S> Any future salary/raise negotiations if you were to be hired would be impacted because they know that you'll cave in to whatever they offer. <S> If they don't come back with an offer that is acceptable to you then walk away. <S> You hold the power here, unless you're so desperate for a job that you'll take whatever is offered. <S> If their offer doesn't "feel right in your gut" then walk away. <S> If you accept an offer that doesn't feel right then you'll regret it, and that will surely poison your employment there as you'll be starting off with resentment and disappointment, which will only increase over time. <A> Calling and saying you're comfortable with a lower salary will have 2 outcomes <S> They will offer you the job at the lower salary <S> They will not offer you the job because they will be concerned that you will leave for a higher offer if it comes along. <S> There is very little chance of them offering the original salary you requested. <S> It feels like you're risking a lot by calling up and saying you're happy with the lower salary <S> and it doesn't really feel like there is much to gain. <S> If they think you're good enough for the job, but you're out of their price range, they are unlikely to not give you the job, they are more likely to offer you the lower salary. <S> If you really insist on contacting them about this, I would suggest you email them (give it a week at least from when you last spoke) and mention that you are flexible on the number you gave as you are very keen on the company. <A> As you outlined, by waiting passively you risk either not being contacted back or being contacted back without a counter-offer. <S> If you take action and contact them again you will in fact lose leverage and will, for sure, have no chance of being offered what you asked. <S> My advice is to wait for a definite amount of time (say a week up to 10 days) <S> and if they have not come back to you, contact them requesting the feedback, maybe mentioning that you are open to discuss the numbers. <A> Should I wait passively until they come back to me and tell me their offer? <S> This has for me the disadvantage that I see some risk they will come back and say they cannot come close to my offer so they won't hire me. <S> Or even worse, they won't even answer me again. <S> (That happened to my in previous hiring processes, when the offer did not match my expectation they did not go into any negotiation, just stopped there). <S> You can, <S> but as said by the other answers, you might never get called. <S> Should I proactively contact them and tell them I am cool with a salary right in the middle of their offer and my expectation? <S> That has the advantage in my opinion that they will see I am totally ok with it and might still want to hire me, provided they are also ok with that salary. <S> The only disadvantage I see is that, they might actually have offered what I originally asked, but I think it would be too akward since is 20% above what they offered. <S> So I would feel uncomfortable knowing they feel they are over paying me. <S> And actually I feel comfortable with only 10% more than what they offer. <S> I'd advise not to do this. <S> If you do, there is a strong risk they'll offer less than 110%A <S> and you will have the same problem later. <S> My advice: <S> wait a little (5-7 days after your last contact) and if you have no news, contact them, but do not mention another figure. <S> I'd do this with a phone call, but you can do it by e-mail, keeping in mind that an e-mail can be misunderstood. <S> Tell them you are checking if they have news on your offer and that you really look forward working with them. <S> If they tell you they can match your expectations (or they offer you an amount you're willing to accept), you won. <S> If they tell you they can't match your expectations (or offer an amount you're not willing to accept), then tell them you can make an effort if they make one too. <S> They'll get the hint and maybe they'll offer something in between. <S> If they can't, they'll tell you and at least you know it. <S> But if they can, be aware it might be their final offer so if you decline it, you may not receive another offer.
| If you believe that you're worth what you asked for, then hold firm to that.
|
Is there a reliable way to climb up the ladder? I'm in a developer role, and applying for developer positions since around 3-4 years. I'm in a moment in my career where I'd be willing to lean toward a managerial position as I feel fit for the role, however I have little to no prospects how I'd be doing this. I could apply for junior project manager positions, but that would mean job hunting without related experience and difficult for me to get the job. I would also have difficulties to train to that new role, as switching company culture at the same time than role. I could also try to get promoted in-house, with the benefit of not having to switch jobs, but this would require the company to trust I would do a better job higher up than in my current position. Since we are a small company, and they had trouble keeping developers lately, I'm guessing the answer would be no or take a long time to complete. Finally, as this world is completely unknown to me, I have preconceptions that managers work in average more time, are more often on-call and am a bit worried if this move would be detrimental to my work/life balance. I'd rather not try anything if this is at stake. What would be the most reliable way to climb up the ladder, without risking to burn out, supposing I have the ability ? <Q> Preface: There is no "this one weird trick to climb corporate ladder, 100% effective money-back guarantee". <S> "Climbing the ladder" means gradually take more and more responsibility, managing more risks, being involved in more projects. <S> The scope of work is like a cone on its' nose, it gets wider as you get higher. <S> You seem to be concerned with lack of experience or trust in you. <S> job hunting without related experience and difficult for me to get the job ... <S> require the company to trust I would do a better job higher up <S> You have two things going for you: <S> You are a professional, and have been for some time. <S> You are capable of holding a job, very related to your desired path. <S> You also understand what you want to do in life, you can articulate why you want to do X. <S> Many people can't, especially right after college. <S> That takes experience (you saw bunch of PMs and know what is good and what is bad) <S> You are currently employed. <S> You can ask for more responsibility. <S> The "manager" title doesn't mean much, what's important is earned authority. <S> You can be a manager while working as a developer. <S> You can create pocket of excellence , you can train your coworkers in better practices , any other systemic improvement. <S> You need to ask your supervisor for more responsibility in this area, and perhaps negotiate your work. <S> Negotiations usually require some leverage (competing job offer is good example) <S> It is not chicken-egg problem, where you can't get managerial experience without being manager, and you can't become manager without experience. <A> In software companies, the work of product management has some high rungs on the ladder. <S> You can learn about it with tutorials from an outfit called "Pragmatic Marketing." <S> In general, there are two paths up the ladder. <S> One is the "principal engineer / distinguished engineer / CTO" path. <S> The other is the supervisory ladder. <S> In either case, let your supervisor know you want more responsibility. <S> (Don't tell him you're gunning for his job!) <S> Almost every employer really wants people who want responsibility, so you won't insult anybody by asking about it. <S> For both of these paths up the ladder you need top-notch communications skills. <S> (You know that job-req cliche "excellent written and oral communication skills? <S> " It's a real thing, and a key to advancement.) <S> How to get those skills? <S> Present lunch-and-learn topics. <S> Prepare and deliver training on how to use the stuff you make. <S> speak in public. <S> Do short presentations for your colleagues. <S> Sign up for Toastmasters International to get practice in public speaking. <S> write. <S> Whenever you write anything for work, do your best to write clearly. <S> If you can find a co-worker to be your "editor" -- to read over what you write, that's good. <S> write. <S> Blog. <S> If you can't think of anything else to blog about, do a "something I learned today" blog. <S> write: <S> Write a book about something you know. <S> Get it published. <S> O'Reilly. <S> Packt. <A> The strategy I have seen successfully used the most is to get management certification. <S> Invest in yourself and take a course. <S> You'll learn what is generally involved if nothing else. <S> And you get a chance to do some networking. <S> You may well find it's not to your taste, it's a very different role.
| Bottom line : you can get necessary experience. Ask for advice about what you can do to prepare to get more responsibility. By communicating: teach. Sign up to teach night school.
|
New job, getting pulled into co worker drama I started an ER registration job about 3 months ago, and there are two coworkers responsible for my training who are going through some teenager level of drama. Apparently, since I am friendly with both of them that is a problem. I am not interested in their issues, but one of the parties decided that I am out to get her now because of a mistake I made in my training. I kindly explained to her that I have too much going on in my own life to be wrapped up in her drama with the other coworker or participate in the petty behavior she was accusing me of. I want to quit, I want to quit tonight. I am in nursing school, marriage on the rocks, parents getting divorced, mental health in the toilet, and I already have a second job. How should I handle this: I want to quit, I have another job and I'm nervous about quitting without notice. Should I tell my manager about the hostile work environment when resigning? <Q> Well, if you're prepared to quit, then you really don't have anything to lose. <S> However, it's not a good practice to quit over a situation you never informed your manager of, and never gave them a chance to address. <S> You should inform your manager of the situation immediately, and especially how it's affected you to the point that you want to quit immediately. <S> From a manager's point-of-view: They've already invested a lot in your training. <S> To lose you now is pretty much a defeat for them, so if they're competent at all, they'll at least try to fix it. <S> Give your manager a chance, first. <S> Tell them what's happening and see if it gets fixed. <A> If asked, just say that the new job is a better fit for your future plans and leave it at that. <S> You don’t have to declare the actual reason for leaving. <A> It sounds like your manager is not one of these two. <S> So tell him <S> /her what is going on right now. <S> Hopefully, he can solve the problem. <S> If he can, than you have nothing more to worry about. <S> If he cant, then if you choose to leave, then he will be more understanding of the situation and less likely to give you a negative recommendation. <A> So from your post this is what is going on in your life: <S> Marriage on the rocks Nursing school <S> Two jobs <S> Mental health issues <S> Parents getting a divorce..... <S> Coworker drama <S> I've numbered them like that on purpose. <S> While you did not go into detail, anyone with issues 1-3 are bound to have some level of mental health issues. <S> That is no surprise there. <S> Now #4 may be more serious than I am giving credit for here, and if you have a desire to hurt yourself or someone else <S> you need help with that. <S> Please seek it. <S> However, #4 may clear up if 1 through 3 are not issues. <S> Along those lines the coworker drama would likely be very easy to deal with if you did not have the other things going on in your life. <S> Nursing school will end and once it does, it may clear up the need to work a second job. <S> That will greatly reduce the stress in your life. <S> The marriage stress in both you and your parent's marriage will eventually work itself out. <S> It may not seem like it now, but it will. <S> The key is that you need to reduce the stress surrounding issues 1 through 5. <S> Solving the coworker issue, will not greatly reduce your stress. <S> If you have a caring boss, I will tell her about 1-3 and 5 and ask them for suggestions. <S> An alternative might be to talk to an older nurse where you work. <S> Nurses are a caring lot and can provide good advice on the challenges you are facing. <S> They might have gone through similar things themselves.
| If you have another job to move into where you feel the working environment will be more calm and supportive, then just hand your notice in and leave.
|
Confused about my career I have 20 years of experience and right now I am working in a FANG company as a Senior Software Engineer for the past two years. Most of my career I focused on technical skills and whenever I changed jobs I always looked for more challenging technical projects. However, I find that in big companies even engineers with half my experience has the same title as I have even though their technical depth is not very high. These engineers have spent almost all or most their careers in the same company. I realized that most Senior Engineers are focused on solving business problems and stopped going in depth into technology. All of my peers who started out as Software Developers have moved into the managerial path. Having said that I do feel bad of having the same title as someone half my experience and wondering if there is some path where I can continue focusing on technology without just being a person who works on business problems or a manager. <Q> Whether or not it is an option to remain a technical expert at your current job is not really something I, nor anyone else here can likely answer, but it is definitely a career path that exists within certain industries and typically involves some niche specialization. <S> The fact of the matter is that most software being developed today is not terribly technically complex so being skilled at understanding the business domain and being able to advise stakeholders on the best solution <S> is often more important than deep technical skills. <S> As for your other concern about your title, well that may just be your vanity talking. <S> Titles describe your responsibilities within the company, they aren't a skill ranking. <S> If you do not have signifigantly different responsibilities in your daily work than your fellow Senior Engineers then you don't need a different title. <S> Your compensation is where you should be rewarded for your skill and experience, not your nametag. <A> I think nowadays is possible to make "a career" working only on technical problems. <S> Of course it depends on your definition of making a career. <S> You should work on what you wish to work, not being related on whether people doing the same thing have half or double of your experience. <S> That should not be a factor. <S> The real reason why developers move to more management roles are two. <S> First, they want to earn more money, and the companies need a reason to justify why they pay team managers more money than the people doing the technical work. <S> By changing the title and the task to a "more management" role, the company has a reason to pay more. <S> The other reason why many developers change to mild management roles is because they want to show to the world that "they have a promotion". <S> Nowadays there are developers 50+ totally happy and competent <S> and I also see some managers in their 20s, who although we could argue a bit unexperienced, they proved to be competent already at young ages. <S> Bottom line: <S> Do the work you want to do, and do not stare at the others. <S> If you feel like continuing doing technical jobs and mild management roles do not appear to you, skip them! <S> Things could change in the future thought. <S> Then reconsider at that time. <A> This a rather vague question, and can hardly help but be when you ask a bunch of strangers who don't work at your company. <S> We may tell you our eopxeriecne, but they may not apply at your company. <S> Have you discussed this with your manager? <S> For instance at a regular performance review, when they tend to ask how you see your career developing? <S> Because that seems to me to be the obvious thing to do.
| You should work on what you want to work, not on what your friends are working.
|
Is it ethical to single-out and fire someone for drinking at lunch when the manager and co-workers did the same? After 28 very successful days outperforming others in the office, I was fired. From my first day the manager and 5-6 others would have lunch. Manager bought drinks. I thought this was unusual, but most of the job is computer/phone contacts so I didn't think much of it. On Monday I am pulled into a conference room and a supervisor in another state says it has come to their attention that I have been drinking during work. I was fired immediately, noone else was. The manager gets my commissions which puts him eligible for an incentive trip to the tropics! I was outraged, blind-sided, hurt, depressed and broke; a hard lesson learned. Is being singled out for termination, and losing commissions to the manager for drinking at lunch with the manager and co-workers ethical? <Q> Whenever you are denied compensation which you believe that you have earned, you need to consult a lawyer in your jurisdiction. <S> Even though you did break a rule, and were terminated, that might not preclude you from your commissions. <S> The story, as you said it, is very sketchy. <S> The fact that your manager bought you the drinks, which got you fired benefited financially from the act might also be illegal. <S> Did he disclose the fact he bought it for you and that he drank as well? <S> I would definitely recommend talking to an attorney. <A> Is being singled out for termination, and losing commissions to the manager for drinking at lunch with the manager and co-workers ethical? <S> It's probably not very nice and not very ethical, assuming you were intentionally singled out as you wrote. <S> You should check your company's compensation rules, and perhaps have a discussion with HR, regarding the commissions. <S> It seems unusual that you could be denied commissions that you already earned. <A> I'm not a lawyer, but one question that does come to mind is: are you really forbidden from drinking during lunch? <S> I mean, was it conveyed to you in some unequivocal, official company manner, for example, a guidebook, a new workers orientation day or, worse for your case, in the contract? <S> Again, no lawyer, but if the answer is <S> no and is genuine, <S> or it's yes, <S> but... , where the "but" is <S> something that can't be proven (e.g. on one of our team lunches out, someone told me alcohol isn't allowed on lunch, even when eating out)... <S> I would get a lawyer and go after that company guns blazing! <S> I know, for example, where I work, the country, not the specific company, it is very customary for folks eating out (as opposed to within office walls) to drink, as long as it's responsibly and such that it doesn't impair their abilities (we're trusted to know our limits, and peer pressure also keeps you to one pint per lunch anyways). <S> Unless explicitly told otherwise by an employer, even if I were to switch jobs, I would assume the same and would be very surprised to learn otherwise, especially if learning would be by termination. <S> Lastly, the fact you out-performed your peers and that by terminating you, your commission goes to the same boss that bought the drinks in the first place is super-fishy. <S> To say the least. <S> Get a lawyer! <S> This whole story smells wrong. <A> Could it be a prank or other manipulation rather than a genuine firing? <S> It's a "out of left field" answer, but <S> Maybe something that happens to all new people (or maybe it's just you!). <S> On the surface of it, there is no real reason for you to be fired. <S> You have been meeting and exceeding sales targets, there are no complaints about your performance (I assume since you didn't mention any). <S> A manager's success is mostly the success of their team, so if you are successful in hitting your sales numbers then that reflects well on your manager! <S> And if you are in an "at will" employment area (which I assume you are in the USA since you referred to 'another state') they actually don't need a reason to fire you at all, just "it isn't working out" or whatever would be enough. <S> My reasoning <S> So... Out of the blue you hear from a supervisor in another state, over a conference call, about your "drinking at work". <S> Did you already have involvement or knowledge of this boss? <S> You already have a manager on-site where you work, who would presumably be the one to fire you if that was needed. <S> And this is the specific incident that allows your commissions to be attributed to your manager instead, and this incident just happens to put the manager over the threshold to win an incentive vacation in the tropics! <S> (This seems especially suspicious if your manager is primarily involved with management tasks rather than sales/commission-generating work directly.) <S> Is it possible that one of your (peer) 'rivals' set you up as they see you outperforming them? <S> Possible Consequences <S> if I'm right <S> If you think it's at all possible that this could be a prank and that you aren't really fired... <S> I would look into this urgently. <S> Did you get any paperwork from HR or anything like that, or was it just "don't show up tomorrow" etc? <S> If it is actually a prank or set-up, it may be that your actual management are thinking (something like) <S> "wtf? <S> OP hasn't showed up for work for 3 days now... <S> we will consider they have abandoned their job?"
| But if you are prohibited from drinking during work and you did it anyway, it's probably within their rights to do so. I would suggest you consider whether this could be a prank, or a sort of 'hazing ritual', or a set-up by a rival, rather than a genuine firing process.
|
How do I talk to my boss about lack of support I am the GIS Analyst for my company and work in the project management office. I want to preface that this isn’t a gripe about my job, I just feel the way things are being run is unsustainable. My boss manages a team of 3 people for the project management side of her department and me for the GIS side. I have no doubt that she is busy and she focuses the entirety of her time on the project management side of her department. Currently they are working to fill a position, and she thanks me for taking the reigns and working independently. This is a constant thing, she has a large meeting and does not have time, she has a conference to prepare for and does not have time, etc. Each time thanking me for taking the reigns (I have been called a “rockstar” more times than I care to count). This has gone on essentially since I have started over 5 and a half years ago. She has no real knowledge of GIS and really can’t support me. Currently I am at a conference and my out of office reply is to contact her if someone needs immediate assistance, she would not be able to assist anyone with any request that is directed to me. All of the counter part companies I have spoken with have multiple people on a team doing what I am doing, while I am running an enterprise system by myself. I do have an intern, but he is only part time and I often spend considerable amounts of time giving him guidance and instruction (this is not his fault he does work hard, he just lacks experience). I cannot act as the manager and analyst much longer as I do not wield the authority of a manger and it is affecting my mental health. I regularly wake in a cold sweat due to the stress, and breakdowns are regular. The only complaint about my performance was that I looked like “Eeyore” consistently (I also have clinical major depressive disorder and an anxiety disorder), though this is largely due to the demands placed on me and the lack of recognition. I cannot continue to function in this manner, I either need support from the top down or from the bottom up. I do not know how to approach my boss about this as I do not want it to sound like an attack. While the matter of the fact is that she essentially signs my time card, she is still my manager. Telling her what I wrote, I feel, would come off as an attack and her employee telling her, in essence, that she is not filling her job duties and that is not my place to say that. How do approach her about this subject? I have broached the subject that I need more staff to meet the demands and she is well aware that our counterpart companies have teams doing my job. I have been told in a year when our intern graduates, but this is too little too late. We also rely on our IT department for technical support, often they are unresponsive and problems need to be escalated to higher echelons, in my roll I cannot address these issues. I have been searching for another job as this has been too much for too long, but things like a generous pension and the pay for job title is on the high end (though I have long surpassed the duties of this job title). I enjoy what I do and want to continue to be a top performer, I just need support. We have talked about this at performance meetings and her “goal” is to have my intern move to a full time position when he is done with graduate school, which will be at least another year. Our VP appears to be very resistant to hiring more staff in all the departments he is in charge of. Edit: It is starting appear that I have one option and that is to leave my job. I have been job searching, but I’m sure we all know that is not an easy task. I live in a very rural area so that will mean I need to relocate, which I am willing to do. <Q> How do approach her about this subject? <S> There's no shame in admitting that you can't handle the requirements of the position as it currently exists. <S> Just talk with your manager, indicate clearly that you feel you need some help, then listen. <S> If you aren't seeing signs that you'll get some help, then ramp up the efforts to find a new job. <S> A generous pension and high pay are not worth having repeated mental breakdowns. <A> How do I talk to my boss about lack of support <S> You are in a rather difficult situation. <S> My first suggestion would be to come up with a data driven presentation as to why you need extra help. <S> I think the real problem is that you have been doing a good enough job on your own with your intern. <S> In fact, you may be doing so good on your own with a part time intern that they are okay with the results, and how it impacts you. <S> Your manager already knows your over worked, based on your prior conversations. <S> Another talk with your manager probably isn't going to help. <S> A possible course of action Besides looking for another job, which you already are doing, try backing off a bit in terms of productivity . <S> This should help your mental state a bit by not working too hard where it clearly is being taken advantage of . <S> Work your 40 hours a week, and do the bare minimum to get the job done. <S> When and if they ask what is going on, show them your plan, demonstrate the amount of effort your expending while explaining that you are doing the best you can with the resources you have. <A> I know you said: Telling her what I wrote, I feel, would come off as an attack and her employee telling her, in essence, that she is not filling her job duties and that is not my place to say that. <S> But I don't entirely agree. <S> I don't think you're attacking your manager in this post and a lot of the issues you've raised here are genuine problems in the role. <S> Maybe try leaving out bits where you've specifically said you're doing her job, but I doubt she'd have too many arguments with: Please feel free to disagree, but I don't think you be able to assist anyone with any request that is directed to me? <S> I understand you're busy, but it's difficult to be the only contact on xyz whilst balancing conferences and time off work. <S> Having someone else on my team would alleviate some of this pressure on both me and you. <S> One way to look at is is, what if I were to get hit by a car tomorrow? <S> There is no one else to pick up my role, it would take x months to get someone new trained up. <S> Explain the impact of that on the business (I assume it would have a significant impact). <S> I wouldn't normally recommend this (threatening to quit is usually a bad idea), but once you have exhausted most other avenues, maybe try playing hard ball. <S> It sounds like you're not expendable at all to the company. <S> Mention that you love the role and the company, but you simply cannot continue to do the job of X number of people by yourself as it is running you into the ground. <S> You'd prefer not to need to move and you understand it's a drastic step, but you really see no other choice if things continue as they are.
| Sit down and have another meeting with your manager where you say that this job is impacting your mental health and you are in the process of looking elsewhere. Be clear in terms of why you need the support, and also how many resources you need and at what cost.
|
My boss is motivated but is no longer engaged and suspects he is losing his job and this is making everyone feel unhappy, what can I do? My boss is very clever and is highly motivated, often putting in more time than he needs. However, recently a number of people left the company, and everything seems to have came to a halt. My boss has started swearing, nit picking about what people are doing, and saying things like I couldn't care less I am sick of it quite frankly and would happily tell half the office to **** off tomorrow if it came down to it. He recently told me he thought he was going to lose his job when he was asked to attend the head office. My boss has started saying things like he feels he doesn't have the authority to make decisions, yet he used to make them all the time. When I want to do something for me or my team, he no longer backs me up and is basically saying no to everything. He is not coming up with solutions to anything anymore and is simply pointing out where things have not been done correctly, as opposed to saying what could be done to put things right. A massive investment was made in some technology recently, and it turned out to be a bad investment. Now the mood has soured in the office and everyone is feeling unhappy. There are times where I feel so sad about the situation I feel like applying for another role. However, I have worked at this company for many years now and I was always well looked after so don't want to throw in the towel just yet. I was considering bypassing my boss but he has a lot of control and influence in the company, so I feel without concrete evidence it would be my word against his and I think others fear speaking out about the way he is being. I like my boss, and think he is under a lot of pressure and would happily do anything to support him, but he is starting to make me feel like my job is pointless and that everything we do is a waste of time. I have no idea where to turn or what to do anymore and feel isolated and trapped in a situation I can't do anything about. So I am wondering if there any suggestions on what I can do to improve the situation. <Q> This is a battle that is being fought way above your paygrade. <S> The only thing you can really do is talk to your boss in private, preferably after work, offsite. <S> Remember, what you are seeing are the results of disputes you have not seen. <S> Maintain your course, and try to bring as much of a positive attitude as you can muster, make changes where you can, and update your resume. <S> If your boss has become bitter enough to start going "scorched earth", you may need to move on, be ready to do so. <A> My boss is motivated but is no longer engaged and suspects he is losing his job <S> and this is making everyone feel unhappy, what can I do? <S> Do your job , to the best of your ability. <S> Part of your job is to help your boss do his by providing any work related information <S> (ie Systems is running slow due to XYZ <S> and I fixed it before it was noticed ). <S> Factual data is his best ally here, rumors are not. <S> Continue trying to help him as best you can. <S> Continue with your suggestions to improve the team's situation. <S> You cannot make your boss do anything however. <S> Just don't put yourself in the line of fire <S> while this get's sorted out. <S> Short answer : <A> Your boss is feeling bitter and burned. <S> This is apparently the core of your current issue. <S> So, try to help that as best you can. <S> The first thing you can do is go to your boss, and ask what you can do to help. <S> It's a nontrivial emotional lift, but talking with him, listening to him, and being supportive will likely help at least some, and it's highly likely make him more favorably disposed to you personally. <A> Good answers already. <S> There is one other thing to contemplate in these sorts of situations. <S> Your boss is slowly digging a hole. <S> He may soon just leave, quite possibly he is actively job hunting. <S> There is potentially an opportunity if the scenario is right for advancement. <S> So look closely at what could be done to make yourself look like a good candidate for the job. <S> Thinking all the angles through gives you an edge in a career, sometimes chances pop up briefly, you need to be prepared to roll any eventuality to your advantage at short notice.
| Do your job as best you can, help your boss where you can. If the powers that be want your boss gone, you don't have the influence to fix that . You might also get a better idea of what's going on for yourself, and perhaps some useful things you can do to help things work out a bit better.
|
Discovered that my new job has cameras in the restrooms Location is Washington state, USA. I've been at this company for less than a week and I hardly know everyone yet. I had to go to IT today to get some stuff set up and the sysadmin had all the security cameras in a 4x4 grid on a TV. While he was working on my laptop, I noticed that two cameras show the mens and womens restrooms. They're on the ceiling overlooking the stalls so you can see into them. I didn't say anything about them at the time because I'm not sure what to do. I went back and found the camera in the mens' room, it's inside an air vent so it's very hard to notice, while none of the other cameras outside are hidden. I'm not sure if this is known by the whole company and it's just accepted, or if it's legal at all. I'm definitely not going to work for a company that does this. I'm trying to decide if I should: Go to the sysadmin and ask him about it. Go to my manager and tell him, in case these aren't actually approved. Leave the company. I'm not worried about finding another job, and if I did this I'd email my whole department and let them know, then walk out. Alert some legal authority. Does anyone have any advice for the best way to handle this? <Q> They're on the ceiling overlooking the stalls so you can see into them. <S> So they're overlooking the stalls even when the stalls are closed? <S> The law in Washington seems pretty clear-cut to me. <S> https://www.washemploymentlaw.com/employee-rights/workplace-surveillance#1 <S> I would call the police. <S> Don't call 911. <S> It's not an emergency. <S> But find out what the local number for the police is and call them. <S> If you're not sure about calling them, you could just visit your local police station and describe what you saw. <S> Do not ask the manager. <S> Do not talk to HR. <S> Get the police involved. <S> If you complain about the cameras before the police get there, the cameras will be moved, pointed into different directions, incriminating footage will get erased, and signs notifying you of that hidden camera in the vents will be posted everywhere. <S> In fact, that camera in the vents may even disappear overnight, so discreetly double-check that it is still there tomorrow morning before telling the police to come. <S> Then, I would use that police report when filing for unemployment (since as you said, you're not interested in working for such an employer). <S> That being said, if upper management was truly not aware, they may beg you to stay. <A> You need to consult a lawyer and then the police. <S> While I am not a lawyer, a quick Google search would HIGHLY indicate this is illegal. <S> Read this article from a lawyer in Washington state for more information. <S> Its probable one or more persons will be facing fines, criminal charges, civil charges, and jail/prison time. <S> A lawyer will advise you on how best to protect yourself and coworkers when reporting this to the police. <S> Not to mention advise you on what could happen in the future. <S> This is serious. <A> Management, HR and sysadmin are definitely poor choices to start. <S> I'm not from the U.S. <S> and I don't know in which field it is, but if you feel uncomfortable going directly to the police, talking to a union representative in the company is surely a good option. <S> They might know if a similar issue has been raised and already addressed in the past and, in case not, raise it in the cleanest way. <S> If that does not work, due to lacking of union representative or to an unhelpful one, the police is the next option, and other answers have surely addressed that. <A> Cameras pointed into bathrooms stalls is extreme prison-like surveillance. <S> Utterly unacceptable in every imaginable workplace, let alone the USA. <S> Most likely it's a creep Sysadmin and not any sane manager's idea of a policy. <S> But it might be helpful to gather several employees including higher level ones, bring them into the bathroom and pull down the vent to expose the camera, and then take a walk to the IT guy's office. <S> Yes, it would be a disruptive scene. <S> The plus side is that it avoids putting you in a situation where the camera is removed making you look like you're making an explosive unbelievable claim.
| Even not reporting it could be unethical, or even illegal. Putting a camera in a bathroom violates a person's reasonable expectation of privacy. The police definitely need to be called at some point.
|
How to manage a combo of busywork and micromanaging My job requires equal parts analysis and data display on a map. On a project I send these maps out for review as many as several times a day and incorporate changes requested by the project manager and sometimes support staff. I'm looking for advice on how to handle a boss whose comments are (I feel) personal preference and extremely time-consuming. At this point I may sound like someone who just can't take criticism. But there are a few issues here: He isn't the project manager (PM) for many of these projects. The comments are almost all preference based: "Make the title smaller. Make the blue a darker shade. Make the..." versus the PM's comments: "Make these colors more distinct." There are MANY of comments like this, introducing a blockage in my workflow and making it harder to complete other tasks. He has admitted on some projects that he doesn't think all of the changes are necessary, but he was asked to review it and feels compelled to add as many as possible. The analysis is never checked, just the visuals. Few, if any, of his proposed changes are open to discussion. The obvious thing to do is to suck it up and incorporate his changes. But I feel that there might be a better way to handle this. <Q> The reason why you are asked to send the maps to multiple people is to receive different perspectives on how it could be improved. <S> This specific boss seems to be only focused on the presentation rather than the content. <S> His criticisms and suggestions are not necessarily a knock on your work, but suggestions on making the document more presentable for its intended audience. <S> If you feel like all these changes are unnecessary or time consuming, I would bring it up with your boss and ask to assign priorities to proposed changes. <S> This way, if it is determined that the visual aspects are a low priority, you can leave them for the end ( or not bother if your boss doesn't think they are needed ). <A> In that meeting, you want to have a conversation something like <S> Hey Boss, I want to make sure that I'm being as productive as I can be. <S> Over the past two weeks (or whatever a reasonable time period is), I've been spending 80% of my time incorporating the visualization changes <S> you're suggesting and 20% of my time making changes that everyone else is suggesting. <S> That means that when Alice noticed a problem with the analysis, it took 4 hours to get a revised version out rather than 1 hour because I spent 3 hours incorporating your changes. <S> And it took me 2 extra days to get out the first version of the Smith analysis because I spent 16 hours making visualization tweaks to the Jones analysis. <S> Is there a way that I can make sure that the visualizations look the way you want more efficiently? <S> Could we come up with a handful of pre-approved templates that I can just drop a new analysis into rather than building the entire analysis from the ground up every time? <S> If templates aren't an option, can we come up with some guidelines on what you're looking for that I can apply so that there is less subsequent rework? <S> Maybe it would make sense for me to take this class [link to some training you'd like] on making impactful visualizations? <S> Should we talk about changing the process to separate out "required" changes from "nice to have" changes so that I'm prioritizing the more valuable work? <S> Is there something else I can do to make this process smoother? <A> First thing, you should incorporate backlog into your workflow. <S> Hopefully, you get comments in writing, then you can just copy-paste them in something like Trello or Google Doc. <S> backlog in this case is just a list of tasks you have to finish. <S> After you have some history accumulated, you can sit down and discuss how to better prioritize these items, because that seems to be the core problem. <S> Second thing, you should try to have a hierarchy of process. <S> Maybe you don't have to send draft to your boss every iteration. <S> You are hired to make some judgements yourself, so try to say: "boss, I will ask for feedback from X, Y and Z, and only then send you a draft. <S> That will decrease number of iterations you have to go through and hopefully save you some time". <S> TL;DR : <S> Stop sending every draft to your boss, especially since there is not much of substance feedback
| Gather some numbers on how much time you're spending on these requests, how much time you're spending on other requests, and what other tasks are getting postponed and schedule a meeting with your boss. Start writing things down to get help on prioritization
|
My employer is postponing my FIRST paycheck due to a funding shortfall; what can I do? I don't think I can even file for unemployment or can I? I'm continuing to work and attend meetings. It seems like a bad idea for me to be actively checking code into their source control system if I'm not getting paid. It's a startup seeking additional venture capital. I also haven't been reimbursed for flying to their headquarters to work for a few days. CA unemployment says I'm performing work for someone so ineligible. I'm applying elsewhere, but I have to pay rent and other bills long before I can get a check from someone else. If I quit and start work full time, I think I become ineligible. <Q> I don't think I can even file for unemployment or can I? <S> You cannot file for or collect unemployment while you are employed. <S> And in general, you cannot collect unemployment benefits if you quit. <S> But check with your state's unemployment office to see if you can collect unemployment benefits if you quit in your specific circumstances. <S> Do this before you decide to quit. <S> Only your state's office can actually determine your eligibility. <S> If you don't get a good answer, you can call your local Department of Labor and State Attorney General's office. <S> Meanwhile, you can try hard to get your next job with a company who can actually pay their employees. <A> My employer is postponing my FIRST paycheck due to a funding shortfall; what can I do? <S> Postpone any work for this company until they have paid you for your work and have been reimbursed for your business travel. <S> If you have not been paid within a week, report them to your state's Attorney General. <S> If I were you, I would avoid startups as they are usually not very stable with regards to financials and a normal working environment. <A> No, the accepted answer is not really correct. <S> It's not the State Attorney General. <S> It will be quicker if you file directly with the Labor Commissioner's Office of California. <S> File a claim for unpaid wages with the Labor Commissioner’s Office. <S> https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToFileWageClaim.htm <S> The advice to stop work is good also. <S> Also, if they're not paying you and you quit because of that, it's not really quitting, it's them breaching your employment contract. <S> So check on your unemployment eligibility. <S> But like you said, if you're able to find another full time job right away, unemployment won't kick in. <S> From what I remember, it takes at least one week to start from the time you've stopped working, plus one additional week for you to receive your first paycheck.
| You can ask your employer when you can expect to get paid. Finally, start looking for a new company to work for.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.