Letters of Recommendation

I was recently laid off from my position at a large company during a first round of lay offs. I was the only official executive person there and did a good job. I was told that they have a "tool" that the manager uses to decide who stays and who goes, but my manager also assured me that the decision was not based on my performance. So, what is on these tools anyway? Also, I asked my manager for a letter of recommendation and was told that because he was a Director, he was not allowed to write one. This sounds strange to me. I have never had a situation where my direct manager could not write letters of recommendation. Is this common place? Am I getting the old song and dance on these issues?

There isn't a standard tool used for layoffs, but there are definitely tools used and it is very true that the decision is not a reflection of your performance at all. Frequently companies use things such as performance rating, location, years of service, and position to determine who stays and who goes.

Also (and I swear that this is true), high level people are especially vulnerable. Why? Money and power. Let's talk money first. You're expensive, as are your peers. One of the expectation of executive level is that you can do amazing things. There is a reason why you get the bigger pay check. However, this also means that your bosses always expect you to be able to do more.

So, when a budget crunch came up and layoffs needed to be done, it makes perfect sense that someone from the executive team would have to go. Furthermore, it makes sense that the big boss looked and said, "Who can we get rid of and who can take on this person's responsibilities?"

If you were the only executive person at your site, and they truly did this by a "tool," they probably plugged in sales/productivity/location/experience/performance rating/seniority and things unique to your company and determined that "The Duluth office can fall under the responsibility of the Minneapolis office." And so, Janet in Duluth gets laid off and Karen in Minneapolis gets extra responsibilities. An entire, expensive, salary is saved.

It's not personal. Honest. Except when it is, and when it is relates to the second reason: Power.

Now, I was not around when the decision to eliminate your position was made, so I have to assume that it was not personal and it was through a tool (this is VERY common) and everything is on the up and up. But, for the benefit of other people, let's talk power.

If you an analyst making $45,000 a year and you get a new boss and the new boss finds you annoying--not a bad employee, mind you, just annoying--most companies will not allow him to fire you. Terminating someone is a huge pain and ALWAYS opens up a company to a legal headache. (Lawsuits are headaches regardless of who wins. They take time and money to fight even if the whole premise is completely unfounded.) The new boss will go to his boss and HR and be told, "Suck it up!"

But, if you're a senior level person and your boss finds you annoying, well then, don't let the door hit you on the way out. Granted, the exit will be announced as "Janet has left to pursue other options" and Janet will get a severance package tied to a general release.

You might say, "Well, that's more expensive then whatever possible lawsuit the annoying $45k analyst could bring." Yes, well, but because the senior person has so much more responsibility it is that much more important for the senior team to work cohesively.

(Of course, none of this is universal. Businesses are like people--endless variation.)

This has to do with power, of course. This is not necessarily a bad thing. When you are in charge, you need the power to get things done and if you don't get along with your subordinates it can hinder progress. (Yes, I realize this applies at all levels, but the more responsibility you have the more important business feels it is.)

And here's a helpful Evil HR Lady tip for figuring out if you are on the executive chopping block: Special projects. Being assigned to a special project when you are low level can be a great growth experience and be good for your career. If you are high level and relieved of your other duties so you can head up this "special project," rest assured that unless you knock it out of the park, you've been slated for termination. Oh, termination isn't tomorrow, but they are thinking about it. You can save yourself, but be aware that once you hand over your regular responsibilities you should probably start taking home your personal items.

This is different then being asked to head up something new. New is permanent. Special projects have an end and when they end, the executive who headed it will have no place to go. (Because she gave up her other responsibilities, remember?)

So, those of you who are still reading are wondering "when in the heck is she going to get to the letters of recommendation part?" Yeah, yeah, I'm getting to it.

First of all, my opinion (and this is just how I feel, I don't know how others feel), is that letters of recommendation are practically worthless. I also feel that the recommendations on LinkedIn are worthless. Anything that is going to be read by the actual person being discussed is suspect. I don't feel that people are as honest in those situations.

Therefore, I always wonder what people have to hide when they present letters of recommendation. Why can't I just call your reference?

And that's the question you should ask: Can I use you as a reference? If the answer to that is no, then it's worth it to inquire as to why. "Because I'm a director" is a story unless the company has an official policy of not providing references and because of his position he knows he'd get busted and disciplined. You should know the policy and it's okay to challenge him back, because what is he going to do? Fire you? (I'm not talking about pitching a fit and burning bridges, I'm talking about pushing back and asking for an explanation.)

If the company will only provide employment verification, then that's what they'll do. It stinks, but it is what it is. (For a discussion on this topic, check out this post and comments from Ask A Manager.)

Good luck on the job hunt.

Educational Pauses

I started out in law school five years ago, and I attended full-time for three semesters. The school I was at got put on probation by the ABA, and the administration panicked and kicked out a bunch of students in order to increase their chances of maintaining accreditation. I got caught up in the purge and I was "academically disqualified". I wasn't a straight A student or anything, but I wasn't awful, either. I was your typical B- student.

The ABA requires a two year wait before any disqualified student can reapply to any accredited law school. During my suspension, I went to a community college and got an associates degree in paralegal studies. I graduated with honors. Now I'm back in law school, at a better school for me, and I'm doing well grade-wise. (I'm also a part-time evil HR lady in training to pay the bills.)

This was a long-winded way for me to get to the heart of the question. Do I have to put my first time in law school on my resume? I'm thinking that I don't, since I didn't graduate. I have been employed the entire time that I've been in school, so there are no resume gaps to account for. I transferred those units into my paralegal degree program, but that degree came from a community college. (I do put my associate's degree on my resume, along with my bachelor's degree.) I have on my resume that I'm in law school at my current school, with an expected graduation of 2011.

I've asked a few trusted people, and I get mixed responses, but none of them are in hiring. Also, if it comes up in an interview, how should I deal with it? I'm sure I'm not the first person to do poorly in school and then do better later.

Nope! You absolutely do not have to put your first time in law school on your resume.

You should never, ever, not in a million years, lie on your resume. But, you aren't required to put everything you've ever done on your resume. Remember, your resume is your way to advertise yourself. You never see a Hostess Cupcake ad saying, "Caution: If you eat 12 of thses in one sitting, you'll be sick as a dog!" (Not that I would know anything about this.)

If you weren't employed continuously, then you might want to consider including something because having a gap on your resume with no good explanation is problematic. But, leaving off schooling that is irrelevant is okay. Good luck with your current stint in law school and have fun in HR.

Things I learned on vacation

I just got home from a fabulous vacation in Sharm El Sheik, Egypt. I'd never heard of it before we moved to Europe, but it's a very popular vacation spot. We went and it was wonderful. Plus, I learned a few things about business.

Fancy isn't always better: We ate some really fancy desserts. They looked incredible. But, honestly, the brownies at a church potluck taste better.

Before you go spend all that money on the high priced consultant, see if you've got any brownie bakers in your company. You may be surprised that their view of the situation and proposed solution is actually more palatable then the one dreamed up by the B school grads with the fancy power point presentations. After all, your people are in the trenches every day.

Under promising and over delivering really works: We flew on Edelweiss Air. I have such low expectations of airlines that I about fell over when the flight attendant brought out little backpacks with coloring books and beach balls in them for my children. Wow! I said. I will fly this airline again.

The return flight was an evening flight and they brought me a pillow and blanket for my toddler without me even having to ask. "I thought this might help with the flight," she said cheerily. Again, wow.

Now, I didn't know anything about this particular airline when we booked the flight, but I expected the same lousy service I'm used to on the standard US carriers. By doing just a few things better then them I felt like I'd found the best kept secret in air travel.

HR has a lousy reputation in a lot of companies. If we do just a little bit better on the basics, people may actually start listening to the important things we have to share.

And speaking of airlines... We actually flew the same day as the infamous Panty bomber. I, of course, didn't hear about this until the next morning when I turned on my computer for the first time in a week. I rightly predicted that a whole bunch of new regulations will be thrown at passengers, none of which will actually make us safer.

The new TSA directives include "Perform thorough pat-down of all passengers at boarding gate prior to boarding, concentrating on upper legs and torso." Super. So, if I'm a terrorist, now, I'll just put my plastic explosives in my socks.

See? Silliness. But, what do businesses do? Instead of coming up with solutions that will actually, you know, solve problems with problem employees, we come up with rules that will bother everyone else. For instance, we make exempt employees clock in, or we track when they log on to their computers, or we make them sign in and out for lunch, rather than saying, "Gee, we have a problem with Bill in accounting. He's not getting his work done. Let's work with Bill to come up with a solution."

Because, you see, requiring Bill and all his coworkers to clock in, doesn't actually make Bill a good employee and it bugs the snot out of those of us who are putting in 60 hours a week anyway, and get yelled at for not coming in until 8:13 when we were working (at home, on our laptops) until midnight the night before. Bill can be on time and still be a lousy employee.

Instead of imposing big rules that annoy your employees, teach your managers how to manage problems. Some problems can be solved. Some problems need to be shown the door and put on the "do not rehire" list.

Don't be a Russian Girl. We took a day trip to Cairo to see the pyramids. It was fantastic and fascinating. Our guide was a 25ish Egyptian man. He was nice and knowledgeable and funny and a little too open about his life. He told his he really wanted to get married to a "British girl," and did we happen to know any available ones? He assured us he would only marry for love, but she needed to be British.

Later he informed us that Russian tours were his favorite (he spoke Arabic, English, German and Russian) because the Russian girls were soooo easy.

Some of you may find out that your boss actually considers you a "Russian girl" while you keep thinking you're British. Stay with me and I'll explain.

I get e-mails from people all the time complaining about how they are hard workers, competent, get regular praise, but can't ever get promoted. That's because you are missing some quality that your boss (or your company) has decided is essential to a promotion. Any "Russian girl" dating our tour guide may think she's doing everything right to have a relationship that progresses to marriage, but our guide is just using her.

Unlike our love seeking tour guide's "dates" you can do something about changing yourself from Russian to British. Find out what those qualities are that you are missing. Work to obtain them. Realize that your particular boss may never recognize that you would be good in a higher role and leave the department or company. If you have cannot gain the necessary qualifications to "become British" then find a company that values your Russian-ness. (And no, I don't mean be "easy." This is just an analogy and keep your minds out of the gutter. Hard working! Responsible! Be good!)

No need to be so sensitive: We were in Egypt on Christmas Eve and Christmas day. Egypt is mostly Muslim. They put on a fantastic Christmas party for the guests. I have no idea of the religious affiliation of the rest of the guests, but I'm guessing the mothers in headscarves telling little "Mohammed"or "El Sayed" to go sit on Santa's knee (Santa rode in on a camel!) weren't practicing Christians. But it was a good party and so they came.

Most of the guests were from Europe (both Western and Eastern Europe), where most people celebrate Christmas. So, the hotel staff said, "Hey it's good for business if we cater to the bulk of our clientele. We realize that those of us putting up the Christmas trees and some of our guests won't actually be celebrating, but most of the guests will be." And so they did.

If your company has a Christmas party and you're Jewish/Muslim/Hindu/Atheist/Whatever, don't sulk in the corner because it's not your holiday. Likewise, if you're Christian and your company has a generic "holiday" party, don't go sulking in the corner complaining about how it should be a Christmas party. Come on, lighten up. It's a party. No one is asking you to be baptized or declare your faith null and void.

I'm sure more than a few non-Christian kids climbed on Santa's knee and got a present. Super for them. And super for their parents. Before you pitch a fit about something, ask yourself, "is this important, or is it just a party?" If it's the latter, let it go.

And speaking of letting things go: Sharm El Sheik is on the Sinai Peninsula. This bit of land has been the site of many wars over hundreds of years. Now, while the snorkeling is fabulous and a hike to where Moses received the 10 commandments (among other things, but this is not a Sunday school lesson), is enlightening, the rest of the place is pretty desolate.

We kept asking ourselves, "Why do so many people care about this piece of land?" This, of course, was a rhetorical question. We know why they care. (Both my husband and I have degrees in politics and I studied Hebrew in college, for goodness sakes. We know why from an intellectual stand point.) My point is, that if you don't have an emotional/religious/historical attachment at stake it's not great land.

How many times do employees hold grudges, or attempt to cling to a project that is doomed to failure because they've already invested time into it? Sometimes you need to take a step back and just let go. Give that project to the person who has been angling for it for months and work on something else. Evaluate if this really is the hill you want to die on, before you go to battle. Some things just aren't as great in the cold light of day as we build them up to be in our minds.

These are a few of the things I learned on my vacation. I also learned I can get Betty Crocker brownie mix in Egypt, but not in Switzerland. That's worth a post of its own some day.

Benefits Swap

I have a single employee, currently enrolled in our group health plan, who is getting married to someone who does not work with us in April. He wants to drop our health insurance group plan in favor of joining his bride's group plan with her employer when he gets married. But he has asked our business owner if we would be willing to pay his new wife's monthly premium. He's arguing that it would be cheaper for the company to do this instead of carrying him and his wife on our health care, and our boss likes the idea.

Is this legit? I'm worried that it might be discriminatory (wouldn't we have to offer to pay for all our employee's spouses health care premiums?) Are we going down a road we don't want to travel? Or is this a clever way to reduce health care costs. I'm not an HR expert, just the poor guy assigned to these duties in the office, and I really could use some guidance. We're located in Pennsylvania.

This is an excellent question, for which I don't know the answer. So, I'm publishing it anyway! I used to work for a company that did just that, but that was 11 years ago, I was an admin, and I certainly wasn't in on any of the discussions. It was in New York State, if that helps any. I worked with some fine people, so I presume they did their legal checking, but it was also a very small company, so who knows?

Anybody know the answer to this, or how to proceed? I would never want a policy where you paid the whole amount of the spouse's insurance increase.

I would just raise everyone's salary by $200 (or whatever) and increase the amount they paid towards their own benefits by $200, so if they didn't take the insurance, they would have the extra $200. But, of course, once you did that, people would forget about that and you'd run into the same situation later.

Firing with a delay

I am the manager of an administrative team of seven people plus myself. Next year I am going to have to lay off one of my people for poor performance and inability to work as independently as the job requires. She's been informed of her poor performance but doesn't seem to understand that we are serious.

She has been in this position for about six years. Because of rules in our state institution, we are required to give her at least three months notice. We are allowed the option of moving her to a different position once she has received notice, but we don't have any other position open at this time. Sending her home and paying her for three months isn't an option. She can certainly leave earlier if she gets another job, but I can't count on that happening.

My question is, what is the best way to work with the rest of the team, who will definitely be shocked and surprised and unhappy that she is being let go? Her performance issues aren't evident to them. I can't cite budget issues because we will actually be hiring two people to replace her (each will handle half of her job and take other duties as well). I'm reluctant to tell them that her performance is poor, because that seems, well, pretty nasty, like kicking someone when they are down.

I really don't want the rest of the team feeling like their jobs are in jeopardy, and I can't imagine what it's going to be like to keep going for three months with her still working there knowing she is leaving. Any advice on how to handle this?

First of all, I don't like using the term layoff for someone who is being terminated for performance reasons. It makes people leery of hiring people who were terminated for no fault of their own. But, that's neither here nor there.

I hate terminations with advanced notice. I'm of the "today is your last day" philosophy for precisely the reasons you outlined. It's hard for someone in that position to come in. The co-workers don't know what to make of it and it makes for a tough time for everyone. I much prefer payment in lieu of notice.

But, as you said, that's not an option here. First of all, if you don't think she's aware of how serious you are, do you don't have her on a formal performance improvement plan? If not, put her on one now. She needs to be totally aware. (Now, truth me told there are times in which you will tell an employee, "If you are late to work/miss an assignment/swear at Bob one more time you will be terminated." And then when the employee does just that they are in utter disbelief. But that doesn't seem like the case here.)

You seem to think that her co-workers will have no idea that her performance is low. I seriously doubt it. They suspect it. And if she has friends at the office, she's talked with them about the performance meetings you've held with her.

I think you are absolutely correct in informing her co-workers. Rumors are always worse then the truth. Notify her of her impending termination, with a clear statement of her last day of work. (And please be clear that this her LAST DAY OF WORK. "March 15, 2010 will be your last day of work. You will be terminated as of end of day on March 15." You'd be surprised at how many people don't process the fact that they are actually being terminated if you are not absolutely clear.) Then have a meeting with the rest of the staff. "Stephanie is going to be leaving us. Her last day of work will be March 15, 2010. We wish her well. The nature of the job duties are changing and we will be recruiting new people for the department."

Yes, you'll be asked a bunch of questions, none of them relevant. Stephanie will tell them all that you're a big meanie who is firing her for no good reason. But, don't stoop to the level of trying to justify your decision.

Now, one more thought before you terminate. If her co-workers truly don't suspect, it means that she's doing at least an adequate job in many areas. I don't know what her problems are, but if it's a case of non-willful non-performance, have you thought about dividing the job responsibilities now, giving Stephanie responsibilities for the things that she does well and hiring someone else for the remaining responsibilities?

It takes a lot of work to bring people up to the same level as someone with 6 years of experience in the organization. I have no idea what her issues are, but this may be something to think about.

You also mention that she will be looking for another job (duh!) but I kind of got the feeling you meant internally. If this is the case, please, please, please be honest with the potential manager about her inadequacies. Please do not play the "shuffle the bad employee" game. It is a bad game with no winners.

Why we should put filters on our work computers

I work for a small family-run company. Upper management is all related, middle management and lower is not. The owner is a porn addict. One of my employees, "Lisa", complained about his porn within her view on occasion and said she was offended. I tried several methods to resolve this issue without direct confrontation as I found out that another employee in the past was conveniently terminated shortly after voicing her complaint.

That said, the end result was that I had to move Lisa to another area. It was not a punishment by any means (the work environment is much nicer in my opinion) but she now complains that she was not happy about why she had to be moved. Since the move, she disclosed to me that she has a mental illness. She also has made several statements about how she doesn't have any money and she seems to be a chronic complainer. The quality of her work has declined since her move and I get the feeling that she feels that she can do whatever she wants because she knows the "boss' dirty little secret". I do believe that if she were terminated that she would pursue a lawsuit for sexual harassment or whatever else she could come up with. She does enough to get by although she is definitely slacking more than normal.

The family is not aware of his porn problem although it turns out almost all of the non-familial employees do. Since I have resolved the situation to the point where she is no longer exposed to the harassment conditions, do I have anything to worry about or can I move forward with the issue with her non-performance? Should I just let her performance go if it makes the basic standards? If I let the necessary management/family members aware of his porn problem then it is almost guaranteed that I will lose my job.

Do you have any advice for me?

Help!


PS This is the second small company I have worked for where I have faced this problem of an owner viewing porn in front of employees. Unbelievable!

Okey-dokey. And why don't we have filters on our servers? I know they aren't fool proof, but they sure do make it easier. (Yes, I know the answer to this, the owner is the porn viewer.)

You have reason to believe that someone was fired for complaining about the owner's viewing habits. You also have reason to believe that you will be terminated if you complain. Interestingly enough, Lisa has the opposite view--I know the owner is viewing porn so my job is safe. Because it is, from you, because you don't want to lose your job.

Puts you in an interesting situation, doesn't it?

Porn viewing in the office can definitely lead to sexual harassment cases and the owner is putting his business at risk by doing so. The fact that the last person who complained about it was fired and didn't sue probably makes him feel invincible. You know, the whole "It's my company and I'll do what I want!" mentality.

You say the family members don't know about the porn problem. I bet that is not true. They just don't want to deal with it. Not only is this man their father/brother/husband, he's their boss. Talk about a classic example of why family owned businesses have a tendency to fall apart.

Your first step is you need to make your boss aware of the situation, even if your boss is the owner's wife. There are real potential consequences to his behavior. You, personally, need to be able to document that you have done everything in your power to end the porn problem in the office. Go to www.eeoc.gov and learn about the potential consequences to the business. Here's a little quote to present:

The court held that the proliferation of pornography and demeaning comments, if sufficiently continuous and pervasive "may be found to create an atmosphere in which women are viewed as men's sexual playthings rather than as their equal coworkers.

I realize you think you'll be terminated for bringing this up. You, yourself, would be able to file a sexual harassment charge in that case. So could everyone else that is aware of this. You, as a manager, whose only action was to move the complaining employee, are demonstrating that the company isn't committed to a workplace free of sexual harassment. Seriously. This could become a bigger problem for you if you don't tell.

If I were you, I'd go contact your local EEOC office first, and ask for advice. Have them document that you are afraid you'll be terminated for bringing up the problem. Then, go to your boss. Explain the situation, including the person who was terminated before. Say that you expect that this will be taken care of or you'll proceed to file a lawsuit.

You don't say, but I'm guessing you're male, so they probably think you can't complain about porn. Not true. It's obviously affecting your ability to perform your job.

After all this is done, go to Lisa and have a discussion about her work. If she has true mental health problems and your business is subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act, work with her to develop an appropriate plan. If it's not, work with her to develop an appropriate plan anyway. Explain that you expect high performance from her.

If she brings up the whole issue with the owner, tell her that you have escalated the issue and that she is free to approach the EEOC as well. Point out that you have removed her from the situation as well, so there should be no ongoing problem. This, of course, doesn't prevent the prevailing overall atmosphere of women as objects.

Now, normally, I would tell you to just go straight to the offender before you go to the EEOC, but he's already demonstrated that he's not interested in changing and is interested in retaliation. (Note to my readers--he gave me some additional info that he asked me not to share, as it increases the risk of identification. Just trust me on this one that the boss will retaliate.)

No matter what, you want to start looking for a new job. This company is messed up and it's doubtful this will solve the problem. If you are fired for this, you can definitely sue and will probably win but that can take years and years and what a pain. Your boss needs to be made painfully aware that this habit is costing the company good employees and has potential to cost it a lot of money as well.

Now, with the number of times I've used the word "porn" I fear for the comments. Oy.

You're not Jack Bauer

Find out why over at US News.

Of course, after I wrote this I found out that Jack Bauer might be replaced!

And PS, fellow 24 watchers, I'm totally lame and just started watching this show, so I'm only on season 2, so no spoilers past 9:00 p.m. on day 2. :>)

The Wife

I am a 33 year old that has been working at the same company for 5 years. Things were going along quite smoothly until about 10 months ago. This is an involved story, and I apologize for writing an email longer than you want. I just can't explain quite how nuts the situation is without going into it all.

I work for a private marketing firm of about 35 people, with 4 partners. We do not have an HR department, but rather one of the partners is designated HR partner and we are to go to him with any HR related issues. With the exception of 1 person, who I will call Dee, we somehow all manage to get along great. The real problem? Dee is married to the HR partner, who also happens to be my direct boss.

For the first 4 years that I worked for this company, I managed to stay on the "Good Side" of Dee. Dee is not in any management or higher up position - she is a peer to everyone else at the company. While I was on her good side, I was amazed at the mean, vindictive and hateful things she would say about her coworkers. I did not join in. Furthermore, the quality of Dee's work is astonishingly low, and it is generally assumed that the only reason she is still working for the firm is because she is married to one of the partners. I don't know of a single coworker who respects her or her work.

I managed to get on her bad side about a year ago when at a work social event I mentioned that I was putting my house up for sale. Evidently, she is a realtor in her spare time. The second she found out that I was putting the house on the market, she began to offer her services to me. Knowing that I don't find her work to be satisfactory, I knew that the last thing I wanted was for her to be my realtor. However, I wasn't ready with a quick response such as "Oh, my friend is a realtor and we are using her!" (This is beside the point that under no circumstances should I have to have a ready made realtor excuse, but it sure would have made my life alot easier!)

Anyway, over the next couple months she harassed me endlessly about being my realtor. I was "Realtor harassed". I finally told her that I had a realtor in mind that I had used in the past and that I was going to have her be my realtor. This is when the evil Dee came out! She told me that she was going to be too busy anyway, and that people were going to have to walk through urine to get to my house (I'm not sure where she came up with that one) and several other petty comments. I smiled and said "Well as long as it gets sold!"

The next day all hell broke loose. She strongly badmouthed me to several of my coworkers including badmouthing my job performance - insinuating to them that her husband, my boss, had said negative things about my job performance while they were at home at night. Being that the coworkers are my friends and not so much hers, they reported everything that was said to me. At this point I was still considered a "rising star" in the firm, and I am literally my boss's "go to girl" for everything, so I was suspicious. I routinely make him look really, REALLY good, and clients have let him know that. Furthermore, I considered him to be my mentor and we had talked at length about how important it is to communicate criticisms so that one might have a chance to improve - he had promised to always let me know if he had an issue with me. But since the accusation was brought up, I felt like I had no choice but to address it. So I spoke to him privately, let him know what happened, and told him that I had no interest in involving him in petty issues, but that if my job performance was in question, then I needed to know that.

He responded that No, he had no issue with my work and was very appreciative to have an employee like me. He said that he would take care of the issue and apologized to me that it was even an issue. He seemed to recognize that it was an absurd situation for me to be in. He also thanked me for coming to him. No other employee has gone to him when they have had a problem with Dee, they always go to other partners because they are too scared to say bad things about his wife to his face.

However, since this conversation 10 months ago, things have been different at the company. My boss seems like he tries really hard to separate his professional and personal life, but he's not really good at it. Dee continues to harass me in her own way - sometimes affecting my work and other times just being obnoxious. She routinely tries to make me look bad - I don't think she's succeeded yet, but quite frankly, the behavior is getting old. I have no interest in being involved in pettiness, but it's getting harder and harder as the days go on. I can deal with people I don't like - because I care about the end goal and I care about getting my job done. What I'm having a hard time dealing with is someone attacking me and tearing me down. I have tried very hard to control my reactions to her behavior, but after a year, I feel myself losing the battle and am feeling quite negative.

6 people have left the company in the 3.5 years that I have worked for them because they couldn't put up with Dee's behavior anymore. The company looses good employees because they refuse to deal with the bad ones. I have come very close to leaving the company, but I enjoy my relationships with my clients, and with the economy being what it is, there is NOBODY hiring in my field right now. I also enjoy my job aside from Dee! I've tried very hard to simply ignore it, but now Dee is involving our projects in the mess as well. I sincerely believe that she is affecting my chances for success at this company. Do I talk to my bosses again? What will come of that? Valuable people have left because of her, and they've done nothing. If I am valuable enough for them to fire her over me, then I'm going to be the employee that got my boss's wife fired, and that's not good.

If I do go to the bosses, how far do I go in explaining her behavior? Do I tell my boss that she's accused the president of the company of staring at her boobs? Do I tell my boss that she makes coworkers uncomfortable by saying terrible things about his mother to us? Because everything she has done is small and petty, I don't know how to explain it to them without sounding petty myself.

Part of the problem is that I can't really prove much. I can't prove that she's dragging my name through the mud to our clients, but I am 100% sure of it. I can't prove that she's done much of anything.

Alright, I think you get the gist of it and so will end this now. Hopefully you can see my conundrum. I'm really feeling like I'm in a no-win situation.

There is nothing worse then a co-worker with a side job that involves selling. Pamper Chef, Melaluca, Real Estate. It's all bad. (Although, as a side note, I had a delightful Real Estate Agent co-worker at my last job and she never pressured anyone.) Make this person the boss's wife and you've got a recipe for disaster.

Here are some realities: Dee is not going to quit. Dee is not going to be fired.

As long as you are at this business you will need to deal with her.

To his credit, your boss, recognizes there is a problem and is not intentionally holding it against you. Obviously, he's got a difficult situation going on. Even though you are the only one who has gone to him with Dee problems, his response to you indicates that he knows full well what she is like. It's uncomfortable for him.

In the past you "stayed out of it" hoping that Dee would keep attacking others and leave you alone. This worked for a while. Now you are the target and others are laying low, hoping Dee will just leave them alone.

The time to hope Dee leaves everyone alone has come to an end. This plan will work best if you have some trusted co-workers that you can bring in on it. If not, you can go it alone. Here's what you do:

Every time Dee makes a negative comment about another worker, speak up. "Dee, you know that Ryan did a great job on the Jones account. Why would you say otherwise?" "Dee, that is an inappropriate comment." "Dee, why would you say that? Stephanie is hard worker with good results." "Dee, I didn't choose you as my realtor because I wanted someone who had experience in my neighborhood." Don't cower from her. Don't be mean, just let her know that you are not going to listen to or tolerate her mean behavior.

None of your other coworkers like her either, but they have been too scared to speak up. If you start this others will follow. Dee will go crying to her husband. But, given his earlier response it's doubtful that he'll do anything towards the rest of you. He's undoubtedly tired of the problem as well.

Don't run to any of the partners about her behavior. They see it. The other partners are just as stuck as you are. Just work on retraining her. (Also, I wouldn't worry about the quality of her work. I'd just focus on the meanness.)

If no one will listen to/put up with her mean behavior she'll have to change somehow. She may just sulk, but at least that's quiet. She may realize she can't expect immunity any more because she's a partner's wife.

This plan requires extreme caution. You cannot say, "Dee you are such a jerk!" Or "Dee, stop being rude!" You can only say things that are actual fact. If her complaint about how dumb Ryan is is met with, "Ryan did a good job on the Jones account," how is she going to complain to her husband about you? "But she said that Ryan did a good job!!! Waah!" See, it holds no water. Now, if you said, "Dee, stop being a jerk to Ryan," then she can say, "That big meanie called me a jerk!" So, don't do that.

And, just to be on the safe side, it's always a good idea to freshen up your resume! But, my bet is that as long as you say these things firmly and stick to the facts, you will have nothing to fear. But, also, keep notes. Just in case

A new job

I am just 21 years old. Currently I am pursuing a graduate degree in HR through correspondence college.But at the same time,I am working as an HR Executive with one of the reputed BPO.As I am very much passionate about my career,so I started to work as an HR after completing my graduation only.At present,I have one year experience in HR including recruitment and HR operation.Being a girl,my friends and my parents really feel proud about me that I am on a right track of my career.

I joined my current company in the month of October,2009.The company with whom I am working now,it is already settled in IT.But,they are very new into BPO business.So I joined this BPO by thinking that at the initial stage of career,I will get opportunity to learn as well as grow.But after joining,I came to know that HR policies are not in place.For every single thing,I need to struggle.My HR manager is not with me.He is handling everything from a different City.Even,employees have lot many issues about the policies and facilities like salary(which is a big concern),HR policies etc.But,management says that it will take time to streamline everything.

Now,I started to feel very insecure that I took a very important decision to join this company and the company situation is forcing me to rethink on my decision.Normally,I always believe on myself and my decisions.That's why,while taking this decision,I never discussed with anybody.

I can not leave also because before accepting this offer I rejected other offers by thinking that this company is offering me good designation as well as package.Now I am in a big mess.But,still I feel that this company is a reputed company in IT market so they will try to settle in BPO as well.So let them give a chance and continue my work.In short,I am confused and double minded about my decision.

Can you please advice me that what should I suppose to do in this condition as I am very much concerned about my career?

Take a deep breath.

You've answered your own question, by they way. You'll notice that I put a few lines in bold. This is to draw your attention to them. You said you wanted to learn and grow, which is why you took this job. The company doesn't have policies in place, your manager is at a different location and things are not peachy keen. This is what we call an ideal situation for learning and growing.

There's a reason it's called work, and that's because it is hard. You've landed a hard job and it isn't the dreamy world of a "career" that you wanted. When I was young and stupid I wanted a "job" that would require a suit and heels, because that must be an important job. I had an idea of what "business" was and somehow the suit was an important part of it. I found out rather quickly that this was neither an indication of power nor importance, but of business culture.

You had some idea of what it meant to be in a learning and growing position. I bet it involved a mentor, who would listen to you and guide you and it would be like college except with a paycheck. Instead, you found out that it is thinking on the fly, figuring things out, dealing with crisis after crisis and doing this, mostly on your own. Welcome to the real world.

Your company has troubles. They hired you to help figure those out. You do need a mentor, but you'll have to do the work to get the mentoring. Having an offsite boss can be a difficult thing. Figure out how he prefers to communicate with his offsite people--is it e-mail, phone or occasional face-to-face meetings. See if you can establish regular contact with him.

Find out what his goals and priorities are and figure out how he can meet them. At one point I was telecommuting and my boss was one of those super-de-duper busy VPs so I couldn't really call her to chat. What I did was send her a weekly status report on everything I had done that week and what I planned to do the next week. This gave her the opportunity to stop me from investing huge amounts of time in a project that she was planning to kill, but hadn't gotten around to telling me about yet.

You may have to explain and remind your boss that you need a little bit of guidance. If he's not amenable to providing guidance, well, then you create policies and then present them to him.

You wanted learning and growing and by golly you got it! I understand that you are now second guessing yourself, but it's a little late for that. Plunge forward. Give it at least a year before you begin looking for a new job. You may find that this is the best experience of your life. But, you have to go forward with full steam. If you keep saying to yourself, "I should have asked for advice from my parents/friends/professors before I did this. This was probably the wrong decision" it will show in how you attack your work.

Your management said it will take time. They are right. Policies, procedures and company culture don't appear out of thin air. It takes time. Find out from your boss what your role is in this whole process.

And one more petty little thought: Back in the dark ages, when I was in school, we were taught to put double spaces between sentences. I understand single spaces are acceptable now. Fine. Pick one and stick with it.

Getting Stuck with a Problem

I am an executive director for a small company, and I report directly to the company president. The office hours for my company are 8 am to 5 pm, and every employee has to badge is and no one is required to badge out. All employees, exempt and non-exempt, enter their arrival and departure times into the company time-tracking system.

There is a director (Mr. X, we'll call him) who is a problematic performer. Among other things, he consistently arrives at the office 10-25 minutes late, and frequently much more than that. By consistent, I mean that his on-time percentage is 12% for the year to date - that means that he's arrived on time >10 days since the first working day of 2009. Traffic is not a problem - I live in the same general area as Mr. X, and I can get to work early or on time every single day under normal traffic conditions (it takes about 20 minutes).

Mr. X also frequently leaves early, particularly during the spring months, when he coaches his daughter's Little League team. On the occasions that he's stayed an hour late or worked through lunch, he's left early some other day that week and requested that he be given "comp" time for the extra hour or two that he worked (not recognizing that his late arrivals mean he's robbed the company of 1+ hours of time each week). Basically, whenever he works more than 40 hours a week, he wants additional compensation. This request is uniformly denied, but he can't seem to figure out that he's not entitled to special privileges, so he just keeps asking. I would note that there are many employees (exempt, of course) who routinely work 15 hour days, come into the office on Saturdays and Sundays and work through holidays. They don't get comp time either.

Because he's a director, in addition to a generous vacation allotment, he gets 80 hours a year of "management time" - which is intended to be used to cover portions of the work day when such an employee needs to be away from the office on personal business (taking a family member to the doctor, getting a car repaired, etc). This time is not intended to supplement vacation time. Of course, Mr. X has never applied this time to his late arrivals, and until he was threatened with termination earlier this year, he wouldn't apply it to the 30-60 mins of his frequent early departures. As of the end of June, Mr. X used up 75% of his management time allotment, because he was leaving early three times a week for 6 weeks.

Please note, I've not been tracking Mr. X's arrival time for my own "pleasure". After an incident this summer, when he "misreported" time - that is to say, lied - on his time sheet, I was asked to look at his entire on-time performance and PTO usage and provide a regular report to the President. That's how I happen to know the details of his badge in time and on-time performance - but all the other managers and directors know the guy show up late because there is a daily management call to catch up on operational and project issues that occurred overnight (we have offices in the middle and far east). The call is scheduled at a time that gives everyone who gets to work on time enough time to get a cup of coffee and go through email and open up the previous night's status reports, and is also comfortable for our overseas managers to participate (there are 8 and 14 hour time differences to deal with). Because Mr. X arrives either just as the call starts or is in progress, he has not had the chance to review any of the incoming emails and reports, so he is playing catch up, and because he's trying to read the emails while the call is on-going he's never on the same line, frequently asking everyone to backtrack, slow down or skip and come back. This slows down the progress of what is supposed to be a quick 15 minute meeting, frequently extending it by 10 minutes or more. Everyone else is prepared and is fully able to participate.

There are other issues with Mr. X's performance as well - he cannot make a decision for himself (which is my chief complaint, because he's a time sink - tying up personnel who need to do their own work). He constantly seeks confirmation of his point of view from other managers, and then he tries to create a wall of deniability in case his decision was not the correct one. He badgers mid-level staff for immediate responses to his inquiries but in turn ignores the requests of lower level staff, his peers and (in the case of my requests) his superiors. At one point, a client had started paperwork to terminate a contract because their interactions with Mr. X were such a problem. Work product that has gone to clients is often full of errors, both substantive and technical. Of course, Mr. X sees no deficiencies in his performance and has a greatly inflated view of his importance and the quality of his work product. But, at the end of the day, his work is just good enough to get by on, but only just.

So - why is this guy still here? I've never gotten a good answer on that. As I noted, he reports directly to the company president, who can't stand him - but for some reason refuses to terminate him. However, there is going to be an organizational restructuring in the very near term, and I fully expect that Mr. X will be transferred to my department - his function dovetails into areas I oversee. This will be interesting, since Mr. X has always seen me as a threat, and for some reason, doesn't understand that I am senior to him in the organization - in terms of authority, responsibility and impact. I let this slide, because - as I said, we're a small company and I've got to work with him on a daily basis, and it's not the culture of the company to pull rank.

These are my question:

1. When the transfer occurs, can I and should I do a full performance assessment with him (he would have already gotten an annual review for the prior year's work)?

2. If so, do I have to start from scratch, building up a file on his performance deficiencies only from the time he was transferred to my department, or can I use my prior observations and interactions.

3 . Regarding his abuse of time, since there is no requirement to badge out at the end of the day, can I require Mr. X to do so, in light of his habit of early departure? I should note that he parks away from the employee parking lot and does not use the employee entrance (he's the only one who does this), presumably so no one can see him enter and leave. He also refuses to shut down his computer and sign out of the company's IM program - so no one knows when he's out of the office. He is the only person who does this - when I was doing an investigation of the timesheet incident, I had to pull the server logs to see if I could ascertain departure times by when he logged off of the network.

In the past, when I've had to discuss the Mr. X problems with the company president, he (the president) has jokingly said that he'll make Mr. X report to me - and I've not-so-jokingly said that I'd fire the guy immediately.

What can I do?

Whew! I'm going to get on my soap box first and then answer your questions. It's my blog, so if I choose to do be all soap-boxish, I can.

Knock off the hour monitoring. Really. The 80 hours "management" time sounds awesome except when you realize that it's utterly ridiculous to require exempt employees to track when they take an hour off for a doctor's appointment. You should be managing your exempt employees on performance only. If they can get everything done in 25 hours a week, yippee for them. If they can do it while sitting on their living couch, wearing a bathrobe with Oprah playing in the background, then super-de-duper. Most people, of course, can't. (And if you have an exempt employee who can get it all done in 25 hours per week, dump some more work on that employee!)

You'll note that this guy has problems far beyond he's 20 minutes late to work every day. Duh. Because his problem isn't that he's late to work, his problem is that he's a terrible employee.

The problem with his late arrivals and early departures are that it affects the rest of the team. He's not prepared for the morning call. He can't be reached when he's coaching Little League. I know plenty of people who could coach Little League and have their work be completely unaffected.

And now to your specific problems.

First, I would sit down with the company president and say, "What is keeping you from firing Mr. X?"

If the answer is, "he's awfully annoying, but his work is stellar. He manages our biggest client who just loves him," well then you suck it up and understand that what you've got is a non-conventional worker. You work with Mr. X to come to an understanding of what he needs to soar and support him in that. Perhaps he gets a blackberry so he can check his e-mail in the morning while he's waiting for the school bus to pick up his daughters, which is why he's late every day.

If, more likely, the answer is, "he'll sue us!" Ask for what? Honestly. Discrimination against lazy people? He's has daughters in little league, so I'm guessing he might be over 40, which puts him in a protective class. However, even so, you can still fire someone in a protective class. You just can't fire them because they are in the protective class.

If you are afraid of lawsuits I see two options:

Option 1: Offer Mr. X a reasonable severance package. (3-6 months because he sounds fairly high level.) In exchange he signs a General Release, which means he agrees not to sue the company. You need to hire a labor & employment lawyer to help you with this. YOU CANNOT JUST WRITE UP A PIECE OF PAPER YOURSELF. Sorry, I should have used bold instead of all caps, but what is done is done.

If he doesn't sign, he's terminated anyway, but no cash. Wrongful termination lawsuits aren't usually the jackpot kind and attorneys won't take a case they don't think they can win. If your attorney feels like it's a low risk, it's a low risk.

Option 2: Get the company president to begin a termination procedure now. He sits down with Mr. X and says, "Your performance is not up to par." He then details the problems and presents Mr. X with a plan, no longer than 90 days.

This plan can include things like showing up for work on time and not leaving early, because those behaviors are contributing to problems with performance, not because I think you should be monitoring an exempt employee's hours.

Now, if your boss says he isn't firing Mr. X because "Mr. X has a family support" and "how could we be so cruel?" I'd point out that Mr. X is making a choice to behave in a way that could negatively affect his family and that there are many people out there who have the responsibility to support a family who would love Mr. X's job.

Now, if your boss won't buck up and fire the guy (or put him on the plan so that Mr. X can fix his problems), and the guy lands on your doorstep, then you begin with the performance plan. You can certainly start off with reference to his past behavior. In fact, you must start out that way.

You should sit down and go through all his expectations, what he needs to do to meet those, quantifiable plans to meet them and the clear understanding that he has a short time period to meet those or he'll be out on his ear. (You'll need the company president's support for that, so make sure he's willing to fire if Mr. X fails, because if not you'll have to come up with an alternative consequence.)

Good luck. You'll need it.

Some Advice on Quitting

Thinking of quitting or have an employee who is thinking of quitting? How you handle it can have a big impact on your future. Hop over to US New's On Careers and read about Employees should quit and how bosses should accept the news.

And what do you want me to do about this?

I am an HR manager. I have employees who come to me with complaints about their supervisors and these supervisors are also my confidants as managers on the management team I am on. Do I keep their complaints to myself or share with the manager that I think will fix the issue with no problem?

Employees whine. Managers whine. Evil HR Lady whines incessantly because she has a bad cold and cannot breathe properly. (No, it is not Swine Flu, or any flu. It is a cold, but if you want to feel sorry for me and make me dinner, please do. I really, really really dislike squash and mayonnaise. And don't tell me that the reason I don't like squash is because I've never tried YOUR recipe for squash delight, I won't like it. I will, politely accept it, thank you, and then try to force my family to eat it while declaring, "Squash is good for you!" Then we'll all have spaghetti.)

Anyway, a little digression. You need to figure out what your job is. I'll help. Your job is to help the business.

Think about that for a minute.

Your job is to help the business. You need to do what will help the business.

First, erase from your mind the idea that you are a therapist who is here to "help" people. You help people because it's good for the business. You have an EAP (I hope) to provide help with people's psyches. (Again, why? Because it's good for the business.) When someone comes to you with a complaint about their manager, feel free to say, "And what would you like me to do with that bit of information?"

Sometimes it is just venting. If it's not a real problem, fine, you're done. They've vented and feel better and you can move on to other things.

If it's a real problem, then you need to decide where the problem lies--with the complainer or the complainee. And then you need to figure out how it's best for the business to fix it. If that means going to the manager, go to the manager. If that means working the employee, work with the employee. If that means developing a company wide memo on how picking your nose and examining the finds during meetings is inappropriate, go for it.

You aren't required to keep confidences like a lawyer is. You do, however, want people to trust you so that you can help. That's why I find the "and what do you want me to do about this?" question so helpful. (Said sincerely, not snottily, of course.)

The solutions vary based on the problem. Some solutions are to coach the complainer on how to approach the complainee. Another time, it's best to pull the manager aside and tell him/her what is going on. Sometimes, you do nothing but listen. Sometimes you launch a formal investigation. Things that are illegal cannot be ignored. Things that are annoying can be.

If you truly think the manager will "fix the problem," let the complainer know, and then go ahead and tell. I don't like blindsiding people. (Now, if it's something that can be fixed without telling someone who the complainer is, you can do it that way.)

You need to be absolutely trustworthy. This is why you tell people what you are going to do with their information. You don't need to be everybody's friend. You also need to figure out what you can and cannot fix. Things that you cannot fix, you can leave alone.

Fixes do not always involve other people. Often the best fixes come from coaching the complainer to deal with their own problems.

Evil HR Lady Gets a Little Mean

I got this e-mail this morning:
Could u plz help me to writing my career development goals.

That was all it said. I copied and pasted so I didn't accidentally correct grammar or spelling. (And yes, I'm guaranteed to make grammar mistakes since I'm picking on someone else right now. 'Tis Muphry's Law.)

First of all, the answer is no. Although, if I was, the first thing I would do is say "u" and "plz" are not real words. So, your first goal should be to write out full words. Secondly, I believe you are asking a question, so it should end in a question mark. I do suspect that English is not this person's first language (and heaven knows I know how difficult it is to learn a new language), so I'll give the "to writing" a pass.

The real problem here is that I can't write someone else's career development goals. I can maybe answer a specific question about how to write one, or a few things that should be included in a development plan, but I can't do it for you.

And this is a good thing. Because you need to develop your own plan. You need to really have two development plans: One for your job that deals with your relationship to the company and another for you alone that addresses your long term goals that don't necessarily involve your current employer.

I realize few people actually do that, but think of where you'd be if you did. It's always a huge advantage to know where you want to go. So, stop trying to pass your goal setting off to some random person on the internet and figure it out yourself.

And please, leave the "text speak" for your teenagers. We like proper grammar around here.

Asking For Severance

In January I will have been with the same company for 25 years. It is privately owned and has no HR department. About five years ago I spoke with the owner about where he thought the company was going and he assured me things were fine and to 'trust' him. I know he personally is financially secure and I have no problem with that, but the $600 a year profit sharing isn't going to get me very far as a retirement fund. I was given a very good raise a few years ago and make a good salary now. But, with the company running on a skeleton crew it is stressful. There is another person at the company that is capable of doing my job that I am sure is getting paid way less than I am and does not participate in our health insurance program. I sometimes get the feeling the owner resents paying my salary along with his half of my health insurance. To tell the truth the atmosphere is very stressful.

I know this seems really odd, but I was wondering if you thought approaching the owner about letting me go with some sort of a severance package would be really out of line? I have been looking the want ads, but with the economy and the unemployment so high I really have to question whether someone would hire me (someone with a good paying job) over an unemployed person? I think the company would save money by letting me go and I do appreciate the loyalty but would like to move on.

If you see any hope in this how would you approach the owner?

First let's address the asking for severance portion. Yes, I've seen this done. I've seen people ask for severance and be given it and I've seen people told no. It is usually successful when your manager really wants you to be gone. Then you're just offering to make it simple for him to get rid of you.

I'm not sure this is the case with you. I don't think you're a bad employee, just that you are overpaid. Let's assume, for a moment, that you are overpaid. One of your big concerns is that the miniscule profit sharing program isn't helping your retirement. Well, I've got bad news for you: If you are already over paid any new job you find isn't going to come with fabulous profit sharing. You'll end up with LESS money then before and still won't have anything for retirement.

Even though you've worked here for 25 years, you can't expect them to take care of your retirement. You need to change your lifestyle to save money, regardless of profit sharing dollars.

I also suspect you're not ready to hit the job market quite yet. Why? You mention "looking through the want ads." I'm pretty sure that's an indication that you don't realize how the job market has changed in the 25 years since you last job hunted. Want ads are generally a waste of time. Online job boards are better, but still not super. (Although, for full disclosure, I will say that I got my last job through Monster.com, so it does work, but it is one of many methods.) If you want a new job, you need to network.

This may be difficult because you've been in the same company for so long. It's time to start contacting former co-workers, current friends and family and let them know you are looking for a change. You need to figure out what companies you want to work for and then figure out how to get hired. Want ads are not the way to go.

The economy is terrible, so don't count on getting even a huge chunk of severance and then walking into a new job the next week. Even a large severance payout may not be enough to see you through to a new job, which may well pay less than your current one.

I realize I'm being as comforting as a bunch of frozen porcupines, but this is reality.

Unless the writing on the wall is that your boss wants you to leave, and that he's actively documenting reasons to fire you, I think you'd be foolish to ask for severance at this point. He may take you up on it, give you 6 weeks pay and send you out the door, and then what will you do?

If he has a history of giving out large severance payments, that's a different story, but I doubt he does. Most small business don't, and I doubt he's ever addressed something like this before.

Severance sounds fabulous. It's money for sitting on your behind. Yeah! Except that money eventually runs out. Plus, you'd have to pay for COBRA or get other health insurance, which will run you a lot more than what you're paying now.

Find a new job, then quit. Unless you're going to be fired. Then ask for severance. Just be direct. "Bob, I know you are unhappy with my performance. I'm willing to leave in exchange for 6 months severance. I'll sign a general release as well. Let me know what you think." And then you negotiate from there. If he wasn't planning to fire you, though, this tells him flat out that you're unhappy and may make your life worse.

Keep in mind that you're an at will employee and he's not required to give you any severance.

Too Much Information?

Is it bad to write about my difficulties finding a job in my blog,if I'm going to include the URL in Resume?

This is an excellent question. I think that if you are specifically going to include a blog URL on your resume you need to consider that blog part of your resume.

For the record, my blog is on my resume at the moment, but I'm not actively looking for a new job. I may change my mind when I am looking for a new job. Of course, any recruiter would be remiss if they didn't google my name, and if you do so, I'm usually in the top 3 hits for "Suzanne Lucas." (There is a Suzanne Lucas who does Rolfing, which sounds like Ralphing, which is a term we used to use for an unpleasant illness related event. I'm not her.)

So, included on the resume or not, my blog is part of my resume. Most likely, so is yours. I know most people think they can be anonymous on the internet. But you must assume that you are not. You must be willing to stand behind everything you write--even if it's in a chat room, Facebook, or a product review at Amazon. You represent YOU.

So, do you write about your troubles job hunting? In my never to be humble opinion (when interviewers ask me what my flaw is, I can say "pride" and point to this blog as evidence), it all depends on how you do it. If you talk about general struggles related to a bad economy, fine. If you start talking about stupid &*$&! who interviewed you and didn't realize you were the best &*$(!$#(( person for the job, then you're in big trouble.

There is a middle ground, of course. Finding it is difficult. Keep in mind that, while unlikely, any potential employer may be reading your blog. If you write, "I have a big interview with AcmeCorp tomorrow," your potential manager's ears are going to perk right up.

Before you write, think "Would I say this in a job interview?" If the answer is no, then leave it off the blog. If the answer is yes, go ahead. One other thing to keep in mind is that if you detail your troubles and you write about each one of your 15 job interviews with no offers you might lower your chances of success. People can't help but think, "Gee, 15 other companies didn't hire him. Must be something wrong."

So, How's That Working For You?

After reading everyone's horror stories about crazy punishments for getting sick, I'm really interested in hearing from the people who create and/or enforce these rules. I know you must be out there.

Does it really decrease absenteeism? Does your turnover increase? What is the reasoning behind it? Was it HR's idea, or the CEOs or Finance? Have you calculated the costs associated with this policy?

I'm really interested. Honest. I'm pretty sure the people who comment aren't all just making up stories, so there must be HR out there who enforces these things. Tell me how it's going.

Exempt Day Swapping

What impact does pay periods have on exempt employees who wish to make up time? If an employee takes a couple of hours off but desires to make up the time, why does it have to done in the same pay period?

To put us in context, the majority of the staff are exempt, we currently get paid on the 5th and 20th of each month, have vacation and sick buckets and work 9/80 with every other Friday off.

I ask this because a couple of employees worked on what would have been 'Off Friday on 10/9'. One of the employees had a scheduled sick day [medical apt] for the following Friday which would have been 'On Friday on 10/16'.

He asked could he cover his medical apt with his 'Off Friday time worked' rather count it against his sick time. I allowed it. However the owner raised a fuss because the medical apt time off was not in the same pay period as the time worked, but she allowed 'this time'.

Pay periods have no impact on when exempt people take time off, or switch schedules, or what have you. Legally. An exempt person gets paid the same every paycheck and that is that.

Now, a non-exempt person is a different story, because if they work more than 40 hours in a given week, they have to receive overtime pay, even if the reason they worked was to make up for time they took off in a previous week.

But, this is an exempt question. What you did is perfectly reasonable. Your employee knew he was going to be gone on a specific day, so he asked to swap his days off, so as to not have to use PTO. Super! No problem. It's no problem because it doesn't matter, in terms of pay, when an exempt employee works or doesn't work.

The owner "allowed" this, but said not to do it again. I'm tempted to ask her what purpose this would serve. I'll tell you. It would serve to further alienate employees! Yeah! Just what you want.

However, the owner certainly is within her rights to not allow this. Companies can set the rules for time off. And even though you have to pay exempt employees, you can dictate the rules and discipline if they break them. So, yes, she could say, "No, sorry. You can't swap days." Is this dumb? Yes. But, sometimes owners/managers think that they are doing favors for their employees by giving them jobs. They feel like they are handing out Halloween candy and you better darn well say thank you, even if they hand out those nasty peanut-butter things in the orange and black wrappers. And if you don't they yell at you for your lack of manners. They forget that the reason you are working for them is that it benefits the owner/manager/company. (If it doesn't, you should be fired.)

So, the pay periods thing is her rule. Fine. You live with it. But it's not (as far as I know, not being a lawyer or anything like that) illegal to do so.

A Job You Can't Take

Should I accept an interview for a position in a location to which I would never (could never) move? Or should I state it in the cover letter or phone interview and risk being passed over by someone willing to relocate? The position is primarily project management with few, if any, direct reports (other than coordinating tasks with other groups). My intention is to request to telecommute from several states away (as the company website cites flex-time and telecommuting as benefits).

I realize that the career benefits sections of corporate websites typically are lip service, but should I try anyway? Please note that I work in an incestuous industry and would worry about being branded later in my career as one who “wasted the company’s time and money” with potentially unethical intentions.

Yeah, some things are lip service. Some companies proclaim loudly about all the benefits you'll get, only they don't specify that the "you" means everyone who makes $300,000 or more.

But, some companies are honest. When you are applying, it's best to assume they are being honest. When you are evaluating an offer, it's best to verify and get everything in writing.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with applying for a job that you would only accept if you could telecommute. But, this is something that you should mention in your cover letter, or at the very latest at the phone screen.

Frequently, I tell people to wait until the negotiation phase to ask for special things. That works best for things like, "I've already scheduled a vacation next month" and "I will need to leave work by 4:00 on Thursdays, but can work normally every other day" not, "I want to live across the country."

This is a situation where even if the company, as a whole, supports telecommuting, not all bosses do. The hiring manager may be someone who just can't handle a telecommuter. Or the job description doesn't accurately portray the job (not unusual!) and you don't realize that it would be critical to be on site.

Since there are far more qualified candidates then there are jobs, I would bet that this would get you eliminated from consideration. But this, actually, is okay. Because you don't want the job if you have to relocate.

I think telecommuting is fantastic. I've done it. I've had awesome, family friendly bosses in a family friendly company. But, in my experience, it works best when there is some regular face time as well. I'd be very hesitant to consider an external hire for 100% telecommuting. I think getting to know people is much easier in a face-to-face situation, and would like any new employee to be able to get to know their co-workers before going 100% off site.

But, others may disagree. Apply, but be honest. I can tell you right now that if you wait until they fly you out there to interview before you say, "I won't relocate," you are going to be on the bad list.

And keep in mind, if you are super fabulous (and you are!) they just may go for it.

MD activity at work

Is an employer allowed to hand you a thermometer and tell you to take your temperature at work? Can they send you home if you have a temperature?

And now it's time for the big disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I do not pretend to be a lawyer. I am not an expert on law. I don't pretend to be one. This is not legal advice.

I see this as one of those you can't win situation. If you allow people who are sick to work then their co-workers will be writing me saying, "Can't the company require sick people to stay at home? I don't want to get infected?"

There are some things to think about. 1. If they send home an exempt employee they must pay her anyway. 2. Hourly employees (not under contract, this does not apply to unions) are only paid for the hours they work. Companies are not required to provide a certain number of hours per week. (Think back to your days working fast food. If it was a slow night, they sent you home.)

I honestly don't know if it's legal to require someone to have their temperature taken in the normal course of a work day. You can require drug tests and physicals as conditions of employment. (And if I recall, my last work physical involved a temperature check, although why I can't imagine. Having a fever at THAT MOMENT hardly means you always have one.)

I think the real question is should this be a policy? Well, honestly, I want sick people to stay home. I want people to be adults and be able to call up their own bosses and say, "I'm sick so I'm staying home," and have that be the truth and I want the boss to believe the person and I would really like it if there were an adequate number of sick days.

I think it's a weird thing to do, but I can totally see the business reason: Sick people infect other people, which makes more people sick, which hurts the business. Unfortunately, with most diseases you start being contagious before symptoms show, so you can't stop that. However, it makes sense to ban sick people from the office.

Like I said, I'd rather see this occur by having everyone take their own temperatures at home. I hate the requirement to go see a doctor because for most illnesses the doctor is either going to say, "you're sick. Drink fluids. Rest. You'll get better on your own" or he'll prescribe an unnecessary antibiotic. I understand why though, because all HR people can tell you about lying liars who we've dealt with.

The problem comes in when you have an hourly workforce who don't get paid if they don't work. People work because they need the money. No one wants to work when sick. We do it out of obligation (I must get this project done) and need (I must pay the mortgage). If the company is offering paid sick days, doesn't require you to come in for the temperature taking (that is, they believe you if you call in sick), and doesn't punish you for taking time off (lower rating, bonus, etc), then sure. I think it's a bit creepy and weird, but okay.

If it's a job that involves food handling or dealing with already sick people, then I think it's even more important to keep sick people home. But like I said, I think it's creepy. Maybe a lawyer can chime in if it's legal to take the actual temperature.

The Hazards of Being Dependable

I am a production manager at a trade org/not for profit.

I love my boss, who is a great guy, but not the best manager. As long as things get done, he’s satisfied, but procedures and work flows have suffered.

About 80% of all projects cross my desk. I can get anything done and I pride myself on being very capable. The problem is no one sees me as a manager or leader, just another worker bee.

My boss has often praised me and told me he’d fight for me. But it’s been 2 years since my last raise and I’m getting very unhappy about my role and my compensation.

The raise (or the lack thereof) is a red herring. Yes, it's a problem (and here is where lots of people jump in to say, I don't even have a job, let alone a raise!), but it's not THE problem.

There may be many problems, so I'll suggest a few.

PROBLEM A: You aren't good management material. Ouch, I know. But consider the possibility. Some people are fabulous individual contributors, but lousy managers. Your boss may see that you can and do get anything done that he asks of you, but also sees that you lack the skills to manage others.

Many people are surprised that being good at a job doesn't automatically make you good at being the boss. They are entirely different skill sets. If you look at senior leadership outside hires, they sometimes come from different industries altogether. This is because the skills needed to manage aren't those needed to make the product.

SOLUTION A: Sit down with your boss and express your desire to move into a management role. Explain that you feel you may be lacking a few skills and want to develop those. Ask for advice, mentoring, training, etc. Just because you don't have good management skills now, doesn't mean you can't gain them.

PROBLEM B: There's nowhere to go from here. You didn't say your non-profit was small, but in my mind I always think small when I hear non-profit. (And yes, I know there are some large non-profits, but humor me.) You may be ready to move into a new role, but there isn't one for you. Promoting you would require a huge reorganization that wouldn't benefit the organization--just you.

SOLUTION B: Once upon a time I worked for a Credit Union that had a grand total of 142 employees. There was no one between me and the head of HR. If she left, they would have had to hire from the outside because I was in no way ready for such leadership. But, there was no place to promote me either. So, I looked for another job and found one and left.

I needed more experience before I could fill the position "above" me. You may as well. Leaving is one option. Another option is moving sideways. Gain experience in a different group, preferably one that has room for growth.

PROBLEM C: You are too good at your job. This, unfortunately, happens. Managers can't figure out how they could possibly function without their star employees and hold them back. They aren't trying to undermine their careers; they are trying to make their own careers successful.

SOLUTION C: Leave. Or find another department with a position available and post for that. Please note that if this is the problem your manager may still have the ability to prevent your promotion.

If you don't want to leave (or can't find a better job), the harder thing to do is work with your manager on this. This can have fantastic results, by the way. You need to be clear that you are looking for management opportunities, but you don't want to leave him in the lurch. Present a plan for how you will fill the position you want and how you will train your replacement.

This can be scary, though, because we want our managers to think, "I could never get along without Sally." (Unless of course, your name is Jane and Sally is a huge brown-noser.) The fear is that if you demonstrate that he could get along without you, you might find yourself out of a job. This probably won't happen, though.

Again, when you start this conversation you need to emphasize that you want to stay with the company, you just want to be in Role X, and you need his help to get there, and you will help him replace you. This is a HUGE benefit to the company. Make sure you show it that way.

PROBLEM D: Your manager is a jerk who will never pay you more money, will never allow you to get promoted and will continue to pile work on you no matter what.

SOLUTION D: Suck it up or leave. Wait it out until he leaves and maybe you'll get his job, but probably not because if you've been there 10 years without a promotion, his management will assume there's a problem with you.

Co-worker evaluations

I work for a large company. Every year we are asked to fill out evaluation forms, supposedly anonymously, about our coworkers. Our Manager picks many of the people who fill out the forms about us; although most of the Managers let the staff pick their own people to fill in their forms. We are cautioned not to pick friends, but to pick people who will be honestly critical. The end of the form has areas for narrative writing about areas of strength and weaknesses. Since we basically know which people are filling out the forms on us, we usually can figure out exactly who wrote what about us.

I find this to cause a great amount of stress, divisiveness and unhappiness amongst the coworkers. Personally, I never write negative things on these forms for my coworkers even if I truly have do have criticism for them or can barely stand to be in the same room with them. This is because reviews can affect their raises etc. and because I want to keep the peace. I think that even the most constructive criticism, in this format, can be seen as betrayal.

Besides, is it my job to deliver criticism? Shouldn’t my Manager be in touch enough with the team to know the problems or weaknesses and strengths of the team members and deal with it? Honestly, I feel like little good ever comes of these things. I am particularly curious about what will show up on mine this year as there are some "certifiable" people who have been asked to do mine as well as a few people who are extremely critical but I've had almost no contact with the entire year due to the nature of our work.

Can you explain why companies do this?


You know, after I decided to tackle this question, I went upstairs and found my husband filling out just such a form for a co-worker. It's not uncommon. 360 degree feedback can be an excellent thing. Frequently bosses don't know everything and co-workers and clients can offer real insight.

However, I have yet to find the person who loves to receive criticism and having co-workers delivering it directly causes the stress and anxiety you talk about.

But wait, my astute readers note, it's all anonymous because they don't put the names of the actual person on the notes! Yeah, just like your third grade teacher couldn't identify which kid wrote the dirty word on the chalkboard, just by looking at handwriting. You don't have to be psychic to figure out which of the 4 people selected made the comment.

Your company means well (honest!). They are trying to get you accurate feedback so that you can improve. They recognize that managers don't know everything (Positive and negative) that their employees do. This is all good.

However, I think that as a general employee review process, that directly impacts raises, bonuses, etc., that the feedback should be collected and given to the manager. The manager then writes the review and uses that information to help him do so, not as a substitute for doing it himself.

You've noted that you're not being honest in your reviews because of the political fall out. Others aren't either. Some, like you, are nice. Others see it as an opportunity to undermine their competitors. (And yes, many people treat co-workers as competitors.) By filling out the information and giving it to the manager, the manager has more information (good), more honest information (because it's not going directly to the person, although the underminers are still likely to be jerks, but the boss should know and can verify if things seem off), and can write a better review.

As for you, keep being nice, but feel free to mention real problems if you can also do so with a suggested solution. If you don't feel comfortable saying something on the form, tell the person's boss directly about the problem. It's his job to deal with it.

Random Travel Post

We spent 3 days in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. You didn't even know it was a Grand Duchy, did you? Well, you do now. There were castles, of course, and cool tunnels under Luxembourg City, but this post is about sinful vending machines.

This is a picture of one of the vending machines in our hotel. See if you can spot the "interesting items" it offers. Oh, and in case you were worried about corrupting minors, there was a sign on the top that said you had to be 16 to purchase things other than the candy.

If you get all three bad items correctly, then you win a prize! Of course, the prize is the knowledge that you purposely seek out wickedness. Sinner.

 

Did you spot them? I'll help. We have, right next to the "kinder" treats (really), a dirty magazine, c0ndoms, and cigarettes! Awesome, and what a great cover story. "Honey, I meant to get the M&Ms, but I hit the wrong number and got these cigarettes instead! Might as well smoke 'em."

So, what if one of these isn't the vice of your choice? (The M&Ms, I mean. Not everyone likes chocolate, but cigarettes--those meet everyone's desires.) Never fear, next to vending machine number 1 was the beer vending machine!

 

If you never have good luck with vending machines, you can still have convenient shopping. In Northern Luxembourg, we ran into a store that definitely would be helpful around Christmas time. It specialized in two types of products:

 

That's right! Alcohol and toys. Hard liquor and puzzles. It had three or four big window displays and everyone one of them showcased both children's items and alcohol. Some of the alcohol was in delightful animal shaped bottles, in case you were torn between indulging your alcoholism and buying your child a present. Go ahead and buy the scotch in the glass duck and then when you've finished, the duck can be a present for Junior.

Feedback, Feedback, Feedback

I work for a small non-profit organization and we have no HR. Because I have some seniority, I've been assigned as a supervisor to one of our part-time workers, who also happens to be a friend of mine from high school. She is in communications and often makes mistakes on print and online publications. Even before I was her supervisor, I'd sat down with her and told her she needed to be more careful. That did not prove effective, as a few days later, she made another mistake and I had to e-mail her to remind her about the review process we established so we can avoid publication errors. Others in the communications team have also mentioned her making mistakes.

Since I became her supervisor, I removed her from online publishing, but now she is doing grant proposals and documents for the government, and is still making mistakes! I am usually the first one called into the boss' office, because she cuts and pastes from drafts of my work(cut-and-paste is a common practice here), and doesn't bother to check--or ask me--if the document is the final version, and therefore had been reviewed for errors.

She is also absent-minded when it comes to other things. For example, I requested that she make copies of her timesheet so I have records of her projects in case the boss asks me. She has so far done this only once. Also, another co-worker has complained that when she asks her to research something, she would agree, and then not do it.

I have no idea how to tell her that she really needs to be more focused and detail-oriented, especially since (a) I had done so in the past and it hadn't worked, (b) she has a tendency to say "Okay," and then no to do what we asked her to do, and (c) apparently she's upset that I was assigned as her supervisor. Do you have any advice for me?

First, I hope that you were not made a supervisor strictly because you have seniority. That's about the worst reason to promote someone. (Although, admittedly, it's a very popular reason for promotion. Longevity does not=good supervisor material.) Because you are not sticking your head in the sand with this employee, it seems like you earned this role by more than not quitting.

Your first issue is that she is an old friend who is ticked off that you are her boss. Her failures could just be passive aggressive behavior--and may even be subconscious. This is a frustrating situation. Now, since she made mistakes before you became her supervisor, my guess is that there are some competence issues along with negative feelings.

It's hard to have a supervisor who used to be a peer. It's hard to be a supervisor to someone who used to be a peer.

I'm going to solve part of your problem right now. This is super-de-duper easy. Instead of trying to get your employee to ask if the document she is cutting and pasting from is a final version, you simply save documents as proposal42_draft.doc when it is a draft and then change it to proposal42_final.doc when it's final. Easy-peasy.

Now, as for the other mistakes, what we need here is a shorter leash. She's been told that she needs to proofread, or whatever, and she's not doing it. Or, she's incapable of noticing the mistakes. If it's the former, then she has to run everything by you before she turns it in. This is a huge pain for you, but hopefully, will be a bigger pain for her and she'll start paying attention. This also blocks her access to the big-wigs and can be very frustrating. But, until she can produce error free work, absolutely necessary.

If she's incapable of noticing the mistakes then you've got a person who is in the wrong position. So, she either gets nudged towards the door or the position evolves to fit her strengths. There's nothing wrong with the latter, by the way. I'm a writer, not an editor. I don't have an editor over here (except for my commentors who can spot a misspelling or missed word a mile away), but I do at US News and she catches some things and occasionally changes my grammar to something clearer. She's very good at it. (She's a very good writer as well.)

If this person just needs a quick grammar clean up, then this might be a solution. If this person's errors, however, are of the factual kind, this may be manage out situation. You have to decide if the problem is fixable. Include her in your decision making process.

Explain that these errors have got to stop and you are willing to help her with that. What support does she think she needs? Are the deadlines too tight? Does she not know how to do research? (The first page of Google hits does not equal "research.") If it's just sloppiness, then the short leash should help.

She may need a mentor who can help her through. Or, this may be too much effort for a part time person. (Yes, I can be heartless.)

But, work with her, not against her. Be clear in expectations. Follow up every time. And good luck.

Just a little brag

No real post here. Just writing to say, I'm going to Paris this weekend. Neener-neener.

And, no, I won't eat escargot. I don't care that it is delicious. Blech.

HR not MD

I've put my thoughts on why HR isn't responsible to guess what medical problems you have over at US News. Check it out and leave your comments.