I understand your point, but I also think that it would be worthwhile to have an "on the record" conversation in case there is any need for it to obtain unemployment insurance coverage. All I would do in this meeting is state my understanding of the policy, allow the boss and/or HR person to respond, say thank you, and leave. I would then send them a polite email thanking them for meeting and restating what was discussed. I'd also keep a copy of this and any other relevant emails, just in case. However, if the OP has another position lined up and is certain that UI coverage won't be necessary, it would be better to just leave quietly.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Work Problem
- Thread starter puma1552
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I understand your point, but I also think that it would be worthwhile to have an "on the record" conversation in case there is any need for it to obtain unemployment insurance coverage. All I would do in this meeting is state my understanding of the policy, allow the boss and/or HR person to respond, say thank you, and leave. I would then send them a polite email thanking them for meeting and restating what was discussed. I'd also keep a copy of this and any other relevant emails, just in case. However, if the OP has another position lined up and is certain that UI coverage won't be necessary, it would be better to just leave quietly.
First thing is to recognize that you are wrong.
The policy is that you ask first. Nothing should need to be clarified about the fact that if you ask, the answer might be "no", and that you will have to abide by the answer.
You asked. The answer was "no". You should have left it at that.
You might have also made a mental note that your boss is an ******. But you already knew that.
There was no need to go on and on about it.
OF COURSE your boss was wrong when he said "that's what vacations are for". No, vacations are not for completing your work at home when the weather is bad! Depending on how big a jerk your boss really is, perhaps this would be something to bring up directly with him at a later date, when he is in a better mood. It seems from the above that SOME employees HAVE been taking advantage of the policy (or at least that is your boss's perception) and obviously at the time was something on his mind. It was not a good time to challenge him on it!
As well, it should be fairly obvious that the timing LOOKS suspicious, and that it is just plain prudent to avoid taking a sick or weather day right before or after a holiday. I think you boss would be right in diminishing his opinion of you just on the basis of your lack of common sense. While the case for staying home may well have been legitimate, MOST people would avoid asking to work that day at home. It was a foolhardy decision. Might you then be expected to make similarly poor decisions in the course of your work? It might be thought you'd make some decision on behalf of the company (say, dealing with a customer or vendor) that might be RIGHT yet LOOK BAD. Companies tend to try to avoid getting into such situations. Companies are generally more interested in getting on with their business with a minimum of snags, rather than BEING RIGHT.
If you have not yet watched "The Butler" (on Netflix) I'd recommend it. There is a relevant sub-theme in the movie. You'll have to watch the whole thing to get it.
The policy is that you ask first. Nothing should need to be clarified about the fact that if you ask, the answer might be "no", and that you will have to abide by the answer.
You asked. The answer was "no". You should have left it at that.
You might have also made a mental note that your boss is an ******. But you already knew that.
There was no need to go on and on about it.
OF COURSE your boss was wrong when he said "that's what vacations are for". No, vacations are not for completing your work at home when the weather is bad! Depending on how big a jerk your boss really is, perhaps this would be something to bring up directly with him at a later date, when he is in a better mood. It seems from the above that SOME employees HAVE been taking advantage of the policy (or at least that is your boss's perception) and obviously at the time was something on his mind. It was not a good time to challenge him on it!
As well, it should be fairly obvious that the timing LOOKS suspicious, and that it is just plain prudent to avoid taking a sick or weather day right before or after a holiday. I think you boss would be right in diminishing his opinion of you just on the basis of your lack of common sense. While the case for staying home may well have been legitimate, MOST people would avoid asking to work that day at home. It was a foolhardy decision. Might you then be expected to make similarly poor decisions in the course of your work? It might be thought you'd make some decision on behalf of the company (say, dealing with a customer or vendor) that might be RIGHT yet LOOK BAD. Companies tend to try to avoid getting into such situations. Companies are generally more interested in getting on with their business with a minimum of snags, rather than BEING RIGHT.
If you have not yet watched "The Butler" (on Netflix) I'd recommend it. There is a relevant sub-theme in the movie. You'll have to watch the whole thing to get it.
Last edited:
^^^While you bring up some good points, they'd likely be better applicable if I was a new employee, and not one who has proven myself to be a good employee who doesn't abuse policies and has put out solid work for the last five years.
As far as the part with my boss, whatever, that's pretty much par for the course and I long ago accepted that (along with several others), hence the "functionally tolerant" relationship we seem to have. I just take issue with the coworker accusing me of doing something I genuinely never have done, completely without basis. Not sure when I fell so out of favor with her, but nobody else in the office seems to have any issues with me or my work, including the #2 guy in the office (who would also not be considered my boss but is definitely #2 in the office). Never in five years has there been any question or concern of either ethics or quality of work, so this accusation is so unbelievably out of left field that I've really been taken aback.
All I can figure is my coworker takes my functionally tolerant relationship with my boss personally for some reason, which if true is her own problem and I am not going to expend any effort trying to figure out why, let alone change it. Lost cause as far as I'm concerned - I'll just exit stage left and that'll be that
As far as the part with my boss, whatever, that's pretty much par for the course and I long ago accepted that (along with several others), hence the "functionally tolerant" relationship we seem to have. I just take issue with the coworker accusing me of doing something I genuinely never have done, completely without basis. Not sure when I fell so out of favor with her, but nobody else in the office seems to have any issues with me or my work, including the #2 guy in the office (who would also not be considered my boss but is definitely #2 in the office). Never in five years has there been any question or concern of either ethics or quality of work, so this accusation is so unbelievably out of left field that I've really been taken aback.
All I can figure is my coworker takes my functionally tolerant relationship with my boss personally for some reason, which if true is her own problem and I am not going to expend any effort trying to figure out why, let alone change it. Lost cause as far as I'm concerned - I'll just exit stage left and that'll be that
Last edited:
So, you are a special snowflake?
Maybe you are. And maybe snowflakes that have been around for a while should be treated differently.
Thing is, it's for that guy with the heat gun to decide.
I note that your boss did cite concern over copycat behavior. That seems to have gone in one ear and out the other. If he had let you work at home that day, then he has a difficult time explaining it to the other employees, especially the new ones, who will likely then develop a cynical and negative attitude right from the start.
I do think that if companies adopt liberal policies, they have to really take them to heart. Statistically, somebody is going to take advantage of them. But apply it across the board, to new employees and old. If you just let it run it's course, the old employees will take care of shaming the new ones that take advantage of it. And then when somebody does do something that looks borderline, most people will know that you are a hard worker and get the job done. And maybe with a bit of a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" that even if they think it's a bit shady, it's a small transgression that should be tolerated.
You seem to have an adversarial relationship with your superiors. At your next job, I suggest you try to be conspiratorial instead. Might have gotten you some kind of bonus, perk, or maybe just a "thanks for setting a good example" if you'd had a different attitude.
That makes sense. If I wanted to get this on record I would do it exactly the way you and @Scepticalscribe laid out. I'm just not sure if the OP should bother. I can't imagine that a UI claim would get denied in most states over something like this, and given the fact that he's an engineer with 5+ years of experience in a good job market, he probably won't need it anyway.
[doublepost=1482791233][/doublepost]
You know, I didn't really see anything in the excerpt from her email that you posted that looked like an "accusation" to me. If anything, I would have seen it as her trying to elaborate on your boss' lousy attempt to explain his reasoning for denying your request.
I mean, she didn't say "you're trying to start your vacation early". She said that's how it appeared. She left him off the email most likely so that you wouldn't feel like they were ganging up on you.
Was it her place to do that? No, but it's his ridiculous position that vacation days be taken when you telecommute and you're giving him a pass on that. Yet, you have an issue with her for simply agreeing with him.
If anything, you should be upset with your boss, but if I were you, I'd be upset with neither. Your HR people aren't going to do anything so you're basically playing in his sandbox with his absurd rules. It is what it is. Just keep a good attitude and work on that exit strategy.
Last edited:
BeeGood said:
Same thing as far as I'm concerned
I certainly wouldn't tell someone it appears they are trying to do X and expect them to interpret that as anything other than an accusation of trying to do X...but that's just me.Either way, I spent the afternoon setting up my LinkedIn, so one step closer.
In management-speak, "consider the visuals".
Appearance DOES matter. And it DOES appear the way she said, doesn't it? To others? Do you disagree? Why wouldn't it occur to your co-workers that you are taking advantage, even though you are not? Put yourself in their shoes.
This is not so much a matter of you are cheating the company or not. It is a matter of setting an example. It is better to avoid the appearance that you are taking advantage. Then there is no issue for the other workers to ponder in the first place.
You seem to keep missing the point that I keep making that I've been there five years and have never taken advantage or abused any policies, and my coworker should certainly know that at this point, 5 years into a professional working life together and ten years into a personal/school relationship.
If I'd been there six months, sure. After five years? I should have enough work place capital to get the benefit of the doubt - you'd think a five year record of reliability would count for something. It's ridiculous that it doesn't.
But you and I won't agree, and that's fine.
The other thing I should say is that when we are out of office or working from home, we are not required to notify everyone in the office - just the people on our project, so in this case I would've notified a mere two people - my coworker this post is about, and one other person who isn't the type to care if someone works from home who has been there longer than both of us. So there isn't even anyone to set an example for.
Same thing as far as I'm concerned
It's definitely different. Perception and reality are often very different. By saying something "appears" to be a certain way, she's not saying that it "is" a certain way. She's simply saying that's this is what it looked like to her...
...unless she's God. It doesn't sound like your project manager is God. And thank God for that.
Speaking of differences in perception, what exactly was your stated reason for requesting time off? You said "inclement weather" in your post, but in her email she only mentions "a bad commute"...two very different things.
Is it possible she and your boss are thinking, "it's going to rain and this guy just doesn't feel like sitting in traffic" versus what you saw as probable unsafe road conditions?
Freezing rain/sleet with a few inches of snow on top, which was forecasted to start at 6:00 AM and stop at 5:00 PM according to weather.com.
You didn't ask for this advice, but I'm going to give it anyway.
I've worked in engineering for over 22 years. That focus on 100% billability isn't going away. Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that's how consulting professions work.
I got about 4 paragraphs in and said screw it id find a different job. Maybe you should, when the weather is bad at my work I fire off a WFH subject line with a one liner body and that's it.
I wanted to red-flag this one: Bullsh*t. If a manager "has trouble" explaining that not everyone is equal, and that some proven workers can do things that less proven workers maybe can't, he or she has no business managing. Being a manager is a working position, not a privilege or a sinecure, and has certain job duties. This sort of thing is one of them.
Granted, way too many managers don't understand that, but that's their problem, not the employees being managed, and if they can't figure that out, they'll also never figure out why they can't keep good people around.
"If I let you do X, I have to let everyone else do X" is NEVER a valid reason for denying anything. Period.
To the OP: You've answered your own question. Let it all drop, find another job, and leave. If there's an exit interview you can maybe lay out a few of the issues if it makes you feel better, but keep it short, factual, and don't expect anyone to actually notice or do anything about it.
A few further thoughts come to mind.
The first is the OP's aggrieved tone - this will undoubtedly spill over into the work environment, it will be difficult for it not to do so.
However, it might not be a bad idea to remain fairly reserved on the matter, as, when things turn sour - the support of work colleagues for the OP may evaporate.
Secondly, while @kschendel has made the valid point that for a manager to attempt to argue the 'floodgates' argument, namely, "if I let you do X, I'll have to let everyone do it" is, indeed, utter poppycock, but I do not believe that this is what is at stake here.
I think - or suspect - that management may be in the process of preparing to freeze the OP out, - all those years of employment may well have made him expensive to retain, or, they want a different ambience, or flavour - and this topic is simply a convenient justification on which to pick a fight.
For the OP, I have two pieces of advice: The first is to seek clarification - in writing - as to the company's policy on working from home in inclement weather. That means polite emails - a proper and formal paper trail - that stick to the point and do not - in either aggrieved tone - or content - stray from that and introduce anything extraneous.
Secondly, it seems to me that it is time to cast around for a new position, elsewhere.
The first is the OP's aggrieved tone - this will undoubtedly spill over into the work environment, it will be difficult for it not to do so.
However, it might not be a bad idea to remain fairly reserved on the matter, as, when things turn sour - the support of work colleagues for the OP may evaporate.
Secondly, while @kschendel has made the valid point that for a manager to attempt to argue the 'floodgates' argument, namely, "if I let you do X, I'll have to let everyone do it" is, indeed, utter poppycock, but I do not believe that this is what is at stake here.
I think - or suspect - that management may be in the process of preparing to freeze the OP out, - all those years of employment may well have made him expensive to retain, or, they want a different ambience, or flavour - and this topic is simply a convenient justification on which to pick a fight.
For the OP, I have two pieces of advice: The first is to seek clarification - in writing - as to the company's policy on working from home in inclement weather. That means polite emails - a proper and formal paper trail - that stick to the point and do not - in either aggrieved tone - or content - stray from that and introduce anything extraneous.
Secondly, it seems to me that it is time to cast around for a new position, elsewhere.
Last edited:
I only read half of your post. But in your situation I put my head down and quietly start exploring other opportunities in other firms. You are in a no win situation that is likely to get worst.
One other point worth making in every job i have worked, the day before i leave for vacation has been a crazy day with me working many extra hours to clear things up. Perhaps this played against you in the way things were perceived.
One other point worth making in every job i have worked, the day before i leave for vacation has been a crazy day with me working many extra hours to clear things up. Perhaps this played against you in the way things were perceived.
Interesting problem OP and one I've had similar experience with minus the person dating the actual boss. I've had colleagues stuck their noses in on matters though.
I would do one of two things or maybe both;
1. Reply to this troublemakers email.
Dear (insert name)
Thank you so much for your email previously. However in future I would appreciate it if you kept your thoughts to yourself and stay out of matters that do not concern you.
Kind Regards
2. Call a meeting to clarify the original misunderstanding and explain in no uncertain terms that you were not pulling a fast one. Schedule this with your boss and HR and leave this woman out. Conduct it friendly and civil.
In any case I would get your head down and keep yourself to yourself and look for another job. Give them the least amount of notice required and tag your outstanding holiday entitlement to it. Good luck OP but this silly woman could be promoted soon and it's best to get out of there. All the best
I would do one of two things or maybe both;
1. Reply to this troublemakers email.
Dear (insert name)
Thank you so much for your email previously. However in future I would appreciate it if you kept your thoughts to yourself and stay out of matters that do not concern you.
Kind Regards
2. Call a meeting to clarify the original misunderstanding and explain in no uncertain terms that you were not pulling a fast one. Schedule this with your boss and HR and leave this woman out. Conduct it friendly and civil.
In any case I would get your head down and keep yourself to yourself and look for another job. Give them the least amount of notice required and tag your outstanding holiday entitlement to it. Good luck OP but this silly woman could be promoted soon and it's best to get out of there. All the best
Interesting problem OP and one I've had similar experience with minus the person dating the actual boss. I've had colleagues stuck their noses in on matters though.
I would do one of two things or maybe both;
1. Reply to this troublemakers email.
Dear (insert name)
Thank you so much for your email previously. However in future I would appreciate it if you kept your thoughts to yourself and stay out of matters that do not concern you.
Kind Regards
2. Call a meeting to clarify the original misunderstanding and explain in no uncertain terms that you were not pulling a fast one. Schedule this with your boss and HR and leave this woman out. Conduct it friendly and civil.
In any case I would get your head down and keep yourself to yourself and look for another job. Give them the least amount of notice required and tag your outstanding holiday entitlement to it. Good luck OP but this silly woman could be promoted soon and it's best to get out of there. All the best
Hm. Workplace dynamics and personal relationships.
From what I can see, I suspect that it is not just 'the silly woman' who is the issue, here.
Actually, I would argue, and strongly suspect, that the boss is behind it, too, and is hiding behind the 'silly woman', both as cover, and as plausible deniability, and - allowing him to throw her under the proverbial bus if things go very wrong someday in the future - and indeed, may well be also taking this opportunity to test the temperature to see just how much support the OP has, (or how isolated the OP is).
This looks to me as though the company are preparing the ground to allow them to part ways with the OP, and, if the OP is as tetchy as his posts suggest, the support that colleagues might be prepared to extend to him might be a lot less than he would expect, or hope, in the circumstances.
You are too emotional about this. You should have read between the lines in the first place. When your boss made it clear that he wanted you there complaining about the clarity of the policy was wrong place wrong time. It's always amazing to me how some people don't think through office politics in situations like this.
Quit tilting at windmills. Let it all go and get back to work. Quit being emotionally attached to what comments are made. Work is about getting paid and doing well within the environment and unless YOU are the owner or high up in management the environment is imposed on you and not subject to your desires
Escalating a conflict as suggested above may feel good but will be counterproductive to your own interests
Quit tilting at windmills. Let it all go and get back to work. Quit being emotionally attached to what comments are made. Work is about getting paid and doing well within the environment and unless YOU are the owner or high up in management the environment is imposed on you and not subject to your desires
Escalating a conflict as suggested above may feel good but will be counterproductive to your own interests
I think #1 is dangerous advice that will only lead to more problems for the OP.
This "troublemaker" isn't just some random colleague that interjected herself into the situation unsolicited.
She's the project manager on the OPs project. That doesn't make her his boss, but it does give her somewhat of a quasi-managerial role wrt the OP. He can't just tell her to "buzz off", especially if he wants to continue to have meaningful tasks within the scope of this project.
In addition, the HR policy states that telecommuting requests go through the project manager, which is why the OP CC'd her in the first place. So this matter certainly concerns her, and while I don't agree with the way in which she jumped into the conversation, it was certainly her right to offer her thoughts.
As for your option #2, eh. If I did go to HR (I don't think I would), I would only do it the way @Scepticalscribe says and keep it explicitly limited to getting clarification on the HR policy. I would do any explanation of my intent with the project manager and my boss separately, face to face. And again, I definitely wouldn't exclude the project manager. That would come off as unprofessionalism to me.
[doublepost=1482849832][/doublepost]
Exactly. The more and more I think about it, I find the anger towards the project manager a little baffling. It was the boss' decision to reject the OPs request and make the ridiculous statement that vacation time should be used in order to work remotely.
Last edited:
I can understand the anger towards the project manager - she basically accused him of being a slacker and liar. Not cool.
I find that people often project what they might do, or at least consider doing, in various situations onto others. I bet this PM would have at least thought seriously about asking for a telecommute day and then goofing off. I've found that in general you can't reason with that sort of person. If the OP were seriously committed to the company, it would be worth trying to work with the PM to convince her that it's the end result that counts and not where or when the work is done - one can goof off until the night before deadline as long as the target is hit. (Of course, actually doing it that way is fraught with peril!) Given that OP is planning to leave anyway, I'd probably just let it go and focus on finding another position.
I find that people often project what they might do, or at least consider doing, in various situations onto others. I bet this PM would have at least thought seriously about asking for a telecommute day and then goofing off. I've found that in general you can't reason with that sort of person. If the OP were seriously committed to the company, it would be worth trying to work with the PM to convince her that it's the end result that counts and not where or when the work is done - one can goof off until the night before deadline as long as the target is hit. (Of course, actually doing it that way is fraught with peril!) Given that OP is planning to leave anyway, I'd probably just let it go and focus on finding another position.
I don't think it was an accusation but even if it was, she only made it because the boss has the same viewpoint. Its almost certain that they discussed this issue before she sent her email.
I agree that the project manager seems to have a low opinion on telecommuting (this opinion no doubt comes from the boss). It might be worth it to try to convince her otherwise, but I think that the boss has effectively nixed the OPs telecommuting arrangement. If he can't work remotely in inclement weather I doubt he'll be allowed to at all.
If I understand you correctly, it seems you may have written the email to both your boss and coworker, without differentiating in any way. If you had for example written the mail to the boss with a cc to your coworker, that would mean that you were asking your boss but only informing your coworker. This is that way I would have done it - because the boss is the one who can say yes or no. The coworker only needs to be kept in the loop but isn't the one who can say yes or no.
Feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood.
Regardless of how you addressed the mail, your coworker - as far as I understand your description - has no say in the matter. Her opinions are just that - her opinions. The only two things that matter here are 1) the (as of now unclear) policy, and 2) your boss's decision.
I understand your impulse to clear your name. I get that it's very frustrating to be accused of trying to sneak in an extra vacation day when you have a stellar record of working from home. But I don't think going at it in that way is going to win you any points. So here's what I would do:
I'd like to better understand the inclement weather policy, and to that end I suggest we schedule a short meeting at your convenience after the holidays.
I've had good experience with working well from home when inclement weather has made it necessary, and I understand the company's need for a consistent policy. There are some aspects of the policy as it's now worded that seem confusing, and I'd like to understand it. I'd appreciate any clarification you can give me.
This way you're asking for help in a polite and professional manner, not accusing anyone of anything. You're also indirectly pointing out that there are problems with the policy, but in such a way that no one needs to get defensive.
Basically, you're giving them an out.
I'd go in with a smile, and have around four examples of previous situations where permission has been granted at the ready, in case the clarification you're asking for proves hard to get. It can often be easier to discuss concrete examples, and if it's the case that some situations would be handled differently or more restrictively now, they might need help explaining it. Your examples make it easier for them. ("I know that situation X has been fine in the past, but maybe it will be handled differently now?")
Whatever you do, don't lose your cool or defend yourself. Your record speaks for itself, and a polite employee who wants to better understand his company's policies is a good employee.
The alternative is of course to write the whole thing off, look for another job, and assume working from home isn't an option anymore. But I suspect your blood pressure might suffer if you do that! Depends on what you need out of this situation, and only you know that.
Good luck!
Feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood.
Regardless of how you addressed the mail, your coworker - as far as I understand your description - has no say in the matter. Her opinions are just that - her opinions. The only two things that matter here are 1) the (as of now unclear) policy, and 2) your boss's decision.
I understand your impulse to clear your name. I get that it's very frustrating to be accused of trying to sneak in an extra vacation day when you have a stellar record of working from home. But I don't think going at it in that way is going to win you any points. So here's what I would do:
- Send a polite email to your boss and cc the HR person. Say you'd like to better understand the policy, and ask for a short meeting after the holidays.
- Leave the coworker out of this loop - the policy isn't her responsibility.
- Keep the mail as short as possible, and cc yourself as well so you have documentation.
I'd like to better understand the inclement weather policy, and to that end I suggest we schedule a short meeting at your convenience after the holidays.
I've had good experience with working well from home when inclement weather has made it necessary, and I understand the company's need for a consistent policy. There are some aspects of the policy as it's now worded that seem confusing, and I'd like to understand it. I'd appreciate any clarification you can give me.
This way you're asking for help in a polite and professional manner, not accusing anyone of anything. You're also indirectly pointing out that there are problems with the policy, but in such a way that no one needs to get defensive.
Basically, you're giving them an out.
I'd go in with a smile, and have around four examples of previous situations where permission has been granted at the ready, in case the clarification you're asking for proves hard to get. It can often be easier to discuss concrete examples, and if it's the case that some situations would be handled differently or more restrictively now, they might need help explaining it. Your examples make it easier for them. ("I know that situation X has been fine in the past, but maybe it will be handled differently now?")
Whatever you do, don't lose your cool or defend yourself. Your record speaks for itself, and a polite employee who wants to better understand his company's policies is a good employee.
The alternative is of course to write the whole thing off, look for another job, and assume working from home isn't an option anymore. But I suspect your blood pressure might suffer if you do that! Depends on what you need out of this situation, and only you know that.
Good luck!
Where I work some people are allowed to work from home and some are not. I'm not sure why, but as I am I don't worry about it too much. I guess it comes down to trust. I know they trust me. Some others not so much.
I agree. It all comes down to trust and it's sad how many employers don't trust their employees enough to do their jobs without being constantly monitored like school children. In my case, my boss is in another state so he has no choice but to trust me (although, I'd like to think that my telecommuting privileges would be exactly the same if he were here
). I'm not sure what has changed in the OPs situation, but my guess is that he is being viewed as a poor cultural fit. He has indicated that the company has changed a lot since he's been there and he's not pleased with where things have gone and are heading. Usually, it's hard to hide these feelings; they come out and I have a hunch that his superiors are aware of his disenchantment with the company.