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

1. My boss told me my dresses need to be longer

My line manager told me yesterday that there had been “comments made” about how short / inappropriate my dresses are in the office, as a member of the team who is front-facing for clients. I was asked to not wear these outfits in the office any longer.

These comments have utterly humiliated me, and I spent about an hour crying on my way home. I have always dressed fairly modestly at work and am deeply uncomfortable with my body being perceived as being “on display.” My dresses are long-sleeved, with skirts that stop just above my knee. They are conventional office wear. I prefer dresses and skirts over trousers, as the medications I take have made my stomach quite bloated, and I find tight waistbands uncomfortable. But I was told they need to be longer as I’m greeting clients (as my work wear was just above the knee already, my presumption is that longer means to the knee or below).

It’s a very male heavy office, so what other women wear is split between trousers and skirts that are above the knee or to the knee. My line manager was wearing an above-the-knee dress the day after telling me my outfits were too short.

After looking at my work wardrobe, I estimate I’m going to have to get replace nearly 80% to get to these new standards — of dresses and skirts to the knee or lower — while also managing the other restrictions that are placed on women’s wear at our office. For instance, I’m not allowed to wear a sleeveless blouse because our male directors decided they are not professional for women. This is while the men in our office can meet with clients in hoodies or polo shirts.

I simply don’t understand why my clothing is an issue 16 months into working here.Am I being unreasonable or is this unfair? Is this something I should speak to my union about?

Yes, you should absolutely speak to your union. Something here doesn’t make sense — skirts and dresses to just above the knee aren’t unprofessional or inappropriate work wear, and that goes triple in an office where a bunch of other people are wearing them, including the manager who told you that you couldn’t. “You’re client-facing” doesn’t make sense as an explanation. Is there anything else that could explain why you’re getting this feedback and others aren’t? Sometimes this happens when you’re the only one in your office with a particular body shape (which doesn’t make it okay), and I wonder if that’s in play here.

Ideally you’d go back to your manager and ask for clarification — including explicitly asking if she is telling you that your skirts must be below the knee, and pointing out that all your skirts are currently the same length as the ones you see other women in your office wearing. But since you have a union, pull them in for advice too.

2. CEO sends a delusional AI-generated image of himself with every email

As a mere lower-level staffer, I am certain there is nothing I can do about this issue, but perhaps you have some ideas.

The CEO has begun to attach an AI-generated image of himself to every email he sends out. The images are universally more handsome than the real thing. No more receding hairline, or stomach fat. Plenty of bicep muscles. Not a wrinkle in sight.

This is cringe behaviour, and staff mock him for it behind his back. While I am not personally invested in helping him save face, I do want to stop being forced to look at these unprofessional, inaccurate portraits. Especially since the workplace is a public library, where one would hope to avoid misinformation.

No, this is amazing and you must not try to stop it!

And that’s fortunate, because there’s almost certainly nothing you can do about it anyway. If you were, say, a senior communications staffer or his right-hand person or otherwise a trusted confidant, you could attempt to diplomatically address it, but assuming you are none of those things and therefore have no real standing or obligation to take this on, the only correct response is to sit back and bask in the utter absurdity of it.

Is it a problem for his credibility? Yes! Is it your problem? No.

You can just enjoy the spectacle.

3. I wish my board would just fire me already

I am the chief executive of a small nonprofit and I report to a board, and I have been on a performance improvement plan (PIP) for the past four months. The PIP is full of things that are untrue and half true, along with some things that could legitimately be improved. The PIP was my first notice of any of those gripes that the board (or rather, a few members of the executive committee) had about me, my work, and, more pointedly, my personality.

The first PIP was supposed to be 60 days. They had no objective success measure in it and missed over half the weekly check-ins we had scheduled. They are having a lawyer handle everything for them, so I didn’t receive a determination about the PIP until a couple weeks ago when they gave me another PIP with a 60-day extension. This document, even more than the first one, has things in it explaining where I am failing to meet expectations that I was unaware of and were not part of the job previously.

At this point, it is clear that at least two of the board members just don’t like me and want to fire me, which is completely within their power to do. I have sincerely done what I can to meet their expectations, but I can’t and won’t change my personality or pretend to be someone I am not. And this job has turned into something different than what I was hired for.

I have been looking for a new job since the process started, but it is not easy at this level and I can’t afford to be without an income or I would have quit already. How do I have the conversation with them expressing my desire to leave along with my need to be eligible for unemployment benefits?

Frame it this way: “It’s clear to me that you’re unhappy with my work and I want to be realistic about my chances for success here and not drag out the process, so I’d like to propose a managed separation with a transition that will be as smooth as possible for both of us. I’d ask that you not contest my unemployment benefits since it sounds like I was likely to be let go at the end of this process anyway, but beyond that I’m flexible about what this could look like in terms of timing and messaging.” They are likely to hear this with relief.

You might also consider whether you have an argument to request severance, if they’re now defining success in the role differently than what you were brought on to do.

4. Requiring 15+ hours of outside reading per week

I am curious to your take on a job listing I recently came across. There is an indie bookshop in my city that is looking for booksellers — basically part-time retail work, $12/hour starting wage, nothing atypical for the area.

Amongst the qualifications and job duties listed, alongside needing 3+ years experience as a bookseller and “associates or better” degree, I noticed something that seemed super wild. “Booksellers are required to spend an additional 15+ hours a week reading recent releases and bestsellers to stay up to date on merchandise and better assist customers.”

(I am assuming the 15+ hours of reading homework is unpaid, but I could be wrong; this is a very hipster bookshop that I like to visit now and then but would never work at personally, so I haven’t inquired further or anything.)

Is this as bonkers as it sounds to me? Or does this sound more like “continuing education” and is pretty reasonable to expect?

As a general rule, if outside reading is required for non-exempt employees, they need to be paid for that time. There are exceptions for things like continuing education required to maintain a license, but booksellers aren’t licensed.

They’d be better off saying that they’re looking for employees who already maintain a deep knowledge of recent releases and bestsellers and who will maintain that knowledge going forward — and then screening for dedicated readers of recent releases (which is different from just being a voracious reader in general) in their interview process — instead of presenting it like a job duty with a specific number of hours attached.

5. I was fired from my last job, then didn’t work for several years — how do I explain it in interviews?

I was fired from my job several years ago. Due to a combination of burnout and undiagnosed depression, I effectively went AWOL and didn’t do anything about anything until it was too late, and I’m trying to re-enter the job market now. I have a resume gap of several years, my previous job loss was entirely my fault, and it’s been a very long time since I had to do any kind of job searching.

How do I write a resume to cover this particular ground? And, in the event of an interview, any advice on how to answer the inevitable question of what I was doing while unemployed? (The honest answer is nothing, while trying to claw my way out of a mental health hole.”)

You don’t address it on a resume at all; that’s the place to highlight your work history and accomplishments. In an interview, the language you want is: “I’ve been dealing with a health issue that is now resolved and I’m excited to return to work.” You don’t need to say more than that; they’re not supposed to ask for details, and it explains why you left the last job as well as what you’ve been doing since then.

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

1. My boss doesn’t want to give me a bonus because I’m leaving soon

I am moving soon to another state and leaving my agency to be closer to family. I really don’t want to leave and neither does my boss. He even advocated for me to stay on as fully remote, but his boss and HR said no; the agency has a new strict policy that doesn’t allow employees to be fully remote. I have no choice but to resign.

Coincidentally, my annual performance review is due shortly before the time my lease is up and I have to leave my job. My annual reviews have always come with a bonus, so I’m expecting a lump sum payment that will help cover some of the costs of moving. I’ve been somewhat transparent with my boss about my plans on leaving, but I have not given him an exact resignation date yet because I’m still in the process of finding new employment and coordinating the move so the dates are not yet set in stone.

I have been pushing my boss to get my performance review done so I can feel secure knowing that money is on the way. When I asked him for an update, he was vague and made it seem like he wasn’t sure if it would be approved because his boss and HR know I’m leaving soon. So I asked him if he himself is resistant to giving me a bonus because he knows I’m leaving soon and he said yes because it “doesn’t come off as a good financial decision” to give a chunk of money to an employee who is leaving. I argued that this is my reward for my performance of last year to now, so that money should be paid to me anyway. Plus, I haven’t submitted a resignation letter yet, so technically I’m not leaving until that is made official.

I can say with confidence that I earned a bonus this year and it doesn’t feel fair to be withheld a bonus because I’ll be gone a month or so after it’s paid. I think anyone else in my position would also try to leave with as much as they could. Am I asking for too much or is my timing just bad?

Your timing is bad. It’s very common for companies not to pay bonuses to people who have made it clear they’re leaving soon. You see the bonus as compensation for work you’ve already done, but employers see bonuses as a retention strategy and very often won’t give them if you’ve told them you’re leaving. That’s not always the case; some organizations handle it differently (and for some, the bonus is contractually obligated). But it’s the case enough of the time that it’s an established thing for people to need to delay their exits (and any discussion of their exits) until after a bonus is paid out.

You can certainly make the argument for a bonus as compensation for work already done if you want to — but from what your boss is saying, your company is unlikely to give it to you.

2. When a candidate’s resume has different job titles than LinkedIn does

I’m screening resumes for a role. For anonymity’s sake, let’s say it’s a teapot designer, and we’re looking for five years of designer experience. Many people in designer roles first spend time as teapot painters, and while that experience is valuable, designer is a more expansive, senior role.

On a few occasions now, I’ve looked at resumes that appear strong, with several past designer roles, but when I click through to the applicant’s LinkedIn profile, I see these are actually painter roles, and they’ve changed the titles on their resume. When they’ve done this across the board and have no actual designer experience, I can easily screen them out. But sometimes I’m finding it’s a mix — their current role is in fact a designer role, but previous designer roles were actually painter roles. If they’d been truthful on their application, I would’ve screened them in! But now I feel like I have to screen out these candidates because they’re embellishing their applications.

Am I being too harsh? Is this the red flag I think it is? I feel for applicants in this difficult job market, but I just can’t get past the false titles on the resume, and I’m not sure how I’d explain to my boss that I’m screening in people who don’t have the experience they claim to, even if their actual experience is solid. (Also, these applicants are willingly handing over their LinkedIn links. Do they think we won’t notice the discrepancies between their profile and their application? What am I missing here?)

If they’re people who you otherwise would have advanced, it’s worth doing a phone screen with them to clarify — where you’d ask directly, “I saw your resume calls your current job ’teapot designer’ but on LinkedIn you list it as a ’teapot painter’ role. Which is correct?” Give them a chance to elaborate — because while I can’t speak for what’s common in the teapot industry, there a lot of people have titles that don’t accurately reflect the work they’re doing, and it’s not unheard of for people to try to clarify by using a more accurately descriptive title on their resumes. That might not be what’s happening here; this might just be people trying to finesse their experience into something it isn’t. But it’s worth talking to at least a handful and finding out, to inform your thinking going forward.

If it turns out to be a straight-up lie — they’re just flagrantly misrepresenting their experience to try to get their foot in the door — that’s prohibitive. But if someone says, “I started out doing painting, but for the last two years I’ve been doing the designer job and my company never updated my title,” I wouldn’t hold that against them.

But also, if you’re just doing the initial resume screen before passing resumes on to your boss (and you’re the person doing the phone screens), you should have this conversation with her to get aligned on how to handle it. She may not know you’re seeing this and may have her own opinions about how she wants you to handle it.

3. People misspell my name

I have a fairly straightforward issue that I’m sure you’ve run into as well — my name gets misspelled on emails! I have a fairly common name that has a fairly understandable misspelling (think “Anglea” instead of “Angela”). While this is easy for me to correct internally, how does one go about correcting this for people outside of our organization?

I work in a company where I regularly interact with people from client companies asking for my services, and yes, my name is in my email signature! So far, I’ve been happy to just ignore it and reply to the email content itself, but is there anything you would recommend to “repeat offenders”?

Personally, as someone with a name that frequently gets misspelled, I just ignore it. I have decided that life is less stressful when I just don’t care unless it’s someone who’s close to me.

That said, if it bothers you and someone has done it multiple times, it’s fine to just matter-of-factly say at the end of your next reply, “By the way, it’s Angela, not Anglea!” (But expect this still won’t completely solve it.)

4. Should I tell my boss my commute is only doable if we remain hybrid?

I’m a very highly valued executive assistant for a very senior partner in a law firm.

I know eventually my work is going to consider changing our remote work policy to only allow us to work from home one day a week. My commute is 75 minutes each way. It’s a pretty relaxing commute, and I did not mind it at all before I had a baby. However, with a baby it’s only doable because I only have to go in three days a week.

Is it risky to verbalize to my boss and HR that if they ever increased the amount of days in office required, I would have to look for a new job in my own city? I don’t think my job would it be at risk; they’re lost without me and I always have top reviews each year, but am I being naive? My boss isn’t the managing partner at the firm but is very senior and her word has a lot of power. I feel like she should know that one of her most valued employees can only stay because of the current benefits offered with remote work. I really love my job and really love working for my boss I don’t want to leave my job but would absolutely have to if they increased the days in office required.

In your shoes, I’d have a conversation with your boss right now (not with HR) and say something like, “Is your sense that the firm is likely to stick with our current hybrid policy or that they might increase the number of in-office days required at some point? I’m asking because I love my job and I love working for you, but the commute is only doable right now because I only need to do it three days a week.”

Since you’re highly valued, that’s not terribly risky to say. And since she has a lot of capital herself, arm her now with the info she needs if a change ever does start to get discussed. That doesn’t mean they still won’t do it, but at least they won’t be surprised by what it means for you if they do.

5. Employees donating to their own organization in memory of a colleague

My mom worked for a nonprofit for many years. When she passed away, we asked for donations to the nonprofit in her memory. Several of the donations they received were from her colleagues, who still worked for the organization. My sister thinks it’s weird they’d donate to their own employer. I don’t. Who’s right?

I’ve worked at nonprofits where some employees donated simply because they felt strongly about the mission (truly of their own volition, with no pressure from the organization to do it) and were proud to be donors. So I don’t think it’s weird, particularly since these colleagues were honoring her in the specific way your family requested.

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

1. Can a manager lead a Bible study?

I am a mid-level supervisor for a state government agency. While I directly supervise several employees, about half of the employees in my section directly report to my manager, “Michael.” He, in turn, reports to “David” and “Jan,” who are the chief and the second-in-command. There are several other sections within our agency that do separate work, and those sections have their own corresponding Michaels, who also report to David and Jan.

Hypothetically (I do not have any plans to do this currently), given the fact that I supervise some employees, would it be inappropriate for me to organize a Bible study, book club where we read a religious book, etc., which would occur, say, over lunch?

On the one hand, my religion is extremely important to me and my religious beliefs aren’t exactly a secret. (For example, I told a coworker who lost a family member that I would pray for them, because I know they follow the same religion as me.)

However, I would not want anyone, especially those I supervise, to think that their participation (or lack thereof) in this sort of activity is being encouraged by me by virtue of my position. That is, I wouldn’t want there to be any pressure for people to participate because someone in management is doing it. Does the fact that I only supervise a handful of people when there are well over 100 employees in our agency, many of whom do entirely separate work from me, make a difference?

No, a manager should not organize any kind of religious discussion at work. No matter how sincere you are in saying that people who attend wouldn’t get favorable treatment from you, some of your staff will still worry that they will and/or will feel pressured to participate and/or will find it unfair that people are getting extra networking opportunities with you based on a shared religious practice. And frankly, it would be unfair — that is an extra networking opportunity with you, and it shouldn’t be open only to people willing to talk about religion with you (or be based around religion at all).

2. Can I ask an interviewer about their terrible customer reviews?

After being laid off a month ago, I’m in the early stages of interviewing for a learning and development role at a midsize corporation. Unlike my last job, where I was creating customer-facing trainings, this role would entail creating internal trainings on a wide range of topics, which is much more aligned with my long-term career goals. However, when I was researching the company, I discovered that the service the company provides garners VERY low customer ratings (as in, 1.4 stars on Google reviews and Yelp and an enormous pile of Better Business Bureau complaints). While of course I realize that these online reviews don’t reflect the good experiences (there must be some, right?), I was appalled by some of the claims people were making.

Right now, I’m leaning toward not moving forward in the interview process, as I’m not desperate for a job (yet!) and I am reluctant to work for a company that seems to have no compunction about scamming its customers. But there is a part of me that is curious as to how they would respond if I asked them about those reviews — I mean, maybe they’re working to address the issues. I have been considering asking something like, “I have seen some online reviews where customers are really unhappy with Company’s services. I know that people who are happy with Company aren’t likely to go online to rave about it, but I was wondering what steps Company takes to address customer feedback and how your customer service reps fit into the vision you have for the L&D team.” Or something along those lines. Is that totally unhinged? Should I just cut and run now?

It’s not unhinged at all. That’s a pretty normal question to ask in this context, and they’ve probably been asked it before! They’re aware of their reviews, and they’re aware (some) candidates will be too. Your wording isn’t particularly aggressive or adversarial; it’s reasonable.

That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t cut and run. But if you’d otherwise be interested in the job, go to the next interview and ask.

Related:
asking a company about its bad reputation in an interview

3. Should I tell a former coworker that someone is talking smack about them?

I had a job recently where we were a team of seven, including the system admin, Amanda. Her attendance was sporadic, but didn’t really affect the rest of us. I felt like whatever arrangements she had with our team’s leadership were none of our business.

The front-end guy, Kevin, and I talked regularly, and he’d often talk junk about her. He’d regularly make comments to me like, “Well, what the hell does Amanda do all day? Why don’t we see her on X date?” It made me uncomfortable because neither of us was Amanda’s supervisor and I felt it was none of our business as it didn’t affect our jobs in the slightest.

Now that I’m no longer there, should I warn Amanda that Kevin was talking junk about her? Why or why not? Does it make a difference if I got fired for an unrelated reason? (It was my fault, and I own it.)

Are you close with Amanda and do you consider her a friend? If so, sure, you could go ahead and tell her — if you think she needs to know that Kevin is potentially stirring up drama that could affect her. If you’d just be telling her on principle and not because it potentially could have repercussions for her, then no; in that case I’d leave it alone since there’s no point in getting involved when you’re not even there anymore.

And if you’re not close with Amanda, then there’s nothing to do. You’re no longer there and that office’s issues don’t need to take up any space in your brain (and it risks coming across as odd and drama-stirring to contact someone you’re not close to after leaving to share something like this).

4. Expected to show up in person even when we don’t need to

I’m a teacher in an independent school, and I love my job, for many reasons. However, my colleagues and I get frustrated by the administration’s expectations regarding our working hours. Like essentially all teachers, we work quite a bit outside of school hours; we work before school, after school, evenings, weekends, and on breaks. That’s just part of being a teacher. We are salaried, and sometimes we are required to stay after school or be at school in the evening for meetings, events, Parents’ Nights, graduations, etc. Also part of the job.

What’s frustrating is that the administration and HR tell us that we have to be on campus for a particular eight hours a day (even when not teaching) and sometimes even on days with no classes or meetings. As teachers, we are a pretty highly educated bunch; most have advanced degrees and could earn a lot more in other industries. It feels kind of disrespectful of our time and dedication for us to be told that we have to be on campus when nothing is scheduled, and it feels inconsistent with other jobs for salaried professionals. What are your thoughts?

Yes, it’s disrespectful of your time, your obvious commitment to the work, and the amount of additional hours you put in over and above a normal work week. It’s also pretty par for the course in teaching, unfortunately, which is still very much a “you need to be in the building to be seen to be working” culture from what I understand.

5. Is it legal for a job ad to set a limit on years of professional experience?

I recently read on your site that requiring someone to be a recent graduate could quality as age discrimination. I’ve seen a company director posting a job on LinkedIn (not an ad, a post from their regular profile) saying the job only accepts people with a maximum amount of professional experience of five years. This is in the U.S., so doesn’t this open them up to age discrimination? While they work in an field I’m not interested in, I am nearing 50 with decades of “professional experience” and it really sounds like it is a statement of “old people need not apply.”

Yes, it absolutely opens them up to liability for age discrimination. I wouldn’t be surprised if you don’t find that language in the actual HR-approved ad (because they know better) and this guy, in writing his own message, let the truth about who they prefer slip out.