A reader writes:
I was recently hired as a Personal Assistant/Office Manager at a non-profit organization and I love my job!
However, there is one issue. During the interview process, I was told I would be working 24 hours a week. Once they called me and said I was hired, I was told (in the same conversation) that the position had been changed to 18 hours a week due to finances. I accepted the job and have been there almost a month.
The previous Personal Assistant who retired has trained me and still volunteers there a couple times a week. I have realized that my boss is expecting me to perform the same amount of work in 18 hours that previously was done in 24 hours a week, AND take on new responsibilities such as designing artwork for banners, and other various time consuming tasks. I am having trouble keeping up even though I am experienced, have been trained and fully understand my duties.
My lack of time is not because of a learning curve. The previous person in my position told me that she doesn't know how the heck I will accomplish this in 18 hours a week. I handle the finances so I can see that there is wiggle room in the budget, but only by cutting back on other things. They have already saved money by hiring me at a lower hourly rate than my predecessor.
There are two possibilities here. Either:
1. Your boss is guilty of sloppy thinking -- knowing she wants to save money and just hoping that this plan will make it happen, without thinking through how it'll actually work to cut the hours by 25% while increasing the workload.
or
2. The previous assistant was really inefficient, and they'd been unhappy with how little she was accomplishing. In looking at the workload, they felt it reasonably could be done in fewer hours per week, and with more work on top of it.
So what you need to do is talk to your boss and figure out what's going on. Say something like this: "I know this position was recently cut by 25%, from 24 hours to 18 hours, but from what I understand, the workload wasn't cut at all. In fact, it seems like the workload has actually been increased. I'm concerned about my ability to do in 18 hours what Ellen was doing in 24 hours, plus having more work on top of that. So I wanted to find out from you what the thinking was with my position: Were you thinking that Ellen wasn't as efficient as she could have been, and so therefore the cut in hours shouldn't matter if her replacement works at a higher level? Or is there something else going on that I'm not seeing?"
Now, your boss may say that Ellen wasn't inefficient at all, but that money is tight and so they were just forced into cutting the hours. If that happens, tell her that you understand and would like to talk about what changes to make to the job so that the workload matches the cut in hours. If this is what's going on, she probably hasn't fully thought through the reality of the situation, so you may need to be explicit: "On the face of it, I'm not sure it's realistic for me to take on the same workload as she did with fewer hours. Did you have ideas for how that would work?"
Assuming that she doesn't, you can then respond with something like: "I see a couple of possibilities: I'd be happy to increase my hours to get it all done, or if that's not an option, I have some suggestions for projects to remove from this role."
If she's not willing to remove any projects from your plate, then you say, "I'm concerned about setting myself up for failure here. I can certainly keep all of this on my plate, but I think we're in agreement that it's not realistic to do the same amount in less time, so clearly some things aren't going to get done. I'd rather talk about what those items should be, so that we're deliberate about it, rather than just having things fall through the cracks or be a rush job that isn't high quality."
On the other hand, if it's option #2, and Ellen wasn't performing at a high level, then your boss's expectations might be reasonable. If your she tells you that, try to take it with an open mind and see how things go over the next few weeks. Look for efficiencies (if Ellen trained you, maybe her training wasn't the best), cut out time-wasters, and see if you still have a problem on your hands. If you do, then you go back to your boss and raise the issue again.
Good luck!
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Thursday, November 12, 2009
company wouldn't interview me because I was 5 minutes late
A reader writes:
Yesterday, I was scheduled for a very much anticipated interview with a well-known airline for a customer service position. I know in my heart that this company would not only be an honor to work for, but that the position would be a great fit for me!
The interview was scheduled for 3:00 p.m. I left home in ample time to arrive. The problem was that I encountered traffic due to an accident on the freeway. I did not telephone for fear of being rejected from the interview process. I managed to get off the freeway and take an alternate route. I arrived at the guard's gate @ 3:00 p.m., I was allowed into the parking lot, made into the front door/reception desk (this took maybe another minute or two); then I was told that "it's 3:05 p.m., and because I was not there at 3:00 p.m., that they could not see me and would not allow the interview. I explained the circumstances but it was apparently of no interest to them
Feeling like this was a bad joke, I was absolutely devastated. I know my watch and car clock is set to the radio station time and is accurate. As I was heading to my car, I looked at my watch and it was just 3:04/3:05. All the preparing I did and anticipation I had has been crushed. I want to get in, I want to work for this company. Who knows when they will have another opening in Phoenix?
What, if anything, do you think I can do right now to somehow get into an interview? I just know that once I get an interview, they'll love me, they'll agree that I would be an asset to their team. This circumstance is not customary, it was a circumstance that simply happened.
Yes, it simply happened, but you made choices that contributed to it: You deliberately chose not to call, and you also didn't allow a buffer for the possibility that you'd hit traffic -- two things you could have done differently.
However, that doesn't change the fact that refusing to interview you because of a five-minute delay is pretty harsh. (Especially from the airline industry -- insert obvious joke here.) We've discussed the question of how late is too late in the past, and very few people thought that a couple of minutes deserved a flat-out rejection.
Still, though. I can't quite get my head around why you decided calling them would be a bad idea. You call in that situation because it's the courteous (and safe) thing to do.
As for what you can do to get an interview, well ... maybe nothing. But if anything is going to work, it's writing a flawlessly professional and apologetic letter reiterating your strong desire to work for them. Don't make excuses, take responsibility for it, and find some convincing way to assure them that this was out of character and a one-time aberration. It still may not work, but it's probably your best shot.
There's also the question, of course, of how much you really want to work for a company that handled a five-minute delay this way. Screening procedures go both ways, you know.
Yesterday, I was scheduled for a very much anticipated interview with a well-known airline for a customer service position. I know in my heart that this company would not only be an honor to work for, but that the position would be a great fit for me!
The interview was scheduled for 3:00 p.m. I left home in ample time to arrive. The problem was that I encountered traffic due to an accident on the freeway. I did not telephone for fear of being rejected from the interview process. I managed to get off the freeway and take an alternate route. I arrived at the guard's gate @ 3:00 p.m., I was allowed into the parking lot, made into the front door/reception desk (this took maybe another minute or two); then I was told that "it's 3:05 p.m., and because I was not there at 3:00 p.m., that they could not see me and would not allow the interview. I explained the circumstances but it was apparently of no interest to them
Feeling like this was a bad joke, I was absolutely devastated. I know my watch and car clock is set to the radio station time and is accurate. As I was heading to my car, I looked at my watch and it was just 3:04/3:05. All the preparing I did and anticipation I had has been crushed. I want to get in, I want to work for this company. Who knows when they will have another opening in Phoenix?
What, if anything, do you think I can do right now to somehow get into an interview? I just know that once I get an interview, they'll love me, they'll agree that I would be an asset to their team. This circumstance is not customary, it was a circumstance that simply happened.
Yes, it simply happened, but you made choices that contributed to it: You deliberately chose not to call, and you also didn't allow a buffer for the possibility that you'd hit traffic -- two things you could have done differently.
However, that doesn't change the fact that refusing to interview you because of a five-minute delay is pretty harsh. (Especially from the airline industry -- insert obvious joke here.) We've discussed the question of how late is too late in the past, and very few people thought that a couple of minutes deserved a flat-out rejection.
Still, though. I can't quite get my head around why you decided calling them would be a bad idea. You call in that situation because it's the courteous (and safe) thing to do.
As for what you can do to get an interview, well ... maybe nothing. But if anything is going to work, it's writing a flawlessly professional and apologetic letter reiterating your strong desire to work for them. Don't make excuses, take responsibility for it, and find some convincing way to assure them that this was out of character and a one-time aberration. It still may not work, but it's probably your best shot.
There's also the question, of course, of how much you really want to work for a company that handled a five-minute delay this way. Screening procedures go both ways, you know.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
trouble fitting in with coworkers
A reader writes:
I have been working at a software company for a little over a year now. I like the company, we produce a product which I like, the mission statement is very focused on making a difference in education, and the culture of the overall company is very relaxed and employee centered (jeans and free lunch!). In addition to this, we continue to profit and grow despite the awful economy. The pay is decent and I see opportunities for advancement.
That said, I don't feel like I fit in with my department. When I first started, I was very eager to fit in, work hard and succeed within the organization. Most of the people in the company seemed normal and nice as I met them, but I noticed that the people in my department seemed.....odd. Some of them didn't make eye contact or return greetings, others had loud, overly casual ways of speaking and acting (bodily function jokes, casual swearing). As I worked more within my department and ate lunch with these folks, I noticed more behaviors that I didn't know how to respond to. More sexual/sexist jokes and comments (mostly by women), gruff and/or condescending tones of voice, moody personalities, trash talking of other departments, political bickering, etc (one guy even sent racist jokes to me). I even heard a couple people talk about how us newer folks were getting paid too much. Much of the more crass behavior was by only certain individuals, but overall the culture seems weird and unprofessional to me. Some of the quieter ones are real quiet and nervous around me. The director of my department is very hands off, and seems depressed and is sometimes very moody. Some of the people are fine, but I just don't have much in common as far as interests or worldview.
The department is very close (they often each lunch and socialize together) and when I try to talk to them casually or at company events, I feel like an outsider. Most of them are close to my age (mid 20's to early 30's), but many of them talk about pretty boring stuff or are of the unprofessional type described previously.
As a result of all this, I stopped eating lunch with these folks and I don't really socialize with them outside of work. When I try to, I still really feel like an outsider. I want to move up to something more at my level professionally (it's pretty entry level, this is my first job out of grad school) and get out of my department as soon as I can, but am I hurting my career by not eating with these folks or socializing with them? Some of the most unprofessional are moving up the most in my department! The department director said during my interview that he likes people who see the job as "more than a job" and that the department is very close, so I have the impression that hanging out with my coworkers is expected. I can't stand eating with them and I would not want to spend time outside of work with most of them.
Well, wanting to spend time with them outside of work or sharing common interests isn't really the right litmus test for whether they're good coworkers. If you find yourself in a job where you do, you're really lucky -- most people don't find that. It's a bonus, not something you should expect.
Some of the behaviors you described are things that are truly unacceptable in the workplace (racist jokes), but a lot of them are things that you're likely to find almost anywhere you go: gruff tones of voice, moodiness, shy people who don't make eye contact, people you just can't relate to, and, in most places, casual swearing.
Please don't ignore the racist jokes. Tell the perpetrator you don't see humor in it, and if he persists, talk to your boss or HR department, because not only is he offensive, but he's almost certainly violating a company policy (as well as possibly harassment law, depending on the details).
But for the other stuff -- well, this is the work world. You'll probably be working with a lot of people you don't really click with your entire life.
On the question of whether you're hurting your career by not eating lunch with them -- it depends. Some workplaces -- but not most -- do have cultures where that's expected. I don't think you should feel pressured to eat with them all the time, but it wouldn't kill you to join them occasionally -- and if you go into it with an open mind, you might find that it helps you. Having good relationships with your coworkers can make it easier to get things done (because conversations are easier/more efficient when you have a comfort level with each other, people are more likely to go out of their way to help you out, etc.). You may also be part of work-related discussions over lunch that are useful to you.
I don't think you should feel obligated to socialize with them outside of the work day, but it's reasonable to attend the occasional office happy hour. I mean, you don't need to go camping with these people, but an hour for drinks after work? Do it from time to time, for the same reasons as the occasional lunch.
You don't need to be best friends with your coworkers, but I think you'll be happier if you let your guard down a bit.
Do your work well, maintain pleasant (not BFF) relationships with your colleagues, and you'll be fine.
I have been working at a software company for a little over a year now. I like the company, we produce a product which I like, the mission statement is very focused on making a difference in education, and the culture of the overall company is very relaxed and employee centered (jeans and free lunch!). In addition to this, we continue to profit and grow despite the awful economy. The pay is decent and I see opportunities for advancement.
That said, I don't feel like I fit in with my department. When I first started, I was very eager to fit in, work hard and succeed within the organization. Most of the people in the company seemed normal and nice as I met them, but I noticed that the people in my department seemed.....odd. Some of them didn't make eye contact or return greetings, others had loud, overly casual ways of speaking and acting (bodily function jokes, casual swearing). As I worked more within my department and ate lunch with these folks, I noticed more behaviors that I didn't know how to respond to. More sexual/sexist jokes and comments (mostly by women), gruff and/or condescending tones of voice, moody personalities, trash talking of other departments, political bickering, etc (one guy even sent racist jokes to me). I even heard a couple people talk about how us newer folks were getting paid too much. Much of the more crass behavior was by only certain individuals, but overall the culture seems weird and unprofessional to me. Some of the quieter ones are real quiet and nervous around me. The director of my department is very hands off, and seems depressed and is sometimes very moody. Some of the people are fine, but I just don't have much in common as far as interests or worldview.
The department is very close (they often each lunch and socialize together) and when I try to talk to them casually or at company events, I feel like an outsider. Most of them are close to my age (mid 20's to early 30's), but many of them talk about pretty boring stuff or are of the unprofessional type described previously.
As a result of all this, I stopped eating lunch with these folks and I don't really socialize with them outside of work. When I try to, I still really feel like an outsider. I want to move up to something more at my level professionally (it's pretty entry level, this is my first job out of grad school) and get out of my department as soon as I can, but am I hurting my career by not eating with these folks or socializing with them? Some of the most unprofessional are moving up the most in my department! The department director said during my interview that he likes people who see the job as "more than a job" and that the department is very close, so I have the impression that hanging out with my coworkers is expected. I can't stand eating with them and I would not want to spend time outside of work with most of them.
Well, wanting to spend time with them outside of work or sharing common interests isn't really the right litmus test for whether they're good coworkers. If you find yourself in a job where you do, you're really lucky -- most people don't find that. It's a bonus, not something you should expect.
Some of the behaviors you described are things that are truly unacceptable in the workplace (racist jokes), but a lot of them are things that you're likely to find almost anywhere you go: gruff tones of voice, moodiness, shy people who don't make eye contact, people you just can't relate to, and, in most places, casual swearing.
Please don't ignore the racist jokes. Tell the perpetrator you don't see humor in it, and if he persists, talk to your boss or HR department, because not only is he offensive, but he's almost certainly violating a company policy (as well as possibly harassment law, depending on the details).
But for the other stuff -- well, this is the work world. You'll probably be working with a lot of people you don't really click with your entire life.
On the question of whether you're hurting your career by not eating lunch with them -- it depends. Some workplaces -- but not most -- do have cultures where that's expected. I don't think you should feel pressured to eat with them all the time, but it wouldn't kill you to join them occasionally -- and if you go into it with an open mind, you might find that it helps you. Having good relationships with your coworkers can make it easier to get things done (because conversations are easier/more efficient when you have a comfort level with each other, people are more likely to go out of their way to help you out, etc.). You may also be part of work-related discussions over lunch that are useful to you.
I don't think you should feel obligated to socialize with them outside of the work day, but it's reasonable to attend the occasional office happy hour. I mean, you don't need to go camping with these people, but an hour for drinks after work? Do it from time to time, for the same reasons as the occasional lunch.
You don't need to be best friends with your coworkers, but I think you'll be happier if you let your guard down a bit.
Do your work well, maintain pleasant (not BFF) relationships with your colleagues, and you'll be fine.
Monday, November 9, 2009
will tattoos prevent me from getting hired?
A reader writes:
I have a couple tattoos, 2 that are visible, one on my wrist and another on my forearm. They aren't large or obscene. I also have my nose pierced with a small stud. I do have a good job, that I've been at for 6 years, and I got these "decorations" while working here. I am currently looking for a new position and wondered if having visible tattoos will hurt me from getting hired, although they can be covered up by long sleeves. What do you think?
Depends 100% on the company. Some won't care, some will. Some industries would see right past it or even welcome it, and some would frown on it.
Unless you're in a very creative field, I'd cover the tattoos up during the interview and definitely remove the nose ring -- just as part of dressing appropriately formal for an interview.
But, on the other hand, if it's very important to you to get a job where things things don't matter, then you can always keep them visible and assume that it'll be a good screening mechanism for ensuring that you end up in the culture you want. Do you want to work for someone who would have a problem with your tattoos and piercing? If not, take that into account.
I have a couple tattoos, 2 that are visible, one on my wrist and another on my forearm. They aren't large or obscene. I also have my nose pierced with a small stud. I do have a good job, that I've been at for 6 years, and I got these "decorations" while working here. I am currently looking for a new position and wondered if having visible tattoos will hurt me from getting hired, although they can be covered up by long sleeves. What do you think?
Depends 100% on the company. Some won't care, some will. Some industries would see right past it or even welcome it, and some would frown on it.
Unless you're in a very creative field, I'd cover the tattoos up during the interview and definitely remove the nose ring -- just as part of dressing appropriately formal for an interview.
But, on the other hand, if it's very important to you to get a job where things things don't matter, then you can always keep them visible and assume that it'll be a good screening mechanism for ensuring that you end up in the culture you want. Do you want to work for someone who would have a problem with your tattoos and piercing? If not, take that into account.
5 signs you might be a bad coworker
I get a lot of email from people who are being driven crazy by their coworkers. In most cases, I suspect the coworkers have no idea that they're even doing anything irritating.At U.S. News & World Report today, I wrote about five signs that you might be the one pushing your coworkers to the limits of their sanity. Please check it out!
Saturday, November 7, 2009
upset with size of raise
A reader writes:
I'm on my 6th year of working with the same small nonprofit. I haven't moved up or down. I've stayed at my same position.
Every year they do an evaluation, and every year I get the same raise, 1.5%. Since I have been working here, I have taken on more than my requirements. I have shed blood, sweat, and tears at this company.
I had asked for a 3% increase on my recent evaluation and was denied because I didn't "supervise" anyone. Is this honestly fair? I also received my A+ IT Technician Certification before my evaluation when I had asked for the raise. My manager denied my raise because she said that other employees in the company that received any type of certification were not given a raise. Is it really fair to base my job and my responsibilities against someone else in the company?
Salaries are based (or should be based) on market value. In the nonprofit world, sometimes that's also balanced against what the organization can afford to pay; many people accept lower salaries at nonprofits because they feel the work provides other rewards.
1.5% is low, even for nonprofits. This could mean one of several things:
1. Your employer tries to get away with lowballing employees and hopes you'll accept it, but might give you more if you present a strong case for it.
2. Your employer tries to get away with lowballing employees and won't budge regardless of the strength of your argument.
3. Your employer, like many nonprofits, is struggling with funding and can't give you more even if it wanted to.
4. Your employer is open to giving larger raises, but doesn't believe your performance warrants more.
I have no idea which of these is going on here, but what I do know is that you need to ask different questions when you next talk to your manager about this. Ask directly: "What would I need to change about my performance to get a higher raise?" Maybe it's not even possible, who knows. Ask and find out.
You asked whether any of this is fair. Fair means compensating you according to your value to the company, based on your contributions there. It's not really about what your coworkers earn or who has what certification. It's about the employer's assessment of your value. If you disagree with that assessment, you have the following choices:
* Ask for more -- but this must be presented as the case for why your accomplishments warrant more, not just longevity or certifications.
* Accept it and stay.
* Or, if you don't you don't like the salary you're being offered and the employer won't budge, go out there and see what other offers the world has for you. You might find one you like a lot better -- or you might decide that you'd rather stay put.
Good luck.
I'm on my 6th year of working with the same small nonprofit. I haven't moved up or down. I've stayed at my same position.
Every year they do an evaluation, and every year I get the same raise, 1.5%. Since I have been working here, I have taken on more than my requirements. I have shed blood, sweat, and tears at this company.
I had asked for a 3% increase on my recent evaluation and was denied because I didn't "supervise" anyone. Is this honestly fair? I also received my A+ IT Technician Certification before my evaluation when I had asked for the raise. My manager denied my raise because she said that other employees in the company that received any type of certification were not given a raise. Is it really fair to base my job and my responsibilities against someone else in the company?
Salaries are based (or should be based) on market value. In the nonprofit world, sometimes that's also balanced against what the organization can afford to pay; many people accept lower salaries at nonprofits because they feel the work provides other rewards.
1.5% is low, even for nonprofits. This could mean one of several things:
1. Your employer tries to get away with lowballing employees and hopes you'll accept it, but might give you more if you present a strong case for it.
2. Your employer tries to get away with lowballing employees and won't budge regardless of the strength of your argument.
3. Your employer, like many nonprofits, is struggling with funding and can't give you more even if it wanted to.
4. Your employer is open to giving larger raises, but doesn't believe your performance warrants more.
I have no idea which of these is going on here, but what I do know is that you need to ask different questions when you next talk to your manager about this. Ask directly: "What would I need to change about my performance to get a higher raise?" Maybe it's not even possible, who knows. Ask and find out.
You asked whether any of this is fair. Fair means compensating you according to your value to the company, based on your contributions there. It's not really about what your coworkers earn or who has what certification. It's about the employer's assessment of your value. If you disagree with that assessment, you have the following choices:
* Ask for more -- but this must be presented as the case for why your accomplishments warrant more, not just longevity or certifications.
* Accept it and stay.
* Or, if you don't you don't like the salary you're being offered and the employer won't budge, go out there and see what other offers the world has for you. You might find one you like a lot better -- or you might decide that you'd rather stay put.
Good luck.
how to manage an employee without enough work to do
A reader writes:
I have an employee who for the past few months has said that she doesn’t have enough to do. I am not the type to give out busy work. It is perhaps that she has mastered her job and should move on to something else with another company? We are a small company -- 6 people. I am not sure what to do.
So you have an employee who has mastered her job and has time for additional work, and you want her to move on?
Is there nothing else that your company could benefit from having done since she has free time?
Of course you don't want to give her busy work, but surely it would benefit your company to have the chance to get to do things that people normally don't have time for.
I don't know where her talents or interests lie or what your company needs, but why not ask her to figure out what projects or responsibilities would be useful for her to take on? It's a small company, so she's probably intimately familiar with its inner workings and should be able to come up with ideas about where there are needs.
Maybe the company could use better documentation of its various procedures, or better training materials, or, hell, a Twitter account to communicate with customers. I don't know since I don't work there, but she has the time to figure it out -- let that be the first project she takes on.
(I should also note: I'm assuming that you're convinced that her job would be a full-time job for most people, and that she's unusual in being so fast. If that's not the case, then you need to take a hard look at how you have your staffing structured.)
I have an employee who for the past few months has said that she doesn’t have enough to do. I am not the type to give out busy work. It is perhaps that she has mastered her job and should move on to something else with another company? We are a small company -- 6 people. I am not sure what to do.
So you have an employee who has mastered her job and has time for additional work, and you want her to move on?
Is there nothing else that your company could benefit from having done since she has free time?
Of course you don't want to give her busy work, but surely it would benefit your company to have the chance to get to do things that people normally don't have time for.
I don't know where her talents or interests lie or what your company needs, but why not ask her to figure out what projects or responsibilities would be useful for her to take on? It's a small company, so she's probably intimately familiar with its inner workings and should be able to come up with ideas about where there are needs.
Maybe the company could use better documentation of its various procedures, or better training materials, or, hell, a Twitter account to communicate with customers. I don't know since I don't work there, but she has the time to figure it out -- let that be the first project she takes on.
(I should also note: I'm assuming that you're convinced that her job would be a full-time job for most people, and that she's unusual in being so fast. If that's not the case, then you need to take a hard look at how you have your staffing structured.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
