It’s 5 solutions to 5 questions. Here we go…

1. My boss jokes about firing individuals

I moved from company to nonprofit about eight months in the past and presently am a newer member (not the latest) of a good group. My boss may be very touchy-feely and I’m very not, however we have now not had any conflicts and I’ve felt supported in methods I by no means did in the company world.

However, I want recommendation on whether or not I can or ought to say one thing that’s actually bothering me. In the final eight months, she has made nearly equivalent jokes to 4 individuals on our group. We have a weekly group assembly and if somebody is late (completely acceptable for this setting), after they do enter the digital assembly she at all times says, “Hey Jane, we have spent the first part of the meeting talking about you and your performance and we will need to let you go.” She instantly laughs, nobody thinks she is severe for a single second, and she is a very candy girl. But it makes me loopy! Can I say one thing or do I want to only chuckle and bear it?

It’s baffling when individuals in positions of energy don’t perceive that their capacity to yank somebody’s livelihood out from underneath them will not be a humorous joke. And but, this occurs method more usually than you’d assume it will. Sometimes it’s people who find themselves uncomfortable with their authority, generally it’s people who find themselves fascinated by their very own authority, and generally it’s people who find themselves simply inconsiderate.

In any case, there’s room to say one thing! The light-touch strategy, if you wish to attempt it first, is to react in the second. The subsequent time she does it, you would simply let your self have a pure response — like wanting stricken and saying, “That’s really mean” or “That’s awful.”

That could be sufficient to jog her into reconsidering how the “joke” goes over. But if she retains doing it, you would say one thing to her in a one-on-one like, “You’ve joked a few times about firing people in meetings. It gives me a pit in my stomach every time. I don’t think we should joke about people’s ability to support themselves and their families.” If she’s a usually respectable one that simply didn’t assume this by means of, that’ll probably get her to re-think it.

2. My awful former coworker works at the company I’m interviewing with

I used to be impacted by a restructuring final 12 months and have been actively in search of a new function. It has been taking longer than anticipated and a company I’m very involved in referred to as me concerning a place they thought I’d be a good match for.

My concern is that I do know a earlier colleague, who I had a horrible expertise with, lately beginning working there. I imagine they’re in the identical division however completely different group. My expertise with this particular person was they had been a bully and extraordinarily tough to work with. My outdated company acknowledged to me that they had been conscious that this particular person was a downside however did nothing about it. I’d be very involved about working round them once more.

I took the first interview to be taught more, no matter my concern. At my interview, the division head talked about they lately employed this particular person from my outdated company. I didn’t react or reply in the second. The company has referred to as me to arrange one other interview and have said they need to transfer shortly with me and mentioned, “We are very keen on you. We see you as a great fit.” I’m involved in the function and have indicated I’d be involved in persevering with the dialog.

Any strategies for the way I can increase my considerations with out it wanting dangerous on me or is it higher to bow out gracefully and state another excuse? I’m involved that if I don’t increase it proactively, they may hear about “a challenging dynamic” between us from one in every of my references.

I don’t see myself having the ability to settle for the function with out setting some expectation that I cannot tolerate being bullied in the future and categorical my concern. I feel they might need to know in addition to it might influence the broader group dynamic if not managed.

I’d bow out of the interview course of. It’s very tough to inform a potential employer that you just don’t get together with one in every of their present staff or attempt to deal with bullying earlier than you’re even working there. They don’t know you, in order that they’re not geared up to guage which of you is the downside and it’s more likely to sound like drama they’d somewhat simply keep away from. It’s additionally such an uncommon factor to lift as a candidate that there’s a danger, nevertheless unfairly, that you just’ll find yourself wanting excessive upkeep (once more, they don’t know you and are occurring very restricted knowledge). There’s additionally no assure that you just wouldn’t have a horrible expertise with this particular person once more (and identical division, even when a completely different group, is just too shut for consolation).

3. Managing expectations of inside candidates after they’re not proper for the job

Any recommendation on what to do when a direct report inquires about their suitability for an inside job opening? I’ve been promoted (yay!) and now have to fill my outdated place. I’ve two colleagues who I do know are involved in making use of for the function (which might be a step up from their present roles). One of them is nice, and that is precisely the form of place they need to be aspiring to in 3-4 years, however they only don’t have sufficient administration expertise but. The different is … nice in some methods, and has more expertise so on paper could be a match for this function, however I’ve labored with them for lengthy sufficient to know they’re 1) extremely disorganized and 2) a dangerous supervisor. Both of them are angling for “informal” conversations with me about whether or not they need to apply. I don’t need to routinely rely them out, however I additionally don’t need to give them any false hope. How would you deal with this?

With the nice however inexperienced particular person, does the expertise deficit already make them a clear-cut no? If so, be forthright about that: “We’re looking for a hire with more management experience because ____, but you would be a really strong candidate for this kind of role in a few years.” If it’s not so clear-cut: “I want to be up-front that we’re really emphasizing management experience for the hire because ____, but I still encourage you to throw your hat in the ring if you’re interested.”

With the disorganized dangerous supervisor: If you’d been managing them for longer, ideally you’d give actually clear suggestions about the points you see and why they’d be prohibitive for the job. With somebody you simply began managing, that may really feel untimely (even when you realize it’s not) so on this case the most I’d say is one thing like, “Two things we’re really going to look at for this role are management skill and ability to stay organized with a high volume of work coming at you, so I would try to speak to those in your application if you can.” (You can embody different issues on that listing too if it will be bizarre to only identify these two.) And in a while, assuming you finally reject them, give them suggestions at that time about strengths the profitable candidate had that they had been weaker on.

4. Did I misunderstand my provide letter?

I work as an teacher. Wages are typically very low on this subject. I used to be provided a very part-time place (10 hours a week) instructing a couple of courses. This is an hourly place, no advantages or stability.

The provide letter mentioned: 20 hours a week at 50 {dollars} an hour. I knew I’d solely be instructing 10 hours a week. So, I interpreted the provide to imply 10 instructing hours + 10 prep hours. This is pretty widespread in our subject.

I bought my first paycheck and I used to be paid just for the 10 hours I taught, not the 20 hours in the provide letter.

I did speak with HR and they mentioned that the provide letter was meant to convey that 20 hours/week was the most I might train, not that I’d be paid for 20 hours a week. But now I get paid half of what I assumed I’d be for this gig, and it’s having a fairly vital impact on my pocketbook and temper!

My query is, do I’ve to just accept that? Did I simply misunderstand the provide letter? It’s completely my personal fault for not clarifying with the director earlier than I signed all the paperwork, so I genuinely don’t know whether or not I’ve something to face on right here.

I suppose it’s attainable that your subject has some uncommon norms round this, however normally, no, you weren’t mistaken. A letter that gives you 20 hours a week of labor usually means … they’re providing you 20 hours a week of labor. Not as much as 20 however actually 10.

Are you a contractor or an worker? If you’re an worker, because you’re hourly they’re required by regulation to pay you for all the hours you’re employed, which it is best to level out — as in, “To comply with federal law for hourly workers, we need to pay me for my prep time as well, which was 10 hours last week and which I expect to be 10 hours a week going forward. That’s always been the standard practice I’ve seen in our field.”

If you’re a contractor, your choices are more restricted and depend upon how keen you’re to stroll away in the event that they gained’t budge. You can level out that the provide specified 20 hours a week, less than 20, and that you just’re being paid half of what the letter mentioned you had been signing on for, and you may maintain agency that that you must be paid for the 10 hours a week of prep work you’re doing. If you’re keen to stroll away from the job over it, make that clear — as in, “I of course can’t do the job for half the pay I came on board for, so what makes sense from here?”

5. How do I ask my interviewer about their frequent turnover?

I lately utilized for a job and after I was looking for info about the place, I discovered an outdated job posting for the identical place from round six months in the past. Do you assume it’s okay to ask in the interview why they’re having to fill the place once more so quickly? Do you have got any concepts on easy methods to phrase it? I don’t need to be perceived negatively for asking however I additionally really feel like it will be a main oversight to not attempt to discover out what occurred, particularly as I’d be leaving a job I like and that I’m snug in for it.

From the LinkedIn profiles, it additionally looks like there are a variety of managerial stage workers who’ve began in the final 3-6 months, which looks like it could be a crimson flag. Any ideas? It’s principally an administrative place so I don’t assume I might ask to talk with numerous workers members earlier than accepting or something like that, however I need to be as thorough as I can.

For the query about why they’re filling the job once more so quickly, you don’t want to bounce round it! You can both ask how lengthy the final particular person was in the function and why they left, or you may say, “Am I right in thinking I saw this position advertised about six months ago? … Can I ask what happened that led to it being open again now?” (Of course, remember that they may have a number of slots for the job.)

Then from there, you may go to, “What’s your turnover like generally? I got the sense from LinkedIn that you’ve have had a lot of new people start in the last six months or so, and I wondered if that’s being driven by growth or turnover or something else…?”

Also, there’s a lot of due diligence you are able to do through networking, which doesn’t depend on having to get all of your data out of your interviewers. Here’s some recommendation on easy methods to do it.