Not relevant. John acting like a brat does not justify Jill acting like a brat. If she wants to be respected as a professional, she needs to act like an adult regardless of what John was doing.
Add “with John” and I’ll agree that this is the appropriate and professional way to handle it. I’ll even agree that a private conversation with her own supervisor, of the tone “I’m not sure what to do about John’s unprofessionalism, can you give me advice?” could be warranted if John’s behavior was truly egregious. But with anyone else? No.
It’s awful because it’s unprofessional. Scolding uninvolved parties for things they didn’t even do? Really?
Sure. If it’s behavior that more than one person has done in the past and the boss has good reason to be fed up.
I’d only been working at my current job for a few months when the entire division was called in for a mandatory meeting with the director. The rumor mill had been spinning wildly and we all knew who had done what. And I remember being irritated that I was about to be scolded for doing something I hadn’t done.
Turns out that others had been guilty of the same behavior in the past, and it had been addressed in the past as well. Multiple times, in multiple ways. And now it happened yet again and the director was the one who’d just been cursed out by HER boss. Sure, maybe I didn’t need to be in the room since I hadn’t done anything. But I also learned a valuable lesson: When the boss says “Do not do X”, she isn’t playing around. So I learned not to do X. Otherwise, I might have done X and messed everything up for everyone.
Exactly. The glaring omission of John’s role in this little drama is enough for me to conclude otherwise. Bad behavior in the workplace is one thing, but spontaneous unprovoked crticism rising to the level of walk-out quitting is not really a believable scenario. So unless John is going to pony up the other side of the story, looks like the same old “pride goes before a fall…” story.
In the hiring stage, I had demanded the boss immediate placement into a higher position (instead of starting as an regular employee, I wanted to start as assistant manager). I knew that this put the boss in a tight position because I was needed by the company to a certain extent, and that by putting me in this position, my boss would likely offend people who worked their way up honestly.
I get hired, and then I get talked about by the boss. Some co-workers were coming up to me shortly after I got hired and asking me what I did. I told them nothing. Nope, didn’t fool them. Apparently my boss had filled them all in on my hand-wringing before I had been hired.
Today we had a professional disagreement - I told my boss I couldn’t do something because of a schedule conflict (hey, I have a life outside of work, too). My boss was irreconcilable. I admit that I was being very stubborn too - neither of us would cede any ground. I partly did have a scheduling conflict, and I partly did NOT want to come in to work on Sunday. The confrontation ended up in my being called a “brat.”
It was probably deserved, as I did demand a lot of my boss, from immediate position into a higher position to excusing my absence (if only for one day).
But I still feel that any professional disagreement, no matter how egregious, should end with anyone being called a “brat.” Such behavior is unprofessional.
I refuse to work in a place where I cannot even be treated with basic respect. If you don’t like me because I played power politics and put you in a bad position, you shouldn’t have hired me.
But you should never talk behind my back or pelt me with names. Am I in a professional setting or am I on an elementary school playground? :dubious:
Maybe if everyone didn’t treat me like dirt I’d actually want to come in to work on Sunday. But nope.
I donno. Maybe you were being a brat. I wasn’t there. It’s not necessarily unprofessional to tell someone who is acting childish that their behavior is childish. Or being a brat. A lot of that depends on how the conversation goes.
There’s too many unknowns about the story, and since you are one of the parties, then the account isn’t going to be unbiased.
In my previous company, if there was a pressing need for someone to come in on a very occasional Sunday, and the person didn’t because they didn’t feel like rescheduled something which could, then the person would likely be let go.
It sounds like you and the boss weren’t a good fit, so it’s probably better for everyone that you’re no longer there.
Let me just say, rude and unprofessional. I have been in this situation. I haven’t been John or Jill, though. I was one of the people in the office that watched this shit go down. It’s uncomfortable and makes the workplace environment horrible.
And I put the blame squarely on the Jill figure. Not that John didn’t or can’t fuck up, I don’t know about that and don’t care. It is Jill’s job, as boss, to be professional at all times and to deal with this sort of shit, and to be honest, I should never know if my boss does not like my coworker.
OP, I was actually trying to give you good advice, not taunt you. Employees Never win against managers. Managers do… and let those big fish feed on each other. Honestly, ‘head down & do the job’ really is good advice. If you want to vent, go for it.
She’s an unprofessional hack who shouldn’t be at that job. But me agreeing with you doesn’t make hiring/firing her your job.
Short Term, she’s there. If you’ve got bills & don’t have another job lined up, you’ve gotta deal with it.
Long Term, she may hang herself & be gone. Just make sure that when the big hand in HR yanks out that weed that you aren’t a blade of grass that gets yanked out with it. I’m not wishing you ill, dude. I’m Not trying to hurt you with bad advice…
But, a job offering basic respect of an employee? in 2012?
Where do I apply…?
Says the poster who was allowed 3 whole days off for a broken bone that makes typing very difficult & painful, to heal.
I donno. We’re only hearing from one side, on the day he walked out. So much of it depends on what was exactly said, what tone of voice, etc., that I don’t think we can really tell.
I have had real shits for employees and have watched people truly test their bosses. Depending on what John did and say, if Jill blew up once, then it just means she’s human.
If it were an ongoing thing, then yes, that’s another issue. If someone quits without notice because they don’t want to work on a Sunday and this is a expectation that it will occasionally be required, yes, I’d say they were acting like a brat.
As I said, there’s no way to tell here what’s happening.
Must be nice to make “demands” during the hiring process. Either you’re really good, or have a really bad attitude.
How you you characterize the working of “your” way, if not honestly?
So they were desperate, then?
So you are new there, and this is how you behave?
I’d say she probably got it just about right. I’d have probably used some different terminology.
So new employees “demand” stuff these days? My, my, how things have changed.
Good for you! I guess now maybe you’ll see how long it takes to learn your lesson: “Power politics” is not for new hires. Sorry if you were under some misunderstanding about that.
I don’t think discussing a subordinate’s work performance with the janitor is appropriate under any circumstances. (And it sounds like this gossiping has been happening since day one.) As Anaamika said, no co-workers should know if Jill doesn’t like John.
It’s called “negotiating” and it is, in fact, typically done during the hiring process before an offer is accepted. That’s pretty much how business works. If one party doesn’t like the terms the other party is offering, they have the option to counter-offer, or even to walk away. No one held a gun to Jill’s head and forced her to hire anyone. If she wanted John badly enough to hire him at assistant management level instead of entry-level, that’s entirely her choice. She made her own bed, there. If she wanted a different arrangement, she could have passed on John and hired someone else.
It’s in everyone’s best interest to negotiate the best deal they can, and to do it before the job offer is accepted. It sets expectations and puts everyone on the same page. (This is also why you get everything in writing.) If Jill agrees to a deal she doesn’t like, then what is she doing? That’s her problem.
Given that it’s not been said one way or the other what may or may not have been put in writing, it seems premature to call him a whiny brat for it. Plus, if nothing was put in writing, the fault for that lies just as much with Jill and the hiring company. If their expectations of John are unclear, or they decided to change them post-hire, it’s not John’s fault for having a different set of expectations.
Also, I’d have to guess that his position in the office was made clear, one way or the other, before he got there. Cuz I know if I’m told I’m going to be an assistant manager (and I’ve let them know that my accepting the job is contingent on being one), and get bait and switched to office drone my first day of work, I’m turning right around and leaving.
Quitting your job in a huff doesn’t sound like “power politics” to me.
Yes, Jill sounds like she was being unprofessional. However, as a manager I would probably also find your attitude infuriating. Jill is your boss. You are not in a position to “cut slack”, “have a falling out”, “hold in high esteem”, “give props”, or otherwise dictate to your boss the terms of your employment relationship (unless you are so critical the company can’t do without you…which most people aren’t).
Jill is probably pissed at you because she hired you at a more senior level and expected that you act as such. i.e., unless it’s your freakin wedding day, put in a bit of extra effort, make a little bit of a sacrifice of your personal time and come in on Sunday to help finish whatever project is so critical that it needs to be done over the weekend.
I especially like how you crafted the OP to make it look like Jill was being a total bitch because you had a “professional disagreement.” A scheduling conflict could be a professional disagreement as you say. However, digging deeper, your entire attitude seems to be based on a misconception that you are in charge.
