![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 19 of 19. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Recently, I was ill for 3 days. I called in sick each day, as required, but did not speak directly to my supervisors. Instead, I left a message. During the sick leave, I received some phone messages, as well, from my supervisors. I called back, but did not speak with the supervisors directly. Instead, I left messages. There was nothing to indicate in their messages that direct consultation was required because of any kind of urgent situation.
After I returned, I was summoned to a meeting with the 2 supervisors. They told me they had been uncomfortable with my not having spoken with them directly during my 3 days of absence. One of the supervisors indicated that she had almost called my emergency contact (a sibling) because she had not been able to have direct voice contact with me. I pointed out to her that since I had called in sick each day as required, there would have been no reason to contact my emergency contact. She insisted it was because of her concern, so I thanked her for her concern but pointed out that she is not my personal friend, but is my supervisor, and that contacting my relative would have gone beyond the boundaries of a supervisor-employee relationship.
The supervisors also argued that it is customary business practice for employees to be required to be available for consultation during a sick day. To support the claim that this is usual and reasonable and commonly practiced, one supervisor said she had asked her husband and he said it was a reasonable expectation, based on how he had run his business before he retired. I did not engage in disputing whether the requirement is common business practice because I do not know. But whether her husband says it is or not didn't seem to me to be of much consequence.
(As an aside, I thought her citing her husband as substantiation of whether this is expected universally seemed rather pathetic to me, and I tried to imagine her husband in a parallel situation, defending a policy decision because his wife said so).
They went on to say they wanted to require that if I am out sick that I call at a specific time when the supervisor would be at her desk. This seemed unrealistic to me, as I do not actually know when she will or will not be at her desk, or on the phone for that matter. The main point they were trying to establish is that to them, it is insufficient to communicate via voice mail and that I'd be required to be available directly.
I told them that had there been an urgent situation, they could have left a message indicating this, but had not. And that I understand the need for consultation on urgent matters, but the nature of illness is such that a person might not be able to consult while out sick. I was not refusing to ever be available to consult, but that in my mind there were few situations that fell into the category of truly urgent (I said this because I know that these 2 people have difficulty triaging what is important and not, and what is urgent and not--they tend to operate out of anxiety).
I ended by saying that I beleived I heard what they were requesting and that I needed to think about how to respond so that we can try to resolve this matter.
A couple of days later, I received a memo from the senior supervisor, "summarizing" the meeting. "Summarizing" is in quotes because her recollection was replete with innacuracies. Not to mention that it detailed her review of the messages from the days I was out sick, reading like a list of accusations of failure to meet objectives. Of course, I was angry, and in my mind began to formulate a point-by-point response. But I stopped myself when I realized that I was taking the bait to be on the defensive when I did nothing wrong. In my mind, the meeting was to establish an expectation that they wanted me to meet from here on. It was based on concerns arising from the sick days, but since they hadn't ever articulated the expectation to me before this, it really isn't about what actually did or did not happen on my sick time.
But the major inacuracy was that she wrote that I had agreed to the new policy. I was actually very surprised to read this because I had chosen my words so carefully at the time, to indicate that I needed time to think about it and respond to what they were saying.
I was also angry because I felt that the supervisors were drawing my time, attention, and energy away from things that were of much higher priority.
But I contained my anger, and called the supervisor to say I had gotten her email, and that I wanted to request that we defer further discussion about the matter until after a major time-sensitive project was completed, which is only about a week away. I also told her that I did need at this time to correct one item in her email, which is that she wrote that I had agreed to the policy when I had not said one way or another, but had said I needed time to formulate a response, and was interested in resolving the matter with them.
She argued with me on this. I then said that I did not want to get into a power struggle with her, and could we defer further discussion until the more pressing responsibilities were seen to. She said yes.
So here I still am, trying to formulate how to respond. I am very uncomfortable with their approach, and afraid that my personal boundaries have been and will be violated. I do not trust their judgment about what kind of situation would require consultation. I have never stated that I refuse to consult as needed while out sick, and in fact, I have had direct conversations in the past. I have also had some sick time when there were no conversations.
Just to be sure, I checked our policy manual, and of course, there is no policy requiring a sick employee to have direct conversations with a supervisor. I have also looked at about 25 personnel policy manuals of varied types of workplaces. None have such a requirement.
If such a policy is indeed, standard operating procedure that is practiced without being in policy manuals, I don't know and I don't have the means to survey other businesses about this.
In my mind, consultation with a sick employee is a judgment call--balancing the professional responsibilities of both the employee and the supervisor with the need to respect a very important boundary--when a person is ill enough to stay home from work, I assume they should not be disturbed unless absolutely necessary.
In this case, there was no urgent need expressed. I believe that the supervisors are acting out control issues. I do not trust their sense of boundaries, and therefore feel very protective of my boundaries, which makes it hard to just say OK to their request. But by not agreeing, they are seeing me as uncooperative. I want to avoid being insubordinate, but I also need to feel like my personal boundaries will be respected.
I am writing this at 4:13 am, which reflects how hard it's been for me to shut out my worries about this. I find myself waking up in the middle of the night rehearsing potential responses.
BTW, I think it is important to note that the supervisors have not at all challenged my 3 days of sick leave. I filled out the forms and the leave was granted. They could have, according to our policies, required certification from a doctor, which I can provide. But they did not.
Posted by zenhussy on June 8, 2003, at 10:21:19
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Noa,
I don't mean to belittle your situation at all by summarizing it as corporate power struggle crap. Pure and simple.
If your company manual and 25 others do not have this "magical" policy your three supervisors have come up with then I'd start documenting everything and getting very familiar with the ins and outs of the ADA and NAMI.
I wish you all the best and am sorry you are losing sleep over this crap. It bites the big one. Really sorry you are in middle of this bs power corporate struggle.
You're stronger than I am to keep at it in that kind of cornering and distorting of words after the fact (after the meeting the summary you received).
Good luck Noa.
zenhussy
Posted by Dinah on June 8, 2003, at 11:31:48
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Hi Noa,
Maybe this is part of the same attitude on their parts that had them evaluate your co-worker the way they did. If they're all on the same page about what they expect, maybe they see anyone who isn't as being "not a team player" or whatever they saw your co-worker as being. It might not be handbook definitions as much as shared expectations among the supervisors who work closely together.
Even in the very small workplace I'm at, I run into the same sort of problems. Sometimes they'll be upset with me for not meeting expectations I didn't even know they had.
From a practical standpoint, how much power do you have in this situation? Are you actively looking for a job where you would find the working conditions more congenial? A lot of times in a subordinate - supervisor relationship, the sad truth is that it doesn't matter who's right. It's all about perceptions and who has, in the words of Seinfeld, "hand". If you need the job more than they need you, there is a limit to how much control you can have over your working conditions. If they need you more than you need the job, the conditions reverse.
I need my job more than they need me, although you might not know it from how I act sometimes. The truth is though that I'm unbelievably self-destructive.
Can you look around for other jobs, so that the power differential shifts a bit? Are you secure for the one year of your contract? Being an employee would give you a bit more leverage, probably.
Have you talked this over with your therapist? What does she think about it?
And sorry for being so d**n practical, Noa. I know how incredibly annoying that can be. It utterly enrages me when someone is like that with me. But I'm in rational mode this morning, and it's all I can offer.
But I'm sorry you're so unhappy with your work, and no matter how this situation works out, I don't think it could hurt to look around for other options. You've been unhappy here for a while.
Posted by Dinah on June 8, 2003, at 11:35:22
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Noa, this may be a strange analogy. And forgive me if I'm way off base. But your work posts remind me somewhat of a person who is ready to move on from a romantic relationship that is no longer satisfying their needs. It is seldom a quick break. There is usually a build-up to it.
Is it possible that you are ready to move on from this job? If so, is it a relationship worth trying to save with therapy?
Again, forgive me if I'm way off base.
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 11:37:32
In reply to Re: Workplace frustrations update response(short) » noa, posted by zenhussy on June 8, 2003, at 10:21:19
Thanks, Zenhussy. Yep, it enrages me too, but I'm so trying not to deal with it that way, but to try to deal with it above board. It is very hard for me to do so.
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 12:32:48
In reply to Re: P.S. » noa, posted by Dinah on June 8, 2003, at 11:35:22
Dinah, thanks. No, you are not off base at all. In many ways, I am ready to move on. There are things I like about this job, though. And I really do think that these managers are engaging in behaviors that are self-defeating for them and for their goals in the long run. It seems so personality-driven, not any kind of hard-ass policy-driven stuff. Does that make sense?
Aside from the things that this job offers in terms of responsibilities that I enjoy carrying out, there is also the salary and benefits thing that would be hard to match. Not that I am making such a terrific salary. But looking in the paper, I see that there isn't much that I would like that pays well enough for me to meet my expenses the way that this job does.
I have been looking at ads, but have done nothing about pursuing the leads. I don't know why. I do need to. And you are right about how that changes the power differential, even if in an intangible way.
I do lately feel more empowered because the level of absurdity in their process has just made it so clear and therefore more easy for me not to let my own inadequacy buttons get pushed. That is how the process usually goes. But given all that has happened in recent months, from the time in late December when my three member team was told, vaguely, that one of us would lose our jobs, through all the nonsense that they put us through and the distorted communications,etc., and now this stuff, it is easier to see things clearer. But not that easy--it is taking a lot of effort.
In addition to the stuff I am dealing with, my other remaining teammate called me to tell me that the junior supervisor had really gone over the top with her and screamed at her in public in a very out of control way, about something she had percieved impulsively as a problem but hadn't checked out what was really going on. My colleague had been able to keep her composure and say that she felt she did not want to address the issue in public. The supervisor kept at it, and my colleague just kept repeating her request to deal with it at a better time and place. Finally, the supervisor stormed away. My colleague reported it to the senior supervisor, who tried to minimize it by telling my colleague, oh, you know, sometimes people yell at each other in order to get things done around here, don't take it so personally, as if my colleague was being too sensitive, so my colleague then responded that she did not agree that yelling and screaming was an appropriate way to carry on business, and that, while she is not saying this as a threat, she would need to think seriously about whether she needs to subject herself to this kind of environment. I was so proud of her!!
While I was on the phone with her she got another call and it turned out to be the junior supervisor calling to apologize, saying she had been way out of line, and trying to explain it as spillover from a frustrating meeting she had just come out of when she encountered my colleague. My colleague thanked her for the apology and for taking the time to call. The junior supervisor then tried to make friendly chit-chat with her (!) which my colleague did not respond in kind to, just thanking her for calling. She got back on the phone with me and told me this. We were wondering if she apologized at her own initiative or because the senior supervisor had spoken to her about it.
You can see from the chit chat attempt, that this junior supervisor seems to be confused about boundaries. She used to be at our level but was promoted a half step last year. I think it is an issue for her not to be 'part of the crowd' anymore. In my mind, though, one of things that shows readiness for management is the ability to cope with this kind of adjustment and accept that you are not in the same kind of relationship anymore. She seems unable to deal with it and is acting it out, imho.
What they are doing with me is different than this loss of control blow up incident, because they are trying to act out control issues in the guise of policies. I wish she would just have an out of control incident with me once and for all! Actually, she did have one last year, right after she was appointed as manager, but never apologised to me about it. She got super micromanaging with me about the most absurd things during a few days when we were moving offices. She was really a bully in her behavior to me and I lost it right back at her at the time, crying and telling her that if this was the way she was going to speak to me as my supervisor, then I would have to leave. I stand by the content of what I said, but it was not the right time to say it, and I was crying at the time. It then pushed her buttons and she cornered me and blocked the door to my office. She had always been assertive with our senior boss about how micromanaging she had been, and when she was micromanaging me (if you knew the kinds of things she was ordering me around about and the belligerent tone and inappropriate space boundaries--ie literally getting in my face, etc.--you would not beleive it. It was so incredibly over the top) so when she was doing this and harassing me on one particular day when we were moving our offices, I just quietly asked her if she was planning on micromanaging me the way the other supervisor had and she had been so unhappy with. She yelled back, I will because you are making me micromanage you, said in anger out loud in public. I wasn't purposely trying to disobey her, but there were logical reasons I was proceeding with the day as I had that I tried to explain to her but she wouldn't listen. She was simply stuck on how she had imagined the moving process to go, and couldn't seem to accommodate to the fact that some real circumstances were calling for us to modify the procedure slightly. The problem was that the office I was moving into was not ready to be moved into because when they removed the previous occupant's belongings, it was clear that the room needing some repairs and cleaning. The maintenance crew were in agreement with me that these repairs and cleaning--nothing major--just cleaning the floor which had never been cleaned due to the volume of stuff that had been in the office before, and patching up some rather large holes in the walls and doing some minor paint touch up. But the junior supervisor, when she found out about it, made a comment that tried to paint me as some kind of primadonna for wanting these things done. In any event, it didn't disturb the overall move plan because I also worked out with the moving crew that I would make room in my old office for the stuff of the person who was taking it over. That person (who happens to be the colleague I mentioned earlier) was away on vacation anyway, so did not need to occupy my office yet, and wouldn't be there to unpack her stuff anyway. I made the space for her belongings. In the meantime, since I could not proceed with my move, I continued to work on tasks that were do-able given the disruption of the moving process. I found "portable" tasks and went to another unoccupied computer and worked there. But the supervisor was enraged at me for not moving my office, and refused to listen to me explain why I was not moving. It was awful, and I totally lost it, crying.
We never spoke about it again after it happened, and in our first official supervisory meeting, it was not mentioned, and she presented herself as very positive toward me, so I just decided to leave it behind us. I had brought it up with the senior supervisor, and at that time I was naive enough to think of her as someone I could speak frankly with and be able to trust her. But, as I was explaining my concerns about what happened, the senior supervisor started rehashing some old criticism of me that I thought we had addressed months before. I let my buttons get pushed again, although I think I did have enough composure to ask her if something new had come up since she and I had addressed these older issues that indicated to her that I had not absorbed the previous criticism (ie, had I repeated what she thought was a problem?). She said no. Her response was so hostile, and began a period of hostility when I received snitty memos about little infractions, some real some not, that was clearly the prelude to the whole job cut thing--ie trying to create some kind of paper trail.
My goodness, if you've had the patience to read this far I thank you so much!!
Anyway, it may be time to leave. I've been lazy about it. I need to update my resume, and haven't gotten to that. But I need to. I guess it is somewhat like a relationship thing, Dinah, in that I am sad because this *could* really be a great job for me to stay in, if it weren't for the unprofessional behavior of the managers. And I wish I could go over their heads but I don't have confidence that I could get the upper level people to understand what I am saying, even though I think that if they really knew how these managers run things, they might be appalled. But such is how power structures work. I have no plans to go over their heads because I know that doing so frequently backfires badly on the employee.
As for documenting--I will need to do this more consistently and thoroughly. But I resent it because it does take time away from what we are all supposed to be doing--our jobs. And it seems like I have to document every little utterance, given how distorted their version of things comes out.
Yes, it's time to update the resume and try to find something else.
Thanks for the support. It is so important to me.
Posted by Snoozy on June 8, 2003, at 12:47:23
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Ni noa -
> After I returned, I was summoned to a meeting with the 2 supervisors. They told me they had been uncomfortable with my not having spoken with them directly during my 3 days of absence. One of the supervisors indicated that she had almost called my emergency contact (a sibling) because she had not been able to have direct voice contact with me.
I pointed out to her that since I had called in sick each day as required, there would have been no reason to contact my emergency contact. She insisted it was because of her concern, so I thanked her for her concern but pointed out that she is not my personal friend, but is my supervisor, and that contacting my relative would have gone beyond the boundaries of a supervisor-employee relationship.
>
It does sound like this supervisor has some power/control issues going on. You called in sick each of the days, and you responded to phone messages during the time you were gone. Calling your emergency contact - in my opinion, that would only be appropriate if they had not heard from you at all during this time.
> The supervisors also argued that it is customary business practice for employees to be required to be available for consultation during a sick day. To support the claim that this is usual and reasonable and commonly practiced, one supervisor said she had asked her husband and he said it was a reasonable expectation, based on how he had run his business before he retired. I did not engage in disputing whether the requirement is common business practice because I do not know. But whether her husband says it is or not didn't seem to me to be of much consequence.
>
> (As an aside, I thought her citing her husband as substantiation of whether this is expected universally seemed rather pathetic to me, and I tried to imagine her husband in a parallel situation, defending a policy decision because his wife said so).
>
I would hate to work for that guy!!!! It's totally pathetic (did she ask her parents too?) - and whatever his business did may not relate to what you do at all (apples and oranges). It sounds like she had already decided that this was customary, expected practice. Who knows - maybe he's one of those husbands that just says "yes dear" to everything without listening. "Is it normal to make sick employees talk to you every hour? Yes, dear. I'm going to tear down the curtains and set them on fire right here. Yes, dear" :)I don't have a lot of experience in dealing with this type of workplace, but I'll give my opinion anyway! :)
Yes, there may be situations where it is appropriate for an employee to consult with the office when they are home sick. A CPA in early April perhaps.
But I have a suspicion that a lot of the people who are in constant contact with their office when they're sick are doing so by choice and that it's not really necessary. "Look how important I am, the workplace can't get along without me"I think you should keep notes of these things. Not necessarily for legal action. But this supervisor is creating records with inaccuracies. If you can say "you said x on this date" it's much harder for them to argue it with you.
> Just to be sure, I checked our policy manual, and of course, there is no policy requiring a sick employee to have direct conversations with a supervisor. I have also looked at about 25 personnel policy manuals of varied types of workplaces. None have such a requirement.
>
If this were a common expectation, I'm sure you would have seen it in one of those policy manuals. If there is such an expectation, it's unwritten and needs to be spelled out clearly beforehand. I know you don't trust your supervisors on this, and I don't know if there are any "definitions" that can be applied to your work (meaning if x happens, and I'm absolutely needed, I'll call from home).Is there someone at your workplace in a position similar to yours, or under the same supervisors? If so, it might be useful to subtly get a sense of what kind of treatment they get and how it differs from yours.
> I am writing this at 4:13 am, which reflects how hard it's been for me to shut out my worries about this. I find myself waking up in the middle of the night rehearsing potential responses.
>I don't know if this helps at all, but it does apply to different situations. You know that old phrase "I'll worry about it in the morning?" For me, it turns into worrying about it at 2, 2:20, 2:50, 3:05 and on and on. This doesn't totally fix things, but I find I do better if I come to some resolution before I try to sleep. At least a vague idea of where I want to go with something. Even if I have to stay up later, it's worth it for me because I would lose even more sleep if I left it for morning.
> BTW, I think it is important to note that the supervisors have not at all challenged my 3 days of sick leave. I filled out the forms and the leave was granted. They could have, according to our policies, required certification from a doctor, which I can provide. But they did not.
>That's good. I hope that this works out ok for you. And it's always helpful to vent about bad situations with employers/work. I used to be Old Faithful lol
Posted by judy1 on June 8, 2003, at 12:52:06
In reply to Re: P.S.-very long, posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 12:32:48
I am in awe of your restraint in this situation, in all the jobs I've had I have never been treated this way over a sick leave (and I don't know anyone who has). So obviously, it is a power trip on part of your supervisors (like everyone said). I'm more knowledgeable in this area and have found when you are dealing with idiots like this in power, they don't change, and the sad truth is even if you resolve this something else will pop up. So for your own mental health, please look around for another position. Is there someone higher up the food chain you can speak to in the meantime? (Not HR, they never help). Try to understand what this is, that it has nothing to do with you personally (meaning, they have very likely done this to other people), and make sure your support system is in place. I wish you all the best noa- judy
Posted by Snoozy on June 8, 2003, at 13:06:01
In reply to Re: P.S.-very long, posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 12:32:48
Yes, documenting things is very important. You could try really venting in your notes - personal comments, sarcasm, visions of revenge, and then just editing them out later if need be. I find it much easier to keep up with these things if I really let myself go with it.
I don't know if this applies to what you do - but can you "network"? (Ugghh, I hate that word and I'm not overly fond of the process). I heard a statistic once on how many jobs are filled by word-of-mouth rather than advertisements. It was quite high.
You probably can't feel it, but you know it's a good thing that the supervisor is being over-the-top with her behavior. There's nothing worse than someone who snarls and snorts behind closed doors but is all smiles and rainbows in public. At least in terms of trying to get other people to see the bad side. I think there are elements of a few fairy tales in there :)>As for documenting--I will need to do this more consistently and thoroughly. But I resent it because it does take time away from what we are all supposed to be doing--our jobs. And it seems like I have to document every little utterance, given how distorted their version of things comes out.
Posted by mmcasey on June 8, 2003, at 14:09:24
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
I'm curious about what your actual job is, if it's not too complicated. And also, how long have you worked there?
I don't feel like I have much to offer in the way of advice because my job is basically so far from that kind of thing. For the most part, it probably wouldn't really matter one way or the other if I even DID call in sick, though of course it is the courteous thing to do. I don't think anyone I work with has my home number either. Hmmm.
Posted by coral on June 8, 2003, at 14:55:10
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Dear Noa,
DOCUMENT! DOCUMENT! DOCUMENT! I speak as a management consultant. If you keep a journal for personal venting, fine, but on the professional front, document in a straight-forward fashion and DO respond in writing (e-mail is fine) to your supervisor. Approach it as if there was a misunderstanding that you're taking this opportunity to clarify, then, state your position about their request, and you appreciate the opportunity to meet with the supervisor at DATE/TIME. After the next meeting, follow up immediately with an e-mail recapping the meeting. I've worked with hundreds of companies and what they're asking is not reasonable. The standard practice is that a person who is going to be home sick calls in, preferrably to the supervisor (or pre-determined call line) and leaves a message. The exception, as someone mentioned, would be something like a CPA in early April. Keep your correspondence very straight-forward, factual and dry. (Keep your emotions out of it - and you're doing a wonderful job of that!!!) Hopefully this is just a blip. If it becomes a pattern, your documentation becomes even more critical.
Please let me know if I can be of assistance...
Coral
Posted by Dinah on June 8, 2003, at 15:35:35
In reply to Re: P.S.-very long, posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 12:32:48
Sounds miserable. But I do understand the trap you're in. Too good to leave, too bad to stay. Again, just like a relationship. I think there's a book by that title. :) I have the same like/hate relationship with my job, with the hate way outweighing the like. But I have no illusions that I could function elsewhere. However, you are way more together than I am, as evidenced by your mature and reasoned response to their behavior.
I agree with the others about documentation. I don't know how much legal help it is, as you're a contractor. But it will help that crazed differing views of reality feeling. And you can always refer to it if a dispute over what was said comes up. Of course, I'm not sure how much help that is either when the managers are sticking together. Being right might just make them more angry.
Good luck with choosing the wisest course of action for you. I know that whatever you choose, you will deal well with it.
Dinah
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 18:36:24
In reply to Re: Workplace frustrations update (long) » noa, posted by Snoozy on June 8, 2003, at 12:47:23
>>Who knows - maybe he's one of those husbands that just says "yes dear" to everything without listening. "Is it normal to make sick employees talk to you every hour? Yes, dear. I'm going to tear down the curtains and set them on fire right here. Yes, dear" :)
I love this thought! It really made me chuckle!!
>>But I have a suspicion that a lot of the people who are in constant contact with their office when they're sick are doing so by choice and that it's not really necessary. "Look how important I am, the workplace can't get along without me"
I think you're right. This woman is one of those people. Even before she became a manager, she used to like to let everyone know that she checked her email and messages all the time from home. The ultimate role model of our workplace is the overall division boss who has insomnia and leaves people email and voice mail messages in the middle of the night!
>>Is there someone at your workplace in a position similar to yours, or under the same supervisors? If so, it might be useful to subtly get a sense of what kind of treatment they get and how it differs from yours.
One was just let go, the other has had some similar kinds of treatment. We support each other all the time.
Thanks, Snoozy.
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 18:38:05
In reply to Re: P.S.-very long » noa, posted by judy1 on June 8, 2003, at 12:52:06
Thanks, Judy! I don't know about going higher up. I think about it but I am wary of doing so because I don't know if it would help or work, and not backfire big time.
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 18:43:07
In reply to Re: Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by coral on June 8, 2003, at 14:55:10
Thank you, Coral! I hate the idea of having to document so much but I guess I have to. It also helps to hear that you have worked with hundreds of companies and none have this expectation. As for the CPA in April, to me that seems solvable if they were to just leave detailed messages if they needed information from me, rather than requiring me to have to chase them down when I am sick. With a detailed message, I can respond and if they are not available, I can leave a detailed message back to help them with an urgent matter if one comes up. This is more or less what I had suggested in that meeting, but they didn't like the idea, sticking to this notion they have that it is essential to have voice contact no matter what--and regardless of whether there is an urgent matter or not.
Posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 18:45:42
In reply to Re: P.S.-very long » noa, posted by Dinah on June 8, 2003, at 15:35:35
Again, I am so appreciative of the support you and the others here are giving me. It helps. I am just going to continue to try to not get pulled into the game playing. And, yes, I'll document document document.
I'll keep you guys posted. Thanks.
Posted by fallsfall on June 8, 2003, at 21:50:00
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
Posted by Emily Barrett on June 11, 2003, at 6:06:44
In reply to Workplace frustrations update (long), posted by noa on June 8, 2003, at 10:11:19
I can empathize with those sorts of problems, as I suffer from a pysical condition that sometimes prevents me from working for several days at a time. I would hope that only three sick days would be okay with most companies. I hadn't realized that one is supposed to be available for phone consultations, even when ill. However, when I am ill I'm always at my home, so if they wanted to reach me from work, they could. (Unless I were taking a nap). The worst part of it for me is that I suffer from an intermittent, painful, neurological condition that causes me to forget entire conversations when I am in the midst of an attack. I'm unable to think clearly or plan anything during those episodes, and I probably would sound rather "out of it" on the phone. Certainly not the way I would want my employer to hear me! But again, I don't know how much a person can do about it. Sometimes I debate whether or not full disclosure of the extent of the symptoms would be wise. For now, I have disclosed to my employer my medical condition, but very few people can understand weird symptoms like memory lapses, unless they themselves have suffered from the condition. Good luck with everything and I hope it all works out okay!
Emily
Posted by noa on June 11, 2003, at 16:51:01
In reply to Re: Workplace frustrations update Noa, posted by Emily Barrett on June 11, 2003, at 6:06:44
Thanks. See, and I think that when you are having those kinds of symptoms, you should not feel obligated to answer the phone. I am cautious about disclosing, but if at some point you need accommodations at work, you may decide to do so. Or if you think you might have memory lapses while at work and are afraid people will get the wrong idea about why. But it is such a personal decision, and you have to weigh out what the benefits of disclosing would be vs. the risks.
But you are right, it can take a lot of energy to help people understand certain symptoms and not judge us for having these symptoms.
I'm feeling more empowered today, actually. I think I have emotionally checked out, maybe that is why. I even responded improvisationally to my boss in a way I didn't expect and that makes me feel good, but perhaps is a little "wicked" of me. My response was pretty patronizing. We ran into each other in the copy room and she asked me, in her very micromanaging sort of way (totally acting out her uncontained anxiety, I've decided), if a particular task had been accomplished. When I said no, she got that angry, scared look and started going on about the number of days left to have it happen. I was totally confident it would happen, and though it hadn't already happened, the process was in motion for the things that had to happen first, leading up to it happening. So, I was happy that I did not allow my defensive buttons to be pushed, and then out of nowhere, this improvised move came out: she was standing with her hands on the copy machine, and I just kind of leaned in a little and put my hand on her arm, and looked her in the eye, smiled, and said, "Don't worry, 'M', I'm on the case." I think she was too stunned to reply and so I just went about my business and walked away. I know, it is so patronizing, but wow, it feels good to have done it!!
I continue to have my daily 5 minute consults with my co-worker where we support each other in our attempts to sort the latest stuff out, and stay centered and deal with this stuff as professionally as we can. This has helped a lot, as has talking with friends, with my therapist, and with you guys here.
I have my meeting set up with the two bosses for next week. I am not really sure what I will say, but I feel like I'll figure it out. I know some of what I want to say. My goals are different than they were before I decided it is time to find another job and leave. I'll probably get nervous before then, and who knows what idiotic nonsense will be sent my way between now and then that might agitate me. Oh well. You'll hear about it if it happens!
Thanks.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.