Send questions about the office, money, careers and work-life balance to [email protected]. Include your name and location, or a request to remain anonymous. Letters may be edited.
Dear Work Friend,
I manage a team of about 20 people in an open-plan office suite. A few months ago, one of my staff members asked that we disconnect the overhead lighting above his pod because he is prone to migraines. His co-workers didn’t object, so I complied. That corner of the office is now permanently dark, which isn’t ideal, but I’ve been willing to tolerate it.
Last week, a worker in another corner of the office asked to work from home in the morning because her husband’s schedule had changed and she needed to be home to care for her two preschoolers. I said she could change her schedule if necessary, but not work from home while also caring for a 2- and 4-year-old. She escalated to the union, but the union supported my decision.
Yesterday, she came back with a request to have the lights above her desk disconnected as well, saying she also suffers from migraines. Today, a third employee, a close friend of the second, said that she, too, suffers migraines and needs the lights disabled. This feels like a retaliatory protest, and obviously, I cannot agree to the entire office being plunged into a perpetual state of gloom with no overhead lights.
My question is, in declining the two new requests, should I then also revert to full lighting for the whole office? That feels like penalizing a person with a legitimate health need for two disgruntled staffers.
— Anonymous
This is an interesting letter, because I’m not sure the advice you need is the advice you’re looking for.
The answer to your specific question is pretty obvious: No, you should not revert to full lighting for the whole office. Your migraine-suffering employee’s accommodation was made separately from these two later (and, to your mind, suspicious) requests. Right now you have two apparently disgruntled employees; why would you add a third?
I understand why you’re looking to assert some authority here. You’re afraid of being undermined by employee rebellion. (And afraid of a darkened office.) But being a manager isn’t solely about maintaining dispensatory power, and flexibility and creativity can often defuse tension more effectively than a rigid commitment to particular rules — or, for that matter, to particular office lighting schemes.
Rather than roll back accommodations for the sake of fairness (or to make a point), I would at least consider trying to meet your other employees halfway. For all you know, their requests are legitimate and the connection to the contentious schedule change is coincidental. (“Bad migraines” doesn’t seem like a far-fetched condition for a woman with two young kids and a stressful schedule.) Could you, for example, move the two newly incapacitated employees to the same darker section of the office as the original migraine sufferer? This might blunt their frustration, and even earn some good will, without darkening the entire office.
Or you might go in one day this week and try to look at the office lighting as lighting rather than as leverage. Is a less brightly lit office really “gloomy”? Is that one corner “permanently dark,” or naturally — even soothingly — lit? Would individual desk lamps be better for everyone? Is it possible that the migraine sufferers have a point? You could even consult some of the other employees to see how they feel. Some of them may hate the darkness as much as you do, which would at least give you more ground to stand on in rejecting the newer requests.
These exercises may amount to nothing; creativity is not a panacea. And it’s true, you’re backed into a (particularly ill-lit) corner right now because you made the original accommodation informally. But the best alternative to casual flexibility is a formal, neutral and transparent process, not arbitrary rollbacks. In other words, if you can’t absorb tension through creative management, absorb it into bureaucracy.
Your team is big enough and organized enough to run management decisions through the union; why aren’t you also running their accommodation requests through your own process? Ask for medical documentation and discuss alternatives, both for the two new requests and, retroactively, for the original one. If the new requests are bad-faith, you can defensibly shoot them down. And if those two employees can demonstrate need, you’re empowered to help them without feeling undermined.
How to Stand Up for a Colleague
Dear Work Friend,
A technologist at the laboratory where I work was scheduled to come in at 2 a.m. to relieve the holdover from the second shift. He collided with a deer on his way to work, and his car sustained severe damage. He notified the technologist covering the lab that he’d be returning home rather than risk driving the damaged vehicle any farther.
Because this employee had a history of arriving late to work, the laboratory manager filed an incident report. The technologist went to human resources to plead his case. He was told that in a year’s time the incident would be expunged from his personnel file, but that he needed to address the matter with his manager.
When he went to the manager’s office, he found the manager focused on his computer screen. He tried to hand him the garage’s detailed bill as proof of what had happened, but the manager continued looking at his computer and simply said, “I wouldn’t worry about it.”
This man is well liked around the office, and a group of us wrote a letter on his behalf with the intention of giving it to the C.E.O. He was grateful for what we’d done but, in keeping with his nonconfrontational nature, refused to sign the letter.
Was the laboratory manager justified in maintaining his incident report? Should H.R. have followed up on this matter? And what responsibility, if any, did the manager or H.R. have for what happened to the incident report?
— Anonymous
I agree with your sense that the manager was being unfair in filing the report and that H.R. perhaps should have intervened or declined to escalate the report. I also appreciate the methodical detail with which you recount this story, which probably speaks highly of your skill as a laboratory worker.
But I think the surplus of incidental facts, and your overall sense of frustration with the injustice and unfairness, may be distracting from the practical takeaway of these interactions, which is that most of the people involved seem to want to let the mess die down.
H.R. has said the report will be expunged from his personnel file in a year. The manager has explicitly said not to worry about it. Even the employee in question has declined to join you and your colleagues in your attempt to get the report overturned.
Obviously this doesn’t mean your co-worker is safe from escalation as far as possible escalation goes. And given the manager’s fussy report filing, I understand why you feel concerned.
But your colleague (and you) should be cheered that he has such supportive and well-organized colleagues willing to stand up for him. If the situation develops further — if you get better evidence that the manager or H.R. is truly looking to escalate or retaliate — you already have a protest letter in place. But for now I would listen to H.R., the manager and the technologist themselves and keep it in the drawer.
Asking for a Friend
Dear Work Friend,
I have worked for myself for over 20 years, but the kids are gone, the house is being sold, and I’m contemplating going back to work for someone else. I have some dated experience about what corporate, government and nonprofit workplaces are like.
My question is: What has changed in the past 10 to 20 years that I should take into account as I prepare to do this? As a woman, I expect there to be additional challenges — by most statistics, women over 50 who have not recently been in the work force are not at the top of the hiring list.
There’s lots out there on how to make yourself relevant, how to fill in the gaps in résumés; how #MeToo has had an effect, and a backlash; even how to address ageism. But I don’t get a sense of how the culture itself has changed.
What would you qualify as the biggest workplace cultural changes in the past decade or so? What are things to absolutely avoid, but that might have been acceptable in the past?
Your thoughts are welcome!
— Anonymous
The Lord (and my editors) know that I’m usually all too happy to weigh in on circumstances with which I don’t have a huge amount of personal familiarity. (What kind of advice columnist would I be if I didn’t?)
But given my own demographic categories (a man in his 40s) and work history (checkered), I think any attempt I could make at answering this letter would fall badly flat. Plus, I recently re-entered office work myself, and could use the advice. So it seems like a good opportunity to turn this question over to readers.
What has changed in the workplace? What advice would you give to someone returning to the office from self-employment? What have you had to learn, and what do you wish you’d known?
Send your advice for Anonymous to [email protected] or fill out the form below, and we’ll publish a selection of the letters in a future column.
The post A Contagious Aversion to Overhead Lights appeared first on New York Times.
