1. Talking about my cats in my business messaging
I’m a long time reader with a low-stakes question you’re uniquely qualified to answer. I own my own one-person business, primarily providing tech education for professionals and hobbyists in a niche industry. It’s very public-facing. I’m also fairly new in the space (about five years). And like you, I’m passionate about animal rescue and am owned by two rescued cats.
I’d like to use my voice to highlight them and the rescue cause, without overwhelming people and seeming less professional than I should. What’s too much? You feature your cats on the weekends, but you’re more established than I am. I was thinking of a few social media posts a year (International Cat Day!), and maybe a page on my website for the Chief Feline Officers. Any advice?
You should do it! A few posts a year and a page on your website is a perfectly fine balance. I don’t say that just because I share your love of cats; I would say the same thing if the topic were, I don’t know, snowboarding or gardening.
One company I work with includes pictures of their employees’ animals on their “about us” page, and I love it. It doesn’t overtake the main message of that page, but it humanizes them and did make me feel extra warmly toward them.
2. Communicating with an employee’s mother while they’re on medical leave
I just started a new position where I manage a small team. One of the members of that team, Brad, unexpectedly went on PFML prior to my start date. My direct manager, Jane, told me that Brad has very high anxiety and had “a meltdown” which led to him no-showing for a couple weeks before filing for Paid Family Medical Leave (PFML). He may have been communicating with HR during the no-show period; it’s unclear.
Jane is speculating that the cause of said meltdown was the fact that Brad applied for my position but was not given an interview due to him not meeting an essential requirement of the job. Jane told me that when Brad’s anxiety is in-check, which is most of the time, he is an excellent employee. Jane also added that Brad’s mother is overly involved in his life, gives him a lot of bad work advice, and is generally a big source of his anxiety. I’ve never met Brad but I feel empathy for him and genuinely hope he gets better and comes back to work (I also really need all hands on deck on my team right now).
Yesterday Jane told me that, while no one’s heard directly from Brad yet, HR has been communicating with his mother. I can’t control what HR does but my first thought was that, if his mother were to reach out to me at all, I would refuse to discuss Brad’s employment with her because she’s not my employee. However I’m wondering whether the PFML — more specifically the anxiety-as-a-medical-condition angle — changes the appropriateness of communicating with an employee’s family members.
What do you think? I would have no problem engaging with an employee’s parent if the employee were, say, in a coma or otherwise unable to communicate due to a medical condition. Does potentially debilitating anxiety count as such a condition? And should there be any kind of next-of-kin consideration here? For the record Brad is married. In this hypothetical situation, should I differentiate between whether I engage with his mother vs his wife?
If Brad is incapacitated, that may be why his mother is the one communicating on his behalf. It doesn’t sound like there’s reason to think they’re discussing anything beyond the date of his return, or the fact that he’s not ready to return yet. If she’s handling that because he can’t, that’s not inherently inappropriate (and in fact is explicitly permitted under FMLA). It is surprising that he’s deputized his mom rather than his wife (although there are things that could make her the better choice), but ultimately that aspect isn’t something the employer needs to sort through, as long as Brad has consented to her being his point of contact. Still, though, the conversations should be limited to logistics related to the leave and not anything beyond that.
It also shouldn’t continue once Brad is no longer incapacitated, so once he’s back at work I’d expect you’ll only be communicating with him directly.
3. My coworker’s name is a slur
In 99% of circumstances, I believe in calling people what they want to be called. It’s respectful.
But I’m now in an odd situation where I have a new coworker, and her name is a racial slur! Others seem fine using her name, even if they raised their eyebrows when first introduced. It seems like I’m the only one flat out not comfortable saying that word.
I tried referring to her by her last name, and she gently interjected saying, “You can call me [Slur].” Everyone else goes by their first name, so I know it’s singling her out to call her by her last name. That feels rude on my part.
The slur is not against my group, and it’s not as widely used or known as a slur compared to the “n” word. But it’s unambiguously a slur. Nobody in that group is reclaiming the word.
For the record, I and my coworker both seem to be white. I know looks can be deceiving, but I would be very surprised if she’s a member of the referred-to racial group.
Looking for similar situations for guidance, I’m only finding instances where a people were disciplined or even fired for not saying another person’s name. For example, a professor was put on administrative leave for refusing to use a Chinese student’s name, Phuc, because the prof didn’t want to say a word sounding like “fuck.” Still, my situation feels different. “Phuc” is not “fuck,” and “fuck” is a swear but not a slur.
I understand that, despite her name’s racist meaning, it would be crossing a line to ask her to change it at work. But, saying it feels so wrong. I just want to draw a line around saying it myself. Is there any reasonable way to do this?
No. You do need to call people by their names at work. In this particular usage, the word is her name, not a slur.
4. Asking for a raise when my job means I know what everyone else makes
You always give strong advice on how to discuss and advocate for a raise — that it’s important to know your worth and market rate for a role, that a salary is based on the value of your position and not individual financial needs, and of course that you should be prepared to make your case with achievements or new responsibilities since your salary was last set.
I’m in a position where I’ve taken on substantially more responsibilities in the last year, completed several successful projects, and gotten glowing feedback (“I wish I had 10 of you at my last firm,” etc.) — but I was only given the bare minimum cost-of-living raise this review cycle. On the one hand, I am already being paid slightly above market rate for my role so it’s hard to use that argument in any negotiation. On the other hand, due to my job responsibilities I know everyone’s salaries … and I’m being paid 13-20%+ less than others at my level in the firm.
I’m prepared to argue my case for a larger raise with just my accomplishments, but can you ever use your job-related knowledge of others’ pay to negotiate your own? Of note, there are no protected class issues in this situation, and I work in a management role (so I don’t think salary transparency laws really apply in this case).
The biggest way to use that information is as background for your own thinking; it tells you what your company is willing to pay for similar work, which means you’re better equipped to figure out what you can ask for. Make sure you’re factoring in differences in job responsibilities, not just level — for example, it would make sense that someone who manages a large team is paid more than someone who doesn’t manage anyone, even if they’re at the same general level.
But you also don’t need to pretend that you don’t have this information. It would be a mistake to just say, “I see Jane is making $X and so I’d like to, too.” But you can say, “Given what the company pays for similar positions, and given my work and contributions in the last year, I’m requesting that my salary be raised to $X.”
5. When you apply for an internal job, are you supposed to tell your manager?
I have a question about applying for an internal position in the same company, where you would be switching teams or even whole departments. How does that work, logistically?
When a position opens up, typically does someone ask their manager about it first, or apply and let their manager know they applied, or ask the hiring manager first, or just apply silently and cross your fingers? Or is there another method I can’t think of?
It varies by company. Some companies have policies that require you to tell your manager at some point. Some require that upon application, some if you get to the interview stage, and some only if you move forward from there. So first, you want to find out what, if anything, your company expects.
Also, regardless of any policy, your manager may find out anyway since managers sometimes talk to each other, and the hiring manager could mention it to your boss (for example, to seek feedback about you) unless you specifically explain that you’d like to keep your interest confidential for now (and explicitly ask if that’s something they can do, rather than just assuming).
There’s some advice here on language to use with your manager.