It’s 5 solutions to 5 questions. Right here we go…
1. Ought to I say one thing about previous allegations in opposition to a colleague?
I began a brand new place about six months in the past, working with accomplice organizations throughout the state on neighborhood initiatives. On a current name, I used to be stunned to see somebody I’ll name Brad.
I knew Brad from my time educating in a special metropolis, the place he was an activist within the reproductive well being rights house. A couple of years in the past, Brad needed to depart that work and relocate after being accused of grooming minors. Two pals who work in that house advised me about it on the time.
Now, Brad is working in a special community-focused position, and whereas it’s unrelated to reproductive well being, they’re nonetheless able of affect. My position is to supply technical help to assist make a undertaking possible for the neighborhood Brad works with. Brad is actively facilitating conversations with our companions. It feels surreal to be in conferences with somebody who needed to depart their earlier job on account of allegations of being a sexual predator. Nevertheless, every part I do know is secondhand. I don’t know if Brad’s new position includes minors.
Do I’ve an obligation to say one thing to my boss? Ought to I deliver this up, even when I don’t have firsthand data? Or is that this a type of conditions the place I simply must compartmentalize and transfer on?
I don’t suppose you have got an obligation to say one thing to your boss since (a) Brad isn’t working on your group and (b) you heard in regards to the allegations secondhand. However I don’t suppose suppose you’d be fallacious to have a quiet phrase along with your boss about it both — framed as, “I solely have secondhand data of this and no thought if his present job includes minors, however provided that minors had been concerned beforehand, I felt uncomfortable preserving it to myself. Is that this one thing you suppose we have to do something with?”
2. HR unilaterally modified our efficiency critiques
Throughout our most up-to-date efficiency evaluation interval, managers had been advised that they needed to rating 75% of staff as 3s on the general 1 by 5 ranking scale (5 being one of the best), with the rest cut up between 1/2/4/5s. Apparently, regardless of this, there have been too many excessive scores given so HR went in and — seemingly randomly since they most definitely don’t have perception into individuals’s day-to-day efficiency — knocked individuals all the way down to 3s. In addition they requested managers to alter their feedback on the critiques of people that had this occur to replicate the brand new scores. I used to be amongst this fortunate demoted group, and since confirming that neither my supervisor or grandboss had any enter on this modification, I’ve felt more and more annoyed by this case because it has the potential to have an effect on future promotions in addition to this yr’s wage enhance and bonus.
Ranting about it to a good friend who works in a special trade I discovered that his firm had finished the identical factor! Is that this a brand new development? Are you able to consider any option to push again in opposition to this? One additional complication is that it’s unclear if HR realizes that everybody is aware of what they did (plenty of managers weren’t pleased with the adjustments).
This isn’t a brand new development, however it’s a ridiculous observe. There have all the time been firms that insist on a sure distribution of efficiency analysis rankings, which has all the time brought about issues for managers and groups whose efficiency didn’t line up with the required distribution of scores. However the thought of HR randomly altering rankings after which demanding managers rewrite their feedback to justify these rankings is an additional degree of ridiculous; usually they’d simply inform managers that they should change their rankings and depart it to them to resolve how to try this.
I do wonder if it’s true that HR selected the brand new rankings randomly or whether or not it was based mostly on something (together with conversations with managers). Managers wouldn’t essentially disclose the latter to you, and would possibly even desire to let HR take the blame.
As for pushing again — in the event you’ve had glowing suggestions all yr (particularly if it’s documented, however even when it’s not) and/or in the event you’ve met/exceeded the targets that had been laid out for you, you may definitely spotlight that and ask how your ranking squares along with your efficiency and the suggestions you’ve acquired out of your supervisor. They may not care, however it’s an inexpensive avenue to pursue.
3. Do I’ve to announce my being pregnant at work?
Would it not be extraordinarily bizarre if I simply didn’t broadly announce my being pregnant at work? My boss and grandboss know, and some different people I selected to inform, however I simply actually don’t need to make an enormous e mail announcement. I’ve plenty of anxiousness about this being pregnant and it appears like a jinx (regardless that logically I do know it’s not). However individuals will have the ability to inform I’m pregnant quickly. Will it’s bizarre if I am going round with an clearly pregnant stomach with out ever having stated something? Am I inviting gossip and/or nosy questions? Do I simply have to recover from myself and ship the darn e mail?
In some workplace cultures it is perhaps a little bit bizarre. That doesn’t imply you need to announce in the event you don’t need to, although, and it sounds just like the individuals who have to know already do.
For what it’s price, within the places of work the place it might be uncommon, I do suppose you’re most likely inviting extra hypothesis and gossip by not saying it than by simply sending out a quick e mail. Once more, you don’t must in the event you don’t need to, clearly it’s nobody’s enterprise, and so forth. and so forth., however realistically on closer-knit groups, individuals could discover and surprise in the event that they missed an announcement. In truth, a bonus of sending a quick announcement is that if you wish to, you may explicitly say, “I’m nervous in regards to the being pregnant and would like to not be requested about it at work, thanks for understanding.”
Associated:
my worker didn’t inform anybody she was pregnant till she was about to offer delivery
4. Was this coaching’s clarification of discrimination right?
I needed to take a coaching on office discrimination and harassment that was necessary for all staff at my firm. As a part of the coaching, we had been requested a collection of hypothetical questions and needed to reply whether or not they constituted discrimination or harassment. One instance concerned a graphic design firm that had a undertaking to design a emblem for a soccer crew, and gave the undertaking to a male worker over a feminine one as a result of “males know extra about soccer then girls.” The reason given was that it was discrimination as a result of whether or not somebody is aware of about soccer just isn’t related to their job efficiency.
It appears to me that in the event you’re designing a emblem for a soccer crew, your data of soccer is certainly related to your means to take action. The difficulty right here is that they assumed the male worker should know extra about soccer than the feminine worker solely due to his gender. Due to this fact, it does certainly represent discrimination however the supplied clarification is fallacious. Whose clarification is right?
Yours. It’s unlawful discrimination to assign a undertaking based mostly on gender (“males know extra about soccer than girls do”) however to not assign a undertaking based mostly on a particular particular person’s data or curiosity (“Lucas is aware of probably the most about soccer”).
Whoever introduced this coaching (a) doesn’t have a superb grasp of the fabric and (b) most likely obtained sidetracked by the gendered nature of the game and hopefully would acknowledge that “I’m assigning X to Lucas as a result of he is aware of a ton about frogs” can be positive.
5. Are non-competes nonetheless authorized?
I had a recruiter attain out to me for a job at a direct competitor. I’m not seeking to depart, however I additionally talked about that I’ve a non-compete.
He advised me these “aren’t a factor anymore” and it wouldn’t maintain up in courtroom anyway. However I’ve been monitoring them and noticed that the FTC was attempting to go a legislation in September to cease non-competes nationally however it was being challenged by two completely different Texas courts and now the legislation is in limbo.
The recruiter stated I used to be fallacious, so I needed to ask you since I do know you have got reported on them previously. Are you able to give us an replace? Once more, I’m not seeking to depart, but when I used to be I wouldn’t be snug with “it wouldn’t maintain up in courtroom.”
Sure, non-competes are nonetheless authorized on the federal degree.
In April 2024, the Federal Commerce Fee introduced it might ban them for many U.S. employees, saying they stifle wages. However earlier than that might take impact, two federal courts (one in Texas and one in Florida) issued injunctions blocking it, saying the company lacked the authority to challenge the rule. The FTC was initially anticipated to enchantment these rulings, however that’s a lot much less prone to occur beneath the brand new administration.
As well as, in 2023 the Nationwide Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) common counsel issued a memo stating that non-competes violate the Nationwide Labor Relations Act in most circumstances. Nevertheless, that common counsel has been eliminated by the brand new administration, and that directive may be very prone to be rescinded.
So in the meanwhile, non-competes stay authorized federally.
Nevertheless, 4 states ban non-competes fully (California, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Oklahoma), and 33 extra plus Washington, D.C. prohibit them (usually through banning them for hourly wage employees or employees under a wage threshold).
