The Boss Who Asks Too Much

Q: Recently my C-suite-level boss has compelled staff members to interrupt their work to drive him to meetings, or even to the airport. We're a public agency with a lean staff and plenty to do. I want to avoid having to say yes to this request/assignment.

I could politely state the trade-off: "No problem - but it will take me away from Project X." But I'm afraid that he will affirm the new priority, leaving me feeling twice devalued.

Can I respectfully suggest that he use one of the taxis that often pass by our building? - Anonymous

A: This certainly does sound like a dubious - and rather odd - use of agency resources. You're right to question it, and, ideally, to make it stop.

But having that conversation at the precise moment you're being asked to play chauffeur is a bad strategy. If the guy has a plane to catch, he is unlikely to be in a mindset that will lead to a thoughtful discussion, let alone be open to rethinking his own decision-making.

You'd also be wise to frame this as being about more than just you - as you'd be better off speaking on behalf of a group. Canvass your colleagues who have also been given driver duty; it's a good bet that none of them appreciate it, either. Moreover, it seems to be a problem for the whole team if one person is pulled away to make an airport run. Stressing this aspect of the issue is much more convincing than saying, "I don't want to drive you around anymore!"

If it's not too hard to do, you may want to figure out whether other managers at his level do the same thing, or if they just take cabs. (Obviously, it's also worth learning whether there is some overlooked but relevant official policy, from an office manager or rarely read company manual.)

You could start by simply asking your boss about this habit: Maybe he honestly thinks that it's a shrewd budgetary move. Then make your points in a way that has nothing to do with being irritated at the practice, and everything to do with its consequences. Be specific: We needed so-and-so for Project X, my group needed me for Project Y, etc.

I understand that you don't want to feel devalued if, despite a reasoned case, the response boils down to: "Whatever. Your time is better spent ferrying me around." But if that's the way he feels, I'd say you may as well know it - and maybe start thinking about finding a boss who appreciates more than your driving skills.

Explaining an Exit

Q: I took a new job in July 2013, having moved 600 miles both for the position and to live closer to my family. It turned out that most of the information I was given when I was hired - schedule, number of hours, benefits, etc. - wasn't really true. My new boss was vague about instructions.

He was also abusive when unhappy, which was often. Finally, he ordered me to interrogate a co-worker (who was not my subordinate) about an alleged problem. I did not think this was appropriate, and resigned. I am now working some part-time hours at a retail store, but at less than one-fourth of what I was making before.

Now I am a bit stuck. In three interviews I've had since then, I've been asked why I quit my last job. I have tried to say that the terms of my employment changed, and that the hours and benefits were not what were promised. But after being pressed for details, I have told the basics of the story. And so far, I have not been hired.

How I can say something polite without having to tell the whole story about why I left and end up sounding crazy and like I was bashing the old boss? - West Bloomfield, Mich.

A: The Workologist often condenses inquiries for reasons of space and clarity, but in this case I should mention that this question originally contained a much more detailed blow-by-blow of the former boss' misbehavior. I've severely condensed that, partly so that I'll have some room to respond - but also because the first step toward not bashing the old boss is to get over the old boss.

I don't question that the situation seemed intolerable, or that moving on was a logical decision. (Of course, it's always better to line up a new gig before quitting, but sometimes that's not possible.) And there is absolutely something cathartic about cataloging the grievances and injustices that lead to such decisions.

But it's easy to forget that when we're engaging in such behavior, we're fundamentally talking to ourselves: It's reassuring to re-articulate the sound basis for a difficult decision, like a lawyer making a case. A potential new employer, however, is no jury:

Pressing for details about a past resignation is a strategy for getting a better sense of the job candidate; it's not meant to evaluate the potential misdeeds of a past boss at another firm.

So your instinct to avoid bashing the old employer is sound. It seems fine to offer basic facts about a disconnect between the job's promise and its reality, underscoring that it was your decision to leave. But if you hint that this involved an ugly conflict, it's inevitable that the interviewer will start probing - and that the catharsis instinct may kick in.

You've now had some experience with the kinds of questioning this entails, so think about how to answer in ways that take the focus off the behavior of others, and put it on you and what you have to offer. In other words, instead of thinking about how to characterize what happened in the past, think about ways to promote what you can do in the future.