Twice the work and zero the money? No thanks, but how?

August 23, 2015 9:10 AM

I asked this question several weeks ago... and I'm back. How do I professionally ask/demand to be paid to do a much bigger job. I'm willing to quit over this, but would really prefer not to.

(previous background: my supervisor was on leave for a few months. S came back for awhile, but surpriiise... S will be back out again for at least a month, minimum. I agreed to do S's work for no extra money this summer, because both my and S's job were in a slow period. This has changed).

I took your advice in the last Q and didn't really pursue issuing ultimatums. You were correct that unless I was willing to walk, there wasn't much I could do in terms of negotiating after the fact. Luckily, S did return a few weeks ago but, unfortunately, will now be out again for at least a month.

OK, so I'm pretty sure I am going to be asked again to resume S's duties, either wholesale or in a "will you just do this one thing..." that then balloons into most of the things.

Except now, both my normal job and S's job are about to hit their very busiest time. As in, I don't think it's humanly possible for one person to do mine and S's job without going nuts.

So I am not willing to take on S's role, even for a month as a low estimate, without:

- essentially giving up all of my current job duties, to be either suspended or farmed out to others,

- getting paid a significant extra amount for the time I do S's job...

If mine and S's superiors order me to do both jobs, I am willing to walk away. S's job is very stressful and I am not willing to put myself through it without the extra money AND releasing my current duties.

My question is basically again, how to handle this in the most professional way. I am pretty comfortable asking for the raise and to suspend all my current work, if I am asked to just take on S's whole job. It will be more sticky, though, if I am asked to "just" do this part or that part temporarily. I pretty much know this will have two side effects: they will inevitably try to push more parts on me if I say yes to one, AND other people will start coming to me as S's "fill-in" for everything and I'm not happy with even the extra work of telling other people that this is not my job.

I'm not sure how to best handle the "just one thing" scenario. It seems petty to refuse to help with even one "minor" task, but the point is... it's a task that my supervisor usually does, it's a task that S is paid much more to take care of. I can't think of a professional way to say "once I do one thing, you and everyone else will keep asking me to do all the things."








I am imagining that I will be asked to do S's work as "temporary relief" / teamwork , but there will be all sorts of Reasons why they can't or won't pay me more, or relieve me of my normal tasks. I have never had to "negotiate" this roughly and don't want to burn bridges.
I am normally a very easygoing, happy to help person and I am afraid I will be easily... manipulated, somehow, into thinking I'm being selfish for refusing to do an extra, very stressful job for free.

I am really not kidding that these few weeks are of course the very busiest time of year for us. It is the time when I am most taxed and at my limit in even my normal job; there is no way I can handle even "just one more thing" - especially when the "things" are all things that are MORE high-profile responsibilities.

So please help me figure out the least "Fighty" way to make clear that I am not taking this "temporary" job unless money AND relieving me of current job happens... and they will either have to get someone else to do it or they will lose me.


(As an aside: I don't think I want S's job permanently. Maybe I'll discover I love it, but I am assuming the scenario here will be that I fill in for S again, and then go back to my old job once it's determined whether S will return, or they will rehire S's position.)

posted by nakedmolerats to Work & Money (15 answers total)

So please help me figure out the least "Fighty" way [...]

I suspect, without specific evidence, that your managers are being confused by your position of "extra work with extra pay or no extra work". I suspect, again without specific evidence, that due to your stated description of yourself as a "very easygoing, happy to help person", your managers are perceiving your statements as allowing an option of "extra work for maybe extra pay in the future". This is actually not that uncommon in general; most upwardly mobile people ask for extra work for no extra/little extra pay in order to prove themselves able to take the higher position permanently (for extra pay). In other words, your statements are somewhat odd from the perspective of a manager, especially if they are presented with the sort of non-combative language I suspect you'd use.

I recommend you to change your approach to "no extra work, period". It sounds like you don't actually want the job. For as much as you've said, there's no benefit to you, and there are significant drawbacks. So, don't offer your managers the option of giving you something you don't want to do anyway. Give them one option, which makes it significantly harder to misinterpret your position.

When you are asked to do extra work, simply reply with, "I'm not able to do that." That's not a "fighty" statement, it's a true statement (you don't have enough time). Let them turn it into a fight. If they respond suggesting doing more with no relaxation on other tasks, respond with "I am 100% occupied with my other tasks." Again, this is not a "fighty" statement, it's a true statement. Don't try to be nice with them, say the truth - say how many hours you work on your other tasks in specific detail. Don't try to do their time/resource loading work for them - state what you have been told to do and how long it takes. Let them be the ones that first suggest working beyond your agreed to hours (which they likely won't, as it raises legal issues for anyone who isn't obviously a professional exempt worker), and when they do, again state the truth - either "I'm not able to work more hours" (which it sounds like is the case for you) or "I'm not able to work more hours at my current pay."

You'll note I'm using the language "I'm not able to" very specifically. This sort of language is both concise and hard to argue with. You're not presenting this as a problem to be resolved by negotiation, you're stating your abilities. This puts the burden on them to change the environment to make your abilities appropriate for what they want (either by reducing your workload or by paying you more).

They may ultimately come to the conclusion of asking you to take on S's job either for no extra money or for extra money. At that point, you have no choice but to issue ultimatums. However, let them come to that conclusion - don't help them out in any way by ever suggesting that you have the ability or time to do the job. The more you state that you can't do the job, the harder it becomes for them to tell themselves that you're the ideal person to do the job.
posted by saeculorum at 9:45 AM on August 23, 2015

i think you're worrying too much about "not being fighty". if you're doing an important job (think they're unlikely to fire you) then just go out and say it.

i have had success with giving my notice and making it clear i am willing to stay if they agree to certain conditions. obviously, i tried to do it in as nice a way as possible, and first talked to people individually before sending in my email. but in the end, you have to come out and say it.

i just dug out the email, and this was the critical part, a few paragraphs in:

Because I would like this to happen as soon as possible, and because I would rather leave than continue as things are now, I'm afraid that I also need to tender my resignation. But I hope we can work something out before the end of next month.

edit: i should probably add that i am on good terms generally with the company, and they are decent people, they like my work, and what i was asking for was "reasonable".
posted by andrewcooke at 9:49 AM on August 23, 2015

Never threaten to quit. That's just showing weakness. Turn in your notice and when they ask why you're leaving tell them. If that doesn't get their attention and bring them to the negotiating table you've made the right choice.
posted by three blind mice at 9:54 AM on August 23, 2015

Don't worry about being fighty because you're being taken advantage of, period. I had a similar situation last year at work when my supervisor left. I was asked to pick up most of their work, I ended up doing two jobs (and neither one very well), was paid for one job, and I was a miserable stressball.

Again and agin I spoke to higher ups, stating I could not do either job very well and they needed to relieve me of my supervisor's position, and they never did.

Why? Because I just kept doing the extra work.

You need to tell them, FULL STOP, that you cannot take on any additional work. Listen, they are well aware they're taking advantage of you. It will only stop when you refuse to do this work.

We all want to be flexible, be team players, show we're willing to take on more work, etc. but when month after month we're not being compensated fairly, then it's more than fine to say, "I can't do this anymore; my performance is suffering."
posted by kinetic at 9:55 AM on August 23, 2015

I actually did what I will recommend below to get me off a management track and into the direction I wanted to go. It sounds like it will apply to you (as in you don't want to be assigned role X or job duties X, and only go in the direction of the job that you were hired for). I am going to stress that this was preemptive - you go to them with your limits and goals before they approach you with what they want to do.

Schedule a one-on-one with your supervisor and your supervisor-s supervisor (at different times). Usually, at one-on-one's, the employer or employer's minions try to give you their goals and what roles they see you doing in the future. But flip it. You just want to let them know that ... you took on the job with the understanding that you would do your particular job with your particular skills, you enjoy that job, and your goals are X and Y (do not have it be remotely related to whatever S does/have it delve deeper into whatever things like you do). You are an unhappy person if you have to do S-like job duties and you do not anticipate ever wanting to do them. You could throw in how you did step up before to do the roles of S, but that helped clarify what are NOT your professional goals/and what you do not want to ever do again in the future - you helped in that one time, but do not want to play that role again. Are we in agreement? I do not want to do these tasks and be positioned to ever have an S-like role.

Before you go in there, have it clear in your mind what you will and will not do. Because I have seen a surprised manager say things like (well, what if instead of supervising, you are "leader" of 10 people who have job title X, or you are their mentor etc.). So it is defined in advanced what you will and will not do, and what makes you a happy/unhappy employee.

Nthing three blind mice. Do not put quitting on the table with your cards as a negotiating tactic. Negotiate for what you want first, if those things fail then you look for a new job, but quitting is your personal card when it meets your best interests.
posted by Wolfster at 10:31 AM on August 23, 2015

"When I agreed to take on S's duties last summer, it was with the understanding that it would be a one-time temporary arrangement during my slowest period. Now that S is going out on leave a second time, but this time during a busy period, it would be impossible for me to continue to do my job and S's in a normal 40-hour week, and keeping a work-life balance is important to me. How do we proceed?"

Then you stay silent. Let them talk.
posted by Automocar at 10:59 AM on August 23, 2015

I think you can frame it as: I will need to put in overtime to possibly be able to do both jobs, and I'd like to be paid some overtime for the extra hours. You can say that it was different when you covered for your boss during the slow season, but now you are too busy to do two people's jobs in your work day. The key and the hardest part (to me) is to be direct in your ask. If you want more money, be clear about that. And if they deny you, then either you say you won't do her work, or you'll cover a only bit of both jobs -- and then be sure to allow shit to fall by the wayside if it must.

You should think about your ideal scenario though. Is it to do the work and get extra money? Is it a permanent pay raise? Is it not being stuck with having to do your boss' job for a month? If it's the last one, then don't ask for more money -- just say you can't feasibly do it.
posted by AppleTurnover at 11:07 AM on August 23, 2015

You should not go into this with the belief that you don't want to quit. Quitting is, as you pointed out, your only real bargaining chip, since it would put the company in a bad spot of finding a replacement for you AND the supervisor. I generally think if your Plan A requires someone else to change their behavior, your Plan B should not have that requirement – otherwise, you leave yourself in a position of waiting for the world to change to make you happy, which is a recipe for madness. So I would start thinking about quitting in a serious way, just to get a sense of your options. Are there similar roles at other companies in your area that you could reasonably hope to get? Would you be reasonably happy if you had to change jobs to get out of this? Once you have your Plan B, go back to your employer and kindly deliver your request in the terms others have outlined above, but make clear that this is a demand, not a humble suggestion, and remember that you have a bargaining chip. Then if Plan A isn't working after a few months, you go with Plan B. But first you need a Plan B.
posted by deathpanels at 4:50 PM on August 23, 2015

I like Automocar's advice, but I'd leave out, "keeping a work-life balance is important to me. How do we proceed?"

Your employer doesn't care about your work-life balance. They just want the job done.
posted by kinetic at 3:20 AM on August 24, 2015

If/when your supervisors do ask you to assume extra responsibilities, here are some questions you might ask them (these are drawn from the excellent book "21 Dirty Tricks at Work" by Mike Phipps and Colin Gautry):

- How will this arrangement be a good move for the company?
- How will this arrangement be a good move for customers?
- Who else have you considered for this responsibility?
- What was the thinking behind me taking this on?
- What will the success criteria be for someone covering both positions?
- What timescale are we working with? What is the end date for this arrangement?
- What impact will this have on my current workload and schedule?
- Which of my current priorities should I cancel to find room for this extra work?
- What resources will you make available to me to help me fulfill the extra duties?
- How might this extra work be relevant to my current work and career plan?
- What's in it for me?
- What happens if I say, "Thanks, but no thanks"?
posted by helpthebear at 4:49 AM on August 24, 2015

Update: our bigger boss sent an email to our entire company, saying that S was back out and in the meantime, "come to nakedmolerats or me with questions".

Big boss did not ask or tell me in any capacity that he was going to tell everyone to come to me. Hooray.
posted by nakedmolerats at 7:12 AM on August 24, 2015

Take automocar's script and send to big boss. Let him respond. See where that takes you. That wouldn't be the first time somebody had to send an update email.
posted by koahiatamadl at 8:01 AM on August 24, 2015

Thank you all for the scripts. I did exactly as suggested and opened with automocar's script. Big boss came to see me. Acted polite about it but obviously was not expecting me to say "I can't do two jobs at once." So the question of who will do S's work continues, but at least for the moment it's not me.

I will have to continue standing firm. I anticipate the next step is going to be me being asked to "direct" questions that normally would have gone to S to someone else... which is still asking me to do the work of figuring out who else to direct people to, and inevitably people will return to me if my "directee" doesn't tell them what they need.
posted by nakedmolerats at 4:52 PM on August 24, 2015

"directee" is big boss. Just direct people to big boos, regardless of the question. Just say, "Umm, yeah, I don't know, ask big boss."
posted by at at 11:07 PM on August 25, 2015

Update for anyone checking back: I stood firm and have not been asked to take on extra work!

Shortly after my previous update we all had a "staff meeting" where Bigger Bosses , basically, asked us what our "concerns" were and essentially what S did that we'd have to redirect. When it was my turn, I just said "my concern is that I'm already at 100% effort so if you want me to take on extra work, I need to discuss or decide what I can stop doing in the meantime". Lo and behold... no one has asked me to do extra work. Sadly, I can tell that some of my other coworkers have had the "can you "Just" figure out how to do..." dropped on them, but hey.

I can't tell yet if there are/will be any long term implications for me looking like I wasn't willing to "pitch in" or prove that I was S's worthy successor or whatever. Bigger bosses have been aloof with me but that's not that unusual, and I guess if they are being aloof I'd rather feel like they got the message that I'm not willing to be dumped on, than have them act nice to me because they can give me more work.

PS. S is still gone and there has been absolutely no discussion of when or if S will return.
In fact we have had no meetings with Big Bosses since my last update. ??!!??
posted by nakedmolerats at 1:43 PM on September 27, 2015