How do I convince my boss that I can do two jobs?

September 14, 2007 10:45 AM

Asking for my husband: How do I convince my boss to let me do two jobs?

I used to have a job at another place in which I wore two hats, A and B. I currently have a job that is approximately half of what I used to do, only Hat A. I know I am overqualified for this job but am glad to have an income right now. However, the person who wears Hat B just received an offer of a different position here and will be accepting it. He and I both agree that I could wear Hat A and Hat B here and have no problem.

The question is, what sorts of things do I need to think about when coming up with a proposal to my boss? Never having done this before, are there sticking points I don't know about? And what portion of Hat B's salary can I expect? I don't expect both A and B, but what's reasonable to propose? What questions should I anticipate being asked?

posted by orangemiles to Work & Money (8 answers total)

What's his relationship with his boss? Your question reworded into a statement seems to cover what you'd want to communicate.

'I think I can take on B's responsibility, and B thinks that I could handle it all. If you create a new position which merges both of these current jobs, it will save the company $YY,YYY in in salary and benefits. I'd only want $XX,XXX more a year in exchange for taking on the new role. Here's what I did at my last job, and this is why I think I could do it now.

As it would be a more efficient use of my time and your money, there is very little downside to giving it a shot. It would benefit both of us, and save lots of time in finding and training a new employee who may or may not work out. As you may remember it took me and B a couple months to really get comfortable in our positions, and a new person would be a drain on other staff members time for at least that long. If you recall in that crisis last month, I rose to the challenge and did this that and the other thing when it really counted. I've proven myself for all these years/months, so you know exactly what you'll be getting from me in the future.'

Honestly that sounds like his boss would be crazy to pass it up, so the worst that could happen is that they so no or merge the roles and don't offer additional compensation, so he should stress when he brings it up that he's proposing a new position, and not an extension of hist current one, just to set the right tone and his expectations for the discussion.
posted by voidcontext at 11:03 AM on September 14, 2007

If you can actually do both jobs as well as two people without diminishing your performance in either, and you can convince your boss of this, then shoot for salary A + salary B - twenty or thirty percent. That's enough to make it interesting to the boss and maybe worth taking the risk that you won't be as good as two separate employees working longer combined hours than you can do on your own.

But that applies to a company in which the boss has some say over these things and can make up rules as needed. If you work in a big corporation with rigidly defined job descriptions and pay grades and ranges, it may be impossible regardless of the seeming logic of the proposal.
posted by pracowity at 11:10 AM on September 14, 2007

Response by poster: Sorry, forgot to include:

1.) This is at a public university, which means government jobs. Does that make things more complicated? Official Job Descriptions would have to be changed. Problematic? I know there was talk a while ago about changing Hat B's position to be a more robust position, so I'm thinking that change is not impossible.

2.) I've been there for less than three months. Too soon to weigh in on whether or not I'm capable of doing both jobs?

3.) What if Boss says no? I don't want other assuming I'm taking 40 hours to do a part time job. Well, technically that is what's happening, but I don't want to broadcast this.
posted by orangemiles at 11:16 AM on September 14, 2007

I don't want other assuming I'm taking 40 hours to do a part time job.

Hmm. Your fear seems well-founded. If I were your boss, I'd want to know why you were so eager to double your work, so I'd start looking at your work load and perhaps piling on more duties.

Maybe you should just keep the best of the two jobs officially and then, if you have so much time and energy left, work secretly at another job. Maybe your own private project, something you can sell eventually?
posted by pracowity at 1:08 PM on September 14, 2007

If the boss says no, I suspect he won't think you're spending 40 hrs on a part-time job - I think he'll think you were overestimating what you could take on when you asked the question. So really I don't think you have a lot to lose. Ask already!
posted by selfmedicating at 1:12 PM on September 14, 2007

Government worker, here.

In my experience, in a government setting, it's all about the trust the employer puts in you to do the job well and not get swamped. Three months is really quite early days to adequately judge someone's performance (in gov't terms, anyway). And in my experience, adequate performance means "can you do it perfectly the first time, and not have to ask your manager to do anything other than sign off".

I'd go with the following approach: tell your employer that you really enjoy what you do, but that because of previous experience, you find it's not the equivalent of work for 1 FTE. Acknowledge that Hat B person is leaving to take up another challenge, and given your experience, you'd like the opportunity to take on Hat B responsibilities in the interim, until management can decide what to do with the position.

Here's where it gets noodly. Are Hat A and Hat B responsibilities at the same substantive level? Is there a pay difference between the two, where you would have to be "acting" in Hat B position? If managers can hand off the responsibilities of Hat B in the interim to you without paying you more, they'll do that willingly. If you ask for acting pay, they will be far more reluctant, not because they have to pay you more, but because you're suddenly further up the signing authority chain than previously, and they don't know if they trust you, yet.

They may prefer to keep position B open until they can decide what to do with it, or HR may be wringing their arm to "modernize" the position, or whatever the buzzword is these days. You would be well advised to sidle up to the Finance and HR person on your team and get some info from that person, if possible.

If, in the event that management says no, acknowledge the fact that they are telling you they don't trust you yet by reminding them of how committed you are to doing the job well and gaining their trust. Reiterate the fact that you are not full up with work, and ask to be added to or given a project where you can grow and learn new skills.

Good luck!
posted by LN at 1:22 PM on September 14, 2007

In a sole proprietorship or a very small company, your bosses would be delighted if you could do both jobs, and would reward you (not with both salaries-- there has to be something in it for them, too), but in a large public university, I predict they will not be happy at the prospect no matter how well you are able to perform.

If your superiors give both jobs to you, they will suffer a loss of power and prestige because they would lose one of the positions they oversee and a piece of the budget they now command. Each of these is a serious setback for a middle or high level manager in a large bureaucracy.

The only way I can see that would work for them and you is to re-define your job to include the responsibilities you want from job B, and to re-define that job to include some other thing they want. They can't just give you job B, because if they try that, there are almost certainly rules which require them to open the position to the classified staff of the whole university, and probably the larger community of job seekers as well, and they will have to conduct a bunch of Kabuki dance-like interviews as they contort themselves so as to be able to give you the job without letting on to the other hopefuls.
posted by jamjam at 2:42 PM on September 14, 2007

Yeah, I take back what I said in the first comment - government or union situations are beyond my ken.
posted by voidcontext at 8:32 PM on September 14, 2007