Its Not in My Job Description

[Anonymous]

When it's truly a "everybody pitch in" all-hands on deck exercise, I'm one of the first to volunteer.

When it's a "this is woman's work and it's beneath me - here, you do it," then I'm an immovable boulder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes it's frustrating to have co-workers who don't put in 100%, but it's equally frustrating that managers and bosses and ceos try to get away with squeezing as much out of their workers as possible without adequate compensation. I've seen this in my own organization where one person was constantly given the same work as others in her department who were at a much higher pay grade. She asked for a promotion and was denied it on the excuse that there was no funding, so eventually she left, much to her boss's chagrin.

this. I've seen people completely exploited. And the goal posts just keep getting moved. No raise, no bonus, no promotion. Meanwhile, people who have managed to befriend the boss/manager get away with doing 50 percent.

Hard work isn't rewarded as much as "networking" (aka schmoozing) is. The problem is that once a person keeps accepting without complaint, they become a doormat and then the "go above and beyond" becomes perceived as part of their regular job.

Of course, it's never a good idea to say "it's not in my job description." Instead, you have to find more subtle ways to set boundaries. And when you do things out of your purview or going way above and beyond, get acknowledgement in writing that you did X, Y, and Z on such and such date. Keep a list, and if you notice the list keeps getting longer, then you have concrete examples when asking for increased compensation.

Not that even that will work, but you have to look out for yourself. No one else will.

[Anonymous]

I have a position where I'm teaching most of the time, but I also have other responsibilities that no one in my building has. Those duties are pretty time consuming, and yet I carry a full teaching load. There are other responsibilities like chaperoning certain after school events, or working carpool line, that are specified in the job description of every teacher in the building, except for me and one or two other people who also have additional responsibilities. In my case, and I assume their case, they were specifically removed to make room for the other things. I don't get paid for the extra responsibilities, but I do get some time back to do them because those responsibilities are removed.

So yes, if someone asks me "why don't you chaperone sporting events?" or "can I put you down for carpool on Tuesdays and Thursdays", then I'll say "those things aren't in my job description". On the other hand, if someone who I know I can count on calls me and says "The baby is throwing up and I'm not making it in, can you cover carpool for me?" or my boss says "I'm desperate for people to chaperone the soccer game." Then I'll say yes, because I'm a team player, but that's different.

[Anonymous]

I don't say it in my job, but when my boss offered me a promotion that would put me at a new "level" of who I was interacting with in the company, we had a really clear description about what the role would be and I asked him never to use me as an admin "in a pinch." We have a culture of pitching in at my company, and I love that, but I'm the youngest in every meeting now and one of only two women (in a room of 10 - 14). It's very important for my career not to be the "go to" to do administrative type things at this particular point, especially publicly. I pitch in in a 1000 other ways, but I won't be the one to jump up and set up the projector, handle dialing into a conference line, cleaning up after lunch, etc - for now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's also an equity issue. If you're asking me, the female employee, to do things that you don't ask the male employee to do -- answer the phones at the front desk, pick up the cupcakes for the party, etc. -- then yes, I will likely tell you it's not in my job description. It's not in Bob's job description and no one is making him do it, so why would you think it's okay to ask me to do it.

There's a lot of evidence that women are more likely to default to these roles, or be disciplined for not doing these kinds of emotional labor or menial tasks where as men would not

[Anonymous]

Depends what your company culture is. Big companies this is the norm. I went from medium to big company where I got into hot water for doing anything even minutely out of my job description including forwarding an email to the person whose job description it was. Culture. I got frustrated and left for a smaller company where "not my job" gets you fired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends what your company culture is. Big companies this is the norm. I went from medium to big company where I got into hot water for doing anything even minutely out of my job description including forwarding an email to the person whose job description it was. Culture. I got frustrated and left for a smaller company where "not my job" gets you fired.

OP here. Yes this is what I am talking about. I am in a small company with people coming from larger companies who want a hard and fast job description so they can stonewall any request that is outside that description. I have always worked for small companies and had my own and I know what it takes for them to run--pitching in. I am done with this though--even if it gets me fired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are there some people who refuse to do work because it wasn't outlined in a job description? Why do they not pitch in for the good of the company. These people seem to get away with it. Please enlighten me. I don't think this is normal.

Are you working for the federal gov? I had two 14s in my team like that, making over $120K/year and not able to open a spreadsheet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also an equity issue. If you're asking me, the female employee, to do things that you don't ask the male employee to do -- answer the phones at the front desk, pick up the cupcakes for the party, etc. -- then yes, I will likely tell you it's not in my job description. It's not in Bob's job description and no one is making him do it, so why would you think it's okay to ask me to do it.

There's a lot of evidence that women are more likely to default to these roles, or be disciplined for not doing these kinds of emotional labor or menial tasks where as men would not

Yeah as a young woman I have trouble navigating this. I'm really engaged and want to help my bosses look great, but I do hesitate when asked to do admin shit. I'm happy to do it when I've seen the person rquestinf it do it themselves (so they clearly don't think it's beneath them).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there some people who refuse to do work because it wasn't outlined in a job description? Why do they not pitch in for the good of the company. These people seem to get away with it. Please enlighten me. I don't think this is normal.

Are you working for the federal gov? I had two 14s in my team like that, making over $120K/year and not able to open a spreadsheet.

OP here. No not Fed Gov, actually a small business. This is why it baffles me.

[Anonymous]

I totally get the "don't ask me to do it just because I'm young and female" mindset. But the problem is that administrative and junior levels tasks frequently ARE in young people's job descriptions, but they don't want to do them because they think it's beneath them. Sorry/not sorry: I have 20 years experience, and you have been here for 6 months -- you need to dial the phone for the conference call and pass out the agendas. I did that shit when I was 23, and you can too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine this. In 40, and when I worked as a CPA, if your boss asked you to do something, you did it. If you didn't know how, you figured it out. Kids nowadays!

I would do things but only to benefit my own career. I would do zero "for the organization" or "for my boss". Most of us know the company doesn't give a rats about us and will dump us as soon as they can get an H-1B on board.

Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I totally get the "don't ask me to do it just because I'm young and female" mindset. But the problem is that administrative and junior levels tasks frequently ARE in young people's job descriptions, but they don't want to do them because they think it's beneath them. Sorry/not sorry: I have 20 years experience, and you have been here for 6 months -- you need to dial the phone for the conference call and pass out the agendas. I did that shit when I was 23, and you can too.

I have a couple of issues with these statements. First of all, sure, if someone has seniority in a job and they ask someone in an entry level position to handle admin tasks that are part of the entry level position, then that's fine.

But I have a problem with assuming that just because someone is younger than you are and new to the organization that they somehow should have to do all of the grunt work. A lot depends on the actual job. If the person is hired as an admin-type person, that's one thing. But if the person is hired on a team of specialists or as an attorney or in some function where, despite your time there, you are BOTH actually at equal levels, then the grunt work should be spread around and not just dumped on the new person because she/he is young.

And, no, I'm not in my 20s. I'm the one who has 20 years experience, but I would still not expect that the new person does all of the grunt tasks. I would expect everyone to participate and kind of take turns.

The best managers and most competent professionals I've worked with are the ones who, despite their seniority or their credentials or their experience, they didn't view other coworkers or even direct reports as "beneath" them and therefore the ones who should do all of the grunt work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I totally get the "don't ask me to do it just because I'm young and female" mindset. But the problem is that administrative and junior levels tasks frequently ARE in young people's job descriptions, but they don't want to do them because they think it's beneath them. Sorry/not sorry: I have 20 years experience, and you have been here for 6 months -- you need to dial the phone for the conference call and pass out the agendas. I did that shit when I was 23, and you can too.

I have a couple of issues with these statements. First of all, sure, if someone has seniority in a job and they ask someone in an entry level position to handle admin tasks that are part of the entry level position, then that's fine.

But I have a problem with assuming that just because someone is younger than you are and new to the organization that they somehow should have to do all of the grunt work. A lot depends on the actual job. If the person is hired as an admin-type person, that's one thing. But if the person is hired on a team of specialists or as an attorney or in some function where, despite your time there, you are BOTH actually at equal levels, then the grunt work should be spread around and not just dumped on the new person because she/he is young.

And, no, I'm not in my 20s. I'm the one who has 20 years experience, but I would still not expect that the new person does all of the grunt tasks. I would expect everyone to participate and kind of take turns.

The best managers and most competent professionals I've worked with are the ones who, despite their seniority or their credentials or their experience, they didn't view other coworkers or even direct reports as "beneath" them and therefore the ones who should do all of the grunt work.

Agree. The people at my corporation that are so obsessed with their seniority are almost always coasting, depending on their years of service to get them by. The "I've been here for years, I don't have to do that attitude" is way more annoying than the "that's not my job" response (since usually the folks playing the years of service card are trying to get out of responsibilities that are solidly in their job description). Then those same folks are shocked, SHOCKED when they get laid off.