Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not allergic but I'd be so annoyed to work in an open floor plan office with a dog. I'm sorry. I like dogs, but they're distracting. I don't want to be on a client phone call and have a dog panting next to me or begging for a bite of my granola bar. Just no.

I'd be tempted to bring my baby into the office if we are cool with nonverbal, cute, occasionally noisy and messy, non employees hanging around the office all day. And I'd babywear my baby so she wouldn't go up to other peoples desks, too.

Neither dogs nor babies belong in offices. You are the one who thinks your baby is cute: people trying to work would find it annoying when she cries, and the unspoken new obligation to fuss over the boss's baby. Just let people work in the office.

That’s exactly my point. I’d be the only one who would want my baby in the office. I bet Ops boss is the only one who wants his dog there, too. But everyone is polite because he is the boss.

We have a dog. I'd rather have a baby if the are quiet, sweet and fun to play with.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's AWFUL. While he's looking for a new job, he should consult a lawyer, because I'm sure it's illegal to not accommodate the medical needs of employees. What a horrible boss. And I love dogs. Humans before pets.

The boss did offer an accommodation which the employee declined. Reasonable accommodations are the employers choice of accommodation, not the employee. Not much of a lawsuit here IMO.

This, the dog should not have free roaming of the building and should be with the owner at all times, which is how my spouses former office did it. Ideally there are dog free areas but reality is its on people's clothing and belongings so nothing is ever dog free. He should go remote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not allergic but I'd be so annoyed to work in an open floor plan office with a dog. I'm sorry. I like dogs, but they're distracting. I don't want to be on a client phone call and have a dog panting next to me or begging for a bite of my granola bar. Just no.

I'd be tempted to bring my baby into the office if we are cool with nonverbal, cute, occasionally noisy and messy, non employees hanging around the office all day. And I'd babywear my baby so she wouldn't go up to other peoples desks, too.

Neither dogs nor babies belong in offices. You are the one who thinks your baby is cute: people trying to work would find it annoying when she cries, and the unspoken new obligation to fuss over the boss's baby. Just let people work in the office.

That’s exactly my point. I’d be the only one who would want my baby in the office. I bet Ops boss is the only one who wants his dog there, too. But everyone is polite because he is the boss.

First of all, I don’t find this post to be real. But let’s play… The owner says no to an entire floor being dog free because he wants everyone to interact with the dog but yet allows him to work from home full time but for some odd reason, that isn’t good enough?

I find this hysterical and insane at the same time. Dogs at work? Absurd.

It sucks, but he should just find a new job.

Anonymous wrote:That's AWFUL. While he's looking for a new job, he should consult a lawyer, because I'm sure it's illegal to not accommodate the medical needs of employees. What a horrible boss. And I love dogs. Humans before pets.

The boss did offer an accommodation which the employee declined. Reasonable accommodations are the employers choice of accommodation, not the employee. Not much of a lawsuit here IMO.

Not sure why a whole floor can't be dog-free. The people on that floor can work to switch or... wait for it, it's brilliant.... walk to the floor where the dog is to visit it if they want.

I love dogs and would love one wandering around all the time but would be fine just visiting it once in awhile. It would probably distract me too much honestly.

Nephew should quietly find a new job and move on.

If asked, say nothing about the dog, just act excited about the new opportunity. And do not tell current employer the name of new employer.

Anonymous wrote:The legal question is whether th offered accommodation (remote work) is really equivalent. If it will prejudice his ability to do his job and basically set him up for failure, maybe not.

If I were him. I’d try a hepa filter. I’m allergic to dogs but own 2. I use hepa filters and take otc Zyrtec. Zyrtec might be easier than finding a new job or litigating this.

I would actually love love love a job where there was a dog at work. But it does seem like there should be a way to set aside a non dog area for employees who prefer not to work with the dog.

Same. I’d love a job with a dog. Our HQ allows dogs once a week but field offices can’t.

I’m very allergic to dogs but I have a small hypoallergenic dog that’s bathed weekly. I can still be around dogs as long as they’re hypoallergenic, bathed often and I don’t touch them. You’d think an office dog would be non shedding?

To be fair though I’m very allergic to cockroaches and my federal agency would do nothing about it. I was a snotty sneezing mess at work. I was told it’s against the law to spray in federal buildings (they’d have to shut down the building and send everyone home) I had visible cockroaches on my desk every morning. They set out little sticky traps and that was all they’d do. They said the old dc sewers were the issue. I think workplaces just don’t give AF about allergies. I got a new job after 2 years of dealing with that mess. Annoying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Owner said he could work remotely, so a “reasonable accommodation” was offered. This may also be a signal to your nephew that he’s not valued and should move on.

Not reasonable. The boss clearly values in-person employee interaction and being away from the office may mean the nephews gets passed over on assignments and promotions due to medical issue.

Then nephew can take a claritin or wear a mask if being in the office is so important to him.

I'm sympathetic and think the boss should have a pet free floor for people with allergies, fears, or who just don't want their work day interrupted by an animal. But the boss isn't going to change, and did offer an accommodation. Your nephew doesn't get to get his way because he doesn't like the accommodation offered.

yeah, sorry, that's not the way the law works. if working from home would hurt his career, that's not an adequate accommodation.

personally I'd choose the remote option and look for another job because since the boss has bad judgment on this issue, boss will continue to have bad judgment on other issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Owner said he could work remotely, so a “reasonable accommodation” was offered. This may also be a signal to your nephew that he’s not valued and should move on.

Not reasonable. The boss clearly values in-person employee interaction and being away from the office may mean the nephews gets passed over on assignments and promotions due to medical issue.

Then nephew can take a claritin or wear a mask if being in the office is so important to him.

I'm sympathetic and think the boss should have a pet free floor for people with allergies, fears, or who just don't want their work day interrupted by an animal. But the boss isn't going to change, and did offer an accommodation. Your nephew doesn't get to get his way because he doesn't like the accommodation offered.

Anonymous wrote:Owner said he could work remotely, so a “reasonable accommodation” was offered. This may also be a signal to your nephew that he’s not valued and should move on.

Not reasonable. The boss clearly values in-person employee interaction and being away from the office may mean the nephews gets passed over on assignments and promotions due to medical issue.

The legal question is whether th offered accommodation (remote work) is really equivalent. If it will prejudice his ability to do his job and basically set him up for failure, maybe not.

If I were him. I’d try a hepa filter. I’m allergic to dogs but own 2. I use hepa filters and take otc Zyrtec. Zyrtec might be easier than finding a new job or litigating this.

I would actually love love love a job where there was a dog at work. But it does seem like there should be a way to set aside a non dog area for employees who prefer not to work with the dog.