The New York Times - USA (2020-11-15)

THE NEW YORK TIMES, SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2020 NBU 3

Send questions about the
office, money, careers
and work-life balance to
[email protected].
Include your name and location,
even if you want them withheld.
Letters may be edited.

Q

:

I found a job I love after 15 years. I’ve been lucky enough to be on

a relatively diverse, gender-balanced team. Despite this balance,

the work itself does not feel fair. Within the project teams I’m a

part of, it falls to women to take notes, organize their colleagues

and make sure work gets done with regular check-ins and meet-

ings.

I’ve done a few things to address this, including talking to a few

senior (female) leaders. Their advice was (a) bring it up directly

with group members not doing their fair share, or (b) let them fail.

I tried both. When I had a direct conversation with a male col-

league who is a particular offender, he simply did not agree and

refused to acknowledge this might be happening.

I’m wondering if you have any advice. Do I have to just let this

go to be successful?ANONYMOUS, BEND, ORE.

First, who cares if your male colleague

agrees with your assessment of his behav-

ior? Get it together! He does not get to

dictate reality in ways that enable his

nonsense. Moving along. Research has

long shown that in collaborative work

settings, women shoulder the most re-

sponsibility. It’s frustrating, it’s compli-

cated, and it absolutely contributes to

burnout and women not having enough

time or energy to do the work they need

and/or want to prioritize. You have to

work to make sure that you and the wom-

en you work with are not disproportion-

ately responsible for administrative and

emotional labor. You have to be willing to

be perceived as “difficult” even though

there is nothing difficult about establish-

ing firm boundaries and sticking to them.

You do not have to let this go. You

should not let this go. I teach, and because

I am sensitive to women generally being

relegated to note-taking and so on, I rotate

the responsibility among all students,

regardless of gender. You can do some-

thing similar. And you can also let these

men fail. They are adults, and they can

clean up their own professional messes.

Secondary work responsibilities should be

shared by everyone. If a natural, equitable

system isn’t manifesting, assign people

specific responsibilities. Stop assuming

everything will fall apart if you don’t hold

it together. Stop coddling grown men.

Prioritize your own work and ambition

more than you prioritize the man-babies

you work with.

ARE YOU EXPERIENCED?

I am the resident lawyer at a small legal

nonprofit. Part of my job is to create plain-

language legal content for our websites. It

takes subject-matter expertise and writing

ability, but my boss keeps suggesting I get a

recent college graduate or a law student to

help. I let him know it’s skilled work and not a

good fit for people that inexperienced. It’s

discouraging to defend something I do well,

based on 20-plus years of writing practice

and legal work. I feel undervalued and need

help to address his suggestions.

ANONYMOUS

You are being undervalued. Your frustra-

tion is understandable. Explain to your

boss what you do, and how your expertise

enables that work. Make clear that you

are a professional and you and your work

product deserve to be respected as such. If

that doesn’t work, ask him if a student or

an intern can do his job. One probably

could, but that’s neither here nor there.

ONLY MODERATELY PETTY

Is it wrong to be thoroughly annoyed by

people who reply all in an email thread when

their reply isn’t necessary for all to see? It

drives me nuts. Is that extremely petty? Am I

crazy? Is it uncalled-for if I send a gentle

reminder to those people that they have

replied all?DEMI, BROOKLYN

We will have finally evolved as a species

when people stop replying all unnecessari-

ly. Reply to the sender if you need to com-

municate only with that person, or reply

all to everyone if you need to communi-

cate to the group. It’s not that hard.

I wish I knew why this was so elusive a

skill. I guess most people are over-

whelmed by professional emails, try to

respond to them quickly and perfunctorily,

and don’t take the time to reply carefully.

That’s how you get trapped in endless

email chains about topics irrelevant to

your work, and just when you think you’re

free from its clutches, someone who was

on vacation will return and add to the

conversation, triggering a new wave of

replies, none of which should have ever

arrived in your inbox.

Long story short, your sentiment here is

not extremely petty. It’s only moderately

petty. You are not crazy. This is one of

those minor grievances that irritate most

people, and there’s really nothing you can

do about it but complain. Embrace that.

MORE MANDATORY FUN

Our H.R. department is trying hard to get us

to connect virtually while we are all out of the

office. Unfortunately, these efforts involve

online events that cover a pretty narrow

range of interests. Virtual ugly sweater party.

The online version of that game from summer

camp where you need to figure out who is the

spy. Zoom calligraphy lesson. The last one

was mandatory: Every team needed to come

up with a motto and make signs.

It looks like H.R. insists on continuing to

mandate “fun” events. Do you have any ideas

that I could suggest that are less twee?

ANONYMOUS

As I’ve discussed previously, mandatory

fun in person is unbearable. Mandatory

fun via Zoom is even worse. But I also

think we need to extend a little generosity

to H.R. departments. They are doing their

best to maintain collegial work envi-

ronments with everyone working re-

motely. If this state of affairs goes on

much longer, H.R. will adapt and, hope-

fully, realize that the kind of warm, fun

work environment you can create in per-

son might not be possible in a virtual

workplace. And that’s probably OK.

If you’re going to suggest anything, ask

for these events to be optional. You might

also suggest they deploy a survey to ask

employees their opinions on how to sup-

port strong connections and what kinds of

activities would be more enjoyable. For

better or worse, lots of activities have

moved online. On a recent date night, my

wife and I attended “Inside the Box,” a

virtual magic show featuring David

Kwong. It was so fun, and we enjoyed it

far more than we expected to.

H.R. might look beyond your company

for group activities the staff can enjoy.

There are all kinds of shows and concerts

and the like. It’s not all sweater contests

out there. Treat yourself.

WORK FRIEND ROXANE GAY

Enough With the Man-Babies at Work

MARGEAUX WALTER FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

.......................................................................................

Roxane Gayis the author, most recently, of

“Hunger” and a contributing Opinion writer.

THE WORST ECONOMIC CRISESof the last
century both played out during “transition”
— the period between the presidential elec-
tion and the inauguration. That’s not a co-
incidence.
The most important transitions — ones
that involve major changes of direction for
the government — leave months of uncer-
tainty over policy in the interim. Things that
were already going wrong often spiral. Cha-
os loves a vacuum.
Unfortunately, the Covid crisis and the
transition of 2020 have the clear potential to
spin out of control in the same way.
The country’s major transition crises had
certain elements in common: an existing
problem, an incumbent administration that
had been criticized for its policy in dealing
with it, and a presidential election ushering
in a challenger calling for a sharp break
from the predecessor’s approach.
The transition then left the public (and
businesses and investors, too) trying to
grapple with a paralyzing dilemma: “What
happens while we wait for something com-
pletely different?” The answer was that the
problem metastasized.
It happened in 1932. The Great Depres-
sion had worsened, and the economy and
the financial system teetered on the edge of
ruin. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election prom-
ised a strong break from the policies of Her-
bert C. Hoover. Yet for months, while the
country waited for the inauguration, Hoo-
ver remained in charge.
Hoover maintained that the Depression
had only gotten worse because of people’s
fear of what the incoming president was
proposing to do. He attempted to convince
Roosevelt to commit to continuing policies
like fiscal austerity and the gold standard.
But Roosevelt wanted nothing to do with
him. During the standoff, the economy cra-
tered and the financial system fell apart.
Another major crisis occurred in 2008,
when President Obama won the election
promising a starkly different approach
from the Bush administration’s. I was part

of that transition, and in December our eco-

nomic team briefed Mr. Obama about the

quickly fading economy. He said, jokingly:

“Is it too late to ask for a recount?”

Unlike in 1932, the transition in 2008 was

amicable and cooperative. Officials in the

outgoing Bush administration did not un-

dermine the incoming administration. To

the contrary, they took the transfer of power

seriously and did what they could to help.

Even in that circumstance, though, there

were still significant disagreements in how

to respond to the crisis: how the Troubled

Asset Relief Program (TARP) rescue

money should be spent, what conditions

should be put on banks that received the

money, how auto companies should be

treated, and much more. People knew a

change was coming but not what would

happen in the interim, and they worried

that no one was really in charge. The crisis

escalated.

I’ve focused on economic crises, but the

issue is even bigger than that. Some of the

biggest political crises in the country also

happened in transition. In 1860, Abraham

Lincoln won the election, promising a sharp

break from Democrats and the incumbent,

President James Buchanan. Lincoln’s elec-

tion brought tensions to a boil. States talked

openly of seceding.

President Buchanan, a lame duck, an-

nounced that he did not believe the federal

government had the authority to stop states

from leaving. Within weeks, South Carolina

voted to secede, followed by six other

states, all before the inauguration. Soon af-

ter Lincoln took office, the Civil War began.

Which brings us to 2020. Even before the

election, the coronavirus had surged and

was raging through much of the country.

The United States has had more than

140,000 cases in a day, rising numbers of

hospitalizations and has even witnessed

multiple super-spreader events in the

White House that infected the president, his

chief of staff, cabinet members and senior

advisers.

Economists have emphasized from the

beginning that controlling the spread of the

virus is crucial to fixing the economy. The

CARES Act, the rescue package passed in

March, provided temporary relief in the

hope that the virus would rapidly diminish.

But as that money has run out, a wide gulf

has opened between the approach of the

outgoing Trump administration (which has

variously argued for doing less and min-

imized the seriousness of the problem) and

the incoming Biden administration, whose

first action after the election was to appoint

a board of medical advisers and push an ag-

gressive agenda to get the coronavirus un-

der control.

And so the nation is, once more, counting

down the months before a new administra-

tion changes the country’s direction, won-

dering what policy the federal government

will pursue in the interim, and watching an

existing problem that may easily spiral out

of control while we wait.

The good news is that there is a strong

possibility that we could have an effective

vaccine widely available sometime next

year.

The bad news is that the outgoing admin-

istration has actively fought against the

changeover — withholding transition

funds, forbidding the sharing of information

with the Biden folks and contesting the elec-

tion results. As the weeks pass, tens of thou-

sands of people may lose their lives and mil-

lions of businesses may disappear unneces-

sarily.

Certainly we will hope for the best — that

this third wave of infections in the United

States subsides quickly, that the economy

continues to recover, people temporarily

laid off can come back to their jobs, and a

massive number of small businesses do not

go broke.

But history teaches that problems brew-

ing during major transitions of power can

explode. So, as if enough hadn’t happened

already in 2020, the Biden administration

and the broader American public had best

prepare for the worst, just in case.

ECONOMIC VIEW AUSTAN GOOLSBEE

Waiting for Something Completely Different

The most important

transitions leave months of

uncertainty in the interim.

President Trump’s

administration has actively

fought against a changeover,

withholding transition funds

and forbidding the sharing of

information with the Biden

team.

DOUG MILLS/THE NEW YORK TIMES

AUSTAN GOOLSBEE,a professor of economics at
the University of Chicago’s Booth School of
Business, has advised President Barack Obama
and President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. Follow
him on Twitter: @austan_goolsbee