Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

How to handle a bit of a prick

29 replies

noooooooo · 18/12/2024 01:25

Apologies for the racy title, prepare to be perplexed, bored and disappointed 😝

I'm looking for interpersonal advice, I suppose, but to be used in a professional capacity. Posting here rather than in work or whatever cos I haven’t got much time to prepare and I want a quick transfusion of the collective MN strategic experience.

I can't give many details for confidentiality reasons so I need to ask you all to try and bend your brains round handling this situation without knowing many specifics.

I could try and come up with an analogous set of circumstances but it’s pretty specific so that might set us off down the wrong road and pull focus.

Imagine you’re representing people who find themselves somewhat in the role of a whistle-blower. Their organisation is in some pre-existing trouble, but they also stand to lose a lot by going public or escalating.

How would you tackle a conversation with someone who holds authority over them, and is also the heady combination of defensive, over-promoted, and condescending? He clearly thinks he's The Man (he's not, he’s got a boss, but chain-of-command etc, and we are not certain the ultimate boss will behave differently - explanation to follow)

Short version, it seems to me this chap knows people have failed and been failed but he won't admit it, so is defensive verging on hostile (not quite yet but not miles off). He also has a ‘listen, dear lady’ manner that would make you want to send him on a course.

AFAIAA this is down to not being sufficiently experienced (staff seem to be hired through a revolving door) and employees beneath him not being well-trained. Some of that pre-dates him and is not his fault but from what I can glean, there's been some shockers in a number of areas. This is provable, it’s been discussed elsewhere (to the extent it has been in the press) and he can’t not know this. There have also been several points where someone could have sensibly intervened in the current shitshow without it getting so far. He didn’t exactly jump into action either when it landed with him, I think the hope is that it will magically go away, maybe that’s why they’re in this pickle more broadly, not rigorous enough by some way.

If I was advising him I’d say ‘it’s a wise general who knows when to retreat’ but perhaps because the overall culture seems to be fairly toxic and broadly runs on fit in or fuck off, that’s not happening.

For my part, I don’t want to push him right into recalcitrance. He could do something constructive about this yet and is expressing willingness to ‘get things back on track’ but thus far isn’t actually doing it.

Another issue - can't seem to answer a question. I politely pointed out the second time he didn’t answer me that that's not what I asked and he gave the same irrelevant answer again - think ‘computer says no.'

There are obviously legal ways to deal with this and that’s what I’d advise but sadly it seems it will be neither feasible nor desirable for the parties involved to escalate much further than they've already done - it’s a small world, they are junior, really afraid of reputational risk to them (troublemaker narrative) and not to mention all the stress - so ideally I'd quite like to get him feeling good about the decision to get onside.

I suspect they’ve only got this far cos he's slightly worried about where this could go - like I said, bad press, plenty of failings - but I know what he doesn't (this probably can't and won't go much further and the poor people involved will likely just fold. I also doubt they will be the last to fall foul of these issues).

That said - at the moment he's not seeming worried enough to admit this was poor, or to undertake to prevent a reoccurrence - or indeed, be less of a prick!

So - any prick charmers reading? 🤓

OP posts:
noooooooo · 18/12/2024 01:41

Sorry, it must be. I really can’t risk being more specific, it’s a PITA.

The word grievance hasn’t yet been used. The element of whistle-blowing is that some of the problem seems related to failings that have already been made public and of which everyone is well aware.

No HR. They want, ideally, to stay in their roles. It’s a competitive sphere. They are legitimately worried, however, that if the issues are not acknowledged and actively addressed they are going to be professionally disadvantaged. The option most people take is either suffer through it or go.

OP posts:
itisafuckinggoat · 18/12/2024 01:38

Sorry love. You come across as rather self-important and condescending.

If you aren’t his boss, unless it is you that wishes to whistleblow, I would stay in my own lane.

Although you’ve rambled on for so long and made assumptions about how people might interpret an analogy (as your job situation must be so unique we would all instantly know who you were) (actually, the way you write will out you to anyone who knows you) I got lost along the way.

HollaHolla · 18/12/2024 01:38

You're being unreasonable, because this is totally undecipherable.
Can you make up a situation, with Bob, Jane & Stanley (or whichever names you like), and make it understandable?

IchiNiSanShiGo · 18/12/2024 01:31

This is really hard to follow. Are you this persons manager? Or are you HR? Is he whistleblowing, or raising a grievance? Are you trying to support them or manage them out?

Swipe left for the next trending thread