Who is being unreasonable here?

[bossorworker1]

I am A or B- I don't want to say which do it doesn't skew answers. I've not included salaries as a stealth boast - just for context in terms of level of post.

A - senior manager in a business support function line managed by B. Started £75k role in late January- job is approx 1.5 hour commute each way from A's home. Notice in first year is 1 month, after that it's 3 months. Enjoying the job, excellent feedback and has consistently fed back how committed they are to role/organisation. Resigned on Friday for a new role closer to home - about 25 minutes- on a little bit more money. Has given 1 month notice including a week of which they are in a precooked holiday. A says they didn't aim to mislead - but the job came up and they went for it. Feels that B has taken the resignation personally.

B - A's line manager - senior senior manager. Really pleased with A's work. Received resignation on Friday. Upset, disappointed and a bit pissed off that A has been lying about commitment to role as would have taken another candidate on if it had been known they would leave so soon after joining. Has offered A payrise and flexible working to stay but A still wants to go. Has fed back to A that the move is career limiting due to changing sectors and that they do feel personally let down.

Who is unreasonable here?

It’s so incredibly self-important to post like this. Yes you’re being unreasonable, whichever one you are. Also describing a bitchy, mean comment as something one ‘fed back’ doesn’t magically make it less bitchy or mean.

You’re B. You need to stop taking business so personally and fix what is making everyone leave rather than putting it on them.

We’ll that’s one way of getting your YABU in 😂

Makes zero difference.

b should try working in social care management. She’d pass out*

Haha, yes. 9 months would be the longest standing member of staff sometimes.

Sounds like it’s a shit company to work for or B is a shit person to work for if turnover is so high tbh

but it’s business doesn’t matter how committed someone is initially peoples lives and priorities change

B is unreasonable. If there's more money or flexible working available it should be offered to the candidate when they're offered the job - maybe they'll get more loyal employees if working conditions are better.

You're obviously B and I don't think either of you are unreasonable. It is the nature of business. Very similiar happened to my OH last year- he went to a new role with every intention of staying long-term and then was asked (he was not looking) to work elsewhere much closer to home and for better pay/conditions. It has changed our home life for the positive immeasurably and he would have been mad to say no. He felt guilty but ultimately had to do what was best for him and his family.

However you have every right to feel the way you feel and its completely understandable. Its not personal. You've offered more, A has declined. Move on gracefully and start looking for someone else.

The manager is being unreasonable. Recruiting can be a pain in the arse but businesses also get rid of employees at the drop of a hat at times, no-one is indispensable. So no employee should put loyalty to an employer over a better choice for their finances or quality of life, or both, because an employer would not hesitate to make redundancies if they had to.

So if they’ve had 4 people leave the role over 3 years they obviously need to look at why. Either they need to offer better money, more befits or adapt the job someone wants to stay in it. They need to look at themselves if multiple people are leaving the same role.

Neither are unreasonable. I do think A is fairly unprofessional for jumping ship so soon but in the end the company is better off without people like that. You need trustworthy committed staff.

B should not take it personally. It's really hard to hire the right staff. Sometimes people leave sooner than you want. It such a ballache doing the hiring and getting someone up to speed. It's limiting to your plans because I don't doubt that A has taken time to get used to the job and having put in all that leg work B will have to start again. There's also the recruitment cost if they paid an external recruiter. You don't get that back if they leave sooner.

That's why it's frowned upon to move jobs frequently. If I see someone has moved after a short time I make sure they have good reason and as a one off I might allow it for the right candidate but I do view people like that as a flight risk.

You were obviously B from the outset. Your description of B is much more emotive, and your follow up confirmed it.

B is overstepping. Yes it's irritating to have to start the recruitment process, but A is perfectly entitled to leave for whatever reason, whenever they choose. It's not a jail sentence.

B is being manipulative with comments about career progression. This attitude is most likely the reason that no-one stays for long.

Good luck to A. They're well shot of what sounds like a horrendous commute to an environment that is toxic the moment you don't toe the line.

B, the update make no difference.

You can be totally committed, and then just come across an advert for a job that makes you want to leave.

I suspect the reason people keep leaving has something to do with B's attitude. Flexibility isn't their strong point. Making people constantly reaffirm their commitment is ridiculous.

Both are a bit unreasonable.
A should not have taken a job so far form home without discussing flexible working at the outset. They have been less than truthful about their committment to the job

B should have offered flexible working and better pay earlier to ensure the job was competitive. Understandably frustrated to have to recruit again.

Managers in general need to let go of "feeling let down"
Just grow the fuck up
And I say that as a Manager.

Tbh if B can't handle it they should probably be looking for a new job too

Thank you everyone for your comments. I'm actually A.

However, I absolutely disagree with this ^^ the whole tone of the replies changed once people seems to think I was B. I'm a regular poster so I know that's how AIBU works sometimes hence I wanted to see which side people picked when they didn't know which one was the OP.

Well as A stop giving a crap what B thinks.

B is being unreasonable

To be fair I started in January when a lot of people were still WFH so the journey was 45 minutes which is feasible. The traffic situation has massively changed and it's adding at least another 45 minutes on which I would never have predicted

It's obvious, these posts are so tiresome. Lots of detail for A, it's clearly A? 😂

YABU for this post OP, HTH

For 75k I'll do it. And stay more than a year.

OP, I said B was unreasonable. However, just how could you not have predicted the commuting time? How far is it in miles? Sounds like at least 50 miles? That’s a long way from home. I did that too, as I had no choice, but it was killing me and I too moved asap.

😂 me too

You couldn’t possibly have predicted that most people were stopping WFH and that traffic would increase? 🤨

Neither are unreasonable.

However B is a little naive in thinking that someone doing a 90 minute commute won't ALWAYS keep an eye out for a job that doesn't involve that length of time.

Commuting is wasted time.

I did an hours commute for a year (for a work assignment) and I remember registering the difference in my energy levels when I returned to a 10 minute walk to my original office. I was only 25 at the time!

My husbands company (Pharma) are having huge difficulty getting people back into the office.

Several long term, highly valued staff, have flat out said 1 day a week for meetings only, or they walk.
It has been accepted.
They are no longer prepared to do the commute.

B needs to look at their recruiting package and include flexible working terms to help retain staff.

A has nothing to feel guilty about IMO.

Congratulations on loosing that commute, it will be life enhancing.