Expected to start teams meetings?

[surrpundedby]

I’ve started a new job and my diary for now is very empty with few meetings and there’s quite a lot of training material that I have to go through.

My manager is always in back to back meetings and he’s put two 30 minute catchups in with me for the first month. From experience meetings tend to overrun so I’ve waited for him to be ready for our call and then I’ll hop on as I’m just reading - or he might need a loo break or get a drink.

Today it got to 5 past our meeting and he messaged me to say “are you joining”. So I started the call and he said that I am expected to always start the meetings.

Obviously once I’m more busy I won’t even give it a second thought as to who starts a meeting, but this seems such a weird rule to me.

It shouldn't really have come up as something that needed communicating.

If you've got a teams meeting with your line manager, you start it on time unless told they can't make it.

Boss sounds a bit weird. Surely you both want to start the meeting at eg 10am and whoever starts the meeting is the one that hits the button first.

Totally agree with you OP. Couldn’t be doing with that kind of nonsense behaviour (I say that as a manager).

Seems weird to me. I have never been expected to always start a meeting first and it's odd you're expected to every single time. Also why didn't they start the meeting, and then during the meeting just say going forward it's better if you wait in the call if someone is running late. Wanting someone else to start is strange. Saying that, I do always just join at the start time and wait.

I don't think the boss is weird here... He's telling OP that etiquette is you "join" the meeting at the start time regardless of who is there or not. Yes every time you join (start) when it's time. Sitting there waiting but not going in is just weird.

Is this some kind of a test thread or are you 14?

People are clearly telling you their opinion and you get all aggressive and insulting because it's not what you expect us to tell you.
He's your manager. He told you to start the meeting, you start it. Pick your battles. This one isn't even a battle, it's his expectation and there's nothing wrong with that.

Yes you don't be hang around outside a short distance away watching and seeing when the boss turns up

I hope most younger people aren't like this. I would always be on time, especially when starting a New job. OP finds it unfair that she has to start the Teams on time. Jesus wept.

Your new, be proactive, just start the meeting. I'm a middle level manager and often first one to start a meeting. Sometimes have to chair larger ones because exec members are stuck in other meetings.. Nothing wrong with being keen, in larger group meetings use it as a chance to Network and get to know stakeholders.

This thread is excellent. I hope the OP starts a fresh one for everything in her new job she doesn't understand.

@AGoingConcern I'm not sure why you've singled me out for a pedantic side-debate.

I didn't mention anything about "junior"
I also didn't think that I needed to clarify that I didn't mean "all" meetings as I thought that it was fairly common sense that it meant the meetings that the OP was referring to in her post.
I've quoted exactly what it said in the OP.

And if you had read the second half of my original comment, you'll notice that I said why wouldn't the OP just ensure she joined the Teams meeting a minute or two early.

But anyway, I'm a little bemused that you further felt it necessary to describe your manager's expectations of you when you were an associate, so I think I'll just leave you to it.

By doing what they are asked??

I replied to your comment, you replied to mine, I replied back. I haven't been rude to you, and I used an example from my own life as a comparison to illustrate my explanation.

This is how discussion forums work - they're conversations. You're not being attacked or singled out.

Whoever arrives last is technically late and should acknowledge that. "I was waiting for you to finish and start the meeting " is not really ideal response. I would start meeting also manager wants you to start it.

@AGoingConcern Totally get how discussions work.

But it does feel like you had replied to my comment while only having read the first paragraph of it, and also not having fully read either the OP, which seems kind of essential to the process.

(I haven't said you were rude by the way - nor do I think you were. That wasn't my point at all.)

People on this thread are obsessed with senior and junior titles, nowhere I work has actually been like that, everyone is equal in a workplace some people have more overall responsibility but that doesn't make others useless - such a weird attitude to have. And also to say you don't see someone lasting long in a job from a little snippet of info? You don't have to blindly follow your "seniors" you know.

You sound young and argumentative for the sake if it.

If you want to make a good first impression in your new role, join the meetings on time. Don't worry about what your boss is doing. It's irrelevant.

This!

BlueEyedLeucy
You start the meeting, the manager joins - hopefully quite quickly. It’s bad form to just wait for someone else to start the meeting.

Which is exactly what he did? Sat there waiting for me to start the meeting.

Or is it just bad form for me?

I think the many threads above this one are telling you the answer op.

@VivX I thoroughly read your entire post as well as all of the OPs. I don't agree with your characterizatuon of the manager's comment as a power play, and I do think it's important to distinguish between the manager expecting OP to start these particular meetings, the OP being required to start all meetings, and the wild leap OP and some others have made in this thread to "the most junior person has to start every teams meeting because the boss thinks it's beneath him and wants to show that." Pinning down what was actually said and not said is particularly important when OPs are showing disproportionate reactions to something.

You don’t have line managers?

Or a management system where people report to the next role up?

Many jobs have supervisors, or managers directly workflow and making the ultimate decisions.

I licked my boss’s arsehole today - dared to hit a deadline. No amount of mouthwash will help.

Yes, it actually sounds like a defensive response, a lie, or an accusation. ‘I’m not late, YOU’RE late!!’

Just press the fucking Join button OP, is it that hard?

When I'm ready for a video call with one of my staff, I log in and if theyre busy or offline I leave the app running in the background and take advantage of that minute or two to read another email or shoot off a quick text. If they don't call, I do another one. If it goes over 5 min and I haven't heard from them I send an "are you ready" message. I know when they arrive that they'll start the call, so I carry on working until they do, rather than sitting watching a blank screen.

Ideally everyone on a team feels that they are equally valued and equally capable of making a contribution or asking a question. But someone is accountable for team performance and for ensuring that it operates efficiently and effectively. No organisation is completely flat: there is at least one person who is in charge. They may or may not have a job title that includes the word ‘senior’, but there is definitely someone who is responsible for managing your performance and making decisions about your pay awards. To resist the political reality of this is just stupid.