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.

Wow 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

WTAF are you on about. Never in a million years if I was American would I vote for that abhorrent man. Get a grip.

Perhaps the more Donald approach would be to call someone names like you have here.

Yeah wow indeed.

Whoosh 🤣

Maybe but maybe you could be the more professional and show willing? You're not coming across as terribly easy to work with here. Maybe he's trying to make a point?

Indeed! I'm bemused at my mild joke of a comment was deleted. Perhaps the pp and the mods didn't recognise the reference.

OP its not a weird rule.
I run my team exactly the same.

They are all really busy and so am I. As you say in your OP he is in back to back so may take a few mins to grab a drink or bathroom break.

I also know my team are busy, it's essentially their meeting to catch up with me, so as soon as I seen them join I will know they are ready and jump on too.

They might be in back to backs and overrun too so it's a time saver for everyone. They are on, I see the notification so I join.

You are reading way too much into this and the "power play" thing cracked me up, it's like something out of a 90s movie.

There was nothing deletable about your comment!

No, apparently he wasn't in an overlapping meeting, he just wants her to be first on principle.

The meeting can’t “start” on teams until more than one person is on

so he would have had a “as soon as the meeting starts ….” Message on his screen

I don’t think it’s about what position starts a meeting - join at the right time and if he’s, he’s late. You can still something else whilst you wait

I hadn’t read the entire thread when I replied a minute ago.

I don’t understand how this is even a thing?

so neither of you joined? How did he know you weren’t there if he hadn’t joined?

i thought it was whoever did the invite is the one who has to “start” it? But you join on time regardless and it will have a different message depending on if others have joined yet….

very unusual mind sight to not even join; even if you think boss will likely be late. You can use your computer as normal until they arrive.

reading work posts on MN makes me feel very lucky sometimes. My work is apparently very laid back and flexible.

Slagging off people because of their date of birth does not scream high IQ.

This thread needs to go into classics I think!

Start the meeting.
They will be exhausted with back to back meetings all day.
Don't try and justify your position.
It's your boss. Do you want to annoy them.
You've just started this role.

They have asked you to start it. So start it.

This. I would already have your card marked. If I was your manager.

You need to recover this situation fast.

You have probation to pass presumably?

Fabulous

I really don't think it s power move.
He's just busy and thinking between calls.

He'd like you to start it as a prompt.

Help your boss out. If you want to get good projects and support.

When you are a manager you will see how it works.

Until then help him out.

In my workplace whoever is ready at the allotted time starts the meeting and if the other is running late they'd send a message in chat to let the person waiting know - I'll then message to say I'm getting a cup of tea while I'm waiting. My boss often sees the meeting start and is prompted to join because her head has been in something else. I'd never just sit waiting for her to start the meeting.

In my work it's join at the start of the meeting, doesn't really matter who gets there first!
I wouldn't just sit there and not join a meeting, if the other person/people are running late I would expect them to message they'll be there in 5 or whatever

In addition to the fact that there is literally no evidence to confirm how old the OP is....

so if your now saying your (still ridiculous over generalisation with no evidence whatsoever) comment was actually aimed towards people who are 'new to the workplace' then you shouldn't have even used millennial in the first place, as the absolute youngest millennials are 28, and thus fairly unlikely to be starting their first jobs at that age....

Odd perspective, the young always did question everything both the "right" and the "wrong" things, it's how times change though the decades. Are you gen X by any chance?

As posters have said, millennials are not the newbies in the work place, I've 25 years experience in my field and I'm a millennial. Even older "gen z" will be approaching 30 in the next few years. I never quite get the need to see age so to speak in the work place, younger or older, everyone has strengths/weaknesses.

Christ, you sound about 12

I think you're misunderstanding OP (and me). Her manager wants her to be the one that actually switches the meeting on, as it were.

So. That’s not really different to what the poster wrote so what are we misunderstanding?