Why would HR think it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?
I just got out of a meeting with my supervisor and a member of our HR department, giving me a "formal warning" for engaging in inappropriate conduct by visiting a coworker in the hospital.
HR told me doing this was violating their rules on employee relationships. We're both men and in about the same position in different departments. I was trying to be courteous in the HR meeting while still pushing for details on why they thought it was inappropriate, and all the representative could tell me was "It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
I'm not sure how I could avoid future inappropriate situations if I can't find anything inappropriate about this one. What did I do wrong?
colleagues unprofessional-behavior health
New contributor
add a comment |
I just got out of a meeting with my supervisor and a member of our HR department, giving me a "formal warning" for engaging in inappropriate conduct by visiting a coworker in the hospital.
HR told me doing this was violating their rules on employee relationships. We're both men and in about the same position in different departments. I was trying to be courteous in the HR meeting while still pushing for details on why they thought it was inappropriate, and all the representative could tell me was "It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
I'm not sure how I could avoid future inappropriate situations if I can't find anything inappropriate about this one. What did I do wrong?
colleagues unprofessional-behavior health
New contributor
1
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
17
Seeing as my comment asking for clarification has (once again on this particular stackexchange) been removed along with everything else, I now voted to close as the question is unclear.
– Sebastiaan van den Broek
20 hours ago
3
How's your co-worker doing?
– Strawberry
12 hours ago
1
I've been ill in hospital for a week, and was visited separately by the company owner and a coworker - it was definitely appreciated at the time. Hospitals are boring! Did you go on work time?
– Criggie
8 hours ago
This looks really insane. There are boundaries of the employment agreement and your employer can't simply dictate what you are supposed to do or not to do in your free time. They are trespassing your private life area.
– ElmoVanKielmo
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I just got out of a meeting with my supervisor and a member of our HR department, giving me a "formal warning" for engaging in inappropriate conduct by visiting a coworker in the hospital.
HR told me doing this was violating their rules on employee relationships. We're both men and in about the same position in different departments. I was trying to be courteous in the HR meeting while still pushing for details on why they thought it was inappropriate, and all the representative could tell me was "It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
I'm not sure how I could avoid future inappropriate situations if I can't find anything inappropriate about this one. What did I do wrong?
colleagues unprofessional-behavior health
New contributor
I just got out of a meeting with my supervisor and a member of our HR department, giving me a "formal warning" for engaging in inappropriate conduct by visiting a coworker in the hospital.
HR told me doing this was violating their rules on employee relationships. We're both men and in about the same position in different departments. I was trying to be courteous in the HR meeting while still pushing for details on why they thought it was inappropriate, and all the representative could tell me was "It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
I'm not sure how I could avoid future inappropriate situations if I can't find anything inappropriate about this one. What did I do wrong?
colleagues unprofessional-behavior health
colleagues unprofessional-behavior health
New contributor
New contributor
edited 2 days ago
Erguy
New contributor
asked 2 days ago
ErguyErguy
375226
375226
New contributor
New contributor
1
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
17
Seeing as my comment asking for clarification has (once again on this particular stackexchange) been removed along with everything else, I now voted to close as the question is unclear.
– Sebastiaan van den Broek
20 hours ago
3
How's your co-worker doing?
– Strawberry
12 hours ago
1
I've been ill in hospital for a week, and was visited separately by the company owner and a coworker - it was definitely appreciated at the time. Hospitals are boring! Did you go on work time?
– Criggie
8 hours ago
This looks really insane. There are boundaries of the employment agreement and your employer can't simply dictate what you are supposed to do or not to do in your free time. They are trespassing your private life area.
– ElmoVanKielmo
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
17
Seeing as my comment asking for clarification has (once again on this particular stackexchange) been removed along with everything else, I now voted to close as the question is unclear.
– Sebastiaan van den Broek
20 hours ago
3
How's your co-worker doing?
– Strawberry
12 hours ago
1
I've been ill in hospital for a week, and was visited separately by the company owner and a coworker - it was definitely appreciated at the time. Hospitals are boring! Did you go on work time?
– Criggie
8 hours ago
This looks really insane. There are boundaries of the employment agreement and your employer can't simply dictate what you are supposed to do or not to do in your free time. They are trespassing your private life area.
– ElmoVanKielmo
6 hours ago
1
1
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
17
17
Seeing as my comment asking for clarification has (once again on this particular stackexchange) been removed along with everything else, I now voted to close as the question is unclear.
– Sebastiaan van den Broek
20 hours ago
Seeing as my comment asking for clarification has (once again on this particular stackexchange) been removed along with everything else, I now voted to close as the question is unclear.
– Sebastiaan van den Broek
20 hours ago
3
3
How's your co-worker doing?
– Strawberry
12 hours ago
How's your co-worker doing?
– Strawberry
12 hours ago
1
1
I've been ill in hospital for a week, and was visited separately by the company owner and a coworker - it was definitely appreciated at the time. Hospitals are boring! Did you go on work time?
– Criggie
8 hours ago
I've been ill in hospital for a week, and was visited separately by the company owner and a coworker - it was definitely appreciated at the time. Hospitals are boring! Did you go on work time?
– Criggie
8 hours ago
This looks really insane. There are boundaries of the employment agreement and your employer can't simply dictate what you are supposed to do or not to do in your free time. They are trespassing your private life area.
– ElmoVanKielmo
6 hours ago
This looks really insane. There are boundaries of the employment agreement and your employer can't simply dictate what you are supposed to do or not to do in your free time. They are trespassing your private life area.
– ElmoVanKielmo
6 hours ago
add a comment |
10 Answers
10
active
oldest
votes
We can not tell you what you did wrong (that sounds odd to me too), but your HR person has given you the hook you need by claiming that the employee handbook forbids it. This means you can (politely) ask the HR person to point out the relevant policy, so you can review it and make sure you understand it.
If you'd thought of this during the meeting you could have said something like "oh, I didn't remember that from when I read the handbook; could you show me where so I can review it?". After the fact, your best bet is to send email (so you'll have a "paper" trail). In the email you want to convey: (1) you want to follow your employer's policies, (2) you didn't know you hadn't, so (3) you want to review to avoid future problems. Be polite, not confrontational; if it turns out the HR person is wrong, you can deal with that later. Here's a sample message, which assumes that you've checked the handbook and couldn't find the relevant part:
Dear HR person,
Thank you for letting me know about our policy against hospital visits. I'd like to review the relevant policies again so I can be sure to avoid future problems. I'm having trouble finding this in my copy of the handbook; could you please tell me where I should be looking? Thank you.
Specific followup would depend on what you learn; there are too many possibilities to plan for all of them in advance. Email like this should elicit the information you need to decide what to do next.
53
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
19
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
4
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
14
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
16
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
|
show 8 more comments
I think that there is a different point of view that's not being considered here, but it's difficult to know for sure with the little detail that you provided in your question.
It seems very unusual and unlikely that HR would have a policy that prohibits something as simple as a visit to a co-worker in the hospital. Obviously, I'm basing this off of my experience living and working in the United States, other cultures may have different norms for this type of behavior. So you need to respect the norms and work culture where you are.
But ultimately this sounds to me as if the person you visited may have been uncomfortable with your visit and reached out to HR or their supervisor. Perhaps they are embarrassed, or uncomfortable with interacting with you outside of the office for something that they consider to be a very personal and private matter.
5
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
10
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
12
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
It's not at all uncommon to have friends at work. I was once friends with a couple at my office and I would regularly visit them at their house. However, nothing you've said has indicated that you are close friends with this coworker you visited, other than the fact that you thought to visit him.
Hospital visits are a special sort of case where a person is particularly vulnerable. This person is unable to leave, and so he is at a tremendous social disadvantage when someone chooses to visit him. This isn't to say he necessarily dislikes you but sometimes uneven social environments are very discomforting to people even when the other person is being perfectly pleasant.
My guess is that the coworker informed management about the visit, as others have indicated. You may have committed a subtle sort of faux pas that's hard to pin down. I wouldn't fret about it too much since this sort of thing can happen to the best of us. I think the Interpersonal Skills stack exchange is a great place to learn more about social cues and I'd like to spend more time there myself.
11
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
4
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
14
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
2
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
4
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
|
show 4 more comments
Focusing on the reaction 'read the manual', the responsible for the underlying matters ought to be in the condition
- to point out to the source (existence of the rule);
- to explain the letter and spirit of it (interpretation of the rule);
- to indicate the grounds of the infringement (relevance of the rule);
- to justify consequences being commensurate to facts and circumstances (application of the rule);
ideally in an effortless fashion. The more competent and prepared, the more effortlessly.
The answer you received shifts the burden of the proof on you and amplifies your distress --- hence, preoccupies you and distracts you from your tasks on the job --- at least fourfold:
- the rule is not clear (whether the rule exists and is vague; exists and has not been clarified; or does not exist at all);
- you have to find out, lone and alone, what the probably existing, hopefully clear and surely not clarified rule is;
- you have to build your own case for such a lack of support, clarity and explanation;
- you have to convey this case to someone who has already proven that they feel entitled to sanction you rather curtly.
So you might well be wrong, but you cannot be asked to find out why a sanction has been imposed on you. This is a Kafka-like situation.
There must be an explainable reason why paying a courtesy/goodwill visit to, say, an hospitalized HR officer conflicts with the company's rightful interests and core values. And the HR officer needs to know and explain this.
add a comment |
If HR got orders or objectives to reduce amount of workers or to rotate them by firing some of them regularly (it's not necessarily against you), they are likely to use this kind of language.
It's known the most effective way to fire people is to warn people with some irrelevant things first.
This way the day the company fires the people HR will just have to say the people “you know why, right?” and the people will say nothing and silently accept what his happening because the people would feel guilty and would already have accepted what is happening since days or months.
Nothing can happen if coworkers support you, but in most case coworkers just point you to save themselves.
I'm not saying it's what happening to you, but that is a real answer to that question if that is happening to you: “Why would HR say it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?”
Note that in what you said you there is no sign HR thinks it's inappropriate, you just reported HR said it is.
There can be a real reason why it's forbidden by handbook (for example I know that some companies formally forbid workers to receive gifts from other companies, that to prevent corruption), but I see no reason why visiting a coworker at hospital would be a threat for the company at this point. Some people talked about the fact the coworker may have not liked your visit but if that's true that kind of faux-pas would be a threat for that coworker at first look it does not looks like a threat for the company. Remind the handbook is there to protect the company and remind the warning is there to protect the company.
The fact HR hides itself behind the handbook instead of going the social way (not saying it's a faux-pas in this culture etc.) and the fact HR have not explained why this is forbidden by handbook (not explaining how this forbidding would protect the company) may be a ringing bell as HR demonstrated there is no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better this culture or no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better how to protect the company or to make the company a better one.
New contributor
add a comment |
Do you and your friend work at the aforementioned hospital?
Noticed your name was Erguy (ER + Guy) so though I'd throw it out there.
New contributor
6
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
@ ERguy - Hello. You mentioned you are of comparable professional status, albeit in different departments. To my thinking, this dissociative workplace variable probably means you, and the hospitalised chap, are not, and would not, be perceived as "co-workers" by fellow company employees or the concerned man. You did not state in your OP whether this hospital visit was to see a co-worker not a friend. I must say I would find it disturbingly odd if a person I'd seen and possibly even chatted with at my workplace were to suddenly appear at my hospital bedside to wish me a speedy recovery (or cynically check to see if there may soon be a new job opening). One expects close friends and family to undergo the chore of hospital visits (not the most convivial of places to socialise). Having a relative stranger drop by may have been excessively stressful, especially if one thinks said stranger may have undeclared ulterior motives. He may well be concerned or worry if/that you have a crush on him; one big enough to trigger a surprise hospital visit. Thus thinking you are gay and making a play where he is not. Then again, he may be gay and simply not fancy or like you or has been in a monogamous gay relationship for years. Awkward if his life-partner drops in for a visit too, where your reason for visiting is not readily understood or appreciated.
You must know from experience when a person is poorly or simply under the weather that any energy required to remain socially engaging and mannered may be extremely difficult to muster. One's social affectations are easily sloughed when in the company of close relatives or established friends. Having to wriggle into and wear one's cultural persona when all one really wants is to bask in sympathetic rays emittedthose closest to him may bathe him withis lie back and feel terribly sorry for oneself .
Then again...he may have considered your intrusion to have been stalker like.
You have ultimately to take onboard that he may not actually like you.
You should wait until he is fully recovered and back at work. There, with the proviso you're not breaking workplace rules, you can write him a considerate e-mail, letter, PiN, whatever, with which you apologise for inadvertently causing him stress and anxiety during a time when it was thoroughly unnecessary. If appropriate to your circumstances, remove any anxieties he may have about yours or his sexuality, especially if you weren't motivated by sexuality and opportunism. If you were then tell him to his face.
I haven't seen any replies from you regarding contributors comments, so hopefully you're past the indignity of being dragged over the coals for an accidental misdemeanour. In future though, think carefully before encroaching on an acquaintances personal space.
Those Workplace rules you've been warned to abide by may not be explicitly black and white. However, the greys and tact should help to guide you.
Anyway, all the best. You've not lost your job...yet!
New contributor
add a comment |
OP note: If you understand what I am trying to say, feel free to fix/improve it!
This is an inhumane rule, thus you are by an inhumane company.
It doesn't matter, what is in their "handbooks". It is long bad that the HR thinks they are free to dictate the off-workplace, human relation of the employee.
It is your decision, how do you deal with it. I can imagine such a wage, or life situation, for which I would tolerate it.
But the main attitude is this: the company is inhumane and un-ethical, so if also you aren't very ethical with it, is not a big problem.
At least, you are free to use their own evil rules against them. Check that handbook, and find ways to attack back, while you hold a bridge to fly away.
Hopefully no HR co-worker will ever say you that you were "un-ethical" in any sense.
6
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
1
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
1
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
1
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
2
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
|
show 2 more comments
Employer getting involved, or having rule regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous and in sane countries this should be against the law / constitution.
If that person was uncomfortable, he should've confronted you. Sane employer would tell him the same (wtf, are you still grade-school kids, and is the company your teachers ?).
I would consult a lawyer, and if such abhorrent control over employee private life is condoned by your country's laws, I'd seek better employer (and better homeland; or start some public initiative to rectify this).
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
16
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
26
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
5
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
add a comment |
"It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
THIS is your ANSWER.
Read the handbook and if you still have questions edit your question or ask HR.
Something in that chain of events you described violated at least one policy in said handbook (at least according to its interpretation of the company / HR).
I URGE YOU TO CONSULT A LAWYER!
Engaging in inappropriate conduct is a serious offense raising all sorts of red flags.
See what your chances are in expunging this from your documents.
If it has no merit, if HR's interpretation of the policies in the handbook was false, a lawyer will be able to help you!
EDIT:
Seriously, downvoters, the issue is OP was told he violated a policy.
WITHOUT knowing that policy we CAN'T answer any differently.
Idle speculation won't help OP and aimless rants about the sense of rules encompassing private relationships with colleagues are way out of the scope.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: false,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Erguy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f127213%2fwhy-would-hr-think-its-inappropriate-that-i-visited-a-coworker-in-the-hospital%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(function () {
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function () {
var showEditor = function() {
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
};
var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True') {
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');
$(this).loadPopup({
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup) {
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');
pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
}
})
} else{
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true) {
showEditor();
}
}
});
});
10 Answers
10
active
oldest
votes
10 Answers
10
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
We can not tell you what you did wrong (that sounds odd to me too), but your HR person has given you the hook you need by claiming that the employee handbook forbids it. This means you can (politely) ask the HR person to point out the relevant policy, so you can review it and make sure you understand it.
If you'd thought of this during the meeting you could have said something like "oh, I didn't remember that from when I read the handbook; could you show me where so I can review it?". After the fact, your best bet is to send email (so you'll have a "paper" trail). In the email you want to convey: (1) you want to follow your employer's policies, (2) you didn't know you hadn't, so (3) you want to review to avoid future problems. Be polite, not confrontational; if it turns out the HR person is wrong, you can deal with that later. Here's a sample message, which assumes that you've checked the handbook and couldn't find the relevant part:
Dear HR person,
Thank you for letting me know about our policy against hospital visits. I'd like to review the relevant policies again so I can be sure to avoid future problems. I'm having trouble finding this in my copy of the handbook; could you please tell me where I should be looking? Thank you.
Specific followup would depend on what you learn; there are too many possibilities to plan for all of them in advance. Email like this should elicit the information you need to decide what to do next.
53
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
19
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
4
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
14
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
16
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
|
show 8 more comments
We can not tell you what you did wrong (that sounds odd to me too), but your HR person has given you the hook you need by claiming that the employee handbook forbids it. This means you can (politely) ask the HR person to point out the relevant policy, so you can review it and make sure you understand it.
If you'd thought of this during the meeting you could have said something like "oh, I didn't remember that from when I read the handbook; could you show me where so I can review it?". After the fact, your best bet is to send email (so you'll have a "paper" trail). In the email you want to convey: (1) you want to follow your employer's policies, (2) you didn't know you hadn't, so (3) you want to review to avoid future problems. Be polite, not confrontational; if it turns out the HR person is wrong, you can deal with that later. Here's a sample message, which assumes that you've checked the handbook and couldn't find the relevant part:
Dear HR person,
Thank you for letting me know about our policy against hospital visits. I'd like to review the relevant policies again so I can be sure to avoid future problems. I'm having trouble finding this in my copy of the handbook; could you please tell me where I should be looking? Thank you.
Specific followup would depend on what you learn; there are too many possibilities to plan for all of them in advance. Email like this should elicit the information you need to decide what to do next.
53
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
19
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
4
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
14
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
16
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
|
show 8 more comments
We can not tell you what you did wrong (that sounds odd to me too), but your HR person has given you the hook you need by claiming that the employee handbook forbids it. This means you can (politely) ask the HR person to point out the relevant policy, so you can review it and make sure you understand it.
If you'd thought of this during the meeting you could have said something like "oh, I didn't remember that from when I read the handbook; could you show me where so I can review it?". After the fact, your best bet is to send email (so you'll have a "paper" trail). In the email you want to convey: (1) you want to follow your employer's policies, (2) you didn't know you hadn't, so (3) you want to review to avoid future problems. Be polite, not confrontational; if it turns out the HR person is wrong, you can deal with that later. Here's a sample message, which assumes that you've checked the handbook and couldn't find the relevant part:
Dear HR person,
Thank you for letting me know about our policy against hospital visits. I'd like to review the relevant policies again so I can be sure to avoid future problems. I'm having trouble finding this in my copy of the handbook; could you please tell me where I should be looking? Thank you.
Specific followup would depend on what you learn; there are too many possibilities to plan for all of them in advance. Email like this should elicit the information you need to decide what to do next.
We can not tell you what you did wrong (that sounds odd to me too), but your HR person has given you the hook you need by claiming that the employee handbook forbids it. This means you can (politely) ask the HR person to point out the relevant policy, so you can review it and make sure you understand it.
If you'd thought of this during the meeting you could have said something like "oh, I didn't remember that from when I read the handbook; could you show me where so I can review it?". After the fact, your best bet is to send email (so you'll have a "paper" trail). In the email you want to convey: (1) you want to follow your employer's policies, (2) you didn't know you hadn't, so (3) you want to review to avoid future problems. Be polite, not confrontational; if it turns out the HR person is wrong, you can deal with that later. Here's a sample message, which assumes that you've checked the handbook and couldn't find the relevant part:
Dear HR person,
Thank you for letting me know about our policy against hospital visits. I'd like to review the relevant policies again so I can be sure to avoid future problems. I'm having trouble finding this in my copy of the handbook; could you please tell me where I should be looking? Thank you.
Specific followup would depend on what you learn; there are too many possibilities to plan for all of them in advance. Email like this should elicit the information you need to decide what to do next.
edited yesterday
answered 2 days ago
Monica Cellio♦Monica Cellio
45.8k19116200
45.8k19116200
53
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
19
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
4
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
14
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
16
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
|
show 8 more comments
53
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
19
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
4
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
14
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
16
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
53
53
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
I like that phrasing, as it is polite and non-confrontative. It seems OP has already pushed for details, let's hope this email will shed some light... otherwise I'd say reading the handbook (again?) would be a good idea.
– DarkCygnus
2 days ago
19
19
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
I mean, it's most likely going to be some passage along the line of respecting co-workers boundaries or maintaining a strictly professional relationships, which is completely up to interpretation.
– SpeedOfRound
2 days ago
4
4
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
I think this is the best answer, but I am really curious if HR not being able to provide this information makes company susceptible for creating a hostile environment... It would be a groundless action against a basic humane reaction of empathy. I understand this might be out of scope of the answer, but I got personally upset, and maybe it's worth of addressing or a question of it's own. Should it be legal to punish an individual for caring for another one bearing no professional nor immediate business consequences. I completely fail to see reasoning behind such policy. Antistalking?
– luk32
2 days ago
14
14
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
@Erguy Could you please let us know what happens?
– Ovi
2 days ago
16
16
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
@luk32 there are lots of possibilities, depending on what the details are that aren't in the question. Rather than speculate about them, I suggest the OP ask directly. Possibly it was unwanted contact (the employee wanted to keep it private), possibly there's a concern about asking a sick employee who might go out on disability to do anything work-related, possibly there's a concern about accidental disclosures of corporate secrets, possibly the HR person is mistaken... asking to see the policy should move things forward.
– Monica Cellio♦
2 days ago
|
show 8 more comments
I think that there is a different point of view that's not being considered here, but it's difficult to know for sure with the little detail that you provided in your question.
It seems very unusual and unlikely that HR would have a policy that prohibits something as simple as a visit to a co-worker in the hospital. Obviously, I'm basing this off of my experience living and working in the United States, other cultures may have different norms for this type of behavior. So you need to respect the norms and work culture where you are.
But ultimately this sounds to me as if the person you visited may have been uncomfortable with your visit and reached out to HR or their supervisor. Perhaps they are embarrassed, or uncomfortable with interacting with you outside of the office for something that they consider to be a very personal and private matter.
5
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
10
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
12
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
I think that there is a different point of view that's not being considered here, but it's difficult to know for sure with the little detail that you provided in your question.
It seems very unusual and unlikely that HR would have a policy that prohibits something as simple as a visit to a co-worker in the hospital. Obviously, I'm basing this off of my experience living and working in the United States, other cultures may have different norms for this type of behavior. So you need to respect the norms and work culture where you are.
But ultimately this sounds to me as if the person you visited may have been uncomfortable with your visit and reached out to HR or their supervisor. Perhaps they are embarrassed, or uncomfortable with interacting with you outside of the office for something that they consider to be a very personal and private matter.
5
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
10
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
12
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
I think that there is a different point of view that's not being considered here, but it's difficult to know for sure with the little detail that you provided in your question.
It seems very unusual and unlikely that HR would have a policy that prohibits something as simple as a visit to a co-worker in the hospital. Obviously, I'm basing this off of my experience living and working in the United States, other cultures may have different norms for this type of behavior. So you need to respect the norms and work culture where you are.
But ultimately this sounds to me as if the person you visited may have been uncomfortable with your visit and reached out to HR or their supervisor. Perhaps they are embarrassed, or uncomfortable with interacting with you outside of the office for something that they consider to be a very personal and private matter.
I think that there is a different point of view that's not being considered here, but it's difficult to know for sure with the little detail that you provided in your question.
It seems very unusual and unlikely that HR would have a policy that prohibits something as simple as a visit to a co-worker in the hospital. Obviously, I'm basing this off of my experience living and working in the United States, other cultures may have different norms for this type of behavior. So you need to respect the norms and work culture where you are.
But ultimately this sounds to me as if the person you visited may have been uncomfortable with your visit and reached out to HR or their supervisor. Perhaps they are embarrassed, or uncomfortable with interacting with you outside of the office for something that they consider to be a very personal and private matter.
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
SteveSteve
5,22951732
5,22951732
5
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
10
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
12
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
5
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
10
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
12
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
5
5
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
You may well be right. It's still a totally odd move on the part of the company to treat it this way. There's nothing culturally inappropriate about this visit (on its face).
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
19
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
@Marcin HR's behavior is one of the reasons I think that this may be the case, they are stuck in the middle of something that they aren't comfortable with.
– Steve
2 days ago
10
10
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
Yep for sure, but their whole job is dealing with things that are vaguely uncomfortable. Basically I think you're right, and this is some crappy HR work.
– Marcin
2 days ago
19
19
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
And one has to wonder how HR heard about the visit. I think this is the likely scenario.
– Aurast
yesterday
12
12
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
I can perfectly imagine a person not wanting to be seen in a diminished state in front of their coworkers and reaching out to HR asking, gently, that coworkers be asked to refrain from visiting (after the first visit), and things going downhill (for the OP) from there...
– Matthieu M.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
It's not at all uncommon to have friends at work. I was once friends with a couple at my office and I would regularly visit them at their house. However, nothing you've said has indicated that you are close friends with this coworker you visited, other than the fact that you thought to visit him.
Hospital visits are a special sort of case where a person is particularly vulnerable. This person is unable to leave, and so he is at a tremendous social disadvantage when someone chooses to visit him. This isn't to say he necessarily dislikes you but sometimes uneven social environments are very discomforting to people even when the other person is being perfectly pleasant.
My guess is that the coworker informed management about the visit, as others have indicated. You may have committed a subtle sort of faux pas that's hard to pin down. I wouldn't fret about it too much since this sort of thing can happen to the best of us. I think the Interpersonal Skills stack exchange is a great place to learn more about social cues and I'd like to spend more time there myself.
11
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
4
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
14
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
2
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
4
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
|
show 4 more comments
It's not at all uncommon to have friends at work. I was once friends with a couple at my office and I would regularly visit them at their house. However, nothing you've said has indicated that you are close friends with this coworker you visited, other than the fact that you thought to visit him.
Hospital visits are a special sort of case where a person is particularly vulnerable. This person is unable to leave, and so he is at a tremendous social disadvantage when someone chooses to visit him. This isn't to say he necessarily dislikes you but sometimes uneven social environments are very discomforting to people even when the other person is being perfectly pleasant.
My guess is that the coworker informed management about the visit, as others have indicated. You may have committed a subtle sort of faux pas that's hard to pin down. I wouldn't fret about it too much since this sort of thing can happen to the best of us. I think the Interpersonal Skills stack exchange is a great place to learn more about social cues and I'd like to spend more time there myself.
11
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
4
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
14
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
2
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
4
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
|
show 4 more comments
It's not at all uncommon to have friends at work. I was once friends with a couple at my office and I would regularly visit them at their house. However, nothing you've said has indicated that you are close friends with this coworker you visited, other than the fact that you thought to visit him.
Hospital visits are a special sort of case where a person is particularly vulnerable. This person is unable to leave, and so he is at a tremendous social disadvantage when someone chooses to visit him. This isn't to say he necessarily dislikes you but sometimes uneven social environments are very discomforting to people even when the other person is being perfectly pleasant.
My guess is that the coworker informed management about the visit, as others have indicated. You may have committed a subtle sort of faux pas that's hard to pin down. I wouldn't fret about it too much since this sort of thing can happen to the best of us. I think the Interpersonal Skills stack exchange is a great place to learn more about social cues and I'd like to spend more time there myself.
It's not at all uncommon to have friends at work. I was once friends with a couple at my office and I would regularly visit them at their house. However, nothing you've said has indicated that you are close friends with this coworker you visited, other than the fact that you thought to visit him.
Hospital visits are a special sort of case where a person is particularly vulnerable. This person is unable to leave, and so he is at a tremendous social disadvantage when someone chooses to visit him. This isn't to say he necessarily dislikes you but sometimes uneven social environments are very discomforting to people even when the other person is being perfectly pleasant.
My guess is that the coworker informed management about the visit, as others have indicated. You may have committed a subtle sort of faux pas that's hard to pin down. I wouldn't fret about it too much since this sort of thing can happen to the best of us. I think the Interpersonal Skills stack exchange is a great place to learn more about social cues and I'd like to spend more time there myself.
answered 2 days ago
Kyle DelaneyKyle Delaney
43727
43727
11
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
4
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
14
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
2
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
4
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
|
show 4 more comments
11
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
4
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
14
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
2
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
4
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
11
11
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
+1, though if the coworker did not wish to be visited, then I can't quite picture how the OP even knew to visit him (e.g., how he knew what hospital to go to, what the visiting hours were, etc.).
– ruakh
2 days ago
4
4
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
@ruakh It can happen, although I doubt that's the explanation here.
– Geoffrey Brent
2 days ago
14
14
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
It is always a good idea to call in advance and check whether the patient wants a visit. Most hospital stays involve some sort of undress :-), which might make a person, especially a coworker, uncomfortable. You will likely find out a lot more about their medical condition than they might want to share. They might just be throwing up all over the place and prefer privacy for icky bodily functions. They might be exhausted by overlong other visits. Even if you are a relatively close friend, you might not always be welcome. So just check.
– George M
2 days ago
2
2
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
Fully understandable. IMHO, however, the problem's core is whether and why a humane situation such as this falls within the scope of the HR policy and related sanctions. It seems to me to be a problem of authority, more so than one of sensitivity, granted that the latter is paramount.
– XavierStuvw
yesterday
4
4
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
@GeoffreyBrent ..... holy crap!
– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday
|
show 4 more comments
Focusing on the reaction 'read the manual', the responsible for the underlying matters ought to be in the condition
- to point out to the source (existence of the rule);
- to explain the letter and spirit of it (interpretation of the rule);
- to indicate the grounds of the infringement (relevance of the rule);
- to justify consequences being commensurate to facts and circumstances (application of the rule);
ideally in an effortless fashion. The more competent and prepared, the more effortlessly.
The answer you received shifts the burden of the proof on you and amplifies your distress --- hence, preoccupies you and distracts you from your tasks on the job --- at least fourfold:
- the rule is not clear (whether the rule exists and is vague; exists and has not been clarified; or does not exist at all);
- you have to find out, lone and alone, what the probably existing, hopefully clear and surely not clarified rule is;
- you have to build your own case for such a lack of support, clarity and explanation;
- you have to convey this case to someone who has already proven that they feel entitled to sanction you rather curtly.
So you might well be wrong, but you cannot be asked to find out why a sanction has been imposed on you. This is a Kafka-like situation.
There must be an explainable reason why paying a courtesy/goodwill visit to, say, an hospitalized HR officer conflicts with the company's rightful interests and core values. And the HR officer needs to know and explain this.
add a comment |
Focusing on the reaction 'read the manual', the responsible for the underlying matters ought to be in the condition
- to point out to the source (existence of the rule);
- to explain the letter and spirit of it (interpretation of the rule);
- to indicate the grounds of the infringement (relevance of the rule);
- to justify consequences being commensurate to facts and circumstances (application of the rule);
ideally in an effortless fashion. The more competent and prepared, the more effortlessly.
The answer you received shifts the burden of the proof on you and amplifies your distress --- hence, preoccupies you and distracts you from your tasks on the job --- at least fourfold:
- the rule is not clear (whether the rule exists and is vague; exists and has not been clarified; or does not exist at all);
- you have to find out, lone and alone, what the probably existing, hopefully clear and surely not clarified rule is;
- you have to build your own case for such a lack of support, clarity and explanation;
- you have to convey this case to someone who has already proven that they feel entitled to sanction you rather curtly.
So you might well be wrong, but you cannot be asked to find out why a sanction has been imposed on you. This is a Kafka-like situation.
There must be an explainable reason why paying a courtesy/goodwill visit to, say, an hospitalized HR officer conflicts with the company's rightful interests and core values. And the HR officer needs to know and explain this.
add a comment |
Focusing on the reaction 'read the manual', the responsible for the underlying matters ought to be in the condition
- to point out to the source (existence of the rule);
- to explain the letter and spirit of it (interpretation of the rule);
- to indicate the grounds of the infringement (relevance of the rule);
- to justify consequences being commensurate to facts and circumstances (application of the rule);
ideally in an effortless fashion. The more competent and prepared, the more effortlessly.
The answer you received shifts the burden of the proof on you and amplifies your distress --- hence, preoccupies you and distracts you from your tasks on the job --- at least fourfold:
- the rule is not clear (whether the rule exists and is vague; exists and has not been clarified; or does not exist at all);
- you have to find out, lone and alone, what the probably existing, hopefully clear and surely not clarified rule is;
- you have to build your own case for such a lack of support, clarity and explanation;
- you have to convey this case to someone who has already proven that they feel entitled to sanction you rather curtly.
So you might well be wrong, but you cannot be asked to find out why a sanction has been imposed on you. This is a Kafka-like situation.
There must be an explainable reason why paying a courtesy/goodwill visit to, say, an hospitalized HR officer conflicts with the company's rightful interests and core values. And the HR officer needs to know and explain this.
Focusing on the reaction 'read the manual', the responsible for the underlying matters ought to be in the condition
- to point out to the source (existence of the rule);
- to explain the letter and spirit of it (interpretation of the rule);
- to indicate the grounds of the infringement (relevance of the rule);
- to justify consequences being commensurate to facts and circumstances (application of the rule);
ideally in an effortless fashion. The more competent and prepared, the more effortlessly.
The answer you received shifts the burden of the proof on you and amplifies your distress --- hence, preoccupies you and distracts you from your tasks on the job --- at least fourfold:
- the rule is not clear (whether the rule exists and is vague; exists and has not been clarified; or does not exist at all);
- you have to find out, lone and alone, what the probably existing, hopefully clear and surely not clarified rule is;
- you have to build your own case for such a lack of support, clarity and explanation;
- you have to convey this case to someone who has already proven that they feel entitled to sanction you rather curtly.
So you might well be wrong, but you cannot be asked to find out why a sanction has been imposed on you. This is a Kafka-like situation.
There must be an explainable reason why paying a courtesy/goodwill visit to, say, an hospitalized HR officer conflicts with the company's rightful interests and core values. And the HR officer needs to know and explain this.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
XavierStuvwXavierStuvw
31915
31915
add a comment |
add a comment |
If HR got orders or objectives to reduce amount of workers or to rotate them by firing some of them regularly (it's not necessarily against you), they are likely to use this kind of language.
It's known the most effective way to fire people is to warn people with some irrelevant things first.
This way the day the company fires the people HR will just have to say the people “you know why, right?” and the people will say nothing and silently accept what his happening because the people would feel guilty and would already have accepted what is happening since days or months.
Nothing can happen if coworkers support you, but in most case coworkers just point you to save themselves.
I'm not saying it's what happening to you, but that is a real answer to that question if that is happening to you: “Why would HR say it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?”
Note that in what you said you there is no sign HR thinks it's inappropriate, you just reported HR said it is.
There can be a real reason why it's forbidden by handbook (for example I know that some companies formally forbid workers to receive gifts from other companies, that to prevent corruption), but I see no reason why visiting a coworker at hospital would be a threat for the company at this point. Some people talked about the fact the coworker may have not liked your visit but if that's true that kind of faux-pas would be a threat for that coworker at first look it does not looks like a threat for the company. Remind the handbook is there to protect the company and remind the warning is there to protect the company.
The fact HR hides itself behind the handbook instead of going the social way (not saying it's a faux-pas in this culture etc.) and the fact HR have not explained why this is forbidden by handbook (not explaining how this forbidding would protect the company) may be a ringing bell as HR demonstrated there is no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better this culture or no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better how to protect the company or to make the company a better one.
New contributor
add a comment |
If HR got orders or objectives to reduce amount of workers or to rotate them by firing some of them regularly (it's not necessarily against you), they are likely to use this kind of language.
It's known the most effective way to fire people is to warn people with some irrelevant things first.
This way the day the company fires the people HR will just have to say the people “you know why, right?” and the people will say nothing and silently accept what his happening because the people would feel guilty and would already have accepted what is happening since days or months.
Nothing can happen if coworkers support you, but in most case coworkers just point you to save themselves.
I'm not saying it's what happening to you, but that is a real answer to that question if that is happening to you: “Why would HR say it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?”
Note that in what you said you there is no sign HR thinks it's inappropriate, you just reported HR said it is.
There can be a real reason why it's forbidden by handbook (for example I know that some companies formally forbid workers to receive gifts from other companies, that to prevent corruption), but I see no reason why visiting a coworker at hospital would be a threat for the company at this point. Some people talked about the fact the coworker may have not liked your visit but if that's true that kind of faux-pas would be a threat for that coworker at first look it does not looks like a threat for the company. Remind the handbook is there to protect the company and remind the warning is there to protect the company.
The fact HR hides itself behind the handbook instead of going the social way (not saying it's a faux-pas in this culture etc.) and the fact HR have not explained why this is forbidden by handbook (not explaining how this forbidding would protect the company) may be a ringing bell as HR demonstrated there is no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better this culture or no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better how to protect the company or to make the company a better one.
New contributor
add a comment |
If HR got orders or objectives to reduce amount of workers or to rotate them by firing some of them regularly (it's not necessarily against you), they are likely to use this kind of language.
It's known the most effective way to fire people is to warn people with some irrelevant things first.
This way the day the company fires the people HR will just have to say the people “you know why, right?” and the people will say nothing and silently accept what his happening because the people would feel guilty and would already have accepted what is happening since days or months.
Nothing can happen if coworkers support you, but in most case coworkers just point you to save themselves.
I'm not saying it's what happening to you, but that is a real answer to that question if that is happening to you: “Why would HR say it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?”
Note that in what you said you there is no sign HR thinks it's inappropriate, you just reported HR said it is.
There can be a real reason why it's forbidden by handbook (for example I know that some companies formally forbid workers to receive gifts from other companies, that to prevent corruption), but I see no reason why visiting a coworker at hospital would be a threat for the company at this point. Some people talked about the fact the coworker may have not liked your visit but if that's true that kind of faux-pas would be a threat for that coworker at first look it does not looks like a threat for the company. Remind the handbook is there to protect the company and remind the warning is there to protect the company.
The fact HR hides itself behind the handbook instead of going the social way (not saying it's a faux-pas in this culture etc.) and the fact HR have not explained why this is forbidden by handbook (not explaining how this forbidding would protect the company) may be a ringing bell as HR demonstrated there is no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better this culture or no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better how to protect the company or to make the company a better one.
New contributor
If HR got orders or objectives to reduce amount of workers or to rotate them by firing some of them regularly (it's not necessarily against you), they are likely to use this kind of language.
It's known the most effective way to fire people is to warn people with some irrelevant things first.
This way the day the company fires the people HR will just have to say the people “you know why, right?” and the people will say nothing and silently accept what his happening because the people would feel guilty and would already have accepted what is happening since days or months.
Nothing can happen if coworkers support you, but in most case coworkers just point you to save themselves.
I'm not saying it's what happening to you, but that is a real answer to that question if that is happening to you: “Why would HR say it's inappropriate that I visited a coworker in the hospital?”
Note that in what you said you there is no sign HR thinks it's inappropriate, you just reported HR said it is.
There can be a real reason why it's forbidden by handbook (for example I know that some companies formally forbid workers to receive gifts from other companies, that to prevent corruption), but I see no reason why visiting a coworker at hospital would be a threat for the company at this point. Some people talked about the fact the coworker may have not liked your visit but if that's true that kind of faux-pas would be a threat for that coworker at first look it does not looks like a threat for the company. Remind the handbook is there to protect the company and remind the warning is there to protect the company.
The fact HR hides itself behind the handbook instead of going the social way (not saying it's a faux-pas in this culture etc.) and the fact HR have not explained why this is forbidden by handbook (not explaining how this forbidding would protect the company) may be a ringing bell as HR demonstrated there is no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better this culture or no intention to help you becoming a better coworker by making you understanding better how to protect the company or to make the company a better one.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 10 hours ago
Thomas DebesseThomas Debesse
111
111
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Do you and your friend work at the aforementioned hospital?
Noticed your name was Erguy (ER + Guy) so though I'd throw it out there.
New contributor
6
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Do you and your friend work at the aforementioned hospital?
Noticed your name was Erguy (ER + Guy) so though I'd throw it out there.
New contributor
6
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Do you and your friend work at the aforementioned hospital?
Noticed your name was Erguy (ER + Guy) so though I'd throw it out there.
New contributor
Do you and your friend work at the aforementioned hospital?
Noticed your name was Erguy (ER + Guy) so though I'd throw it out there.
New contributor
edited yesterday
J. Chris Compton
4,112527
4,112527
New contributor
answered yesterday
FrankFrank
171
171
New contributor
New contributor
6
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
6
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
6
6
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
Hi Frank, questions asking for clarification of the original question should be posted as comments on the question, not as answers. Once you've earned enough reputation score, you'll be able to comment on questions and answers.
– reirab
yesterday
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review
– bruglesco
7 hours ago
add a comment |
@ ERguy - Hello. You mentioned you are of comparable professional status, albeit in different departments. To my thinking, this dissociative workplace variable probably means you, and the hospitalised chap, are not, and would not, be perceived as "co-workers" by fellow company employees or the concerned man. You did not state in your OP whether this hospital visit was to see a co-worker not a friend. I must say I would find it disturbingly odd if a person I'd seen and possibly even chatted with at my workplace were to suddenly appear at my hospital bedside to wish me a speedy recovery (or cynically check to see if there may soon be a new job opening). One expects close friends and family to undergo the chore of hospital visits (not the most convivial of places to socialise). Having a relative stranger drop by may have been excessively stressful, especially if one thinks said stranger may have undeclared ulterior motives. He may well be concerned or worry if/that you have a crush on him; one big enough to trigger a surprise hospital visit. Thus thinking you are gay and making a play where he is not. Then again, he may be gay and simply not fancy or like you or has been in a monogamous gay relationship for years. Awkward if his life-partner drops in for a visit too, where your reason for visiting is not readily understood or appreciated.
You must know from experience when a person is poorly or simply under the weather that any energy required to remain socially engaging and mannered may be extremely difficult to muster. One's social affectations are easily sloughed when in the company of close relatives or established friends. Having to wriggle into and wear one's cultural persona when all one really wants is to bask in sympathetic rays emittedthose closest to him may bathe him withis lie back and feel terribly sorry for oneself .
Then again...he may have considered your intrusion to have been stalker like.
You have ultimately to take onboard that he may not actually like you.
You should wait until he is fully recovered and back at work. There, with the proviso you're not breaking workplace rules, you can write him a considerate e-mail, letter, PiN, whatever, with which you apologise for inadvertently causing him stress and anxiety during a time when it was thoroughly unnecessary. If appropriate to your circumstances, remove any anxieties he may have about yours or his sexuality, especially if you weren't motivated by sexuality and opportunism. If you were then tell him to his face.
I haven't seen any replies from you regarding contributors comments, so hopefully you're past the indignity of being dragged over the coals for an accidental misdemeanour. In future though, think carefully before encroaching on an acquaintances personal space.
Those Workplace rules you've been warned to abide by may not be explicitly black and white. However, the greys and tact should help to guide you.
Anyway, all the best. You've not lost your job...yet!
New contributor
add a comment |
@ ERguy - Hello. You mentioned you are of comparable professional status, albeit in different departments. To my thinking, this dissociative workplace variable probably means you, and the hospitalised chap, are not, and would not, be perceived as "co-workers" by fellow company employees or the concerned man. You did not state in your OP whether this hospital visit was to see a co-worker not a friend. I must say I would find it disturbingly odd if a person I'd seen and possibly even chatted with at my workplace were to suddenly appear at my hospital bedside to wish me a speedy recovery (or cynically check to see if there may soon be a new job opening). One expects close friends and family to undergo the chore of hospital visits (not the most convivial of places to socialise). Having a relative stranger drop by may have been excessively stressful, especially if one thinks said stranger may have undeclared ulterior motives. He may well be concerned or worry if/that you have a crush on him; one big enough to trigger a surprise hospital visit. Thus thinking you are gay and making a play where he is not. Then again, he may be gay and simply not fancy or like you or has been in a monogamous gay relationship for years. Awkward if his life-partner drops in for a visit too, where your reason for visiting is not readily understood or appreciated.
You must know from experience when a person is poorly or simply under the weather that any energy required to remain socially engaging and mannered may be extremely difficult to muster. One's social affectations are easily sloughed when in the company of close relatives or established friends. Having to wriggle into and wear one's cultural persona when all one really wants is to bask in sympathetic rays emittedthose closest to him may bathe him withis lie back and feel terribly sorry for oneself .
Then again...he may have considered your intrusion to have been stalker like.
You have ultimately to take onboard that he may not actually like you.
You should wait until he is fully recovered and back at work. There, with the proviso you're not breaking workplace rules, you can write him a considerate e-mail, letter, PiN, whatever, with which you apologise for inadvertently causing him stress and anxiety during a time when it was thoroughly unnecessary. If appropriate to your circumstances, remove any anxieties he may have about yours or his sexuality, especially if you weren't motivated by sexuality and opportunism. If you were then tell him to his face.
I haven't seen any replies from you regarding contributors comments, so hopefully you're past the indignity of being dragged over the coals for an accidental misdemeanour. In future though, think carefully before encroaching on an acquaintances personal space.
Those Workplace rules you've been warned to abide by may not be explicitly black and white. However, the greys and tact should help to guide you.
Anyway, all the best. You've not lost your job...yet!
New contributor
add a comment |
@ ERguy - Hello. You mentioned you are of comparable professional status, albeit in different departments. To my thinking, this dissociative workplace variable probably means you, and the hospitalised chap, are not, and would not, be perceived as "co-workers" by fellow company employees or the concerned man. You did not state in your OP whether this hospital visit was to see a co-worker not a friend. I must say I would find it disturbingly odd if a person I'd seen and possibly even chatted with at my workplace were to suddenly appear at my hospital bedside to wish me a speedy recovery (or cynically check to see if there may soon be a new job opening). One expects close friends and family to undergo the chore of hospital visits (not the most convivial of places to socialise). Having a relative stranger drop by may have been excessively stressful, especially if one thinks said stranger may have undeclared ulterior motives. He may well be concerned or worry if/that you have a crush on him; one big enough to trigger a surprise hospital visit. Thus thinking you are gay and making a play where he is not. Then again, he may be gay and simply not fancy or like you or has been in a monogamous gay relationship for years. Awkward if his life-partner drops in for a visit too, where your reason for visiting is not readily understood or appreciated.
You must know from experience when a person is poorly or simply under the weather that any energy required to remain socially engaging and mannered may be extremely difficult to muster. One's social affectations are easily sloughed when in the company of close relatives or established friends. Having to wriggle into and wear one's cultural persona when all one really wants is to bask in sympathetic rays emittedthose closest to him may bathe him withis lie back and feel terribly sorry for oneself .
Then again...he may have considered your intrusion to have been stalker like.
You have ultimately to take onboard that he may not actually like you.
You should wait until he is fully recovered and back at work. There, with the proviso you're not breaking workplace rules, you can write him a considerate e-mail, letter, PiN, whatever, with which you apologise for inadvertently causing him stress and anxiety during a time when it was thoroughly unnecessary. If appropriate to your circumstances, remove any anxieties he may have about yours or his sexuality, especially if you weren't motivated by sexuality and opportunism. If you were then tell him to his face.
I haven't seen any replies from you regarding contributors comments, so hopefully you're past the indignity of being dragged over the coals for an accidental misdemeanour. In future though, think carefully before encroaching on an acquaintances personal space.
Those Workplace rules you've been warned to abide by may not be explicitly black and white. However, the greys and tact should help to guide you.
Anyway, all the best. You've not lost your job...yet!
New contributor
@ ERguy - Hello. You mentioned you are of comparable professional status, albeit in different departments. To my thinking, this dissociative workplace variable probably means you, and the hospitalised chap, are not, and would not, be perceived as "co-workers" by fellow company employees or the concerned man. You did not state in your OP whether this hospital visit was to see a co-worker not a friend. I must say I would find it disturbingly odd if a person I'd seen and possibly even chatted with at my workplace were to suddenly appear at my hospital bedside to wish me a speedy recovery (or cynically check to see if there may soon be a new job opening). One expects close friends and family to undergo the chore of hospital visits (not the most convivial of places to socialise). Having a relative stranger drop by may have been excessively stressful, especially if one thinks said stranger may have undeclared ulterior motives. He may well be concerned or worry if/that you have a crush on him; one big enough to trigger a surprise hospital visit. Thus thinking you are gay and making a play where he is not. Then again, he may be gay and simply not fancy or like you or has been in a monogamous gay relationship for years. Awkward if his life-partner drops in for a visit too, where your reason for visiting is not readily understood or appreciated.
You must know from experience when a person is poorly or simply under the weather that any energy required to remain socially engaging and mannered may be extremely difficult to muster. One's social affectations are easily sloughed when in the company of close relatives or established friends. Having to wriggle into and wear one's cultural persona when all one really wants is to bask in sympathetic rays emittedthose closest to him may bathe him withis lie back and feel terribly sorry for oneself .
Then again...he may have considered your intrusion to have been stalker like.
You have ultimately to take onboard that he may not actually like you.
You should wait until he is fully recovered and back at work. There, with the proviso you're not breaking workplace rules, you can write him a considerate e-mail, letter, PiN, whatever, with which you apologise for inadvertently causing him stress and anxiety during a time when it was thoroughly unnecessary. If appropriate to your circumstances, remove any anxieties he may have about yours or his sexuality, especially if you weren't motivated by sexuality and opportunism. If you were then tell him to his face.
I haven't seen any replies from you regarding contributors comments, so hopefully you're past the indignity of being dragged over the coals for an accidental misdemeanour. In future though, think carefully before encroaching on an acquaintances personal space.
Those Workplace rules you've been warned to abide by may not be explicitly black and white. However, the greys and tact should help to guide you.
Anyway, all the best. You've not lost your job...yet!
New contributor
edited 1 hour ago
New contributor
answered 16 hours ago
D. JoeD. Joe
12
12
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
OP note: If you understand what I am trying to say, feel free to fix/improve it!
This is an inhumane rule, thus you are by an inhumane company.
It doesn't matter, what is in their "handbooks". It is long bad that the HR thinks they are free to dictate the off-workplace, human relation of the employee.
It is your decision, how do you deal with it. I can imagine such a wage, or life situation, for which I would tolerate it.
But the main attitude is this: the company is inhumane and un-ethical, so if also you aren't very ethical with it, is not a big problem.
At least, you are free to use their own evil rules against them. Check that handbook, and find ways to attack back, while you hold a bridge to fly away.
Hopefully no HR co-worker will ever say you that you were "un-ethical" in any sense.
6
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
1
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
1
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
1
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
2
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
|
show 2 more comments
OP note: If you understand what I am trying to say, feel free to fix/improve it!
This is an inhumane rule, thus you are by an inhumane company.
It doesn't matter, what is in their "handbooks". It is long bad that the HR thinks they are free to dictate the off-workplace, human relation of the employee.
It is your decision, how do you deal with it. I can imagine such a wage, or life situation, for which I would tolerate it.
But the main attitude is this: the company is inhumane and un-ethical, so if also you aren't very ethical with it, is not a big problem.
At least, you are free to use their own evil rules against them. Check that handbook, and find ways to attack back, while you hold a bridge to fly away.
Hopefully no HR co-worker will ever say you that you were "un-ethical" in any sense.
6
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
1
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
1
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
1
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
2
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
|
show 2 more comments
OP note: If you understand what I am trying to say, feel free to fix/improve it!
This is an inhumane rule, thus you are by an inhumane company.
It doesn't matter, what is in their "handbooks". It is long bad that the HR thinks they are free to dictate the off-workplace, human relation of the employee.
It is your decision, how do you deal with it. I can imagine such a wage, or life situation, for which I would tolerate it.
But the main attitude is this: the company is inhumane and un-ethical, so if also you aren't very ethical with it, is not a big problem.
At least, you are free to use their own evil rules against them. Check that handbook, and find ways to attack back, while you hold a bridge to fly away.
Hopefully no HR co-worker will ever say you that you were "un-ethical" in any sense.
OP note: If you understand what I am trying to say, feel free to fix/improve it!
This is an inhumane rule, thus you are by an inhumane company.
It doesn't matter, what is in their "handbooks". It is long bad that the HR thinks they are free to dictate the off-workplace, human relation of the employee.
It is your decision, how do you deal with it. I can imagine such a wage, or life situation, for which I would tolerate it.
But the main attitude is this: the company is inhumane and un-ethical, so if also you aren't very ethical with it, is not a big problem.
At least, you are free to use their own evil rules against them. Check that handbook, and find ways to attack back, while you hold a bridge to fly away.
Hopefully no HR co-worker will ever say you that you were "un-ethical" in any sense.
edited yesterday
answered 2 days ago
Gray SheepGray Sheep
1,2031921
1,2031921
6
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
1
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
1
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
1
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
2
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
|
show 2 more comments
6
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
1
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
1
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
1
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
2
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
6
6
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
Hum. What the hell?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
1
1
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
If the visit was an entirely private meeting of two consenting parties with no consequences to their joint employer, how would HR learn of it? We can hardly assume that HR contacted the patient first, more likely the reverse happened. In which case HR cannot mention that communication to the OP because such a slip could hypothetically expose the coworker to some form of retaliation from the OP.
– Jirka Hanika
yesterday
1
1
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
This is not worded the best
– Steve
yesterday
1
1
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
@PierreArlaud Sorry if I was not enough clear. I am trying to say, that it is an unfair, inhumane policy what the HR is doing, and I adviced the OP to check that "handbook" and to try to utilize its rules - as they were written - to fight back that inhumane behavior. Thus, essentially, I am inciting the OP against its employer, and I think it is pretty okay! If you have any better idea, how to formulate this post better, please do it. What is not clear?
– Gray Sheep
yesterday
2
2
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
Ok let me elaborate on that. What the hell do you know about the company being inhumane? What if the colleague in the hospital told HR some guy at the office came in his private circle and that he disapproved of it (as some people have suggested could be the case)? Would it be inhumane to tell a coworker to mind his own business in that case?
– Pierre Arlaud
yesterday
|
show 2 more comments
Employer getting involved, or having rule regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous and in sane countries this should be against the law / constitution.
If that person was uncomfortable, he should've confronted you. Sane employer would tell him the same (wtf, are you still grade-school kids, and is the company your teachers ?).
I would consult a lawyer, and if such abhorrent control over employee private life is condoned by your country's laws, I'd seek better employer (and better homeland; or start some public initiative to rectify this).
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
16
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
26
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
5
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
add a comment |
Employer getting involved, or having rule regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous and in sane countries this should be against the law / constitution.
If that person was uncomfortable, he should've confronted you. Sane employer would tell him the same (wtf, are you still grade-school kids, and is the company your teachers ?).
I would consult a lawyer, and if such abhorrent control over employee private life is condoned by your country's laws, I'd seek better employer (and better homeland; or start some public initiative to rectify this).
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
16
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
26
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
5
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
add a comment |
Employer getting involved, or having rule regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous and in sane countries this should be against the law / constitution.
If that person was uncomfortable, he should've confronted you. Sane employer would tell him the same (wtf, are you still grade-school kids, and is the company your teachers ?).
I would consult a lawyer, and if such abhorrent control over employee private life is condoned by your country's laws, I'd seek better employer (and better homeland; or start some public initiative to rectify this).
New contributor
Employer getting involved, or having rule regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous and in sane countries this should be against the law / constitution.
If that person was uncomfortable, he should've confronted you. Sane employer would tell him the same (wtf, are you still grade-school kids, and is the company your teachers ?).
I would consult a lawyer, and if such abhorrent control over employee private life is condoned by your country's laws, I'd seek better employer (and better homeland; or start some public initiative to rectify this).
New contributor
edited yesterday
Kevin
2,74521117
2,74521117
New contributor
answered 2 days ago
Miloslav RausMiloslav Raus
1653
1653
New contributor
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
16
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
26
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
5
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
add a comment |
16
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
26
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
5
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
16
16
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
This seems more like a rant than an answer
– stannius
2 days ago
26
26
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
Your suggestion is that, in response to a formal warning from HR, the questioner should move to a different country??
– Sneftel
yesterday
5
5
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
"regulating what you do in your free time, strikes me as totally ridiculous" If my manager starts calling me every day at 2am "in his free time", I feel entitled to complain to HR. If a male coworker makes improper comments to a female coworker in an after-work outside working hours, she has a right to complain, etc. A company can sanction behavior outside working hour if it happens between two co-workers and one of them complaints, so your main reasoning seems flawed.
– zakinster
yesterday
add a comment |
"It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
THIS is your ANSWER.
Read the handbook and if you still have questions edit your question or ask HR.
Something in that chain of events you described violated at least one policy in said handbook (at least according to its interpretation of the company / HR).
I URGE YOU TO CONSULT A LAWYER!
Engaging in inappropriate conduct is a serious offense raising all sorts of red flags.
See what your chances are in expunging this from your documents.
If it has no merit, if HR's interpretation of the policies in the handbook was false, a lawyer will be able to help you!
EDIT:
Seriously, downvoters, the issue is OP was told he violated a policy.
WITHOUT knowing that policy we CAN'T answer any differently.
Idle speculation won't help OP and aimless rants about the sense of rules encompassing private relationships with colleagues are way out of the scope.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
add a comment |
"It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
THIS is your ANSWER.
Read the handbook and if you still have questions edit your question or ask HR.
Something in that chain of events you described violated at least one policy in said handbook (at least according to its interpretation of the company / HR).
I URGE YOU TO CONSULT A LAWYER!
Engaging in inappropriate conduct is a serious offense raising all sorts of red flags.
See what your chances are in expunging this from your documents.
If it has no merit, if HR's interpretation of the policies in the handbook was false, a lawyer will be able to help you!
EDIT:
Seriously, downvoters, the issue is OP was told he violated a policy.
WITHOUT knowing that policy we CAN'T answer any differently.
Idle speculation won't help OP and aimless rants about the sense of rules encompassing private relationships with colleagues are way out of the scope.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
add a comment |
"It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
THIS is your ANSWER.
Read the handbook and if you still have questions edit your question or ask HR.
Something in that chain of events you described violated at least one policy in said handbook (at least according to its interpretation of the company / HR).
I URGE YOU TO CONSULT A LAWYER!
Engaging in inappropriate conduct is a serious offense raising all sorts of red flags.
See what your chances are in expunging this from your documents.
If it has no merit, if HR's interpretation of the policies in the handbook was false, a lawyer will be able to help you!
EDIT:
Seriously, downvoters, the issue is OP was told he violated a policy.
WITHOUT knowing that policy we CAN'T answer any differently.
Idle speculation won't help OP and aimless rants about the sense of rules encompassing private relationships with colleagues are way out of the scope.
"It's against the rules. Read the handbook".
THIS is your ANSWER.
Read the handbook and if you still have questions edit your question or ask HR.
Something in that chain of events you described violated at least one policy in said handbook (at least according to its interpretation of the company / HR).
I URGE YOU TO CONSULT A LAWYER!
Engaging in inappropriate conduct is a serious offense raising all sorts of red flags.
See what your chances are in expunging this from your documents.
If it has no merit, if HR's interpretation of the policies in the handbook was false, a lawyer will be able to help you!
EDIT:
Seriously, downvoters, the issue is OP was told he violated a policy.
WITHOUT knowing that policy we CAN'T answer any differently.
Idle speculation won't help OP and aimless rants about the sense of rules encompassing private relationships with colleagues are way out of the scope.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
DigitalBlade969DigitalBlade969
6,6081523
6,6081523
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
add a comment |
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
add a comment |
Erguy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Erguy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Erguy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Erguy is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f127213%2fwhy-would-hr-think-its-inappropriate-that-i-visited-a-coworker-in-the-hospital%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
– Jane S♦
yesterday
17
Seeing as my comment asking for clarification has (once again on this particular stackexchange) been removed along with everything else, I now voted to close as the question is unclear.
– Sebastiaan van den Broek
20 hours ago
3
How's your co-worker doing?
– Strawberry
12 hours ago
1
I've been ill in hospital for a week, and was visited separately by the company owner and a coworker - it was definitely appreciated at the time. Hospitals are boring! Did you go on work time?
– Criggie
8 hours ago
This looks really insane. There are boundaries of the employment agreement and your employer can't simply dictate what you are supposed to do or not to do in your free time. They are trespassing your private life area.
– ElmoVanKielmo
6 hours ago