coworker said my leggings were too see-through, security guard keeps parking in disabled parking, and more

It’s four answers to four questions. Here we go…

1. My coworker said my leggings were too see-through

My office recently set up a fitness room, and has just started to host cardio classes a few days a week with guest instructors. It would be great if there were a changing room or showers, but it’s still a nice resource to have available even without those facilities. I attended the first class, wearing a typical outfit that I’d wear to Pilates — a sports bra, tank top and leggings.

After class, one of my colleagues came up to me and quietly told me that she thought my leggings were “too see-through.” I felt mortified! These were purple leggings with a floral pattern that, when worn on my body, stretched enough so that you could see that I have caucasian skin tone on my legs (the seat area was less stretched, and also clad in opaque underwear).

Was she completely bananapants to say this? I’m planning on digging up some solid black leggings for the next class but now I’m worried that I inadvertently exposed myself to the office when walking between the bathroom and the fitness room. It also strikes me as a weird double standard that showing exposed shoulders and arms would not be worthy of comment, but showing leg skin would be worthy of comment.

Let me know if I should plan on wearing opaque black leggings to the office gym forever or if these were perfectly reasonable choices of clothing to wear to exercise at a fitness class at work.

It’s difficult to say with certainty without seeing the leggings, but assuming that they were indeed fully opaque in the underwear area and the only part with any sheerness was on your legs, she’s (a) off-base and (b) really stretching to think this is something she should have mentioned (although she might have meant to be doing you a favor rather than just being judgy). That said, leggings that are more opaque everywhere may be a better choice — not because there’s anything scandalous about knowing you have skin on your legs, but just because at work you might as well err on the side of caution.

(Although in answering this, I am leaving aside my qualms about an office offering cardio classes with nowhere to shower.)

2. Security guard keeps parking in disabled parking without proper plates

I am a branch manager at a public library that uses contracted security guards. We’ve had staff and the public raise concerns about our current guard’s conduct: they leave early, have played audio out loud on their phone in designated quiet hours while enforcing the quiet rule with patrons, and are generally disengaged with the work. All together, I take this as their belief the rules don’t apply to them. I’ve spoken with the guard and run the concerns up the chain, but they’re technically managed by their company so there’s only so much I can do other continuing to document. I am not in a position to terminate them, only advocate for a new guard placement (and there’s no guarantee the next guard won’t be worse, which has been my experience with these companies).

Recently, I noticed they park in one of the few designated accessible spots when it’s available. They do not have plates or a placard indicating accessible parking privileges, but I can’t say for certain they’re not entitled to the spot. However, paired with the context above, I’m at least given pause over it. We have a lot of elderly and disabled users who use the spaces with the expected documentation. My community is not shy about complaining, so I’m anticipating complaints about this at some point.

The paths I see are: confront the guard about the lack of plate/placard and cite that as the issue (one or the other is required by law to park in these spaces) while leaving out the disability piece of it, or leave it alone to avoid getting into a situation where they claim I’m questioning the existence of a disability.

We don’t get emails for our guards, so any conversation we have wouldn’t be documented.

Also, I have next to no supervisory support and I’ve been explicitly told my performance is based on how often I reach out (the less, the better). Any concerns I try raising are often ignored, dismissed, or thrown back at me without guidance. I know, I know. Point is: I won’t get far bringing this up with my supervisor. Which path is the right one? Or is there one I’m not thinking of?

Tell the guard they need to have the required plate or placard to park in the disabled spaces. Don’t get into the issue of whether they’re disabled or not; just tell them that they need to display the correct plate or placard, since that’s the law. If they don’t stop parking there, do whatever you’d do if someone else were parking there when they shouldn’t (have them towed? report the violation to a parking enforcement officer?).

And I assume you’re doing this, but every time they play audio on their phone, tell them to turn it off and make sure your staff knows you want them to enforce that too (and that they don’t think they need to cut the guard any special slack). Beyond that, keep documenting the early exits, etc. and informing whoever manages the guard contract.

3. Applying for a promotion that is more senior than the title and pay indicate

I previously worked as, let’s say, a senior X, but currently work as an X. The reason I’m working at a lower level than I used to is mostly because I reached a point in life where I prioritized geographical location and the values of the organizations I work for over the seniority of my job title and pay level, so I found roles that suited me best in those areas. I really enjoy my current role and the company I work for, but have begun to desire some of the more senior and strategic work that comes with being in a senior role.

Great news! There is a new senior X position being advertised on my team, and I’m being encouraged to apply. I really want a senior X job here and have been aware for a couple of months that this opening is coming. Now the ad is live, I can see that the job description is very clearly for a lead X, which is a level above a senior X, is worth a higher salary, and involves less actual X work, possibly even no X on a day-to-day basis. The pay is at the low end of senior X pay, which I’d be okay with if it were a senior role and I had the opportunity to negotiate or progress.

I don’t want a role in which I don’t do X as part of my usual duties, and I certainly don’t want to do the work of a lead for the pay of a senior. The hiring team doesn’t have extensive experience with the X role, and I think they may have never worked with seniors or leads before. This leads me to think they aren’t trying to shortchange the successful candidate, they just don’t realize there’s a disconnect. I’m going to apply for the “senior” role, asking further questions about what the duties will be. If it’s offered to me, I’m going to hold to my boundaries that I won’t do lead work for senior pay, I won’t do the lead role without the lead job title, and I won’t do a role that doesn’t give me a chance to regularly do X. I’m happy to turn down the offer and stay in my current role if the promotion would cross any of those boundaries.

My question is about when I should bring up the discrepancy between the role they want someone to fill versus the job title and pay. My instinct is to not say anything until I have an offer, but I don’t know if this being an internal role makes a difference to that? Would it be strange or off-putting if I don’t mention this earlier to my manager, who is also the hiring manager for the new role?

You should talk to your boss now, rather than potentially going all the way through the interview and turning the job down at that point if you can’t agree on these key things about the role. Interviewing for an internal role is a bit different in that regard — if there’s a point of conflict that you know would need to be worked out before you’d take the job, you’re expected to raise it before you’ve gone through the whole hiring process. If you stay in until the end without raising it, it’s assumed that you’re interested in the job and likely to take it if offered. If you wait to bring up multiple deal-breakers until you’re offered the role and then they’re not able to work those things out so you’ll accept, you’re likely to burn a lot of capital, annoy people, and make it harder to be considered for promotion there in the future.

4. Can a company make severance conditional on signing an NDA?

My workplace has gotten in the unfortunate habit of suddenly laying people off, telling their managers to keep it a secret, and making severance conditional on the released employee signing a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). A few questions:

• Are these NDAs enforceable, given recent rulings on NDA enforceability?
• Are they allowed to do this?
• Is this common? It’s obviously shitty, but is it routine?

It depends on exactly what’s in the NDA.

It’s extremely common for severance to be conditional on signing what’s known as a “general release” and which often contain non-disparagement clauses. But they can’t be overly broad; specifically, in 2023 the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that, for most employees, NDAs cannot stop you from discussing working conditions, talking with coworkers about pay, or filing complaints with federal labor boards, and it’s illegal to offer a severance agreement that attempts to do that. However, the current administration has rescinded the enforcement memo that governed how strictly that rule would be applied, so it’s currently unclear exactly what stance the NLRB will take on this.

Some states have also banned employers from using broad NDAs to hide discrimination, harassment, or illegal workplace practices.