Coffee Break: Paige Bootie

97 Comments

1. Do you think that everyone needs management training to be a good manager?

   My company is small and has limited manager training. That’s definitely an issue. At the same time do people need training to:

   – delegate
   – apply policies fairly
   – not say things like “my elementary school kid could have done that better than you”
   – not require people to work late etc

   I get that training is useful for learning management strategies, long term planning etc but for some basic temperament things I don’t know if training would help

   1. i do not think that everyone needs it. Similarly there are those who can just sing or run superfast. But I think most people would benefit from it and most employers don’t prioritize it nearly enough.

   2. Some of your examples are not like the others. Nobody should need training to not belittle their colleagues. But delegating is a skill, bias can be unconscious, and managing work load and communicating proactively don’t come naturally to everyone. These things can absolutely be improved through training or coaching.

   3. I think most people newly promoted to management need mentorship. I think most “management training” is awful.

      1. This. I was so fortunate to have had a boss/mentor at my last job who helped me unlearn things from a prior horrible job. I was much more in tune with company culture and also a better person to work for as a result.

   4. What? No. None of this is taught in those classes, and most of that is intuitive. Also, there’s nothing wrong with asking people to work late, but how you do it matters.

   5. Yes. I think everyone can benefit from good management training, specifically around working with different personalities and coaching people’s careers. Most people aren’t actually good people managers, they’re task managers. Both are important skill sets for successful management.

   6. There’s a “Manager tools” podcast that is a pretty good resource for learning management techniques and just thinking through things to get ideas. A small company could also suggest mentoring like some other commenters suggested, or have managers have a business book club or something like that, depending on your company culture.

      1. I think a version of the business book club would work. Maybe business articles or book summaries lol, but people have been open to similar concepts in the past & repeated concepts from the book regularly for months after.

         Any particular book suggestions?

      2. Oh no please…that podcast is way out of date. It probably works in military style organisations.

         1. pretty curious to check out this podcast now!

   7. The Making of Manager by Zhuo is a good book. Also, I like Winning by Jack and Suzy Welch.

   8. Yes, it’s a skill , plus different people and projects need different approaches. Plus we all bring our biases, and “applying policies fairly” is not so black and white.

      Also, will add that training is often required for a disciplinary process. Even for managers. Especially for managers who say, “my elementary school kid could have done that better than you.”

2. Has anyone tried Andie swimwear? It was stalking me on social and I finally gave in and ordered a one-piece. I have a one-piece for lap swimming and it makes me totally flat-chested and magnifies my pear-shape. Fine, it’s for swimming. I wanted something cuter. Here’s to hoping that this is it (ordered a M, which should fit my hips).

   1. Are you looking for another suit for lap swimming? If so, Andie ain’t it. Stick with your compression suit. If this is a separate suit for fun swimming/lying out, report back because some of their pieces are very cute!

   2. I tried it twice and had a similar experience to yours — also it was incredibly cheeky! They have a lot of good reviews but I found it the least flattering suit I’ve ever tried (twice)

      1. Same. I don’t understand why all the internet swimwear brands marketed at middle-aged women are cheeky. I don’t want to constantly worry about wedgies while I am chasing after my kids at the pool.

   3. I tried the one piece that has the buttons. I forget the exact name. I’m short (5 ft) and carry most of my weight in belly. I also have a short waist. I liked it for lounging at the pool in vacation. It’s not the cutest suit I’ve owned, but it’s functional.

      1. Where do the cute suits come from? I’m struggling.

         1. Try Swimsuitsforall.com. I’ve gotten cute bathing suits there, and they offer a wide variety of sizes and styles. And they don’t break the bank.

   4. I have ordered and re ordered the same Andie suit 3 times. It’s essentially a sexy black tank suit with a super high cut and it’s very flattering on my hourglass side 12.

      I would not do athletic swimming in it.

   5. I’m a pear and like Gottex suits for active pool days. They have sophisticated colors and interesting details, but I can actually still get a swim in. I like Tyr for lap swimming.

3. This substack is arguing that you need to make ~$140k to be middle class in modern America because of increased “access costs.” E.g. the cheapest/crappiest car you can buy and still get to work reliably is a lot nicer than 1950s cars, but it costs a lot more and this is The Cheapest Option. Curious to hear thoughts on this from the tax brackets that typical read and comment here.
   https://www.yesigiveafig.com/p/part-1-my-life-is-a-lie

   1. It’s likely a much more structurally sound car. IDK that we need automatic windows. Maybe we could go back to the hand-cranked ones? But we are financially better off when we have shoulder belts vs lap belts (or no belts at all). Plus now we have air bags.

      1. Read the article and you’ll see how you’re missing the point.

      2. I’ll agree on seat belts and air bags, as those likely don’t add a ton of complexity and cost relative to the benefits. But “lane assist” and “smart cruise control” are areas I’d be willing to cut. Not even getting into electronic controls for windows, seat adjustments, etc.

   2. I think it’s more like $250K if you have kids in a MCOL area.

      1. No way. We earn this much in the Chicago area with two kids in daycare and are able to save appropriately and have a number of extras.

         1. How long ago did you buy your house though?

            1. 2021. We live in a small ranch in a good school district.

            2. You can live very well in Chicago area with 250K.

               The above poster is also smart in their priorities. You don’t need the huge house, all remodeled to your taste with all the utility/maintenance costs associated with it.

            3. With not equity from previous homes?

         2. We live in a MCOL area and make about $260K; our take-home after taxes, deductions for benefits, and retirement savings is the same as the take-home in this article. We pay $40K per year for college, not $32K for day care, and our mortgage is less than the rent in the article’s example. We are saving nothing and have zero extras.

         3. I agree with this. We also live in the Chicago area with three kids in private school (think parish Catholic school, not $$$ private school). I make $250k and DH stays home. We are doing fine and saving appropriately, $250k is not the poverty line.

            We do live an otherwise “1950s” life though – small ranch home, all the kids share a bedroom, 1 old car, ordering pizza is an unusual treat, drive to see family for vacations, make prolific use of the library but don’t have any streaming services, cut our own grass with a manual lawnmower, etc.

   3. I don’t disagree. The cost of doing business so to say has gotten so high.

   4. He says that’s the poverty line, not the entry point to the middle class. And I agree based on his numbers.

   5. The $140k is for the HHI a family of four, so presume 2 adults making $70k or a single earner with household at $140k supporting two children. It seems accurate to me.

      1. It does seem like a family with 1 earner making 140k is way better off in practical terms than 2-earners at 70k though — a spouse at home full-time has huge impacts on childcare costs, home maintenance, even just saving costs on regular life stuff, like meal planning based on weekly sales.

   6. It think it depends a lot on what you define middle class and the cost of living in your area. In my HCOL city, I would agree that you need at least $140k for a family of four to be middle class. In my parents’ MCOL area, maybe not.

   7. The most stunning revelation to me was how the poverty line is drawn. I can’t believe I didn’t know this, as it is used as a benchmark for so many policy decisions and access to some services.

      “The U.S. poverty line is calculated as three times the cost of a minimum food diet in 1963, adjusted for inflation.”

      Think about that. Wildly inappropriate in today’s society.

      1. What is different about that as a yardstick now vs then?

         1. The article covers that, but if you’re not willing to read it: transportation, healthcare, housing, childcare (wasn’t an expense when you could have a single income family but that’s just wildly unrealistic in today’s economy especially when talking about people trying to raise a family out of poverty), connectivity (landline cost in the 50s vs today’s Internet and phone and computer)

         2. First, think of how frugal a “minimum food diet” is likely to be. In 1963, as other costs (especially housing/healthcare/education/childcare needs) were relatively low, food was on average 1/3 of your budget. Think about that. Could you live now on 3x your current food budget? That’s what the US Government is using as the poverty line. Wildly shockingly low, considering the exponential rise in costs of housing/healthcare/education and now that many couples both need to work to cover these costs, the childcare needs are a large additional cost.

            The article’s author recalculated how much of an average family budget is now spent on food. It is now 5-7%. Not 33% like in the 1960s. Yes, when adjusted for inflation some foods are actually cheaper now. But EVERYTHING else is so much more.

            So the current poverty line is $31,500 for a family of 4.
            Using the current amount the average family spends on food relative to other expenses, that number would be pushed to ~$140,000.

            1. Wasn’t that because food was much more expensive then, and now it’s a lot cheaper?

            2. Yeah, if he wanted to come up with a more robust calculation it ought to weight things out a little more robustly, but I think the concept of the poverty line being far far lower than it should be tracks.

   8. His budget is subsistence-level and does not include retirement savings. To be middle-class, you need to be able to afford to save for retirement. There’s also no room in that budget for major expenses such as car repairs, home repairs, appliance replacements, etc.

   9. Costs have gone up, yes, but so have expectations.
      A family that lives as a family would in the 1950s to early 60s did would come in well under that figure. But I’m talking 1 car, 1000 sf house with 1 bathroom, no cable, no a/c, small wardrobe that doesn’t really change until something wears out, kids wear hand me downs, scratch cooking, not going out to eat, no air travel vacstions, and so on.
      This is pretty much my life (I do have internet though), and we do just fine on a much, much smaller salary. Everyone has to decide what’s important to them. For me that’s a simpler life and savings.

      1. If you read the article, to some degree you can live that “simpler 50s life” but things like a car and Internet and housing and smartphones are all things you cannot opt out of if you are to participate in society that are really expensive. And the poverty line doesn’t account for that.

      2. Yeah, health care is important to me. What I pay is nothing like the portion of salary it used to be. Pensions don’t exist like they used to so affordability with aging is entirely different. College affordability and need is entirely different. But, sure, you think you can scratch cooking your way out, sure.

   10. It makes sense to me. It seems like the cost of “basics” (healthcare, housing, childcare, education) has risen so much across the board in ways that are really difficult to avoid. With the cost of “basics” rising so much, your income needs to be much higher than it used to be for you to have significant money “left over” after meeting those needs, which is what really allows you to build wealth, enjoy a higher standard of living, absorb emergencies without worry – things that we typically associate with being upper middle/upper class.

   11. It’s a very interesting approach to the math and I think the author is right about the Cost of Participation.

       We’ve been helping my brother out of a crisis (he’s doing great now, just needed a foothold and then climbed the ladder himself) and it has been very eye-opening to see what it looks like for him to live on his $50k/year salary as a single adult.

       I got married young and skipped right from “poor student with 5 roommates and my parents’ health insurance” to “biglaw associate”, so I missed the in-between step.

       $50k is about the absolute minimum he can live on even being as frugal and careful as he is, and living rent-free with us – he will not be able to move out until he finds a better-paying job. (He’s actively working on it). So yeah, $140k seems like baseline then for a family of 4.

       1. Is being middle class worth it at that point? I wish him luck but a lot of people get stuck at 50k long term.

   12. I see zero data to support his average of $32k/year on childcare claim. Even if it were true (and I strongly doubt it), that would be for a max of 9 years, assuming care costs ramp down at age 5 and the two kids actually overlap in both needing daycare concurrently. Those costs then go down. He is using median data, at best, and then proclaiming it is the minimum acceptable spend (and below that is poverty). Amazingly, many people live just fine on $75k, particularly if they have employer offered insurance. TVs are optional, as are cars in many areas.
       This is just the progressive equivalent of Fox News.

       1. TVs aren’t a huge budget item for most people, not sure if you realized.
          Would love to hear about all the walkable cities you can live just fine in on 75k/year. Thanks!

          1. Yes, where are these walkable neighborhoods; I am highly interested?

             1. I do it in a tiny rural town in Montana. Studded bike tires work great in winter. I wish there were more intercity transit options, as the bus service is spotty, but it’s do-able and so much cheaper. Approximately 1/3 of people in the US can’t drive for one reason or another and quite a few more shouldn’t. Cars equaling freedom is the biggest pile of BS this country fell for in the 20th century. Tell me why trains are socialism but highways aren’t???

             2. Tell me how that doable bike situation works when you have a kid or two.

       2. I do think his point that the way we calculate the poverty line sucks, but yeah his new numbers are pretty high. Based on my gut feeling, I’d say the poverty line for a family of 4 ought to be $75k or so.

   13. First, think of how frugal a “minimum food diet” is likely to be. In 1963, as other costs (especially housing/healthcare/education/childcare needs) were relatively low, food was on average 1/3 of your budget. Think about that. Could you live now on 3x your current food budget? That’s what the US Government is using as the poverty line. Wildly shockingly low, considering the exponential rise in costs of housing/healthcare/education and now that many couples both need to work to cover these costs, the childcare needs are a large additional cost.

       The article’s author recalculated how much of an average family budget is now spent on food. It is now 5-7%. Not 33% like in the 1960s. Yes, when adjusted for inflation some foods are actually cheaper now. But EVERYTHING else is so much more.

       So the current poverty line is $31,500 for a family of 4.
       Using the current amount the average family spends on food relative to other expenses, that number would be pushed to ~$140,000.

   14. IMO It’s impossible to set a standard national salary because it varies so much based on cost of living. You’re so much wealthier on $150k in a small Midwest city than in SF or NYC.
       I live in a place where decent houses in good school districts costs $250k and really nice houses in the best school district cost $400k. Most families we know including ours earn $150-200k and are doing very well, meaning all basic needs met, saving well and able to afford some luxuries like occasional international travel. I know a number of people who support families of 4-5 people on <$75k incomes and I consider them middle class. (True middle class, not wealthy people who like to call themselves middle class.) They don’t ever go on vacation to Europe and their kids will go to college at State U because they can’t afford private, but they don’t worry about feeding and sheltering their kids. So that number does not sound right to me for my area.

       But SF or someplace like that is obviously a different story.

       1. I’m not being facetious – where is this magical sounding location?

          1. I live in Western/Central NY and in a walkable (within reason) mid-sized city. While 75k would mean frugal living for a family of four, it’s doable within reason and with some creative stretches (family watching the kids, driving vacation destinations, etc.)

             I don’t own a car and I can in theory walk to a handful of places (in reality once real winter sets in, not so much)–a library, a movie theatre, churches, a deli/7-11 type shop, tons of small businesses, a cute shop-able cultural street, the art museum, and so on. Buses are $1 one way and while they are not extensive, are reliable and clean.

             *However* the job market is *rough* and the weather is a major downer–grey, rainy and overcast most days, short summer, very long winter with heavy, difficult to manage and deal with snow.

4. Thanks for the advice here to actually do something with staycation days! I took this week off and sorta did nothing yesterday but had a modest local attraction visit planned for today and today has already felt like more of a luxury and a day off for sure :)

   1. Yay! So glad for you! Scheduling fun makes sure it actually happens – otherwise you end up squeezing it in after the work is done and the work is never done.

   2. Nice!

5. Does anyone have tips for staying composed during active edit sessions when you’re the one screen scaring and editing the document?

   We’re working on a process flow chart and I’m the sole woman in the group. I feel like I’m being treated poorly and rushed to make the changes while we’re meeting live. None of the other people on the call seem willing to be the one actively editing.

   I’m having trouble with my level of frustration while editing. Any tips?

   1. I’m not trying to be flippant when I say this, but you need to turn the editing over to someone else.

      Fake a computer issue if you need to! (“Sorry, my screen sharing isn’t working today, could someone else be the scribe for this session?”)

      1. I should add — if you’re the most junior person on the team, this is just something to suck it up and deal with, unfortunately. I’ve been in your situation many, many times! But if there’s someone else more junior than you or you’re all the same level, there’s no reason for you to be on the hook for this every time.

      2. This. Do not be the default admin

   2. I make the juniors do it (and they’re male on my team). I’m not doing adminy stuff, I already paid my dues.

   3. Know when you can make a quick change “live” vs. when you need to just publicly type in a note memorializing what to fix offline. Saying something like ‘to make the best use of time, let’s move on and I’ll edit later”

6. I’m in the early stages of interviewing with a F500 tech company. The job is hybrid, requiring 2-3 days in office per week. Separately, I am planning to move closer to my elderly parents, which would put me about 80 miles from the company’s office. I am okay going into the office 2-3 days per week IF they are consecutive days and I can stay at a hotel without coming out of pocket for that. In other words, I am wondering if my hotel can be expensed to the company. Before I raise this with the recruiter, I wanted to see if this is an unreasonable thing to suggest.

   1. Yes, that’s not what hybrid means. You’re describing a remote role where company requires you to come in once a quarter.

   2. I vote unreasonable. Elder care is a private issue in America – why should the company underwrite your housing choices?

      Not saying I agree, just stating how it is.

      1. I agree. Asking for consecutive days could be reasonable if the company policy isn’t that WFH days cannot be Monday or Friday (my office limits WFH to Tuesday through Thursday, presumably afraid we will convert Mondays or Fridays at home into long weekends). But asking the company to pay for lodging is unlikely to be successful.

   3. You want them to expense 30k a year for a hotel (rough estimate)? What about transportation and meals? Is that a reasonable cost for them to attain someone at your level? I think it would be better to negotiate a salary increase of 30k since that would be more permanent and not subject to change if they later decide to cut expenses.

   4. Ehh probably not. You applied for the job while living somewhere where this wouldn’t be necessary, but are planning to move, and you’re asking them to pay for that choice, basically. If I was the hiring manager, I’d worry that you would find that this commute and hotel stay practice gets old real fast and wouldn’t stick around. This isn’t something they’ve budgeted for, could create fairness issues with other employees.

      Unless you have some rare and valuable skillset/experience, I vote no.

   5. I would build the analysis that you would want to get a raise and also pay for a hotel several nights a week into your salary request. would not ask for it.

   6. Asking for the company to cover the cost is unreasonable. Your personal housing decision isn’t their choice. I’m sure many other employees are paying more than they would like for housing to have shorter commutes in their in-office days.

   7. Are you interviewing for high level C-suite? Maybe you could swing this. But honestly the only people who are high enough level to get this kind of perk are those who don’t need to worry about $30K in hotel bills because the comp is so high.

   8. I agree with the comments above that this is not a request that will be viewed favorably. Came here to add on that generally speaking, we are seeing remote work go away as well, even in positions previously billed as 2 days in office, we are seeing them shift to 3 or 4. So if you make plans based on 2 days/week in office, consider that that could change in the future.

   9. Yeah this is really out of touch, sorry.

   10. Ha, no, they’re not going to put you up in a hotel half the week. This is not the job for you.

   11. That’s insane no.

   12. It is very unreasonable to ask for in this job environment, but they may flex the hybrid if you’re more than 50 miles from an office. That’s how my company is.

   13. It’s unreasonable. I know a lot of people that commute 80 miles 1-2 days a week (some even did it 5 days/week pre-pandemic). This should take a little over an hour. It’s not an unbearable commute to do a couple times a week and I feel like I’m very anti-commute in general. It’s reasonable to ask for back to back days if *you* want to pay for a hotel yourself. But if you want to stay over, you have to do it on your own dime.

   14. If you really want this job, get hired first. Some places don’t offer consecutive days, although mine does. And it’s very manager dependent.

       The dealbreaker is the hotel, but wonder if you could negotiate a benefit if your would-be employer offers it. It’s a very know your situation kind of thing. Sometimes tech does this. Also, as an employer, I used to offer a commuting employee a special rate with a hotel we partnered with. But he paid. And many hotels will negotiate a rate for regular guests.

       WHAT IF you negotiated enough pay to pay for the hotel though? As in $80×52= $4160 more per year? Wouldn’t that be a better approach?

       1. That’s a huge underestimate of the costs. I live in the middle of nowhere snd you can’t even get a Motel 6 for $80 a night anymore. And she needs multiple nights per week.

          1. So ask for 31,000 (200x3x52, someone did the math above). I would assume you would also build credit card and loyalty points which could lower your hotel costs as the year goes on.

   15. Hahahahahahahaha, no.

   16. For that many days a week, why get a hotel and not rent a room or tiny studio apartment? A cheap apartment share is probably a lot less than that many hotel nights, you can keep basic items and clothes in the room and probably save on food costs.

   17. Not reasonable

7. I’m looking for a basic jacket, I thought: spring/fall weight puffer, mid-thigh, in black or navy. I could have sworn I had like 3 of these, but alas. Where can I get one now at a modest price?

   1. lands end is good quality and reasonably priced. sure they are having black friday sales and they have different weights to chose from.

   2. I got a great one at Sams Club a few years ago for $20. They sell them every year

   3. Eddie Bauer.

   4. Uniqlo

Comments are closed.