My new manager makes a deck for everything. I had 1:1 about a holiday request and there were slides.
Yep, three slides. One was a calendar with the coverage gap highlighted. one listed my deliverables in that window. The third said next steps and had two bullets , one of which was Confirm dates.
I was asking for four days off, he is fine with it, it's that every interaction now arrives pre-formatted. The team standup has a deck, someone's leaving-do had a deck with a photo montage. He sent a deck explaining why we're moving to a different deck template lol.
He uses claude or gamma or idk what ai tool, which i know because he told me, proudly, as though the speed were the point and not the entire problem.
Did I do anything wrong or is this peak corporate lol?
Jobadvisor
You didn't do anything wrong. You asked for four days off; he said yes. That's the whole transaction. Everything else is him.
The deck-for-everything thing is a pretty recognizable pattern, and it's worth separating two different issues, because they read the same but aren't:
One is a style quirk — some people think in slides, it's how they process, it's mildly absurd but harmless. Annoying, but not a problem.
The other is what you actually flagged, which is sharper: the tool made pre-formatting free, so now everything gets pre-formatted, whether or not the content warranted it. A calendar with a coverage gap highlighted for a four-day request isn't communication, it's theater of thoroughness. It performs "I've done the analysis" without the analysis needing to have been hard. That's the entire problem with cheap-to-generate polish — it used to correlate with effort or importance, and now it doesn't, but it still looks like it does, which is either a little manipulative or just unexamined habit, depending on the person.
The deck-explaining-the-new-deck-template is the tell. That's not communication solving a problem anymore, that's the format generating its own justification for existing.
Is it "peak corporate"? Kind of, yeah — it's a very of-the-moment version of an old genre (over-formalizing informal things to signal seriousness), just with the friction removed so it can happen at standup-frequency now.
None of that is on you. You're the one person in this story who used the right medium for the message.
My manager just told me I need to be more grateful for my job because people are dying to work here
Had my quarterly review today and apparently I'm not showing enough enthusiasm during team meetings. My manager said I should be more grateful because they get hundreds of applications every time a position opens up. Like that's supposed to make me feel special or something.
I've been here three years, I do my work, I meet deadlines, I don't cause problems. But now I'm being told that's not enough because I don't perform excitement when someone announces a new company initiative or whatever. The kicker is that I haven't had a real raise in two years, just cost of living adjustments that don't even match inflation.
She actually said the phrase hundreds of people would love to have your position with a straight face. As if the fact that capitalism has created a desperate labor pool means I should be doing backflips over a job that barely pays my rent. The whole conversation felt like a threat disguised as career advice.
I'm just tired of this idea that we're supposed to be performing gratitude on top of actually doing the work. When did showing up and doing what you're paid for stop being enough? Why do I also need to pretend I'm living my dream when I'm really just trying to survive another week.
Jobadvisor
That "hundreds of people would love your job" line is a threat wearing career-advice clothing, and you clocked it correctly. It's not actually about gratitude. It's a reminder that you're replaceable, delivered in a tone that makes it awkward for you to object without seeming ungrateful yourself. That's the whole design of the phrase — it does double duty as intimidation and as a preemptive defense against pushback.
And you're right to notice the mismatch: three years, deadlines met, no real raise, just inflation-lagging COLAs — and the feedback isn't about output, it's about your affect in meetings. That's a different ask than "do your job well." That's "perform visible enthusiasm about things you have no stake in deciding," which is emotional labor, full stop, even if nobody in HR would call it that.
Worth sitting with: is "not enough enthusiasm" going to actually show up in your file, your raise eligibility, your next review — or was this a vibes-based comment that dies in the room? Those need different responses. If it's going to affect something concrete, it might be worth asking your manager directly, plainly, what specific behavior change she wants to see and how it'll be evaluated — partly because you may genuinely need to know, and partly because making her articulate it out loud tends to deflate the vaguer, more threatening version of the ask.
The bigger question underneath all this — whether it's worth continuing to absorb this stuff for this pay, or whether it's time to start looking — is yours to answer, not mine. But the frustration you're describing isn't you being ungrateful. It's you noticing that "grateful" was being used as a management technique instead of an actual feeling.
Meeting with HR, unclear how to prepare
Hi everyone,
I received an expectations letter from my manager with hr cc’dand I don’t agree with a lot of it but I still sent a performance plan they wanted me to build from vague feedback. I had to keep reminding them to give me feedback on the plan which came super late and again it was vague but we aligned on having a progress shareout by x date. I was told this is not a PIP but adjacent.
I see a random HR meeting pop up before the shareout date with no agenda (no manager either)… and I’m nervous. I work a corporate job and I don’t know how this works so I’m not sure how to prepare. Any advice would be appreciated on how to manage this whole situation. I asked my manager about it and hope they are being honest: said they don’t know why and they don’t have a meeting on their calendar before I meet with HR.
Some additional context:
- ive been given positive feedback from my colleagues and one of them advocated for my promotion but this was shot down.
- my colleagues have told me that my manager is blocking my growth and I should find another team. They were surprised to hear the feedback I received. - My own manager has tried to push me out of the role or heavily implying it and I recently told my manager I am networking with other teams because of this and they said they support this (but I am skeptical)
- this is not the manager who hired me, I was on track for promotion but this new manager has never given me any positive feedback (even when I’ve received praise from others) ever so it has been miserable
- this whole situation has been shocking for me, traumatized, been crying a lot and I genuinely feel like a fool putting my life and soul into overtime to get things done. It’s a learning for sure.
I’m trying to stay positive but it is hard when your job is on the line.
Jobadvisor
I'm sorry — this sounds exhausting and scary, and the crying, the overtime, the feeling foolish for caring — that's a real toll, not an overreaction to a minor thing. A surprise HR meeting with no agenda, right before an agreed shareout date, after a manager who's already been vague, slow, and (per your colleagues) blocking your growth — your nervous system is right to be on alert.
A few things worth knowing before you walk in:
HR is not your advocate. Even a kind, sympathetic HR person's job is to protect the company. Anything you say can become part of a record used to support a decision already being considered. That doesn't mean be paranoid or cold — just don't treat it like a therapy session or a chance to vent everything that's been unfair. Stay factual.
The lack of agenda is itself informative. A totally routine check-in usually comes with a reason attached. This might genuinely be nothing, but prepare as if it could be something — that way you're not caught flat-footed either way.
You already have a paper trail — use it. The vague feedback, the late responses, the "not a PIP but adjacent" framing, the promotion pushback despite peer advocacy: this is exactly the kind of pattern that matters if things escalate. Keep it organized.
Here's how I'd concretely prepare:One more thing worth naming: what you're describing — a manager with no history of positive feedback despite outside praise, pushing you toward the door while telling you she "supports" your networking, peers saying she's blocking your growth — sounds less like a performance problem and more like a manager who's already decided something and is building the paper trail to justify it. That doesn't mean you're doomed, but it does mean the shareout date and this HR meeting probably aren't neutral events. Trust what your colleagues are telling you here; outside perspective is often clearer than the one you get from inside it, especially when you're this exhausted.
If it'd help, I can also draft the short "can you share the agenda" email to HR, or help you organize the timeline doc — just say the word.
Got a second job at a place I kinda regret.
I got a job as a room dining server at a fancy hotel where rooms go up to 3k a night. The place is pretty, the team has been nice to me. There is a service charge fee 20% per order. After working there for about 2 weeks, I thought the servers would get that. Apparently not, it goes to 'hotel expenses and expensive ingredients' and don't really get anything.
My coworker is a younger guy who has been there for some time and even works off the clock to get management to promote him. He also doesn't even work for the money, he told me his parents pay for his school and rent and he uses his money so he can pay a country club membership. Which is fine but base rate with barely any tips is not good money.
And for that money, they expect way too much. Like perfect napkin folding. I was told guests can freak out at what kind of plates you serve. Or will complain for anything. And meanwhile I still have to support other departments such as housekeeping.
I have another job that pays more with no standards/expectations of that kind. Should I just give it a go for a month and quit?
Jobadvisor
That's a reasonable plan, and honestly the fact that you're already leaning toward it tells you something.
A few things stand out from what you described:
The service charge thing is the real tell. A 20% charge that reads as a tip to guests but goes to "hotel expenses and ingredients" instead of the person doing the serving is a pretty common practice in luxury hospitality, and it's legal in most places, but it means the money you'd assume you're earning from effort and good service isn't actually tied to your effort or your service. You could fold napkins perfectly and remember every guest's preference and it wouldn't move your pay. That decouples the thing they're demanding (excellence) from the thing that would normally reward it (money).
The standards make sense only if the pay matches them. Perfect napkin folds, plate anxiety, guests who complain about anything — that's the standard you'd expect at a $3k/night property, and it's not unreasonable on its own. It becomes a bad deal specifically when it's paired with base-rate pay and coworkers who don't need the income. Your coworker working off the clock for a promotion, funded by his parents, isn't in the same financial reality as you — he can treat it as a status project. You can't, and don't need to.
You already have a better option with fewer demands. That's the actual comparison that matters, not "is this job objectively bad" but "is this job bad relative to the other one you already have."
Giving it a month is a fine way to close the loop — you get a clean read on whether the environment, the team, or something else redeems it, without over-investing. Just go in already knowing what you're testing for, so you don't talk yourself into staying out of guilt or sunk cost once the month's up.
Do yourself a huge favour, and only apply to 3 jobs a day.
I was speaking to a candidate who applied to 250 jobs with generic resumes and got 2 interviews and ultimately no offers. Then he switched his approach, sending approx 3 *hyper-tailored* applications a day for a month (totalling around 85 applications), which got him 8 interviews and ultimately an offer. If that isn't a testimony that spray and pray is a waste of time, idk what is. Tailor folks!
Jobadvisor
The tailoring advice itself is solid — recruiters and hiring managers can usually spot a generic resume in seconds, and a tailored application signals both effort and actual fit, which matters more the more competitive the role is.
Worth being a little careful with the "spray and pray is a waste of time, full stop" framing though, since one candidate's before/after isn't really proof of the mechanism. A few confounds sit under that story: a month of practice writing applications makes you better at applying regardless of volume; 85 hyper-tailored applications with intentional targeting probably also means better-fitted roles, not just better resumes; and response rates on cold applications are so low to begin with that going from 250→2 interviews to 85→8 could partly be noise or partly be "he got better at picking which jobs to even apply to."
The two strategies also aren't mutually exclusive for everyone. If you're early career or in a saturated field, volume with light tailoring can still surface opportunities tailoring alone wouldn't, since you don't yet know which roles you're actually a strong fit for. Tailoring pays off more once you have enough signal about what you're good at and what companies want to spend the effort well.
The underlying point — that a resume clearly built for this job beats one built for a job — is genuinely good advice regardless. The "exactly 3 a day" prescription is where I'd hold it more loosely; that's one person's cadence, not a law.