Ask Slashdot: How Would You Deal With A 'Gaslighting' Colleague?

An anonymous reader writes: What's the best unofficial way to deal with a gaslighting colleague? For those not familiar, I mean "bullies unscheduling things you've scheduled, misplacing files and other items that you are working on and co-workers micro-managing you and being particularly critical of what you do and keeping it under their surveillance. They are watching you too much, implying or blatantly saying that you are doing things wrong when, in fact, you are not...a competitive maneuver, a way of making you look bad so that they look good." I'd add poring over every source-code commit, and then criticizing it even if the criticism is contradictory to what he previously said.
The submission adds that "Raising things through the official channels is out of the question, as is confronting the colleague in question directly as he is considered something of a superstar engineer who has been in the company for decades and has much more influence than any ordinary engineer." So leave your best suggestions in the comments. How would you deal with a gaslighting colleague?

Comments

Leave.

[Anonymous Coward]

If they've been there for decades then it's considered acceptable behavior and nothing will change. Time to move on.

Re:Leave.

[Sarten-X]

And in the letter of resignation (perhaps a separate one to management, rather than one to your colleagues), document in great detail the actual reason for your departure. It's pretty hard to ignore a complaint that isn't just an idle threat. The gaslighter drove someone out of the company, so management will notice.

Re:Leave.

[war4peace]

Unless he drove dozens before, and management still didn't care, because he's someone's protege.

Re:Leave.

[Anonymous Coward]

While airing your complaints on exit may feel good, it is almost never in your best interest to do so.

If the company cared about this problem, the OP could bring it up now and get it resolved without having to leave. Even if someone does fire the problem guy - who's winning? The OP is already out the door. And, he'll likely put two and two together and figure out the OP was the reason, possibly causing him problems down the road.

A best case scenario is that the company tosses his resignation letter in the garbage without reading it. More likely, one or more of his former colleagues will read it, take offense, and possibly also cause the OP problems in the future.

Re:Leave.

[BarbaraHudson]

No good, because the only way to deal with these types of jerks is for the company to fire both the arsehole causing the problem and the arsehole who hired them. And that's just not going to happen.

Save yourself the aggravation - quit. They'll be cursing bozo out soon enough when things start breaking.

Re:Leave.

[King_TJ]

So what? IMO - you never have anything to lose by documenting valid reasons you left a company. I suspect that in quite a few cases, upper management doesn't really do anything about it when they receive letters or exit interview information like this. But eventually, it piles up and *someone* notices. (I used to work at a place like that, where one of the managers had a continuous history of insulting and angering the interns and assistants they hired to work with him. Many years of that went on, with everyone else who worked there long enough gossiping about it and how it would "never change". But then the economy took a nosedive and they had to make cutbacks. Guess who one of the first guys was they let go?)

If you don't already use it, I'd also recommend creating an account over on GlassDoor.com and make sure you post about the issue there. At least that way, you might be helping someone else who is researching the company and considering taking the opening you left behind, or one similar.

Re:Leave.

[Jane Q. Public]

This can't be stressed enough.

EVERYTHING, even the little things, should be documented, with evidence where possible. Because that's the only possible way to defend yourself.

Carry your phone around in a pocket or something at work. Take pictures. Copy documents.

Re:Leave.

[lucm]

They'll be cursing bozo out soon enough when things start breaking.

Or maybe things won't start breaking. Maybe things work just fine - especially since the alleged asshole has been there for decades - and an ecosystem that's been in place just got rid of an outsider that didn't fit in.

The world is a rich tapestry. Some organizations thrive with neurotics and sociopaths in key roles - for instance, Steve Jobs was a piece of shit but he was the driving force at Apple. See what happened when they kicked him out for being an asshole.

Barry Bonds was not a positive presence but he sure helped his team win. And there are many other famous cases.

This being said, if someone at work is unpleasant, is making one's life difficult and is well-regarded by senior management, then yes quitting is the best solution if putting up with it is not an option. This is not kindergarten, this is real life.

This is simple

[Anonymous Coward]

The submission adds that "Raising things through the official channels is out of the question, as is confronting the colleague in question directly

If you're not willing to use official channels and you're not willing to confront the person directly then you need to leave. That's it.

Re:This is simple

[Dahamma]

The submission adds that "Raising things through the official channels is out of the question, as is confronting the colleague in question directly

If you're not willing to use official channels and you're not willing to confront the person directly then you need to leave. That's it.

In fact, the post unintentionally answered its own question:

Raising things through the official channels is out of the question, as is confronting the colleague in question directly as he is considered something of a superstar engineer who has been in the company for decades and has much more influence than any ordinary engineer." So leave [your best suggestions]

Re:This is simple

[schnell]

If you're not willing to use official channels and you're not willing to confront the person directly then you need to leave. That's it.

Precisely. However, you really need to question whether the original poster's two above assertions are true, or if they are just conflict avoidant/unable to understand corporate culture. Because if those aren't the case and the two assertions above are true, then the company is a toxic shithole that should be avoided like the plague.

The implication that you can't use official channels - even "skipping levels" up - indicates that the whole place is thoroughly corrupt through to the very very top. Saying that you can't talk to the person directly implies that they are so menacing/terrible/powerful that asserting yourself against a bully could never work.

Unless this is a small family owned business and the offender in question is part of the family, do both of these situations both sound likely?

I'm certainly not trying to impugn the submission poster, but it sounds fishy to me that this company is so rotten that none of the two most obvious approaches are even possible. I've never met a corporate HR department (at least at a company big enough to actually have legal counsel retained) that wasn't ready to jump all over any accusation of misconduct because they're so eager to fend off potential lawsuits. And any company where everyone - including the HR department and the org chain all the way up to the CEO - is totally off limits to a complaint about a malevolent employee is either a nepotism factory or a 100% nest of vipers.

I can't assess better than anyone else the validity of what the submitter says, but it does sound to me like some of the options he/she thinks are off limits might actually be on the table but he/she is too young/shy/lacking in self confidence to pursue. But if those things really are out of the question, then run don't walk out the door.

Re:This is simple

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly having to post AC because I've already moderated in this thread, but about ten years ago I worked for a company where this was most definitely the case, and it ran to 400 people. Not huge, but a world-famous name in its field of specialist technical equipment. Our boss (technical director of our division's hardware & software design team) was probably a sociopath and abused his staff daily, but was untouchable because he was the CEO's pet. (The CEO himself was probably a narcissist.) The so-called HR department was one woman: the CEO's PA, and she wasn't even competent at that. You get the picture.

I agree with everyone who says the OP should leave. Very few other approaches are likely to work.

Develop a backbone.

[aussersterne]

Raise hell with him/her and with management about him/her. Be ANGRY. Say you'll walk.

And then, if you have to, do it.

I speak from experience in my past. You do NOT want to go down the road of trying to "make it better in a non-confrontational way." Do you know what that makes you? A weakling. A loser. Someone who has to tiptoe around. Someone who spends too much time thinking strategically about how to get from mundane point A to mundane point B without experiencing problems.

Your productivity will fall. Your self-esteem will collapse. And you will find that you also enable the behavior, and it gets worse, and then worse again.

You're already a victim, and you're letting yourself stay one. Don't make yourself a target, too.

I know the whole schtick about "it's not that easy," and finances and economic realities and justice and whatever else. Used to be there, too.

The fact is, you will regret it in the end. All of the consequences you are hoping to avoid will happen, because you will lose the respect of your co-workers, your bos(ses), and you will lose your own productivity. Long term, you have one choice: confront or not. And not confronting is a SURE loss (again, long term). If you don't confront, WILL be out of a job eventually, you WILL find that you have been made worse for it with respect to your ability to do the next job.

If you confront and raise hell, you have a CHANCE of coming out of things intact. A chance may seem like a risk you don't want to take. But the other way, losing is a certainty.

So accept the hard truth that someone has decided to fuck you over, accept the hard truth that unless you metaphorically punch them in the face they WILL continue to do it and will intensify the behavior, and then grow a backbone and take your best shot back. Even if you lose that way, at least you took a shot. You didn't sit there like a weenie (which I did for far too long) and take it, then whine like a little girl, lose your self respect, and then find out that that's what everyone thinks of you and that's why you got let go despite taking shit like a hero. You're nobody's hero if you take shit. Management does not want employees that take shit.

Re:Develop a backbone.

[aussersterne]

I should add—you have probably already screwed yourself over.

The right time to hit fan with shit is the FIRST time an incident happens. Show that you're worth a lot, and you know your worth, and you won't stand for it.

By waiting until it's a whole narrative and you're posting to Slashdot, when you do go to management about it, they're going to see you as someone that can't solve your own problems and lets them fester in secret and grow, then brings them up the chain when they're too big for you to solve. This is not a desirable characteristic in an employee.

Live and learn.

Next job, the first time someone fucks with you, tell them in no uncertain terms, "Unless you somehow get promoted ahead of me, you are NOT my manager and I won't stand for that shit. This is a boundary. I'm drawing it right now. Cross it and it'll be you or me around here."

Then, immediately tell your manager, "I just had a bad experience with X. They did Y which I found to be unacceptable and not conducive to my work. I set a boundary. It was conflictual. I told them that if they do it again, this will be a significant issue. I'm not leaving this on your plate or anything, but I did want you to be aware that that happened, and that that's what I said."

Re:Develop a backbone.

[bulled]

This, I made the mistake once of letting a Gaslighting jerk slide and I ended up leaving when it became clear that the non-confrontational approach just fed his bullshit. You have to put a stop to it immediately or walk, there is no middle ground.

Re:Develop a backbone.

[RuffMasterD]

Well said. I had a similar issue with my own manager last year. She decided to micro manage, moved the goal posts repeatedly, tried to blackmail me into doing her work, isolated me from colleagues by saying bad things about me, examining and criticising every piece of work I did, and generally being a bully.

I trained in the army, where pissing contests are the norm, so I have seen this before. I resisted immediately and consistently. This left my manager with two strategies to choose from. Either back off and lose status, or escalate. She chose to escalate. The more she escalated, the more I resisted. It is a risky strategy for her. On the one hand she is betting that I will relent sooner rather than later so she can have her way, and in return she will give me some peace. On the other hand, the more she escalates the more intrusive, abusive, unreasonable, and messy things get for both of us. The messier things get, the more people notice, and not in a "look how well she is managing" kind of way.

Meanwhile she made a friend at HR and told them all about this terribly unprofessional employee she had. Then I got a letter from HR requesting a meeting to discuss some concerns my manager had about my unprofessional behaviour. This is where documentation comes in handy. Try to get every decision in writing. My manager took great care to say verbally anything that I might use against her. The best I could do at that point is write her an email asking for clarification or confirmation. Then she either confirms it, sealing her fate, or refutes it, letting me off the hook, or she ignores it, implicitly accepting it. In any case, there is now a paper trail. Once she sees her request in writing, she usually tries to weasel out of it, implying I misunderstood and comes back with a much more reasonable request.

I succeeded to disprove most of my managers accusations by bringing up old emails. That took the wind out of the remaining accusations. Somewhere in this process my managers new friend at HR realised she had been hoodwinked and swap herself with someone impartial. Then things really started to improve. My manager couldn't conceal or undo some things she did while escalating. HR elevated some issues very high up the ranks. When busy important people have to fix underlings fuck-ups, they remember. They will fix things once, but not twice. My manager knows that if I am going to give up my job and get a shitty reference because of her, I will make it as difficult as possible for her and take her down with me. We have a much better understanding now.

Morel of the story:
- Get everything in writing. You might need it. In any case, written agreements tend to be self limiting and self enforcing.
- Resist firmly and consistently. If you waver once, you give them leverage.
- Things will get much worse before they get better. Find as much support as you can.
- Keep it clean. Let the other person lose their morel high ground if they choose, but don't follow them.

Finally, I would say do not give an ultimatum between X or leaving. I have seen people do that, and the response is generally "OK. Leave. Bye". Your company might start preparing for it, leaving yourself little room to negotiate. You can always leave after trying all other avenues, and finding another job first, but don't let them see it coming.

If you always seem to have bad roommates...

[sunking2]

Maybe you're the bad roommate. Be a better employee perhaps.

Re:If you always seem to have bad roommates...

[mjr167]

This. We had an employee we had to hand hold and scrutinize everything. One team even went so far to create a special branch just for them. They were convinced they were perfect and everyone else was racist/sexist/egotistical/out to get them. They were absolutely convinced they walked on water and the problem with everyone else.

Truth was, their work sucked. They didn't listen to instructions. They didn't do what they were told to do and instead always did something "better".

Depends on what you mean by "gaslighting"

[Scareduck]

The problem with "gaslighting", as I wrote here, is that it tends to be used in two contexts, one legitimate (people lying about factual events) and one illegitimate (people disagreeing on interpretations of those events). Based on what I'm reading here, it looks like some of both: the unscheduling in particular seems like a red flag, but a lot of the other stuff is contextual and missing details. Furthermore, the fact that the author complains about coworkers' criticisms — and in particular, the criticism of someone they label as a "superstar" within the company, i.e. a person who has developed a sterling reputation — leads me to question the submitter's competence. So, I would advise,

• If you know from prior work experience that you are competent and the work environment is toxic, leave, knowing you can find a better employment situation elsewhere.
• But also be open to the idea that you may have your own "crisis of competence" here.

Out them....

[Anonymous Coward]

I had someone do this to me while working in Wall Street.

Told me to do all sorts of things in private then days later in the team review started complaining and calling the idea dumb. Said he told me to do a different thing and bla bla you know the rest.

Started off little and got bigger until I started literally hating the job itself. He was all buddy-buddy with the boss too so all that could be done was to leave for another team. To drive the point home I worked even harder at impressing the new team and got my name out there. Shows that I wasn't just an idiot or difficult to work with.

After that I left the company and just decided to start outing these people. The guy that gave me grief was Rich Kershaw. Basically a talented C/C++ coder who couldn't handle meeting anyone else with talent. Only works well with those below his skill level. I encourage others to do the same and out these people.

Not 'Gaslighting'

[ScentCone]

Gaslighting isn't just being a douchebag.

Watch the original film. It's all about one person doing a spectrum of things to make the second person question their own judgement, their own recollection of facts, and even their own sanity. It's about undermining someone's OWN sense of their worth, abilities, and memory - not trying to make them look bad in front of other people. If they CAN make their victim so full of self-doubt that they won't even try to get a third party to weigh in, it's just that much better. But, as in the movie, the whole point was for a villain to throw his victim off the trail while he spent time searching the house for something valuable - to make her doubt her own judgement and soundness of mind that she wouldn't trust herself to question what he was up to.

The OP is completely mis-using the term.

Not really gaslighting

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

They are a bully, but NOT gaslighting. If they where, you wouldn't ever know it. The idea behind gaslighting is to make someone question their own sanity or "efforts to manipulate someone's sense of reality" This is a funny version of gaslighting. If someone is that much of an asshole, I'd be looking for another job ASAP.

They should probably try to find out if other people have had these issues with this employee. Talk to HR, as that's supposed to be "confidential". Don't mention names at first, just tell them the situation at first. Make sure THEY are documenting it. But, yeah, it sounds like it's time to move on. Make sure you update your resume.

Please stop overusing the term gaslighting...

[Dahamma]

I see the term gaslighting being thrown around so much in the last year, but most people really don't seem to understand what it means. This is not gaslighting. Gaslighting is *literally* trying to convince the *victim* that they are insane or misremembering real incidents or facts.

In this case their point is not to make the victim think they are crazy or wrong, it's to convince others that they are screwing things up. That's just basic bullying, undermining, or backstabbing. Not gaslighting.

Semantics...

[mi]

For those not familiar, I mean "bullies unscheduling things you've scheduled, misplacing files and other items that you are working on and co-workers micro-managing you and being particularly critical of what you do and keeping it under their surveillance.

The term Gaslighting does not mean, what the submitter believes it means:

The term originates in the systematic psychological manipulation by the main character of a victim in the 1938 stage play Gas Light, known as Angel Street in the United States, and the film adaptations released in 1940 and 1944. In the story, a husband attempts to convince his wife and others that she is insane by manipulating small elements of their environment and insisting that she is mistaken, remembering things incorrectly, or delusional when she points out these changes. The original title stems from the dimming of the gas lights in the house that happened when the husband was using the gas lights in the attic while searching for hidden treasure. The wife accurately notices the dimming lights and discusses the phenomenon, but the husband insists she just imagined a change in the level of illumination.

The term "gaslighting" has been used colloquially since the 1960s[5] to describe efforts to manipulate someone's sense of reality. In a 1980 book on child sexual abuse, Florence Rush summarized George Cukor's 1944 film version of Gas Light, and writes, "even today the word gaslighting is used to describe an attempt to destroy another's perception of reality."

The question itself remains valid, but the misuse of the term is so annoying, I'm not going to give my (very valuable) advice on the subject.

Re: Rest of words imply group

[nyet]

Exactly this.

Which is more likely: the rock star engineer with a proven track record who is well regarded is incompetent, or the new person complaining is incompetent?

Play the game or don't

[m00sh]

Number one rule of not being bullied is to be part of a pack. Don't be singled out. Form a pack with your other colleagues.

So, either drum up the popular support and find a way to change the gaslighter. This option will take a lot of energy and it will take away from your work and life.

Or, leave and find somewhere else.

Super bad idea, keep it verbal

[SuperKendall]

And in the letter of resignation (perhaps a separate one to management, rather than one to your colleagues), document in great detail the actual reason for your departure.

DO NOT DO THIS.

Such a letter will come back to haunt you in some way. Either messing with some future job prospects or retaliation of some kind.

Instead, there will be an exit interview, use that time to lay out, calmly and without emotion, the problems you have had. Then it's up to them to react to it or not. If they get combative just give up. But at least they will not have a paper trail to potentially harm you with later. Remember the whole reason you are even telling them is to help THEM, so if they are not receptive why would you push?

Words of discontent and anger can always be made to make you look bad to someone who lacks context, or is provided a different context in which your words are placed.