Of course it is. The fact that they would write an article about it and don't have the self awareness to recognize they have a problem - but worse - the number of people on HN that seem to think there is a material problem in behaviour of the manager is a bit shocking.
It's ridiculous. It's not even a 1 out of 10 in terms of inappropriateness, it's fully a 0. It's 100% within the preoperative of anyone frankly to say "hey, can we chat for 10 at lunch?"
Anyone who has difficulty with this should seek a bit of help, and those implying there is something wrong ... they have a different problem entirely, I don't know how to describe it.
My grandparents were born on farms without electricity or plumbing (common for the area), no public healthcare, retirement, social assistance, unemployment, radio, refrigeration, TV, barely any cars. etc.. They were kind and generous people but also resilient and self assured. They literally wouldn't understand the author's concern. It would have to be spelled out to them. They would be empathetic (it's in their character) but wouldn't think anything other than the author has some kind of issue.
Complaining about "Can we chat?" as some kind of 'unreasonable thing' is getting absurd.
People above are commenting 'what kind of stressful world we must live in' - I think the complete opposite: we have reached a threshold of material abundance and prosperity such that the most vague, imperceptible form of nuance in communication is now worthy of demarcation. Only extremely privileged and wealthy people could afford to go on about someone asking them 'if they have time to chat'.
>> Anyone who has difficulty with this should seek a bit of help, and those implying there is something wrong ... they have a different problem entirely, I don't know how to describe it.
This line of thinking seems really...bad. I mean, essentially what you're saying is:
"I disagree on this matter which is unambiguously a personal opinion, and anyone with a differing opinion is wrong, and anyone who is sympathetic to their opinion has something wrong with them, too."
I'm genuinely curious, what makes you take this position?
The line of thinking that you assume anyone's grievances are immediately legitimate is ... 'bad'.
People whine and cry about any number of things, we have to be conscientious about what constitutes a reasonable grievance.
There is such a thing as objectivity.
I've worked in 4 countries over 25 years and never would have I have seen someone make a legitimate concern over 'being asked to chat later'.
Can I empathize with someone who feels that way? Sure, it's not outrageous, but that person would have to have the self awareness to recognize that it's their issue, and that they likely ought not to bother other people about their problems. I'm sure any decent manager would 'not do it' if asked, at the same time, it's definitely 'an ask'.
This is not an issue of undue pressure or harassment on the part of a manger, not even close.
Adults in the workplace have a minimum responsibility regarding their disposition include emotional maturity, among other things.
This one is not even nuanced. There's no 'workplace problem' here whatsoever.
You come off as being defensive about this in several of your comments here. There is nothing wrong with admitting that a random “can we chat” can lead to a spike of anxiety in people.
Many of us work in environments where 15-20% of employees are let go every year. Even for those who do not, the modern world, despite all our material abundance, can be cruel in subtle but destructive ways.
Society recognizing that humans have emotion and learning about mental health is.. well really healthy!
