u/Slight_Horse8992

Well, this is new. My manager just pulled me into his office to talk about my lunch break. Apparently, I take an hour for lunch when the 'official' policy says the break is only 30 minutes, so I'm considered 'short' on my hours with the company.

I work in the data analytics department, and things are very flexible here. As long as you complete your 8 hours a day, no one cares when you took your lunch break. I come in at 8 AM and leave at 4:30 PM, meaning I'm at work for 8.5 hours. I take about an hour for lunch, which means I work 7.5 hours. So yes, technically I'm short by about 30 minutes.

Most of my colleagues take an hour and a half for their break, which is why they leave later than me. I just don't need all that time. I eat lunch, maybe run a quick errand, and I'm ready to get back to work. The thing is, I submit all my work on time, and often even ahead of schedule. Honestly, there are many times ultimately when I'm looking for tasks to do just to fill my time.

I'm pretty sure I know who complained. There's a colleague who's been here for a very long time and always talks about how stressed and swamped she is with work, probably because she's slow with the new software we're using. And it's very obvious she's annoyed that I arrive at the same time as her but leave before her most days.

My manager wants to talk about this again tomorrow, and I don't know how to answer. I feel like this whole thing is just about office politics. I'm a salaried employee. If the company doesn't pay me overtime when projects run late, I don't feel I should be punished for being efficient and finishing my work early.

How do I explain this without coming across as a lazy or 'entitled' employee? Any advice on what I could say would be great.

I've been to a few interviews lately where the job description was very generic, and the conversation felt more like a first date. All they're doing is trying to see if they 'feel comfortable with you' or not. This makes you wonder, how are they even evaluating anyone for the actual job when the whole thing depends on your personality, your appearance, or even your age?

A recruiter once told me, verbatim, that the hiring manager's biggest concern was finding someone with the 'right energy' for the team. So basically, if you don't give the perfect answer to a question like 'What series are you watching these days?' or 'What do you usually do on the weekend?', you're likely out of the running, no matter how strong your CV is.

Look, I understand that culture fit is important. Nobody wants to work with an unpleasant person. But when you have someone who is clearly competent and seems very nice, why does it ultimately boil down to these other random things? It feels like the whole process has become about them looking for a new friend, not hiring someone who can do the job.