So... you took it as a sign that he doesn't like you when he didn't come and talk to you, but you don't consider it reasonable that he took it as a sign that you didn't like him when you didn't talk to him?
So... you took it as a sign that he doesn't like you when he didn't come and talk to you, but you don't consider it reasonable that he took it as a sign that you didn't like him when you didn't talk to him?
Whenever we talked, it was because I came to him. He never came to me, I was ignored. The more I felt that he disliked me, the less frequently I went to talk to him and resorted to emails. I felt that he had already written me off.
In the performance review, one of the things mentioned was that I wasn't communicating with him enough. I pointed out how one-sided our relationship was, I would come to him and rarely the reverse. He said that he was very busy and doesn't always have time to come by my office but couldn't explain how he did that for all the other engineers.
I knew that I should suck up to him if I wanted to succeed there but the circumstances caused me to detest working there so I cared less and less about the threat of being fired.
In case it's comforting to you, I'll let you in on a secret: For guys like Scott, there's always going to be a made-up excuse. You were his chosen scapegoat, and there was literally nothing you could do that would be right. I've had a manager like this, and it's hopeless. They'll choose 1+ people on the team as their "Can Do Nothing Wrong" golden boys, and they'll choose 1+ people as their "Can Do Nothing Right" scapegoats, and that's just the way it is. You unlucked into a bad manager.
Nobody expects the teacher to bring in candy, but it's kind of awful if they only bring it in for the students they like.
"Rule of law" is ideal, even for laws you don't agree with.
etc.
I hated teachers who insisted on treating everyone exactly the same. Ideal would be treating everyone according to their need. Which might mean candy for some, the freedom to set their own workload for others, understanding of chattiness for yet other, etc. Admittedly candy is fairly universal in terms of how it affects people.
> "Rule of law" is ideal, even for laws you don't agree with.
I'd rather have exceptions be able to made where appropriate. I'd see "rule of law" as a least-worst fallback where that can't be achieved.
Further:
> Then when we all went out for drinks at the end of the week, I chatted as I normally would but I felt like the new boss kept shutting down my stories to get a laugh from the others.
I would take that as a sign he didn't like me.