Return to Answer

It's quite uncomfortable for me to share a break room with someone who won't engage in conversation with me.

The point of a break is to have a break from the obligated activities of the workplace.

You might prefer to spend your break socializing, someone else might prefer to spend it quietly in their thoughts.

Ultimately this is an issue of consent.

No, it's not a capitol-C file a grievance with HR issue of consent, but the ultimate principle is actually the same one that is at the root of those issues.

• your desire to socialize does not compel other employees to expend their break time making small talk with you

• another employee's willingness to make small talk with you on one day does not remove their right to decline to do so on another

• your co-workers are employed to perform their job functions, not to provide for your extracurricular entertainment

I wish to respect his space, but at the same time...

If you truly respect another person's right to self determination, then when it is clear to you that they are not in a mood to be social, you must respect their preference to have a quiet non-interactive break, generally, or on any given day.

Otherwise, no, you really are not respecting their rights; what you are doing is charging ahead even knowing that they do not consent to the interaction you are trying to force.

I wish he would offer common courtesy.

This feels innocent to you, and in the grand scheme of things it's not too serious an example. But at its root, it is still an example of exactly the same denial of other's personhood thinking as that of the man on the street demanding that the young woman passing by "smile" for his entertainment

Sure... in this case "it's just small talk"...

But the issue is the same - either when made aware of the issue you are willing to back up and revise your thinking to respect another human being's right to make their own choices, be their own person, and do their actual job... or you are not.

It's quite uncomfortable for me to share a break room with someone who won't engage in conversation with me.

The point of a break is to have a break from the obligated activities of the workplace.

You might prefer to spend your break socializing, someone else might prefer to spend it quietly in their thoughts.

Ultimately this is an issue of consent.

No, it's not a capitol-C file a grievance with HR issue of consent, but the ultimate principle is actually the same one that is at the root of those issues.

• your co-workers are employed to perform their job functions, not to provide for your extracurricular entertainment

• your desire to socialize does not compel other employees to expend their break time making small talk with you

• another employee's willingness to make small talk with you on one day does not remove their right to decline to do so on another

I wish to respect his space, but at the same time...

If you truly respect another person's right to self determination, then when it is clear to you that they are not in a mood to be social, you must respect their preference to have a quiet non-interactive break, generally, or on any given day.

Otherwise, no, you really are not respecting their rights; what you are doing is charging ahead even knowing that they do not consent to the interaction you are trying to force.

I wish he would offer common courtesy.

This feels innocent to you, and in the grand scheme of things it's not too serious an example. But at its root, it is still an example of exactly the same denial of other's personhood thinking as that of the man on the street demanding that the young woman passing by "smile" for his entertainment

Sure... in this case "it's just small talk"...

But the issue is the same - either when made aware of the issue you are willing to back up and revise your thinking to respect another human being's right to make their own choices, be their own person, and do their actual job... or you are not.

It's quite uncomfortable for me to share a break room with someone who won't engage in conversation with me.

The point of a break is to have a break from the obligated activities of the workplace.

You might prefer to spend your break socializing, someone else might prefer to spend it quietly in their thoughts.

Ultimately this is an issue of consent.

No, it's not a capitol-C file a grievance with HR issue of consent, but the ultimate principle is actually the same one that is at the root of those issues.

• your desire to socialize does not compel other employees to expend their break time making small talk with you

• another employee's willingness to make small talk with you on one day does not remove their right to decline to do so on another

• your co-workers are employed to perform their job functions, not to provide for your entertainment

I wish to respect his space, but at the same time, I wish he would offer common courtesy.

If you truly respect another person's right to self determination, then when it is clear to you that they are not in a mood to be social, you must respect their preference to have a quiet non-interactive break, generally, or on any given day.

Otherwise, no, you really are not respecting their rights; what you are doing is charging ahead even knowing that they do not consent to the interaction you are trying to force.

Sure... "it's just small talk"...

but the issue is the same - either you respect another human being's right to make their own choices, or you do not.

It's quite uncomfortable for me to share a break room with someone who won't engage in conversation with me.

The point of a break is to have a break from the obligated activities of the workplace.

You might prefer to spend your break socializing, someone else might prefer to spend it quietly in their thoughts.

Ultimately this is an issue of consent.

No, it's not a capitol-C file a grievance with HR issue of consent, but the ultimate principle is actually the same one that is at the root of those issues.

• your desire to socialize does not compel other employees to expend their break time making small talk with you

• another employee's willingness to make small talk with you on one day does not remove their right to decline to do so on another

• your co-workers are employed to perform their job functions, not to provide for your extracurricular entertainment

I wish to respect his space, but at the same time...

If you truly respect another person's right to self determination, then when it is clear to you that they are not in a mood to be social, you must respect their preference to have a quiet non-interactive break, generally, or on any given day.

Otherwise, no, you really are not respecting their rights; what you are doing is charging ahead even knowing that they do not consent to the interaction you are trying to force.

I wish he would offer common courtesy.

This feels innocent to you, and in the grand scheme of things it's not too serious an example. But at its root, it is still an example of exactly the same denial of other's personhood thinking as that of the man on the street demanding that the young woman passing by "smile" for his entertainment

Sure... in this case "it's just small talk"...

But the issue is the same - either when made aware of the issue you are willing to back up and revise your thinking to respect another human being's right to make their own choices, be their own person, and do their actual job... or you are not.

It's quite uncomfortable for me to share a break room with someone who won't engage in conversation with me.

The point of a break is to have a break from the obligated activities of the workplace.

You might prefer to spend your break socializing, someone else might prefer to spend it quietly in their thoughts.

Ultimately this is an issue of consent.

No, it's not a capitol-C file a grievance with HR issue of consent, but the ultimate principle is actually the same one that is at the root of those issues.

• your desire to socialize does not compel other employees to expend their break time making small talk with you

• another employee's willingness to make small talk with you on one day does not remove their right to decline to do so on another

I wish to respect his space, but at the same time, I wish he would offer common courtesy.

If you truly respect another person's right to self determination, then when it is clear to you that they are not in a mood to be social, you must respect their preference to have a quiet non-interactive break, generally, or on any given day.

Otherwise, no, you really are not respecting their rights; what you are doing is charging ahead even knowing that they do not consent to the interaction you are trying to force.

Sure... "it's just small talk"...

but the issue is the same - either you respect another human being's right to make their own choices, or you do not.

It's quite uncomfortable for me to share a break room with someone who won't engage in conversation with me.

The point of a break is to have a break from the obligated activities of the workplace.

You might prefer to spend your break socializing, someone else might prefer to spend it quietly in their thoughts.

Ultimately this is an issue of consent.

No, it's not a capitol-C file a grievance with HR issue of consent, but the ultimate principle is actually the same one that is at the root of those issues.

• your desire to socialize does not compel other employees to expend their break time making small talk with you

• another employee's willingness to make small talk with you on one day does not remove their right to decline to do so on another

• your co-workers are employed to perform their job functions, not to provide for your entertainment

I wish to respect his space, but at the same time, I wish he would offer common courtesy.

If you truly respect another person's right to self determination, then when it is clear to you that they are not in a mood to be social, you must respect their preference to have a quiet non-interactive break, generally, or on any given day.

Otherwise, no, you really are not respecting their rights; what you are doing is charging ahead even knowing that they do not consent to the interaction you are trying to force.

Sure... "it's just small talk"...

but the issue is the same - either you respect another human being's right to make their own choices, or you do not.