Ben Newman, executive director of the Baltimore Chamber Orchestra and Catapult Opera, has sparked a fiery debate on LinkedIn regarding proper etiquette about emails in professional life. In his post, Newman cited the need to use the ‘reply all’ option in group emails and warned that not doing so may even result in job offers being rescinded.
If I write you an e-mail with a work offer, and there are others cc’d on it, and you don’t respond all, the offer will be revoked,” Newman said. He bemoaned that few of them practice it, especially when it involves those less than 40 years old-it wastes people’s time, makes for unnecessary follow-up calls or messages, and fills one’s inboxes.
Newman pointed out that this kind of email etiquette should be standard in professionals, especially for those people above 25 or who had experience working somewhere else in the past. “It is mind-boggling that I have to include notes like ‘Please remember to reply all’ in emails when I’m trying to hire YOU,” he said.
He also claimed that his position was not classist, adding that professional communication is the minimum expected from everyone. “Take time to learn what it means to be a professional, be considerate of colleagues, and do better. You might just get more opportunities and money as a result,” Newman concluded.
Newman’s post immediately started to gain popularity, prompting many LinkedIn users to call out his stance as excessive.
One user joked about his approach, writing, “Someone didn’t reply all to your little group, so you replied to the world with this post? LOL.” Another said the onus is on employers to set clear expectations, commenting, “Most people are taught NOT to reply all to avoid unnecessary emails. It’s up to you to set the standard.”
Other commenters labeled the post “cringe” and described Newman’s policy as toxic. “You did that person a favour by revoking the offer. If this is your biggest concern, no telling what other nonsense they’d have to endure there,” one user remarked.
The post has sparked more debates about the thin line separating standards in the profession and a proper friendly working environment. Whether Newman’s strict policy resonates with others or remains a controversial approach to workplace communication remains to be seen.
