What does "laid-back" mean anyhow?

I have lived on the west coast for twelve years. When I say the west coast I mean all of it. I’m one of the few people I know that can actually say that they have lived in California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska. Therefore, when I say I have lived on the west coast, I really mean it. The point is this. After twelve years living on the west side of America one would think that I would have not only become a “laid-back” person but would also have a solid working knowledge of what the term really means. But I don’t. Worse yet is that I detest this phrase.

My disdain for this phrase stems from the fact that everyone I know out west not only describes themselves as laid-back but also uses the term laid-back to explain all sorts of things, from why they were late to their indifference to what is happening around them.

Spurred on by yet another morning commute in which my carpooling colleague’s indifference to world events was explained away by being “laid-back”, I decided to get to the root of this phrase. A quick search of web-based Dictionary.com yielded nothing.

A thumb through Webster’s New World Dictionary resulted in nothing. No definition was found by searching any dictionary or thesaurus currently in print. My only option was to look up the phrase in urbandictionary.com. There I found five definitions for this irksome phrase. The first definition equated laid back to being “lazy”. The second claimed that a laid back person would “get stuff done…eventually.” The third defined it as “relaxed, calm, not anxious”, and the fourth “apathetic, passive or passive-aggressive.” It was the fourth definition that struck a powerful chord in me, as that is exactly how I would describe a laid-back person.

My claim that a laid back person is apathetic, passive or passive-aggressive has been proven throughout the duration of my tenure on the west coast. I have often been reproached by my employers for being “harsh” when I have addressed co-workers or my own staff with whom I had problems. I would be told that I should talk to my supervisor first about the problem and then have my supervisor talk to my offending colleague’s supervisor so that the issue could be worked out. What? This type of logic has always escaped me. I mean why would I not be able to discuss the matter with a co-worker like a reasonable adult? It’s work, it’s not personal and I can address someone is a very fair, open-minded and diplomatic method. I have learned however, that others cannot and I have been fodder for many an early morning water cooler gossip session. Moreover, I have come to realize that the simple act of talking to a colleague about a problem would be interpreted as being “harsh” and I would be accused of “yelling” despite the fact that I rarely, if ever, yell at anyone.

Around the fourth of fifth time I was accused of yelling I began to really question myself and seriously wonder if I was in fact yelling? Three minutes later I realized that I was not the problem and yet I was the problem. It simply came down to perceived versus real time location. I was on the west coast but acting like an east coaster would and this was something that needed to be addressed, immediately.
I began my professional career on the east-coast. I worked at a small college for a man named Mr. Dick. In addition to the obvious issue of having to address someone as Mr. Dick without laughing, I also had to work closely with a rather persnickety study abroad advisor who had the knack for promising things to international students that were patently untrue. As the Residence Life Director I would inevitably dash the hopes of the foreign students upon their arrival. I would have to explain that we didn’t offer private rooms, that you couldn’t smoke in your room, we did not have a private kitchen, and no you couldn’t call Djibouti from your dorm room without an international calling card.

After trying and failing to reason with my study abroad nemesis, I went to see Mr. Dick. I explained to him the ongoing problem with the dissemination of misinformation and he nodded appreciatively and would “hmmm, I see” to acknowledge my concern. I thought the meeting was going well and assumed he would come to my aid when he said, “ And you’re telling me this because?", he said sacrastically.

“Well like I said Mr. Dick, the problem is that…”

“Yes, and I believe I hired you to problem solve NOT to bring your problems to me. Is that correct?”, he countered.

“Yes, sir.”

“Good. Now go out there and solve your own problems. I have too many fish to fry and I hired you to solve these problems for me. Not to bring the problems back on to my plate. If you can’t handle that then you need to look for a new job.”

“I can handle it sir. Thank you for your time,” I muttered as I walked out of his office.

I was angry and dismayed. I thought he would help. I puttered around my house, furious the rest of the evening. I called my friend to tell her what happened and she said, “Well this is great. Now you can deal with it anyway you want to. The gloves come off.”

I never thought of it like that. I mean I was in charge of dealing with my own problems and conflicts. I could handle them the way I see fit to get the results I wanted. How liberating, how empowering. I began to like this Mr. Dick.

The next day I sought out the study abroad advisor and let her have it, diplomatically of course. I walked in to her office and laid down the ultimatum. I said what I needed to say, I stated very clearly my expectation for what I wanted to happen, and I gave her the choice to either do that or face the consequences. Period. And unsurprisingly that was the end of the conflict.

I realize in hindsight that the difference between east and west is simply the east-coasters willingness and desire to confront the situation. We are not afraid of confrontation and sometimes we actually like it. Moreover, we are often empowered to handle things ourselves. Mr. Dick didn’t like that I was going to him with the problems and in truth it made me look bad. That is why it was the last time I ever went to see a supervisor about a problem co-worker. I want to show that I can handle the issue myself, like an adult. Moreover, I don’t want to get anyone in trouble with the boss when we can handle it ourselves. I’m not trying to get anyone fired; I just want to work together in a more effective way. How is that not the epitome of laid-back? East-coasters deal with the issue when it comes up and then let it go.

That is not the west coast way. The west coast way involves telling your supervisor, getting someone in trouble, writing a report, and then telling everyone in the office what happened behind that person’s back. Its subterfuge and it’s catty and deliberate, especially when that same tattletale is nice and sweet to your face.

So why do the west-coasters do this? The first reason is fear of conflict. West-coasters are conflict adverse. They hide behind the idea of wanting everything to be nice and harmonious and “no worries” to the point that they won’t bring up anything that is really bothering them to the person who is the cause of the bothering. Instead they “vent” to everyone and anyone that is willing to listen to their complaints. The west coasters try to rally everyone on to their team before they take action. That action is usually avoidance of the trouble causing person and or scheming to make their lives miserable by getting everyone else to hate them too so that the trouble causing person eventually quits or gets promoted.

The second reason is that west coasters like their drama. Afterall, work wouldn’t be so much fun without the petty drama and gossip, the who said what to whom, the dirty looks, the back-stabbing, the lies and deception? West-coast living is a lot like The Real Housewives. I mean watch those two shows. Watch the California housewives and then watch the New York housewives. Wow, vastly different personalities and methods of handling problems. And they epitomize my point so effectively.

So all you “laid-back” west-coasters can continue to own that self-describing moniker and I will accept it for what it is – a self-descriptive phrase. In two words you are conveying to me the fact that you identify yourself as passive-aggressive and someone not to be trusted. I mean push come to shove you won’t tell me that you have a problem with me. You won’t tell me what the real issue is. You’ll simply tell everyone else and remain in high school forever. Now, remind me why I should want to hang out with you?