At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks • Hacker News Board

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#51

Post by throwaway359087 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:10 PM UTC

dunpeal wrote: post #37

> Many employees say they see the keeper test as a guise for ordinary workplace politics while some managers say they feel pressure to fire people or risk looking soft. Postmortem emails and meetings explaining why people got fired are viewed by some employees as awkward and theatrical when the audiences can be dozens or even hundreds of people. So every employee gets to be badmouthed in front of as many as hundreds…

Because Netflix pays 360k a year plus benefits. It’s a shit place to work if you don’t fit the exact culture though, which is pretty brash and confrontational

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#52

Post by quasse » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:11 PM UTC

darkerside wrote: post #44

dunpeal wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never seen an employee getting fired "because their manager didn't like them". I've seen plenty of employees getting fired because their manager, who didn't like them, gave them a bad review. In fact, across companies and even industries, being disliked by your manager is the single most reliable way to get fired. Anyone claiming you can be disliked by your superior yet reliably keep your job - is BSing you. Sin…

OTOH your feelings for your reports correlates highly with the quality of work they're putting out

That assumes most managers are skilled / engaged enough to correctly judge the quality of work put out by the individuals working under them.

My personal experience puts that at about 2/4 as far as previous managers go.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#53

Post by strangerlands » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:12 PM UTC

AWildC182 wrote: post #16

I think the headline misconstrues the issue. There's nothing wrong with transparency, but there are plenty of issues with airing dirty laundry and having, quite apparently, sociopathic upper management.

Transparent lies are still lies.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#54

Post by marssaxman » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:12 PM UTC

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #41

I would really not like to work there, but out of the FAANG companies, Netflix is definitely the most all-in on its quirks. My sense is that the culture at Google, Apple, MS, and FB are all in a cluster compared with the culture at Netflix, which is a real outlier. It's also an outlier in my unwillingness to go there. But I think they and I are both happier that way.

"FAANG" seems like a bizarrely arbitrary grouping overall, with Netflix as a clear outlier; I understand that it might make superficial sense to an investment banker, but in terms of the businesses they are engaged in and the type of work their employees are doing, Netflix should be dropped from the list and replaced with Microsoft.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#55

Post by dunpeal » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:12 PM UTC

strangerlands wrote: post #43

dunpeal wrote: post #37

> Many employees say they see the keeper test as a guise for ordinary workplace politics while some managers say they feel pressure to fire people or risk looking soft. Postmortem emails and meetings explaining why people got fired are viewed by some employees as awkward and theatrical when the audiences can be dozens or even hundreds of people. So every employee gets to be badmouthed in front of as many as hundreds…

> Netflix employees, why do you accept this? Money, of course. Plus, people working in tech and making very good money are not known for "spine-straightness".

> Money, of course.

If they are such solid performers, they can get jobs in other FAANGs who pay just as well. Netflix pays well, but does it pay so much better that I should put up with this BS?

I doubt.

In fact, by keeping up this abusive charade, Netflix is guaranteeing that many of the best candidates will never apply. So my guess would be that their employees aren't the best, but perhaps the best candidates willing to accept this BS.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#56

Post by Sharlin » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:13 PM UTC

throwaway4195 wrote: post #15

stevenjohns wrote: post #6

> Richard Siklos, a Netflix spokesman, said the company only fires employees for performance reasons, not because managers don’t like them Oh how I wish I could have had that. I've had an experience in the past where I was dismissed because my manager decided he just didn't like me anymore. Although I was the best performing, most senior developer on the team and was doing all the hiring and mentoring of others, it d…

I had the exact same experience with a well known startup in SF. I got a glowing "Outstanding" review in the previous quarter. My manager left and the new manager who came in took just 15 days (with a single one on one meeting) to decide she din't like me and fired me without offering much of a reason.

I'll never understand US-style at will employment. It just seems so barbaric and arbitrary. Where I'm from the current conservative government just proposed legislation that would make it slightly easier to fire people in small companies (at most dozen employees or so). This caused the left-leaning part of the country to throw a collective hissy-fit, including several political strikes organized by major unions.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#57

Post by AWildC182 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:14 PM UTC

tareqak wrote: post #38

AWildC182 wrote: post #16

I think the headline misconstrues the issue. There's nothing wrong with transparency, but there are plenty of issues with airing dirty laundry and having, quite apparently, sociopathic upper management.

Isn't it actually selective transparency that's just passed off as transparency? Just because someone states reasons A, B, and C as the supporting evidence behind a decision doesn't necessarily mean that those three were the only reasons.

Yea, you're definitely right. The direction I was going was more along the lines of "you're fired because x/y/z" instead of "hey everybody, this person was fired because x/y/z, they are now available as a blame dumping ground for all your problems."

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#58

Post by dunpeal » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:14 PM UTC

throwaway359087 wrote: post #51

dunpeal wrote: post #37

> Many employees say they see the keeper test as a guise for ordinary workplace politics while some managers say they feel pressure to fire people or risk looking soft. Postmortem emails and meetings explaining why people got fired are viewed by some employees as awkward and theatrical when the audiences can be dozens or even hundreds of people. So every employee gets to be badmouthed in front of as many as hundreds…

Because Netflix pays 360k a year plus benefits. It’s a shit place to work if you don’t fit the exact culture though, which is pretty brash and confrontational

You can get similar comp at Google and Facebook, to name just two examples. Why should I choose Netflix if I can get the same pay there, minus the BS?

Also, I won't have to live in Los Gatos.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#59

Post by strict9 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:14 PM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #23

strict9 wrote: post #8

>Many employees say they see the keeper test as a guise for ordinary workplace politics while some managers say they feel pressure to fire people or risk looking soft. I worked for a place like this. Regular firings, sometimes every month. The CEO (who also self-funded the company) believed that regularly letting people go was a way of eliminating bad apples and forcing people to work harder and smarter. Similar to N…

> The CEO ... believed that regularly letting people go was a way of eliminating bad apples and forcing people to work harder and smarter. Microsoft called it Stack Ranking.

Presumably it wasn't structured like MS's stack ranking, it was arbitrary. It's a weird feeling to come in regularly and be uncertain if you'd still be employed by the end of week, but not for anything you specifically did.

Now that I think about it, it was a bizarrely nepotistic environment. An engineering manager would hire their friends, many speculated as at least partial insurance against being fired. But once that manager was gone, job security for those people was also gone.

Weird how people put up with madness like that when your field is in high demand.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#60

Post by sxp62000 » Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 10:15 PM UTC

When your manager is a sh*tbag, two things can happen: You will either get sick of him/her and switch teams, or you'll keep taking it till the manager decides they really don't want you any more, and they give you a bad review, and a warning. Which basically means you're fired.