Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

inc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 201 posts

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#81

Post by JustLurking2022 »

ceuk wrote: post #8

In the UK (and most other places with fairly strong employee protections I imagine) it becomes pretty difficult to get rid of employees once they've been around for a while. Often involving a lengthy "managing out" process. Given this, it's common for a 3-6 month "probation period" when starting a new role in which you can be dismissed fairly arbitrarily. This makes sense given the commitment taking on an employee re…

Her ability to "just move on" may be compromised by having a very short stay on her resume, and no reference.

I hope she finds something else quickly but many companies look for any red flags as sufficient reason not to take the risk. This kind of experience has real implications for a person's future prospects, at least for several years.

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#82

Post by j4yav »

JustLurking2022 wrote: post #78

Saw a variation of this during the recent bout of tech layoffs. Shortly before end of year eval time, a senior executive sent out emails questioning whether it was even possible for new hires to have made sufficient impact and suggesting they should consequently be given a poor rating as the default. It's amazing that leaders at these companies which, for years, acted as though they had all the answers and were more…

Is the main reason they are motivated to blame performance so that they can avoid paying out disability (edit: unemployment) insurance?

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#83

Post by rjsw »

ceuk wrote: post #54
JazCE wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the UK (and most other places with fairly strong employee protections I imagine) People keep saying this, but I'm not at all convinced anyone commenting really understands UK employment law. It's really only after 2 years of working for the same company that you get any decent employment protection. It takes a bit more legal work, but if within the first 2 years they don't want you, they can get rid of you. If y…

So I made a very vague comment about it being more tricky to get rid of employees in the UK. If you think it's not actually that hard as "it takes a bit more legal work", great.. but we still seem to generally agree. It's a bit patronising to imply I know nothing about UK employment law because we have a small difference of opinion around how robust we would say the protections are. It was a minor anecdotal comment b…

Segways are dangerous, just look what happened to the one time owner [1].

ITYM "segue".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimi_Heselden

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#85

Post by AmVess »

fullspectrumdev wrote: post #24
AmVess wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She was in sales and sold nothing. 3 months is a long time to be unproductive. People complain about corporations sending out emails to notify people they have been fired or laid off. This person posting a hit video is a prime example why companies make things as brief as possible with no interaction available.

Sales people generally (in sensible firms) aren’t expected to sell anything in their first quarter while they learn the ropes, the product, etc. It’s also not expected to make any real enterprise sales during Q4 or the beginning of Q1 - those are usually dead times of year. Unless your sales org is a puppy mill/boiler room… which many are. Also, in this case they cut a huge amount of the sales org, this seems more li…

I worked in quite a few sensible firms. A salesperson not selling anything for 3 months was never heard of because they would have been fired long before that. A 3 month ramp doesn't mean produce zero results. In case anyone is wondering, results for a salesperson means selling things.

That she goes on to try and rub their noses in her shortcomings tells me all I need to know who was at fault here.

Q4 is a dead time of year? I swear some of you have never had jobs.

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#86

Post by gruez »

JustLurking2022 wrote: post #78

Saw a variation of this during the recent bout of tech layoffs. Shortly before end of year eval time, a senior executive sent out emails questioning whether it was even possible for new hires to have made sufficient impact and suggesting they should consequently be given a poor rating as the default. It's amazing that leaders at these companies which, for years, acted as though they had all the answers and were more…

>I'm honestly curious how CloudFlare will handle reference checks for these people, given they are calling these performance based dismissals. Will they say they are "not eligible for rehire" (the HR way of saying they were terminated for cause)? If so, I hope they get sued, as that can tank a person's entire career trajectory.

1. If you were fired for "performance" reasons, why would you want to use that as a reference?

2. IANAL, but regardless of whether "not eligible for rehire" will "tank a person's entire career trajectory", truth is a valid defense against defamation. If Cloudflare indeed is not going to rehire them, they're fairly safe from lawsuits.

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#87

Post by gruez »

j4yav wrote: post #82
JustLurking2022 wrote: post #78

Saw a variation of this during the recent bout of tech layoffs. Shortly before end of year eval time, a senior executive sent out emails questioning whether it was even possible for new hires to have made sufficient impact and suggesting they should consequently be given a poor rating as the default. It's amazing that leaders at these companies which, for years, acted as though they had all the answers and were more…

Is the main reason they are motivated to blame performance so that they can avoid paying out disability (edit: unemployment) insurance?

>disability insurance

I think you meant unemployment insurance?

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#88

Post by gruez »

JazCE wrote: post #26
ceuk wrote: post #8

In the UK (and most other places with fairly strong employee protections I imagine) it becomes pretty difficult to get rid of employees once they've been around for a while. Often involving a lengthy "managing out" process. Given this, it's common for a 3-6 month "probation period" when starting a new role in which you can be dismissed fairly arbitrarily. This makes sense given the commitment taking on an employee re…

> In the UK (and most other places with fairly strong employee protections I imagine) People keep saying this, but I'm not at all convinced anyone commenting really understands UK employment law. It's really only after 2 years of working for the same company that you get any decent employment protection. It takes a bit more legal work, but if within the first 2 years they don't want you, they can get rid of you. If y…

>If you don't want these rug pulls and employment laws to keep getting watered down, instead of asking about 4 day work weeks, start voting for candidates and parties that have better employment laws at the top of their policies.

What would "better employment laws" look like for you? After all, the parent's theory was that she was fired because she was on the verge of getting additional employment protection, and her performance was mediocre, so rather than risk being saddled with an underperforming employee they fired her just to be safe. Stronger laws against termination would make this problem worse, either by causing companies to be even more aggressive to fire people before their probationary period ends, or try to mitigate risk earlier in the hiring pipeline.

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#89

Post by barbazoo »

JustLurking2022 wrote: post #78

Saw a variation of this during the recent bout of tech layoffs. Shortly before end of year eval time, a senior executive sent out emails questioning whether it was even possible for new hires to have made sufficient impact and suggesting they should consequently be given a poor rating as the default. It's amazing that leaders at these companies which, for years, acted as though they had all the answers and were more…

> as that can tank a person's entire career trajectory

Plus the act of career suicide by publishing company meeting recordings on social media.

Re: Cloudflare Termination Video: A Master Class in How Not to Terminate Someone

#90

Post by krallja »

gruez wrote: post #86
JustLurking2022 wrote: post #78

Saw a variation of this during the recent bout of tech layoffs. Shortly before end of year eval time, a senior executive sent out emails questioning whether it was even possible for new hires to have made sufficient impact and suggesting they should consequently be given a poor rating as the default. It's amazing that leaders at these companies which, for years, acted as though they had all the answers and were more…

>I'm honestly curious how CloudFlare will handle reference checks for these people, given they are calling these performance based dismissals. Will they say they are "not eligible for rehire" (the HR way of saying they were terminated for cause)? If so, I hope they get sued, as that can tank a person's entire career trajectory. 1. If you were fired for "performance" reasons, why would you want to use that as a refere…

I just got a new job, and they called every single company I had worked for to ask them if I worked there, what my position was, and whether I was eligible for rehire. I didn’t get a choice about whether to include each previous employer or not: my choice was between “do the background check” or “thanks for your application, we have decided to move forward with a different candidate.”

The only other thing I could have done was not included the ones with less-than-stellar experience, but then I wouldn’t have made it past the resume screen because of the gaps!

Post reply on HN