21–23 of 23 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t think laying off nearly 1000 people en masse with a video is cruel and unusual? I do. This is a terrible look for the company in my opinion and I’m glad this article exposed it.
I would rather be told in the privacy of my house then in a office and have to walk by all the other folks in the other meeting.
What the hell. Just do video call.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Perhaps the author could read up on how his own employer does layoffs They did it the normal way, individual private notification. It would be remiss not to mention it afterward at the next all-hands meeting. > They’ll hire you over video chat and fire you over video chat. They didn't hire anyone on a one-way broadcast-only video conference with 900 attendees.
> They did it the normal way, individual private notification. Over a messaging app? How is that normal or better? > They didn't hire anyone on a one-way broadcast-only video conference with 900 attendees. CEO doesn't hire anyone individually either. So, is it better to push this layoff responsibility to the hiring manager? I have no idea why hiring and firing need to be symmetrical. When I was hired, I was congrat'e…
Who said a messaging app? The Vice story says Google Meet video chat.
> How is that normal or better?
Most people don't want to be entirely impassive spectators while someone who can't see or hear them upends their career plans with uncontested fluffy business jargon.
> So, is it better to push this layoff responsibility to the hiring manager?
Yes, I've been laid off once and a colleague twice, and that's how it's gone each time. The whole reason there are articles written about this incident is that it's so sensationally exceptional.