So always get the direct email of all your coworkers so you can reach them independently of your boss. Firing has a desired second-effect as destruction of evidence.
Bitpanda said no mass layoffs, three weeks before axing one-third of staff
91–95 of 95 posts
Re: Bitpanda said no mass layoffs, three weeks before axing one-third of staff
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trust, which is instrumentally valuable, is the wage earned by honesty. Even a pathological, amoral entity will find value in being honest, unless they assign no value to being trusted.
The company entity will not trust their employees generally. They verify, or use multiple parties to prevent any possible trust needed to perform a task - that's why there's "supervisors" and manager roles. The employees, on the other hand, is required to trust the company. It's a condition of employment. For example, you are only paid after the work is completed - this requires that the employee trusts the company t…
I mean trust in a communications sense: the amount that a listener believes your message when you say something. The purpose of communication is, ultimately, to change minds. If your audience has lost all trust in you, then your message will be treated as complete noise, and regardless of whether you say X or Y, it will have zero impact on a listener's belief about X or Y.
If your trusted friend says "I'm in trouble and I need a loan", you probably believe them. If a spam email says the same thing, you probably won't.
Employers and employees are on an equal footing in terms of this type of trust. Whether you're speaking to your senior manager or to your new hire, you need to establish that your words carry factual meaning. Fail repeatedly at that, and you'll end up on a mental spam filter.
When Enzersdorfer-Konrad says "There will not be any kind of massive layoffs within Bitpanda", the impact of that message on employees is proportional to how much trust Enzersdorfer-Konrad, and Bitpanda, have earned. If they have a record of lying and deceiving their employees, then such announcements are complete noise. There's not even any use in uttering them.
Telling such a blatant lie -- or, to be charitable, an overconfident wrong prediction -- costs credibility that has to be earned back the hard way. The next time Enzersdorfer-Konrad says something, even if he really means it this time, it won't carry weight. He'll have to build, or rebuild, a strong record of honesty before people listen to him again.
Re: Bitpanda said no mass layoffs, three weeks before axing one-third of staff
#93When all three founders wear turtlenecks on PR photos, you know there’s something amiss…
Re: Bitpanda said no mass layoffs, three weeks before axing one-third of staff
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't make much sense to me. If there is market turmoil, are you saying the best strategy for a company is to not communicate anything no matter the company and industry?
On the context of this one article, what do you expect a company can communicate about layoffs?
[deleted]
Re: Bitpanda said no mass layoffs, three weeks before axing one-third of staff
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if the company doesn't bring it up, but says there won't be a layoff in response to a direct question (at an employee town hall, for example)? It seems like that's how a lot of these rumors get started.
If I was in charge I would deflect and talk about how strong fundamentals were etc
So you're saying, in the scenario where someone asks directly "will this company lay anyone off," you'd rather the company deflect the question and not answer it than just say "no?"
I really can't imagine why anyone would think that's a better look. If someone dodges a question, it's safe to assume that the truthful answer would look bad for them. That's WHY people dodge questions.