I can’t give more approval for this woman, she handled everything so well.

The backstory is that Cloudflare overhired and wanted to reduce headcount, rightsize, whatever terrible HR wording you choose. Instead of admitting that this was a layoff, which would grant her things like severance and unemployment - they tried to tell her that her performance was lacking.

And for most of us (myself included) we would angrily accept it and trash the company online. Not her, she goes directly against them. It of course doesn’t go anywhere because HR is a bunch of robots with no emotions that just parrot what papa company tells them to, but she still says what all of us wish we did.

(Warning, if you’ve ever been laid off this is a bit enraging and can bring up some feelings)

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    621 year ago

    We fired ~40 sales people out of over 1,500 in our go to market org. That’s a normal quarter. When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not. Sadly, we don’t hire perfectly. We try to fire perfectly. In this case, clearly we were far from perfect. The video is painful for me to watch. Managers should always be involved. HR should be involved, but it shouldn’t be outsourced to them, No employee should ever actually be surprised they weren’t performing. We don’t always get it right. And sometimes under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten before we let them go. Importantly, just because we fire someone doesn’t mean they’re a bad employee. It doesn’t mean won’t be really, really great somewhere else. Chris Paul was a bad fit for the Suns, but he’s undoubtedly a great basketball player. And, in fact, we think the right thing to do is get people we know are unlikely to succeed off the team as quickly as possible so they can find the right place for them. We definitely weren’t anywhere close to perfect in this case. But any healthy org needs to get the people who aren’t performing off. That wasn’t the mistake here. The mistake was not being more kind and humane as we did. And that’s something @zatlyn and I are focused on improving going forward.

    -Matthew Prince
    Co-Founder & CEO, Cloudflare

    Nitter / Mirror | Twitter

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      This isn’t the first time I’ve heard “we need to fire people right away because it is GOOD for them!” from a corporate type, and it’s not getting any less ghoulish sounding with repetition.

    • TheHarpyEagle
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      What feedback?? The feedback that said she was doing well from the people familiar with her work? Or the mysterious metrics she was failing to meet but also had no idea about? God, what an out of touch douche nozzle.

      Also, if they’re not a fit but still a good employee, LAY THEM OFF. But who wants to pay for all that messy extra stuff when you can just grind through the workforce?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The way this whole thing went down is absurd.

        That said, I had an underperforming colleague who never picked up that feedback was negative. They only latched onto the positive statements. This is either a failing of the receiver to hear the negative when also getting positives or a failing of the feedback giver to be direct.

        It’s impossible to say in this situation, though it caught my attention that she mentioned she was close to closing a deal and lost it last second. If we take the CEOs statement at face value, perhaps she didn’t actually meet their metrics.

        I can’t say if this is justified or not, but what is abundantly obvious to me is 1) their feedback system likely sucks 2) the hit squad was under prepared with the justification for a termination for lack of performance, 3) she called them on their shit justifiably.

        I also agree that it should be expected they give a reasonable severance if this is their hiring model… If you by rule whack people.after three months, they should compensate for another three as people were not looking for new work.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      571 year ago

      This is the same piece of shit ceo trying to force their workers back to office too. Fuck this asshole

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      84
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If he thinks it’s painful to watch then he should apologize personally to HER and her coworkers for traumatizing them, and give them a good severance pay. The way he phrases this as if he’s just shrugging and saying “we’ll do better at some unspecified point in the future, I’m sure” makes him come off as an inhumane piece of garbage with no empathy.

    • ScrubblesOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      221 year ago

      Shocked they actually admitted a mistake here. What will really matter is if they actually change anything.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        Dude, he didn’t really admit to any mistake.

        That wasn’t the mistake here. The mistake was not being more kind and humane as we did.

        He’s literally saying firing her was not the mistake. He still believes she should’ve been fired and not laid off. He also believes firing her based on nondescript performance metrics was right. The only thing he believes was wrong was how the firing was carried out. The only thing he’s admitting is that the firing wasn’t “PR friendly”, which is an indirect way of saying the mistake was getting caught.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        63
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Did he though? I mean he perfectly sticks to individual shortcomings as the reason and even implies that she ignored feedback.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      561 year ago

      This asshat is also just beating around the performance bush that doesn’t exist, only to avoid calling the firing a layoff. Disgusting.

      • Lemminary
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten

        What feedback?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Tbf

          1. we don’t know if she’s got feedback before getting fired or not

          2. he does address that:

          No employee should ever actually be surprised they weren’t performing. We don’t always get it right.

          • Lemminary
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            She claims she had not and raised it to the people firing her. She says she was constantly reassured that all was going well and even her review periods were good, but not even her manager was present to attest. She wasn’t even put on an improvement plan, or ever told that she was underperforming when she was actually performing above her peers (according to her) which is why she was so upset that they couldn’t give her a concrete reason to let her go. Neither point really applies.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    201 year ago

    My one question going in was whether this was a Sales role. It’s hard to overstate how volatile a career in sales can be. You are your numbers and your income can swing around wildly. Maybe you can control your own performance but the viability of the products is out of your control and the targets set for you to be evaluated against are outside your control too. Companies use Sales to grow, not to subsist, so the second budgets are tight and a company shifts into survival mode, you’re the first to go. Culture is also volatile and high pressure, competitive, etc. I know a sales guy who closed a multi hundred thousand dollar enterprise software deal and was missing just one signature for weeks and could not reach the guy. He travelled internationally and camped out in the building lobby for multiple days until he saw him and ran up and got him to sign.

    It’s hard. You can do really well but it’s hard. She’s pretty vulnerable not having actually closed anything, ever, yet. No one actually cares at the end of the quarter if you “have great meetings.”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    411 year ago

    So glad she eventually got to the “how the fuck are you so clueless about this, you’re the ones firing ME” part.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    431 year ago

    why can’t corporations just do things in a reasonable and rational way?

    Why do they constantly make so many extreme changes all the time? When they need to hire more people, they hire way more than they need, when they need to downsize…or rather when they’re tired of paying so many people, they fire way too many.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        It’s about maximizing the bonuses for the executives. A bigger bonus than what they got last year.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Yeah in the kind of was that a shitty gambler plays when the “table (market) is ‘hot’” they feel overconfident and go all in, ignoring that the pieces they’re playing with are people’s lives

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      211 year ago

      Because it improves short term profits, so the stock goes up, so both shareholders and execs are happy with their big payouts. The rest is just collateral, they don’t care.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Last I checked the average tenure of a CEO was less than 2 years.

        As long as the problems only properly start getting felt a couple of years later, all such “save a bit now, pay a lot later” strategies are ideal for CEOs as they optimize their bonuses.

        As for other people, well, these types are usually far into the sociopath side of the spectrum so they don’t feel the pain of others, don’t worry about the harm for others, and have no shame whatsoever.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Because it’s easier that way. Rather than protracted recruiting processes that really dig deep into the current needs of the company after detailed evaluation of current projects and current manpower, just hire anyone who looks halfway decent and fire the ones that don’t seem worth it whenever is convenient.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Because it’s easier that way.

        In the short term, easier. But for long term sustainability, no…But what does that matter when you get a bailout every time you fail?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          What about the way we’ve seen markets operate makes you believe they care about the long-term? Long-term is someone else’s problem.

    • LeadersAtWork
      link
      fedilink
      30
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Graphs. Executives love graphs. Numbers also mean different things to them, and changes better invoke noticeable change, preferably monetarily and with some sort of proof. This is for those quarterly meetings. Larger layoffs are often done for investors. It’s a clock’s pendulum. Pull back payroll, show the numbers and talk about skimming the fat or whatever, yell “look at us!”, profit. Hire a bunch of people, talk about a big product/project, yell “look at us!”, profit.

      It’s the capitalist endgame. You, I, little Johnny, and the kitchen sink if it could talk and move, are all numbers on an excel sheet. Plenty of exceptions exist, this remains the rule, however.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yup, and this is fundamentally down to the whole system being low-information. Workers, management, upper management and shareholders are all playing it close to the chest because they know they are pitted against one another. So much of corporate life is smoke & mirrors. It’s incredibly wasteful of information, of resources, and of the dignity of the people within it.

        EDIT: I didn’t connect the dots between low-information and graphs: graphs are an attempt to make the unfathomable complexity of many humans working together legible to the managers & the owner class, when they know they can’t trust those workers’ word for anything. So people make graphs to try to filter information they don’t care about - how is Marv from accounting feeling after his back surgery - from information they do care about like KPIs. It destroys most of the information and hence is easily gamed by everyone up & down the chain, which leads to this bizarre yo-yoing that makes the workers’ lives and the company worse, but satisfies the graphs.

        And it’s all because the owning class wants to exploit us, so they have to dominate us. There’s no getting around it, as long as this extractive system exists this is how it will inevitably be. No culture change is going to fix things. Only the workers being the owners will fix it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      Because the guy who makes the big risky splashy changes to his department gets the promotion. The one who makes small continous improvements without fucking things up along the way flies under the radar.

    • guldukat
      link
      fedilink
      191 year ago

      Because their bottom line is improved in the short term by firing people

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        Youre right. Because their bottom line is improved in the short term so that they can say “Look at how much revenue we made last year!”

        “And now look at how many people employed to gain that revenue!”

        “No, don’t look over the whole year! Just look at right now!”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    50
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I only saw the start and the emotional vibes are pretty bad, and not just for Brittany (though, of course, even in the beginning she’s clearly already hurting).

    At least somebody actually directly got in contact with her, personally, rather than firing-by-email.

    If there is a lesson I learned way back at the beginning of my career in Tech back in the mid 90s is that you shouldn’t really go for the whole loyalty to your employee when they’re anything but a little company were everybody works together, because they will screw you over if its in their best interest, sometimes casually so, and those making the decision will never be in calls such as this one and instead send some poor sods like the HR lady and that director guy to do the dirty work for them and fell the hurt from the person on the other side if they have any empathy (which most people do have, which is probably why both the HR Lady and the guy were uncomfortable from the start).

    Also beware of the company trying to manipulate you as an employee to have your workplace be your entire social circle of friends and even like a second family: the whole point of that is to “retain” employees without having to actually pay what the market says they’re worth. This is actually a pretty old trick in Tech HR, dating back to the original Internet Boom.

    The whole loyalty of the companies to employees thing died in the late 80s early 90s and you should be skeptical when it comes to what the company “does for you” and ponder on what’s in it for them: for example, “free pizza dinners” are not at all about being nice for you, they’re about you working long hours for free (which would cost them way more than that free pizza if they had to pay for them) to enhance that company’s profits.

    It’s sad and it’s the World we live in: one were the real power of the land is Money and it’s mainly in the hands of Sociopaths.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    321 year ago

    She did really good! Almost drove it home, she was so close… As a former manager in HR, here are my two cents. Note that I’m from canada, might not apply as I have it in mind in the US. If they’re trying to frame a layoff as a firing for cause and poor performance, her first way of handling it is excellent. Ask pointed specific questions on what about your performance was lacking and more importantly can you demonstrate to me that I’ve been communicated clear quantifiable and Timely objectives that I’ve been communicated means and ways to be coached and trained to meet those objectives and that I’ve been communicated milestones of me not meeting objectives, with proper corrective measures and coaching to then change course before a firing for poor performance.

    If you can’t communicate any of these to me, the objectives, my performance against his objectives, the milestones, and the coaching I received to meet objectives when I did not, then this is not a poor performance related firing. If you’re missing any of these information then I am not yet terminated and I am at your employment until a subsequent meeting where you can come back with that information. On the other hand if what you meant to say is that this is a layoff because you have hired too many people, and that this letting Go has nothing to do with my performance, okay no problem, let’s talk, but in this case it will be with X months of severance and a glowing recommendation letter.

    Lastly I want to make you aware that I’ve recorded this conversation, in which it’s now clearly documented that you have no clear tangible indication of any notion of documented poor performance about me, and thus I am still at the employed of my employer until you either provide those, or provide me with coaching that I then fail to put into practice to meet objectives, or until you come back with the severance package for a layoff that has nothing to do with my performance.

    Something along those lines…

    • ScrubblesOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 year ago

      Yeah sure, if she has no emotions I’d say that’d be a great way to handle it.

      Unfortunately she’s trying to keep herself composed while going through an extremely traumatic event in her life. A layoff is something that may seem routine for you - but for me I still process through my layoffs years later. She’s holding back tears. I held back tears. I’d say she did remarkably well while having her life plans crumble around her.

      I put 100% of the blame on HR and the company - even if it’s completely her fault for getting fired I wouldn’t put any blame on her for not using the perfect wording.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        Please allow me to offer a nuance on the topic of HR. I see a lot of hate about HR on this thread and quite a bit is founded… But on the other hand, two things:

        1. the HR folks themselves are not to blame for the fact that the company overhired, are cutting people, or even to some extent some shitty strategies like pretending people are fire for cause instead of laid off. It’s decided by executives ans the CEO, and HR operationalizes. I’ll fully grant though that they sometimes (often) operationalize shittily.

        2. and more importantly, HR is shitty in a shitty company, and pretty decent in a (quite rare) decent company. Fundamentally HR’s job is to help manage humans as a resource, and among other tasks it means to protect the company against human-related risks. There are different fundamental beliefs and philosophies companies can have around how to avoid that risk - and their HR strategy is set accordingly.

        Some decent (rare) employers believe that to avoid risks like being sued or unionizing, the best strategy is to provide employees with a healthy work environment, competitive pay and to remove toxic managers and executives quickly. In these companies HR plays a very strong policing role ensuring that managers don’t cause human related risk by abusing workers. I know it sounds idealistic and I’ll 100% grant that it applies unfortunately to a very small sample of employers, but it’s true.

        Of course way more common are companies with the philosophy that to avoid these risks you need to squash people, back your managers at all cost, never admit a fault, etc - and that’s the shitty strategy operationalized by shitty a HR department.

        Lastly the governmental labour laws framework of a country plays a big role too - in some countries where those laws are super weak like the US, particularly if your employer is your only way to access half decent healthcare, you can’t afford to change employer - and the shitty strategy becomes a much lower cost than the decent one (found a bit more often in Canada, way more in Europe and even more in Scandinavian countries)

        Sorry for the walltext rambling

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          Nah. They are the blame. If your work requires you to do shitty things go find other work. If that is too difficult of a concept then you have to wonder why they are doing it to other people. Getting a new.job is super easy right?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            51 year ago

            I get your point, but just playing Devil’s advocate here: don’t work in real estate because it’s fraud and landlords are thieves, don’t work for McDonald’s because your work make people fat and unhealthy, don’t work retail or manufacturing because your work encourages capitalism and all its evils…? I mean… don’t like 90% of all jobs require you to do shitty things?

            Most people in HR went in the field with pretty decent intentions. They have debts and families to feed and the job they landed is sometimes for a shitty employer.

            If you want to hate someone, don’t hate the HR person who’s dealing with their own shitty problems, blame the uber rich, that maintain everyone else in a constant state of infighting while they lobby or buy lawmakers to ensure the poor get poorer so they get richer. There the ones maintaining a hyper capitalistic society and making sure executives are ordering the cuts (often ending with cutting the HR folks after they finish the layoffs)

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              3
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              If you’re asked to fire people in this way then you should stand up for yourself and your coworkers and say “sorry, but I’m not going to treat people in this way and contribute to traumatizing them. We need to be more transparent and give them clear reasons why they are being fired.”

              If you just do whatever you’re told with no concern for the consequences for others then you are supporting the company’s actions and you are a shitty human being.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              I might see that point of view if they didn’t act like they drank the Kool aid.

              In any case there is plenty of moral work. Mine is.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                31 year ago

                Agreed lol. People are backing down and here, and don’t. YOU are responsible for being a moral person, you aren’t off the hook just because “my boss told me to!”. I’ve worked in an industry where my boss wanted me to cut safety corners and falsify data. I never did. I knew the repercussions that could happen.

                I don’t work for renting companies because of this reason! I’ve thought about applying, I have the experience and skills. But I know how they operate. I lived in a building where every good landlord I had as a renter was fired by the property owners for trying to operate efficiently and legally. One woman even knew it was coming, and helped everyone get lawyers for the illegal stuff the property owners were doing.

                Louder for those lying to themselves. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING A MORAL PERSON. You don’t get to back out just because your boss told you to do something.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  Military contractors pay more because they have problems finding people willing to work for them. Imagine a better world where everyone decided under orders wasn’t an excuse. Cops would report bad cops, juries would never convict on drug or prostitute charges, the militaries of the world would be reduced to crafting swords, medical and student loan debt system would collapse.

                  Obedience to authority, best book I have ever read in my life. A shrink analysis the tendency of humans to be awfult.o each other as long as an authority figure says it is required.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      211 year ago

      It’s insane the hoops you guys have to jump through to not get fucked over in America/Canada. It really makes the social achievements we have in my country stand out that much more.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    91 year ago

    Is there actually a video here? I just get a broke link and I don’t see any mirrors in the comments.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    161 year ago

    Only watched her initial verbal volley and fuck that is some strength. I heard the emotion right under the surface but it was emphatically not in her voice, I’d have been shitting myself if I were on the other end of those questions

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    821 year ago

    HR is working their script, or they will be fired too. It’s like a fucking callcenter to destroy people.

    • AlmightySnoo 🐢🇮🇱🇺🇦
      link
      fedilink
      28
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This. I don’t think people here realize that HR doesn’t really have a say in this, they aren’t the ones deciding on the firing and they aren’t the ones who can undo it since they aren’t the ones providing the team’s budget.

      HR’s job in these situations is to do the dirty part: handle the announcement to each employee and damage control if necessary.

      The girl in the video is saying that her manager was “pleased” with her work and she didn’t understand why strangers in the HR department are doing the announcement to her: that’s the whole point, it’s very likely that it’s that “nice” manager who threw you under the bus when he had to make a choice on which people he needs to keep after top management told him to downsize his team but he didn’t have the guts to tell you that personally.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          Get paid to*. This is labour and we’re all exploited.

          Companies like this often hire external consultants to do the layoffs. They literally have no skin in the game.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      411 year ago

      Literally looped in circles over and over to avoid answering questions. It was so frustrating to listen to.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    291 year ago

    Wow I applied to Cloudflare a few months ago, glad I got rejected because I was just laid off late last year.

  • snooggums
    link
    fedilink
    401 year ago

    Loved it when she asked if performance indicators were real or just something they use as an excuse. Plus pointing out that they aren’t going to explain after she is fired, since she won’t be an employee anymore.

    I hope she finds another job that doesn’t treat her like shit.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      18
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They didn’t actually have performance indicators, nor any poor performance data. When she asked for their evidence, they said they could get it later. In my head that translates to “We don’t actually have the data.”

      “We can talk about that later.”

      “We can’t go into specifics at the moment.”

      “This isn’t the form, or the situation where we can go into detail.”

      I love her response:

      “But then when? If it’s not right when I’m getting fired then it’s certainly not going to be after when I’m no longer part of the company.”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1991 year ago

    HR are all class traitors. Their sole purpose in life is to pay you as little as possible and protect the people at the top who are stealing everyone elses’ profits. Fuck anyone working in HR.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1191 year ago

      That really isn’t true, and you would know that if you were actually familiar with HR.

      HR, for stuff like this, is just the messenger. Some exec told them to fire people, and gave them a directive on who to fire. The HR reps couldn’t answer her questions because they likely don’t know the answer.

      Yes, the job of HR is to protect the company, but mostly that’s protecting the company from the company breaking labor laws.

      But, I’m sure I’ll get downvoted to hell because the hive mind loves to shit on HR, which is exactly what the execs are wanting. They’re scapegoats.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        311 year ago

        Nothing you said contradicts the claim that HR people are class traitors. HR only cares about labor law so far as they can achieve management’s goals without landing the company in legal hot water. It’s absolutely not about any concern for the people themselves.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          111 year ago

          No one in any business cares about their customers or coworkers any more than they have to. Why would you think that the person at the supermarket cares about the weird story you have to tell them?

          HR doesn’t care about you because they don’t know you. Your coworkers barely care about you. Do not think people you work with are your friends. HR has no moral reason to do anything other than their jobs. Don’t rely on them for legal advice. They are just a mouthpiece for what has already been decided.

      • ThePowerOfGeek
        link
        fedilink
        English
        141 year ago

        I’ve interacted with lots of HR employees over the years. And for quite a while my wife worked in that field, so I’ve had some ‘inside’ insight into the field. And I largely agree with you.

        Like with any field, there are good people and bad people in there. My wife (and most of her colleagues) was one of the good ones. She intervened many times at her old job to stop out of control managers from firing store employees for bullshit reasons. Yes, part of that was to avoid the company getting into legal trouble for it. But an equal part was because she wanted to help these employees, because they were clearly being mistreated by their managers. And while not to that level, I’ve been helped by other decent HR people who went above and beyond company policies to help me during things like bereavement and healthcare needs.

        I’ve also dealt with some absolute shit-heel HR people. People who would spend almost all day spying on employees using CCTV to try to catch them doing something - anything - that they could write them up for. People who would go out of their way to hide and ignore evidence of managers vindictively punishing employees who they (the managers) didn’t like. People would use their power as HR professionals to exploit vulnerable employees for sexual motives.

        It’s a mixed bag. To say all HR people are good is facile (side note: I know you weren’t doing that). And equally, to slate all HR employees is also wrong.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        381 year ago

        I worked in HR for a while and 80% of the job was telling managers/execs “you can’t do that to an employee”. It was defending the employee, arguing for better programs, planning events for employees/associates/team members. I paid for a Christmas event out of my own pocket one year because I was told there was no funding. I never got badmouthed or trashed by a manager. But after fighting everyday for associates it was really disheartening to see them say stuff like the person youre replying too. It’s one reason people who aren’t corporate shills get out of HR. You spend your day advocating for people and they turn around and spit in your face. After awhile you just ask yourself why am I turning myself inside out for these people who hate me?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          121 year ago

          Oh come off of it. Your job is to tell those managers and executives “you can’t do that”. You are there to prevent liability. I’m not calling you a bad person or class trader like above, but that’s what your job is.

        • TheLowestStone
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I’ve literally never worked at a company where HR advocates for the workers. In 20 years, I haven’t seen it happen a single time.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            The HR team at the company I work for absolutely advocates for me and my coworkers. Their job is to protect the company’s interests and the workers being empowered is in line with the company’s interests. A close friend and coworker had a PM try to deny her benefits (both PTO and insurance) and HR stepped in on her behalf and forced the company to give her what she was owed. The HR team is always available to answer questions about how insurance works and how to plan for retirement, plus they go out of their way to host a yearly Christmas party and other major events. The companies you worked at might have had bad HR teams, but that doesn’t mean every HR team is bad.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        79
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I am very familiar with HR at many different fortune 500 corporations.

        You’re so close to getting the point. You realize HR are the executives’ scapegoats. So stop being their scapegoat.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          251 year ago

          Just don’t get a job in HR and no one can get fired. It’s that easy guys.

          HR is a legitimate job and serves and important purpose in the structure of a company. You can’t dismiss it by saying their purpose is to serve rich assholes because that’s the purpose of every job at a company. That’s work, that’s most jobs.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            101 year ago

            Except HR’s entire purpose is to insulate management. They’re not exactly producing anything

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Production of goods is not relevant at all there are plenty of valid jobs that do not produce anything. Having an HR department in a large company allows other departments to focus on what they are good at and have HR handle all the employee contracts, hiring, firing, complaints, performance reviews, leave etc.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                41 year ago

                All those tasks you listed are really the responsibility of management. HR is basically the grease between the decisions of upper management and the reactions of the lowly prawns

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  They can be the responsibility of management in smaller companies but at scale they require a department.

        • ThyTTY
          link
          fedilink
          81 year ago

          Well, if you’re working for that company in any other role your purpose is to serve the rich assholes anyway.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          Better yet, get a job in HR and sabotage the company from the inside!

          Though, the reality is that most menial HR jobs are like any other menial non-decision maker jobs, in any other area of the business, so your argument is just as applicable to, and just as disingenuous, for most roles in any business — e.g. like arguing janitor’s at EvilCorp are complicit class traitors because they enrich EvilCorp and facilitate it’s success.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago

            No. Most jobs do not directly involve enacting bad worker related decisions.

            An engineer will never, ever come in and fire you for some made up reason. HR will.

            You are conflating the fact that HR does not need to exist like the jobs that do the actual work need to exist. They are not the same. Ever.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          201 year ago

          HR exists to insulate people with real authority in a business from those who suffer from their whims. In a lot of companies, your job is to get yelled at so some ghoulish C level executive isn’t forced to strain their neurons processing the emotional reality of the fact that their decisions impact real people in negative ways. It might disrupt their “objectivity” and make it harder to issue layoffs next time.

        • oce 🐆
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Wouldn’t that also apply to engineers working for those rich assholes? Because there are a lot of engineers working for rich assholes here who like to trash HR, starting with me.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            No. What? HR does company dirty work. Engineers do actual work. What the fuck is the relation there??

            • oce 🐆
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              They both prostitute themselves to serve the rich to get more money even though they are educated enough to have the freedom to choose whom to work for.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                21 year ago

                Ahh yes, and Marx wasn’t a real socialist because he sold books for money… You are choosing to miss the very obvious nuance and that is incredibly stupid to choose to do.

                • oce 🐆
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  You’re talking about nuance after the vast generalization you wrote about HR? May beyou could self reflect on that nuance notion.

        • Fushuan [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Anyone in the company is serving the rich assholes fucking everyone else over. All the money they are producing goes to the rich assholes.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Being a shield against the decisions of upper management is the kind of class traitor work the person above is talking about. HR’s job is taking that kind of decision and turning it into something that can be executed with the least likelihood of an office shooting or lawsuit. Whether either of those things are warranted or not.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      It is actually such a shitty job and while good people may find themselves in it, only bad people stay in it for long. If you’re a great person and just spend your time bringing sunshine to employees then you were rolled in luck before you went into the fryer.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      This is the nature of the HR as a sector, not the ppl that work there. The lumberjack is not responsible for the deforestation. If you dont have any collective to help ppl stand their ground they will only follow orders to buy the milk.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        The lumberjack is harvesting wood which the population as a whole benefits from. They aren’t taking a side of one class vs the another class. Sure I would like them to harvest responsibly but even if they don’t they are still adding value to civilization.

        HR is not the same thing. When is the last time they actually helped you? I remember once the employee health insurance was giving me problems covering a medication for my wife and the HR bitch is taking the insurance company side. Telling me how they nice they were at contract time. Yeah mouthbreather of course they are nice, they scammed us out of money and you let it happen.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        171 year ago

        You’re the kind of fool who thinks some of the nazis weren’t bad, they were just following orders.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          101 year ago

          You literally compared HR workers with the nazis, and you are not the first I saw in this thread, wtf are you all eating? You talk with ppl like that IRL?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            81 year ago

            Meh. Maybe they are just tired of the people who don’t really do anything acting like they are top shit.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                5
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Literally no, moron. You are fundamentally incapable of understanding that workers actually do work and HR literally is tasked with protecting the boss and company. It’s their job. They’d be fired if they were perfectly moral you fucking idiot. They’re REQUIRED to “just follow orders”. That’s the point.

                That’s why we’re blaming the position: The position itself is immoral when the boss is immoral, just like a Nazi soldier holding a gun and aiming at allies is immoral. It doesn’t fucking matter that it’s his job. The problem is the job exists in the first place, you pillock.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, so your solution for the capitalism is all HR resign? I love how you feel so smarter even so is completely incapable to think over a simple provocation. You are not even comparing the police, the state force that actually kill to protects the capital, with the Nazis, you are comparing the HR, like firing ppl and killing ppl had a “moral” equivalence to keep a political system.

                  And to glue this shit argument you use this abstract"morality" that have no meaning, exactly like a conservative would do.

                  You are not even aware that your hate against HR is exactly what your boss want, HR and middle managers exists with no other purpose than ppl stupid like you to hate them instead of the boss, and keeps the grindmill running.

                  You are much closer to a Nazi person than an HR that hates his Job, cause your hate is in the exactly place the leader wants, against workers and not against him.

                  You are too far of the reality to being so angry, maybe you should go to Twitter, there is a lot like you there.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      Ok, cut out the middleman and get fired face to face by someone even more profit motivated and psychopathic and disinterested in your person.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Pretty sure they don’t do that in the US cause the 2nd Amendment apparently says that we aren’t allowed to disarm a fucking toddler in this country, so the guns outnumber the citizens.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      221 year ago

      The people doing the firing were lawyers, not HR, but you are absolutely right. If you are told to fire a bunch of people illegally, the only moral response is to refuse and if pressed, document publicly what happened (and quit or be fired yourself).

      Following orders is no excuse.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      141 year ago

      Generally, the WARN Act covers employers with 100 or more employees, not counting those who have worked fewer than six months in the last twelve-month work period.

      She mentioned in the call that she started working in like August.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          51 year ago

          Ahh my mistake. I misread that as the employees who have not been there for that long would be exempt from this protection.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        171 year ago

        It specifies which employers are cover with the WARN act, not employees. It either covers whole company (all employees in company) or no one at company at all.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      This is why severance gets offered. It’s a contract that you agree to and henceforth you can’t really fight. And employees would frankly rather take the pay than immediately lose income and then start investing time in a lawsuit against a much better resourced organization, which could take years and may not result in anything. Most companies know how to navigate the laws. Few ordinary people know how to sue over them and win.