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)
So glad she eventually got to the “how the fuck are you so clueless about this, you’re the ones firing ME” part.
Being a 9-5 sucks. Never be loyal to an employer especially millenials and coming generation. You have lost everything so do what you get paid for and leave. Don’t let them tell you how boomers and the generation before that did the job.
don’t be loyal to your employer, be loyal to your union
Build loyalty to an employer only after they prove they are worthy of it. Some employers do warrant loyalty, because they are good employers. A company that does this dirty work using mercenaries instead of their own hearts is cowardly, and therefore dangerous.
Also their inability to stomach doing it themselves is evidence to them that it’s the wrong thing to do, but they don’t care. They want the thing done, the fact that their conscience seems to deflate them every time they think about doing it themselves should indicate to them they haven’t really thought it through, that there are complex outcomes that will not go well for them if they proceed.
So do they steel themselves and proceed anyway? No they hire Mitch and Melissa to doublespeak-handwave their way through it because they’ve mastered the vapidity required to fire someone with zero questions asked and take ten minutes saying “I understand how you feel” (as a psychopath I understand the feeling of fear).
They do not understand Brittany’s feeling of injustice. That’s the feeling they don’t understand, and don’t even realize she’s talking about.
As far as I’m concerned, this video is evidence that they fired her without reason. Why? Because she asked for a reason and the HR ghoul said “We can’t give you an answer for that”.
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.
My first job out of college was for an global company. I was there just over one year when they announced they were outsourcing us. On the day of announcement, there were two meetings. One way getting hired by the outsourcer, the other was being let go at some point in the next year (after turnover). Since subset of the let go group was booted that day.
It was a great lesson to learn early in my career.
My loyalty to my employer extends to the 40 hours they pay me. I accept my on call week three times per year, because I’m in IT and that’s just how it goes. But past that, I don’t care. I do, however, appreciate and enjoy my coworkers. We are friends, and no one abuses that friendship. I would miss working with them if I left, but that’s not enough to keep me where I am. I’ve been looking, but not terribly seriously. For the most part I’m left to manage my stuff, and I don’t get too much hassle from above. There is, however, a ton of corporate BS these days.
I think what we do is called “professionalism” rather than “loyalty” - they pay us for our time and it’s a questions of professional pride and moral obligation that we are there doing the work for them, in a reasonable professional way to the best of our abilities, but no freebies.
They might decorate it with “we appreciate your work” hypocrisy and bullshit, but they treat it as a “supplier” business transaction hence I’ll treat it from my side as a business transaction too, which means what’s in the contract is what’s in the contract and if I find a better “client”, I’m off.
After less than a decade as an “employee” I actually became a freelancer and it has served me well and I never regretted it, even though I was in the middle of each of the industries worse hit by the last to major crashes, first Tech and after that Finance. Job security is an illusion, so you have to build your own security by making sure you’re well paid for your work and hence can fall back on your savings even when the whole Economy plunges and even the few genuinelly good companies to work for still end up firing most of their people.
Since when does professionalism include lying about the person’s performance metrics as the reason for the layoff? She professionally asked for receipts, they had none. These people seems to think gaslighting is part of being professional.
I think you misunderstood my point if you think I’m defending the people who accepted to work in a job, HR, were they’re going to be firing people whilst trying to misportray it in such a way that the company saves money.
Also, Professionalism and Morals are mostly separate things (though it has been my experience that those who are ok with working a job were they’re screwing other are also ok with screwing those who pay for their work).
Sure, I can see how somebody in their first job might go into HR thinking its fine, but somebody with a couple of years doing the job either is a complete moron or has figured out what it really is all about, and that’s not about treating people well or even just fairly.
Honestly the problem I see here is not the layoff, which was disguised as a “lack of performance”. Yes, it wasn’t done perfectly, but still, it’s no tragedy.
What is definitely the problem here is the absolute lack of a social security system in the US. That should be implemented.
Don’t worry, so long as you say the magic word “intersectionality” it will be okay. It doesn’t matter if progressives spend all of our energy on shoehorning every issue into racism and identity so long as we say “it’s okay, bro - INTERSECTIONALITY.” See? Couldn’t you feel the magic happening?
Say you have no understanding of Intersectional Theory without saying you have no understanding of Intersectional Theory.
No, I’m saying that regardless of theory, popular understanding of intersectionality is actually quite the opposite, a way of siloing off issue areas and the losing issue is ALWAYS labor rights. I’m telling you that in practice, I’ve had SJ groups tell me that food deserts in my overwhelmingly white rural area are the result of racism. And that the vast majority of poor white people of course had their own intersectional issues, but we had to address the racism rather than think about it as an economic and labor issue that impacts everyone. Literally, insisting that they be as ineffective as possible by approaching it in a way that loses everyone except the farthest left.
Here in Europe the 4 months she was at would be somewhere mid to end of the trial period, during which you can be let go without having to provide a reason on relatively short notice. This is also pretty much the only chance you get to easily let go a specific individual - so if there are indications it’ll not work out doing just that is a good idea.
But having that done by arbitrary HR drones is just crazy, and obviously you’ll be entitled to unemployment benefits or other social benefits after that.
They need a union.
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, CloudflareThat’s a massive wall of text to say “sorry we got caught”
under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten
What feedback?
Tbf
-
we don’t know if she’s got feedback before getting fired or not
-
he does address that:
No employee should ever actually be surprised they weren’t performing. We don’t always get it right.
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.
-
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?
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.
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.
an inhumane piece of garbage with no empathy.
He is a CEO.
Shocked they actually admitted a mistake here. What will really matter is if they actually change anything.
Did he though? I mean he perfectly sticks to individual shortcomings as the reason and even implies that she ignored feedback.
Yeah, it reads like “our mistake is that there is always room for improvement”
implies that she ignored feedback.
I missed that the first time and now I’m angry all over again 😡
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.
This asshat is also just beating around the performance bush that doesn’t exist, only to avoid calling the firing a layoff. Disgusting.
This is the same piece of shit ceo trying to force their workers back to office too. Fuck this asshole
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.
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.
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.
It’s all about maximizing profit.
It’s about maximizing the bonuses for the executives. A bigger bonus than what they got last year.
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
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.
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?
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.
capitalism.
Why would they care, people are just tools to them.
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.
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.
The rest is just collateral, they don’t care.
I know.
deleted by creator
Because their bottom line is improved in the short term by firing people
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!”
If anyone ever thinks differently, this video should convince you.
If you work for a corporation, you are not a person with a name, you are a number. And that number is the amount of money given to you as pay and benefits.And when the corporation no longer likes your number, you can be unceremoniously shown the door, regardless of your past performance.
Unless you’re apart of a strong union. Then they think twice before firing you.
Really need to create an “analyst union” that title seems like a white collar coverall term to just pay people less.
They likely fall under already exiting tech related unions.
The Teamsters Union even has a tech worker umbreall now.
Unless you live in one of the many countries that have good employment laws.
bruh the girl didn’t close the deals it 🦆 happens it suxxxxxxxs. i usually close the deal tho
love how its hey we will fire you today as a surprise after you’ve been told something completely different but we promise to tell you why later. I really this was just taken legally as an illegal termination. Because if it’s for performance that means you have data, if you have data you should be able to give me graphs and charts, stick figure animations, poorly acted corporate videos.
I expect and demand a puppet show demonstrating my poor performance
“Snape… Snape… Severance Snape…”
Okay, you got me thats a good one
Internet peaking early today. This is great
“Dumbledore!”
Interpretive dance or GTFO
And it has to be done using the Ride Of The Valkyries as music.
Fr. If my performance was bad the entire time, why wasn’t I told until now? If I am doing a crappy job but told I’m doing great, why would I ever do better? Either it’s bullshit that my performance is poor, or they’ve set me up for failure from the beginning. Either of which makes them a piece of shit.
Link’s not working
He’s done plenty for Hyrule so I’d say give him a break.
His recent performance has declined unfortunately so we have to let him go
But are those performance indicators real or something that’s being used as an excuse?
Try it again, I had to change something on the video site and I think it reconfigured it, but I see views coming through now
I couldn’t get it to work either. What did you say in it?
Edit: got it to work on the duck duck go browser
It is a recording of the call, about 9 minutes.
Still doesn’t work for me, I get this message:
Content unavailable Reach out to the creator to obtain the full URL for access.
I got what when I clicked on the expand within the window (kbin) but clicking the title as the link worked.
Not sure what the comparable parts are for Lemmy, but if there are two options you might want to see if the other one works.
Doesn’t work for me in Mulch or Mull, basically Firefox with ublock origin. Media type not supported. There’s nothing in ublock that looks like a video or something I’d want to switch on, things that are blocked are standard things I’d want blocked.
Dodgy website be dodgy. Other videos on that site work, but in general it’s janky.
The comment link works for me in Firefox with uBlock Origin.
For me it behaves like imgur links that don’t work as the expand on the page but do if they open a new tab to the link.
Imgur links don’t work as expanding because they’re using a link to a page and not the actual image. You have to click “Get share links” after you upload and then use the url in the BB code one to get the actual image link.
This is a link to a video website, so it would likely never be processed as an expanding video in lemmy, kbin or whatever. This video works for me now on PC, however on Mull and Mulch - which are Android forks of Firefox specifically set for privacy - it did not. Other videos did work, but this one didn’t. My guess is the video is in a weird file format.
The website also has plenty of dodgy shit - like facebook and gstatic.com. What’s the point of using an alternative to YouTube if you’re still connecting to Google??
(Incidentally, these images were all uploaded to imgur. You just have to pick the right links.)
TL;DR this is a janky and dodgy website.
Not working for me either.
Feels like we’re back in the Real Player days, trying 8 different combinations of browsers and operating systems to slowly load some video you end up not being interested in anyway.
Why did you choose to create your channel on Odysee?
Mostly to upload these videos tbh, it wasn’t YouTube and peertube didn’t show any instances accepting new users. Could host myself but I already host lemmy and that’s enough for me
Works for me
I have an interview scheduled with CloudFlare for later this week. Guess what topic is going to come up.
Looks like I’ll miss this bullet. I’m still pretty happy in my current role so I’ll only jump for something spectacular.
Between us, I think it’s still okay to vet them out, but yeah you have the benefit of knowing they need to sell the job to you. Are there layoffs happening, “I read articles where layoffs are still happening, why are you hiring?” and knowing that HR is going to be impersonal and callous when you’re dealing with them. All important factors.
And hey worst case, it’s good interview prep for yourself
Yeah, still attending the interview but don’t really think I’m going to go anywhere with it. As you said, it’s good game practice.
But really though. If CF is this brazen on
letting gorecalibratingfiring the people closest to the money (sales) then how am I supposed to think they’re going to treat their engineering talent? R&D is typically the first to get the blunt end of the axe, not the last.I’ve seen it hit both ways tbh, sometimes it’s engineering, sometimes it’s support. Depends on if the company views engineering as “they’ll save us money” or not.
But yeah, it’s a good chance to work out the first interview jitters, probably do some stupid technical questions on the whiteboard like “write out binary search perfectly in the whiteboard from memory”, and see how it goes.
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…
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.
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:
-
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.
-
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
-
Pretty good, although really difficult to vocalize under stress. I’d say if you’re given a chance to provide a written statement, there’s a good opportunity to be precise like this.
Also, as an aside, many states have laws about recording conversations. Some require consent of all parties, some two, some one (yourself). And almost all require consent before the action. I feel like if you ask, they will say no, and you’ll get an overnight letter letting you know about your termination.
Generally virtual meetings in companies like these are being recorded anyway, so there was likely a prompt before joining that everyone got.
100% on the recording, fair pt.
On the letter: that’d be good - go ahead and give me written evidence…
While they can totally do that in some states (like where I live in California) that letter/email/alternate contact doesn’t absolve them from having to prove they did their due diligence in warning you and trying to fix your performance
You are fully within your rights to demand that proof from them and to not let up, though talking to a lawyer immediately is probably the wisest move. And by immediately I mean when they say “no” to the recording
Dang that sucks, I always wanted to work there and recently applied eagerly because I haven’t seen much controversy from them.
Cloudflare is an absolute awful company and the pinacle of immortality in the tech sphere, well I guess besides Meta, Google, and everyone else.
More than half of the Wikipedia article for Cloudflare is made up of a Controversies section
We still haven’t figured out what POV means hu.
deleted by creator
