The lack of response on the issues probably means they had already decided to get rid of him for whatever reason and were setting him up to fail. He probably di

The lack of response on the issues probably means they had already decided to get rid of him for whatever reason and were setting him up to fail. He probably didn't get fired because of the outburst. The outburst was just what got filled out in the HR form. This isn't any judgement on the developer. Management can get a lot of stupid ideas about why they need to get rid of someone. Maybe the developer picked a bad time to use the restroom and his manager didn't see him immediately available whenever the manager walked around the room to find a target to micromanage. A toxic project can tend to taint anyone involved on it, even if the person working on it is doing a stellar job, given the circumstance. In big corporations, there really is no "working your way up" or "working from behind". If you get stuck in a shit project, it really doesn't matter what you do. Either the company will attrit through developers until the project is no longer a hot potato and then the next developer to get it will get to stick around for a while, or (more likely, due to the lack of continuity) eventually the project gets canned. No apologies will be issued.