9 ms·

> He didn't mention the $750m (£565m) cash > infusion Better.com received from investors last week. I like the BBC but this sort of lazy judgemental journalism

> He didn't mention the $750m (£565m) cash > infusion Better.com received from investors last week. I like the BBC but this sort of lazy judgemental journalism annoys me. The inference here is that because investors put in cash, the business isn’t in trouble and he shouldn’t have to fire anybody. In all likelihood, the investors had to put in cash because the business is in trouble and it meant he was able to fire less people. The critique of the zoom thing is unfair too. If he’d brought 900 people on site during a pandemic just to fire them, he’d have been criticised for that. This is just a manager having to make some incredibly tough calls in very difficult times. Easy to snipe from the sidelines when you don’t have to make those difficult decisions.

quantified 5y ago
> The critique of the zoom thing is unfair too. If he’d brought 900 people on site during a pandemic just to fire them, he’d have been criticised for that. This would have been a super interesting case. How many of those people would have complained bitterly at being forced to come back into an office at all? And then for the purpose of being sent off forever. Real issue raised by the story is 900 at once, with basically full clarity into the whole group dynamic. Imagine doing that in person! Being laid off over Zoom goes with Covid time. By now quite a few of us have never set foot in our local employers’ offices, even during the hiring process.