4 ms·

Firing while on paternity leave isn't really that bad as long as they give you severance to cover paternity leave plus some extra - which I'm guessing they did

Firing while on paternity leave isn't really that bad as long as they give you severance to cover paternity leave plus some extra - which I'm guessing they did since severance packages for higher ups tend to be pretty good. (As compared to no severance or two weeks that many ICs get)

rcoder 4y ago
I strongly disagree. Firing someone while they’re on leave sends a direct signal to anyone else considering taking leave: “watch out, you won’t be able to defend yourself if you aren’t here.” ICs follow the lead that executives set. A chilling effect like this will cause folks who most _need_ the leave — single parents, people with family in need of care, or those struggling with their own health issues — to second-guess their choice, while those who can just walk away w/o any real risk can go ahead and try taking time away. It also puts the lie to the idea that employer-subsidized leave beyond the federally-protected time window is an entitlement rather than an easily-canceled perk. We all know that rationally, but a BigCo obviously exploiting that trust is a good reminder that the company (any company) is not there to help you, they are not your family, and you have to be ready for this kind of “switcharoo” whenever the numbers (or politics) justify it.
- rmk 4y ago
  If you are being fired, you generally do not "defend" yourself. Also, people at this level are very well-compensated, and the comp generally prices in the risk of things like this. Whether you are on leave or not scarcely matters unless you can show that you are fired because you are a parent (and that's an employment law issue). It is my experience that people taking time off to be parents also take time off from the machinations that will lead getting promoted (at certain levels), thus hampering their advancement, but they are usually not fired, in tech anyway. Now the treatment of women, who already get a pretty bad deal even if they aren't mothers, is another matter altogether...
- hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
  Totally disagree, primarily because Twitter offers nearly 5 months of paternity leave. I don't know when the Twitter's Head of Product originally left for paternity leave, but if it was a couple months ago, obviously the world has changed under Twitter's feet in that time. A business can't just stop because someone is on leave. I would expect them to be treated fairly, and the same as if they were not on leave when it comes to personnel decisions. What would not be fair, to both the employee and all of their colleagues, is to say that when someone goes on leave that there is a moratorium on any changes to their status for 5 months.
  - jaywalk 4y ago
    From looking at his tweets, he left just over a month ago. So if he had four months left in his leave, it would have been absolutely unreasonable to wait that long.
  - dghlsakjg 4y ago
    The ENTIRE point of parental leave benefit is to ensure that your employment status doesn’t change while you are using it. The business doesn’t have to stop in it’s tracks, but the legal expectation is generally that you will come back to the same job you left. This sends a horrifying message to employees.
    - jaywalk 4y ago
      > The ENTIRE point of parental leave benefit is to ensure that your employment status doesn’t change while you are using it. That's strange, I always thought that the point of it was to allow parents to spend much needed time with their newborn child.
      - dghlsakjg 4y ago
        Anyone can get that time with their child by quitting their job. The ‘benefit’ part is that you get your job back after a few months.
        4y ago
chrisco255 4y ago
I mean, it's still getting fired heading into a recession shortly after having a kid.
- bradlys 4y ago
  He's very high up. He's not going to be suffering like the serfs below him. I've seen many let go with no severance or two weeks in a worse recession - including those who don't have a 8+ figure NW... Don't be fooled - the guy is quite rich.
- nrmitchi 4y ago
  I mean, he apparently sold $1.5M worth of Twitter stock last week, and is estimated to hold (based on some super basic internet research) ~500k more shares, which is ~$25M in stock[0]. I think he'll be able to weather the financial impact of a recession and having a kid. [0] Note that this is Twitter only, and wouldn't include any other form of diversified holdings.
- rchaud 4y ago
  His stock options have probably been in the black for years.
travisgriggs 4y ago
This my feeling as well. Maybe I’m thinking too logically about all this: A) spend paternity leave enjoying your newborn, but in the second half gearing up and remotivating to go back to work, getting back to work and being let go with a “we didn’t want to dismiss you while you were gone, thanks for coming back, here’s the door” vs B) you’re on paternity leave and the company lets you go, but still your leave is fulfilled (I.e you get the payout and time off). Now, instead of investing energy on the return to work, you can just move on with a “best to quit while your having fun” attitude. I fully support paternal leave. As a father of four who despairs at a fatherless world around me, anything we can do to strengthen fathers (and equally mothers) is a great thing. But there is a sad reality to extended leaves as well. We hire people with 6 month probationary periods, but rarely are people filtered by this. But I have been in meetings where a person on extended leave (medical, parental, whatever) and it becomes group apparent that the individual hasn’t been missed for a variety of reasons, and the consensus emerges that this “individual not being here” is actually a net win for the company and its aspirations. Do we know that that’s not what happened in this case? Remember, “My Job” is an oxymoron.
- rleahy22 4y ago
  I feel like you're missing the part of scenario B where you have to take time away from your newborn to find a new job.
  - SamBam 4y ago
    When you have a few tens of millions to your name, you can probably do that part at your leisure...
  - travisgriggs 4y ago
    I feel like you’re missing the part where I said I was father of four. I failed to mention I recently helped my oldest with newborn twins (if you’re thinking 2 is twice is hard as one, you’re wrong, it’s more like 4x). I’ve accrued some experience with newborns. It’s a very tired time at times. It’s a time of wonderment. Especially with your first, it’s surreal, after 2 weeks you can barely remember “what was life like before this again?” But despite its otherworldliness, it’s also a lot of downtime. It’s different than normal downtime, because you’re tied to this growing little life, but it’s there. And I did indicate that it is in the latter half where having this project to work on would be ideal. Guess that’s just me and apologies if that seems insensitive. It worked for me.

rcoder 4y ago

I strongly disagree. Firing someone while they’re on leave sends a direct signal to anyone else considering taking leave: “watch out, you won’t be able to defend yourself if you aren’t here.” ICs follow the lead that executives set. A chilling effect like this will cause folks who most _need_ the leave — single parents, people with family in need of care, or those struggling with their own health issues — to second-guess their choice, while those who can just walk away w/o any real risk can go ahead and try taking time away. It also puts the lie to the idea that employer-subsidized leave beyond the federally-protected time window is an entitlement rather than an easily-canceled perk. We all know that rationally, but a BigCo obviously exploiting that trust is a good reminder that the company (any company) is not there to help you, they are not your family, and you have to be ready for this kind of “switcharoo” whenever the numbers (or politics) justify it.

rmk 4y ago
If you are being fired, you generally do not "defend" yourself. Also, people at this level are very well-compensated, and the comp generally prices in the risk of things like this. Whether you are on leave or not scarcely matters unless you can show that you are fired because you are a parent (and that's an employment law issue). It is my experience that people taking time off to be parents also take time off from the machinations that will lead getting promoted (at certain levels), thus hampering their advancement, but they are usually not fired, in tech anyway. Now the treatment of women, who already get a pretty bad deal even if they aren't mothers, is another matter altogether...
hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
Totally disagree, primarily because Twitter offers nearly 5 months of paternity leave. I don't know when the Twitter's Head of Product originally left for paternity leave, but if it was a couple months ago, obviously the world has changed under Twitter's feet in that time. A business can't just stop because someone is on leave. I would expect them to be treated fairly, and the same as if they were not on leave when it comes to personnel decisions. What would not be fair, to both the employee and all of their colleagues, is to say that when someone goes on leave that there is a moratorium on any changes to their status for 5 months.
- jaywalk 4y ago
  From looking at his tweets, he left just over a month ago. So if he had four months left in his leave, it would have been absolutely unreasonable to wait that long.
- dghlsakjg 4y ago
  The ENTIRE point of parental leave benefit is to ensure that your employment status doesn’t change while you are using it. The business doesn’t have to stop in it’s tracks, but the legal expectation is generally that you will come back to the same job you left. This sends a horrifying message to employees.
  - jaywalk 4y ago
    > The ENTIRE point of parental leave benefit is to ensure that your employment status doesn’t change while you are using it. That's strange, I always thought that the point of it was to allow parents to spend much needed time with their newborn child.
    - dghlsakjg 4y ago
      Anyone can get that time with their child by quitting their job. The ‘benefit’ part is that you get your job back after a few months.
      - 4y ago

chrisco255 4y ago

I mean, it's still getting fired heading into a recession shortly after having a kid.

bradlys 4y ago
He's very high up. He's not going to be suffering like the serfs below him. I've seen many let go with no severance or two weeks in a worse recession - including those who don't have a 8+ figure NW... Don't be fooled - the guy is quite rich.
nrmitchi 4y ago
I mean, he apparently sold $1.5M worth of Twitter stock last week, and is estimated to hold (based on some super basic internet research) ~500k more shares, which is ~$25M in stock[0]. I think he'll be able to weather the financial impact of a recession and having a kid. [0] Note that this is Twitter only, and wouldn't include any other form of diversified holdings.
rchaud 4y ago
His stock options have probably been in the black for years.

travisgriggs 4y ago

This my feeling as well. Maybe I’m thinking too logically about all this: A) spend paternity leave enjoying your newborn, but in the second half gearing up and remotivating to go back to work, getting back to work and being let go with a “we didn’t want to dismiss you while you were gone, thanks for coming back, here’s the door” vs B) you’re on paternity leave and the company lets you go, but still your leave is fulfilled (I.e you get the payout and time off). Now, instead of investing energy on the return to work, you can just move on with a “best to quit while your having fun” attitude. I fully support paternal leave. As a father of four who despairs at a fatherless world around me, anything we can do to strengthen fathers (and equally mothers) is a great thing. But there is a sad reality to extended leaves as well. We hire people with 6 month probationary periods, but rarely are people filtered by this. But I have been in meetings where a person on extended leave (medical, parental, whatever) and it becomes group apparent that the individual hasn’t been missed for a variety of reasons, and the consensus emerges that this “individual not being here” is actually a net win for the company and its aspirations. Do we know that that’s not what happened in this case? Remember, “My Job” is an oxymoron.

rleahy22 4y ago
I feel like you're missing the part of scenario B where you have to take time away from your newborn to find a new job.
- SamBam 4y ago
  When you have a few tens of millions to your name, you can probably do that part at your leisure...
- travisgriggs 4y ago
  I feel like you’re missing the part where I said I was father of four. I failed to mention I recently helped my oldest with newborn twins (if you’re thinking 2 is twice is hard as one, you’re wrong, it’s more like 4x). I’ve accrued some experience with newborns. It’s a very tired time at times. It’s a time of wonderment. Especially with your first, it’s surreal, after 2 weeks you can barely remember “what was life like before this again?” But despite its otherworldliness, it’s also a lot of downtime. It’s different than normal downtime, because you’re tied to this growing little life, but it’s there. And I did indicate that it is in the latter half where having this project to work on would be ideal. Guess that’s just me and apologies if that seems insensitive. It worked for me.