4 ms·
This situation is complicated and I've noticed most of the top posters saying they would fire the employee immediately. However, the behaviour expectations wer
by icu 3y ago
This situation is complicated and I've noticed most of the top posters saying they would fire the employee immediately. However, the behaviour expectations weren't communicated properly post acquisition and it's really the company's management who are responsible for protecting the company from these situations. Imho the situation is something like, it's the employee's fault, but not their responsibility. Management should have done a lot more to prevent this happening and communicate to all employees expectations in a clear way. Imho the VP should have taken the L, communicated a clear policy and then dealt with the angry customer personally. This whole sacrificial 'fire the employee' thing makes the company and the VP look weak and pathetic. It's much harder to meditate and communicate towards an amicable resolution.
- 000ooo000 3y agoIs this a defense of tweeting "fuck you" at a customer based in the company not having said "don't tweet 'fuck you' at customers"? Is there some ambiguity at play here, like in some cases employees are encouraged to tweet fuck you at customers? I'm puzzled
- Apocryphon 3y agoPresumably there are companies that consider your social media part of your personal life and beyond the purview of corporate scrutiny. Maybe the reason why the author felt entitled to act this way was because their company permitted them to tweet like this prior to the VMWare acquisition.
- HDThoreaun 3y ago> Imho the VP should have taken the L, communicated a clear policy and then dealt with the angry customer personally. This is exactly what happened. But when communicating the policy the poster flat out refused to follow it and brought their bud to the meeting to insultingly live tweet it. Insulting the VP and refusing to follow the policy after that meeting is what got them fired.