5 ms·

Confused European here :) Is there a reason they pretend she has been fired for bad performance, instead of just admitting management decided to fire X%?

searealist 3y ago
What makes you think she has not been fired for performance? She has had 0 sales in 5 months according to her own video.
- mroche 3y ago
  For those that may not have experience in enterprise facing sales (same topic, different submission): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38964345 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38964345
  - searealist 3y ago
    Do you think it's impossible to fire a sales person for performance reasons in under 6 months then?
    - mroche 3y ago
      No I do not, however there's terminating employees based on data (0 sales in Q4) and terminating based on data with context. (0 sales in Q4 due to ...). The latter paints a complete picture and weighs all the variables. If it's actually on the employee for the underwhelming performance, then it's whatever the org allows to happen (axe vs performance improvement plan) and how humane they're willing to be about it. In this scenario, I don't think anyone would predict getting axed for performance reasons if they appeared to be getting along with the team / manager and weren't receiving any red flag feedback. In the context provided in the clip, it really comes off as using the "performance" as an easy excuse to let her go, without actually providing information to back it up.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- kramerger 3y ago
  I got the impression that she was a new hire (3 months minus holidays, but maybe I misheard?). But it is clear from the video that this is a mass layoff, not firing an individual based on her performance. So my question is, why are they pretending this is about performance? Does this make any difference for the severance package and unemployment?
  - searealist 3y ago
    You can fire many people based on performance.
    - adamzwasserman 3y ago
      [flagged]
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  Depending on who the sales targets are, that’s completely reasonable. Big deals take time to negotiate, approve and close. The tech company I work at has an average sales pipeline of over 12 months.
michelb 3y ago
Probably because of the WARN act. They seem to be claiming it’s for performance so they can avoid paying unemployment benefits as well. Absolute scummy behaviour. But I guess that is to be expected in the USA, where most tech employment is at-will and CEO's kowtow to the board and shareholders at the expense of employers.
- sshine 3y ago
  My wife was once fired with the argument that she was performing poorly. She counter-argued and said she was the most productive employee they had, that their argument simply wasn't true, and that she understood if their cashflow was tight and that that was the real reason. She offered to flexibly go down in hours at the convenience of the employer. She didn't force them to admit the real reason, and when they got their cashflow back and offered to give her full hours, she politely declined.
- thekevan 3y ago
  >they can avoid paying unemployment benefits as well. Not every US state allows this. Also, sometimes if a certain number of people are all fired at the same time due to "performance", they still have to pay unemployment.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

searealist 3y ago

What makes you think she has not been fired for performance? She has had 0 sales in 5 months according to her own video.

mroche 3y ago
For those that may not have experience in enterprise facing sales (same topic, different submission): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38964345 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38964345
- searealist 3y ago
  Do you think it's impossible to fire a sales person for performance reasons in under 6 months then?
  - mroche 3y ago
    No I do not, however there's terminating employees based on data (0 sales in Q4) and terminating based on data with context. (0 sales in Q4 due to ...). The latter paints a complete picture and weighs all the variables. If it's actually on the employee for the underwhelming performance, then it's whatever the org allows to happen (axe vs performance improvement plan) and how humane they're willing to be about it. In this scenario, I don't think anyone would predict getting axed for performance reasons if they appeared to be getting along with the team / manager and weren't receiving any red flag feedback. In the context provided in the clip, it really comes off as using the "performance" as an easy excuse to let her go, without actually providing information to back it up.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
kramerger 3y ago
I got the impression that she was a new hire (3 months minus holidays, but maybe I misheard?). But it is clear from the video that this is a mass layoff, not firing an individual based on her performance. So my question is, why are they pretending this is about performance? Does this make any difference for the severance package and unemployment?
- searealist 3y ago
  You can fire many people based on performance.
  - adamzwasserman 3y ago
    [flagged]
dghlsakjg 3y ago
Depending on who the sales targets are, that’s completely reasonable. Big deals take time to negotiate, approve and close. The tech company I work at has an average sales pipeline of over 12 months.

michelb 3y ago

Probably because of the WARN act. They seem to be claiming it’s for performance so they can avoid paying unemployment benefits as well. Absolute scummy behaviour. But I guess that is to be expected in the USA, where most tech employment is at-will and CEO's kowtow to the board and shareholders at the expense of employers.

sshine 3y ago
My wife was once fired with the argument that she was performing poorly. She counter-argued and said she was the most productive employee they had, that their argument simply wasn't true, and that she understood if their cashflow was tight and that that was the real reason. She offered to flexibly go down in hours at the convenience of the employer. She didn't force them to admit the real reason, and when they got their cashflow back and offered to give her full hours, she politely declined.
thekevan 3y ago
>they can avoid paying unemployment benefits as well. Not every US state allows this. Also, sometimes if a certain number of people are all fired at the same time due to "performance", they still have to pay unemployment.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]