3 ms·
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 behaviou
by 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 agoMy 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.