5 ms·

You might want to hire this person but the question is if your boss would want them. There is a high chace they wouldn’t want to hire specifically this disobedi

You might want to hire this person but the question is if your boss would want them. There is a high chace they wouldn’t want to hire specifically this disobedient person.

k8svet 3y ago
Disobedient? She's being fired. Honestly, I think the whole thing is mostly a nothing burger. Gen not-my-gen finding out about capitalism and at-will employment at the worst time, I guess. Watching tech over the last year makes it clear how out of touch lots of people are. Employers, employees, exploiters, exploitees. Especially the highly-comped ones. All of the sudden surprised the gravy train has run out. But "disobedient", is quite a word choice.
sangnoir 3y ago
> There is a high chace they wouldn’t want to hire specifically this disobedient person. I had a niggling suspicion the opposing views on her employability are because the commenters are on opposite ends of the authoritarian axis. My thesis is people who strongly believe in (power) hierarchies as the natural order of things will see her actions as unacceptable, and an affront to social order itself since she has proven she can't be trusted to submit to the rightful authority regardless of circumstances.
- JambalayaJim 3y ago
  She specifically set herself up to be recorded and then shared it across the internet. That is the problem part, not her questioning of the HR people (which was a show for the camera!) That kind of “I’m the main character” type energy would be a lot to deal with, especially for a 4 month employee.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    Yes, she didn't follow the rules. Whether one views that as inherently problematic broadly follows the value-system I outlined earlier. I think her breaking (the letter of) the rules is amply justified in this case - others clearly disagree. AFAICT, she didn't violate the spirit if the rules - no confidential. information was revealed.
    - jstarfish 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - FreakLegion 3y ago
      People's names, roles in the company, and voices were revealed. If you Google "rosie cloudflare hr", the top result is a LinkedIn profile for Rosemary J. Fantozzi, who works in GTM HR. That profile is now hidden or deleted, and it's not hard to figure out why. I have no regard at all for corporate rules, but I do for privacy and privacy laws. Brittany may have broken the law by making the recording (Georgia is a one-party state, but she couldn't know where the other people in the meeting were -- New York is also one-party, but California for example is all-party), but either way it was poor judgment to release it without at least redacting names and roles.
      - pg_1234 3y ago
        If the recording was made in a one-party state it doesn't matter where the other parties were. You'd only be bound by other laws if the recording was done at the location governed by those laws.
        FreakLegion 3y ago
        You're wrong. The California Supreme Court, for example, has said so explicitly, for the general case. That leaves the question of this specific case, which nobody here is qualified to judge. Either way, tech is in California, and she's definitely going to lose out on opportunities because of this. The good news for Brittany is that a bunch of companies will try to hire her right now purely for clout, so she'll be fine.
      - sangnoir 3y ago
        > People's names, roles in the company, and voices were revealed. If you Google "rosie cloudflare hr", the top result is a LinkedIn profile for Rosemary J. Fantozzi, who works in GTM HR As you noted, Rosie's name and title was already public on LinkedIn! So it's just the voice that was possibly non-public, and I don't think that's widely considered to be "confidential information". As for breaking the law, I consider thr actions to be whistleblowing on a layoff disguised as performance-related firing (as evidenced bu the recording!) Realizing this information is in the public's interest, she showed excellent judgement and robustly defended herself against a sham dismissal that makes a mockery of norms: most companies have the decency to place "poor performers" on PIPs (even when the poor performance is due to stack-ranking rather than failure to do assigned duties). Firing someone for poor performance out of the blue, without giving them feedback about it first is immoral (and hopefully illegal considering employment is at-will. That could have fired her fir any reason, but I suppose they don't want to trigger layoff-provisions)
tiredcto 3y ago
"disobedient"
bsder 3y ago
Wrong. She's exactly who I'd want in sales. Salespeople need to face overwhelming failure and keep going. They need to ignore social cues that would cause most people to back off. They need to be aggressive and challenging. Getting rid of this salesperson seems like a big loss for Cloudflare.
- latchkey 3y ago
  She wasn't a good fit for CF, so maybe she would be a good fit at your company instead? "We fired ~40 sales people out of over 1,500 in our go to market org. That’s a normal quarter. When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not. Sadly, we don’t hire perfectly. We try to fire perfectly. In this case, clearly we were far from perfect. The video is painful for me to watch. Managers should always be involved. HR should be involved, but it shouldn’t be outsourced to them, No employee should ever actually be surprised they weren’t performing. We don’t always get it right. And sometimes under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten before we let them go. Importantly, just because we fire someone doesn’t mean they’re a bad employee. It doesn’t mean won’t be really, really great somewhere else. Chris Paul was a bad fit for the Suns, but he’s undoubtedly a great basketball player. And, in fact, we think the right thing to do is get people we know are unlikely to succeed off the team as quickly as possible so they can find the right place for them. We definitely weren’t anywhere close to perfect in this case. But any healthy org needs to get the people who aren’t performing off. That wasn’t the mistake here. The mistake was not being more kind and humane as we did. And that’s something @zatlyn and I are focused on improving going forward." https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/1745697840180191501 https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/1745697840180191501
  - bsder 3y ago
    > When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not. 1) This is complete hogwash and absolutely cements that I want nothing to do with Cloudflare. I've worked in enterprise sales. I've also worked with sales as engineering support. I've also been the senior technical rep that sales had to sell to, too. 3 months on a newbie barely gets you up to the point that you can probably go into a client and shadow a senior and talk about a couple Powerpoint slides without completely embarassing yourself. That's it. It certainly doesn't get you the ability to handle an account or do a close. Some of our later best salespeople looked completely useless at 3 months. 2) This is the kind of shitty "we're sorry you're offended" apology that dribbles out of every shitty CEO's mouth. The fact that Cloudflare is STILL trying to stick with "fired for cause" after being put on blast is a gigantic red klaxon. How many people did they treat like this before they finally got their chain yanked over it? What's the punishment for the people who did this? And how do they plan to make this right? I don't see any of that, thanks. Hopefully some of the Cloudflare competitors are ready to make hay over this.

You might want to hire this person but the question is if your boss would want them. There is a high chace they wouldn’t want to hire specifically this disobedient person.

k8svet 3y ago

Disobedient? She's being fired. Honestly, I think the whole thing is mostly a nothing burger. Gen not-my-gen finding out about capitalism and at-will employment at the worst time, I guess. Watching tech over the last year makes it clear how out of touch lots of people are. Employers, employees, exploiters, exploitees. Especially the highly-comped ones. All of the sudden surprised the gravy train has run out. But "disobedient", is quite a word choice.

sangnoir 3y ago

> There is a high chace they wouldn’t want to hire specifically this disobedient person. I had a niggling suspicion the opposing views on her employability are because the commenters are on opposite ends of the authoritarian axis. My thesis is people who strongly believe in (power) hierarchies as the natural order of things will see her actions as unacceptable, and an affront to social order itself since she has proven she can't be trusted to submit to the rightful authority regardless of circumstances.

JambalayaJim 3y ago
She specifically set herself up to be recorded and then shared it across the internet. That is the problem part, not her questioning of the HR people (which was a show for the camera!) That kind of “I’m the main character” type energy would be a lot to deal with, especially for a 4 month employee.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  Yes, she didn't follow the rules. Whether one views that as inherently problematic broadly follows the value-system I outlined earlier. I think her breaking (the letter of) the rules is amply justified in this case - others clearly disagree. AFAICT, she didn't violate the spirit if the rules - no confidential. information was revealed.
  - jstarfish 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - FreakLegion 3y ago
    People's names, roles in the company, and voices were revealed. If you Google "rosie cloudflare hr", the top result is a LinkedIn profile for Rosemary J. Fantozzi, who works in GTM HR. That profile is now hidden or deleted, and it's not hard to figure out why. I have no regard at all for corporate rules, but I do for privacy and privacy laws. Brittany may have broken the law by making the recording (Georgia is a one-party state, but she couldn't know where the other people in the meeting were -- New York is also one-party, but California for example is all-party), but either way it was poor judgment to release it without at least redacting names and roles.
    - pg_1234 3y ago
      If the recording was made in a one-party state it doesn't matter where the other parties were. You'd only be bound by other laws if the recording was done at the location governed by those laws.
      - FreakLegion 3y ago
        You're wrong. The California Supreme Court, for example, has said so explicitly, for the general case. That leaves the question of this specific case, which nobody here is qualified to judge. Either way, tech is in California, and she's definitely going to lose out on opportunities because of this. The good news for Brittany is that a bunch of companies will try to hire her right now purely for clout, so she'll be fine.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      > People's names, roles in the company, and voices were revealed. If you Google "rosie cloudflare hr", the top result is a LinkedIn profile for Rosemary J. Fantozzi, who works in GTM HR As you noted, Rosie's name and title was already public on LinkedIn! So it's just the voice that was possibly non-public, and I don't think that's widely considered to be "confidential information". As for breaking the law, I consider thr actions to be whistleblowing on a layoff disguised as performance-related firing (as evidenced bu the recording!) Realizing this information is in the public's interest, she showed excellent judgement and robustly defended herself against a sham dismissal that makes a mockery of norms: most companies have the decency to place "poor performers" on PIPs (even when the poor performance is due to stack-ranking rather than failure to do assigned duties). Firing someone for poor performance out of the blue, without giving them feedback about it first is immoral (and hopefully illegal considering employment is at-will. That could have fired her fir any reason, but I suppose they don't want to trigger layoff-provisions)

tiredcto 3y ago

"disobedient"

bsder 3y ago

Wrong. She's exactly who I'd want in sales. Salespeople need to face overwhelming failure and keep going. They need to ignore social cues that would cause most people to back off. They need to be aggressive and challenging. Getting rid of this salesperson seems like a big loss for Cloudflare.

latchkey 3y ago
She wasn't a good fit for CF, so maybe she would be a good fit at your company instead? "We fired ~40 sales people out of over 1,500 in our go to market org. That’s a normal quarter. When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not. Sadly, we don’t hire perfectly. We try to fire perfectly. In this case, clearly we were far from perfect. The video is painful for me to watch. Managers should always be involved. HR should be involved, but it shouldn’t be outsourced to them, No employee should ever actually be surprised they weren’t performing. We don’t always get it right. And sometimes under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten before we let them go. Importantly, just because we fire someone doesn’t mean they’re a bad employee. It doesn’t mean won’t be really, really great somewhere else. Chris Paul was a bad fit for the Suns, but he’s undoubtedly a great basketball player. And, in fact, we think the right thing to do is get people we know are unlikely to succeed off the team as quickly as possible so they can find the right place for them. We definitely weren’t anywhere close to perfect in this case. But any healthy org needs to get the people who aren’t performing off. That wasn’t the mistake here. The mistake was not being more kind and humane as we did. And that’s something @zatlyn and I are focused on improving going forward." https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/1745697840180191501 https://twitter.com/eastdakota/status/1745697840180191501
- bsder 3y ago
  > When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not. 1) This is complete hogwash and absolutely cements that I want nothing to do with Cloudflare. I've worked in enterprise sales. I've also worked with sales as engineering support. I've also been the senior technical rep that sales had to sell to, too. 3 months on a newbie barely gets you up to the point that you can probably go into a client and shadow a senior and talk about a couple Powerpoint slides without completely embarassing yourself. That's it. It certainly doesn't get you the ability to handle an account or do a close. Some of our later best salespeople looked completely useless at 3 months. 2) This is the kind of shitty "we're sorry you're offended" apology that dribbles out of every shitty CEO's mouth. The fact that Cloudflare is STILL trying to stick with "fired for cause" after being put on blast is a gigantic red klaxon. How many people did they treat like this before they finally got their chain yanked over it? What's the punishment for the people who did this? And how do they plan to make this right? I don't see any of that, thanks. Hopefully some of the Cloudflare competitors are ready to make hay over this.