3 ms·

why? they fired them to send a message to the other employees.

stickfigure 2y ago
If you value these employees so much that you pay them $400k/yr, be careful what message you want to send. My assumption is that this is an excuse to get rid of some employees they didn't want anyway.
- chii 2y ago
  > be careful what message you want to send. the message is that it didnt matter how much you're paid, you still are under our thumbs, and we can use any excuse to fire you.
- lazide 2y ago
  Or, clearly, they value the employee in a way they don’t want to pay them $400k. And the fool made it easy for them.
- FirmwareBurner 2y ago
  >If you value these employees so much that you pay them $400k/yr A company isn't paying you X amount of money because it "values you", they pay you that because of the market forces that force them to pay you that amount of money. They'd gladly pay you nothing and crack a whip on your back if they could get away with it. "Valuing you" is something your family will do, but rarely a company, especially a publicly traded one. >be careful what message you want to send. The message was exactly the one they wanted to send: "Everyone is expendable".
tyleo 2y ago
Because training employees is expensive & may not be obvious how the $ could be used. In the employee side it is a small % of total comp so it doesn’t make sense for them either. It isn’t clear that they fired the employees to send a message. From the article, it doesn’t look like Meta told other employees, “we fired people who abused the free meal service,” so I don’t know how others would get the message. Instead it was posted on Blind and picked up by news which seems like a poor way to send a message from a PR perspective.
- jcgrillo 2y ago
  Whether or not they intended to send a message, if I work at the facebook the blaring loud message I just received is "do not under any circumstances try to expense anything, ever."
  - dustyventure 2y ago
    And given that I don't work at Facebook the message to me is even clearer.
    - jcgrillo 2y ago
      Exactly. Although tbh that message has been clear for a long time.
  - bananapub 2y ago
    > the blaring loud message I just received is "do not under any circumstances try to expense anything, ever." did you not read the article? the message was, quite reasonably, "don't take the fucking piss, if we give you food vouchers to buy your dinner, then use it for buying yourself dinner".
    - jcgrillo 2y ago
      > did you not read the article? That's obviously not a serious question, so it doesn't deserve a response. > if we give you food vouchers to buy your dinner, then use it for buying yourself dinner I don't know whether there even is a "message", but if I worked for a company that just fired a bunch of people for discrepancies in really minor expense reports I would simply avoid submitting an expense report for something like a meal ever again. They're clearly looking for an excuse to fire people, and it's better to not make oneself a target.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        These aren't expense reports. They are digital vouchers. Imagine if your boss has a stack of gift cards on their desk in case people need a taxi home, and some employees start using it as their personal expense fund. If I was looking to fire someone, the thieves would be at the top of the list.
grugagag 2y ago
For accidentally bundling a toothpaste with some groceries? That seems excessive but again I don’t know the scale of it.
- echoangle 2y ago
  Where did you see "accidentally"?
  - consteval 2y ago
    It's an assumption, but groceries are food and I'm assuming the person just threw in toothpaste as well. And, apparently, that one dollar worth of toothpaste was too far.
    - echoangle 2y ago
      Well it was a credit replacing the food that’s normally available. If the stated purpose is credit to get a meal while working there, it’s fraud to buy other stuff with the credit. I can see why an employer would want to terminate you, they have to trust you and your work.
      - consteval 2y ago
        Right, if you're looking at from a surface-level view. Using such a surface-level view means I could, instead, buy a meal and choose not to eat it. Because the credit is only for food. But that's worse, right? Okay, then the conclusion is that this basis doesn't work, and you need some leniency. Simply sticking to rules, especially if they're stupid, almost always backfires. We have to do cost analysis. Is it really worth it spending 100,000+ dollars to rehire and knowledge transfer over a few bucks? Do we really want to set the precedent that we are anal dictators? What affects does that have on other employees in our company? It's very tempting to be technically right, and then believe that means you can do whatever you want. I mean, you can, but as a company that can bite you. Being correct is not a hall pass from human perception. If you're an asshole, you will still be treated as such, regardless of how correct you may be. Naturally, I'm sure this move eroded much employer trust at Meta - almost all of it being in innocent employees. Collateral damage, but somehow, I doubt anybody sat down and did the cost analysis on if it's worth it.

If you value these employees so much that you pay them $400k/yr, be careful what message you want to send. My assumption is that this is an excuse to get rid of some employees they didn't want anyway.

chii 2y ago
> be careful what message you want to send. the message is that it didnt matter how much you're paid, you still are under our thumbs, and we can use any excuse to fire you.
lazide 2y ago
Or, clearly, they value the employee in a way they don’t want to pay them $400k. And the fool made it easy for them.
FirmwareBurner 2y ago
>If you value these employees so much that you pay them $400k/yr A company isn't paying you X amount of money because it "values you", they pay you that because of the market forces that force them to pay you that amount of money. They'd gladly pay you nothing and crack a whip on your back if they could get away with it. "Valuing you" is something your family will do, but rarely a company, especially a publicly traded one. >be careful what message you want to send. The message was exactly the one they wanted to send: "Everyone is expendable".

tyleo 2y ago

Because training employees is expensive & may not be obvious how the $ could be used. In the employee side it is a small % of total comp so it doesn’t make sense for them either. It isn’t clear that they fired the employees to send a message. From the article, it doesn’t look like Meta told other employees, “we fired people who abused the free meal service,” so I don’t know how others would get the message. Instead it was posted on Blind and picked up by news which seems like a poor way to send a message from a PR perspective.

jcgrillo 2y ago
Whether or not they intended to send a message, if I work at the facebook the blaring loud message I just received is "do not under any circumstances try to expense anything, ever."
- dustyventure 2y ago
  And given that I don't work at Facebook the message to me is even clearer.
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    Exactly. Although tbh that message has been clear for a long time.
- bananapub 2y ago
  > the blaring loud message I just received is "do not under any circumstances try to expense anything, ever." did you not read the article? the message was, quite reasonably, "don't take the fucking piss, if we give you food vouchers to buy your dinner, then use it for buying yourself dinner".
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    > did you not read the article? That's obviously not a serious question, so it doesn't deserve a response. > if we give you food vouchers to buy your dinner, then use it for buying yourself dinner I don't know whether there even is a "message", but if I worked for a company that just fired a bunch of people for discrepancies in really minor expense reports I would simply avoid submitting an expense report for something like a meal ever again. They're clearly looking for an excuse to fire people, and it's better to not make oneself a target.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      These aren't expense reports. They are digital vouchers. Imagine if your boss has a stack of gift cards on their desk in case people need a taxi home, and some employees start using it as their personal expense fund. If I was looking to fire someone, the thieves would be at the top of the list.

grugagag 2y ago

For accidentally bundling a toothpaste with some groceries? That seems excessive but again I don’t know the scale of it.

echoangle 2y ago
Where did you see "accidentally"?
- consteval 2y ago
  It's an assumption, but groceries are food and I'm assuming the person just threw in toothpaste as well. And, apparently, that one dollar worth of toothpaste was too far.
  - echoangle 2y ago
    Well it was a credit replacing the food that’s normally available. If the stated purpose is credit to get a meal while working there, it’s fraud to buy other stuff with the credit. I can see why an employer would want to terminate you, they have to trust you and your work.
    - consteval 2y ago
      Right, if you're looking at from a surface-level view. Using such a surface-level view means I could, instead, buy a meal and choose not to eat it. Because the credit is only for food. But that's worse, right? Okay, then the conclusion is that this basis doesn't work, and you need some leniency. Simply sticking to rules, especially if they're stupid, almost always backfires. We have to do cost analysis. Is it really worth it spending 100,000+ dollars to rehire and knowledge transfer over a few bucks? Do we really want to set the precedent that we are anal dictators? What affects does that have on other employees in our company? It's very tempting to be technically right, and then believe that means you can do whatever you want. I mean, you can, but as a company that can bite you. Being correct is not a hall pass from human perception. If you're an asshole, you will still be treated as such, regardless of how correct you may be. Naturally, I'm sure this move eroded much employer trust at Meta - almost all of it being in innocent employees. Collateral damage, but somehow, I doubt anybody sat down and did the cost analysis on if it's worth it.