5 ms·
Meta Fires Employee Making $400k per Year over a $25 Meal Voucher
- gnabgib 2y agoDiscussion (53 points, 8 hours ago, 79 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41868090 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41868090
- sandwichsphinx 2y agoThe article doesn't mention their role but if someone is fired over $25, can we really justify that they were ever worth a $400k salary?
- killingtime74 2y agoCEOs and heads of state of entire countries have been fired or forced to resign for abusing entitlements. Are you in fact saying is anyone worth their salary?
- FireBeyond 2y agoThe critical word in this headline is missing (maybe a length issue)... > Meta Fires Employee Making $400,000 Per Year Over a $25 Meal Voucher Issue This wasn't one $25 meal voucher, this was employees buying homegoods and pooling credit for other purposes: > some Meta staff opted to buy items like toothpaste and wine glasses with the credit, per The Financial Times. Or they would get dinner delivered at home or pool their credit money together > The staff who were let go routinely misused their vouchers
- potato3732842 2y agoThe funny thing is that pooling the credit is probably the best possible ROI for meta because if they're pooling the benefit they're probably using it together which builds morale, cohesion and friendship and even if they aren't and it's a rotation as to who gets the benefit the interdependence of trading favors has the same effect just less so. I agree that the other stuff is arguably abuse and defeats the point of getting the employees to come to the office and eat in the office.
- nithssh 2y agoI wonder how explicit and clear they were about the intended purpose of these vouchers. I can see myself saying fck it and using it however I feel without thinking much since it seems insignificant, unless they make a deal of it.
- mvdtnz 2y agoSounds like the employees were let go for dishonestly abusing a perk. It's hard to tell from the linked article but I presume you get these meal vouchers if you are working early/late and are in the office during meal times. These bad apples were using the vouchers to have food delivered to their homes while not working, or buying non-food items. It's a clear abuse of the policy and hard to understand why someone making such a good salary would risk it for peanuts - but many of my high-earning friends are also some of the cheapest people I have ever met.
- daghamm 2y agoThat's a click bait title. What actually happend was a little less crazy: "The staff who were let go routinely misused their vouchers, while others who misapplied them less frequently, were reprimanded but not fired."
- tdy_err 2y agoIt’s kinda crazy that they even keep track of what their employees are ordering with food delivery app vouchers
- mmmlinux 2y agoI mean, $25 may not sound like a lot. but these meal vouchers (assuming every day, 5 days a week) add up to $18,200 per year for the breakfast lunch and dinner combined. That said, what are you going to get on doordash for $25. half a sandwich?
- knowitnone 2y agomaybe you can't but I can eat well for at 25/day
- potato3732842 2y agoI suspect this is a result of acquisitions. They buy some startup, bring them all under Meta's HR umbrella with all the rules and perks that comes with. Since these recently acquired guys are running out of random offices in random places they just give them a stipend rather than force them to all relocate to a campus with dining. Some people are happy, some are unhappy, some don't like their new overlords and don't feel bad abusing the system. That's just how it goes with these sorts of things. The $400k employee was probably a higher up (or key SME Meta felt they needed to put in golden handcuffs) at one of these acquired companies and was probably already on his or her way out or they were in a position of authority and encouraging/condoning abusing the system. You don't fire someone like that over ~$100/day unless there's more to the story.
- mvdtnz 2y agoThat's a lot of assumptions.
- s1artibartfast 2y agoEvery company I have ever worked at would fire employees for blatant and repeated theft.
- potato3732842 2y agoOf course but depending on how this was or wasn't messaged it probably doesn't fall into that category. At the very least using the word "blatant" is in error.
- m463 2y agoIt seems pretty blatant to me: Instead of using the $25 credit to buy dinner and have it delivered to the office, some Meta staff opted to buy items like toothpaste and wine glasses with the credit
- withinboredom 2y agoIf you give me 25 bucks for dinner, and I'm not hungry, am I obliged to not spend the 25 bucks?
- simple10 2y agoFor liability reasons, HR needs a reason to fire someone to avoid potential wrongful termination lawsuit. The meal vouchers just sound like it was an excuse they needed to let some people go. But it makes a good story for the interwebs.
- potato3732842 2y agoI doubt that simply because they gave everyone they didn't fire who did it an official talking to. It's atypical for a BigCo to do that if they're simply manufacturing a pretext.
- m463 2y agothe article seemed pretty clear: The staff who were let go routinely misused their vouchers, while others who misapplied them less frequently, were reprimanded but not fired.
- grouchomarx 2y agoYea I've known plenty of people with performance issues that were let go as soon as HR found some technicality to pin them on. One left a guest unattended at the office during lunch for 15 minutes and they fired him for it the following week
- knowitnone 2y agoDo they though? You're an at-will employee. Unless there is a contract, you can be fired for any reason including cutting costs. Just like you can quit whenever. Wrongful termination lawsuit happen when employ fires employee for illegal reasons(gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, or disability status).
- mywittyname 2y agoIt's hard to prove intent, but convincing a jury there's a pattern of discrimination is a lower bar. So perceptions matter. Doing things by the book provides evidence that the process is fair, objective, and was reviewed by multiple people.
- 2y ago
- ChrisArchitect 2y ago[dupe] Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41868090 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41868090
- paxys 2y agoSo we’ve reached a stage where people are outraged over a company firing employees for blatant theft.
- Etherlord87 2y ago[flagged]
- cityofdelusion 2y agoIt takes years to build trust and one second to destroy it. If you are a fully functioning adult and basically stealing the office stapler, how low are you willing to go? It’s not even about the morality of the situation at that point, it’s about being a dishonest liar. The one type of coworker no one gets along with is the dishonest, manipulative, penny-pinching narcissist. Fire them, and there are 10 honest people willing to replace them in this IT oversupply market, probably at lower salary. Win-win for Meta.
- theGnuMe 2y agoI suspect the employee will have a good case for wrongful termination. As these vouchers are subject to income tax ultimately by the IRS vs a traditional corp expense report reimbursement. It’ll likely depend on how the voucher was implemented.
- auggierose 2y agoNote to myself: Do not accept any vouchers and demand a 20K raise instead.
- JauntTrooper 2y agoThis happens every once in a while in investment banking, and we were warned about it regularly in HR training. Here's Matt Levine on one of the incidents: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-09-04/wells-fargo-had-a-fake-dinner-receipt-scandal https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-09-04/wells-far... The logic is if you couldn't trust a banker to not defraud their employer by submitting dishonest meal receipts, how could you trust them with client money and confidential information. I don't disagree.
- naveen99 2y agoIt might also be related to irs audits. even business meals are only 50% tax deductible. Personal items just aren’t. They are income and irs would want its share.
- dzhiurgis 2y agoDura lex sed lex
- p5v 2y agoFine - that’s 400K less per year they have to pay now.