>

i’d prefer email to zoom, and zoom to in person. less time wasted and less awkward social interaction.
Practical and efficient. Id be pissed to spend gas getting dragged in to be told i have less fuel next month. >

Having someone tell me I'm laid off to my face would be so awkward. >

I work in HR and have delivered the layoff message many times. It’s awkward for everyone. The person being laid off has the added pain of losing their job. 
I didn’t make the decision and someone has to tell the person. Least I can do is treat them professionally and with dignity. 
Note - I’ve also been laid off as the HR person so I do have a modicum of experience on both sides. >

My sister worked tangentially to HR in one of her former jobs, had to sit in on a firing and be the person who escorted them to their desk/out the door. 
Honestly one of the reason she left the job. >

Yeah it’s a shitty part of the job. But then, some lawyers defend murderers, right? Someone has to do the shitty jobs and in HR my job is sometimes to lay people off by making sure their rights are protected and the person is treated like a person. But, I work for a much smaller company. I’m not doing ten thousand people. 
But I also do investigations and lemme tell you, when I get to recommend we fire someone for being the creepy guy creeping on the girls or someone that’s just ridiculously racist… yeah I enjoy getting those people out of my company. 
Or when we fuck up someone’s pay, I fix that shit in a hurry. Mistakes happen. And a couple times in fifteen years it was intentional and someone got fired for messing with pay. 
HR isn’t as evil as Reddit seems to think. Lots of shitty HR people make the whole profession look bad. >

HR doesn't have the best PR department. >

There's more nuance in the text than the title, and I think the title has people angry. I agree that a zoom call would suffice because that's how they typically "show up." No one would honestly say it makes sense to drag them in person to be fired >

If youre not in the office, I honestly dont even know how you could lay them off except email or a zoom like you said. Cause let me tell you, if you called all those people into the office to lay them off, they'd be bitching about that too! >

Plus they could throw a chair or something >

You have a valid point. I agree with you. >

Same. I was expecting to disagree. But this was well reasoned. >

Well what am I going to take my boundless rage out on now? >

downvotes post >

Maybe I'm just super shy but I would prefer it this way. Having someone tell me I'm laid off to my face would be so awkward. >

Honestly I've been laid off before, in person, and it was excruciating. I would prefer a mass email. >

Zoom meeting I can understand, just an email? That's alittle too cold. >

At the end of day Monday so you can squeeze that last bit of work out of them >

If I worked from home and got laid off I’d rather get a phone call or email rather than drive in. >

I agree as someone that's been laid off. They brought me in for a meeting and had to do like an exit interview. I was like this sucks, that's my interview. >

3 people would have probably complained even more about having to pay the gas and take the time out of their day just to go in and get fired
Also all the people who have been bragging about how they have been able to do a full day of work in four hours and still get so much other stuff done or the people who even go so far as to do two online jobs at once and bragged all over social media did a lot to bring this on. >

Every CEO is scared now because of the Booking.com zoom layoff debacle.  
That was far from the first zoom layoff, and the controversy wasn't even related to the communication method, the problem was the CEO was extremely unsympathetic towards the people losing their jobs.
But now executives are terrified of "zoom layoff" headlines attached to their name.
My company laid off 5% a couple weeks ago.  They decided that to be respectful every person affected would be called personally.  So at 6:00am they sent an email that there were layoffs today  and you'd be called if you were affected, and they'd send an "all clear" email when everyone had been notified.
It was 4pm by the time it was all done.  So an entire company of people sat at stared at their inbox for 10 hours, and panicked every time their phone rang.
A mass zoom call would have been INFINITELY better. >

Laying someone off by email isn't appropriate, but a zoom call is fine. >

Because they should tell hundreds of employees across multiple time zones that they all have to be online at the same time so they have a pretty good idea of what is coming but still have to wait for the ax to drop?
How is that better? >

A large portion of in-person layoffs don't happen at the same time, you're called into an impromptu meeting with your "surviving manager" where they inform you that you have been laid off. They explain the severance package they're giving you, and often the support that is available to find you a new job. 
The exact same model can be used in person and remote. >

This is what we do. We schedule a meeting, usually as early as possible and there is often a HR rep on the call. These can either be quick, or not so quick. >

Maybe it’s just that I come from a country with far stronger work place protections than the US, but that whole “one minute you’re employed, next you’re out the door with no pre-warning kr discussion is just utterly baffling. 


they were remote workers, they didn’t want to come into the office. Is a company going to force them to come in just to get fired? Mass email or zoom call is the only realistic option. 


An email, nah that’s just utter horseshit. A 1-1 teams/zoom/houseparty/insert whatever other medium here, should be the way to have this discussion. >

On minute you’re employed, the next you can leave for a different job. With no pre-warning or discussion. >

The best would be the corporate overlords making a YouTube song and dance video that gets sent out via email >

Zoom, ok fine. Email, naw man. There should be some real time contact with the employer. >

Honestly if I was getting fired I’d prefer an email over a call im or in person thing. I’m not good at controlling my emotions sometimes and really hate it when I get overwhelmed with witnesses. >

What the fuck do they want? The employer to drive down to your house and fire you right there? >

Of course it is. Surprised there’s so much disagreement. >

Unpopular, and inconsiderate. 
Yeah laying people off sucks, no one really wants to be the bearer of bad news; but losing your job sucks worse. You shouldn’t offload that to a faceless email because it’s uncomfortable, you owe it to them to look them in the eyes. 
They may also have some follow up questions; details that were not included in the email, or not thought of. Why start a back and forth over email that the thread of conversation can get so easily lost? Or the “firing” employee gets busy and can’t respond, immediately to the “fired” employee’s concerns? 
Or even worse, you send that email out at 4pm on a Friday, the fired employee doesn’t refresh their inbox until Monday, and now their access is revoked, they can’t respond, and they are left even more confused and angry. >

I mean that’s why I prefer email so I DONT have to look them in the eye >

When you’re firing someone, or any business communication?
Every office worker has sat in meetings or video calls that should have been an email, but there shouldn’t be any personal connection to those meeting topics. Firing someone has a personal impact, and should involve a human to human connection, not an impersonal form letter saying hit the bricks. >

I don’t want to feel bad over it though >

It's the same as the "getting dumped via text" debate. At the end of the day, you're getting dumped/fired. THAT is what you're upset about. Does it really matter that it's not a face-to-face conversation? Give me a break. >

This is my perspective on it. Wtf does it matter how it was done? The bad thing happened... deal with that part. >

Precisely >

It's Like breaking Up over Text >

This shouldn't be in unpopular opinion it. If they don't work face to face why get laid off face to face? >

Calm down Satan. The least you could do for a person is look at them in the eye when you tell them the bad news. It's called decency. >

these are the same assholes who claim there is no loyalty anymore..fuck people who layoff via email. Is their phone broken? >

How about a proper phone call, if they're not going to be coming into the office? >

Makes sense to me. By asking a purely remove worker to come to an office for a meeting, you are changing their place of work and therefore are responsible for any and all travel expenses and probably travel time too. Not much in the grand scheme of thing if youre gonna sack them but it could all add up >

If your primary way of getting assignments and communicating with the company is email. Then how else are they supposed to give you the news you are fired? >

I’d be even more pissed if I had to drive in, but we regularly video call; that’s the best way in my opinion. >


They didn’t want to come into the office 

Job hires you for a remote job. “Well that’s your fault for not wanting to come in” 
Have the balls to tell a person while looking at them. >

What? >

no way this is unpopular >

Email vs zoom are very different. >

Oh You wanna work remote but get fired in person? Okaaaay >

I want the manager to have the decency to have a conversation with me/the group and treat us like humans, not send out a faceless memo and hide themselves from the valid emotional experience. >

wtf is not human about an email? should they send a photo attachment with it? >

They should do it in a video or phone cal if they can’t arrange for face to face; anything else is them putting their personal comfort over giving the employee the bare minimum respect a person deserves. >

LOL, nothing says respect by asking an employee to come in one day in a whole year to give them the pink slip. >

I’m not advocating for extra punishment on the pain, but a video call with your manager is base level respect the company can give you. >

Good take. All these work from home entitled employees need a reality check. >

Careful. Your jealousy is sipping through. >

i doubt that was jealousy, people that WFH seem to be very demanding and entitled the last year or so >

Can you provide an example that isn't just workers demanding what they should have a right to from the beginning? >

The number of people bragging on reddit about how they can finish a day worth of work in 4 hours and spend the rest of the time on social media is at least slightly disconcerting to a person who works the full day. >

How is that their fault? Lmao you definitely sound jealous >

employers dont owe you anything and vice versa >

I agreed with your first five points, and also with the kids thing, but I disagree with the pregnant thing. Being laid off while being pregnant is a massive gray area, primarily because it's setting off the discrimination red flag in my head. Even if it's coincidental with a mass layoff of entire departments and similar or identical positions, women (esp in the US) are still and continue to be penalized at work for wanting/having a family. >

Why is this a red flag?  Why does someone who happened to have sex deserve more than say John Doe with stage 3 colon cancer or Beth who takes care of her Alzheimer stricken dad? >

Wait do people want to be fired in person for a remote job that's ridiculous yeah come into the office Monday so I can fire you crust o.e people >

When you have a call friday afternoon with management out of nowhere you already know. >

How else would you? >

I got hired via zoom and email so i dont se why they wouldnt fire me the same way