this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
750 points (98.3% liked)

Work Reform

10006 readers
7 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Grindr has lost about 45% of its staff as it enforces a strict return-to-office policy that was introduced after a majority of employees announced a plan to unionize.

About 80 of the 178 employees at the LGBTQ+ dating app company resigned after the company in August mandated that workers return to work in person two days a week at assigned “hub” offices or be fired, the Communications Workers of America said in a statement Wednesday.

love seeing companies going full mask off now


not even trying to sell the 'collaborative environment' bile, it's purely punitive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] muse@kbin.social 322 points 1 year ago (35 children)

That's a weird way of saying "grindr found a way to lay off half its staff without having to pay severance"

[–] anon232@lemm.ee 100 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This should honestly be the top comment, most companies appear to be using RTO as a means of doing mass layoffs without the negative PR hit.

[–] krayj@sh.itjust.works 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Exactly right - this is a thinly veiled excuse for a planned large scale workforce reduction sidestepping some of the normal repercussions.

What I find most interesting here is that WFH is essentially a benefit (a big one) at this point, and they just eliminated a huge benefit. That usually has the effect of causing some of your greatest talent to walk - and leaving behind those people who either don't care about the benefit (there may be some, but I think this number is small) or don't immediately have the hireability to resign and go for greener pastures.

The tradeoff for grindr is that it'll make them temporarily look better on paper, but the loss of talent will probably hurt them in the long run. If there's one thing that seems to be true of modern capitalism, it's that companies are more than willing to fuck their futures over some perceived short term gains.

Grindr isn't the only company doing this. I'll be interested to see how this works out for all the employers using this same tactic.

[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)

how did we get to the point where a gay hookup app is doing evil corporate schemes and attrition

[–] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll give you a hint, the first three letters of the answer are MBA.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago

My Butt Aches?

[–] Pseu@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

Because once the firm is big enough where the decision-maker doesn't personally know the people they're laying off, it almost immediately turns into this. The severance pay and unemployment of 80 software developers is millions of dollars, enough for even people who are normal and nice to the people they know to look the other way and say it was for the good of the company.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right. This produces the opposite result of what a layoff usually obtains, retaining talented key personnel while cutting the chaff. That's why I'm not sure layoffs were the actual goal.

[–] jantin@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

back to the comments above: the management knows not the people who do the actual work. They can't immediately tell if the Chris who left was carrying his team or was the worst slacker in the company. They'll learn after they audit the remaining workforce and see The Spreadsheet say the people who remained are bottom performers (pun probably intended) but it'll be too late - the talent is gone, the trust is broken. Whether different companies learn from each others' mistakes is a mystery to me, apparently the global conspiracy of billionaire CEOs is not as robust as I expected (/s)

[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

RTO itself isn't negative PR?

[–] Dashi@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Less negative than 'Grindr lays off half its staff due to economic troubles'

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Depends on your audience. Potential employees will hate RTO and fear bad financial news, customers likely won't care about either, shareholders don't really care about RTO but will jump ship with bad financial news

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

Strange that they think this isn't a negative PR hit, then.

load more comments (30 replies)