It is awkward to fire people and should be. The point of doing it in person is to let the employee know that they’re a human being who is worth the effort of spending 10 min in-person to talk about the lay-off.
Believe it or not, some people care whether they were thought of as a person or just a “human resource” on a spreadsheet.
Yes, shutting down a company with 30 employees shouldn't just be some abstract financial transaction to the founders. They should understand that it has significant implications for the people involved.
Believe it or not some people would prefer to be let go in a text message
I would rather not have the Face to Face conversation, I would rather not have to drive all way into the office just for them to tell me I no longer have a job, I would rather save that time.
Of course I also view employment different than most people as I do not have an attachment to it, I trade my labor for money, that is all. I do not have personal effects in my office, nor do I intermingle personal things with work things (i.e having personal emails sent to my work address, or signing up for personal accounts with my work address, or using work computers to store personal files)
If I am let go this week, I have ample savings to carry me until my next job, and I have nothing at the office I need or want to retrieve.
I was looking for a job when I found my current job, and if they no longer desire my labor some other company will.
Send me a email detailing any Severance Package, and any other details, and save me the trouble and awkwardness of having to talk to you in person.... Of course Introverted personality with almost no emotions
> Of course Introverted personality with almost no emotions
I know that people like you exist and understand your position. However, people running companies should use an approach that works for the lowest common denominator. People like you are somewhat rare.
It's not just about introverted people with less emotions. There are people who have more emotions that would rather deal with it through text e.g. because they can't stop themselves from shedding tears even though they know it doesn't really matter, and would like to save themselves from the awkwardness.
> people running companies should use an approach that works for the lowest common denominator.
No. They should use the best approach for that particular person. If they don't know what that is then IMO a respectful e-mail is the best way.
That's the ideal scenario - you have enough money to be unemployed for a while, you get a severance package, and you're in high demand so people readily hire you. Many people don't have that.
I understand that not everyone can, but I also understand that people commonly over extend themselves by attempting to "keep up with the jones" or to project their status as a "high earner" but getting that large home, or brand new luxury car.
I also attempt to make myself very marketable by being a generalist instead of specializing in any one area, I have a wide range of skills that can be applied to a large number of industries.
I also live a somewhat minimalist life style so if needed I could massively downsize my expenses, currently my "Must have to live" expenses total about 60% of my income (and that is high because in the last year I acquired some new assets normally I run less than 50%) , that is my mortgage, utilities, auto expenses, food, etc. I could in theory take a 35% pay cut, it would impact my ability to save for retirement, and my hobbies but not my everyday life.
I think most people could have that level of security as well, with proper budgeting and self control, most people however want the nicest home that they pay 5-10x their annual salary for (my home is under 2x my annual salary), most want the fancy new car, I drive a reasonable used car cheap to maintain, and insure. I do not eat out often, I grow some of my own food, in fact for 2019 my goal is to get down to a food budget of less than $7 per day, I am much higher than that right now.
the point is, having a rainy day fund for job loss should be a higher priority than it is for people, i wish I would have learned that less in my 20's instead of in my mid 30's it would have saved me lost of pain.
Anything less than 6mos of expenses should be alarming to people. 3mos being the absolute bare minimum, and should be kept in a high yield cash savings account.
I'm not defending this startup specifically. But, in general, I dislike this attitude because:
The first point is that it wastes everybody's time. This also applies when a recruiter letting us know the interview result. The recruiters love to make us feel like we are human. I actually feel the opposite.
When a recruiter wanted to let me know the interview result, they would send an email to schedule a call. Then, the call would have to happen in the next few days instead. This occurred during the time I was interviewing with 7 companies and trying to juggling deadlines and offers. Just fcking tell me the result.
Another point is that this kind of attitude doesn't account for "diversity" of preferences. I admit that different people would want prefer different things. But why do we default to the way that wastes the most time? Just send an email that I am fired and offer to schedule a time to talk. If I want to talk, I'll schedule the time.
Please don't see me as a "human resource". But, more importantly, please do NOT waste my time.
Believe it or not, some people care whether they were thought of as a person or just a “human resource” on a spreadsheet.