Brittany Peach gets fired

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Zoomers are the whiniest excuse makers I’ve ever experienced. Nothing is ever their fault; it’s always something else: ADHD, climate change, anxiety, my cat died, etc. Take your pick.

Wow… this post reflects a level of confusion that I’d never want on my team. Conflating ADHD (a medical condition measurable by imaging) with anxiety (a mental health issue that affects like 40% of Americans and negatively impacts productivity) with climate change (an ongoing catastrophe that is currently causing mega extinction and which corporate risk managers are neck deep in actively dealing with) seems shockingly muddleheaded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Zoomers are the whiniest excuse makers I’ve ever experienced. Nothing is ever their fault; it’s always something else: ADHD, climate change, anxiety, my cat died, etc. Take your pick.

Wow… this post reflects a level of confusion that I’d never want on my team. Conflating ADHD (a medical condition measurable by imaging) with anxiety (a mental health issue that affects like 40% of Americans and negatively impacts productivity) with climate change (an ongoing catastrophe that is currently causing mega extinction and which corporate risk managers are neck deep in actively dealing with) seems shockingly muddleheaded.

The poster did not conflate these things, they made a list of items that Gen Z uses to excuse their lack of enthusiasm for performing any productive work for their employers. All of these items are important but ultimately your employer is paying you to do a job and the endless excuses are exhausting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

lol right I’m sure prosecutors are eager to bring charges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

lol right I’m sure prosecutors are eager to bring charges.

Given that she chose to make this as public as she could I hope they do.

In any case what employer is looking for a self-centered mess like this woman? The only things we know about her is she didn’t meet the performance metrics to stay employed at Cloudfare and she tries to publicly embarrass her employer. Who is looking for someone like that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

Most states only require one-party consent. I'm not sure where she lives, but this was probably a legal recording.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

Most states only require one-party consent. I'm not sure where she lives, but this was probably a legal recording.

She's in Georgia, a one-party state. The recording was fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

Most states only require one-party consent. I'm not sure where she lives, but this was probably a legal recording.

She's in Georgia, a one-party state. The recording was fine.

Where were the HR personnel?

Recording is one thing. Publishing may be another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

Most states only require one-party consent. I'm not sure where she lives, but this was probably a legal recording.

She's in Georgia, a one-party state. The recording was fine.

Where were the HR personnel?

Recording is one thing. Publishing may be another.

Neither of those things matter. The Georgia resident was the one recording. She was obeying her state's laws. And once she had the recording, she was free to do what she wanted with it.

Conceivably the contents of the call could be covered by a non-disclosure agreement as part of her employment contract, but given the complete lack of information from the HR reps, it would be pretty hard to claim there was any proprietary information in the call.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro tip: everyone should remember you are an at-will employee who can be let go at any time for practically any reason.

Freaking out on strangers from HR won’t change the outcome.

Re: taping it - many jurisdictions have laws against taping people without consent.

A federal wiretapping charge, that will help make her marketable.

Most states only require one-party consent. I'm not sure where she lives, but this was probably a legal recording.

She's in Georgia, a one-party state. The recording was fine.

+1 That’s why Raffensperger was able to tape Trump’s phone call.

[Anonymous]

So given what you know of her would anyone offer her a job right now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So given what you know of her would anyone offer her a job right now?

She'll have no problem getting an offer for a remote job. Some people like employees with a backbone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So given what you know of her would anyone offer her a job right now?

She'll have no problem getting an offer for a remote job. Some people like employees with a backbone.

What backbone? She was fired for not meeting her performance metrics and publicly flamed her employer on the way out. Best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, why would anyone take the risk on this nutcase?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So given what you know of her would anyone offer her a job right now?

She'll have no problem getting an offer for a remote job. Some people like employees with a backbone.

What backbone? She was fired for not meeting her performance metrics and publicly flamed her employer on the way out. Best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, why would anyone take the risk on this nutcase?

Exactly. She had nothing to loose. She was getting fired no matter what. Not like she stood up for a co-worker or blew a whistle. Cheap stunt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So given what you know of her would anyone offer her a job right now?

She'll have no problem getting an offer for a remote job. Some people like employees with a backbone.

What backbone? She was fired for not meeting her performance metrics and publicly flamed her employer on the way out. Best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, why would anyone take the risk on this nutcase?

If so, it is a very bad look to not have her supervisor on the call, which seems to support her claim that she received no negative feedback from her supervisor prior to being let go.

The reality is, Cloudflare was doing a RIF but wanted to avoid triggering the WARN Act provisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So given what you know of her would anyone offer her a job right now?

She'll have no problem getting an offer for a remote job. Some people like employees with a backbone.

What backbone? She was fired for not meeting her performance metrics and publicly flamed her employer on the way out. Best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, why would anyone take the risk on this nutcase?

Exactly. She had nothing to loose. She was getting fired no matter what. Not like she stood up for a co-worker or blew a whistle. Cheap stunt.

If she had nothing to lose, then why are you claiming her reputation was harmed?