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

  • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think that’s entirely the case though. With layoffs you remove the positions that the company no longer needs, or can’t sustain. With this strategy they’re just randomly losing half the staff. You wouldn’t lay off your chief software architect, or the only guy who knows how your database works, or the account manager who will take all of your vendors with them when they leave. This will cause enormous hardship for the company if the wrong people left.

    I suppose they could have done a bunch of mandatory surveys first, asking employees how they felt about a return to the office and carefully monitoring the responses from key personnel, even preemptively mandating documentation or hand-off of responsibilities. That’s incredibly nefarious though if that’s what they did. That might even border on illegal.

    • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re taking them at their word that all hands are required back. It is zero effort for them to carve out exceptions for key staff – or literally any group or individual they want to please – while still bleating about ‘come back to the office or be fired’ to the press and everyone else. Corporate heads talking out of both sides of their mouth is the norm, not the exception.

      • CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        They did that to me. I’m in IT in a ‘critical’ (read - too expensive to rehire for) role for a large company doing forced RTO. I’m the only one on the team in my state, and not near any remaining offices, because they closed my building during COVID. My boss knew I was going to walk if they tried to force me to move, so they carved out an exception for me and I’m still WFH full time while the rest of my team has to go to the office 2 days a week minimum. The whole thing is toxic and destructive to morale. I’m trying to finagle a way to get the severance package because I want out of here before everything finishes circling the drain.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t agree at all. We do attrition based staff reduction all the time. Years upon years of it. Is it smart and planned? No. Do we survive anyway? Sure.

      They’re not losing clients over this so they’ll be fine if they’re less efficient for a while.

    • Steeve@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Agreed with this, if it’s an attrition play it’s an incredibly incompetent one. I’d argue there’s reason to believe you’d lose the senior employees that you’d want to keep.

    • Damage@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      If an important position is paid enough, they won’t leave just because of this return to office

      • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, they might. The more important they are, the higher the likelihood that they can get high pay and remote work elsewhere, and have plenty of savings on hand to weather the transition.