Their appeal initially was that they would deliver for places that didn't have their own drivers. So you went from only getting pizza and Chinese delivery to anything being available.
Now, everyone is offloading their deliveries to DoorDash. Wendy's first-party delivery is just a wrapper for DoorDash. Pizza Hut used DoorDash if they don't have enough drivers available. Even PetSmart or Petco uses DoorDash for delivery now.
Not saying it's right or good, but you could order from Pizza Hut and still get a gig worker if their driver called out stick today.
Substack knowingly and openly platforms neo-nazis, allowing them to profit from their rhetoric while taking a piece of the action. Even if the authors avoid specific calls to violence to skirt the ToS, it still gives them fertile ground for recruitment and funding of their activities.
By your definition, then, Substack should be labelled as a terrorist organization and shutdown, yes?
Writing about your Neo-Nazi beliefs, or even being a Neo-Nazi doesn't make you a terrorist, and I'm sure none of those you're talking about are. So no, by his definition, Substack shouldn't be labelled as a terrorist organization and shutdown.
What an odd choice of inflammatory language for a feature that uses standard email headers. It doesn't forge anything since it clearly says it was sent from the GMail account on behalf of the other email address in the headers.
There's a huge range of options between a terse Zoom call with 900 people on it and flying everyone to NY. And if you're someone who previously said "You are TOO DAMN SLOW. You are a bunch of DUMB DOLPHINS… SO STOP IT. STOP IT. STOP IT RIGHT NOW. YOU ARE EMBARRASSING ME" to your employees, you may want to lean towards the more humane options if you don't want to get dragged.
There is nothing inhumane about announcing layoffs over Zoom though. Hell I'd prefer to be laid off in the least personal way possible because I'm a grown-ass adult who doesn't need my company to treat my like a child. Tell me and get it over with.
I don't know. Pre-pandemic, when doing mass layoffs, it wasn't unusual for a company to hold a giant update meeting and let everyone know they're shutting down the division and that everyone's been laid off.
> Shutting down is a subset of reasons for mass layoffs.
Not shutting down the company, but shutting down a division. The reasons are almost always the same.
> Disregarding that, it's not very different. What is the implication you're making? That it's good because it's common?
Having been at a company that had several rounds of layoffs over several years, I can assure you there's no way to do a layoff were people won't complain (and the complaints can be quite petty).
In the last round, it was the manager scheduling calls to let people know. He scheduled them over two days (not enough hours in the day to do everyone). We're all in a team meeting (without the manager), and random people are just piping up "Oh wow. I just got a meeting request." Each of them knew they were getting laid off just by the mere fact of getting a calendar invite. So they have to spend the rest of the day waiting to formally hear what they already know when their time comes.
I dunno. Not saying it's worse than what this CEO did, but I can't see it being better either.
As I alluded to elsewhere, I've yet to see a layoff where there's no one who doesn't consider how it was done "a dick move." Your preferred way of doing a layoff will be someone else's "dick move" judgement.
I don't understand this either. It's a professional environment and all you're doing is a business transaction: you offer them services, they pay you.
My phone provider doesn't have an emotional breakdown when I fire them, why should I?
People should never take anything corporations do personally. This is why all the messaging about "we're a family" is BS..
The biggest issue is the lack of safety net and healthcare for people when they are let go.. severance kind of take care of this but it varies greatly.
But hey.. perhaps working in this industry for decades has made me too cynical.
> My phone provider doesn't have an emotional breakdown when I fire them, why should I?
You really can't think of a single reason why an employee would have an emotional breakdown when being fired without it being their fault, or see the difference between a person losing their job vs. a company with thousands+ customers losing a single customer?
> "You can have the fucking common decency to do a 1:1 Zoom call with each person."
My employer is not my family. Why would I even want the 1:1 call? It's awkward and pointless. Nothing that is said there will change the situation and saying the wrong thing can harm the employee.
I have never viewed my employer as family. I have been laid off though. My manager and HR were in the room. They handled it incredibly well, and I have spoken of them very highly for years. I can't imagine I'd feel the same way if the CEO spoke to me during a mass layoff.
I would expect a layoff with the same level of care as onboarding. If that’s done 900 people at a time over Zoom, cool. We all know we’re part of a herd.
It just sucks and is completely unnecessary to treat people like garbage on their way out if you have a company culture that otherwise treats people well.
Now, everyone is offloading their deliveries to DoorDash. Wendy's first-party delivery is just a wrapper for DoorDash. Pizza Hut used DoorDash if they don't have enough drivers available. Even PetSmart or Petco uses DoorDash for delivery now.
Not saying it's right or good, but you could order from Pizza Hut and still get a gig worker if their driver called out stick today.