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

  • @krayj@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    451 year ago

    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.

    • SokathHisEyesOpen
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        61 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)