Over the last year, Paizo has been navigating one of the most challenging periods in our company’s history. I want to speak to you directly about what happened, how it has affected us, and the steps we’re taking to protect the future of Pathfinder and Starfinder.
This is a hard update. But you deserve clarity, and we remain committed to being open with our community.
This is the dumbest way to choose who is fired. You keep people on based on their skills and value to the business going forward, not how long they’ve been in the company. It may align with seniority, but it shouldn’t be the deciding factor.
Spoken like a true capitalist pig dog
No shitting on less senior staff just because of tradition (I.e. not taking responsibility for who you fire) is just the biggest possible asshole and coward move.
If you aren’t firing people because they are incompetent or for very specific reasons relating to that individual, then you are only treating people as cogs in a wheel. The time they spend working for you fucking matters. It’s those who have been there the longest that have contributed to you than anyone else. Throwing them away because they are easily replaceable by someone who is new is incredibly inhumane
Right, and throwing the newest employees, who may be busting their ass off working harder and more for shittier pay, under the bus just because they are the newest in the door is somehow more humane or fair!? No it fucking isn’t…
It’s not pleasant but it is entirely fair. Last in first out IS fair.
Hard disagree. a merit-based approach rewarding skill and value, instead of a bullshit crony approach favoring old people just because, is much more fair.
My guess is that they talked with their union, and both management and the union agreed that this would be the best, most respectful way to approach the layoffs, and has nothing to do with tradition.
Traditional, the least senior member of the team has the least experience and lowest skillset.
In reality that is not always the case though. I’ve had senior colleagues close to retirement age that did fuck-all, mostly resisted new ideas just because they liked it the old way, and were just waiting and wasting resources. If you keep these people and fire less senior (not necessarily junior/entry-level) people that were actually contributing, because of tradition, you’re terrible at running your business.
You are describing someone who should have been fired for those reasons alone. If they weren’t in Paizo’s situation then thats not the situation here…just sayin
Well, when you’re CEO at Paizo, you can fire all the folks you think are slacking.
I’m not sure you read the article though, or know why the company’s finances have gone sour
No I read it, and understand the predicament is caused by another company going bankrupt tying part of paizos stock in their warehouse. I still firmly believe firing less senior staff just because of tradition or some misguided honor code or whatever the hell it is, is complete bullshit.
This would have been previously agreed upon by the union contract, and they also said explicitly that the union would have a period of 20 days between selecting the business units where layoffs will happen and the actual layoffs to negotiate or provide alternatives. Paizo is a pro-union shop generally, and they’re telling the union that layoffs are necessary and giving them a chance to make suggestions, while also following the terms of the union contract. Nothing shady about that.
It sounded to me like that was the system they worked out with the union, not necessarily that it was their first choice.
Maybe, that’s not entirely clear to me. If that’s the case then unions work differently than were I live. Here they negotiate what is a valid reason (in general, not on case-by-case situations) for termination, but not how they select the employees to terminate.