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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 45 points 3 years ago (2 children)

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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 32 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    how did we get to the point where a gay hookup app is doing evil corporate schemes and attrition

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 3 years ago

    Because once the firm is big enough where the decision-maker doesn't personally know the people they're laying off, it almost immediately turns into this. The severance pay and unemployment of 80 software developers is millions of dollars, enough for even people who are normal and nice to the people they know to look the other way and say it was for the good of the company.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -24 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    How did we get to a point where people online claim a company is evil?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    How did we get to a point where people started becoming anti-employee corporate apologists?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Let me guess- corporations are people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    If you read it. It isn't saying corporations/business are people. It is saying they are owned by people and people have rights that cannot be violated.

    People have rights and a business inherits the rights of the people who work within and own it. Just think about what it would mean otherwise. A bank or hospital holds countless private information of anyone who uses them. Any business does, as they all hold private information of clients and employees. That information by extension has a right to certain things like privacy. The government or others cannot just force their way in when they want to get information they want.

    That isn't because businesses are people. Its because businesses are created and owned by people. That's all that law is saying and it gets twisted every time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years 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)

  • source
  • parent