I wonder if Irish employees were being let go for not enforcing content moderation dictated by the borg party. Ireland also goes by euro laws where employees have right to quit but employers must have fair grounds to fire.
Company finally uses a qualitative test to make lay-off decisions and gets torn apart on the details unlike the companies that use badge photos to rate employees.
>Mr Saleh’s evidence was that 35 of the 100 posts did not load when he attempted the test.
>He also took issue with the fact that the test was based on TikTok’s rules for the English-language market, which were different to the rules for the Middle East and North Africa where he had primarily worked.
If you're going to do a test, you should probably make sure it works and that it's relevant.
'primarily worked'. If he was also covering the other market he needs to know those rules - he was in a supervisor role. The company is still at fault for the bad implementation though.
The problem is that 50% of staff not knowing the company's moderation rules points to a systemic problem with internal training, not a problem with the staff themselves.
Cynically, I suspect that they wanted to cut staffing costs by 50% and this was seen as an easy way to justify it without going through a consultation process.
In what sense do you need to be cynical to believe the purpose in testing employees and then keeping the 50% of staff that did best when reducing staff was for the reduction of staff?
Readit News
This is exactly how they were terrible to you? That makes sense.
Unfortunately, a bad performance review should be a heads up to look for a new job. Sounds like that happened even before this test.
>He also took issue with the fact that the test was based on TikTok’s rules for the English-language market, which were different to the rules for the Middle East and North Africa where he had primarily worked.
If you're going to do a test, you should probably make sure it works and that it's relevant.
Cynically, I suspect that they wanted to cut staffing costs by 50% and this was seen as an easy way to justify it without going through a consultation process.