Mark Zuckerberg and his company, Meta, have been at the center of controversy due to mass layoffs at one of the world’s most influential tech companies. However, some of these decisions have sparked further debate.
A few weeks ago, the leader of Facebook and Instagram announced the dismissal of 5% of Meta’s developers, citing “low performance” as the reason. However, according to former employees, the real reason was different.
Through various social media platforms, many of those laid off have claimed that they were actually let go after taking sick leave, maternity or paternity leave, working remotely, or simply using their vacation time. Some programmers even argue that Meta has become “the worst tech company” in Silicon Valley. LinkedIn has been flooded with posts from these workers sharing their side of the story.
These layoffs were not due to financial struggles. Although Meta announced the dismissal of nearly 4,000 employees in January, the company continues to generate massive profits. In August, it reported earnings of $13.5 billion between April and June, and in the third quarter of 2024, it reached record revenues of $40.58 billion, marking a 19% year-over-year increase.
The anonymous app Blind, widely used by tech industry employees, has gathered multiple testimonies, as reported by Fortune. In addition to claims about the misuse of the “low performance” label, some employees stated they were fired while on sick leave.
One of the most striking testimonies comes from a woman who said she had consistently exceeded expectations for years but was laid off after having a baby in 2024. Another former employee recalled that “dozens of people with impeccable records and outstanding evaluations were fired after taking maternity or sick leave.”
Another former employee, who was on maternity leave for six months, stated that she had no history of underperformance and is now seeking legal advice. Another worker described the layoffs as cruel, pointing out that some employees were forcibly given “lower” performance ratings while they were on leave.
According to testimonies, many of those laid off had been with the company for over a decade, had no complaints from their superiors, yet were dismissed after starting a family. An Amazon employee commented that Meta now seems to prioritize young workers without family commitments, whose only focus is making money.
The criticism hasn’t just come from those directly affected. On LinkedIn, former Meta employees have voiced their dissatisfaction. Some reject the “low performance” label, calling it misleading and unfair. Additionally, discussions have emerged on how companies are misusing this classification to justify layoffs.
Experts have pointed out that Meta cares more about shareholder perception than employee well-being. As a viral comment ironically puts it, the company’s stance seems to be: “We don’t care that labeling those we fired as ‘low performers’ hurts their ability to find another job. We also take no responsibility for how they got here or how they performed.”
A dismissed attorney mocked “Zuckerberg’s new masculine energy” and offered proof to refute the accusations. “I have performance reviews that prove it, and plenty of colleagues and managers who can vouch for my work,” she stated.
In her post, she clarified that she wasn’t angry about being laid off but rather about the defamation of her professional record. She also stated that she wouldn’t miss the pressure of making decisions on products she had no control over, the mental overload, the dozens of browser tabs open at all times, or the shifting work environment.
Meanwhile, Business Insider highlighted the case of a data scientist who shared screenshots of performance reviews, showing that he had “consistently exceeded expectations.”
These testimonies have cast doubt on Meta’s official narrative and have sparked a broader discussion about the ethics of layoffs in the tech industry.
