Meta’s laid-off ‘low performers’ defend themselves on LinkedIn and Reddit

Meta underwent another big round of layoffs on Monday, cutting 3,600 jobs, or roughly 5%, of its total workforce. Between 2022 and 2023, the tech giant eliminated 21,000 positions, nearly a quarter of its workforce, and continued to reduce staff in 2024. But while those other recent reductions appeared driven by organizational restructuring and cost-cutting efforts, CEO Mark Zuckerberg seemed to tie this week’s layoffs to those he deemed “low performers.”

“I’ve decided to raise the bar on performance management and move out low performers faster,” Zuckerberg wrote in an internal memo when announcing the cuts in January. “We typically manage out people who aren’t meeting expectations over the course of a year, but now we’re going to do more extensive performance-based cuts during this cycle.”

Some of the employees who have just been let go object to this characterization, though, and they are fighting back.

Layoffs are increasingly common in tech, but they’re often framed as a failure of the company and its leaders rather than a reflection of individual employees. (Although Amazon famously culls its workforce based on performance metrics, and Microsoft reportedly has plans to do the same.) Given Meta’s public trumpeting of the “low-performer” criteria for this recent initiative, however, being swept up in this batch of layoffs seems closer to just getting fired.

When these newly unemployed workers apply for other jobs, the concern is that hiring managers who might ordinarily be impressed with seeing “Facebook” on a CV will know exactly why these applicants are suddenly on the market—and, as a result, may be less inclined to give them a chance to defend themselves in an interview. 

Instead of waiting to find out for sure, some laid-off workers have started preemptively defending themselves online—and they are bringing receipts.

Kaila Curry, who, until Monday, worked in product content operations at Meta, posted on LinkedIn her surprise at being lumped in with supposed low performers after receiving an “exceeds expectations” in her mid-year review. “I frequently asked for feedback and was always told I was doing a good job,” she wrote in the post. “I was never placed on a [performance improvement plan], never given corrective feedback, and never properly mentored or provided clear expectations.

Curry’s experience lines up with a new report from Business Insider, claiming Meta’s director of people experience allowed managers to add employees from higher-performance tiers to those marked for layoffs if they couldn’t reach their reduction goals just from lower-rated employees. A spokesperson for Meta tells Fast Company that these were “performance-based terminations,” adding, “Prior ratings were not downgraded. Simply because someone had a history of meeting or exceeding expectations does not mean they continue to consistently meet the bar.”

In searching for other potential reasons for her inclusion in the layoffs, though, Curry cites one recent incident: “Perhaps I became too vocal when our shift to young adult (YA) content involved removing safeguards that protected LGBTQ+ users.”

The past few months have been a time of transition for Meta. The company has recently made major changes to its content moderation and DEI policies that appear in line with Zuckerberg’s recent embrace of President Trump. (The CEO also donated to Trump’s inauguration fund, added UFC CEO and Trump ally Dana White to Meta’s board, and declared on Joe Rogan’s podcast in January that companies currently need more “masculine energy.“) 

Another former employee, data scientist Joshua Latshaw, was also taken aback by his inclusion in the layoffs. As he wrote on LinkedIn, his five-year history with the company included several “exceeds expectations” ratings and a promotion. (His post even includes screenshots of those reviews in the comments.) According to Latshaw’s post, a “meets most expectations” in 2024 followed months of turmoil within his team—with the managers who conducted his review having only worked with him for less than six weeks.

“This is the first [Performance Summary Cycle] at [M]eta that I wasn’t exactly correct in predicting my rating,” he wrote.

The lone “meets most expectations” rating in Latshaw’s tenure at Meta was also striking, he notes, because it followed his taking parental leave earlier in the year. Over on Reddit’s r/Layoffs sub, a pseudonymous poster, identifying as a senior-level Meta employee who was let go on Monday, wrote that she, too, had taken maternity leave in the lead-up to her layoff. Several posters elsewhere on Reddit describe rumors of other Meta employees being laid off after returning from a recent parental or medical leave. (Meta did not comment on this.)

Regardless of what led each Meta employee to wind up in this round of layoffs, it’s clear that the “low performer” moniker struck a nerve among those affected. Meta’s stock has been on the rise, with shares gaining 65% in 2024. Yet, considering that Zuckerberg’s big bet on the metaverse continues to cost his company billions of dollars per quarter, the CEO should maybe consider himself fortunate to have evaded the “low performer” label himself.  

https://www.fastcompany.com/91276893/meta-laid-off-low-performers-defend-themselves-on-linkedin-and-reddit?partner=rss&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=rss+fastcompany&utm_content=rss