Cloudflare Employee records her final meeting where HR tries to fire her

- HR is IT for people. Do you think the IT guy cares about all the laptops in the company? No, it's a resource he manages. Do you think HR cares about all the people in the company. No it's a resource they manage. Companies try so hard to make HR look like high school guidance counselors instead of the ruthless hatchet men they are.
  
  It guy here, I care more about the computers and tech than HR cares about people. Fuck HR
  
  IT guy here... Uh, no. I resent that you would group us with HR.
  At my work I keep advocating to give our underperforming hardware (aka old hardware) a second life by opening up sales for them instead of destroying them (except hard drives of course).
  When my laptop was acting up and was kind of crappy... I replace the thermal paste and replaced the old failing hard drive with a new SSD. At laptop is now 14 years old (Intel i5-540).
  
  I care about the laptops. I care about them a lot. People return them in a shit state, I clean them up take care of them and then advocate to donate them to schools in the area.
  HR are just that, hatchet men.
- I went through a lay off being a manager once. It's not fun at all. We had the list and the metrics. But we were already pretty small and we really didn't want to lose anyone on the list except for a couple people.
  So we basically gamed financial. Offered anyone that wanted it part time. Fired the few people people that were clearly not interested in working anyways. We did something else that I can't remember, and we ended up being able to fucking keep everyone. It was amazing.
  Not even two months later we had to ramp up for the holidays, so everyone that willingly cut their hours went right back to full time. And we were offering OT too.
  Year later the company pulled out of the state. But until that time we kept everyone.
  
  Thank you for sticking up for your employees. Had a similar thing happen where I was part time for a few months until things picked up. While it was difficult I appreciated that I had an income for then. And he gave me a stellar reference for if my finances got too tight and I needed to start searching.
  This is why managers need to be included in firing decisions. The fact that Brittany here wasn't able to have that dignity enrages me.
  
  Is this response AI generated or something? How did you keep everyone if you fired people?
- Yep HR actually stands for Human Risks.

HR are all class traitors. Their sole purpose in life is to pay you as little as possible and protect the people at the top who are stealing everyone elses' profits. Fuck anyone working in HR.
- That really isn't true, and you would know that if you were actually familiar with HR.
  HR, for stuff like this, is just the messenger. Some exec told them to fire people, and gave them a directive on who to fire. The HR reps couldn't answer her questions because they likely don't know the answer.
  Yes, the job of HR is to protect the company, but mostly that's protecting the company from the company breaking labor laws.
  But, I'm sure I'll get downvoted to hell because the hive mind loves to shit on HR, which is exactly what the execs are wanting. They're scapegoats.
  
  I am very familiar with HR at multiple fortune 500 corporations.
  You're so close to getting the point. You realize HR are the executives' scapegoats. HR's purpose is to serve the rich assholes fucking everyone else over. Anyone working HR is complicit whether they're intelligent enough to realize it, or just a useful idiot. Execs want and need their scapegoats. People should realize this and avoid HR (class traitor) jobs.
  
  Nothing you said contradicts the claim that HR people are class traitors. HR only cares about labor law so far as they can achieve management's goals without landing the company in legal hot water. It's absolutely not about any concern for the people themselves.
  
  I worked in HR for a while and 80% of the job was telling managers/execs "you can't do that to an employee". It was defending the employee, arguing for better programs, planning events for employees/associates/team members. I paid for a Christmas event out of my own pocket one year because I was told there was no funding. I never got badmouthed or trashed by a manager. But after fighting everyday for associates it was really disheartening to see them say stuff like the person youre replying too. It's one reason people who aren't corporate shills get out of HR. You spend your day advocating for people and they turn around and spit in your face. After awhile you just ask yourself why am I turning myself inside out for these people who hate me?
  
  I've interacted with lots of HR employees over the years. And for quite a while my wife worked in that field, so I've had some 'inside' insight into the field. And I largely agree with you.
  Like with any field, there are good people and bad people in there. My wife (and most of her colleagues) was one of the good ones. She intervened many times at her old job to stop out of control managers from firing store employees for bullshit reasons. Yes, part of that was to avoid the company getting into legal trouble for it. But an equal part was because she wanted to help these employees, because they were clearly being mistreated by their managers. And while not to that level, I've been helped by other decent HR people who went above and beyond company policies to help me during things like bereavement and healthcare needs.
  I've also dealt with some absolute shit-heel HR people. People who would spend almost all day spying on employees using CCTV to try to catch them doing something - anything - that they could write them up for. People who would go out of their way to hide and ignore evidence of managers vindictively punishing employees who they (the managers) didn't like. People would use their power as HR professionals to exploit vulnerable employees for sexual motives.
  It's a mixed bag. To say all HR people are good is facile (side note: I know you weren't doing that). And equally, to slate all HR employees is also wrong.
  
  deleted by creator
  
  Being a shield against the decisions of upper management is the kind of class traitor work the person above is talking about. HR's job is taking that kind of decision and turning it into something that can be executed with the least likelihood of an office shooting or lawsuit. Whether either of those things are warranted or not.
  
  "Don't hate HR! We're not the master, just his trained attack dogs!"
- The people doing the firing were lawyers, not HR, but you are absolutely right. If you are told to fire a bunch of people illegally, the only moral response is to refuse and if pressed, document publicly what happened (and quit or be fired yourself).
  Following orders is no excuse.
- It is actually such a shitty job and while good people may find themselves in it, only bad people stay in it for long. If you’re a great person and just spend your time bringing sunshine to employees then you were rolled in luck before you went into the fryer.
- Ok, cut out the middleman and get fired face to face by someone even more profit motivated and psychopathic and disinterested in your person.
  
  Pretty sure they don't do that in the US cause the 2nd Amendment apparently says that we aren't allowed to disarm a fucking toddler in this country, so the guns outnumber the citizens.
- This is the nature of the HR as a sector, not the ppl that work there. The lumberjack is not responsible for the deforestation. If you dont have any collective to help ppl stand their ground they will only follow orders to buy the milk.
  
  You're the kind of fool who thinks some of the nazis weren't bad, they were just following orders.
  
  The lumberjack is harvesting wood which the population as a whole benefits from. They aren't taking a side of one class vs the another class. Sure I would like them to harvest responsibly but even if they don't they are still adding value to civilization.
  HR is not the same thing. When is the last time they actually helped you? I remember once the employee health insurance was giving me problems covering a medication for my wife and the HR removed is taking the insurance company side. Telling me how they nice they were at contract time. Yeah mouthbreather of course they are nice, they scammed us out of money and you let it happen.

The ridiculous thing is they try to frame this as a performance issue when the reality is the company is just doing layoffs. Why even frame it that way? How fucking awful.
- At least in my state, if your employment is terminated for poor performance, the employer can deny unemployment insurance claims. If you’re just laid off, they must pay out unemployment insurance claims.
  By blaming the victim, the company saves money. It’s such scumbaggery.
  
  At least in my state, if your employment is terminated for poor performance, the employer can deny unemployment insurance claims.
  Which in itself is a total bullshit rule. What, so people who are bad at a certain job don't deserve help while they find a job they're better at?
  
  Seems like it would also have the effect of making the employee less appealing to any potential future employers. When asked in an interview why they left their previous job, these people have to decide whether to say honestly that they were let go because of mismanagement and risk their possible new job on whether the background check includes a call to the HR department of your last employer, or give the line that would match the HR record and say they were fired for poor performance. Either way is going to make it pretty hard to get hired, and so if Cloudflare ever needs to hire again in the future, there's a decent chance these people will still be seeking employment.
- They don't have to pay unemployment if you are fired for performance.
  That said, my understanding is that you should always file for unemployment and file an appeal when it's denied. Chances are higher that it will get overturned on appeal.
  
  That's a gross and very American thing to do
- It is a performance issue. The company performed poorly in hiring too many people
- This is a USA problem that is both illegal, and extremely hard to game, in most of the developed world... Elsewhere employers can generally fire you during probation, or within the first 6-12 months, without severance, but they have no reason whatsoever to lie to you about your performance — they tell you straight up that your position is no longer required, pay out the mandatory 2-4 weeks notice period, and that's the end of it. Beyond that they cut their losses and pay severance, because the legal and financial implications for lying about performance are not worth the crime.
  I find it ridiculous that people blame Cloudflare for this situation. EVERY for-profit company will choose this path IF given the opportunity to avoid fault or severance, and any that don't will be less profitable and eventually fail on the uneven playing field — 99% of the blame for this situation falls on the US political kleptocracy and their corruption; a political system "BY the capital, FOR the capital".
  
  While you can complain about the US having weak labor protection, I can tell you that, based on her description, is already illegal, and I have worked at two other companies in the US that take this very seriously. They almost never "fired" anyone but sadly did layoffs fairly often. They gave the appropriate notice and paid the promised severance. Even people that folks would have said deserved a during often got to hang out until the next layoff, because generally the risk of a labor law violation was not worth the notice and severance cost.
  Over the last couple of decades working at companies, I have only seen four firings, but many many layoffs.
  The four firing were: A guy that would show up for the morning meeting every day then leave work right after, hoping no one would notice. Fired after doing this for a week, getting a talking to to let him know we knew, then he kept doing it for another week before getting fired.
  A guy who, in his first week, was on camera stealing 30 thousand dollars of equipment. He returned the equipment and the employer didn't even press charges.
  A guy that would be at work, but do nothing but play with the equipment without ever doing a single thing he was asked. He lasted about 4 months before they finally gave up.
  A guy who was walking around the parking lot yelling about how he was going to kill everyone while waving a pistol around.
  
  We can blame both. Yes I do blame our shit labor laws, but they're shit because half of our country thinks (or claims to think) that corporations can self-regulate and will naturally operate in the best interests of the population. We do what we can on that front, but we shouldn't let companies get away with shitty behavior just because they aren't being forced to do the right thing. The more evidence of misconduct, the better.
  
  As a comment, in some "elsewhere" places (Spain) they don't need to pay the notice weeks if they fire you in the first 3-6-12 or whatever was the testing period.
  You don't need to give them notice either. At least in normal Spanish contracts. However, in Spain you are always elegible for unemployment salary (4 months for every worked year, when you file for it iirc), what you would not get is the severance, in case the dismissal was "fair" (despido procedente). Any Spanish worker that is unemployed and didn't leave their work willingly can file for unemployment salary, which is then given to them as 4 months of salary for every worked year, up to 2 years.
  The only case when you might get unemployment salary denied is if you left your job, you were then hired by a company and they fired you after a day. This smells like you had a pact with the second company just so you got the salary, which is obviously fraud.
- Not having to pay a redundancy package? Or just sociopaths in the management team.

deleted by creator
- Generally, the WARN Act covers employers with 100 or more employees, not counting those who have worked fewer than six months in the last twelve-month work period.
  She mentioned in the call that she started working in like August.
  
  It specifies which employers are cover with the WARN act, not employees. It either covers whole company (all employees in company) or no one at company at all.
  
  Cloudflare has 100 employees not counting her.
- This is why severance gets offered. It’s a contract that you agree to and henceforth you can’t really fight. And employees would frankly rather take the pay than immediately lose income and then start investing time in a lawsuit against a much better resourced organization, which could take years and may not result in anything. Most companies know how to navigate the laws. Few ordinary people know how to sue over them and win.

Holy fucking shit American corpospeak is pure fucking cancer. Just fucking talk normally.
- I understand how you are feeling, and nothing I can tell you today is going to be able to change that.
- I only know American culture from the internet, and knowing all of the memes and blog posts and everything, it's still mindblowing to see it in action to this degree and in a situation that is probably representative for so many.
  
  As an American it’s a relief to hear there’s a place left on Earth where this behavior would still be unexpected.
- This is, no joke, not trying to exaggerate, exactly the kind of language-as-weapon stuff Orwell was always talking about.
  Honest, authentic communication and doublespeak look the same on the surface, but the way they’re generated is completely different. One enhances perception and information processing using a shared semantic context built in the air between people trying their best to accurately describe what they see. The other degrades the quality of the language model in everyone’s heads, due to continually violating the relationship between words and reality, making everyone in the room less capable of understanding literally anything.
  Unless the person in the room doesn’t put up with it. Brittany stayed on task and didn’t accept bullshit answers, and so even if there were some consequences to speaking up (in this case it sounds like she had nothing to lose) they’d be less severe than the literal brain atrophy that results from swallowing bullshit with a smile.
  
  The thing that really sticks out is "I understand how you feel". They never accept that they may be unfair, that her criticism is valid, just "sorry you feel that way."
- It's not just in America.
  This kind of thing is one of the main products of the new style MBAs from the late 80s forward - it's all about appearances and emotionally managing other people (notice how she says something and the guy goes "I understand", "100%" or something like that and then just proceeds to not actually answer her question: it's all about making her feel she's being heard without that at all being the case, and he's not even very good at it).
  The same perspective into managing companies that brought us calling employees as "human resources" and firing employees as "letting go" (or in this case, "recallibration") normalized a whole discourse technique of half-truths, evading the question and in general use of Conversational Jiu-Jitsu (anything that comes your way, you just deflect it to the side) to manage a conversation.
  You see the same kind of think in modern Politics.
  Mind you, I've now watched more of the video and it's really cringey how all sides are behaving: the guy clearly has no power whatsoever, she's nervous as fk and doesn't get it that whatever she says makes no difference at all (clearly the decision was already made well above that guy who go given a shitty task to do) and the HR lady is just doing the smart thing which is keeping out of it as much as possible.
  In her position I would've focused on extracting as much compensation as I could from them (not necessarilly money: something as simple as a great letter of recommendation that makes it clear it wasn't about ones own performance specifically could be useful) or gone completelly around these people to make my case (for example, via my own director) as that meeting is at best a discharging of fidutiary responsabilities and the people talking to her are definitelly not empowered to keep her on and even if they did, they're not going to risk their own careers for somebody they don't know (it's actually part of why she's not getting her own director: she has chance at all appealling to these anonynous randos). It's not by chance that the guy is going so heavy on "I hear you" kind of messaging: she's supposed to feel listenned to so that she doesn't cause any problems but whatever she says here makes no difference)
  
  doesn't get it that whatever she says makes no difference at all
  She's well aware she's being fired. She's trying to get them to admit that it's not about performance and that she's actually being laid off. She knows exactly what she's doing and the HR goons are shitting their pants.
  
  Honestly, it's not just corpo talk.
  My mother talks the same way. "I understand that you don't feel well. But you still have to do this completely brain-dead thing that everybody else is doing." "Why? Because I tell you so. Do children not respect their parents anymore? I'm your mother. You must do what I say. Once you grow up, you can do what you want. But as long as you live in my house, it's my rules. No, you can't keep your door locked. Privacy? I'm your mother."
- "I hear what you're saying, feebl, and those feelings are valid today. But unfortunately American corpos will not be able to change the outcome of how fking stupidly soulless they are today mmk?"
  You're absolutely right. It is a cancer, and stupid trends like this spread until there's no hope of escape and even a freaking gas station manager tries to talk to you like this.
- They're snakes. Dox them.

If anyone ever thinks differently, this video should convince you.
If you work for a corporation, you are not a person with a name, you are a number. And that number is the amount of money given to you as pay and benefits.
And when the corporation no longer likes your number, you can be unceremoniously shown the door, regardless of your past performance.
- Unless you're apart of a strong union. Then they think twice before firing you.
  
  Really need to create an "analyst union" that title seems like a white collar coverall term to just pay people less.
- Unless you live in one of the many countries that have good employment laws.
- bruh the girl didn't close the deals it 🦆 happens it suxxxxxxxs. i usually close the deal tho

love how its hey we will fire you today as a surprise after you’ve been told something completely different but we promise to tell you why later. I really this was just taken legally as an illegal termination. Because if it’s for performance that means you have data, if you have data you should be able to give me graphs and charts, stick figure animations, poorly acted corporate videos.
- Fr. If my performance was bad the entire time, why wasn't I told until now? If I am doing a crappy job but told I'm doing great, why would I ever do better? Either it's bullshit that my performance is poor, or they've set me up for failure from the beginning. Either of which makes them a piece of shit.
- I expect and demand a puppet show demonstrating my poor performance
  
  "Snape... Snape... Severance Snape..."

HR is working their script, or they will be fired too. It's like a fucking callcenter to destroy people.
- Literally looped in circles over and over to avoid answering questions. It was so frustrating to listen to.
- This. I don't think people here realize that HR doesn't really have a say in this, they aren't the ones deciding on the firing and they aren't the ones who can undo it since they aren't the ones providing the team's budget.
  HR's job in these situations is to do the dirty part: handle the announcement to each employee and damage control if necessary.
  The girl in the video is saying that her manager was "pleased" with her work and she didn't understand why strangers in the HR department are doing the announcement to her: that's the whole point, it's very likely that it's that "nice" manager who threw you under the bus when he had to make a choice on which people he needs to keep after top management told him to downsize his team but he didn't have the guts to tell you that personally.
  
  We’re all complicit, but HR volunteered to be complicit.

- The "non-apology"
  
  Right? Like apologize for laying me off because you overhired, at least then you're just an honest idiot.
- Not to mention "I hear what you're saying". While objectively true, it doesn't mean that they understand or give a shit in the slightest. I have a very argumentative family member that says that line ALL the time, and all they really want is to get you to shut up so they can say what they want to say.

We fired ~40 sales people out of over 1,500 in our go to market org. That’s a normal quarter. When we’re doing performance management right, we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire, even during the holidays, whether they’re going to be successful or not. Sadly, we don’t hire perfectly. We try to fire perfectly. In this case, clearly we were far from perfect. The video is painful for me to watch. Managers should always be involved. HR should be involved, but it shouldn’t be outsourced to them, No employee should ever actually be surprised they weren’t performing. We don’t always get it right. And sometimes under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten before we let them go. Importantly, just because we fire someone doesn’t mean they’re a bad employee. It doesn’t mean won’t be really, really great somewhere else. Chris Paul was a bad fit for the Suns, but he’s undoubtedly a great basketball player. And, in fact, we think the right thing to do is get people we know are unlikely to succeed off the team as quickly as possible so they can find the right place for them. We definitely weren’t anywhere close to perfect in this case. But any healthy org needs to get the people who aren’t performing off. That wasn’t the mistake here. The mistake was not being more kind and humane as we did. And that’s something @zatlyn and I are focused on improving going forward.
-Matthew Prince
Co-Founder & CEO, Cloudflare
Nitter / Mirror | Twitter
- If he thinks it's painful to watch then he should apologize personally to HER and her coworkers for traumatizing them, and give them a good severance pay. The way he phrases this as if he's just shrugging and saying "we'll do better at some unspecified point in the future, I'm sure" makes him come off as an inhumane piece of garbage with no empathy.
  
  an inhumane piece of garbage with no empathy.
  He is a CEO.
- This is the same piece of shit ceo trying to force their workers back to office too. Fuck this asshole
- This asshat is also just beating around the performance bush that doesn't exist, only to avoid calling the firing a layoff. Disgusting.
- That's a massive wall of text to say "sorry we got caught"
  
  under performing employees don’t actually listen to the feedback they’ve gotten
  What feedback?
- Shocked they actually admitted a mistake here. What will really matter is if they actually change anything.
  
  Did he though? I mean he perfectly sticks to individual shortcomings as the reason and even implies that she ignored feedback.
  
  Dude, he didn't really admit to any mistake.
  That wasn’t the mistake here. The mistake was not being more kind and humane as we did.
  He's literally saying firing her was not the mistake. He still believes she should've been fired and not laid off. He also believes firing her based on nondescript performance metrics was right. The only thing he believes was wrong was how the firing was carried out. The only thing he's admitting is that the firing wasn't "PR friendly", which is an indirect way of saying the mistake was getting caught.
- This isn’t the first time I’ve heard “we need to fire people right away because it is GOOD for them!” from a corporate type, and it’s not getting any less ghoulish sounding with repetition.
- What feedback?? The feedback that said she was doing well from the people familiar with her work? Or the mysterious metrics she was failing to meet but also had no idea about? God, what an out of touch douche nozzle.
  Also, if they're not a fit but still a good employee, LAY THEM OFF. But who wants to pay for all that messy extra stuff when you can just grind through the workforce?
  
  The way this whole thing went down is absurd.
  That said, I had an underperforming colleague who never picked up that feedback was negative. They only latched onto the positive statements. This is either a failing of the receiver to hear the negative when also getting positives or a failing of the feedback giver to be direct.
  It's impossible to say in this situation, though it caught my attention that she mentioned she was close to closing a deal and lost it last second. If we take the CEOs statement at face value, perhaps she didn't actually meet their metrics.
  I can't say if this is justified or not, but what is abundantly obvious to me is 1) their feedback system likely sucks 2) the hit squad was under prepared with the justification for a termination for lack of performance, 3) she called them on their shit justifiably.
  I also agree that it should be expected they give a reasonable severance if this is their hiring model... If you by rule whack people.after three months, they should compensate for another three as people were not looking for new work.

Honestly the problem I see here is not the layoff, which was disguised as a "lack of performance". Yes, it wasn't done perfectly, but still, it's no tragedy.
What is definitely the problem here is the absolute lack of a social security system in the US. That should be implemented.
- Here in Europe the 4 months she was at would be somewhere mid to end of the trial period, during which you can be let go without having to provide a reason on relatively short notice. This is also pretty much the only chance you get to easily let go a specific individual - so if there are indications it'll not work out doing just that is a good idea.
  But having that done by arbitrary HR drones is just crazy, and obviously you'll be entitled to unemployment benefits or other social benefits after that.
- Don’t worry, so long as you say the magic word “intersectionality” it will be okay. It doesn’t matter if progressives spend all of our energy on shoehorning every issue into racism and identity so long as we say “it’s okay, bro - INTERSECTIONALITY.” See? Couldn’t you feel the magic happening?
  
  Say you have no understanding of Intersectional Theory without saying you have no understanding of Intersectional Theory.

I only saw the start and the emotional vibes are pretty bad, and not just for Brittany (though, of course, even in the beginning she's clearly already hurting).
At least somebody actually directly got in contact with her, personally, rather than firing-by-email.
If there is a lesson I learned way back at the beginning of my career in Tech back in the mid 90s is that you shouldn't really go for the whole loyalty to your employee when they're anything but a little company were everybody works together, because they will screw you over if its in their best interest, sometimes casually so, and those making the decision will never be in calls such as this one and instead send some poor sods like the HR lady and that director guy to do the dirty work for them and fell the hurt from the person on the other side if they have any empathy (which most people do have, which is probably why both the HR Lady and the guy were uncomfortable from the start).
Also beware of the company trying to manipulate you as an employee to have your workplace be your entire social circle of friends and even like a second family: the whole point of that is to "retain" employees without having to actually pay what the market says they're worth. This is actually a pretty old trick in Tech HR, dating back to the original Internet Boom.
The whole loyalty of the companies to employees thing died in the late 80s early 90s and you should be skeptical when it comes to what the company "does for you" and ponder on what's in it for them: for example, "free pizza dinners" are not at all about being nice for you, they're about you working long hours for free (which would cost them way more than that free pizza if they had to pay for them) to enhance that company's profits.
It's sad and it's the World we live in: one were the real power of the land is Money and it's mainly in the hands of Sociopaths.
- My first job out of college was for an global company. I was there just over one year when they announced they were outsourcing us. On the day of announcement, there were two meetings. One way getting hired by the outsourcer, the other was being let go at some point in the next year (after turnover). Since subset of the let go group was booted that day.
  It was a great lesson to learn early in my career.
  My loyalty to my employer extends to the 40 hours they pay me. I accept my on call week three times per year, because I'm in IT and that's just how it goes. But past that, I don't care. I do, however, appreciate and enjoy my coworkers. We are friends, and no one abuses that friendship. I would miss working with them if I left, but that's not enough to keep me where I am. I've been looking, but not terribly seriously. For the most part I'm left to manage my stuff, and I don't get too much hassle from above. There is, however, a ton of corporate BS these days.
  
  I think what we do is called "professionalism" rather than "loyalty" - they pay us for our time and it's a questions of professional pride and moral obligation that we are there doing the work for them, in a reasonable professional way to the best of our abilities, but no freebies.
  They might decorate it with "we appreciate your work" hypocrisy and bullshit, but they treat it as a "supplier" business transaction hence I'll treat it from my side as a business transaction too, which means what's in the contract is what's in the contract and if I find a better "client", I'm off.
  After less than a decade as an "employee" I actually became a freelancer and it has served me well and I never regretted it, even though I was in the middle of each of the industries worse hit by the last to major crashes, first Tech and after that Finance. Job security is an illusion, so you have to build your own security by making sure you're well paid for your work and hence can fall back on your savings even when the whole Economy plunges and even the few genuinelly good companies to work for still end up firing most of their people.

I respect her speaking up for herself, but once a company has decided to let you go there is no amount of talking you can do to convince them to change their mind.
- She knows that, she just wants them to admit it's not her. As someone who has been in that seat, there's being laid off, and then there's people telling you you are incompetent. It's a vastly different experience. By not proving to her that they knew she was a bad employee they said more about their company and culture.
  
  It is likely that firing her for 'performance issues' costs the company less than just firing her for whatever the actual reason would be.
- She’s not trying to do that—the corporate asshats are trying to blame this as a performance related firing as opposed to a layoff (which it was) which means she’s not entitled to the same severance and unemployment benefits. If she can get them to slip and admit that she has a legal case.
  
  Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.
- She’s not trying to talk her way out of getting laid off. She’s forcing them to justify it as a firing, instead of calling it a layoff. Because if you get fired with cause, you don’t get unemployment insurance. But if you get laid off without cause, you get unemployment. If she can get them to slip and admit that there’s not a reason for her layoff, then she can take that to the unemployment appeal and prove she deserves to claim insurance.
  It could also affect her going forwards, because it determines whether or not she’s able to use her manager/coworkers as a reference in the future. If a future employer calls her manager and asks “would you hire this employee again” and she was fired for underperformance, the answer will be “no”. But if she was laid off without cause despite hitting all of her metrics, the answer will be “yes”. So it’s advocating for her future employment prospects, by not allowing the company to falsely blame her performance for the firing.
  
  At least in Massachusetts this is entirely incorrect. Have had friends fired for cause, zero issues collecting unemployment.
  And zero chance anyone would EVER say anything about job performance of a fired employee. You will get date of hire, and date of separation anything else opens them up for a lawsuit.
- Cloudflare wanted to pretend their layoffs were performance related firings. Depending on your employment contract, a person who loses their job as part of a layoff may be owed severance, bonus payments, or additional benefits and services. Someone who is fired for poor performance is not owed those things.
- She was responding for the audience that will be watching the video that wants to see how the company responds when asked directly about their bullshit.

They need a union.

I was laid off almost a year ago. I don't even know the reason why. Our team was fairly small, and targetted a specific product within our company that was still very profitable and we had a lot of work lined up for it. They let go of me, two other devs, the senior qa person and a few others. Our team did not over hire during COVID, in fact our team shrunk during that time. I had a good rep within the company and with the team and I know for a fact the others did too.
My only guess is that the company was trying to save money by shrinking each team, despite already being small (there were 6 left after the layoffs and about 12 before).
My layoff meeting was with my boss and an HR person that I had already been aquatinted with. They did ensure me that my performance was not the reason I was being let go, but they couldn't get into specifics either. Strangely my boss seemed emotionally unphased.
That experience taught me the lesson that no matter who you are in a company, you're disposable.
- That's a good lesson to know. I've had great bosses who definitely care about me. But - they aren't the ones who have laid me off. They were directed to by their boss' boss. I remember my boss literally crying as she let me go, she didn't want to, but the company forced her to.
  HR, the company, we're all disposable. But, I still try to look for a good manager
  
  I do think my manager at the time was a good manager and I'm sure he cared to some degree. He was usually pretty stone cold emotionally but I expected that to be different on that day I guess.
  And yeah I understand that the company forced him to do it, I don't blame him at all.
- I was laid off almost a year ago. I don’t even know the reason why.
  One of my teammates got laid off because a completely different business sector lost a major, major contract. Since the math didn't add up, everyone suffered. It doesn't fucking matter. We're all just cogs in the CEO's machine. Fuck them.

- Graphs. Executives love graphs. Numbers also mean different things to them, and changes better invoke noticeable change, preferably monetarily and with some sort of proof. This is for those quarterly meetings. Larger layoffs are often done for investors. It's a clock's pendulum. Pull back payroll, show the numbers and talk about skimming the fat or whatever, yell "look at us!", profit. Hire a bunch of people, talk about a big product/project, yell "look at us!", profit.
  It's the capitalist endgame. You, I, little Johnny, and the kitchen sink if it could talk and move, are all numbers on an excel sheet. Plenty of exceptions exist, this remains the rule, however.
  
  Yup, and this is fundamentally down to the whole system being low-information. Workers, management, upper management and shareholders are all playing it close to the chest because they know they are pitted against one another. So much of corporate life is smoke & mirrors. It's incredibly wasteful of information, of resources, and of the dignity of the people within it.
  EDIT: I didn't connect the dots between low-information and graphs: graphs are an attempt to make the unfathomable complexity of many humans working together legible to the managers & the owner class, when they know they can't trust those workers' word for anything. So people make graphs to try to filter information they don't care about - how is Marv from accounting feeling after his back surgery - from information they do care about like KPIs. It destroys most of the information and hence is easily gamed by everyone up & down the chain, which leads to this bizarre yo-yoing that makes the workers' lives and the company worse, but satisfies the graphs.
  And it's all because the owning class wants to exploit us, so they have to dominate us. There's no getting around it, as long as this extractive system exists this is how it will inevitably be. No culture change is going to fix things. Only the workers being the owners will fix it.
- Because it improves short term profits, so the stock goes up, so both shareholders and execs are happy with their big payouts. The rest is just collateral, they don’t care.
  
  Last I checked the average tenure of a CEO was less than 2 years.
  As long as the problems only properly start getting felt a couple of years later, all such "save a bit now, pay a lot later" strategies are ideal for CEOs as they optimize their bonuses.
  As for other people, well, these types are usually far into the sociopath side of the spectrum so they don't feel the pain of others, don't worry about the harm for others, and have no shame whatsoever.
- Because their bottom line is improved in the short term by firing people
  
  Youre right. Because their bottom line is improved in the short term so that they can say "Look at how much revenue we made last year!"
  "And now look at how many people employed to gain that revenue!"
  "No, don't look over the whole year! Just look at right now!"
- It's all about maximizing profit.
  
  Yeah in the kind of was that a shitty gambler plays when the "table (market) is 'hot'" they feel overconfident and go all in, ignoring that the pieces they're playing with are people's lives
- Why would they care, people are just tools to them.
- Because it's easier that way. Rather than protracted recruiting processes that really dig deep into the current needs of the company after detailed evaluation of current projects and current manpower, just hire anyone who looks halfway decent and fire the ones that don't seem worth it whenever is convenient.
- capitalism.
- Because the guy who makes the big risky splashy changes to his department gets the promotion. The one who makes small continous improvements without fucking things up along the way flies under the radar.

Loved it when she asked if performance indicators were real or just something they use as an excuse. Plus pointing out that they aren't going to explain after she is fired, since she won't be an employee anymore.
I hope she finds another job that doesn't treat her like shit.
- They didn't actually have performance indicators, nor any poor performance data. When she asked for their evidence, they said they could get it later. In my head that translates to "We don't actually have the data."
  "We can talk about that later."
  "We can't go into specifics at the moment."
  "This isn't the form, or the situation where we can go into detail."
  I love her response:
  "But then when? If it's not right when I'm getting fired then it's certainly not going to be after when I'm no longer part of the company."

Yikes. This kind of thing is happening all over the industry as it pulls back from COVID over-hiring. https://layoffs.fyi
- I hear that phrase a lot like it means something. What is "COVID over hiring"? What does that even really mean?
  
  Monetary policies and cheap loans from the government that stimulated the economy to counter the effects of the recurrent lockdowns. The opposite of what's happening now (high interest rates to counter inflation).

You can see first the fear, then the thrill of battle in her eyes. Don’t take any guff from these swine, Brittany.

So glad she eventually got to the "how the fuck are you so clueless about this, you're the ones firing ME" part.

The only time I got laid off was from a university where I worked. I read in the paper that morning that there were going to be layoffs and I came in and my boss was really apologetic and told me I was laid off. It actually went really well all things considered. I didn't blame him and he was as nice as he could be about it, saying things like, "if you ever need a letter of recommendation, send me an email."
- Which is all it need d to be. Layoffs always suck, but your boss did it the right way
  
  Right. This HR video shows exactly the wrong way to do it. Sometimes layoffs are necessary, but you don't have to be an asshole about it.
  
  Right. You can piss on my face, but don't tell me it's raining.
- See? That’s the thing these HR types didn’t get. Britney’s loss of a job is bad enough, but it’s so much worse when there are lies on top of it.
  “Adding insult to injury” applies perfectly here.

Being a 9-5 sucks. Never be loyal to an employer especially millenials and coming generation. You have lost everything so do what you get paid for and leave. Don't let them tell you how boomers and the generation before that did the job.
- don't be loyal to your employer, be loyal to your union
- Exactly. Don't be loyal to a company when it will never be loyal to you. You're just an employee ID, a cog in the machine that can replaced or removed at any time.
- Build loyalty to an employer only after they prove they are worthy of it. Some employers do warrant loyalty, because they are good employers. A company that does this dirty work using mercenaries instead of their own hearts is cowardly, and therefore dangerous.
  Also their inability to stomach doing it themselves is evidence to them that it’s the wrong thing to do, but they don’t care. They want the thing done, the fact that their conscience seems to deflate them every time they think about doing it themselves should indicate to them they haven’t really thought it through, that there are complex outcomes that will not go well for them if they proceed.
  So do they steel themselves and proceed anyway? No they hire Mitch and Melissa to doublespeak-handwave their way through it because they’ve mastered the vapidity required to fire someone with zero questions asked and take ten minutes saying “I understand how you feel” (as a psychopath I understand the feeling of fear).
  They do not understand Brittany’s feeling of injustice. That’s the feeling they don’t understand, and don’t even realize she’s talking about.
  As far as I’m concerned, this video is evidence that they fired her without reason. Why? Because she asked for a reason and the HR ghoul said “We can’t give you an answer for that”.

She did really good! Almost drove it home, she was so close... As a former manager in HR, here are my two cents. Note that I'm from canada, might not apply as I have it in mind in the US. If they're trying to frame a layoff as a firing for cause and poor performance, her first way of handling it is excellent. Ask pointed specific questions on what about your performance was lacking and more importantly can you demonstrate to me that I've been communicated clear quantifiable and Timely objectives that I've been communicated means and ways to be coached and trained to meet those objectives and that I've been communicated milestones of me not meeting objectives, with proper corrective measures and coaching to then change course before a firing for poor performance.
If you can't communicate any of these to me, the objectives, my performance against his objectives, the milestones, and the coaching I received to meet objectives when I did not, then this is not a poor performance related firing. If you're missing any of these information then I am not yet terminated and I am at your employment until a subsequent meeting where you can come back with that information. On the other hand if what you meant to say is that this is a layoff because you have hired too many people, and that this letting Go has nothing to do with my performance, okay no problem, let's talk, but in this case it will be with X months of severance and a glowing recommendation letter.
Lastly I want to make you aware that I've recorded this conversation, in which it's now clearly documented that you have no clear tangible indication of any notion of documented poor performance about me, and thus I am still at the employed of my employer until you either provide those, or provide me with coaching that I then fail to put into practice to meet objectives, or until you come back with the severance package for a layoff that has nothing to do with my performance.
Something along those lines...
- It's insane the hoops you guys have to jump through to not get fucked over in America/Canada. It really makes the social achievements we have in my country stand out that much more.
- Yeah sure, if she has no emotions I'd say that'd be a great way to handle it.
  Unfortunately she's trying to keep herself composed while going through an extremely traumatic event in her life. A layoff is something that may seem routine for you - but for me I still process through my layoffs years later. She's holding back tears. I held back tears. I'd say she did remarkably well while having her life plans crumble around her.
  I put 100% of the blame on HR and the company - even if it's completely her fault for getting fired I wouldn't put any blame on her for not using the perfect wording.
  
  Please allow me to offer a nuance on the topic of HR. I see a lot of hate about HR on this thread and quite a bit is founded... But on the other hand, two things:
  the HR folks themselves are not to blame for the fact that the company overhired, are cutting people, or even to some extent some shitty strategies like pretending people are fire for cause instead of laid off. It's decided by executives ans the CEO, and HR operationalizes. I'll fully grant though that they sometimes (often) operationalize shittily.
  and more importantly, HR is shitty in a shitty company, and pretty decent in a (quite rare) decent company. Fundamentally HR's job is to help manage humans as a resource, and among other tasks it means to protect the company against human-related risks. There are different fundamental beliefs and philosophies companies can have around how to avoid that risk - and their HR strategy is set accordingly.
  Some decent (rare) employers believe that to avoid risks like being sued or unionizing, the best strategy is to provide employees with a healthy work environment, competitive pay and to remove toxic managers and executives quickly. In these companies HR plays a very strong policing role ensuring that managers don't cause human related risk by abusing workers. I know it sounds idealistic and I'll 100% grant that it applies unfortunately to a very small sample of employers, but it's true.
  Of course way more common are companies with the philosophy that to avoid these risks you need to squash people, back your managers at all cost, never admit a fault, etc - and that's the shitty strategy operationalized by shitty a HR department.
  Lastly the governmental labour laws framework of a country plays a big role too - in some countries where those laws are super weak like the US, particularly if your employer is your only way to access half decent healthcare, you can't afford to change employer - and the shitty strategy becomes a much lower cost than the decent one (found a bit more often in Canada, way more in Europe and even more in Scandinavian countries)
  Sorry for the walltext rambling
- Pretty good, although really difficult to vocalize under stress. I'd say if you're given a chance to provide a written statement, there's a good opportunity to be precise like this.
  Also, as an aside, many states have laws about recording conversations. Some require consent of all parties, some two, some one (yourself). And almost all require consent before the action. I feel like if you ask, they will say no, and you'll get an overnight letter letting you know about your termination.
  
  While they can totally do that in some states (like where I live in California) that letter/email/alternate contact doesn't absolve them from having to prove they did their due diligence in warning you and trying to fix your performance
  You are fully within your rights to demand that proof from them and to not let up, though talking to a lawyer immediately is probably the wisest move. And by immediately I mean when they say "no" to the recording
  
  100% on the recording, fair pt.
  On the letter: that'd be good - go ahead and give me written evidence...
  
  Generally virtual meetings in companies like these are being recorded anyway, so there was likely a prompt before joining that everyone got.
- As a former manager in HR
  I am glad you have moved on to more moral work.

nice
- That it's cloudflare ddos prevention is fuckin icing
- Why does that happen
  
  DDOS prevention mostly.

Damn girl, I want you on my team! You got moxy!
- And incredibly professional, given the circumstances.

They kept bringing up performance metrics. So are the metrics predetermined to always be against employees? Employees will never have a good performance regardless of all the positive feedback, just so the company can fire people when they want or need and say "well here's your performance based on the metrics, you're not working out so we gotta let you go". That's what it sounds like to me.
- It’s kinda like speed limits set so low they know nobody will comply. Then they can “generously” not pull us over most of the time, and whenever they want to, they’ve always got “speeding” as a reason.
  A mis-calibrated rule that is never enforced, until it is for other reasons, is just arbitrary despotism pretending to be a system of rules.
- Performance metrics are always set against the employee. The company always wants the option to fire so metrics are set higher than possible. So if you ever meet metrics your probably cheating and that's fireable itself. It's all rigged.
  
  Damn, why can’t these corporate idiots recognize the value of morale? Like, there are reasons to tell the truth that go beyond naïveté. If you’re fair with your employees, they fucking love you, and do so much better.
  It’s like mosquitos vs wolves, r-type vs k-type strategies. There’s a whole different universe of getting ahead that has to do with bringing value and playing fairly, and so much upper management just seems totally blind to it.
  I think people without conscience don’t understand what morale is. I think they understand motivation, but not morale.
- As soon as you start measuring metrics, you can expect to see a lot of people playing to the metrics, regardless of what they are. No metrics can really cover everything the company actually needs to accomplish to succeed. The people who focus on getting the necessary shit done can often end up looking bad if the metrics are especially off.
- Technically, if your boss supports you and likes you, and so do your other co-workers, then you’re practically immune to being fired. There really isn’t such a thing as performance-based firing, it’s more that you weren’t able to play the game as well as someone else. If you’re not liked as a person, it doesn’t matter how great your performance is unless you’re a genius—everyone has room for improvement. So performance-based firings are a problem for people with mid IQ or mid EQ, which is mostly everyone (me included). I haven’t been fired, yet but nothing to say it won’t happen in the future.
- Even if the employer wasn't a total piece of shit, metrics should be able to cover the gamut of performance outcomes.
  It's pretty easy to weaponize that though. The whole industry is already more than capable of producing tight deadlines for no particular reason.
  Personally I prefer just a binary acceptable or unacceptable. Instead of handling merit-based increases, You do merit-based promotions. I always hated the here's the unreachable goal to get your full raise crap.

Wow I applied to Cloudflare a few months ago, glad I got rejected because I was just laid off late last year.

The way she handled this, she is gonna get hired by another company in an instant.
- Not with that video.
  She'll be a hot iron for a minute
  
  Only for places not worth working for. If Louis Rossmann saw this he'd probably offer her a job immediately.
- I don't know, some companies want people who won't blast them if they need to fire them. I feel this could go both ways for her.
- I think she could find employment with a political org or union or non-profit. I hope she finds employment wherever she wants.

This gave me PTSD to my time working in tech in San Francisco. To me, some of the larger problems with the tech world that don't get highlighted so often is how much people are completely making up what they do. I had zero experience in my industry, none. I sweet talked my way into my role and had a friend at the company put in a good word for me. A couple kudos later and I find myself managing, then running my own department. So many of the employees in many of the more ambiguous non-learned-skillset required jobs like sales, customer service, HR just found there ways into a niche and learn along the way. Unlike say a software engineer who went to school to learn how to code, I did not go to school to learn how to get screamed at on the phone and troubleshoot their tech issues. Brittany here probably didn't go to school to learn how to close deals. The people that designed her programs probably didn't set her up for success enough, and clearly, the mismanaging of new hires vs the bottom line was their fault, not hers. That said, to any young folks getting into the game, I'd say be wary of doing what she did here by recording this interaction and posting it. I know the gratification probably feels right and just in the moment, but she could have made her life a lot worse than a lost job with potential lawsuits. As mentioned above, a job is just a job and unfortunately we are all just a number to the company. You can and will get another job. Always cover your ass though.
- Nah, the only thing she did wrong was being a new hire. They were just firing all of the new people.
  
  Her recording it was maybe a little unprofessional but they should've just said "hey we're getting rid of a bunch of people and your number came up, sorry." but I guess then they'd have to pay out. It's pretty shitty to blame the employees performance, most people would just roll over when told they weren't measuring up.
  But I can see someone finding this video later and not wanting to hire her because of it.
- A job is just a job
  ... except its also your livelihood and health insurance, whahaha. Man, you sound like you adopted management perfectly, with the same disregard for your fellow human. Why don't you give your job to the next passerby and give them the same chances you had back in the day? It's just a job man.

My one question going in was whether this was a Sales role. It’s hard to overstate how volatile a career in sales can be. You are your numbers and your income can swing around wildly. Maybe you can control your own performance but the viability of the products is out of your control and the targets set for you to be evaluated against are outside your control too. Companies use Sales to grow, not to subsist, so the second budgets are tight and a company shifts into survival mode, you’re the first to go. Culture is also volatile and high pressure, competitive, etc. I know a sales guy who closed a multi hundred thousand dollar enterprise software deal and was missing just one signature for weeks and could not reach the guy. He travelled internationally and camped out in the building lobby for multiple days until he saw him and ran up and got him to sign.
It’s hard. You can do really well but it’s hard. She’s pretty vulnerable not having actually closed anything, ever, yet. No one actually cares at the end of the quarter if you “have great meetings.”
- As she mentioned, she only had a month in the least busy time of year to make a sale. Had her manager said anything or any available metrics indicated that her performance was insufficient, that would be one thing. To blindside her with a meeting with absolutely 0 proof of poor performance is 100% shitty management. Yeah, sometimes shit happens and the company can't keep staff, that's just capitalism. But they do morally and legally owe her the things afforded to laid off staff (especially in the case of mass layoffs). Them trying to weasel out of it shows utter disrespect for their employees, and it should be called out.
  
  Yes many extenuating circumstances. Sadly she’s still open to attack since she hasn’t put any points on the board.
  I understand you’re saying that this performance crap is made up so they can save money, and I agree.
  But a sales position that has never closed a sale doesn’t make a good poster child for this cause of fighting back against bad performance ratings. Fact is she has not created value.
  If her employment included a contract that guaranteed she could complete her ramp period, she’d have some footing.

Only watched her initial verbal volley and fuck that is some strength. I heard the emotion right under the surface but it was emphatically not in her voice, I'd have been shitting myself if I were on the other end of those questions

I have an interview scheduled with CloudFlare for later this week. Guess what topic is going to come up.
Looks like I’ll miss this bullet. I’m still pretty happy in my current role so I’ll only jump for something spectacular.
- Between us, I think it's still okay to vet them out, but yeah you have the benefit of knowing they need to sell the job to you. Are there layoffs happening, "I read articles where layoffs are still happening, why are you hiring?" and knowing that HR is going to be impersonal and callous when you're dealing with them. All important factors.
  And hey worst case, it's good interview prep for yourself
  
  Yeah, still attending the interview but don’t really think I’m going to go anywhere with it. As you said, it’s good game practice.
  But really though. If CF is this brazen on ~~letting go~~ ~~recalibrating~~ firing the people closest to the money (sales) then how am I supposed to think they’re going to treat their engineering talent? R&D is typically the first to get the blunt end of the axe, not the last.

Great video, she was right to challenge them.
A lot of people in the comments seems to be trashing HR, but they are just the messengers / bad cops, they carry out the will of the executives, who just give their goons the orders to shoot you, and walk away. If you want to look for someone to blame, look near the top.
- So you're saying they're just following orders?
  That would be why people refer to them, absolutely correctly I might add, as class traitors. They work for the enemy.
- I realize Nazis are an extreme comparison, but principally the problem is the same as with the Germans in the concentration camps: they do what they’re told without concern for morality or their own integrity.
- Under orders defense
- HR nazi
  
  Literally Hitlers

Original video:
https://www.tiktok.com/@brittanypeachhh/video/7322301313134415134

This really fucked up thing this layoff streak is to send a message to investors that they are cutting back, mass laying off sales people is not a good sign for your business model.

Link's not working
- He's done plenty for Hyrule so I'd say give him a break.
  
  His recent performance has declined unfortunately so we have to let him go
  
  Link
- Try it again, I had to change something on the video site and I think it reconfigured it, but I see views coming through now
  
  Still doesn't work for me, I get this message:
  Content unavailable Reach out to the creator to obtain the full URL for access.
  
  Works for me
  
  Why did you choose to create your channel on Odysee?
  
  I couldn't get it to work either. What did you say in it?
  Edit: got it to work on the duck duck go browser
  
  It doesn't work. That website sucks

The tap must have dried up bad enough that every damn firm and their dog has to quickly trim away those "excess fat".

- Idk video linked worked fine for me

Content unavailable

Dang that sucks, I always wanted to work there and recently applied eagerly because I haven't seen much controversy from them.
- Cloudflare is an absolute awful company and the pinacle of immorality in the tech sphere, well I guess besides Meta, Google, and everyone else.
  Edit: https://0xacab.org/dCF/deCloudflare/-/blob/master/readme/en.md
- Please read this:
  https://0xacab.org/dCF/deCloudflare/-/blob/master/readme/en.md

Content unavailable :(
- Well, Cloudflare did fire some of their best employees recently.

We still haven’t figured out what POV means hu.

Content unavailable

Could she threaten to sue for slander. They are telling her that her performance was sub par. She can prove it wasn't. I would cut them off after those comments are made and tell them a lawyer will contact them.
- This is not slander. It would be slander/libel if they went out and proclaimed she sucked at her job with nothing tl back it up.
  
  Good point. Slander would not be the correct term here.
- She’s the one who made this public.
- I hope so, but is it a right to work state? Not a lawyer, but absolutely ask one. Recall that that costs money though, and she no longer has an income. It's wildly disadvantaged against the workers here.

Video won't load for me, website seems dodgy so I'm not going to bend over backwards to make it work.
- Odysee is one of the biggest distributed video hosting platforms, equivalent to PeerTube. It's not sketch, but the embed isn't working for some reason. That is on the instance admin.
  
  I wouldn't expect a website like this to be embedded, not from a url to the page.
  The website absolutely is sketchy, there's plenty of dodgy connections eg Facebook and Google. Why use an alternative to YouTube when you're' still connecting to Google??

dammit I missed the “…off” part

this must be a result of the recent internet downtimes.
Good infrastructure bois, keep at it. Soon there will be nothing left.

It sucks to get fired but it was 4 months not 4 years. You will be able to bounce back and pivot
- 4 months or 40 years, no employer should treat you this way.
  I'd also say it's potentially worse to get fired this early on. You have to restart any waiting period for health insurance or 401k, deal with any potential life-changing accommodations you had to make to work there, and live off what little you could make between two periods of unemployment.

Ok, I understand the point of recording this but...she is very young, and likely this is her first time being laid off. I know, it's shocking. Except for me, who had to console the person that came to get me to be laid off who was much more upset than I was, but I digress.
Here's the thing. You're being laid off. There is nothing you can say or do to change that. The people doing the firing were likely brought in specifically for that job, and they know nothing more than what management has told them. Your manager had absolutely no say in the matter, this decision was made 3 levels higher than them. Your manager likely didn't even know until about an hour before you are let go. I know you're upset, I know you're frustrated, I know you're likely not thinking straight. But it's happening, whether you like it or not. You can ask why you're being let go, but they can't tell you what they don't know. And even worse, they've had this exact same conversation at least 50 times that day. The first instinct is to make it awkward and difficult for them, but this is their job and they are use to it.
Confirm your information. Make sure you can follow up on next steps and get your employment insurance claim started immediately. If you can, make sure you can still contact your actual manager for a reference afterwards. Usually you can find out more about what really happened at the same time. Just get as much information as you can about what they will provide you for the aftermath. Then once you get off the call....scream. Cry. Jump up and down with joy, if that's how you feel. Just let it out. You're going to be feeling a lot of emotion, so just let it out. Go home, explain what happened to your family of you have one. Let them scream and cry if they have to. And then try to sleep.
The next morning will feel weird not having to get up to go to work. Enjoy it. Take the first week to yourself. Get your employment insurance claim going and all the paperwork for that. But take time to decompress so you can be ready for the next move. Work on some of those home projects you've been putting off because you were too busy with your job. Take time to spend with family. Just don't worry about finding a job yet. The emotions from the last job will still be raw, so you don't want to bring that to an interview. Let yourself adjust to the new routine before you dive headfirst into a job search. When you're ready to start your job search, you don't want those emotions clouding your judgement and avoiding jobs that you think are too close to your old job. A little distance will help to put things into perspective.
And remember, it's not the end of the world. You'll find another job. You just need to be open to the possibilities. But you can't do that of you're still pissed off to the eyeballs. Take the time to let it go and truly move on.
- All of your advice is sound enough, but the point of this video was more to demonstrate that Cloudflare (and absolutely other companies) are specifically avoiding "layoff" language in favor of firings based on "performance" to avoid paying these people even the paltry amount in unemployment they would receive. It's not just that they're being laid off.
  
  The excuse might be "performance", but they are being fired without cause officially. They can still apply for employment insurance. This is just standard procedure. Being fired with cause opens them up to lawsuits, so most companies avoid that whenever possible. Especially when they are firing multiple people like this.
- I don't think you understand the problem. The issue is that some of these people might actually believe they did something wrong, or didn't measure up. That is the problem. They should just be honest.
  There's no law against laying people off because you hired too many people and need to downsize. They are using performance as a reason because they think (and in many cases, they'll be right) it will subdue the person being laid off from a position of anger or resent, to a position where they're upset with themselves for not measuring up.
  It's a really bad way to do this, for the person being laid off.
  So, yes. Asking about the fictional performance metrics to at least make them feel a little uncomfortable too is completely fine in my opinion.
- Exemplary response!