[Alupis]

> “Employees disagreed in the chat, which resulted in Cannon-Brookes angrily interjecting to tell off the people who were complaining,” Puckett said in an opening statement at the hearing. On the company’s internal “Outrage Notification” Slack channel (a play on the “outage notifications” staff receive about technology issues), employees including Unterwurzacher mocked and condemned the comments from Cannon-Brookes, the company’s billionaire co-founder, who had joined the meeting from the headquarters of a basketball team he co-owns, the Utah Jazz.

> “What’s up Outragers, just dialing in from my NBA team’s headquarters to yell at the people whose careers I’ve just pummeled,” Unterwurzacher wrote.

It takes a certain amount of entitlement and lack of awareness to do this on official internal channels - with your name attached and viewable by anyone in the company, particularly during a downsizing event.

This would have been akin to printing out the statement, signing it with your name, and then stapling it to a literal bulletin board in the office hallway. There's no reality where that is acceptable...

[happytoexplain]

>There's no reality where that is acceptable...

Except the reality in which the criticism is well-deserved, obviously. That's subjective, of course, and I'm not commenting on whether it applies here, but "zero public outcry allowed, no matter what's happening" is an absurd position. Of course that doesn't mean you shouldn't expect consequences, even up to being fired by the tyrant in question, but that's not the same thing as "unacceptable". Employees aren't slaves.

[Alupis]

If this was said on a private, non-official channel there would be no issue. She's allowed to have that opinion, and even say it. But doing so on an official internal channel is where it crossed the line.

Again, what she did was akin to printing out the statement and stapling it to a bulletin board - or, mass emailing it to everyone in the company. It was an official internal channel everyone in the company can access...

Imagine one of your reports saying something like this about you during a team meeting, while you're standing there. Not acceptable workplace behavior... and that would be limited to just your team.

[wood_spirit]

The company has an internal policy of “open company, no bullshit” and an internal channel for venting called literally “outrage”. I don’t see an “official internal” and “unofficial internal” distinction here.

[miltonlost]

I am not the CEO. I am not a leader of a company. Leaders should expect for their behavior, which has far far far more reaching effects than mine, to be criticized. CEOs shouldn't be little babies who can fire everyone but not take a little heat themselves.

[Alupis]

If you emailed something like this about a coworker to everyone in the company, it would also be inappropriate for the workplace. Just because it was the CEO doesn't make it acceptable.

[happytoexplain]

Not always, but it does make it more acceptable, in terms of tone. That's how the power dynamic works.

[JKCalhoun]

I don't know. "Punching up" should always be acceptable.

[triceratops]

> Just because it was the CEO doesn't make it acceptable

Actually, yes, yes it does. There are some things you can't say to any employee of any rank: racist or sexist harassment for example. And commenting on the performance of an employee that doesn't report to you is also generally a no-go. But legitimate, job-related criticism of the CEO, or any other senior management, is entirely acceptable. Why wouldn't it be?

[miltonlost]

Yes it is acceptable because it is the CEO. CEOs and lowly coworkers are not the same people and do not deserve the same level of interpersonal communication. CEOs shouldn't make evil decisions and then think they can not have mild criticism laid against them.

[triceratops]

Describing events as they happened is now not acceptable in any reality?

The CEO was at his NBA team's HQ. He had demoted many staff members. He was then criticizing staff members for protesting those demotions.

[rdiddly]

It would be nice to know what comments the CEO decided to make in those same official channels though. The article doesn't say, except to quote someone as saying he angrily told people off. What was the communication, and should it be without consequences?

[antonvs]

> It takes a certain amount of entitlement and lack of awareness

Your comment would make sense if it were talking about the CEO.

Otherwise, it's a unwittingly sad comment on the quasi-feudal nature of these corporations.

[nnm]

> It takes a certain amount of entitlement and lack of awareness

It takes integrity and bravery to challenge the lies of the powerful.