[RickHull]

> First, you should inform people as soon as you made up your mind that you were going to fire them. Letting them work (a lot) and just after that letting them go is wrong. Is using them.

You're on very shaky moral ground, and I don't find it persuasive. I don't understand the moral obligation to inform as soon as the decision is made. Employment is a 2 way street. By this logic, employees are "using" their employers if they continue working while hunting for a new job. I don't buy that moral logic.

Moreover, morale is important for both employer and employee. You don't want to keep a disgruntled employee around to sap morale. A significant blow to morale can sink the entire enterprise, multiplying the number of layoffs.

> A simple way to assess that you're up to no good is to see how the employees treat and refer to you after you let them go.

Entirely too simple. An entirely legitimate difference of opinion can result in a disgruntled employee. Employees can have wildly inaccurate estimates of their own value and productivity. Losing your job almost always feels unfair. Even the most amicable of splits can still result in latent bitterness.

So if a former employee does go on a rampage, it's unreasonable to conclude that his employer was "up to no good".