That Didn't Take Long

As I noted the other day, the news late last week and over the weekend was that Elon was going to fire half of Twitter's work force. I was skeptical, if for no other reason than the managers he tasked with drawing up the lists of whom to fire had an incentive to sabotage the process by firing the people who actually made the company run, insofar as it did. But in any case, a project that big planned in the space of a week wasn't going to turn out well. As of yesterday,

Twitter has asked dozens of employees that were laid off after Elon Musk took office to return. This is just days after nearly half of the company’s workforce across countries were asked to go, as per multiple media reports.

According to sources cited by Bloomberg, a few of those who are being asked to return were “laid off by mistake” while others were let go before management realized that their work and experience may be necessary to build the new features the new boss Elon Musk envisions.

Once again, life imitates Dilbert. In 2018, Musk issued the following almong a list of rules for Tesla employees:

6. Follow logic, not rules

“In general, always pick common sense as your guide. If following a ‘company rule’ is obviously ridiculous in a particular situation, such that it would make for a great Dilbert cartoon, then the rule should change.”

Well, give the guy credit. He decided to lay off half of Twitter, but it turned into a great Dilbert cartoon, so he decided to hire some of them back. What could go wrong?

In general, my corporate experience is that companies just don't reverse terminations, leaving aside only furloughs due to seasonal or business conditions where employees are called back when business improves. That even includes voluntary resignations where someone leaves the company for a better job -- for someone to have quit x years ago but be rehired, especially into a higher-level job, is so unusual that it's a subject of quiet congratulation. From a corporate point of view, firing someone probably leaves them bitter enough that they'll return and make trouble anyhow.

This would apply to the Twits who got the adverse notices last Friday, for that matter. Even if it was a big mistake, what does it say about the company that it would make that kind of mistake? You spent the weekend cursing fate and updating your resume, and they just say never mind? Frankly, I'd want more than an e-mail saying sorry, please come back, and the company should know that, too. Every one of those people is now a potential troublemaker who at minimum can be expected to be out the door at the first opportunity.

And it goes both ways -- advice from career consultants and headhunters is that if you submit your resignation letter and the company asks you to reconsider, it's a good idea not to do it. After all, why did you go to all the effort of updating your resume, sneaking out for interviews, and lining up your references? There had to be a good reason for leaving, and you can be sure that won't change. The corporate hierarchy, meanwhile, will be smarting over having been beaten and forced to rehire someone who wasn't happy.

I can think of one exception, though, which probably proves the rule: I was caught in a big downsizing and laid off with several others in my work unit. Half a dozen years later, I came back briefly as a consultant, working again with the remainder of the people in the unit who'd stayed. (This was probably a sign that they'd laid off the wrong people, come to think of it.) However, on returning, I discovered that they'd actually brought back one of the others who'd initally been laid off.

I was a bit surprised, since that worker was absolutely the most clueless and unproductive of the bunch, and the person simply resumed that role when she was rehired. I can't understand why this was done; the only explanation I can think of is that this was part of some obscure upside-down function of the Dilbert universe. In my case, once someone realized I was a former employee, they called the company who'd brought me in as a consultant and ordered me off the property.

Which takes me back to Elon's own advice, if it looks like a great Dilbert cartoon, maybe it's not such a good idea. Except I assume Elon figured it would make him look really smart if he ordered his people not to look like characters in a Dilbert cartoon. Maybe dating Amber Heard affected his IQ or something, who knows?