I don't know legally how it works, but my gut says if this is found to be a wrongful termination under state/local/FMLA, then it also stands to reason that this could also be a wrongful death. From 1960, but it covers this line of thinking wrt suicide: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
From their site: 'Employee mental health and wellbeing is another core focus at MongoDB. It’s important for us to help break the stigma around mental health and provide our employees with the support they need, especially at work. We are dedicated to providing our employees with valuable tools to face all of life’s challenges and offer mental health programs that provide confidential assistance from qualified professionals.'
Companies use people. Thats it. If you’re of no use to them, they’ll get rid of you. Anyone that thinks different is naive and setting themselves up for disappointment. This is a sad situation, but not unexpected.
Companies are made of people. Companies only use people if the people who make up the companies are ok with it. Being a decisionmaker in a company doesn't give you carte blanche to behave like an amoral automaton.
So no, MongoDB are assholes for doing this. They could have had some humanity and prioritized human well-being over cost savings.
I did not say MongoDB weren’t being assholes here. I’m saying asshole behavior is the norm and should be expected. I have an excellent boss (and his boss is fantastically supportive too). Several coworkers have needed leave for sometimes weeks and they have accommodated them. I don’t expect this is the norm or written in our company policies.
I disagree, if you expect asshole behaviour, you make it the norm. Expect the behaviour you want, and complain when the standard isn't met. That's how you raise the bar.
If companies operated as partnerships instead of limited liability companies, then I guess I could buy into this.
But states grant special privileges of capping personal liability for investors. Perhaps states should rethink the conditions for granting this if too many companies act like Gordon Gecko psycho paths.
The British East India company had its charter revoked once it started stepping over red lines. Voters need to reconsider the cart-blanche granting of privileges to corporate entities.
I wish someone had sat me down and told me this as a teenager, especially with the addendum that anything about "family" in business descriptions is nothing more than bullshit/marketing.
I wonder if this should be the case. The state consists of it's voters and it's voted representatives. Companies and the economy in general, are secondary entities (unless you really treat them as people, which opens a whole can of worms, see PACs etc), and a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.
As such, yes, be pro-economy, but don't forget the people having to live in that society.
Trying to force companies to keep people longer than they want is how the social safety net works in some places (like Japan) and it's how the US healthcare system works, but both of those are, like, bad.
It's better to make it easier to quit and find a new job and support people in the meantime. Denmark as an example.
But to do this you have to have other ways to push people to stay productive.
IMO, there should be a balance. My brother lives in Europe and it seems every time he has a small ache/cold he can go to the doctor and get a note for a couple of days off. On the other hand, companies here in the US expect you to be at work unless you’ve been hit by a bus.
if you are in pain, you need to rest. period. there is no other option. of course the system can be gamed simply because pain can't be measured objectively, at least not without expensive machinery. a cold can be infectious. i don't want people to come to work with a cold.
I like this post where you agree with the person you’re replying to and then imagine somebody posting “Wow this was so unexpected because my worldview does not have room for companies to be mean, can somebody explain this??” and calling out that imaginary poster for being naive.
>>"...She asked for an extension to complete her treatment, or at the least a short period to consult with her medical providers about whether and how she might be able to return to work before the treatment was completed. .."
>>"An extension of Annie’s leave would have cost MongoDB nothing. We made it clear that they did not need to pay her or hold her job open for her. We just asked them not to fire her while she was in such a vulnerable state, as we feared that would result in tragedy. We just wanted a little more time to get her stabilized."
There is no plausible need of management that would outweigh simply letting someone stay on the books as "employed-on-unpaid-leave" for some extra weeks or months.
Whoever did this should be held personally responsible for negligent harm.
And yeah, never touching their software, IDGAF how useful it is.
And perhaps a controversial take but consider the counterfactual: Should it be illegal to fire employees that recent took mental health leave? Get a bad review or put on a PIP? It's already becoming a common strategy to immediately take mental health/sick leave.
> Should it be illegal to fire employees that recent took mental health leave?
In civilized countries it is illegal to fire someone on sick leave, and I highly doubt you’d get a permit to fire someone who just got back from sick leave.
I've taken mental health leave (not due to a PIP) and my productivity before and after was significantly different. It was great for my employer that I took it. I'm quite sure I would've eventually ended up with a PIP if I hadn't taken it sooner myself, and the best remedy on a PIP would have been to take mental health leave. Not as a strategy as such, but literally because it would have been the best solution (and I think the only one).
Better way to look at it: why are people so afraid of losing their job, and how do we reasonably remove the fear of losing one? Denmark may provide some good guidance here, as they have a good balance between social welfare and protections and fostering a robust business environment
Sounds like the kind of thing a union or works counsil could help with: enforcing a fair policy. That and revisiting the concept of at-will employment.
If neither option satisfies, we must go up the stack. There is something seriously wrong with a society that drives educated, productive adults to suicide.
The US is somewhere in the middle, right there with some European countries. It's hard to say what drives people over the edge. Surprisingly Uruguay is high up there but Uganda, Ghana and Colombia are low.
I know people who upon getting put into a PIP took a mental health leave as it took them over the PIP time horizon. The mileage you get from this will vary on organization —some won’t want the reputational hit, others won’t care though.
> An employer is prohibited from discriminating or retaliating against an employee or prospective employee for having exercised or attempted to exercise any FMLA right.
You can fire someone after they come back but you will need to show receipts. Your employer also doesn't pay you when you take that leave so it would be a strange way to game the system.
>Should it be illegal to fire employees that recent took mental health leave?
Yes, at least for companies the size of MongoDB
Didn't need much ruminating to come to that answer, but I lack the sociopathic behaviors necessary to run a corporation in the American legal environment.
If you believe a person can drive another person suicide through how they act, I don’t see how this would be any different, especially since they both rely on power asymmetry. If we don’t want to hook MongoDB responsible in some manner than we need to remove that asymmetry
I feel sorry for this woman. Meta did this to me because they're discriminatory dicks, so I know how she felt. Fortunately, I have a tremendous amount of family support.
I don't know legally how it works, but my gut says if this is found to be a wrongful termination under state/local/FMLA, then it also stands to reason that this could also be a wrongful death. From 1960, but it covers this line of thinking wrt suicide: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
Anyway here's the actual complaint (I read it after I wrote the above), I guess her parents/counsel thought the same thing: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docInde...
From their site: 'Employee mental health and wellbeing is another core focus at MongoDB. It’s important for us to help break the stigma around mental health and provide our employees with the support they need, especially at work. We are dedicated to providing our employees with valuable tools to face all of life’s challenges and offer mental health programs that provide confidential assistance from qualified professionals.'
https://www.mongodb.com/company/blog/culture/employee-benefi...
Never trust this horseshit!
All public culture documents are bullshit. It always comes down to your direct manager and what they believe in.
Really quite nasty of the company.
Companies use people. Thats it. If you’re of no use to them, they’ll get rid of you. Anyone that thinks different is naive and setting themselves up for disappointment. This is a sad situation, but not unexpected.
Companies are made of people. Companies only use people if the people who make up the companies are ok with it. Being a decisionmaker in a company doesn't give you carte blanche to behave like an amoral automaton.
So no, MongoDB are assholes for doing this. They could have had some humanity and prioritized human well-being over cost savings.
Groups of people don’t act with the same ethics as individuals.
Yes, companies are made of people, but behave differently than people.
Yes, this is the justification decisionmakers use to shirk moral responsibility for their decisions.
I did not say MongoDB weren’t being assholes here. I’m saying asshole behavior is the norm and should be expected. I have an excellent boss (and his boss is fantastically supportive too). Several coworkers have needed leave for sometimes weeks and they have accommodated them. I don’t expect this is the norm or written in our company policies.
I disagree, if you expect asshole behaviour, you make it the norm. Expect the behaviour you want, and complain when the standard isn't met. That's how you raise the bar.
If companies operated as partnerships instead of limited liability companies, then I guess I could buy into this.
But states grant special privileges of capping personal liability for investors. Perhaps states should rethink the conditions for granting this if too many companies act like Gordon Gecko psycho paths.
The British East India company had its charter revoked once it started stepping over red lines. Voters need to reconsider the cart-blanche granting of privileges to corporate entities.
It's expected because of a large swath of defeatist citizens making comments like this. If we don't make this normal, it won't be normal.
I wish someone had sat me down and told me this as a teenager, especially with the addendum that anything about "family" in business descriptions is nothing more than bullshit/marketing.
That is broadly true, but it's possibly better to pretend it isn't, because it is self-fulfilling.
The less people expect ethical behavior, the lower the pressure people feel to behave ethically... and repeat.
I wonder if this should be the case. The state consists of it's voters and it's voted representatives. Companies and the economy in general, are secondary entities (unless you really treat them as people, which opens a whole can of worms, see PACs etc), and a means to an end, not an end in and of itself.
As such, yes, be pro-economy, but don't forget the people having to live in that society.
Trying to force companies to keep people longer than they want is how the social safety net works in some places (like Japan) and it's how the US healthcare system works, but both of those are, like, bad.
It's better to make it easier to quit and find a new job and support people in the meantime. Denmark as an example.
But to do this you have to have other ways to push people to stay productive.
IMO, there should be a balance. My brother lives in Europe and it seems every time he has a small ache/cold he can go to the doctor and get a note for a couple of days off. On the other hand, companies here in the US expect you to be at work unless you’ve been hit by a bus.
if you are in pain, you need to rest. period. there is no other option. of course the system can be gamed simply because pain can't be measured objectively, at least not without expensive machinery. a cold can be infectious. i don't want people to come to work with a cold.
> Really quite nasty of the company.
> This is a sad situation
I like this post where you agree with the person you’re replying to and then imagine somebody posting “Wow this was so unexpected because my worldview does not have room for companies to be mean, can somebody explain this??” and calling out that imaginary poster for being naive.
But this is particularly egregious
>>"...She asked for an extension to complete her treatment, or at the least a short period to consult with her medical providers about whether and how she might be able to return to work before the treatment was completed. .."
>>"An extension of Annie’s leave would have cost MongoDB nothing. We made it clear that they did not need to pay her or hold her job open for her. We just asked them not to fire her while she was in such a vulnerable state, as we feared that would result in tragedy. We just wanted a little more time to get her stabilized."
There is no plausible need of management that would outweigh simply letting someone stay on the books as "employed-on-unpaid-leave" for some extra weeks or months.
Whoever did this should be held personally responsible for negligent harm.
And yeah, never touching their software, IDGAF how useful it is.
Sickening
Sad.
And perhaps a controversial take but consider the counterfactual: Should it be illegal to fire employees that recent took mental health leave? Get a bad review or put on a PIP? It's already becoming a common strategy to immediately take mental health/sick leave.
> Should it be illegal to fire employees that recent took mental health leave?
In civilized countries it is illegal to fire someone on sick leave, and I highly doubt you’d get a permit to fire someone who just got back from sick leave.
> It's already becoming a common strategy
I've taken mental health leave (not due to a PIP) and my productivity before and after was significantly different. It was great for my employer that I took it. I'm quite sure I would've eventually ended up with a PIP if I hadn't taken it sooner myself, and the best remedy on a PIP would have been to take mental health leave. Not as a strategy as such, but literally because it would have been the best solution (and I think the only one).
Better way to look at it: why are people so afraid of losing their job, and how do we reasonably remove the fear of losing one? Denmark may provide some good guidance here, as they have a good balance between social welfare and protections and fostering a robust business environment
Sounds like the kind of thing a union or works counsil could help with: enforcing a fair policy. That and revisiting the concept of at-will employment.
Yes. This is already the case in the E.U. and Australia.
Depending on the nature of the leave, this could've also been unlawful in the U.S. due to the Family Leave Act.
If neither option satisfies, we must go up the stack. There is something seriously wrong with a society that drives educated, productive adults to suicide.
The US is somewhere in the middle, right there with some European countries. It's hard to say what drives people over the edge. Surprisingly Uruguay is high up there but Uganda, Ghana and Colombia are low.
I know people who upon getting put into a PIP took a mental health leave as it took them over the PIP time horizon. The mileage you get from this will vary on organization —some won’t want the reputational hit, others won’t care though.
Yes. This is The Family and Medical Leave Act.
> An employer is prohibited from discriminating or retaliating against an employee or prospective employee for having exercised or attempted to exercise any FMLA right.
You can fire someone after they come back but you will need to show receipts. Your employer also doesn't pay you when you take that leave so it would be a strange way to game the system.
>Should it be illegal to fire employees that recent took mental health leave?
Yes, at least for companies the size of MongoDB
Didn't need much ruminating to come to that answer, but I lack the sociopathic behaviors necessary to run a corporation in the American legal environment.
This is sad, and if true as presented a big suit for MongoDB
I’m not sure about third party responsibility for suicide. It’s a horrible, tragic situation.
If you believe a person can drive another person suicide through how they act, I don’t see how this would be any different, especially since they both rely on power asymmetry. If we don’t want to hook MongoDB responsible in some manner than we need to remove that asymmetry
I feel sorry for this woman. Meta did this to me because they're discriminatory dicks, so I know how she felt. Fortunately, I have a tremendous amount of family support.
I think the Head of HR should face legal repercussions and have a full audit. I guarantee you that they have committed other crimes....
My mental health also suffered when I was fired... wish I could've claimed wrongful termination but maybe if I offed myself I'd have a better chance?
That is the dumbest logic I've ever heard. She was fired sorry.