Major publications picking up on Cisco firings and positioning it more negatively e.g.
https://thepostmillennial.com/cisco-fires-employees-criticizing-black-lives-matter
Several other publications like the sentinel have also run the same story
13 replies (most recent on top)
They fired people who made inappropriate comments in the work place. They should have been smarter, they weren’t , they ran their mouth and they paid for it. Nobody was out to get them.
Cisco systems 200-2007 you had complete autonomy and ability to speak your mind, even though JC would say one thing then do the other (layoffs), he understood to trust his people. Chuck snowed JC into gig, then replaced everyone with kiss ups and young cheap labor. Cisco systems was best company to work for, Cisco is just a job now.
They promote open dialogue then fire people if you don’t agree with their opinion. The current environment is you can’t say anything to certain people even if they clearly aren’t doing their job. If you are a minority and volunteer your time to minority movement you get recognition even if you are not doing your job. A workplace is just that where we should WORK. There is no room for political movements that the majority of the brainwashed Americans don’t have sense to research that it’s just terrorist organization.
The bad press is not because Cisco fired them but it is because Cisco hired such people in the first place.
“who in the world thinks it's a good idea to air your opinion about race, religion or politics at work??”
Apparently the CEO of Cisco
who in the world thinks it's a good idea to air your opinion about race, religion or politics at work??
Most of my “leaders” seem to.
Most employees are also stock holders.
If you can’t share your feedback w/ the CEO on spending decisions with questionable organizations like BLm then something is very wrong.
Maybe the wrong venue to do it however the questions are legitimate. Just read the Blm charter for yourself
Add the Indian Discrimination lawsuit and you can say go short
I doubt the folks who made those stupid comments were Americans. Americans know better. I heard at least two were foreigners from the subcontinent. Not a surprise since they treat some of their own as untouchables.
but who in the world thinks it's a good idea to air your opinion about race, religion or politics at work??
Especially with your name associated with it. It's one thing to be anonymous, but when you make offensive comments of ANY kind in a meeting, virtual or otherwise, and people know who said what, it makes people uncomfortable working with you.
Were the comments termination worthy, that's a matter of opinion and some say yes, some say no. But what was said internally when the terminations were mentioned in the next all-hands session was that they investigated the workers and interviewed them and realized that these were not one-time only comments, so it went from reprimand to termination. Others were simply reprimanded, which was not mentioned in the article.
What happened to just being nice or keeping quiet when you have nothing nice to say?
I think they got fired for being stupid. Above comments were made during an all hands session on diversity which make them even more offensive and inappropriate.
Clearly, this has become the norm on social networking but but who in the world thinks it's a good idea to air your opinion about race, religion or politics at work??
That article is extremely misleading. Cisco did not fire anyone for saying "All Lives Matter". Cisco fired a person for saying "Black lives don't matter. All Lives Matter". One is much worse than the other.
The only way things change at Cisco is if more of these hit the press. They've been firing based on age and race for many years. Until they get called on it in the press it will continue.
This thread has been archived. Posting is disabled.