Employee says 'got fired' after complaining about manager, shares what happened in meeting on Reddit
An employee claimed that his boss treated him like he was incompetent, but got fired after three days. (Pic courtesy: istock. Image used for representative purpose only)
For many employees, HR is seen as a safety net, a department meant to protect and support them when workplace issues arise. But as more stories surface online, that trust is being called into question. One recent viral Reddit post has struck a nerve, exposing the harsh reality some face after speaking up against toxic behaviour. In a detailed account, a 2-year employee at a mid-sized company revealed how reporting their manager's misconduct to HR backfired in the worst possible way.The Reddit user, who worked a stable if unspectacular job, described how things started to unravel when micromanagement escalated into obsessive tracking, right down to bathroom breaks, and invasive questioning about routine work tasks. Despite consistent performance reviews, he began to feel like he was being treated as incompetent. The final straw came when the manager made inappropriate comments about his appearance during a team meeting, leaving everyone uncomfortable.Hoping for a resolution, he did what most would consider the "right thing": he went to HR. Armed with documentation, dates, and even witnesses, he filed a formal complaint. The HR representative appeared sympathetic and assured him that retaliation was against company policy and wouldn't be tolerated. But just three days later, he was called into a meeting with the same HR person and the manager he had reported. The tone had shifted dramatically. He was suddenly accused of performance issues, presented with vague write-ups, and told he was being let go. As if that wasn't enough, they offered him a mere two weeks of severance—if he signed an NDA. He refused.
Now job hunting and emotionally shaken, the Redditor is weighing whether to involve a lawyer. His friends are divided: some say to fight back legally, while others warn him that the road ahead could be expensive and draining. Adding insult to injury, he later found out through colleagues that similar incidents had happened before at the same company, yet the manager remained untouched. He signed off the post by claiming, 'HR really is just there to protect the company, not the employees.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Apple loses bid to pause app store reform order in Epic Games case; Reddit sues Anthropic; Amazon to test humanoid robots for delivery
Apple loses bid to pause app store reform order in Epic Games case Apple has failed to convince a U.S. appeals court to pause key parts of a federal judge's order that demanded that the company open up the App Store to more competition. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Apple's request to put the provisions on hold as the iPhone maker appeals the order. The judge found Apple in contempt of a previous injunction order she issued in the Epic Games lawsuit. Apple responded saying they were disappointed with the decision not to stay the district court's order and that they will continue to argue the case during the appeals process. On April 30, the judge ordered Apple to end several practices including a new 27% fee that Apple imposed on app developers when customers purchase an app from outside the App Store. The court also restricted Apple from stopping developers placing links to make purcahses outside of an app. Epic Games founder and CEO Tim Sweeney wrote in a post on X post the ruling that the 'long national nightmare of the Apple tax is ended.' Apple has seen a sudden increase in competition since the injunction was issued as developers updated apps with 'better payment methods, better deals, and better consumer choice,' Epic Games said. The company had sued Apple back in 2020 so the hardware giant loosens control over transactions in apps that use their iOS operating systems. Reddit sues Anthropic Reddit has sued Anthropic AI for allegedly illegally scraping comments on the social media platform to train their AI chatbot Claude. The platform has claimed that Anthropic used automated bots to access content on Reddit without taking their permission. Anthropic has defended itself saying that they didn't agree with Reddit's claims. Earlier, Reddit had signed licensing agreements with Google and OpenAI so they can get paid in exchange for these companies using their platform's user content. Reddit was able to raise funds post the AI deals ahead of their IPO last year. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has previously stated in a research paper that subreddits have the highest quality AI training data around varied subjects like history, relationships, gardening and random thoughts of people. Amazon to test humanoid robots for delivery Amazon is building software for humanoid robots which could replace delivery agents, a new report by 'The Information' revealed. The e-commerce giant is constructing a 'humanoid park' with an indoor obstacle course at one of their San Francisco, California offices. Amazon expects to start testing these humanoid robots soon. While Amazon will be making the software on their own to power these robots, the hardware will be from other firms for testing for now. Amazon also made a host of announcements yesterday around AI and demonstrated how they would integrate the technology into their stockroom robots, delivery and warehousing so packages could be sped up.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Hyderabad Student Refused US Visa ‘Surprise Quiz': Here's What Happened
Last Updated: The Visa Officer (VO) at the US Consulate in Hyderabad initially asked normal questions but soon turned into a surprising and difficult technical quiz. A recent student applying for an F1 visa at the US Consulate in Hyderabad faced an unexpected rejection under Section 214(b). After finishing their undergraduate degree in April 2025, they applied to several US universities for a Master's program in Data Science. The Visa Officer (VO) initially asked normal questions about their education and university choices but soon turned into a surprising and difficult technical quiz. Even though the applicant stayed calm and answered clearly, the officer decided to refuse the visa and asked the individual to reapply. Feeling confused and unsure about what went wrong, the applicant shared their story online, hoping to get advice and support. Taking to Reddit, the applicant explained, 'I had my F1 visa interview at the Hyderabad Consulate, India. He is a white male VO in his 30s. Unfortunately, I was rejected under section 214(b). Here's how it went: VO: Are you still studying? Me: No, I completed my undergraduate degree this year, in April 2025. VO: What universities have you applied to? Me: Indiana University Bloomington, University of Colorado Boulder, Northeastern University, Arizona State University, University of Florida and University of Washington. VO: Tell me about your project. Me: I explained my project, what I worked on, the technologies I used and what I learned from it." 'Then, he unexpectedly asked some technical questions: Do you know coding well? Me: I'm decent at it. What's the difference between Array and Linked List? What is Linear Regression? He then repeated: VO: Which universities did you apply to again? Me: (Repeated the same list: IUB, CU Boulder, NEU, ASU, UF and UW.) VO: Why Indiana University Bloomington? Me: It has one of the oldest and most established Data Science departments. They offer specialisations across different tracks like Applied Data Science, Computational DS and Analytical DS," the individual added. The applicant shared that during the interview, the officer asked which track they had chosen and they replied with Applied Data Science. When asked why, they explained that this track includes job-focused courses that match their career goals and will help them gain useful skills. After a short pause, the officer informed, 'Unfortunately, your visa has been rejected. You're welcome to reapply." The student was surprised by the technical questions. They tried to remain calm and answered truthfully, but they still didn't understand what caused the rejection. Reacting to the post, a user wrote, 'Industry-oriented is not the word you should say. Or if you say it, you should emphasise that I would work back home." 'Two things I would say might have been the cause for rejection would be: You did not indicate that you planned on returning after your program. None of your answers showed your personality, they seemed scripted and robotic," a comment read. An individual stated, 'After the new visa slot pause, there has been a hike in technical questions asked, so anyone having an upcoming interview, do the basics right and be sure you know what you're saying, as the counter questions will feel like arrows coming at you." Another mentioned, 'Maybe he just ran out of time and had to make a decision, for the last question, maybe you should've looped back to how this will help you get a better job in your country, but other than that, I don't think you could've done anything differently." One more added, 'A visa denial under Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) typically means the consular officer wasn't convinced you intended to return to your home country after your studies." A new Reddit post has gained attention after news broke that the US government, under President Donald Trump, has temporarily stopped scheduling new visa interview appointments for student and exchange visitors. According to Politico reports, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sent a message to embassies around the world, asking consular offices to pause adding new interview slots for F, M and J visa applicants. First Published:
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Employee claims trapped after even after end of bond period, managers are blocking job-hunting prospects
A Reddit user highlighted a company's struggle with employee retention due to low pay and lack of recognition during the bond period. Frustrated workers are actively seeking alternative employment, leading to significant disruptions within the organization. This exodus is leaving the company scrambling to fill the vacant positions and maintain operational efficiency. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Turning employees into little more than bonded labour not only affects productivity but also causes workers to look for other options at the drop of a hat. Recently, a Reddit user revealed how workers at his company, fed up with the low pay and lack of recognition during their bond period, have been making a beeline for an exit, leaving the company in a to the popular subreddit Developers India , she shed light on the internal conditions of a company where new hires—both fresh graduates and professionals with prior experience—are bound by a compulsory two-year commitment. During this bond period, employees receive extremely modest salaries ranging between Rs 12,000 and Rs 15,000 per has added to the frustration is the absence of a merit-based appraisal system. Salary increases are linked only to the number of years served, not to actual performance or contribution. Even then, the annual raise is a negligible Rs 1,000 to Rs 3,000—and not every employee receives one. This rigid structure has naturally bred dissatisfaction across the the past year, the organization has refrained from hiring any new employees. Instead, the entire operational burden has been carried by the existing staff. Most of them are nearing the end of their bond period or have just completed it. Unsurprisingly, many are now actively seeking new opportunities that offer better pay and recognition. After spending years stuck in a low-paying, underappreciated role, the desire to move on is both rational and the management's reaction to this growing trend has been troubling. Instead of addressing the core issues—such as salary disparities, lack of appreciation, or career growth—they've resorted to stricter control. Employees have reported an increasing number of leave requests being denied without valid justification. Moreover, some team leaders and supervisors have begun exerting undue pressure, taking advantage of their positions to control or intimidate their has further fueled an environment rife with internal politics, favoritism, and intrusive micromanagement. These actions appear to be hasty and panicked attempts to curb attrition, rather than thoughtful strategies to retain overarching sentiment among the workforce is clear: the company never intended to invest in the long-term growth of its employees. Its goal seemed limited to extracting maximum output at the lowest cost for a fixed duration. Such short-sighted tactics have begun to backfire. Rather than fostering loyalty, the organization is inadvertently pushing talent out the an era where employees have access to better job options and platforms for voicing grievances, companies clinging to exploitative practices risk not just losing their workforce—but also their reputation.
