‘Can't say the same for you': Worker's savage response after termination
An employee has shared the moment she was laid off from her job, with her savage response earning her huge amounts of praise from social media users.
The US woman, who goes by Karson Bree online, recently shared a recording of a video call from last year in which she was told by her then-employer that she would no longer be working for the company.
Karson did not name the company and also blurred the faces of the other people in the video but, in the caption of the TikTok, she explained she had taken a job at a local magazine and described the experience as a 'sh*t show'
After less than three months with the company, she was asked to join a video call with two senior staff members and an HR representative, in which she was told her employment was being 'terminated effective immediately'.
Asked why she was being let go, her boss, who she referred to only as Lisa, informed her that it was coming towards the end of the first 90 days of her employment and felt it 'wasn't a great fit'.
When Karson asked why they thought it wasn't a great fit her question was met with an almost 10 second silence.
Her boss then pointed to issues like the publication going out late, having typos and her design not being a 'good fit' for the publication.
Karson then asked if she could offer her own feedback to these claims, before launching into a detailed breakdown of her experience with the company.
She claimed a lot of the reasons for these issues were out of her control, such as receiving materials late and not being given access to accounts that would help get things out on time.
The worker claims she was 'met with roadblocks' every step of the way, before taking direct aim at her boss.
'I received very little feedback from you and often there were times where I did reach out to you without being told anything or having any reply or response whatsoever,' she said.
'I also found it very unacceptable to receive a message at 11pm last night informing me that I was going to be laid off the next day with this meeting and then immediately revoking my access to everything.'
The woman added: 'I feel like I have done every step of the way of trying to do this job to the best of my abilities and, quite frankly, you have made it very difficult.'
There was another long pause following this, after which Karson asked when the decision to end her employment was made.
This time the other senior worker on the call, referred to as Kendall, responded, claiming there was 'no specific date' and they just felt it 'wasn't a good fit' and hoped she could find a role that was better suited to her 'style' of work.
Once again, Karson pushed back on this, asking: 'So was it a problem with my style of working? Kendall I would love to know specifically if you had issues with my workflow with you.'
The woman explained it wasn't as much a workflow problem as they found that she wasn't a stylistic fit for the magazine.
But the worker wasn't done quite yet, saying that, in that case, she would 'love to make a suggestion'.
'If you guys want to maintain a good team and moving forward, you need to make sure that your leadership is also possessing the strengths that need to be had to make a well designed magazine,' Karson said, adding that if she had been given the proper materials in a timely manner she would have been able to do her job more effectively.
'I apologise for there being slips and typos and slight mistakes, but when it comes down to it, the publications being sent out late are not my fault. I want that to be clear. It was not my fault.'
She then addressed her boss Julie directly, saying she hoped she took this feedback on-board, stating that 'since starting my biggest frustration was working with you'.
'I want that to be known because you have not given me the time to express that to you or give you any feedback until this moment,' she said.
Karson was then reminded that this call was 'not about Julie', to which she responded that she understood that, but felt she wouldn't get a chance in the future to raise her concerns.
She then ended the call by saying. 'It has been lovely working with you Kendall, I cannot say the same for you Julie. Have a great day.'
Since sharing the video to TikTok last week, it has been viewed more than 2.3 million times and has gained more than 4400 comments.
Many praised the employee for how she handled the situation and her professionalism.
'You did such a beautiful job standing up for yourself. Their answers were so vague,' one wrote.
Another person branded her response 'epic' and another said it was 'extremely satisfying to watch'.
Others were stunned by how unprepared the leadership team seemed to be when Karson asked simple questions, such as why she was being let go.
'Did they not expect you to ask why…?' one person said.
'Them sitting in silence like that was embarrassing when she asked questions,' another wrote, with one agreeing, saying 'the silence was crazy'.
There were also HR professionals in the comment section who were horrified by how the situation was handled.
'I'm a person that unfortunately has to fire people and lay people off as part of my job. I have a full script and different things to say based off of different outcomes. I always tell them why, show empathy and let them know I never want to give the news,' one person said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Trump announces plans to double steel tariffs to 50 per cent
US President Donald Trump says he plans to increase tariffs on foreign steel imports from 25 per cent to 50 per cent amid a deepening trade war.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Anthropic CEO warns AI could wipe out 1 in 2 white collar jobs in next five years
The head of one of the world's most powerful artificial intelligence labs has warned the technology could eliminate half of all entry-level, white-collar jobs within the next five years. Fresh off promoting his company's technology at a developer conference, Anthropic chief executive officer Dario Amodei told CNN's Anderson Cooper that politicians and businesses are not prepared for the spike in unemployment rates AI could prompt. 'AI is starting to get better than humans at almost all intellectual tasks, and we're going to collectively, as a society, grapple with it,' the 42-year-old said in an interview with Cooper. 'AI is going to get better at what everyone does, including what I do, including what other CEOs do.' The technology that companies like his are building, Mr Amodei said, could boost unemployment in America as high as 20 per cent by 2030. Anthropic's AI can work nearly seven hours a day, he said, and has the skills typically required of entry-level corporate workers – 'the ability to summarise a document, analyse a bunch of sources and put it into a report, write computer code' – at the same standard 'as a smart college student'. 'We can see where the trend is going, and that's what's driving some of the concern (about AI in the workforce),' Mr Amodei said. Public not 'fully aware of what's going on' Though Mr Amodei acknowledged it would 'definitely not (be) in my economic interest' to do so, he urged US politicians to consider implementing a tax on AI labs. He said he was 'raising the alarm' because his counterparts at other companies 'haven't as much and I think someone needs to say it and to be clear'. 'It's eerie the extent to which the broader public and politicians, legislators, I don't think, are fully aware of what's going on,' he said. In a separate interview with US publication Axios, Mr Amodei said such workforce changes are 'going to happen in a small amount of time – as little as a couple of years or less'. 'Cancer is cured, the economy grows at 10 per cent a year, the budget is balanced – and 20 per cent of people don't have jobs,' he said. 'Most of them are unaware that this is about to happen. It sounds crazy, and people just don't believe it.' In January, a World Economic Forum (WEF) survey found that 41 per cent of employers intend to reduce their workforce because of AI automation by 2030. 'Advances in AI and renewable energy are reshaping the (labour) market – driving an increase in demand for many technology or specialist roles while driving a decline for others, such as graphic designers,' the WEI said in a statement at the time. 'The presence of both graphic designers and legal secretaries just outside the top 10 fastest-declining job roles, a first-time prediction not seen in previous editions of the Future of Jobs Report, may illustrate GenAI's increasing capacity to perform knowledge work.' Closer to home, in December the Social Policy Group reported that without immediate intervention, one in three Australians in knowledge-based or manual roles were at risk of job loss by 2030. Conversely, the WEF found that close to 70 per cent of companies plan to hire new workers with skills to design AI tools and enhancements, and 62 per cent plan to hire more employees with skills to work alongside the technology. 'Now, you can hire one experienced worker, equip them with AI tooling, and they can produce the output of the junior worker on top of their own – without the overhead,' recruiter at US venture capital firm SignalFire, Heather Doshay, told Business Insider. Ms Doshay stressed that AI 'isn't stealing job categories outright – it's absorbing the lowest-skill tasks'. 'That shifts the burden to universities, boot camps, and candidates to level up faster,' she added. 'We can't just sleepwalk into it' Mr Amodei insisted AI can – and will – be used for good, noting he 'wouldn't be building this technology if I didn't think that it could make the world better'. '(But) we have to make sure that people have the ability to adapt, and that we adopt the right policies,' Mr Amodei told CNN. 'We have to act now. We can't just sleepwalk into it … I don't think we can stop this bus. 'From the position that I'm in, I can maybe hope to do a little to steer the technology in a direction where we become aware of the harms, we address the harms, and we're still able to achieve the benefits.'
SBS Australia
5 hours ago
- SBS Australia
Why Elon Musk's White House farewell has people talking
Elon Musk's farewell at the White House, which marked the end of his short tenure as a special government employee, has been overshadowed by a black eye, problems at Tesla, and allegations of drug use. In a press conference with Donald Trump on Friday local time, the United States president praised Musk as "one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced". But it was an unusual briefing, with Musk dodging questions about his appearance, while receiving a present that Trump reserves for only "very special people". Musk told reporters the injury was from his 5-year-old son, after he told the boy: "'Go ahead, punch me in the face.' And he did". Musk also received a large golden key in a box, a gift from Trump acknowledging his "very great talents". So, if things appear amicable between Musk and Trump, why are they parting ways? Musk has not given a specific reason for his departure from the Trump administration. He announced on Wednesday that his "scheduled time" in the Trump administration had come to an end and thanked Trump for "the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending". Meanwhile, his electric vehicle company, Tesla, has been in trouble, with declining sales and stock prices falling 12 per cent this year. Tesla shareholders had written an open letter to Musk, describing the company as in "crisis" and demanding he return to work a standard 40-hour week. During the press conference, Musk was also asked about reports of extensive drug use, which the New York Times claimed involved ketamine, ecstasy, and psychedelic mushrooms. The Times reported on Friday that Musk had used these drugs while in office, citing White House insiders and people close to the billionaire. The DOGE leader developed what those sources described to the Times as a serious ketamine habit. Musk dismissed the claims outright, saying it was "fake news". "The New York Times? Is that the same publication that got a Pulitzer prize for false reporting on the Russiagate? "I think it is. That New York Times? Let's move on."
