I think this is definitely acceptable behaviour if they knew they were going to fire you and they were just waiting for the "important" people to roll out of bed to do it.
Most of the lunch service is coming home with me too.
As I was getting at with acceptable, my wording is probably also incorrect. I can see she thought it was justified, but to others not. Also justified doesn’t always mean the right thing to do, but I can see how it can be used that way. You can be justified in punching a bully, that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do (however effective it may be).
I realise I should have included in my comment that it depends on the reasoning for the sacking in the first place. If its because she does unhinged things like this frequently then fair enough but if it's an unjustified sacking then retaliation is definitely acceptable.
Acceptable means this can be the norm. People ‘should’ never do this sort of thing, but that doesn’t mean these sort of actions aren’t justified in some cases.
Depending on the whole situation with what happened in the video to mean her firing, it’s justified and I wouldn’t bat an eye. But that still shouldn’t make this sort of behaviour acceptable. I can feel her pain and think go for it, possibly do it myself in a similar situation, that still doesn’t make it the right thing to do.
I know the fallout is likely to be on the people who don't deserve it, being the FOH who have to tell guests why there suddenly isn't breakfast (probably lie to them to protect company image) and whoever has to clear it up.
Tactical punching of the company wallet is the right thing to do, but when pushed to breaking point this sort of clear thinking doesn't happen any more.
I don't disagree with you entirely, there are better ways than this, but we have all been in a position where this is realistically the next thing that's going to happen if someone tips you over the edge unfairly, and I don't think anyone would see it as an overreaction.
It’s not the seeing it as overreacting, it’s the acceptable of it. She can be absolutely doing what may seem right, it still doesn’t make it acceptable to do it. Some human behaviour should never be acceptable, but can be the right thing to do. Throwing a tantrum like a toddler is not acceptable, even if that’s what you may want to do. Again I’m not saying she should not have done it, but to make it acceptable this sort of thing becomes the normal practice, and it should not be.
I do get what you are saying, it’s just the wording that is my issue. As an extreme example, violence should never be acceptable (outside of combat sports), but it can be justified.
To be acceptable there will be no consequences for actions, she should absolutely get in trouble for this, but I bet it made her feel better.
I find what she has done understandable, doesn’t mean it’s the accepted thing to do. I think it’s the language of what you said as apposed to the sentiment. She should definitely get in trouble for her actions here, but I can see why she did it.
So having a temper tantrum and destroying other peoples stuff is justified when you get fired? I think not. If she did this in my kitchen the police would be called. When it’s time to fire someone im gonna fire them, be it before their shift, during it, or after. Not that im a dick about it, but sometimes you have to fire people and it’s never easy.
Maybe you didn’t want to fire them until the end of their shift? Like is it impossible to make your boss want to fire you just because your shift is winding down? Maybe they just caught her stealing, or maybe the morning manager came in to yet another day of her not doing her job properly?
Impossible to know the important details from this video. The person claiming the boss “waited” to fire her was not actually involved with any of this, I recognize her voice she’s a popular YouTuber. So how do you know she’s telling the facts of the matter as opposed to just inventing a scenario to fit a video for content creation?
But by all means, spill your rage over this injustice by downvoting my very logical observation simply because you saw a 10 second clip on Reddit, and now know the whole story.
Why are people "speaking the truth" always so overly concerned with their vote count? You even asked us to downvote you. You can't then claim that as a negative! You invited it.
But also I didn't vote on your comment either way.
I don’t care about your votes. However, they are a feature of the platform and I can see them coming form a mile away based on the sub. Whether you downvoted or not is moot. The downvote comment was simply a commentary rather than a prediction, and one I came up with after reading all the comments.
It was a joke about your reddit-ass wording of "very logical observation"
So I combined it with another reddit phrasing where people always say they "calmly explained" something when we know damn well they didn't calmly explain shit lmao.
Oh absolutely not. If you deserve to be fired then absolutely this sort of thing couldn't be considered in any way fine. My main point is as you say, when you need to fire someone you do it then and there. If you don't then your reason isn't good enough anyway.
The last person I had to fire knew immediately that he had fucked up, we didn't even need a conversation, he packed his knives and left mid service. He came back the next morning before opening for a coffee and to apologise.
I’m not saying there should be no consequences for this sort of thing. That’s why isn’t not acceptable, I can see why she may of felt like she had to do this. But I don’t think she can do this with impunity, I’d be surprised if the police weren’t called.
I can see why she may have felt like she had to do this.
I cannot.
No one should ever feel like they have to do this, because you will gain absolutely nothing from doing this aside from more problems.
If you somehow don’t add to your list of problems after doing this, you’re almost assuredly adding problems for someone else (the sucker who has to clean up your mess), and that person probably didn’t deserve those problems you created for them.
People shouldn’t be put in the situation that they feel they need to do this. But it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. I assume there is more to this story than we see here.
Not everyone has the ability to just accept the situation and move on calmly, have you not met frustrated people that are on edge. I would be pissed if I was fired in this situation, don’t wait until the end of a shift. I wouldn’t have done this, I would have just walked away, but others wouldn’t respond in this manner. If you have never been put in a bad situation that makes you upset then well done you have managed to avoid things. That’s not the case for everyone.
Again I’m not saying what she has done is right, and it is punishing co workers more than anyone else, but I get the feeling.
In a perfect world we’d all eat ice cream and pet puppies when we’re having a bad day, but the world is far from perfect, and not understanding that is not an excuse to act like this.
Yes I’ve been frustrated, yes I’ve wanted to knock MFers out… but see I exercise this thing called self control, which is something I learned the hard way is important to exercise, especially when I’m frustrated.
People who can’t exercise self control… well their actions speak for themselves. It’s never excusable to have a temper tantrum unless the world revolves around you. Pretty sure the world does not, in fact revolve around anything besides the sun. Grow up, do a better job or get a new one that suits you better than the graveyard cafe shift at a hotel.
Just so you don’t get the wrong idea… I always try not to fire people but instead try and hook them up with another job. It’s almost always been the case and I’ve had to let plenty of people go in my day. Of course, I try to only hire people me and my crew can vibe with.
Yeah, this is unacceptable behaviour, but I can understand why it happened and that doesn’t mean I agree with it happening. But I get it. I can understand why it happened and the justification for it without agreeing to the act itself. People are complicated, I understand the reason for wars, but don’t think they should happen. There is no black and white, it’s all shades of grey.
I would never put someone or want to be put in a similar situation, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.
The moment shit starts breaking, the cops are getting called. Everyone always thinks people will follow them, but it never goes down that way. Especially if she's getting frog marched out of there.
As I say it really depends. If they were just waiting for someone who could be bothered to get out of bed and do the sacking because they were "finished" from the day before even though they knew they were getting rid of her then it's very different to if she had done something monumentally stupid on that particular shift.
Im guessing it was the first thing the manager did that day. Clocked in, read her email saying to let her go. Then went and fired her. More so just bad timing that she worked the night shift.
This doesn’t make sense/isn’t a response to my question. You are claiming it is wrong to fire someone if they knew they were going to fire you and waited until your shift ended. I’m asking you why that would be.
If you are being paid for your work, then I can’t conceive of any reason why this would be bad in any way. But you’re claiming it could be, so I’m wondering why.
"we don't want you to work here but also we really need you to cover this shift"
Makes no sense. Either you want them working there or not, if you've made up your mind, why would you even allow them to work a shift if they are fire able?
Take it on the chin as cost of doing business that an owner or a manager will have to cover their shift. You want to have your cake and fire it too.
This doesn’t include a reason why it’s bad to pay someone to work and then fire them. You are just using extra words to describe how someone worked, were paid and fired, and then saying it’s wrong without offering a reason why it’s wrong. I don’t know how much more simple this question could be.
I’ll tell you now, there is no reason. This is just a thing people say and have never thought about. If you have one, feel free, but you have not included one in this reply
It’s considered rude and disrespectful because it treats the employee as expendable labor rather than a person deserving honesty and basic consideration.
Think of it this way. Assume this took place on Tuesday. Let’s say they “were not rude and disrespectful” (only using your words) - and decided to let this person know about their termination as early as possible. They let the employee know end of day Monday because that’s way better than end of day Tuesday, a whole 24 hours sooner! It’s still end of shift. Or would you prefer they terminate the employee at the beginning of Tuesday’s shift? Or would you prefer they call this person at home Monday evening?
I’m not sure what your expectation is to let this employee go to not be “rude and disrespectful”
Please - let me know what time you think is acceptable to not be “rude”
Again, you are literally just restating the premise that I’ve already dismantled. This isn’t a reason. It’s just stating the thing I’ve already refuted. It’s responding “because!” And acting like that is a reply. Pretty silly
It's just not a thing you should do and just reeks of cowardice on the part of the person doing the firing. Waiting until someone is already going home and they've done the tasks they needed them to do so it doesn't affect them for the rest of the day.
If there is a justified reason to fire someone it needs to happen immediately, otherwise its not a justified reason.
You realize this still avoids providing a reason why it’s bad, right? You are claiming it’s wrong to do this to a person, as if something bad is happening to them when it happens at the end, opposed to the beginning of a shift. I am asking you what that thing is. What is the bad or wrong thing. Telling me it’s cowardice from another person..isn’t a reason why it’s bad..I’m not sure how else I can ask this
What I’m getting at is this is a sentiment people commonly repeat that they heard other people repeat, but it isn’t based in reality. It’s just a thing people say because other people say it. For instance, I can defend why I think it’s actually better at the end of a shift: You are being paid money, and money is good. You can also now plan your next day to hit the ground running in a job hunt, instead of wasting your time, energy and commute going to a job that is not paying you for work anymore.
Now, someone may have a good reason for why it’s worse to fire them at the end, and better at the beginning. I’ve never heard one, but maybe there is. You are claiming there is, and I’m asking what that reason is. So far you’ve sent a couple comments, and haven’t included a reason. It’s fine if you don’t have one, just let me know up front if you’re going to keep replying about it instead of telling me the actual reason.
My old job used to fire people at the end of their days and I thought that was so fucked up. Glad I left before they could get the chance to fuck me over.
This is incredibly silly for multiple reasons. The first to get out of the way is it still isn’t a reason why firing someone at the end of their shift is bad compared to the beginning. It’s just a new claim about having good reasons to fire someone. That’s an entirely separate conversation.
The second is that this just isn’t how anything works. There are countless reasons why people are fired. Countless reasons, valid reasons, that don’t mean the person cannot be there for a last shift. I’m not sure where you got this idea or what world you’re living in but it makes no sense. Im now trying to figure out what you believe a business even is with this statement. Like you don’t understand for increase what lay offs are? You believe if a company can’t afford to continue paying you and keep you on…that’s not a good reason to fire you? So they should, have you work and not pay you? lol what?
Again, that’s just one example of many. But regardless, this is not a reason why it’s wrong to fire someone at the end of a shift. Again, it’s fine if you don’t have one and your claim is wrong, but let’s not keep pushing this along as if the reason is going to come if it isn’t
Lay offs and not being able to afford to pay someone are entirely different things to firing someone.
You get laid off or let go on the grounds of the company not having enough money, you would already know something like that is coming in the vast majority of cases.
There is no legitimate reason to fire someone outside of this without it being inappropriate to keep them for additional time.
I understand you must have an enormous amount of free time and mental gymnastic skill, but I have provided accurate and relevant response to your question. I have no interest in having any kind of further debate with someone such as yourself.
Lay offs and not being able to afford to pay someone are entirely different things to firing someone.
This is completely incoherent…yes…they’re not firing someone..? lol yeah..they’re reasons…why someone can be fired…I mean..what do you believe you just typed there? What do you think is happening right now?
You get laid off or let go on the grounds of the company not having enough money, you would already know something like that is coming in the vast majority of cases.
…and? And so the thing I said…so you’re wrong…those are reasons someone can be fired, and it’s not performance based and not unreasonable for them to be inside a business..I genuinely don’t understand how you’re this confused. You’re not saying anything, and still nothing you’ve typed contains a reason why it’s wrong
There is no legitimate reason to fire someone outside of this
Ok so you were wrong
without it being inappropriate to keep them for additional time.
why would it be inappropriate? Again, I’ve asked this question countless times, and you still avoid providing the reason. Instead keep claiming it, as if claiming it will somehow become a reason for it..I mean..whoa
I understand you must have an enormous amount of free time and mental gymnastic skill, but I have provided accurate and relevant response to your question. I have no interest in having any kind of further debate with someone such as yourself.
You’re very clearly not equipped to engage in a conversation or form coherent thoughts. Not a single thing you’ve written is in any way a coherent reply to anything I’ve written, or even a coherent thought on its own. And again, at no point in all of these words have you provided a single reason for why it’s wrong. You continue over and over to run from backing up your claim while pretending you’re doing so. It has become really hard to watch. I don’t know what else I can do for you here. It’s concerning how little sense you’re able to make.
Firing someone at the end of their shift, when the decision had already been made earlier, is unethical because it disrespects the employee’s time and dignity. You’ve used their labor under false pretenses. It signals to others that management is willing to extract value from someone even after deciding they’re no longer wanted, which erodes trust and morale across the team.
That kind of treatment can hurt your reputation, damage employee retention, and create a toxic workplace culture. If someone is going to be let go, they deserve to know as soon as the decision is made.
Firing someone at the end of their shift, when the decision had already been made earlier, is unethical because it disrespects the employee’s time and dignity.
How is this different from firing them at any other time? It’s just a re wording of the original claim. Why would it disrespect someone’s dignity? That is the question, and this is just restating the premise.
Also, firing them at the beginning of the shift would apply just the same to this. Having someone waste their time going to work and commuting to a job to work and make money, only to find that they aren’t working and making money does literally exactly that. So we’re still at square one here
You’ve used their labor under false pretenses. It signals to others that management is willing to extract value from someone even after deciding they’re no longer wanted, which erodes trust and morale across the team.
What do you think class pretenses means? Again, this is just rewording the premise. It’s another way to describe how people are being fired at the end of their shift. It’s not providing a reason why it’s wrong. It’s also silly in more ways. Like I don’t understand what you think a job is. Basically everyone at every job would be working under false pretenses. Almost everyone in the world is eventually going to have to no longer work where they are. This doesn’t make any sense, isn’t a defense for why it’s bad, and again is just rewording the premise without providing an actual reason why it is wrong compared to the beginning of a shift
That kind of treatment can hurt your reputation, damage employee retention, and create a toxic workplace culture. If someone is going to be let go, they deserve to know as soon as the decision is made
Again, this is not a defense for the claim or a reason why it is wrong compared to firing at the beginning of a shift.
If good reason for firing someone is there, then it happens immediately, otherwise there wasn't a reason in the first place.
This just isn't true. There's tons of reasons why someone should be fired but why having them for a time is better than not.
Dude used to duck out of work 30 minutes before everything was done every night when I closed with him. I brought it up to management and he didn't fix his shit. If they had fired him I would have been dead in the water because we didn't have the staff.
They got a better replacement and sacked him. It was 1000% justified and it was 1000% the right move to wait until the hole could be filled. He even got to keep a job he didn't deserve for an extra week.
This is usually the "have some kind of disciplinary meeting with them" point and if they don't improve then we fire them.
But yes I absolutely take your point, and if it can work financially then get that extra person and eventually push the original one out so long as they aren't doing anything that's actually damaging the Company in the mean time.
I really should have been more specific with my wording of certain comments, it seems.
Listen man, I don't think this is a wording thing. I don't understand any way "it happens immediately, otherwise there wasn't a reason in the first place" could ever be reworded to be true. It's just a fully false thing to say. I think you're just reaching for reasons why this person should be seen as justified/sympathetic.
There are tons of reasons why you keep someone on for a short/midterm while actively staging an offramp. Whether that short/midterm is a shift, a pay period, or even a few months.
For example a chef doing something fireable isn't going to get them kicked out the door day of unless it's a catastrophic fuckup. Doing that could bankrupt a business.
Well, for me it's the time and effort put in, plus the time and effort I get out of it. If I work a full shift, and get fired at the end, I have to go home, still do all my usual shit, try to sleep (and probably won't cause now I'm anxious about finding a paycheck/setting up unemployment), then start the next day trying to do shit. On top of that, if I have things I need to bring home with me from work, or if I want to make sure all my ducks are in a row, I have to do that exhausted from a full day's worth of work. My brain is fried. If it happens on a week like this last week, where 80-90 in a warehouse and our brains are melting, I'm also totally unprepared to handle myself well, and everyone I might want to speak to about what's happening is getting ready to go home.
But, if I get fired before a shift even starts: now I'm anxious but I have a whole day to plan some stuff. I'm fresher, and my employers are at work, so I can talk to people as I need to finalize anything/grab my stuff. It'll still be a heavy day, but at least (for me) banks and stores are open so I can figure out my money, or go talk to unemployment, or do some shopping for staples so I have food, etc.
And because this person is customer-facing, we have no idea what kind of hell they saw in the night, especially since they're a night auditor, so for all we know this person also dealt with some bullshit from customers on the fall-back that "at least I have a job", and now they don't even have that. So all shitty things they dealt with in the previous shit feel like "If they had fired me as I came in I wouldn't have had to deal with any of that".
Well, for me it's the time and effort put in, plus the time and effort I get out of it. If I work a full shift, and get fired at the end, I have to go home, still do all my usual shit, try to sleep (and probably won't cause now I'm anxious about finding a paycheck/setting up unemployment), then start the next day trying to do shit. On top of that, if I have things I need to bring home with me from work, or if I want to make sure all my ducks are in a row, I have to do that exhausted from a full day's worth of work. My brain is fried. If it happens on a week like this last week, where 80-90 in a warehouse and our brains are melting, I'm also totally unprepared to handle myself well, and everyone I might want to speak to about what's happening is getting ready to go home.
All of what you’re describing here would apply to being fired in the beginning of the shift. All the differences here only involve time and when it happens. The closest thing you gave to a reason, was “what if I forget something at work” which is incredibly silly and obviously not a reason why it would be wrong to fire someone at the end of their shift.
But, if I get fired before a shift even starts: now I'm anxious but I have a whole day to plan some stuff. I'm fresher, and my employers are at work, so I can talk to people as I need to finalize anything/grab my stuff. It'll still be a heavy day, but at least (for me) banks and stores are open so I can figure out my money, or go talk to unemployment, or do some shopping for staples so I have food, etc.
Again, every single thing you’ve written here would apply just the same to both before and after a shift. Literally the only difference is which day it is. Which again isn’t a reason why it’s wrong to fire someone at the end of a shift opposed to before. And more, having people exert effort and commute to work, where they won’t work and won’t be paid, is actually the worst of the two options.
Also, to further demonstrate how this doesn’t make sense and this is an arbitrary line: Firing someone before their next shift, is also firing them after their last shift. Firing someone after their last shift, is firing them before their next shift. The moment anyone actually tries to identify when it is acceptable exactly and what the actual reason is, they’ll see they can’t do it, and what is happening is they are just blindly repeating a phrase or sentiment they heard other people repeat, without thinking about whether or not it makes sense, and then retroactively trying to apply reason to it, when none existed in the first place
Unfortunately most of your last paycheque won't be going home with you. At least you will have confirmed to management that they made the right decision!
Humans are complicated and messy. People don’t act like the soulless automatons in a HR training video. You mistreat people and they react. Manners and decorum are made up and usually to suppress people that are being treated badly.
Depends entirely on the circumstances. We had a district manager call the restaurant on a Friday night and threaten to sack one of the kitchen staff because we were 'somehow' overbooked and the GM had told her they couldn't do overtime on that night (salaried with no overtime pay and had somewhere to be). She did things like this a lot, but never directly threatened anyone like that.
I immediately took the whole team to the pub for the rest of the night. Nobody should be treated like shit, and the company was going to learn an overdue lesson.
Cost the company about 4k in comped bills, free drinks and typical trade.
They would have done the overtime for me if I had asked.
A customer is never going to be threatened by a middle aged woman pouring milk on the floor.
We didn't smash anything because we knew that the incident would never be spoken of again and we could all just get on with our lives.
Customers knew we were leaving and why, though. 6 angry kitchen staff stomping through and out of a restaurant is probably far more threatening than whatever this woman was up to.
Comfortable no, no more comfortable than you or I would be sharing a train carriage with someone crazy. Unsafe is a stretch, she didn't appear to have anything against the customers themselves.
Maybe they just didn't want breakfast juice thrown all over their new clothes. Anyone would be uncomfortable there but she's obviously not threatening the guests, just wants to fuck the management. I don't condone it, but oh do I get it.
537
u/Rusty_Tap Jul 12 '25
I think this is definitely acceptable behaviour if they knew they were going to fire you and they were just waiting for the "important" people to roll out of bed to do it.
Most of the lunch service is coming home with me too.