• themusicman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    If I had to guess, I’d say the turnover stats only count full employees, and are therefore a reflection of their “trial period” hiring policy more than anything else. They avoid needing to officially “fire” people they don’t like, and anyone who isn’t comfortable with the culture can leave without needing to “resign”.

    On top of that, LTT holds “dream job” status in many people’s minds, so a lower-than-average turnover is expected, and it’s impossible to distinguish that effect from the working conditions.

    I’m not saying it’s necessarily a bad place to work, I’m just saying the stats they gave are inconclusive.

    • whofearsthenight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I had to guess, I’d say the turnover stats only count full employees, and are therefore a reflection of their “trial period” hiring policy more than anything else.

      If they were deliberately manipulating the stats, that would come out quickly with the level of scrutiny they’re facing right now. Also, wholeheartedly agree with a trial period. They’re good for the company obviously for lots of reasons, but a less obvious one is rooting out cultural fits and problem people like this. Also, I think this is better for the employee as well - it’s much better for mental health to have a clean break than it is to spend the next 6 months going through “performance improvement plans” and such.

      • themusicman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Never said the trial period was bad, nor that they were “manipulating” the figures per se (including temp employees in the stats wouldn’t make sense at all). It just makes comparing against the national average a little silly.