That’s Business Insider being Business Insider, yeah.

I’m super confused by this verbiage. If it’s harder for a worker to get hired than fired, doesn’t that mean that it’s relatively easier to get fired? Which is nit how it should be right?

Based on the article context, shouldn’t the worker quoted in the article be saying “It’s very hard to get hired here, and getting fired is even fucking harder!”?

Anyway I agree that it should not be easy for a company to fire workers. I think that knowing this, companies should try to ensure they’re onboarding quality workers in the first place, which would probably involve a difficult hiring process.

My read on the article isn’t that workers are complaining about “half decent work conditions”, but that workers are complaining about completely checked out coworkers. If you’re a new, junior level worker and both your manager and your Intermediate and Senior level coworkers have completely checked out, you’re probably not getting the performance feedback, mentorship, or over the shoulder exposure to techniques and procedures that are invaluable at that stage in your career.

I’m definitely reading between the lines, but I’m seeing an article where less tenured employees are complaining about that culture shift, and BI is putting their “happy, well-compensated employees bad” corporate bootlicker spin on it.