Bumble has lost a third of its Texas workforce in the months since the state passed the controversial abortion SB 8 (Senate Bill 8), also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, over a year ago. This new data point was shared by Bumble’s Interim General Counsel, Elizabeth Monteleone, speaking on a panel this afternoon at the SXSW conference in Austin, Texas. The panel focused on the “healthcare crisis in Post-Roe America” and featured women who had both sued and spoken out about the need to have doctors, not politicians, involved in their healthcare decisions.
I was looking for some additional info to see if bumble is helping employees with these moves and found this instead: Austin-based Bumble to lay off nearly a third of its workforce.
So… I guess OPs article is still true, but maybe the cause is a bit different than we were led to believe? Suggestion is a helluva drug.
The original article mentions these layoffs as distinct from the relocation of a separate third of the workforce away from Texas.
You can read how they are mentioned in the last paragraph of the article, and then see how Bumble’s Interim General Counsel, Elizabeth Monteleone, discusses the relocations as related to the heartbeat bill in the rest of the article body.
I think you probably just missed that part of the article. Still, consider editing what you wrote, because it is misleading and implies that this is an attempt to use the layoffs for political aims.
Tell me you didn’t read OP’s article without telling me you didn’t read OP’s article.
But I did read it. Please let me know where you find wording that directly ties the abortion ban as the result of people leaving the company. It’s all innuendo.
My point in looking further in the first place was, I wondered even if a third of people wanted to leave the state (which I don’t doubt), how could they all really afford to pick up and move? This wasn’t addressed in OPs article- which is why I went looking in the first place.
“Bumble has lost a third of its Texas workforce in the months since the state passed the controversial abortion SB 8” is not mutually exclusive from, “we let a third of our workforce go after SB8.” It’s just the first version cats the blame elsewhere, IMO quite dangerously. I get why they did it, they are campaigning for women’s reproductive rights. But it’s this kind of disingenuous language that gives talking points and counter claims to proponents of the law.
Please tell me you’re susceptible to an inflexible belief system despite contrary evidence without telling me you’re susceptible to an inflexible belief system despite contrary evidence.