CEO Denies 2-Day Wedding Leave, Faces Backlash For 'Rage Baiting'

The decision by Lauren Tickner, CEO of a British marketing company, to deny an employee's request for a two-day leave to attend their wedding has sparked widespread debate. Her justification, shared on social media, has raised a lot of important questions.

An Apparent Lack of Preparation and Replacement Training?

Initially, Tickner stated that the leave request was denied because the employee had not made sufficient preparations for their absence. The employee, she claimed, failed to train a suitable replacement before requesting time off, which she believed could jeopardize the progress of two very important projects. Emphasizing the importance of maintaining workflow, Tickner instructed the employee to ensure a trained substitute was in place before considering any leave. According to her, this lack of foresight put the company's pressing deadlines at risk.

A Creative Leave Policy

Despite the initial denial, Tickner later took to Threads to provide additional context about her decision, highlighting her company's 'Flexible Time Off' policy. This policy, designed to offer freedom and trust to employees, allows them to take leave without needing managerial approval. Tickner encouraged the employee to leverage this policy for future absences, stressing that team members could set their own schedules, choose their work locations, and take time off at their discretion under the company's framework.

"It's called Flexible Time Off. (The opposite of micromanagement & outdated policies). Your employees set their hours. They work where they want. They take days off when they choose," she explained in her post.

Balancing Flexibility with Responsibility

Tickner further elaborated on the philosophy behind the policy, emphasising that it fosters a culture of trust and mutual respect within the team. According to her, this approach motivates high-performing employees to maintain a strong work ethic, as those who misuse the system risk losing respect among their peers. She implied that the policy creates a self-regulating environment where team members hold each other accountable.

"The biggest benefit? A-players don't respect slackers. Anyone taking too much time off loses status. Flexible Time Off is a policy that creates trusting teams. What's your approach to unlimited time off?" she added, inviting public opinion on her management style.

A Divided Response: Social Media Reacts

Tickner's post quickly went viral, igniting a debate among social media users. Many found the CEO's stance contradictory, pointing out that her decision to deny leave appeared to clash with the spirit of the company's Flexible Time Off policy. People on social media argued that if employees truly had the freedom to take time off whenever they wanted, a request for a short, two-day leave should not have been a point of contention.

Some users felt that the emphasis on training a replacement was a reasonable expectation, especially given the project's urgency. They highlighted the importance of maintaining continuity in a business environment where deadlines matter. Others, however, viewed the CEO's stance as overly rigid, particularly in the context of a personal event like a wedding. The incident raised broader questions, let's have a look.

One user commented, "Two days? You could have registered your concern and given them the two days off. This would enhance your status going forward. Can't believe your business is hanging on a thread because two staff members want two days off."

Another commented, "The part I don’t like is anyone taking too much time off loses status. You are pretty much guilting people into not using their PTO. And who determines what too much time is? Some employers might think 2 weeks a year is the most a person needs. I would disagree."

A third commented, "-It’s the end of the year and they’ve only taken 2.5 weeks off? -are they part of management where training is their responsibility? -even after ppl with LIMITED PTO have used their PTO, get time off approved (with a point on their record for attendance perhaps) as long as it’s given enough notice -seems the only reason ur really denying it is because of lack of preparation on your end?"

"Serious question, I read the full thing. Post 1 begins "I denied my employee’s request for 2 days off work", #2 "- Find a replacement.", #3 "It's called Flexible Time Off." and #4 "The biggest benefit? A-players don't respect slackers."That's the whole thing, and I don't see where she comes across as the good guy here. She allows her employees Flexible Time Off, wow! Except when she doesn't allow it, and has her employees 'lose status' if they take too much time off. She's not the good guy.

Ultimately, Tickner's decision has sparked a discussion on how companies can balance the need for employee freedom with the demands of business operations. Meanwhile, her attempts to address the backlash only fueled further confusion, despite her repeated requests for people to "read till the end" of her explanations. She also faced allegations of "rage-baiting" after many suggested she deliberately crafted a provocative post to stir controversy and boost engagement.