Frank Rimerman and Co LLP reviews about "layoff"

I was placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) by my manager during the busiest season, without prior warnings, due to "technical issues" and "lack of communication." I disagreed with this assessment for several reasons: - This is an entry-level position, and the expectations seemed unrealistic. - I was making similar mistakes, asking the same questions, and taking the same amount of time on projects as my teammates—none of whom were placed on a PIP. - The training felt rushed and ineffective, and many associates expressed concerns about this. Despite actively communicating my weaknesses and improving based on feedback from seniors and managers, I was told during my PIP evaluation that I still hadn’t met expectations. The focus seemed to be on stretching small mistakes into larger issues. Additionally, concerns about the time I took on returns were raised, even though that wasn’t mentioned when I was first placed on the PIP. Ultimately, I was fired, which caught me off guard. I later learned that many other associates experienced the same thing. Given the firm's downsizing and structural changes, I believe "poor performance" was used as a cover for broader layoffs. Another con is that the tax department would hit 65-hour work weeks during their busy season, making for a poor work/life balance.