Moral Dilemma: Paper marketed its Education Support System (ESS) as a cutting-edge solution, but in reality, it is a half-baked product that is far from fully integrated or built out. What's even more concerning is that there is no transparent pricing model in place, resulting in smaller districts being charged tenfold more than their wealthier counterparts for the same service. When districts express their dissatisfaction and hesitate to renew contracts, Paper's response is to offer the product for free, seemingly in a bid to entice them back. However, this strategy rarely achieved its intended results. In fact, American districts should consider ending their contracts with Paper early or refraining from renewal altogether to ensure they don’t end up in potential litigation risks, especially given the uncertainty surrounding a company seemingly on the verge of financial instability, all while spending valuable federal funds on a product that consistently falls short of expectations. Lack of QUALITY Middle Managers: In February, the company went through an opt-in/out process, resulting in the departure of many middle managers. Unfortunately, these positions were never backfilled, creating personnel deficits across multiple departments. This left existing employees with heavier workloads and less support. Managers that they did replace had little to no experience. They brought in their “friends” who never worked in education but rather in the restaurant business. Many middle managers lacked prior managerial experience and received little to no training. They often benefited from the hard work of Customer Service Managers (CSMs) who took on special projects without compensation or promotion. Opaque Layoffs and Rebranding: In April, Paper had its first round of layoffs, ostensibly in the name of transitioning to the "Education Support System." The problem was that no one truly understood what this ESS meant. When former educators raised concerns about the naming being used with ESE/Special Education programs, their insights were ignored, leaving many of us feeling disconnected from the company's direction. Maternity and Paternity Leave: Paper offered an impressive 6 months of maternity and paternity leave, but in 2023, employees expecting or planning to start families were laid off in multiple rounds. It raises questions about the sincerity of such benefits. Inconsistent Communication: Middle Management and Senior Leadership (SLT) were quick to contact employees at all hours, creating a sense of urgency. The CEO would even send Slack messages to people in the middle of the night. They did not understand how to schedule a message in Slack. However, when individual contributors had questions or concerns, responses were delayed, leaving employees frustrated. Unprofessional HR Practices: Despite boasting about building a world-class HR team, Paper's layoff list was leaked days before the September layoffs, causing unnecessary stress and anxiety among employees. This is far from the professionalism one would expect. The CPO opening said during a company-wide meeting that those who were left needed to “trust” leadership and that “trust is a two-way street.” This made a lot of people uneasy (and still does) because we opted in in February and were selected to remain after rounds of layoffs. We continued to trust despite bad press and to be chastised like a child in a professional setting was disheartening. The COO also openly said in a company meeting that “diversity of thought” was the extent of diversity within the SLT and they were not going to focus on hiring women, POCs, etc. for that level (aka not their friends). There is no DEI, ERGs, or focus on minority populations. Limited Career Growth Opportunities: Opportunities for career growth were scarce, with the Chief People Officer (CPO) insisting on a minimum of six months in a role before considering promotions or raises. Promotions were shrouded in secrecy and not publicly shared. Long-term employees were passed over, and people of color (POCs) were predominantly overlooked, fostering a lack of transparency and fairness. Wasteful Spending: Paper continues to maintain an office in Las Vegas, despite only having two employees in the area. This is particularly baffling for a company that touts itself as "remote-first," and it raises questions about its financial prudence. Despite financial struggles, the company continued to “invest” in off-site training with a questionable "sales coach," who has personal ties to the CEO. Benefit Reductions: Paper would quietly remove benefits, leaving employees to discover these changes on their own. This included the removal of the $1,000 learning stipend and access to mental health benefits like Headspace, further eroding employee morale. In its goal of fostering a trusting and robust workforce, Paper is eroding the very foundation of trust it seeks to build. Instead of nurturing an environment where questions are encouraged, voices are heard, and diversity is valued, the company's actions have created an atmosphere where employees don’t ask questions, feel silenced, and live under the fear of being laid off if they don't conform to a certain mold. For a company aiming to thrive, they need to recognize that trust, transparency, and employee empowerment are not just buzzwords but essential elements for sustainable success and a thriving, innovative workplace culture.
