Employee claims company didn't let his 2-year old enter the premises when he went to return his laptop, netizens react

A laid-off employee claimed he was forced to ask a colleague to look after his 2-year-old son after he was denied entry to his former workplace while returning his company laptop. He shared the experience in a Reddit post titled “Got Laid Off, Took My 2-Year-Old Son to Return My Laptop Learned a Hard Lesson About Companies.”

The employee said he had gone to the office to complete his last-day formalities and return the laptop. Since his wife was also working and there was no one at home to care for their son, he took the child with him.

Employee says son was denied entry

According to the employee, office staff told him that his son could not enter the premises. He explained that it was his final day and that he only needed to submit the laptop before leaving, but said the restriction remained in place.


He then contacted a colleague and asked them to look after his son while he completed the process. What he expected to take about five minutes ultimately took around 15 minutes.

The employee said the experience left him feeling bad, particularly because it happened immediately after he had been laid off.

‘A company is a company’

The employee acknowledged that the workplace may have rules concerning visitors and children and said he was not claiming that the company had violated any policy.

However, he said the experience made him reconsider how employees view their relationship with their employers. He wrote that personal circumstances may not matter to a company in the same way they matter to an employee.

He said workers can spend years contributing to an organisation, working late and taking ownership, but an employment relationship ultimately remains a business arrangement.

Employee urges workers to prioritise family

The employee described the incident as a reminder to maintain perspective and build a life beyond work.

He encouraged others to prioritise their families and avoid making their employer the centre of their identity. He said the experience was personal and that he was sharing it because other people dealing with layoffs might relate to it.

He also noted that he had previously seen an HR employee bring a baby to the office, which had led him to believe that bringing a child into the workplace was not against company policy.

Netizens reaction to the post

The post prompted several users to share how they handled returning company property after being laid off.

One user suggested asking the company to send a pre-labelled box for the laptop rather than making a personal trip to the workplace.

Another user recalled being instructed to visit a FedEx store and charge the shipping costs to the company's account after the employer refused to mail a box. The user said they sent the laptop overnight across the country using premium packing services, with the total cost reaching about $350.

A third user suggested contacting the former manager or HR from the building lobby and asking someone to collect the equipment after security prevented entry with the child.

Another commenter said employees should remember that family and loved ones are more important than any employer and that no job is worth sacrificing health, peace or family time.

A further user said they had returned their laptop and other company items through FedEx after a layoff, while keeping a company hoodie. The commenter added that although companies may not be able to show personal concern, former colleagues can still provide support and help people move forward.

Disclaimer: This article is based on claims, statements, images, videos and other information shared by users on social media platforms. The ET.com has not independently verified the authenticity, accuracy or completeness of these claims unless expressly stated otherwise. The views, allegations and assertions contained in the social media content are those of the respective users and do not reflect the views of The ET.com. The publication bears no responsibility for the accuracy of such claims and readers are advised to exercise their own judgment and seek independent verification where necessary.