There were many people who were axed as part of the layoffs days after start.
But these layoffs were planned for months.
The thinking was either 1) we can rescind job offers and give them nothing or 2) at least give a severance package to people who expected employment.
Now, I'm not excusing that there are cases like this that fall through the cracks. It really really sucks.
I'm not sure how to process it... when you're laying off 10k+ people there are bound to be "bugs"/misses and general failures.
Should META have preemptively rescinded this employee's offer so they got nothing but at least didn't move? Maybe. Or give months of pay as an "I'm sorry our timing was awful (like they did)" in exchange for their own failure? Also a bad option given the move.
I feel for this person. They got caught in get crossfire and that really blows. I'd be pretty pissed.
In the other hand, the thought behind what happened was admirable - even though it created some awful edge cases.
META has done a lot to draw ire. In this case I was impressed by management's decision not to rescind offers and save maximum money but to acknowledge that people would have quit jobs, moved, etc and give severances.
A counterpoint could be "why give the job offer in the first place"? Given the level of secrecy and reality of a nearly 90k person company - it's highly doubtful that the people involved in the hiring process had any idea of the impending layoffs.
Still - super super crappy for anyone who relocated due to the offer.