YesMadam says ‘stressed employees’ weren’t fired but given a break, calls mass firing controversy a publicity stunt

So, here’s the plot twist: Noida-based startup YesMadam says they didn’t really fire over 100 employees for being stressed. Nope, they were just “given a break to reset.”

Sounds lovely, doesn’t it? Like a paid vacation; only without pay, benefits, or a job to come back to. But let’s rewind to how this melodrama started, and more importantly, let’s talk about what it exposed.

First, the “termination.” Then, the “just kidding.”

The story began when YesMadam’s HR allegedly sent an email to stressed employees, announcing they were being “let go” to “ensure no one remains stressed at work.”

Subtle, right? Screenshots of this email went viral when Anushka Dutta, a UX copywriter at the company, shared her disbelief on LinkedIn.

“First you conduct a random survey and then fire us overnight because we’re feeling stressed?” she wrote, claiming over 100 employees faced the same fate.

But, oh, the internet wasn’t buying it.

Critics quickly pointed out the absurdity of a wellness company firing employees for stress; while former employees painted a picture of grueling work hours and little regard for mental health.

“Employees are forced to work even on weekends and off days,” one former staffer claimed, making the company’s “commitment to well-being” sound more like a corporate punchline.

By the time the backlash hit full throttle, YesMadam stepped forward with a clarification.

In a social media post, they claimed no one was fired and that the email was part of a planned campaign to highlight workplace stress. The goal, they said, was to raise awareness; not, you know, awareness about their working conditions, which reportedly resemble a boot camp with lipstick on.

Publicity stunt or damage control?

Now, let’s get real.

Was this actually a publicity stunt from the get-go, or was it a panicked cover-up after the backlash turned their “termination” into a PR nightmare? The evidence leans heavily toward the latter.

Why? Because if the goal was awareness, why did they wait until the internet collectively dragged them before clarifying? Why did they fail to mention any actual initiatives to address workplace stress? And why, oh why, would they think a mock firing would spark a positive conversation about mental health? This smells less like a stunt and more like a scramble to spin a tone-deaf policy into a teachable moment.

Even if it was planned, the execution raises serious questions about YesMadam’s leadership.

Imagine an actual stressed employee receiving that email, thinking they’ve just lost their job overnight. Would anyone call that a wellness initiative or just corporate cruelty?

The irony of a wellness brand that causes stress

What’s especially galling is that YesMadam’s entire brand is built on wellness and self-care. This is a company that promises to pamper you in the comfort of your own home, all while allegedly working its employees into the ground.

Former staffers have spoken out about long hours and weekend work, painting a picture of a workplace where “relaxation” is reserved strictly for paying customers.

And then there’s the elephant in the room: even if this was all a big misunderstanding (or an ill-advised PR stunt), it highlights a disturbing trend in how companies handle mental health.

YesMadam’s response to stress, real or fabricated, seems to prioritize optics over solutions. It’s performative wellness at its finest, where the appearance of caring matters more than the reality of employee well-being.

The internet isn’t buying it

Of course, social media has had a field day with this debacle.

One user wrote, “If this is a PR campaign, whoever came up with this idea deserves to be fired; but, you know, in a stress-free way.”

Another added, “If your workplace is so toxic that employees are forced to work weekends, don’t try to rebrand firings as ‘resets.’”

Some even questioned whether the stunt would backfire on the company’s investors, which include Shark Tank India’s big names like Peyush Bansal and Vineeta Singh.

“Surely they didn’t sign up to fund a circus,” one user quipped.

So, what’s next for YesMadam?

If this was indeed a publicity stunt, it’s safe to say it backfired spectacularly.

The company’s apology, while full of flowery phrases like “reset” and “recharge,” does little to address the underlying criticisms. If anything, it has drawn more attention to YesMadam’s alleged workplace culture and not in the way they hoped.

At the end of the day, YesMadam has inadvertently highlighted a crucial point: handling workplace stress isn’t just about awareness. It’s about action. And no amount of PR spin can substitute for creating an environment where employees feel supported, valued, and here’s the kicker; actually less stressed.

So, was it a stunt or a panicked backpedal? Either way, YesMadam has a long road ahead if it hopes to regain credibility.

Because while they may have tried to spark a conversation about mental health, what they’ve really done is start a debate about corporate accountability and whether it’s time to hold “wellness” companies to the same standards they claim to uphold.