> I found out this morning that one of the tech guys from my company got fired. We know for a fact that he was escorted out of the building and someone else was given the responsibilty of packing his desk up, which is standard operating procedure around here when someone gets fired. So, we're safe in assuming he didn't just quit.
>
> I don't know him at all besides being able to put his name to his face. But from what I've heard in the past, and today as well, he's a very well-liked, knowledgable, hard-working guy. And because of this fact, a lot of people are upset because they aren't being told why he was "fired". Personally, I think I can understand why. The company doesn't owe explanations to the rest of us for their decisions - well founded or not. I would love it if they did, but the business world rules don't work like that. In a way, I can see how sharing details could get the company in trouble depending on what the circumstances were.
>
> My question, or topic for discussion, is this: What do you think would be a proper or "better" way for the company to explain things to the rest of the employees besides telling us that he is no longer employed here? Just curious if anyone has any thoughts.

I personally like the normal way of saying "So-and-so is not employed by this company any more" just fine. This happened a lot of times in my previous company, and I just shrugged it off. Then one day it came to pass that two people were fired: one was our webmaster, who had become a good friend of mine, and I was the other myself.
I asked for an explanation for this from the CEO himself. He said that my immediate manager (who had been fired before me) had given him a performance report of our department and I came off as the least productive. Well, I couldn't blame the CEO for that, so I decided to also shrug it off.
I was lucky enough to get another job only two months afterwards.