Ubisoft has terminated David Michaud-Cromp, a design team lead with roughly 13 years at the company, after he publicly criticized management decisions on LinkedIn. The firing came after an initial suspension failed to resolve the situation.
Michaud-Cromp’s posts targeted two main issues. First, he questioned Ubisoft’s push to bring employees back to the office five days a week. He wrote that the company justified the mandate by claiming it “believes in collaboration,” but he suggested other motives were at play.
Second, he criticized the decision to have Vantage Studios led by Charlie Guillemot, who is Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot’s son and now serves as co-CEO. Michaud-Cromp pointed to Charlie’s background at Unagi Games, a company focused on AI-powered web3 entertainment, and questioned whether that experience qualified him for the role. He also argued that cost-cutting should start with executive compensation rather than falling on regular employees.
The posts were made on LinkedIn under his real name while his profile listed Ubisoft as his current employer. This matters because LinkedIn functions as a professional platform where statements carry more weight than anonymous comments. Companies generally treat public criticism from identified employees as a reputational risk, especially when it comes from senior staff.
Most major companies include social media and non-disparagement clauses in their employment policies. These typically restrict employees from making public statements that could harm the company’s reputation or reveal internal information. LinkedIn posts from current employees often fall directly into this category since they’re tied to professional identities.
Ubisoft first suspended Michaud-Cromp before escalating to termination. The exact grounds for dismissal—whether classified as termination for cause and how it affects severance—remain unclear.
The return-to-office battle
The gaming industry has seen mounting tension over return-to-office mandates since the pandemic ended. Many studios expanded remote and hybrid work during COVID-19, then later reversed course with stricter in-office requirements. These policies create friction around relocation costs, childcare logistics, and commuting burdens, particularly for employees hired during remote-friendly periods.
The Charlie Guillemot appointment adds a nepotism angle to the controversy. Family leadership at major companies always creates optics challenges, especially when appointments involve the CEO’s relatives. Critics tend to scrutinize such moves unless companies demonstrate clear qualifications and independent oversight.
