When a Webflow software engineer woke up on a Wednesday morning to a series of alarming text messages from coworkers, he had no idea that within 90 minutes he would lose his job. The engineer, who spoke anonymously to a local newspaper, described the experience as a “bloodbath.” This is the story of how Webflow, a California tech startup valued at over $4 billion, handled its second round of layoffs in just over a year, and why the company’s explanation — blaming artificial intelligence — has drawn sharp criticism from the very people who built its product.
Why did Webflow lay off employees?
CEO Linda Tong announced the layoffs on a Wednesday, framing the decision as a necessary response to an industry shift. She described the moment as an “inflection point” for the company. According to Tong, artificial intelligence is fundamentally changing how marketing teams create, test, and optimize digital experiences. She stated that companies willing to make decisive moves during such transitions are the ones that pull ahead.
Tong explained that Webflow is moving toward smaller, more focused teams. She said the new structure will allow the organization to move faster and deliver more value to customers. Leaders, she added, will stay closer to the actual work. The company spokesperson, Paul Chalker, declined to provide an exact number of impacted employees. Webflow employs between 500 and 1,000 people, based on its LinkedIn profile.
This is not Webflow’s first workforce reduction. In 2024, the company cut 8% of its staff. The current round appears to be larger, though the company has not confirmed exact figures. The stated rationale — AI-driven restructuring — places Webflow alongside a growing list of tech firms making similar claims.
What do former employees think of the layoffs?
Former employees paint a starkly different picture than the official narrative. The anonymous software engineer who spoke to the press described the layoffs as a “bloodbath.” He believes more people lost their jobs this time compared to the 2024 cuts. His criticism was pointed: he said the C-suite believes he is being replaced by AI, but they do not actually understand what AI does.
“They’re going to find out at some point that they haven’t actually replaced anything, all they’ve done is make a mess,” the former developer said. He argued that AI cannot replace people because the technology does not function that way. In his view, the company’s leadership made a strategic error by overestimating what AI can currently deliver.
Another former employee learned about her termination through a personal email account. Neither worker received any advance notice. Both described the communication as sudden and impersonal. The gap between executive rhetoric about AI and the on-the-ground developer reality is wide, and these former employees believe the company will eventually face the consequences of that disconnect.
Did employees receive any warning?
Both former employees who spoke to the press confirmed there was no heads-up before the layoffs. The software engineer described the timeline in detail. He woke up around 7:30 AM to concerning text messages from colleagues. About 90 minutes later, an email arrived informing him that his employment had been terminated.
Spokesperson Paul Chalker explained that as part of standard security procedures, access to company devices and systems was restricted a few minutes before notifications were sent to personal email addresses. He stated this step was taken to protect customer data and company information, not to leave employees without information or support.
For the workers receiving those emails, the distinction offered little comfort. Being locked out of company systems before receiving termination notice is a jarring experience, especially when working remotely. The lack of a conversation, a meeting, or even a phone call left many feeling that the company prioritized data security over human dignity.
How does this compare to other tech layoffs?
Webflow is not alone in citing AI as a reason for workforce reductions. More than 140,000 tech jobs have been cut so far this year, with artificial intelligence frequently cited as a central factor in restructuring decisions. Major companies including Meta, Intuit, Cisco, and LinkedIn have all announced significant job cuts.
In a notable parallel, Wix, the Israeli-based website building platform, announced a workforce reduction of roughly 20% on the same day as Webflow’s layoffs. CEO Avishai Abraham cited currency exchange rates between the Shekel and the US dollar, as well as the rapid evolution of AI, as driving factors. He described the current moment as the most significant shift in how companies are built since the invention of modern programming languages in the 1970s.
The pattern is clear: companies across the tech sector are using AI as a justification for restructuring. Whether this represents genuine strategic necessity or a convenient cover for cost-cutting is a matter of debate. What is certain is that the trend shows no signs of slowing down.
The gap between executive AI rhetoric and on-the-ground developer reality
The former Webflow engineer’s complaint touches on a broader tension in the tech industry. Executives often speak about AI in sweeping, transformative terms. They describe a future where algorithms handle tasks that humans currently perform. Developers, however, work with AI tools daily and understand their current limitations.
AI can automate certain repetitive tasks. It can generate text, suggest code completions, and analyze data patterns. But it cannot understand context the way a human does. It cannot navigate office politics, make judgment calls about product direction, or build relationships with customers. The gap between what AI can do today and what executives claim it can do is significant.
For a no-code platform like Webflow, the AI pivot raises specific questions. The company’s core product allows users to build websites without writing code. If AI can generate entire websites from a prompt, does that reduce the need for human designers and developers? Or does it simply change the nature of the work? The answer is not straightforward, and Webflow’s leadership appears to have bet on the former interpretation.
Consider an engineer who joined Webflow because they believed in the mission of democratizing web development. They spent years building features, fixing bugs, and supporting customers. Then, in a single morning, they receive an email telling them their role is being eliminated because AI can do their job. The developer knows, from daily hands-on experience, that AI cannot replicate what they do. The disconnect between executive vision and technical reality is painful and personal.
How repeated layoffs affect company culture and survivor morale
This is the second time Webflow has cut its workforce in just over a year. Repeated layoffs send a powerful message to remaining employees. They signal that the company is unstable, that leadership may make reactive decisions, and that no role is truly safe.
Survivor morale is a well-documented phenomenon in organizational psychology. Employees who remain after a layoff often experience guilt, anxiety, and reduced productivity. They wonder if they will be next. They question whether they should start looking for other opportunities. The trust between employees and leadership erodes.
For a company that relies on innovation and creativity, this erosion is dangerous. Developers who are worried about their jobs are less likely to take risks, propose new ideas, or go the extra mile for customers. The very agility that Tong said the company is pursuing may be undermined by the fear that the restructuring has created.
Furthermore, the way the layoffs were communicated — via personal email, with no advance warning — compounds the damage. Employees who witnessed colleagues being locked out of their accounts without any conversation may find it difficult to trust that they would be treated differently. The security protocol, while understandable from a data protection standpoint, creates an atmosphere of suspicion rather than transparency.
The role of AI in reshaping no-code/low-code platforms like Webflow
Webflow operates in the no-code and low-code development space. These platforms allow users with minimal programming experience to build websites, applications, and automations. The rise of generative AI has created both opportunities and threats for companies in this sector.
On one hand, AI can make no-code tools more powerful. A user could describe the website they want in plain English, and the AI could generate the structure, layout, and content. This reduces the learning curve and opens the platform to even more users. On the other hand, if AI can generate websites entirely on its own, the value proposition of a no-code platform becomes less clear. Why pay for a tool that helps you build a website when you can ask an AI to build it for you?
Webflow’s leadership appears to believe that the former scenario is more likely. By restructuring around AI, they are betting that the platform’s future lies in integrating intelligent features that augment human creativity rather than replace it. The question is whether the layoffs are a necessary step toward that future or a premature reaction to a technology that has not yet matured.
For a marketing team that relies on Webflow to manage its website, the AI pivot raises practical concerns. Will the platform’s core features change? Will pricing increase? Will support quality decline as the workforce shrinks? These are questions that customers are likely asking themselves as they evaluate their own vendor relationships.
What “restructuring” really means for product focus and team autonomy
CEO Linda Tong stated that Webflow is moving to a simpler structure with leaders who stay closer to the work. This language is common in restructuring announcements. It suggests that the previous organizational design had become bloated or inefficient. The implication is that smaller teams will be more autonomous and move faster.
In practice, restructuring often means the opposite. Teams become smaller, but they are also expected to cover the same scope of work with fewer people. Autonomy may increase, but so does pressure. Leaders who are “closer to the work” may micromanage rather than empower. The promise of agility can become a justification for overwork.
For product teams at Webflow, the layoffs likely mean that certain projects will be deprioritized or cancelled. Features that were in development may be shelved. Roadmaps will be rewritten. The engineers and designers who remain will need to absorb the work of their former colleagues while also adapting to new reporting structures and expectations.
For a startup that has raised significant venture capital, the pressure to show profitability or growth is immense. Layoffs are often seen as a way to extend runway and demonstrate fiscal discipline to investors. Whether this particular restructuring achieves those goals remains to be seen.
The emotional and practical toll of sudden layoff communication
Receiving a termination notice via email is a jarring experience. For the Webflow employees who experienced it, the lack of a human conversation added insult to injury. They were locked out of their accounts minutes before receiving the news. They had no chance to say goodbye to colleagues, save personal files, or ask questions.
Imagine a developer who has spent years contributing to a product they care about. They have built relationships with teammates, invested in learning the codebase, and aligned their career with the company’s mission. Then, in a single morning, that connection is severed by an automated email. The emotional whiplash is significant.
You may also enjoy reading: Upgraded iOS 27 Camera Interface: 7 New Features.
For an engineer considering a job at a tech startup, this scenario raises a practical question: how do you evaluate job security? The honest answer is that you cannot fully predict when or if layoffs will happen. But you can assess the company’s financial health, its history of workforce reductions, and its communication patterns. A company that has laid off employees twice in two years may be more likely to do so again.
For employees currently working at startups, the Webflow story serves as a reminder to keep resumes updated, maintain professional networks, and have a financial cushion. Sudden job loss is always possible, and being prepared reduces the stress of the situation.
What if AI-driven layoffs become a standard practice across the tech industry?
The current wave of AI-related layoffs raises a troubling possibility. If companies can use AI as a justification for reducing headcount without facing significant backlash, the practice may become widespread. Executives may find it convenient to blame a technology rather than admit to poor planning, overhiring, or strategic missteps.
If this becomes the norm, the tech industry could see a permanent shift in the employer-employee relationship. Workers may become more skeptical of company communications about AI strategy. They may demand more transparency about how decisions are made. The trust that is essential for productive collaboration may erode further.
On the other hand, companies that misuse the AI justification may face consequences. If the promised productivity gains from AI do not materialize, executives will be held accountable. If customer satisfaction declines because there are fewer people to support the product, revenue may suffer. The market has a way of punishing short-sighted decisions.
For now, the trend is clear. Webflow, Wix, Meta, and many others are citing AI as a reason for restructuring. Whether this represents a genuine transformation or a convenient narrative is something that only time will reveal.
How do I assess whether my company’s AI strategy is genuine or just a cover for cost-cutting?
For employees trying to evaluate their own company’s AI strategy, there are several indicators to watch. First, look at whether the company is investing in AI training and tools for existing employees. A genuine AI strategy includes upskilling the current workforce, not just replacing them.
Second, examine the specifics of the AI initiatives. Vague statements about “leveraging AI” or “transforming with AI” are less credible than concrete plans with clear milestones. If leadership cannot explain exactly how AI will change specific workflows, skepticism is warranted.
Third, consider the timing. If AI is cited as a reason for layoffs but the company has not previously discussed AI as a strategic priority, the explanation may be opportunistic. Companies that have been investing in AI for years are more credible than those that suddenly discover its importance during a cost-cutting exercise.
Finally, talk to engineers and product managers who work with AI tools. Their perspective on what the technology can and cannot do is often more grounded than executive pronouncements. If the people closest to the technology are skeptical of the company’s AI strategy, their skepticism is probably justified.
Why does leadership often frame layoffs as an “inflection point” rather than acknowledging poor planning?
The language of “inflection points,” “restructuring,” and “strategic realignment” serves a specific purpose. It frames layoffs as a proactive, forward-looking decision rather than a reactive, defensive one. It suggests that leadership has identified a coming change and is positioning the company to take advantage of it.
This framing is more palatable to investors, employees, and the public than admitting that the company overhired, misjudged the market, or failed to achieve expected growth. It allows executives to maintain an aura of competence and control even when the situation suggests otherwise.
The problem is that this language can become a crutch. If every layoff is described as an “inflection point,” the term loses meaning. Employees and investors learn to translate the phrase as “we made mistakes and now we are cutting costs.” The credibility of leadership erodes over time.
For the former Webflow employees who received termination emails, the CEO’s statement about an “inflection point” likely rang hollow. They experienced the layoff not as a strategic pivot but as a sudden, impersonal, and poorly communicated event. The gap between executive language and employee experience is a recurring theme in the tech industry, and it shows no signs of closing.
What can employees do to prepare for sudden remote layoffs with no warning?
The Webflow layoffs offer a stark lesson for remote workers. When you work from home, a layoff can happen without any in-person cues. There is no hushed conversation in the hallway, no closed-door meeting with managers. The first indication may be a notification on your personal device.
To prepare for this possibility, remote employees should take several practical steps. Keep personal files and documents separate from company systems. Maintain a backup of important contacts and project portfolios on personal accounts. Save performance reviews and positive feedback for future job applications.
Financial preparation is equally important. Maintain an emergency fund that covers at least three to six months of living expenses. Keep your resume and LinkedIn profile updated. Stay connected with your professional network even when you are not actively job searching. The time to build relationships is before you need them.
Finally, understand your company’s layoff policies and legal rights. Review your employment contract if you have one. Know what severance, if any, you are entitled to. Being informed reduces the shock and helps you make better decisions if the worst happens.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many employees did Webflow lay off in this round?
Webflow has not disclosed the exact number of employees affected by the recent layoffs. The company employs between 500 and 1,000 people according to its LinkedIn profile. Former employees have described the cuts as a “bloodbath” and believe this round is larger than the 8% reduction the company made in 2024.
What is the difference between Webflow’s 2024 layoffs and the current round?
The 2024 layoffs affected 8% of Webflow’s workforce. The current round, announced in 2025, appears to be significantly larger based on employee accounts. The company cited AI-driven restructuring as the reason for the latest cuts, whereas the previous reduction was attributed to broader market conditions. The communication process also differed, with the recent layoffs being delivered via personal email with no advance warning.
Is Webflow’s AI strategy likely to succeed in the long term?
The success of Webflow’s AI strategy depends on whether the technology can deliver the productivity gains that leadership expects. Former employees have expressed skepticism, arguing that AI cannot replace the nuanced work that developers perform. The company is betting that smaller, AI-augmented teams can move faster and serve customers better. Whether this bet pays off will become clear over the next one to two years as the restructured organization attempts to execute on its vision.
