Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 185 posts

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#101

Post by walshemj »

Bartweiss wrote: post #41
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #36

1,200 of 33,000 employees amounts to 3.6% of the work force. This level of action, 1 in 25 employees, gives managers an opportunity to release employees that looked good in the interview but did not meet expectations. Whether Tesla conducted this in a proper manner is open to debate and perhaps details will emerge if/when any former employees pursue Tesla in court. But any company needs to address the inevitable hiri…

> I don't see evidence that Tesla is doing any more than that If the lack of promised performance reviews is accurate, that's the obvious issue - it implies a labor force decision disguised as a performance decision. This is a pretty common move in e.g. game development, so it certainly isn't unthinkable. The point about total workforce size is well taken, though; this still seems like it could be as simple as "times…

Then the WARN act applies

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#102

Post by programmarchy »

moduspol wrote: post #65
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #36

1,200 of 33,000 employees amounts to 3.6% of the work force. This level of action, 1 in 25 employees, gives managers an opportunity to release employees that looked good in the interview but did not meet expectations. Whether Tesla conducted this in a proper manner is open to debate and perhaps details will emerge if/when any former employees pursue Tesla in court. But any company needs to address the inevitable hiri…

Indeed. Calling 3.6% a "mass firing" to me looks like pushing a narrative.

Might be a narrative. One reason would be to push the stock price down. Currently down to 330 from 360 a month ago. Could be a good time to buy if you're long.

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#103

Post by moduspol »

gowld wrote: post #87
moduspol wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Calling 3.6% a "mass firing" to me looks like pushing a narrative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layoff > "Mass layoff" is defined by the United States Department of Labor as 50 or more workers laid off from the same company around the same time.

By that definition, they could lay off only 0.15% of their workforce and still qualify. Likewise, bigger companies are probably in a perpetual state of "mass layoff."

Context is important, though. The term can be simultaneously technically correct in the context of US Department of Labor terminology and misleading to a general audience. I think that is happening here.

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#104

Post by rgbrenner »

ctdonath wrote: post #52
20years wrote: post #18

This doesn't really surprise me. A few years ago we had lead generation software that catered to the solar industry. We had some decent sized clients and it did really well for about 2 years. Once the tax credits started going away and the power companies started killing off their rebates, a lot of these solar companies were not able to survive. One of our larger clients who was heavily funded went bankrupt this year…

Recall that Musk has been begging Congress to end the subsidies (broadly defined), which are distorting the market.

Odd that he didn't have an objection to it when Tesla was benefiting from it.. but once Tesla 3 sales crossed that 200k threshold, and set the end date on the subsidy for Tesla... then Musk comes out and says 'We MUST end this subsidy for everyone immediately'.

Real principled stance there.

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#105

Post by dtparr »

kunaalarya wrote: post #100
dtparr wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not correct. $389 is its all-time high. It closed at ~$345 on Friday and opened ~$350 on Monday.

it's literally $325 right now so what's not correct?

skgoa said "The stock price has dropped by $64 since the start of the week BTW."

It has dropped ~$25 since the start of the week. It's down $64 from its all-time high.

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#106

Post by walshemj »

yeezul wrote: post #95
gowld wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layoff > "Mass layoff" is defined by the United States Department of Labor as 50 or more workers laid off from the same company around the same time.

That's a pretty inaccurate way set point a term. In SolarCity case, that means 0.15% of their workforce.

Its what the law calls it and with my Industrial Relations / HR hat on firing > 50 at one time is redundancy / layoffs.

firing an entire team of 10 or so for malfeasance I could buy - btw collective punishment of employees is allowed under common law

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#107

Post by [deleted] »

walshemj wrote: post #101
Bartweiss wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't see evidence that Tesla is doing any more than that If the lack of promised performance reviews is accurate, that's the obvious issue - it implies a labor force decision disguised as a performance decision. This is a pretty common move in e.g. game development, so it certainly isn't unthinkable. The point about total workforce size is well taken, though; this still seems like it could be as simple as "times…

Then the WARN act applies

[deleted]

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#108

Post by lovich »

SubiculumCode wrote: post #78
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> edit: I believe workers should be treated fairly, but I also want us to go to Mars. If 1 prevented 2, I would be torn. Why should this earn a negative vote? I assume because this same argument, if you took it to ridiculous extremes, could be used to justify a whole range of terrible shit. Watch: "I believe workers should not be enslaved, but I also want us to go to Mars. If 1 prevented 2, I would be torn." "I belie…

I am not trying to create an axiom meant to generalize to all cases. I am just willing to be a little less pro-union (and this point has gotten lost here apparently) than I am usually when it comes to THIS set of companies, for very particular reasons. That is because I tend to think of these companies (at least SpaceX) more as causes than as companies. When you willingly work for a cause, you expect these things. If…

Noble causes don't tend to be for profit entities. If SpaceX was a charity or not for profit I'd agree, but it's a business and it is hurting the workers to accumulate more capital for the owners. It's goal of getting to Mars is nice but a separate set of moral concerns as long as it is attempting to maximize profit

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#109

Post by SRasch »

Bartweiss wrote: post #41
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #36

1,200 of 33,000 employees amounts to 3.6% of the work force. This level of action, 1 in 25 employees, gives managers an opportunity to release employees that looked good in the interview but did not meet expectations. Whether Tesla conducted this in a proper manner is open to debate and perhaps details will emerge if/when any former employees pursue Tesla in court. But any company needs to address the inevitable hiri…

> I don't see evidence that Tesla is doing any more than that If the lack of promised performance reviews is accurate, that's the obvious issue - it implies a labor force decision disguised as a performance decision. This is a pretty common move in e.g. game development, so it certainly isn't unthinkable. The point about total workforce size is well taken, though; this still seems like it could be as simple as "times…

Would you say 3,6 % is that stringent though? I remember GE under Welch fired 10 % of the lowest performers every year, that seemed kind of stringent. But Tesla is fast-hiring and acquiring, so seem to have a larger need to fix hiring-errors than GE. At the end of 2015 they had only 14,000 employees! In light of that, 3,6 % seems completely reasonable to me. Low, even.

Concerning the performance review: would expect that after acquisition, SolarCity would adjust to Tesla's performance standards. So even if they were based on prior performance reviews, still seems like a reasonable action and level to me.

As much as I try to squint, I'm having troubles seeing the smoking gun here.

Re: Tesla's mass firings spread to SolarCity

#110

Post by 20years »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #49
20years wrote: post #18

This doesn't really surprise me. A few years ago we had lead generation software that catered to the solar industry. We had some decent sized clients and it did really well for about 2 years. Once the tax credits started going away and the power companies started killing off their rebates, a lot of these solar companies were not able to survive. One of our larger clients who was heavily funded went bankrupt this year…

I’m surprised. At the rate PV has been falling these subsidies are probably negligible (federal rebate withstanding). I purchased PV because the cost with a 20-year loan comes out to be 13c kWh, meanwhile PG&E charges 29c kWh. And the loan interest is tax-deductible.

If you purchase with a loan, you can get a much better deal and it can make sense.

A lot of the solar companies were selling their low interest $0 down lease programs and they themselves were benefiting from the credits/rebates not the homeowner. Homeowners didn't really have to have a great credit score either. Once the credits and rebates went away, the lease programs weren't sustainable for the solar companies.

Post reply on HN