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

Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 623 posts

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#31

Post by [deleted] »

1996 wrote: post #18
gamblor956 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Union contracts are employer specific (and in some cases, facility specific), and if the Tesla factory workers unionized, they could negotiate for stock grants. The threat was that Tesla would revoke stock option grants if the workforce unionized, or refuse to negotiate over the availability of stock options, which is illegal under current federal labor regulations. No, most other automakers don't offer stock, becaus…

> Union contracts are employer specific (and in some cases, facility specific), and if the Tesla factory workers unionized, they could negotiate for stock grants If it was my factory, I would cut the stock grant and fire them all - unionized or not - to end a clear message to the other factories: "you only have one job, while I have more than one factory"

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#32

Post by npad »

sharkjacobs wrote: post #15
mlindner wrote: post #3

To repeat the key info from this case that makes one question the NRLB ruling (from reddit originally): The tweet is https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/998454539941367808 > Nothing stopping Tesla team at our car plant from voting union. Could do so tmrw if they wanted. But why pay union dues & give up stock options for nothing? Our safety record is 2X better than when plant was UAW & everybody already gets healthcar…

> why pay union dues & give up stock options for nothing? If you don't think that Elon means employees will lose their stock options if they unionize, then what does he mean?

I'm taking it to mean union employees wouldn't get new grants. Which makes sense to me - I have a hard time squaring how you can be in a union with an adversarial relationship to management, whilst at the same time being an owner of the company. It's one or the other.

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#33

Post by CameronNemo »

dang, can we change the link/title to https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL4N2LN4L0 ?

Snippet below:

> Tesla CEO Musk's anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

> Tesla Inc Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk’s 2018 tweet threatening employees would lose their stock options if they formed a union was illegal and should be deleted, the U.S. National Labor Relations Board said on Thursday.

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#34

Post by [deleted] »

stretchwithme wrote: post #19
joshuamorton wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The downside musk presented was a lie though: a union could absolutely bargain for stock options.

Maybe he has no plans to offer stock because such incentives don't really work when your labor supply is captured by a monopoly.

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#35

Post by [deleted] »

samr71 wrote: post #30
dundarious wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That logic doesn't hold if you share a belief in Tesla's stated mission "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport", and also want to be in a union -- which is a reasonable set of beliefs and desires to hold. And I don't see how unions would be intrinsically incompatible with Tesla's mission or operations. There's no reason I know of to hold that it is an immutable fact that Tesla's workers are non-union -- s…

Unionizing Tesla would almost certainly not "accelerate the advent of sustainable transport". More likely cause it to wither and stagnate for the gain of a privileged few as we saw with GM et al.

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#36

Post by slumpt_ »

meddlepal wrote: post #11
hellomyguys wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or Tesla’s workers can collectively decide for what’s best for themselves?

And Tesla should be allowed every opportunity to stop them. I guess Tesla broke the law in this case, but I do not really agree with the ruling and the law. Musk should be allowed to present the possible downsides.

Sounds like you should crack a history book open.

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#37

Post by mullingitover »

npad wrote: post #32
sharkjacobs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why pay union dues & give up stock options for nothing? If you don't think that Elon means employees will lose their stock options if they unionize, then what does he mean?

I'm taking it to mean union employees wouldn't get new grants. Which makes sense to me - I have a hard time squaring how you can be in a union with an adversarial relationship to management, whilst at the same time being an owner of the company. It's one or the other.

Why are these things at odds? It seems like the ideal outcome for the union would be to have a significant ownership stake in the company and share in its success, rather than have an adversarial relationship and drag down profits. Making the company uncompetitive in the market is bad for the union in the long run.

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#38

Post by drak0n1c »

samr71 wrote: post #30
dundarious wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That logic doesn't hold if you share a belief in Tesla's stated mission "to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport", and also want to be in a union -- which is a reasonable set of beliefs and desires to hold. And I don't see how unions would be intrinsically incompatible with Tesla's mission or operations. There's no reason I know of to hold that it is an immutable fact that Tesla's workers are non-union -- s…

Unionizing Tesla would almost certainly not "accelerate the advent of sustainable transport". More likely cause it to wither and stagnate for the gain of a privileged few as we saw with GM et al.

Seeing the current state of Detroit, you have a point that such practices may not have been sustainable.

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#39

Post by zja »

stretchwithme wrote: post #19
joshuamorton wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The downside musk presented was a lie though: a union could absolutely bargain for stock options.

Maybe he has no plans to offer stock because such incentives don't really work when your labor supply is captured by a monopoly.

Why wouldn’t stock options “work” when labor is unionized?

Re: Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

#40

Post by jakelazaroff »

npad wrote: post #32
sharkjacobs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why pay union dues & give up stock options for nothing? If you don't think that Elon means employees will lose their stock options if they unionize, then what does he mean?

I'm taking it to mean union employees wouldn't get new grants. Which makes sense to me - I have a hard time squaring how you can be in a union with an adversarial relationship to management, whilst at the same time being an owner of the company. It's one or the other.

Individual employees have every bit as adversarial a relationship to management as union members. They just have much less bargaining power.
Post reply on HN