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

SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 322 posts

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#151

Post by the_doctah »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #11
belltaco wrote: post #9

> It also said a company vice president had broken the law by criticizing the letter at a meeting with employees a few days after it was circulated Weird, breaking the law for just criticizing a letter written by employees? The judge might overturn this on the basis of free speech.

In the US (or at least California?) you typically have the right to discuss your working conditions, even if you're not unionized. More to the point, companies don't have the right to try and prevent these discussions from happening. Depending on how the criticism of the letter went down, it could very possibly have gone beyond what's legal.

Being offended by the CEO's tweets has nothing to do with working conditions. Imagine the people who fought for actual working conditions laws reading this tripe.

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#152

Post by throwaway2037 »

dralley wrote: post #113
jeswin wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"On this platform". That's not circulating grievances/politics on a company's internal channels. How are we confusing these two?

First of all, let's dispense with the notion that "on twitter" actually matters, given the man is so petty that he canceled a dude's Tesla order over a tweet that criticized him. Anyway: "grievances/politics" It came out that he paid a $250,000 settlement for a sexual harassment suit and he decided to respond to this by making jokes on twitter, quote: “Hi Chad, long time no see! Fine, if you touch my wiener, you can…

Wow, that Twitter quote is crazy. Can you imagine any other CEO (or C-suite) for a major corp writing the same thing? They would be instantly fired. You see it on Wall Street frequently for much less, and at all ranks of employees. After many costly sexual harassment lawsuits against Wall Street banks, the culture has changed significantly in the last 20 years.

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#153

Post by cdogl »

lokar wrote: post #110
throwaway914 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate you making this distinction; it's one I haven't understood clearly. My outside impression is that right-to-work is a campaign to smear unions, though I understand in some areas/professions they can only hire union workers.

There is a range of rule by state/history: Closed shop: must be a full union member to have the job Fair share: you don’t have to join, but you must pay the portion of dues that go towards contract negotiations and enforcement Right to work: they can’t make you do anything. In some cases even going as far as saying the employer does not have to deduct dues for members (who have agreed to it) pay

Well put, but:

> even going as far as saying the employer does not have to deduct dues for members (who have agreed to it) pay

I'm surprised you frame this as an extreme example. Regardless of one's views on unions (they have their place), it seems way off for the employer to deduct those payments. Perhaps it's a convenience, but as a worker that is my money to pay to the union; if the union and the employer orchestrate the transfer of my membership payment behind closed doors before the money hits my account, it's makes it harder to feel the union is truly acting in my interests.

This is not just a matter of hygiene; for example, I was once in a (notoriously corrupt and socially reactionary) union here in Australia that represents retail workers. I didn't have a choice in the matter and my membership payments were deducted by my employer. About a decade later, a court ruled that a deal made between that employer and the union had left workers worse off (but was in the interests of the union bureaucracy). Incidents like this seriously damage the reputation of the union movement.

Having your dues deducted automatically in an environment of compulsory unionism doesn't seem to have much to do with empowering workers at all!

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#154

Post by geysersam »

sokoloff wrote: post #134
geysersam wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the opposite of meritocracy. And abuse of power on your bosses part. Don't know why so many in this thread seems to support obviously corrupt behavior.

Is it? If I have serious on-going disagreements with my CEO's strategy and tactics to lead the company and I choose to take those disagreements public in a scorched earth style, I fully expect that I'd get sacked for it. And I think I should be (presumably with the typical severance for a other-than-cause termination). I'm standing here thinking "yup, that's about right" and other posters are thinking this is "so not…

Was this a professional disagreement about the strategy of the company? No, it was a disagreement about politics. Rich people shouldn't have the right to use their power to silence others, that's why I called it abuse and corruption.

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#155

Post by geysersam »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #127
geysersam wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the opposite of meritocracy. And abuse of power on your bosses part. Don't know why so many in this thread seems to support obviously corrupt behavior.

Abuse of power is a relative term. If something is the norm, then doing it is not abuse. It's fine in most companies to complain about the boss to HR or to the boss themselves, but not fine to complain it to someone else. If I had bad boss who isn't doing anything illegal or breaks company's policy, I would likely switch my job rather than taking the impossible task of fixing them if they don't want to fix themselves…

We should aspire higher than moral relativism and "might is right".

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#156

Post by Eisenstein »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #143
Eisenstein wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If something is the norm, then doing it is not abuse. Abuse is abuse regardless of whether it is normalized in a company, but it is also against the law in this case specifically, so it is obviously not 'the norm'. > If I had bad boss who isn't doing anything illegal or breaks company's policy, I would likely switch my job rather than taking the impossible task of fixing them if they don't want to fix themselves. T…

> but it is also against the law in this case specifically, so it is obviously not 'the norm'. Law IS the norm. And I could definitely bet there is no law in US which says that employee can spam other employees about how their boss is bad.

> And I could definitely bet there is no law in US which says that employee can spam other employees about how their boss is bad.

That is exactly what this case is alleging is the law that was violated. What do you think this is all about?

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#157

Post by cycomanic »

sokoloff wrote: post #134
geysersam wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the opposite of meritocracy. And abuse of power on your bosses part. Don't know why so many in this thread seems to support obviously corrupt behavior.

Is it? If I have serious on-going disagreements with my CEO's strategy and tactics to lead the company and I choose to take those disagreements public in a scorched earth style, I fully expect that I'd get sacked for it. And I think I should be (presumably with the typical severance for a other-than-cause termination). I'm standing here thinking "yup, that's about right" and other posters are thinking this is "so not…

Since when is an internal letter public? Also what happened to the whole "I'm a free speech advocate" spiel? I guess free speech only applies to thinks Musk likes.

Seriously, under which definition is firing employees for their criticism considered good leadership?

Re: SpaceX Illegally Fired Workers Critical of Musk, Federal Agency Says

#160

Post by cycomanic »

karpatic wrote: post #126
AlexandrB wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is anything negative that happens to/is said about Musk his own doing, or is everything just a ploy by external entities to bring down a great man?

How is it MUSK's doing that a middle manager fired an employee?

Middle manager? I recommend you look who Gwynne Shotwell is within Space X.

To spare you the googling, she is the CEO, but I guess under Elon Musks "leadership" everyone else is just middle management.

Post reply on HN