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

171–180 of 322 posts

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

#171

Post by imgabe »

maxbond wrote: post #146
the_doctah wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gonna have a hell of a time proving the boss's tweets have anything to do with working conditions.

I don't think that's the burden of proof though, I think they have to prove they were fired in retaliation.

NAL, but I think they would also have to prove that the thing they were fired in retaliation for is something you're actually not allowed to fire people for.

You can fire people in retaliation for stealing or screwing up or for wasting everyone's time complaining about Twitter drama instead of doing their job or lots of other reasons. Simply firing in retaliation is not illegal.

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

#172

Post by alephnan »

AlexandrB wrote: post #61

Musk's conception of free speech is completely incoherent. On the one hand he claims to want to fund the legal defense of people fired for their tweets[1], on the other hand we have stuff like this. The simplest explanation is that his idea of speech that should be free is: "stuff I agree with" and anything that falls outside of that box can be freely censored or actioned against. Is there an alternative explanation…

It's a private company that does not have a legal or moral obligation to extend free speech to employees. Employees are paid to produce value for their bossses and are free to leave if they don't like it.

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

#173

Post by maxbond »

imgabe wrote: post #171
maxbond wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's the burden of proof though, I think they have to prove they were fired in retaliation.

NAL, but I think they would also have to prove that the thing they were fired in retaliation for is something you're actually not allowed to fire people for. You can fire people in retaliation for stealing or screwing up or for wasting everyone's time complaining about Twitter drama instead of doing their job or lots of other reasons. Simply firing in retaliation is not illegal.

Also not a lawyer.

I think if, for instance, a group of roof tile workers were discussing how they thought their safety straps needed to be replaced, and were fired for doing so - whether or not the straps needed replacing would be immaterial. The discussion is protected.

In the same way, I don't think it's material whether Twitter is disruptive to their work. NLRB's argument, if I'm understanding correctly, is that they were discussing their conditions, and that such a discussion is protected.

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

#174

Post by throwaway09223 »

gambiting wrote: post #150
throwaway09223 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly not. In a similar vein, the employees don't own their position at the company. Employment arrangements are made through mutual agreements. If the company says something an employee doesn't like, the employee is free to leave. If the employee says something the company doesn't like, the company is free to dismiss the employee. It's astounding that the NRLB is defending an insubordination termination after ac…

>>If the employee says something the company doesn't like, the company is free to dismiss the employee. Except they are not, even in the US with its meagre employee protections there are entire classes of protected activity that you cannot be fired for, and discussing your working conditions while at work(and being critical of them) is protected. >>This is pretty obviously a political prosecution Going after the peop…

> discussing your working conditions while at work(and being critical of them) is protected.

Discussing working conditions is unrelated to criticizing the CEO.

> Going after the people who break the law is political now?

They didn't break the law. Wait and see.

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

#175

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

sokoloff wrote: post #163
cycomanic wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

There are productive and destructive ways to handle disagreements with the chain of leadership. If I choose a destructive way, I shouldn't be shocked that I find destruction at the end of that path.

They chose a constructive way, yet received destruction in return.

To be absolutely clear, politely communicating with fellow employees is absolutely the constructive way to handle work disagreements. The problem here obviously wasn't the constructiveness, but that there was any disagreement at all.

That's toxic leadership, but no surprise given the leader of the company.

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

#176

Post by Rebelgecko »

the_doctah wrote: post #151
Rebelgecko wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I guess we'll have to disagree. IMO it's pretty easy to see how sexual harassment is related to working conditions.

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

#177

Post by saghm »

sokoloff wrote: post #163
cycomanic wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

There are productive and destructive ways to handle disagreements with the chain of leadership. If I choose a destructive way, I shouldn't be shocked that I find destruction at the end of that path.

Circulating a letter internally is "destructive"?

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

#178

Post by maxbond »

maxbond wrote: post #58
imgabe wrote: post #36

8 out of 13,000 employees wanted to circulate a letter complaining about Musk's tweets and the Labor board claims they were "illegally" fired over this. Which law specifically requires employers to permit every employee to spam the company with their personal grievances? This isn't union organization or whistleblowing. They could use a little more detail on how and why they believe this firing is illegal.

I spent about fifteen minutes poking around. I'm not sure, but I take the impression this is in fact protected organizing, at least according to the NLRB. It seems like this is seen by NLRB as workers expressing concern and advocating for better working conditions (eg free of Musk's distractions), and the company retaliating against them. (To be clear, I have no idea whether the case has merit or not, my only claim i…

> I tried to find the particular case...

The case numbers are in the header of the document linked in this comment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38862605

The reason I didn't find the case was I spaced out and looked for Tesla instead of SpaceX, d'oh.

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

#179

Post by geysersam »

charcircuit wrote: post #115
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.

Human relationships are not that cold. It is against human nature. Sure acting human may be suboptimal from a business sense, but there should not be a surprise when a human acts human.

If the rich and powerful are unable to show self restraint then they should not have that power. Humans are Human, but we don't have to give some humans the power to sack others without just cause.

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

#180

Post by perihelions »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #170

I was pretty dismayed that Gwynne Shotwell's actions were so blatantly egregious. I'd expect something like that (or probably worse) from Musk, but my view of Shotwell was that she was always "the adult in the room" at SpaceX. So a bit sad to see that she didn't even realize the illegality of her actions (as other comments mentioned, all her actions were clearly put in writing).

The NLRB only collects tens of millions in fines, nationwide, per year [0]. Shotwell probably understood the illegality of her actions quite well—and more importantly understood that the benefits of chilling labor activism in a 30k-employee company far outweighed the miniscule costs.

In support of this: Shotwell not only fired these employees, but made a loud spectacle out of it—emailing the entire company to announce their firing. This, deterrence, was the reason.

[0] https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/the-nlrb-recov...

Post reply on HN