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

201–210 of 322 posts

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

#201

Post by wharvle »

systemstops wrote: post #121
maxbond wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's clearly newsworthy. Lots of news organizations are reporting on it, not just NYT. I don't think we need to assume that a newspaper is corrupt for reporting that the government published a document, that's a huge part of their job.

Maybe - but the deluge of anti-Musk articles in the media the last few months is a probably more newsworthy. We can't ignore the fact that after buying Twitter and getting rid of some of the speech restrictions, he has been sued by several federal agencies, lost major federal contracts and all sorts of (questionable) scandals about him are now suddenly being discovered.

How are people surprised or decide it must be a conspiracy or personal vendetta when the media cover a powerful person who routinely acts like a complete lunatic in public, and the coverage ends up (gasp!) slanting negative?

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

#202

Post by networkchad »

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #109
geysersam wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Is it good for the overall wellbeing of people, for economic productivity, that we don't criticize our leaders, be it our bosses or our politicians? No it isn't. It's free speech.

Unfortunately mainstream conservatives don’t believe in free speech anymore, that was a 2000s era flash in the pan.

[dead]

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

#203

Post by John23832 »

fsckboy wrote: post #191
John23832 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking up against your employer should not threaten your job. That's how you get an echo chamber of horrible decisions made by the people who just so happen to sit at the top. Especially in a company run by someone who claims to "seek truths" like Musk. However, it certainly would not make you popular with the true believers in the room. You would definitely feel the discontent amongst your peers in a conviction le…

> Speaking up against your employer should not threaten your job. if you mean this as advice, ok, but if you mean it as "this needs to be a law", what are you even talking about, authoritarian much? > That's how you get an echo chamber of horrible decisions made by the people who just so happen to sit at the top. firing employees for speaking out might get you, the employer , an echo chamber, but perhaps for your pro…

>if you mean this as advice, ok, but if you mean it as "this needs to be a law", what are you even talking about, authoritarian much?

Yes I think that should be law. You should be able to attempt to help self correct your company by speaking up and not have the your life blown up because of the misaligned interest of a select few at the top. Just quitting is the the most extreme form of protest, but not the most feasible because we all can't find jobs tomorrow. This idea is no more authoritarian than whistleblower protection laws.

>firing employees for speaking out might get you, the employer, an echo chamber, but perhaps for your product an echo chamber is the business strategy you chose.

I take it you haven't read the article. The ask by employees was for SpaceX to uphold THEIR OWN STANDARDS by distancing themselves from Elon's bad actions through his tweets. You do not get to create rules within a company and then ignore your own codified rules while firing people for non-codified ones ("deeming" speech "insubordination").

As for Musk's tweets in relation to his company, when you create company from a cult of personality, your actions for the cult and the company are blurred. So you have to be on your best behavior for both.

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

#204

Post by arrosenberg »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #193
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).

Keep in mind she answers to Musk, you can't assume she had the leeway in this instance, especially since he likely got a bee in his bonnet about it and took an uncompromising position.

Nuremberg defense. She could have quit.

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

#205

Post by LargeTomato »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #131
sumeno wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His conception of free speech is that he should be able to say whatever he wants with no consequences. It doesn't go beyond that, he doesn't want other people to be able to say whatever they want with no consequences unless they're saying nice things about him.

I am sure Musk has lot but issues but he has repeatedly said and acted like he is fine with consequences of his speech. Like he is fine with advertisers leaving twitter/X[1] for his speech. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK91Ji6GCZ8

He's pouting, lashing out in anger, flipping people off, etc. He's not acting like he's done with the consequences. It seems like the consequences make him rather upset to the point he acts out.

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

#206

Post by imgabe »

maxbond wrote: post #187
imgabe wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the question is whether the boss's personal social media account is part of their workplace conditions. A safety strap is definitely a part of the work place. If your job is not social media manager and you don't work at Twitter (these are SpaceX employees), then it's hard to see how Twitter is a part of their workplace conditions. They should probably be designing rockets or whatever they were being paid to…

ETA: See also this better response to a similar question; we're myopically focusing on Twitter, but that isn't the real story here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726 Musk regularly tweets about his companies. His tweets regularly move the share price, so it makes sense to me that they might regularly impact employees (not to say the share price is the mechanism by which that would happen, just that it sta…

I kinda think "workplace conditions" would mean, you know, the conditions in which you do your work, like the physical environment where you are working. If the safety straps are old and frayed or the air conditioning in the office is broken, this is a condition of the workplace.

I don't think it means "every conceivable thing in the world that might affect the share price". If the Fed changes the interest rates, that could affect the share price. Does that mean that if I want to email my 13,000 co-workers my thoughts about the Fed's interest rate policy this is a protected discussion of workplace conditions? I don't think so.

The test seems to be "workplace conditions" not "things that impact employees" or "things that can affect the share price" which could be literally anything at all.

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

#208

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

tw04 wrote: post #35
robertwt7 wrote: post #27

how are they able to prove this in court though? surely the HR wouldn't be that stupid to document the reason of firing is "criticising the CEO". also, not trying to be on Musk side, of course he has made some embarrassing and stupid tweets. But if you created a letter that your CEO's public comment is "frequent source of embarrassment", won't you get fired in any other company?? in meta, someone even got fired for b…

Shotwell literally wrote an email telling them they had to stop discussing the issue or she would consider it insubordination then fired them the next day. No need for HR to do anything when the person in charge is incriminating themselves.

Right - but won't some high priced lawyer be able to prove correlation and not causation?

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

#209

Post by eganist »

0xedd wrote: post #207

[flagged]

> Worked at a 10k+ US company. Executive swore at me. Threatened to fire me. Did HR give a fuck? No. I did what I could, in my position, to protect my job. I had my own manager join the call early on (was a 15 minute "heated" debate with that exec. I kept my head) and involved another senior exec, above the previous one.

I'm struggling to see how your circumstance, described as involving only a mid level exec, compares to one involving the CEO of a similarly large company who's notorious for firing people on a whim.

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

#210

Post by maxbond »

imgabe wrote: post #206
maxbond wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ETA: See also this better response to a similar question; we're myopically focusing on Twitter, but that isn't the real story here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726 Musk regularly tweets about his companies. His tweets regularly move the share price, so it makes sense to me that they might regularly impact employees (not to say the share price is the mechanism by which that would happen, just that it sta…

I kinda think "workplace conditions" would mean, you know, the conditions in which you do your work, like the physical environment where you are working. If the safety straps are old and frayed or the air conditioning in the office is broken, this is a condition of the workplace. I don't think it means "every conceivable thing in the world that might affect the share price". If the Fed changes the interest rates, tha…

Please note I specifically said I wasn't discussing share price. Regarding the Fed, that honestly is a misrepresentation of what I said. Please don't do that. And please review this part of my previous post:

> (not to say the share price is the mechanism by which that would happen, just that it stands to reason his tweets are relevant to the operations of the business if they're relevant to its valuation)

Public statements can contribute to a hostile work environment. What is being alleged is that joking about sexual harassment and a lack of clarity around workplace policies have created a hostile work environment. That is directly related to working conditions. (To be clear, they never say the words "hostile work environment," that is my interpretation.)

I invite you to read the open letter for yourself. https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk...

Or the passages quoted here, for the especially relevant parts. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726

Post reply on HN