311–320 of 322 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aha yeah, true, in the United States employers don't have much rights and can be quite easily fired for any reason. In Europe you usually need to have a valid reason to fire someone. Valid reasons can include refusal to perform work, culpable conduct, excessive sickness absence, reorganization, or company closure.
Yes this is why the US has good software jobs and most good devs move to the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Circulating an open letter point-blank criticizing the CEO is absolutely unprofessional and I'm honestly shocked anyone here thinks they could pull this crap without getting fired.
This is a good point. Since employees are not shareholders they have no standing to criticize a CEO. Only someone with a financial stake in the future of a company should be able to voice their concerns without fear of retribution
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But for SpaceX this is even more foolish - the FAA can deny their launches. NASA is further empowered to find another launch service. SpaceX is very dependent on being in the good graces of government. Thumbing your nose at them, while a very Elon Musk thing to do, simply isn't wise.
I don't think the FAA or NASA, as organization policy, care what the NLRB thinks. "Government" is not in fact a single monolith with emotions and grudges.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess: The most senior employees (C-suite and close to it) have special responsibilities and legally much great accountability. What a CEO of a public company says on public media (including Twitter/X) has far greater legal consequences for the company and the CEO than someone a few steps below. This is pretty normal for highly developed countries. Note: Responsibilities may change in different countries depending…
Corporations with shareholders must list specific accounts as disclosure accounts; because otherwise sharing insider business related information is unfair insider advantage. When you list a social media account as a disclosure account for a business, it should then be clear that there's liability to all such communications through such account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems like an instance of "Something must be done; this is something, therefore it must be done"—more high-quality rocketry and space expertise clearly is a benefit to humanity, at least in the long term, but that doesn't necessarily mean that SpaceX in particular needs to be the organization to do it.
Agreed, but they're pushing things forward. If we waited for Boeing or the like who are fed by fat, lazy government and military contracts things would never improve. Basically more (good) competition is better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Which part of the open letter discusses working conditions? The sections regarding unacceptable behavior seem like potential candidates: > SpaceX’s current systems and culture do not live up to its stated values, as many employees continue to experience unequal enforcement of our oft-repeated “No Asshole” and “Zero Tolerance” policies. This must change. > [snip] > Define and uniformly respond to all forms of unacce…
So that raises an interesting question. If part of the letter was about working conditions, and part was about Elon tweeting, can they legally be fired for the second part of the open letter despite the existence of the first?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Our legal system is, absent other laws, free employment, meaning you can be fired for anything not explicitly protected by law, and "pissing off the CEO" is not one of them.
Aha yeah, true, in the United States employers don't have much rights and can be quite easily fired for any reason. In Europe you usually need to have a valid reason to fire someone. Valid reasons can include refusal to perform work, culpable conduct, excessive sickness absence, reorganization, or company closure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So that raises an interesting question. If part of the letter was about working conditions, and part was about Elon tweeting, can they legally be fired for the second part of the open letter despite the existence of the first?
This is my reading and might be off base, but it seems like they’re saying that Elon is undermining the “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies with his very loud and visible opinions. As long as Elon is seen as BEING SpaceX, his dismissive attitude towards things like sexual harassment will make it difficult to enforce policies against that sort of behavior. That’s why they asked SpaceX to distance itself from T…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is my reading and might be off base, but it seems like they’re saying that Elon is undermining the “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies with his very loud and visible opinions. As long as Elon is seen as BEING SpaceX, his dismissive attitude towards things like sexual harassment will make it difficult to enforce policies against that sort of behavior. That’s why they asked SpaceX to distance itself from T…
Do those “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies apply to employee behavior outside work?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do those “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies apply to employee behavior outside work?
does a ceo or worker represent their company when making public statements on media platforms?
What's your opinion? Do you allow ceos to have private lives?