What’s with the contempt for twitter employees in this thread? I really hope Musk doesn’t come for your job next
I can tell you the viral "day in the Life" video that was going around in the last week or so did not help the situation much.
Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
191–200 of 852 posts
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#192Did Twitter file a California WARN notice? If not, they need to do so and give 60 day notice to workers in California. So, don't accept anything that doesn't preserve your rights to your Tuesday equity grant. Details here: https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN Key Provision: "Layoff of 50 or more employees within a 30-day period regardless of % of workforce. ...." Penalties for Violation: "A po…
Given that none of this is official, and there are at minimum 3 different reports about the quantity and timeline of layoffs I dont think anyone is concerned about a WARN notification
I beat even Elon, at this moment, does not have a full accounting of what the layoffs will be. This is all just pure media hype and nonsense with very little basis in truth or reality
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#193Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They're employees, but "workers" implies blue collar in my opinion. You are (understandably) conflating "worker" with "working class", but these are different contexts. A worker is anyone who must, well, work for a living as opposed to their income coming from property/capital.
Wouldn't you differentiate between workers and executives? Is the CEO a worker if he doesn't own the company? Tying it to the salary makes sense to me. If you get paid minimum wage, asking you to work overtime without additional pay is unjust. You get paid a minimum wage worker's life-time-earnings per year? It's perfectly fine to ask you to come in this weekend for an urgent project.
I am not making any argument here about whether this specific incident is fair or whatever. I'm just clarifying how the word "worker" is used in the context of economic and labour theory, and where your blue-collar misunderstanding likely came from.
Yes, I am a well-paid SWE. But I must still work for my salary; my income does not come from owning capital. That's the crucial difference.
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#195What’s with the contempt for twitter employees in this thread? I really hope Musk doesn’t come for your job next
The contempt for them on twitter is even worse. A ton of anonymous twitter accounts laughing at people losing their jobs.
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Reports that he gave a team until Nov 7th to roll out a paid subscription > None of these things are particularly unreasonable I see you're not an engineer according to your bio. Can you explain how you came to the conclusion that having one work week to roll out a brand new feature is reasonable so I can tell you how completely wrong you are?
The feature was in development for far longer. The real question is, will it exist on Nov. 7th?
> The feature was in development for far longer.
You know this?
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#197All tech companies should probably lay off 50% of their employees and double everyone's salary...
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They're employees, but "workers" implies blue collar in my opinion. You are (understandably) conflating "worker" with "working class", but these are different contexts. A worker is anyone who must, well, work for a living as opposed to their income coming from property/capital.
Wouldn't you differentiate between workers and executives? Is the CEO a worker if he doesn't own the company? Tying it to the salary makes sense to me. If you get paid minimum wage, asking you to work overtime without additional pay is unjust. You get paid a minimum wage worker's life-time-earnings per year? It's perfectly fine to ask you to come in this weekend for an urgent project.
> You get paid a minimum wage worker's life-time-earnings per year? It's perfectly fine to ask you to come in this weekend for an urgent project.
Something on fire? Sure. Regulation means this project must be done Monday? Maybe, thought I'm wondering why management didn't start it sooner. A failure to plan on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
New CEO sets an arbitrary deadline for no reason other than to cull the heard? Fuck that.
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who’s hurt more: the company whose employee leaves on the spot, or the employee whose company fires them on the spot? At-will is asymmetric.
It is the definition of symmetrical. Both parties can cut ties at any time without any warning. In general employers are able to benefit from this symmetrical relationship more often though since they are only losing a small percentage of their workers while the employee is losing 100% of the income they were getting from that employeer.
Symmetry can exist on one axis but not another. Sure it's symmetrical on the "actions an entity can take axis", but when people refer to the employee/employer relationship being asymmetrical they are discussing the risk or impact axis.
Re: Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who’s hurt more: the company whose employee leaves on the spot, or the employee whose company fires them on the spot? At-will is asymmetric.
Depends on the role, the company, and the timing. A single worker in an important position leaving on the spot, dropping some critical work half-way done and taking all the context and specific knowledge with them, could easily torpedo a million dollar deal. Or, a single employee leaving could trigger a cascade, and soon you're short a whole project team. In general , I'd say at-will still favors employers, who are i…
I'll note that a company that depends on a single employee like this has failed to plan and is already in trouble. No matter how well you treat them, your critical employees will leave. You might be able to pay them well enough to limit the risk on them taking another job (though few employers do) but even with that sooner or later they'll win the lottery, get hit by a bus, or just retire.
A business can and must hedge against critical employees leaving. It's much harder as an employee to hedge against your employer giving you the boot.