Elon Musk’s anti-union tweet from 2018 must be deleted: U.S. labor board

Post by fastball » Sat, Mar 27, 2021, 1:32 PM UTC

foerbert wrote: post #248

sokoloff wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“We give our workers stock options now. We do not expect to do so under a union contract.” I don’t see that as “threatening workers”, but as a reasonable communication between employer and employees and a proper counterbalance against union claims that the workers will be better off if they unionize. “We give our workers stock options now. No other automaker working under a union contract does so.” is something that…

That's real easy to say when there isn't a union yet. And the company has zero incentive to give any kind of realistic and useful information in this situation. They can say whatever they want, and it doesn't mean anything. They don't even know what the non-existent union will want or care about later, so how they can have any accurate expectations even if they are perfectly rational and honest. The only purpose thes…

Post by sjwright » Sat, Mar 27, 2021, 1:47 PM UTC

neolog wrote: post #69

sjwright wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problem with unions so long as membership is entirely voluntary for every employee. The problem I have is coercive collectivism. Also, is there any evidence that collective action returns a sustainably larger slice of corporate revenues?

It's a commons problem; voluntary membership means free-riders will destroy the collective resource.

Post by rsynnott » Sat, Mar 27, 2021, 1:55 PM UTC

AzzieElbab wrote: post #217

There is a federal board that makes people delete tweets?

Post by jmjanzen » Sat, Mar 27, 2021, 2:02 PM UTC

cwhiz wrote: post #238

telaelit wrote: post #55

I wish the NRLB would be much harsher against business owners and executives who engage in anti-union rhetoric and behaviors. People have the right to form unions, lying about losing benefits and lowering pay should be handled much more harshly, there should be actual penalties instead of just having to read a statement and delete a tweet.

I disagree. It should be a free market. If the employees don’t like their treatment they should leave and take a different job. I am sure there is a UAW job out there to be had. The most likely outcome from this is that Tesla moves more and more production out of a California and into a more business friendly state, such as Texas.

Post by Trombone12 » Sat, Mar 27, 2021, 2:07 PM UTC

fastball wrote: post #252

foerbert wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's real easy to say when there isn't a union yet. And the company has zero incentive to give any kind of realistic and useful information in this situation. They can say whatever they want, and it doesn't mean anything. They don't even know what the non-existent union will want or care about later, so how they can have any accurate expectations even if they are perfectly rational and honest. The only purpose thes…

Everything you're saying applies to union organizers though, which do exists before the union is formed. And the entire point is that the union forming could be bad for workers in various ways, so if I was a worker I would want to be made aware of what could possibly go wrong before I joined the effort to unionize and no longer had a choice in the matter after the union is fully formed and going strong.