Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 623 posts

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

#481

Post by shkkmo »

URSpider94 wrote: post #154
shkkmo wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it isn't a firable offense given that it violates the confidentiality agreement that lists termination as a possible consequence of violation. So it seems to me that what Oritz did must qualify as protected activity...

First of all, the system wasn’t treated as confidential information, and workers weren’t told that use of the system was restricted. Second, the data they extracted were simply names and photos. Third, they posted them to a FB group comprising Tesla employees. If you read the judgment, indeed, all of these actions are considered protected activity.

If you read the policy they had people sign (it is included in the official opinion linked in other comments) it would seem to be expressly included under that policy.

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

#482

Post by justin66 »

evgen wrote: post #247
eru wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it depends a bit on whether you talk about real world US unions like the UAW, or about what unions could be in theory and might be in other parts of the world. Eg German unions have a reputation, at least compared to the US, of cooperating much more with their host companies. Similar also for Scandinavian unions.

It could also be the case that US unions operate in a country where power is held by a class of people who would really prefer their serfs to STFU and get back to whatever dangerous, ill-paid task they were assigned. When the most egregious wrongs are simply illegal and never happen then it is much easier for capital and labor to have a less adversarial relationship, but when you operate in a country like the US I wo…

It could also be the case that most people commenting do not have experience with very many unions and have adopted the portions of a goofy pro- vs anti-union argument that has existed in popular US culture since right-wing think tanks began poisoning public political dialogue in the seventies.

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

#483

Post by mempko »

baud147258 wrote: post #467
door100 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The horrors of... a 35 hour workweek, 5 weeks paid vacation, 16 weeks paid maternity leave, universal healthcare, and no at-will employment?

or the deadwood that gets protected because they belong to an union. Or unions being against remote work because that'd reduce employee control. Or union leadership just using their membership to laze around. Or union opposing projects they don't like. Or union harassing (including physically) managers. And to say nothing of railway union who apparently have a Mission to gridlock the country every few years (usually…

Great way to talk about your fellow colleagues as dead wood. I would love working with you.

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

#484

Post by renewiltord »

AlexandrB wrote: post #472
youeseh wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What riches, exactly? Why the hate?

I'm not sure why people hate unions exactly. Seems weird to have "freedom of assembly" but then hate those that practice it for better negotiating leverage.

Eh? I hate lots of people who I nonetheless want to have freedom of assembly. Like anti-vaxxers. I want them to be able to say antivax shit but I hate them. What exactly is weird about this?

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

#485

Post by tchanglington »

mempko wrote: post #483
baud147258 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or the deadwood that gets protected because they belong to an union. Or unions being against remote work because that'd reduce employee control. Or union leadership just using their membership to laze around. Or union opposing projects they don't like. Or union harassing (including physically) managers. And to say nothing of railway union who apparently have a Mission to gridlock the country every few years (usually…

Great way to talk about your fellow colleagues as dead wood. I would love working with you.

Working together isn’t fun when we’re all out of a job because the factory moved to another country

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

#486

Post by twirlock »

mempko wrote: post #483
baud147258 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or the deadwood that gets protected because they belong to an union. Or unions being against remote work because that'd reduce employee control. Or union leadership just using their membership to laze around. Or union opposing projects they don't like. Or union harassing (including physically) managers. And to say nothing of railway union who apparently have a Mission to gridlock the country every few years (usually…

Great way to talk about your fellow colleagues as dead wood. I would love working with you.

What a stupid, flailing response.

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

#487

Post by door100 »

baud147258 wrote: post #467
door100 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The horrors of... a 35 hour workweek, 5 weeks paid vacation, 16 weeks paid maternity leave, universal healthcare, and no at-will employment?

or the deadwood that gets protected because they belong to an union. Or unions being against remote work because that'd reduce employee control. Or union leadership just using their membership to laze around. Or union opposing projects they don't like. Or union harassing (including physically) managers. And to say nothing of railway union who apparently have a Mission to gridlock the country every few years (usually…

Even if all of these were true (I would describe most of them as a mischaracterization at best), do you honestly think that outweighs everything that I described? The worst thing that people can say about unions is they are bureaucratic and inconvenient. The worst things people can say about, say, working conditions in many non-unionized American workplaces are far, far worse. People dying, unfairly losing their job (and healthcare, and home), working incredibly long hours, unable to see their kid, unable to get adequate sleep, etc etc etc. I happen to think there are values other than "workers producing profit for their employers as efficiently as possible at the expense of anything else"

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

#488

Post by door100 »

kepler1 wrote: post #409
door100 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The horrors of... a 35 hour workweek, 5 weeks paid vacation, 16 weeks paid maternity leave, universal healthcare, and no at-will employment?

Ah, classic selection bias blinders on. Sure, great benefits for those who have jobs. What about for the people who can't get employed due to the conditions on labor? The young, poor, already jobless? Not so much concern for them, you got yours.

unlike the US, where working conditions for the poor are fantastic?

Don't get me wrong, France (and the EU) has its share of problems. But "better protections for their workers" is not one of them. EU countries decided to use a small portion of their enormous wealth building a safety net and decent worker protections. The US does this to a much lesser degree, preferring instead to center corporate profits and the wealthy.

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

#489

Post by IntelMiner »

smitty1e wrote: post #470
eutropia wrote: post #461

Interesting, in a way: asking to delete the tweet has likely given it far more audience than it originally had. Streisand effect, maybe?

Does the First Amendment amount to a fart in a thunderstorm any longer? If anyone getting paid out of taxpayer funds doesn't grok the Bill of Rights, then their employment is what needs deleting.

The first amendment doesn't protect a private company making statements on a private platform

If Elon stood on the street corner shouting lies into a megaphone? Sure, maybe there'd be an argument there

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

#490

Post by foerbert »

sokoloff wrote: post #289
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…

I agree that they shouldn't be unduly influenced by the company when contemplating joining a union. But if they're paying the workers part in cash and part in options, and the union organizers are pitching that they'll raise their wages, I think it's fair for the company to point out that that is likely to result in moving some of the comp from options into cash. The UAW and representatives can certainly make stateme…

Even that is itself a weird quasi-bad-faith statement though. A potential union would not be unaware of stock options, nor how to value them. They could just as easily request higher cash pay and that stock options remain as they are. That's a valid position, and arguably a likely one.

On what possible basis could Musk be making a fully good-faith statement that he has good reason to believe it is impossible for a union to negotiate on such grounds? Obviously he is free to stick on that point in actual negotiations, but again he can't in any kind of good faith negotiate in public with an entity that doesn't exist yet.

As for UAW, that's kind of getting into the detailed specifics of this instance. Maybe there's more room to argue for looser regulations when there are extant industry unions? But that would also seem to push things more in favor of larger, more encompassing unions rather than smaller more specific ones, which I imagine most people in favor of less regulation wouldn't be fond of either.

Post reply on HN