Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans

Post by assetlabel » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 9:59 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #525

eqbridges wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you cite where it’s been said he’s firing 25% (or any significant percentage) “for cause”? The only parties being cited as fired for cause are the outgoing executives, and WaPo article at the top of this post provides reasons for that.

From WP: "Layoffs are expected to begin ahead of Nov. 1, when Twitter employees are slated to receive additional compensation related to stock grants." I think this might be the confusing part, because he's trying to claw back as much compensation as possible, maybe he's trying to avoid paying severance as well

Post by root_axis » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 10:00 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #163

fknorangesite wrote: post #134

Earlier 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.

Post by ummonk » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 10:00 PM UTC

eqbridges wrote: post #426

linuxhansl wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firing 25% of the workforce "for cause" looks like a very hard sell to me, and would open up Twitter for a barrage of lawsuits - and rightly so. Even laying off 25% of the workers would be hard to justify at this point. I'm certainly curious where this all is going.

Can you cite where it’s been said he’s firing 25% (or any significant percentage) “for cause”? The only parties being cited as fired for cause are the outgoing executives, and WaPo article at the top of this post provides reasons for that.

Post by jupp0r » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 10:01 PM UTC

photochemsyn wrote: post #120

jupp0r wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why we have multiple newspapers. The other ones can cover for deficiencies of a single one. The Post is doing great investigative journalism still, including this piece.

I understand the argument, but I find this a bit disturbing, as there are some topics that all of the oligarch-owned newspapers will not be willing to cover in depth. There is kind of a 'fringe' that will publish some details, i.e. "(2020) Amazon: We Totally Don’t Want To Spy On You. Also Amazon: We Just Hired The Architect Of The NSA’s Mass Domestic Surveillance Program" https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/10/amazon-sur…

Post by xeromal » Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 10:02 PM UTC

nharada wrote: post #469

saurik wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elsewhere in this thread, people are discussing a potentially-credible (but maybe you disagree) report on this from Gergely Orosz that does not paint this as "only the 3 senior executives". https://twitter.com/gergelyorosz/status/1587042365084209153?... > I talked with an engineering manager who was at Twitter for 5+ years, and got laid off on Sunday "for cause". They were too exhausted from working over the weekend…

I don't understand why so many people celebrate when Elon treats his underlings like trash. Is it because people hate Twitter and think if you work there you deserve this? Is it because they want to have Elon's level of power and fame where the rules don't apply to them? Something else?