4 ms·
>If the individual were under-performing then that would have been adequate reason to fire them Not if they had a claim of harassment, which is my point. Now
by daenz 9y ago
>If the individual were under-performing then that would have been adequate reason to fire them
Not if they had a claim of harassment, which is my point. Now any firing looks like retaliation, similarly to what is being claimed by Vandermeyden's lawyer. According to Tesla, she was fired for false accusations of harassment, as proven by an independent third party investigation (reported in the link). But because she made the claims of harassment, she's been immunized against the repercussions of making false claims, at least in the realm of public opinion. Now the burden is on Tesla to use their time and resources to prove that something didn't happen in order to justify her termination, not the other way around.
- dleslie 9y agoIf an individual were genuinely under-performing, and the company were decently managed, then there would be a paper trail of feedback and attempts to rectify the situation which would indicate that the individual was not performing adequately. Such a paper trail is what allows a company to defend itself in wrongful dismissal lawsuits. The sort of lawsuit that arises when an individual is wrongfully dismissed for non-existent performance reasons as a retaliation for other actions they took. The individual is not, in any way, immunized from making false claims so long as Tesla is operating itself in a manner befitting a company of its size.
- mattferderer 9y agoI once heard that LinkedIn endorsements by fellow co-workers & especially supervisors can come in to play as evidence that you performed well.
- abiox 9y agopoor performance and harassment are discreet issues. both can be true (or both false). as such, any record of performance isn't by nature proof of non-retaliation.