6 ms·

It’s interesing that the company can just decide not to report this as a mass layoff. While the performance reasons for letting someone go may be true, it seems

It’s interesing that the company can just decide not to report this as a mass layoff. While the performance reasons for letting someone go may be true, it seems like an easily exploitable loophole. Model 3 production rates were missed by a wide margin, so at least a few people should have known that management would react.

Avshalom 9y ago
Do public company actually have an obligation to report mass layoffs?
- cbanek 9y ago
  Yes, it's the WARN act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraini... California also has their own version: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/californiawarnact.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-...
  - Avshalom 9y ago
    TIL. ETA: this is getting downvoted; I have enough karma that I don't care about being downvoted but for the record, I am sincere that Today I Learned.
    - csours 9y ago
      Reddit style, low value add comments tend to get downvoted on HN.
      - Avshalom 9y ago
        I mean like I said, I don't really give a shit about being down voted, it's not about to get me hell banned or anything but: cbanek, js2, fjsolwmv and pravula might care that i am glad to be informed and my original comment was actually a question and not just me being a dick.
      - pizza 9y ago
        It's not low value. You get a good gauge of others' sentiment with that kind of comment triplet. That social information is worth more than the value of the person who learned the information silently upvoting the evidentiary response, with no follow-up comment left behind.
        csours 9y ago
        There's got to be some kind of Muphry's Law about talking about downvotes, and I ought to know better by this point.
- fjsolwmv 9y ago
  For qualifying situations https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retrai...
- pravula 9y ago
  Yes. By law, they have to report it, esp in CA
- js2 9y ago
  Per Chapter 4, Part 4, Sections 1400-1408 of the Labor Code, WARN protects employees, their families, and communities by requiring that employers give a 60-day notice to the affected employees and both state and local representatives prior to a plant closing or mass layoff. http://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN.htm http://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN...
fjsolwmv 9y ago
<500 people, it might be too small to count as a mass layoff. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retrai...
jws 9y ago
Company's don't get to decide. It is written in law. Check the WARN act, but the key threshold seems to be 500 workers at a single facility. As an employer, getting rid of your worst 1% of workers once a year is just housekeeping.
- Molkar 9y ago
  "Housekeeping" is a funny euphemism for sending hundreds of people into unemployment.
  - loeg 9y ago
    Like it or not, US companies don't have any obligation to be a social safety net for their worst performing employees.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - danjayh 9y ago
    If I line up a random group of 100 people at the average company, I can almost guarantee you that there is at least one who isn't doing his part. As someone who has worked with some of these people (and seen them laid off in rounds of performance-based cuts), I can tell you that some people deserve to be sent to unemployment. Yep, some good people will get hit too, but from my experience a good middle management layer can identify the low performers with a great deal of accuracy.
    - trhway 9y ago
      >a good middle management layer Fairy dust is more real than that.
    - jws 9y ago
      In my industry, and having to make the decisions to fire people, our worst 1% not only didn’t pull their own weight, they were a negative contribution. Getting rid of them and not replacing them actually put us ahead. In most cases the employee wasn’t a bad person, they just weren’t able to satisfactorily do their job and weren’t willing to accept reassignment to a job we felt they could do.
wokeland 9y ago
The word “layoff” appears nowhere in this report. The words used are “fired” “dismissals” and “firing”. This is a completely different activity than laying off.
- yellowapple 9y ago
  To elaborate further, "firing" makes sense if Tesla is pinning its low Model 3 production numbers on inefficient and/or incompetent staff.
- a3n 9y ago
  So they say. I imagine straight termination for "performance" reasons (even people who self-report as never having previous bad reviews) differs from layoffs in any company-declared or regulatory obligations. Unemployment insurance might be one.

Avshalom 9y ago

Do public company actually have an obligation to report mass layoffs?

cbanek 9y ago
Yes, it's the WARN act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraini... California also has their own version: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/californiawarnact.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-...
- Avshalom 9y ago
  TIL. ETA: this is getting downvoted; I have enough karma that I don't care about being downvoted but for the record, I am sincere that Today I Learned.
  - csours 9y ago
    Reddit style, low value add comments tend to get downvoted on HN.
    - Avshalom 9y ago
      I mean like I said, I don't really give a shit about being down voted, it's not about to get me hell banned or anything but: cbanek, js2, fjsolwmv and pravula might care that i am glad to be informed and my original comment was actually a question and not just me being a dick.
    - pizza 9y ago
      It's not low value. You get a good gauge of others' sentiment with that kind of comment triplet. That social information is worth more than the value of the person who learned the information silently upvoting the evidentiary response, with no follow-up comment left behind.
      - csours 9y ago
        There's got to be some kind of Muphry's Law about talking about downvotes, and I ought to know better by this point.
fjsolwmv 9y ago
For qualifying situations https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retrai...
pravula 9y ago
Yes. By law, they have to report it, esp in CA
js2 9y ago
Per Chapter 4, Part 4, Sections 1400-1408 of the Labor Code, WARN protects employees, their families, and communities by requiring that employers give a 60-day notice to the affected employees and both state and local representatives prior to a plant closing or mass layoff. http://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN.htm http://www.edd.ca.gov/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN...

fjsolwmv 9y ago

<500 people, it might be too small to count as a mass layoff. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retrai...

jws 9y ago

Company's don't get to decide. It is written in law. Check the WARN act, but the key threshold seems to be 500 workers at a single facility. As an employer, getting rid of your worst 1% of workers once a year is just housekeeping.

Molkar 9y ago
"Housekeeping" is a funny euphemism for sending hundreds of people into unemployment.
- loeg 9y ago
  Like it or not, US companies don't have any obligation to be a social safety net for their worst performing employees.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- danjayh 9y ago
  If I line up a random group of 100 people at the average company, I can almost guarantee you that there is at least one who isn't doing his part. As someone who has worked with some of these people (and seen them laid off in rounds of performance-based cuts), I can tell you that some people deserve to be sent to unemployment. Yep, some good people will get hit too, but from my experience a good middle management layer can identify the low performers with a great deal of accuracy.
  - trhway 9y ago
    >a good middle management layer Fairy dust is more real than that.
  - jws 9y ago
    In my industry, and having to make the decisions to fire people, our worst 1% not only didn’t pull their own weight, they were a negative contribution. Getting rid of them and not replacing them actually put us ahead. In most cases the employee wasn’t a bad person, they just weren’t able to satisfactorily do their job and weren’t willing to accept reassignment to a job we felt they could do.

wokeland 9y ago

The word “layoff” appears nowhere in this report. The words used are “fired” “dismissals” and “firing”. This is a completely different activity than laying off.

yellowapple 9y ago
To elaborate further, "firing" makes sense if Tesla is pinning its low Model 3 production numbers on inefficient and/or incompetent staff.
a3n 9y ago
So they say. I imagine straight termination for "performance" reasons (even people who self-report as never having previous bad reviews) differs from layoffs in any company-declared or regulatory obligations. Unemployment insurance might be one.