4 ms·

It’s almost as if we didn’t learn our lesson 100 years ago about the failings of the Company Town and Company Store. What’s next? Will Tesla be paying its emplo

It’s almost as if we didn’t learn our lesson 100 years ago about the failings of the Company Town and Company Store. What’s next? Will Tesla be paying its employees in scrip?

omni 8y ago
I'm genuinely curious in a breakdown of the good and bad of company housing _without also assuming company scrip_ if you'd actually like to put some content into this low-effort post. Naively I'd imagine there's some sort of argument that company housing is good for both the employees and the rest of the community. If Tesla moves in and uses the general housing market, rents go up whether you work at Tesla or not. Even if they increase their salaries to accommodate, it doesn't help you if you work at the local hardware store. Conversely, if Tesla mitigates their own employees' shock to the housing market by adding Tesla-only housing stock, hardware store guy's rent doesn't go up by as much. What am I missing?
- omni 8y ago
  Can't figure out how to edit but I'm also assuming there are not Tesla-controlled stores since that's a less obvious version of scrip. If it's _just_ houses, is it still bad?
- cimmanom 8y ago
  Well, if losing / leaving your job means you also lose the roof over your head, effective immediately or on short notice, that gives the company a whole hell of a lot more leverage over employees. And if you have to live in company housing in order to take your job (or have access to it within a vaguely reasonable commute), the company has a lot more leverage over you as tenant than a typical landlord would.
  - diggernet 8y ago
    I'm not settled on whether I consider this idea good or bad. Probably a mixed bag. But these points are critical. It MUST be handled very carefully to avoid being a really bad thing. Like, up front contract giving you 3-6 months to move after end of employment (no matter the cause). Even better, have some portion of the lots be empty with hookups, for employees to park their own mobile home or RV. [Edit to add: Your name is tongue-twisting my brain. Make it stop.]
jadell 8y ago
The failure of company towns was because they were paid in scrip, which made it impossible to move away if/when you got fired or found better work. As long as the employees are paid in real money, and they can choose not to live in the company housing if they don't want to, there's nothing wrong with employer provided housing. That's pretty much what happens right now in the oil and shale fields in the north midwest.
belltaco 8y ago
Aren't company shares and options a bit like scrip? Maybe we'll see employees paid in company cryptocoins soon.
RickJWagner 8y ago
Yes, exactly! As I was reading it, the song '16 Tons' started running through my head.

It’s almost as if we didn’t learn our lesson 100 years ago about the failings of the Company Town and Company Store. What’s next? Will Tesla be paying its employees in scrip?

omni 8y ago

I'm genuinely curious in a breakdown of the good and bad of company housing _without also assuming company scrip_ if you'd actually like to put some content into this low-effort post. Naively I'd imagine there's some sort of argument that company housing is good for both the employees and the rest of the community. If Tesla moves in and uses the general housing market, rents go up whether you work at Tesla or not. Even if they increase their salaries to accommodate, it doesn't help you if you work at the local hardware store. Conversely, if Tesla mitigates their own employees' shock to the housing market by adding Tesla-only housing stock, hardware store guy's rent doesn't go up by as much. What am I missing?

omni 8y ago
Can't figure out how to edit but I'm also assuming there are not Tesla-controlled stores since that's a less obvious version of scrip. If it's _just_ houses, is it still bad?
cimmanom 8y ago
Well, if losing / leaving your job means you also lose the roof over your head, effective immediately or on short notice, that gives the company a whole hell of a lot more leverage over employees. And if you have to live in company housing in order to take your job (or have access to it within a vaguely reasonable commute), the company has a lot more leverage over you as tenant than a typical landlord would.
- diggernet 8y ago
  I'm not settled on whether I consider this idea good or bad. Probably a mixed bag. But these points are critical. It MUST be handled very carefully to avoid being a really bad thing. Like, up front contract giving you 3-6 months to move after end of employment (no matter the cause). Even better, have some portion of the lots be empty with hookups, for employees to park their own mobile home or RV. [Edit to add: Your name is tongue-twisting my brain. Make it stop.]

jadell 8y ago

The failure of company towns was because they were paid in scrip, which made it impossible to move away if/when you got fired or found better work. As long as the employees are paid in real money, and they can choose not to live in the company housing if they don't want to, there's nothing wrong with employer provided housing. That's pretty much what happens right now in the oil and shale fields in the north midwest.

belltaco 8y ago

Aren't company shares and options a bit like scrip? Maybe we'll see employees paid in company cryptocoins soon.

RickJWagner 8y ago

Yes, exactly! As I was reading it, the song '16 Tons' started running through my head.