3 ms·

Termination due to non-performance on the job is entirely different from at will termination which can hit a performer and non performer alike. You seems to im

Termination due to non-performance on the job is entirely different from at will termination which can hit a performer and non performer alike. You seems to imply employees are the resources to be used to achieve goals. I do not see an issue in this arrangement if Employees have the same negotiation power as the employer.

nullifidian 8y ago
>Termination due to non-performance on the job is entirely different from at will termination which can hit a performer and non performer alike. Termination due to non-performance can also hit a performer. Human beigns and hence their social systems are not perfect. N% layoff is performance related termination, because it's an impossibility that all employees pefrorm at the same level, are of the same value to the company. It's absurd to imply that N% layoff is absolutely random, that companies use lottery techniques to choose who to fire next. >You seems to imply employees are the resources to be used to achieve goals. They are. Within the constrains of culture and law.
- drieddust 8y ago
  > Termination due to non-performance can also hit a performer. If everyone is meeting the success criteria, then still trying to fire lower 10% is Darwinian view of the world. This also means objective enough criteria exists to judge the poor performers. In reality, that guy in the corner with his head down get fired because he is too busy to make connections and show how valuable he is. This specific case seems harsher because a lot of these people assembled under Mr. Musk's banner because they thought they were working for a cause. I am sure many of them have took paycuts, toiled above and beyond expectations because they thought they were working for a cause. In my view this is not a fair at all. > They are. Within the constrains of culture and law. Agreed but every lawful and culturally acceptable things are not right necessarily.
dwd 8y ago
Equal negotiating power generally implies employees unionising or having some form of collective bargaining that allows to right to strike.

nullifidian 8y ago

>Termination due to non-performance on the job is entirely different from at will termination which can hit a performer and non performer alike. Termination due to non-performance can also hit a performer. Human beigns and hence their social systems are not perfect. N% layoff is performance related termination, because it's an impossibility that all employees pefrorm at the same level, are of the same value to the company. It's absurd to imply that N% layoff is absolutely random, that companies use lottery techniques to choose who to fire next. >You seems to imply employees are the resources to be used to achieve goals. They are. Within the constrains of culture and law.

drieddust 8y ago
> Termination due to non-performance can also hit a performer. If everyone is meeting the success criteria, then still trying to fire lower 10% is Darwinian view of the world. This also means objective enough criteria exists to judge the poor performers. In reality, that guy in the corner with his head down get fired because he is too busy to make connections and show how valuable he is. This specific case seems harsher because a lot of these people assembled under Mr. Musk's banner because they thought they were working for a cause. I am sure many of them have took paycuts, toiled above and beyond expectations because they thought they were working for a cause. In my view this is not a fair at all. > They are. Within the constrains of culture and law. Agreed but every lawful and culturally acceptable things are not right necessarily.

dwd 8y ago

Equal negotiating power generally implies employees unionising or having some form of collective bargaining that allows to right to strike.