6 ms·

It is not very surprising when companies behave this way. They act in their own interest which oftentimes aligns with employee interests, but not always. I'm pr

by notus 8y ago

It is not very surprising when companies behave this way. They act in their own interest which oftentimes aligns with employee interests, but not always. I'm pretty sure the only way to guarantee more ethical behavior is to regulate it.

gpm 8y ago
It surprises me that a company as reliant on good will as Tesla is would do this. Literally every part of Tesla's business is relying on good will. Employees working hard for substandard wages. Customers buying luxury vehicles and sticking down deposits years in advance. Politicians creating subsidies and buying grid scale batteries. Etc. It's unlikely that this move (cutting the bonuses of everyone laid off) has saved Tesla more money than this one post hitting hacker news cost them.
- mcny 8y ago
  Even as I read this, I am aware that I’m desperately trying to rationalize Tesla’s actions. I’m pretty sure I will be able to do it shortly. My guess is Tesla’s goodwill is safe for now.
  - bjl 8y ago
    This is Musk's PR budget in action, folks.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
denormalfloat 8y ago
..Or they could have interests more aligned. I would like to see more companies pay in stock rather than cash. That would mean sharing in company profits, and having a vote in company policies. If companies didn't pay dividends or give voting shares, that would be a reason to pick another company.
- tensor 8y ago
  I've seen so many posts here complaining about how stock is worthless and please just give them cash. You literally can't win against the mob.
- monksy 8y ago
  The stocks typically given are non-voting shares.
hoaw 8y ago
Unfortunately I don’t believe regulation would work in this case. Not because it wouldn’t be effective, but because it wouldn’t happen. People tend to wonder why e.g. Nordic unions are so strong. It is because they have real power. They have organizations, newspapers, building, cash and everything else that you need. The prime minister of Sweden was even recruited directly from being the head of a union, because of that unions long standing relationship with the party. This is why I always smirk a little bit when Americans speak out against unions like they actually would have a choice to form a an organization that would take power from the corporations and politicians. Eh, I don’t know what my point was. I guess I wouldn’t expect a solution anytime soon because it is a power issue.
- unreal37 8y ago
  But this is also why Silicon Valley didn't happen in Norway.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Norway is probably better off by not having Silicon Valley.
  - hoaw 8y ago
    No, it isn’t. SV didn’t happen anywhere in Europe, very likely because of WWII. Norway is mostly concerned about oil these days, but Sweden have been doing very well in tech for its size. Second most unicorn per capita in the world after SV is what people like to say.
    - monksy 8y ago
      Not even close. It's all down to culture and where their priorities lie. If WWII is any indication, the Germans would be very good at developing new tech. (They did it during the war) I believe that the reason why Europe has not had a good chance at a SV: 1. They don't rely on credit for the most part. Using Debit/EC cards are more previlent. 2. High taxes and cheap sources of labor: Most tech is outsourced to Eastern Europe. There is some seriously good talent there, but there's a heck of a lot that isn't great. The treatement of talent is used as a cheap cog in the machine. Hard to hire the best talent when the wages are at a particular level. 3. Strong labor unions and policies: Germany requires companies over a particular size to have representation from the labor force on the board. (This has created the wackamole in companies splitting off) 4. The regulations and monopolies are pretty strong in Europe: it's hard to compete and overthrow say sap or mediamarkt. (Although those are prime for a disruption). 5. Companies play fast and loose there. Due to strong workers rights, they're still playing tricks to prevent people from being full time. (Contractors, probation periods, etc)

by notus 8y ago

gpm 8y ago

It surprises me that a company as reliant on good will as Tesla is would do this. Literally every part of Tesla's business is relying on good will. Employees working hard for substandard wages. Customers buying luxury vehicles and sticking down deposits years in advance. Politicians creating subsidies and buying grid scale batteries. Etc. It's unlikely that this move (cutting the bonuses of everyone laid off) has saved Tesla more money than this one post hitting hacker news cost them.

mcny 8y ago
Even as I read this, I am aware that I’m desperately trying to rationalize Tesla’s actions. I’m pretty sure I will be able to do it shortly. My guess is Tesla’s goodwill is safe for now.
- bjl 8y ago
  This is Musk's PR budget in action, folks.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

denormalfloat 8y ago

..Or they could have interests more aligned. I would like to see more companies pay in stock rather than cash. That would mean sharing in company profits, and having a vote in company policies. If companies didn't pay dividends or give voting shares, that would be a reason to pick another company.

tensor 8y ago
I've seen so many posts here complaining about how stock is worthless and please just give them cash. You literally can't win against the mob.
monksy 8y ago
The stocks typically given are non-voting shares.

hoaw 8y ago

Unfortunately I don’t believe regulation would work in this case. Not because it wouldn’t be effective, but because it wouldn’t happen. People tend to wonder why e.g. Nordic unions are so strong. It is because they have real power. They have organizations, newspapers, building, cash and everything else that you need. The prime minister of Sweden was even recruited directly from being the head of a union, because of that unions long standing relationship with the party. This is why I always smirk a little bit when Americans speak out against unions like they actually would have a choice to form a an organization that would take power from the corporations and politicians. Eh, I don’t know what my point was. I guess I wouldn’t expect a solution anytime soon because it is a power issue.

unreal37 8y ago
But this is also why Silicon Valley didn't happen in Norway.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Norway is probably better off by not having Silicon Valley.
- hoaw 8y ago
  No, it isn’t. SV didn’t happen anywhere in Europe, very likely because of WWII. Norway is mostly concerned about oil these days, but Sweden have been doing very well in tech for its size. Second most unicorn per capita in the world after SV is what people like to say.
  - monksy 8y ago
    Not even close. It's all down to culture and where their priorities lie. If WWII is any indication, the Germans would be very good at developing new tech. (They did it during the war) I believe that the reason why Europe has not had a good chance at a SV: 1. They don't rely on credit for the most part. Using Debit/EC cards are more previlent. 2. High taxes and cheap sources of labor: Most tech is outsourced to Eastern Europe. There is some seriously good talent there, but there's a heck of a lot that isn't great. The treatement of talent is used as a cheap cog in the machine. Hard to hire the best talent when the wages are at a particular level. 3. Strong labor unions and policies: Germany requires companies over a particular size to have representation from the labor force on the board. (This has created the wackamole in companies splitting off) 4. The regulations and monopolies are pretty strong in Europe: it's hard to compete and overthrow say sap or mediamarkt. (Although those are prime for a disruption). 5. Companies play fast and loose there. Due to strong workers rights, they're still playing tricks to prevent people from being full time. (Contractors, probation periods, etc)