3 ms·
In a company of ten thousand employees, I have no problem giving benefit of the doubt that two instances of wrongful termination could be done by mistake. It's
by sjwright 6y ago
In a company of ten thousand employees, I have no problem giving benefit of the doubt that two instances of wrongful termination could be done by mistake. It's not unreasonable to imagine that an HR department might screw up at least 0.02% of the time when having to manage ten thousand individuals making ten thousand individual decisions with regards to their response to a pandemic.
Besides, it just doesn't ring true to me. Had this been intentional, they would have been far more careful and not set themselves up for the most predictable made-for-media firing scandal you could possibly envisage. Companies deal with firings all the time, they know to avoid this sort of thing. That's basically the point of an HR department.
- jka 6y agoLet's hope that if these were mistakes, that the former employees affected can receive at least an apology and explanation, and perhaps offers to restore their position (it sounds like one of them has a tentative return offer). If accidental, and assuming a continuous-improvement policy within the company, it could also be an opportunity to understand how the wrongful terminations took place.
- coliveira 6y agoIt's you who are being very naive about Tesla. If this was a simple mistake, HR would have just reverted it immediately after the workers pointed out the issue. The article mentions that the workers contacted HR and presented their correspondence with managers concerning their attendance, to no avail.
- sjwright 6y agoIt's you who are being very naive about human nature when presented with evidence of your mistakes.
- plussed_reader 6y agoWhen they double down on the mistake in light of the evidence it becomes intention and not 'miscommunication'.
- sjwright 6y agoI don’t disagree, nor do I think that conflicts with anything I said.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]