7 ms·

Recording internal meetings to raise an issue isn't the best way to deal with the situation. I'm not surprised she was let go. The company probably saw this as

Recording internal meetings to raise an issue isn't the best way to deal with the situation. I'm not surprised she was let go. The company probably saw this as dangerous behavior.

vkou 6y ago
Companies record their employees all the time, in order to have evidence for when they raise an issue with them. I understand why they feel threatened when this sort of thing is turned around on them, though.
buran77 6y ago
> she was let go That's a very "euphemistic" way of putting it. Kind of like putting someone in a wheel chair could be described as "allowing them to tackle different challenges". She was more than just let go, she was bullied, humiliated, demoted, threatened, retaliated against, and blackmailed among others. Evidence was tampered with, destroyed, or manufactured, along with quite the list of irregularities even judges observed. There's nothing to justify that except an incredibly toxic company culture coming straight from a brilliant but extremely toxic leader. But people like him don't have to worry about any court. They can always buy their escape from a court of law with money, and buy their escape from the court of public opinion with charisma, PR, and their loyal following.
- ActorNightly 6y ago
  >She was more than just let go, she was bullied, humiliated, demoted, threatened, retaliated against, and blackmailed among others. Evidence was tampered with, destroyed, or manufactured, along with quite the list of irregularities even judges observed. Real quick: all of this information exists in your head because of online articles. You haven't seen the full proof of this happening. Be careful of making conclusions based on stories rather than evidence.
  - mixmastamyk 6y ago
    A happy and competent friend of mine went to work for them in the HR department at SpaceX, and left a month later, things were that brutal. Later I took a short contact at TBM in curiosity, it was rather hardcore as well. Long story short, I tend to believe it.
    - ActorNightly 6y ago
      Plenty of anecdotal examples to go around on both sides. Talk to anyone in FAANG, you will hear the same story. Im just saying not to form hard conclusions on things unless you have pretty hard evidence available that presents a certain picture. Its too easy to fall into the trap of manufactured outrage.
      - mixmastamyk 6y ago
        No outrage. Co culture is definitely a thing however.
  - buran77 6y ago
    > all of this information exists in your head because of online articles And first person accounts from people I trust all confirming things along the same lines. On the other hand there are people defending Tesla or Musk because they genuinely haven't observed such issues but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In practically all such cases it just means they never got on the wrong side of your company or CEO. A company should never treat you like garbage because you pissed them off. Or ever. Imagine sexual harassment cases where the vast majority of men will genuinely say they haven't witnessed any foul play. But it's clearly not a sign the issue doesn't exist, just that some people never got to see it.
  - mgh2 6y ago
    You can hear Balan's testimony/interview here: https://podtail.com/en/podcast/tslaq-podcast/episode-41-interview-with-christina-balan/ https://podtail.com/en/podcast/tslaq-podcast/episode-41-inte... Whether she is telling the truth is for you to judge. The details and tone of voice sound genuine.
josefresco 6y ago
She only started recording meetings to collect evidence after being "bullied, humiliated, demoted and retaliated against in the most horrible way possible." Seems ... justified.
- PeterisP 6y ago
  As far as I understand, doing that (recording meetings without notifying other participants) is a crime in California (https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html) and that justification does not make it permissible. So if she admits that she did record these meetings without informing the other participants, then in this defamation case - a key part of which is about the claim in HuffingPost "She also illegally recorded internal conversations within Tesla without anyone’s permission, which is clearly criminal conduct" - she has a good chance to lose, as it's not defamation if it's true.
  - gnicholas 6y ago
    Even if she broke the law when making the recordings, it's not clear that the recordings can't be used in court. [1] This would be different if it were the police illegally procuring evidence, under the 'fruit of the poisonous tree' theory, but here it's just a private citizen. So while she could surely be punished for breaking laws related to recording people, that doesn't seem to foreclose the possibility that she could use the recordings in court to prove her case. 1: https://acitylawfirm.com/recorded-conversations/ https://acitylawfirm.com/recorded-conversations/

Recording internal meetings to raise an issue isn't the best way to deal with the situation. I'm not surprised she was let go. The company probably saw this as dangerous behavior.

vkou 6y ago

Companies record their employees all the time, in order to have evidence for when they raise an issue with them. I understand why they feel threatened when this sort of thing is turned around on them, though.

buran77 6y ago

> she was let go That's a very "euphemistic" way of putting it. Kind of like putting someone in a wheel chair could be described as "allowing them to tackle different challenges". She was more than just let go, she was bullied, humiliated, demoted, threatened, retaliated against, and blackmailed among others. Evidence was tampered with, destroyed, or manufactured, along with quite the list of irregularities even judges observed. There's nothing to justify that except an incredibly toxic company culture coming straight from a brilliant but extremely toxic leader. But people like him don't have to worry about any court. They can always buy their escape from a court of law with money, and buy their escape from the court of public opinion with charisma, PR, and their loyal following.

ActorNightly 6y ago
>She was more than just let go, she was bullied, humiliated, demoted, threatened, retaliated against, and blackmailed among others. Evidence was tampered with, destroyed, or manufactured, along with quite the list of irregularities even judges observed. Real quick: all of this information exists in your head because of online articles. You haven't seen the full proof of this happening. Be careful of making conclusions based on stories rather than evidence.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  A happy and competent friend of mine went to work for them in the HR department at SpaceX, and left a month later, things were that brutal. Later I took a short contact at TBM in curiosity, it was rather hardcore as well. Long story short, I tend to believe it.
  - ActorNightly 6y ago
    Plenty of anecdotal examples to go around on both sides. Talk to anyone in FAANG, you will hear the same story. Im just saying not to form hard conclusions on things unless you have pretty hard evidence available that presents a certain picture. Its too easy to fall into the trap of manufactured outrage.
    - mixmastamyk 6y ago
      No outrage. Co culture is definitely a thing however.
- buran77 6y ago
  > all of this information exists in your head because of online articles And first person accounts from people I trust all confirming things along the same lines. On the other hand there are people defending Tesla or Musk because they genuinely haven't observed such issues but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In practically all such cases it just means they never got on the wrong side of your company or CEO. A company should never treat you like garbage because you pissed them off. Or ever. Imagine sexual harassment cases where the vast majority of men will genuinely say they haven't witnessed any foul play. But it's clearly not a sign the issue doesn't exist, just that some people never got to see it.
- mgh2 6y ago
  You can hear Balan's testimony/interview here: https://podtail.com/en/podcast/tslaq-podcast/episode-41-interview-with-christina-balan/ https://podtail.com/en/podcast/tslaq-podcast/episode-41-inte... Whether she is telling the truth is for you to judge. The details and tone of voice sound genuine.

josefresco 6y ago

She only started recording meetings to collect evidence after being "bullied, humiliated, demoted and retaliated against in the most horrible way possible." Seems ... justified.

PeterisP 6y ago
As far as I understand, doing that (recording meetings without notifying other participants) is a crime in California (https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html) and that justification does not make it permissible. So if she admits that she did record these meetings without informing the other participants, then in this defamation case - a key part of which is about the claim in HuffingPost "She also illegally recorded internal conversations within Tesla without anyone’s permission, which is clearly criminal conduct" - she has a good chance to lose, as it's not defamation if it's true.
- gnicholas 6y ago
  Even if she broke the law when making the recordings, it's not clear that the recordings can't be used in court. [1] This would be different if it were the police illegally procuring evidence, under the 'fruit of the poisonous tree' theory, but here it's just a private citizen. So while she could surely be punished for breaking laws related to recording people, that doesn't seem to foreclose the possibility that she could use the recordings in court to prove her case. 1: https://acitylawfirm.com/recorded-conversations/ https://acitylawfirm.com/recorded-conversations/