5 ms·
“The other signatories, a majority of whom were engineers, declined to publicly disclose their names because they did not want to jeopardize employment at Blue
by rkochman 5y ago
“The other signatories, a majority of whom were engineers, declined to publicly disclose their names because they did not want to jeopardize employment at Blue Origin or harm their prospects in the aerospace industry for other jobs.”
That’s not how signing works.
- prepend 5y agoMy organization had an “open letter” published that claimed hundreds of signatories but wouldn’t disclose the signatures due to fear of reprisal. I’m not sure how effective this can be as the whole point of names signed is that they are real. A claim of signatures is not very useful. Cynically, every time I see a “secret list of signers” I just figure the number is zero or a bazillion as it doesn’t matter. It’s like Nixon’s “silent majority” of supporters.
- kelnos 5y agoI get what you are saying, but then what is the solution for people who have legitimate complaints, but fear reprisal if they don't remain anonymous? Not everyone has the luxury of being able to go up against their employer without repercussions that are worse than the original complaint. But that doesn't mean people should just have to suck it up and put up with unjust (and perhaps illegal) behavior.
- angelzen 5y ago"This org is kind of shitty. Sadly, I need to move on.". That's what the vast majority of people do. Unless there are clearly illegal acts, say withholding pay or physical endangerment, not sure why people would want to pick a public fight with their employer. It's a lose-lose proposition.
- prepend 5y agoI think the solution is to not make unverifiable claims. Just write a letter and have it stand on its merits. If I can’t disclose the identity of 21 people and have no way of verifying that 21 people did someone, I can just not mention that part.
- bumby 5y ago"Fear of reprisal" is one of the primary measures of a toxic culture. But I get what you're saying about it almost being an unfalsifiable claim.
- philwelch 5y ago> It’s like Nixon’s “silent majority” of supporters. The term "silent majority" referred to people in the 1968 and 1972 elections who held moderate-to-conservative views that weren't represented in the mass protests and domestic terrorism of the time. Considering that Nixon won both presidential elections--1972 in an utter landslide--it turned out that the "silent majority" actually existed--quite unlike these anonymous signatories.
- staysafeanon 5y ago"It's so toxic there that I will virtue signal by non-publically signing an essay, but not toxic enough to pen my name openly and quit."
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- WalterBright 5y agoIt seems odd to me that highly skilled aerospace engineers would have any trouble finding other jobs if they were unhappy at Blue Origin.
- gameswithgo 5y agoThey have very rare skills, but also live in a small pool employers as well.
- Taylor_OD 5y agoExactly this. You can be the best Physical Security - Spacecraft Engineer (making up a title obviously) on the planet who can make sure no unauthorized entities get into a spacecraft but if you piss off the 5 people who run spacecraft companies you will be unemployed.
- WalterBright 5y agoOh phooey. Expertise like that is very transferable. I didn't have any trouble transitioning from being an aerospace gearbox expert to writing software and then compilers.
- _moof 5y agoOk. And if you don't want to write compilers? Not everyone wants to make a career change, especially not folks in the space business.
- WalterBright 5y agoIf you decide that you only want to work in a very narrow niche that only exists in one company, it's a prison of your own making. Not the company's. P.S. I was also offered a position at Sikorsky working on helicopter designs.
- bumby 5y ago
- tehjoker 5y agoIt's what happens when there aren't enough colleagues willing to also sign. Once a majority are willing to sign, it's a lot easier to make your name public. Unfortunately, prior to that point there is a ding you take on credibility. However, it's pretty odd for employees to want their company to get criticized like this unless it deserves it. Why start something unless its real when the consequences are fighting the first or second richest man in the world?
- nsoxo 5y agoOr maybe they just disagree?
- tehjoker 5y agoPossible, but unlikely. Usually when workers speak up they're the tip of the iceberg. This is different from e.g. celebrities because when they say something, they get attention, adulation, sell shit etc. When workers speak up, they are risking mostly negative consequences and so most speech is repressed.
- Invictus0 5y ago> "In 2019, Blue Origin leadership requested that all employees sign new contracts with a non-disparagement clause binding them and their heirs from ever saying something that would 'hurt the goodwill of the company,'" the essay authors write. "Contracts for some departing employees now mandated they pay the corporation’s legal fees if the corporation chose to sue them for breach of contract. The inner circle of leadership tracked who signed and discussed contingency plans for those who did not." They signed non-disparagement contracts.
- jaytaylor 5y ago> Defamation is essentially, “Don't make up bad things about us to hurt us,” while disparagement is, “Don't say bad things about us—even if they're true.” So, yes, even if your happy-hour venting session or LinkedIn post references something totally true and not malicious, it's still considered disparagement.
- belval 5y agoCan you actually bind the heirs? How would that work?
- LaundroMat 5y agoAre such things enforceable in court?
- codezero 5y agoDoesn’t need to be, the company has more money than the individual, so the threat remains tangible to many.
- LaundroMat 5y agoI understand that, but I still wonder if it is.
- no_butterscotch 5y ago> all employees sign new contracts with a non-disparagement clause binding them and their heirs from ever saying something uh what? their heirs? How is that even enforceable?
- rpgmaker 5y agoReminds me of those journalists who penned a letter against censorship but used a pen name to sign it lol.