13 ms·

To those arguing that this letter is tantamount to insubordination and is therefore a fireable offense: “Insubordination (noun)- refusing to obey orders from s

To those arguing that this letter is tantamount to insubordination and is therefore a fireable offense: “Insubordination (noun)- refusing to obey orders from someone in authority.” [1] Unless they had received direct orders not to criticize Musk at all, internally or externally, they are not guilty of refusing to obey orders. And if they had received such orders, that only adds to Musk’s burgeoning reputation for pettiness and immaturity, in which case these are the kinds of orders one could be forgiven for disobeying. The whole point of the letter seems to have been “Musk’s behavior is detrimental to the company.” This implies that they care about the company and want it to succeed, and that their loyalty lies with it, not with Musk. As well it should. Tesla, SpaceX, etc are (or should be) companies, not cults. 1. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/insubordination https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/insub...

hunterb123 4y ago
- MPSimmons 4y ago
  Could you please define "woke culture" for me?
  - hunterb123 4y ago
    - pclmulqdq 4y ago
      Wait, this is exactly what Elon Musk himself does. Remember the whole "pedo guy" incident? And all of the Musk noise recently about being conservative and buying twitter?
      - monkey_monkey 4y ago
        "One rule for he, another rule for thee"
    - larkost 4y ago
      Conversely, could this not describe Musk's/SpaceX's response to this: complaining about a letter rather than working with them? I don't think anyone has accused the letter writers of not getting their job done. So far it seems this is all about the boss having a thin skin.
      - nearbuy 4y ago
        They're accused of making employees feel "uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied". Without knowing the details of the situation, I'm not sure we can confidently know whether these employees were being jerks or management were being jerks.
    - guhidalg 4y ago
      I don’t hear anyone talking, let alone complaining, about Satya tweets, or Cook tweets, or Zuckerberg tweets, or any other CEO. I don’t hear people discussing publicity stunts performed by CEOs not named Elon Musk. I get that you’re trying to troll but you’re not trying hard enough.
      - gfosco 4y ago
        Marketing teams write their tweets. They never say anything interesting or remotely human.
      - stagger87 4y ago
        Do they tweet stuff like this? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517707521343082496 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517707521343082496
    - klyrs 4y ago
      > Victimhood of feelings sums it up. Like firing people for being critical of one's Lord and Savior?
      - hunterb123 4y ago
        They were fired for badgering other employees with a letter complaining about tweets.
    - blitzar 4y ago
      Complaining about letters instead of working? Sticks, stones and letters may break my bones.
    - seoaeu 4y ago
      That sounds just like Musk’s job description!
  - outside1234 4y ago
  - Auracle 4y ago
    [flagged]
  - UberFly 4y ago
    Topics that usually include "racial or social discrimination and injustice". They are introduced to the workplace in many different forms and reasons. When it comes to the workplace, some are justified some aren't. There are lots of social issues that should remain muted or non-existent in the workplace, but yea it also just depends on the situation.
    - sangnoir 4y ago
      Thank you for your response - I have a follow-up question: Is "Treat your colleagues that may be different from you with respect" woke culture?
- the_only_law 4y ago
  > It can't be good working conditions to have a small group of people playing victim and antagonizing others So you're saying musk should step down?
  - hunterb123 4y ago
    Your snark makes no sense. Are you saying Elon is a small group of people? Clearly I was talking about the group who sent out the unsolicited internal letter in work channels.
    - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago
      Musk is the one doing the distraction.
      - hunterb123 4y ago
        You don't have to follow Elon's Twitter. However you do have to be in work channels, and this group of people sent the unsolicited letter in those channels. And now we're all having to talk about the letter.
        fzeroracer 4y ago
        Musk's behavior and actions directly impact things like hiring, employee retention and more You can argue you don't have to follow Elon's twitter, but when you try to hire someone and they quote Elon's behavior as a reason why not to work for your company what do you expect?
  - vorpalhex 4y ago
    You aren't engaging in argument, you're just doing this childlike back and forth of "Yes I am!" "No you aren't!".
    - the_only_law 4y ago
      Yes, actually, you're right, at the same time my comment is upvoted pretty well and yours is greyed, which pretty much sums up HN in [current year].
- Cd00d 4y ago
  I find it ironic that you're worried about a 'woke culture' while speaking on behalf of other people's feelings that you don't know or work with.
HillRat 4y ago
Even so, they're not protected against being fired -- circulating an internal letter criticizing leadership is, in a right to work state without existing workplace union agreements and outside of a whistleblower or other protected situation, enough to get you fired, though not fired for cause. Are the optics bad? Yes. Is it indicative that "free speech absolutist" Musk believes your right to speech ends where his feelings get hurt? Certainly! But there isn't much the employees can do other than claim unemployment and then bring their talents to a competitor.
- thehappypm 4y ago
  “Musk believes your right to speech ends where his feelings get hurt? Certainly! ” This is totally incorrect. Free speech in this case is an opinion. The right to free speech is not freedom from consequences for voicing opinions.
  - sumeno 4y ago
    Consequences like... being banned by Twitter perhaps?
    - mwint 4y ago
      You don’t have a right to not be banned from Twitter. Musk has been saying he thinks the way Twitter bans people is unhealthy for democracy. Point me to the place he’s said you have a capital-R Right to not be banned from Twitter.
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  Except for Montana, every state in the US is an at-will employment state. Meaning the employer (and the employee) may terminate employment at any time, with or without cause or prior notice. In circumstances like this, the idea of "X is enough to get you fired" loses its meaning, since "X" could mean anything or nothing at all. Therefore, the relevant question is not "is the company within its rights to fire these employees", but rather "was it a good idea for the company to fire these employees".
samatman 4y ago
An open letter like this puts management in a difficult position. I'm going to discuss that without considering other perspectives, to keep the comment on point, please don't read that as endorsement of either the system or, well, anything else. The most powerful response is to have a top level stakeholder meeting, identify changes from the letter which need to be made, then: fire everyone who wrote the letter, and make those changes. This sends the message that management is responsive to worker complaints, and will also send you packing immediately if you defect on the company by making anything public which should be an internal matter. If they do only one of these things, it's either demoralizing or mutiny. Neither of those outcomes is good, one is completely unacceptable. So this is what happens.
- waffleiron 4y ago
  > you defect on the company by making anything public which should be an internal matter. I assume they tried making it an internal matter before going public. Pushing your employees to have the feeling they need to go public instead of being able to solve this internally is a failure of the company.
  - jackmott42 4y ago
    Yeah a lot of people have a very authoritarian bent without realizing it. For many people it is hard to find any example of protest or dissent from the less powerful about the more powerful, ever being acceptable unless it is the type of protest that is easily ignored. "This should have been kept internal, where we could have fired you without publicity"
  - mbreese 4y ago
    I wouldn’t assume that - this was well publicized. That publicity had only one purpose — to put pressure on management to act. But I doubt the authors anticipated this particular action.
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  I'm not sure it's clear that the people who are being fired are directly responsible for the letter being made available to the media. From what I can tell, the letter was circulated internally by the authors and leaked by an unknown number of individuals. If by "defect on the company" you mean "leak the letter", then the company appears to be punishing the wrong people. One could argue that those writing the letter should have known it would be leaked. But you could also say that about any kind of internal criticism. I'd counter that this argument has the 2nd-order effect of preventing any kind of internal criticism, constructive or otherwise, lest it be leaked at some point in the future. Not to mention, the "demoralizing" label could also be applied to Musk's public behavior, which is the bulk of the point that the letter and its authors are making.
IncRnd 4y ago
THat's not how the term "insubordination" is used in the context of employment. Insubordination also might be "Directly questioning or mocking management decisions". [1] Another example: 5 insubordination in the workplace examples [2] 1. Refusal to complete a task 2. Refusal to come into work 3. Refusal to remain at work 4. Disrespecting authority figures 5. Sabotaging team or organizational activities [1] https://www.upcounsel.com/insubordination-in-the-workplace https://www.upcounsel.com/insubordination-in-the-workplace [2] https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/insubordination-in-workplace-examples https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/insu...
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  The authors aren't mocking Musk at all. The tone of the letter is professional yet direct and constructive. As far as questioning "management decisions", the closest example of this that I can find is the mention of the company's selective application of things like the "No Assholes" policy, which seems like a completely valid problem to surface. For the most part, they're questioning his tweets and their effect on employee morale. As for the 2nd example- which of those 5 points are the letter's authors guilty of? The only one of those 5 that looks even remotely relevant is #4, but even that's a stretch since there's a difference between "criticizing" and "disrespecting". Musk might believe those two things are one and the same, but they are, in fact, quite different.
  - IncRnd 4y ago
    > The authors aren't mocking Musk at all. I never said they are, and that's not why they were fired. From the article: "The letter, solicitations and general process made employees feel uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied, and/or angry because the letter pressured them to sign onto something that did not reflect their views," Ms. Shotwell wrote.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
memish 4y ago
SpaceX is the most ambitious company on Earth, working toward the goal of making humans a multi-planetary species. Their orders are to get to Mars. Employees that are bikeshedding, sowing internal discord, engaging in mutiny, are not working toward the goal and in fact actively hindering it. That's all the reason needed to prune them from the otherwise focused and ambitious team.
- cratermoon 4y ago
  But Elon's hyperbolic tweets and offensive behavior don't actively hinder getting to Mars? I mean, he's the guy running the company, you'd think what he says and does would have a lot more influence over the success or failure of the company's goals.
  - memish 4y ago
    Whether they are offensive is a personal opinion and it's fully your choice whether to take offense. Personally I don't. I also don't take offense at anything Chris Rock or Ricky Gervais says. Others do take offense to what they say. That's their choice, their opinion, and not one that can or should be enforced on others.
    - shakes_mcjunkie 4y ago
      But the point is his behavior causes problems and you're implying it's okay for him to act that way but anyone else to call him out is a problem. That doesn't foster good workplace values.
    - tzmudzin 4y ago
      To a degree only. Some speech is generally considered offensive.
    - mthoms 4y ago
      What those comedians say has zero effect on your career. Like it or not, Musk represents his employees. His childish babbling is actively hurting the reputation of the company these people work for. Thus, it is affecting their careers. I'm not saying what they did is right or wrong but your outright dismissal of their (valid IMHO) concerns is missing lots of nuance.
nr2x 4y ago
Exactly, if they didn’t care they’d leave, instead they risked a lot in an effort to save the company from its teenager CEO.
jeffwask 4y ago
Musk is free speech warrior that's why he is about to be taken to the cleaners on this Twitter deal. ...except when that free speech is a respectful letter crafted by his employees asking him to tone down his social media because it's reflecting poorly on their work.
bko 4y ago
> The whole point of the letter seems to have been “Musk’s behavior is detrimental to the company.” This implies that they care about the company and want it to succeed, and that their loyalty lies with it, not with Musk. As well it should. Tesla, SpaceX, etc are (or should be) companies, not cults. Here's an experiment. At your place of work, circulate a document criticizing leadership and how they're all wrong. Make sure to publicize this loudly to people outside the organization. See what happens. What should the appropriate response be? You have to work with these people and its incredibly distracting and out of line. These are children that think they can just shout down leadership and suffer no consequences. The rest of us who live in the real world understand that hierarchy doesn't exist arbitrarily and we're not entitled to have someone pay us while we're spitting in their face.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  Would you apply the same logic to your leaders drowning the company stock and killing the public image ? What should the appropriate response be ?
  - jackmott42 4y ago
  - awestroke 4y ago
    Leave the company?
  - bko 4y ago
    Your company may make decisions that you don't agree with or are objectively stupid. There is a proper channel to voice your concerns. They may be ignored in which case you can leave if you feel strongly enough about it. This is what adults do.
    - waffleiron 4y ago
      > This is what adults do. I am sure the people who wrote the letter are adults. You don't have to insult people you don't agree with.
runjake 4y ago
The SpaceX President claims that the fired employees repeatedly spammed a large number of employees during paid time[1]. > "Blanketing thousands of people across the company with repeated unsolicited emails and asking them to sign letters > and fill out unsponsored surveys during the work day is not acceptable." I appreciate their spirit, because I think Elon is being juvenile and distracting, but this seems cut-and-dry. 1. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/06/spacex-fired-employees-who-wrote-letter-slamming-musks-embarrassing-behavior/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/06/spacex-fired-emp...
- andrepd 4y ago
  Why are you taking their claims at face value?
  - zozbot234 4y ago
    It's not about "taking their claims at face value", it's highlighting those claims because that's the one thing that might actually make this firing stick. If the claims are accurate, the employees can't claim that the letter was "protected activity" relating to workplace conditions.
  - runjake 4y ago
    Because, in the absence of other evidence, it's the best take I have. Also, if the SpaceX president's statement is false, then the fired people probably have a lawsuit to file. Would the SpaceX president be that dumb? Maybe.
- dlp211 4y ago
  > Blanketing thousands of people across the company with repeated unsolicited emails So a normal day in any business with more than a few hundred folks.
sangnoir 4y ago
> Unless they had received direct orders not to criticize Musk at all, internally or externally, they are not guilty of refusing to obey orders Wouldn't it be ironic if a man who is "fighting to preserve free speech" fired employees for their speech he disagrees with? Oh, wait...
- adrr 4y ago
  If Musks buys Twitter, do you think he’ll allow the Elon Jet Twitter account to remain?
  - oittaa 4y ago
    Yes.
  - sangnoir 4y ago
    Maybe, but I suspect he may turn his followers ire on the accounts operator "Firstname Lastname (picture) in $City has an bot that tweets my location, putting my life in danger. Not cool"
throwyawayyyy 4y ago
Well, sure, it's probably legal to fire them. But it smacks of "one rule for me, one rule for thee" from Mr "free speech absolutist" Musk, right?
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  I think we're in agreement. I made a similar point in another reply in this thread. I argued that talking about whether the firings are legal is irrelevant since most states have at-will employment laws, and that a more useful question is "are these firings a good idea?"
- ajhurliman 4y ago
  I think there's a higher bar for working at Twitter than there is for having an account on Twitter
JackFr 4y ago
tan·ta·mount /ˈtan(t)əˌmount/ equivalent in seriousness to;
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  I'm confused, are you saying I used the term incorrectly? Because the definition you provided seems to fit the context in which I used the term.
fabianhjr 4y ago
> If we believe in democracy, then allowing the economy to run by a patchwork of private command structures, with no internal democracy or accountability, should make our stomachs turn. Alexis de Tocqueville once asked; “can it be believed that the Democracy which has overthrown the Feudal system and vanquished Kings, will retreat before tradesmen and capitalists?”. The question he poses requires an address, and not all are shy to the challenge. https://web.archive.org/web/20211029205638/https://newsyndicalist.org/2017/09/30/union-cooperative-strategy-david-oconnell/ https://web.archive.org/web/20211029205638/https://newsyndic...
oh_sigh 4y ago
993 comments here and literally only one person called it insubordination.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
thereddaikon 4y ago
It's a pretty simple universal rule that you don't try to make your boss look bad. And doing so is a great way to end your employment. I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this. Whether what they said is right or wrong it was still damaging to the owner of the company and the company's reputation as well. Its like the Tesla guy who was fired a few months back. Yeah it was his own car. Yeah it was on his own time. But he, a tesla employee was making the company look bad by uploading videos of the car failing to self drive to Youtube. You don't get to not be a representative of your company just because you are off the clock. If people know that you work for X company then anything you say or do may be seen through the lens of "An X company employee"
- toomanyrichies 4y ago
  > You don't get to not be a representative of your company just because you are off the clock. If people know that you work for X company then anything you say or do may be seen through the lens of "An X company employee" But that’s exactly the point that the letter’s authors are making about Musk himself, and his tweets. Either the same rule applies equally to both Musk and his employees, or there’s an unfair double standard which should be remedied.
  - thereddaikon 4y ago
    It doesn't work that way when one of them owns the company. If Musk were CEO then maybe they would have a point. But Musk isn't CEO. In fact I don't think he's an employee of SpaceX at all. He is the majority owner of the company. The most important of the investors. And legally speaking the company has a duty to him, not the other way around. CEO's can and do get fired for making companies look bad. Happens all the time. You can't fire an owner. Now we can discuss how we think it ought to work all day long. But that is how it does work today. It's not an even relationship and never has been. The guy signing the checks gets to decide if he wants to employee you. If people decide that he's a dick and don't want to work for him then he will find it hard to hire good talent.
    - toomanyrichies 4y ago

hunterb123 4y ago

MPSimmons 4y ago
Could you please define "woke culture" for me?
- hunterb123 4y ago
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    Wait, this is exactly what Elon Musk himself does. Remember the whole "pedo guy" incident? And all of the Musk noise recently about being conservative and buying twitter?
    - monkey_monkey 4y ago
      "One rule for he, another rule for thee"
  - larkost 4y ago
    Conversely, could this not describe Musk's/SpaceX's response to this: complaining about a letter rather than working with them? I don't think anyone has accused the letter writers of not getting their job done. So far it seems this is all about the boss having a thin skin.
    - nearbuy 4y ago
      They're accused of making employees feel "uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied". Without knowing the details of the situation, I'm not sure we can confidently know whether these employees were being jerks or management were being jerks.
  - guhidalg 4y ago
    I don’t hear anyone talking, let alone complaining, about Satya tweets, or Cook tweets, or Zuckerberg tweets, or any other CEO. I don’t hear people discussing publicity stunts performed by CEOs not named Elon Musk. I get that you’re trying to troll but you’re not trying hard enough.
    - gfosco 4y ago
      Marketing teams write their tweets. They never say anything interesting or remotely human.
    - stagger87 4y ago
      Do they tweet stuff like this? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517707521343082496 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517707521343082496
  - klyrs 4y ago
    > Victimhood of feelings sums it up. Like firing people for being critical of one's Lord and Savior?
    - hunterb123 4y ago
      They were fired for badgering other employees with a letter complaining about tweets.
  - blitzar 4y ago
    Complaining about letters instead of working? Sticks, stones and letters may break my bones.
  - seoaeu 4y ago
    That sounds just like Musk’s job description!
- outside1234 4y ago
- Auracle 4y ago
  [flagged]
- UberFly 4y ago
  Topics that usually include "racial or social discrimination and injustice". They are introduced to the workplace in many different forms and reasons. When it comes to the workplace, some are justified some aren't. There are lots of social issues that should remain muted or non-existent in the workplace, but yea it also just depends on the situation.
  - sangnoir 4y ago
    Thank you for your response - I have a follow-up question: Is "Treat your colleagues that may be different from you with respect" woke culture?
the_only_law 4y ago
> It can't be good working conditions to have a small group of people playing victim and antagonizing others So you're saying musk should step down?
- hunterb123 4y ago
  Your snark makes no sense. Are you saying Elon is a small group of people? Clearly I was talking about the group who sent out the unsolicited internal letter in work channels.
  - xyzzy_plugh 4y ago
    Musk is the one doing the distraction.
    - hunterb123 4y ago
      You don't have to follow Elon's Twitter. However you do have to be in work channels, and this group of people sent the unsolicited letter in those channels. And now we're all having to talk about the letter.
      - fzeroracer 4y ago
        Musk's behavior and actions directly impact things like hiring, employee retention and more You can argue you don't have to follow Elon's twitter, but when you try to hire someone and they quote Elon's behavior as a reason why not to work for your company what do you expect?
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  You aren't engaging in argument, you're just doing this childlike back and forth of "Yes I am!" "No you aren't!".
  - the_only_law 4y ago
    Yes, actually, you're right, at the same time my comment is upvoted pretty well and yours is greyed, which pretty much sums up HN in [current year].
Cd00d 4y ago
I find it ironic that you're worried about a 'woke culture' while speaking on behalf of other people's feelings that you don't know or work with.

HillRat 4y ago

Even so, they're not protected against being fired -- circulating an internal letter criticizing leadership is, in a right to work state without existing workplace union agreements and outside of a whistleblower or other protected situation, enough to get you fired, though not fired for cause. Are the optics bad? Yes. Is it indicative that "free speech absolutist" Musk believes your right to speech ends where his feelings get hurt? Certainly! But there isn't much the employees can do other than claim unemployment and then bring their talents to a competitor.

thehappypm 4y ago
“Musk believes your right to speech ends where his feelings get hurt? Certainly! ” This is totally incorrect. Free speech in this case is an opinion. The right to free speech is not freedom from consequences for voicing opinions.
- sumeno 4y ago
  Consequences like... being banned by Twitter perhaps?
  - mwint 4y ago
    You don’t have a right to not be banned from Twitter. Musk has been saying he thinks the way Twitter bans people is unhealthy for democracy. Point me to the place he’s said you have a capital-R Right to not be banned from Twitter.
toomanyrichies 4y ago
Except for Montana, every state in the US is an at-will employment state. Meaning the employer (and the employee) may terminate employment at any time, with or without cause or prior notice. In circumstances like this, the idea of "X is enough to get you fired" loses its meaning, since "X" could mean anything or nothing at all. Therefore, the relevant question is not "is the company within its rights to fire these employees", but rather "was it a good idea for the company to fire these employees".

samatman 4y ago

An open letter like this puts management in a difficult position. I'm going to discuss that without considering other perspectives, to keep the comment on point, please don't read that as endorsement of either the system or, well, anything else. The most powerful response is to have a top level stakeholder meeting, identify changes from the letter which need to be made, then: fire everyone who wrote the letter, and make those changes. This sends the message that management is responsive to worker complaints, and will also send you packing immediately if you defect on the company by making anything public which should be an internal matter. If they do only one of these things, it's either demoralizing or mutiny. Neither of those outcomes is good, one is completely unacceptable. So this is what happens.

waffleiron 4y ago
> you defect on the company by making anything public which should be an internal matter. I assume they tried making it an internal matter before going public. Pushing your employees to have the feeling they need to go public instead of being able to solve this internally is a failure of the company.
- jackmott42 4y ago
  Yeah a lot of people have a very authoritarian bent without realizing it. For many people it is hard to find any example of protest or dissent from the less powerful about the more powerful, ever being acceptable unless it is the type of protest that is easily ignored. "This should have been kept internal, where we could have fired you without publicity"
- mbreese 4y ago
  I wouldn’t assume that - this was well publicized. That publicity had only one purpose — to put pressure on management to act. But I doubt the authors anticipated this particular action.
toomanyrichies 4y ago
I'm not sure it's clear that the people who are being fired are directly responsible for the letter being made available to the media. From what I can tell, the letter was circulated internally by the authors and leaked by an unknown number of individuals. If by "defect on the company" you mean "leak the letter", then the company appears to be punishing the wrong people. One could argue that those writing the letter should have known it would be leaked. But you could also say that about any kind of internal criticism. I'd counter that this argument has the 2nd-order effect of preventing any kind of internal criticism, constructive or otherwise, lest it be leaked at some point in the future. Not to mention, the "demoralizing" label could also be applied to Musk's public behavior, which is the bulk of the point that the letter and its authors are making.

IncRnd 4y ago

THat's not how the term "insubordination" is used in the context of employment. Insubordination also might be "Directly questioning or mocking management decisions". [1] Another example: 5 insubordination in the workplace examples [2] 1. Refusal to complete a task 2. Refusal to come into work 3. Refusal to remain at work 4. Disrespecting authority figures 5. Sabotaging team or organizational activities [1] https://www.upcounsel.com/insubordination-in-the-workplace https://www.upcounsel.com/insubordination-in-the-workplace [2] https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/insubordination-in-workplace-examples https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/insu...

toomanyrichies 4y ago
The authors aren't mocking Musk at all. The tone of the letter is professional yet direct and constructive. As far as questioning "management decisions", the closest example of this that I can find is the mention of the company's selective application of things like the "No Assholes" policy, which seems like a completely valid problem to surface. For the most part, they're questioning his tweets and their effect on employee morale. As for the 2nd example- which of those 5 points are the letter's authors guilty of? The only one of those 5 that looks even remotely relevant is #4, but even that's a stretch since there's a difference between "criticizing" and "disrespecting". Musk might believe those two things are one and the same, but they are, in fact, quite different.
- IncRnd 4y ago
  > The authors aren't mocking Musk at all. I never said they are, and that's not why they were fired. From the article: "The letter, solicitations and general process made employees feel uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied, and/or angry because the letter pressured them to sign onto something that did not reflect their views," Ms. Shotwell wrote.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

memish 4y ago

SpaceX is the most ambitious company on Earth, working toward the goal of making humans a multi-planetary species. Their orders are to get to Mars. Employees that are bikeshedding, sowing internal discord, engaging in mutiny, are not working toward the goal and in fact actively hindering it. That's all the reason needed to prune them from the otherwise focused and ambitious team.

cratermoon 4y ago
But Elon's hyperbolic tweets and offensive behavior don't actively hinder getting to Mars? I mean, he's the guy running the company, you'd think what he says and does would have a lot more influence over the success or failure of the company's goals.
- memish 4y ago
  Whether they are offensive is a personal opinion and it's fully your choice whether to take offense. Personally I don't. I also don't take offense at anything Chris Rock or Ricky Gervais says. Others do take offense to what they say. That's their choice, their opinion, and not one that can or should be enforced on others.
  - shakes_mcjunkie 4y ago
    But the point is his behavior causes problems and you're implying it's okay for him to act that way but anyone else to call him out is a problem. That doesn't foster good workplace values.
  - tzmudzin 4y ago
    To a degree only. Some speech is generally considered offensive.
  - mthoms 4y ago
    What those comedians say has zero effect on your career. Like it or not, Musk represents his employees. His childish babbling is actively hurting the reputation of the company these people work for. Thus, it is affecting their careers. I'm not saying what they did is right or wrong but your outright dismissal of their (valid IMHO) concerns is missing lots of nuance.

nr2x 4y ago

Exactly, if they didn’t care they’d leave, instead they risked a lot in an effort to save the company from its teenager CEO.

jeffwask 4y ago

Musk is free speech warrior that's why he is about to be taken to the cleaners on this Twitter deal. ...except when that free speech is a respectful letter crafted by his employees asking him to tone down his social media because it's reflecting poorly on their work.

bko 4y ago

> The whole point of the letter seems to have been “Musk’s behavior is detrimental to the company.” This implies that they care about the company and want it to succeed, and that their loyalty lies with it, not with Musk. As well it should. Tesla, SpaceX, etc are (or should be) companies, not cults. Here's an experiment. At your place of work, circulate a document criticizing leadership and how they're all wrong. Make sure to publicize this loudly to people outside the organization. See what happens. What should the appropriate response be? You have to work with these people and its incredibly distracting and out of line. These are children that think they can just shout down leadership and suffer no consequences. The rest of us who live in the real world understand that hierarchy doesn't exist arbitrarily and we're not entitled to have someone pay us while we're spitting in their face.

makeitdouble 4y ago
Would you apply the same logic to your leaders drowning the company stock and killing the public image ? What should the appropriate response be ?
- jackmott42 4y ago
- awestroke 4y ago
  Leave the company?
- bko 4y ago
  Your company may make decisions that you don't agree with or are objectively stupid. There is a proper channel to voice your concerns. They may be ignored in which case you can leave if you feel strongly enough about it. This is what adults do.
  - waffleiron 4y ago
    > This is what adults do. I am sure the people who wrote the letter are adults. You don't have to insult people you don't agree with.

runjake 4y ago

The SpaceX President claims that the fired employees repeatedly spammed a large number of employees during paid time[1]. > "Blanketing thousands of people across the company with repeated unsolicited emails and asking them to sign letters > and fill out unsponsored surveys during the work day is not acceptable." I appreciate their spirit, because I think Elon is being juvenile and distracting, but this seems cut-and-dry. 1. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/06/spacex-fired-employees-who-wrote-letter-slamming-musks-embarrassing-behavior/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/06/spacex-fired-emp...

andrepd 4y ago
Why are you taking their claims at face value?
- zozbot234 4y ago
  It's not about "taking their claims at face value", it's highlighting those claims because that's the one thing that might actually make this firing stick. If the claims are accurate, the employees can't claim that the letter was "protected activity" relating to workplace conditions.
- runjake 4y ago
  Because, in the absence of other evidence, it's the best take I have. Also, if the SpaceX president's statement is false, then the fired people probably have a lawsuit to file. Would the SpaceX president be that dumb? Maybe.
dlp211 4y ago
> Blanketing thousands of people across the company with repeated unsolicited emails So a normal day in any business with more than a few hundred folks.

sangnoir 4y ago

> Unless they had received direct orders not to criticize Musk at all, internally or externally, they are not guilty of refusing to obey orders Wouldn't it be ironic if a man who is "fighting to preserve free speech" fired employees for their speech he disagrees with? Oh, wait...

adrr 4y ago
If Musks buys Twitter, do you think he’ll allow the Elon Jet Twitter account to remain?
- oittaa 4y ago
  Yes.
- sangnoir 4y ago
  Maybe, but I suspect he may turn his followers ire on the accounts operator "Firstname Lastname (picture) in $City has an bot that tweets my location, putting my life in danger. Not cool"

throwyawayyyy 4y ago

Well, sure, it's probably legal to fire them. But it smacks of "one rule for me, one rule for thee" from Mr "free speech absolutist" Musk, right?

toomanyrichies 4y ago
I think we're in agreement. I made a similar point in another reply in this thread. I argued that talking about whether the firings are legal is irrelevant since most states have at-will employment laws, and that a more useful question is "are these firings a good idea?"
ajhurliman 4y ago
I think there's a higher bar for working at Twitter than there is for having an account on Twitter

JackFr 4y ago

tan·ta·mount /ˈtan(t)əˌmount/ equivalent in seriousness to;

toomanyrichies 4y ago
I'm confused, are you saying I used the term incorrectly? Because the definition you provided seems to fit the context in which I used the term.

fabianhjr 4y ago

> If we believe in democracy, then allowing the economy to run by a patchwork of private command structures, with no internal democracy or accountability, should make our stomachs turn. Alexis de Tocqueville once asked; “can it be believed that the Democracy which has overthrown the Feudal system and vanquished Kings, will retreat before tradesmen and capitalists?”. The question he poses requires an address, and not all are shy to the challenge. https://web.archive.org/web/20211029205638/https://newsyndicalist.org/2017/09/30/union-cooperative-strategy-david-oconnell/ https://web.archive.org/web/20211029205638/https://newsyndic...

oh_sigh 4y ago

993 comments here and literally only one person called it insubordination.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

thereddaikon 4y ago

It's a pretty simple universal rule that you don't try to make your boss look bad. And doing so is a great way to end your employment. I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this. Whether what they said is right or wrong it was still damaging to the owner of the company and the company's reputation as well. Its like the Tesla guy who was fired a few months back. Yeah it was his own car. Yeah it was on his own time. But he, a tesla employee was making the company look bad by uploading videos of the car failing to self drive to Youtube. You don't get to not be a representative of your company just because you are off the clock. If people know that you work for X company then anything you say or do may be seen through the lens of "An X company employee"

toomanyrichies 4y ago
> You don't get to not be a representative of your company just because you are off the clock. If people know that you work for X company then anything you say or do may be seen through the lens of "An X company employee" But that’s exactly the point that the letter’s authors are making about Musk himself, and his tweets. Either the same rule applies equally to both Musk and his employees, or there’s an unfair double standard which should be remedied.
- thereddaikon 4y ago
  It doesn't work that way when one of them owns the company. If Musk were CEO then maybe they would have a point. But Musk isn't CEO. In fact I don't think he's an employee of SpaceX at all. He is the majority owner of the company. The most important of the investors. And legally speaking the company has a duty to him, not the other way around. CEO's can and do get fired for making companies look bad. Happens all the time. You can't fire an owner. Now we can discuss how we think it ought to work all day long. But that is how it does work today. It's not an even relationship and never has been. The guy signing the checks gets to decide if he wants to employee you. If people decide that he's a dick and don't want to work for him then he will find it hard to hire good talent.
  - toomanyrichies 4y ago