3 ms·
It was a mistake to participate in this absurd analogy to begin with. You can just stretch it until it becomes convenient again. There is simply no comparing th
by disintegore 4y ago
It was a mistake to participate in this absurd analogy to begin with. You can just stretch it until it becomes convenient again. There is simply no comparing the power dynamic between you and an independent contractor to that of an aerospace company and its highly specialized workforce.
It's a simple fact that SpaceX chose its CEO's public image over its mission statement and reputation. I hope future prospects realize that there is no stability or long-term personal growth to be found there unless they can keep their heads down and kiss ass.
- JackFr 4y ago> there is no stability or long-term personal growth to be found there unless they [do their jobs].
- disintegore 4y agoWay to tell on yourself there
- d0mine 4y agoCEO who surrenders themselves with yes-men is bad at his job.
- pcmoney 4y agoNo they chose to remove unproductive, toxic people who were distracting away from the people actually doing the work.
- achenet 4y agoIn theory, if politics starts making SpaceX ineffective, the free market will provide an opening for a competitor with a more effective culture to eat their lunch.
- arghnoname 4y agoI think the workforce being highly specialized is where this gets tricky. In principle I think firing someone for causing internal strife in someone's judgement as a manager is in accordance to how our economy is structured and is to be expected. We may disagree with the judgement, but it isn't a free speech issue if that person can just go get another job. The 'consequences' to their speech are inconsequential enough that their ability to express themselves is not prohibited even if inconvenient. But if they can't work anymore because they got fired from the one employer of their skill the consequences are quite severe. They have to learn a new field! Ideally I'd say people with this specialized skill set form a guild or union. The same thing that makes them vulnerable makes their employer vulnerable--the workers of that industry are highly concentrated, with high investment in skill development. Absent that, it's a tricky issue and I think it would be fair to say that at least a warning would have been in order before dismissal. I don't know if the people Musk fired are in this category or not. If it were an office manager, for example, seems fine. if it is an engineer on some space ship esoterica, ouch.