6 ms·

> 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 spitti

> 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. And someone isn't entitled to spit in your face just because they pay you. Respect for people should go both ways, and the view that just because someone is rich, above you in the ladder, you should just shut up and take it, isn't a good one too. Workers have very little power to fight back, yes there might be consequences but they wouldn't have written this letter if they didn't feel they weren't already living under the consequences of bad leadership.

bko 4y ago
> And someone isn't entitled to spit in your face just because they pay you. Respect for people should go both ways, and the view that just because someone is rich, above you in the ladder, you should just shut up and take it, isn't a good one too. How is Musk spitting in their face? By shitposting on twitter? By voting for the wrong candidate? These people need to get over themselves. Not everything is about them. They're free to leave.
- waffleiron 4y ago
  > These people need to get over themselves. And how do you not apply this to Musk, who fired people after a bit of critique?
  - bko 4y ago
    It's his organization. Why is that so hard to understand? The leader and some person working there are not the same. If I hired a cleaner and she started posting publicly how shitty my interior design, I would fire this person. It's not what you pay her to do. I would argue it was a good move. Like I said, its a distraction and completely out of line. Imagine you were managing someone and they think its okay to arbitrarily go above your head and call you out publicly. This is incredibly toxic and not a person living in the real world.
    - toomanyrichies 4y ago
      Technically, the organization belongs to a group of shareholders, of which Musk is one. And apparently, Musk is now a minority owner.[1] And as chairman and CEO, Musk has a fiduciary duty to the other owners to act in the best interests of the company. I would argue that he failing to abide by that directive by failing to apply the "no assholes" policy to himself (along with the other points the letter makes), thereby harming recruitment and branding efforts. Also, you're comparing complaints about the company's double standards with a cleaner complaining about shitty interior design? Do you really think those two things are equivalent? 1. https://wccftech.com/elon-musk-now-owns-less-than-half-of-spacexs-shares-reveal-filings/ https://wccftech.com/elon-musk-now-owns-less-than-half-of-sp...
      - LouisSayers 4y ago
        And in the context of SpaceX, how exactly has he been "an asshole"? People don't have to like him, but it doesn't seem he's actually done anything other than make people work hard at their jobs...
        trs8080 4y ago
        SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell on Monday said the aerospace company's "no a--hole" work policy ensures everyone is heard and creates space for staff to propose big ideas. "At SpaceX, we have a 'no a--hole' policy," Shotwell said in a virtual speech to graduates in Northwestern University's 2021 commencement ceremony. "These kinds of people — a--holes — interrupt others, they shut down or co-opt conversation, and they create a hostile environment where no one wants to contribute," Shotwell said. She is also SpaceX's chief operating officer. Interrupting others stifles innovation and stops people solving difficult problems, Shotwell said. "In short, the best way to find solutions to hard problems is to listen harder, not talk louder," she said. "Embrace the ideas of your fellow workers, especially when they differ greatly from yours." https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-president-gywnne-shotwell-no-asshole-policy-2021-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-president-gywnne-shot...
        toomanyrichies 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- andrepd 4y ago
  It's amazing, someone fires a bunch of people for writing an open letter, and it's the latter who need to "get over themselves". Outstanding.
  - oh_sigh 4y ago
    Well yes, they need to get over themselves to the extent that they even thought their letter was appropriate in the first place, and would have no negative consequences for themselves.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- trs8080 4y ago
  > How is Musk spitting in their face? By shitposting on twitter? By voting for the wrong candidate? You're asking questions that were answered in the letter: "Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us, particularly in recent weeks... As our CEO and most prominent spokesperson, Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX — every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company. It is critical to make clear to our teams and to our potential talent pool that his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values." His behavior devalues their work and denigrates the image of the companies they work for.
  - fuckcensorship 4y ago
    > His behavior devalues their work and denigrates the image of the companies they work for. Then they should go work elsewhere if it bothers them that much. Nobody is forcing them to work for a company ran by Elon Musk.
    - trs8080 4y ago
      Er no, as employees they're also paid partly in stock options (RSUs?). They're literal shareholders in the company, they have a say in how it's run. And I don't know about you, but many people don't just run away when faced with a difficult situation - they face it head on and try to improve it. Furthermore, if I spent years of my life contributing to a mission that I believe in, giving a company my best work, I'm not going to just walk away because of the actions of a single entitled individual, no matter how rich he is.
      - fuckcensorship 4y ago
        So employees compensated by their employer via stock options are entitled to attempt to sabotage their company’s leadership from within without repercussion?
        trs8080 4y ago
        They're not trying to sabotage anything. They're asking for SpaceX to disassociate itself from statements made by Musk, an individual, which harm the company.
cj 4y ago
> Workers have very little power to fight back Workers (especially the average HN reader) have incredible power to fight back… find a new job and switch companies. Lots a companies are hiring even with the macro economic issues. From an employee perspective it’s insane to me that one would put so much energy into fighting their leadership rather than just leaving the company for a better one.
- cloutchaser 4y ago
  Because their motivation is becoming some sort of public martyr, not actual change or principled behaviour
  - waffleiron 4y ago
    That's quite a reach, this was posted in an internal Teams channel and leaked. The original authors might not have wanted to become "some sort of public martyr".
- yellowapple 4y ago
  > Workers (especially the average HN reader) have incredible power to fight back… find a new job and switch companies. Outside of the tech industry (and even then), this ain't anywhere near as easy as you assert. Lots of companies are "hiring"... for positions with shit pay and inflated qualifications. > From an employee perspective it’s insane to me that one would put so much energy into fighting their leadership rather than just leaving the company for a better one. From an employee perspective it's insane to me that one would be entirely oblivious to both the risks inherent in quitting (especially given the current economic conditions) and the notion that maybe people might like everything about their company aside from one or two things that need changed.
api 4y ago
Flip it over: if you worked for Apple and wrote and circulated an open letter criticizing Tim Cook's advocacy of LGBTQ rights, what would happen? I bet you'd be fired. I said the same thing by the way about the guy who got fired from Google for circulating a misogynistic rant about female engineers. That was also stupid and unprofessional at the very least. Politics at work can be generally problematic. Political rants at work that criticize leadership or coworkers or are broadly offensive are probably going to get you fired.
- dubswithus 4y ago
  What would happen if the letter criticized Tim Cook for being a homophobe for inviting MBS to Apple. Yes, I know Tim is gay.
- adrr 4y ago
  Strawman to compare criticizing a gay man’s LGBT advocacy to asking a leader to stop being a jackass on Twitter. I am sure board members have made the same statements to Musk because there is fiduciary responsibility to not alienate your customers. As a shareholder in Tesla, I would love to see Musk get off of Twitter.
dsco 4y ago
These people can go work for other employers, or even start competing businesses. This type of agitative behavior is detrimental to productivity and serves no purpose. If they wanted the company to succeed so much why didn’t they just become management themselves and have a positive impact that way?
jcadam 4y ago
There's this long lost dark art known as "tact." Folks who came of age after the advent of social media seem to be completely unfamiliar with it. It's something you use when trying to address a delicate subject whilst minimizing the blowback. Calling out the head of your organization publicly via a scathing open letter would not be it.
- DangitBobby 4y ago
  Wasn't this a non-public communication which was leaked?
  - thraway11 4y ago
    "SpaceX, the private rocket company, on Thursday fired employees who helped write and distribute an open letter criticizing the behavior of chief executive Elon Musk, said three employees with knowledge of the situation." First paragraph of the article. And of course there is also this, "In an email, Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX’s president, said the letter had made other employees “feel uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied.”"
    - DangitBobby 4y ago
      That doesn't answer the question, obviously. An open letter shared in a private medium is not public. I get the impression that neither the general public nor Musk himself were the intended audience of the letter. I find the entire notion of calling for the CEO's ouster with "tact" a bit disingenuous.

bko 4y ago

> And someone isn't entitled to spit in your face just because they pay you. Respect for people should go both ways, and the view that just because someone is rich, above you in the ladder, you should just shut up and take it, isn't a good one too. How is Musk spitting in their face? By shitposting on twitter? By voting for the wrong candidate? These people need to get over themselves. Not everything is about them. They're free to leave.

waffleiron 4y ago
> These people need to get over themselves. And how do you not apply this to Musk, who fired people after a bit of critique?
- bko 4y ago
  It's his organization. Why is that so hard to understand? The leader and some person working there are not the same. If I hired a cleaner and she started posting publicly how shitty my interior design, I would fire this person. It's not what you pay her to do. I would argue it was a good move. Like I said, its a distraction and completely out of line. Imagine you were managing someone and they think its okay to arbitrarily go above your head and call you out publicly. This is incredibly toxic and not a person living in the real world.
  - toomanyrichies 4y ago
    Technically, the organization belongs to a group of shareholders, of which Musk is one. And apparently, Musk is now a minority owner.[1] And as chairman and CEO, Musk has a fiduciary duty to the other owners to act in the best interests of the company. I would argue that he failing to abide by that directive by failing to apply the "no assholes" policy to himself (along with the other points the letter makes), thereby harming recruitment and branding efforts. Also, you're comparing complaints about the company's double standards with a cleaner complaining about shitty interior design? Do you really think those two things are equivalent? 1. https://wccftech.com/elon-musk-now-owns-less-than-half-of-spacexs-shares-reveal-filings/ https://wccftech.com/elon-musk-now-owns-less-than-half-of-sp...
    - LouisSayers 4y ago
      And in the context of SpaceX, how exactly has he been "an asshole"? People don't have to like him, but it doesn't seem he's actually done anything other than make people work hard at their jobs...
      - trs8080 4y ago
        SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell on Monday said the aerospace company's "no a--hole" work policy ensures everyone is heard and creates space for staff to propose big ideas. "At SpaceX, we have a 'no a--hole' policy," Shotwell said in a virtual speech to graduates in Northwestern University's 2021 commencement ceremony. "These kinds of people — a--holes — interrupt others, they shut down or co-opt conversation, and they create a hostile environment where no one wants to contribute," Shotwell said. She is also SpaceX's chief operating officer. Interrupting others stifles innovation and stops people solving difficult problems, Shotwell said. "In short, the best way to find solutions to hard problems is to listen harder, not talk louder," she said. "Embrace the ideas of your fellow workers, especially when they differ greatly from yours." https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-president-gywnne-shotwell-no-asshole-policy-2021-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-president-gywnne-shot...
      - toomanyrichies 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
andrepd 4y ago
It's amazing, someone fires a bunch of people for writing an open letter, and it's the latter who need to "get over themselves". Outstanding.
- oh_sigh 4y ago
  Well yes, they need to get over themselves to the extent that they even thought their letter was appropriate in the first place, and would have no negative consequences for themselves.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
trs8080 4y ago
> How is Musk spitting in their face? By shitposting on twitter? By voting for the wrong candidate? You're asking questions that were answered in the letter: "Elon’s behavior in the public sphere is a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us, particularly in recent weeks... As our CEO and most prominent spokesperson, Elon is seen as the face of SpaceX — every Tweet that Elon sends is a de facto public statement by the company. It is critical to make clear to our teams and to our potential talent pool that his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values." His behavior devalues their work and denigrates the image of the companies they work for.
- fuckcensorship 4y ago
  > His behavior devalues their work and denigrates the image of the companies they work for. Then they should go work elsewhere if it bothers them that much. Nobody is forcing them to work for a company ran by Elon Musk.
  - trs8080 4y ago
    Er no, as employees they're also paid partly in stock options (RSUs?). They're literal shareholders in the company, they have a say in how it's run. And I don't know about you, but many people don't just run away when faced with a difficult situation - they face it head on and try to improve it. Furthermore, if I spent years of my life contributing to a mission that I believe in, giving a company my best work, I'm not going to just walk away because of the actions of a single entitled individual, no matter how rich he is.
    - fuckcensorship 4y ago
      So employees compensated by their employer via stock options are entitled to attempt to sabotage their company’s leadership from within without repercussion?
      - trs8080 4y ago
        They're not trying to sabotage anything. They're asking for SpaceX to disassociate itself from statements made by Musk, an individual, which harm the company.

cj 4y ago

> Workers have very little power to fight back Workers (especially the average HN reader) have incredible power to fight back… find a new job and switch companies. Lots a companies are hiring even with the macro economic issues. From an employee perspective it’s insane to me that one would put so much energy into fighting their leadership rather than just leaving the company for a better one.

cloutchaser 4y ago
Because their motivation is becoming some sort of public martyr, not actual change or principled behaviour
- waffleiron 4y ago
  That's quite a reach, this was posted in an internal Teams channel and leaked. The original authors might not have wanted to become "some sort of public martyr".
yellowapple 4y ago
> Workers (especially the average HN reader) have incredible power to fight back… find a new job and switch companies. Outside of the tech industry (and even then), this ain't anywhere near as easy as you assert. Lots of companies are "hiring"... for positions with shit pay and inflated qualifications. > From an employee perspective it’s insane to me that one would put so much energy into fighting their leadership rather than just leaving the company for a better one. From an employee perspective it's insane to me that one would be entirely oblivious to both the risks inherent in quitting (especially given the current economic conditions) and the notion that maybe people might like everything about their company aside from one or two things that need changed.

api 4y ago

Flip it over: if you worked for Apple and wrote and circulated an open letter criticizing Tim Cook's advocacy of LGBTQ rights, what would happen? I bet you'd be fired. I said the same thing by the way about the guy who got fired from Google for circulating a misogynistic rant about female engineers. That was also stupid and unprofessional at the very least. Politics at work can be generally problematic. Political rants at work that criticize leadership or coworkers or are broadly offensive are probably going to get you fired.

dubswithus 4y ago
What would happen if the letter criticized Tim Cook for being a homophobe for inviting MBS to Apple. Yes, I know Tim is gay.
adrr 4y ago
Strawman to compare criticizing a gay man’s LGBT advocacy to asking a leader to stop being a jackass on Twitter. I am sure board members have made the same statements to Musk because there is fiduciary responsibility to not alienate your customers. As a shareholder in Tesla, I would love to see Musk get off of Twitter.

dsco 4y ago

These people can go work for other employers, or even start competing businesses. This type of agitative behavior is detrimental to productivity and serves no purpose. If they wanted the company to succeed so much why didn’t they just become management themselves and have a positive impact that way?

jcadam 4y ago

There's this long lost dark art known as "tact." Folks who came of age after the advent of social media seem to be completely unfamiliar with it. It's something you use when trying to address a delicate subject whilst minimizing the blowback. Calling out the head of your organization publicly via a scathing open letter would not be it.

DangitBobby 4y ago
Wasn't this a non-public communication which was leaked?
- thraway11 4y ago
  "SpaceX, the private rocket company, on Thursday fired employees who helped write and distribute an open letter criticizing the behavior of chief executive Elon Musk, said three employees with knowledge of the situation." First paragraph of the article. And of course there is also this, "In an email, Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX’s president, said the letter had made other employees “feel uncomfortable, intimidated and bullied.”"
  - DangitBobby 4y ago
    That doesn't answer the question, obviously. An open letter shared in a private medium is not public. I get the impression that neither the general public nor Musk himself were the intended audience of the letter. I find the entire notion of calling for the CEO's ouster with "tact" a bit disingenuous.