3 ms·

But I think Elon's goal is to screw the employees out of their next grant

datalopers 4y ago
Valuations would be down 70% (eg $META, $SNAP) if it weren’t for this buyout so I think the majority of employees end up better than they would have been. Annual grants are usually 10-25%.
hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
1. Elon already tweeted that this is false. 2. As another commenter mentioned, I don't even think this would be possible given California WARN Act requirements, but I'm less sure on the legal requirements here.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > As another commenter mentioned, I don't even think this would be possible given California WARN Act requirement Large-scale labor law violations are not impossible, or even unprecedented for Musk-owned firms.
- DesiLurker 4y ago
  >Elon already tweeted that this is false. Did you expect him to say it is true?
  - hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
    Of course not, I would expect him to say nothing in that case. Honestly, it's pretty ridiculous how people conflate "Elon is a bad guy who stretches the truth all the time" with him sending out a completely unambiguous statement that, if it were a lie, would easily be proven wrong in one day. Point being, people who do stretch the truth/over-promise know how to do it in a way that isn't falsifiable in 24 hours.
    - watwut 4y ago
      Hd did said and tweeted outright lies in the past. Lying is not out character for him.
      - hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
        Again, the outright lies he tweeted were not something that were provably false in less than 24 hours. Just consider his infamous "Funding secured" tweet. I considered that a lie, but there is obviously enough wiggle room/deniability over what "secured" actually means. That's not the case here. In any case, the deadline has already passed. If there were to have been mass layoffs before the Nov 1 deadline, it's too late.
    - type-r 4y ago
      I mean, he did send out that classic "funding secured" unambiguous statement right? Which was insane and people doubted immediately. He had to settle with the SEC barely a month afterwards.

Valuations would be down 70% (eg $META, $SNAP) if it weren’t for this buyout so I think the majority of employees end up better than they would have been. Annual grants are usually 10-25%.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

1. Elon already tweeted that this is false. 2. As another commenter mentioned, I don't even think this would be possible given California WARN Act requirements, but I'm less sure on the legal requirements here.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> As another commenter mentioned, I don't even think this would be possible given California WARN Act requirement Large-scale labor law violations are not impossible, or even unprecedented for Musk-owned firms.
DesiLurker 4y ago
>Elon already tweeted that this is false. Did you expect him to say it is true?
- hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
  Of course not, I would expect him to say nothing in that case. Honestly, it's pretty ridiculous how people conflate "Elon is a bad guy who stretches the truth all the time" with him sending out a completely unambiguous statement that, if it were a lie, would easily be proven wrong in one day. Point being, people who do stretch the truth/over-promise know how to do it in a way that isn't falsifiable in 24 hours.
  - watwut 4y ago
    Hd did said and tweeted outright lies in the past. Lying is not out character for him.
    - hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
      Again, the outright lies he tweeted were not something that were provably false in less than 24 hours. Just consider his infamous "Funding secured" tweet. I considered that a lie, but there is obviously enough wiggle room/deniability over what "secured" actually means. That's not the case here. In any case, the deadline has already passed. If there were to have been mass layoffs before the Nov 1 deadline, it's too late.
  - type-r 4y ago
    I mean, he did send out that classic "funding secured" unambiguous statement right? Which was insane and people doubted immediately. He had to settle with the SEC barely a month afterwards.