4 ms·

100%. Rules are for other people.

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
You can't expect getting paid and set the rules. If you don't like it, stop receiving pay, that allowes you to ignore the rules. It's fair.
- bigfudge 4y ago
  Some rules are not allowed. Not allowing remote work is still allowed, but I don’t think it’s far away from being socially unacceptable. Being legally unacceptable is just one step beyond that.
- ben_w 4y ago
  While true, I don't think that's pertinent. This is more of a "if you don't like it, buy the company" situation.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
    No need to buy the company, anyone can always start a new one, it's very affordable, just a few hundred bucks. Then you can set whatever rules you want for yourself and your employees.
- fortuna86 4y ago
  Getting paid doesn't change the fact that the employees are the ones actually making Twitter work. If Twitter were a car, it would have an owner.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
    So what do you suggest? Them have the pay, and also set the rules? What else do you suggest? Work on the things they want, and not on what they are told? Whatever you tell about the fact that it is employees are actually the ones who make twitter work, they aren't there the only ones on the planet who can do this job. If current employees don't want to work from office, then, maybe, some others might be willing.
    - fortuna86 4y ago
      > Them have the pay, and also set the rules? Yes that's how it often works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union
      - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
        Like all monopolies and cartels, they do far more harm than good. If Twitter workers unionized, I'd suggest firing them all and hired new ones. Maybe in a country where unions are prohibited.
        fortuna86 4y ago
        > Like all monopolies and cartels Unions aren't monopolies they are collective bargaining. The monopoly on power you are advocating is for a single owner of a company to set all the rules. So you do view Twitter as a car, which can have an owner. What are the employees then in your scenario? Musk offers no value to Twitter having purchased it, the value lies in the people working on it.
mirekrusin 4y ago
Same rule, he explicitly stated remote work is allowed if approved (by him).

You can't expect getting paid and set the rules. If you don't like it, stop receiving pay, that allowes you to ignore the rules. It's fair.

bigfudge 4y ago
Some rules are not allowed. Not allowing remote work is still allowed, but I don’t think it’s far away from being socially unacceptable. Being legally unacceptable is just one step beyond that.
ben_w 4y ago
While true, I don't think that's pertinent. This is more of a "if you don't like it, buy the company" situation.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  No need to buy the company, anyone can always start a new one, it's very affordable, just a few hundred bucks. Then you can set whatever rules you want for yourself and your employees.
fortuna86 4y ago
Getting paid doesn't change the fact that the employees are the ones actually making Twitter work. If Twitter were a car, it would have an owner.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  So what do you suggest? Them have the pay, and also set the rules? What else do you suggest? Work on the things they want, and not on what they are told? Whatever you tell about the fact that it is employees are actually the ones who make twitter work, they aren't there the only ones on the planet who can do this job. If current employees don't want to work from office, then, maybe, some others might be willing.
  - fortuna86 4y ago
    > Them have the pay, and also set the rules? Yes that's how it often works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union
    - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      Like all monopolies and cartels, they do far more harm than good. If Twitter workers unionized, I'd suggest firing them all and hired new ones. Maybe in a country where unions are prohibited.
      - fortuna86 4y ago
        > Like all monopolies and cartels Unions aren't monopolies they are collective bargaining. The monopoly on power you are advocating is for a single owner of a company to set all the rules. So you do view Twitter as a car, which can have an owner. What are the employees then in your scenario? Musk offers no value to Twitter having purchased it, the value lies in the people working on it.

mirekrusin 4y ago

Same rule, he explicitly stated remote work is allowed if approved (by him).