4 ms·

To be honest, I wonder if they could band together and challenge this in court. While companies get tons of leeway, you might be surprised that there's sometime

To be honest, I wonder if they could band together and challenge this in court. While companies get tons of leeway, you might be surprised that there's sometimes protection. Even if legal, what Musk is doing is incredibly sleazy. The employees agreed to work on certain terms. Then he demands they agree to different terms. Seems sketchy, but I think I know what they'd argue. It's just a really creepy thing. I don't think I've really seen or heard of it elsewhere. You work for me, so sign here for different terms, or you lose your job. I do know that it's probably legal in most jurisdictions for CEOs to just dictate new work conditions, after hiring (though it shouldn't). However, it doesn't normally come in the form of a button you must push to agree with him, "or else". Usually you have a meeting where you explain the plans moving forward... it seems companies that are scared of being sued do this. I can't imagine this is a legally prudent move. We should enact laws that specifically target CEOs that act like cartoon characters. Of course, that would just let them be more secretive or quiet.

Demotioo 4y ago
It's the USA why wouldn't he be able to just fire people? He gives them 3 month should be plenty enough
- Pengy7 4y ago
  I think contracts aren't enforceable unless both sides get something.
  - seunosewa 4y ago
    3 months pay sounds like something.
- P_I_Staker 4y ago
  You might be surprised. It's really complicated. Based on my experience with companies such as twitter, they are so finicky about not doing stuff like this. It's not just altruism or for employee moral. It's clear some of the companies are simply deciding to not rock the boat by firing people. This can be more legally complicated than it seems. Anyway, I'm not really saying one way or another, but it seems to follow that if others are taking measures, there might be good reasons for them. I would be surprised if the Elon / twitter don't get sued by this; multiple times.
prirun 4y ago
The main issue to me is that according to what I've read, employees were not given severance agreements nor employment contracts to review before making their decision to stay or go. It's unreasonable to force someone to make an important decision like this without even knowing what they are agreeing to.

Demotioo 4y ago

It's the USA why wouldn't he be able to just fire people? He gives them 3 month should be plenty enough

Pengy7 4y ago
I think contracts aren't enforceable unless both sides get something.
- seunosewa 4y ago
  3 months pay sounds like something.
P_I_Staker 4y ago
You might be surprised. It's really complicated. Based on my experience with companies such as twitter, they are so finicky about not doing stuff like this. It's not just altruism or for employee moral. It's clear some of the companies are simply deciding to not rock the boat by firing people. This can be more legally complicated than it seems. Anyway, I'm not really saying one way or another, but it seems to follow that if others are taking measures, there might be good reasons for them. I would be surprised if the Elon / twitter don't get sued by this; multiple times.

prirun 4y ago

The main issue to me is that according to what I've read, employees were not given severance agreements nor employment contracts to review before making their decision to stay or go. It's unreasonable to force someone to make an important decision like this without even knowing what they are agreeing to.