5 ms·

I spent about fifteen minutes poking around. I'm not sure, but I take the impression this is in fact protected organizing, at least according to the NLRB. It se

I spent about fifteen minutes poking around. I'm not sure, but I take the impression this is in fact protected organizing, at least according to the NLRB. It seems like this is seen by NLRB as workers expressing concern and advocating for better working conditions (eg free of Musk's distractions), and the company retaliating against them. (To be clear, I have no idea whether the case has merit or not, my only claim is that NLRB seems to think so.) I took that impression from here. https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/spacex-illegally-fired-workers-critical-elon-musk-us-labor-agency-says-2024-01-03/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/spacex-illegally-fi... I tried to find the particular case; according to Reuters' initial coverage (linked in the above article) these charges were filed November 2022, but I couldn't find one from that time on the NLRB website. https://www.nlrb.gov/search/case/Tesla?sort=desc https://www.nlrb.gov/search/case/Tesla?sort=desc As a side note - I don't know what a normal number of NLRB cases is for a large corporation, but this seems like a lot?

charcircuit 3y ago
Reading Twitter is not a part of the workplave
- maxbond 3y ago
  Public statements by your CEO can easily impact your work. Twitter might have a trivial and lighthearted feel, but that doesn't detract. Eg, when Musk tweeted he was taking Tesla public, it was probably very disruptive, regardless of the medium. I think one of the lessons of the last few years has been that things people say on Twitter do, in fact, matter a great deal. ETA: I had a brain fart and thought we were talking about Tesla, but the example is illustrative nonetheless.
the_doctah 3y ago
Gonna have a hell of a time proving the boss's tweets have anything to do with working conditions.
- maxbond 3y ago
  I don't think that's the burden of proof though, I think they have to prove they were fired in retaliation.
  - imgabe 3y ago
    NAL, but I think they would also have to prove that the thing they were fired in retaliation for is something you're actually not allowed to fire people for. You can fire people in retaliation for stealing or screwing up or for wasting everyone's time complaining about Twitter drama instead of doing their job or lots of other reasons. Simply firing in retaliation is not illegal.
    - maxbond 3y ago
      Also not a lawyer. I think if, for instance, a group of roof tile workers were discussing how they thought their safety straps needed to be replaced, and were fired for doing so - whether or not the straps needed replacing would be immaterial. The discussion is protected. In the same way, I don't think it's material whether Twitter is disruptive to their work. NLRB's argument, if I'm understanding correctly, is that they were discussing their conditions, and that such a discussion is protected.
      - imgabe 3y ago
        I think the question is whether the boss's personal social media account is part of their workplace conditions. A safety strap is definitely a part of the work place. If your job is not social media manager and you don't work at Twitter (these are SpaceX employees), then it's hard to see how Twitter is a part of their workplace conditions. They should probably be designing rockets or whatever they were being paid to do instead of reading Twitter.
        maxbond 3y ago
        ETA: See also this better response to a similar question; we're myopically focusing on Twitter, but that isn't the real story here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726 Musk regularly tweets about his companies. His tweets regularly move the share price, so it makes sense to me that they might regularly impact employees (not to say the share price is the mechanism by which that would happen, just that it stands to reason his tweets are relevant to the operations of the business if they're relevant to its valuation). Also, if you listen to Musk, he has no regular personal and working hours, they're constantly intermingled. I think many people in the thread have a misconception that because Twitter is something kinda silly that it couldn't possibly matter. I think it can be helpful to mentally substitute "Twitter" with "public statements." As a thought experiment, if the CEO of your company went on a drunken bender (not saying this is what Musk did, just a hypothetical) and they started tweeting a bunch of really offensive stuff, do you think that could impact your job? Say, if you were a startup about to do another round of fundraising - they might alienate investors, and you might end up losing your job.
maxbond 3y ago
> I tried to find the particular case... The case numbers are in the header of the document linked in this comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38862605 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38862605 The reason I didn't find the case was I spaced out and looked for Tesla instead of SpaceX, d'oh.

charcircuit 3y ago

Reading Twitter is not a part of the workplave

maxbond 3y ago
Public statements by your CEO can easily impact your work. Twitter might have a trivial and lighthearted feel, but that doesn't detract. Eg, when Musk tweeted he was taking Tesla public, it was probably very disruptive, regardless of the medium. I think one of the lessons of the last few years has been that things people say on Twitter do, in fact, matter a great deal. ETA: I had a brain fart and thought we were talking about Tesla, but the example is illustrative nonetheless.

the_doctah 3y ago

Gonna have a hell of a time proving the boss's tweets have anything to do with working conditions.

maxbond 3y ago
I don't think that's the burden of proof though, I think they have to prove they were fired in retaliation.
- imgabe 3y ago
  NAL, but I think they would also have to prove that the thing they were fired in retaliation for is something you're actually not allowed to fire people for. You can fire people in retaliation for stealing or screwing up or for wasting everyone's time complaining about Twitter drama instead of doing their job or lots of other reasons. Simply firing in retaliation is not illegal.
  - maxbond 3y ago
    Also not a lawyer. I think if, for instance, a group of roof tile workers were discussing how they thought their safety straps needed to be replaced, and were fired for doing so - whether or not the straps needed replacing would be immaterial. The discussion is protected. In the same way, I don't think it's material whether Twitter is disruptive to their work. NLRB's argument, if I'm understanding correctly, is that they were discussing their conditions, and that such a discussion is protected.
    - imgabe 3y ago
      I think the question is whether the boss's personal social media account is part of their workplace conditions. A safety strap is definitely a part of the work place. If your job is not social media manager and you don't work at Twitter (these are SpaceX employees), then it's hard to see how Twitter is a part of their workplace conditions. They should probably be designing rockets or whatever they were being paid to do instead of reading Twitter.
      - maxbond 3y ago
        ETA: See also this better response to a similar question; we're myopically focusing on Twitter, but that isn't the real story here. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38863726 Musk regularly tweets about his companies. His tweets regularly move the share price, so it makes sense to me that they might regularly impact employees (not to say the share price is the mechanism by which that would happen, just that it stands to reason his tweets are relevant to the operations of the business if they're relevant to its valuation). Also, if you listen to Musk, he has no regular personal and working hours, they're constantly intermingled. I think many people in the thread have a misconception that because Twitter is something kinda silly that it couldn't possibly matter. I think it can be helpful to mentally substitute "Twitter" with "public statements." As a thought experiment, if the CEO of your company went on a drunken bender (not saying this is what Musk did, just a hypothetical) and they started tweeting a bunch of really offensive stuff, do you think that could impact your job? Say, if you were a startup about to do another round of fundraising - they might alienate investors, and you might end up losing your job.

maxbond 3y ago

> I tried to find the particular case... The case numbers are in the header of the document linked in this comment. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38862605 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38862605 The reason I didn't find the case was I spaced out and looked for Tesla instead of SpaceX, d'oh.