3 ms·

> discuss working conditions Which part of the open letter discusses working conditions?[1] It's about how they don't want to work for a company owned by a per

> discuss working conditions Which part of the open letter discusses working conditions?[1] It's about how they don't want to work for a company owned by a person expressing their opinion in the public sphere because it causes embarrassment in their own social spheres being voluntarily associated with that. The court case is now about them demanding to have their jobs reinstated to a company owned by that exact same person where absolutely nothing has changed. I agree that workers should have freedom of speech, but the owner of the company they work for also has that same right, a right they oppose and which seems to be the root of all their problems leading to this case. Freedom of speech was never freedom from consequences was it. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk-internal-open-letter-behavior https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/16/23170228/spacex-elon-musk...

aw1621107 3y ago
> Which part of the open letter discusses working conditions? The sections regarding unacceptable behavior seem like potential candidates: > SpaceX’s current systems and culture do not live up to its stated values, as many employees continue to experience unequal enforcement of our oft-repeated “No Asshole” and “Zero Tolerance” policies. This must change. > [snip] > Define and uniformly respond to all forms of unacceptable behavior. Clearly define what exactly is intended by SpaceX’s “no-asshole” and “zero tolerance” policies and enforce them consistently. SpaceX must establish safe avenues for reporting and uphold clear repercussions for all unacceptable behavior, whether from the CEO or an employee starting their first day.
- leereeves 3y ago
  So that raises an interesting question. If part of the letter was about working conditions, and part was about Elon tweeting, can they legally be fired for the second part of the open letter despite the existence of the first?
  - water-data-dude 3y ago
    This is my reading and might be off base, but it seems like they’re saying that Elon is undermining the “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies with his very loud and visible opinions. As long as Elon is seen as BEING SpaceX, his dismissive attitude towards things like sexual harassment will make it difficult to enforce policies against that sort of behavior. That’s why they asked SpaceX to distance itself from Twitter Elon.
    - leereeves 3y ago
      Do those “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies apply to employee behavior outside work?
      - wahnfrieden 3y ago
        does a ceo or worker represent their company when making public statements on media platforms?
        leereeves 3y ago
        Legally? I don't believe so but I'm not a lawyer. What's your opinion? Do you allow ceos to have private lives?
comex 3y ago
Catchphrases aside, freedom of speech has always been about freedom from (specific categories of) consequences. That is the entire point. For example, the First Amendment protects you from most consequences imposed by the government, such as being sent to jail, or even lesser consequences like being fired from a government job (depending). Analogously, in the employment context, “freedom of speech” would have to include freedom from being fired for that speech or it would be quite meaningless.

aw1621107 3y ago

> Which part of the open letter discusses working conditions? The sections regarding unacceptable behavior seem like potential candidates: > SpaceX’s current systems and culture do not live up to its stated values, as many employees continue to experience unequal enforcement of our oft-repeated “No Asshole” and “Zero Tolerance” policies. This must change. > [snip] > Define and uniformly respond to all forms of unacceptable behavior. Clearly define what exactly is intended by SpaceX’s “no-asshole” and “zero tolerance” policies and enforce them consistently. SpaceX must establish safe avenues for reporting and uphold clear repercussions for all unacceptable behavior, whether from the CEO or an employee starting their first day.

leereeves 3y ago
So that raises an interesting question. If part of the letter was about working conditions, and part was about Elon tweeting, can they legally be fired for the second part of the open letter despite the existence of the first?
- water-data-dude 3y ago
  This is my reading and might be off base, but it seems like they’re saying that Elon is undermining the “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies with his very loud and visible opinions. As long as Elon is seen as BEING SpaceX, his dismissive attitude towards things like sexual harassment will make it difficult to enforce policies against that sort of behavior. That’s why they asked SpaceX to distance itself from Twitter Elon.
  - leereeves 3y ago
    Do those “no assholes” and “zero tolerance” policies apply to employee behavior outside work?
    - wahnfrieden 3y ago
      does a ceo or worker represent their company when making public statements on media platforms?
      - leereeves 3y ago
        Legally? I don't believe so but I'm not a lawyer. What's your opinion? Do you allow ceos to have private lives?

comex 3y ago

Catchphrases aside, freedom of speech has always been about freedom from (specific categories of) consequences. That is the entire point. For example, the First Amendment protects you from most consequences imposed by the government, such as being sent to jail, or even lesser consequences like being fired from a government job (depending). Analogously, in the employment context, “freedom of speech” would have to include freedom from being fired for that speech or it would be quite meaningless.