Tesla employees reveal how they were fired(businessinsider.com)
businessinsider.com
Tesla employees reveal how they were fired
https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-employees-reveal-how-they-were-fired-2018-6
41 comments
What about this part?
> A third employee, an engineer who still works at Tesla and asked not to be identified by name, said he discovered his manager had been fired after the manager didn't show up for a meeting on Tuesday. When a colleague of his attempted to email the manager, the email bounced back.
Seems very odd not to notify employees when their manager gets fired.
> A third employee, an engineer who still works at Tesla and asked not to be identified by name, said he discovered his manager had been fired after the manager didn't show up for a meeting on Tuesday. When a colleague of his attempted to email the manager, the email bounced back.
Seems very odd not to notify employees when their manager gets fired.
What day were they fired? Given that's one case, could it have been overlooked by another manager or by HR dealing with bigger fallout?
Are these types of stories written for every round of layoffs at every other automotive company? It strikes me that the media is quick to find drama when it's Tesla.
Are these types of stories written for every round of layoffs at every other automotive company? It strikes me that the media is quick to find drama when it's Tesla.
Exactly. As an employer, I don't want to pay (or demean) someone by telling them to report to a job they know they will lose and have no chance to save. A severance is supposed to ease the transition, but you don't want disgruntled employees in your office.
If you leave voluntarily, I can see your contract could plausibly deny you points on sales completed after you walked.
If you are on commission and the tail payment is not paid because they sacked you without cause, I would be surprised if the payment was not still due. It feels like its a part of the conditions of employment you can't avoid by firing somebody simply to downsize.
Doubtless some truly shitty employment law loophole means this assumptive, pathetic "but thats unreasonable" idea is wrong, but thats what I'd assume: the work was done for payment on completion, how can it not be paid, if the customer completes? If this was true, then the history of commission selling would be littered with lawsuits leading to some law to clarify.
If its clearly at-risk payment subject to retained employment, thats a huge rip-off, which makes me glad I have never, ever worked on commission.
If you are on commission and the tail payment is not paid because they sacked you without cause, I would be surprised if the payment was not still due. It feels like its a part of the conditions of employment you can't avoid by firing somebody simply to downsize.
Doubtless some truly shitty employment law loophole means this assumptive, pathetic "but thats unreasonable" idea is wrong, but thats what I'd assume: the work was done for payment on completion, how can it not be paid, if the customer completes? If this was true, then the history of commission selling would be littered with lawsuits leading to some law to clarify.
If its clearly at-risk payment subject to retained employment, thats a huge rip-off, which makes me glad I have never, ever worked on commission.
You can only bring a lawsuit if you have the money for a lawyer in the first place. If your employer is not paying you, then you are already out a lot of money you could have used to defend your rights
Some lawyers will take a strong case for a percentage of the settlement.
Most of these sorts of cases are too small to be worth it for a lawyer on an individual basis. Losing out on $3000 of commission you are owed and where expecting can be terrible for an individual, but a chance of winning 30% of a $3000 settlement isn't worth getting out of bed for if you're a lawyer. That's why these sorts of cases only make sense as a class action.
Small claims court is your friend. Judges take a dim view of employers not paying money owed.
[deleted]
> If you leave voluntarily, I can see your contract could plausibly deny you points on sales completed after you walked.
There’s also a very good chance that it you are terminated and offered severance, your severance package is contingent on your waiver of all potential claims against the company.
There’s also a very good chance that it you are terminated and offered severance, your severance package is contingent on your waiver of all potential claims against the company.
All I can do is repeat how glad I am to be bound to salary and pension benefits with legal strings on termination. Commission income feels like a deal with the devil.
This is how clueless but innocent individuals suffer for (whimsical) promises / decisions of leaders.
Musk promises profitability - sale's not picking up, production is far behind, cost of production isn't reducing... the low hanging fruit - employees.
I am waiting for how the employees would respond to the increased pressure. If I worked there, I'd have already blasted my resumes months ago.
Musk promises profitability - sale's not picking up, production is far behind, cost of production isn't reducing... the low hanging fruit - employees.
I am waiting for how the employees would respond to the increased pressure. If I worked there, I'd have already blasted my resumes months ago.
The counterpoint of course is that without whimsical promises / decisions of leaders many jobs wouldn't exist for them to lose.
Which isn't to say they don't go too far on occasion.
I've always found the self-interested "safe" leaders to be the worse kind. They're also 99% of them.
Which isn't to say they don't go too far on occasion.
I've always found the self-interested "safe" leaders to be the worse kind. They're also 99% of them.
This has been coming for a while. In public Elon has been using "eccentric millionaire" to dodge Tesla finance questions which is a sure sign the numbers look bad.
Given they'll need to refinance and I'd bet the Model 3 sales after reservations are low due to the cheap one not being available yet, the company must've been looking at a financing crunch for a while now.
This is very much a move to clean house so they can do another round.
Given they'll need to refinance and I'd bet the Model 3 sales after reservations are low due to the cheap one not being available yet, the company must've been looking at a financing crunch for a while now.
This is very much a move to clean house so they can do another round.
I don't think there will be enough business for the staff levels that they have," she said. "I would be scared to lose my job if I still had one.
This seems consistent with the company's statements that they are restructuring to boost profitability, as opposed to a frantic move to conserve a dwindling cash reserve.
This seems consistent with the company's statements that they are restructuring to boost profitability, as opposed to a frantic move to conserve a dwindling cash reserve.
This is how big layoff rounds work. Tesla just fired 9% of its people in a hurry. That means somebody had to come up with a huge list of people and make tough choices based on cost, budgets and spreading the pain across departments, etc. Usually that involves quite a bit of bartering between departments, quotas, etc. The main reason here is cutting cost; not performance of the individuals.
Looks like a job well done to me. Minimum amount of fuss and the they got it over with in a day or so. Most people did not see it coming, which means they contained the chaos nicely. Having disgruntled employees panicking ahead of this kind of stuff is very bad for morale. And once it is done, you basically want these people out of your building ASAP. Tesla is not a charity and dragging this out for weeks or months while they went department by department would have been very bad.
Looks like a job well done to me. Minimum amount of fuss and the they got it over with in a day or so. Most people did not see it coming, which means they contained the chaos nicely. Having disgruntled employees panicking ahead of this kind of stuff is very bad for morale. And once it is done, you basically want these people out of your building ASAP. Tesla is not a charity and dragging this out for weeks or months while they went department by department would have been very bad.
>The company broke promises more than once, she said, adding that she was not reimbursed for mileage, as promised
Isn't this a good example of something that merits an NLRB complaint?
Isn't this a good example of something that merits an NLRB complaint?
> Musk said in an email on Monday that the company was laying off people now so that it would never have to do it again.
Sounds like another promise waiting to be broken. Never is a long time.
Sounds like another promise waiting to be broken. Never is a long time.
Sounds like the company is suffering from poor management. They can develop a product people love but sounds like everything (mfg, delivery, sales) after is chaos.
There’s no good way to do a layoff, but a good severance package goes a long way towards “doing the right thing”. 1 month per year or part year of service, plus notice period, is fair. Statutory minimum, in the U.K. at least, is a sick joke. That’s all that IBM offers.
Dont give up on Tesla, America, hand them some public money instead
My vote for a 'convert submitted amp links to normal links' automatism on HN. Or simply a block like 'You are trying to submit the amp version of a page. Please submit the original'.
By the way, shouldnt amp versions automatically have a 'Go to the real page' link on the top or something?
I see a totally absurd version of the page on my 30" monitor. With no obvious way to go to the normal page.
Not even the url has a clear indication where the normal version is. Guess you have to read it from the rel="canonical" link in the source code.
By the way, shouldnt amp versions automatically have a 'Go to the real page' link on the top or something?
I see a totally absurd version of the page on my 30" monitor. With no obvious way to go to the normal page.
Not even the url has a clear indication where the normal version is. Guess you have to read it from the rel="canonical" link in the source code.
AMP pages load faster on suboptimal internet. I'm pretty ok with OP having used this.
The irony. The original site loads instantly without JS but the amp one takes longer to load and will not display anything (also without JS).
From The Netherlands:
Original [1]: 585.51KB, load: 1.31s
AMP: 918.44KB, load: 1.56s
[1] http://www.thisisinsider.com/tesla-employees-reveal-how-they...
Original [1]: 585.51KB, load: 1.31s
AMP: 918.44KB, load: 1.56s
[1] http://www.thisisinsider.com/tesla-employees-reveal-how-they...
Thanks for posting that - the non-AMP original is significantly easier to read on my monitor due to its layout more suitable for larger screens.
Amp adds nothing to make a site faster. The opposite. It adds some mandatory libraries. It just imposes some restrictions on what a page can contain. So the version companies make to be included in amp might be smaller then their original version for that reason.
We should downrank slow bloated sites directly instead. Then companies would have an incentive to make their sites fast from the start.
We should downrank slow bloated sites directly instead. Then companies would have an incentive to make their sites fast from the start.
I'm on mobile on 2G and the AMP version loads instantly, whilst the non-AMP one takes forever to load a ton of assets. In the end it doesn't matter much, but I personally do appreciate when a page is lighter and loads quickly. For instance, HN loads pretty fast even on crap, lossy connections.
I first noticed the weird no-margin page, but didn't bother looking at the URL but after:
> "font-weight: 400;">Musk said in an email on Monday...
I got suspicious. Took a look and stopped reading. Flagged the post. I don't know what else to do but GOOGLE you are reaching levels of EVIL.
> "font-weight: 400;">Musk said in an email on Monday...
I got suspicious. Took a look and stopped reading. Flagged the post. I don't know what else to do but GOOGLE you are reaching levels of EVIL.
As much as I'd love a reason to snip on AMP, that's also present in the full version.
"font-weight: 400;"> is proofreading not a thing anymore?
Probably an bug of the AMP auto-conversion. I bet the full version of the page displays fine.
It doesn't.
It doesn’t. This is also in the full version.
It was probably proofread before they inserted the ad just in the middle of that paragraph.
Not enough indication of what the meeting is about, and they'll be surprised. Give them too much indication and their anxiety will balloon.
I've been on the receiving end of this as an employer in a really small business. e.g., a keystone employee was leaving and with awkward timing. There's no brilliant way to do it.