Not The Onion

12304 readers

977 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

644

Elon 'Back to the Office' Musk Called in Remotely to First X All-Hands (gizmodo.com)

submitted 1 year ago by tree@lemmy.zip to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

67 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The billionaire owner and CEO Linda Yaccarino dialed in from out of town, vaguely touting new features that will roll out in the coming months.

There is very little surprising about Elon Musk’s methods of running X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, seemingly into the ground. A year after Musk officially took over the platform, both he and recently installed X CEO Linda Yaccarino held a joint all-hands Thursday to address some of the changes at the company and suggested that X might be a new financial platform.

Neither Musk himself nor Yaccarino showed up, according to a report from Fortune Thursday. The two executives dialed in remotely from Austin and New York City, respectively, citing an anonymous source within the company. Musk and Yaccarino skipping out on an in-person appearance during the all-hands comes after the former demanded employees return to office 40 hours per week last November, according to Insider, in one of his first sweeping changes as owner.

archive link: https://archive.ph/2F2SZ

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are completely misrepresenting the power dynamic between employer and employee. The entire reason unions exist is to attempt to correct that power imbalance.

[–] Bread@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I agree and disagree. For the average low paying job that doesn't require any skill or knowledge, a union is the only arguing power you have. However, if you are hard to replace because of skill/knowledge and you know it, the power balances back. You have the power to say no without consequences.

Obviously don't push it to where the cost of replacing you is worth it for your employer, but you have more power than most realize. Making yourself invaluable only increases your say in how things go. So getting the time you requested off is certainly doable.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have seen plenty of companies can someone with specialized knowledge, no mater how much you are the only person to know something, you are still less important than your bosses vacation, or the department financing, and this is from tel-co development, where island knowledge is almost the norm

[–] Bread@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But for taking their requested vacations? I would highly doubt that for specialized employees. It is very costly to replace an employee like that. Unless the employer is an actual idiot (which can certainly be the case) they know they can't afford to lose you.

If you work for the kind of employer that fires the very critical person for a job without a great reason for doing so, do you really want to stay there? They probably aren't a great employer.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

first off, they don't care about "being a good employer" they care about cost optimization, if they can get someone to do the job for cheaper, even if to a significantly lower standard they will do it

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

The point is, if it's an otherwise good job, and you don't want to have uproot and move your family to a different state again. If you want stability in your and your family's life. Maybe it doesn't make sense to individually attempt to bargain for yourself.

Maybe you bargain collectively with your coworkers, and get better conditions for EVERYBODY. And then you don't have to move again and force you children to meet new friends. Again.

It bums me out when I see people like you who would be a force of good in a union, then it turns out that they're 100% just in it for them (not even their family).

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This just isn't how life works in reality, and (no offense, but) unfortunately it's bullshit anti-union propaganda that you're pushing whether you realize it or not.

I am in a highly specialized STEM field, and I'm in a union, and that union has been nothing but amazing for myself and my colleagues. In fact, we are in the process of negotiating a great new contract that would never have even been on the table sans union.

Without collective bargaining, everyone is much worse off. You just take what contract they give you or walk. Great way to build a career. Don't buy the hyper-individualist, "they'll all just bring you down," bullshit rhetoric.

There's a reason management is (nearly) always dead set against it, to the point where they'll spend millions convincing working class folks to vote against their interests, and it isn't out of the kindness of their hearts.

[–] Bread@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I agree, I would rather have a Union.