Not The Onion

12313 readers

210 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

690

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

81 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

[–] 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).