Such hypocrisy

Sorry, another news from this asshole, but this is too much assholery to don’t be shared

Despite him being a shitty boss that fired employees that criticized him on twitter, he promised an “unlimited” legal defense fund to fight against employers that fired employees because of something they wrote on Twitter.

Under his tweet a lot of “verified” (=right wing) accounts plauded this and asked to fight employers who fired employees for having written something homophobic

  • smellythief@beehaw.org
    3·
    1 year ago

    fired employees that criticized him on twitter

    I hope one of those employees sues him. And asks him publicly to pay their legal fees.

  • Karlos_Cantana@kbin.social
    0·
    1 year ago

    We make our employees sign a form when they’re hired stating that they will not mention our company or any of its employees on social media in a negative way. It’s standard practice. Any company big enough to have its own lawyer(s), they will advise them to do that because it can help prevent serious legal Issues.

    • prole@beehaw.org
      0·
      1 year ago

      We make our employees sign a form when they’re hired stating that they will not mention our company or any of its employees on social media in a negative way. It’s standard practice

      The NLRB ruled that non-disparagement clauses are not enforceable

      https://www.axios.com/2023/03/27/labor-board-says-non-disparagement-clauses-are-unlawful

      It’s a clear violation of the first amendment… Also, referring to the company you work for as “we” while talking about firing another employee is cringe as fuck.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        It has literally nothing to do with the first amendment.

        The first amendment gives you zero protections from anyone but the government. All other entities are entitled to respond to your speech however the fuck they want.

        • prole@beehaw.org
          0·
          1 year ago

          Oh ok… So I guess that means the National Labor Relations Act is unconstitutional (it’s not, it was upheld by SCOTUS in the 30s), because it explicitly prevents employers from firing or otherwise retaliating against employees for discussing salary.

          https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-rights/your-rights-to-discuss-wages

          Or do you think an employer should be allowed to fire someone for that?

          Maybe don’t give this current Supreme Court any ideas given their blatant disregard for stare decisis/precedence, and Chevron deference…

            • prole@beehaw.org
              0·
              1 year ago

              The First Amendment protects the right to organize in addition to free speech. The NLRB (and the Wagner Act, the law that gives us the right to discuss wages, as well as unionize, without retaliation) have a storied history of being challenged on first amendment grounds.

              People have tried arguing that an employer’s first amendment rights are violated by a law that prevents them from firing someone for any reason they want. The government codifying what an employer can and can’t fire an employee for is directly related to the first amendment.

              Any time you’re talking about protected speech, or the right to organizing, its directly related to the first amendment. If you can’t see that, then I don’t know what to tell you.

              • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
                1·
                1 year ago

                Since it’s abundantly clear that you’ve never actually read the 1st amendment, let me help you out:

                Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

                As you can see, employment disputes are not part of the 1st amendment. As you can also see, it restricts establishing a state religion, exercising your religion, protects you from prosecution when peacefully assembling and when you are giving the government the finger.

                I suggest reading through the Constitution and it’s amendments. It’s not a long read.

      • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
        1·
        1 year ago

        The first amendment only protects you from being prosecuted by the government for things you say (and it’s even limited… You can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre for instance).

        The first amendment doesn’t apply here, at all.

    • VanillaGorilla@kbin.social
      0·
      1 year ago

      Even if I hadn’t agreed to this it would be a no brainer. If you found your friend talking shit about you they wouldn’t be your friend anymore, why would an employer react any different?

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        0·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know what kind of friends you have, but your employer is not your friend, nor your family.
        They are there to exploit your labour for profit, and will only ever defend themselves, never you.

        (this isn’t to say I agree with musk or anything, fuck him and anything he does, and fuck the bigots, they deserve consequences to their actions, but the idea that anyone would defend their boss like they would defend a friend makes me sad and angry and massively frustrated. Those contracts Karlos mentioned are 100% ass covering by a company that is more concerned with its reputation than it is with its employees, which when you consider we live in capitalism is to be expected, but it still seems to escape so so many people - 99% of employers don’t give two shits about you, including, and maybe especially, those who are really good at convincing you that they value “loyalty”)

          • DessertStorms@kbin.social
            0·
            1 year ago

            expect consequences when you get caught talking shit.

            Sure, to a point.
            Ever wonder why they never fire the bigot before they go public? The bigots I’ve met in life have really sucked at keeping their mask on, do you really think their employers (and fellow employees) were oblivious? Or was it only when there was publicity involved and the company feared for their own reputation, rather than the safety of their other employees, that they do something about it?
            Yet if you tweet “my boss sucks”, it probably won’t go viral or get any publicity, but your employer can just as easily fire you for “talking shit” that literally didn’t cause harm to anyone.

            You specified:

            If you found your friend talking shit about you

            Meaning if the company found you talking shit about it, and the fact that you think your employer can and should have that level of control over your thoughts and actions is actually terrifying.

                • VanillaGorilla@kbin.social
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not talking about them taking a dislike in you. I’m talking about you talking shit about the company or posting shit against laws or just plain offensive. If nobody can connect your profile to you/your company why should they care. If they can, it’s about them as well as it’s about you.

                  At least in my country they can’t just fire you without reason. If you are a - for example - racist piece of shit on the internet and it can be tracked back to your company then hell yeah, they should at least give you a warning if not set you free.

    • Mothra@mander.xyz
      1·
      1 year ago

      I’d be inclined to think he got dumped because of these levels of pathologic behaviour- if this is what we see in public, I can only imagine the things that happened in private between those two.

    • DessertStorms@kbin.social
      0·
      1 year ago

      yeah, could we maybe not frame it as “trans people hurt him so he’s lashing out” type nonsense?
      Not only is it false (he was like this long before that, you just had to be paying attention), but it also provides fuel to transphobes, who already make up enough, but we don’t need to hand them more.

      • squiblet@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        It’s not that “trans people hurt him”, it’s that he got dumped for being a dickweed and then blamed it jealously on a trans person. Also, his daughter who disowned him and the fact that he explicitly had all 10 of his kids with IVF so he could choose that they be born male says a lot.

  • blunderworld@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    Ive defended these musk posts in the past, but sorry… This story has nothing at all to do with technology.