They're not "using Musk's money" - wages paid to employees are owed to the employees for their work, and are no longer the employer's money in any way, shape or form!
Even if we ignored all the other reasons and protections: a massive chunk of Space-X's profits come from government contracts and he should absolutely be subject to worker protections as a part of those contracts if my tax dollars are being spent on it. I don't particularly care if he's personally offended that people who work for him think he's a jerk. If his skin is that thin, perhaps he should consider a profession other than "leading" a diverse group of critical thinkers.
I understand that in this case communications about workplace conditions may be specifically protected, but is there some level of insubordination for which you think employees should be allowed to be fired?
If they taught Veblen's Theory of the Leisure Class, then people wouldn't be surprised the gp reaction is the exact goal of Leisure Class.
Through Conspicuous Consumption and Conspicuous Leisure where the keyword is being "Conspicuous" with all their over the top activities, what is really being signaled to the entire chimp troupe is - "you want to be like me or hang out with me then do I what I tell you", "who do you want to work for - the king in the palace with cool toys or someone boring?"
Veblen said using such signalling is important for group formation since people are so different and have different interests pushing them all in different directions. So group formation and cohesion requires leaders who are master bullshiters or people who really believe in their stories.
But the danger is when the leader forgets the point of signalling and story telling is group formation and cohesion. Thats when things go off the rails.
If anything we should give him less leeway, since he has so much power. I know it's a cheesy Spider-Man quote, but "with great power comes great responsibility". Also "power corrupts".
So to give this a serious answer, why not ? Most but not all of the world has made this illegal because it’s generally viewed as harmful, to society, to the business and to the owner him self quite often. Companies are social enterprises and enjoy the rights with atleast in theory on the perimis that they benefit society in general as well as their stakeholders. Firing an individual who is performing their duties well doesn’t really benefit anyone. Not even Musk, who seems to have always had a particularly thin skin.
TLDR it’s not just Musks money/company, nor is he even acting in his own best interests IMO.
Most of the world isn't experiencing the GDP growth that the US has. Its unfortunate that this country is so bought and owned by the rich and until that dragon is slayed (how? who knows) then there will always be this sanctuary for the Musks of the world.
This is an issue though, he is so fucking successful that he can't be wrong, right? wrong. Don't put people on pedestals like this, it never ends well and isn't how the world should work.
The specifics if this case notwithstanding (I recognize that communications about workplace conditions are protected), if someone was on a slack channel, bulk emailing other employees undermining and disparaging their manager, were asked to stop and they didn’t, isn’t that grounds for termination?
They’re free to speak and tweet about it all they want. They’re just no longer an employee.
AIUI, if you want to enforce rules like that they need to be uniform. Eh you can say “business communication only, only email people who need to know, don’t spam, etc”. You can’t allow someone to sell Girl Scout cookies but then not discuss working conditions.
Not necessarily? Most of us don’t make most of our money through command of capital, so we aren’t capitalists in that sense. Far more are probably capitalists in the sense of liking capitalism and more-or-less promoting it, specifically, but that still may not be most, let alone everyone.
Anyway, markets and investment pre-date and are not identical to capitalism. Working in and among those (“yet you participate in society. Curious!”) does not imply love of those things, nor even does appreciating or being a fan of markets and private investment require one count oneself a capitalist in an ideological sense. They’re not identical.
