What are the chances that Musk composed and sent this email while working remotely? Very high I reckon.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/31/elon-musk-has-pulled-more-th...
If you bought a company, especially a failing company, it wouldn't be business as usual: you would immediately set policies that make the most sense for your shareholders and increase profits.
And, Musk has a reputation to be a very hard 24x7 worker but also one not bound by a timezone, let alone geographic location, but again it's a lot easier for him to note dedication etc based on who actually shows up to work. This might be an undeserved reputation, but he is clearly "on" texting and tweeting at all hours day-and-night, and he's running multiple successful companies simultaneously, so either he's awesome at delegation or he's working very hard (or both).
(of course, he has other shareholders, but he is clearly the majority shareholder and the one who is completely in control of the board, and thus has the greatest legal responsibility to keep twitter solvent and return value to himself and the other investors.)
This is just PR. Seems naive to believe the emperor is wearing clothes.
And not sure how happy they are with Musk and employees not being fully committed to adding value to their investments. Especially given that both companies have serious competition that is increasingly in quality and aggressiveness as each day passes.
On a sidenote, any manager who measures dedication by number of physical hours at the office is either inexperienced or incompetent.
All private corporations in the U.S. have shareholders. (LLC's have members, which are similar.)
The executive team and board of those private corporations have a fiduciary duty to the corporation that they will take actions to increase their investment.
Twitter has at least one major shareholder, Elon Musk, which is why I jokingly wrote "the shareholder" singularly. He also seems to have other institutional shareholders, but it's unclear if he just personally owes the money or if they have taken a collateral interest in Twitter itself. (The latter seems more likely)
Thus, Elon Musk has a fiduciary obligation to his shareholder(s), even if it was just him (it's not).
Like it or not, he is taking steps to reduce the drag on Twitter's finances because he doesn't have a lot of choice.
After burning hundreds of millions of dollars for years, he's got to cut the fat quickly or the company will become insolvent.
Not allowing remote work is still allowed, but I don’t think it’s far away from being socially unacceptable. Being legally unacceptable is just one step beyond that.
Whatever you tell about the fact that it is employees are actually the ones who make twitter work, they aren't there the only ones on the planet who can do this job. If current employees don't want to work from office, then, maybe, some others might be willing.
Yes that's how it often works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_union
Unions aren't monopolies they are collective bargaining. The monopoly on power you are advocating is for a single owner of a company to set all the rules.
So you do view Twitter as a car, which can have an owner. What are the employees then in your scenario?
Musk offers no value to Twitter having purchased it, the value lies in the people working on it.
This is more of a "if you don't like it, buy the company" situation.