Retracting a sign-on bonus when you're laying someone off -- rather than them quitting or being terminated for cause -- is wrong. That's tantamount to wage theft, IMO. Reversing someone's yearly bonus after the fact is just as bad.

Its not wrong unless the contract specifically says being laid off as exception.

Just because something isn't illegal/breach of contract doesn't mean it's right.

Then they shouldn't have agreed to it.

It shouldn't be wrong to assume that a contracted amount of money will actually be given to you without an added assessment that "if I'm laid off I should still get that money". Contracts cannot be used the same way one can code defensively, because when humans are involved defensive moves are also hostile moves- and the only way keeping the negotiations going is leverage on both sides.

Well, actually It doesn't matter what you think right or wrong, what matter is can u force the other party to follow what you want.

I think we're arguing what is morally correct while you're arguing what is legally correct. You're right legally, but it still sucks that everything has to be defined to the Planck length and you'll still probably get screwed.

The implication is that both sides don't necessarily have leverage, meaning you cannot force fair behavior by yourself. This power disparity is something society at whole tends to recognize, and is thus able to leverage social norms to shame a company into behaving align with societal understandings of fairness.

Did you even read what she wrote ?

She has a list of grievances not just the signing bonus. I think if Tesla had shown her husband a bit more respect she likely wouldn't have posted it.

Giving someone 0-day notice and physically escorting them out of the company is simply unacceptable.

> Giving someone 0-day notice and physically escorting them out of the company is simply unacceptable.

This is a pretty common practice, especially when dismissing employees that work with sensitive information (e.g. architecting trade secrets), or work in public-facing positions (e.g. spokesperson or PR). It avoids the risks found in the question of "what will this person do when they know they're on their way out?".

Unacceptable how? They had no responsibility to do otherwise. They no longer wanted the employee so he was removed immediately. Are they supposed to give him notice even when he has no value to them?

It's unacceptable on the level of treating people with appropriate acknowledgement of the inherent fuzziness of society- employees need time to get hired elsewhere, and employers need time to find a replacement- thus it is courteous to give notice on both sides of the relationship. By not acknowledging this fuzziness of human society, one is also giving the message that people will not be treated with what is the standard understanding of human dignity.

Sure, if he has no value to them, the company has every right to let go of him and hire someone better. Doesn't mean that they have to do it as if their worker is an unfeeling mechanical automaton whose sole purpose was to spend his existence slogging for the company, and that he somehow failed in that regard. A little empathy wouldn't hurt.

This is very common in the industry I used to work in. You’d get a sign on bonus but only after a certain threshold. Usually completion of training. If for some reason you didn’t make it to that threshold (lay-off, quit, fail training, etc.) you saw none of the bonus money. It wasn’t even paid out until that threshold was met.

I have sympathy for the couple in that it’s really tough to lose a job you just moved for but unfortunately that’s just kinda life. It doesn’t seem to me a Twitter rant solves anything other than marking one’s self as a potential headache to other employers.

If you fail training or quit you should not get the bonus. If you were fired for cause same thing. That's on the employee.

But layoffs were coming and probably known, that was out of the employee's control. Pay the damn bonus as goodwill.

Does a company want a reputation of "yeah they hired me but unfortunately with cutbacks I was new, but they made good on their promises even though I hadn't been there long enough"

Or "they hired me, enticed me with a signing bonus and then didn't bother making good, fuck that company"

I don't care if the contract specifically allowed that, it will leave a bitter taste in that employee's mouth. And it will be repeated regardless of the original contract. Reputation matters more than some line in a contract.

There’s a difference between quitting and being laid off, you know that right?

There are two sides to this story, we don't know why he was fired, and we don't know Tesla's policies regarding bonuses.

It sounds like it wasn't a one time payment, but rather a monthly addition. It makes complete sense to retract that after firing.