They wouldn’t mind. The employees have expertise in renovating. So makes sense.

What a weird timeline we are living in..

It's not about the employees liking the work or not. It's about whether or not Tesla is paying them to do work that does not benefit Tesla.

This is basic, basic, basic corporate law. It's not a "weird timeline" and it is in no way specific to the tech industry.

Managers, directors, CEOs, etc. cannot have the corporation do services for them for free because this deprives the non-management shareholders of value. Using their position as manager to assign employees to work on their house is in effect causing the corporation to provide them with renovation services for free. This self-dealing would be grounds for a derivative suit.

Also, it only takes one shareholder (in principle) to make this an issue. Even if you and most Tesla longs think Musk earned the right to do a little self-dealing here and there, it is an open invitation for legal action by SEC and other shareholders.

If you owned 100% of the company then all of that wouldn't be an issue, but it's still not something any legal department would OK.

The comment above you is wrong to call it wage theft--that would refer to workers not being paid the higher of minimum or promised wage for the time worked.

Agreed I muddied things with the phrase wage theft. It’s theft from shareholders.

It's a field trip. Is taking the team out to lunch also "stealing from shareholders"?

Are you real my equating eating with your team the same as doing work for another org?

The mental gymnastics of Musk supporters are only matched by the Trump supporters.

You can only lose by trying to have a conversation with them.

I feel like there is a lot of misinformation here and am compelled to comment, I’ve started and administered two corporations.

What you’re describing as self dealing isn’t illegal, thousands of corporations are run this way every day as long as taxes are paid correctly on the fair value of any transactions between the companies in question. It doesn’t even have to be profitable, Tesla could categorize the work they are doing for Twitter 100 different ways; marketing, R&D, team building, training, whatever.

As for minority shareholders, they have completely arbitrary rights depending on the bylaws, articles of incorporation, etc. If they are lucky, they might be able to periodically vote for board members given the right class of shares. Otherwise they have pretty much 0 input into how a company is run.

> Managers, directors, CEOs, etc. cannot have the corporation do services for them for free

Sure, but do you know this to be the case here? There are a whole lot of assumptions flying out here that Elon just went and poached a bunch of engineers from Tesla to work on Twitter on Tesla’s dime. Pretty sure no one commenting her on HN as any idea of what the deal and detail actually is, all we apparently know for sure from this article is that one or more Twitter folk think that one or more Tesla folks are looking at their code. Beyond that…no details are really known.

Point taken, but it's not wage theft so long as he's paying them. He's stealing from Tesla stockholders. Though I imagine the engineers he borrowed have existing priorities and deadlines, so the experience for them and their teams probably isn't great.

Correct. I used wrong term. It’s theft from Tesla shareholders.

Ya, no, it may not be popular but it isn't illegal and the impact on Tesla will be neglible.

It may be poor options or even poor management but it isn't theft.

“Hey, take some vacation days to do some lucrative consultation work” is probably how it went.

What if the developers wanted to this excursion?

> That's absolutely insane. Tesla employees are paid by Tesla to do work for Tesla.

Unless Twitter is paying handsomely for the consultation?

It is still ethically a no-go. Tesla isn't a consultation firm and they haven't done this type of work ever except for personal interests of the CEO. It doesn't take a particularly skilled lawyer to establish a conflict of interest there.

Happens all the time and the only reason anyone cares about this time is because Musk. If Twitter pays a FMV to Tesla for any resources, and as long as the Tesla board doesn’t care (which they won’t), this is a non-issue. Doesn’t matter what kind of “firm” Tesla is.

If the CEO of Ford used Ford resources to purchase a rental property for themselves, people would definitely be talking about it. I would even flip your claim and say the only reason people are dismissing this is because it's Musk.

Ah yea I’m sure Musk ran it by HR, compliance and legal.. had all the paperwork squared away on both sides and is making sure time tracking is done carefully.

or he just winged it and grabbed some engineers and said “come with me”…

Which is more in character for him?

Tesla definitely seems like the kind of place where they love hiring HR people who habitually push against powerful higher ups.

> Musk ran it by HR, compliance and legal

Right? Tesla hasn't had General Counsel since 2019, and is not looking for one.

You are living in a dream if you think top executives don't get people working for the company to also do stuff for them.

I’m chastising an alleged shareholder who pronounces this as good.

You are chastising me for pronouncing it bad?

This is literally a wint tweet lol 6/1/14 the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you f*%#% moron"

Maybe so.

And... you approve of this? Or what? What exactly is your message here?

I don't approve of minimum wage, but I'm still not going to be surprised when people pay minimum wage.

Doesn’t matter. There’s no remedy.

Of course GP realizes this which is why they were able to recognize and characterize the pattern. Objecting to something isn’t failure to recognize its existence.