Introduction
The above statement, which announces the end of remote working for Tesla’s workforce, directly results from Tesla’s lack of engagement and connection with its employees. Such an announcement requires consultation with every organization member regardless of their seniority. Since the matter directly concerns junior employees, involving them in the decision to alter their working schedule will help them prepare and embrace the changes wholesomely (Zogjani & Raçi, 2015). The company must continue providing its workers with the independence and security necessary for a profitable telecommuting model. Having a flexible work schedule is also suitable for morale in the workplace. Employees more invested in their work are more likely to report high positivity, physical activity, and health (Setiyani, Djumarno, Riyanto, & Nawangsari, 2019). Furthermore, studies conducted over many years have demonstrated that when people are engaged, they are more productive. This study analyzes Elon Musk’s comment on discontinuing remote working by examining the failure’s lack of sufficient engagement, poor workers’ care and adaptation, and low resource and information supply.
Discussion
First, the lack of company-wide participation and involvement among Tesla workers is the primary cause of the program’s failure. Tesla still needs to provide its employees with the required engagement and involvement, which is why the remote working arrangement has failed. For employees to put up their best effort and produce fruitful results, they must feel they have a stake in the company’s success (Zogjani & Raçi, 2015). Instead, the corporation has shown its employees that they can be replaced anytime. Therefore, workers are less invested in their work and producing results, which harms efficiency.
The second flaw in Tesla’s remote work arrangement is the lack of adaptability and care for employees. The effectiveness of a remote work arrangement depends on several aspects: the employees’ ability to be flexible and their general sense of well-being (Ray & Pana-Cryan, 2021). Tesla, however, has yet to give its workers either of these. Instead, employees are expected to work long hours and are not offered the option to telecommute. As a result, employees are more stressed and anxious, which has a knock-on effect of lower output.
Lastly, Tesla’s remote working arrangement has failed since the firm has yet to supply its employees with the required engagement and involvement. The corporation doesn’t care about its workers’ flexibility or happiness, which are crucial to a productive remote work environment (Ray & Pana-Cryan, 2021). It is the latest in a series of actions by large employers to restrict remote work. Tesla’s statement is disappointing but not surprising. It reflects an increasing trend among employers to coerce workers into showing up to work and putting in long hours. But there may be better courses of action.
Tesla, a manufacturer of electric vehicles and a provider of solar energy, has a unique approach to business that is hard to replicate. However, the CEO’s utterances that they will treat employees as though they have quit if they are out of the office for more than 40 hours per week sounds unprofessional (Brand, 2022). Perhaps, Tesla is unusual amongst businesses because it mandates office attendance from its workers. This has caused friction among remote workers, who feel they are losing their independence and autonomy. The company lacks a proper explanation for denying its employees a chance to participate in its decision-making process.
This essay contends that Tesla’s remote-work policy is immoral and breaches US Constitutional rights. Companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Google are called “digital feudal rulers,” and their lack of support for remote workers is criticized due to their inflexibility (Weidema & Hofmeyr, 2020). For that reason, the article’s limitations are addressed. Employees are sought after for their adaptability and the possibility that they may provide answers to issues that cannot be resolved by the line managers alone (Azad, Anderson, Brooks, Garza, O’Neil, Stutz & Sobotka, 2017). With the proper infrastructure, remote workers won’t be a distraction to those in the office. Numerous studies have demonstrated the high productivity and increased employee engagement that result from allowing workers to do their duties from a distance.
In addition to showing a lack of trust in employees and their actions, the policy appears to run counter to instructions from the National Labor Relations Act and other ethical principles, as the authors point out. Tesla’s legal remote-work policy is unethical. Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act allows employees to “engage in such collective agreements for collective bargaining, mutual aid, or protection. Tesla’s policy of requiring employees to quit if they miss work breaches this right (Azad et al., 2017). Tesla’s regulations on remote work are unethical because of the negative impact they have on employees’ lives and livelihoods. When Tesla went public in 2014, it caused quite a stir because it was the first prominent American automaker to do so in almost a decade (Setiyani et al., 2019). In just a few short years, Tesla evolved from a relatively unknown electric vehicle maker to a household name. Elon Musk was named “The World’s Youngest Billionaire” by Forbes. Numerous explanations have been proposed for Tesla’s sudden rise, such as its innovative products and marketing campaigns.
The unusual CEO of Tesla is responsible for the company’s success and recent stock price dip. The media has been split between Tesla, with some calling Musk a “real-life Iron Man” and others saying he’s rude and arrogant. Some surveys have found that as many as 85 percent of businesses utilize bonuses to motivate their workers. You will hear, “At Tesla, we don’t do bonuses; we pay for results.” This means that bonuses are available at Tesla. However, they are not tied to the employee’s annual or quarterly performance but rather to their productivity in the workplace (The New York Times, 2018). The number of hours worked, and miles driven together make up a worker’s weekly productivity (work time). It may look like a punishment, but it’s designed to keep employees at Tesla. One caveat is that productivity issues may be one of many factors in the decision to cease remote employment (Foster, 2022).
Conclusion
In conclusion, the statement by Tesla CEO Elon Musk shows the gap in the capacity of Tesla to engage its employees. For that reason, no motivation can play such a role as a push to boost morale and participation among workers. Managers have a hard time monitoring worker productivity and addressing potential problems in a conventional office. Consequently, the organization device strategies like meeting one another, which can help the organization to improve connections between employees and managers in the workplace. While this decision may have some benefits, it also may have some problems.
References
Azad, N., Anderson, H. G., Brooks, A., Garza, O., O’Neil, C., Stutz, M. M., & Sobotka, J. L. (2017). Undefined. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(6), 102. Web.
Brand, A. (2022). Elon Musk ends remote working for Tesla employees: Is office working ideal? HRreview. Web.
Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, G., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case study approach. PubMed Central (PMC). Web.
Foster, J. (2022). The impact of managers on workplace engagement and productivity. Interact software. Web.
Guest, D. E. (2011). Human resource management and performance: Still searching for some answers. Human Resource Management Journal, 21(1), 3-13. Web.
The New York Times. (2018). Tesla’s Elon Musk may have the boldest pay plan in corporate history (Published 2018). The New York Times – Breaking News, US News, World News, and Videos. Web.
Noon, M. (2018). Pointless diversity training: Unconscious bias, new racism, and agency. Work, Employment and Society, 32(1), 198-209. Web.
Ray, T. K., & Pana-Cryan, R. (2021). Work flexibility and work-related well-being. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 3254. Web.
Rogers, B. (2002). What changes and what stays the same in behavior management? Teacher Leadership and Behaviour Management, 4-19. Web.
Setiyani, A., Djumarno, D., Riyanto, S., & Nawangsari, L. (2019). The effect of work environment on flexible working hours, employee engagement, and employee motivation. International Review of Management and Marketing, 9(3), 112-116.
Torres, E. (2014). The limitations of history to the field of intelligence. E-International Relations. Web.
Weideman, M., & Hofmeyr, K. B. (2020). The influence of flexible work arrangements on employee engagement: An exploratory study. SA journal of human resource management, 18(1), 1-18.
Zogjani, J., & Raçi, S. (2015). The role of leadership in achieving sustainable organizational change and the main approaches of leadership during organizational change. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies. Web.