Perhaps you might understand the point he made were you to look up ‘omission’ and ‘comission’. With that information you might better understand he did not imply Tesla had “done” anything but, by definition ‘did not do’ that something. ‘Something’ in this case would have been to convince employees it was not in their interest to be unionized.I’ve now made the same assumptions about you. I asked a straight up question why Tesla had to take note of what Costco did. You suggesting that Tesla had to do it in the first place leaves a person to wonder what Tesla has or hasn’t done regarding employees. No need to leave a message that Tesla has to follow another company’s position if Tesla is in fact doing things just fine. So what exactly has Tesla done that warrants your message? Feel free to provide specifics otherwise your message can be ignored by Tesla.
Alternatively, you could have said ALL companies should follow Costco’s example. Then I wouldn’t have asked the question.
Really you are, in this rare case, being obtuse. You might object to precise use of grammar and rigid adherence to explicit rules of logic. After all this time, you should know what to expect of the creator of our sub-forum. Bluntly he answered your question.
in reality unions are not successful when employees think they’ve nothing to gain. Surely you agree. Tesla, therefore, would be wise to concede they had not convinced employees to reject union solicitation. Why could be other than positive from so doing?