Musk and the Australian billionaire are at loggerheads, why would they do this?

Because Musk believes that working from home will make employees lazy, Musk also very disapproves of other office models.

Because Musk himself is a very assertive entrepreneur, and he also likes to make his own remarks, many of Musk's remarks will cause some controversy. When talking about the issue of working from home, Musk does not approve of working from home, and he even requires all employees to work at work, which has also caused many people to controvert.

Musk and Australian billionaires are at loggerheads.

After Musk's remarks about working from home, Musk said that all employees need to come to work, otherwise they will be considered to leave their jobs automatically. One Australian billionaire strongly disagreed with Musk's remarks, and he even said that Musk is a very old-fashioned person because he thinks this way of working is very unfair to employees. After hearing this remark, Musk said that working from home will make employees more lazy, and also believes that the economic crisis is one of the tools to solve employee laziness.

Because Musk doesn't endorse working from home.

Before making this remark, Musk has actually expressed his dissatisfaction with working from home more than once, because Musk believes that many employees have limited self-control, and employees will also be lazy at work, so the way of working from home is not conducive to employees doing their jobs well, and it is not conducive to corporate management of related employees. <>

Personally, I support Musk's remarks.

After this controversy, I personally support Musk's remarks, because I think many grassroots employees do have a certain degree of self-control, and we also need to adopt corresponding rules and regulations to restrain relevant employees. Although we need to effectively protect the basic rights and interests of employees, we also need to look at the work of employees from the perspective of the enterprise as much as possible, and we should not treat work as a so-called charity. <>

I think the main reason why the two of them did this is that they had a dispute over the company's equity and management model, so there was an irreconcilable conflict, and now there is a very serious quarrel between the two of them, and there are many discussions about them.

It was because of these two people that they had a dispute over the company's shares, and Musk wanted to buy a small company owned by the billionaire.

This could be a big battle, so they kept arguing, and that's it.

The feud between them is mainly an argument over the way they go to work.

Before talking about the disagreement about the way they work, Musk and Farquhar did not have any intersection, and even the two did not know each other at all. Because Musk is very discouraged from working from home, Farquhar is a person who respects the rights and interests of employees relatively well, and even respects the rights and interests of employees excessively, so the two of them will have a disagreement on this issue, and there will be many people on the Internet who express their blind opinions about the two of them.

What's going on here?

This is news about Musk, because Musk believes that working from home is very inefficient, so Musk has made it mandatory for all Tesla employees to come to work in the company. After that, Musk said that working from home is not a good way to work, and many people have different opinions on this. Farquhar said that he does not support Musk's point of view, and also believes that many employees themselves have a long time on the job, and going to work in the company will take up a lot of employees' personal time.

The two of them don't have any grudges.

The reason why I say this is mainly because Musk and Farquhar are not enemies, and the two of them don't even have any business cooperation and contacts. The reason why the two of them suddenly quarreled was mainly because Musk and Farquhar had different views on the way employees went to work. Musk will be more inclined to focus on the level of effort of the employees themselves, and Farquhar will be inclined to focus on the welfare of employees.

Farquhar hopes that the company will further protect the rights and interests of its employees.

For Musk, Musk will pay more attention to what kind of way employees create more work value. Obviously, more attention will be paid to the rights and interests of employees. Farquhar believes that if it can ensure the efficiency of employees, the company should not force employees to work in a problem, let alone threaten employees with a problem in work style.

In a way, there is nothing wrong with Farquhar's ideas themselves, but all of his ideas are based on the self-consciousness of his employees. <>

In fact, they have a grudge because of the issue of investment, because the two people invest in the same industry, so they are equivalent to opponents.

Musk and the Australian billionaire are at odds with each other, and there is not much grudge between them, but they disagree because of some minor issues.

It's because both of them snatched an item. No one let anyone, and in the end it was the billionaire who got it. But the two also formed a bond because of this.

It's because of this Musk who wants this rich man to invest in their company. I feel that I should invest in saving the life of a rich man before I play the ruler. But this rich man is not short of willingness.

Musk believes that employees need to come to work in the company and cannot work from home, while Farquhar believes that Musk's actions go against the subjective will of employees.

For Musk, Musk said that working from home will make employees more lazy and reduce the office efficiency of most employees, so Musk does not advocate working from home. After that, Musk even required all Tesla employees to go to work in the company, and if the employees did not come to work, Tesla would default to the resignation of the employee, which also caused a lot of heated discussions. <>

Musk and Farquhar quarreled over the air.

This happened after Musk made his own remarks about the way employees go to work, and Farquhar himself is an Australian billionaire, although Musk has no connection with Farquhar, but Farquhar obviously does not agree with Musk's views. Farquhar said that Musk's ideas are very old-fashioned, and even made himself feel like he was back in the working mode of the 50s of the last century. <>

Musk responded to Farquhar's remarks.

Because Farquhar not only talked about Musk's way of working, but also directly expressed the hope that Tesla's employees would consider their own company, this behavior aroused Musk's disgust. Musk said that it is no wonder that the economic crisis has an economic cleaning effect, because many employees are becoming lazier and less productive, and the efficiency of employees is becoming less and less due to the so-called labor rights. <>

Finally, I personally support Musk's remarks, because I don't think all employees can reasonably control their work behavior, let alone all employees have very strong self-control. For enterprises and employees, if they want to achieve a win-win situation, not only do enterprises need to respect the rights and interests of employees, but also employees need to fulfill their corresponding work obligations and responsibilities.

is because this billionaire has pried away many of Musk's employees, and Musk is very dissatisfied with this, so he often scolds this billionaire.

Musk and the Australian billionaire have a long-standing feud. The two have disagreements about the new crown epidemic and their views on electric trucks.

It was because of a female secretary that Musk had carefully cultivated, but he was deceived by this billionaire and married this billionaire, and Musk was very angry.

It's because Musk's son wants to marry the daughter of this rich man. But this rich man was unwilling, and even said that Musk's son was not worthy.

It is because Musk invested in this billionaire's project. But it failed. The rich man also did not give him compensation.