Twitter doesn't have shareholders. But Tesla and SpaceX does.
And not sure how happy they are with Musk and employees not being fully committed to adding value to their investments. Especially given that both companies have serious competition that is increasingly in quality and aggressiveness as each day passes.
On a sidenote, any manager who measures dedication by number of physical hours at the office is either inexperienced or incompetent.
All private corporations in the U.S. have shareholders. (LLC's have members, which are similar.)
The executive team and board of those private corporations have a fiduciary duty to the corporation that they will take actions to increase their investment.
Twitter has at least one major shareholder, Elon Musk, which is why I jokingly wrote "the shareholder" singularly. He also seems to have other institutional shareholders, but it's unclear if he just personally owes the money or if they have taken a collateral interest in Twitter itself. (The latter seems more likely)
Thus, Elon Musk has a fiduciary obligation to his shareholder(s), even if it was just him (it's not).
Like it or not, he is taking steps to reduce the drag on Twitter's finances because he doesn't have a lot of choice.
After burning hundreds of millions of dollars for years, he's got to cut the fat quickly or the company will become insolvent.
And not sure how happy they are with Musk and employees not being fully committed to adding value to their investments. Especially given that both companies have serious competition that is increasingly in quality and aggressiveness as each day passes.
On a sidenote, any manager who measures dedication by number of physical hours at the office is either inexperienced or incompetent.