California Opens Investigation into Tesla Workplace Conditions(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
California Opens Investigation into Tesla Workplace Conditions
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-18/california-opens-investigation-into-tesla-workplace-conditions
250 comments
> I think somebody needs to do something about this NDA situation, it’s getting out of control in SV
Not just in SV, it's all over the world. IMHO the right of protection for whistleblowers should be made a basic human right, in order to protect people worldwide who are afraid to speak out.
Not just in SV, it's all over the world. IMHO the right of protection for whistleblowers should be made a basic human right, in order to protect people worldwide who are afraid to speak out.
Is there any way we can fine gross negligence by the executives responsible for these conditions and hand them to the whistleblower(s) most responsible for it coming to light?
California law DOES protect whistleblowers. The law is extremely clear. Those laws even provide for damages due to retailiation.
Even in that situation, if you’re a paycheck-to-paycheck worker, how much boat-rocking can you endure? On some theoretical future date according to the law you can get back at your employer, great: in the meantime, maybe you got fired and now you can’t feed yourself?
We’ve seen plenty of companies that shrug off large fines and such. Whatever the rules, it has to reach the point of being seriously unprofitable to disobey (i.e. investors knocking to demand compliance).
We’ve seen plenty of companies that shrug off large fines and such. Whatever the rules, it has to reach the point of being seriously unprofitable to disobey (i.e. investors knocking to demand compliance).
Not to mention the further stigmatization that results from being a whistleblower- having your name in published sources associated with calling out an employer may impact how quickly you can find a new job. Future employers also like seeing $LARGE_CORP experience on a resume, where I've seen colleagues stay at a job they didn't like only for the prestige attached to this line item.
For a worker without this safety net there really isn't reason for them to violate an NDA and have to rely on whistleblower protections for future remidial damages if there isn't a guarantee that their current living situation would be able to be maintained. We saw last week how Apple fired leakers on the spot and have their name blacklisted towards future tech employers as such.
For a worker without this safety net there really isn't reason for them to violate an NDA and have to rely on whistleblower protections for future remidial damages if there isn't a guarantee that their current living situation would be able to be maintained. We saw last week how Apple fired leakers on the spot and have their name blacklisted towards future tech employers as such.
Not to mention the emotional toll. Having an entire HR department viciously attacking you when you’ve already been wrongned, while backing the party who wronged you, can be extremely scary and depleting.
So what we need is name suppression for whistleblowers.
> if you’re a paycheck-to-paycheck worker, how much boat-rocking can you endure?
As someone who grew up in a paycheck-to-paycheck household, you generally can't endure too much boat rocking. The ability to whistleblow takes a huge hit to your pocketbooks. If you don't have a pocketbook to begin with, it can be an extreme hardship.
As someone who grew up in a paycheck-to-paycheck household, you generally can't endure too much boat rocking. The ability to whistleblow takes a huge hit to your pocketbooks. If you don't have a pocketbook to begin with, it can be an extreme hardship.
Sure, except they only protect you from retaliation by your current employer. It does nothing to help you retain new employment once your reputation precludes you from opportunities at companies with draconian H.R. policies aimed at mitigating risk. Maybe existing or forthcoming case law can tell us more about how this plays out in reality.
Maybe we need a nonprofit job placement service for whistleblowers.
So why are people still afraid to talk, then? It's obvious that either the law isn't as crystal clear, the law does not prevent companies from writing FUD into employment contracts or that people are not educated well enough about their rights. Or: that they have economic pressure (e.g. no 3 months of savings, like way too many people have!) to stay in their job and thus cannot afford to lose it by ratting out illegal or immoral practices.
Now, if every company in the world had the legal requirement to add a paragraph like "in the event that you witness illegal behavior at the company, the law explicitly allows you to report such behavior to media, unions, NGOs and public offices, and we are required to pay you for the duration of the investigation", that would be a different story. Everyone who reads his/her contract would know it.
Now, if every company in the world had the legal requirement to add a paragraph like "in the event that you witness illegal behavior at the company, the law explicitly allows you to report such behavior to media, unions, NGOs and public offices, and we are required to pay you for the duration of the investigation", that would be a different story. Everyone who reads his/her contract would know it.
Tesla has a history of blaming the owners of their cars for accidents with plenty of people defending Tesla's actions. I would imagine that a paycheck-to-paycheck worker has to know that the response to them will be similar with the added bonus of a signed NDA.
Sure. As long as you can prove that you experienced retaliation due to your whistleblowing and not because you were late to work 2 times this year, and can afford to litigate it.
NDA situation is getting out of control in the United States.
Almost every employee at every company signs an NDA when they start working. Oftentimes NDAs and other employment documents (Non-Compete clauses etc) are chock full unenforceable information. Most people agree because there's no ability to negotiate these documents, because they don't understand the clauses or because they don't know they're unenforceable.
Almost every employee at every company signs an NDA when they start working. Oftentimes NDAs and other employment documents (Non-Compete clauses etc) are chock full unenforceable information. Most people agree because there's no ability to negotiate these documents, because they don't understand the clauses or because they don't know they're unenforceable.
The problem, as I see it, is that there's generally no consequences for an employer (or anyone else) to put unenforceable clauses in contracts due to the concept of severability.
It doesn't matter if parts of a contract are unenforceable, because the rest of it still is, so you may as well put as much bullshit in and hope nobody notices.
In New Zealand, this is a big problem with rental contracts. Landlords and real estate agents will put a bunch of clauses that they know are unenforceable in the contract and hope you don't notice. Most people will think that they are enforceable though because they're in the contract. Usually I know better, but rather than bring it up with the agents at signing time, I've found the easiest thing to do is to just ignore the clauses, and when they try to enforce it, I tell them to pound sand.
It doesn't matter if parts of a contract are unenforceable, because the rest of it still is, so you may as well put as much bullshit in and hope nobody notices.
In New Zealand, this is a big problem with rental contracts. Landlords and real estate agents will put a bunch of clauses that they know are unenforceable in the contract and hope you don't notice. Most people will think that they are enforceable though because they're in the contract. Usually I know better, but rather than bring it up with the agents at signing time, I've found the easiest thing to do is to just ignore the clauses, and when they try to enforce it, I tell them to pound sand.
There need to be penalties for knowingly putting unenforceable terms in employment contracts. Too many companies subvert the law by putting unenforceable terms in their contracts and knowing that most employees will not realize that the terms are unenforceable and that most of the rest will be too afraid of being sued to break the contract even if they know that they would eventually win in court.
> I think somebody needs to do something about this NDA situation, it’s getting out of control in SV
Jimmy John's used to have their sandwich-making employees sign non-competes. They buckled on this since then, but this article details it with some other policy examples:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/upshot/when-the-guy-makin...
Jimmy John's used to have their sandwich-making employees sign non-competes. They buckled on this since then, but this article details it with some other policy examples:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/upshot/when-the-guy-makin...
Honestly, I'm not sure how many rank and file employees signed one. I worked there from 2012-2015 and, as far as I recall, wasn't required to sign an NDA. I do think they required managers (who were sent off to the 1-2 week managerial school in IL) to sign NDAs, though. Also GMs and other salaried positions.
Planet Money recently had a podcast about the growth and overreach of NDAs:
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/04/06/600412430/epis...
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/04/06/600412430/epis...
NDAs are out of control everywhere. I understand they have a time and a place where they are useful, but most of the time they are being abused (ie. Stormy Daniels NDA, etc).
No, most of the time they are rather unremarkable and don't cause problems for anybody. You hear about the outliers, not the thousands and thousands of NDAs that are never disputed.
The last 3 NDAs I've signed were entirely reasonable; I'm not allowed to tell you who our customers were, but that's all it covers.
I thought generally NDAs are sort of unenforceable.
Is it possible there wasn’t anything to talk about? We are assuming that they had something to say but didn’t because of an NDA, but are we considering that they might not have anything to say?
If something illegal is happening, California law provides that NDAs are not enforceable when in conjunction with some criminal acts. Furthermore, NDAs can’t protect against a witness being subpoenaed or being required to testify in a court proceeding.
California whistleblower laws are also quite clear on the matter. It isn’t “getting out of control.”
It’s very possible that a reporter is using the existence of an NDA to imply something that can’t be confirmed or refuted. Remember, reporters are ambitious and have inherent bias as well. Just because someone doesn’t want to go on the record doesn’t mean they are acknowledging a problem. They might just genuinely not want to talk to reporters.
If something illegal is happening, California law provides that NDAs are not enforceable when in conjunction with some criminal acts. Furthermore, NDAs can’t protect against a witness being subpoenaed or being required to testify in a court proceeding.
California whistleblower laws are also quite clear on the matter. It isn’t “getting out of control.”
It’s very possible that a reporter is using the existence of an NDA to imply something that can’t be confirmed or refuted. Remember, reporters are ambitious and have inherent bias as well. Just because someone doesn’t want to go on the record doesn’t mean they are acknowledging a problem. They might just genuinely not want to talk to reporters.
The assertion in the excerpt is not that people didn't have anything to say. It's that the anonymous sources declined to put their name to their claims:
> It was difficult to find employees to go on the record.
> It was difficult to find employees to go on the record.
If there's nothing wrong, but the NDA scares people into staying silent instead of saying there's nothing wrong, that's still a problem.
The real problem for Tesla is that their destiny is probably to be the next BMW - a good midrange luxury car maker, about #12 in the world on volume. That would be fine except for the excessive market cap. Tesla's market cap exceeded GM's at one point. The stock has to come down a lot if Tesla ends up at BMW's scale. Even with Tesla's most optimistic production estimates, Tesla will make far fewer cars than BMW in the next few years.
Silicon Valley has a few other companies like that, Uber and Twitter being the most prominent.
Silicon Valley has a few other companies like that, Uber and Twitter being the most prominent.
The market cap is a bit of a mystery, but they've got some options for making money even if they stay around BMW levels in terms of auto production volume. There's no reason they can't compete well against in the automotive space against LG Chem, who makes batteries for cars like the Nissan Leaf and makes batteries, the entire powertrain, and the infotainment system for the Chevy Bolt. In the event their autonomous tech is ever any good, they could sell that. (today they could offer a steep discount and just sell big microprocessor-controlled guillotines or something)
Superior tech can really kill Tesla, though, if they don't get with it. Little cylindrical batteries aren't necessarily the future in that space, it is definitely not a given that their autonomous tech will be a big winner, and BMW's inexpensive carbon fiber is a thing of awe and wonder that Tesla has no answer for. And there's always the outside chance that Toyota is onto something about fuel cells...
Superior tech can really kill Tesla, though, if they don't get with it. Little cylindrical batteries aren't necessarily the future in that space, it is definitely not a given that their autonomous tech will be a big winner, and BMW's inexpensive carbon fiber is a thing of awe and wonder that Tesla has no answer for. And there's always the outside chance that Toyota is onto something about fuel cells...
> and BMW's inexpensive carbon fiber is a thing of awe and wonder that Tesla has no answer for.
BWM appears to be going all-in on 3D printing--which makes sense given their volumes. At practically every conference where non-hobby 3D printers appear, BMW is always a real customer of those companies.
To my mind, BMW is the most dangerous company to Tesla.
BWM appears to be going all-in on 3D printing--which makes sense given their volumes. At practically every conference where non-hobby 3D printers appear, BMW is always a real customer of those companies.
To my mind, BMW is the most dangerous company to Tesla.
If Tesla ends up as the next BMW I would consider that an absolutely astounding success.
> bought shares under valuation based on GMs market share
> doesn't grasp how smaller is the luxury market share
this is the investors tesla scam depends on. this and a million people thinking they could flip a model3 reservation for a profit.
> doesn't grasp how smaller is the luxury market share
this is the investors tesla scam depends on. this and a million people thinking they could flip a model3 reservation for a profit.
>The real problem for Tesla is that their destiny is probably to be the next BMW - a good midrange luxury car maker, about #12 in the world on volume
I think this is dead on. People are expecting Tesla to be the GM of EV's but that's never going to happen. GM will be the GM of EV's. Bolt and Nissan Leaf have both far outsold all Tesla models combined, and that's not even a fraction of the worldwide EV fleet that exists now. There are over a dozen competitors to Model 3 at this point.
I think this is dead on. People are expecting Tesla to be the GM of EV's but that's never going to happen. GM will be the GM of EV's. Bolt and Nissan Leaf have both far outsold all Tesla models combined, and that's not even a fraction of the worldwide EV fleet that exists now. There are over a dozen competitors to Model 3 at this point.
> Bolt and Nissan Leaf have both far outsold all Tesla models combined, and that's not even a fraction of the worldwide EV fleet that exists now.
And Android phones are for more numerous than iPhones. My point here is just that pure number of units sold does not determine a company's value.
And Android phones are for more numerous than iPhones. My point here is just that pure number of units sold does not determine a company's value.
> The real problem for Tesla is that their destiny is probably to be the next BMW - a good midrange luxury car maker
Tesla doesn't do well at the things a non-novelty luxury car maker needs to do well, and EVs are only luxury cars now due to novelty.
Tesla doesn't do well at the things a non-novelty luxury car maker needs to do well, and EVs are only luxury cars now due to novelty.
I wouldn’t call the Nissan Leaf or GM Bolt+Volt luxury cars at any stretch - thought I appreciate they’re priced $10k more than they should be. I’m still convinced GM and BMW are deliberately trying to delay, if not sabotage, the mass adoption of BEV cars.
>I wouldn’t call the Nissan Leaf or GM Bolt+Volt luxury cars at any stretch - thought I appreciate they’re priced $10k more than they should be.
Agreed. I own a Leaf and absolutely love it to death, but it just is not a $35,000 car. I'd have never bought mine for full MSRP, even with all the money in the world. However once these cheap little EV's with 20-30kWh batteries drop to the range of ~$15k new (which I have no doubt will be within 5 years, based on battery price forecasts) it's going to become a no-brainer for most urban people.
Agreed. I own a Leaf and absolutely love it to death, but it just is not a $35,000 car. I'd have never bought mine for full MSRP, even with all the money in the world. However once these cheap little EV's with 20-30kWh batteries drop to the range of ~$15k new (which I have no doubt will be within 5 years, based on battery price forecasts) it's going to become a no-brainer for most urban people.
You are not GM’s customer, dealerships are. If dealers don’t want to sell BEVs (for whatever reason) GM can’t do much.
> I’m still convinced GM and BMW are deliberately trying to delay, if not sabotage, the mass adoption of BEV cars.
Interesting.
Can you explain both their (presumed) reasoning, and the indicators you see?
Interesting.
Can you explain both their (presumed) reasoning, and the indicators you see?
BMW's market cap exceeds GM's today, so that all seems to check out. Tesla's valuation assumed high future value; their stock could stay stagnant as they grow to BMW production numbers and they'd be doing great. Just growing into their shoes.
I agree with your first paragraph, but I don't think it's fair to compare Tesla to Uber and Twitter.
the cars are a product demo. selling batteries by the gigawatt is the real biz. GE not GM.
People are already paying this price without it even being a certainty, that's speculation.
Then you should back Panasonic, not Tesla, because they're the ones with the tech.
Related: the two Reveal reporters who worked on the investigation are currently doing an IAMA:
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/8d7khd/were_two_inves...
https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/8d7khd/were_two_inves...
From that thread:
> Have you investigated any other auto manufacturer?
> (ajpreports) I haven't nor has Will. But maybe that's our next venture!
That diminishes their credibility a lot in my mind. This is a type of investigation that should be done by people with experience in the area. Especially on a company that pushes the envelope like Tesla.
> Have you investigated any other auto manufacturer?
> (ajpreports) I haven't nor has Will. But maybe that's our next venture!
That diminishes their credibility a lot in my mind. This is a type of investigation that should be done by people with experience in the area. Especially on a company that pushes the envelope like Tesla.
Some auto manufacturer has to be their first. Why not Tesla?
You're in the schoolyard, shooting hoops. From time to time somebody throws the ball over the fence, and somebody has to run to retrieve it. You get annoyed, but move on. Then the new kid, nerdy, scrawny, with no friends, throws the ball over the fence. You beat him up. Why him? Well, somebody has to be first. Why not him?
Five people downvoted but only one replied. I would appreciate a line explaining, since I didn't think my opinion was so controversial.
So what are your feelings about Theranos, another hugely visionary/envelope-pushing Palo Alto company (valued as high as $9 billion) that was investigated by an East Coast reporter who has no medical, bioengineering, or entrepreneurial experience?
https://www.propublica.org/podcast/how-a-reporter-pierced-th...
https://www.propublica.org/podcast/how-a-reporter-pierced-th...
I thought about this. I don't think the comparison is correct. Theranos was not delivering what was promising product-wise. Tesla is accused of hiding injuries.
I don't know the truth here, but I would be surprised if the other car companies are behaving better. That was my point: How do these reporters know that the other factories do not underreport injuries the same way? If they have never done this before, they wouldn't know. So it appears as if they picked on Tesla.
I don't know the truth here, but I would be surprised if the other car companies are behaving better. That was my point: How do these reporters know that the other factories do not underreport injuries the same way? If they have never done this before, they wouldn't know. So it appears as if they picked on Tesla.
It was only because of the WSJ reporting that we can say Theranos “was not delivering what it was promising product-wise”. Before the investigation, hundreds of millions of dollars had been invested by ostensibly sane investors, nevermind partnerships with Walgreens and Safeway. Using your standard, no one should have paid the WSJ investigation any attention until the reporter was thoroughly versed in blood tech.
The Reveal reporters are making a claim about Tesla’s worker safety practices, and they have experience covering these issues. Why don’t you think that experience is relevant in the car making domain?
More to the point, Reveal’s story isn’t claiming that Tesla is misreporting injuries more than other car makers. It claims Tesla is misreporting injuries, full stop. It doesn’t require comparison.
The Reveal reporters are making a claim about Tesla’s worker safety practices, and they have experience covering these issues. Why don’t you think that experience is relevant in the car making domain?
More to the point, Reveal’s story isn’t claiming that Tesla is misreporting injuries more than other car makers. It claims Tesla is misreporting injuries, full stop. It doesn’t require comparison.
Are you suggesting that they shouldn't investigate Tesla unless they also investigate all other car manufacturers?
Probably because many other car companies have unions that hold them accountable.
Don't know about Tesla, but have heard horror stories about SpaceX here in LA. 60+ hour weeks, butts in seats, whole depts fired/walkouts, sweatshop conditions, etc.
Some folks are still not aware that these practices lower productivity. shrug
Some folks are still not aware that these practices lower productivity. shrug
Worked at SpaceX in LA on software. It was generally quite pleasant but you do put in a lot of hours. No one asks you to work overtime or work extra hours - it’s just a fun environment and you like your coworkers so you stay at work longer than you should. Most people who were there longer than I was ended up finding a healthy work / life balance that they could sustain... I don’t think the new folks do this because they’re obsessed with learning as much as they can.
I left because the space industry moves at quite a slow pace compared to the rest of the software world and I was tired of working on one small piece of software while the world was changing around me...
All in all? SpaceX was pretty wonderful and I don’t think anyone should judge employee happiness solely from hours worked. I was frequently encouraged to take some recharge time for me. This is just one data point and maybe we’re all only hearing the negative data points?
I left because the space industry moves at quite a slow pace compared to the rest of the software world and I was tired of working on one small piece of software while the world was changing around me...
All in all? SpaceX was pretty wonderful and I don’t think anyone should judge employee happiness solely from hours worked. I was frequently encouraged to take some recharge time for me. This is just one data point and maybe we’re all only hearing the negative data points?
> I left because the space industry moves at quite a slow pace compared to the rest of the software world and I was tired of working on one small piece of software while the world was changing around me...
Would love it if you could shed some more light on this point :)
Was it that you were using an old programming language or something? It's hard for me to believe that the space industry didn't present some pretty awesome opportunities to use your brain. Sometimes building CRUD apps with the latest X framework is just too damn easy.
Would love it if you could shed some more light on this point :)
Was it that you were using an old programming language or something? It's hard for me to believe that the space industry didn't present some pretty awesome opportunities to use your brain. Sometimes building CRUD apps with the latest X framework is just too damn easy.
I wasn’t working on any code that was changing rapidly. I was basically making small tweaks to existing projects without the opportunity to refactor. The work being done by the whole company was fascinating... the small part of that I was working on was somewhat mind numbing. I kept doing some one off projects that were fun for a day or two but nothing that took multiple months or people to build and get into production. Nothing that I was personally super proud of. Others were in more substantial projects and probably enjoyed their work more.
The thing with mission critical systems is boring == safe. So conservatism is endemic in aerospace where stakes are high.
I've heard both positive and negative, which is not atypical for a young company or any company for that matter. Some managers are good and some are probably assholes.
Work hours are very long at SpaceX but they tell you that up front.
Work hours are very long at SpaceX but they tell you that up front.
Does Tesla have automation problems? They appear to be having atrocious labor conditions while putting out a very small quantity of product compared with absolutely everybody else.
Musk in an interview last week said as much (re: automation). He claims that the Model 3 line was over-automated so now they're tearing out sections for rework while doing more with the labor on hand. (Although they're about to also install new sections from their German automation subsidiary so it goes both ways).
The whole play with making their own tooling seems ill conceived at Tesla's small scale, and it has definitely set the Model 3's production back quite a bit.
This has been true across the board at Tesla... they make almost all of the parts in house, even when there are established reliable providers... even when it costs them more and results in lower quality.. even when they are already short staffed. Musk is pro-NIH syndrome.
In fairness, Musk says they will eventually be as reliable, and as high quality as others and it'll be cheaper.. one day. That's the common NIH fallacy though.
In fairness, Musk says they will eventually be as reliable, and as high quality as others and it'll be cheaper.. one day. That's the common NIH fallacy though.
> even when it costs them more and results in lower quality.
The advantage of keeping much knowledge in-house is that you are not subject to extortion campaigns (e.g. the Prevent/VW dispute. In addition you
- are always exposing your internal knowledge to the part vendor and have to rely on the vendor protecting your IP from other customers, so "inventing here" works out better.
- are not bound to endless rounds of waterfall development. Tesla is heavily agile from what can be seen in reports... keeping communications (and decisions!) short saves money and especially time. Where time is Teslas biggest issue - just like a Tesla will kill almost anything at a drag race, eventually the gas-powered engine will win as it can go to higher speeds... and this is even more valid in terms of production. Tesla absolutely has to develop rapidly so they can get an established mass production e-car before Mercedes, BMW, VW and especially Toyota catch up and fly past Tesla.
- have to factor in margins for the vendors and by extension also their refinancing cost - Tesla gets shovelled with cheap cash, a vendor must build production lines with significantly more expensive capital. This adds up especially over many years...
- have less issues if something goes bad. For the old model, if a defect turns up it's usually a complex and long negotiation process where each side wants to avoid assuming blame (and thus costs). For Tesla, this cost risk falls away for all parts they manufacture in-house.
- have less probability for a catastrophic fuck up, I'd say. While a vendor has to "save face" and so has the incentive to e.g. hide issues that crop up during development or, worse, production from the customer (in order to avoid delay or other fines), the incentive for a Tesla-internal department is much less, as there are no delay fines.
The advantage of keeping much knowledge in-house is that you are not subject to extortion campaigns (e.g. the Prevent/VW dispute. In addition you
- are always exposing your internal knowledge to the part vendor and have to rely on the vendor protecting your IP from other customers, so "inventing here" works out better.
- are not bound to endless rounds of waterfall development. Tesla is heavily agile from what can be seen in reports... keeping communications (and decisions!) short saves money and especially time. Where time is Teslas biggest issue - just like a Tesla will kill almost anything at a drag race, eventually the gas-powered engine will win as it can go to higher speeds... and this is even more valid in terms of production. Tesla absolutely has to develop rapidly so they can get an established mass production e-car before Mercedes, BMW, VW and especially Toyota catch up and fly past Tesla.
- have to factor in margins for the vendors and by extension also their refinancing cost - Tesla gets shovelled with cheap cash, a vendor must build production lines with significantly more expensive capital. This adds up especially over many years...
- have less issues if something goes bad. For the old model, if a defect turns up it's usually a complex and long negotiation process where each side wants to avoid assuming blame (and thus costs). For Tesla, this cost risk falls away for all parts they manufacture in-house.
- have less probability for a catastrophic fuck up, I'd say. While a vendor has to "save face" and so has the incentive to e.g. hide issues that crop up during development or, worse, production from the customer (in order to avoid delay or other fines), the incentive for a Tesla-internal department is much less, as there are no delay fines.
Yes, but that isn't what I'm talking about.. for example, Tesla produces seats in house.. they're low margin and labor intensive. And Tesla runs an assembly line in their factory that makes them cost even more. Other auto companies outsource this part. There's no special IP here.. Not everything that Tesla touches is special. A seat is a seat.
> they're low margin and labor intensive
... and thus very vulnerable to strikes or arbitrary price hikes. Yes, a seat is a seat, but once you're locked in into a vendor, you are locked in.
Tesla wants to avoid lock-ins as far as possible and especially something where a switch to a different manufacturer is as difficult as a seat. You can switch a vendor for a simple plastic part in a matter of days if the need arises (and the 3D data for the forming process is your IP), or do multi-vendor sourcing from the start - but try switching your seat vendor, that ain't gonna be cheap nor in a reasonably fast time frame.
... and thus very vulnerable to strikes or arbitrary price hikes. Yes, a seat is a seat, but once you're locked in into a vendor, you are locked in.
Tesla wants to avoid lock-ins as far as possible and especially something where a switch to a different manufacturer is as difficult as a seat. You can switch a vendor for a simple plastic part in a matter of days if the need arises (and the 3D data for the forming process is your IP), or do multi-vendor sourcing from the start - but try switching your seat vendor, that ain't gonna be cheap nor in a reasonably fast time frame.
> Yes, a seat is a seat, but once you're
> locked in into a vendor, you are locked in.
If it's easy for other car manufacturers at much bigger scales why would it be an issue for Tesla?
> Isn't the entire point that it's a generic and easily sourced component?
On the outside, it is a seat. What is different between manufacturers, and even between cars: dimensions of the components, abilities of the seat (e.g. how many degrees of movement, heating, massage functions), the attachment of the seat to the car itself, the form of the seat... if you want to switch the seat vendor, you have to account for weeks if not months until the new vendor delivers the same final product.
> If it's easy for other car manufacturers at much bigger scales why would it be an issue for Tesla?
They don't switch or only switch at model "refreshments", which is at odds with Teslas always-improving workflow.
On the outside, it is a seat. What is different between manufacturers, and even between cars: dimensions of the components, abilities of the seat (e.g. how many degrees of movement, heating, massage functions), the attachment of the seat to the car itself, the form of the seat... if you want to switch the seat vendor, you have to account for weeks if not months until the new vendor delivers the same final product.
> If it's easy for other car manufacturers at much bigger scales why would it be an issue for Tesla?
They don't switch or only switch at model "refreshments", which is at odds with Teslas always-improving workflow.
[deleted]
"and thus very vulnerable to strikes or arbitrary price hikes"
If they have professional supply chain and commercial departments they'll have contingencies in place for situations like this.
If they have professional supply chain and commercial departments they'll have contingencies in place for situations like this.
> If they have professional supply chain and commercial departments they'll have contingencies in place for situations like this.
Even companies as massive as VW can not handle such a situation (as evidenced last year: https://www.ft.com/content/ffd3ee62-6934-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea0...).
Even companies as massive as VW can not handle such a situation (as evidenced last year: https://www.ft.com/content/ffd3ee62-6934-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea0...).
Tesla brought seats in-house because the sub-contractor they had had problems and caused delays.
This is the same guy that promised full self-driving by the end of last year right? He's got a habit of over promising and under delivering when it comes to Tesla.
There are quite a few parts in the Model S that come from suppliers. The steering wheel, window / mirror controls all appear to come from the same folks that supply Mercedes. I don't know where the parts for the Model 3 come from - the steering wheel and window / mirror controls are definitely different.
Yes, but Tesla has the highest rate of vertical integration in the industry. In 2016, Goldman visited their factory and put it at 80% vertically integrated:
https://www.valuewalk.com/2016/02/tesla-stock-rallies-after-...
And they've brought in house more since then (like the seats).
And they've brought in house more since then (like the seats).
For Model S i know that the parts for the air suspension are coming from the german companies Continental and Bilstein. The brakes are made by Brembo from Italy.
Sounds like a replay of Next.
I was thinking the same thing: the over-engineered automation reminds me of the NeXT computer production line that Steve Jobs built:
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/12/24/business/all-next-inc-s-p...
I happen to work at a place that has three Model 3s on the parking lot. I looked at them all yesterday. All three had the trunk lid installed haphazardly.
I bet. I see this frequently in companies with high automation dependency. If your automation isn’t working correctly you accelerate full speed into a brick wall.
That's Toyota, we're talking about Tesla.
This is absolutely and utterly false. Toyota's manufacturing is moving in almost the exact opposite direction of Tesla's and it is working much better.
I think kistaro was making a joke about Toyota's infamous acceleration problem.
That feels like computing bugs in general.
Wonder if Alabama will see the opportunity this might represent for them. High tech and high relative pay.
Alabama produces a million cars a year, in factories that are actually high-tech unlike Tesla’s. You think they are clamoring to bring in an automaker struggling to produce a handful of cars with double the industry injury rate?
> actually high-tech unlike Tesla’s
citation needed.
citation needed.
Having toured the Tesla plant a few months after touring BMW in Munich, they're worlds apart. I also toured the Fremont plant back in the NUMMI days.
That said, I don't think it's necessarily a huge strike against Tesla; they're at a different scale and at a different stage in the life of the company.
That said, I don't think it's necessarily a huge strike against Tesla; they're at a different scale and at a different stage in the life of the company.
That's pretty fascinating; I'd love to hear more about your various plant tours. Roughly when did you visit BMW and Tesla? Also comparing it to pre-2010 would be interesting. Thanks!
It's just been far too long for me to remember NUMMI that well, but as far as I remember, it was a pretty automated plant. At Tesla, I saw tons of forklifts being driven around manually, occasionally bumping into things, one with a broken piece of pallet stuck under a wheel, people hand-polishing parts, etc. Workers with boomboxes setup in their desk area on the factory floor, fun stuff like that. I don't begrudge them this, as they have tons of space and are building a car company from scratch; it won't be as automated on day or week or even decade 1 as an existing established manufacturer. But when you compare to BMW, where virtually every operation is highly automated, it's quite a change.
Of course, there's also the matter of what the manufacturer is willing to show you (perhaps we didn't visit the forklift floor at BMW!), and also BMW is highly space constrained building cars right in the heart of Munich.
Of course, there's also the matter of what the manufacturer is willing to show you (perhaps we didn't visit the forklift floor at BMW!), and also BMW is highly space constrained building cars right in the heart of Munich.
https://youtu.be/HGi-KmYGuZE
CFRP + Aluminum, similar volumes as what Tesla was targeting.
CFRP + Aluminum, similar volumes as what Tesla was targeting.
From the video:
"This is the first time that carbon-fibre-reinforced plastic (CFRP) has been used in automotive volume production. The body structure of the BMW i3 consists entirely of this extremely lightweight and durable material, allowing the extra weight of the batteries for the electric drive system to be cancelled out."
That's cool stuff, thank you!
That's cool stuff, thank you!
In a word, Yes. The median salary in Alabama is $41,657, these would be high paying jobs relatively speaking.
The only upside is their stated unemployment rate is sitting around 3.5%.
The only upside is their stated unemployment rate is sitting around 3.5%.
Why not? Alabama isn’t exactly a worker friendly state.
Because being the low-regulation option worked out well for Arizona and Uber...?
Well, likely better than it would have in CA. Back on topic, Mazda, Toyota have plants there, they have the workforce and friendlier reg., which is a plus if you're a MFG.
There a lot more than you would think down here: Honda, Mercedes, Kia, Toyota, Mazda all have plants and many of their suppliers are also in state.
"... ideologically motivated attack by an extremist organization working directly with union supporters to create a calculated disinformation campaign against Tesla. The piece even includes an interview with Worksafe – the same organization that the UAW enlisted to publish a negative report against Tesla last year, and whose board includes labor union officials and advocates."[1] - from Tesla's own site.
Wow. That sounds like something Hannity or Trump would say. Is Musk losing it?
The United Automotive Workers union is hardly an "extremist organization".
[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/not-so-revealing-story
Wow. That sounds like something Hannity or Trump would say. Is Musk losing it?
The United Automotive Workers union is hardly an "extremist organization".
[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/not-so-revealing-story
Reveal won a Pulitzer Prize in this year for revealing how all around the country judges steered convicted drug offenders into rehab / thinly disguised private industry work camps. I guess that is pretty extremist if one is in favor of private industry work camps and judges benefiting from them.
Nomination details: http://www.pulitzer.org/finalists/amy-julia-harris-and-shosh...
Clarification: they were finalists for the award in national reporting. The WaPo and NYT were the winners this year: http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/staffs-new-york-times-and-wa...
Reveal was also a finalist in 2013 (back when it was named California Watch) for the award in public service (generally considered the most prestigious of the Pulitzers): http://www.pulitzer.org/finalists/california-watch
Reveal was also a finalist in 2013 (back when it was named California Watch) for the award in public service (generally considered the most prestigious of the Pulitzers): http://www.pulitzer.org/finalists/california-watch
> Reveal won a Pulitzer Prize in this year....
Turns out they were a finalist not the winners. The difference is here: http://www.pulitzer.org/page/frequently-asked-questions (no. 23). 3 finalists are chosen by that category jury from the submissions and one winner is picked by the board from that.
Good info though. Thanks.
Turns out they were a finalist not the winners. The difference is here: http://www.pulitzer.org/page/frequently-asked-questions (no. 23). 3 finalists are chosen by that category jury from the submissions and one winner is picked by the board from that.
Good info though. Thanks.
The author line of the blog post reads 'The Tesla Team'.
However, I'm not surprised there is no single person putting her name on this blog post.
Having said that, I can imagine that unions are disliked here on HN / in the US due to various reasons. In the end, from what I witness, they care significantly for human rights across companies. If they weren't there, companies would squeeze out life of the low-end workers at a significantly higher rate, than they already do.
It's a funny thing: Move fast and break things. This basically stops working, when 'things' are humans.
However, I'm not surprised there is no single person putting her name on this blog post.
Having said that, I can imagine that unions are disliked here on HN / in the US due to various reasons. In the end, from what I witness, they care significantly for human rights across companies. If they weren't there, companies would squeeze out life of the low-end workers at a significantly higher rate, than they already do.
It's a funny thing: Move fast and break things. This basically stops working, when 'things' are humans.
The blog post didn't call UAW extermist, that remark was clearly directed at Reveal the organization behind the article/campaign. Quite a big difference. UAW was only referenced in regard to the fact Reveal cited Worksafe in the article, an organization which previously pushed an anti-Tesla PR campaign funded by UAW.
Additionally, the Reveal journalist said on Reddit that many of the people interviewed were indeed "union supporters" (the words Musk specifically used), but also said that not all of them were, such as Tesla's former safety manager.
The "extremist" part may be debatable or an exaggeration, but the other parts had carefully chosen words and were not inaccurate.
Additionally, the Reveal journalist said on Reddit that many of the people interviewed were indeed "union supporters" (the words Musk specifically used), but also said that not all of them were, such as Tesla's former safety manager.
The "extremist" part may be debatable or an exaggeration, but the other parts had carefully chosen words and were not inaccurate.
The original Reveal article [1] didn't get much discussion here, but it's pretty damning.
[1]: https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-says-its-factory-is...
[1]: https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-says-its-factory-is...
THIS IS FANTASTIC.
I’ve had a friend, a specialist engineer doing failure analysis, who has been largely incapacitated from any work because of Tesla. He sustained an injury during a high urgency project (which failed, whodathunk) which required him to work 16 hour days for a few months. During the course of this, he sustained injuries to arms and legs due to machinery issues (the machinery at Tesla often has workers contorting into unnatural positions, I’ve heard). It’s been 2 years and my friend is unable to pay for the requisite operations and can’t get a cent out of Tesla. He is unable to work because of his injuries and so really has been confined to his home for 2 years now.
I have no respect for Musk. An employer who has no respect for their employees, a leader who has no regard for those he leads, is morally bankrupt and seeks only their own good.
I’ve had a friend, a specialist engineer doing failure analysis, who has been largely incapacitated from any work because of Tesla. He sustained an injury during a high urgency project (which failed, whodathunk) which required him to work 16 hour days for a few months. During the course of this, he sustained injuries to arms and legs due to machinery issues (the machinery at Tesla often has workers contorting into unnatural positions, I’ve heard). It’s been 2 years and my friend is unable to pay for the requisite operations and can’t get a cent out of Tesla. He is unable to work because of his injuries and so really has been confined to his home for 2 years now.
I have no respect for Musk. An employer who has no respect for their employees, a leader who has no regard for those he leads, is morally bankrupt and seeks only their own good.
If your friend already pursued legal avenues with no results, it may be worth having them reach out to news companies to see if he can get some attention (especially in-light of California starting this investigation). Bad press with case-study sort of issues is always a great way to get things fixed.
Its horrifying how Musk treats his workers, its very reminiscent of what Amazon does to most of its employees here in Seattle.
Unpaid overtime for warehouse workers? Definitely, as long as the worker doesn't squawk to L&I! Work your developers 10 hours a day, then guilt trip them to coming in on Sunday? Amazon does this constantly. Tesla, SpaceX and Blue Origin seem to have the same work culture as Amazon, even Microsoft or Adobe have better work cultures.
Oh, and Musk is all too happy to intimidate employees: https://www.thedailybeast.com/workers-say-tesla-is-trying-to...
Unpaid overtime for warehouse workers? Definitely, as long as the worker doesn't squawk to L&I! Work your developers 10 hours a day, then guilt trip them to coming in on Sunday? Amazon does this constantly. Tesla, SpaceX and Blue Origin seem to have the same work culture as Amazon, even Microsoft or Adobe have better work cultures.
Oh, and Musk is all too happy to intimidate employees: https://www.thedailybeast.com/workers-say-tesla-is-trying-to...
"even" Microsoft? Microsoft, home of the individual office, 8-hour workday, #7 in Fortune's Best Places to Work?
There's a lot to dislike about bigcorps, but the working environment isn't one of them.
There's a lot to dislike about bigcorps, but the working environment isn't one of them.
Yeah, have to agree here. From personal observations, as well as other people I know who work there, MSFT work/life balance is hard to beat. Ofc it varies by team, so I can only talk about what I have personally encountered
In the recent past, Microsoft had pretty awful work/life balance. It has improved measurably over the past couple years, but some teams are still pretty bad, and the people I know who are higher up (esp. if they aren't software devs) consistently work over 60hrs a week.
Based on the same type of anecdotal evidence, I have the complete opposite view. I've not met anyone that has enjoyed their time at Microsoft. They all talk about the awful work situation, terrible management practices and the backstabbing politics to the point you can't trust your own co-workers.
With all that said, the reality is that you can't take a single brush and paint companies that have so many employees with it. The experience varies very widely on which part of the company they are in.
I'm sure parts of Microsoft are wonderful to work at. Just like I'm sure parts of Amazon are wonderful to work at (they have numerous awards as well indicating this: #1 by LinkedIn this year, for example). I wish we'd stop taking articles that point out the experiences of a couple people to mean that is the situation at the company. Report the full story, not click-bait articles.
With all that said, the reality is that you can't take a single brush and paint companies that have so many employees with it. The experience varies very widely on which part of the company they are in.
I'm sure parts of Microsoft are wonderful to work at. Just like I'm sure parts of Amazon are wonderful to work at (they have numerous awards as well indicating this: #1 by LinkedIn this year, for example). I wish we'd stop taking articles that point out the experiences of a couple people to mean that is the situation at the company. Report the full story, not click-bait articles.
Microsoft ditched individual offices starting in 2014. At least half of the Redmond campus is in “team rooms” now - with mixed results.
This is 100% the "move fast and break things" culture SV has come to adore over the last decade. Things also includes employees and pesky labor laws.
Really? How does Facebook, Apple, Salesforce, Intel, etc. violate labor laws or mistreat their employees? You can’t use a few companies as a proxy for the entire valley.
Wait, seriously? You've never heard about Uber? Or this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-tech-job...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-tech-job...
I don't think any of those companies represent the "move fast and break things" ethos at this point either.
Just for the record, while I've heard enough terrible things about Tesla and SpaceX to never consider working there, I know someone at Blue Origin and, at least as of a year or two ago, he reported that the hours and stress were way better than the aviation/rocket industry average. He was very happy. Employee turnover at Blue Origin is low.
Why not cite your claims about Amazon with a news article, just show good faith
I have many friends that work there or have in the recent past, Amazon's practices wrt employee abuse are constantly reported on though.
Take a look through recent articles about Amazon: https://www.qwant.com/?q=amazon overwork employees&t=news&freshness=all
Take a look through recent articles about Amazon: https://www.qwant.com/?q=amazon overwork employees&t=news&freshness=all
With respect to you and your friend, I'm automatically skeptical of stories like this. We're on the internet, after all.
Has your friend spoken to news agencies about this? Why not, if he/she hasn't? Surely any of the major news agencies would be watering at the mouth for a story like this.
Has your friend spoken to news agencies about this? Why not, if he/she hasn't? Surely any of the major news agencies would be watering at the mouth for a story like this.
Hey I don’t blame you for being skeptical, it’s the way of the internet. I don’t think media attention is what he wants as he is still attempting to work through legal recourse.
Smart, I can think of a couple articles I've read of people that have torpedoed their legal options by kicking up a shitstorm.
Extended legal action may very well be why there aren't big stories about this.
Extended legal action may very well be why there aren't big stories about this.
Huh? There are articles every week about injured workers at Tesla getting screwed over, its a core reason why the workers are attempting to unionize. Someone needs to stand up to Tesla and protect injured workers.
Take a look for yourself: https://www.qwant.com/?q=tesla%20workers&t=news
Take a look for yourself: https://www.qwant.com/?q=tesla%20workers&t=news
> There are articles every week
I looked, it's an exaggeration to say every week.
I looked, it's an exaggeration to say every week.
What are you skeptical about? That this person's friend is actually injured? That it happened because of tesla? People get injured at work. Maybe not where YOU work, but it absolutely happens.
Also, the subtext of your comment - that this person OF COURSE would have contacted a news organization if their claim was legitimate is frankly very weird.
Also, the subtext of your comment - that this person OF COURSE would have contacted a news organization if their claim was legitimate is frankly very weird.
> What are you skeptical about? That this person's friend is actually injured? That it happened because of tesla?
What I (not the original poster of the comment you are questioning) is that they were injured in the workplace at Tesla as en employee and unable to get anything from Tesla to deal with that, since workers compensation is a bright-line legal requirement for all employers and covers all employees.
Now, bureaucratic difficulties dealing with Tesla’s WC insurer resulting in annoying runarounds, poor doctors in inconvenient locations, and disappointing care quality would be credible. Crickets, though, stretches belief.
What I (not the original poster of the comment you are questioning) is that they were injured in the workplace at Tesla as en employee and unable to get anything from Tesla to deal with that, since workers compensation is a bright-line legal requirement for all employers and covers all employees.
Now, bureaucratic difficulties dealing with Tesla’s WC insurer resulting in annoying runarounds, poor doctors in inconvenient locations, and disappointing care quality would be credible. Crickets, though, stretches belief.
komali2(2)
Could you please not use allcaps for emphasis in HN comments? This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
That's crazy. What happened, generally speaking? Was he hit by something, or more along the lines of a receptive stress injury?
I believe the issue was repeated stress causing tendons to tear in one leg and one arm. There have been reports that the machinery Tesla uses puts unnecessary strain on the body and the hours this man was working, I can easily see this happening.
Which part of this story is crazy? That someone got injured working at an automotive plant, that they were strongly encouraged to do overtime, or that their employer declined to assume any liability?
Denying worker's comp for injury is so obviously illegal and such a brazen civil liability that it would be shocking that a company of Tesla's size would be able to simply refuse to deal with it. This person should be able to sue the pants off of Tesla. If they haven't gotten any compensation for their injuries maybe they haven't even filed a worker's comp claim, or they don't know that's a thing, or something.
I know a few worker comp attorneys in NY and CA. They say that in general worker comp claims that are being fought take 3-5 years to win.
There's an entire sub-industry of attorneys specializing in fighting insurers/companies on worker comp cases.
There's an entire sub-industry of attorneys specializing in fighting insurers/companies on worker comp cases.
Specialist engineer doing failure analysis doesn't sound like one of the more injury prone jobs. I mean, I don't know what happened, I just don't associate that job description with debilitating injuries, so it does sound a little crazy.
Yeah that's the angle I was taking. Doing failure analysis seems like it involves observation and thinking, hard to see how you get injured doing that unless it is a freak accident.
Doesn't California have Workers' Compensation? I once injured myself on the job a long time ago in Florida (drill press nearly turned my finger into a Pez dispenser), and with a little paperwork, all my medical bills were covered by WC. I thought it worked like that in all 50 states.
> Doesn't California have Workers' Compensation?
Yes, all California employers are required to offer workers compensation benefits, and to inform employees about their rights under workers comp law.
https://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/faqs.html
Yes, all California employers are required to offer workers compensation benefits, and to inform employees about their rights under workers comp law.
https://www.dir.ca.gov/dwc/faqs.html
[deleted]
It's really surprising to me see posts critical of Tesla highly upvoted on HN these days. It tells me the narrative around Tesla is finally starting to break down, and naturally the stock price has declined from its highs as well.
A few years ago most of the comments here would have been much more sycophantic. It's very refreshing to see.
edit: Ok maybe it's not completely gone yet.
A few years ago most of the comments here would have been much more sycophantic. It's very refreshing to see.
edit: Ok maybe it's not completely gone yet.
Because we all want Tesla to succeed. It's competition in an industry that needs what Tesla is trying to bring to market. It will also greatly benefit the American economy to be the first to mass produce inexpensive electric cars.
So personally, I read comments like yours and wonder who you are and why you feel it is necessary to be critical of that motive.
So personally, I read comments like yours and wonder who you are and why you feel it is necessary to be critical of that motive.
I, for one, feel it is necessary to be critical of the means of achieving that, namely, by treating your workers like Musk apparently does.
so what you're saying is that selective information > all information. an ends justify the means, of sorts - a very myopic, startup-like mentality, IMO; Boz would be proud [1].
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/29/17178086/facebook-growth-...
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/29/17178086/facebook-growth-...
I want the electric car transition to succeed, but if Tesla's becoming a bad actor in their quest to be the biggest winner, than I don't think that's helpful for the overall effort anymore.
> if Tesla's becoming a bad actor in their quest to be the biggest winner, than I don't think that's helpful
It's still super helpful. We need to advance our tech at all costs. It's the only thing we have on this continent. We've gifted foreign nations with our manufacturing industries and gutted the American middle class, and the entrails have been used to lift 250,000 people a day out of poverty since 1990. This is a serious gift and a serious tragedy at the same time.
Now there is nothing good about herniated disks from 16 hours of holding your arms over your head every day. I am not defending that. But you have to put it in perspective. Things are so damn good all the frigging time in America and Canada, _relatively speaking_, that we look at herniated disks from hard work like it's some great tragedy that should net each suffering worker $400,000 and a couple years off. But if you lived in China you'd be faced with taking zero dollars, or going to prison for complaining, or getting caught in one of the suicide nets on the sides of Foxconn.
So what's it going to be, guy? Are we going to stifle our tech because we aren't willing to break eggs to make an omelette? Or are we going to let go of our hatred for the tall poppy and let him do his job?
Let me finish by saying that Elon Musk inspired me to move to the big city and get a comp sci education 3 years ago, at this point I am now an intermediate-level dev with great prospects and without Elon Musk striking inspiration and courage in my heart I would be much more bitter and resentful and lame than I am now. So I will defend him to the end of the Earth for setting such a shining and glorious example for me to follow.
It's still super helpful. We need to advance our tech at all costs. It's the only thing we have on this continent. We've gifted foreign nations with our manufacturing industries and gutted the American middle class, and the entrails have been used to lift 250,000 people a day out of poverty since 1990. This is a serious gift and a serious tragedy at the same time.
Now there is nothing good about herniated disks from 16 hours of holding your arms over your head every day. I am not defending that. But you have to put it in perspective. Things are so damn good all the frigging time in America and Canada, _relatively speaking_, that we look at herniated disks from hard work like it's some great tragedy that should net each suffering worker $400,000 and a couple years off. But if you lived in China you'd be faced with taking zero dollars, or going to prison for complaining, or getting caught in one of the suicide nets on the sides of Foxconn.
So what's it going to be, guy? Are we going to stifle our tech because we aren't willing to break eggs to make an omelette? Or are we going to let go of our hatred for the tall poppy and let him do his job?
Let me finish by saying that Elon Musk inspired me to move to the big city and get a comp sci education 3 years ago, at this point I am now an intermediate-level dev with great prospects and without Elon Musk striking inspiration and courage in my heart I would be much more bitter and resentful and lame than I am now. So I will defend him to the end of the Earth for setting such a shining and glorious example for me to follow.
The comparison to China is whataboutism and/or a false equivalence. Chinese work practices and available legal recourse might be worse than what Americans have today, but that doesn’t mean Americans have to sacrifice their quality of life to remain competitive. The application of “breaking a few eggs to make an omelette” to workplace injuries is also insensitive at best: what if a family member or friend in your life suffered the same? Would that individual be a “broken egg” for someone else’s potential “omelette” in your opinion?
We might not be able to stop all workplace injuries, and I totally agree that Elon Musk has accomplished a lot in his all of his ventures to date; however, if Musk’s path to future success requires further harm towards his customers and/or his employees, then I’d rather wait for someone else to accomplish the same without any lives being in jeopardy.
We might not be able to stop all workplace injuries, and I totally agree that Elon Musk has accomplished a lot in his all of his ventures to date; however, if Musk’s path to future success requires further harm towards his customers and/or his employees, then I’d rather wait for someone else to accomplish the same without any lives being in jeopardy.
> We need to advance our tech at all costs.
If this is he primary directive, then what kind of business practices wouldn't be justified?
If this is he primary directive, then what kind of business practices wouldn't be justified?
It's important to look at everything with a critical lens, especially the stuff you support. Tesla is deeply flawed, and in order for it to succeed, it needs to overcome those flaws.
OK, so how do we (outsiders) productively discuss Tesla's "flaws" without spending all of our time engaging in arm-chair quarterbacking based on rumors, many of which turn out to be incorrect or incomplete?
Anti-sycophantic comments are just as annoying, don't you think?
[deleted]
You seem to have as much of an agenda as the folks you're decrying.
"...an ideologically motivated attack by an extremist organization working directly with union supporters to create a calculated disinformation campaign against Tesla"
vs.
"...Tesla failed to report serious injuries on legally mandated reports to make its numbers appear better than they actually were."
Now use Occam's Razor.
vs.
"...Tesla failed to report serious injuries on legally mandated reports to make its numbers appear better than they actually were."
Now use Occam's Razor.
Occam's Razor doesn't say that the simplest explanation is automatically true; it just says that if we can't know for sure, and we have to choose between two equally valid hypotheses, then we might as well assume the simpler one.
This being a real-world situation, it should be possible to figure out what's really going on, which is what California seems to be doing. No reason to make unwarranted assumptions either way in the mean time.
This being a real-world situation, it should be possible to figure out what's really going on, which is what California seems to be doing. No reason to make unwarranted assumptions either way in the mean time.
I would argue that the more tailored, narrow, and fact referenced one is simpler. The Tesla statement reads as far to hysterical to be taken as simple or serious. It is absolutist where the journalists are not.
I love the bit about "working directly with union supporters" too. Am I supposed to recoil in horror upon reading that? "Oh no, not the dreaded union supporters!! And being worked with directly no less!"
...is what I would say if I were Montgomery Burns. Tesla's PR people must be thinking it's better to win over the tiny Burns demographic and not the millions of Homer Simpsons out there.
...is what I would say if I were Montgomery Burns. Tesla's PR people must be thinking it's better to win over the tiny Burns demographic and not the millions of Homer Simpsons out there.
To be fair, Tesla's target audience is wealthy people, many of which are entrepreneurs or high-level managers and may feel the same as Elon Musk, even if a majority of regular people would shake their head about such comments. If/when Tesla's market expands past the luxury segment, I presume that their communications will also change tone by a bit.
"A set of universal rules by which the moon exerts a force called "gravity" and that pulls at the ocean over the whole planet, which is spherical by the way, so we get a bulge on both sides because on the near side it makes the water go towards the moon because gravity attracts things, but on the other side it makes the water go away from the moon or at least it looks like that, but really it's still gravity causing it, and that is why we get tides twice a day"
vs
"Neptune is breathing, and so the ocean goes up and down, just like when you are in the tub and take a deep breath"
Now use Occam's Razor.
If you were unaware of the persistent activities of various organizations then you might think that unions creating false information is an absurd idea, just as you might feel about the tides if you were a simple peasant, ignorant of the work of physicists.
vs
"Neptune is breathing, and so the ocean goes up and down, just like when you are in the tub and take a deep breath"
Now use Occam's Razor.
If you were unaware of the persistent activities of various organizations then you might think that unions creating false information is an absurd idea, just as you might feel about the tides if you were a simple peasant, ignorant of the work of physicists.
They're both likely true.
Unions, conventional automobile companies, and the oil industry are all terrified of electric cars. EVs mean less jobs, less parts, longer renewal cycles, and of course removing inflexibility from oil demand. EVs threaten industries collectively totaling trillions of dollars and in some cases even double digit percentages of nations' GDPs. It's absurd and naive to think these industries would do nothing.
... but Tesla is a corporation, and corporations act in their self-interest. Corporations (and governments and other large entities too) routinely omit negative information, cook their numbers, ignore problems, over-reach, and generally push boundaries in their race for profit, power, and status. As good as Tesla's mission is, I don't necessarily expect it to behave better than a standard issue corporation.
Conventional auto industries only implemented safety in vehicles and in factories after being repeatedly whacked upside the head. They still don't hesitate to ignore safety overseas when they can get away with it, nor do they hesitate to destroy the economic well being of entire regions of the country to save a bit on short term costs or flout environmental regulations.
Tesla is new, so they'll probably need to get whacked around a bit too. But I still hope they are successful because their mission is good for humanity in the long term. Continued reliance on oil is an existential risk to the human race.
Unions, conventional automobile companies, and the oil industry are all terrified of electric cars. EVs mean less jobs, less parts, longer renewal cycles, and of course removing inflexibility from oil demand. EVs threaten industries collectively totaling trillions of dollars and in some cases even double digit percentages of nations' GDPs. It's absurd and naive to think these industries would do nothing.
... but Tesla is a corporation, and corporations act in their self-interest. Corporations (and governments and other large entities too) routinely omit negative information, cook their numbers, ignore problems, over-reach, and generally push boundaries in their race for profit, power, and status. As good as Tesla's mission is, I don't necessarily expect it to behave better than a standard issue corporation.
Conventional auto industries only implemented safety in vehicles and in factories after being repeatedly whacked upside the head. They still don't hesitate to ignore safety overseas when they can get away with it, nor do they hesitate to destroy the economic well being of entire regions of the country to save a bit on short term costs or flout environmental regulations.
Tesla is new, so they'll probably need to get whacked around a bit too. But I still hope they are successful because their mission is good for humanity in the long term. Continued reliance on oil is an existential risk to the human race.
Yes, I’m seeing a lot of assumptions that unions are purely (or at least mostly) forces of good, but that’s not necessarily true. Auto workers’ unions in particular have a reputation of being bullies, extortionists, and sometimes obstructionists. Unionization of Tesla may improve conditions for the workers (though it’s worth noting that many auto union member companies still have serious unaddressed issues) but it’d also likely slow the company to a crawl and rob it of much of its agility.
I think that Tesla’s worker treatment problems should absolutely be addressed but I wouldn’t be so sure that unions are the answer.
I think that Tesla’s worker treatment problems should absolutely be addressed but I wouldn’t be so sure that unions are the answer.
The company could just improve the situation enough that the workers don't want to unionize. Losing your agility isn't a good enough argument to convince people to not negotiate a better situation for themselves when you are literally destroying their bodies.
It's not even like they are acting the same as the rest of the industry. Directly in the article it says that they have much higher injury rates than the rest of the industry. Either make the environment safer or at least give the workers enough equity that they benefit from pushing the company through as well. It's pretty disenguous for a rich guy like Elon to say that this is losing money now, so everyone has to sacrifice, when he's going to reap the benefits of that sacrifice
It's not even like they are acting the same as the rest of the industry. Directly in the article it says that they have much higher injury rates than the rest of the industry. Either make the environment safer or at least give the workers enough equity that they benefit from pushing the company through as well. It's pretty disenguous for a rich guy like Elon to say that this is losing money now, so everyone has to sacrifice, when he's going to reap the benefits of that sacrifice
They are saying Tesla isn’t reporting injuries and then they say Tesla has higher injuries? If they aren’t being reported, then what’s the source of that claim? Do we know for a fact that other companies aren’t also (allegedly) underreporting? Reporting about Ford or GM is far less sexy than Tesla, so there could be less incentive.
Both of those statements can be true. They can have a higher injury rate _and_ be misclassifying injuries to hide the fact that it's even higher than what is known.
Regardless though, employees fight for unions in the US only when it's become really bad. There's such a baseline hatred of unions that you can't casually get one going here just by saying you might be able to get more money. Tesla might not have the capital to impeove things directly but they could at least hand out more equity to the employees so that their incentives aligned.
Regardless though, employees fight for unions in the US only when it's become really bad. There's such a baseline hatred of unions that you can't casually get one going here just by saying you might be able to get more money. Tesla might not have the capital to impeove things directly but they could at least hand out more equity to the employees so that their incentives aligned.
Did you read the original investigation (the one referred to in the submitted article)? It says quite clearly that Reveal was given data from Tesla's internal tracking system.
https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-says-its-factory-is...
> Reveal compared records from Tesla’s internal tracking system, obtained from a source, with the official logs, which were requested by an employee and provided to Reveal.
https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-says-its-factory-is...
> Reveal compared records from Tesla’s internal tracking system, obtained from a source, with the official logs, which were requested by an employee and provided to Reveal.
> Now use Occam's Razor.
Somehow I doubt that will result in less disagreement.
Somehow I doubt that will result in less disagreement.
soheil(3)
I'm actually willing to give Tesla credit here precisely for that reason -- not because unions are bad (many industries need it, auto included), but because UAW in my possibly-misinformed mind has been at least indirectly the cause of a decline in build quality in American cars.
The journalists refute what Tesla is saying in their ongoing AMA:
Hi there, we did this reporting completely independently of the union.
This is another instance of deceptive Tesla wording, when Tesla says:
working directly with union supporters
what they mean is that some of the workers Reveal interviewed were in the union. Of course some of the interviewees weren't tied to the union but those go unmentioned.
Hi there, we did this reporting completely independently of the union.
This is another instance of deceptive Tesla wording, when Tesla says:
working directly with union supporters
what they mean is that some of the workers Reveal interviewed were in the union. Of course some of the interviewees weren't tied to the union but those go unmentioned.
I have got to say, in the past year I have gotten from "oh I should get a Tesla some day if I need a car" to "nope, never buying anything from these guys".
I appreciate what Tesla did to popularize electric cars, but everything else isn't that great.
I appreciate what Tesla did to popularize electric cars, but everything else isn't that great.
your loss, they're the best cars on the road. it's iphone 2007 vs flip phone...
I am fine, thanks.
I really enjoy not needing a car and don't enjoy driving, even a nice one.
The various reports of low quality of Tesla's cars (like their doors :/ ) have also contributed to suppress any tesla envy.
If I really needed a car right now, I would start by comparing the different ones on the market, Tesla is not the only player in town anymore.
I really enjoy not needing a car and don't enjoy driving, even a nice one.
The various reports of low quality of Tesla's cars (like their doors :/ ) have also contributed to suppress any tesla envy.
If I really needed a car right now, I would start by comparing the different ones on the market, Tesla is not the only player in town anymore.
Uh ok... clearly you have no idea about what a Tesla is or maybe never driven one or even ridden in one... why are you commenting on things you have no experience in?
This crosses into personal attack, which isn't ok on HN. Could you please read the rules and post only civil, substantive comments from now on? Regardless of how wrong another comment is.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
or maybe I just have .. gasp .. a different opinion than you
Why do people think that? A lot of cars are poor quality by design and choice of material. I drive German cars and there are certain choices in design and material don't stand up to time. I understand why those choices were made (70% of luxury cars are leased and aren't expected to be owned past 5 years). From an engineering point of view, the cars were optimized for a certain "fitness function". I imagine American cars were designed to optimize for certain constraints too. I also know that a large number of Japanese brand cars are in fact built in the US by American auto workers. And their quality and reliability are as high as those built in Japan.
The view you espoused is fairly common but I don't understand why UAW would lead to poor quality cars when cars are designed and built using standardized procedures with machines that perform the same each time (not a rhetorical question, I really don't understand where this view comes from)
The view you espoused is fairly common but I don't understand why UAW would lead to poor quality cars when cars are designed and built using standardized procedures with machines that perform the same each time (not a rhetorical question, I really don't understand where this view comes from)
This is a self-contradictory statement and the end of which you're blaming unions for something you don't provide evidence.
Citation please.
Citation please.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/business/27auto.html?m...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/business/28auto.html
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/business/15auto.html
Closest I can get you since all the journal articles are from conservative-leaning institutions with a vested interest against unionization. All three articles are about the new contracts UAW signed in 2007 as the auto industry was collapsing in the United States, all of which cite massive concessions back to the auto companies. Notably, Ford still got to fold 10 of their original 16 plants scheduled for closure, GM got to shift away massive healthcare obligations, and Chrysler managed to substantially reduce their employment guarantees.
If you were a union interested in a happy balance between company and employee rather than just making your employees score every short-term dollar that they could, you wouldn't need to concede like this with one, let alone every, major United States-founded auto maker.
It's worth noting that GM actually got the biggest haul up front since they got the opportunity to negotiate first.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/business/28auto.html
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/business/15auto.html
Closest I can get you since all the journal articles are from conservative-leaning institutions with a vested interest against unionization. All three articles are about the new contracts UAW signed in 2007 as the auto industry was collapsing in the United States, all of which cite massive concessions back to the auto companies. Notably, Ford still got to fold 10 of their original 16 plants scheduled for closure, GM got to shift away massive healthcare obligations, and Chrysler managed to substantially reduce their employment guarantees.
If you were a union interested in a happy balance between company and employee rather than just making your employees score every short-term dollar that they could, you wouldn't need to concede like this with one, let alone every, major United States-founded auto maker.
It's worth noting that GM actually got the biggest haul up front since they got the opportunity to negotiate first.
That is absolutely baseless.
This is why you shouldn’t put your business in California. There’s a legion of highly-paid bureaucrats who have nothing, I mean nothing, better to do than screw with you.
Elon Musk is the Preston Tucker of our time — seems to get hammered from all sides while trying to break the status quo. I have no information to comment on the validity of any allegations, but it seems like Musk is continually under attack. I was a moderate Musk fan before, but now I am really hoping for his success. It seems to me that if you are pissing off everyone, you’re doing something right.
I highly recommend watching the Coppola film “Tucker, A Man and His Dream.”
I highly recommend watching the Coppola film “Tucker, A Man and His Dream.”
It's also notable that TSLA has a very large community of short interests. That kind of money can drive all sorts of stories in the press...
Yes but short interest is still dwarfed by traditional long positions. All the money wrapped up into long positions can also drive press.
Tesla has one of the largest communities of shorts, and a normal community of longs.
Yes but that large community of shorts is still much smaller than the normal community of longs.
The source of being pissed of now is higher then usual injury rates. It is good that such a thing pisses everyone off.
Valuing mans dream and ambitions over people he hurts on a way is wrong ethics. People who cancel on dreams when they are causing damage are superior.
Valuing mans dream and ambitions over people he hurts on a way is wrong ethics. People who cancel on dreams when they are causing damage are superior.
You cannot just throw platitudes around like they mean anything. This is not about "pissing everyone off", those are allegations against real damage being done to undeserving people.
> Elon Musk is the Preston Tucker of our time — seems to get hammered from all sides while trying to break the status quo. I have no information to comment on the validity of any allegations, but it seems like Musk is continually under attack. I was a moderate Musk fan before, but now I am really hoping for his success. It seems to me that if you are pissing off everyone, you’re doing something right.
Maybe you should read about the allegations? He's under attack for abusing his workers. This is a good reason to be pissed off, and a good reason _not_ to hope for his success.
Maybe you should read about the allegations? He's under attack for abusing his workers. This is a good reason to be pissed off, and a good reason _not_ to hope for his success.
> investigation
That's an important word, since it does not mean that he is convicted of doing so. If investigation immediately meant guilt, the world would be a very different place.
That's an important word, since it does not mean that he is convicted of doing so. If investigation immediately meant guilt, the world would be a very different place.
That is true, though there are still a large number of workers who have really been injured while working there. That is a fact.
The allegations about public, verified data? That's called evidence.
To be fair, this particular investigation alleges that Tesla has underreported workplace-related injuries by classifying them as minor or unrelated personal issues; Tesla argues that it does not misclassify injuries. The integrity of the public data (what Tesla is required to report) is in question, so I don't know if we can call it "verified", other than in the official sense (i.e. we know what Tesla has officially reported).
throwahey(2)
If everybody hates you, you are NOT doing something right. If everybody loves you, then you're doing it right, and in fact you barely even have to do anything because everybody's helping you.
Listen up, kids! Always do what everyone else is doing, never make anyone mad, always choose the popular path.
/s
It seems like everything worth doing nowadays results in someone hating you.
/s
It seems like everything worth doing nowadays results in someone hating you.
I'm not talking high school here, I'm talking about real life. Popularity and conformity are orthogonal. In the early stages of doing something, they can be somewhat opposed, so you'd be partly right in that case. But you push through that and don't complain, and wait and see what people think whom you've actually managed to help.
The most worthy path is the one that helps the most people. Not coincidentally, each of those people you've helped, becomes a supporter of yours, in some capacity. You become popular. So the worthy path ends up being the popular path.
That doesn't mean the popular path is always the worthy path. People can become popular for really stupid reasons and without really helping anybody. I actually think Musk is such a person; I literally don't think any of his projects are "worth doing" and you are just gonna have to grant me my opinion there. So if I'm not impressed with his outlandish narcissistic persecution-fantasy of extremist groups being out to get him, it's not because he's doing something worth doing, it's because he's NOT.
The most worthy path is the one that helps the most people. Not coincidentally, each of those people you've helped, becomes a supporter of yours, in some capacity. You become popular. So the worthy path ends up being the popular path.
That doesn't mean the popular path is always the worthy path. People can become popular for really stupid reasons and without really helping anybody. I actually think Musk is such a person; I literally don't think any of his projects are "worth doing" and you are just gonna have to grant me my opinion there. So if I'm not impressed with his outlandish narcissistic persecution-fantasy of extremist groups being out to get him, it's not because he's doing something worth doing, it's because he's NOT.
"It seems like everything worth doing nowadays results in someone hating you."
No, not in the least. Especially when the things that make people mad, in this case, treating your workers horribly, are entirely avoidable.
No, not in the least. Especially when the things that make people mad, in this case, treating your workers horribly, are entirely avoidable.
People who got it wrong will still hate you because you got it right and they got it wrong. So they will try to convince other people that you got it wrong not them. Its not always black and white.
[deleted]
Damn, so workers were afraid to speak up and spread the injury info because they were forced to sign an NDA and we’re worried about being sued. I think somebody needs to do something about this NDA situation, it’s getting out of control in SV