
Hotbed of Misinformation - runesoerensen
https://www.tesla.com/blog/hotbed-misinformation
======
Top19
Came into this not knowing what to expect, and recently I’ve had some mixed
feelings about Tesla, but wow what an awesome statement.

Honestly it was just so...authentic. They described very exactly what
happened, what the accusations were, what the consequences were for those
involved, what concerned them as a company, etc. It has none of the corporate
double-speak that you would expect if this were Equifax.

~~~
forapurpose
How can we tell if it's authentic without independently knowing what the truth
is? There are many, many people who are good at sounding convincing while
being dishonest. Human beings have very limited capability to discern the
truth based on presentation, and IMHO one of our greatest weaknesses is that
most of us believe we're secretly good at it.

~~~
darawk
We can tell that the _tone_ is authentic. The language doesn't hedge. It makes
clear, verifiable claims about the facts of the situation. If they are lying,
we will almost certainly find out in the trial process. An inauthentic message
would be one that hedges and avoids making specific, falsifiable claims.

We perceive this tone as authentic because it makes claims that an uncertain
or lying PR department wouldn't have the nerve, authority, or legal standing
to make. In that way, it is an unforgeable signal. Of course it's possible to
forge in the moment, but then it makes your situation 100x worse when you
inevitably get called out later. Which is why people afraid of being called
out later can't do it.

~~~
watwut
How do you know the tone is authentic? People who lie are very good at looking
confident. That is how it works.

And being totally certain about whether fuzzy incident happened/not happened
usually means you are aware of peoples bias toward looking confident - or that
you jumped to conclusion without really investigating all the conflicting
evidence.

~~~
darawk
Like I said, in my original comment, if you are a rational actor and you _did_
mess up in a circumstance like this, you have two options: You can own up to
it, or you can lie. If you're going to lie, you have two options: Use vague
language and make fuzzy assertions, or confidently, directly, and clearly make
counter-claims. If you were at fault, and there is a pending legal case,
pursuing option two will inevitably lead to your exposure not only for the
original wrongdoing, but for lying about it later. Any rational actor
evaluating their options would play this through and realize this. Therefore,
we can conclude either Elon is so divorced from reality that he doesn't care
about the obvious negative consequences, or, that he is being authentic in his
messaging here. And while Elon certainly may be off in his own little world in
a number of ways, I personally don't think he's crazy enough to outright lie
in a message like this.

~~~
watwut
It is blog post and email, most likely scrutinized by PR experts. Written to
sound convincing, because it is the goal and the job of people writing it.
Nothing wrong with that. It is not something sent to court, so your rational
actor theories based on judge punishing them don't apply. It is also very
general, so there is not all that much judge would punish them for, even if
untrue. (Unless they would lie about dude being contractor, but there is
literally zero reason to lie about that as it is mostly irrelevant.)

There is not much specific that you could make inferences from, but there are
general claims truth for majority of lawsuits phrased as something specific
(trials being expensive, tesla employing contractor).

The rest is words made to make you feel good for working for Tesla (little
company fighting good cause surrounded by ennemies). Again, this does not
prove anything related to lawsuit, but it is PR in action - if it is either
insincere or cultish. Either way, it is PR nothing else.

~~~
jaxwerk
> It is blog post and email, most likely scrutinized by PR experts. Written to
> sound convincing, because it is the goal and the job of people writing it.
> Nothing wrong with that.

Everyone above is on the same page here. This is PR. Why keep re-stating this?

> It is not something sent to court, so your rational actor theories based on
> judge punishing them don't apply.

Who claimed that a judge would punish lies in this piece? Those above you are
referring to the "court of public opinion", not legal ramifications. If
Tesla's claims here are disproven in court, this piece gives the media a lot
of ammunition to use to lambast Tesla with later.

> It is also very general, so there is not all that much judge would punish
> them for, even if untrue. (Unless they would lie about dude being
> contractor, but there is literally zero reason to lie about that as it is
> mostly irrelevant.)

The piece makes several assertions that are quite specific. Number of people
involved in the situation, circumstances of termination of the plaintiff and,
importantly, asserting that the actions taken were right and just, leaving
them no graceful way to backtrack later and claim that the actions on the part
of the company were a mistake and the fault of some individuals who can be
thrown under the bus.

> There is not much specific that you could make inferences from, but there
> are general claims truth for majority of lawsuits phrased as something
> specific (trials being expensive, tesla employing contractor).

There are specific claims made. No inferences required. See my point above for
examples of claims that I think are particularly impactful.

> The rest is words made to make you feel good for working for Tesla (little
> company fighting good cause surrounded by ennemies).

So you are thinking this is a fluffy PR piece with language that doesn't
convey much information but placates the reader? I'd like to see examples of
what you're reading there that strikes you as platitudinous.

> Again, this does not prove anything related to lawsuit,

Nobody is claiming that this piece proves anything. It simply makes claims
which will then need to be proven in court.

> but it is PR in action - if it is either insincere or cultish.

What about this piece strikes you as insincere or cultish? Nothing about this
piece seems crafted to rally folks on brand loyalty or warped worldview.

> Either way, it is PR nothing else.

That's been established. Repeatedly. Everyone above you has agreed that this
is PR. We're just saying that it's _good_ PR.

------
meri_dian
Great response to the noise, I'm glad Tesla is getting out in front of this.

This part struck me as important:

"The trial lawyer who filed this lawsuit has a long track record of extorting
money for meritless claims and using the threat of media attacks and expensive
trial costs to get companies to settle. At Tesla, we would rather pay ten
times the settlement demand in legal fees and fight to the ends of the Earth
than give in to extortion and allow this abuse of the legal system"

There are bad actors out there who will fan the flames of the outrage machine
for their own selfish ends. Jumping to conclusions based on hearsay and
accusations is what they want, not what is reasonable.

~~~
b3lvedere
A big part of me is very happy that they would "fight to the ends of the
Earth", but then again i'm also very sad that the only ones that can actually
do that are the ones with a huge amount of money at their disposal.

~~~
grkvlt
What's interesting is that they are basically saying 'we are big enough and
rich enough that trying to sue us is pointless if you are poor, because we can
always outspend you ten to one' while still making it seem like a good thing,
when other large corporations do the same, is perceived as a bad thing! In
_this_ case however, they seem to be doing the right thing, which is good,
obviously.

~~~
b3lvedere
I agree completely. It's a real shame modern justice is still pretty connected
to status and wallet.

------
ChanningAllen
Good on Tesla for standing its ground and making its case publicly. Musk's
pushback is nuanced and important.

The establishment institutions outside of Silicon Valley in America — the
media and Capitol Hill — have united recently to spin a decidedly anti-civil
rights narrative about large tech companies. Some of it is valid, but much is
not, and relevant complexities and subtle moral distinctions are lost on a
general public which only has the bandwidth to digest memorable headlines and
themes.

And what could be more complex and morally thorny than how to mediate social
issues — particularly those involving race — in a highly visible tech company
employing tens of thousands of people? Speaking for myself as a black tech co-
founder, I agree with the cliffnotes of Musk's message entirely: those of
well-represented groups should consider the challenges they never had to face,
but no one from _any_ group should have free license to be a jerk. And for
god's sake: when you misrepresent facts to serve a handful of minorities you
end up undermining all the other minorities.

~~~
abandonliberty
>The establishment institutions outside of Silicon Valley in America — the
media and Capitol Hill — have united recently to spin a decidedly anti-civil
rights narrative about large tech companies.

I think progressives are under attack. Hollywood, entertainment, and tech
companies.

I'm not arguing that bad behavior is acceptable and should be ignored.

I'm just saying that, for example, removing health care coverage from millions
of Americans is more important and hurtful than a homosexual grabbing
someone's junk. It's happened to me a couple times, but sadly I wasn't offered
a several thousand dollar watch afterwards to keep it quiet.

~~~
RickS
You're being downvoted because you've fallen into a common but serious logical
trap[1]

The validity of racial tensions in silicon valley companies is due
consideration completely irrespective of sexual assault or healthcare. Both
are problems, but the size of B has no bearing on the size of A.

[1]
[https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFalla...](https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/155/Relative-
Privation)

~~~
abandonliberty
I explicitly stated: "I'm not arguing that bad behavior is acceptable and
should be ignored."

I am arguing that we're rearranging chairs on the Hindenburg. The question is,
"Are we devoting effort to the issues in accordance with their size and
impact?"

I'm asking you to give 1 100th of a shit that you do about a closeted gay
celebrity's past sex life about the vast fucking tragedies that continue to
happen today in the USA - let alone across the world.

But that's not nearly as fun as jumping on a bandwagon against a wealthy
famous person, is it? You can even pretend to be a little bit of a feminist or
racially sensitive.

The facts call out the hypocrisy:

IN VIRGINIA FROM 2004-2013:

— Nearly 4,500 children were married.

— Over 200 children married at age 15 or younger.

— About 90% of the underage spouses are girls; and among the youngest spouses
(15 or younger), there are 13 times more underage brides than grooms.

— Children as young as 13 (and pregnant) were granted marriage licenses.

— Nearly 90% of these marriages were to an adult spouse, and between 30-40% of
those adults were 21 or older, and sometimes decades older.

These figures shocked us, too:

— 13: Number of children under age 15 married to spouses more than 20 years
older

— 25: Number of 15-year-olds married to spouses more than 10 years older

— 47: Number of 16-year-olds married to spouses more than 14 years older

[http://www.tahirih.org/news/child-marriage-happens-in-
the-u-...](http://www.tahirih.org/news/child-marriage-happens-in-the-u-s-too/)

------
colemannugent
I like the spirit of Elon's letter, but there is one part that bothers me:

 _> This doesn't mean there is a different standard of performance [for less
represented groups] ..._

...

 _> We have had a few cases at Tesla where someone in a less represented group
was given a job or promoted over more qualified highly represented
candidates..._

Which is it?

~~~
sdenton4
I read 'standard' as implying a quality bar, beyond which there's space for
flexibility.

Suppose we're giving out 100 promotions, and have 1000 promo nominations. You
review the 1000 noms and find that there are 500 that pass the quality bar
because your company is full of awesome people. So now you have to choose
which 100 of the 500 to actually promote. You can do this in a number of ways,
ranging from uniformly at random to doing a total stack rank and selecting the
top 100. Or you can choose to try to correct systemic under-representation in
management, which helps the company on a number of axes (including better
recruitment of smart people from under-represented groups, providing a
statistical bulwark against lawsuits, etc...).

(edit: It's worth keeping in mind that trying to do a full stack rank of your
1000 applications is going to be noisy as hell and an incredible amount of
work, as there will be multiple (individually noisy) promo committees working
on sub-sets of nominations. So it pays off to have a clear set of standards
for promotion to a given level, even if you don't automatically promote
everyone who meets that standard.)

~~~
hw
Promotion is a touchy thing. As a manager, promoting your top performers seems
like a no brainer, but sometimes if an employee is above a certain quality bar
that warrants a promotion (as you mentioned), even though there are others who
probably deserve it more, you sometimes have to spread the love around.
Knowing who to promote (and who not to promote, knowing they'll still stick
around) is a skill.

So I don't think that the promotion was necessarily done just because those
employees are from underrepresented groups and just to hit some company
diversity/equality metric, but I wouldn't know for sure

~~~
_s
I’m not sure I agree with this statement at all.

Promotion is _never_ a touchy thing when you set clear expectations for a
persons progression - one that is measurable and comparable to their peers.

The individuals then know, directly or indirectly, if they are on the right
path, and which one of their peers is ahead or behind. The incentive there is
for them to either up their game, or stay where they are.

The only fear there is that the system / process can be gamed; but one almost
always never picks the lesser of the two qualified individuals - you risk
loosing the more qualified individual and the team no longer has any faith in
the “system” and they too will loose respect and move on.

Perhaps I may not have the experience you do, but it’s something I would never
stand for - I would love to hear examples of when and such a scenario would
play out though as it’s something I may encounter at some point in my career.

~~~
jaredklewis
What is measurable way to compare peers?

All the systems I’ve ever encountered are horrible: lines of code, hours spent
coding, issues closed, bugs created, and so on.

Not all lines of code are equal. Not all hours are equally productive. Not all
issues are equally difficult. Not all bugs are equally costly. And so on.

~~~
sillysaurus3
Impact.

It's not directly measurable, but you know it when you see it. And sometimes
that impact is negative.

~~~
jaredklewis
“Impact” sounds like a qualitative metric, not a quantitative one, which is
fine of course. But the parent asserted that promotions should be based on
measurable data, which I’m still unconvinced is practical to do well.

------
riffraff
I have a question: how is it that things like n-word and w-word and whatever-
word became part of normal and formal speak in the english language (or is it
the US only?) ?

I mean, how is the case that people don't just use "racial slander" or
something like that, and instead use what seems to be like kindergarden
teacher expressions?

Is this phenomenon present in other languages/cultures?

~~~
ahoka
It's a PR trick to downplay it. Try how it reads like this:

>>At the time, our investigation identified a number of conflicting
accusations and counter-accusations between several African-American and
Hispanic individuals, alleging use of racial language, including the "nigger"
and "wetback" towards each other and a threat of violence.<<

~~~
Al-Khwarizmi
Maybe because I'm not American, but it sounds fine to me. Whoever wrote the
text is not using those words, just reporting.

When there is a murder with a knife everyone says person A murdered person B
with a knife, not "he m'd person B with a k-thing". How come people can cope
with describing murder and violence and not slurs?

~~~
aninhumer
Because a slur is not a description of a slur, it is the slur itself.

You can argue about whether it's appropriate to use in different contexts, but
pretending it's the same as the word "murder" or "knife" is a false
equivocation.

~~~
grkvlt
There's a concept called the 'use-mention distinction' [0] that is very
important here. It is fine to _mention_ the word 'nigger' in the context of
reporting speech, for example, but _not_ fine to _use_ the word, in which case
it becomes a racial slur.

0\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinctio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction)

------
KKKKkkkk1
> "In fairness, if someone is a jerk to you, but sincerely apologizes, it is
> important to be thick-skinned and accept that apology."

I have a colleague who has "sincerely apologized" to me three times within the
span of a few months. Some people just know how to play the system, and if
management is not firm (which this passage indicates is the case in Tesla),
these people will win out.

~~~
meri_dian
Then I guess that person isn't sincerely apologizing.

~~~
forapurpose
Why isn't it sincere? Do you mean that if they were sincere, they'd stop the
behavior?

Unfortunately, I think human behavior and relations are far more difficult
than that. To a significant degree behavior isn't subject to will, though we
like to assume it is. Everyone I know makes the same mistakes over and over
(different mistakes for different people); they would sincerely like to stop.
IME, to survive in relationships we have no choice but to accept those things
in ourselves and in others.

Of course, that makes accountability very complicated, but I think it's a fact
of life.

~~~
ImSkeptical
My mother told me that "sorry" means "I won't do it again.". Maybe that's not
exactly right, or standard, but I think it's pretty close.

"Sorry I stepped on your toes.". That was probably an accident.

"Sorry I did it again. And again." This is probably not an accident.

~~~
felipelemos
Great example. It's hard to know what are the exact intentions when someone
speaks, but it's easy to judge by its actions.

------
saagarjha
Perhaps I'm simply naive, but I've never encountered the term "w-word". What
is it?

~~~
comicjk
In the context, mentioning Hispanic individuals, probably
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetback_(slur)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetback_\(slur\))

~~~
kiproping
How is wetback as a slur even remotely comparable to the N-word.

~~~
Cthulhu_
Are you serious or just trolling? Both are used by white supremacists to
describe the respective ethnic minorities as a dehumanizing put-down.

~~~
nmeofthestate
"Both are used by white supremacists", except in this instance it's Blacks and
Hispanics using it against each other, so I'm not sure why you brought whites
into it.

~~~
zentiggr
A point of history, per se: in this case, the terms were originated on the
white side as slurs, and later they are used by each group to offend the
other.

------
partycoder
If a person out of their own initiative want to accept an apology, that is
fine. But expecting employees to indulge such behavior is not fair, or
acceptable even.

The US has had: slavery, racial segregation, ethnic cleansing, forced
depopulation, extrajudicial killings (e.g: hangings, lynchings), compulsory
sterilization, racial profiling/police brutality, mass incarceration, with the
latter resulting in loss of voting rights. Thanksgiving day 2016 was being
celebrated while people at Standing Rock were being tear-gassed... and that is
only _domestically_.

What enabled a lot of that has been racial discrimination. If someone that has
been discriminated doesn't want to accept an apology that is fine. At some
moment you need to draw a line and racial discrimination is a reasonable
criteria for that.

South Africa, the country Elon is originally from, had institutionalized
racial segregation until 1991. He should know first hand there difference
between being a racist and being a jerk.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport%27s_Scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport%27s_Scale)

~~~
vlehto
But what happens when employee is not accepting apology from another employee?
Does not sound like team spirit. So do you fire another one? Dissolve that
team?

That sounds very costly. If I was employer and had to abide by that, any work
location would only have employees of single race and gender. Prevention is
likely to be cheaper than dealing with the possible consequences. But then we
immediately arrive second level of Allport's Scale...

~~~
partycoder
What is more costly is allowing that behavior to become tolerated and normal,
affect employees' morale, ruin the culture, affect the company's reputation,
etc. It can also get the company sued.

Take a look at EEO laws.

You also seem to be forgetting the fact that people don't have to insult or
antagonize each other in order to be successful. If anything that is neurotic
behavior that is negatively correlated with career success.

------
abalone
The weak point in this statement is equivocating explicitly racist harassment
with “being a jerk.” You should not have to accept a “sincere apology” from
someone who calls you a racial epithet. There is nothing careless or
unintentional about that.

I mean, look how awful this policy sounds if we substitute more concrete
language: “if someone _calls you a n_gger_ on a single occasion, but
subsequently offers a sincere apology, then we believe that apology should be
accepted.”

Weird that Musk is doubling down on that, especially coming from South Africa.
He should have instead clarified that Tesla is zero-tolerance on racism.

~~~
alien_at_work
I think this "zero tolerance for all the things" is more dangerous than the
things it targets in most cases.

I assume Tesla is a very high stress place (at least at times). I don't know
if you've ever experienced a highly emotional situation but it's possible to
get so upset you yell things at people that you actually feel absolutely
terrible about later (and didn't realize you were capable of saying). I can
imagine someone, in such a highly charged situation, saying something hurtful
like that and then feeling absolutely gutted about it later. Of course you
don't _have_ to accept an apology in that situation but I personally wouldn't
think much of the kind of person who would write someone off, permanently, for
one such event when they never did anything like that before or ever again and
sincerely appologized.

~~~
abalone
Straw man. No one said zero tolerance for _all_ things. Just racist
harassment.

Your argument is weak as well. Would this logic apply to physically assaulting
a coworker as well, if the perpetrator is stressed and they’ve never done it
before and feel bad after? No, of course not. There is a line beyond which
zero tolerance should be the rule, and that line starts with calling someone a
n_gger.

------
runesoerensen
Context
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15699645](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15699645)

~~~
Alex3917
And also this:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15685818](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15685818)

~~~
lloydde
Sounds like different lawsuit. New Yorker is hard to read as it tends to meld
narratives and topics, but the lawsuit there is no “yesterday’s lawsuit”. NYer
article includes: “On September 20, 2016, Vandermeyden filed a lawsuit
charging Tesla with sex discrimination, retaliation, and other workplace
violations.”

------
pdimitar
You know what? I believe every word Tesla said. Especially about attorneys
specializing in extorting companies into settlements. I applaud their decision
to not give in to extortion and fight the battle in court until the end.

Side note:

From non-USA perspective, guys, sincerely, you're crazy. Everybody is suing
everybody for what often times seems total nonsense. No offense or disrespect
meant, just an honest bafflement -- how can somebody get promoted, then leave,
and _then_ sue? Wow.

------
majewsky
> What it comes down to is this: do what would make your parents proud. If you
> can't look someone you respect in the eye and explain what you did, don't do
> it.

That's a nice rule in general, although I think Elon is underestimating
people's capabilities to rationalize past decisions.

------
diminish
Antidiscrimination, mobbing, harassment classes for adults are fine but I
guess it goes back to families, kindergarten and primary school. Such behavior
must be excluded not only from the literate mind but from the subconscious
social behavior too.

Otherwise w- n- and other words will continue be part of entertaining back
stage talk consumed with beer, sports, other unhealthy but fun things together
with close friends and colleagues.

~~~
averagewall
If you want to exclude racism from private groups of friends, then you'd
better exclude gossip too. It's also harmful in much the same way -
reinforcing people's negative views of others so they'll subconsciously or
deliberately treat them badly. But unfortunately, even progressives haven't
got themselve as far as not bullying or abusing individuals.

~~~
CodeWriter23
If someone gossips to you they will gossip about you. Maybe not today or
tomorrow, but they will.

------
zdw
When does Elon sleep if he's writing cogent emails like this at 2:37AM ?

~~~
mistermann
Does he write these himself? Whoever wrote that has a way with words.

~~~
EGreg
I would love to know if someone vets these.

------
Spike66
"Our human resources team also conducts regular in-person spot training
sessions when an allegation or complaint has been made, even if the evidence
is not conclusive enough to warrant disciplinary action."

~~~
eecc
That’s good. I guess it also works as unofficial warning

~~~
rimliu
How do you like unofficial warning when you did nothing wrong? "Hey, would you
please stop doing that you never did?"

~~~
eecc
IMHO failing to avoid engaging in bickering and name-calling is a professional
blunder. Just being around and catching the wind means you didn't call
yourself out in time. In this case - where nothing sanctionable really
happened - a "retraining" that isn't really a warning, just a "gentle
reminder", is fair.

------
sleepychu
_The trial lawyer who filed this lawsuit has a long track record of extorting
money for meritless claims and using the threat of media attacks and expensive
trial costs to get companies to settle. At Tesla, we would rather pay ten
times the settlement demand in legal fees and fight to the ends of the Earth
than give in to extortion and allow this abuse of the legal system._

I wonder how your shareholders will feel about that.

~~~
zolthrowaway
This is good PR for them now. "Look we are clearly not at fault and will
vehemently defend our innocence." In addition this claim is absolutely non-
binding.

Also, if the trial lawyer in question is just trying to make a quick buck,
this is a deterrent. If the goal is just a cash grab, why would this lawyer go
through an arduous legal battle for a false claim when there are plenty of
other lucrative cases that will settle out of court.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I can't see any downside to saying this. There is zero
obligation to follow through. The outcome of this case is going to be a big
story regardless of this statement. It's just solid PR and posturing with
little to no cost to do so.

------
stesch
By the way: Tesla's CEO is African-American. ;-)

~~~
stesch
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8wrqe72YG4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8wrqe72YG4)

------
snowwrestler
> Everyone at Tesla, without exception, is required to go through an anti-
> discrimination course.

This is the literal bare minimum in a U.S. corporation in 2017.

> Our human resources team also conducts regular in-person spot training
> sessions when an allegation or complaint has been made, even if the evidence
> is not conclusive enough to warrant disciplinary action."

This sounds bad to me. Discrimination complaints are complicated and dangerous
and should be handled by experts--which the vast majority of HR staff are not.
The idea of a "spot training session" sounds like the sort of thing that could
be easily misinterpreted by any of the parties as a "make this go away"
conversation.

> We have also created a dedicated team focused exclusively on investigating
> workplace concerns, recommending corrective actions and assisting managers
> with implementing those actions.

This is more like it but the timing is vague--by this wording, this could have
happened at any point, including yesterday.

> Regarding yesterday’s lawsuit, several months ago we had already
> investigated disappointing behavior involving a group of individuals who
> worked on or near Marcus Vaughn’s team. At the time, our investigation
> identified...

Oh jeez, please don't share the details of an internal employee matter that is
subject to litigation...

\- (me, but also Tesla's general counsel, probably)

> Our company has more than 33,000 employees, with over 10,000 in the Fremont
> factory alone, so it is not humanly possible to stop all bad conduct, but we
> will do our best to make it is as close to zero as possible.

Ok, but you are not getting sued for just random "bad conduct," you're getting
sued for a failing to properly handle a specific (but relatively common,
sadly) type of bad conduct.

> There is only one actual plaintiff (Marcus Vaughn), not 100. The reference
> to 100 is a complete fabrication with no basis in fact at all.

Yes, this is how class action lawsuits work.

> The plaintiff was employed by a temp agency, not by Tesla as claimed in the
> lawsuit.

Doesn't matter for workplace discrimination litigation. Contractors are
legally the same as employees under certain conditions and this is one of
them.

> The trial lawyer who filed this lawsuit has a long track record of extorting
> money for meritless claims and using the threat of media attacks and
> expensive trial costs to get companies to settle.

Well yes, you did say it was a trial lawyer.

Overall I think this letter is not great for Tesla. It seems like the sort of
thing that will be useful for feeding the current race-based culture war in
the U.S., but doesn't make Tesla look serious about preventing racist and
discriminatory behavior among its workforce. Fewer words and more contrition
would probably have been better.

~~~
jack9
>> Everyone at Tesla, without exception, is required to go through an anti-
discrimination course

> This is the literal bare minimum in a U.S. corporation in 2017

Not in the slightest. It might as well say "drum circle", since there's no
evidence that either are effective. The key is that there are supposed to be
metrics and investigative procedures and protections for complaints, not some
re-education mumbo jumbo.

~~~
prawn
I would imagine it'd be limited to companies large enough to have not only a
dedicated HR staff or possibly even a particularly competent HR staff. There'd
be countless companies in any country without any formalised course, let alone
a specific one.

~~~
snowwrestler
33,000 employees seems big enough to expect a company to be doing this right.

That said, this is a common growing pain for companies and many only take it
seriously once a situation blows up in their faces.

~~~
prawn
I'm not sure what the "33,000" is in reference to. I was contesting, "This is
the literal bare minimum in a U.S. corporation in 2017."

Is a corporation defined as a company with 33,000+ employees in the US?

------
nodesocket
This kind of stuff is such a distraction from the business and the goal of
Tesla the company. Don’t believe me, in the last few years how many disastrous
incidents have we seen derail companies and their founders? Companies
shouldn’t need to hire full time employees that manage sensitivity training
and certainly the ”tech” news that profits off the constant outrage is just
fueling it all further. I fully expect this not to be a popular opinion, but
everyday is some new incident or outrage. Get back to work!

~~~
sidcool
Exactly my feeling. My conspiracy theory alt ego says this is a handy work of
the entrenched companies that Tesla is aiming to displace.

