
Tesla employees who don’t return to work could lose unemployment benefits - sharemywin
https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/13/tesla-employees-who-dont-return-to-work-could-lose-unemployment-benefits/
======
dang
A thread on this from yesterday:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23163794](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23163794)

~~~
koheripbal
Which concluded that the title here is misleading. The statement from Tesla is
just a legal-speak that they don't know. ...but the reality is that if the
state isn't allowing you to report to work, then you can continue to file and
collect unemployment.

~~~
dang
Thanks for the clarification.

------
ccorda
This is going to apply to every employee at every company, regardless of
whether they have a celebrity CEO or a clickbait friendly name.

In California, EDD released guidelines today:
[https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/networth/article/Califo...](https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/networth/article/Californians-
can-refuse-some-work-during-15267447.php)

"Even if your employer has complied with the state’s requirements for
reopening, and any and all government safety regulations, you would have good
cause to refuse to return to work if you are at greater personal risk due to
higher risk factors as identified by the” California Department of Public
Health. These factors include being older than 65, having a weakened immune
system or having certain serious chronic health conditions, such as heart
disease, lung disease or diabetes."

~~~
apatters
This seems pretty reasonable to me. Ultimately there are many reasons that
lockdowns and blanket bans on assembly and commerce can't continue, aside from
the collateral damage and the legal questions, anyone who thinks they're even
enforceable beyond a few months lives in a fantasy land. Violations are
growing by the day.

If we try to just go back to normal, though, a lot of people are going to get
sick and die.

The solution has to be policies which seek to protect people from the virus
with minimal collateral damage. This is no different from other spheres of
public policy - for example we have speed limits on the road, and we have road
deaths. We could lower all speed limits to 5mph and prevent all deaths, but
the roads would become practically useless and society would grind to a halt.
So we've selected limits that we feel are a reasonable compromise between
safety and practicality.

The vast majority of COVID-19 fatalities are people who are over 65 and/or
have the mentioned chronic conditions. So it makes sense to do everything we
can to protect these people.

As an aside, since cars are pretty dangerous, I think we're very lucky that
social media and the 24/7 news cycle didn't exist when they were invented.
What with the panic these mediums generate, you have to wonder if cars would
have gotten off the ground and become commonplace or if they would have just
been panic banned.

~~~
CydeWeys
I think you're taking exactly the opposite lesson on cars there. They _are_
incredibly dangerous, killing tens of thousands in the US alone each year, yet
we're immune to the carnage because it's always been that way. They should
have had that kind of scrutiny on them from the beginning.

~~~
xwdv
Agreed, the fact that we ignore so many gruesome vehicle fatalities is doing
society no favors. The nation has been designed for cars from the ground up,
but if we had been more privy to their risks, perhaps we would have built more
pedestrian focused cities instead, and more emphasis on robust mass transit
solutions.

~~~
lvnfg
Designing cities around cars is a great mistake of urban planning imo. Ideally
there should be no motorized vehicles above ground within a city's boundary.
The improvements to safety, air quality, and quality of life in general would
be immense and would make cities infinitely more livable. There are European
cities that have been moving in this direction:
[https://www.fastcompany.com/90456075/here-are-11-more-
neighb...](https://www.fastcompany.com/90456075/here-are-11-more-
neighborhoods-that-have-joined-the-car-free-revolution).

------
asadhaider
I remember an article[0] from mid-March saying Tesla employees could have up
to two weeks paid time off if they didn't feel comfortable coming back after
the shelter-in-place order was lifted.

Is paid time off not a big thing in the US? I would have thought Tesla would
have good employee benefits, or would it not really cover wanting to be off
for preventative reasons if they're not currently sick.

I work for a tech company in the UK and they pay up to a full year of full
sick pay, then reduced for up to five years. We're covered under that if we're
advised to stay at home due to having pre-existing medical conditions or
advised to by a doctor, or if showing any symptoms and thus self-isolating.

[0] [https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/13/tesla-employees-who-
dont-r...](https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/13/tesla-employees-who-dont-return-
to-work-could-lose-unemployment-benefits/)

~~~
Ididntdothis
In the US you often get 10-20 sick days per year, not more.

Edit: This is what I have experienced and I meant this as a ridiculously low
number. I had no idea that people would get even less.

~~~
jeffbee
The majority of hourly wage workers in the US do not get any paid sick days at
all.

~~~
vinay427
That's not true in the states I've lived in and a few others I spot checked. I
couldn't find a list with every state yet.

~~~
TylerE
Only required by law in 12 states + DC

~~~
vinay427
For the purposes of my curiosity, do you have a list? I'm wondering if those
states actually include a majority of Americans.

~~~
TylerE
Arizona, California, Connecticut, DC, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Washington

~~~
testbot123
Maine doesn't go into effect until 2021.

Rough population count [1] of those states divided by population of 50 states
+ DC is 0.3032003614019388.

Edit: most of those are also capped at 40 hours a year, which amount to one
week maximum sick leave. [2]

[1] Per
[https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_pop...](https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population)

[2] [https://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/paid-
sick...](https://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/paid-sick-
leave.aspx), via [https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/12/as-
coronavi...](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/12/as-coronavirus-
spreads-which-u-s-workers-have-paid-sick-leave-and-which-dont/)

------
jsight
From the article:

> “Once you are called back, you will no longer be on furlough so if you
> choose not to work, it may impact your unemployment benefits as determined
> by your local government agency — and not by Tesla,” Workman wrote in the
> email. “We completely respect your decision and will support you, without
> any penalties from us.”

I feel like this is going to be a common problem as things start to reopen. I
hope the state devises a workable solution.

~~~
vikramkr
I don't know the details of California's regulations, but if feasible, and if
Tesla actually respects and supports these decisions, they should find a way
to figure out who wants to be called back and who doesnt and only call back
people that are willing and wanting to come back. I don't know if asking first
violates any labor laws (I don't know why it would since that's a pretty pro-
employee thing, but it might impact the budget and lots of states have very
strange regulations like prop 56) but if it doesn't then that would be
actually supporting workers.

------
inamberclad
THIS is why I don't like the idea of states reopening quickly. It puts people
who may have elevated risks in a bind - go to work and risk your health or
lose your benefits and risk your health.

------
jccooper
Remove "Tesla" and the headline is exactly as true. That's just there for
clickbait.

~~~
8ytecoder
No one else is being forced to return to work (except essential workers and
healthcare workers).

~~~
other_herbert
Sort of... If you are getting unemployment then your past employer notifies
the state that you have been recalled (or something similar) they (the state)
will deny your claims

------
justaguy88
Why isn't unemployment benefits simply conditioned on 'you dont work there
anymore and you dont have a new job yet'. Why have the extra complexity?

~~~
credit_guy
Unemployment benefits are available not only to people who lost their job, but
also to furloughed people, i.e. people who are told by their employer "your
services are not needed at this time, and by the way, we aren't able to pay
you either, but when we'll need you back, we'll give you a call". Well, now
these guys got the call. If they decide to stay at home, should the Government
keep paying them unemployment benefits, or not? If yes, then it should be yes,
if not, not, but this is Government's problem, not Tesla's problem.

------
nikolay
This is your fake idol - Elon Musk! The guy who was going to colonize Mars is
behaving like an infant using recreational drugs for his teething and throwing
tantrums... or more like tweetrums! Elon Musk is not a nice guy! He's never
been! He's not hero material, as narcissists are no heroes!

The weird part is he found a way to finally be liked by the far-right by
acting like a freetard (a pun of "libtard"). He dethroned Trump among
Muricans! He's their new idol now - a rebel against the sense of reason!

Stop buying his cars! Tesla is not the only EV company, and glorifying and
buying mostly Teslas, you're not doing the market a favor!

------
whalesalad
This is how jobs and work... work.

Why is this newsworthy? Why is this even a headline? Pretty low, even for TC.

