
Tesla employees say they took shortcuts, worked through harsh conditions - sorenjan
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/15/tesla-workers-in-ga4-tent-describe-pressure-to-make-model-3-goals.html
======
mu_killnine
As someone who works in manufacturing, I can't count the number of times I've
been told to "just make it work". And, in reality, sometimes that truly is the
best option in the immediate term to get a system working so you can make
enhancements later. But I think that's the operative phrase: so you can
enhance later.

The challenge is that once the immediate fire is out, it's easy to simply
leave things in a half-baked state. That accumulates as technical debt.

Thankfully, most of the instances where I have had to deal with this has been
purely software and not affected the lives and comfort of operators on the
floor like with Tesla. But I can see how this happens. Even if the 'tent'
becomes a permanent installation, I hope they spend the time and money to
improve it to the necessary working standards that employees deserve.

~~~
Barrin92
>And, in reality, sometimes that truly is the best option in the immediate
term to get a system working so you can make enhancements later.

well that depends on the industry. Toy manufacturer probably, aeorospace
engineer, not so much. I would think of cars without drivers of belonging into
the second category.

~~~
just_myles
Me too. Given the importance of the part and what would happen should it go
out during operation do to cutting corners.

------
Lazare
What I find interesting is how _vigorously_ Tesla denies everything, always,
even when they're clearly wrong. They lose a lot of credibility that way; I
wonder if Musk[1] realises that if he admitted the things Tesla is obviously
doing wrong, he might have a hope of convincing people about the ones they're
not obviously doing wrong?

And it's especially odd because so much of the article is just a bunch of
_nothing_ , but Tesla makes it newsworthy by denying everything. And 50 cents
says Musk has a team analysing the photos right now to try and track down the
employees who took them. ...to ensure they're fired and/or sued, of course;
obviously Tesla would never see people who had identified problems as a
potentially valuable resource.

There's a lot more interesting details if you dig into it, but wikipedia has a
pretty good summary of the Toyota Production System
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System)).
An interesting contrast, perhaps.

[1]: I mean, we all know who's behind this PR strategy, right?

~~~
diegocg
"The most fundamental difference is thinking about the factory really as a
product, as a quite vertically integrated product," said Musk. "It's treating
it as more of an engineering and a technical problem as well," added Chief
Technical Officer J.B. Straubel.

"Which is the Toyota Production System," replied Johnson.

"Yeah, we don't think so," countered Musk.

~~~
almost_usual
The fact his ego is this big is amazing. I would be shocked if I saw one
vehicle on the road today manufactured by Tesla in thirty years.

~~~
et2o
You'd have to ignore the substantial progress Tesla has made to date against
overwhelming odds. Will return to this in 30 years!

~~~
BuckRogers
Don't need to, they already blew the doors off all the naysayers since they
were founded. Waiting 30 more years is unnecessary, they've more than proven
themselves. These people who insist on further and further benchmarks have
already been made out to be fools.

------
taf2
Keep in mind this is from cnbc - they consistently push an anti-tesla position

[https://cleantechnica.com/2018/08/28/40-tesla-headlines-
on-c...](https://cleantechnica.com/2018/08/28/40-tesla-headlines-on-cnbc-
in-2-days-31-negative-2-positive/)

[https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/9b71x0/40_tesl...](https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/9b71x0/40_tesla_headlines_on_cnbc_in_2_days_31_negative/)

And for more insight google “why does cnbc hate tesla”

~~~
adrr
Can we get away from the logical fallacies here? If you have a problem with
the facts in the article list them instead of attacking the author/publisher.

~~~
jerf
I think people overestimate the fallaciousness of examining the motivations of
the speaker. It only applies to the factual and logical matters; the fact that
CNBC may or may not hate Tesla or Elon Musk does not affect whether or not
tape was used to correct cracks in parts or whether or not people were asked
to work in low-quality conditions on pain of firing, or any _strictly_ logical
conclusions you may draw from those facts. Those purported facts may be true
or false, but whether someone at CNBC has it out for Elon is not a relevant
consideration in whether those facts are true or false.

However, it is _entirely_ relevant in determining whether or not the slant of
the piece is necessarily factual or whether it has bias, and in determining
the probability that the speaker may have left out information unfavorable to
the cause they are advancing.

It is a _logical_ fallacy, but it is _only_ a logical fallacy. It is
completely relevant in arenas other than pure, strict logic, such as meta-
logical analyses about potential biases.

(There's a few other "fallacies" for which this is true too; many of them like
affirming the consequent are just straight-up errors, but "appeal to
authority", for instance, is a fallacy in Aristotelian binary true/false
logic, but in a more realistic probabilistic logic, it _can_ be valid to use
it to update your probabilistic beliefs about the world. You just are not
logically justified in taking an authority and setting your belief in their
statements to a true, mathematical 100.0000...% (which is what the fallacy
would be in Aristotelian logic), and you are obligated to make judgments about
the quality of the authority as you make the updates.)

~~~
Angostura
What makes you think that CNBC is _particularly_ hard on Tesla?

~~~
nkoren
Anonymous anecdotes aside, the scandalous news they report is that Consumer
Reports puts Tesla's reliability in the bottom half -- yes, shock and
consernation, the BOTTOM HALF!!! -- of all automobile manufactures.

Of course, 50% all automobile manufacturers are in the bottom half, and sure,
it's not where you want to be. But none of the rest get special attention for
being so.

Want proof? Do a search for the the following: CNBC consumer reports
reliability rating.

What comes up? In order:

1\. "Tesla Tanks": [https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/tesla-tanks-subaru-soars-
in-...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/tesla-tanks-subaru-soars-in-consumer-
reports-new-reliability-survey.html)

2\. "Tesla Slips": [https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/24/tesla-reliability-slips-
to-t...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/24/tesla-reliability-slips-to-third-
worst-in-us-consumer-reports-says.html)

3\. "Consumer reports yanks recommendation for Tesla":
[https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/reuters-america-
update-2-con...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/21/reuters-america-
update-2-consumer-reports-yanks-recommendation-for-teslas-model-3-citing-
reliability.html)

4\. "Tesla Falls": [https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/tesla-falls-
after-...](https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/tesla-falls-after-
consumer-reports-yanks-its-reliability-ranking/ar-BBTUtWt)

..And so forth.

Note, however, that we didn't search for "Tesla". The spotlight given them is
CNBC's bias. There's an entire automobile industry out there, and at any given
time, half of it is in the lower half of reliability ratings. But only one is
ever given headlines for it.

That's bias.

~~~
bildung
>* Anonymous anecdotes aside, the scandalous news they report is that Consumer
Reports puts Tesla's reliability in the bottom half -- yes, shock and
consernation, the BOTTOM HALF!!! -- of all automobile manufactures.*

Actually Consumer Reports placed the Model S at the third-worst of 29
positions, so at the bottom 7%. "Tesla Slips" is actually a pretty mild
headline, considering they slipped 6 spots and 8 was the technical maximum.

~~~
jtuente
> Actually Consumer Reports placed the Model S at the third-worst of 29
> positions

It was Tesla as a whole that placed 27th of 29 on that list of average lineup
reliability (tied with Cadillac at 28th). Tesla tied with RAM for the lowest
"most reliable" model ranking at 49 pts, while squeaking by RAM and Volvo for
lowest reliability of a model.

------
mbrumlow
> pressured to take shortcuts

I work in software, and this happens all the time and it is not the end of the
world. It normally means doing even more work later, or shipping without all
the features. Its done by not coding in most cases.

But this is a car. What sort of shortcut could you make when assembling parts
to a car that has already had every part planed out?

Edit: never-mind, I skipped a entire paragraph somehow. Tape, it is tape guys.

~~~
stefco_
What concerns me is that shortcuts in industrial manufacturing processes are
often directly detrimental or even fatal to workers. Heavy industry uses toxic
chemicals and large, powerful machinery; cutting corners around those things
is actively dangerous.

Using some electrical tape in places where you'd otherwise use shrink tubing
is not a big deal. But like you said, trying to cut corners on a finished
hardware design sounds orders of magnitude harder than doing so on software,
and I worry about what _else_ workers are being forced to do to cover for
management's failures.

[edit] added word "else" for clarity

~~~
ajross
There's absolutely no such contention in the linked article though. It's about
tape.

I mean, yeah, they could be doing all kinds of crazy things. But so could
anyone else who needs to ship products on tight schedules. Why single out
Tesla here? I mean, would you react this way if it turned out Mazda or Audi
was taping down some misassembled parts?

~~~
reitzensteinm
Yes. This "you're singling Tesla out" persecution complex is getting old.
Tesla is an amazing company in many ways, but there's plenty of bad to go
along with the good.

~~~
ajross
You have a link to equivalent worries about Mazda or Audi or someone? I
mean... it's not a persecution complex if there's actual persecution. No one
writes articles about tape on Fords. Ever.

~~~
supergauntlet
Does Ford use electrical tape in lieu of heatshrink tubing?

~~~
cptskippy
Sadly, for you, the article does not say Tesla used tape in-lieu of heat-
shrink tubing or even mention heat-shrink at all. It simply states a fact that
"factory tape is high-quality and looks as if it’s shrink-wrapped on a part"
to provide contrast to the product Tesla was using.

The usage of the tape, as suggested by the article, wasn't for electrical
insulation or wiring protection.

~~~
supergauntlet
Weird, I saw people elsewhere in the comments mention heatshrink tubing being
substituted with electrical tape.

Definitely does seem like a weird thing to base an article on especially when
Tesla does lots of other things wrong.

~~~
ajross
> Weird, I saw people elsewhere in the comments mention heatshrink tubing
> being substituted with electrical tape.

Right, because like I said above, the prevailing paradigm is to skewer Tesla
by extrapolating from any available datapoint. So people take "tape" and
invent reasons for the tape that don't appear in the article. Some of this
isn't the posters' fault, because the article is sensationalized and is
clearly _trying_ to lead you to a conclusion about "tape" that it can't make
with the simple facts presented.

Which is a media behavior that is, in the auto industry as of right now,
almost exclusive to Tesla. No one runs dirt stories about tape on Fords, not
because there isn't any (I mean, who knows, but none of would be shocked to
read about it) but because even if there was, no one would care.

~~~
swish_bob
It's particularly weird, because the people who're talking about Tesla using
tape are the ones saying "it's heat shrink tape, guys, nothing to see here".

Whereas the people reporting the tape are saying it's standard electrical
tape, used to hold cracked pieces of plastic together.

------
infecto
Genuine question that is unrelated to this but has always bothered me about
Tesla.

Why does his brother, Kimbal, draw a $6million/year total comp for sitting on
the board. He has zero relevant experience related to manufacturing and that
salary is very high compared to the rest of the industry....this always
bothered me about TSLA.

------
gkfasdfasdf
Wow, my Model 3 has been serviced for both the issues mentioned in the
article: a loose connection in the 12v subsystem (which completely locked me
out of the car and required a tow!) and moisture in one of my tail lights.

I hope they are able to work these issues out.

------
close04
> In fact, we have a large number of employees who request to work on GA4
> based on what they hear from colleagues and what they have seen first-hand

Wonder if the Tesla spokesman has a desk there. Off the top of my head I can't
imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work. Equal maybe
but certainly not better than a factory building that was not put up in a
hurry to meet demands.

In any manufacturing job the "get it done" mantra is pretty much guaranteed to
rear its head from time to time. Issuing such a strong blanket rejection for
every single point really undermines the rejection.

~~~
cptskippy
> Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a
> great place to work.

It's in Fremont California where the weather averages 49-69F with extremes
being 42F and 79F. It's outside so constantly moving fresh air, and it's
covered so no sun beating down. The ends of the tent appear to be open letting
natural light in and allowing you to look out at the sky.

Contrast that to a typical factory that's a climate controlled coffin.

I have no experience working in a factory setting but it seems like it's the
difference between running outside vs indoor on a treadmill.

~~~
fasicle
I worked in a factory for a couple of weeks putting radiators on Defenders
[0].

The work was extremely boring (30 second task repeated 8 hours a day) but
temperature / conditions were never an issue. Workers were looked after
seemingly well.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_Defender](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rover_Defender)

~~~
cptskippy
I guess my point is that the climate of the region is such that I don't see it
being an issue to be "outside" and that it might be more pleasant than an
actual factory, then again I'm ignorant to the dress code or actual
temperature of a typical automotive factory.

~~~
close04
The temperatures you listed are close to freezing (sometimes below freezing).
Are you sure working in a tent at those temps is "pleasant"? The chances of
the tent providing the same levels of climate control as the factory building
are close to none which is why workers had to use the radiators against
company policy. And the policy makes sense given the clear danger of a fire.

~~~
cptskippy
> The temperatures you listed are close to freezing (sometimes below
> freezing).

None of the temperatures listed were close to or below freezing. Freezing is
32 degrees Fahrenheit, the lowest temperature I mentioned was 42F which is 10
degrees above freezing.

> Are you sure working in a tent at those temps is "pleasant"?

I listed the min and max temperatures as well as the the average min and max
temperatures for a reason. The average min temperature is 7 degrees warmer
than the min and both would occur overnight.

Is the tent a 24 hour operation? If not then it's unlikely that workers would
have to endure the "freezing" 42F weather at all.

~~~
close04
> In Fremont [...] the temperature typically varies from 43°F to 82°F and is
> rarely below 35°F or above 92°F.

From the link I posted below. Rarely below 35F (~1.5C) is still pretty damn
cold. Would you want your workplace to be "just about freezing" once in a
while? What I mean is I'm pretty sure Tesla's statements are the regular PR
thing any company in their position would put out, they just exaggerated a bit
with "they actually insist on it". Maybe they took an existing example and
didn't mind implying it's a general thing.

~~~
cptskippy
Rarely being below 35F does not mean routinely 35F as you're implying.

~~~
close04
You're just deflecting, those people complaining have a point. Even excluding
the "comforting fact" that it's only literally freezing "rarely", having to
work full shifts even at an _average_ low of ~6-8C/43-46F, and an average high
of ~16C/62F (official weather data for Dec/Jan/Feb) for ~3 months is still
damn uncomfortable if not dangerous. Enough to warrant taking dangerous
measures in such an environment like using a space heater. Would you like you
day job to be a choice between "freezing" and "risking life threatening fire"?

If the tent would be the better choice that people actually ask for, you'd
expect more of them popping up in that kind of climate. It's just the cheap
and fast choice (for the company) and these are the downsides (for the
employees).

~~~
cptskippy
> You're just deflecting

I'm not deflecting anything. You quoted some PR that said "we have a large
number of employees who request to work on GA4" and said "Off the top of my
head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to
work."

I pointed out that, by your own admission, for ~9 months of the year the
climate is fine AND it's outside as possible reasons for choosing to work in
the tent.

The original quote doesn't say employees requested permanent positions or even
year round. Two employees requesting to work 1 shift in the tent during ideal
conditions would still make the statement true.

Why is that so far beyond your comprehension? You're fixated on the fact that
it gets cold at night in the middle of winter as proof that no one would ever
request to work in the tent ever.

I think you're just being contrary and difficult which may or may not be
because you have a hidden agenda.

~~~
close04
> for ~9 months

The year has 12. If you have to selectively pick the part of the year or of
the job that supports your point then you need to widen your view. You can't
just ignore whatever contradicts it. I'll rephrase: off the top of my head I
can't think of a reason for a "large number of employees" to want to work in
that tent without any significant disclaimers attached to the request. "Only
in good weather" or lack of awareness (not realizing that work conditions are
bad part of the year) would be such disclaimers.

> Why is that so far beyond your comprehension

Because if people hate it 25% of the time it still makes Tesla's statement
disingenuous and supports the complaint.

> may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda

Why is this always the go to response whenever someone criticizes Tesla (short
sellers!)? If you need to try to discredit _me_ to counter my argument then
I'm making a pretty strong argument.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone
> says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

~~~
cptskippy
The statement you questioned didn't provide any context, you're being
presumptuous (e.g. An employee will only request to work outside year round,
no less) which is why you couldn't fathom why someone might ask to work
outside and thus concluding the statement was false.

------
vxxzy
musk slept on the floor of the factory... Safety issues with giant pieces of
metal going down the road aside (though it is paramount!), at least the leader
struggled with his underlings.

~~~
entropea
There are people sleeping on the streets blocks away from his factories.
Sleeping on the floor of his hundred million dollar factories is not proof of
anything.

~~~
sabertoothed
How does the price of the factory matter? It does not make the floor (couch or
whatever he slept on) any more comfortable.

------
RocketSyntax
This article should read: "CNBC reporter eggs on engineers and then betrays
their trust by running their mouth to the world about it."

~~~
entropea
What you're describing kind of sounds like journalism to me.

------
magwa101
Yeah, what are their shares worth? They're taking on huge incumbents, be
realistic, they must take risks or disappear.

------
michaereyess
That's the price you gotta make when you want to sell cheap cars

------
WhyKill
Hey, lets ignore Toyota Production System (which was invented by a startup,
Toyoda Automatic Loom) and then perfected on building cars with small amounts
of resources and minimal failure. It's pretty clear they don't use TPS at
Tesla, which will be their downfall...

------
htkibar
Tesla has shown time and time again that they care for their customers, giving
free services and even upgrades. This is just another CNBC attack on TSLA for
whatever reason.

~~~
shareIdeas
I got a bad feeling, if something is free, it's because it was unsafe.

~~~
Whatarethese
That's irrational.

------
usbseeker
I doubt these vehicles made it onto the road with the half fixes, they most
likely just used the tape to allow the vehicle to move down the line then when
the parts were available replaced them before customer delivery. This is
probably not apparent and not explained to the untrustworthly assembly line
worker.

------
DanCarvajal
Real car companies don't make cars in tents.

~~~
willio58
Hmm. Didn’t some _real_ car companies need bail-outs from the US government?

~~~
DanCarvajal
You mean like how every U.S. Tesla ever sold has been heavily subsidized with
tax rebates? And how they actually got a U.S. Government loan? And how they
got further tax credits from Nevada for building the Gigafactory there?

~~~
cptskippy
As opposed to oil subsidies that are reported at $4 billion annually with
estimates that they're actually somewhere between $10 and $40 billion?

The tax rebates amount to ~$4 billion subsidy for a BEV manufacturer. Maybe we
should just eliminate subsidies on both and see what happens.

~~~
DanCarvajal
"Maybe we should just eliminate subsidies on both and see what happens."

I am completely in favor of that proposal.

------
simion314
>Tesla is able to build the safest and best-performing cars

Am I out of date with the news? Are Tesla the safest cars? I am not a car
enthusiast so I recall that Volvo has most safety features, did things change
or is Tesla PR so deluded, at least I would use something like "one of the
safest cars", provide some modesty,

~~~
Whatarethese
Tesla's are inherently very safe because they have such a large frontal
crumple zone with no engine and the floor is a solid battery which helps with
side collisions.

[https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/04/watch-how-tesla-
model-3-ea...](https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/04/watch-how-tesla-
model-3-earned-its-5-star-safety-rating-from-euro-ncap/)

~~~
simion314
Are the safest though? I know that there are ICE cars witht eh engine at the
back, and there are cars that are very safe in crash tests.

So your answer is not responding at my questions, I know there are probably
cars that are for sure less safe then Tesla

~~~
F_r_k
Go to the ncap website and find out, then... That is if you're really
interested by it

