19 ms·

Inside Tesla’s factory, a medical clinic designed to ignore injured workers

336 points by amputect 8y ago

eduah 8y ago
Yeah, no. https://www.tesla.com/blog/one-year-in-tesla-update https://www.tesla.com/blog/one-year-in-tesla-update You don't pass a 4 month long safety inspection by California OSHA by making injured workers continue working. "News organization" writes article about a company in California under reporting and hiding injuries, leading to a 4 month OSHA investigation that completely clears company of the accusation. Do they retract the accusation, write an article on why they made the previous accusations given we now know they were wrong? No, they write a new article making new accusations about the company.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Reveal News has previously made claims of unreported/underreported/hidden workplace injuries at Tesla [1], determined to be unfounded after an investigation by CAL OSHA (reported by Elon Musk and Laurie Shelby, Tesla's Vice President of Engineering Health and Safety, during the October 24th, 2018 earnings call at timestamp 19:05 [2]). @danso: Please consider this the follow up to our earlier discussion on the issue. [3] [1] https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-left-injuries-off-the-books-but-it-might-not-face-penalties/ https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-left-injuries-off-t... [2] https://edge.media-server.com/m6/p/omd73p8r https://edge.media-server.com/m6/p/omd73p8r [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17238737 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17238737
  - danso 8y ago
    Randomly came across your comment during some late night procrastination. As others have noted, Reveal asserts that OSHA’s investigation did not address the reported incidents because of the statute of limitations: > Reveal had documented many other cases of injuries that Tesla had failed to record. But the agency had only about six months from the date of an injury to fine a company. By the time Cal/OSHA concluded its four-month investigation, the statute of limitations had run out. Of course, it could both be the case that the time limit ran out and Tesla books happen to be fine. But if OSHA doesn’t consider the contrary examples reported on by Reveal, then it’s to be expected they won’t find Tesla at fault.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  Cal OSHA subsequently launched a new investigation a few weeks ago, on the basis of undisclosed issues that came to light after the completion of the second (summer) inspection. https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-another-inspection-into-tesla-factory-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-a... The thing about inspections is that it's quite possible for a company to put on their best face during an inspection, only to resort to their unsafe practices after the inspection concludes. This is, for example, why restaurant inspections are conducted without notice. The fact that Tesla has survived two inspections doesn't mean anything--companies are expected to pass inspection. However, the fact that they have had 3 inspections in a single year... That is a matter for concern, since CalOSHA generally doesn't inspect a workplace more than once every few years. If they felt that multiple inspections were warranted--especially a new one so soon after finishing a thorough, months-long inspection, that means they have serious concerns about Tesla's safety practices. Given the relative lack of issues pointed out so far by CalOSHA, it's likely that they don't trust management to adhere to safe practices or that they feel that Tesla is changing work practices while inspectors are present.
  - loceng 8y ago
    "the fact that they have had 3 inspections in a single year... That is a matter for concern, since CalOSHA generally doesn't inspect a workplace more than once every few years. If they felt that multiple inspections were warranted--especially a new one so soon after finishing a thorough, months-long inspection, that means they have serious concerns about Tesla's safety practices. " Or that Tesla's the most shorted stock in history and there's a lot of negative, probable propaganda, being created/distributed to impact the stock price.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      Conspiratorial thinking is a bad look.
      - loceng 8y ago
        Hiding behind an anonymous username generally bodes a worse look IMHO, similarly making an empty statement - your short and shallow quip that's meant as a put down - instead of engaging in critical thinking and dialogue. I'm guessing you downvoted me too, if not, lots of people prefer to react impulsively and are too lazy to actually engage in civil discourse.
- jijojv 8y ago
  Said company has been scamming thousands into buying a Tesla based for past 2 years with the fake "driver is just there for legal reasons" 2016 FSD video
  - Latteland 8y ago
    That's pretty inaccurate - I think tesla said they were waiting on the fsd (full self driving) system to be finished, but tesla played up that it also depended on regulatory support - there was a ton of work before tesla finished it, it was just almost done waiting on govt approval. I can only guess that buyers thought it was coming soon, but it wasn't.
    - nlowell 8y ago
      Tesla was selling FSD for 3k. Selling something with no guarantee that it even exists does not seem like honest business practice.
      - Latteland 8y ago
        It was prepay to get it cheaper now, costs more later. Also came with hardware upgrades if any - they made a new computer, prepay people got it free. I was thinking about not getting it on my car.
- Deimorz 8y ago
  The article specifically addresses that investigation and its result. It's the subject of the last section, "State regulators not interested". It includes the fact that the statute of limitations had expired on many of the reported violations. As a result, state legislators ended up changing the window so that it wouldn't happen again in the future for similar reports.
- Animats 8y ago
  CAL-OSHA had seven investigations of Tesla underway as of Sep. 20th.[1] Including the fingertip amputation. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-another-inspection-into-tesla-factory-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-a...
- dtornabene 8y ago
  Kind of sad that this is the highest voted comment right now, and that almost all of the responses pointed out the investigation is addressed in the piece. Also "news organization" is weak, this is a site thats won a Peabody(among other awards), as other commenters have also pointed out.
  - reitzensteinm 8y ago
    Not to mention the parent commenter has contributed nothing to the site except breathless defences of Musk and Tesla.
    - iofiiiiiiiii 8y ago
      Oh, so opinions are only valid from the right type of person with the right contributions? I guess I should be glad you did not raise concerns about skin color.
      - alliecat 8y ago
        Bloody hell, mate - It's perfectly valid to highlight the fact that somebody's PoV may be biased based on their past contributions, there's no need to bring race into it. They're just a car company.
  - cheschire 8y ago
    I would like to think that HN isn't subjected to brigading[0], but unfortunately there's a lot of money to be made in this topic, regardless of which way the sentiment swings. When I see things voted up which are misleading, false, or ridiculous, my reaction is typically that of distrust and an expectation of manipulation. But my hope for humanity lies in believing that some posts are simply because the poster was mistaken. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_brigading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_brigading
- erikb 8y ago
  Well, I can see why such inspections have respect from a lot of people. But also keep in mind that a multi-billion dollar company, which might be stronger than any single government organ, will be treated differently than the burger shop around the corner.
- danso 8y ago
  Disclosure: I have friends who now work at Reveal (the news industry being a very small world) but don't know anything about this or other of their stories. As others have pointed out, the article addresses OSHA's investigation into Tesla's injury recordkeeping. And Reveal argues that OSHA was not allowed to fine the company for the other injuries Reveal had reported because "the agency had only about six months from the date of an injury to fine a company" (and the injuries reported by Reveal were already in the past). But assessing fines is one thing -- it's not clear whether the statute of limitations restricts OSHA from considering these past injuries when scrutinizing Tesla's recordkeeping. Reveal certainly implies it does, and Tesla doesn't mention it. Neither Reveal nor Tesla links to the published investigation results. I think it's OK to assume that Tesla isn't going to be punished by OSHA (in this case; several more investigations are still ongoing. But I see no reason until OSHA says otherwise that its investigation "completely clears [Tesla] of the accusation." Only Tesla itself has asserted that, and well, Tesla has been creative in the past at interpreting results; NHTSA having to publicly clarify an Autopilot statistic that Elon Musk eagerly touted comes to mind [0]. Whatever the case, I don't agree with your interpretation of cause-and-effect -- i.e. "No, they write a new article making new accusations". Tesla's statement about OSHA came on Oct. 26 [1], just a little more than a week ago from the submitted article's publish date. While the article does have several confidential sources, it leads with a former employee making litigious claims. The lawyering for this story alone would've taken at least a week, nevermind the time it takes to find the sources and interview them, and to talk to Tesla and check the related sources and documentation. I wouldn't be surprised if this story was at least a couple months in the making, with the timing of its publication only coincidental with Tesla's recent statement. [0] https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistics/ https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistic... [1] https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-releases-workers-safety-update/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-releases-workers-safety-upda...
monochromatic 8y ago
>an investigation by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting has found Never heard of it. Strike 1.
- sammythes34lion 8y ago
  They've won a Macarthur, an Emmy, and a Peabody for their investigative journalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Investigative_Reporting#Awards_and_recognition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Investigative_Repor...
  - loceng 8y ago
    Curious, the same journalist and editor who wrote/are associated with this?
    - bjl 8y ago
      Did you even click the link? "His reporting with a partner and CNN exposed rampant fraud in California's drug rehab system for the poor, winning an Investigative Reporters and Editors Award."
      - loceng 8y ago
        It's always interesting and odd to me when a journalistic source doesn't actually link to what they reference about themselves, that they are sharing about in their profile; without myself spending a fair amount of time looking into it I can't find out who specifically got the award: was it him, the partner, or CNN that got the award? What was the award specifically if it was the author? With research papers we expect references to be cited, linked to - yet, journalists trying to prove their integrity make links? It's a big problem too if people just assume what text someone writes about as true, so why not make it easy for people to follow the cookie trail through links?
- dang 8y ago
  "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
black6 8y ago
This is OT, but do editors exist any more? Second sentence in and there is a glaring mistake: "...including one who severed the top a finger...". I notice this across the web AND in print publications. I'm an engineer, not a journalist or English major, and I'm constantly picking up typos, grammatical errors (less vs. fewer really grinds my gears), and other mistakes which should never make it to publication. Is it a "first to press" or cost-cutting measure? Or is it that the editor has transitioned from editing the manuscript for mistakes to editing it for the "proper" voice/slant/bias?
- fredsted 8y ago
  Who's going to pay for the editor with noone wanting to pay for journalism anymore?
  - _Codemonkeyism 8y ago
    Many people want to pay for journalism, e.g. have an Economist subscription. Not many people want to pay for badly informed opinions dressed up as journalism with cut & paste from other sites and Reuters. Take the Economist vs. most other publications. An usual Economist article has 20 facts about the issue (e.g. elections in South Sudan) and at the end sometimes an opinion (notwithstanding the general thinking of the Economist). Opinion pieces are easily spotted ("Charlemagne"). Others take 20 facts and write 20 articles and add 10 opinions to each of them to get out more content.
- danso 8y ago
  I don't think it's off-topic. A grammatical error in the top of the story, especially a non-breaking-news story, is never a good look. Based on my experience in working in web and print, such mistakes are increasingly uncommon because digital publishing makes it relatively easy to tweak text right up to the second of publication -- and afterwards. It's very easy and tempting to make a quick rewording without thinking it needs another set of eyes. Print newspapers definitely had more editors proofing your copy. But even with a completely computerized publishing system, if I wanted to make a last minute change, I still had to go through at least 2 editors. At some point, making a fix requires, well, literally "stopping the presses". Having several editors in a well-defined editing workflow was a luxury that news orgs could afford decades ago, but it was also a necessary cost to prevent any reporter from making a costly "stop the presses" last minute fix. Digital-only news orgs don't face that consequence.
modeless 8y ago
If you are stable and not in immediate danger, you should absolutely take a Lyft to the hospital instead of an ambulance. Ambulances are very expensive and should be reserved for people who actually need them. What if there's a car accident and someone is bleeding out and the ambulance is delayed because it was busy transporting some guy who wanted an ambulance ride for his stable back injury?
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  In the UK we have two tiers of ambulance for this purpose. One kind only turns up with basically just a van and ambulance drivers. The other kind turns up with paramedics and full kit.
  - willyt 8y ago
    Also Paramedics on motorbikes and in cars. Paramedic on a bike gets there quickly and triages/delivers critical care, cars and ambulances are stood down or dispatched as needed.
    - michaelt 8y ago
      Bike paramedics stop the time-to-help-arriving clock, which is a KPI for health service administrators. As they can't transport people to hospital and they don't carry strong painkillers they're basically useless if you've got, say, a broken arm.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - PJDK 8y ago
        It's a particularly key KPI if you happen to be having a heart attack, which is why the bikes carry defibrillators.
- mschuster91 8y ago
  > Ambulances are very expensive and should be reserved for people who actually need them. Lol what? It's the job of the state to provide adequate resources (for example, the law in Germany requires that emergency personnel be at your location in 10min tops, on average). Telling people to use an Uber/Lyft/cab due to cost concerns or not enough ambulances being available is bad. Demand proper emergency services funding from your politicians! Obviously: when all you got is a small cut on your finger, fine, take public transport or whatever. But for a back injury?! No way in hell I'd risk my chance in public transport or taxi.
Latteland 8y ago
These are serious allegations and look like terrible injuries. This publication I'd never heard of does have some journalism awards. I looked at their other stories and they seem like a reasonable publication but the stories seem a tinge sensationalistic. But since osha found tesla was doing a good enough job after months of investigation, it's hard to trust this report. I searched google news for osha penalties and found issues about nail gun injuries, plumbing, a death of a worker at a winery, metal working, foundry, etc. So I don't see them as just letting tesla get a free ride. Could it be that tesla meets the legal requirements but some injuries aren't well treated? I like tesla generally but I want to see them treat their workers well. I'd like to see a more mainstream media investigation further, like the ny times maybe. With tesla there was also an incredible negative fud campaign about them, leading to many sensible financial journalists mystified that they didn't go out of business. So I am struggling to be neutral about this story.
- danso 8y ago
  Reveal is the digital side (and public radio program) of the Center for Investigative Reporting, which has been around for a few decades. Its About page touts its recent awards (including a Peabody and a George Polk Award, plus finalists for the Pulitzers) but CIR is pretty well-known in journalism. Its founder is Lowell Bergman, who is probably most well-known for being played by Al Pacino in "The Insider", a dramatization of his investigation into the tobacco industry.
Animats 8y ago
They need a union. Bad.
- jernfrost 8y ago
  Definitely. That is the best way to deal with stuff like this. Without a union individual employees have a too weak position to complain. Although I hope the US adopts a more Nordic/German style union system which is less adversarial. I think the US system has sadly given unions a bad reputation.
  - Rainymood 8y ago
    > I think the US system has sadly given unions a bad reputation. You mean big corporations have spent millions of dollars and hours lobbying against unions and crushing any whiff of unionization by immediate termination of employment? All hail to your corporate overlords ... It's a double-edged sword really, explotation of low cost labor allows you to innovate and be the technologically advanced society you are, but it also hurts those at the bottom who have no other choices/options.
    - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
      Much better to have all of this stuff happen in China where we don't need to think about it.
      - haveupeedtoday 8y ago
        People here are pedants, you need to add the sarcasm tag to be clear
    - folkrav 8y ago
      Public employees over here in Quebec are unionized to hell and back, and it often ends up with protecting incompetent workers. I had a teacher back in college that was teaching extremely outdated material, didn't know anything about what she was teaching, and the whole department knew about it. A teacher told us that they all wanted her gone for years now, but unless she committed fraud or literally murdered a student, she was basically unfireable because of her union-negociated work contract. Not saying unions are unjustified in all cases, but to be fair, they visibly _do_ get obtrusive in some instances. It's another problem than our southern neighbors though.
jernfrost 8y ago
I am a big Tesla fan but if this is true and does not improve shortly, then screw this company. I’ve dreamt of buying a Tesla but I could not ethically rationalize that to myself if this article is true. It also shows the problem of measuring companies by specific metrics. It sounds like good old “juking the stats” (the wire). It gives the impression that things actually end up worse because of how injuries are measured.
- commonsense1234 8y ago
  one less in the long waitlist. thank you. But, if what is being reported by this site is true. I hope the workers are well compensated for their trauma.
- loceng 8y ago
  Here's a response horseRad posted that comes from Tesla's side - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 - and that is from https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-reveal-worrying-report-doctor-denies/ https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-...
  - bjl 8y ago
    That statement isn't exactly compelling. It just resorts to ad hominem attacks in an attempt to discredit a minor piece of the article, while deflecting/ignoring the major claims (like the worker with a crushed spine who was denied an ambulance because it would've shown up on OSHA logs). Also, this report was done by one of the most respectable investigative news organisations in the world. Its hard to see how the PR wing of a corporation that just settled with the SEC for fraud could be considered more trustworthy.
    - loceng 8y ago
      I was referencing the response from their doctor, where they have 24/7 doctors at their factory. I'm not sure if this answer is in anything posted, however: 1) is that claim of someone with a "crushed spine denied an ambulance" proven, and 2) is "because it would've shown up on OSHA logs" proven as Tesla's reasoning, or just conjecture and/or speculation? Likewise, why aren't people addressing that maybe an ambulance being called as the triggering something added to OSHA logs is incomplete or badly designed - and because Tesla has doctors on staff/on-site 24/7 for workers to go to first, maybe a visit to doctors should actually be the trigger adding the event to logs? Maybe the process is broken, but requiring an ambulance be called for a sprained wrist - if they trained doctors on staff to access the situation isn't reasonable, it certainly is an emotional reaction they're triggering in people though. "Also, this report was done by one of the most respectable investigative news organisations in the world." I've never heard of them and likewise - is this specific journalist (and perhaps the editor) known and associated with any awards the journal received?
ToFab123 8y ago
After reading this, I no longer want a Tesla.
- loceng 8y ago
  Here's a response horseRad posted an hour after your comment here that comes from Tesla's side - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 - and that is from https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-reveal-worrying-report-doctor-denies/ https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-...
  - bjl 8y ago
    I find it somewhat amusing that you're trying to discredit a report by one of the premiere institutions of investigative journalism using a blog post on a site ran by a self-admitted Tesla fanboy. That's even setting aside the monetary conflicts of interest created by the fact that Tesla pays Lambert for shilling their cars.
    - Tuna-Fish 8y ago
      > report by one of the premiere institutions of investigative journalism We are talking about the same place that claimed that Tesla factory did not have yellow safety tape because "Elon hates the color yellow". The factory did have the yellow-black safety tape around all dangerous machinery, and still does today. This is an organization that publishes literal fake news.
      - klingebeil 8y ago
        There‘s a huge difference between getting something wrong in an article and "fake news". Could we please at least try to have nuanced discussions around this topic or news in general?
        Tuna-Fish 8y ago
horseRad 8y ago
Statement from Basil Besh mentioned in article: “I spent nearly one hour with Reveal detailing Tesla’s decision earlier this year to bring me and my medical team on site at Fremont, providing its employees with state-of-the-art occupational and musculoskeletal health care. I detailed our vision for exemplary patient care and I gave specific examples of protocol improvements and subsequent successes in outcomes in only four short months, including accurate diagnoses and reducing needless delays for advanced testing and treatment. I patiently educated Will Evans on how Tesla allowed me to give the same care to Tesla employees that I do to my private patients including ones who are professional athletes, with the ability to get necessary testing and treatment in a timely manner without being hindered by an often cumbersome California Worker’s Compensation System that sometimes negatively effects injured workers. I counseled Will on the difference between subjective complaints of pain, which cannot be proven and are often magnified, and objective signs found only on careful clinical examination by an experienced physician. I even mailed Will a copy of a relevant chapter from the American Medical Association Return to Work Guidelines and offered to make myself available for additional questions. Research and evidence-based medicine indicate that deconditioning injuries involving sore muscles should not be treated with inactivity as this only exacerbates the problem, but should instead be treated by proactive conditioning, ergonomic modifications and supportive care. Not all patients in pain should be off work, at home and on opioids. In fact, it is most often in these patients’ best interest to have supportive care that enhances their activity, their function, and their well-being. As a physician, my foremost obligation is to perform a careful history and physical examination, order additional tests when clinically indicated, make an accurate diagnosis, and deliver the absolute best care possible. If patients are injured and continued work presents safety issues for the patient, myself and my fellow physicians prescribe the appropriate work restrictions. Any suggestion that myself or any of my medical team at AOC allow external factors to influence our medical care in any way is false and inaccurate. I advised Will on why ambulances should be reserved for life or limb threatening injuries and that every ambulance that is thoughtlessly called for a non-life-threatening injury is one less ambulance that is available to actually save a life rather than be used as a convenience. Most importantly, all members of my team are empowered to call 911 for any limb or life-threatening condition. Rather than deliver an informative and balanced piece of journalism, Reveal has instead chosen to hitch its wagon to Ms. Anna Watson, a provider with whom we severed ties after less than two weeks at our clinic and about whom I cannot provide any additional comment as she is currently the subject of an investigation by the California Medical Board. Instead of highlighting the tremendous progress being made in both patient safety and patient care at Tesla, this report uses poor sourcing to tell a story consistent with a predetermined agenda.”
_cs2017_ 8y ago
And how am I supposed to figure out who to trust? Reporters say Tesla is shitty. But reporters often lie and even more often exaggerate. Musk says he cares about safety and all accusations are wrong. But CEOs often lie and even more often are uninformed or delusional. If anyone has advice about how I can develop some trust in one side or the other, please let me know.
- JacKTrocinskI 8y ago
  What does the author of this article have to gain, or rather, why do you think she would fraudulently write an article on this topic?
  - bigzyg33k 8y ago
    Views. That's primary reason reporters exaggerate news, controversy has a monetary benefit. (This doesn't necessarily mean that the reporter in question here is exaggerating, however)
    - TarpitCarnivore 8y ago
      Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Reveal is an independent nonprofit organization. The idea that you would prescribe to "clicks" as a justification for not trusting their reporting is a very damning thing to me. For a site that prides itself on it's intellect and knowledge, it's unsettling how often I'm seeing people jump to "fake news" type of commenting.
    - klingebeil 8y ago
      As someone working in the media business. Please could you at least google the outlet you‘re talking about? You‘re embarrassing yourself with your own ignorance. Reveal is a non-profit. They don‘t care about page views, because they don‘t need advertising to finance themselves. There‘s only one thing an investigative journalism team cares about and that‘s reputation. They are deeply incentivized against publishing half-assed work or missinformation. Please just stop repeating this meme over and over that journalists only care about page views.
avoutthere 8y ago
This is pretty clearly a hit piece.
mcguire 8y ago
"CEO Elon Musk’s distaste for the color yellow and beeping forklifts eroded factory safety, former safety team members said." Ok. How different is this from the policies of most auto factories? They are all incentivised to minimize the number of reported injuries.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  This statement has been proven false many times already. Yellow tapes and beeping forklifts are pretty common in Tesla's factories. - https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UpGmsQSu9rvSUrD1nMw__A--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9MTI4MDtoPTk2MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-US/homerun/motleyfool.com/ed8cfa267d41c41df2a684deffbc2077 https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UpGmsQSu9rvSUrD1nMw__A--~A... - https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/Azdk_dANbjn20fMkF_yYVg--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9MTI4MDtoPTk2MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-US/homerun/motleyfool.com/18ba1356e0cc8c627a80bd5656a0a006 https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/Azdk_dANbjn20fMkF_yYVg--~A...
will_brown 8y ago
Funny how this thread is debating whether a crushed hand or severed fingers justifies an ambulance or ride share. It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport. The fact that an on-site physician would not call medical transport and put patients with crush hands/severed fingers in a ride share is per se illegal. Next we will hear the “SV disruption cult” begin making their claim that those regulations only exist because the EMT lobby industry is spending billions for legislation to protect the market incumbent. Well don’t forget your extra $150 Uber cleaning fee for bleeding all over your drivers car.
- y4mi 8y ago
  only $150? you need to add professional cleaning cost and lost revenue while cleaning to the bill. and not just professional cleaning... the injured person could've a serious illness (think HIV), so it will probably cost even more i'd wager you'll need at least twice that amount
  - spamizbad 8y ago
    Which is why they should be using medical transportation services.
    - jimmaswell 8y ago
      They should ideally* use medical transportation services if there's bleeding or a broken neck, and be able to use something cheaper if there's no danger of further injury or creating biohazards. *Truly ideally there wouldn't be ambulance bills stuck on people, but I mean within the framework of what's currently in practice.
      - bfdm 8y ago
        See the thing is, you're not able to determine whether a person is "no danger of further injury" being you aren't a medical professional. A person with a severe impact might not have much external signs or pain, but could be bleeding internally. That would present a problem in the backseat of an uber on the highway. Without stabilization, a broken bone can cut or puncture any number of blood vessels or organs (for a rib). There's a reason we use medical transport after injuries -- you don't really know what might follow. If the cost is the concern, using cheap transport isn't the answer. Either socialize the care or force workplaces to pay the EMT fees for workplace injuries. Sending someone in a cab is just not acceptable if a doctor deems medical transport necessary. Now, all of this hinges on the particulars and accuracy of the description of the situation, which I can't really judge from the outside. But if otherwise independent medical professionals are being urged to reduce ambulance use in order to save face for the factory, that's a real problem. I'm inclined to believe the ousted clinicians and former employees, though.
M_Bakhtiari 8y ago
What did these people expect, with that doped-up delusional playboy at the helm?
- sctb 8y ago
  We've banned this account like we said we would.
  - M_Bakhtiari 8y ago
    I guess Musk is a bit of a sacred cow around these parts. I suppose I shouldn't have expected anything else from Y Combinator but to run this kind of a Silicon Valley society for mutual admiration, my apologies.
jsight 8y ago
All I see is evidence of why NUMMI closed to begin with. Manufacturing cars is hard, maybe manufacturing them in California is impossible?
AndrewBissell 8y ago
The workers in this story said one reason they were told they couldn't take an ambulance was because Tesla couldn't afford to pay for the rides. That same quarter, Elon Musk paid himself $65mm and his cousin Lyndon Rive $17.5mm on a Solar City promissory note, which they had the option of rolling out to a later maturity.
blablabla123 8y ago
> Recommending stretches to treat an injured back Tesla obviously sucks at everything when it comes to workers. But recommending stretches can make things worse if it’s not clear what kind of back problem it is. In any case I think it’s all about liability and costs.
- thebluehawk 8y ago
  It depends on the injury. I would trust the medical professional here.
- garysahota93 8y ago
  It makes me really sad to hear all of this. I've suffered from back pains myself in the past and stretching should NOT be the only option.
- ashelmire 8y ago
  It seems pretty obvious that they need a physical therapist or a rehab physician (probably both) on staff. Ortho surgeons are great if you need immediate surgical intervention... and that's about it. Leave the rehabilitation to the people who specialize in it.
AndrewBissell 8y ago
@PlainSite on Twitter has been going through injury reports from the Tesla clinic, and it seems Tesla may have even had fake MDs signing documents. https://twitter.com/PlainSite/status/1059875691263483904 https://twitter.com/PlainSite/status/1059875691263483904 According to the tender it used to get the Tesla engagement, one of Access Omnicare's explicit objectives was to reduce OSHA recordability: https://twitter.com/Trumpery45/status/1059902463510142976 https://twitter.com/Trumpery45/status/1059902463510142976
neuralRiot 8y ago
This might be true or not but sadly is nothing unheard of, it will be keep like that until a seriously injured worker is sent back to work only to have his condition worsened and a skillful lawyer pulls a chunk of money from mr Musk then suddenly he will start liking yellow stripes and beeping forklifts.

336 points by amputect 8y ago

Yeah, no. https://www.tesla.com/blog/one-year-in-tesla-update https://www.tesla.com/blog/one-year-in-tesla-update You don't pass a 4 month long safety inspection by California OSHA by making injured workers continue working. "News organization" writes article about a company in California under reporting and hiding injuries, leading to a 4 month OSHA investigation that completely clears company of the accusation. Do they retract the accusation, write an article on why they made the previous accusations given we now know they were wrong? No, they write a new article making new accusations about the company.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
Reveal News has previously made claims of unreported/underreported/hidden workplace injuries at Tesla [1], determined to be unfounded after an investigation by CAL OSHA (reported by Elon Musk and Laurie Shelby, Tesla's Vice President of Engineering Health and Safety, during the October 24th, 2018 earnings call at timestamp 19:05 [2]). @danso: Please consider this the follow up to our earlier discussion on the issue. [3] [1] https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-left-injuries-off-the-books-but-it-might-not-face-penalties/ https://www.revealnews.org/article/tesla-left-injuries-off-t... [2] https://edge.media-server.com/m6/p/omd73p8r https://edge.media-server.com/m6/p/omd73p8r [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17238737 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17238737
- danso 8y ago
  Randomly came across your comment during some late night procrastination. As others have noted, Reveal asserts that OSHA’s investigation did not address the reported incidents because of the statute of limitations: > Reveal had documented many other cases of injuries that Tesla had failed to record. But the agency had only about six months from the date of an injury to fine a company. By the time Cal/OSHA concluded its four-month investigation, the statute of limitations had run out. Of course, it could both be the case that the time limit ran out and Tesla books happen to be fine. But if OSHA doesn’t consider the contrary examples reported on by Reveal, then it’s to be expected they won’t find Tesla at fault.
gamblor956 8y ago
Cal OSHA subsequently launched a new investigation a few weeks ago, on the basis of undisclosed issues that came to light after the completion of the second (summer) inspection. https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-another-inspection-into-tesla-factory-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-a... The thing about inspections is that it's quite possible for a company to put on their best face during an inspection, only to resort to their unsafe practices after the inspection concludes. This is, for example, why restaurant inspections are conducted without notice. The fact that Tesla has survived two inspections doesn't mean anything--companies are expected to pass inspection. However, the fact that they have had 3 inspections in a single year... That is a matter for concern, since CalOSHA generally doesn't inspect a workplace more than once every few years. If they felt that multiple inspections were warranted--especially a new one so soon after finishing a thorough, months-long inspection, that means they have serious concerns about Tesla's safety practices. Given the relative lack of issues pointed out so far by CalOSHA, it's likely that they don't trust management to adhere to safe practices or that they feel that Tesla is changing work practices while inspectors are present.
- loceng 8y ago
  "the fact that they have had 3 inspections in a single year... That is a matter for concern, since CalOSHA generally doesn't inspect a workplace more than once every few years. If they felt that multiple inspections were warranted--especially a new one so soon after finishing a thorough, months-long inspection, that means they have serious concerns about Tesla's safety practices. " Or that Tesla's the most shorted stock in history and there's a lot of negative, probable propaganda, being created/distributed to impact the stock price.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Conspiratorial thinking is a bad look.
    - loceng 8y ago
      Hiding behind an anonymous username generally bodes a worse look IMHO, similarly making an empty statement - your short and shallow quip that's meant as a put down - instead of engaging in critical thinking and dialogue. I'm guessing you downvoted me too, if not, lots of people prefer to react impulsively and are too lazy to actually engage in civil discourse.
jijojv 8y ago
Said company has been scamming thousands into buying a Tesla based for past 2 years with the fake "driver is just there for legal reasons" 2016 FSD video
- Latteland 8y ago
  That's pretty inaccurate - I think tesla said they were waiting on the fsd (full self driving) system to be finished, but tesla played up that it also depended on regulatory support - there was a ton of work before tesla finished it, it was just almost done waiting on govt approval. I can only guess that buyers thought it was coming soon, but it wasn't.
  - nlowell 8y ago
    Tesla was selling FSD for 3k. Selling something with no guarantee that it even exists does not seem like honest business practice.
    - Latteland 8y ago
      It was prepay to get it cheaper now, costs more later. Also came with hardware upgrades if any - they made a new computer, prepay people got it free. I was thinking about not getting it on my car.
Deimorz 8y ago
The article specifically addresses that investigation and its result. It's the subject of the last section, "State regulators not interested". It includes the fact that the statute of limitations had expired on many of the reported violations. As a result, state legislators ended up changing the window so that it wouldn't happen again in the future for similar reports.
Animats 8y ago
CAL-OSHA had seven investigations of Tesla underway as of Sep. 20th.[1] Including the fingertip amputation. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-another-inspection-into-tesla-factory-2018-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/california-regulators-open-a...
dtornabene 8y ago
Kind of sad that this is the highest voted comment right now, and that almost all of the responses pointed out the investigation is addressed in the piece. Also "news organization" is weak, this is a site thats won a Peabody(among other awards), as other commenters have also pointed out.
- reitzensteinm 8y ago
  Not to mention the parent commenter has contributed nothing to the site except breathless defences of Musk and Tesla.
  - iofiiiiiiiii 8y ago
    Oh, so opinions are only valid from the right type of person with the right contributions? I guess I should be glad you did not raise concerns about skin color.
    - alliecat 8y ago
      Bloody hell, mate - It's perfectly valid to highlight the fact that somebody's PoV may be biased based on their past contributions, there's no need to bring race into it. They're just a car company.
- cheschire 8y ago
  I would like to think that HN isn't subjected to brigading[0], but unfortunately there's a lot of money to be made in this topic, regardless of which way the sentiment swings. When I see things voted up which are misleading, false, or ridiculous, my reaction is typically that of distrust and an expectation of manipulation. But my hope for humanity lies in believing that some posts are simply because the poster was mistaken. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_brigading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_brigading
erikb 8y ago
Well, I can see why such inspections have respect from a lot of people. But also keep in mind that a multi-billion dollar company, which might be stronger than any single government organ, will be treated differently than the burger shop around the corner.
danso 8y ago
Disclosure: I have friends who now work at Reveal (the news industry being a very small world) but don't know anything about this or other of their stories. As others have pointed out, the article addresses OSHA's investigation into Tesla's injury recordkeeping. And Reveal argues that OSHA was not allowed to fine the company for the other injuries Reveal had reported because "the agency had only about six months from the date of an injury to fine a company" (and the injuries reported by Reveal were already in the past). But assessing fines is one thing -- it's not clear whether the statute of limitations restricts OSHA from considering these past injuries when scrutinizing Tesla's recordkeeping. Reveal certainly implies it does, and Tesla doesn't mention it. Neither Reveal nor Tesla links to the published investigation results. I think it's OK to assume that Tesla isn't going to be punished by OSHA (in this case; several more investigations are still ongoing. But I see no reason until OSHA says otherwise that its investigation "completely clears [Tesla] of the accusation." Only Tesla itself has asserted that, and well, Tesla has been creative in the past at interpreting results; NHTSA having to publicly clarify an Autopilot statistic that Elon Musk eagerly touted comes to mind [0]. Whatever the case, I don't agree with your interpretation of cause-and-effect -- i.e. "No, they write a new article making new accusations". Tesla's statement about OSHA came on Oct. 26 [1], just a little more than a week ago from the submitted article's publish date. While the article does have several confidential sources, it leads with a former employee making litigious claims. The lawyering for this story alone would've taken at least a week, nevermind the time it takes to find the sources and interview them, and to talk to Tesla and check the related sources and documentation. I wouldn't be surprised if this story was at least a couple months in the making, with the timing of its publication only coincidental with Tesla's recent statement. [0] https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistics/ https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-safety-statistic... [1] https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-releases-workers-safety-update/ https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-releases-workers-safety-upda...

monochromatic 8y ago

>an investigation by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting has found Never heard of it. Strike 1.

sammythes34lion 8y ago
They've won a Macarthur, an Emmy, and a Peabody for their investigative journalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Investigative_Reporting#Awards_and_recognition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Investigative_Repor...
- loceng 8y ago
  Curious, the same journalist and editor who wrote/are associated with this?
  - bjl 8y ago
    Did you even click the link? "His reporting with a partner and CNN exposed rampant fraud in California's drug rehab system for the poor, winning an Investigative Reporters and Editors Award."
    - loceng 8y ago
      It's always interesting and odd to me when a journalistic source doesn't actually link to what they reference about themselves, that they are sharing about in their profile; without myself spending a fair amount of time looking into it I can't find out who specifically got the award: was it him, the partner, or CNN that got the award? What was the award specifically if it was the author? With research papers we expect references to be cited, linked to - yet, journalists trying to prove their integrity make links? It's a big problem too if people just assume what text someone writes about as true, so why not make it easy for people to follow the cookie trail through links?
dang 8y ago
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

black6 8y ago

This is OT, but do editors exist any more? Second sentence in and there is a glaring mistake: "...including one who severed the top a finger...". I notice this across the web AND in print publications. I'm an engineer, not a journalist or English major, and I'm constantly picking up typos, grammatical errors (less vs. fewer really grinds my gears), and other mistakes which should never make it to publication. Is it a "first to press" or cost-cutting measure? Or is it that the editor has transitioned from editing the manuscript for mistakes to editing it for the "proper" voice/slant/bias?

fredsted 8y ago
Who's going to pay for the editor with noone wanting to pay for journalism anymore?
- _Codemonkeyism 8y ago
  Many people want to pay for journalism, e.g. have an Economist subscription. Not many people want to pay for badly informed opinions dressed up as journalism with cut & paste from other sites and Reuters. Take the Economist vs. most other publications. An usual Economist article has 20 facts about the issue (e.g. elections in South Sudan) and at the end sometimes an opinion (notwithstanding the general thinking of the Economist). Opinion pieces are easily spotted ("Charlemagne"). Others take 20 facts and write 20 articles and add 10 opinions to each of them to get out more content.
danso 8y ago
I don't think it's off-topic. A grammatical error in the top of the story, especially a non-breaking-news story, is never a good look. Based on my experience in working in web and print, such mistakes are increasingly uncommon because digital publishing makes it relatively easy to tweak text right up to the second of publication -- and afterwards. It's very easy and tempting to make a quick rewording without thinking it needs another set of eyes. Print newspapers definitely had more editors proofing your copy. But even with a completely computerized publishing system, if I wanted to make a last minute change, I still had to go through at least 2 editors. At some point, making a fix requires, well, literally "stopping the presses". Having several editors in a well-defined editing workflow was a luxury that news orgs could afford decades ago, but it was also a necessary cost to prevent any reporter from making a costly "stop the presses" last minute fix. Digital-only news orgs don't face that consequence.

modeless 8y ago

If you are stable and not in immediate danger, you should absolutely take a Lyft to the hospital instead of an ambulance. Ambulances are very expensive and should be reserved for people who actually need them. What if there's a car accident and someone is bleeding out and the ambulance is delayed because it was busy transporting some guy who wanted an ambulance ride for his stable back injury?

chrisseaton 8y ago
In the UK we have two tiers of ambulance for this purpose. One kind only turns up with basically just a van and ambulance drivers. The other kind turns up with paramedics and full kit.
- willyt 8y ago
  Also Paramedics on motorbikes and in cars. Paramedic on a bike gets there quickly and triages/delivers critical care, cars and ambulances are stood down or dispatched as needed.
  - michaelt 8y ago
    Bike paramedics stop the time-to-help-arriving clock, which is a KPI for health service administrators. As they can't transport people to hospital and they don't carry strong painkillers they're basically useless if you've got, say, a broken arm.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - PJDK 8y ago
      It's a particularly key KPI if you happen to be having a heart attack, which is why the bikes carry defibrillators.
mschuster91 8y ago
> Ambulances are very expensive and should be reserved for people who actually need them. Lol what? It's the job of the state to provide adequate resources (for example, the law in Germany requires that emergency personnel be at your location in 10min tops, on average). Telling people to use an Uber/Lyft/cab due to cost concerns or not enough ambulances being available is bad. Demand proper emergency services funding from your politicians! Obviously: when all you got is a small cut on your finger, fine, take public transport or whatever. But for a back injury?! No way in hell I'd risk my chance in public transport or taxi.

Latteland 8y ago

These are serious allegations and look like terrible injuries. This publication I'd never heard of does have some journalism awards. I looked at their other stories and they seem like a reasonable publication but the stories seem a tinge sensationalistic. But since osha found tesla was doing a good enough job after months of investigation, it's hard to trust this report. I searched google news for osha penalties and found issues about nail gun injuries, plumbing, a death of a worker at a winery, metal working, foundry, etc. So I don't see them as just letting tesla get a free ride. Could it be that tesla meets the legal requirements but some injuries aren't well treated? I like tesla generally but I want to see them treat their workers well. I'd like to see a more mainstream media investigation further, like the ny times maybe. With tesla there was also an incredible negative fud campaign about them, leading to many sensible financial journalists mystified that they didn't go out of business. So I am struggling to be neutral about this story.

danso 8y ago
Reveal is the digital side (and public radio program) of the Center for Investigative Reporting, which has been around for a few decades. Its About page touts its recent awards (including a Peabody and a George Polk Award, plus finalists for the Pulitzers) but CIR is pretty well-known in journalism. Its founder is Lowell Bergman, who is probably most well-known for being played by Al Pacino in "The Insider", a dramatization of his investigation into the tobacco industry.

Animats 8y ago

They need a union. Bad.

jernfrost 8y ago
Definitely. That is the best way to deal with stuff like this. Without a union individual employees have a too weak position to complain. Although I hope the US adopts a more Nordic/German style union system which is less adversarial. I think the US system has sadly given unions a bad reputation.
- Rainymood 8y ago
  > I think the US system has sadly given unions a bad reputation. You mean big corporations have spent millions of dollars and hours lobbying against unions and crushing any whiff of unionization by immediate termination of employment? All hail to your corporate overlords ... It's a double-edged sword really, explotation of low cost labor allows you to innovate and be the technologically advanced society you are, but it also hurts those at the bottom who have no other choices/options.
  - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
    Much better to have all of this stuff happen in China where we don't need to think about it.
    - haveupeedtoday 8y ago
      People here are pedants, you need to add the sarcasm tag to be clear
  - folkrav 8y ago
    Public employees over here in Quebec are unionized to hell and back, and it often ends up with protecting incompetent workers. I had a teacher back in college that was teaching extremely outdated material, didn't know anything about what she was teaching, and the whole department knew about it. A teacher told us that they all wanted her gone for years now, but unless she committed fraud or literally murdered a student, she was basically unfireable because of her union-negociated work contract. Not saying unions are unjustified in all cases, but to be fair, they visibly _do_ get obtrusive in some instances. It's another problem than our southern neighbors though.

jernfrost 8y ago

I am a big Tesla fan but if this is true and does not improve shortly, then screw this company. I’ve dreamt of buying a Tesla but I could not ethically rationalize that to myself if this article is true. It also shows the problem of measuring companies by specific metrics. It sounds like good old “juking the stats” (the wire). It gives the impression that things actually end up worse because of how injuries are measured.

commonsense1234 8y ago
one less in the long waitlist. thank you. But, if what is being reported by this site is true. I hope the workers are well compensated for their trauma.
loceng 8y ago
Here's a response horseRad posted that comes from Tesla's side - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 - and that is from https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-reveal-worrying-report-doctor-denies/ https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-...
- bjl 8y ago
  That statement isn't exactly compelling. It just resorts to ad hominem attacks in an attempt to discredit a minor piece of the article, while deflecting/ignoring the major claims (like the worker with a crushed spine who was denied an ambulance because it would've shown up on OSHA logs). Also, this report was done by one of the most respectable investigative news organisations in the world. Its hard to see how the PR wing of a corporation that just settled with the SEC for fraud could be considered more trustworthy.
  - loceng 8y ago
    I was referencing the response from their doctor, where they have 24/7 doctors at their factory. I'm not sure if this answer is in anything posted, however: 1) is that claim of someone with a "crushed spine denied an ambulance" proven, and 2) is "because it would've shown up on OSHA logs" proven as Tesla's reasoning, or just conjecture and/or speculation? Likewise, why aren't people addressing that maybe an ambulance being called as the triggering something added to OSHA logs is incomplete or badly designed - and because Tesla has doctors on staff/on-site 24/7 for workers to go to first, maybe a visit to doctors should actually be the trigger adding the event to logs? Maybe the process is broken, but requiring an ambulance be called for a sprained wrist - if they trained doctors on staff to access the situation isn't reasonable, it certainly is an emotional reaction they're triggering in people though. "Also, this report was done by one of the most respectable investigative news organisations in the world." I've never heard of them and likewise - is this specific journalist (and perhaps the editor) known and associated with any awards the journal received?

ToFab123 8y ago

After reading this, I no longer want a Tesla.

loceng 8y ago
Here's a response horseRad posted an hour after your comment here that comes from Tesla's side - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18389796 - and that is from https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-reveal-worrying-report-doctor-denies/ https://electrek.co/2018/11/06/tesla-fremont-factory-clinic-...
- bjl 8y ago
  I find it somewhat amusing that you're trying to discredit a report by one of the premiere institutions of investigative journalism using a blog post on a site ran by a self-admitted Tesla fanboy. That's even setting aside the monetary conflicts of interest created by the fact that Tesla pays Lambert for shilling their cars.
  - Tuna-Fish 8y ago
    > report by one of the premiere institutions of investigative journalism We are talking about the same place that claimed that Tesla factory did not have yellow safety tape because "Elon hates the color yellow". The factory did have the yellow-black safety tape around all dangerous machinery, and still does today. This is an organization that publishes literal fake news.
    - klingebeil 8y ago
      There‘s a huge difference between getting something wrong in an article and "fake news". Could we please at least try to have nuanced discussions around this topic or news in general?
      - Tuna-Fish 8y ago

horseRad 8y ago

Statement from Basil Besh mentioned in article: “I spent nearly one hour with Reveal detailing Tesla’s decision earlier this year to bring me and my medical team on site at Fremont, providing its employees with state-of-the-art occupational and musculoskeletal health care. I detailed our vision for exemplary patient care and I gave specific examples of protocol improvements and subsequent successes in outcomes in only four short months, including accurate diagnoses and reducing needless delays for advanced testing and treatment. I patiently educated Will Evans on how Tesla allowed me to give the same care to Tesla employees that I do to my private patients including ones who are professional athletes, with the ability to get necessary testing and treatment in a timely manner without being hindered by an often cumbersome California Worker’s Compensation System that sometimes negatively effects injured workers. I counseled Will on the difference between subjective complaints of pain, which cannot be proven and are often magnified, and objective signs found only on careful clinical examination by an experienced physician. I even mailed Will a copy of a relevant chapter from the American Medical Association Return to Work Guidelines and offered to make myself available for additional questions. Research and evidence-based medicine indicate that deconditioning injuries involving sore muscles should not be treated with inactivity as this only exacerbates the problem, but should instead be treated by proactive conditioning, ergonomic modifications and supportive care. Not all patients in pain should be off work, at home and on opioids. In fact, it is most often in these patients’ best interest to have supportive care that enhances their activity, their function, and their well-being. As a physician, my foremost obligation is to perform a careful history and physical examination, order additional tests when clinically indicated, make an accurate diagnosis, and deliver the absolute best care possible. If patients are injured and continued work presents safety issues for the patient, myself and my fellow physicians prescribe the appropriate work restrictions. Any suggestion that myself or any of my medical team at AOC allow external factors to influence our medical care in any way is false and inaccurate. I advised Will on why ambulances should be reserved for life or limb threatening injuries and that every ambulance that is thoughtlessly called for a non-life-threatening injury is one less ambulance that is available to actually save a life rather than be used as a convenience. Most importantly, all members of my team are empowered to call 911 for any limb or life-threatening condition. Rather than deliver an informative and balanced piece of journalism, Reveal has instead chosen to hitch its wagon to Ms. Anna Watson, a provider with whom we severed ties after less than two weeks at our clinic and about whom I cannot provide any additional comment as she is currently the subject of an investigation by the California Medical Board. Instead of highlighting the tremendous progress being made in both patient safety and patient care at Tesla, this report uses poor sourcing to tell a story consistent with a predetermined agenda.”

_cs2017_ 8y ago

And how am I supposed to figure out who to trust? Reporters say Tesla is shitty. But reporters often lie and even more often exaggerate. Musk says he cares about safety and all accusations are wrong. But CEOs often lie and even more often are uninformed or delusional. If anyone has advice about how I can develop some trust in one side or the other, please let me know.

JacKTrocinskI 8y ago
What does the author of this article have to gain, or rather, why do you think she would fraudulently write an article on this topic?
- bigzyg33k 8y ago
  Views. That's primary reason reporters exaggerate news, controversy has a monetary benefit. (This doesn't necessarily mean that the reporter in question here is exaggerating, however)
  - TarpitCarnivore 8y ago
    Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Reveal is an independent nonprofit organization. The idea that you would prescribe to "clicks" as a justification for not trusting their reporting is a very damning thing to me. For a site that prides itself on it's intellect and knowledge, it's unsettling how often I'm seeing people jump to "fake news" type of commenting.
  - klingebeil 8y ago
    As someone working in the media business. Please could you at least google the outlet you‘re talking about? You‘re embarrassing yourself with your own ignorance. Reveal is a non-profit. They don‘t care about page views, because they don‘t need advertising to finance themselves. There‘s only one thing an investigative journalism team cares about and that‘s reputation. They are deeply incentivized against publishing half-assed work or missinformation. Please just stop repeating this meme over and over that journalists only care about page views.

avoutthere 8y ago

This is pretty clearly a hit piece.

mcguire 8y ago

"CEO Elon Musk’s distaste for the color yellow and beeping forklifts eroded factory safety, former safety team members said." Ok. How different is this from the policies of most auto factories? They are all incentivised to minimize the number of reported injuries.

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
This statement has been proven false many times already. Yellow tapes and beeping forklifts are pretty common in Tesla's factories. - https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UpGmsQSu9rvSUrD1nMw__A--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9MTI4MDtoPTk2MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-US/homerun/motleyfool.com/ed8cfa267d41c41df2a684deffbc2077 https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UpGmsQSu9rvSUrD1nMw__A--~A... - https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/Azdk_dANbjn20fMkF_yYVg--~A/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9MTI4MDtoPTk2MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-US/homerun/motleyfool.com/18ba1356e0cc8c627a80bd5656a0a006 https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/Azdk_dANbjn20fMkF_yYVg--~A...

will_brown 8y ago

Funny how this thread is debating whether a crushed hand or severed fingers justifies an ambulance or ride share. It is illegal for “ride shares” to provide medical transport. The fact that an on-site physician would not call medical transport and put patients with crush hands/severed fingers in a ride share is per se illegal. Next we will hear the “SV disruption cult” begin making their claim that those regulations only exist because the EMT lobby industry is spending billions for legislation to protect the market incumbent. Well don’t forget your extra $150 Uber cleaning fee for bleeding all over your drivers car.

y4mi 8y ago
only $150? you need to add professional cleaning cost and lost revenue while cleaning to the bill. and not just professional cleaning... the injured person could've a serious illness (think HIV), so it will probably cost even more i'd wager you'll need at least twice that amount
- spamizbad 8y ago
  Which is why they should be using medical transportation services.
  - jimmaswell 8y ago
    They should ideally* use medical transportation services if there's bleeding or a broken neck, and be able to use something cheaper if there's no danger of further injury or creating biohazards. *Truly ideally there wouldn't be ambulance bills stuck on people, but I mean within the framework of what's currently in practice.
    - bfdm 8y ago
      See the thing is, you're not able to determine whether a person is "no danger of further injury" being you aren't a medical professional. A person with a severe impact might not have much external signs or pain, but could be bleeding internally. That would present a problem in the backseat of an uber on the highway. Without stabilization, a broken bone can cut or puncture any number of blood vessels or organs (for a rib). There's a reason we use medical transport after injuries -- you don't really know what might follow. If the cost is the concern, using cheap transport isn't the answer. Either socialize the care or force workplaces to pay the EMT fees for workplace injuries. Sending someone in a cab is just not acceptable if a doctor deems medical transport necessary. Now, all of this hinges on the particulars and accuracy of the description of the situation, which I can't really judge from the outside. But if otherwise independent medical professionals are being urged to reduce ambulance use in order to save face for the factory, that's a real problem. I'm inclined to believe the ousted clinicians and former employees, though.

M_Bakhtiari 8y ago

What did these people expect, with that doped-up delusional playboy at the helm?

sctb 8y ago
We've banned this account like we said we would.
- M_Bakhtiari 8y ago
  I guess Musk is a bit of a sacred cow around these parts. I suppose I shouldn't have expected anything else from Y Combinator but to run this kind of a Silicon Valley society for mutual admiration, my apologies.

jsight 8y ago

All I see is evidence of why NUMMI closed to begin with. Manufacturing cars is hard, maybe manufacturing them in California is impossible?

AndrewBissell 8y ago

The workers in this story said one reason they were told they couldn't take an ambulance was because Tesla couldn't afford to pay for the rides. That same quarter, Elon Musk paid himself $65mm and his cousin Lyndon Rive $17.5mm on a Solar City promissory note, which they had the option of rolling out to a later maturity.

blablabla123 8y ago

> Recommending stretches to treat an injured back Tesla obviously sucks at everything when it comes to workers. But recommending stretches can make things worse if it’s not clear what kind of back problem it is. In any case I think it’s all about liability and costs.

thebluehawk 8y ago
It depends on the injury. I would trust the medical professional here.
garysahota93 8y ago
It makes me really sad to hear all of this. I've suffered from back pains myself in the past and stretching should NOT be the only option.
ashelmire 8y ago
It seems pretty obvious that they need a physical therapist or a rehab physician (probably both) on staff. Ortho surgeons are great if you need immediate surgical intervention... and that's about it. Leave the rehabilitation to the people who specialize in it.

AndrewBissell 8y ago

@PlainSite on Twitter has been going through injury reports from the Tesla clinic, and it seems Tesla may have even had fake MDs signing documents. https://twitter.com/PlainSite/status/1059875691263483904 https://twitter.com/PlainSite/status/1059875691263483904 According to the tender it used to get the Tesla engagement, one of Access Omnicare's explicit objectives was to reduce OSHA recordability: https://twitter.com/Trumpery45/status/1059902463510142976 https://twitter.com/Trumpery45/status/1059902463510142976

neuralRiot 8y ago

This might be true or not but sadly is nothing unheard of, it will be keep like that until a seriously injured worker is sent back to work only to have his condition worsened and a skillful lawyer pulls a chunk of money from mr Musk then suddenly he will start liking yellow stripes and beeping forklifts.