5 ms·

A bunch of you here are clearly concerned about the financial impact of the fine on Tesla’s bottom line, but maybe you should consider they could’ve gotten the

• aaomidi 5y ago
  This person is a VP of engineering too. Like. I feel uncomfortable just thinking about the poor people working for them. Ugh.
  • sprayk 5y ago
    what part of their comment brought you to that conclusion?
    • meheleventyone 5y ago
      The bit where their only recourse to a company facing a meaningful punishment for allowing a hostile work environment is to institute an incredibly invasive level of snooping?
      • BluSyn 5y ago
        The point of my comment was the warn against such an outcome. I thought that was obvious. If the alternative is bankruptcy, large companies will do just about anything to survive it.
        • meheleventyone 5y ago
          Right but you went straight to pervasive surveillance which is not the only option here. For example Tesla could start enforcing their existing zero tolerance policy. They didn’t get here because there was no way to know about the issue! It comes across more like a threat than a warning.
      • aaomidi 5y ago
        Exactly this. That language, the argument, just :flashing-red-light:.
• afarrell 5y ago
  A bunch of folks are concerned about their ability to build healthy companies under conditions of such hostility from the legal system. ... so same problem, different layer of abstraction. Doesn't change the fact that running a company creates a duty of care. It's hard to build safe cars if your workers worry that they're going to get shouted down with something that belongs in the 1920s. ------ I really would be keen for a deeper understanding of what went wrong in Tesla's sociotechnical systems that led to someone in such a position of leadership responding exercising power with such little attention to their word choice.
  • MisterBastahrd 5y ago
    Well, part of the problem is with people like you who think that this can be boiled down to "word choice," as if those words didn't come from an entire package of racist sentiment that finally managed to become public.
    • afarrell 5y ago
      > can all be boiled down to word choice I don't think that, but I lack the communication skill to be sufficiently clear to avoid being misunderstood in this medium on this topic.
  • ngcazz 5y ago
    Not, by any measure, the same problem, since a company has no intrinsic right to exist. In fact, if the legal system needs to be hostile against a company so human rights are upheld, that company's very existence should be put in question.
    • jollybean 5y ago
      This is authoritarian hyperbole. People have a right to form groups and freely interact with others to the extent that they chose - that's a right not a privilege. The absurdity of the arguments in this threat are revealing - HN is normally viscerally against any kind of authoritarian appeal, hacking on cops for arresting actual criminals ... but for this one ... they're supporting coercive and completely disproportionate actions by the state? Because someone was called some names and meant to feel bad about themselves? You can see how quickly the hand of angry populist authoritarianism comes out, like a bad religious movement, whenever it triggers some group's sensitivities.
• makomk 5y ago
  No, they really couldn't. Even actual social justice activism communities that literally see their goal as advocating for minorities and fighting racism can't seem to just get the house straight to the point they eliminate this kind of thing entirely.
  • ngcazz 5y ago
    Is the line on those racist behaviors at Tesla really that blurry to you?
• roenxi 5y ago
  For $137 million, I could probably organise a conspiracy with my manager and a couple of co-workers to fake a hostile, racist work environment. Probably only need 10 people. Say they're paid $300k each. This would be about break even (assuming a 40 year worklife, slightly short) for a lifetime's wages.
  • oblio 5y ago
    If you get caught with that, it's going to be <<super>> serious jail time.
    • roenxi 5y ago
      Why? I mean, the last time I recall someone faking a crime like that was Jussie Smollett and he only got hit with a $130k fine or thereabouts. Which is a big deal, but hardly <<super>> serious jail time. The risk-reward here looks like it might be a bit skewed. $137 million is not a normal amount of money. It only looks like $130k if you ignore the logarithmic nature of the Hindu-Arabic number system.
      • sandworm101 5y ago
        Fraud. Conspiracy. Embezzlement. If you plan anything via email or other electronic means, likely federal charges. And if you get paid, all sorts of possible charges related to the handling of proceeds of crime. Smollett didn't have a massive corporation pressuring the local DAs.
  • ngcazz 5y ago
    If you try doing that in a company that has any sense, you'll be stopped right in your tracks. If it's allowed, then even if conspiring you just made a huge point.
• jeegsy 5y ago
  For me, Tesla's bottom line is irrelevant. While Tesla was indeed liable for the events, 137M is way too much for what happened to the victim. Its really that simple
  • ngcazz 5y ago
    I'm not going to discuss what the price tag for the harm caused should've been, I don't think that's reasonably or fairly quantifiable. That said, the ratio between the punitive damages and the direct compensation to the victim clearly intends send a message to other companies. Unfortunately, the ones that are able to pay these fines - which they are, effectively - won't ever be persuaded to change their ways, and will continue to seek other legal avenues to shield themselves from their responsibilities.
  • TheCoelacanth 5y ago
    The impact to Tesla's bottom line is precisely the point. $130 million dollars of the award is punitive damages. They aren't supposed to compensate the victim. They are supposed to punish Tesla and force them to follow the law in the future. The penalty needs to be large enough that it significantly hurts Tesla.
    • jeegsy 5y ago
      Wasn't this a civil suit? What law was broken by the Tesla company?
• nuerow 5y ago
  > A bunch of you here are clearly concerned about the financial impact of the fine on Tesla’s bottom line, but maybe you should consider they could’ve gotten the house straight instead. Well, shareholders who voiced concerns regarding systemic racism in Tesla sought to actually fix the problem by looking into the arbitration process and making it clear they do not tolerate racism. I'm afraid some of the comments in this thread are directly advocating against any need for Tesla to address systemic racism, and instead are deeply invested in blaming the victim.