3 ms·
I seem to remember this from one of the previous cases, all I could find now is: "An ex-Tesla employee who worked at the Fremont factory for about two years sa
by rasz 5y ago
I seem to remember this from one of the previous cases, all I could find now is:
"An ex-Tesla employee who worked at the Fremont factory for about two years said in a sworn declaration in the Vaughn case that he had heard the “N-word” used at least 100 times by co-workers and that Black and White employees alike referred to the factory as “the plantation” or “slaveship.”"
- temp8964 5y agoSo, is there a recording?
- noisy_boy 5y ago> "An ex-Tesla employee who worked at the Fremont factory for about two years said in a sworn declaration in the Vaughn case that he had heard the “N-word” used at least 100 times by co-workers and that Black and White employees alike referred to the factory as “the plantation” or “slaveship.”" There are two parts to the sentence. first-part: "the “N-word” used at least 100 times by co-workers" second-part: "and that Black and White employees alike referred to the factory as “the plantation” or “slaveship.”" People referred to in the first part need not have an overlap with those referred to in the second part. Yes, it doesn't preclude an overlap but it doesn't also exclude the possibility of the two groups being mutually exclusive.