Tesla Employee Calls For Unionization, Musk Says That's 'Morally Outrageous' (arstechnica.com)

"In a Medium post published today, Tesla employee Jose Moran detailed working conditions at the company's Freemont factory and called for the factory workers to unionize with United Auto Workers (UAW)," reports Ars Technica. In response, Elon Musk told Gizmodo via Twitter Direct Messages: "Our understanding is that this guy was paid by the UAW to join Tesla and agitate for a union. Frankly, I find this attack to be morally outrageous. Tesla is the last car company left in California, because costs are so high." Musk went on to blame the UAW for killing the New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc (NUMMI), which sold the Fremont factory to Musk in 2010. Ars Technica reports: Tesla currently employs more than 5,000 non-union workers at its Fremont, CA-based factory. Moran wrote that the workers are often faced with "excessive mandatory overtime" and earn between $17 and $21 hourly, compared with the national average of $25.58 hourly for most autoworkers in the U.S. The Tesla employee noted that the astronomical cost of living in the Bay Area makes $21 an hour difficult to live on. Moran also claimed that the factory's "machinery is often not ergonomically compatible with our bodies," and requires "too much twisting and turning and extra physical movement to do jobs that could be simplified if workers' input were welcomed." He added that at one point, six out of eight people on his team were out on medical leave "due to various work-related injuries."

Comments

Not what he said.

[duckintheface]

RTFA! Musk said that it as "morally outrageous" for someone to sign on as a Tesla employee, not because they wanted the job but because they wanted to be in a position to influence a unionization vote. Musk did not say or imply that unionization was morally outrageous. But that was obvious so the false title was intentional.

Re:Not what he said.

[Mass Overkiller]

Exactly he's complaint is not against Unions per se but against someone who purposely got hired by Tesla for the expressed purpose of instigating Unionization.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

Musk did not say or imply that unionization was morally outrageous. But that was obvious so the false title was intentional.

Well, let's look at his claim. Is it morally outrageous to take a job specifically for the purpose of encouraging unionization? I don't think that it is. I mean, it's a lot less outrageous to me than someone who takes a job specifically for the purpose of fucking off and phoning it in and doing a shit job. My perception is that most union members believe in their union, and thus, in the act of encouraging unionization. I don't see anything to be morally outraged about there. If I were a business owner, I would be peeved at them, but I'd be equally upset with my HR department.

Re:Not what he said.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly he's complaint is not against Unions per se but against someone who purposely got hired by Tesla for the expressed purpose of instigating Unionization.

Yes. Additionally, the guy was being paid by the union for doing this.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

Unionization is no longer needed in the United States.

It's not the best solution; the best solution would be the things you think we have, that we don't. To wit:

There are laws in place to protect worker safety and inflating wages/job protection are the only real things unionization does anymore.

The laws in place which protect worker safety are inadequate, because they do not make unsafe work conditions sufficiently unprofitable for large industries. And there is absolutely zero job protection for non-union workers; in a world which insists that you have a job, there should be some form of job protection.

Wages are too high in the US in two areas.... the lowest paid unionized workers (floor sweepers, fork truck drivers etc) and the highest paid (CEO's).

CEOs don't have a union. The lowest-paid unionized workers are getting paid what we all should be getting paid. The minimum wage has not kept up with inflation in over twenty years, and the inflation is meant not to simply pay a subsistence wage, but to pay a comfortable living wage upon which one could support a family. That's the minimum standard that we want to accept as Americans, because we don't want to see a race to the bottom.

Middle tier skilled labor positions such as welders have good wage parity between union and non-union jobs indicating the wage is FAIR to both the workers and the businesses.

That doesn't actually indicate that at all. You need a lot more information to determine whether a wage is fair.

CEO's wages should be capped at a percentage of average employee wages.

Well, finally you say something that makes sense. Too bad about the rest of your comment. Also, it's too bad that outside education, the administration isn't union, and so this idea is completely off topic.

This would create incentive to raise employee wages

False. They just find other ways to deliver compensation.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

It's morally outrageous to pay somebody to take a job to try to force unionization in to your specific union.

That would make a lot more sense if unions didn't have specific purposes. This is the obvious union they "should" be joining (if they are to join a union.)

But UAW has a sleazy enough background that before reading the summary, I did think that maybe UAW paid the guy off.

Paying your employees so poorly, and taking such poor care of them, is also sleazy. So we see here sleaze being used to fight sleaze. I am having a hard time getting upset.

Re:Not what he said.

[inhuman_4]

It's one thing to join a company and want to form a union. But it's another thing to join a company with the purpose of getting it's employees to join an existing union. If Musk's accusations are correct, then this man is an agent provocateur sent by UWA. He is there calling for unionization to help UWA expand it's business, not improve the working conditions at Tesla. It's a fake grass roots movement, aka astroturfing. And that is morally outrageous. I don't see that kind of shady business dealing as being any different than taking a bribe.

Re:Not what he said.

[Baleet]

Unions not only lobbied for those laws, they also force non-union shops to improve pay and benefits to compete with union shops. If you depend on a paycheck, you are a worker. If you are a worker who sides with employers against unions, you are like a chicken rooting for KFC.

Re:Not what he said.

[johanw]

Considering the massive support for Hillary in the past elections by some corporations, I'd say that the democratic party provides a similar role.

Re:Not what he said.

[Trailer Trash]

Yes, it is morally outrageous for the UAW to try to come and unionize his employees, to the point that they send a paid agitator in.

I don't have a problem with Tesla employees unionizing. The UAW coming in and extracting money from them in exchange for "helping" them isn't the same thing - not by a long shot.

I worked at Indiana University years ago and something similar happened with the clerical workers there. AFSCME was able to get enough of a foothold to get a vote and win. The benefits provided by the university were already far and above what you would get elsewhere. During the first round of "negotiations", which lasted for nearly a year, the new union workers had their wages frozen. When it was finalized, they ended up getting the annual raises they would have received, anyway. But with union dues taken out.

You see, AFSCME didn't give a damn about the workers. They cared about AFSCME. So, AFSCME was able to capture an income stream from IU while effectively doing nothing.

Don't be fooled - this is about the UAW, not Tesla workers.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

It's one thing to join a company and want to form a union. But it's another thing to join a company with the purpose of getting it's employees to join an existing union.

The two are clearly different things, and yet the two are clearly related things.

If Musk's accusations are correct, then this man is an agent provocateur sent by UWA. He is there calling for unionization to help UWA expand it's business, not improve the working conditions at Tesla.

Your logic is as faulty as your use of apostrophes. The moral question to be asked (remember, it's Elon that brought this into the realm of morality, and it is the subject we are discussing in this thread — I will resist all efforts to veer off topic) is whether one is justified in seeking employment specifically for the purpose of bringing unionization. I submit that the question hinges upon the following: Does the alleged agent provocateur in question believe that unionization will in fact improve conditions for employees? If so, then seeking employment specifically for the purpose of promoting unionization has the following moral components: deceiving the owner[s] of the business (or by proxy, their agents) while attempting to aid the employees of the business. Therefore, while it remains a morally questionable act, in balance the purpose would be (in my ever-so-humble opinion) essentially moral.

Of course, if the union is a scam, and the agent is in on the scam, then it is an act both reprehensible and illegal as well, and I share Musk's apparent moral outrage. As I have posted in numerous comments in this discussion, I have significant reservations about unions and would prefer to see them replaced with government protections for all workers. However, the likelihood of anything like that happening under a Trump administration (or any Republican, but we can table that argument for the next four to eight years) is basically nil. Under these circumstances, I can hardly justify agitating for the dissolution of worker's unions. I would like to see school administrator's unions eliminated, though. Let all the employees of the school have one union. Executive compensation in American schools today has become beyond outrageous.

Re:Not what he said.

[wisnoskij]

Except he is clearly against both. He is not saying that attack is theoretically morally outrageous. He is saying that both Moran and the UAW union are evil and bad. He is 100% against the union. He believes that unions killed all auto manufacturing in California.

Re:Not what he said.

[avgjoe62]

They may very well be dishonest, self-serving and manipulative, but are the complaints valid? Do the complaints about pay and working conditions stand on their own? If they do then Tesla needs to address those.

Has Tesla ever produced an analysis of their pay and benefits versus those of a unionized shop? Showing that there are advantages to working without unions sounds like a better response than assigning morality to what are essentially monetary transactions.

Re:Not what he said.

[Holi]

The claim that a guy who has worked there for 4 years (and only now is speaking up) is a UAW plant is the "morally outrageous" part.

Re:Not what he said.

[guises]

It's funny, there was a story just the other day about H1-B visas which inspired exactly the opposite response in most of the comments. When the union is the country, and the scabs they're keeping out are foreigners, the union is great (as long as you don't call it a union, even though it's doing exactly the same thing).

Re:Not what he said.

[jandersen]

Exactly he's complaint is not against Unions per se but against someone who purposely got hired by Tesla for the expressed purpose of instigating Unionization.

As it stands, it still begs the question: why? If you are of the conviction that all workers should be encouraged to be in a union, is it wrong to try to convince others that they should join? IOW, does freedom of speech only hold for the right kind of opinions? Taking a job with Tesla so you can talk to your colleagues about joining a union is no different than going to any other place to argue for your particular opinions; or going to another country as a missionary. Is that morally wrong?

Re: Not what he said.

[dywolf]

The disconnect between wages and productivity, between woker wages and ceo pay, and overall inequality, all mirror and councide with the trend of decreasing union membership.

Re:Not what he said.

[dbIII]

So unions decided not to re-tool and just keep on rolling the same sort of crap down decaying production lines while the Japanese and Germans came in to dominate the automotive market?
I think you got the spelling of MBA wrong and wrote union instead.

Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[RobotRunAmok]

He should quit. Or move to where the Cost of Living/Wage for His Expertise ratio is friendlier.

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

My dick

So.. nothing substantial?

Something is fishy in Denmark

[darthsilun]

Moran claims he's worked there for four years.

Tesla/Musk claim Moran was paid to join Tesla to agitate for unionizing.

So he joined four years ago, and was silent for four years.

And only after four years of silence, four years of mandatory overtime, etc., etc., he starts to speak out.

At which point he's suddenly a shill for the UAW?. Dunno, whether he is or isn't a shill, that doesn't make it magically wrong, per se, to argue for a union.

(And perhaps it need not be the UAW, but if not them, then who?)

Re:Something is fishy in Denmark

[drinkypoo]

People would get hired on usually by having a sterling resume, or qualifications that put them above the average worker to get hired on. Then after several years start agitating for unionization and so on.

So they work for years and then they want to be treated better and therefore they are a UAW plant who is evil and must be destroyed? I'm going to need more than that.

This is where government standards SHOULD come in

[jenningsthecat]

There should be no need and no place for a dispute over "not ergonomically compatible" and "excessive mandatory overtime". Legislated workplace standards, (and people of integrity to investigate complaints and enforce relevant legislation), should be in place to prevent this kind of dispute from being fought in the press. As for unions, they are an evil made necessary only by the fact that so much of government is in the pockets of corporations. Just my two cents worth.

Re: Unions

[fluffernutter]

Companies certainly had their time and place in history, but these days it seems to be less about making a quality product for the consumer and more about making as much profit for the shareholders as possible.

Re:Unions

[Baloo Uriza]

Unions certainly had their time and place in history, but these days it seems to be less about standing up for the little guy and more about how much money can we bring in via Union Dues. ( My opinion of course, I work within a Union Company )

Sounds like your union sucks, therefore all unions suck? Maybe you should get more involved in your union.

That said, $21 an hour is a rather laughable wage in a State with a high cost of living like California.

That's rather the union's point, is it not?

Re:Just leave

[Gavagai80]

Or better yet, just skip straight to the developing world so you can even more fully exploit people.

UAW scam job

[Anonymous Coward]

Normally I'm not a fan of Elon Musk's approach to things, but i have to agree with him on this. Of course the UAW would be after him once he gets enough momentum for Tesla, it's what the UAW does. And frankly it's the UAW's policies that have crushed the old car manufacturers in the US; their ability to redesign production processes is severely hampered by union rules.

The reason I support Musk though on this is because if the things that this guy claims is true of Tesla's plant, then frankly they don't need to unionize to improve conditions because the plant would be illegal under California labor law. I've worked in manufacturing facilities in California nearly my entire life. So either Tesla is operating illegally, or this guy is making a lot of false claims to cause agitation. I doubt the California Labor Commission (CLC) would have not inspected a 5,000 employee plant by now, so the more likely scenario is this guy is making stuff up.

From his post:

"Most of my 5,000-plus coworkers work well over 40 hours a week, including excessive mandatory overtime. "

This is extremely illegal under California state law; then penalties for companies for this are really harsh. Musk can't even get away with it by making his employees salaried exempt, the CLC takes a very hard stance on classifying employees of a particular job differently than another company. And they do inspect.

"The hard, manual labor we put in to make Tesla successful is done at great risk to our bodies."

Tesla's plant is heavily automated so I find this unlikely. I also find it unlikely that OSHA has not inspected a 5,000 employee plant for safety and health hazardous issues given how OSHA operates, so this is a questionable statement.

"There is too much twisting and turning and extra physical movement to do jobs that could be simplified if workers’ input were welcomed. Add a shortage of manpower and a constant push to work faster to meet production goals, and injuries are bound to happen."

I could see ergonomics to be a problem, and Tesla is under a crunch to deliver vehicles and meet performance measurements. And given how fast Tesla has grown, I could see their production lines being made in a haphazard and inefficient and not ergonomic way. But again, I doubt it. Tesla took a lot of influence from Toyota (including investment) on this plant, and frankly Toyota's lines are far and above the best in the business when it comes to efficiency and worker safety. So it's possible, but again unlikely.

"Most Tesla production workers earn between $17 and $21 hourly. The average auto worker in the nation earns $25.58 an hour, and lives in a much less expensive region. The living wage in Alameda county, where we work, is more than $28 an hour for an adult and one child (I have two)."

I'm sorry buddy, but labor is a market. If you don't like your rate go find another job that pays better, it's that simple. You signed up for the job at this rate, you can always leave and find another. It' unethical to go into a job with a pay rate you knew was low when you signed up, and then threaten unionization to increase the pay rate; that's you threatening trying to break an employment contract you signed.

"A few months ago, six out of eight people in my work team were out on medical leave at the same time due to various work-related injuries."

This is extremely unlikely. Work related injuries must be reported to OSHA on an ongoing basis. If a whole team is down due to people out due to medical injuries, even if the management is a cold-hearted I would think they'd be concerned about the efficiency of this team and try to make fixes, because this would shut down an entire functional group in the plant. Not only that, if 6 out of 8 on a team were out and those were reported to OSHA, then OSHA would be sending inspectors in almost next day. So for this to be true, Tesla would have to be breaking Federal employment law by not reporting injuries to OSHA, so he's either claiming that Tes

Re:Being a member of a union

[argStyopa]

I think people should freely be allowed to unionize, but people should also be allowed to NOT be part of the unions if they don't want to be: it's their economic choice, really.

However, I do believe that if a union interposes itself as the collective-bargaining agent for a number of workers, then the union logically should be legally held liable for the conduct of the workers it's representing: ie if productivity falls below normal, etc, the union should be liable to compensate the firm for lost income.

Re:Being a member of a union

[Richard_at_work]

The problem here, and one most non-US readers wont get so I will spell it out and repeat some of what you say, is that in the US most unionisation through majority vote means *total* workforce unionisation, whether individuals want it or not.

Even if you, as a worker, disagree with the union, in most states you are *required* to at least pay dues to the union if you want to continue to work at that employer, even if you never engage with the union in any way. Thats not something that has been foisted on the unions, thats something the unions have wanted - mandated whole workforce dues payments increase their funding.

So yes, unionisation is a right, but its a right which is forced on a lot of people who don't want it and whose only recourse is to quit and find a different job.

So I agree with you that unions should only have to represent members in good standing who pay their union dues, its the laws requiring or allowing 100% union shops against individual employees wishes that need to be gotten rid of.

Re:Unions

[whoever57]

The factory wasn't built by Tesla.

The building was formerly a joint venture between GM and Toyota (NUMMI). GM pulled out of the site as part of its bankruptcy. Toyota invested $50M in Tesla and then Tesla bought the site from Toyota for $50M.

Re:Being a member of a union

[XxtraLarGe]

I think people should freely be allowed to unionize, but people should also be allowed to NOT be part of the unions if they don't want to be: it's their economic choice, really.

Collectivism only works when it's mandatory--and even then, it doesn't work.

Re:Yes, actually they did

[dbIII]

The unions in the USA are incredibly weak compared with those in Germany and do not have anything like the power you suggest to stop modernization.
Those other countries that produce more, better cars, faster have unions with more of a say in workplace than in the USA, so I really don't get why you push that line unless it's to say what The Party says you should say in Amerika. Nyet?