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]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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).

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.

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.