Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Tesla Fires Female Engineer Who Alleged Sexual Harassment (theguardian.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the act-of-retaliation dept.

Tesla has fired a female engineer who accused the company of ignoring her complaints of sexual harassment and paying her less than her male counterparts. AJ Vandermeyden, who went public with her discrimination lawsuit against Tesla in February, was dismissed from the company this week. The Guardian reports: Vandermeyden had claimed she was taunted and catcalled by male employees and that Tesla failed to address her complaints about the harassment, unequal pay and discrimination. "It's shocking in this day and age that this is still a fight we have to have," she said at the time. In a statement to the Guardian, Tesla confirmed the company had fired Vandermeyden, saying it had thoroughly investigated the employee's allegations with the help of "a neutral, third-party expert" and concluded her complaints were unmerited. "Despite repeatedly receiving special treatment at the expense of others, Ms Vandermeyden nonetheless chose to pursue a miscarriage of justice by suing Tesla and falsely attacking our company in the press," a Tesla spokesperson said. "After we carefully considered the facts on multiple occasions and were absolutely convinced that Ms Vandermeyden's claims were illegitimate, we had no choice but to end her employment at Tesla."

8 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. Ballsy by alvinrod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tessa must have some pretty damning evidence against her to fire her for this, because it does open up a legal case against them for retaliation, which their HR department and legal team are no doubt well aware. They'd have to have solid proof that she made it all up or so flagrantly lied about parts of it to be able to fire her over it without legal repercussion.

    1. Re:Ballsy by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Looks like they hired a neutral third-party to investigate. They presented some of the evidence:

      The investigator had access to Tesla’s compensation data and found that Vandermeyden’s salary was in the middle of the range and while some new hires were indeed paid more than her as her lawsuit claims, the highest paid new hire was a woman and several men were paid less than her. Therefore, Hilbert determined that gender discrimination had nothing to do with her compensation.

      It doesn't say why she was fired, but most companies won't say that.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  2. The lawsuit by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We might actually get to hear all the nitty gritty details on this one, rather than the usual handful of accusations in the press followed by the company settling the lawsuit with a gag clause. If Tesla's lawyers think they're on firm enough ground to fire her after she filed suit, they must also think they're on extremely firm ground regarding the suit itself, in which case they should fight it out to a conclusion. Which is damn rare. We're going to get an unusually detailed look at the HR practices of a billion dollar company. Should be fascinating.

    I wonder what the market will think of it tomorrow... Their stock hit a new 52 week high today of $344.88. Which happens to also be an all-time high. The previous high was $342.89.

    1. Re:The lawsuit by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Tesla has yet to turn a profit, claiming growth - yet every other firm manages to grow while it is profitable. Tesla has significant governance issues, so it isn't being managed well at all.

      Firms which are profitable while growing are typically growing at single digit percentages per year, while not being in one of the most capital intensive industries in the world. Did you know there's a battery factory in Nevada now? It was empty desert a few years ago. Do you think that was free? Or even cheap? They spent half a billion dollars on capital expenditures in the fourth quarter of 2016 alone, then did it again in the first quarter of this year. They expect to spend an additional $1.5 billion on capital expenditures by September. The incumbent car companies thought they were completely safe from new competition because they knew how much money somebody would have to spend in order to actually compete with them. They believed that everybody was just like you, too cowardly to spend that money in order to build factories. Turns out they were wrong, just like you.

      I read your links. They're both a year old, and almost totally obsolete. The SolarCity buy is a done deal. There is no SolarCity anymore. It's all Tesla now. I'm not so sure it was a good purchase, but all "will they/should they" analysis is irrelevant. They did. Meanwhile they made $2.7 billion in GAAP revenue in the first quarter of this year, up almost triple what they made a year ago. They did it by producing cars 64% faster than they did a year ago. And that's with zero ZEV sales in the quarter. Nobody has to buy the zero emissions credits from them anymore. The whining about the board of directors is nothing more than a naked attempt at a power grab. I consider Tesla's ability to tell the usual suspects to go to hell a serious strength, not a weakness. Those people only know how to fuck up old companies by gutting them, not grow new ones.

      Badly managed? Not even close. You just don't have any idea how to evaluate them because what they're doing hasn't been done in your lifetime. They're spinning up a global car company from scratch. Fifteen years ago they didn't exist. Of the top 15 car companies in the world (by manufacturing volume), 7 of them are over a century old and 2 of them aren't global (neither SAIC nor Peugeot Citreon sell into the US market). None of them were founded less than 40 years ago. Groupe PSA, formerly Peugeot Citreon, is the youngest, founded in 1976. The rest date from the 1940s or earlier. Two of them, Fiat and Renault, date from the 1800s. When Tesla is a century old, maybe you'll be able to understand them.

      Tesla Motors isn't one of the top 15 in the world and may never be, but they're competing directly with those top 15. That's expensive. Really expensive.

      I can't deny that markets are delusional though...

  3. Re:Entitled by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've seen both in tech circles. I've seen women that were harassed, and I've seen women that got special treatment where they were good at deflecting the work that was supposed to be assigned to them to others, or faced no punitive action for severely underperforming to the point that it became obvious to outsiders.

    I've also seen men that were bullied in the workplace and did not have any advancement, and men that also managed to underperform for extended periods of time. Gender doesn't really dictate this.

    Frankly we're not going to ever know the particulars of this case. Basically none of us were there, and it would behoove anyone that was to not say anything unless it's part of any legal proceedings and behind closed doors, or potentially in-court. At the moment there's only a single datapoint, so there isn't enough information for us to make any real conclusions. She may well be right, and could have been the target of specific harassment that was covered-up by some element of management, or she could be making false claims. There just isn't enough information for us to conclude anything.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  4. Re:Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hiring quotas result in employees that take their jobs for granted, don't produce, and cause trouble....and they get away with it because the company can't fire them due to the quota.

    It IS true that some places tolerate harassment and pay women unfairly. It is ALSO true that some women make these accusations when they aren't true, to get EVEN MORE pay and EVEN MORE special treatment. Abuses exist on both sides, and so we should not try to fix them with a one-sided solution.

  5. Re:Engineer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Found more:

    https://electrek.co/2017/02/28/tesla-allegations-discrimination-female-engineer-review/

  6. Promote as an engineer WITHOUT a degree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    “Tesla is committed to creating a positive workplace environment that is free of discrimination for all our employees. Ms. Vandermeyden joined Tesla in a sales position in 2013, and since then, despite having no formal engineering degree, she has sought and moved into successive engineering roles, beginning with her work in Tesla’s paint shop and eventually another role in General Assembly. Even after she made her complaints of alleged discrimination, she sought and was advanced into at least one other new role, evidence of the fact that Tesla is committed to rewarding hard work and talent, regardless of background. When Ms. Vandermeyden first brought her concerns to us over a year ago, we immediately retained a neutral third party, Anne Hilbert of EMC2Law, to investigate her claims so that, if warranted, we could take appropriate action to address the issues she raised. After an exhaustive review of the facts, the independent investigator determined that Ms. Vandermeyden’s “claims of gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation have not been substantiated.” Without this context, the story presented in the original article is misleading.”