Connect with us
tesla store in New York City tesla store in New York City

News

Report: Women discuss discrimination, harassment and “predator zone” at Tesla

Published

on

At a crowded Fremont Factory meeting, female employees shared stories of sexual harassment, mistreatment by male managers, unfair promotion decisions and more, sources told The Guardian.

One of the women there was AJ Vandermeyden, the female engineer who sued the company for pervasive harassment and pay discrimination. Shortly after this town hall took place, Vandermeyden was fired.

“They just want to absolutely crush anyone who speaks up,” Vandermeyden told the news outlet. “I spoke up, and I was made a sacrificial lamb for it. It’s a scary precedent.”

Tesla has rejected Vandermeyden’s claims, saying she was terminated for “falsely attacking our company in the press.”

CEO Elon Musk did not attend the meeting of about 70-100 people. More than 20 women talked about their experiences, according to Vandermeyden and another attendee, with one woman describing parts of the company’s Fremont factory as a “predator zone” for harassment.

Advertisement
-->

Vandermeyden also said that a number of women raised their hands when asked if they had been catcalled in the factory.

Some women allegedly talked about feeling unsafe and facing sexist remarks from superiors, while others talked about being dismissed and talked over in meetings with no other female employees.

One male leader spoke up and said it was unacceptable, and noted that he had daughters, according to Vandermeyden

A former female manager, who was present but no longer works for the company, told The Guardian she was offended by that comment: “It’s insulting. You shouldn’t have to have daughters to know this.”

Tesla countered by saying that “executives attended because they wanted to hear directly from employees about their experiences and learn about how to improve the workplace,” in an email obtained by The Guardian.

Advertisement
-->

Tesla further disputed the news outlet’s characterization of the event by saying, “Employees stood up to ask the executives questions, share their experiences at Tesla — both positive and negative — while others spoke of things that they believed Tesla was doing right and some came with suggestions. In some instances, employees were only looking for better collaboration with their HR business partners in general and had nothing to do with any allegations of harassment.”

The company statement said that when an employee referenced an area of the factory as a “predator zone,” it “surprised many in the room who had never heard of this term.”

Tesla said that immediately after the meeting, a factory-wide message to supervisors about its “strict policy against any kind of harassment” was sent, adding, “Any complaints of catcalling in the factory are thoroughly investigated and action is taken where necessary.”

According to The Guardian, Tesla also said that “there was a lot of energy around ensuring we are proactively sourcing diverse talent and ensuring that we have an interview and assessment process that is free from bias.”

Vandermeyden said she spoke at the meeting because “it was finally giving women a venue to voice what was going on. It felt like Tesla had been saying I’m making all this up. And here were all the women saying, ‘No, it’s happening.’ It’s too big to deny.”

Advertisement
-->
Harassment

AJ Vandermeyden sits in her Tesla outside her family’s home in San Carlos, California. (Source: Ramin Talaie for the Guardian)

Vandermeyden first got national attention when she went public with her lawsuit in February of this year, although the lawsuit was filed in September 2016.

She had been with Tesla since April of 2013, and alleged that during her time there she was subjected to behavior including “inappropriate language, whistling, and cat calls” at the hands of the mostly male staff. She further claims that she was paid less than her male colleagues despite performing work “equal in skill, effort, and responsibility.”

Vandermeyden also says that her attempts to raise concerns about the quality testing of cars and office behavior toward women were ignored by male superiors.

Tesla confirmed Vandermeyden’s firing at the time saying:

“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 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.”

This follows cases of alleged harassment at other tech companies, with Uber’s CEO Travis Kalanick recently resigning amid a reportedly turbulent office culture.

Advertisement
-->

As for not working at Tesla anymore, Vandermeyden had the following to say:

“I was never your enemy,” she said. “I still believe in the importance of transitioning the world to sustainable energy, but now I don’t get to be a part of it.”

Interim East Coast Editor for Teslarati, contributor for NextMobility. Share tips at mdolzer@teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

News

Waymo scrutinized after self-driving taxis cause traffic jams during SF blackout

It’s not farfetched to speculate that it would have been a doomsday scenario for Tesla had FSD behaved this way.

Published

on

Credit: @AnnTrades/X

A power outage across San Francisco over the weekend forced numerous Waymo self-driving taxis to stop at darkened intersections and cause traffic blockages in multiple locations across the city. The disruption left riders stranded, frustrated drivers blocked, and city officials stepping in as the Alphabet-owned company temporarily suspended service amid the widespread gridlock.

Needless to say, it would likely have been a doomsday scenario for Tesla had FSD behaved in a similar way, especially if fleets of its robotaxis blocked traffic for numerous drivers. 

Power outage halts Waymo fleet

The outage knocked out electricity for tens of thousands of customers, leaving traffic signals dark across large parts of the city, as noted in a report from the New York Times. Waymo vehicles began stopping at intersections and remained stationary for extended periods, seemingly unable to operate. Tow truck operators worked through the night removing immobilized vehicles, while videos circulated online showing Waymos with hazard lights flashing as traffic backed up around them.

Waymo later confirmed that it had paused its Bay Area ride-hailing service after the San Francisco mayor’s office contacted the company about the congestion its vehicles were contributing to. Service began coming back online shortly after 3:30 p.m. local time, though some users still reported being unable to request rides. Waymo maintained that no injuries or accidents were reported during the outage.

Autonomous cars during emergencies

The incident surprised industry observers since autonomous vehicles are designed to function during signal outages and temporary connectivity losses. Waymo stated that its vehicles treat nonfunctional signals as four-way stops, but “the sheer scale of the outage led to instances where vehicles remained stationary longer than usual to confirm the state of the affected intersections. This contributed to traffic friction during the height of the congestion.” Experts suggested the problem may have been linked to the vehicles’ reliance on remote assistance teams, which help resolve complex situations the cars cannot handle independently.

Advertisement
-->

“Yesterday’s power outage was a widespread event that caused gridlock across San Francisco, with non-functioning traffic signals and transit disruptions. While the failure of the utility infrastructure was significant, we are committed to ensuring our technology adjusts to traffic flow during such events,” the Waymo spokesperson stated, adding that it is “focused on rapidly integrating the lessons learned from this event, and are committed to earning and maintaining the trust of the communities we serve every day.”

Continue Reading

News

Tesla aims to combat common Full Self-Driving problem with new patent

Tesla writes in the patent that its autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles are heavily reliant on camera systems to navigate and interact with their environment.

Published

on

Credit: @samsheffer | x

Tesla is aiming to combat a common Full Self-Driving problem with a new patent.

One issue with Tesla’s vision-based approach is that sunlight glare can become a troublesome element of everyday travel. Full Self-Driving is certainly an amazing technology, but there are still things Tesla is aiming to figure out with its development.

Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to get around this issue, and even humans need ways to combat it when they’re driving, as we commonly use sunglasses or sun visors to give us better visibility.

Cameras obviously do not have these ways to fight sunglare, but a new patent Tesla recently had published aims to fight this through a “glare shield.”

Tesla writes in the patent that its autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles are heavily reliant on camera systems to navigate and interact with their environment.

The ability to see surroundings is crucial for accurate performance, and glare is one element of interference that has yet to be confronted.

Tesla described the patent, which will utilize “a textured surface composed of an array of micro-cones, or cone-shaped formations, which serve to scatter incident light in various directions, thereby reducing glare and improving camera vision.”

The patent was first spotted by Not a Tesla App.

The design of the micro-cones is the first element of the puzzle to fight the excess glare. The patent says they are “optimized in size, angle, and orientation to minimize Total Hemispherical Reflectance (THR) and reflection penalty, enhancing the camera’s ability to accurately interpret visual data.”

Additionally, there is an electromechanical system for dynamic orientation adjustment, which will allow the micro-cones to move based on the angle of external light sources.

This is not the only thing Tesla is mulling to resolve issues with sunlight glare, as it has also worked on two other ways to combat the problem. One thing the company has discussed is a direct photon count.

CEO Elon Musk said during the Q2 Earnings Call:

“We use an approach which is direct photon count. When you see a processed image, so the image that goes from the sort of photon counter — the silicon photon counter — that then goes through a digital signal processor or image signal processor, that’s normally what happens. And then the image that you see looks all washed out, because if you point the camera at the sun, the post-processing of the photon counting washes things out.”

Future Hardware iterations, like Hardware 5 and Hardware 6, could also integrate better solutions for the sunglare issue, such as neutral density filters or heated lenses, aiming to solve glare more effectively.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package

The unanimous decision criticized the prior total rescission as “improper and inequitable,” arguing that it left Musk uncompensated for six years of transformative leadership at Tesla.

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

The Delaware Supreme Court has overturned a lower court ruling, reinstating Elon Musk’s 2018 compensation package originally valued at $56 billion but now worth approximately $139 billion due to Tesla’s soaring stock price. 

The unanimous decision criticized the prior total rescission as “improper and inequitable,” arguing that it left Musk uncompensated for six years of transformative leadership at Tesla. Musk quickly celebrated the outcome on X, stating that he felt “vindicated.” He also shared his gratitude to TSLA shareholders.

Delaware Supreme Court makes a decision

In a 49-page ruling Friday, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick’s 2024 decision that voided the 2018 package over alleged board conflicts and inadequate shareholder disclosures. The high court acknowledged varying views on liability but agreed rescission was excessive, stating it “leaves Musk uncompensated for his time and efforts over a period of six years.”

The 2018 plan granted Musk options on about 304 million shares upon hitting aggressive milestones, all of which were achieved ahead of time. Shareholders overwhelmingly approved it initially in 2018 and ratified it once again in 2024 after the Delaware lower court struck it down. The case against Musk’s 2018 pay package was filed by plaintiff Richard Tornetta, who held just nine shares when the compensation plan was approved.

A hard-fought victory

As noted in a Reuters report, Tesla’s win avoids a potential $26 billion earnings hit from replacing the award at current prices. Tesla, now Texas-incorporated, had hedged with interim plans, including a November 2025 shareholder-approved package potentially worth $878 billion tied to Robotaxi and Optimus goals and other extremely aggressive operational milestones.

Advertisement
-->

The saga surrounding Elon Musk’s 2018 pay package ultimately damaged Delaware’s corporate appeal, prompting a number of high-profile firms, such as Dropbox, Roblox, Trade Desk, and Coinbase, to follow Tesla’s exodus out of the state. What added more fuel to the issue was the fact that Tornetta’s legal team, following the lower court’s 2024 decision, demanded a fee request of more than $5.1 billion worth of TSLA stock, which was equal to an hourly rate of over $200,000.

Delaware Supreme Court Elon Musk 2018 Pay Package by Simon Alvarez

Continue Reading