News
Tesla sets record straight on Giga New York employees’ termination amid unionization efforts
Tesla was recently accused of terminating Giga New York employees because they attempted to form a union. A blog post from the electric vehicle maker has explained that this was not the case.
In a recent filing with the US National Labor Relations Board, the Workers United union noted that Tesla laid off dozens of Giga New York employees “in retaliation for union activity and to discourage union activity.” The union also asked the labor board to pursue a federal court injunction “to prevent irreparable destruction of employee rights resulting from Tesla’s unlawful conduct.”
The workers who attempted to unionize asked for job security and more pay, as well as a say in the decision-making in Giga New York. The employees also aimed to curb factors that they claimed were harmful to their health, such as monitoring, metrics, and production pressure. The Workers United union also noted that the pressure was heavy for the Autopilot labeling team’s workers that some could not even take bathroom breaks.
In a blog post addressing the issue, Tesla noted that “there is a false allegation that Tesla terminated employees in response to a new union campaign.” While the electric vehicle maker admitted that some employees who were part of the Autopilot labeling team were indeed terminated, it was not due to the unionization attempt.
Tesla stated that it conducts performance review cycles for its employees every six months. If employees are not able to meet their performance expectations, they will be laid off from the company. Tesla noted that this review process is not unique to Giga New York. Employees from across the globe are subjected to it. The most recent performance review cycle was thus from July 2022 to December 2022.
On December 13, 2022, Tesla managers received communication about the review schedule. The message included information stating that exits for low-performing employees would begin in the week of February 12, 2023. About 4% of the Autopilot labeling team in Giga New York were exited as a result of the July 2022 to December 2022 review cycle. Tesla explained that the employees were not terminated without warning.
“The employees let go as part of this process received prior feedback on their poor performance from their managers over the course of the review period. Despite feedback, they did not demonstrate sufficient improvement,” Tesla noted, adding that the impacted employees were identified on February 3, 2023.
This date was well before Giga New York employees announced their unionization campaign. Tesla noted that it became aware of the employees’ unionization efforts approximately ten days later. The company learned in hindsight that one out of the 27 employees impacted by the performance review identified as part of the unionization campaign.
Tesla noted that Giga New York’s Autopilot labeling team has been growing over the last several months at an average of 10 employees a week. In the past six months, the team’s employee base grew 54% from 437 employees to 675 workers as of the start of this week. The electric vehicle maker also explained that its time monitoring system for image labeling was put in place to ease the use of its labeling software.
“Since its purpose is to calculate how long it takes to label an image, there is nothing to be gained by delaying bathroom breaks. The claim that Tesla pressures employees to do so is categorically false,” Tesla noted.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
