News
Tesla’s intense work culture is a perfect fit for the industry’s most driven workers
Tesla, just like SpaceX, operates under Silicon Valley principles. While this enables Tesla to evolve faster than traditional automakers, such a system also requires employees to continuously dig deep in order to accomplish targets. When SpaceX was starting out, its recruiting pitch was simple — it was the “special forces” in the space industry — and it was this pitch that attracted talent who are hungry and motivated enough to help the company achieve its milestones over the years.
The same is true for Tesla. The electric car maker has been around for 15 years — a short period of time considering the pedigree of rival automakers — but the company has already established itself as a leader in premium electric vehicles. Such growth and progress did not come easy, though, with Elon Musk openly admitting to tech journalist Kara Swisher at an episode of the Recode Decode podcast that milestones such as the Model 3 production ramp were only made possible due to “excruciating effort” and “hundred hour workweeks by everyone.”
Such an intense work culture has attracted a lot of detractors. Critics have accused the company of overworking its employees, as reflected in multiple critical exposes published about Tesla’s operations this year alone. One of the executives who left Tesla, former Chief Accounting Officer David Morton, also cited the company’s pace of work as among the reasons behind his departure. With its intense work culture, ambitious targets, and its frenetic pace, Tesla’s work environment is definitely not for everyone.
As revealed by data from Handshake, a student career-services app, though, it is exactly this type of intensity that makes Tesla attractive to young, driven applicants. Handshake noted that Telsa received more job and internship applications than any other company listed on the app in the 2016-2017 academic year. Last year alone, Tesla collected almost 500,000 applications, which is about double the volume it received in 2016. In a statement to The Wall Street Journal, Cindy Nicola, vice president of global recruiting at Tesla, noted that the company had already received more applications to date this year than it did in all of 2017.
“Our interest from candidates continues to grow year over year,” she said.
Part of Tesla’s allure among young job applicants is the company’s mission — to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy — as well as the passion of its CEO, Elon Musk, a hands-on leader known to work long hours with his employees when needed. Kiran Karunakaran, who worked as an engineer at Tesla before he moved to Seattle, noted to the WSJ that before he was employed by the electric car company, he received a job offer from Apple. The iPhone-maker’s $115,000 per year offer was superior to Tesla’s 95,000 a year offer, but according to the engineer, the decision for him was a no-brainer.
“What really attracts young people to Tesla is instant gratification. You see these incredible things you’ve worked on come to fruition, on the road, in months,” he said.
Tesla’s attractiveness among applicants extends well into its internship program. For interns, the company’s flat organizational structure provides them with an opportunity to exercise their ideas and be heard. Anusha Atluri, a student from Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business who worked as an intern at Tesla this past summer, experienced this firsthand. She worked at Tesla at a time when the company was ramping Model 3 production, and partway through her internship, she came up with an idea that could speed up the electric sedan’s lines.
The intern presented her idea in a Powerpoint presentation to her team, and it was well-received. She initially planned to discuss her suggestions with management the following week, but Tesla opted to implement her suggestions the next day. By the following week, the line was running more smoothly. “They were like, why not just try it tomorrow?” she said in a statement to the WSJ.
While the demanding hours and ambitious targets in Tesla could be exhausting, some workers have found themselves being underwhelmed in other companies after a tenure with the electric car maker. An engineering manager, who opted to remain anonymous, noted that she actually left Tesla after having a baby. When she was ready to get back on the workforce, she accepted an offer from a large tech company. Eventually, though, she felt that she was not a good fit. It did not take long before the engineering manager decided to go back to Tesla’s high-intensity environment.
“It isn’t just about working less. Everybody should have more work than they can possibly finish at all times. It forces the person to draw the line on when they give up—when they say, I’m done for the day. At Tesla, you have to achieve some kind of comfort knowing you didn’t do it all,” she said.
Elon Musk has noted that Tesla probably has the most exciting product roadmap in the market today. With exciting new electric cars and energy products in the pipeline, the company is bound to grow and expand its workforce even more. The company would most likely demand long hours and ambitious targets for its employees for years to come. Despite this, the company would likely continue to attract the most driven individuals that the talent pool has to offer — individuals that, just like Elon Musk, thrive in the face of pressure.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
