News
Is Tesla Motors disruptive or disturbing?
Tesla Motors stands out in many ways, leaving many wondering how disruptive is it and how disturbing it is for corporations. One thing is for certain, Tesla reflects a need in society, that of a deep fundamental change. The problem is, are giant corporations ready for this change and can they adapt?
To disrupt, or not, that is not longer the questions.
Tesla Motors disrupts and irritates the way corporations operate. Elon Musk and Martin Eberhard didn’t invent the wheel, they both used what entrepreneurs are best at, that of asking what is needed. They wanted a cool and fun car that didn’t use dirty polluting petroleum. They went to see what AC Propulsion was working on with their incredible t-zero, the grandfather of the Roadster and the Tesla Roadster born soon after.
Tesla Motors didn’t reinvent the wheel, but disrupted the automotive world by using old and tested technologies, an electric motor and off the shelf batteries. On the flip side, automakers build vehicles with planned obsolescence and constant maintenance, which perpetuate a thriving cash flow through after market and distribution. Tesla introduced an electric car that required close to no maintenance, sold directly to buyers who choose to buy it or not. That was the disruptive part, now let’s look at the disturbing part for automakers.
Steady as she goes down the drain.
We often fault carmakers for everything wrong in the automotive industry, but their worn out business model that won’t adapt to our fast changing needs is really what is wrong. The biggest mistake they made was to over-rely on the market it created in the first place. It simply didn’t see the electric car technology progressing faster than their gasoline one and doubted this new market was ready. They simply didn’t understand people want a real fundamental change, which means taking a step back from bottom line profits.
The Tesla Motors business model frightens established companies because it operates outside their reality and shifts the emphasis back to the consumer. We can debate how much hype there is around a Roadster and a Model S, but fundamentally, one either buys cars because of its superior performance over a gasoline car, or because of the freedom of energy use, with its convenience and reliability and finally, or because it just darn changes things a lot.
Now flash back to the post 2008 era, when the financial world was partying as if there were no tomorrow and carmakers sued any states imposing better fuel economy. Carmakers perpetuated the belief we wanted cars with more cup holders than we truly needed, and favored creature comforts over performance and evolution. The advent of the electric wrestled that grip on the lulled market away from them, the way only a silicon valley startup could with its different business model.
Who’s disturbing now?
So, who’s disturbing now? When we look back in time, almost all big corporations were at one point disruptive. AT&T gave us Unix, Microsoft gave us the potential of the personal computer, but we certainly can’t call them disruptive anymore. They are disturbing in the fact they no longer innovate, but stubbornly pursue a path of pure profitability. Unfortunately, Apple is also following the same trend. The company once famous for stellar customer service and extremely well made computers is now more focused on profits than innovations. It’s Apple store is no longer fun to visit, and manufacturing problems are happening often.
It doesn’t take much extrapolation to see that one day too, Tesla Motors will be in the same situation. Are there exceptions? Certainly IBM made the right change. After decades of focusing on manufacturing, it made the boldest move to go back to consulting. Look at where IBM is now, and compare it to other personal computer makers. So what can companies learn from newer players and what can newer players learn from older companies having come full circle?
Elon Musk
SpaceX secures win as US labor board drops oversight case
The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX.
SpaceX scored a legal victory after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided to dismiss a case which accused the company of terminating engineers who were involved in an open letter against founder Elon Musk.
The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX. The update was initially shared by Bloomberg News, which cited a letter about the matter it reportedly reviewed.
In a letter to the former employees’ lawyers, the labor board stated that the affected employees were under the jurisdiction of the National Mediation Board (NMB), not the NLRB. As a result, the labor board stated that it was dismissing the case.
As per Danielle Pierce, a regional director of the agency, “the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction over the Employer and, therefore, I am dismissing your charge.”
The NMB typically oversees airlines and railroads. The NLRB, on the other hand, covers most private-sector employers, as well as manufacturers such as Boeing.
The former SpaceX engineers have argued that the private space company did not belong under the NMB’s jurisdiction because SpaceX only offers services to “hand-picked customers.”
In an opinion, however, the NMB stated that SpaceX was under its jurisdiction because “space transport includes air travel” to get to outer space. The mediation board also noted that anyone can contact SpaceX to secure its services.
SpaceX had previously challenged the NLRB’s authority in court, arguing that the agency’s structure was unconstitutional. Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB general counsel under former United States President Joe Biden, rejected SpaceX’s claims. Following Abruzzo’s termination under the Trump administration, however, SpaceX asked the labor board to reconsider its arguments.
SpaceX is not the only company that has challenged the constitutionality of the NLRB. Since SpaceX filed its legal challenge against the agency in 2024, other high-profile companies have followed suit. These include Amazon, which has filed similar cases that are now pending.
News
Tesla accuses IG Metall member of secretly recording Giga Berlin meeting
The union has denied the electric vehicle maker’s allegations.
Police seized the computer of an IG Metall member at Tesla Giga Berlin on Tuesday amid allegations that a works council meeting was secretly recorded.
The union has denied the electric vehicle maker’s allegations.
In a post on X, Gigafactory Berlin plant manager André Thierig stated that an external union representative from IG Metall attended a works council meeting and allegedly recorded the session. Thierig described the event as “truly beyond words.”
“What has happened today at Giga Berlin is truly beyond words! An external union representative from IG Metall attended a works council meeting. For unknown reasons he recorded the internal meeting and was caught in action! We obviously called police and filed a criminal complaint!” Thierig wrote in his post on X.
Police later confirmed to local news outlet rbb24 that officers did seize a computer belonging to an IG Metall member at the Giga Berlin site on Tuesday afternoon. Tesla stated that employees had contacted authorities after discovering the alleged recording.
IG Metall denied Tesla’s accusations, arguing that its representative did not record the meeting. The union alleged that Tesla’s claim was simply a tactic ahead of upcoming works council elections.
The next works council election at Giga Berlin is scheduled for March 2 to 4, 2026. The facility’s management had confirmed the dates to local news outlets. The official announcement marks the start of the election process and campaign period.
Approximately 11,000 employees are eligible to participate in the vote.
The previous works council election at the plant took place in 2024, and it was triggered by a notable increase in workforce size. Under German labor law, regular works council elections must be held every four years between March 1 and May 31.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s xAI plants flag in Bellevue AI hotspot
The lease places xAI’s new office in one of the region’s fastest-growing tech hubs.
Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI has leased a full floor at Lincoln Square South in downtown Bellevue, WA, as per city permit filings.
The lease places xAI’s new office in one of the region’s fastest-growing tech hubs.
Public records indicate that xAI leased roughly 24,800 square feet in Lincoln Square South. The location was previously occupied by video game company Epic Games. Lincoln Square South is part of the Bellevue Collection, which is owned by Kemper Development Co.
The lease was first referenced in January by commercial real estate firm Broderick Group, which noted that an unnamed tenant had secured the space, as stated in a report from the Puget Sound Business Journal. Later filings identified xAI as the occupant for the space.
xAI has not publicly commented on the lease.
xAI hinted at plans to open an office in the Seattle area back in September, when the startup posted job openings with salaries ranging from $180,000 to $440,000. At the time, the company had narrowed its location search to cities on the Eastside but had not finalized a lease.
xAI’s Bellevue expansion comes as Musk continues consolidating his businesses. Last week, SpaceX acquired xAI in a deal that valued the artificial intelligence startup at $250 billion. SpaceX itself is now valued at roughly $1.25 trillion and is expected to pursue an initial public offering (IPO) later this year.
Musk already has a significant presence in the region through SpaceX, which employs about 2,000 workers locally. That initiative, however, is focused largely on Starlink satellite development.
Bellevue has increasingly become a center for artificial intelligence companies. OpenAI has expanded its local office footprint to nearly 300,000 square feet. Data infrastructure firms such as Crusoe and CoreWeave have also established offices downtown.
SpaceX secures win as US labor board drops oversight case
Tesla accuses IG Metall member of secretly recording Giga Berlin meeting
