News
Tesla responds to allegations of unjust pay and visa violations
Tesla has issued a response to this weekend’s report that a factory worker who worked on the company’s high-volume paint shop at Fremont, CA plant was part of a group of foreign workers that were paid $5/hr and operated outside the terms of their visas.
The story has gained attention after the San Jose Mercury published a report of its recent investigation on Gregor Lesnik’s suit against the electric vehicle maker and several other defendants for unfair treatment in a workplace. The Mercury reports that a Slovenian company called ISM Vuzem flew Lesnik and a group of foreign workers to the U.S. while housing them in “nondescript apartments” where they would be shuttled from and to the Tesla plant to work six to seven days a week at low wages.
Among the claims in the lawsuit via the Mercury:
- Eisenmann USA wrote letters to the U.S. Embassy on behalf of Lesnik and as many as 200 foreign workers stating they would supervise employees at a U.S. auto plant. Most of the Vuzem workers were nonsupervisory laborers and tradesmen.
- Tesla issued company security badges to the foreign workers, recorded their time on site and shared responsibility for setting safety conditions.
- Vuzem required foreign employees to regularly work between 60 and 70 hours a week. Vuzem paid Lesnik an average of 800 euros per month, or about $900, for a rate of less than $5 per hour. Lesnik was promised an equal amount when he returned home, but the company never paid the balance.
- The companies violated wage and employment laws and benefitted from the cheap labor of foreign workers. Workers were promised $12.70 an hour based on a standard workweek. The suit estimates they are due $2.6 million in overtime and premium pay.
Tesla has issued a response to the story defending their stance that the company operated within legal limits stating that Lesnik’s claim is a moral issue at heart, but the company will see to it that the right thing happens and all are treated fairly should the claims be true.
According to Tesla’s issued response, Lesnik’s accident as a result of slipping on loose tile and falling three stories while working on the company’s high-volume paint shop, was investigated by the government regulator that oversees workplace accidents (Cal/OSHA) and found to be not at fault of the company. Tesla’s statement says, “When Mr. Lesnik brought a workers compensation case, Tesla was dismissed from the case because the judge concluded that we had no legal responsibility for what occurred.”
Here’s a copy of Tesla’s full response to the story.
-->“At Tesla, we aspire to operate on the principles of hard work and exceptional performance, but always tempered by fairness, justice and kindness. There are times when mistakes are made, but those are the standards to which we hold ourselves. With respect to the person at the center of this weekend’s article in the Mercury News, those standards were not met. We are taking action to address this individual’s situation and to put in place additional oversight to ensure that our workplace rules are followed even by sub-subcontractors to prevent such a thing from happening again.
Gregor Lesnik was brought to the Tesla factory by a company called ISM Vuzem, a sub-contractor brought in by Eisenmann, the firm that we hired to construct our new, high-volume paint shop. We contracted with Eisenmann for the simple reason that we do not know how to build paint shops and they are regarded as one of the best, if not the best, in the world. In our dealings with them, we have found them to be an excellent company, run by good people.
The article describes how Mr. Lesnik came to this country, the conditions under which Vuzem employed him and others to do their work, and how Mr. Lesnik ended up being injured while on the job. Assuming the article is correct, we need to do right by Mr. Lesnik and his colleagues from Vuzem. This is not a legal issue, it is a moral issue. As far as the law goes, Tesla did everything correctly. We hired a contractor to do a turnkey project at our factory and, as we always do in these situations, contractually obligated our contractor to comply with all laws in bringing in the resources they felt were needed to do the job.
Regarding the accident that resulted in Mr. Lesnik being injured, Cal/OSHA (the government regulator that investigates workplace accidents like these) came to our factory, investigated the incident and found that Tesla was not responsible. When Mr. Lesnik brought a workers compensation case, Tesla was dismissed from the case because the judge concluded that we had no legal responsibility for what occurred.
All of that is fine legally, but there is a larger point. Morally, we need to give Mr. Lesnik the benefit of the doubt and we need to take care of him. We will make sure this happens. We do not condone people coming to work at a Tesla facility, whether they work for us, one of our contractors or even a sub-subcontractor, under the circumstances described in the article. If Mr. Lesnik or his colleagues were really being paid $5 an hour, that is totally unacceptable. Tesla is one of the highest paying hourly employers in the US automotive industry. We do this out of choice, because we think it is right. Nobody is making us do so.
Tesla will be working with Eisenmann and Vuzem to investigate this thoroughly. If the claims are true, Tesla will take action to ensure that the right thing happens and all are treated fairly.
Creating a new car company is extremely difficult and fraught with risk, but we will never be a company that by our action does, or by our inaction allows, the wrong thing to happen just to save money.”
News
Waymo rider data hints that Tesla’s Cybercab strategy might be the smartest, after all
These observations all but validate Tesla’s controversial two-seat Cybercab strategy, which has caught a lot of criticism since it was unveiled last year.
Toyota Connected Europe designer Karim Dia Toubajie has highlighted a particular trend that became evident in Waymo’s Q3 2025 occupancy stats. As it turned out, 90% of the trips taken by the driverless taxis carried two or fewer passengers.
These observations all but validate Tesla’s controversial two-seat Cybercab strategy, which has caught a lot of criticism since it was unveiled last year.
Toyota designer observes a trend
Karim Dia Toubajie, Lead Product Designer (Sustainable Mobility) at Toyota Connected Europe, analyzed Waymo’s latest California Public Utilities Commission filings and posted the results on LinkedIn this week.
“90% of robotaxi trips have 2 or less passengers, so why are we using 5-seater vehicles?” Toubajie asked. He continued: “90% of trips have 2 or less people, 75% of trips have 1 or less people.” He accompanied his comments with a graphic showing Waymo’s occupancy rates, which showed 71% of trips having one passenger, 15% of trips having two passengers, 6% of trips having three passengers, 5% of trips having zero passengers, and only 3% of trips having four passengers.
The data excludes operational trips like depot runs or charging, though Toubajie pointed out that most of the time, Waymo’s massive self-driving taxis are really just transporting 1 or 2 people, at times even no passengers at all. “This means that most of the time, the vehicle being used significantly outweighs the needs of the trip,” the Toyota designer wrote in his post.
-->Cybercab suddenly looks perfectly sized
Toubajie gave a nod to Tesla’s approach. “The Tesla Cybercab announced in 2024, is a 2-seater robotaxi with a 50kWh battery but I still believe this is on the larger side of what’s required for most trips,” he wrote.
With Waymo’s own numbers now proving 90% of demand fits two seats or fewer, the wheel-less, lidar-free Cybercab now looks like the smartest play in the room. The Cybercab is designed to be easy to produce, with CEO Elon Musk commenting that its product line would resemble a consumer electronics factory more than an automotive plant. This means that the Cybercab could saturate the roads quickly once it is deployed.
While the Cybercab will likely take the lion’s share of Tesla’s ride-hailing passengers, the Model 3 sedan and Model Y crossover would be perfect for the remaining 9% of riders who require larger vehicles. This should be easy to implement for Tesla, as the Model Y and Model 3 are both mass-market vehicles.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk and James Cameron find middle ground in space and AI despite political differences
Musk responded with some positive words for the director on X.
Avatar director James Cameron has stated that he can still agree with Elon Musk on space exploration and AI safety despite their stark political differences.
In an interview with Puck’s The Town podcast, the liberal director praised Musk’s SpaceX achievements and said higher priorities must unite them, such as space travel and artificial intelligence. Musk responded with some positive words for the director on X.
A longtime mutual respect
Cameron and Musk have bonded over technology for years. As far back as 2011, Cameron told NBC News that “Elon is making very strong strides. I think he’s the likeliest person to step into the shoes of the shuttle program and actually provide human access to low Earth orbit. So… go, Elon.” Cameron was right, as SpaceX would go on to become the dominant force in spaceflight over the years.
Even after Musk’s embrace of conservative politics and his roles as senior advisor and former DOGE head, Cameron refused to cancel his relationship with the CEO. “I can separate a person and their politics from the things that they want to accomplish if they’re aligned with what I think are good goals,” Cameron said. Musk appreciated the director’s comments, stating that “Jim understands physics, which is rare in Hollywood.”
Shared AI warnings
Both men have stated that artificial intelligence could be an existential threat to humanity, though Musk has noted that Tesla’s products such as Optimus could usher in an era of sustainable abundance. Musk recently predicted that money and jobs could become irrelevant with advancing AI, while Cameron warned of a deeper crisis, as noted in a Fox News report.
-->“Because the overall risk of AI in general… is that we lose purpose as people. We lose jobs. We lose a sense of, ‘Well, what are we here for?’” Cameron said. “We are these flawed biological machines, and a computer can be theoretically more precise, more correct, faster, all of those things. And that’s going to be a threshold existential issue.”
He concluded: “I just think it’s important for us as a human civilization to prioritize. We’ve got to make this Earth our spaceship. That’s really what we need to be thinking.”
News
Blue Origin announces Super-Heavy New Glenn 9×4 to Rival SpaceX Starship
The announcement followed the company’s successful NG-2 launch on November 13.
Blue Origin has revealed plans to develop New Glenn 9×4, a “super heavy” rocket designed to deliver 70 metric tons to low-Earth orbit and directly compete with SpaceX’s Starship.
The announcement followed the company’s successful NG-2 launch on November 13, which deployed NASA’s ESCAPADE (Escape and Plasma Acceleration Dynamics Explorers) Mars mission and landed the first stage.
Upgraded engines and reusability
As noted in a Universe Today report, Blue Origin will roll out upgraded BE-4 engines producing 640,000 lbf each, up from 550,000 lbf, starting with NG-3. This should boost the New Glenn rocket’s total first-stage thrust to 4.5 million pounds. Upper-stage BE-3U engines are expected to improve from 320,000 lbf to 400,000 lbf over the next few flights as well.
“These enhancements will immediately benefit customers already manifested on New Glenn to fly to destinations including low-Earth orbit, the Moon, and beyond. Additional vehicle upgrades include a reusable fairing to support increased flight rates, an updated lower-cost tank design, and a higher-performing and reusable thermal protection system to improve turnaround time,” Blue Origin noted.
New Glenn “Super Heavy” 9×4
The super-heavy New Glenn 9×4, with nine BE-4s on the booster, four BE-3Us on the upper stage, will feature an 8.7-meter payload fairing. Blue Origin expects New Glenn 9×4 to be capable of transporting 70 metric tons to LEO, 14 tons to GSO, and 20 tons to trans-lunar injection, as noted by the company in a blog post. This is very impressive, as New Glenn 9×4’s capacity exceeds Falcon Heavy, SpaceX’s largest rocket available to consumers today. Falcon Heavy is capable of carrying up to 64 metric tons to low Earth orbit in a fully expendable configuration.
-->That being said, SpaceX’s Starship’s capacity is extremely impressive. As per SpaceX, Starship is designed to be capable of carrying up to 100-150 metric tonnes to orbit in its fully reusable configuration. At its expendable configuration, Starship’s capacity enters unheard-of territory, with SpaceX stating that the vehicle could transport 250 metric tonnes of cargo.
Waymo rider data hints that Tesla’s Cybercab strategy might be the smartest, after all
Elon Musk and James Cameron find middle ground in space and AI despite political differences
