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.”
Cybertruck
Tesla launches new Cybertruck trim with more features than ever for a low price
This is a considerable upgrade to the Cybertruck Rear-Wheel-Drive that Tesla offered last year. It was discontinued after just a few months, but we still have yet to see anyone share pictures of it online.
Tesla has officially launched a new trim of its all-electric Cybertruck, which has more features than previous offerings at this price point, which is an incredibly good value.
Tesla is now offering the Cybertruck All-Wheel-Drive, and starting at $59,990, it appears to be a lot of truck for the money.
Along with the sub-$60,000 starting price, Tesla gives the Cybertruck AWD a 325-mile range rating, a powered tonneau cover that houses three bed outlets. It also has Powershare capability, coil springs with adaptive damping for a refined suspension feel, Steer-by-wire and four-wheel-steering, a 6′ x 4′ composite bed, a towing capacity of 7,500 pounds, and a powered frunk.
This is a considerable upgrade to the Cybertruck Rear-Wheel-Drive that Tesla offered last year. It was discontinued after just a few months, but we still have yet to see anyone share pictures of it online.
Tesla has launched a new Cybertruck trim: the Cybertruck AWD
– Starts at $59,990
– Dual Motor AWD w/ est. 325 mi of range
– Powered tonneau cover
– Bed outlets (2x 120V + 1x 240V) & Powershare capability
– Coil springs w/ adaptive damping
– Heated first-row seats w/ textile… pic.twitter.com/erZBtlq3Bs— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 20, 2026
That truck did not have a power tonneau, did not have adaptive suspension, leather seats, or nearly any of the premium features in the upper-level trims. It was not a great deal, either. It was only a $10,000 discount from the next Cybertruck trim, which meant losing a motor and a lot of premium features for not that much of a savings.
This is a much better offering from Tesla and could help the company see a bit of a resurgence from a sales perspective. Although the Cybertruck is a popular vehicle from a fan perspective, it is not a great seller, and Tesla knows it.
Tesla Cybertruck undergoes interior mod that many owners wanted
Despite it being a crowd favorite, it was simply priced out of people’s budgets, so this All-Wheel-Drive configuration should be easier to handle financially for many of those who wanted the Cybertruck but not the price tag that came with it.
It is not a far cry from what Tesla priced back in 2019, as it unveiled three trim levels back in November, nearly seven years ago: a Single Motor for $39,990, a Dual Motor for $49,990, and a Tri-Motor for $69,990.
This new AWD trim is just $10,000 off from that price tag, and accounting for inflation, Tesla is pretty close.
Deliveries are expected to begin in June 2026.
News
Tesla dominates JD Power EV Satisfaction ranking, grabbing top two spots
The Model 3 was the highest ranking EV considered, with a score of 804, followed by the Model Y at 797, the BMW i4 at 795, and the BMW iX at 794.
Tesla dominated JD Power’s EV Owner Satisfaction ranking for 2026, grabbing the top two spots in the survey with the Model 3 and Model Y.
The two Tesla models grabbed the first and second spots, respectively, with scores of 804 and 797 out of 1,000 possible points.
Brent Gruber, Executive Director of JD Power’s EV practice, said:
“EV market share has declined sharply following the discontinuation of the federal tax credit program in September 2025, but that dip belies steadily growing customer satisfaction among owners of new EVs. Improvements in battery technology, charging infrastructure, and overall vehicle performance have driven customer satisfaction to its highest level ever. What’s more, the vast majority of current EV owners say they will consider purchasing another EV for their next vehicle, regardless of whether they benefited from the now-expired federal tax credit.”
JD Power’s study showed three key findings: Public charging satisfaction was higher than ever, premium BEVs saw more pronounced quality improvements, and BEVs held their satisfaction ratings compared to plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs).
Tesla Grabs Top 2 Spots
Despite what some publications might try to make you believe, Tesla is still the cream of the crop when it comes to EV ownership, and real-world owners surveyed by JD Power will prove that to you.
The Model 3 was the highest ranking EV considered, with a score of 804, followed by the Model Y at 797, the BMW i4 at 795, and the BMW iX at 794. The segment average for “Premium Battery Electric Vehicles” was 786. The Cadillac OPTIQ (762), Rivian R1S (758), Lucid Air (740), Rivian R1T (739), and Audi Q6 e-Tron (690) all finished below that threshold.
Meanwhile, a separate category for “Mass Market Battery Electric Vehicles” had the Ford Mustang Mach-E as the EV with the highest rating at 760. The segment average for this class was 727.
🚨 Tesla topped J.D. Power’s new EV Owner Satisfaction Study for 2026, with the Model 3 (804) and Model Y (797) being the top-rated vehicles, beating out the BMW i4 (795) and iX (794)
Additionally, Tesla Superchargers helped public charging satisfaction rise to new highs:
“The… pic.twitter.com/4WIxoDxHig
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
Tesla Supercharging Improves Public Charging Satisfaction
JD Power said the availability of public charging is “by far the most improved index factor,” and that the consistent growth of publicly available charging has helped push many consumer sentiments in a positive direction.
Most of this is due to the Tesla Supercharger Network and its expansion. However, Tesla owners are also becoming more satisfied with the infrastructure after expanding access to other EV brands, the study said.
Elon Musk
Musk company boycott proposal at City Council meeting gets weird and ironic
The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal to ban Musk-operated companies. It got weird and ironic.
A city council meeting in California that proposed banning the entry of new contracts with companies controlled by Elon Musk got weird and ironic on Tuesday night after councilmembers were forced to admit some of the entities would benefit the community.
The City of Davis in California held a weekly city council meeting on Tuesday, where it voted on a proposal called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies.”
The proposal claimed that Musk ” has used his influence and corporate platforms to promote political ideologies and activities that threaten democratic norms and institutions, including campaign finance activities that raise ethical and legal concerns.”
We reported on it on Tuesday before the meeting:
California city weighs banning Elon Musk companies like Tesla and SpaceX
However, the meeting is now published online, and it truly got strange.
While it was supported by various members of the community, you could truly tell who was completely misinformed about the influence of Musk’s companies, their current status from an economic and competitive standpoint, and how much some of Musk’s companies’ projects benefit the community.
City Council Member Admits Starlink is Helpful
One City Council member was forced to admit that Starlink, the satellite internet project established by Musk’s SpaceX, was beneficial to the community because the emergency response system utilized it for EMS, Fire, and Police communications in the event of a power outage.
After public comments were heard, councilmembers amended some of the language in the proposal to not include Starlink because of its benefits to public safety.
One community member even said, “There should be exceptions to the rule.”
🚨 After the City of Davis, California, held its City Council meeting on Tuesday and voted on a resolution called “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” it was forced to admit that it needs… pic.twitter.com/hQiCIX3yll
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
Community Members Report Out of Touch Mainstream Media Narratives
Many community members very obviously read big bold headlines about how horribly Tesla is performing in terms of electric vehicles. Many pointed to “labor intimidation” tactics being used at the company’s Fremont Factory, racial discrimination lawsuits, and Musk’s political involvement as clear-cut reasons why Davis should not consider his companies for future contracts.
However, it was interesting to hear some of them speak, very obviously out of touch with reality.
Musk has encouraged unions to propose organizing at the Fremont Factory, stating that many employees would not be on board because they are already treated very well. In 2022, he invited Union leaders to come to Fremont “at their convenience.”
The UAW never took the opportunity.
Some have argued that Tesla prevented pro-union clothing at Fremont, which it did for safety reasons. An appeals court sided with Tesla, stating that the company had a right to enforce work uniforms to ensure employee safety.
Another community member said that Tesla was losing market share in the U.S. due to growing competition from legacy automakers.
“Plus, these existing auto companies have learned a lot from what Tesla has done,” she said. Interestingly, Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis have all pulled back from their EV ambitions significantly. All three took billions in financial hits.
One Resident Crosses a Line
One resident’s time at the podium included this:
Another member of the community did this…a member of the City Council admonished him and it came to a verbal spat https://t.co/zWvKCiCkie pic.twitter.com/1L334qq9av
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 19, 2026
He was admonished by City Council member Bapu Vaitla, who said his actions were offensive. The two sparred verbally for a few seconds before their argument ended.
City Council Vote Result
Ultimately, the City of Davis chose to pass the motion, but they also amended it to exclude Starlink because of its emergency system benefits.
Tesla launches new Cybertruck trim with more features than ever for a low price
Tesla dominates JD Power EV Satisfaction ranking, grabbing top two spots
