On Friday, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union entered its 15th day on strike, accompanied by additional walkouts of General Motors (GM) Ford plants. Stellantis, the parent company of Chrysler, Dodge Ram and Jeep, managed to avoid heightened strikes after reportedly making some progress on contract negotiations.
After the UAW said last week that it would escalate strikes if progress wasn’t made on new contracts, the union officially ordered workers to walk off the job at two assembly plants on Friday: one run by Ford in Chicago, Illinois and another run by Stellantis in Lansing, Michigan, Reuters reports. Stellantis avoided the escalated strikes after UAW President Shawn Fain said the automaker made some last-minute concessions.
The news brings the total number of striking workers up to about 25,000, with the historic strike now in its third week. This is the first time in history that auto strikes have targeted all three of the automakers at once, with the UAW strategically striking at key facilities to disrupt supply chains and force negotiation.
The additional walkouts also mark the second Friday on which additional UAW workers vacated their work sites, with employees walking out of 38 more GM and Stellantis facilities on September 22.
Following the updated walkouts on Friday night, Ford CEO Jim Farley and GM CEO Mary Barra laid into the UAW.
“It’s clear that there is no real intent to get to an agreement,” Barra said.
Yahoo Finance reported on Friday that Farley said the UAW was holding an agreement “hostage” over battery plants, adding that the union’s demands “could have a devastating impact on our business.”
Farley recently also stated that the union’s demands would bankrupt Ford if enacted. Tesla CEO Elon Musk reiterated a similar point this week, saying a 32-hour work week combined with a 40-percent wage hike would be a “sure way” to make the three automakers go bankrupt.
“I need to be clear about one thing, because the UAW is scaring our workers by repeating something that is factually not true, none of our workers today are going to lose their jobs due to our battery plants during this contract period or even beyond this contract,” Farley said. “In fact, for the foreseeable future, we will have to hire more workers as some workers retire in order to keep up with the demand of our incredible new vehicles.”
The union responded that neither Farley nor Barra showed up to bargaining this week.
“We want to get agreements,” Fain said on Friday outside the Lansing GM plant. “We have been there every day 24/7 since the middle of July, we have been there every day. It’s ironic that some of these CEOs make these statements and literally the CEO of Ford has been in probably three meetings over the course of these nine or 10 weeks.”
President Biden backs UAW’s demand for a 40-percent pay raise
Ford Supply Chain Officer Liz Door said that if strikes continued, we could see as many as 300,000 to 500,000 employees laid off across the auto industry, especially in auto supply positions. Farley said that the 125,000 jobs held by Ford suppliers would also be put “at risk” without a deal.
In a separate report, Reuters also noted that the UAW dropped charges previously filed against GM and Stellantis with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which alleged unfair labor practices at the two companies and claimed that the companies weren’t bargaining in good faith.
The UAW represents about 150,000 workers at the three auto companies, and the current strikes make up about 17 percent of the total figure. The UAW is demanding the following in updated union contracts:
- 40-percent wage hikes over four years
- 32-hour work weeks
- Eliminating tiered wage systems requiring several years to reach top wages
- Restoring traditional pension plans
- Restoring wage cost-of-living-adjustments (COLA)
- Improved vacation, retirement and family leave
The automakers have offered wage increases of about 20 percent in contracts over the four years, though negotiations reportedly remain far apart.
Some expect the situation to positively affect non-unionized electric vehicle (EV) maker Tesla, though others point out that the strikes are likely to make wages — and subsequently car prices — increase alongside those of the three legacy automakers. Among the topics regularly discussed during negotiations is the fact that EVs have fewer parts than gas cars and thus will require fewer workers in the future.
Trump claims electric vehicle shift will kill jobs, so UAW talks don’t matter
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
