There's a world of difference between thinking this is okay and thinking that 137 million dollars for facing racist insults and graffiti is appropriate. For context, a worker who was cooked to death in a Tuna processing facility was awarded the largest wrongful death settlement in California of 6 million dollars.
This guy says the people he worked with called him racist names and he saw racist graffiti in the bathroom. It's not like Elon Musk was burning a cross on his lawn.
Rather than worry about the billionaires you might worry how companies will do business if they are subject to massive penalties for racist word use among their employees. "Hey boss, wanna call me racist names for a bit, write some in the bathroom, and split a hundred million?"
All the $137M award says is the Jury found itself really pissed off at Tesla. It's basically a notice that Tesla might consider settling these types of claims in the future instead of wasting the Jury's time.
Or they will keep handling these claims the way they always have: they go to mandatory arbitration which either decides it is not racism or awards the claimant a small amount, and in either case Tesla doesn't take any serious action to prevent future occurrences.
This one only went through the courts instead of arbitration because it involved someone who they did not have under an arbitration agreement.
I'm not sure why they did not have an arbitration agreement. The person was a contract worker employed by a staffing agency rather than directly employed by Tesla, so maybe Tesla thought for some reason that would protect them?
In some European countries you get fined based on your income. So if a billionaire is caught speeding he can get a speeding ticket for millions of dollars.
This isn't about him. It's about the company the proved negligent. Had the amount been lower they would have just moved on and added it as "the cost of doing business". The Jury did this strictly for punishment. They also want other companies to see this verdict, settle and get their act together. It was 2015 and an employee complains about sexual harassment or racism... You should have listened. At least you will from now on. This is on Tesla.
State law claims are tried in federal courts all the time under subject matter jurisdiction and joinder rules. Both state and federal claims are probably at issue here. PACER would yield the answer.
Punitive damages exist in every state, and exist because without them corporations are able to simply budget in the cost of breaking the law. That's why the McDonalds hot coffee incident was so large (they were breaking the law, the woman originally only sued for the few thousand in health insurance copays, the bulk of the fine was because McDs had had the same law suits with different people multiple times but continued to break the law)
Throwaway for obvious reasons, but you could say pretty much anything you want to me for that kind of paycheck. Too bad there's nothing you could say to a white guy that would let me cash in like that.
how lucky we are as a civilization that technology has not yet made a similar punitive equation feasible for time as it is for money.
i.e., imagine if it worked this way for penalty of incarceration, where your mugger forfeits 10 years of their life, and transfers them to you, extending your own by the same amount - less attorneys' fees, of course.
There are numerous articles that elaborate on evidence. The bloomberg article linked has some, as does a tesla link above. It's worth a read if you haven't read much about this case yet.
The legal system was not designed to neutralize the damages. The legal system has been designed to neutralize the damages and leverage scapegoating to deter future cases. e.g. in this case the jury is basically telling Tesla “… is very not profitable. It is your fiduciary responsibility to investors to ensure this never happens again.”
You might disagree with that design of the courts, but changing how the US legal system works is more than a lot difficult.
If you do take on this challenge, I would suggest starting with helping reduce punishments for individuals before focusing on reducing the punishment for corporations. Hopefully the same strategies for change will “help” both situations.
This is like the hot coffee lady. The purpose for the large fine is to punish the company and prevent them from being able to just carry on as they were with a small amount set aside for lawsuits.
The hot coffee lady wound up in hospital with severe burns. McDonald's had a pattern of overheating coffee to disguise poor taste and they continued it knowing they had seriously injured multiple customers.
In this instance a factory worker seems to have have overheard bad language and seen it on graffiti in the bathroom. Pretty different.
The OP still shouldn't be getting downvoted because they're right: she was only seeking $20,000 to cover medical bills for treatment of severe burns originally, in the course of the case McDonalds decided to go on a media campaign about it against her (and succeeded) but during the course of the case got demolished by the prosecution who conclusively showed that they were aware of the danger, had injured others, and had no justifiable reason for preparing the product the way they did.
The final settlement was - as the OP notes - about punitive damages, which they very much deserved.
Ironic! This is exactly like the hot coffee lady. You, and almost everyone else, is going to read Tesla's interpretation and assume the judgement is overboard without ever reading the complaint. Actually, that's exactly what all of the current comments on here are circling towards. Turns out Facebook isn't the only place with rampant misinformation.
I read the factual allegations and skimmed the rest. Thanks for posting this link.
No part of this seems as bad as being scalded and hospitalized. No part of this suggests a harmful or intentional corporate policy, like McDonald's superheating their coffee.
The allegation doesn't address a major point from Tesla's blog post, which is that the men involved were black. What I took from Tesla's post is that it was mostly (or entirely) black men referring to each other with racial slurs.
The factual allegations make it seem like some factory workers used bad/racist language and racist cartoons. Mid level HR types ignored some complaints. Does Tesla have a policy of ignoring or encouraging racist behavior? Or is it just some people failing to do something about reported harassment?
Jury awards to individuals against corporations have been skyrocketing over the last decade or so. In the insurance industry it's referred to as "social inflation" and is a pretty hot topic right now. People in the industry were shocked by a record $411 million award last October [0], only for that record to be shattered by a $1 billion award not even a year later [1].
My pet theory is that it's mostly driven by attitudes that corporations have too much power coupled with increased inaction by the government entities that could be addressing all of that corporate power. An increase in litigation financing is probably a big factor too.
There's lots of firmer legal analysis out there by people who, unlike me, are actually qualified to perform that analysis (e.g. [2]). Naturally it's all somewhat speculative, but there are some interesting solid-ish statistics, for example:
> A national survey conducted by Sound Jury Consulting in 2019 found three-quarters of respondents eligible for jury service stated they would decide a case based on their own personal beliefs of right or wrong if those beliefs conflicted with the law as instructed by the judge. The number is higher for millennials.
Sounds like they intend to pay. I'm surprised. I'd fight it if those are the actual facts as seen from their end. But I suppose the veracity is an issue no matter which side you listen to.
Shit, time to start recording interactions with everyone, I guess. Would've gotten enough evidence for a bunch of cases over the past 6 months alone lol
Were you being abused for your skin colour? Your religion? Your sexuality? Your age? Were you abused by your supervisor? Did their mgmt chain minimize the harm this did, or did they tell you to suck it up or you've never make it in the big leagues? Did you eventually make it in the big leagues?
I'd love to know the algorithm used to arrive at this amount of money, because it seems quite large to me, but I'm very happy to see any company that countenances this sort of nonsense hurt financially. Big companies are not your friend. They're not your enemy. They're just doing what they think they need to. If safeguarding profits requires that they _actually_ enforce rules about racist abuse, then by all means, sue them 'til the pips squeak. LOL.
> What is the job function of an elevator operator in a fully automated manufacturing facility?
It's Tesla after all - fully automated manufacturing facility doesn't mean a human isn't needed to operate. Just like Tesla's fully automated driving doesn't mean a human isn't expected to be at the wheel.
69 comments
[ 6.1 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] threadHow much do you think it should cost a company when a company allows blatantly racist behavior in the workplace and does nothing about it?
e.g. that story with a “noose” in the garage or black students writing racist graffiti on campus
Some do it for attention, others for financial gain
https://www.espn.com/racing/nascar/story/_/id/29354447/fbi-s...
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/education/black-student-...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hoax-missouri-school-distri...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/12/bumble-bee-f...
Rather than worry about the billionaires you might worry how companies will do business if they are subject to massive penalties for racist word use among their employees. "Hey boss, wanna call me racist names for a bit, write some in the bathroom, and split a hundred million?"
This one only went through the courts instead of arbitration because it involved someone who they did not have under an arbitration agreement.
I'm not sure why they did not have an arbitration agreement. The person was a contract worker employed by a staffing agency rather than directly employed by Tesla, so maybe Tesla thought for some reason that would protect them?
This isn't about him. It's about the company the proved negligent. Had the amount been lower they would have just moved on and added it as "the cost of doing business". The Jury did this strictly for punishment. They also want other companies to see this verdict, settle and get their act together. It was 2015 and an employee complains about sexual harassment or racism... You should have listened. At least you will from now on. This is on Tesla.
So OP's point still applies.
You look a wrong way and someone's gonna pull a race card on you, happily assisted by the closest ambulance chaser.
i.e., imagine if it worked this way for penalty of incarceration, where your mugger forfeits 10 years of their life, and transfers them to you, extending your own by the same amount - less attorneys' fees, of course.
US Gov case info is here: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCOURTS-cand-3_17-cv-06...
Basically, the amount is intended to set an example and prevent re-occurence.
For example, damages for trucking accidents have grown substantially over the last decade. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/24/rise-in-nuclear-verdicts-in-...
Punishments must be in-line with the evidence. Otherwise you are wrongfully hurting more people. How does that do any good?
You might disagree with that design of the courts, but changing how the US legal system works is more than a lot difficult.
If you do take on this challenge, I would suggest starting with helping reduce punishments for individuals before focusing on reducing the punishment for corporations. Hopefully the same strategies for change will “help” both situations.
For a good example of a federal court gone rogue, look at east texas: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/supreme-court-ma...
In this instance a factory worker seems to have have overheard bad language and seen it on graffiti in the bathroom. Pretty different.
The final settlement was - as the OP notes - about punitive damages, which they very much deserved.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restau...
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.31...
No part of this seems as bad as being scalded and hospitalized. No part of this suggests a harmful or intentional corporate policy, like McDonald's superheating their coffee.
The allegation doesn't address a major point from Tesla's blog post, which is that the men involved were black. What I took from Tesla's post is that it was mostly (or entirely) black men referring to each other with racial slurs.
The factual allegations make it seem like some factory workers used bad/racist language and racist cartoons. Mid level HR types ignored some complaints. Does Tesla have a policy of ignoring or encouraging racist behavior? Or is it just some people failing to do something about reported harassment?
https://www.tesla.com/blog/hotbed-misinformation
My pet theory is that it's mostly driven by attitudes that corporations have too much power coupled with increased inaction by the government entities that could be addressing all of that corporate power. An increase in litigation financing is probably a big factor too.
There's lots of firmer legal analysis out there by people who, unlike me, are actually qualified to perform that analysis (e.g. [2]). Naturally it's all somewhat speculative, but there are some interesting solid-ish statistics, for example:
> A national survey conducted by Sound Jury Consulting in 2019 found three-quarters of respondents eligible for jury service stated they would decide a case based on their own personal beliefs of right or wrong if those beliefs conflicted with the law as instructed by the judge. The number is higher for millennials.
[0] https://cdllife.com/2020/single-truck-company-slapped-with-n...
[1] https://www.thetrucker.com/trucking-news/the-nation/inside-a...
[2] https://www.hinshawlaw.com/assets/htmldocuments/Articles/The...
https://www.tesla.com/blog/regarding-todays-jury-verdict
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.31...
tl;dr Tesla gas lit the dude
https://www.tesla.com/blog/hotbed-misinformation
I'd love to know the algorithm used to arrive at this amount of money, because it seems quite large to me, but I'm very happy to see any company that countenances this sort of nonsense hurt financially. Big companies are not your friend. They're not your enemy. They're just doing what they think they need to. If safeguarding profits requires that they _actually_ enforce rules about racist abuse, then by all means, sue them 'til the pips squeak. LOL.
It's Tesla after all - fully automated manufacturing facility doesn't mean a human isn't needed to operate. Just like Tesla's fully automated driving doesn't mean a human isn't expected to be at the wheel.