8 ms·

It's great that they are promising that, but I'm just going to leave this here: https://www.thedrive.com/news/26727/tesla-had-3-times-as-many-osha-violations-a

by foob4r 6y ago

It's great that they are promising that, but I'm just going to leave this here: https://www.thedrive.com/news/26727/tesla-had-3-times-as-many-osha-violations-as-the-10-largest-us-plants-combined https://www.thedrive.com/news/26727/tesla-had-3-times-as-man... Tesla Had 3 Times as Many OSHA Violations as the 10 Largest US Plants Combined CEO Elon Musk once called California OSHA the 'most stringent' safety organization in the US.

lend000 6y ago
It's worth noting that most of the competitors are not making cars in California, so he may be correct about that.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- jsight 6y ago
  Indeed, and you hear far fewer stories like this about NV.
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    Except for thousand-word exposés in mainstream newspapers and on cable news networks. https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/11/12/tesla-gigafactory-brings-nevada-jobs-and-housing-woes-worker-injuries-strained-ems/2452396001/ https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/1...
- perl4ever 6y ago
  I didn't think OSHA was just a California thing. Is the state program really a world unto itself?
  - jameskraus 6y ago
    California OSHA is a very different beast from federal OSHA. My wife works in environmental safety (factories are an environment) and she refers to it as "Strict AF". Federal OSHA is basically the bare minimum as to what can be implemented. Most states layer on additional regulations as they see fit. California's Department of Labor, "Cal/OSHA", has the most stringent standards beyond federal OSHA's standards.
  - xienze 6y ago
    OSHA standards are basically a federal minimum, states are able to go above and beyond.
  - ggreer 6y ago
    They are called OSHA-approved state plans. They have to be at least as strict as federal OSHA to be approved. See the OSHA state plan FAQ[1] for more info. Honestly the OSHA enforcement I've seen has been a joke. One summer when I worked a landscaping job, my employer was fined $5,000 because I was caught using a weed-eater while wearing shorts. (It was hot out and I didn't care if I got an occasional pebble flung at my shins.) My coworkers had similar stories. 1. https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/faqs https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/faqs
    - perl4ever 6y ago
      "I didn't care" That seems like the point. People learn what risks to take from experience; the employer has more experience than new/young employees, so you force them to care. I "didn't care" initially about breathing drywall dust, but later I changed my mind.
      - gumby 6y ago
        And when it's the employer who "doesn't care" the employee rarely has a choice.
      - ggreer 6y ago
        I guarantee that if you drove around and looked at people using weed-eaters that day, at least 1/3rd of them would have been wearing shorts. Heck, I bet the majority of them weren't wearing eye protection. I'm an adult and I can accurately evaluate the risk of pebbles hitting my shins. Unlike dust or toxins, there's no lag between my actions and noticeable harm. Also, the maximum possible harm is limited. Nobody was ever crippled or killed by a weed-eater throwing pebbles at their legs. OSHA's action in this case was entirely unnecessary. Stories from my coworkers were equally ridiculous. One time the company got fined because a worker was wearing earplugs instead of earmuffs. Both block sound just fine! If anything, the earplugs should work better because safety glasses can break the seal of earmuffs.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - gumby 6y ago
    Cal OSHA is great. We once had a pressure vessel delivered and I discovered a small ding in it. We called the mfr and without looking they said "don't worry about it". We called the cal osha pressure vessel unit about it (they had issued our permit after all) and 5 minutes later had a call from the manufacturer asking what the hell was going on. 45 minutes later someone from cal osha showed unannounced (from Oakland to Redwood City in 45 minutes in the middle of the day -- he must have hopped in his car as soon as we got off the phone wit the receptionist). He decided it was safe and gave us a ticket as evidence. As it happened we were being sued by a welding contractor company who'd sent us unqualified personnel who were not making safe steam welds. We had to cut them all out and we all had them around the shop as "trophies". It was an expensive lawsuit -- hundreds of $K. Since he was a nice guy and clearly knew his stuff, when he asked about them we showed him some and told him about firing the contractor. He said, "give me a copy of that lawsuit". And a few days later that was the end of it! Funny thing about steam pressure vessels: there's no safety barriers against them blowing up (just tons of rules to try to keep that from happening). If that vessel had exploded it would likely have taken out the entire city block, and possibly the elementary school across the street. So we were delighted to follow all the rules. When I was perched on a ladder tweaking some instrumentation I was comforted that that if anything went wrong I'd never know. Some of the California county toxics agencies on the other hand....some too strict and some, IMHO, excessively lax. Word to the wise: f you want to run a (legal!!) drug lab do it in San Mateo county not Santa Clara County.
    - greglindahl 6y ago
      Santa Clara had and has fabs, I don't think San Mateo did.
      - gumby 6y ago
        This is different. I mean crap like the Santa Clara County inspector insisting that our solvents go into metal secondary containment because they are potentially flammable. But they are corrosive and per the MSDS shouldn't be in metal, though plastic is safe. When I asked what she wanted she said, "Are you arguing with me?" In the end I put metal trays (turns out commercial pan pizza pans meet the spec) under the plastic bins. When we moved in there was a copper pipe from one lab to another marked "nitrogen". The previous tenant had had the building declared safe (we had the paperwork) and moved out. When it was our time to move out (raised a large B round, were hiring like mad!) we couldn't get the facility cleared because of this damned copper pipe. Not only did they want it removed but they wanted remediation (I guess in case nitrogen leaked into the atmosphere). I am a packrat so had the previous tenant's paperwork and only that spared us the agony. We were manufacturing product for human clinical trials there -- the last thing we would want was anything toxic or dangerous around!! (the city of Santa Clara had a nice map showing where the water came from and we were on well supply. For the reason you mention we had bottled water brought in, something I would normally refuse to pay for. If you live in Santa Clara don't worry -- only the industrial districts have this problem. The residences are on a safe supply, I think it's even hatch hetchy water).
tenpies 6y ago
Tesla has a very rich history of destroying the lives of whistleblowers and injured workers The Musk apologists in particular are very keen to never talk about this, since based on documents produced under oath, Musk himself is extremely vengeful and personally oversees the retaliation. E.g. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-03-13/when-elon-musk-tried-to-destroy-tesla-whistleblower-martin-tripp https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-03-13/when-elon... There is more of this coming down the pipe in a few weeks, but it's not like the Tesla fans will care. I mean you can basically google "Tesla whistleblower" or "Tesla injury" and get hundreds of results of awful stories that probably don't even happen in sweatshops, but clearly if you're "saving the planet", destroying a few lives is excusable. Like I've said before, Tesla is to EV what blood diamonds are to jewelry.
- seph-reed 6y ago
  > but clearly if you're "saving the planet", destroying a few lives is excusable You shouldn't put it this way. The point is he was a dick when he didn't need to be. That's not okay. But if there was a button that said "save the planet but destroy a few (<50) lives," it wouldn't be unreasonable to hit it.
  - albinofrenchy 6y ago
    > But if there was a button that said "save the planet but destroy a few (<50) lives," it wouldn't be unreasonable to hit it. Of course, you are assuming the button actually does what it says. Maybe it just kills 50 people and saves a tree. There mindset reminds me very much of religious men rolling into colonies and being ok with any kind of thing so long as they could maybe save a savages soul or two. Once the argument hinges on grandiose intentions, damn near anything becomes "reasonable" and that is cause for alarm.
    - rhizome 6y ago
      "If we can save/provide for/help just one person, it'll al worth it." ad infinitum. Such trash logic.

by foob4r 6y ago

lend000 6y ago

It's worth noting that most of the competitors are not making cars in California, so he may be correct about that.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jsight 6y ago
Indeed, and you hear far fewer stories like this about NV.
- jeffbee 6y ago
  Except for thousand-word exposés in mainstream newspapers and on cable news networks. https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/11/12/tesla-gigafactory-brings-nevada-jobs-and-housing-woes-worker-injuries-strained-ems/2452396001/ https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/1...
perl4ever 6y ago
I didn't think OSHA was just a California thing. Is the state program really a world unto itself?
- jameskraus 6y ago
  California OSHA is a very different beast from federal OSHA. My wife works in environmental safety (factories are an environment) and she refers to it as "Strict AF". Federal OSHA is basically the bare minimum as to what can be implemented. Most states layer on additional regulations as they see fit. California's Department of Labor, "Cal/OSHA", has the most stringent standards beyond federal OSHA's standards.
- xienze 6y ago
  OSHA standards are basically a federal minimum, states are able to go above and beyond.
- ggreer 6y ago
  They are called OSHA-approved state plans. They have to be at least as strict as federal OSHA to be approved. See the OSHA state plan FAQ[1] for more info. Honestly the OSHA enforcement I've seen has been a joke. One summer when I worked a landscaping job, my employer was fined $5,000 because I was caught using a weed-eater while wearing shorts. (It was hot out and I didn't care if I got an occasional pebble flung at my shins.) My coworkers had similar stories. 1. https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/faqs https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/faqs
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    "I didn't care" That seems like the point. People learn what risks to take from experience; the employer has more experience than new/young employees, so you force them to care. I "didn't care" initially about breathing drywall dust, but later I changed my mind.
    - gumby 6y ago
      And when it's the employer who "doesn't care" the employee rarely has a choice.
    - ggreer 6y ago
      I guarantee that if you drove around and looked at people using weed-eaters that day, at least 1/3rd of them would have been wearing shorts. Heck, I bet the majority of them weren't wearing eye protection. I'm an adult and I can accurately evaluate the risk of pebbles hitting my shins. Unlike dust or toxins, there's no lag between my actions and noticeable harm. Also, the maximum possible harm is limited. Nobody was ever crippled or killed by a weed-eater throwing pebbles at their legs. OSHA's action in this case was entirely unnecessary. Stories from my coworkers were equally ridiculous. One time the company got fined because a worker was wearing earplugs instead of earmuffs. Both block sound just fine! If anything, the earplugs should work better because safety glasses can break the seal of earmuffs.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
- gumby 6y ago
  Cal OSHA is great. We once had a pressure vessel delivered and I discovered a small ding in it. We called the mfr and without looking they said "don't worry about it". We called the cal osha pressure vessel unit about it (they had issued our permit after all) and 5 minutes later had a call from the manufacturer asking what the hell was going on. 45 minutes later someone from cal osha showed unannounced (from Oakland to Redwood City in 45 minutes in the middle of the day -- he must have hopped in his car as soon as we got off the phone wit the receptionist). He decided it was safe and gave us a ticket as evidence. As it happened we were being sued by a welding contractor company who'd sent us unqualified personnel who were not making safe steam welds. We had to cut them all out and we all had them around the shop as "trophies". It was an expensive lawsuit -- hundreds of $K. Since he was a nice guy and clearly knew his stuff, when he asked about them we showed him some and told him about firing the contractor. He said, "give me a copy of that lawsuit". And a few days later that was the end of it! Funny thing about steam pressure vessels: there's no safety barriers against them blowing up (just tons of rules to try to keep that from happening). If that vessel had exploded it would likely have taken out the entire city block, and possibly the elementary school across the street. So we were delighted to follow all the rules. When I was perched on a ladder tweaking some instrumentation I was comforted that that if anything went wrong I'd never know. Some of the California county toxics agencies on the other hand....some too strict and some, IMHO, excessively lax. Word to the wise: f you want to run a (legal!!) drug lab do it in San Mateo county not Santa Clara County.
  - greglindahl 6y ago
    Santa Clara had and has fabs, I don't think San Mateo did.
    - gumby 6y ago
      This is different. I mean crap like the Santa Clara County inspector insisting that our solvents go into metal secondary containment because they are potentially flammable. But they are corrosive and per the MSDS shouldn't be in metal, though plastic is safe. When I asked what she wanted she said, "Are you arguing with me?" In the end I put metal trays (turns out commercial pan pizza pans meet the spec) under the plastic bins. When we moved in there was a copper pipe from one lab to another marked "nitrogen". The previous tenant had had the building declared safe (we had the paperwork) and moved out. When it was our time to move out (raised a large B round, were hiring like mad!) we couldn't get the facility cleared because of this damned copper pipe. Not only did they want it removed but they wanted remediation (I guess in case nitrogen leaked into the atmosphere). I am a packrat so had the previous tenant's paperwork and only that spared us the agony. We were manufacturing product for human clinical trials there -- the last thing we would want was anything toxic or dangerous around!! (the city of Santa Clara had a nice map showing where the water came from and we were on well supply. For the reason you mention we had bottled water brought in, something I would normally refuse to pay for. If you live in Santa Clara don't worry -- only the industrial districts have this problem. The residences are on a safe supply, I think it's even hatch hetchy water).

tenpies 6y ago

Tesla has a very rich history of destroying the lives of whistleblowers and injured workers The Musk apologists in particular are very keen to never talk about this, since based on documents produced under oath, Musk himself is extremely vengeful and personally oversees the retaliation. E.g. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-03-13/when-elon-musk-tried-to-destroy-tesla-whistleblower-martin-tripp https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-03-13/when-elon... There is more of this coming down the pipe in a few weeks, but it's not like the Tesla fans will care. I mean you can basically google "Tesla whistleblower" or "Tesla injury" and get hundreds of results of awful stories that probably don't even happen in sweatshops, but clearly if you're "saving the planet", destroying a few lives is excusable. Like I've said before, Tesla is to EV what blood diamonds are to jewelry.

seph-reed 6y ago
> but clearly if you're "saving the planet", destroying a few lives is excusable You shouldn't put it this way. The point is he was a dick when he didn't need to be. That's not okay. But if there was a button that said "save the planet but destroy a few (<50) lives," it wouldn't be unreasonable to hit it.
- albinofrenchy 6y ago
  > But if there was a button that said "save the planet but destroy a few (<50) lives," it wouldn't be unreasonable to hit it. Of course, you are assuming the button actually does what it says. Maybe it just kills 50 people and saves a tree. There mindset reminds me very much of religious men rolling into colonies and being ok with any kind of thing so long as they could maybe save a savages soul or two. Once the argument hinges on grandiose intentions, damn near anything becomes "reasonable" and that is cause for alarm.
  - rhizome 6y ago
    "If we can save/provide for/help just one person, it'll al worth it." ad infinitum. Such trash logic.