Tesla Workers Speak Out: "Anything Pro-Union Is Shut Down Really Fast"

Submitted by: fancylad 1 week ago in News & Politics


This isn't going to do anything for Tesla's inability to improve its piss poor production schedule.

An excerpt from The Guardian: For two years Dezzimond Vaughn was a well-regarded worker at the Tesla factory in Lathrop, California. Then he became involved in trying to organize a union and suddenly his job was on the line.

“They started changing rules without any remorse,” Vaughn, a 31-year-old former Tesla computer-numeric-controlled (CNC) heavy machinery operator, told the Guardian. He cited a strict attendance policy Tesla implemented and backdated that deducted points from employees every time they clocked in late or were absent. “We started talking about forming a union, because they wouldn’t be able to do the things they’re doing, and they somehow found out I was having meetings at my house.”

Vaughn claims management began to try to push him out of employment once they found out he was helping to lead unionization efforts. “Throughout my last year, we kept bumping heads. I never stopped working, they never had a problem with me as far as the work, but I had a lot of complaints about me. My supervisor said they were trying to fire me.”

In October 2017, Vaughn received a phone call at home that he was being fired by Tesla due to two poor employee performance reviews in a row. He provided his separation agreement with Tesla, which cited “failure to meet performance expectations” as the sole reason for termination. Vaughn said his review scores were changed afterward to warrant his job termination, while the positive comments from his supervisor in the review remained.

Vaughn provided a copy of his employee file and his last two employee reviews. In the reviews, his supervisor calls Vaughn an employee who “does what’s right for the company as a whole” and “can always be counted on by team members to both show up (attendance) and get the job done”, yet his review scores are low rated. In previous employee reviews (January to June 2016, June 2015 to December 2015, and January 2015 to June 2015) before management discovered his role in unionization efforts, Vaughn received high scores, which resulted in promotions.

The supervisor who conducted Vaughn’s last two performance reviews (July to December 2016 and January to June 2017), Tarus Starks, confirmed the review scores were lowered by upper management. “When Dezz came to work under me, his performance was super positive,” Starks said. “I was about to train him for back-up lead.”
There are 27 comments:
Male 9,892
Modern day unions suck balls.  I've belong to two, and will never belong to another.

Their only aim was to protect useless workers and slow production to the lowest possible point.

I think the low point was when one of the union 'brothers' filed a grievance because, 'No one woke me up so I could take my break'.   Yup, they claimed that being awake was not a requirement on his job.

In another instance the forced the company to put a guy into a Finishing Supervisor job, which required lots of reading of gauges and note taking.  The guy was illiterate, could not read nor write, but he was most 'senior'.  So, he sat on his ass while someone else did his job for him (while making less money).

Again, Unions suck balls.
0
Reply
Male 9,342
megrendel Again there ARE  bad unions but the positive they did for the American worker FAR outweighs the negatives that they've brought to America.  Just because some are bad doesn't mean ALL are bad.  What we can see though that Inequality will never be adjusted without workers not having bargaining power.  

How much more data do you need?
1
Reply
Male 9,892
normalfreak2 Just because some are bad doesn't mean ALL are bad.

Yeah, How does the saying go?  99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name.

Unions were the solution to a problem when there was no other solution.  Since then they have become the problem and no longer look out for the interest of the worker. They are now simply corrupt entities more interested in protecting their political clout and income (of the union elite, not the employees).

Many unions have managed to their members right out of a job.
-1
Reply
Male 5,110
One thing about unions is not everyone can belong. in fact the "better" ones are quite elitist. 
1
Reply
Male 9,342
Now here's something to Chew on, I'll start this off by stating it could be a coincidence but if you look at the growing inequality in the United States it seems to coincide with the weakening of Unions.



Collective bargaining is what forced companies to pay their employees a healthy wage that could prevent the worker from needing any Government handouts.  Those of you who don't support Unions could only not support them for a couple of reasons. Unions do have their drawbacks but we are seeing what a non unionized workforce does, it exacerbates Wealth inequality.
2
Reply
Male 9,342
normalfreak2


https://wid.world/country/usa/

If you think this is sustainable you are out of your freaking mind.  It's clear that "letting the free market" do it's thing isn't working.  how much more data do you need?
2
Reply
Male 2,601
normalfreak2   This is the bottom 50% so half make more, and the 1% well those are the ones that have given the ones there jobs. And take the chances with investment and may lose everything. 
  You want to be part of the 1% take the risk.
0
Reply
Male 9,342
casaledana And take the chances with investment and may lose everything. 
  You want to be part of the 1% take the risk.



Some cases that's true, most cases it's not.  Most of the investment was done by Government.  Most technologies nowadays are based around the internet, without DARPA and Government funding half of the industries we have nowadays wouldn't exist to the extent that they do.  It's not Private organizations that are taking risks.  It's  the Government.
0
Reply
Male 2,465
Ask the former Saturn workers how bringing the union in helped them. Can’t right?
0
Reply
Male 9,342
scheckydamon GM Mismanagement

Oh it couldn't have anything to do with GM's poor management of the product could it?
0
Reply
Male 2,465
normalfreak2 Sure it did. But they were a going concern until workers voted in the UAW and they ceased as a brand within 10 years. Funny how BMW. Mercedes, KIA, Subaru and Toyota are thriving and taking care of their employees without the UAW.
0
Reply
Male 9,342
scheckydamon https://www.al.com/news/tuscaloosa/index.ssf/2014/10/employees_of_mercedes_benz_pla.html

https://work.chron.com/average-pay-auto-workers-union-member-24071.html

https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Toyota/salaries?location=US%2FTX%2FSan+Antonio

Looks like the non union guys aren't making that much money in comparison.  

hard to find exact numbers but what I could find in the comparable is the Unions get more pay.
1
Reply
Male 2,465
normalfreak2 Find out how much the union gets in dues and fees then try again.
-1
Reply
6,384
I can't remember which president said it is the duty of every American to fight communism.
Labor unions are the epitome of communism. If you don't think so you don't understand what communism means.
-1
Reply
Male 891
dm2754 disagree completely. Collective bargaining and working together is completely  fine in a capitalist society. But legal protections for union workers anymore than other workers are not. 

Basically if x number of McDonald employees want to join together and say we have skills, we demand higher wages or we wont work, go for it. If McDonald disagree they can replace them with workers who are happy with the terms.
1
Reply
6,384
jayme21 one of the fundamental building blocks of Communism is the right of the workers over the right of the employer.
Another tenant of communism is every worker looking out for every other worker..
Can you think of any differences between unions and communism
-1
Reply
Male 2,601
I remember during the Carter years I think it was UPS decided to go on strike for higher wages. By the time it was over the average worker needed to work 4 years (with there new contract) to make up the money they lost and their union wages that they still had to pay while they were on the picket line.
  I don't remember all the details but their pay was not that much higher and in states like Florida where they had no union they got union wages anyway (florida is a right to work state) The hole thing was a political hatchet job for some reason and the union was trying to make a point, no one made out except the union leaders. 
  There were good reasons for unions in the first place but fed law usually takes care of most of the work related health and low wage problems that made them necessary in the beginning. 
1
Reply
60
unions are for people who cant work hard enough in the real world to make it. cowards.
-3
Reply
Male 12,244
andy_bart no, they're so that upper management can't lord it over people without due process.
1
Reply
Male 2,103
monkwarrior They *USED* to be that.  I'd be happy to be proven wrong on more than an anomaly.
0
Reply
Male 44,403
Companies have always avoided unions. This is news?
Walmart has closed stores laying off  many, many people just to avoid unions. I'd pick on them first.
1
Reply
Male 822
Gerry1of1 C'mon man. Are you seriously going to defend Walmart, of all companies, as a selfless employer of the people? 

Unions aren't always great, but they're better than what happens when Walmart makes the rules.
0
Reply
Male 44,403
profworm   I was defending no one. I was just not ready to vilify Tesla for doing what all companies do and cited Walmart as an example of someone much worse. I don't know how you interpreted that into a "defense".
2
Reply
Male 8,605
profworm I don't think Gerry's defending Walmart at all; quite the contrary.
1
Reply
Male 2,103
profworm I'm with Andy_Bart above on this one.  IBEW screwed my dad out of half his pension. The teamsters took so much from me that I made more money as a bus-boy than I did working their warehouse.  The last union I dealt with was propped up by the lazy workers and the ones who produced wanted to get them out of the company.

Unions USED to be worth something, now they take your money to run political campaigns and on rare occasions, they may help the worker.  (in my experience)
1
Reply
Male 9,342
insaneai Again how is that different than what companies do to their employees.  There are definitely bad unions, in fact, there were too many of them, but in the grand scheme of things not a lot of them were bad. 

A lot of the reason we have worker protections were due to unions.  Time off, vacation, Sick pay all things that came from Unions.

We know Unions CAN work, hell they did more for  inhibiting wealth inequality than what's going on right now ever did. I've yet to find any data that supports the conclusion that wealth inequality is kept at bay by getting rid of unions.  That's CLEARLY not the case.
1
Reply
Male 2,103
normalfreak2 Um, Water The Flowers are you on about?  I talk about how Unions have turned into useless political engines that no longer support the worker and you go into wealth inequality.

You're better than this so I'm going to assume you mixed some other stuff into the response to me or left something out that would reveal your intended context.  Please take this as the compliment is intended to be; I think more of you than I do of your response.

A lot of the reason we have worker protections were due to unions.  Time off, vacation, Sick pay all things that came from Unions.

Not really.  Those things came from economic restrictions on hiring to attract workers and keep them.  

I can agree that unions did a lot to help workers in the past.  I can agree that Unions could begin helping workers again in the future but they have to get out of politics first.  I cannot agree that I engaged you in this topic with wealth equality as part of the topic so your response is falling short on me.

You don't need unions to demand and get a fair wage, you need to be willing to demand the wage and walk away when they won't give it to you.  Nothing is worth more than someone else is willing and able to pay for it, including a worker's time and skill.  Wealth inequality will continue until the people who work refuse to work so cheaply...….Enter the original reason for unions; banding together is more effective than one at a time.
-1
Reply