Tesla fined for ‘serious' heat violation at California plant
Although the $13,500 penalty is a pittance for the electric car maker that boasts a market cap of more than $1 trillion, state regulators categorized the company's violation as 'serious,' meaning it could result in injury, illness or death.
The findings stem from Tesla's failure to provide employees working outdoors with adequate cooldown breaks in shaded areas, according to a citation issued by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, known as Cal/OSHA, in December.
Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Cal/OSHA did not provide specifics on the conditions workers experienced at the Fremont plant.
The citation references a section of California's heat safety rules that mandate that employees be allowed and encouraged to take cooldown rests in the shade when they feel the need to do so to prevent themselves from overheating. Any employee who takes this type of preemptive break is supposed to be monitored for symptoms of heat illness by a supervisor and should not be asked to return to work until symptoms have subsided.
Co-founder and CEO of Tesla Elon Musk has had a hostile relationship with the state in recent years, accusing California of 'overregulation, overlitigation, overtaxation.' And the new regulatory scrutiny comes at a time when Musk is leading an aggressive effort to scale back or entirely dismantle swaths of the federal government on behalf of the Trump administration.
The car maker has previously tussled with California workplace safety regulators over conditions at the Fremont plant.
An investigation by The Center for Investigative Reporting in 2018 found that Tesla has failed to report some serious workplace injuries, skewing the company's injury statistics. Tesla rebutted the findings, but Cal/OSHA cited the company the next year for omitting hundreds of injuries listed in logs at its factory from annual summary data that the company sends each year to government regulators.
Tesla also constructed an open-air structure outside its main Fremont vehicle facilities in an effort to speed up assembly and production of its Model 3 sedan, but in 2019 was hit with fines from Cal/OSHA for safety violations, including a failure to obtain a permit to the build the open-air facility, failure to protect workers from exposed metal rods and rebar that posed risks and failure to properly train employees to prevent heat illness.
In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, Musk restarted production at the plant in defiance of a county-wide stay-at-home order, although the company eventually reached an agreement with Alameda County to resume operations. Hundreds of infections were reported in the aftermath of the reopening.
And Cal/OSHA in 2023 slapped Tesla with four safety violations after an employee at the Fremont plant was seriously injured when she got stuck in a Model Y. Tesla had allegedly failed to ensure power was cut to a conveyor belt while workers were performing quality inspections, leading to the worker becoming trapped in the car.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Tesla (TSLA) Rebounds in Spain with 27% Sales Surge in July
Tesla (TSLA) has reported a rise in Spain's electric vehicle (EV) sales after a rocky start to 2025. In July, the EV giant delivered 702 new cars, marking a 27% jump from the same month last year. This increase was aided by an overall rise in the country's EV deliveries, with total sales of electric and hybrid cars up 155%. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. Tesla's sales in Spain are up just 1.1% this year, but July showed signs of improvement. The rise likely came from renewed interest in the updated Model Y and Model 3, helping Tesla bounce back in parts of Europe despite headwinds. Also, in Norway, registrations grew by 83.4% to 838 vehicles, with total sales this year reaching 13,877. This increase was primarily due to Tesla's revamped Model Y and Norway's strong push for EVs. Tesla's gains in Spain and Norway contrast sharply with its struggles elsewhere in Europe. July sales fell in countries like Sweden, Denmark, and France. Key factors affecting Tesla's European market share are growing anti-Musk sentiment, increased competition, and challenges with its product lineup and production. In the second half of 2025, Tesla will aim to keep its positive momentum in Spain and Norway while facing challenges in other parts of Europe. For now, July's strong sales bring an optimistic boost for the EV maker. Is TSLA Stock a Buy? Turning to Wall Street, TSLA stock has a Hold consensus rating based on 14 Buys, 15 Holds, and eight Sells assigned in the last three months. At $310.84, the average Tesla price target implies a 1.08% upside potential. The stock has declined 19.65% over the past six months.
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Tesla (TSLA) Ordered to Pay $242.5M after Fatal Autopilot Accident
A Miami jury has ruled that EV maker Tesla (TSLA) is partly responsible for a 2019 crash that involved its Autopilot system, and ordered the company to pay $242.5 million in damages to the family of the victim and an injured survivor. The award includes $42.5 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages, which was below the $345 million sought by the plaintiffs. The case was heard in the Southern District of Florida and began on July 14. Elevate Your Investing Strategy: Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence. The lawsuit focused on a fatal accident in Key Largo, Florida, where Tesla owner George McGee was driving his Model S with Enhanced Autopilot engaged. McGee dropped his phone and reached down to retrieve it, believing the system would automatically brake for obstacles. Instead, the vehicle accelerated through an intersection at more than 60 mph, crashing into a parked car and striking its owners, 22-year-old Naibel Benavides and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. Benavides died at the scene, while Angulo suffered multiple broken bones, a traumatic brain injury, and lasting psychological harm. Plaintiffs' attorney Brett Schreiber argued that Tesla marketed Autopilot as safer than human drivers and failed to limit its use to highways, which effectively turned public roads into test tracks. Interestingly, the verdict comes as Tesla CEO Elon Musk works to convince investors that the company's autonomous driving technology is safe and has the potential for robotaxi fleets. Despite the news, Tesla shares fell only slightly on Friday and are down 25% year-to-date. What Is the Prediction for Tesla Stock? Turning to Wall Street, analysts have a Hold consensus rating on TSLA stock based on 14 Buys, 15 Holds, and eight Sells assigned in the past three months, as indicated by the graphic below. Furthermore, the average TSLA price target of $310.84 per share implies 2.8% upside potential.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Jury awards over $240 million in damages against Tesla in Autopilot crash lawsuit
A Florida jury on Friday ordered Tesla to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to the victims of a 2019 fatal crash involving its Autopilot driver assist technology. The verdict which comes after a four-year long case could encourage more legal action against Elon Musk's electric car company. A Miami jury decided that Elon Musk's car company Tesla was partly responsible for a deadly crash in Florida involving its Autopilot driver assist technology and must pay the victims more than $240 million in damages. The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his cellphone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months. The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn't happen, settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. 'This will open the floodgates,' said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. 'It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.' The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn't thought it was there. 'We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually defective,' said Benavides' sister, Neima Benavides. 'Justice was achieved.' Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up. 'Today's verdict is wrong," Tesla said in a statement, 'and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,' They said the plaintiffs concocted a story 'blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.' In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 million. 'It's a big number that will send shock waves to others in the industry,' said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. 'It's not a good day for Tesla.' Tesla said it will appeal. Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits punitive damages to three times Tesla's compensatory damages. Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just Tesla's, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will have to pay. It's not clear how much of a hit to Tesla's reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs' lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla's decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. Schreiber said other automakers use terms like 'driver assist' and 'copilot' to make sure drivers don't rely too much on the technology. 'Words matter,' Schreiber said. 'And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they're playing fast and lose with information and facts.' Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said McGee at one point in his testimony. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn't crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: 'The cause is that he dropped his cellphone.' The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver's admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves. (FRANCE 24 with AP)
