Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 290 posts

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#191

Post by bigbillheck »

misslibby wrote: post #179
eesmith wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's irrelevant. The HN comment forum is not government by equal opportunity employment law. The definition of a hostile work environment is not "said something to me I didn't like". Quoting the EEOC at https://www.archives.gov/files/eeo/policy/facts-about-workpl... : "... the anti-discrimination statutes are not a general civility code, Federal law does not prohibit simple teasing, off-hand comments, or isolated i…

Musk has claimed on Twitter that Tesla wasn't allowed to present new evidence, and that the fine would have been 0 with the new evidence. But he says the jury did the best with the given evidence and he respects their decision. I think there is more to the story than CNN reports, also, just because something has been made into a law, it isn't beyond discussion or criticism. There are many bad laws in existence.

Musk claims lots of things on Twitter that aren't true.

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#192

Post by eesmith »

misslibby wrote: post #180
eesmith wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your math doesn't work because the situations are incomparable. jszymborski comments did not break the law. Tesla violations of employment laws regarding a hostile work environment did break the law. Two different juries decided that Tesla broke the law, and that punitive damages were needed to deter that behavior in the future. What law is jszymborski breaking? What court is applicable? None.

Just because something is a law, doesn't imply it is good or justified.

Perhaps you can explain the relevancy of your comment?

Your comment suggests you think financial payment to an HN user with hurt feelings due to another user "not thinking much of his comment" is either good or justified.

I find that hard to believe.

On the other hand, decades ago the US decided that it's neither good nor justified to have a hostile work environment - something I agree with - and put laws and systems into place to enforce that belief.

That's what the lawsuit is about.

Yet I also find it hard to believe you support a hostile work environment.

That makes your comment seen like neither here nor there.

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#193

Post by bryanrasmussen »

thebooktocome wrote: post #185
onethought wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

88 degrees makes sense… you boil water to make coffee… Also you can feel via the cup how hot.

As cousin comment points out, these were the days of styrofoam cups. They are far more efficient heat insulators than today’s standard paper cups. Typically people do not drink coffee at boiling temperature, for the reason that it would burn their mouths and tongues if they did. Perhaps instead of blaming the victim, you might try to sympathize. Third degree burns to the genitals would be life-destroying.

I used to get McDonald's coffee back in those days (to go to work digging ditches), and it was incredibly irritating how long it would take for the damn stuff to cool down so it didn't burn your mouth. Since I have ADHD and a low tolerance for waiting for my caffeine I would drink it, burn the skin of the inside of my mouth, curse out McDonalds, and continue drinking because caffeine!

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#194

Post by bryanrasmussen »

georgyo wrote: post #178
Veen wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this. She bought hot coffee, put it between her legs, and spilled it. If I'd done that, I would feel foolish and blame no one but myself. What reasonable person is surprised that coffee is served hot enough to scald you?

There are three things at play. 1. Styrofoam cups are good heat insulators, so touching the cup does not communicate how hot the contents are. 2. Management intentionally made the coffee too hot. Making the coffee too hot to drink meant people would not get refills because they would drink it more slowly. This is the company knowingly do something unsafe for profit. 3. The award was the amount of money McDonald's mak…

I had forgotten the emails about number 2 thing. pricks.

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#196

Post by _8j50 »

xupybd wrote: post #19
_8j50 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I don't think that is fair. I don't think he has pushed a culture of racism but one of rapid growth. That rapid growth has allowed racism to grow unchecked, and that is a failure of management at the highest level. But, to say that is the same as joining the klan goes beyond hyperbole.

I don't care what caused it, right now he is denying there is a culture of racism that needs to be weeded out despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. I am not saying elon is neccesarily racist but his denial of it and obvious pepetuation of it (and this isn't being called names, look at the actual suits, this is the shit you see in jim crow era movies) means if you support him knowing this you support that also. You can admire his accomplishments but you can't support only part of someome, you support all of this stuff too.

The klan made theit stance obvious they didn't hide it. That's what I am encouraging, if you're going to support racism don't hide behind meaningless excuses.

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#198

Post by meowface »

prepend wrote: post #184
throw0101c wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Liebeck acknowledged that the spill was her fault. What she took issue with was that the coffee was so ridiculously hot — at up to 190 degrees Fahrenheit [88C], near boiling point — that it caused third-degree burns on her legs and genitals, nearly killing her and requiring extensive surgery to treat. > McDonald’s apparently knew that this was unsafe. In the decade before Liebeck’s spill, McDonald’s had received 70…

Also her case forced McDonald’s to change their policy so hundreds or thousands were saved from future burns. I think that’s the main benefit.

Apparently not:

>Since Liebeck, McDonald's has not reduced the service temperature of its coffee. McDonald's current policy is to serve coffee at 176–194 °F (80–90 °C),[38] relying on more sternly worded warnings on cups made of rigid foam to avoid future liability, though it continues to face lawsuits over hot coffee.

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#199

Post by eesmith »

misslibby wrote: post #179
eesmith wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's irrelevant. The HN comment forum is not government by equal opportunity employment law. The definition of a hostile work environment is not "said something to me I didn't like". Quoting the EEOC at https://www.archives.gov/files/eeo/policy/facts-about-workpl... : "... the anti-discrimination statutes are not a general civility code, Federal law does not prohibit simple teasing, off-hand comments, or isolated i…

Musk has claimed on Twitter that Tesla wasn't allowed to present new evidence, and that the fine would have been 0 with the new evidence. But he says the jury did the best with the given evidence and he respects their decision. I think there is more to the story than CNN reports, also, just because something has been made into a law, it isn't beyond discussion or criticism. There are many bad laws in existence.

What lousy lawyers Tesla must have. There were TWO jury trials, and the plaintiff was successful in BOTH of them.

There are also many companies with illegally discriminatory workplace environments in existence.

Just because "pedo guy" Musk claims something doesn't mean it's beyond criticism.

There's always more than what's reported in the news. It's not like we're going to read the court transcripts.

Please be specific about what's wrong with this law, otherwise it seems like you are blowing smoke to minimize Tesla's blame.

I'll quote from the first opinion at https://casetext.com/case/diaz-v-tesla-inc-4 as a starting point:

> The jury heard that the Tesla factory was saturated with racism. Diaz faced frequent racial abuse, including the N-word and other slurs. Other employees harassed him. His supervisors, and Tesla's broader management structure, did little or nothing to respond. And supervisors even joined in on the abuse, one going so far as to threaten Diaz and draw a racist caricature near his workstation. ...

> On Diaz's second day of work, Diaz saw the N-word scratched into a bathroom stall. Id. at 401:6-12. Over the course of his employment, more racist bathroom graffiti was added. Id. at 403:5-15. He encountered swastikas and the phrase “death to all [N-words].” ...

> The jury, in special verdicts, found that: (1) Tesla subjected Diaz to a racially hostile work environment, (2) Tesla was a joint employer of Diaz, (3) Diaz was subject to a hostile work environment caused by a supervisor, (4) Diaz was subject to a hostile work environment caused by a non-immediate supervisor or co-worker, (5) Tesla committed a civil rights violation in a contractual relationship, (6) Tesla failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent Diaz from being subject to racial harassment, and (7) Tesla negligently supervised or negligently continued to employ Ramon Martinez and that action harmed Diaz. ...

> The weight of the evidence is against Tesla's minimization of Diaz's emotional and psychological harm. Diaz testified about the severe consequences he experienced during his time at the factory. See supra Background, Section II.E. Jones similarly testified about the effects on her father. Id. And his psychological expert confirmed all of this, including by performing psychological evaluations to determine whether Diaz was “overreporting” his symptoms. Id. The jury, in short, had ample basis to believe Diaz's testimony that he was severely emotionally harmed.

Given that two different jury trials found Diaz's claims valid, what should the law be to prevent this level of hostile workplace environment?

If $3 million in punitive damages too large, and you think it a smaller one is more reasonable, how much is enough to deter Telsa from having a hostile work environment in the future?

Re: Tesla ordered to pay more than $3M to former worker in racism suit

#200

Post by saiya-jin »

thebooktocome wrote: post #185
onethought wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

88 degrees makes sense… you boil water to make coffee… Also you can feel via the cup how hot.

As cousin comment points out, these were the days of styrofoam cups. They are far more efficient heat insulators than today’s standard paper cups. Typically people do not drink coffee at boiling temperature, for the reason that it would burn their mouths and tongues if they did. Perhaps instead of blaming the victim, you might try to sympathize. Third degree burns to the genitals would be life-destroying.

Well these are well known facts to any kid who is beyond first experience with styrofoam cups, heck apart from appalling chemistry being leaked into drink, I do actually prefer cups that keep temperature longer when ordering drinks. That's the whole purpose if styrofoam here. Heck, there is whole business around thermal mugs for exactly this purpose. Same would be valid for standard tea - you start with cca 100C and its actually how it should be. If you don't like it hot, order something else or go someplace else.

If we would be talking about case of little kid not knowing this type of cup burning themselves, even way less than she did, then that's a completely different story. Or was she also somehow mentally impaired to not understand hot=bad in groin? But as facts are presented, people do themselves harm with stuff that is well known and expected to cause harm.

If I let chainsaw in my lap and accidentally start it somehow via normal way it should be started, well that would be also life-changing injury, and result of my utter stupidity and nothing else. I do get I could sue the company making it, and if in US I can actually win but that's ridiculous.

Sorry, as much as I hate corporations including McDonald for many, many of their transgressions, this one is properly ridiculous even with all the facts stated and all the time passed. There is no end to people getting themselves injured or killed every single effin' day, even right now, doing stupid things with dangerous stuff. Some internet sites are just endless daily streams of records of that, and its pretty damn crazy. So instead of lesson being 'be careful with dangerous stuff, the dangerous part is serious', we bend reality backwards so hot coffee is not hot, just warm, because somebody will put it in their laps, or throw it on another person, or will pour it over their face.

Instead of saying ie - McDonald, please present 2 types of cups, one for people like me, call it 'hot that lasts' and charge extra 20c for it as an added value, and another 'warm coffee that won't burn ya even if you shower in it'. I really don't see actual moral lesson for McDonald in this case. A little bit of personal responsibility expected from citizens would be much, much better lesson for society as a whole.

Post reply on HN