By on June 12, 2018

Tesla Supercharger

An increasingly murky legal battle has pitted one-time Tesla safety director Carlos Ramirez against his former employer.

In his lawsuit against the automaker, Ramirez claims he was terminated after exposing improper logging of workplace injuries, lending weight to a report published by Reveal earlier this year. Tesla says Ramirez’s firing had nothing to do with his safety findings and everything to do with his behavior towards fellow employees.

The lawsuit, exposed by Jalopnik, claims that Ramirez, who took on the role of Director of Environmental, Health, Safety, and Sustainability at Tesla after serving a similar function at Tesla subsidiary SolarCity, was terminated after presenting the results of a safety audit of the automaker’s Fremont, California assembly plant.

Ramirez had been asked to create a safety program for the plant. In the suit, he says trouble arose after an audit of the Tesla Incident Reporting System showed “numerous instances of lack of treatment of Tesla employees that suffered workplace injuries, recordkeeping violations, and improper classification of workplace injuries to avoid treating and reporting workplace injuries.”

In addition to the alleged injury reporting discrepancies, Ramirez claims the Fremont plant was home to unsafe working conditions, which included oil spills and chemical fires.

The former safety director says, after revealing his findings to Tesla at a May 7, 2017 meeting, the automaker “made allegedly untrue statements to the state and the public based on incorrect OSHA 300 records and incident rate numbers.”

Tesla terminated Ramirez the following month. The suit alleges, “Among other adverse employment actions, Tesla wrongfully accused Plaintiff of bullying, brought unfounded complaints against him, and terminated Plaintiff’s employment on June 8, 2017.”

In a response to Jalopnik, a Tesla spokesperson said Ramirez, who was with the company for “less than four months,” was brought on to beef up the company’s safety program, and that terminating him for fulfilling this task “would make no sense.”

Instead, Tesla says the termination came about after an investigation into the claimant’s behavior.

“Mr. Ramirez was terminated because after an extensive investigation, it was clear that he had engaged over and over again in harassing workplace behavior and used extremely inappropriate language that violated any reasonable standard,” the Tesla spokesperson said. “We conducted our investigation after we received an onslaught of complaints about Mr. Ramirez’s behavior, with nearly a dozen different employees stating that he engaged in clear bullying, sought to intimidate his colleagues, and repeatedly made inappropriate comments about women.”

The company then detailed specific complaints it says were lodged against Ramirez. The claimant’s allegations of possible labor law violations went unmentioned in the statement.

[Image: Tesla]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

12 Comments on “Former Tesla Safety Director Sues Over Termination...”


  • avatar
    Sub-600

    Musk doesn’t seem to be big on safety, that of his employees or the public. Perhaps they should change the name from Tesla to Triangle Shirtwaist Motors.

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus

    Well, [insert automakers name here] also fired someone at some time, so its okay if Tesla does it.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    “improper classification of workplace injuries to avoid treating and reporting workplace injuries”

    My former employer did this. They gloated over how many million worker-hours they had accumulated without a workplace injury, yet people knew different. One worker suffered a shattered elbow which didn’t count because he was a contractor.

    However, Mr Ramirez’ very brief stint at Tesla leads me to believe the company in this case, even if some of his allegations about workplace injuries are true.

    • 0 avatar
      ScarecrowRepair

      Same here. It is possible they hired him and expected him to whitewash safety reports, but it seems much more probable that he has a potty mouth and abusive personality. I especially doubt thay’d say they have a lot of complaints when they don’t; that would be the kind of lying that would get a judge’s or jury’s attention mighty fast.

      • 0 avatar
        tonycd

        Given Tesla’s already well documented history of trampling its workers (starting with the justification of constant overtime by telling them on arrival that “changing the world isn’t a 9-to-5 job,”), I sincerely doubt they care if their employees’ ears were burned by a potty mouth and abusive personality. Even if those charges were true, rest assured they’d have been tolerated if he’d played ball with the other, more profit-centric abuses he was likely expected to whitewash.

        • 0 avatar
          Erikstrawn

          In my mind I’m imagining Ramirez delivering his safety report with a lot of “WTF? We can’t do stuff like this!” and shaking documentation at board members. I’m imagining him getting very concerned and very agitated, which is the excuse they used to fire him. *Or* He could just be a real jerk. I wasn’t there, I don’t know, but you know where my money is.

  • avatar
    stingray65

    Maybe they should move the Autopilot designer into plant safety management, and start watching those assembly robots start crashing into walls and parked robots.

  • avatar
    Master Baiter

    “…and repeatedly made inappropriate comments about women.”

    Well, that tears it. He violated the 0th commandment. He should drop his lawsuit now.
    .
    .

  • avatar
    turf3

    Here’s my theory:

    The safety director discovers a bunch of stuff not being done right. Being a crusty old manufacturing guy not a Silicon Valley nu-male, he starts leaning on people to clean up their act, using phrases like “you blankety-blank, you need to get this blank cleaned up right blank now or your blank is out of here!”

    When, instead of backing him up, upper management instructs him to whitewash the safety risks and violations he is trying to get fixed, he responds with statements like “you blankety-blanks are just trying to cover this blank up. Just you wait till some poor blank gets his head crushed or burned to a crisp, and then the blank is really gonna hit the blanking fan! If you blankety-blanks think I’m gonna sit her and be your blanking fall guy, you got another blanking think coming!”

    Whereupon suddenly they discover that he’s being abusive and using improper language.

    How much you want to bet it went down pretty close to what I’m describing?

    Once again the Silicon Valley arrogance comes through. “We don’t need to actually learn anything about how to make automobiles in a mass production factory; we’re from the Bay Area, about which the universe revolves, so we already know everything there is to know!”

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Syke: Ah yes, the Mark III-IV-V, Ford’s attempt to build a ‘commercially relevant’ version of the...
  • DenverMike: I’ve driven V8 cars and trucks over a million miles, from new but most starting with over 150K, unknown...
  • jack4x: Gorgeous vehicle, but what stood out to me most was the $7500 invoice price on a $10,000 car. Imagine dealers...
  • MrIcky: @EBFlex-this is the last of my commentary on the subject. Right, wrong, whatever I don’t know what the...
  • Jeff S: Congratulations on retirement I just retired the end of last year and I don’t drive as much either...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber