snapunhappy

"In Tesla’s internal injury tracking system, a supervisor wrote that a worker couldn’t come to work one day in February 2017 because “his left arm was in pain from installing Wiper motors during his shift.” One worker “fainted and hit head on floor” because “team member was working in a group setting and became uncomfortably hot.” Another employee, a supervisor noted, was “highly relied upon at this workstation” but injured her shoulder from repetitive motion due to an “Unfriendly Ergonomic Process.”

Tesla is required by law to report every work-related injury that results in days away from work, job restrictions or medical treatment beyond first aid. But those injuries were labeled “personal medical” cases, meaning work had nothing to do with them."

Directly from the article - how are those reports, written by tesla, correctly reported?

I think they quite clearly believe that Tesla is lying, otherwise what is the point of the article?

Tesla has not stated any claims by medical professionals and Reveal has only compared what was written in teslas own reporting system with how the incident was categorised when reported officially - So why write one thing internally and then report another category ?

"Hi there, we did this reporting completely independently of the union"

And how do you know that this investigation was paid for directly by anyone and not just with the regular running donations they receive? Why does everything against tesla have to be a conspiracy?

Another quote:

"They said we used old information but the injuries and conditions were were talking about were from 2017 -- and the former health safety professionals (5) who talked to us were from 2017 as well."

Stop drinking the Musk koolaid and read the article and their responses and you will see that it is a generally well-resourced article with multiple current sources and information and examples for the relevant year.If its a hit piece then tesla can sue and win and then you can link it here that Elon was right all along.

That's what the article is about - have you read it? They have actual employees who received major injuries that were not reported correctly - how much more evidence do you need?