yesIssie LapowskyNone
×

Get access to Protocol

I’ve already subscribed

Will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

Power

A racial justice protest took part of Tesla’s factory offline last month, an internal employee email says

In an email obtained by Protocol, a Tesla employee told colleagues that a protest following the Breonna Taylor grand jury decision disrupted manufacturing in Fremont.

Tesla factory

Manufacturing in part of Tesla's Fremont factory was disrupted last month during an apparent employee protest, according to an internal email.

Photo: Lauren Hepler/Protocol

A brief disruption to production at Tesla's Fremont auto plant last month — described by the company as an act of sabotage by an employee who was subsequently fired — may have been the result of a protest over the Breonna Taylor grand jury decision, according to an internal email obtained by Protocol.

Tesla's top lawyer said last week that an employee had "maliciously sabotaged" a part of the Fremont factory, then attempted to cover it up, before ultimately confessing. In a message to Tesla workers, the lawyer called the employee's actions "crimes" and violations of the company's policies, but referred only obliquely to the perpetrator's "personal motivations."

But in an email obtained by Protocol, a Tesla engineer told several colleagues that the disruption was the result of a "peaceful direct action protest," following the decision not to charge any police officers in Taylor's killing. The engineer wrote in the email that he wanted to offer "a brief explanation of my behavior that day and how my role at Tesla fits within the broader movement for racial, social and economic justice." He asked a small group of Tesla employees to forward the message on to other colleagues "to whom you feel I owe an explanation."

The engineer went on to share personal stories of harassment by police: being pulled over, handcuffed, stopped and frisked, and having guns drawn on him. "I have done a substantial amount of work over the years to heal from those personal traumas. Unfortunately, the events of 2020 have punctured new wounds and old scars," the employee wrote. "But this is not about me, this is about a system that has little to no regard for Black and Brown bodies. This is about shutting down technocratic oppression in order to open up this nation's bodily and spiritual wounds."

The email was sent on Sept. 30, one week to the day after both the factory disruption and the decision in the Taylor case. The employee's identity is unknown to Protocol, because portions of the email, including the sender, recipients and identifying details, were redacted. But according to another Tesla employee who knows the email's author, it was written by an engineer whose termination was announced on Oct. 5, the same day Tesla announced it had fired the alleged saboteur.

The Tesla employee who spoke to Protocol said that on the day of the disruption, about a dozen engineers, including the email's author, gathered on a conference call, known internally as a "bridge," to deal with the issue. According to the Tesla employee, the email's author told other engineers on the call he had resolved the issue, leading one person on the call to ask jokingly whether the outage had been the result of a prank. The part of the factory that was disrupted was back up and running within a few hours.

In his email, the engineer did not directly confess to causing the disruption at the factory or say he was behind the "protest." Instead he wrote obliquely about the nature of such protests. "Direct action protests within the workplace often occur as a means of expressing the pain and confusion felt daily in the lives of oppressed people," he wrote. "As a Tesla employee, I often wonder where my role sits to advance the causes of Black and Brown liberation all while economically benefiting from the exploitation of historically marginalized Black and Brown labor on stolen Chochenyo Ohlone land."

The engineer wrote that he'd tried to express concerns about Tesla through the company's employee resource groups, but that "there is negligible support provided to ERG leadership for cultural amelioration." Those concerns, the engineer wrote, include the workplace discrimination lawsuits Tesla has faced, the company's use of forced arbitration in handling disputes, its non-solicitation policies regarding labor organizing, and what the engineer called a "paucity" of Black, Indigenous and people of color in technical and management roles.

"To conclude, I have been asking myself: is Tesla a place where people who have experienced profound intergenerational trauma can work and thrive?" he wrote. "I still don't know the answer to that, but the next few days will acutely reveal that for me."

The Tesla employee who spoke to Protocol said they support the engineer's actions, but are concerned as well. "I hope that they'll be OK after this," the employee said.

Tesla didn't respond to questions about whether this employee is the same one Tesla's acting general counsel Al Prescott accused of sabotage last week. In Prescott's email to staff, which was previously reported by Bloomberg, he made no mention of claims that the disruption was the result of a protest. "Whatever the personal motivations of the attacker were, these are crimes, violations of our code of conduct, and are unfair to other employees," Prescott wrote. "We will take aggressive action to defend the company and our people."

According to Prescott's account, the employee who was fired for sabotage "actively attempted to cover his tracks, falsely accused a former co-worker, destroyed a company computer and repeatedly lied during the investigation." Prescott said the employee eventually confessed "after being shown irrefutable evidence" and was terminated.

In the engineer's own email, he said he hoped to be "a catalyst for genuine change" within Tesla, and acknowledged that he was speaking "from a position of privilege" working for the company. But, he added that he understood that "those privileges can easily be stripped away."

Martin Cooper with his original DynaTAC cell phone.

Photo: Ted Soqui/Getty Images

Martin Cooper helped invent one of the most consequential and successful products in history: the cell phone. And almost five decades after he made the first public cell phone call, on a 2-pound brick of a device called the DynaTAC, he's written a book about his career called "Cutting the Cord: The Cell Phone Has Transformed Humanity." In it he tells the story of the cell phone's invention, and looks at how it has changed the world and will continue to do so.

Cooper came on the Source Code Podcast to talk about his time at Motorola, the process of designing the first-ever cell phone, whether today's tech giants are monopolies and why he's bullish on the future of AI.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editor at large. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

People

In 2020, Big Tech reckoned with racial injustice. Its work is far from over.

From Facebook's walkouts to Amazon's facial recognition moratorium, did any of it make a difference?

Racial injustice issues engulfed the U.S. this year, and Big Tech wasn't spared.

Photo: Mark Makela/Getty Images

The movement for Black lives marched straight into the heart of some of Silicon Valley's most powerful companies this summer, with Facebook employees staging a virtual walkout over the company's policies, Pinterest employees speaking out about racism and retaliation they experienced and a parade of tech giants making heartfelt commitments to diversity and supporting POC-focused causes.

But as the year comes to a close, one of those giants, Google, is facing an uproar over the firing of Timnit Gebru, one of its top AI ethicists, after she wrote an internal message to fellow Googlers that criticized biases within the company and within its AI technology. It's a scandal Gebru's supporters argue is emblematic of the costs Black people in the tech industry bear for speaking out on issues related to discrimination every day.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky
Issie Lapowsky (@issielapowsky) is a senior reporter at Protocol, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University’s Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing. Email Issie.
People

Google’s AI ethics team is furious with Jeff Dean

Members of Timnit Gebru's team at Google published a letter calling Google's paper review process discriminatory.

Timnit Gebru's firing has resulted in backlash against Jeff Dean.

Photo: Kimberly White/Getty Images

Google AI lead Jeff Dean is in hot water with members of Timnit Gebru's team at Google, who published a letter Monday challenging his story about Gebru's resignation and calling the research paper review process discriminatory. Gebru's forced departure stemmed from conflict over a research paper about ethical questions for large-language models (which are a big research focus at Google Brain): Google wanted Gebru to take her name off the paper, Gebru threatened to resign, and then Google took that opportunity to remove her from the team.

  • The biggest revelation from the letter is that almost half of all research papers submitted for approval through Google's internal process are done so with a day or less notice to reviewers, despite Dean's claim that the process requires two weeks. He used that claim to justify why Google tried to force Gebru to retract or take her name off of the paper, and this letter seems to debunk that main defense.

More than 1,500 people at Google have signed a petition in support of Gebru and calling for changes to Google's paper review process, including senior engineers and team leaders. Gebru's boss, Samy Bengio, said he was "stunned" at her firing in a post. Others on her team and in the AI ethics community more broadly have written about their disappointment with Dean specifically, who has been a hero for many in the field. Google did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (@ anna_c_kramer), where she helps write and produce Source Code, Protocol's daily newsletter. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

"We could use our workday debating what to do about various unrelated challenges in the world, but that would not be in service of the company or our own interests as employees and shareholders," writes Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong.

Photo: Michael Short/Bloomberg via Getty Images

In 2017, Sergey Brin attended rallies at the San Francisco Airport to challenge Trump's immigration order. In 2018, Microsoft employees protested their company's work with ICE. In 2019, Google, Microsoft and Amazon employees all walked off the job to urge climate change action. It's fair to say that during a divisive presidency, the tech industry — and business leaders writ large — has become much more comfortable speaking out on societal and political issues.

But in 2020, Coinbase's CEO Brian Armstrong said enough is enough.

Keep Reading Show less
Biz Carson

Biz Carson ( @bizcarson) is a San Francisco-based reporter at Protocol, covering Silicon Valley with a focus on startups and venture capital. Previously, she reported for Forbes and was co-editor of Forbes Next Billion-Dollar Startups list. Before that, she worked for Business Insider, Gigaom, and Wired and started her career as a newspaper designer for Gannett.

Politics

Trump’s ban on diversity training sends tech companies scrambling

Experts say the Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping could strong-arm companies into halting the progress they've made on racial sensitivity.

Under the order, the Department of Labor is required to develop rules and build out an enforcement and auditing team to hold companies to the new standards over the next 60 days.

Photo: Brian Blanco/Getty Images

The country's top tech companies are mobilizing against President Trump's executive order barring federal contractors from offering diversity and inclusion training to their employees.

The executive order could force tech companies with large federal government contracts — including Google, Amazon and Microsoft — to decide between continuing to take hundreds of millions of dollars or pursuing efforts to educate their workforce on issues such as systemic racism and unconscious bias.

Keep Reading Show less
Emily Birnbaum

Emily Birnbaum ( @birnbaum_e) is a tech policy reporter with Protocol. Her coverage focuses on the U.S. government's attempts to regulate one of the most powerful industries in the world, with a focus on antitrust, privacy and politics. Previously, she worked as a tech policy reporter with The Hill after spending several months as a breaking news reporter. She is a Bethesda, Maryland native and proud Kenyon College alumna.

Latest Stories