Severely injured worker sues Tesla
> an arc flash threw him back 15 to 20 feet
That requires significant amounts of energy.
> Tesla should have cut electricity to the equipment he was working on, but refused to because the company didn’t want to temporarily stop production.
Umm, WTF? That's insane at mains-level voltages. Sending someone into a live high voltage system is the kind of behavior that might justify charges for gross negligence or even attempted-murder. There is no way they didn't know this would be incredibly dangerous.
> install dozens of “supercharger” stations where electric vehicles can fuel up
That suggests a lot of power in a device designed to move that power quickly at high current. That's the kind of hazard that should require specific training and special handling procedures.
> Cal/OSHA also cited Mark III for not providing “a suitable barrier to prevent accidental contact with energized parts.”
Given the damage, this sounds like a "barrier to prevent accidental contact" wouldn't have offered much protection. This sounds more like a "only touch it with a long non-conductive poll" level electrical hazard.
--
I suggest watching this[1] video that someone posted recently to a different "electrical hazard" story that discusses the dangers if working near high voltages.
This is almost exactly the same kind of headline as Apple being blamed for the Foxconn suicides or injuries. The sub-contracting relationship exists for a reason. The actual employer in question takes on liability for their employees, and saying that Tesla wanted work done quickly is zero excuse. Tesla wanted exactly what was in the contract, and Mark III was trying to give them what they charged for.
If I go to a restaurant that offers 30 minutes or free service, you cannot possibly drag me into it if the cooks cut safety corners because the restaurant is docking their pay for late service while overcrowding the tables.
If there was an arc flash risk he should have been wearing appropriate PPE. Arc flash is something you don’t argue with. It burns and blinds you almost instantly and fires vaporised metal into your torso potentially killing you.
I’d like to understand the policy and procedures and equipment that was available first. A lot of electrical engineers refuse to use the PPE aware of the risks because it’s uncomfortable and takes time to put on.
Here’s typical PPE for that event to give you an idea the dangers involved: https://www.utilityproducts.com/articles/2012/01/arc-flash-p...
From his injuries it was clear he was not using it. Possibly just a flash visor looking at the lack of direct facial injuries and that was it.
The way most safety regulations work is based on due diligence, did Tesla do what a _responsible_ company would do? Did they review training from contractors, do an investigation and come up with a solution to the issue? From solely the article it seems like they didn't and someone in the chain of command needs to realize how safety works.
Safety is a HUGE problem in all industrial workplaces.
Employers always have "extensive protocols" in place, but managers and workers are often pressured to work in unsafe conditions in order to meet their performance goals.
For example, it's very common for workers to avoid donning PPE or properly setting up safety equipment for "simple" yet risky tasks such as routine cleaning of powerful equipment.
It's one of the "would you jump off a bridge just because everyone else did it?" type things, but complacency and peer pressure are real things.
There is always a battle between productivity and safety.
> Safety officials cited Mark III Construction – and not Tesla – with violations following the accident. However, Nguyen’s suit states that Tesla “controlled” the contractor and safety on the worksite.
Seems like a bad contractor ignored safety and now they're blaming Tesla. It will be interesting to see who the court finds responsible here.
With regards to Tesla's liability, I don't see what difference it should make whether Tesla or Mark III Construction is to blame for the accident. "I employed a negligent subcontractor" isn't really much of a legal defense.
Supposedly, Tesla cars are marketed for the ethically minded consumers. I just can't understand how in the hell people are chill with Tesla's safety policies after all the accident reports and former worker's claiming being overworked to death. Some think that this accident is totally not Tesla's fault because the worker was working for some contractor. This is definitely not ok. Their accident numbers are way above the car manufacturing norms and they are playing the numbers game by under-reporting the accidents.
I think one of the main reasons Tesla is given a pass is because the strong cult of personality around Elon Musk, a modern day slaver in a nice suit. Sure he can go ahead and save the world by his eco-friendly cars, save the ultra-rich by building a Mars settlement, but at what cost?
If human life is sacrificed unnecessarily in your quest to save humanity, then what is the point?
Or put another way, let's not lose our humanity while saving humanity.
Really flies in the face of Grimes' statements.
This reminds me of a scene from Jack London's The Iron Heel[1]:
"He lost his arm in the Sierra Mills, and like a broken-down horse you turned him out on the highway to die. When I say 'you,' I mean the superintendent and the officials that you and the other stockholders pay to manage the mills for you. It was an accident. It was caused by his trying to save the company a few dollars. The toothed drum of the picker caught his arm. He might have let the small flint that he saw in the teeth go through. It would have smashed out a double row of spikes. But he reached for the flint, and his arm was picked and clawed to shreds from the finger tips to the shoulder. It was at night. The mills were working overtime. They paid a fat dividend that quarter. Jackson had been working many hours, and his muscles had lost their resiliency and snap. They made his movements a bit slow. That was why the machine caught him. He had a wife and three children."
"And what did the company do for him?" I asked.
"Nothing. Oh, yes, they did do something. They successfully fought the damage suit he brought when he came out of hospital. The company employs very efficient lawyers, you know."
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Iron_Heel