News
Tesla implicated in foreign worker scandal after reports of visa violations
The San Jose Mercury finds that up to 140 low wage workers were used to build the new Tesla paint shop at the Fremont factory. They were supplied with phony B1/B2 visas by foreign companies.
Updated: Tesla has issued a response to the story which can be seen here.
Tesla is justly proud of its new state-of-the-art painting facility capable of scaling up to 500,000 vehicles per year at the Fremont factory, but a report coming from the San Jose Mercury published on May 15 says that underpaid foreign workers contributed to the construction of the paint shop violating terms of their B1/B2 visas.
The Mercury began its investigation after Gregor Lesnik, a native of Slovenia who worked on the expansion of Tesla’s multimillion dollar Fremont factory paint shop in 2015, filed suit against Tesla and several other defendants. Lesnik was seriously injured while working on the paint shop project after slipping on loose tile and falling three stories before breaking both legs, ribs, and sustaining a concussion.
The newspaper reports that in 2014, Lesnik was an unemployed electrician living with his mother in Velenje, Slovenia. His girlfriend was expecting their first child and money was tight. He saw an ad seeking workers placed by ISM Vuzen, a construction company located in Slovenia. Vuzem provides teams of Eastern European workers to build manufacturing plants in Europe and the U.S. Among its clients are Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, Volkswagen, Ford, and Saab.
In March, 2015, Tesla selected Eisenmann, a German-based manufacturer of industrial systems, to expand the Fremont paint shop. Eisenmann claimed it was the most valuable contract in its history at $100 million. Soon it began hiring subcontractors to fill out the work force for the project. It turned to Vuzen for some of those workers.
Vuzen helped Lesnik apply for a US visa. Eisenmann assisted. Robert Keller, its US purchasing manager based out of Chicago, was listed as Lesnik’s U.S. contact. After Lesnik filed his lawsuit, Eisenmann denied that it had any legal responsibility for him.
US immigration officials were told that Lesnik was a supervisor with specialized training who would be working at a paint shop for a BMW factory in South Carolina. Keller told INS in a letter that Lesnik was a “supervisor of electrical and mechanical installation. His assignment will involve multiple border entries,” Keller wrote, “but in no way adversely affect the employment of citizens of the United States.”
That couldn’t be further from the truth, says Rob Stoker, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council of Alameda County. “There’s definitely something wrong with this picture.” He claims a local company lost the bid on the Tesla project party because their labor costs were higher. The job would have meant tens of thousands of work hours and valuable training for local apprentices. “It killed us,” Stoker said. “We had so many people — ready, willing and able — needing this.”
For Lesnik and his fellow employees provided by Vuzen, the work in Fremont paid an average of $5 an hour with no benefits. They often worked 12 hour days, sometimes 7 days a week. He claims that Tesla employees who he worked side by side with were earning up to 10 times as much.
Tesla denies any responsibility for Lesnik, his injuries, or his immigration status. A company spokesperson told the Mercury, “Tesla expects all its contractors and their subs … to comply with all applicable pay laws.” Of course they do. But the real question is, how closely do they look at the status of people working at their facilities?
As with similar worker abuse issues that have beset other companies, such as Apple’s troubles with Foxconn, it is one thing to have high expectations. It is quite another to take adequate steps to ensure those expectations are met. All too often, it is easier to look the other way, especially when millions of dollars are involved.
Source and photo credit: San Jose Mercury
News
Tesla Model S and X customization options begin to thin as their closure nears
Tesla’s Online Design Studio for both vehicles now shows the first color option to be listed as “Sold Out,” as Lunar Silver is officially no longer available for the Model S or Model X. This color is exclusive to these cars and not available on the Model S or Model X.
Tesla Model S and Model X customization options are beginning to thin for the first time as the closure of the two “sentimental” vehicles nears.
We are officially seeing the first options disappear as Tesla begins to work toward ending production of the two cars and the options that are available to those vehicles specifically.
Tesla’s Online Design Studio for both vehicles now shows the first color option to be listed as “Sold Out,” as Lunar Silver is officially no longer available for the Model S or Model X. This color is exclusive to these cars and not available on the Model S or Model X.
🚨 Tesla Model S and Model X availability is thinning, as Tesla has officially shown that the Lunar Silver color option on both vehicles is officially sold out
To be fair, Frost Blue is still available so no need to freak out pic.twitter.com/YnwsDbsFOv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 25, 2026
Tesla is making way for the Optimus humanoid robot project at the Fremont Factory, where the Model S and Model X are produced. The two cars are low-volume models and do not contribute more than a few percent to Tesla’s yearly delivery figures.
With CEO Elon Musk confirming that the Model S and Model X would officially be phased out at the end of the quarter, some of the options are being thinned out.
This is an expected move considering Tesla’s plans for the two vehicles, as it will make for an easier process of transitioning that portion of the Fremont plant to cater to Optimus manufacturing. Additionally, this is likely one of the least popular colors, and Tesla is choosing to only keep around what it is seeing routine demand for.
During the Q4 Earnings Call in January, Musk confirmed the end of the Model S and Model X:
“It is time to bring the Model S and Model X programs to an end with an honorable discharge. It is time to bring the S/X programs to an end. It’s part of our overall shift to an autonomous future.”
Fremont will now build one million Optimus units per year as production is ramped.
News
Tesla Cybertruck Dual Motor AWD estimated delivery slips to early fall 2026
Tesla has also added a note on the Cybertruck design page stating that the vehicle’s price will increase after February 28.
Tesla’s estimated delivery window for new Cybertruck Dual Motor All-Wheel Drive (AWD) orders in the United States has shifted to September–October 2026. This suggests that the vehicle’s sub-$60,000 variant is now effectively sold out until then.
The updated timeline was highlighted in a post on X by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, who noted that the estimated delivery window had moved from June 2026 to September-October 2026, “presumably due to strong demand.”
The Dual Motor AWD currently starts at $59,990 before incentives. Tesla has also added a note on the Cybertruck design page stating that the vehicle’s price will increase after February 28.
If demand remains steady, the combination of a later delivery window and a pending price increase suggests Tesla is seeing sustained interest in the newly-introduced Cybertruck configuration. This was highlighted by Elon Musk on X, when he noted that the Cybertruck Dual Motor AWD’s introductory price will only be available for a limited time.
When the Cybertruck was first unveiled in November 2019, Tesla listed the Dual Motor AWD variant at $49,990. Adjusted for inflation, that figure equates to roughly $63,000 in 2026 dollars, based on cumulative U.S. inflation since 2019.
That context makes a potential post-February price in the $64,000 to $65,000 range less surprising, especially as material, labor, and manufacturing costs have shifted significantly over the past several years.
While Tesla has not announced a specific new MSRP, the updated delivery timeline and pricing note together suggest that the Cybertruck Dual Motor AWD could very well be the variant that takes the all-electric full-sized pickup truck to more widespread adoption.
Elon Musk
SpaceX targets 150Mbps per user for upgraded Starlink Direct-to-Cell
If achieved, the 150Mbps goal would represent a significant jump from the current performance of Starlink Direct-to-Cell.
SpaceX is targeting peak download speeds of 150Mbps per user for its next-generation Direct-to-Cell Starlink service. The update was shared by SpaceX Spectrum & Regulatory Affairs Lead Udrivolf Pica during the International Telecommunication Union’s Space Connect conference.
“We are aiming at peak speeds of 150Mbps per user,” Pica said during the conference. “So something incredible if you think about the link budgets from space to the mobile phone.”
If achieved, the 150Mbps goal would represent a significant jump from the current performance of Starlink Direct-to-Cell.
Today, SpaceX’s cellular Starlink service, offered in partnership with T-Mobile under the T-Satellite brand, provides speeds of roughly 4Mbps per user. The service is designed primarily for texts, low-resolution video calls, and select apps in locations that traditionally have no cellular service.
By comparison, Ookla data shows median 5G download speeds of approximately 309Mbps for T-Mobile and 172Mbps for AT&T in the United States, as noted in a PCMag report. While 150Mbps would still trail the fastest terrestrial 5G networks, it would place satellite-to-phone broadband much closer to conventional carrier performance, even in remote areas.
Pica indicated that the upgraded system would support “video, voice, and data services, clearly,” moving beyond emergency connectivity and basic messaging use cases.
To reach that target, SpaceX plans to upgrade its existing Starlink Direct-to-Cell satellites and add significant new capacity. The company recently acquired access to radio spectrum from EchoStar, which Pica described as key to expanding throughput.
“More spectrum means a bigger pipeline, and this means that we can expand what we can do with partners. We can expand the quality of service. And again, we can do cellular broadband basically, cellular broadband use cases, like AI or daily connectivity needs,” he stated.
SpaceX has also requested regulatory approval to deploy 15,000 additional Direct-to-Cell satellites, beyond the roughly 650 currently supporting the system. The upgraded architecture is expected to begin rolling out in late 2027.

