News
Tesla emphasizes factory safety, preempts possible smear campaign by auto union
Tesla released a blog post Sunday evening that reemphasizes the company’s goal to become the safest auto factory in the world. The post comes after the United Auto Workers Union (UAW) attempted to rally support earlier this year from Fremont factory workers in favor of unionizing.
Tesla states that it has received several media inquiries over allegations about safety at its Fremont, California factory. The well-timed nature of the inquiries, and similarity in topic, led Tesla to believe that the UAW was spreading anti-Tesla propaganda to the media in an attempt to provoke a response from the public, and from Tesla employees. In typical fashion, Tesla acted quickly and took to the offensive to defend the company’s approach to manufacturing, and maintaining the health and safety of its employees. The company has gone as far as forming dedicated Ergonomics Teams that have exclusive focus on “improving health and safety and reducing ergonomic risk for current and future production”.
“We are building entirely new vehicles from the ground up, using entirely new technology, production, and manufacturing methods, and ramping them at high volume. Getting this right is extremely difficult, and we deeply appreciate the hard work that all our employees do to help us achieve what most regard as impossible.” says Tesla through its blog post.
Tesla notes that in just 15 years, the company has become the largest manufacturing employer in California with over 10,000 production jobs in the Fremont factory and surrounding Bay Area.
Tesla has a proven track record of putting safety first as made evident by the award-winning safety ratings for its Model S and Model X. Vehicles have taken the brunt of the impact for their occupants, have swerved to avoid accidents and have even accelerated to avoid accidents. The innovative safety features Tesla has built into its vehicles is unsurpassed in the automotive world.
Though Tesla’s safety record to date is already better than industry-average, according to its press release, the company indicates that it continues to learn and apply new production processes aimed at improving employee well-being. Among the improvements are:
- Added 3rd shift to the manufacturing schedule to cut overtime because the employees asked for it and it was the right thing to do.
- Hired dedicated Ergonomist and established an Ergonomics team to ensure that current and future Tesla manufacturing lines are ergonomically friendly for employees.
- Model 3 has been designed with manufacturing employee ergonomics in mind. The Tesla Ergonomics Team works closely with design and engineering teams to catch ergonomics issues before they happen and proactively drive these improvements back into the design of the equipment and the car. Yes, you heard that right. Tesla will redesign the car if it is resulting in ergonomically challenging situations for its manufacturing employees.
- Established safety teams in every department which meets regularly to ensure safety is a top focus in its manufacturing operating departments.
These changes are not just skin deep and the company is seeing the results of the changes already. Tesla says it has collectively reduced 52% in lost time incidents and a 30% reduction in recordable incidents in the first quarter of 2017 versus the same period last year. These more granular metrics support an improvement in the industry standard Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) which at the end of Q1 2017 was 4.6, a full 32% better than the industry standard of 6.7.
Anyone who has worked in an industry where safety is important can tell you that a culture of safety awareness is built day by day, month by month over many years. Tesla has a demonstrated history of superior results. The steps it has outlined to drive further improvements at the factory are evidence of a continued focus on safety and its employees.
The full post from the Tesla Blog reads as follows:
Creating the Safest Car Factory in the World
Earlier this year, the United Automobile Workers (UAW) announced it was attempting to organize workers in Tesla’s Fremont factory. The latest phase of their campaign involves a concerted and professional media push intended to raise questions about safety at Tesla.
We have received calls from multiple journalists at different publications, all around the same time, with similar allegations from seemingly similar sources about safety in the Tesla factory. Safety is an issue the UAW frequently raises in campaigns it runs against companies, and a topic its organizers have been promoting on social media about Tesla.
Some of the publications who have contacted us have rejected covering this “story” because they understand it is a misleading narrative based on anecdotes, not facts. However, there will likely be a few publications that choose to publish stories regardless, so we want to make sure the public also has the facts. Watch for these articles to downplay or ignore our actual 2017 safety data and to instead focus on a small number of complaints and anecdotes that are not representative of what is actually occurring in our factory of over 10,000 workers.
First, some context is important. The difficulty of starting a successful U.S. car company cannot be overstated, as evidenced by the fact that Ford is the only other U.S. car company to have never gone bankrupt. We are attempting to break this trend in order to fulfill our mission of accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy.
We are building entirely new vehicles from the ground up, using entirely new technology, production, and manufacturing methods, and ramping them at high volume. Getting this right is extremely difficult, and we deeply appreciate the hard work that all our employees do to help us achieve what most regard as impossible. While we still have a long way to go, in less than 15 years, we have become California’s largest manufacturing employer, creating more than 10,000 high-quality production jobs in the Bay Area, many of which had previously disappeared with the closure of NUMMI under the stewardship of the UAW.
As we work to achieve our mission, nothing is more important to us than protecting the health and safety of our employees. As we look at our safety record in prior years, we realize that we have not been perfect. No car factory is perfect, but particularly given that Model S and X were the first cars we built at more than tiny volumes, we fully acknowledge that they were not designed for ease of manufacturing – far from it. As would be expected, we have since learned many lessons, including how to improve the production process for the well-being of our colleagues.
Here are just some of the improvements that we have made:
- Historically, depending on production needs, some Tesla employees have worked significant amounts of overtime because it was necessary for the company to survive. However, working overtime can be challenging for employees and their families. Last year, we added a third shift to reduce the overtime burden on each team member and to improve safety. We did this because our employees asked for it, and because it was the right thing to do.
- As a result of this change, the average amount of hours worked by production team members has dropped to about 42 hours per week, and the level of overtime decreased by more than 60%. We hired our first dedicated Ergonomist in 2013, and in 2015 established an Ergonomics Team exclusively focused on improving health and safety and reducing ergonomic risk for current and future production.
- In addition to improving the process of building Model S and X, Model 3 has been designed specifically with ergonomics in mind. Our ergonomics team has worked hand-in-hand with our engineers on the design process. As just one example, we created simulations that showed us where reaching or bending by employees was most likely to occur, which in turn allowed us to redesign the equipment and the car to eliminate these issues as much as possible.
- Each department now has a Safety Team that meets regularly to increase safety awareness and recommend improvements, many of which have already been implemented.
- We are continuing to establish health and safety management procedures to scale with our operational growth.
The third shift, ergonomic improvements and increased safety awareness have collectively led to a 52% reduction in lost time incidents and a 30% reduction in recordable incidents from the first quarter of 2016 to the first quarter of 2017. In addition, through the end of Q1 2017, the factory’s total recordable incident rate (TRIR), the leading metric for workplace safety, is 4.6, which is 32% better than the industry average of 6.7. This data shows that there has been a dramatic improvement in employee safety, we are now significantly better than industry-average, and we continue to improve each day. A few anecdotes in a factory of over 10,000 people can always be given, but these are the facts.
Tesla’s safety record is much better than industry average, but it is not enough. Our goal is to have as close to zero injuries as humanly possible and to become the safest factory in the auto industry. We will get there by continuing to ask our employees to raise safety concerns and to keep proposing ideas that make things even better.
The alternative is to stop improving and to instead do what the rest of the industry, including the UAW, has always done. But being industry average would make our safety 32% worse. We care too much about our team to go backwards.
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
News
Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.
The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.
🚨 Close-Up look at Tesla Cybercab without steering wheel: pic.twitter.com/9TXCDeDCz7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2026
Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.
Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders
Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.
Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.
Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled
This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.
FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut
While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.
There Will Be a Lot of Hype
What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.
One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.
It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.
Elon Musk
SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.