Forklift Driver Klaus – The First Day on the Job
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forklift_Driver_Klaus_%E2%80%9...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-lc70Mjp-U
Gore and funny !
„For comparison: Converted to the number of employees, this is three times as many emergencies – in a similar period of time – as occurred, for example, at the Audi factory in Ingolstadt.“
I wonder about this as well. It would make sense that a brand new factory that is rapidly growing would experience more safety issues. No idea if this is a reasonable increase though.
I wouldn't get too hung up on statistical significance here. Whenever someone brings up statistical significance, I always like to ask: "significant with respect to what? by what standard?"
However it might be interesting to consider whether 3x is normal for all new production facilities. But that's a separate question.
But importantly, did it? Did you look into and compare audi's first year safety record before making this suggestion?
Even the article is cashing in on Musk's controversial image. Instead of saying it's a Tesla factory they awkwardly write:
> Tesla boss Elon Musk’s factory
Elon only owns 13% of Tesla so that framing is quite wrong, it's not his factory, why do you think they write like that?
Tesla don't need to invent safety standards they only need to implement them.
BTW you can't compare the first year of the Audi factory with the first year of Tesla because the Audi factory is much older and back then totally different safety standards existed.
Safety standards aren't some black and white thing where you can meet them by exactly following some rules set down in a rulebook.
If you know something is dangerous (or a reasonable man would have known), you can't do it, even if there isn't a specific rule against it. And often you learn things are dangerous through experience.
Yes, this is exactly the point people are making. Tesla has had the opportunity to learn from the experiences of other manufacturers and should be applying those lessons as they begin operations.
This isn't Tesla's first try so the excuse isn't valid
For example, are more incidents reported by British Airlines or Aeroflot? Now, which would you rather fly on?
"documents from the rescue centers also documented that Tesla boss Elon Musk’s factory requested an ambulance or helicopter 247 times in the first year after opening alone."
So this is not simply about incidents in the sense of some hickup that is worthy of reporting, but incidents where probably people gut hurt.
Hence I'm not sure if the airline comparison really applies here.
(Tripped and fell onto the ashes of a fire aged 10, knocked unconscious by a trampoline aged 11, testicular torsion in 2005, hit by an inattentive driver at low speed in the late 00s, 20mm by 1mm by 1mm gouge along a finger from opening a tin of tomatoes during lockdown being the only one on this list where I went by tram instead of ambulance).
(Not that this means they're fine or there's no room for improvement; it's just that this feels like a rerun of the memes about Foxconn and suicide nets, as both completely lack a sense of scale for the workplace place and how much everywhere else also fails, and also as an attempt to demonise rather than to be the "rising tide" that is supposed to "lift all boats").
> In Germany, all work accidents must be reported.
*Amazing videos, can really recommend them. https://www.youtube.com/@USCSB/videos
The real problem is that there are about 2000 OSHA inspectors in the country, working out of about 100 offices, and serving more than 100 million workers.
About half of the states have their own OSHA organizations, but I don't know much about how effective they are. In the northeast where I grew up most of the state-run OSHA orgs only dealt with state/county/city government jobs and left private employers to Federal OSHA.
There are tons of managers in the USA who will pressure people who've been injured into not reporting an incident or lying about where/how it happened. Companies can get away with this for years before anything happens to them.
I think I read that somewhere, but not certain!
All accidents, no matter how minor, have to be documented and the documentation kept for 5 years though.
However no
"factory requested an ambulance or helicopter 247 times in the first year after opening alone"
That's crazy, 5 times a week
I've been hit on the head by a wrench falling like 20ft (while wearing a hard hat), and it kind of hurt.
That being said; yes, this has been an operating modal for Tesla from the beginning. California had to sanction and fine the company multiple times before they started operating lawfully and reasonably.
The perpetual "at will is abusive by design" argument doesn't apply to a) Good Faith covenant states and b) places where the reward for abuse far outweighs a continued employment.
I've lived and worked in both places, I can assure you that the standards are pretty similar. The main difference being that issues in California are generally handled via civil suit, while Germany handles them through a government board.
You're welcome to compare Cal/OSHA regulations:
https://www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/dosh_publications/trainingreq.ht...
To BMAS regulations (and Bundesländer extensions) and try to find something they do to an amazingly higher standard, however.
That sounds like a pretty big difference, and not one that favours california. Having to lawyer up is a big barrier?
As to your latter point, labor suits are pretty heavily in favor of the worker and it's not hard to find a lawyer who will take a case on concession. Fees are also capped, delayed to completion and generally on the losing party to cover. So "the barrier" is as low as you want to consider the solidity of the case.
Considering worker's comp and civil suit structuring are the two pieces of legislation that are most heavily attacked by corporations in California, I wouldn't consider them ineffective; it's certainly a matter of perspective, however.
Not sure why you limit the issue this way, given the strong cultural differences in rule following.
In case you are talking heavy machinery in the lumber yard, alcohol is a no go there now. School friend of mine lost his apprenticeship due to liver problems ~ 15 years ago. It was considered too dangerous to have him work with saws as it couldnt be ruled out that he could pass out and fall into one. Relative of mine also lost his job as a truck driver due to substance abuse despite it not reaching the threshold for loosing his driver license.
This is not to say there arent deadly accidents in Germany. Friend of mine builds electrical substations and the company has regular (deadly) high voltage accidents. Roughly one or two a year since he has been there (not on his site but across all projects of the company). Sadly often unskilled laborers that didnt understand the safety instructions due to language barriers. So falling through grids covering open high voltage or digging up a line.
Since it has been mentioned elsewhere that the threat of lawyers is higher in the US, in Germany you are personally liable in many industries. So those dead workers lead to criminal investigations into the people in charge which can mean years in prison and fines. Technically the company is banned from helping with the fines but there seem to be some bonus payments happening if your company isnt a complete shit. Its still not something you risk as it means you will have a few horrible years in front of you even if you end up being cleared.
Edit: That liability, which also covers shortcomings during the build process discovered later is the reason he is currently looking for another job.
Don't know where you got the idea it's different in California. What do you think happens if you negligently lead to deaths? It's as criminal in California to negligently kill your employees as it is in Germany. It's not some lawless land of corporate freedom.
The original post specifically mentioned that the government sanctioned and fined the company to curtail their abuses, they just didn't lead to any directly attributable deaths.
I think we might be talking past each other. I am not talking about employers but technical staff. Those are employees themselves with no human resources responsibility.
edit: I think the intention is to keep management strictly out of real world safety critical decisions. To simplify, if you got an MBA your opinion is meaningless when it comes the safe running of the physical site.