> In fact, we have a large number of employees who request to work on GA4 based on what they hear from colleagues and what they have seen first-hand
Wonder if the Tesla spokesman has a desk there. Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work. Equal maybe but certainly not better than a factory building that was not put up in a hurry to meet demands.
In any manufacturing job the "get it done" mantra is pretty much guaranteed to rear its head from time to time. Issuing such a strong blanket rejection for every single point really undermines the rejection.
> Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work.
It's in Fremont California where the weather averages 49-69F with extremes being 42F and 79F. It's outside so constantly moving fresh air, and it's covered so no sun beating down. The ends of the tent appear to be open letting natural light in and allowing you to look out at the sky.
Contrast that to a typical factory that's a climate controlled coffin.
I have no experience working in a factory setting but it seems like it's the difference between running outside vs indoor on a treadmill.
I worked in a factory for a couple of weeks putting radiators on Defenders [0].
The work was extremely boring (30 second task repeated 8 hours a day) but temperature / conditions were never an issue. Workers were looked after seemingly well.
I guess my point is that the climate of the region is such that I don't see it being an issue to be "outside" and that it might be more pleasant than an actual factory, then again I'm ignorant to the dress code or actual temperature of a typical automotive factory.
The temperatures you listed are close to freezing (sometimes below freezing). Are you sure working in a tent at those temps is "pleasant"? The chances of the tent providing the same levels of climate control as the factory building are close to none which is why workers had to use the radiators against company policy. And the policy makes sense given the clear danger of a fire.
> The temperatures you listed are close to freezing (sometimes below freezing).
None of the temperatures listed were close to or below freezing. Freezing is 32 degrees Fahrenheit, the lowest temperature I mentioned was 42F which is 10 degrees above freezing.
> Are you sure working in a tent at those temps is "pleasant"?
I listed the min and max temperatures as well as the the average min and max temperatures for a reason. The average min temperature is 7 degrees warmer than the min and both would occur overnight.
Is the tent a 24 hour operation? If not then it's unlikely that workers would have to endure the "freezing" 42F weather at all.
> In Fremont [...] the temperature typically varies from 43°F to 82°F and is rarely below 35°F or above 92°F.
From the link I posted below. Rarely below 35F (~1.5C) is still pretty damn cold. Would you want your workplace to be "just about freezing" once in a while? What I mean is I'm pretty sure Tesla's statements are the regular PR thing any company in their position would put out, they just exaggerated a bit with "they actually insist on it". Maybe they took an existing example and didn't mind implying it's a general thing.
You're just deflecting, those people complaining have a point. Even excluding the "comforting fact" that it's only literally freezing "rarely", having to work full shifts even at an average low of ~6-8C/43-46F, and an average high of ~16C/62F (official weather data for Dec/Jan/Feb) for ~3 months is still damn uncomfortable if not dangerous. Enough to warrant taking dangerous measures in such an environment like using a space heater. Would you like you day job to be a choice between "freezing" and "risking life threatening fire"?
If the tent would be the better choice that people actually ask for, you'd expect more of them popping up in that kind of climate. It's just the cheap and fast choice (for the company) and these are the downsides (for the employees).
I'm not deflecting anything. You quoted some PR that said "we have a large number of employees who request to work on GA4" and said "Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work."
I pointed out that, by your own admission, for ~9 months of the year the climate is fine AND it's outside as possible reasons for choosing to work in the tent.
The original quote doesn't say employees requested permanent positions or even year round. Two employees requesting to work 1 shift in the tent during ideal conditions would still make the statement true.
Why is that so far beyond your comprehension? You're fixated on the fact that it gets cold at night in the middle of winter as proof that no one would ever request to work in the tent ever.
I think you're just being contrary and difficult which may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda.
The year has 12. If you have to selectively pick the part of the year or of the job that supports your point then you need to widen your view. You can't just ignore whatever contradicts it. I'll rephrase: off the top of my head I can't think of a reason for a "large number of employees" to want to work in that tent without any significant disclaimers attached to the request. "Only in good weather" or lack of awareness (not realizing that work conditions are bad part of the year) would be such disclaimers.
> Why is that so far beyond your comprehension
Because if people hate it 25% of the time it still makes Tesla's statement disingenuous and supports the complaint.
> may or may not be because you have a hidden agenda
Why is this always the go to response whenever someone criticizes Tesla (short sellers!)? If you need to try to discredit me to counter my argument then I'm making a pretty strong argument.
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
The statement you questioned didn't provide any context, you're being presumptuous (e.g. An employee will only request to work outside year round, no less) which is why you couldn't fathom why someone might ask to work outside and thus concluding the statement was false.
Your description suggests the tent is actually better than the factory building in such climates (even ones with occasional below freezing temperatures). I have to ask why Tesla didn't go for a tent from the start. The logical conclusion is that the factory building provides necessary extras that still justify the incredibly high costs.
And the extremes you mention are still averages. So with an average low of 43F (~6C) in December [0] you may see minimums of just over 30F (-1C) so it's perfectly conceivable that it can get pretty uncomfortable to work. Same applies to summers, possibly to a lower extent.
> Your description suggests the tent is actually better than the factory building in such climates (even ones with occasional below freezing temperatures).
No, the op was struggling to think of a reason why a worker might request to work in a tent.
I suggested that it might be due to the climate.
You're arguing that it's inconceivable that anyone in that climate might volunteer to work outside because one time in the last 4 years the temperature got down to 32F in the dead of winter in the middle of the night.
Have you ever been to Fremont? It's gorgeous year round.
I am the OP and I’m still struggling to understand how working in a tent at potentially freezing outside temps (see link above for minimums and average minimums) can be anywhere close to comfortable. You have to keep in mind that work doesn’t stop on those days (or nights). And I’m pretty sure it’s not just a 9-5 shift.
Obviously the people found the need for radiators which can be very dangerous in that environment.
Wonder if the Tesla spokesman has a desk there. Off the top of my head I can't imagine a reason why the tent would be such a great place to work. Equal maybe but certainly not better than a factory building that was not put up in a hurry to meet demands.
In any manufacturing job the "get it done" mantra is pretty much guaranteed to rear its head from time to time. Issuing such a strong blanket rejection for every single point really undermines the rejection.