(Reuters) – A u.s. federal judge dismissed a Tesla Inc’s effort to dismiss claims by two former employees of the California electric-car in the factory where she worked, was a hotbed of racial hostilities, to pave the way for a possible court case.
FILE PHOTO: Tesla’s superchargers have been shown to be a docking station in Santa Clarita, California, USA October 2, 2019. REUTERS/Mike Blake
In a ruling Monday, U.s. District Judge William Orrick in San Francisco found that the open-ended questions related to the question of whether A Diaz, and his son, Demetric, Di -, az are faced with a “severe and pervasive racial harassment” in 2015 and 2016, with the Tesla factory, in the outskirts of Downtown, which employs more than 10,000 people.
The plaintiffs, who are black, said they were subjected to repeated racial epithets, dozens of times, as well as a racist cartoon, and that the regulators are employed in, or did little to stop the racism.
Orrick said, Diaz was able to pursue claims that the Tesla is not allowed, and if you fail to take reasonable steps to stop the racial harassment.
He said the punitive damages could be, if Tesla have known about the harassment, and “confirmed” it, even if only to lower-level employees directly involved.
“The n-word is, perhaps, the most offensive and inflammatory racial slur in the English language, a word expressive of racial hatred and intolerance,” Orrick wrote. “This case goes to trial.”
A trial has been scheduled for the 11th of May, by the year 2020.
Tesla and his lawyers to respond immediately to requests for comment.
The Palo Alto, Calif. – based company has been faced with a multi-racial, harassment suit, but that is not the only manufacturer to face such claims in the past few years.
By 2017, Ford Motor Co. agreed to pay $10.1 million to settle a federal investigation into alleged harassment at two Chicago plants.
Tesla is in the court papers, it said that it “did not hesitate” to address many of the abuses at the factory in Fremont, and there was no evidence of “oppression, malice or fraud.”
Orrick also said that Diaz was able to pursue claims against a temporary employment agency that assigned him to a factory, and as a liaison between the Model and the agency.
Lawrence Organ, and the plaintiffs’ lawyer, said his clients are seeking damages in the millions of dollars.
“Tesla’s not sending the message that this type of behavior in the workplace is not allowed,” he said in an interview.
Owen, Diaz said he had worked at the Rate of up to 11 months as an elevator operator, while Demetric Di-z has, for the past two months as a production assistant.
The accusations included a claim that Diaz, a supervisor, admitted to the drawing, a cartoon, a black and white face, a person with a bone in his hand,” and the words “booo,” presumably short for “jigaboo.”
“People can’t take a joke,” Diaz said to the foreman, told him about it.
In the case of Di-z-et al v Tesla, Inc., et al, U. S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 17-06748.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Grant McCool