Tesla N-Word Racism Trial: Lawyer Calls Slur a 'Term of Respect and Endearment'

Tesla's N-word racism trial opened in California with the company's lawyer arguing that the slur can be a 'term of respect and endearment' within some Black communities.

Tyree P. Jones Jr., Tesla's trial lawyer, made the argument during opening statements before Alameda County Superior Court Judge Peter Borkon. The California Civil Rights Department is suing Tesla over allegations of racial harassment, discrimination and retaliation at its Fremont factory.

The case is being heard without a jury. Judge Borkon will decide whether Tesla violated California civil rights laws, with the trial scheduled to continue through 30 October.

The CRD filed the case on 9 February 2022, under the Fair Employment and Housing Act and California Equal Pay Act. Its amended complaint alleges racial harassment, discriminatory employment practices, unequal pay and retaliation involving Black workers.

The case should not be confused with a separate private lawsuit involving more than 6,000 Black workers. In that litigation, Judge Borkon ruled that the workers could not proceed against Tesla as a class.

What Tesla's Lawyer Argued in Court

According to contemporaneous courtroom reporting, Jones cited the use of the N-word in music to argue that its meaning can vary within Black communities. He also told the court that the N-word itself was not the issue being tried.

The argument came as the CRD alleged that racial slurs were used against Black workers at Tesla's Fremont plant. The department's case alleges that Tesla failed to address years of complaints about racial slurs and racist writing or graffiti.

The CRD also alleges that Black workers were segregated into lower levels of the workforce. It says they were not promoted into executive, senior official and management positions at Tesla.

The department's allegations extend beyond language. Its case includes claims concerning assignments, compensation, discipline, promotion, termination, constructive discharge, retaliation and unequal pay.

Tesla has denied wrongdoing. Reuters reported that the company says it does not tolerate discrimination and has fired workers found to have engaged in misconduct.

The court has not determined whether the allegations are true. The trial is intended to establish whether Tesla is legally responsible for the alleged conduct.

The CRD has also alleged that workers, supervisors and managers referred to the Fremont factory as the 'plantation'. It says Black workers were referred to as 'slaves'.

Those allegations provide the wider context for the dispute over the meaning and use of the N-word in the workplace. They do not, however, establish liability before the court reaches a decision.

Witness Dispute Adds Another Legal Issue

The opening days of the trial also brought allegations about contacts between Tesla's legal team and potential witnesses.

Former Tesla worker Ryan Edwards testified that senior Tesla corporate counsel Timothy Kim contacted him before the trial. Edwards said he initially believed the lawyer was working for the state.

Edwards testified that Kim later discussed Tesla, his employment and potential settlements with him. He also said Kim offered to represent him, despite Edwards already having a lawyer, according to courtroom reporting.

CRD attorney Juan Gamboa also told the judge that the agency had been unable to reach at least four other potential witnesses. He alleged that Tesla's lawyers had approached those people before trial.

Gamboa asked the court to prevent Tesla's counsel from contacting people on the agency's witness list. Judge Borkon did not immediately rule on that request, according to the courtroom account.

These claims remain allegations. They should not be described as witness tampering or other professional misconduct unless the court makes such a finding.

The financial consequences could also be significant if the CRD establishes liability. Reuters reported that California's workplace-discrimination law does not impose the same damages cap applicable under federal law.

The proceedings therefore involve more than a dispute over language. The judge is considering allegations about workplace treatment, pay, job assignments, promotions, retaliation and Tesla's response to complaints.

The trial is scheduled to continue through 30 October. Until Judge Borkon issues his findings, the allegations against Tesla remain unproven.

For Tesla, the proceedings put its workplace policies and handling of racial-harassment complaints under direct judicial scrutiny. For the CRD, the case is an attempt to establish liability over alleged employment practices at the Fremont facility.