Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday March 19 2020, @10:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the first-things-first dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

The San Francisco Bay Area is in lockdown to fight the spread of the coronavirus. Under a "shelter in place" order announced Monday, people in seven Bay Area counties are prohibited from leaving their homes except for essential activities like visiting the doctor or buying food.

Tesla's Fremont car factory is in Alameda County, which is participating in the lockdown. But Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been defiant. In a Monday evening email, he told employees that they could stay home from work if they felt sick. However, he wrote, "I will personally be at work" on Tuesday.

But late on Tuesday, the Alameda County Sheriff's office fired a shot across Tesla's bow:

Alameda County's Monday order directed businesses in the county to "cease all activities at facilities located within the County except Minimum Basic Operations"—like processing payroll.

[...] Tesla's stock plunged on news that Tesla could be forced to shut down its Fremont factory. As of publication time, Tesla's stock is down more than 11 percent at $380. That's down from a high above $900 the stock hit just last month—before the economic impact of the coronavirus became clear.

Other car stocks are also being hit hard. Ford's stock is down 12 percent, while GM's stock has fallen 21 percent since Tuesday's close.

[...] But American automakers are hoping to keep running their factories in the United States. On Wednesday, Detroit's Big Three automakers announced tentative deals with the United Auto Workers to continue manufacturing. Under the deals, carmakers will reduce operating hours to provide more time for deep cleaning between shifts. They will also take measures to increase the physical distance between workers—though details about this remain to be worked out.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday March 19 2020, @05:08PM (4 children)

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday March 19 2020, @05:08PM (#973248) Journal

    Maybe... I don't know what the factory is like. Quite possibly it's automated enough that it would be reasonably safe.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 20 2020, @02:10AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 20 2020, @02:10AM (#973370)

    Regardless, Pedo Guy ignored a direct order from the authorities.

    In news just in, the factory will close as of next Monday.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 20 2020, @01:09PM (2 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 20 2020, @01:09PM (#973461) Journal

      Regardless, Pedo Guy ignored a direct order from the authorities.

      And? If he had good reason to ignore the direct order, then something we need to consider. Not merely treat the authorities as unquestionable.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 20 2020, @09:17PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 20 2020, @09:17PM (#973628)

        Is "don't want to disappoint the stockholders" a good reason to ignore a public health warning? Perhaps, but it probably depends a lot upon which chair at the table you're sitting in.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday March 21 2020, @01:43AM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 21 2020, @01:43AM (#973706) Journal

          Is "don't want to disappoint the stockholders" a good reason to ignore a public health warning?

          Ignoring the matter of whether or not it was a "warning" rather than an "order", if the warning isn't relevant (say because you've taken adequate precautions), then why shouldn't it be ignored?

          The problem with the criticism of Musk, is that it is taken out of context. We don't know from the story whether Tesla had a better plan than the authorities did. But I do know that merely assuming the authorities are more right than Tesla and Musk are, is folly.