https://ourgeneration.news/news/tesla-paid-pr-firm-to-monitor-employees-union-organizing-discussing-sexual-harassment-lawsuit 0 Skip to Content Our Generation Home News Commentary Contact About Search Open Menu Close Menu Our Generation Home News Commentary Contact About Search Open Menu Close Menu Home News Commentary Contact About Search Tesla Paid PR Firm To Monitor Employees Union Organizing, Discussing Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Jun 6 Written By Valera Voce For Elon Musk's claim to being a free speech absolutist, practices at Tesla are throwing that claim into question. While Musk, currently in talks to purchase Twitter, has claimed on social media that he wants cynics and opponents to have space in the public forum to disagree with him, certain topics apparently do not apply to his own workers. Tesla workers in 2017 and 2018 were being watched by a PR firm, MikeWorldWide PR (MWW PR), and had their social media activities monitored. The PR Firm focused on discussions alleging unfair labor practices at Tesla and a sexual harassment lawsuit, reported CNBC after reviewing Tesla documents and invoices. MWW PR was hired to "monitor a Tesla employee Facebook group, monitor Facebook more broadly for commentary on organizing efforts, and to conduct research specifically on organizers, going on to develop labor communication plans, media lists, and pitches based on their reconnaissance." They were also ordered to monitor conversations about a female Tesla employee who was fired, allegedly due to seeking a "miscarriage of justice", after filing a lawsuit claiming pervasive harassment and pay discrimination. The lawsuit alleges that the employee was subject to "unwelcome and pervasive harassment by men on the factory floor including but not limited to inappropriate language, whistling, and catcalls" and that she and other female engineers were denied promotions even though they were "equally or more qualified" than male engineers. MWW PR defended its actions, stating it is a "common practice to review media coverage and public social conversation about a company to gain insights into issues and perceptions of stakeholders about the brand." Three people who were Tesla employees in 2018 told CNBC that they were warned by colleagues not to link to their bosses on social networks. They were also warned not to join Tesla employee groups on social media unless they knew every single person in the group and had a say over who would be invited to join. The employees assumed their online activities were being watched by management. Where does spying start and reviewing end? While reviewing public social conversations could offer companies a better understanding of their worker's concerns, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) prohibits companies from spying on workers. The NLRB defines spying as "doing something out of the ordinary to observe the activity." Under the National Labor Relations Act it is illegal for a company to prohibit workers from talking about or soliciting support for unionizing during non-work time or for a company to take (or threaten) adverse action against a worker because they join, support, or advocate for a union. This is not the first time that Tesla has raised eyebrows at the NLRB. Recently, the NLRB ordered Tesla to make Elon Musk delete a tweet that was considered threatening to labor organizers within the company and to reinstate a terminated employee who was a union advocate. The worker was reinstated along with compensation for loss of earnings, benefits, and adverse tax consequences that resulted from his firing, per CNBC . Hiring public relations firms to monitor employee Facebook groups and being ordered by the National Labor Relations Board to reinstate fired union organizers could be seen as a tarnish to Musk's self-appointed title as a "free speech absolutist." Musk has constantly railed on Twitter about alleged left-wing biases on Twitter and that when he assumes control of the social media platform he would restore it to a public forum for the people. Despite claiming he is a free speech absolutist, Musk has claimed that he is for banning speech if laws in certain countries permit it because "if the citizens want something banned, then pass a law to do so, otherwise it should be allowed." This could lead to dissidents in authoritarian countries having their tweets removed from the public forum. Regulations in countries such as Russia, India, and Indonesia among others lead to the respected governments petitioning for Twitter to remove tweets they oppose (such as India requesting Twitter to remove tweets about widescale farmer protests), something Musk appears to have no issue with supporting. Valera Voce Next Next Canadians Unable To Afford Safe Housing Are Turning To Medically-Assisted Death Interested in our Writing? Sign up with your email address to receive news and updates. Email Address [ ] Sign Up Thank you!