On the morning of May 24, Beijing time, it was reported that a judge in California rejected Tesla's application for closed door arbitration and ordered a public hearing of the lawsuit filed by Tesla's female employees about the "rampant sexual harassment" in the company's largest factory in California** Stephen Kaus, a judge of the Alameda County High Court in California, ruled on Monday that although the plaintiff had previously signed an arbitration agreement to abandon the lawsuit, she still had the right to bring a lawsuit to the court.
Coase issued a one sentence court order rejecting Tesla's request for closed door arbitration, but did not explain the specific reasons.
Tesla was attacked by radical shareholders and asked the electric vehicle manufacturer's board to be more transparent in employee diversity and the use of arbitration to resolve sexual harassment and Racial Discrimination Litigation.
US President Joe Biden signed a federal law in March to prohibit employers from forcing employees to reach arbitration on sexual harassment charges. However, the arbitration before this is not bound by this law.
Jessica barraza, the plaintiff in this case, said in an allegation that she was applying for a class action lawsuit that she encountered a "nightmare" environment when she was on the night shift at Tesla. Her colleagues and supervisors kept sending her obscene language and making obscene gestures. The superior person in charge and the human resources department did not take measures after receiving her complaint.
Tesla also faces an independent lawsuit initiated by at least six other female employees for sexual harassment charges.
David Lowe, balaza's attorney, told Judge Coase at a hearing in March that the arbitration agreement was illegal and "unconscionable" under California law.
Tesla only sought arbitration on Baraza's allegations under the California employment discrimination act, not her other allegations related to labor violations.