Electric car maker Tesla has turned back, for now, a class action accusing the company of allowing the racial harassment of thousands of Black workers, after a California judge agreed the class action couldn’t proceed because hundreds of so-called “representative witnesses” had failed to show up to testify about the alleged harassment under oath.
On Nov. 14, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Peter Borkon granted Tesla’s motion to decertify the class, potentially compelling thousands of plaintiffs and potential plaintiffs to take their claims to trial individually, rather than collectively.
The lawsuit dates from 2024, when attorneys from the firms of California Civil Rights Law Group, of San Anselmo; Bryan Schwartz Law P.C., of Oakland; Nichols Kaster LLP, of San Francisco; and The DeRubertis Law Firm APC, of Beverly Hills, filed their complaint in Alameda County court.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of named plaintiffs Marcus Vaughn, Monica Chatman, Titus McCaleb, Chanel Hendrix and Garret Parker. All of the named plaintiffs are identified as Black or African-American employees working in various roles at Tesla’s plant in Fremont since 2016.
The complaint accused Tesla, which is led by CEO billionaire Elon Musk, of allowing or enabling “an intimidating, hostile, and offensive work environment for Black and/or African-American employees that includes a routine use of the terms “N****r” and “N***a” and other racially-derogatory terms, and racist treatment and images at Tesla’s production facility in Fremont…” since at least 2016.
The lawsuit has claimed workers complained about the alleged racial harassment to managers, but nothing was done. In some instances, the lawsuit asserts those who complained faced termination or other discipline.
The lawsuit seeks to make Tesla pay under California state laws prohibiting workplace discrimination and race-based harassment.
The lawsuit sought unspecified “exemplary and punitive damages” against Tesla, plus attorney fees, and court orders requiring the company to address the alleged discrimination and harassment in its California workplaces.
Over Tesla’s objection, the Alameda judge initially certified the case as a class action in May 2024, potentially allowing the plaintiffs to represent as many as 6,000 Black Tesla workers.
However, in recent weeks, the parties have told the judge about problems they are experiencing in moving the class action claims to trial.
Under the judge’s prior orders, the plaintiffs were directed to collect sworn deposition testimony from about 200 witnesses, which they could then use to extrapolate the claims on behalf of the remaining thousands of potential class members.
However, in September 2025, the plaintiffs told the judge they were experiencing difficulties in completing depositions of the so-called “representative witnesses” needed to advance the case to trial.
“Class counsel stated there was a dilemma beyond their control because deponents were not appearing for their depositions and anticipated that witnesses might not appear for trial,” Judge Borkon wrote in his Nov. 14 decision, describing the predicament.
The disclosures came in a motion from plaintiffs to “modify” the trial plan, to allow them to proceed to trial without the testimony of the hundreds of witnesses the court had determined would be needed to establish the alleged pattern of racial harassment allegedly experienced for years by Tesla workers.
They asked the judge to let them bring claims about the experiences of thousands of workers based on testimony of 40 witnesses.
In response, however, Tesla argued the failure by plaintiffs to secure the needed depositions demonstrated the need to pull the plug on the class action altogether.
On Nov. 14, Borkon agreed, saying he believed allowing the class action to proceed under the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ alternative proposal would jeopardize the ability of his court to guarantee Tesla could face a fair trial, addressing actual “evidence that could be reliably extrapolated to the class as a whole.”
“… Plaintiffs argued that it was unduly burdensome and problematic for class counsel to gather testimony from and to present the testimony of 200 representative worker witnesses,” the judge wrote.
“Plaintiffs did not, however, present any expert testimony to support their assertion that the smaller sample in their proposed revised trial plan would permit the jury to reliably extrapolate from the evidence presented at trial to the class as a whole.”
The judge said the ruling does not address the actual claims presented in the lawsuit against Tesla.
But the decision marks a significant procedural win for Tesla in the litigation.
Without the class action, plaintiffs could be forced to advance their claims individually, forcing potentially thousands of would-be plaintiffs to file their own lawsuits; potentially weakening their ability to secure big monetary damages; and limiting the ability to secure a court order against Tesla on behalf of all of its Black employees.
