How did they get away with that? One would assume a contract was in force. Was there an ,"no fash CEO" clause? Kind of an important item the story doesn't bother to cover.

[–] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Contracts basically always have conditions for each party to back out. There's probably a break fee but for leased vehicles it's probably not that significant.

As a construction company, the Tesla fleet is probably a pretty small portion of their vehicle fleet and cashflow.

Could also be some kind of 'bringing the business into disrepute' clause there.

[–] dumblederp@aussie.zone 7 points 1 month ago

I reckon online feedback like "fuck this Tesla driving bunch of fascist assholes" would be as big a PR nightmare for the company as its proving for tesla.

[–] XnxCuX@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The US is one of the few countries that would side with Tesla on this. American company or not

[–] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

The bigger part of Tesla's business in Europe is that each car sold is used to sell carbon credits to polluting companies. Less cars sold means less credits earned to sell to polluters.

Not selling Tesla EVs might almost be better for the environment as the companies will either have to pollute less or find another (actual) environmentally responsible carbon credit creator.