Some Tesla employees officially asked for Elon Musk to resign as they confirmed the automaker is facing a massive demand problem, which they attribute to the CEO.
One employee got fired for it.
Regardless of the political spectrum, there’s no doubt that many Tesla employees still support CEO Elon Musk amid his extreme politicization, whether because they agree with his politics or because they support his vision for Tesla to become an AI and robotics company.
However, not all Tesla employees agree.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
There’s a growing movement within Tesla employees that recognizes that Musk is currently hurting Tesla’s mission to accelerate the advent of electric transport by alienating a large part of the consumer base and politicizing Tesla’s products.
In 2024, Tesla’s sales declined for the first time in a decade, and in Q1 2025, the decline greatly accelerated.
Some Tesla employees recognize what is happening, and they are afraid that the company is ignoring Musk’s negative impact on demand.
A group of current and former Tesla employees published an open letter in which they wrote:
The damage done to Elon’s personal brand is now irreversible and as the public face of Tesla, that damage has become our burden. We are now at a crossroads: continue with Elon as CEO and face further decline as customers abandon the brand, or move forward without him and allow our products and mission to succeed or fail on their own.
They are hoping for the latter to happen, but Musk and the board have completely ignored the demand problem.
The Tesla employees believe that Musk’s announcement that he will “refocus” on Tesla and spend less time on DOGE during Tesla’s earnings call last month was an example of that:
Elon’s recent claim that he is “refocusing” on Tesla is not only tone-deaf, it’s insulting. It implies that the hardships of the past six months stem from a lack of his attention, not from his actions. It shifts the blame onto the very people who have held this company together. Let’s be clear: we are not the problem. Our products are not the problem. Our engineering, service, and delivery teams are not the problem. The problem is demand. The problem is Elon.
The employees highlight how EV sales were up 10% in Q1 in the US while Tesla’s sales were down 9%.
The group of employees is also not buying Tesla’s excuse that it was simply due to people waiting for the new Model Y as they now confirm that thousands of new Model Ys are now sitting in inventory:
Now those very cars are sitting unsold, growing week after week. Production is running better than ever. Quality is high. Processes are strong. Demand is what’s broken. This is not a product problem. It is a leadership problem.
They are officially asking for Tesla to move forward without Musk as CEO
Tesla is ready to move forward. And we’re ready to move forward without Elon as CEO.
One of the Tesla employees behind the letter, Matthew LaBrot, has been let go, and he claims it’s due to his association with the letter.
He published it on a website and said on LinkedIn that he was let go because of it.
LaBrot had been at Tesla for more than 5 years and he was “Staff Program Manager for Sales and Delivery Training Programs” for the last 3 years.
A X account was also created to share the letter, but it was suspended by the platform, which is owned by Musk, who calls himself a “free speech absolutist.”
Tesla’s demand issues are getting so significant that the automaker told workers at Gigafactory Texas working on the Cybertruck and Model Y production lines to take a full week off.
Electrek’s Take
I’m happy to see some Tesla employees challenging the false narrative that there are no real demand issues. I liked how the letter framed the situation. It made it clear that Musk is the source of Tesla’s main problems right now.
Ignoring Tesla’s problems with the hope that you will soon figure out self-driving, even though you have been wrong about it for years, won’t make them disappear.
Unfortunately, Tesla is making it clear that injecting a dose of reality into this narrative will get you fired.
It’s a really sad time for a once-incredible company that had a massive impact on the auto industry and accelerated electrification.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Former reality TV contestant Sean Duffy. Photo by Gage Skidmore
America voted for inflation, and it got it today, as republicans running the Department of Transportation bowed to their oil donors and finalized a rule to make your cars less efficient, thus costing America an extra $23 billion in fuel costs.
Sean Duffy, who was appointed as Secretary of Transportation on the back of the transportation “expertise” he showed as a contestant on Road Rules: All Stars, a reality TV travel game show, announced the rule on his first day in office.
His original memo promised a review of all existing fuel economy standards, which require manufacturers to make more efficient vehicles which save you money on fuel.
Specifically, the rule finalized today targets the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard (CAFE), which was just improved last year by President Biden’s DOT, saving American drivers $23 billion in fuel costs by meaning they need to buy less fuel overall. The savings from the Biden rule could have been higher, but were softened from the original proposal due to automaker lobbying.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Sierra Club’s Transportation for All director, Katherine Garcia, responded to the new Duffy rule’s finalization with a statement:
“The Trump administration’s deregulatory, pro-polluter transportation agenda will only increase costs for Americans. Making our vehicles less fuel efficient hurts families by forcing them to pay more at the pump. This action puts the well-being of our communities at risk in every way imaginable. It will lead to fewer clean vehicle options for consumers, squeeze our wallets, endanger our health, and increase climate pollution. The Sierra Club will continue to push back against this administration’s dangerous clean transportation rollbacks.”
The rule had been filed on Mar 16, and review was completed yesterday. Oddly enough, the rule was filed as “not economically significant,” a categorization for government rules that won’t affect the US economy by more than $100 million – which is less than the $23 billion that the DOT’s own analysis says the new rule will cost Americans.
Both we at Electrek and the Sierra Club had a meeting with the government to point out this inconsistency, but both of our meetings were scheduled for today and were cancelled late last night. There seems to have been no public comment period regarding this change in regulations.
DOT isn’t done raising your fuel costs, it wants to do more
Duffy’s original DOT memo says he wants to target all similar standards, rather than just the improvements made last year – so in fact, our headline likely underestimates how much higher Duffy wants to make your fuel costs.
A recent analysis by Consumer Reports shows that fuel economy standards are enormously popular with Americans, and that maintaining the current standards could result in lifetime savings of $6,000 per vehicle, compared to current costs, by 2029. And that fuel economy standards implemented since 2001 have already saved $9,000 per vehicle. Now, imagine the net effect of removing all of those standards, which Duffy has directed the DOT to examine doing.
As we’ve already seen to be the case often with Trump’s allies, the DOT memo lied about its intentions. Just like EPA head Lee Zeldin, who said he wants to make the air cleaner by making it dirtier, Duffy, says he wants to make fuel costs lower by making them higher. The memo attempts to argue that your car will be cheaper if it has lower fuel economy, even though it wont, because buying more fuel will mean you spend more on fuel, not less.
Unequivocally, over here in the real world, dirtier air is actually dirtier, and higher fuel costs are actually higher.
The result of this increased fuel usage also inevitably means more reliance on foreign sources of energy. The more oil America uses, the more it will have to import from elsewhere. Other countries looking to exercise power over the US could certainly choose to raise prices as they recognize that the US has just become more reliant on them.
And, as we know from the most basic understanding of economics, adding more demand means prices will go up, not down. Reducing demand for a product in fact forces prices down, and EVs are already displacing oil demand which depresses oil prices.
Meanwhile, Biden’s higher fuel economy standards would mean that automakers need to provide a higher mix of EVs, which inherently get all of their energy to run not just domestically, but regionally as well. Most electricity generation happens regionally or locally based on what resources are available in your area, so when you charge a car, you’re typically supporting jobs at your local power plant, rather than in some overseas oil country.
But these are just attempts to follow-through on the dirty air, inflation causing promises that the republicans made during the campaign. Mr. Trump signaled he intended to raise your fuel costs (and costs of everything else) during the 2024 US Presidential campaign, when he asked oil executives for $1 billion in bribes in return for killing off more efficient vehicles.
However, whiplash changes in regulatory regimes like this are typically seen as bad for business. Above all, businesses desire regulatory certainty so they can plan products into the future, and there are few businesses with longer planning timelines than automakers.
This is why automakers want the EPA to retain Biden’s emissions rules, because they’re already planning new models for the EV transition. They went through this once before, in the chaos of 2017-2021, where they originally asked for rollbacks but then realized their mistake, and now still complain about the broken regulatory regime caused by the last time a former reality TV host squatted in the White House.
Further, if American manufacturing turns away from the EV transition, or continues to make tepid movement towards it, this will only hand more of a manufacturing lead to China, meaning more decline of American manufacturing (compared to the huge manufacturing boom seen under President Biden).
But all of these harms will happen to real people. This isn’t reality television, where the intent is to make up drama for views. This is actual harm that’s actually going to be done to Americans, who are having a rough time as the global economy continues to grapple with the long-term disruptions resulting from a pandemic that was exacerbated by the same reality TV host, and of course the ever-present worsening climate change.
And so, Mr. Trump is now trying to follow through on his campaign promises – which, in so many ways, will only make your life costlier, more unhealthy, less stable, and less secure from foreign influence. This is what 49% of America voted for.
Want to have *actually* lower fuel costs? Then charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
In the Electrek Podcast, we discuss the most popular news in the world of sustainable transport and energy. In this week’s episode, we discuss Tesla being in the crosshairs of the Musk/Trump divorce, EV sales in Europe, a new Hyundai electric minivan, and more.
As a reminder, we’ll have an accompanying post, like this one, on the site with an embedded link to the live stream. Head to the YouTube channel to get your questions and comments in.
After the show ends at around 5 p.m. ET, the video will be archived on YouTube and the audio on all your favorite podcast apps:
Advertisement – scroll for more content
We now have a Patreon if you want to help us avoid more ads and invest more in our content. We have some awesome gifts for our Patreons and more coming.
Here are a few of the articles that we will discuss during the podcast:
Here’s the live stream for today’s episode starting at 4:00 p.m. ET (or the video after 5 p.m. ET:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Kia believes hatchbacks will make a comeback, starting with the EV4 later this year. The EV4 is Kia’s first electric hatch, and it’s expected to see big demand.
Kia aims to bring back hatchbacks with the new EV4
During its EV Day event earlier this year, Kia showcased four EV4 models, two sedans and two hatchbacks, all of which are fully electric.
The EV4 is part of Kia’s new entry-level EV lineup, which includes other models, including the EV3, EV5, and the upcoming EV2.
Following the launch of the EV4 sedan in Korea in March, Kia is preparing to introduce the hatchback version in Europe. The EV4 will kick off a series of new hatchbacks, which Kia believes could be its secret weapon as an electric alternative to the Volkswagen Golf and other popular models.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Kia’s executive vice president, Ted Lee, believes there is still “big volume” for hatchbacks in Europe that’s up for grabs. During a recent interview with Autocar, Lee confirmed Kia would launch a new series of hatchbacks.
Kia EV4 hatchback (Source: Kia)
The EV4 is set to kick things off later this year. Unlike the sedan, Kia will build the EV4 hatch in Europe. It will be Kia’s first European-built EV at its plant in Slovakia. The sedan variant will be imported from South Korea.
Kia will launch the EV4 hatch in the UK in October. After that, the new K4 will join the series, which will also arrive in hatchback form. The K4, both hatch and sedan variants, will be imported from Kia’s plant in Mexico.
Kia EV4 hatchback GT-Line (Source: Kia)
According to Lee, Kia is in a “strong position in Europe,” especially in the UK. The Korean automaker is currently the third-best-selling brand in the UK, and it is only 300 units away from surpassing BMW.
Although he admitted new Chinese models are creating a “difficult market,” the company is doubling down on the region.
Kia EV4 hatchback (Source: Kia UK)
Kia will not get caught up in a price war, Lee explained. Instead, the company aims to continue driving the “sustainable growth” it has created over the past few years. Kia’s sales in Europe have increased by 30% since 2020.
Kia EV4 hatchback interior (Source: Kia)
After launching the EV3, Kia said the electric SUV “started with a bang” in January, becoming the UK’s most popular retail electric vehicle. Kia’s compact EV was the best-selling retail EV in the UK during the first quarter and the fourth-best-selling overall.
According to SMNT’s latest registration data, Kia brand sales are up 4% this year, with nearly 52,000 vehicles sold through May. It currently holds a 6.11% market share, up from 6.05% last year.
Kia EV3 Air in Frost Blue (Source: Kia UK)
The EV3 starts at £33,005 ($42,500) in the UK with two battery pack options: 58.3 kWh or 81.48 kWh. The standard battery provides a WLTP range of up to 30 km (270 miles), while the extended range option offers a driving range of 599 km (375 miles).
With the EV3 off to a strong start, the EV4 joining it, and its first electric van, the PV5, rolling out, Kia is laying the groundwork for the “sustainable growth” it’s seeking.
Yesterday, Electrek reported that the EV4 was off to a slow start in Korea with just 831 models sold. However, the disappointing first sales month was due to “limited inventory.”
Ahead of its official launch, we got a sneak peek of the EV4 hatchback after it was spotted driving in Korea (You can watch the video here).
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.