I applied for the Data Collection Supervisor role and initially completed an AI-enabled voice interview. After passing that stage, I was invited to an onsite hiring event. At the event, there were around 8–9 candidates waiting in a meeting room. The process involved being called one by one for a driving evaluation with a member of the data collection team who was visiting from Los Angeles. The evaluation started with a short introduction while walking to the vehicle. From there, the interview mostly took place during the drive itself. The evaluator drove first for about 15–20 minutes to a Tesla charging station. I then drove manually for about 10 minutes to a nearby CVS location while answering some behavioral questions about my background and leadership experience. During the return trip, the evaluator enabled Full Self-Driving (FSD) and observed how I interacted with the system. At one point I disengaged FSD due to a pedestrian crossing in a parking lot area and explained my reasoning when asked. The final portion of the evaluation involved manually parallel parking the vehicle in a very tight spot. After completing the parking maneuver, the drive concluded. The process ended there, and I was told the recruiter would follow up within two weeks. I did not have the separate sit-down interview with a supervisor that had been mentioned in the original invitation. A few days later I received a message saying that my submission did not meet the threshold to move forward. Overall, the experience felt somewhat unclear. The driving evaluation itself was interesting, but the structure of the hiring event differed from what was originally communicated, and there was limited opportunity for a traditional discussion about the role or responsibilities. That said, the team members I interacted with were professional, and the process provided a brief look into how Tesla evaluates candidates for roles connected to their autonomous driving data collection operations.

I went through four rounds of interviews for a role at Tesla, all of which I was told were urgent and time-sensitive. I rearranged my schedule multiple times to accommodate these requests, expecting the same level of commitment from Tesla's side. Unfortunately, the process felt disjointed and ended with no communication or closure. The first round was a standard recruiter screen—straightforward and easy. The second round was onsite with someone currently in the role, which was informative. The third round involved back-to-back sessions with senior technical leads. These felt like they were meant to assess how you think rather than whether you had the "right" answers, which I appreciated. The final round was with the Head of Autonomy. He was late and briefly popped into the call to say so, which I understood. However, once he joined, he asked probing questions about my current employer that I couldn’t answer due to an NDA. He didn’t seem to appreciate that boundary. The interview was cut short, and I got the impression he wasn’t fully engaged—possibly rushing to his next meeting. He also seemed more interested in hearing agreeable responses than thoughtful, realistic ones. When I proposed alternative solutions to a problem he posed, he seemed dismissive. Despite going through all rounds and making time on short notice, I was ultimately ghosted. No follow-up, no feedback—just silence. For a company that emphasizes innovation and excellence, this experience was disappointing and unprofessional. Candidates deserve respect, especially when they invest time and energy into the process.