> While two of the robots were disabled so that the engineer and his crew could work on the machines, a third was inadvertently left on — resulting in the attack two years ago, witnesses told the Information....
   > The injury was apparently not severe enough to require the employee to take time off from work.

A two-year-old injury caused by not shutting off machinery under maintenance that wasn't severe enough to require time off gets described as an "attack"? I'm a strong advocate for holding companies to account for how they treat workers but this feels like barrel-scraping.