3 ms·

Yeah, it's pretty hard to prove you were fired for an illegal reason, especially if your employer has a paper trail. My point in all this is that there is no l

by gm 15y ago

Yeah, it's pretty hard to prove you were fired for an illegal reason, especially if your employer has a paper trail. My point in all this is that there is no legal claim here. What's at dispute is shares that have not vested. It's kinda like being pissed off that you will not get the free coffee you get at work if you get fired or if the employer chooses to not provide it anymore; or next year's bonus, or whatever else you have not earned yet. I guess the downvotes mean fellow readers do not like what I say, which is ok. As long as what I say is not false I'm ok with it.

einhverfr 15y ago
I don't think the firing would be the issue. It's more of a "we are changing what we promised you. Acknowledge this or leave" that might lead to claims. It doesn't seem that different from reneging on retro pay that an employee might have been promised for example.
- davidcuddeback 15y ago
  But they're not changing what they promised. Stock option vest as long as you're still employed by the company. If the company fires you, your options stop vesting. The promise is in regards to the stock option vesting, not the length of your employment.
  - danssig 15y ago
    So the question becomes; why are they firing you? Is it to prevent you from keeping your part of the agreement or because you're crap? Stupidly, Zynga has proven that it was not the latter.
    - einhverfr 15y ago
      That is what it boils down to, really. And the thing is that even in an at will state, you still have contract considerations.
davidcuddeback 15y ago
> Yeah, it's pretty hard to prove you were fired for an illegal reason, especially if your employer has a paper trail In the case for which I was a jury member, a women sued her previous employer for wrongful termination, claiming she was fired for whistle-blowing. Her job was a safety inspector at a refinery and she raised some concerns about the safety procedures involved with cleaning some tanks. She even had documentation (in the form of emails), which showed that some of her coworkers raised a stink about her concerns. The problem is, no matter why a company actually fires you, they can always make a reason. And I don't think it's hard to come up with a pretense for firing someone. In the case that I served on, the women had hired one of the company's contractors to do work at her home using company machinery and provided reasonable evidence that her bosses knew about it. She was fired for "conflict of interest." Ultimately, we decided in the company's favor. It honestly wasn't even close. There were about 10 questions that would have had to answer yes to, and we only made it to the second one (and almost didn't make it that far). Still, I'm surprised that at-will employment never came up in this case. It seems relavent. And the company's lawyer definitely seemed worth his salt.

by gm 15y ago

einhverfr 15y ago

I don't think the firing would be the issue. It's more of a "we are changing what we promised you. Acknowledge this or leave" that might lead to claims. It doesn't seem that different from reneging on retro pay that an employee might have been promised for example.

davidcuddeback 15y ago
But they're not changing what they promised. Stock option vest as long as you're still employed by the company. If the company fires you, your options stop vesting. The promise is in regards to the stock option vesting, not the length of your employment.
- danssig 15y ago
  So the question becomes; why are they firing you? Is it to prevent you from keeping your part of the agreement or because you're crap? Stupidly, Zynga has proven that it was not the latter.
  - einhverfr 15y ago
    That is what it boils down to, really. And the thing is that even in an at will state, you still have contract considerations.

davidcuddeback 15y ago

> Yeah, it's pretty hard to prove you were fired for an illegal reason, especially if your employer has a paper trail In the case for which I was a jury member, a women sued her previous employer for wrongful termination, claiming she was fired for whistle-blowing. Her job was a safety inspector at a refinery and she raised some concerns about the safety procedures involved with cleaning some tanks. She even had documentation (in the form of emails), which showed that some of her coworkers raised a stink about her concerns. The problem is, no matter why a company actually fires you, they can always make a reason. And I don't think it's hard to come up with a pretense for firing someone. In the case that I served on, the women had hired one of the company's contractors to do work at her home using company machinery and provided reasonable evidence that her bosses knew about it. She was fired for "conflict of interest." Ultimately, we decided in the company's favor. It honestly wasn't even close. There were about 10 questions that would have had to answer yes to, and we only made it to the second one (and almost didn't make it that far). Still, I'm surprised that at-will employment never came up in this case. It seems relavent. And the company's lawyer definitely seemed worth his salt.