4 ms·

Did Twitter file a California WARN notice? If not, they need to do so and give 60 day notice to workers in California. So, don't accept anything that doesn't

Did Twitter file a California WARN notice? If not, they need to do so and give 60 day notice to workers in California. So, don't accept anything that doesn't preserve your rights to your Tuesday equity grant. Details here: https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN https://edd.ca.gov/en/Jobs_and_Training/Layoff_Services_WARN Key Provision: "Layoff of 50 or more employees within a 30-day period regardless of % of workforce. ...." Penalties for Violation: "A possible civil penalty of $500 a day for each day of violation. Employees may receive back pay to be paid at employee’s final rate or 3 year average rate of compensation, whichever is higher."

mywittyname 4y ago
Considering breaking the law is one of Musk's seemingly favorite hobbies, I wouldn't be so sure on a WARN notice. The punishments for non-compliance isn't very much.
- swader999 4y ago
  He's following the law if he pays the penalty.
  - oneplusone 4y ago
    So I I kill someone and go to jail for it I was following the law?
    - adventured 4y ago
      There are rarely laws that say you may not kill another person. There are typically laws that lay out the consequences if you are found guilty of murdering someone, through a designation (eg if it's a felony offense, and what type of felony). Whether you're guilty of murder or not is of course established after the fact. And you can do nothing wrong in the act of killing someone and still get screwed by a jury. Just ask the political left what they think of Kyle Rittenhouse being innocent. You can certainly follow the law and go to jail regardless.
  - eCa 4y ago
    If you pay a fine for breaking the law means you still broke the law. If you don’t pay the fine, then you broke the law again.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
lefstathiou 4y ago
Doesn't seem like an insurmountable obstacle. From some Googling: "Employers who fail to provide notification must provide their laid-off employees with back pay and benefits for the period of the violation (which means the amount of time by which their advance notice fell short of 60 days)." The value of ripping off the Band-Aid could easily be worth two months of severance in his mind.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- swader999 4y ago
  Especially with stock awards due.
  - galangalalgol 4y ago
    Is it possible those awards could be construed as benefits?
- brtkdotse 4y ago
  It’s not the severance that’s the issue, it that a bunch of RSUs vest tomorrow.
  - lefstathiou 4y ago
    I need to read into this more… My understanding is that this was a take private so all stock was acquired already (ie vested options get paid and unvested get terminated at Close). This is exactly what would happen if you acquired our company. It’s not like a purchaser would have the honor long term vesting schedules. They bought everything already that was available to be sold. Those who didn’t vest were dragged along into the deal.
    - avrionov 4y ago
nemo44x 4y ago
I think a couple months severance will cover it. That's usually how these types of things work.
- nytesky 4y ago
  The reason they want to lay off today is to avoid the stock grants, so it comes down which $$ was bigger. And honestly they were likely planning for severance anyways...
PragmaticPulp 4y ago
The layoffs, if any, haven’t even been announced yet and the only sources in the article are anonymous sources who can’t agree with each other about the supposed impending layoff. I don’t see any reason to suspect they’re going to somehow violate the law and cost themselves additional fines if or when they do it. This is just about speculation about what Musk will eventually do.
basementcat 4y ago
My understanding is that the WARN notice does not apply when employees are terminated for cause. This has the extra "benefit" of not having to pay out unemployment claims.
- LastTrain 4y ago
  If Twitter fires 25% of the workforce "for cause" they will be facing massive lawsuits and they will lose those.
- zeroonetwothree 4y ago
  Terminating for cause is a lot more work. You need to prepare documentation etc in case the employee sues you. Layoffs are very safe in comparison.
- gamblor956 4y ago
  For legal purposes, a separation letter for a for-cause termination must state the specific "cause" for which the employee is terminated. Termination on the basis of poor performance (legally, "incompetence") requires supporting documentation, such as written reviews of the employees' performance prior to the termination. And legally incompetence only tests the employee's performance at tasks actually within their job description; an employee can't be fired for incompetence at other tasks. Very importantly, a new boss coming in and deciding that employees weren't performing up to his arbitrary (and new) standards doesn't pass muster. A mass layoff for "performance" reasons has never been sustained by a labor department. The penalty is $500 for each day of violation (meaning each day short of the 60 required by the Warn ACT), plus all salary and bonuses that would have been paid during the 60 day period, plus legal fees incurred by the employees to protect their rights. Additionally, a "for cause" termination on performance (or any other grounds) opens the employer up to per se libel lawsuits. Literally, all the employee has to do is submit a copy of the termination letter into evidence and they win unless Twitterlon can demonstrate that the employee was actually incompetent.
rr808 4y ago
I was laid off from another company under a warn notice in NY and I went home the first day and kept getting paid with full benefits for 3 months. I then got a redundancy payment. It was under the condition I couldn't work for another company.
phpisthebest 4y ago
Given that none of this is official, and there are at minimum 3 different reports about the quantity and timeline of layoffs I dont think anyone is concerned about a WARN notification I beat even Elon, at this moment, does not have a full accounting of what the layoffs will be. This is all just pure media hype and nonsense with very little basis in truth or reality

mywittyname 4y ago

Considering breaking the law is one of Musk's seemingly favorite hobbies, I wouldn't be so sure on a WARN notice. The punishments for non-compliance isn't very much.

swader999 4y ago
He's following the law if he pays the penalty.
- oneplusone 4y ago
  So I I kill someone and go to jail for it I was following the law?
  - adventured 4y ago
    There are rarely laws that say you may not kill another person. There are typically laws that lay out the consequences if you are found guilty of murdering someone, through a designation (eg if it's a felony offense, and what type of felony). Whether you're guilty of murder or not is of course established after the fact. And you can do nothing wrong in the act of killing someone and still get screwed by a jury. Just ask the political left what they think of Kyle Rittenhouse being innocent. You can certainly follow the law and go to jail regardless.
- eCa 4y ago
  If you pay a fine for breaking the law means you still broke the law. If you don’t pay the fine, then you broke the law again.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

lefstathiou 4y ago

Doesn't seem like an insurmountable obstacle. From some Googling: "Employers who fail to provide notification must provide their laid-off employees with back pay and benefits for the period of the violation (which means the amount of time by which their advance notice fell short of 60 days)." The value of ripping off the Band-Aid could easily be worth two months of severance in his mind.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
swader999 4y ago
Especially with stock awards due.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  Is it possible those awards could be construed as benefits?
brtkdotse 4y ago
It’s not the severance that’s the issue, it that a bunch of RSUs vest tomorrow.
- lefstathiou 4y ago
  I need to read into this more… My understanding is that this was a take private so all stock was acquired already (ie vested options get paid and unvested get terminated at Close). This is exactly what would happen if you acquired our company. It’s not like a purchaser would have the honor long term vesting schedules. They bought everything already that was available to be sold. Those who didn’t vest were dragged along into the deal.
  - avrionov 4y ago

nemo44x 4y ago

I think a couple months severance will cover it. That's usually how these types of things work.

nytesky 4y ago
The reason they want to lay off today is to avoid the stock grants, so it comes down which $$ was bigger. And honestly they were likely planning for severance anyways...

PragmaticPulp 4y ago

The layoffs, if any, haven’t even been announced yet and the only sources in the article are anonymous sources who can’t agree with each other about the supposed impending layoff. I don’t see any reason to suspect they’re going to somehow violate the law and cost themselves additional fines if or when they do it. This is just about speculation about what Musk will eventually do.

basementcat 4y ago

My understanding is that the WARN notice does not apply when employees are terminated for cause. This has the extra "benefit" of not having to pay out unemployment claims.

LastTrain 4y ago
If Twitter fires 25% of the workforce "for cause" they will be facing massive lawsuits and they will lose those.
zeroonetwothree 4y ago
Terminating for cause is a lot more work. You need to prepare documentation etc in case the employee sues you. Layoffs are very safe in comparison.
gamblor956 4y ago
For legal purposes, a separation letter for a for-cause termination must state the specific "cause" for which the employee is terminated. Termination on the basis of poor performance (legally, "incompetence") requires supporting documentation, such as written reviews of the employees' performance prior to the termination. And legally incompetence only tests the employee's performance at tasks actually within their job description; an employee can't be fired for incompetence at other tasks. Very importantly, a new boss coming in and deciding that employees weren't performing up to his arbitrary (and new) standards doesn't pass muster. A mass layoff for "performance" reasons has never been sustained by a labor department. The penalty is $500 for each day of violation (meaning each day short of the 60 required by the Warn ACT), plus all salary and bonuses that would have been paid during the 60 day period, plus legal fees incurred by the employees to protect their rights. Additionally, a "for cause" termination on performance (or any other grounds) opens the employer up to per se libel lawsuits. Literally, all the employee has to do is submit a copy of the termination letter into evidence and they win unless Twitterlon can demonstrate that the employee was actually incompetent.

rr808 4y ago

I was laid off from another company under a warn notice in NY and I went home the first day and kept getting paid with full benefits for 3 months. I then got a redundancy payment. It was under the condition I couldn't work for another company.

phpisthebest 4y ago

Given that none of this is official, and there are at minimum 3 different reports about the quantity and timeline of layoffs I dont think anyone is concerned about a WARN notification I beat even Elon, at this moment, does not have a full accounting of what the layoffs will be. This is all just pure media hype and nonsense with very little basis in truth or reality