3 ms·
Doesn't seem like an insurmountable obstacle. From some Googling: "Employers who fail to provide notification must provide their laid-off employees with back p
by 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 agoEspecially with stock awards due.
- galangalalgol 4y agoIs it possible those awards could be construed as benefits?
- brtkdotse 4y agoIt’s not the severance that’s the issue, it that a bunch of RSUs vest tomorrow.
- lefstathiou 4y agoI 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 agoUsually, the RSUs are converted to cash and the RSUs schedule is kept the same. The workers which remain int he company receive cash on the same schedule.Hence Letting some people go before the RSU date saves money.
- sangnoir 4y ago> This is exactly what would happen if you acquired our company. That is a terrible deal. I've worked at a company where all outstanding RSUs would vest immediately at the time of purchase; was that an unusual arrangement?