22 ms·

> Additional plaintiffs, Justine De Caires, Jessica Pan, and Grae Kindel said they were terminated on November 3 by being locked out of their accounts. > Under

by cronix 4y ago

> Additional plaintiffs, Justine De Caires, Jessica Pan, and Grae Kindel said they were terminated on November 3 by being locked out of their accounts. > Under Twitter’s takeover deal terms, Musk had agreed to keep employee compensation and benefits the same. That means the laid-off employees should receive 60 days of salary and the cash value of the stock they were to receive within three months of their last date at the company, per law. Have they actually been "terminated?" When does "employment" actually, legally end? This might be closer to "suspended with pay," unless they're no longer being paid which would be hard to know as this literally happened hours ago last night. It could be he's just locking them out, continuing to pay them for 60 days, and then will announce layoffs. I think this lawsuit could be a bit premature if you set emotions aside.

LanceH 4y ago
Like someone was in a rush to be lead plaintiff, or the representing law firm.
- watwut 4y ago
  I am pretty sure law firms were on full alert and actively competing for possible plaintiffs from the moment Musk first time walked through door.
bpodgursky 4y ago
This is what always happens, and what will almost certainly happen here. They'll just give a few months severance. This is so much noise over nothing.
- anonymousab 4y ago
  Musk had previously tried to avoid paying severance at Tesla, so it was absolutely not guaranteed to happen here.
baidifnaoxi 4y ago
This is exactly it. Terminated technically means, no longer receiving compensation or benefits. If Musk is basically saying “stop working” and we will pay you for the next 60 days (and even beyond), then this is completely legal as long as they are not restricted from seeking other employment during this “notice period” Edit: IANAL
- nathanvanfleet 4y ago
  It's almost as if Elon is being sued to ensure that he follows through with his obligations, since he's so consistently doesn't. Strange. It's like there is a purpose to the lawsuit.
  - pb7 4y ago
    That's not how lawsuits work. You don't sue someone for something they might do with zero indication that they will. When you buy a company headquartered in California and elect to layoff half of it, you probably know your legal obligations.
    - rtkwe 4y ago
      The person suing got their termination notification on 11/1 so I imaging they know more about what their termination actually entails than you or I do. Also Musk consistently pushes and oversteps the legal boundaries of what he can and can't do to get his way. Him being in charge of Twitter at all is because he was forced to execute a contract he willingly signed what makes you think he'll be more calmly compliant to laws?
      - spoils19 4y ago
        pb7 is probably correct here, as they are in many things. Elon probably knows what he's doing, you don't get to that level of businessmen without making all the right decisions.
        4y ago
emedchill 4y ago
According to a leak to Business Insider[0], they are still "employed" but are not allowed to work. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twitter-staff-jobs-axed-layoffs-2022-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twi...
- bourgeoismedia 4y ago
  So 3 months of gardening leave with benefits and a final Feb 1 RSU vest. That seems completely fair and reasonable if it's accurate.
  - nullc 4y ago
    It'll be interesting to see if any of them are bold enough to argue that their ability to exert influence over the public via their role at twitter was a material part of their compensation.
    - sulam 4y ago
      You apparently have a very negative view of people who work at Twitter. I worked there for 4.5 years and literally no one I worked with or knew of there would ever make such an argument. The only people who even really have a claim to such an argument got last week and we haven't heard a thing from them, although I'm anticipating some sort of lawsuit having to be filed to recover the real USD compensation owed to them for their summary firing "for cause."
      - nullc 4y ago
        The posted email, linked two posts up stated that "Today is your last working day at the company, however, you will remain employed by Twitter and will receive compensation and benefits through your separation date [90 days out]". Unless they want to claim some side effect of working is part of the employee's compensation this lawsuit looks baseless enough to be an abuse of process.
    - chitowneats 4y ago
maeln 4y ago
It is an interesting case. In France, the case was already judged and having your means of work (example: access to your professional email) cut off before the end of your contract (which include the required advance notice) is considered unlawful firing. The same goes if you are put in the "placard doré", meaning you are not given any work to do. Of course, the laws in France favor the worker a lot more than the U.S so it will be interesting what the result of the lawsuit will be.
- throw_m239339 4y ago
  I mean in France, "at will" employment is illegal at first place.
  - spoils19 4y ago
    Horrible for the free market, imo.
    - TheRealPomax 4y ago
      Probably not, since it encourages companies to actually invest in people that they can't just fire at will. Society comes out on top, and business is kept accountable for how they treat human beings. The free market with at will employment is a race to the bottom. France's model is more of a steady march to the top.
      - filoleg 4y ago
        > France's model is more of a steady march to the top Eagerly awaiting for France to have their own equivalents (in terms of success and worldwide influence) of Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/SpaceX/Tesla/etc. As well as for their devs to be paid even remotely close to what they can get paid in the US. From what I am seeing, even "the year of Linux on desktop" is more likely to happen than that. Which doesn't inspire much confidence.
        ceejayoz 4y ago
quantified 4y ago
From [https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/read-blunt-twitter-email-telling-142536755.html https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/read-blunt-twitter-email-...], it says that the actual termination date is Feb 2 and they keep all compnand benefits until then. They just can't access company systems or violate the code of conduct. Seems like they're not actually laid off yet?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pbreit 4y ago
Does anyone know what WARN actually requires? If they are copensated for 60 days, does that suffice?
- Tangurena2 4y ago
  Yes. > An employer who violates WARN provisions is liable to each employee for an amount equal to back pay and benefits for the period of the violation, up to 60 days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraini... He learned his lesson from a similar large scale layoff at Tesla. The lawyers in this case were the same lawyers in the previous case.
  - pbreit 4y ago
    So does that just mean they need to be paid for 60 days (which they are)?

by cronix 4y ago

LanceH 4y ago

Like someone was in a rush to be lead plaintiff, or the representing law firm.

watwut 4y ago
I am pretty sure law firms were on full alert and actively competing for possible plaintiffs from the moment Musk first time walked through door.

bpodgursky 4y ago

This is what always happens, and what will almost certainly happen here. They'll just give a few months severance. This is so much noise over nothing.

anonymousab 4y ago
Musk had previously tried to avoid paying severance at Tesla, so it was absolutely not guaranteed to happen here.

baidifnaoxi 4y ago

This is exactly it. Terminated technically means, no longer receiving compensation or benefits. If Musk is basically saying “stop working” and we will pay you for the next 60 days (and even beyond), then this is completely legal as long as they are not restricted from seeking other employment during this “notice period” Edit: IANAL

nathanvanfleet 4y ago
It's almost as if Elon is being sued to ensure that he follows through with his obligations, since he's so consistently doesn't. Strange. It's like there is a purpose to the lawsuit.
- pb7 4y ago
  That's not how lawsuits work. You don't sue someone for something they might do with zero indication that they will. When you buy a company headquartered in California and elect to layoff half of it, you probably know your legal obligations.
  - rtkwe 4y ago
    The person suing got their termination notification on 11/1 so I imaging they know more about what their termination actually entails than you or I do. Also Musk consistently pushes and oversteps the legal boundaries of what he can and can't do to get his way. Him being in charge of Twitter at all is because he was forced to execute a contract he willingly signed what makes you think he'll be more calmly compliant to laws?
    - spoils19 4y ago
      pb7 is probably correct here, as they are in many things. Elon probably knows what he's doing, you don't get to that level of businessmen without making all the right decisions.
      - 4y ago

emedchill 4y ago

According to a leak to Business Insider[0], they are still "employed" but are not allowed to work. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twitter-staff-jobs-axed-layoffs-2022-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twi...

bourgeoismedia 4y ago
So 3 months of gardening leave with benefits and a final Feb 1 RSU vest. That seems completely fair and reasonable if it's accurate.
- nullc 4y ago
  It'll be interesting to see if any of them are bold enough to argue that their ability to exert influence over the public via their role at twitter was a material part of their compensation.
  - sulam 4y ago
    You apparently have a very negative view of people who work at Twitter. I worked there for 4.5 years and literally no one I worked with or knew of there would ever make such an argument. The only people who even really have a claim to such an argument got last week and we haven't heard a thing from them, although I'm anticipating some sort of lawsuit having to be filed to recover the real USD compensation owed to them for their summary firing "for cause."
    - nullc 4y ago
      The posted email, linked two posts up stated that "Today is your last working day at the company, however, you will remain employed by Twitter and will receive compensation and benefits through your separation date [90 days out]". Unless they want to claim some side effect of working is part of the employee's compensation this lawsuit looks baseless enough to be an abuse of process.
  - chitowneats 4y ago

maeln 4y ago

It is an interesting case. In France, the case was already judged and having your means of work (example: access to your professional email) cut off before the end of your contract (which include the required advance notice) is considered unlawful firing. The same goes if you are put in the "placard doré", meaning you are not given any work to do. Of course, the laws in France favor the worker a lot more than the U.S so it will be interesting what the result of the lawsuit will be.

throw_m239339 4y ago
I mean in France, "at will" employment is illegal at first place.
- spoils19 4y ago
  Horrible for the free market, imo.
  - TheRealPomax 4y ago
    Probably not, since it encourages companies to actually invest in people that they can't just fire at will. Society comes out on top, and business is kept accountable for how they treat human beings. The free market with at will employment is a race to the bottom. France's model is more of a steady march to the top.
    - filoleg 4y ago
      > France's model is more of a steady march to the top Eagerly awaiting for France to have their own equivalents (in terms of success and worldwide influence) of Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/SpaceX/Tesla/etc. As well as for their devs to be paid even remotely close to what they can get paid in the US. From what I am seeing, even "the year of Linux on desktop" is more likely to happen than that. Which doesn't inspire much confidence.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago

quantified 4y ago

From [https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/read-blunt-twitter-email-telling-142536755.html https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/read-blunt-twitter-email-...], it says that the actual termination date is Feb 2 and they keep all compnand benefits until then. They just can't access company systems or violate the code of conduct. Seems like they're not actually laid off yet?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

pbreit 4y ago

Does anyone know what WARN actually requires? If they are copensated for 60 days, does that suffice?

Tangurena2 4y ago
Yes. > An employer who violates WARN provisions is liable to each employee for an amount equal to back pay and benefits for the period of the violation, up to 60 days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraini... He learned his lesson from a similar large scale layoff at Tesla. The lawyers in this case were the same lawyers in the previous case.
- pbreit 4y ago
  So does that just mean they need to be paid for 60 days (which they are)?