7 ms·

remember people, most employment lawyers work on contingency for this reason. They only get paid if you win. Most people don't know that and think it'll be too

remember people, most employment lawyers work on contingency for this reason. They only get paid if you win. Most people don't know that and think it'll be too expensive to take on their old company

rib3ye 4y ago
Are you saying twitter is legally obligated to pay severance because musk said so on twitter?
- greenhorn360 4y ago
  They're legally obligated because of the WARN Act.
  - gedy 4y ago
    I'm not defending Twitter but it sounds like this person may still be getting paid (due to WARN), just hadn't got severance letter.
  - shagie 4y ago
    The WARN act does not mandate severance. It does, instead, mandate that the employee is given a 30 (edit: California is 60, federal is 30) day notice that they will be laid off. It would be completely within the law to say "you will be laid off on Feb 4" and require you to work until Feb 4, and not have any sort of additional severance pay. Severance pay is not required under California law. https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/finalpay.pdf https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/finalpay.pdf > There is no legal requirement under California law that employers provide severance pay to an employee upon termination of employment. Confusing severance pay, WARN act, and the common practice of garden leave can make it harder for people to understand what they are entitled to.
    - Supermancho 4y ago
      This seems like a long-winded couching of the simple premise that would explain what happened. The tweet/author is misrepresenting the situation or was promised something he isn't legally entitled to, regardless. > mandate that the employee is given a 30 day notice that they will be laid off ie maybe he was terminated with notice and it wasn't explicitly labeled a severance letter.
mc32 4y ago
Suing a company is typically not beneficial for the worker or ex worker. Unless the payout is greater than what remains of your lifetime earnings projections. A person with litigious history carries a kind of scarlet letter around their neck. No one wants to risk being the next target. Think: would you want to bring on a cofounder who sued their previous cofounder? Maybe you would, but many would have second thoughts too.
- CGamesPlay 4y ago
  Why would the ex-worker disclose it? Are there many known cases of this happening? Also, I think founder- or exec-level employees probably have a different hiring experience than J Random Line Worker, regardless of past litigation history.
  - mc32 4y ago
    A BG check would show that as they are public record. One option is to threaten a lawsuit and then hope to settle for a smaller amount.
    - BenFranklin100 4y ago
      That’s interesting, I didn’t know that. Is that the case if it was settled out of court? Often employee labor disputes are settled out of court if the lawsuit is less than $30-50K.
    - bhouston 4y ago
      As someone who has been sued and settled this didn’t affect anything, I still raised money, gained business partners and grew the business. Business disputes happen. In many ways suing or getting sued in business is like losing your virginity. It seems like a big deal before it happens the first time but then anfterward it isn’t a big deal and just stuff that happens. I feel you are spreading FUD to protect one of the richest guys in the world and telling little people who have been abused here to just take it.
- htag 4y ago
encryptluks2 4y ago
Just a warning about contingency-based lawyers. First, read and re-read any agreements they send and know what you're getting yourself into. Hiring a contingency attorney may seem great cause it is easy, but if they are doing a terrible job and you want to fire them then be prepared for them to say they are still entitled to whatever percentage you agreed to with them no longer doing anything. A 30k settlement may seem great to a contingency attorney because they may get 10k for essentially sending a few letters that you could have sent yourself. They also may already have pre-arranged agreements and relationships with the big companies that represent the company you are suing to essentially pay you as little as possible. Don't settle for less than you deserve and definitely don't rely on a contingency attorney to tell you how much you should settle for. Make them work for you and not the other way around.
- P_I_Staker 4y ago
  > They also may already have pre-arranged agreements and relationships with the big companies that represent the company you are suing to essentially pay you as little as possible. This is illegal, but I imagine I could see something like this happening naturally and cynically... you get similar effects with realtors and recruiters. Still, there's plenty that are honestly and earnestly do their job for the most part. Often times these people can make deals happen. Taking a relatively basic deal instead of going to trial is often a good call. If he knows he can get something pretty decent and you have to risk $30K+ for a long shot chance.

remember people, most employment lawyers work on contingency for this reason. They only get paid if you win. Most people don't know that and think it'll be too expensive to take on their old company

rib3ye 4y ago

Are you saying twitter is legally obligated to pay severance because musk said so on twitter?

greenhorn360 4y ago
They're legally obligated because of the WARN Act.
- gedy 4y ago
  I'm not defending Twitter but it sounds like this person may still be getting paid (due to WARN), just hadn't got severance letter.
- shagie 4y ago
  The WARN act does not mandate severance. It does, instead, mandate that the employee is given a 30 (edit: California is 60, federal is 30) day notice that they will be laid off. It would be completely within the law to say "you will be laid off on Feb 4" and require you to work until Feb 4, and not have any sort of additional severance pay. Severance pay is not required under California law. https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/finalpay.pdf https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/finalpay.pdf > There is no legal requirement under California law that employers provide severance pay to an employee upon termination of employment. Confusing severance pay, WARN act, and the common practice of garden leave can make it harder for people to understand what they are entitled to.
  - Supermancho 4y ago
    This seems like a long-winded couching of the simple premise that would explain what happened. The tweet/author is misrepresenting the situation or was promised something he isn't legally entitled to, regardless. > mandate that the employee is given a 30 day notice that they will be laid off ie maybe he was terminated with notice and it wasn't explicitly labeled a severance letter.

mc32 4y ago

Suing a company is typically not beneficial for the worker or ex worker. Unless the payout is greater than what remains of your lifetime earnings projections. A person with litigious history carries a kind of scarlet letter around their neck. No one wants to risk being the next target. Think: would you want to bring on a cofounder who sued their previous cofounder? Maybe you would, but many would have second thoughts too.

CGamesPlay 4y ago
Why would the ex-worker disclose it? Are there many known cases of this happening? Also, I think founder- or exec-level employees probably have a different hiring experience than J Random Line Worker, regardless of past litigation history.
- mc32 4y ago
  A BG check would show that as they are public record. One option is to threaten a lawsuit and then hope to settle for a smaller amount.
  - BenFranklin100 4y ago
    That’s interesting, I didn’t know that. Is that the case if it was settled out of court? Often employee labor disputes are settled out of court if the lawsuit is less than $30-50K.
  - bhouston 4y ago
    As someone who has been sued and settled this didn’t affect anything, I still raised money, gained business partners and grew the business. Business disputes happen. In many ways suing or getting sued in business is like losing your virginity. It seems like a big deal before it happens the first time but then anfterward it isn’t a big deal and just stuff that happens. I feel you are spreading FUD to protect one of the richest guys in the world and telling little people who have been abused here to just take it.
htag 4y ago

encryptluks2 4y ago

Just a warning about contingency-based lawyers. First, read and re-read any agreements they send and know what you're getting yourself into. Hiring a contingency attorney may seem great cause it is easy, but if they are doing a terrible job and you want to fire them then be prepared for them to say they are still entitled to whatever percentage you agreed to with them no longer doing anything. A 30k settlement may seem great to a contingency attorney because they may get 10k for essentially sending a few letters that you could have sent yourself. They also may already have pre-arranged agreements and relationships with the big companies that represent the company you are suing to essentially pay you as little as possible. Don't settle for less than you deserve and definitely don't rely on a contingency attorney to tell you how much you should settle for. Make them work for you and not the other way around.

P_I_Staker 4y ago
> They also may already have pre-arranged agreements and relationships with the big companies that represent the company you are suing to essentially pay you as little as possible. This is illegal, but I imagine I could see something like this happening naturally and cynically... you get similar effects with realtors and recruiters. Still, there's plenty that are honestly and earnestly do their job for the most part. Often times these people can make deals happen. Taking a relatively basic deal instead of going to trial is often a good call. If he knows he can get something pretty decent and you have to risk $30K+ for a long shot chance.