4 ms·
Twitter owes ex-employees $500M in severance, lawsuit claims
- shortrounddev2 3y agoI'm not sure Twitter has that kind of money
- meepmorp 3y agoHe's named, personally, in the suit. He probably has that kind of money.
- crazygringo 3y agoIf it doesn't, then it can pay out what it has, go bankrupt, and have Musk lose ownership. If a company has to pay a lawsuit and it doesn't have the money, it doesn't just get to continue operating with the same owners. The owners lose it. Thankfully -- otherwise punishment would be toothless.
- jmye 3y agoI hope they get every dime they’re owed. That said, I can’t imagine the media geniuses still buying ads on a site that “[…] responded to a request for comment with a poop emoji.” Musk is an absolute child, and Linda Yaccarino better have a real ironclad parachute with a lot of upfront money.
- 3cats-in-a-coat 3y agoYeah forget the parachute, we're in a thread about Twitter not paying severance. The former CEO and management team also didn't get what they're owed by contract (i.e. their "golden parachute").
- rsynnott 3y agoIf I was her, I’d have insisted on the severance payout being held in escrow, under the circumstances.
- throwaway5959 3y agoWhy is that just allowed? If you have enough money you can just not pay your bills?
- 3cats-in-a-coat 3y agoWell, I wanted to elaborate why this is an oversimplification, but... basically yes. Relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36702351 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36702351
- jmye 3y agoI should’ve been clear in what I meant - her parachute should all be up front and in her account by month 3. Because you’re totally right, otherwise.
- gamblor956 3y agoMy employer today officially retired our Twitter API connections. We were still using it for logins and some limited post-to-social media functionality, but this past month's data was clear: Twitter isn't used at all by the younger generations. Out of more than 150k+ new accounts in the past week (across Google, Apple, Twitter, and Meta), Twitter was less than 0.1%. Across all accounts (not just new ones), Twitter usage was less than 0.5%. And the big killer: more people requested we add Threads integration in the past week than used Twitter in the past quarter.
- dathinab 3y agoAFIK pretty much most (active) people on twitter by today are there because they are stuck there due to network effects, lazy and just don't care, or musk fans. I.e. there is nothing sustainable about that IMHO. Worse I wouldn't be surprised if the first group isn't just the biggest, but also the one which has the most paying users.
- mrguyorama 3y agoMost of the people still on Twitter are there because for $8 a month they can push their toxicity and probably garbage opinions onto anyone else.
- treeman79 3y agoYeah, real shame that free speech is allowed again. Can’t be having that. /s
- jmye 3y agoCan you explain to me a) how Twitter allows free speech, in spite of the numerous cases of Musk censoring things he doesn’t like and b) how my comment had literally anything to do with whatever it is you think “free speech” is?
- rlt 3y agoThat can’t be right. That’s nearly $1M per laid off employee.
- rsynnott 3y agoHow do you work that out? Twitter apparently has about 1000 employees; last year it had 8000. 500M/7000=~70,000 (I assume they weren't _all_ laid off, but you'd expect most of them were).
- AceyMan 3y agoCalifornia provides fines in cases where final paychecks are not disbursed timely. IIRC that would need to include unpaid vacation/PTO, so if Twitter didn't cover all those days in the last check the fines would be in force. (relevant websearch: California waiting time penalties)
- aeternum 3y agoThis would be a great precedent for employees. Just get your HR person to write a policy to provide $1 mil severance to every employee. HR person gets fired, but company still has to pay out.
- gamblor956 3y agoThat's not how it works. In general, it's not enough for an HR person to "write a policy" unless that HR person also happens to be head of HR (aka VP of Personnel, etc.). Otherwise, the policy needs to be reviewed and approved by the C-Suite or the Board. In Twitter's case, this policy had been in place for years before the acquisition. And here specifically, Elon agreed to this when acquiring Twitter. This wasn't something they sneaked past him; it was one of the material negotiating points and was widely reported on by the media at the time. It' not just a policy; it was a contract between Elon and Twitter (and now its assigned successor, X) with the (former) employees of Twitter as its intended beneficiaries (which is what gives them standing to sue).
- ethanbond 3y agoYes it is a great precedent that contracts written and signed by people with contractual authority are indeed enforceable.
- aeternum 3y agoYeah too bad this is like HR 101: "THE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK SHOULD MAKE IT CLEAR IT IS NOT A CONTRACT. THE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK NEEDS A “DISCLAIMER.” https://www.gordonfischerlawfirm.com/necessary-employee-handbook-policies/ https://www.gordonfischerlawfirm.com/necessary-employee-hand...