Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 295 posts

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#131

Post by chasd00 »

notyourwork wrote: post #97
falcolas wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California is at-will. And it still requires 60 days notice for a mass-layoff, thorough a separate act, because it's a special case that's covered by a separate law. > “an employer may not order a mass layoff, relocation, or termination at a covered establishment unless, 60 days before the order takes effect, the employer gives written notice of the order” https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/Cal-WARNAct.html

Without sounding dumb, this is saying that a company has to tell you 60 days ahead of time that in 60 days they will fire you? edit: Thank you for the clarification, appreciate the added insights.

not fire but lay off. There's a difference, you can still be fired at any time but laying people off is different. The company is terminating their employment through no fault of the employee. That's a contract violation basically and so the terms are different.

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#132

Post by wongarsu »

maeln wrote: post #86
cronix wrote: post #2

> 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 a…

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…

But those laws are about employers trying to force people to quit so they don't have to fire them. This case feels more equivalent to firing someone and putting them on paid leave during the mandatory notice period. Which seems like a common practice in some industries to prevent revenge acts from those who are let go.

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#133

Post by r00fus »

trap_goes_hot wrote: post #60

Knowing the possible shitstorm it would cause, Twitter upper management sold the company anyway. Not that they care, they got fabulously wealthy off the deal.

You do realize that if they didn't accept the offer, C-suite would be pursued by shareholder lawsuit holding them liable for lost valuation?

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#134

Post by sophacles »

pb7 wrote: post #35
nathanvanfleet wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

> You don't sue someone for something they might do with zero indication that they will.

Sure you do. Often the news reports this with the phrase "seeking injunction base on rumors that..."

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#135

Post by WilTimSon »

selectodude wrote: post #52
pb7 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In a drug-induced haze, Elon offered to buy Twitter at a price that was a weed meme and after sobering up, went on a full court press in the media to get out of his deal. It required a absolute shitpounding in the Delaware court of chancery for him to cop to the legal obligations he clearly wasn't aware of. What on earth has this man done to make you think that he knows his legal obligations?

He doesn't have to know them, he probably has enough management and lawyers on retainer to warn him about stuff like that. It's highly unlikely they haven't warned him about this.

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#136

Post by mikestew »

rickstanley wrote: post #126
mikestew wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't ask for the original title, I asked that the title be fixed. As an example, removing "mass employee" gets under the limit and leaves a title that's a lot more clear than what's up there now. "Twitter faces lawsuit..." gets you there, several ways of shortening without losing much meaning. HN guidelines ask that the original be used. But if original is too long, we should at least try to leave something that…

My mistake, I read you comment erroneously. Sorry.

No worries, hopefully someone benefits from the discussion as to how and why HN titles sometimes end up the way they do.

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#137

Post by BlargMcLarg »

ifyoubuildit wrote: post #130
petesergeant wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so he is circumventing that California law Not a Musk fan, but "circumventing" feels a bit weird when he's basically acting in the spirit of it?

Yeah, it sounds like he's complying, which seems like the obvious thing to do. I get that emotions are understandably high, and people think he's some kind of super villain/buffoon simultaneously, but how would it make any sense for him to make that kind of obvious blunder?

The guy is kind of known for making obvious blunders out of the blue or at least acting like he is above things.

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#139

Post by rco8786 »

nathanvanfleet wrote: post #32
baidifnaoxi wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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.

You can’t sue someone in advance of wrongdoing

Re: Twitter faces a class action lawsuit over mass employee layoffs with proper

#140

Post by rco8786 »

readingnews wrote: post #61

Honestly, what? Every job I have had in IT/programming/universities/heavy industry have been "at will". We can fire you at any time for any reason. Is silicon valley not like this? What is this "advanced notice"?? No, really, I am not taking sides, but is this how it works at some places? I have been working for several decades, I have _never_ heard of this.

Turns out employment laws are a thing and employees have some rights. Yes.
Post reply on HN