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

191–200 of 295 posts

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

#191

Post by spoils19 »

gnicholas wrote: post #114
cma wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But asking employees to resume doing something that they were willing to do when they first joined the company (assuming they joined pre-pandemic) would be difficult to characterize as constructive dismissal. They encouraged people to move far away from the office, where ever they wanted, and then are doing this explicitly for the attrition side-effect, not because they need the people in the office.

Ah, I wasn't aware of that. So they said that people could be remote forever? Was this a company-wide policy, or just certain teams?

Company-wide. Here's a reference that took less than thirty seconds to find: https://twitter.com/paraga/status/1499422876134371329

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

#192

Post by Closi »

jedberg wrote: post #188
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 depends what you define at benefits. Is access to the cafe a benefit? Is access to the internal corporate directory a benefit?

No, not for the purposes of layoffs.

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

#193

Post by shagie »

themadturk wrote: post #156
notyourwork wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You also have to remember that being "laid off" is different than "being fired," at least under the law. I'm not sure where the line is drawn for "mass layoff," but these people aren't being fired for cause, or being let go individually at the whim of the employer (which is kind of what "at will" means for the employer).

Laid off often means that the position is being eliminated.

I will draw attention to https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2012-title20-vol3/pd... which defines a mass layoff:

> (c) Mass layoff. (1) The term "mass layoff" means a reduction in force which first, is not the result of a plant closing, and second, results in an employment loss at the single site of employment during any 30-day period for: (i) At least 33 percent of the active employees excluding part-time employees, and (ii) At least 50 employees, excluding part-time employees.

There is no difference of "for cause" or "not for cause" in the wording of the WARN act. There may be a difference in the contract (not removing a comic may be construed as "for cause") but if that employee was let go in the the frame of a reduction in force, they are likely covered by the WARN act too... of course, ask a lawyer.

In particular, employers with a bit more pragmatic/cautious legal department will avoid firing people for cause in the 30 day window where a layoff happens to avoid the possibility that the fired employee falls into the same category as those who are covered by the WARN act.

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

#194

Post by pb7 »

rco8786 wrote: post #174
sulam wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying that a law firm has decided to risk it by filing this lawsuit on behalf of a few no-name Twitter employees? You can't ascribe 5-d chess skills to Musk on this one, he's lost the benefit of the doubt.

No I am saying the lawyers are suing for something that has already occurred. Specifically not giving the proper advance notice as required by law.

This is proper advance notice as long as he pays for 60+ days of employment. There is no law that requires employers to let you do whatever you want with access to company resources for 60 days.

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

#195

Post by dragontamer »

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.

> When you buy a company

Elon didn't even read the contract that bought the company. He spent the last 6 months in court trying to get out of the contract, not realizing it was ironclad.

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

#196

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#197

Post by TheRealPomax »

spoils19 wrote: post #183
throw_m239339 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean in France, "at will" employment is illegal at first place.

Horrible for the free market, imo.

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.

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

#198

Post by pbreit »

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…

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

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

#199

Post by pb7 »

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?

>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

There's no reason to take your comment seriously when you open like this. You clearly have a bias against the man and you're willing to run with assumptions as facts. Until there is evidence that Twitter was not going to pay for 60 days of employment as required by law, this is a frivolous suit filed out of spite. Otherwise, similar suits would be filed against Stripe, Opendoor, Lyft, and the many other companies that did layoffs recently which are virtually identical to this one.

Edit: Twitter is paying for 90 days of salary and benefits, similar to other companies, more than required by law: https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twi...

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

#200

Post by baidifnaoxi »

lovich wrote: post #105
spoils19 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That is a dangerous Calvinist line of thinking. If someone lies/steals/cheats their way to the top, you’d never notice because you are ascribing virtue to the person solely by their success

// furiously flips through Wikipedia to remember wth Calvinism was again
Post reply on HN