Live data from Hacker News

“X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

motherjones.com

101–110 of 139 posts

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#101
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly: we already have plenty of areas where a civil case can turn into a criminal one like fraud (just ask Elizabeth Holmes). Saying "we'll pay you severance" with 0 intention to do so sure sounds like fraud to me.

Wage theft and fraud are crimes that state attorneys general do prosecute. https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/attorney-general-f...

Not paying severance is not wage theft. Severance was not included in Twitter's employee contract.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#102
post #62

How did we get to this place that so much of our media landscape was centralized within one failing company on Market Street in San Francisco?

I have long held that Twitter should have been bought by a consortium of media companies and run as a market utility. It’s been the media internet’s comment section for long enough that the BBC, MSNBC, Sinclair and even OANN ought to have understood the value of sharing it.

Twitter always should have been an Internet protocol.

But we don’t make those anymore. Haven’t for a while. If we didn’t already have email, I doubt we could create it (and have it take off) today.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#103
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't have debtors prisons. No one's suggesting such. We have plenty of disputed behavior and harms that are within the purview of civil courts, and then more egregious versions that are crimes. IMO, withholding significant pay that you have the ability to pay and is unambiguously contractually owed causes pretty serious harm, and society has strong reasons to criminalize this conduct. Accepting services from so…

Severance is typically not "unambiguously contractually owed." The fact that many here would want company executives imprisoned for not offering goodwill boggles my mind.

[deleted]

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#104
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wage theft and fraud are crimes that state attorneys general do prosecute. https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/attorney-general-f...

Not paying severance is not wage theft. Severance was not included in Twitter's employee contract.

> Severance was not included in Twitter's employee contract.

It likely was once promises were made to continue to pay severance for at least one year, and employees relied upon this promise (instead of immediately seeking to work elsewhere).

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#105
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, wage theft is done by people in corporations, therefore it doesn't count as real theft, so going to jail for it is almost impossible. If you wanna get away with a crime, do it in a company.

It need not be that way, as Sarbanes-Oxley demonstrates.

Agreed, it doesn't have to be that way, but for most crimes, it's currently that way. The kinds of things that would get an individual sent to jail usually get a corporation hit with a fine.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There needs to be criminal consequences for company officeholders. If you are wilfully withholding pay then it should be mandatory jail time. Legislation is underway here in Australia for such an approach after 7/11 et al systemically withheld pay knowing that the financial consequences weren't going to personally affect them.

We don't have debtors prisons. While there are specific cases like this where some jail time would seem just, overall it's a negative for society. It's a civil matter for a reason. I do think such cases should rip the corporate veil to shreds though, and the billionaires would have to pay up.

Until corporate personhood means Twitter/X can be thrown in jail, I don't think debtors prisons are relevant.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#107
It's incredible just how comically bad the saga of Musk's acquisition of Twitter and his general fall from public grace has turned out. You really can't come up with this shit. Next thing you know, he's going to walk into a rake.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overall it's a negative for society I would disagree. We shouldn't allow criminal behaviour to be tolerated just because it's white collar. And the whole point of laws is to protect the vulnerable in our society which definitely includes the innocent employees who are being harmed for doing nothing other than working for Twitter/X.

How is it criminal behavior to not offer severance, which 99% of companies don't offer? Not offering severance has nothing to do with criminal behavior. If so, 99% of small businesses owners would be imprisoned in your world.

You're responding to something not in the parent comment.

"Protect the vulnerable" there probably means enforcing contractual obligations to pay severance that was promised, not to offer severance in the first place.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about prison time for executives who use the legal system in bad faith? Refusing to pay is not permissible.

Sorry, wage theft is done by people in corporations, therefore it doesn't count as real theft, so going to jail for it is almost impossible. If you wanna get away with a crime, do it in a company.

I have this vague recollection that back in the 90's, some culture jamming collective tried to do adbusting defacement of billboards as an LLC, to avoid jail time.

Might have been a CrimethInc. cell, I don't recall.

Re: “X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases – and Big Fees

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is shaded in more than black and white.

This line is a low-effort, cliché dismissal that does not engage the statement in a meaningful way.

The original statement is also low-effort and cliché, so why should a comment require more effort?
Post reply on HN