4 ms·

According to a leak to Business Insider[0], they are still "employed" but are not allowed to work. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling

According to a leak to Business Insider[0], they are still "employed" but are not allowed to work. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twitter-staff-jobs-axed-layoffs-2022-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/read-blunt-email-telling-twi...

bourgeoismedia 4y ago
So 3 months of gardening leave with benefits and a final Feb 1 RSU vest. That seems completely fair and reasonable if it's accurate.
- nullc 4y ago
  It'll be interesting to see if any of them are bold enough to argue that their ability to exert influence over the public via their role at twitter was a material part of their compensation.
  - chitowneats 4y ago
    There's usually at least one person who's willing to say the quiet part out loud in situations like this. Though, I imagine they'll complain about it on Twitter rather than trying to make a federal case out of it.
  - sulam 4y ago
    You apparently have a very negative view of people who work at Twitter. I worked there for 4.5 years and literally no one I worked with or knew of there would ever make such an argument. The only people who even really have a claim to such an argument got last week and we haven't heard a thing from them, although I'm anticipating some sort of lawsuit having to be filed to recover the real USD compensation owed to them for their summary firing "for cause."
    - nullc 4y ago
      The posted email, linked two posts up stated that "Today is your last working day at the company, however, you will remain employed by Twitter and will receive compensation and benefits through your separation date [90 days out]". Unless they want to claim some side effect of working is part of the employee's compensation this lawsuit looks baseless enough to be an abuse of process.
User23 4y ago
Good luck even showing actual damages then. Employment lawsuits from line employees really aren’t that scary to big companies. The case law in California at least is quite clear. I’m not a lawyer, but the source for this information is a lawyer I conferred with. He said legally I had a solid case but he wasn’t interested in 30% of three months compensation. Actual damages are practically capped around 3 months on the theory that you should be able to find a new job in that timeframe. And if you don’t, then that’s evidence you’re not actually qualified qualified and the termination wasn’t wrongful! And if Twitter is effectively paying 60 day’s severance then it’s even harder to show actual damages. Now theoretically punitive damages are a possibility. I assume that’s what this lawsuit is hinging on, raising the however unlikely possibility that a jury might vote for punitive damages. That almost certainly won’t happen though absent gross malfeasance: think outright full blown macroaggression racism or sexism. Otherwise, well privileged tech nerds like tweeps just aren’t very likely to get a jury all riled.
- sulam 4y ago
  There's a reason this is a class action lawsuit.
kenjackson 4y ago
If that's the case, I bet the Twitter employees who still have a job, wish they got laid off. 60 days of pay is better than just resigning, which is what I'm sure I would do.
- postalrat 4y ago
  Whats stopping you from resigning right now?
  - bena 4y ago
    I would imagine needing the paycheck. Those who were put on garden leave have 3 months of pay to lean on while they search. Those who were not, if they quit, their pay ends that day. They'd have whatever savings they have.
    - postalrat 4y ago
      You both seem to assume everyone wants to leave. Which is probably not the case.
      - rideontime 4y ago
        Anybody who stays on at this point deserves what they get.
      - bena 4y ago
        No. I'm not assuming that. You asked what was stopping someone (who wasn't fired but who wanted to leave) from just quitting. Now, kenjackson's statement is kind of generalizing from self a bit. He believes he'd want to leave in that situation and believes that most people share his ideals in this case. And while it's probably not the case, it's also not the case that the number is zero. There are valid reasons to stay in an undesirable situation until you can line up something better.
  - kenjackson 4y ago
    I said I probably would, which is why I would've rather been laid off. I don't work at Twitter though, so I'm not going to resign my current job because of Twitter though.

bourgeoismedia 4y ago

So 3 months of gardening leave with benefits and a final Feb 1 RSU vest. That seems completely fair and reasonable if it's accurate.

nullc 4y ago
It'll be interesting to see if any of them are bold enough to argue that their ability to exert influence over the public via their role at twitter was a material part of their compensation.
- chitowneats 4y ago
  There's usually at least one person who's willing to say the quiet part out loud in situations like this. Though, I imagine they'll complain about it on Twitter rather than trying to make a federal case out of it.
- sulam 4y ago
  You apparently have a very negative view of people who work at Twitter. I worked there for 4.5 years and literally no one I worked with or knew of there would ever make such an argument. The only people who even really have a claim to such an argument got last week and we haven't heard a thing from them, although I'm anticipating some sort of lawsuit having to be filed to recover the real USD compensation owed to them for their summary firing "for cause."
  - nullc 4y ago
    The posted email, linked two posts up stated that "Today is your last working day at the company, however, you will remain employed by Twitter and will receive compensation and benefits through your separation date [90 days out]". Unless they want to claim some side effect of working is part of the employee's compensation this lawsuit looks baseless enough to be an abuse of process.

User23 4y ago

Good luck even showing actual damages then. Employment lawsuits from line employees really aren’t that scary to big companies. The case law in California at least is quite clear. I’m not a lawyer, but the source for this information is a lawyer I conferred with. He said legally I had a solid case but he wasn’t interested in 30% of three months compensation. Actual damages are practically capped around 3 months on the theory that you should be able to find a new job in that timeframe. And if you don’t, then that’s evidence you’re not actually qualified qualified and the termination wasn’t wrongful! And if Twitter is effectively paying 60 day’s severance then it’s even harder to show actual damages. Now theoretically punitive damages are a possibility. I assume that’s what this lawsuit is hinging on, raising the however unlikely possibility that a jury might vote for punitive damages. That almost certainly won’t happen though absent gross malfeasance: think outright full blown macroaggression racism or sexism. Otherwise, well privileged tech nerds like tweeps just aren’t very likely to get a jury all riled.

sulam 4y ago
There's a reason this is a class action lawsuit.

kenjackson 4y ago

If that's the case, I bet the Twitter employees who still have a job, wish they got laid off. 60 days of pay is better than just resigning, which is what I'm sure I would do.

postalrat 4y ago
Whats stopping you from resigning right now?
- bena 4y ago
  I would imagine needing the paycheck. Those who were put on garden leave have 3 months of pay to lean on while they search. Those who were not, if they quit, their pay ends that day. They'd have whatever savings they have.
  - postalrat 4y ago
    You both seem to assume everyone wants to leave. Which is probably not the case.
    - rideontime 4y ago
      Anybody who stays on at this point deserves what they get.
    - bena 4y ago
      No. I'm not assuming that. You asked what was stopping someone (who wasn't fired but who wanted to leave) from just quitting. Now, kenjackson's statement is kind of generalizing from self a bit. He believes he'd want to leave in that situation and believes that most people share his ideals in this case. And while it's probably not the case, it's also not the case that the number is zero. There are valid reasons to stay in an undesirable situation until you can line up something better.
- kenjackson 4y ago
  I said I probably would, which is why I would've rather been laid off. I don't work at Twitter though, so I'm not going to resign my current job because of Twitter though.