back to article Twitter employees sue over lack of 60-day layoff notice

The great Twitter cull of '22 is expected to begin today, but a group of tweeps have preempted the event by filing a class action lawsuit against Twitter for violating the WARN Act. Filed yesterday on behalf of five named plaintiffs "and all others similarly situated" in Musk's layoff sights, the suit accuses Twitter of …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    handling layoffs

    In CA the way silicon valley tech companies frequently handle layoffs is you're dismissed effective immediately, but still on payroll (including medical insurance, if any) for the aforementioned 60 days.

    If the company is at all trying to appear graceful, they'll sometimes give additional time to the severance package, e.g. 1 week for every year of service at the company.

    But in most cases the laid-off employee is no longer actively working at the company, access has usually been revoked, and so on. But WARN requirements have been satisfied.

    Accrued expenses (like vacation hours and some other things) are also cashed-out to the departing employee. This, btw, is supposedly one motivation for some companies not tracking vacation time in favor of "unlimited vacation" -- it moves an accrued expense off the books and into informal "maybe never gets used" territory. YMMV.

    Usually this "cashing out" maneuver is handled pretty promptly after the employee is notified of their impending separation; the company's motivation is presumably to clear the books and remove potential liabilities as quickly as possible. From the employee perspective, yes it may suck to be out of a steady paycheck, but they've been sent off with 60 days' pay to look for another job.

    Seems odd that elon wouldn't just handle twitter layoffs the same way. If he isn't, perhaps he's assuming the rules (and laws) don't apply to him - there's apparently some history of that behavior.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: handling layoffs

      "In CA the way silicon valley tech companies frequently handle layoffs is you're dismissed effective immediately, but still on payroll (including medical insurance, if any) for the aforementioned 60 days."

      It said on the news that that was exactly what Musk was doing. Everybody is paid until February, supposedly, so I don't see what the fuss is about.

      1. Trigun

        Re: handling layoffs

        Yep, this is what I read.

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: handling layoffs

          It was also planely stated in the emails that I have seen.

          Not sure what the lawsuit was all about. Land-sharks smelling money and jumping the gun, probably. Hopefully the Judge whose court it was filled in is in a hanging mood ...

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: handling layoffs

            I’d wait to pass judgement until those ex-employees actually see the money in their bank accounts.

          2. anothercynic Silver badge

            Re: handling layoffs

            No, it wasn't 'landsharks smelling money'. It was the lack of proper information disseminated, the fact that staff saw themselves locked out of accounts and comms channels (I have no problem with that), their company-issued devices wiped remotely (that's a bit disturbing when it happens without warning), etc. The staff in question assumed the worst, i.e. that they were out on their asses immediately.

            Now, there's communicating, and there's *communicating*. It seems Muskrat & Co went for the former option, telling people very little. It could've been done better, but then again, it appears that they simply went for the "everyone'll get treated the same" concept, regardless of what the legislation says, in terms of work access, etc.

            Since then of course those who "remain" will have been told, those who "separated" will have been given more detailed instructions based on the jurisdictions that apply to them. Apparently UK staff were told on Friday evening that they had until Tuesday to nominate someone in their group (kinda hard to know who all the people were who were laid off in the UK when you have no access to staff comms channels anymore) to represent them in the 'consultation process' as mandated by the UK employment legislation. California and New York staff will also have been told that everything statutory will be complied with but not an inch more than that (so if you're officially on 'garden leave' to say you still work there legally but aren't allowed access to anything, including your email, that's compliant with WARN Act legislation)... Other staff in the 'right to work' states all got booted.

            The lawsuits are there to make sure Twitter and Muskrat don't make mistakes in this because those staff are *pissed*. They're upset and maybe rightly so... they want to make sure he and his goons don't get away with *anything* they're not allowed to get away with. It's fair enough.

            1. martinusher Silver badge

              Re: handling layoffs

              Musk won't handle the actual layoffs. That's what the HR department is paid to do. Legal will ensure that all the eyes are dotted and the tees crossed. The law will be observed so the only reason for this preemptive lawsuit if because Musk is a) rich and b) well known.It makes him a target.

              As a general rule it pays not to try and pull stunts like this with an employer because if you're one of the laid off then you'll find you have two problems. One is that the layoff package is often more generous than the bare minimum but its contingent on the ex-employee not taking legal action against them (one place this turns up is medical insurance -- the employer has no obligation outside COBRA to provide medical insurance and that's *expensive*). The other is that you might want another job. Word gets around -- HR personnel all seem to know each other and potential employers don't look favorably on people who are a potential cause of trouble.

              (Hey, I don't make the rules....I'm just telling you what will happen in a practical situation. I've worked in California for decades and I've been laid off several times so I know the drill.)

            2. ecofeco Silver badge

              Re: handling layoffs

              Exactly. They weren't TOLD AT ALL!

              The law is you have to say it BEFORE you do it.

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: handling layoffs

            Hey Jake nice to see you about

            Nice to see a post not about Linux or IR35

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: handling layoffs

        I read that in CA (California) the employees are getting those 60 days - but perhaps not all the fired employees are "in CA".

    2. Joe W Silver badge

      Re: handling layoffs

      "But in most cases the laid-off employee is no longer actively working at the company, access has usually been revoked, and so on"

      That is standard practice in many cases. I know of places where they do that even if you quit.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: handling layoffs

        I know of companies that revoke access even if you die, to say nothing of resigning, being laid off, being fired, etc.

        I'll have to ask corporate security if they shouldn't also be disabling accounts of users on paid leave (which is separate from vacation/sick days.)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: handling layoffs

          Interesting.

          I know of companies that DON'T revoke access, even when informed multiple times of open back doors that should have been closed off (I am talking upgrades to newer access methods and the old methods being left in place for years).

          Last one I saw was meant to have been turned off 7 years prior - even had a warning message that it was meant to be turned off (with a date 7 years old). For all I know it may even still be there.....

          When I left one place, I specifically mentioned my logins should be disabled. I was contacted a year after leaving to help someone out, only to find all my access was still in place!

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: handling layoffs

      Exactly.

      Also, the people affected normally cannot easily start a different job until the full 60 days later. If they do start a new job even on day 59, they would be deemed to have resigned from the first company, so no remaining lump sum payout. As such, WARN is likely to get the full 60 days before people start new jobs. As such, I would assume this lawsuit will go nowhere, at least in the US since the reports say Twitter did the same.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: handling layoffs

        I suppose it depends a lot on the law, how it's worded and how their employment contract is worded.

        The last time I was made redundant, I was on 12 weeks notice and working it, not sitting around at home. On top of that, I was entitled to 12 weeks redundancy pay, due at the end of the 12 weeks notice period. I applied for and was offered a new job within 2 weeks of the formal notice period starting, with a start date at the beginning of week 4. Once notice has been given, my current/old employer has no say over when I actually leave other than they don't have to pay wages for any remaining notice period but still have to pay the full 12 weeks redundancy pay I'm entitled to, and cash for any unused holidays.

        If they had chosen to not have me work my notice period, I'd still be entitled to those 12 weeks pay for as long as I don't find new employment, but that doesn't affect the redundancy pay but will affect the unused accrued holiday pay. In my case I left with 8 weeks notice still to go so "lost" those extra days annual leave I would have accrued. Which doesn't matter of course, because I'm now being paid by the new employers, accruing annual leave in the new job, earning more than the old job and have 12 weeks worth of wages/redundancy pay in the bank, and no unpaid time off work :-)

    4. Paul_Canada

      Re: handling layoffs

      According to news reports, those laid off were given 3 months severance. So I wonder how this will stand up in court.

      1. Kayakerdude

        Re: handling layoffs

        According to Matt Farah (he of The Smoking Tire youtube channel, whose wife is amongst the laid-off, this 3-month items is verified as false in her case at least.

    5. sketharaman

      Re: handling layoffs

      Elon M seems to handled Twitter layoffs the same way? He tweeted that laid off employees were offered three months pay, which is 50% more than legally required.

  2. pimppetgaeghsr

    While I have no sympathy for smug 20-something year old techies working in what is essentialy millenial daycare producing absolutely nothing. If Musk is really firing this fast then it is purely about turning a profit ASAP. He hasn't had time to actually understand the business and probably doesn't care. I still maintain he was just doing this to offload Tesla stock at the peak of what is essentially a stock price that will not be seen again for 10+ years just like what happened in the Dotcom crash.

    1. DS999 Silver badge

      Except he tweeted today that revenue has massively declined due to advertisers fleeing, and calls that a "free speech" issue. So I guess he wants the government to step in and force companies to advertise on Twitter against their will?

      I think he will have to lay off a lot more than 50% of Twitter's employees eventually. Perhaps as many as 100% depending on what direction he takes the moderation.

      1. O RLY

        He also tweeted he was taking Tesla private at $420 per share. It's hard to parse what he says through a filter of reality.

        1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

          re: a filter of reality.

          too bad his cult won't see it that way. Every word he says is true, 100% true and will take down any dissenters.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Uh, advertisers fleeing (though "pausing" as in "wait and see" seems to be the more frequently reported verb) isn't a "free speech issue", it's more like "advertisers don't want their product ads showing next to some hateful loathsome screed in 140 characters".

        Turns out there's a difference. Flip a coin whether elob actually knows that, or if this is just another of his bad faith takes on reality.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          You are a German company whose name literally begins with Adolph.

          Your brand ambassador starts spouting antisemitic conspiracies and gets kicked off twitter.

          The new boss of twitter suggests that these sort of bans will be reversed.

          I would be putting my advertising head down - not starting an ad campaign that might be run alongside this guy.

          1. kat_bg

            Wrong. Audi is an acronym for Auto Union Deutschland Ingolstadt. No Adolph in the name...

            1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

              He was referencing Adidas, surely? Not that it's much of a criticism that someone was named Adolf _before_ Hitler came along. More of a criticism that Adi Dassler was a member of the Nazi party, but supposedly he was just playing along, and it was - not supposedly, definitely, on this part - his brother who was a proper Nazi. He was eventually ruled a Mitlaufer, so that may even have been true - there is reason to believe his brother Rudi, who was a keen Nazi and member of the Gestapo, may have fabricated claims against Adolf in order to gain control of their shared company.

              1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

                The problem is that it's difficult to fit that explanation into a tweet - especially when twitter is running your ads alongside actual Nazis.

                ps. Audi isn't an acronym, it's a rare example of a German pun. The founder was called Horchen which is "listen" in German (ie, harken), he lost the rights to the name when his previous car company went bust so he used the latin for listen = Audio

        2. Strahd Ivarius Silver badge

          It is time for advertisers to check if the amount of money wasted there has provided any improvements to the bottom line...

          (the short answer being stated in 2 characters)

          1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

            Also why pay for ads when you can tweet for free? Just pay some sports/music/movie star with lots of follows to tweet your stuff?

          2. stiine Silver badge
            Thumb Up

            Would those two characters be "ja" or "da"?

      3. MachDiamond Silver badge

        " I think he will have to lay off a lot more than 50% of Twitter's employees eventually."

        When the cost of the office space an employee occupies exceeds their salary, you have a problem.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          "When the cost of the office space an employee occupies exceeds their salary, you have a problem."

          Just make them work from home, simples. Oh, wait. This is Musk. He *hates* WFH :-)

    2. Gwaptiva

      If Musk were interested in profit, he'd stay away from his Twitter account.

      If that man already runs afoul of US legislation, wait until he gets bannded from the EU for failure to adhere to EU Law.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Idiot dot com'ers..

    CA is an At Will state. Just because the unions paid for WARN to be passed in Sac about 20 years means diddly. Did not stop all the manufacturing plants leaving the state. Typically the CA version contradicts the Fed version in several key places - so Musk wins. Then there is the whole can of worms of WFH and what constitutes a physical location of work.. This was not some industrial plant .

    Just goes to prove the massive sense of entitlement and utter stupidity of so many dot com'ers. Those with half a clue would already have their resumes out and interviews organized. Its not like this has not been on the cards for many months now. For the rest, they will discover the hard way just how overpaid they were for what they actually did. Just like the previous generation in 2000.

    1. A. Coatsworth Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Idiot dot com'ers..

      When Orwell wrote that the future would be "a boot stamping on a human face - forever", even he could't imagine that some of the human faces would murmur back harder, daddy

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

        Orwell?? Huh?

        You obviously know zero about working in tech in CA. Its fast in fast out. Companies come and go. Project teams come and go. In the time it takes a UK company to make a decision that they might go ahead with a project a project team in CA would be up and running and could even be gone if some idiot VP in upper management has decided that the company needs to "refocus". Yes, I have seen that happen many times. UK company takes many months to make a decision. CA companies projects comes and goes. Or ships. In the same time period. If a project does not turn around in days its not going to happen.

        And the UK is by far the most nimble county in Europe. Takes literally years to get decisions made in other countries. If you work on projects for starts-up (the successful ones) in CA at least half your clients will be gone in five years. One way or another. Almost all within 10. Most of mine get acquired.

        If you want a nice predicable career you go work for the f*cking government. Or some big company mindless bureaucracy. Or stay in your podunk little backwater market. You dont work for tech in the Bay Area. The rather brutal churn comes with the territory. And always has. 9 to 5'ers never last very long. For a start people like me never hire them. We have a project to finish. Fast.

        Twitter fires half its staff. Big deal. Its been on the cards for a long time. The people with good resumes will do fine.

        1. jake Silver badge
          Pint

          Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

          Thank you, AC. Saved me from typing it.

        2. Natalie Gritpants Jr

          Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

          You sound lovely.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

            Just tellin' it like it is. Like most such things, it's no more than an accident of history. Essentially, a whole bunch of educated people settled in one place because after attending Uni there, they found out it's a nice place to live ... and then they discovered that people are addicted to TheNewShiny, so they invent and sell said haberdasheries at a very high rate of speed, until they are superceded by the NextBigThing. As a result, companies and their employees come and go like the weather in the North of England.

            I didn't make the rules, neither did the AC. Don't shoot the messengers.

        3. VoiceOfTruth Silver badge

          Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

          -> In the time it takes a UK company to make a decision that they might go ahead with a project a project team in CA would be up and running

          This is definitely one thing that I admire about the USA - it can get things done quickly when it wants to. This used to be called the "can do" attitude found in the USA, and AC is right. It is something we haven't had in the UK for about 50 years now. Some people might attribute it our lack of "vim" to "health and safety". It's not, though that might be a symptom of it. There is a general malaise these days about taking risks (I don't mean stupid people doing foolhardy things - they exist everywhere).

          We used to have vision in this country but not any more. We are effectively a bankrupt country. We're over £2tn in debt and absolutely no plan to reduce it. Instead we had/have politicians who wanted to add even more debt. I said it a few weeks ago when the Daily Mail was crowing about a "true Tory budget", that we were hours away from a major financial crash. Even the Bank of England is saying that now (https://www.channel4.com/news/economy-was-potentially-hours-away-from-meltdown-says-bank-of-england-governor). Why does this, this unsustainable debt, not affect the USA too? It does. Debt will be the undoing of the USA. Sooner or later other countries will not want to trade using dollars (we already see this for various reasons).

          -> If you want a nice predicable career you go work for the f*cking government. Or some big company mindless bureaucracy.

          Amen. It probably explains why a lot of low grade accountants work at the Inland Revenue. They're just clever enough to beat Bob the Builder's low grade tax fiddling, but they're not clever enough to beat a company which cheats 10,000s worth of Bob's tax.

          I don't like seeing people kicked out of jobs but it happens. As long as there is a reasonable severance package people should not complain. Job for life? Where exactly?

          1. crayon

            Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

            "Why does this, this unsustainable debt, not affect the USA too? It does. Debt will be the undoing of the USA. Sooner or later other countries will not want to trade using dollars (we already see this for various reasons)."

            It doesn't affect the US because of the petro-dollar. A bargain was made with the Middle East energy exporters to sell their oil/gas in USD and they will be protected from regime change. Iraq started selling for € and Saddam was hanged, Libya planned to sell for African Dinar and Gaddafi was buggered to death. When most world trade is carried out in USD, the US Fed can run the printing presses 24/7 [1] without collapsing the USD. It can run up huge budget deficits (~30T and counting) without serious consequences - let the next government worry about it.

            The day of reckoning is getter nearer, when the US loses the power to conjure up USD without the attendant consequences then the US economy will collapse. The only question is whether they will go quietly or take the world down with them.

            [1] figuratively speaking, in reality - in BOFH-speak - it's just <TAPPITY-TAP> <CLICKETY-CLICK> <ENTER>, and now there is an extra 1T in social security for the weapons industry, another 500B for regime change operations, 100B for Ukraine (but they're kickbacks deductable), 100K for health, ...

            1. heyrick Silver badge

              Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

              "Iraq started selling for € and Saddam was hanged"

              https://foreignpolicy.com/2009/10/07/debunking-the-dumping-the-dollar-conspiracy/

              1. crayon

                Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

                First half of article brings up an irrelevant discussion of "pricing oil/gas in X-currency" to cloud the issue - the issue being the payment for oil/gas in USD.

                And stating "There is absolutely nothing to prevent Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, or any other oil producer ..." doesn't make it true.

                Russia will be banging another nail into the coffin of USD denominated trade when their non-USD based commodities trading platforms come online, soon.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

                  "Russia will be banging another nail into the coffin of USD denominated trade when their non-USD based commodities trading platforms come online, soon."

                  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                  Here I thought you were just another stupid troll. Turns out you're a comedian!

                  I haven't laughed that hard after reading a post here in yonks! Please carry on! Ta!

          2. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

            "This used to be called the "can do" attitude found in the USA, and AC is right. It is something we haven't had in the UK for about 50 years now. Some people might attribute it our lack of "vim" to "health and safety"."

            There are plenty of example of Brits with a can do attitude, but not as many larger firms. Those large entities have curled up in a fear of failure and government that wants to extract fines. The whole "Health and Safety" pogram has devolved into the stupidest requirements that I've ever seen. It's nearly to a point where if there is even a rumor that work might be happening within a 5 mile radius, everybody must don a hard hat, boots and Hi-Vis vest. Even a surveying team working in the middle of a field will have on the full kit. Bonkers.

            1. James 139

              Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

              "Those large entities have curled up in a fear of failure and government that wants to extract fines."

              Under such rules, useless business idiots like Trump would have been struck off so many times, their childrens children wouldnt be able to run a company.

              Its one of those times where a middle balance is better, but the 2 regimes have moved to almost reckless and carefully fearful, neither of which is good for everyone.

              "The whole "Health and Safety" pogram has devolved into the stupidest requirements that I've ever seen. It's nearly to a point where if there is even a rumor that work might be happening within a 5 mile radius, everybody must don a hard hat, boots and Hi-Vis vest."

              This has often been demonstrated to be nothing to do with H&S or the HSE rules, its the nominated H&S employee that is unwilling to take responsibility for saying "yes" in case something goes wrong.

          3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

            "As long as there is a reasonable severance package people should not complain."

            The problem with that is that it's only the 1%ers who get those sort of severance packages. The other 99% get offered a basic contract, take it or leave it. If you leave it, there's queue out the door waiting to take it. Almost everyone in a position to negotiate their employment contract is a 1%er.

            1. Graham 25

              Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

              "The other 99% get offered a basic contract, take it or leave it."

              Thats because their skills, are highly generic, easily replaced by another person and so they are a commodity. If you really have no unique, or discernable skills advantage, its not really a surprise that the employer can replace you with any number of alternative candidates.

              Thats not an employers problem - its your for being a drone just like all the other drones.

              1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

                Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

                That's a pretty shitty attitude to have for the people who do most of the actual work in most companies. Not everyone can be the queen bee like you because the queen bees like you NEED the drones to survive.

                1. jake Silver badge

                  Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

                  "because the queen bees like you NEED the drones to survive."

                  But not all of the drones, all of the time. I have seen a queen move her entire colony of ~10,000 bees into a space that could only over-winter perhaps 400.

                  Evil Bee Overlord that I am, I captured the queen, put her into a queen cage, put that into swarm box (located about a foot straight down from her knot-hole), where she was joined by her complete colony. The workers gnawed the "candy" plug out and released the queen in a couple days, by which time they had acclimatized to the new space. They over-wintered there, until I moved them to their newly built Layens hive in the early spring. That Colony is still thriving ...

                2. MachDiamond Silver badge

                  Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

                  "because the queen bees like you NEED the drones to survive."

                  That analogy really doesn't work. The bee drones are rather useless. I think what you mean are the workers especially when you consider there is one reigning queen in a hive with thousands of workers. The handful of drones are just there to buzz off and mate with a new queen starting a new colony and then their job is over.

        4. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

          In the time it takes a UK company to make a decision that they might go ahead with a project a project team in CA would be up and running and could even be gone if some idiot VP in upper management has decided that the company needs to "refocus".

          And it works for Google so well. Every new product has the stench of death about it from the moment it's announced and they must have had a dozen messaging products with mayfly-like lifespans appearing, disappearing, and merging at random over the past decade.

          Result is nobody will use Google products apart from mail, search, and adwords. Schools use gsuite because there's a no-cost version and parents cough up for the Chromebook.

        5. Ken Moorhouse Silver badge

          Re: Idiot dot com'ers..someone not in the Bay Area I'd guess..

          There are long-term advantages to the concept of inertia.

          The pandemic has caused a lot of people to reevaluate life.

        6. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: UK company decision making

          Is IMHO down to the deluge of MBA (More Bloody Arselickers) in industry today. I have an MBA and it was hammered into us that if we did not make a decision then it was better for our career prospects that sticking your head above the parapet and actually making a decision.

          It does not matter to me as I'm now retired but the arselickers are spreading everywhere causing even more paralysis inside companies.

          I wish that they'd all drop down dead tonight. guess who didn't get the promotions because that called out the other useless MBAites'? Yep, me.

    2. jake Silver badge

      Re: Idiot dot com'ers..

      "Those with half a clue would already have their resumes out and interviews organized."

      They have.

      I have half a dozen friends and acquaintances who have been (in their words) "whoring themselves out to twitter" for a couple years now. I sent 'em all a note this morning, offering them temporary work, should they need it. All except one already have offers elsewhere. The one has decided to retire.

      1. Joe W Silver badge

        Re: Idiot dot com'ers..

        Yeah, as you noted above, the bright ones will be back in a job soon. If there are cuts they are usually the first to leave, as other places pay better.

        Good thing to do from your side. I disagree a lot with you, which does not mean I cannot respect you.

        I'm working for a decent place, decent pay, good job security. It was my choice, temp contracts are too stressful for me. And I like my team, good guys and gals. I might leave in a year or five, when I long for more excitement.

  4. Franco

    It's a good thing no one saw this coming when an entitled idiot massively overpays for a tech company, online reaction to his suggestion of charging either $8 or $20 a month to keep a blue tick suggests that he really hasn't put much thought in to what to do beyond "free speech". It has been quite entertaining seeing his back and forth with AOC and Stephen King, both of whom have absolutely wiped the floor with him.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      It will be interesting to see how LinkedIn manage to screw up the opportunity to be the broadcasting platform for grown ups

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        They've been hacked too many times to take on that onus. And Microsoft owns them...

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Easy. They have Microsoft management. They couldn't do "web" without a stranglehold over their customer base to save their lives. ALL of their population on their web services is people who have legacy data that they need to access. Granted Office 365 is decent, but it is also crippled compared to the desktop version due to bandwidth issues.

    2. SundogUK Silver badge

      AOC couldn't wipe the floor with a mop.

      1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        AOC couldn't wipe the floor with a mop

        Unlike you eh? You must be a pro at it by now in your minimum wage job..

  5. M.V. Lipvig Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Let's see...

    4 million awarded in a class action to be split amongst 4100 employees. In the US, half goes to the lawyers. 2MM split 4100 ways is $487.80 per person.

    Call the kids, Martha, the farm is saved!

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Let's see...

      The suit wasn't filed for the former employees. It was filed for the law firm in question.

  6. Marty McFly Silver badge
    Holmes

    Connect the dots...

    Musk companies have a history of large layoffs. Dot-com companies have a history of layoffs during acquisition. Musk announced the intention to buy Twitter in April. Seems like that is a 6-month notice right there! Way better than what the government requires.

    Snarky Reg attitude aside.... This is a telegraphed punch a long time in coming. There can be lots of whining and gnashing of teeth, but anyone with half a brain saw this coming months ago. Those who chose to ignore it did so at their own accord. Might as well - if a job change is coming, might as well get cashed out on the way out.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Connect the dots...

      There's some truth to this. Best way to leave a bad [company / job / boss / all the above] is getting paid on your way out.

      Which is not to say you shouldn't keep your eye on the wall writing, update the CV, browse help wanted posts, etc. until your number is up, because you may not be one of the lucky ones who get the layoff severance package.

      I've been in the workforce for a few decades by now, and I have yet to get the package from a job I wanted to leave -- I always had to resign. Near as I can tell that's the norm: most people aren't allowed to "volunteer" for layoffs these days, unless they're either in (probably senior-ish) management or they're connected to someone who is and will put them on the list.

      I've heard and read of old school places like IBM offering voluntary retirement sort of programs, but I don't think that's very common in the US.

      1. anothercynic Silver badge

        Re: Connect the dots...

        A former employer learned that the hard way... they did a round of redundancies, and people could offer voluntary. The offer was generous, and quite a few good engineers chose it (one had such a good deal that he could slum it for 6 months without a new job...). The aftermath was predictable... so they went for a second round, but no voluntary redundancies that time, and six months after that, a third round. Investor confidence tanked spectacularly...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Connect the dots...

          That's often the thing about layoffs: the company rarely hangs on to all the good engineers, the ones it can least afford to lose.

          The sharp ones usually can (and have) read the tea leaves, they know the company is wobbly, and usually have their exit strategy(ies) sorted. Plus their skills are in demand, so they probably have attractive landing zones elsewhere, if they want it.

          So if they see an opportunity to get paid to leave, and likely improve their situation by doing it, they will.

          Even if they aren't allowed to volunteer, again -- they're sharp. They can see what's happening, more (probably thankless) work coming their way, fewer coworkers to help carry the load, probably no bonuses or stock etc. for a while, diminishing returns all around. Once it's clear they won't get paid to leave, they'll go to the greener pastures on their own at some point.

          1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

            Re: Connect the dots...

            That's often the thing about layoffs: the company rarely hangs on to all the good engineers, the ones it can least afford to lose.

            BT being a shining example of this.. (all the internet installs I've had done here I had considerably more Clue(TM) than the Openwoe engineer - the DSL one I actually had to tell him what he was supposed to be doing and coach him through what he needed to tell the config centre..)

    2. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: Connect the dots...

      "Musk announced the intention to buy Twitter in April. Seems like that is a 6-month notice right there!"

      Yeah, well, the lettuce didn't even have time to wilt between when Elon signed the contract and when he started trying to weasel out of the deal. I expect that plenty of people were betting it wouldn't happen even with wet signatures on a contract. The stock market certainly didn't believe it would be concluded up until it became obvious that a court was very likely going to force Elon to pony up and abide by what he agreed to do. Whenever there is a firm offer for the stock in a company to buy that company out, the market price of the stock goes up to within a few percent of that offer price.

  7. vtcodger Silver badge

    Any Publicity Is Good Publicity

    Let's see if I have this straight. Musk has just spent a ludicrous amount of money for a crap website whose only known value is in its broad user base. His actions to date seem to indicate a desire to alienate as much as possible of that base as rapidly as possible. I can only guess that Elon belongs to the Any Publicity Is Good Publicity As Long As They Spell Your Name Right school of image management. Either that, or the strain of living with the consequences of his bad judgement in tendering a bid for Twitter has driven him mad.

    It'll be interesting to see if this seemingly quite peculiar strategy works for him.

    1. Martin-73 Silver badge

      Re: Any Publicity Is Good Publicity

      I hope it ends up with him bankrupt, he's a NASTY piece of work

      1. Kayakerdude

        Re: Any Publicity Is Good Publicity

        He's also rather boring really. Neither a good engineer nor a good project manager, fired from the board of X.Com for being an overbearing micromanager before the business entity became paypal.

        What he is, is a kid who got rather lucky with Daddy's mining money, and not really much else.

        There are some people out in the business world that I' like to go for a pint with. Elon is far from one of those. Always gives me the impression that he just can't a) understand a joke and b) can't take the joke when expressed at him.

        I am enjoying the fact that this Twitter takeover is the first time he's likely had to put in actual work into anything in recent decades, and we can all see that the stress is getting to him, and he's cracking apart and quite publicly too,

        I suspect Elon's reputation as a "successful businessman" is about to take a Trump turn, and be exposed for exactly what it is. Not that at least.

  8. Trigun

    Those being laid off are being paid until February, from what I understand. So effectively they're getting gardening leave which pretty much sorts 60 days notice. Also, as others have said, CA is an at-will state (in my mind being ejected from your job at-will without cause is just an abuse) so one could argue Elon Musk is actually being generous - but more likely he's just being careful.

  9. Richard 12 Silver badge

    The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

    Ireland has pretty decent workers rights laws.

    While the Irish government have been quite relaxed about large tech companies paying taxes, large illegal redundancies are a different matter.

    And unlike P&O, Musk xan't rely on a totally incompetent government.

    1. Trigun

      Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

      I don't thinkit's illegal though. Those laid off are getting paid until February.

      1. Strahd Ivarius Silver badge

        Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

        The big question there is (based on previous layoffs at EM's companies):

        was it planned BEFORE the lawsuit?

        (since it looks the mails stating the conditions were sent only after the lawsuit was filled)

        1. ecofeco Silver badge

          Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

          Exactly. This is the part everyone seems to be ignoring: you have to announce the layoff BEFORE you start the actual layoffs.

    2. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

      Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

      "Ireland has pretty decent workers rights laws."

      Ireland, being a European country with proper social security and universal healthcare, of course has much, much, much less in the way of job protection than even the most 'liberal' American state.

      The simple reality is that in the US healthcare is tied to jobs, so getting fired is very, very serious. In Europe, that isn't a thing, so getting fired is not important, so the protections are scanty: as long as it's not discriminatory, you can be fired for any reason or none, with no more than the minimal statutory compensation.

      It is bizarre that people like you think it is the other way around. It doesn't make any sense at all.

      1. deadlockvictim

        Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

        Proper social security? In Ireland? Are you serious?

        Yes, you won't starve but I doubt anybody in Twitter who is renting will be able to pay rent on what they get on the dole. Hopefully they have money saved for this rainy day. Other lucky ones whose parents live in Dublin (or near by) can move back in with their parents while they are looking for a new job.

        There has been a housing crisis in Ireland for the last 10 years and the majority of new apartments & homes built have been sold off to institutional investors, namely companies looking to milk the renting sector for all they can get.

        Thankfully, there are other companies in Dublin and, with any luck, the majority of ex-Twitters will find a new job within the coming months.

        I'm not a fan of Twitter but being fired/let go is not at all fun and having lived through it back at the beginning of the millennium, it's not something I'd like to live through again.

        1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

          Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

          "Proper social security? In Ireland? Are you serious?"

          Compared to the US? Yes. People who have rented expensive properties might have to move out and rent whatever the govt will pay for, but they aren't going to be out on the streets. And they will still get access to healthcare. There's no comparison.

          "being fired/let go is not at all fun"

          Agreed. That wasn't the point of my comment.

      2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

        If you seriously think that employee protections in Europe are scanty compared to the US i would politely suggest that you investigate this bridge I'm selling.

        I have been involved in several layoffs which involved US and European employees, and I can assure you that the difficulty and cost of doing it in Europe, even in the UK, is orders of magnitude more in Europe than in the US.

        1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

          Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

          Of course they are, I don't understand the point of denying the obvious reality. Get your head out of your arse and look at what the protections actually are.

          In almost all European countries, workers can be fired for any reason at all, as long as it isn't discriminatory and the statutory minimum compensation is paid. That is not the case in the US. What on earth do you think 'at-will' is the converse of?

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

          You're utterly delusional or just flat-out lying. I suspect the latter, since it's a lie beloved of the far right in this country. But maybe you're just their useful idiot.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

            In almost all European countries, workers can be fired for any reason at all, as long as it isn't discriminatory and the statutory minimum compensation is paid

            That is simply not true.

            1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

              Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

              Yes, it is true. What's the point lying?

              1. Julian Bradfield

                Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

                Don't know Ireland, but guess it's similar to the UK, where the situation is concisely described here:

                https://www.gov.uk/dismissal/reasons-you-can-be-dismissed

                in what way is this "any reason at all"?

                1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                  Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

                  "If you’re dismissed, your employer must show they’ve:

                  "a valid reason that they can justify

                  "acted reasonably in the circumstances"

                  That's it. The rest of that just gives some examples. As I said, anything except unlawful discrimination is fine.

                  1. Kayakerdude

                    Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

                    The clues are in what you wrote:

                    "that they can justify" - that justification is not to themselves, it's to the likes of the Courts. Cannot be as arbitrary as you appear to wish it to be.

                    "Acted reasonably" - also not determined by the company performing the layoffs, but to be determined by the WRC and similar.

                    What you think you read and what the reality is, do not match up. Your attempt to supply your own reality does not work in this case.

                    .

                    Actually - looking at your posts on this subject along this thread - you really are an undereducted inelequent with an exhibited lack of useful knowledge, and you have the viewpoints of a Muskovite and a MAGA-type Republican. I wonder how close to the mark those monikers are...

                    I wish I could ignore you, but I suspect in real life you will soon get "ignored" by someone you piss off. That would be *great* to see.

            2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

              Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

              Please don't feed the troll..

          2. that one in the corner Silver badge

            Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

            Hmm, perhaps Dave... read the Wikipedia link he posted and misread the first few words "In United States labor law" as "In European employment law"?

            1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

              Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

              Whut? I take it you are still refusing to read the link.

              1. that one in the corner Silver badge

                Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

                > you are still refusing to read the link

                The link was fascinating (I especially liked the way that the link used both underscore and hyphen characters, very elegant).

                Oh, you meant to say "you are still refusing to read the linked to article", didn't you?

                That would be the article whose first five words I quoted? No, obviously I never opened that article. /s

                Now, Dave..., you may want to re-read that article again - start with the rest of that first sentence:

                >> at-will employment is an employer's ability to dismiss an employee for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning as long as the reason is not illegal

                Compare this to your earlier claim:

                > In almost all European countries, workers can be fired for any reason at all, as long as it isn't discriminatory and the statutory minimum compensation is paid. That is not the case in the US

                You are correct that "this is not the case in the US" - in the US, "At Will" doesn't imply that any statutory minimum compensation is paid. I.e. "At Will" is *worse* for the employee.

                You might be helped by reading some comparative articles, where the authors have done the job for you of putting the differences side by side, for example:

                https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/recruitment-and-dismissal-in-europe-what-employers-need-to-know/ "Recruitment and dismissal in Europe: what employers need to know"

                > One key difference between the European approach and the approach elsewhere, which includes the US, is that employees tend to be entitled to minimum notice of termination (other than in limited circumstances). Employment at will is not generally permitted.

                Or try https://smallbusiness.chron.com/compare-us-labor-laws-european-labor-laws-62420.html "Compare U.S Labor Laws & European Labor Laws"

                > In the United States labor laws, there is no requirement for an explicit contract of employment. Most employment is on an at-will basis, meaning that the employer or the employee can terminate the working relationship at any time, as long as the reasons are lawful. In Europe, the employment contract, derived from common law, is the basis of all employer-employee relations. Employment-at-will doctrine does not apply, notes High Street Partners, a leading international business service provider; the employer is required to follow due process in terminating an employee; if he fails to do so, he can be liable for wrongful termination.

      3. Shades

        Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

        Ireland, being a European country with proper social security and universal healthcare, of course has much, much, much less in the way of job protection than even the most 'liberal' American state.

        The simple reality is that in the US healthcare is tied to jobs, so getting fired is very, very serious. In Europe, that isn't a thing, so getting fired is not important, so the protections are scanty: as long as it's not discriminatory, you can be fired for any reason or none, with no more than the minimal statutory compensation.

        Can't work out if you're just a very bad troll or seriously cracked?

        1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

          Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

          What is the point lying? Do you think your far right nonsense is persuasive? Cite something if you can, but obviously you can't because you're lying.

          1. Jesthar

            Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

            If we accept that you aren't lying, then you seriously misunderstand reality. I'm a UK union rep, and employee protections in the UK are (currently) much stronger than pretty much anything in the US...

    3. nematoad
      Thumb Up

      Re: The situation in Ireland is perhaps more interesting

      Ireland has pretty decent workers rights laws.

      You are right there.

      When the company we were contracting at decided to end the service contract we were all made redundant.

      The majority, who were based in the UK, got offered £8000. When they made that offer to me and my colleague we told them to stuff it as we were in a different jurisdiction and UK rules and regulations did not apply. We were in the Republic of Ireland. After a bit of humming and hawing, and I assume checks with the legal department, we were offered £16000.

      So yes, definitely more worker friendly.

      I wish that I could have stayed there even more since we "Took back control" with the potential threats to the security of work and conditions now being mooted.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yeah, but when the boss golfs with politicians and donates hundreds millions to them, they never really have to follow the same rules as everyone else. That much is clear by the fact he's doing it a third time...

    1. heyrick Silver badge

      Or he just has enough money he truly believes "screw the rules"?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Which makes politicians and their parties all the more affordable to buy or rent. :(

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    In the end

    Nothing of value was lost…

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Cloud tech is basically "DotCom boom/bust V2", here we go again!

    Much as I hate it, this is the tech life and always has been for the most part. "Job for life." was dead before I started working in 1989, so I knew heading into tech that my chances of working the same type of career as my father would be almost non-existent. I've managed a few good long stays here and there but as a techie you're just a cog and nothing more, you have 1-2 strong core skills but you'd better be ready to be a jack-of-all-trades and willing to try anything, it's the only way I've survived and kept food on the table.

    Many young people want to chase the FIRE lifestyle ( Fast Incom, Retire Early ) where they get a $150k/year position out of Uni, make it up to $300k/year and then cashout by 40 and go retire. Great if you can get it but that's going the way of "job for life" as more and more short term, crap projects fire up and fail, companies are taking fewer costly risks. Now cloud providers are moaning about putting prices up, companies who got conned into going "full cloud" by PHBs are getting into trouble and IT depts are going to get slashed fast as companies seek to stop the money bleeding out until 2025 when things pick up again.

    1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

      Re: Cloud tech is basically "DotCom boom/bust V2", here we go again!

      you have 1-2 strong core skills but you'd better be ready to be a jack-of-all-trades and willing to try anything

      True, but employers refuse to see it that way. "You're applying for a Bamble-Weezle 2.5 development job? But your last job was Bamble-Weezle 2.495 development. F*** off".

    2. Orv Silver badge

      What I learned way too late is you definitely do NOT want to be a jack of all trades. Employers want specialists, not generalists. If you're a generalist only small companies or larger organizations that are highly stovepiped (such as universities) will hire you.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        "Employers want specialists, not generalists. If you're a generalist only small companies or larger organizations that are highly stovepiped (such as universities) will hire you."

        This is where you have to read the job description and try to then figure out what the actual job is from the very scant clues most listings provide. At that point, you slant your resume and the lies you will tell to the HR dweebs so you can get to the interview with the department head/manager that has a chance of figuring out if you are a good fit for the post or not.

        I agree that it is good to have a broad base of knowledge, but you don't want to advertise that to a potential employer that may prefer somebody that only lives and breathes a narrow field.

  13. xyz123 Silver badge

    Some parts of twitter that are due for further layoffs have "unlimited paid time off" --without HR authorization

    Time for those employees to book 27years holiday.....legally twitter would HAVE to pay them the full holiday pay if they were dismissed whilst ON holiday.....

  14. mark l 2 Silver badge

    While staff costs are usually the largest expense on a company's accounts, surely firing off half of your staff is not going to help you make more money in the long run as those staff must have been doing something?

    Or perhaps since Musk seems to want to turn Twitter into a 'free speech' platform, then they were all in the moderation team which he thinks won't be needed going forward. That is until Apple and Google decide that Twitter aren't doing enough moderation and remove Twitter from their app stores, like they did with Parler back in 2021.

    1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

      surely ... those staff must have been doing something?

      From my reading around, they weren't doing anything. Twitter strikes me as beleiving it's there to provide jobs to its favoured friends, not to produce a product.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        7,500 favoured friends? That's stretching "jobs for the boys" a bit! Or maybe they are all Facebook "friends"? ;-)

    2. MachDiamond Silver badge

      "While staff costs are usually the largest expense on a company's accounts,"

      Usually is the key word. Usually companies look for premises at a good price. Dot Com companies look for a location with the most fashionable postal code/zip code. The staff will become very expensive in a city such as San Francisco since there would be no way to staff the company if people aren't paid enough to be able to live in the area. If the company were to have a small office in the city and allow staff to work from remote work sites, which could be their home or a small inexpensive office someplace with good cost of living figures, that could save tons of money but we have all heard about how much Elon doesn't like that sort of thing. He wants everybody in one room where he can see them all beavering away since he has no methods to evaluate them any other way.

      Elon is saying the company loses $4mn/day. With only 7,500 people on the payroll, it doesn't seem like it was wages for the rank and file driving their losses.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A way to demote

    It could be Musk is firing hoping to hire back some of the same people at reduced salary, or as contractors.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: A way to demote

      I don't think Musk is holding the whip hand here though. Nobody else knows how to fix the mess he made on the first day on the job.

  16. MachDiamond Silver badge

    Cost cutting to bring everybody back

    Just getting out of the leases for SF and NYC offices would likely save enough money to bring more of the employees back. It's an internet based company. They can be anywhere in the world that has good internet access. By not being in some of the highest cost of living areas of the world, Twitter could pay employees less while those employees would wind up with more money left in their pocket at the end of each month.

    The lawsuits might wind up being moot, but they might also be necessary if Elon doesn't formalize his promises to pay people for the 60 days and continue another other benefits that were delivered at the time the employee was laid off (health insurance, Retirement fund contributions, professional memberships, educational stipends/contributions). There shouldn't be an issue with locking people out and paying them their salary in lieu of notice. It gives those people time to get the heck out of SF and other big cities where annual housing costs could feed, provide fresh water and clothe a whole village in Africa for a year.

  17. Kinetic

    According to Elon, the company is losing $4m a day, insiders say the website and tech is held together with sticks. They didn't invest in AI for the moderation (which is the only scalable solution), and they didn't sort the troll/spam problems, infact they seem to have buried the problem, as it would affect the bottom line.

    Does this sound like a place that doesn't need serious restructuring?

    Elon has started by implementing the blue tick payment, to both get some ad-independant revenue in, and to solve the spam/bot problem.

    Next will be media tie-ins to give you paywall access via twitter.

    In the meantime, he's got to get costs down to something sensible.

    Twitter seems to have been run by a bunch of drunken sailors, so things had to change.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      How does paying $8 solve the spam/bot problem? His great idea is people who don't pay are pushed by algorithm to the bottom and accounts which have paid are promoted to the top.

      So that's a licence to spam for $8 a month promoted over everyone else. Spammers can fill their boots.

      Bot farms will pay using stolen CC info. All it means is Twitter has a new problem because it'll be a magnet for CC fraud.

      He also threatened to name and shame advertisers avoiding his dumpster fire, like that would make them home back or something. A couple of days ago I might have thought there was some great malevolent plan but it's become obvious Musk is just out of his depth and it shows, rather like his Russian pal Pootler.

    2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
      Coffee/keyboard

      "They didn't invest in AI for the moderation (which is the only scalable solution)"

      Sorry, can't reply because I'm laughing too much!!!

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    >That's a lot of cash owed to a lot of employees if Musk fails to wriggle out of this one

    If all he has to pay out is wages he still ends up ahead. The big line-item he's trying to do away with by doing things quickly is the quarterly vesting of RSUs as Cash Awards @ 54.20 each. Does WARN require payment of total comp or just wages?

    1. Kayakerdude

      He cannot end up ahead. The maths do not support your assertion.

      He's already in the hole for a billion a year in interest alone, to be paid to various non-US agents and he's likely to end up losing his security clearance because of that set of debts usable as leverage against him. Why else would the entities that agreed to fund him actually fund him? Not to make a profit as that was never going to happen.

      Twitter will not in any way be able to generate a billion a year in net profit - and certainly not after Elon goes after the advertisers the way he has.

      No further income stream as advertisers drop out, huge debts that will not be servicable fromn within Twitter itself, a firing of the majority of the useful people that were keeping Twitter together - this all makes it a wonderful scene to watch as the man-child tries to temper-tantrum his way to success to be met with abject and very public failure.

      I for one have the popcorn ready with some shadenfreude topping.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        "No further income stream as advertisers drop out"

        The biggest income stream for Social Media companies is often the sale of user information with ad revenue coming in second and everything else chasing those two from further back.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        >He cannot end up ahead.

        As in ahead versus doing things legally, not ahead on the transaction overall. He could fire the staff today and fall foul of whatever penalties are in WARN or fire the staff after 60 days of consultations. Twitter's stock vesting day - a quarterly event - was reportedly November 4th.

        By firing the people in question that morning they may have missed a vesting event, which is a huge cash saving for the business. The difference for tenured employees between being paid 60 days salary and 60 days salary plus RSUs/Cash Awards can be as much as double.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          ...except, in some jurisdictions, such as the UK and EU at the least, they are NOT fired. They are on notice of redundancy and therefore still employees on the payroll depending on how long they have been employed for. The notice period is normally 1 week for every full year employed after the first year. And that notice period starts AFTER the legally mandated consultancy period of a minimum of 30 days (I assume the EU is the same since UK laws haven't changed much if at all since Brexit)

          If their UK contracts include stock options, then illegally "firing" people without proper consultation and notice period will quite likely mean that in law they are still employed for the relevant period and therefore also entitled to any benefits they would have got if not illegally laid off.

          IANAL but have some experience of being made redundant..

    2. MachDiamond Silver badge

      "Does WARN require payment of total comp or just wages?"

      It will vary state by state, but most of the time it is total compensation. Many Dot Coms paid a very nominal salary and made the jobs more attractive through stock awards and other things such as education stipends, heath insurance and matching retirement funds. I have a suspicion that they don't have to keep providing coffee and snacks nor toilet paper and bottled water.

  19. Grunchy Silver badge

    I quit Twitter months ago

    No severance for me, not that I was ever an employee.

    It is funny to watch Musk crying about (and threatening) former advertisers that aren’t gonna pay him no more.

    Yeah, I’m done with Twitter for good.

  20. Big_Boomer Silver badge

    Takeovers

    I have been through several takeovers by US/CDN companies and the SOP is to immediately make 1/3 to 1/2 of the staff redundant. Later on when they realise that they laid off people that they needed and that most of the best staff moved on under their own steam before potentially getting laid off, they then realise that they have crippled the very company that they bought. Now if they were buying them to kill competition, then that works fine, but if they expect what they bought to make them money then they need to be a LOT more careful about how they go about dealing with layoffs. It'll be interesting to see what the markets think Twatter is worth in 6 months to 1 years time. We know what it was "worth" at the end of October 2022. Who knows, maybe this process might make his Muskiness learn to think through and censor his own pronouncements in future, rather than waiting for the SEC to muzzle him again. Nah, who am I kidding? <LOL>

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like