>

Ah yes, corporate America. The one thing you can always count on when it comes to worker exploitation.
Donato granted Twitter’s request to force the five ex-employees to pursue their claims individually, citing agreements they signed with the company.

While we're banning non-competes, lets add arbitration clauses to the fire. >

california got started but the law isnt that wide reaching 
"As of January 1, 2020, per AB 51, California employers will no longer be able to require employees to sign mandatory arbitration agreements forcing discrimination, harassment and wage claims into arbitration. Applicants and employees may choose not to sign such agreements, and the employer may not retaliate."
that said, this law isnt retroactive so apparently any agreements signed before 2020 apply >

Told an employer I wouldn't sign one in my onboarding paperwork and they rescinded the job offer.  So much for no retaliation.  They laid 10% of the company off the next month so I dodged a bullet. >

Then sue. What they did is illegal. >

It is a law which doesn't have teeth.  Suing is a waste of my time and money. >

No, you give it teeth by suing that's how the US system works.
Edit: Three people replied with the same thing so I'm just editing this to reply.
Most labour lawyers in the US work on a percentage of your winnings and won't charge you if they lose.
The law for labour is so much in your favour that they can do that as a standard mode of operation.
Don't psyche yourself out of being treated they way you deserve. >

I think the teeth would be to outlaw completely such clauses to avoid putting the potential employee in the position to be denied the job for not signing it. >

Didn't it used to be that way and they did a campaign to sway public opinion until they could remove it. I remember something in public school reading about how ridiculous lawsuits were. You know as a classroom activity. Like the lady who got third degree burns on her crotch from McDonald's super hot coffee. But they sold it and we voted our power away like dumbshits and now we want the laws back.   
Never give power back to employers. People died to get those rights. The whole removing regulations push... So dumb. >

I realize that you understand that the McDonald’s lawsuit wasn’t frivolous but for those who don’t know IT WAS SO HOT THAT IT FUSED HER LABIA TOGETHER >

The pictures are horrific. Skin graphs, extended hospital time. 
But more over it's a jury process.
The jury makes the the call based on evidence given. It may sound outrageous on the outside but a jury agreed it wasn't. 
Until we said naw. We don't want the power to punish giant corporations for wrong or careless doing. >

There are lawyers that batch arbitration cases en-masse. Bet a bunch already reached out to them. >

Yeah I question whether this benefits twitter.  Some people who would have joined the class may drop out now but so many lawyers will still be looking to represent these claims and twitter is now going to have to bear the expense of litigating each one of these individually and paying an arbitration company for each one. >

From a friend who was part of it tells me that the cost benefit of the severance they lost out on vs individual lawyer fees and generally dealing with this is not worth it for many.  He and a few other colleagues that he knows are just dropping off. The class action gave them the option to not be involved and pool lawyer fees (which were going to be a % of the entire amount). >

What about small claims court? Its been a while, but there’s a limit (5-10k) you can get. And if the defendant doesn’t show, the plaintiff auto-wins. And they have a pretty anti-corporate bias. And they might be able to sue multiple times.
Tell your friend you can make a quick 10k in half a days work. Better than nothing. But it might make you ineligible for future settlements. >

Totally off topic, but what is up with that lady's cigarette in the pic?  Is she smoking a curly fry!? >

She’s just gesturing with her hand.  There is a display behind the glass that lights up with the address.  There are other lit up art displays throughout the office as well.  
pic >

/r/Confusing_Perspective >

Imagine being suddenly laid off, not being given the full severance you were owed, and then being told you need to hire a lawyer and go through the process alone... against a billion-dollar company......
If any of them individually pursue and win their lawsuit, it will be years before they see a dime and they'll end up paying more in laywer fees than their total severance pay is worth. 
And who says the American Dream is dead... >

Musk isn’t paying out on anything. Even rent for Twitter buildings.
This is going to drag out until Twitter declares bankruptcy and the workers won’t see anything. >

which is asinine.  I heard on the Opening Arguments podcast that they only had a month left on their lease, about 60k worth of rent, and the deposit they stand to lose for non-payment is itself something like 700k.  It's a fucking rocks-for-brains business move. >

So you are saying it is totally on brand for Elon's behavior since he took over at Twitter. >

I just can't believe he managed to convince so many people he was smart for so long. >

He kept putting smart people in charge of the actual work getting done at SpaceX and to skme extent Tesla, except that one time when he decided that covid wasn't real and that building cars was more important than the lifes and health of his employees, and then he was forced to go through with the twitter sale that he only meant as a stupid meme and instantly got rid of everyone who could have been able to tell him how incredibly stupid every single word is that leaves his mouth. >

If this isn’t advertisement for unions, I dunno what is. Im here for it >

Unions, and strong labor laws strictly enforced. >

And to get those strong labor laws we need unions >

Arbitration agreements need to be outlawed >

No! Using the justice system for anyone other than corporation's benefit is communism!!! >

The goal being to make a bunch of lawyers richer. >

A great American tradition literally since its founding. >

Way to clog the system, making it easier to abuse workers >

Musk is good, woke people bad. 
S/ >

These agreements were almost surely signed before Elon took over. From what I have read, and as a lawyer who practices in this area, I can tell you these individuals each signed an arbitration agreement where they promised not to sue as a class or collective action.  This is often to the individual’s benefit because they recover more as individuals than as a class (think about the $3-5 checks you sometimes get when you learn you’ve been a member of a class action).  I argue the only people who win in class actions are the lawyers, since they keep 30-60% of the settlement/verdict.  Also, California has a law that requires employment arbitration agreements to be voluntary, so these five employees voluntarily entered into the agreement. I think a bunch of people just don’t understand the process, so when it gets sensationalized it’s easy to get swept up in the idea this is really an unbalanced David vs. Goliath thing.
Edit:  Words >

🤗 thank you! Really! My point (s/) refers to that sensationalism exactly. You pointed it out beautifully. Thank you so much for taking the time to share valuable information, the kind of information is usually overlooked. You are the kind of person that make this forums valuable! 🤗 >

You’re right. I did miss your “/s” and I apologize for that >

Why do I hear Milton’s voice (from Office Space) mumbling “gonna burn the building down” in my head? >

Wouldn't even do anything.  Twitter doesn't own the building, and isn't paying rent so you just shit on the property owner and potentially do Elon a favor. >

Twitter Inc has secured a ruling allowing the social media company to force several laid-off workers suing over their termination to pursue their claims via individual arbitration than a class-action lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge James Donato on Friday ruled that five former Twitter employees pursuing a proposed class action accusing the company of failing to give adequate notice before laying them off after its acquisition by Elon Musk must pursue their claims in private arbitration. >

When I read this yesterday it was a handful of employees who signed away their right to class action, but the vast majority can still pursue it. Like five employees out of thousands. >

Possibly, the press doesn't care, they want to dissuade the other to file a lawsuit. The system is working as expected. >

Why should the press care when their customers don’t read past the headlines anyway? >

Doesn't the private process then make the loser pay all court fees - which means that Twitter will drag cases out and show the ex-employees that EM has lots of time / money, which pressures these individuals to lose not only their case but bankrupt their lives.    UGLY >

They're going to get Ubered.  It's much easier to deal with a class action than hundreds to thousands of arbitration clauses.  Imagine having a battle...or having to supervise 800 2 on 2 fights at the same time. >

Imagine being a lawyer for Twitter and not being sure you're actually going to get paid for your work. >

Imagine being a lawyer for Tesla and getting conscripted by Musk to work on Twitter's arbitration. >

Essentially courts in the US are not only available to the rich since everyone has forced arbitration agreements now. How insane. >

Legal representation is also insanely expensive, so you generally only go if you're certain, you have to, you get pro bono or free services, or you have a lot of money. >

Having to pay for hundreds of arbitration cases is going to cost Twitter a shit ton of money. Arbitration clauses come back to bite corps in the ass when mass firings happen. >

I predict at some point the company will be complaining about the weight of thousands of arbitrations, and pleading for them to be handled in bulk. >

I predict Elon will be crying about it on Twitter tomorrow and announcing only class actions are allowed >

Twitter is gonna get railed in the EU courts for this anyway >

The CEOs can get away with whatever they want. The corporations run our government not the elected officials. Big money has infiltrated all 3 branches of the govt. Get ready to send your kids to work because it's about to the gilded age again. The gilded age was the 1850s to the turn of the century in America in case you didn't know and child labor was the norm. >

How to make the tech world unionize. You seriously had to pass legislation that union workers already merit.
He severed 5 identical lawyers to destroy a class action. Just wow. >

Mmm, didn’t think you could sign away your employment laws. Unless  you hire enough lawyers? >

US employment law showing its threadbare nature by allowing employment condition clauses that should not be legally enforceable. >

A class action is a stretch since most will have different compensation claims. >

And if they win, the lawyers get the money and the plaintiffs get 40% their next blue check purchase >

To the people attacking the judge…
Remember, the judge rules off primarily law and case precedence - it’s not just his opinion on what he thinks is fair. 
A FAIR judge would rule against their own personal opinions and rule in favor of the law or statute.  Therefore, if the law or statute is bullshit (like it is here), then it’s up to the legislature to change the law - the judicial system will then follow suit. 
I looked this judge up and there’s nothing too eyebrow raising in their prior rulings. They ruled against Facebook and awarded hundreds of millions to plaintiffs suing multiple corporations. 
I 100% think that these workers should be able to bankrupt Twitter and Musk for their childish bullshit but if I were a judge asked to make a decision on the case, you would want me to follow the law, not my opinion. 
That’s how corruption begins. It’s still corruption if it’s in your favor. >

It seems you really liked the Cool-Aid you drank. >

I don’t even know what this means. You can make that same vague hand wave towards literally anything. >

I guess purchasing a few judges was part of the 44 billion price tag >

The post title is really misleading. Article explains the court decision affects 5 former employees and it is due to arb agreements they signed. >

But Twitter made most of their employees sign these agreements. So effectively it's all the employees locked out. >

He literally purchased an overvalued product at sticker price over emotion.