Twitter Accused of Avoiding Musk's Mass Layoffs Legal Battle

Last updated on July 7th, 2023 at 06:14 am

According to a complaint submitted on Monday in San Francisco federal court, about 2,000 former Twitter employees have resorted to defending their claims in arbitration as the company has demanded – but Twitter hasn’t shown up.

A lawsuit claims that Twitter Inc. is refusing to enter into arbitration with former workers who were let go when Elon Musk became CEO in order to settle claims of unpaid wages, unfulfilled severance obligations, or discrimination.

In numerous lawsuits, the business now known as X Corp. has been charged with multiple labor and workplace infractions, including failing to compensate thousands of employees who were laid off late last year after Musk’s acquisition. According to a complaint submitted on Monday in San Francisco federal court, about 2,000 former Twitter employees have resorted to defending their claims in arbitration as the company has demanded — but Twitter hasn’t shown up.

Keep Reading

Linda Yaccarino Officially Starts Her Role As Twitter CEO

Migration Bill: Lords Maintain Child Migrant Detention Limits

The social media company prevailed in a court decision in January mandating that employees who had signed arbitration agreements settle their disputes in secret hearings presided over by private judges rather than through a class-action lawsuit in a public court. It’s the equivalent of hand-to-hand combat in a legal setting, usually against a more well-funded and well-armed foe. According to studies, workers frequently give up rather than pursue their dispute in arbitration, which is advantageous for employers.

Attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan, who has defended former Twitter employees in numerous lawsuits against the business, has persisted in bringing arbitration claims on their client’s behalf.

According to the complaint, Twitter is refusing to pay the arbitration fees that are mandated by its employment agreements.

According to the complaint, Twitter is further harming its former employees by “failing, neglecting, and refusing to arbitrate under its written agreement.”