Elon Musk received dismissal of a lawsuit claiming he refused to pay not less than $500 million of severance to hundreds of Twitter staff he fired in mass layoffs after shopping for the social media firm now often known as X.
U.S. District Decide Trina Thompson in San Francisco dominated on Tuesday that the federal Worker Retirement Revenue Safety Act governing profit plans didn’t cowl the previous staff’ claims, and due to this fact she lacked jurisdiction.
Associated: Twitter Owes Ex-Employees $500M in Severance, Lawsuit Claims
The case is certainly one of many accusing Musk of reneging on guarantees to former Twitter staff, including former Chief Executive Parag Agrawal, and distributors after shopping for the corporate for $44 billion in October 2022.
Musk additionally runs the electrical automobile firm Tesla, and is the world’s richest particular person, based on Forbes journal.
An outdoor spokeswoman for Sanford Heisler Sharp, which represents the previous staff, stated the legislation agency was dissatisfied and contemplating its authorized choices. Legal professionals for Musk and X didn’t instantly reply to requests for remark.
Based on the criticism, Twitter’s severance plan referred to as for workers who stayed on after the buyout to obtain two or six months of pay, plus one week of pay for every year of employment, in the event that they had been laid off.
The plaintiffs Courtney McMillian, who oversaw Twitter’s compensation and advantages, and Ronald Cooper, an operations supervisor, stated Twitter as an alternative supplied fired staff only one month of pay as severance, with no advantages.
Thompson stated ERISA didn’t apply to Twitter’s post-buyout plan as a result of there was no “ongoing administrative scheme” the place the corporate reviewed claims case-by-case, or supplied advantages akin to continued medical health insurance and out placement providers.
“There have been solely money funds promised,” she wrote.
The choose stated staff fired in Twitter’s 2022 and 2023 mass layoffs can strive amending their criticism, however just for claims not ruled by ERISA.
The case is McMillian et al v. Musk et al, U.S. District Courtroom, Northern District of California, No. 23-03461.
Matters
Lawsuits
Desirous about Lawsuits?
Get automated alerts for this matter.
