Elon Musk’s alleged penchant for not paying bills is catching up with him. In the wake of numerous lawsuits claiming the world’s richest man failed to pay severance owed to many of the 6,000 employees he fired after acquiring Twitter. On Monday, CNBC reported that the tech company now known as X is facing some 2,200 arbitration cases filed by ex-employees, which come with $3.5 million in required fees—an amount that doesn’t even include the actual severance owed to those Musk let go.

In October, shortly after taking Twitter’s reins, Musk laid off more than half of its employees, promising most at least two months’ salary plus a week’s pay for every year they’d worked at the firm. Thousands claim that they haven’t received a single dime, and ex-employees have since filed several lawsuits seeking their promised benefits.

58 points

Elon Musk’s alleged penchant for not paying bills is catching up with him.

Citation required. It’s not having any effect on him personally, the businesses are the ones which are affected. And when you’re not depending on your businesses to eat and live, there are zero consequences.

They’re all his shitty decisions, but as usual, he doesn’t pay for it. The profits are privatised while the losses are socialised. And I’m pretty sick of the media counting eggs before they hatch, because they usually don’t hatch at all.

permalink
report
reply
-6 points

If I lit your house on fire you wouldn’t spend much time arguing that it doesn’t hurt you directly, just your personal property

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

That would be a key difference between personal property and private property. Not that I own my own house.

Even if Musk was at personal risk of losing the entire amount of money Twitter cost, which he isn’t, it would have no effect on his ability to live or conduct business.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points
31 points

Yes, the business he bought (with not only his money) has been sued and evicted. The only time Musk has personally ever been on the hook was when he tried to wriggle out of buying said business, and the business sued him personally. Otherwise, he can walk away consequence-free from everything else.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Yes, the business he bought (with not only his money)

That’s literally part of the problem. He hadn’t paid interest on the loan he took out to buy Twitter.

But also, he was CEO when these things all happened. He is the one who made the decisions not to make payments toward rent on two of his offices, toward his loan, or toward his consulting firm. I’m not sure what sort of mental gymnastics you’re doing to say that he isn’t responsible for these things. Twitter wasn’t having those problems pre-Musk, and is only having these problems as a direct result of Musk’s decision-making. That’s kinda part of what being a CEO entails.

Not sure why one would ask for citations and then dismiss them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

I think they meant citation required for the “is catching up with him” part.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

He is paying for it, because he spent tens of billions on something that is now worth much less. Maybe he doesn’t care, but he is still paying for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

Couldnt happen to a nicer dbag

permalink
report
reply
19 points

he couldn’t care less, he’s worth 95 Billion more now than when he purchased Twitter, the cruelty is the point

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

What’s that come out to, around? 4 weeks pay per employee?

permalink
report
reply
-1 points

Literally the post:

… X is facing some 2,200 arbitration cases filed by ex-employees, which come with $3.5 million in required fees-an amount that doesn’t even include the actual severance owed to those Musk let go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That’s the penalties, not the amount owed to the employees.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Exactly.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

That didn’t answer the question

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*

Considering that number isn’t the amount of severance pay, it kinda did.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Well, minimum 2 months per employee plus the 4 weeks. Let’s figure an average salary of $80k. 6000 employees with an average tenure of 4 years. Let’s go ahead and round that to 3 months salary. So he’s paying the equivalent of 1500 employee’s average salary. That works out to about $120m.

I think my salary estimate is low there, and I have no idea what the tenure of the employees would be. Either way, not a small sum for a company that’s barely treading water.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

$80k/year*.25year*2200 = $44m in this case, though like you said your salary estimate is probably low

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I am gyessing that engineers at Twitter were probably making around $150k per year, give or take.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

I would guess 150-250k.

Twitter was known for lower pay (and a lower pace) than the big names, but it’s still the bay area.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

80k/year*.25year*1500 = $30m, where does the 120m come from?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

1500 = 6000 employees multiplied by 0.25 already. No need to multiply with .25 again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I could be mistaken, but I think the severance was three months when he bought the company.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So 12 weeks? That’s a big chunk of change. Not much to him, though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yeah, you’d think so. But apparently it is since he hasn’t paid anyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Waiting like this was smart. Unfortunately.

Options:

  1. Stall as long as possible. Twitter makes a bunch of money. Have money to pay severances. All good.

  2. Twitter fails anyways. No money to pay anybody but had as long a runway as possible. Bankrupt and a financial guy nominated by a judge sorts it out.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

Surprisingly, you’ve shifted my opinion. Gdi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

When a company files for bankruptcy, employees who are owed money get first dibs on the liquidated assets.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

So was the rebranding of Twitter to X just so Elon could say “U fuckin’ wot m8? This company is X, and your employment contract is with Twitter, so it looks like you were never employed here.”?

permalink
report
reply
23 points

Fortunately that doesn’t work.

Even if Musk totally shut down Twitter, then opened an identical platform named X, the contracts Twitter held are still enforceable under the law.

There might be stipulations in the contracts where severance isn’t payable if the company fails, but if I remember correctly, this severance is something mandated by state law, and not just a contractual perk.

So bottom line, Musk is liable unless his lawyers are able to worm their way into a settlement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So bottom line, Musk is liable unless his lawyers are able to worm their way into a settlement.

Sure, but this is a guy who signed a contract forcing him to purchase Twitter and thought he could just say “I don’t want to anymore.”

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 28K

    Posts

  • 689K

    Comments