X, formerly Twitter, faces 2,200 arbitration cases and filing fees over $3 million
3 years ago by deconstruct to c/technology
X, the social network formerly known as Twitter, is facing 2,200 arbitration cases that ex-employees filed after Elon Musk took over the company, slashed headcount, and made other sweeping changes there. The filing fees alone for that volume of cases could amount to $3.5 million.
The arbitration numbers were revealed in a new filing out Monday as part of a lawsuit in a Delaware district court. The case is Chris Woodfield v. Twitter, X Corp. and Elon Musk (No. 1:23-cv-780-CFC).
As CNBC has previously reported, many large corporations require workers to sign an arbitration agreement upon employment wherever it is legal to do so. This means to speak freely in court, where their speech can become part of a public record, workers would first need to get an exemption from a judge.
I've actually used arbitration to get my way in the past when I pointed out to the company that their filing fee for the arbitration was more expensive than just honoring their commitments, so even if I lost they'd be out several times what I wanted.
I get a kick out of every time a journalist feels they need to specify "formerly known as Twitter" because X is such a generic, indistinguishable brand.
I think it would be better to say "Twitter, currently branded as X" it is both useful and makes it look like it is just a cringy phase a teenager might go through temporarily. So you should just ignore the change and it will eventually resolve itself.
The x.com URL just points at Twitter.com
I continue to use “twitter” because Musk is a transphobe. If he feels obligated to deadname or misgender people, or defend those who do, I don’t see the need to follow what he wants to identify as, either.
So if Musk were to immediately stop deadnaming trans people, would you immediately stop "deadnaming" Twitter?
If Elmo owned up to and apologized for his transphobia, resolving not to do that kind of thing again in the future, I would be more than happy to call his microblogging service whatever he ends up deciding to name it. I’m not sure this is going to be enough to convince him, but go ahead and forward that along if you think it will help.
Might as well just call it Twitter. The only people that go along with calling it "X" are chuds and Musk sycophants.
and Musk sycophants
You already said chuds
All these venn diagrams make a circle.
What a fantastic insult (I didn't mean that as sarcasm, I think it's hilarious).
Currently x.com still redirects to Twitter.com, so I don’t see any issues with calling it Twitter.
Also wouldn't be surprised to find out X is a problematic name to use when programming a social media website.
Elon could make things even worse by hastening that transition. If the x-twitter app is down for a few weeks and all external connections break for a few month, it’s going to be just fine. I’m pretty sure that it would only improve the quality of life of all twitter users.
X gonna give it to ya.
There are a lot of jokes to be made about Twitter referencing the disasterpiece movie "Foodfight!" and its villains fighting for "Brand X".
Oh he's been burning that reputation for a good while. I feel like when he tried to send a useless sub and called some guy a pedo was probably the largest turning point for many. Since that point he's been less and less heralded as he was before hand.
I think that's when I predicted he'd either be a Lex Luthor or a Tony Stark.
Turns out I was wrong on both accounts though. He's just a shit for brains, emerald spooned jerk.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
X, the social network formerly known as Twitter, is facing 2,200 arbitration cases that ex-employees filed after Elon Musk took over the company, slashed headcount, and made other sweeping changes there.
Woodfield, a former senior staff network engineer who had worked at Twitter’s Seattle office, alleges in his suit that Musk’s Twitter (now known as X) had promised then failed to pay his severance, and later delayed alternative dispute resolution by failing to pay the necessary fees required for him to move ahead in the JAMS arbitration system.
The company’s lawyers have argued that it did not mandate employees to resolve any issues in arbitration, so it should not be on the hook for the larger portion of the filing fees.
As CNBC has previously reported, many large corporations require workers to sign an arbitration agreement upon employment wherever it is legal to do so.
Critics view arbitration as a secretive system that makes it harder for employees and prospective hires to find out how companies treat their workers, and what happened to people in previous related cases.
The Woodfield case against Musk’s X Corp. resembles another proposed class action filed in a San Francisco federal court.
The original article contains 431 words, the summary contains 191 words. Saved 56%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Yes, but it's about a major tech company, so maybe it fits? NBC filed it in their 'Tech News' section.
I think that's just more of a rollover from anything on the internet being labeled as 'tech', but like nowadays if the president sends a tweet its really not that notable of news, technologically. We could also start reporting every time a text is sent if we really wanted
You’re technically right, which is the best kind of right. It’s a destructive CEO story who just happens to run a tech company (into the ground)
This is like the Spanish guy kissing the winning footballer woman on the lips against her will. It’s going to be reported under sports, but really it’s a sexism story that just happens to be in sports.
But at least it is being reported and commented on, no?
I don't see what else one would call their own algorithms and media delivery systems.
Technology is a means to an end so I like to make the distinction of what the company actually does or make. Apple's primary business is selling computer hardware (an actual technology product) so it's a technology company. Microsoft sells software and cloud services (tech tools) so it's a technology company. Netflix sells access to video, so it's a media company. Are algorithms involved? Sure, but they're child's play compared to the algorithms used by high frequency traders, yet those people still unambiguously work for finance/banking companies. Every large retailer employs data scientists and teams of data analysts, but they're still retailers rather than tech companies. Amazon is the trickiest to categorize. Amazon.com is a straight up retailer but AWS is clearly a tech "company." Best to think of that one like a conglomerate.
They released Twitter Bootstrap a while ago for "HTML, CSS, and Javascript for popular user interface components and interactions", to this day, it is hard going to a website that doesn't integrate in some way it at least once a day. The source code for lemmy.world's CSS says it is using Bootstrap for example:
You could've just downvoted and moved on 🙄
Same to you lol
I officially recognize your declaration.
Signed,
You
Wait no oops
Just more of the same Luddite shit, unfortunately. Seems nobody loves technology more than people who really fucking hate technology.
The Luddites were actually based as fuck.
And yes, a lot of exceptionally skilled engineers really fucking hate technology - a side effect of one's day to day being deeply entangled in technology.
I used to think automation was the coolest thing ever and that everything should be automated.
After looking at controls for an industrial plant? There are some things I will pay extra to not have automated.
@lemmy.world
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
go to feed...
I have no sympathy. Companies that require class action waivers and mandatory arbitration clauses don't get to complain when thousands of people file arbitration claims simultaneously.
save