“X” Didn’t Pay Severance. Now It’s Facing 2,200 Cases—and Big Fees
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.
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.
Not paying rent for Boulder office:
https://techcrunch.com/2023/06/14/twitter-is-being-evicted-from-its-boulder-office-over-unpaid-rent/
Not paying rent for San Francisco office:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/01/twitters-landlord-sues-for-millions-in-unpaid-rent-at-firms-us-headquarters/
Not paying consulting firm:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/01/twitter-hired-experts-for-case-against-musk-now-musk-wont-pay-them-lawsuit-says/
Not paying interest on loan:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/01/looming-twitter-interest-payment-leaves-elon-musk-with-unpalatable-options/
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.
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.
They aren't saying he pays his bills, they're saying there are effectively no consequences for him personally every time he does it. He's not the one footing the bill for these Xitter lawsuits, it's his company.
He privately owns Twitter, so he can do whatever he wants with it.
The issue is that he took out billions of dollars in Tesla stock loans to cover the Twitter sale, so if Twitter fails and the people that gave him cash ask for the cash back: he has to hand over his collateral, which is largely his controlling stake in Tesla.
Yes, but he's also the sole owner of the company. They went private after the acquisition, so there are no more shareholders. It's his company now, so he is the one directly responsible for it at this point.
If you're the sole owner of a taco truck and you crash into an orphanage with it, you are responsible, not the LLC you registered.
LLC literally means Limited Liability Company.
The owners of the LLC are protected from some or all liability for acts and debts of the LLC, depending on state shield laws.
When it comes into crashing into an orphanage, that's definitely some and not all.
I think they meant citation required for the "is catching up with him" part.
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.
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
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.