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.

  • papalonian@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    120
    ·
    1 year ago

    You guys are failing to see that this was a simple misunderstanding.

    Musk was told he needed to pay severance to all the ex employees, but he was confused why he was paying severance to “X employees” if they were still employed, so he simply didn’t.

    It’s an easy mistake. Anyone could’ve done it.

  • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    1 year ago

    I worked at a company (as briefly as possible) where an advisor came in and did this. He started listing off who we actually needed to pay on our rotating debts and who we could put off and how long. When I left, within 3 months several very important vendors were calling asking if I could do anything to help them out. I told them if they stopped sending supplies that would probably help the process.

      • archiotterpup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        To think a bunch of C students get an MBA to spread this trash and collect consulting fees and I just thought working hard would let to success.

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      I told them if they stopped sending supplies that would probably help the process.

      Somebody running a business actually needed to be told this?

      • NotYourSocialWorker@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        51
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Many sub contractors live on the mercy of the companies they supply. That forces them to show more goodwill than they want.

        I remember a couple years back when Ericsson unilaterally decided that they would stop paying their bills after a month and instead changed it to three months. So, do you want to piss off the biggest company in the region or do you just say “Thank you, sir”?

        As an aside, what kind of amoral sod goes around teaching companies what bills they can ignore and how morally bankrupt must you be to listen to them?

  • fiat_lux@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

      • fiat_lux@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Chozo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

          • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            26
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

            • kbotc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

            • Chozo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              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.

              • merridew@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

    • FlowVoid@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • kitonthenet@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      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

      • fiat_lux@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

  • PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I haven’t yet seen an article where a reporter totals up the numbers and associated dollar amounts associated with Musk’s mismanagement. In terms of general classes - and I’m just going off the top of my head here - we’re looking at (including only the twitter related ones):

    1. Failure to pay agreed upon payouts for fired employees
    2. Age discriminatory termination lawsuits
    3. Violation of employment contracts re: return to work and other conditions
    4. Failure to pay rents and infrastructure fees
    5. Failure to moderate content according to legally required regulations
    6. Allocation of TSLA employees to work at Twitter, a different company with different shareholders, thus robbing Peter to pay Paul on investors’ dimes

    There were also potential suits over mass terminations contrary to state and national laws, but I haven’t heard as much about those recently.

    • remotelove@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the event that Twitter files for bankruptcy, would it partially shield them from all that debt? Yeah, it’s a dirty play and would totally expect Elon to do it if he could.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        its so much worse than just that. there are so many financial mechanisms to avoid liability its not even funny. most of the unwashed are unfamiliar with them because they are specifically written to keep rich people rich.

        money flows to the top, accountability… not so much. and that is 100% the design.

        the twist here is a callous, idiotic billionaire using this lack of responsibility for his own enjoyment. he will never, ever personally suffer for any of the harm caused to all humans affected by his terrible business practices. he is shielded by money, or what we call money these days.

        twitter will cost him billions in personal funds when it goes under, and it will not affect him at all.

            • remotelove@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I am a free speech absolutist and I am saying Twitter. Prepare to be banned from the entire Fediverse.

    • gullible@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t mean this as a threat, but as plain kinetic question. How do billionaires stay so safe with so many enemies? It’s a bit baffling to me. Security is fascinating to me.

      • Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        In this present day, we’re barely steps or even a half step away from having absolutely tyrannically-dictator type behaviors from billionaires. It’s almost as bad as the Roman Emperors that were batshit crazy, and their own Praetorian Guard eventually took those motherfuckers out. It baffles me how we had Presidential assassination attempts as recently as the 80’s in the US but wasting billionaires just isn’t a thing. It’s very amazing power structure.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s because people like this around themselves with a cadre of yes men. Apparently Elon is known to have a large group of Tesla and SpaceX groupies essentially. To use them to replace key positions at X.

    • shuzuko@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      On that’s easy, it’s because he’s still on Putin’s good side.

      As to why no one has… encouraged him into any other “mysterious accident”, though, your guess is as good as mine.

    • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because you don’t get your money back if you kill him. That’s why the mob just breaks kneecaps.

      • Thetimefarm@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        No you just put a cut on the end of their pointer finger on their dominant hand. That way every time they touch something it reminds them who their money belongs to. You save kneecapping for someone who you’ve lost all hope of paying you back and now their value to you is as an example for others.

  • MrFlamey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.”?

    • TechnoBabble@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.”

    • downpunxx@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

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

  • ewe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Smart. Flush money down the toilet trying to impersonate Trump by not paying your bills. Maybe he should run for president.

  • nucleative@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • dmonzel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.