A judgment is made that recognizes the former employee's claim that ``X (formerly Twitter) did not pay the bonus that was promised to the employee.''
A former employee filed a lawsuit alleging that X (formerly Twitter) did not pay the money despite the company's promise that ``If you stay with the company until the first quarter of 2023, we will pay you 50% of your target bonus for 2022.'' The United States District Court for the Northern District of California upheld the former employee's lawsuit.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS
(PDF file)
Judge rules that Twitter violated contract when it withheld millions of dollars in bonuses | Courthouse News Service
https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-rules-that-twitter-violated-contract-when-it-withheld-millions-of-dollars-in-bonuses/
Twitter violated contract by failing to pay millions in bonuses, US judge rules | Reuters
Suit Against Twitter Over Unpaid Bonuses Gets Go-Ahead From Judge - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/24/business/twitter-x-employee-bonuses-lawsuit.html
Mark Schobinger, a former senior compensation director who left X in May 2023, filed suit against X in June 2023.
Mr. Schobinger claims that ``around November 2022, when Elon Musk acquired Twitter, ``If he stays with the company until the first quarter of 2023, he will receive millions of dollars, which is 50% of his target bonus for 2022.'' Despite X's promise to pay him several hundred million yen, the bonus was never paid at the time of his retirement.''
Although the agreement between Mr. Schobinger and X was only verbal, Mr. Schobinger claims, ``I stayed with the company until the first quarter of 2023 because I thought I would receive a bonus.'' Also, according to Mr. Schobinger, he had turned down scouts from other companies because of this promise. On the other hand, the lawyer for the X side argues that ``verbal promises are not formal contracts and are not enforceable.''
In addition, the lawyer for the X side argued that ``the decision should be made under Texas law based on California Civil Code Section 1646, which states that ``contracts shall be construed in accordance with the laws and customs of the place where they are performed.'' I did.
Ultimately, Judge Vincent Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said, ``Mr. Schobinger has plausibly stated a breach of contract claim under California law,'' and X must pay Mr. Schobinger a bonus. I made the decision.
Judge Chhabria stated, ``X's offer to Mr. Schobinger, ``If he remains with the company through the first quarter of 2023, he will pay him 50% of his target bonus for 2022'' is binding under California law. , X has not paid Mr. Schobinger the promised bonus, and therefore X is in breach of that agreement.''
'We are very pleased with the court's decision,' said Shannon Liss-Riordan, Schobinger's attorney. 'We agreed with our argument that, in this case, we found that employees who remained with the company after the Twitter acquisition could appropriately be awarded targeted bonuses in 2022.' said.
Please note that X has declined to comment regarding this ruling by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Related Posts:
in Web Service, Posted by log1r_ut