this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2024
479 points (95.3% liked)
Technology
58012 readers
2862 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You only need 40 people to start a class-action lawsuit
Nothing those employees can do, they're even being offered money and time off to move lol.
Legally, 0 actionable items for a suit.
This is a clear example of constructive dismissal
Constructive dismissal isn’t illegal, it merely allows the employees to receive benefits and make claims as though they had been dismissed. California is an at-will employment state, so unless these employees have contracts stating otherwise (including the employee handbook, unless it has verbiage stating it is not legally binding), their dismissal is legal.
Apple is giving each employee who chooses to resign a $12.5k severance package. Assuming Apple doesn’t plan on fighting any unemployment claims made by these employees, what else you think they would be able to get after a successful lawsuit?
I don't understand what kind of magic bullet people think a constructive discharge lawsuit is or what kind of powerful uno reverse card it would be. Winning a constructive discharge lawsuit is basically being legally fired instead of quiting...they'd probably get less from that lawsuit (not even counting the time and legal fees) than if they just accepted Apples package. What is a constructive discharge lawsuit supposed to do here?
I agree, but I don't think that's even close to a reasonable reason to sue.
I don't like that, but I'm just making the argument that the 1% doesn't give 2 shits either way.