Couldn’t read it there but archive.org has it: https://web.archive.org/web/20210205073421/https://www.latim...

What was the outcome, was he compensated in the end?

A judge refused Apple's request for summary dismissal[1], but then news coverage about it just stops.

My unjustified suspicion, since there's no evidence of it being resolved afterward, is that an out-of-court settlement was reached before it went to trial, and consequently, no press coverage resulted.

I suppose, if this were true, it would qualify as a win-win - Apple doesn't have court precedent of them firing people unjustifiedly, he ends up with a bunch of the compensation he primarily claims Apple was denying him by firing him. The people who lose are anyone else who gets dubiously fired by Apple and don't have the resources to sue over it.

[1] - https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2014/05/21/man-behi...

I mean the article mentioned he had "restricted stock" (I guess it's like options?); I don't know how many he was entitled to, but the stock price of Apple has gone through a split and has become 40x worth as much today.

RSU. It’s the kind of stock grants that are regularly handed out by tech companies. They’re not options.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/restricted-stock-unit.a...

The value of a stock grant is not determined by future growth. You can buy stock on the open market on the same day an employee vests, and all else equal non-employees should by MORE stock than employees, due to diversification concerns.

RSU grants are afaik usually on a per unit basis based on the price when you start. So if the current stock price is $20/share and you get $20k worth of RSUs then that means you get 1k shares. If the value per share goes up to $100 then your RSUs are now worth $100k. This is why some tech company employees have massive stock compensations, the stock has gone up a lot since their initial offer.

Im sure there are different ways of doing it, but this is not my experience. In my experience, you get X RSU stocks, and or Y dollars worth of stock. It is then locked up for 3-4 years so if you took stock it may have increased in value.

This depends on whether your RSUs are measured in $ or units.

This is a fascinating case, and I'm surprised I have never heard of it before. I'm sure Apple lawyers could very easily argue that Steve Jobs' verbal "job for life" guarantee had no legal standing, and he probably wasn't authorized to make such promises despite being CEO. But the company then would also be publicly shitting on Jobs right after his death, which would be much more costly than a quick settlement.

Furthermore, while I've always disliked the "this is contrary to everything that Steve Jobs stood for" cottage industry of takes that sprung up after his death, I can say with utter conviction that there's no way Steve would have let himself be held to a "job for life" guarantee, and surely the author knew this as well as anybody when he went to court.

Not that this necessarily makes him wrong or unethical for trying to enforce the guarantee…

Interesting. I wonder why he was fired.