News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by gongagong on Monday November 20, 2023 @09:58PM (#38358455)
wait so can't SA sue for wrongful termination if everything is as bogus as everyone is saying? same for MS
Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by dragonwriter on Monday November 20, 2023 @10:30PM (#38358736)
> wait so can't SA sue for wrongful termination if everything is as bogus as everyone is saying?

It is breach of contract if it violated his employment contract, but I don't have a copy of his contract. It is wrongful termination if it was for an illegal reason, but there doesn't seem to be any suggestion of that.

> same for MS

I doubt very much that the contract with Microsoft limits OpenAI's right to manage their own personnel, so probably not.

Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by pacificmint on Monday November 20, 2023 @10:14PM (#38358597)
Employment in California is ‘at will’, which means they can fire him without a reason.

Wrongful termination only applies when someone is fired for illegal reasons, like racial discrimination, or retaliation, for example.

I mean I’m sure they can all sue each other for all kinds of reasons, but firing someone without a good reason isn’t really one of them.

Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by adastra22 on Monday November 20, 2023 @11:13PM (#38359110)
That's the default, but employment contracts can override this. C-level employment contracts almost universally have special consideration for "Termination Without Cause", aka golden parachutes. He could sue to make them pay out.

He would also have very good grounds for a civil suit for disparagement. Or at least he would have if Microsoft didn't immediately step up and offer him the world.

Re:OpenAI's employees were given two explanations for why Sa... by vaxman on Monday November 20, 2023 @11:09PM (#38359075)
You mean like being fired by a board member as part of their scheme to breach their fiduciary duty by launching a competitive product in another company?