Laid off in California - am I entitled to severance?

Got laid off yesterday from my marketing role at a tech startup in San Francisco. Been there 3 years, no warning, just "position eliminated due to restructuring."

They're offering me 2 weeks severance in exchange for signing a release. My friend said California requires severance pay and I should negotiate for more. Is that true?

I'm at-will, no employment contract. Salary was $95K.

Sorry to hear about the layoff. Short answer: California does NOT legally require severance pay.

Your friend is mistaken. In California (and most states), employers have no legal obligation to provide severance unless:

• You have an employment contract that promises it
• Company policy/handbook creates an enforceable obligation
• There's a union agreement requiring it

Since you're at-will with no contract, the 2 weeks they're offering is voluntary on their part.

Former HR here. Two weeks for 3 years is pretty low. Standard I've seen at tech companies is 1-2 weeks per year of service, so you'd be looking at 3-6 weeks.

The fact they want a release means they're trying to protect themselves from potential claims. That release has value to them - use it as leverage.

Thanks @LisaT_Employment. So if severance isn't required, what AM I entitled to? They gave me my last paycheck yesterday but I have like 80 hours of unused vacation.

Critical question - good catch. California Labor Code Section 227.3 requires employers to pay out ALL accrued, unused vacation time at termination. This is considered earned wages.

With 80 hours at $95K salary, that's roughly $3,654 they owe you (80 hrs x $45.67/hr). This must be paid on your final paycheck or within 72 hours if they didn't give notice.

This is NOT severance - it's wages you already earned. Do not sign any release until you confirm this is paid separately.

I negotiated my severance last year in similar situation (SF startup, laid off after 4 years). Started with 2 weeks offer, negotiated to 8 weeks plus 3 months continued health insurance.

My approach: politely pushed back via email saying I'd like to discuss the package before signing anything. Then outlined my tenure, contributions, and asked for 12 weeks. We met in the middle.

Worst they can say is no. The initial offer is usually just their opening position.

Before you negotiate severance, check if you have any potential claims that would make the release more valuable to the employer:

• Were you paid correctly for all hours worked (exempt vs non-exempt classification)?
• Any unpaid overtime, missed meal/rest breaks?
• Were you subjected to discrimination, harassment, or retaliation?
• Any wage statement violations?
• Did they fail to reimburse business expenses (phone, mileage, etc.)?

If you have legitimate claims, the release is worth MORE to them and you have significantly more leverage. Many employment attorneys offer free consultations for situations like this.

Actually yes - I was classified as exempt but honestly worked way more than 40 hrs/week and my role was pretty much pure execution, not managerial. Also they never reimbursed my home internet even though I was remote 3 days/week.

Should I mention this in negotiating or talk to a lawyer first?

Talk to an employment lawyer FIRST. Do not mention specific claims to your employer yet.

Misclassification is a big deal in California. If you were improperly classified as exempt, you could be entitled to overtime pay, meal/rest break premiums, and penalties going back 3-4 years. We're potentially talking tens of thousands of dollars.

The release they're asking you to sign likely waives ALL claims including these. You need to understand what you're giving up before you sign anything.

Find an employment attorney who works on contingency - they only get paid if you recover money.

Agreed with @RobK_Law. Also, California has specific requirements for severance agreements:

• If they're asking you to release age discrimination claims, you must get at least 21 days to consider (45 days if group layoff) and 7 days to revoke after signing
• The release must be written in plain language
• They should advise you in writing to consult an attorney

Don't let them pressure you to sign immediately. Take your time, consult counsel, and negotiate. You have leverage here.

Update: talked to an employment attorney this morning (free consult). She confirmed the misclassification issue is real and said my role definitely sounds non-exempt based on job duties.

She's going to send a letter to my employer outlining potential claims and suggesting we negotiate enhanced severance in exchange for release. Sounds like I should end up with way more than 2 weeks.

Thanks everyone for the wake-up call. I was about to just sign and move on.

For anyone else in this situation: also check your employee handbook. Some companies have unofficial "standard severance" policies they follow even though they're not legally required.

At my company we had a reduction in force and everyone got severance based on tenure even though handbook didn't promise it - they just wanted to avoid bad PR and keep morale up for remaining employees.

Quick question - is severance taxed differently than regular wages? I got offered 6 weeks but wondering how much I'll actually see after taxes.

@SiliconValleyDev - Yes, severance is taxed as regular income. Federal, state, FICA, the whole deal. Some companies will withhold at a higher "supplemental" rate (22% federal) which means you might get some back at tax time, but plan for roughly 35-40% to go to taxes in CA.

One tip: if the lump sum pushes you into a higher bracket, see if they'll spread payments across two tax years.

FINAL UPDATE: Just signed the agreement. Got 12 weeks severance (up from 2), 4 months COBRA paid, and they agreed to remove the non-compete clause entirely. Attorney took 25% but even after that I'm walking away with way more than the original offer.

The misclassification issue was key - turns out I wasn't the only one and they didn't want that can of worms opened. For anyone reading this: ALWAYS consult an attorney before signing a release. The free consultation took 30 minutes and completely changed my outcome.

Thanks to everyone who helped, especially @LisaT_Employment and @RobK_Law.

Bumping this thread because I just got my layoff notice today. Similar situation - 5 years at a mid-size tech company in LA, they're offering 4 weeks. I'm 52 so I'm guessing the ADEA stuff applies to me?

They gave me this huge packet of papers to sign and said I have until Friday. That's only 4 days - is that even legal?

@AnxiousBee2025 - NO, 4 days is NOT sufficient if they're asking you to waive age discrimination claims under ADEA (which any standard release does).

Under the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA), for employees 40+:

• You must be given at least 21 days to consider the agreement (45 days if part of group layoff)
• You get 7 days to revoke after signing
• You must be advised in writing to consult an attorney
• The agreement must specifically refer to ADEA claims

Tell them you need the legally required consideration period. If they push back, that's a red flag and potentially grounds to void the release later.

This thread is gold. I'm in the middle of negotiating right now and wanted to share what's worked for me:

1. Asked for the severance agreement in writing before my termination date
2. Took it to a lawyer (paid $350 for review, worth every penny)
3. Came back with counter asking for: more weeks, extended health, accelerated equity vesting, positive reference letter, carve-out in non-disparagement for truthful statements to govt agencies

They said no to the equity but yes to everything else. Currently at 10 weeks from original 3 week offer.

Current HR professional here (throwaway for obvious reasons). I'll share some insider perspective:

When we offer severance, we absolutely expect negotiation. Our initial offer is usually 60-70% of what we're authorized to give. The release protects us from lawsuits that could cost hundreds of thousands - a few extra weeks of severance is nothing compared to that risk.

What we care about most: getting a clean release signed. What we'll usually give on: more weeks, COBRA extension, outplacement services. What's harder to budge on: equity, bonuses already paid, anything that sets precedent for other employees in the same layoff.

Update on my situation: I pushed back on the 4-day deadline citing the ADEA requirements @LisaT_Employment mentioned. HR apologized and said it was "an oversight" (sure it was) and gave me the full 21 days.

Also found out 47 other people were let go the same day. Does that change anything? Someone mentioned a WARN Act to me.

@AnxiousBee2025 - Yes, this is important. California has its own WARN Act (Labor Code 1400-1408) that's broader than the federal version.

California WARN requires 60 days advance notice for:

• Mass layoffs of 50+ employees in a 30-day period
• Relocations of 100+ miles
• Plant closures

If they failed to give 60 days notice, you may be entitled to 60 days of pay and benefits in lieu of notice. This is separate from any severance they're offering.

With 47 people laid off, you're close to the threshold. Ask HR exactly how many employees were affected in the past 30 days - they may be trying to stay just under the limit.

Has anyone successfully gotten their employer to pay for outplacement services? My company is offering 2 weeks severance and I'd rather have job search help than a bit more cash. I'm a senior engineer and finding roles is taking longer than expected in this market.

@NorCalTech - Outplacement is often an easy ask because many companies already have contracts with outplacement firms. It doesn't cost them much per person and looks good.

Ask specifically for "executive outplacement" if you're senior level - it usually includes resume review, interview coaching, LinkedIn optimization, and sometimes direct connections to recruiters. Regular outplacement is often just access to job boards and generic workshops.

My husband got laid off from a biotech in San Diego last month and this thread is scaring me. He signed the release on day 2 because they said the offer would "expire" if he didn't sign quickly. He's 44. Did we mess up?

@WorriedSpouse - Possibly, but not necessarily. A few things to consider:

1. If the release didn't comply with OWBPA requirements (21 days consideration, 7 day revocation, written advice to consult attorney, specific ADEA reference), it may not effectively waive his age discrimination claims.

2. He still has the 7-day revocation period if it was in the agreement. Did he already pass that?

3. Releases obtained through fraud, duress, or mutual mistake can sometimes be rescinded.

I'd recommend consulting with an employment attorney ASAP to review the specific agreement. Many offer free consultations. Don't wait - there may be time limits.

Dumb question maybe but what exactly is a "release of claims" and what am I giving up by signing one?

@QuietQuitter - Not a dumb question at all. A release (also called a "separation agreement" or "severance agreement") is a contract where you agree not to sue the company for claims arising from your employment.

Typically you're giving up the right to sue for:

• Wrongful termination
• Discrimination (age, race, sex, disability, etc.)
• Harassment or hostile work environment
• Retaliation
• Wage and hour violations
• FMLA violations
• Breach of contract

In exchange, you get severance pay. The company is essentially paying for peace of mind that you won't come back later with a lawsuit. If you have potential claims, that peace of mind is worth more to them.

Note: You typically CANNOT release workers' compensation claims or unemployment benefits - those are protected.

UPDATE: Wanted to close the loop on my situation. Turns out there were actually 53 people laid off when you count contractors, which triggered the CA WARN Act. Company tried to argue contractors don't count but my attorney disagreed.

Long story short - they offered me 12 weeks severance (up from 4) plus the equivalent of 60 days pay under WARN to avoid a class action. After attorney fees I'm getting about $45K which is way more than the original $8K offer.

Cannot emphasize enough: TALK TO A LAWYER. If I'd signed on day 4 like they wanted, I'd have left $37K on the table.

Can someone explain the non-disparagement clauses in severance agreements? Mine says I can't say anything "negative or disparaging" about the company. Does this mean I can't leave an honest Glassdoor review? What about talking to the EEOC if I think I was discriminated against?

@GreenGrass_OC - Good questions. California has gotten more protective of employee speech in recent years:

1. Government agencies: You absolutely can still file complaints with the EEOC, DFEH, DLSE, OSHA, etc. No agreement can waive your right to report illegal conduct to government agencies.

2. Truthful statements: Under California law (Civil Code 47), you have a privilege to make truthful statements. Overly broad non-disparagement clauses that prohibit truthful statements may be unenforceable.

3. SB 331 (Silenced No More Act): As of 2022, California employers cannot include provisions in severance agreements that prevent disclosure of information about unlawful acts in the workplace (harassment, discrimination, retaliation).

I'd recommend negotiating a carve-out that explicitly allows truthful statements to government agencies and in legal proceedings. Most employers will agree to this.

Horror story time. I got laid off in June, signed the severance agreement without reading carefully (I know, I know), and then realized 2 weeks later they had included a 1-year non-compete that basically prevents me from working in my field in California.

Called a lawyer who said CA non-competes are generally unenforceable but that I might have waived that protection by signing? I'm freaking out. Has anyone dealt with this?

@JustMyLuck2025 - Take a breath. California Business & Professions Code Section 16600 makes non-compete agreements void as a matter of public policy. You generally cannot "waive" this protection because it's not just about your rights - it's about California's public policy interest in employee mobility.

As of January 2024 (AB 2282), California employers cannot even require employees to sign non-competes that would be void under state law. Including an unenforceable non-compete in a severance agreement could potentially expose the employer to penalties.

That said, every situation is different. Some narrow restrictions (like non-solicitation of specific clients you personally worked with) might be enforceable. Definitely worth a consult to review your specific language, but don't panic - you likely have more rights than you think.

Just got laid off from a FAANG company. They're offering a pretty generous package - 16 weeks base, 6 months health insurance, accelerated vesting on RSUs. But the release is 15 pages long.

Is it still worth negotiating when the initial offer is already decent? I don't want to seem greedy or burn bridges since I might want to return someday.

@LayoffWave3 - At FAANG companies the packages are usually standardized and there's less room for negotiation on the financial terms. But you can still negotiate on:

• Reference language (get it in writing)
• Non-disparagement carve-outs
• Return of personal property timeline
• Removal of any non-compete language
• Clarification of what counts as "confidential information"

You won't burn bridges by politely asking questions about the agreement. That's expected. Just don't be aggressive about it.

Reading through this whole thread and I'm so glad I found it. I'm about to be laid off (they gave us notice last week, layoffs happening Oct 1). I have a question about COBRA vs staying on company health insurance.

They're offering either 3 months continued coverage OR 3 months COBRA subsidy. Is there a difference? Which should I choose?

@TechMom_Bay - There can be important differences:

Continued coverage: You stay on the company plan as an "active" employee. Usually means same premium share you had before. But coverage typically ends on a specific date with no extension.

COBRA subsidy: You're technically a former employee on COBRA, but they pay some/all of the premium. Usually more expensive (full premium cost) but you can continue for up to 18 months if needed, even after subsidy ends.

If you have ongoing medical needs or might need longer coverage, COBRA gives you more flexibility. If you expect to find a job quickly and have no health issues, continued coverage might be simpler.

Also check if you qualify for a subsidized ACA plan - sometimes that's cheaper than COBRA after the subsidy period ends.

Timeline of my severance negotiation for anyone curious:

Day 1 (Mon): Laid off, given initial offer of 4 weeks + 1 month COBRA
Day 2: Emailed HR asking for time to review. They said take the full 21 days
Day 3: Free consult with employment attorney, identified potential expense reimbursement claims
Day 7: Attorney sent letter requesting enhanced package
Day 12: Company counter offered 6 weeks + 2 months COBRA
Day 15: We countered asking for 10 weeks + 3 months COBRA + written reference
Day 18: They agreed to 8 weeks + 3 months COBRA + reference letter
Day 19: Signed agreement
Day 26: 7-day revocation period ended, agreement final

Total time: less than 4 weeks. Doubled my severance.

@ProdDesigner_LA this is really helpful, thanks for sharing the timeline. One thing I'd add from my experience: keep a paper trail of EVERYTHING. I communicated only by email and saved every message. That way if there's any dispute later about what was agreed, you have documentation.

Following up from my post earlier in the thread about the non-disparagement clause. Attorney helped me negotiate a carve-out that allows "truthful statements to government agencies, in legal proceedings, or in response to lawful subpoena." Company agreed without much pushback.

Also want to recommend the demand letter templates on this site - my attorney said having documentation of the expense reimbursement issues in writing really helped our negotiation position.

Is there any recourse if my employer is refusing to negotiate at all? They keep saying "this is the standard package, take it or leave it." I've been there 7 years and they're only offering 2 weeks.

I asked about potential misclassification issues (I was "exempt" but did the same work as non-exempt colleagues) and they basically told me to sign or get nothing. Feels like bullying tbh.

@VentingNeeded - If you have legitimate wage claims (misclassification, unpaid overtime, missed breaks), you don't need them to "negotiate" - you have legal claims you can pursue regardless of whether you sign the release.

Options:

• Don't sign the release and pursue your claims through the DLSE (Department of Labor Standards Enforcement) or a lawsuit
• Have an attorney send a demand letter outlining your claims - this often changes the "take it or leave it" attitude
• File a wage claim with DLSE - it's free and you don't need an attorney

The severance they're offering is voluntary. Your wage claims exist independently. They're trying to get you to release those claims for 2 weeks pay - that might be a bad deal depending on what you're owed.

Definitely consult with an employment attorney before signing anything. If you have 7 years of unpaid overtime, that could be worth far more than their "take it or leave it" offer.

Thanks @LisaT_Employment. Just had a consult and the attorney thinks I have a strong misclassification claim. She's sending them a letter. Will update when I know more.

For anyone in similar situation - I found my old time records on my personal computer (I used to track hours even tho I was "exempt"). Attorney said this documentation is gold.

Quick question - my severance agreement has a clause saying I have to return all company property including "any documents, files, or information stored on personal devices." Does this mean they can demand access to my personal laptop or phone?

@MikeK_Engineer - No, they cannot demand access to your personal devices. What they CAN require is that you delete any company confidential information stored on personal devices and certify that you've done so.

Negotiate that clause to read something like: "Employee certifies that they have returned or deleted all Company confidential information from personal devices and will not retain, copy, or use such information."

If they're insisting on device access, that's a red flag and you should push back or consult an attorney.

Just got laid off from a similar situation (3.5 years at a San Jose tech company) and this thread has been incredibly helpful. Following OP's approach and consulting with an employment attorney before signing anything.

One question: the severance agreement they gave me has a non-disparagement clause that seems really broad - basically says I can't say anything negative about the company ever. Is that enforceable in California? Seems like it would prevent me from leaving honest Glassdoor reviews or warning others about the toxic work environment.

Attorney said it might run afoul of California's anti-SLAPP laws but I'd love to hear if anyone else has dealt with this.

Pro tip from someone who just finished negotiating: Don't just negotiate money. Here's what I asked for and got:

• Extension of exercise period for stock options from 90 days to 1 year
• Written commitment that they won't contest my unemployment claim
• Neutral reference letter with specific language I helped draft
• Agreement to change my termination to "mutual separation" in their records
• Removal of non-disparagement clause entirely (CA law helped here)

The stock option extension alone could be worth more than extra severance weeks depending on company valuation.

58 years old, 15 years with company, just got laid off in a "restructuring." They're offering 6 weeks severance. Seems low for my tenure. Also noticed I was the oldest person in my department and the only one let go...

Is age discrimination hard to prove? Don't want to make accusations but the pattern seems suspicious.

@OldTimer_SD - Age discrimination cases are challenging but not impossible to prove, especially with circumstantial evidence like what you're describing. Key factors attorneys look at:

• Were you the oldest or among the oldest affected?
• Were younger employees with less experience retained?
• Any comments about your age, "energy level," being "overqualified," or needing "fresh perspective"?
• Any pattern in recent terminations targeting older workers?
• Were performance reviews positive before termination?

6 weeks for 15 years is definitely low. The combination of suspicious circumstances + low offer suggests they know they have exposure. Definitely worth a consult with an employment attorney who handles ADEA/FEHA claims.

Remember: accepting severance = releasing age discrimination claims. Know what you're giving up.

UPDATE from October: Remember when I said my company was being difficult about negotiating? Well, the attorney letter changed everything.

Turns out they had misclassified about 40 employees over the past few years. Once legal got involved, their "take it or leave it" attitude disappeared real quick. I ended up with 14 weeks severance (was 2), plus a confidential settlement for the wage claims.

The company also agreed to change records to show I resigned rather than was laid off, and gave me a glowing reference letter. Total value was probably 5x the original offer.

Lesson: "take it or leave it" is often a bluff, especially if you have legitimate claims.

This is my first job out of college and I just got laid off after 14 months. They're offering one week severance. Is it even worth negotiating for such a short tenure? I don't have much leverage since I don't have any real claims and I wasn't there long enough to have issues.

@FirstJobSF - Yes, it's still worth asking. Even without strong claims, you can negotiate for:

• Another week or two of severance (they're already giving one, asking for more isn't crazy)
• Extended health insurance beyond COBRA rates
• A positive written reference
• Agreement not to contest unemployment

Even if they say no to everything, asking professionally won't hurt you. You're leaving anyway - what's the worst that happens?

Also make sure they're paying out any unused PTO - in California that's required regardless of how long you worked there.

Happy new year everyone (well, not really for me - got laid off Dec 30th, what timing).

Question about timing: they're offering 8 weeks severance but want me to sign by Jan 10th. The agreement says payment will be made "within 14 days of execution." Does that mean I won't get paid until late January even though I'm terminated now?

Also is there any advantage to waiting until 2024 to receive severance for tax purposes? My income in 2024 was pretty high.

@BioPharmaDev - The 14-day payment timeline is pretty standard. You can ask them to expedite but they usually won't.

On the tax question: Yes, receiving severance in 2024 vs 2024 could matter if it pushes you into a higher bracket. Some people negotiate to have the payment date pushed into January for this reason. Given you were terminated Dec 30th, you might be able to ask that the payment be processed on a specific date in January.

That said, I'm not a tax professional - talk to a CPA if the amounts are significant. There might be other considerations I'm not aware of.

Coming back to this thread one more time to share a resource. I used the unpaid wages demand letter templates when documenting my expense reimbursement claims. Having everything organized in a formal letter format made a huge difference when negotiating.

Also the severance agreement checklist helped me know what to look for in my agreement.

Good luck to everyone dealing with layoffs. It gets better.

UPDATE from December: Wanted to share how my situation resolved. After consulting with an attorney, we decided the age discrimination circumstantial evidence was strong enough to negotiate aggressively.

Attorney sent a letter laying out the facts: I was 58, had 15 years tenure with strong reviews, was the only one laid off, and younger colleagues with less experience were retained. Didn't accuse them of anything directly, just laid out the facts.

Result: They came back with 6 months severance (up from 6 weeks), full year of health insurance, extended stock option exercise period, and a written agreement not to contest unemployment. Also got a positive reference letter signed by the CEO.

It pays to know your rights. Thanks to everyone in this thread, especially @LisaT_Employment.

I made a mistake and I'm worried. I signed my severance agreement on day 3 because I was scared the offer would be revoked. I'm 45 so the ADEA stuff applies but they only gave me 5 days to decide, not 21.

I already spent part of the severance money. Is there any way to undo this or am I stuck?

@NervousNelly_OC - This is actually a significant OWBPA violation on their part. When an employer fails to provide the required 21-day consideration period, the waiver of ADEA claims is generally NOT valid.

Key points:

• You may still be able to pursue age discrimination claims despite signing
• The Supreme Court case Oubre v. Entergy Operations held that non-compliant ADEA waivers are ineffective even if employee keeps the severance money
• You don't necessarily have to return the severance to challenge the waiver

That said, this is a complex area of law. You really should consult with an employment attorney about your specific circumstances. The fact that you spent some money doesn't necessarily bar you from pursuing claims.

Been lurking this thread for months while dealing with my own situation. Finally ready to share.

Laid off in October after 6 years at a fintech startup. Initial offer was 3 weeks. I thought that was fine until I read this thread and realized I should at least ask.

Ended up negotiating to 8 weeks plus 4 months COBRA. Didn't even need a lawyer - just a polite email pointing out my tenure and contributions, and asking if there was flexibility. HR came back the next day with a better offer.

The lesson: always ask. Worst case they say no. Best case you double or triple your severance. I almost left $15K on the table because I didn't want to seem "difficult."

FINAL UPDATE on the non-compete situation from September:

Good news - lawyer was right, the non-compete was completely unenforceable under California law. I took a job with a competitor in October and my old employer sent a cease and desist letter. My new employer's legal team responded citing B&P Code 16600 and we never heard from them again.

Moral of the story: Don't let scare tactics in severance agreements prevent you from working in your field. CA non-competes are void. (But definitely consult a lawyer for your specific situation, especially if there's trade secret concerns.)

Great updates from everyone! Since this thread keeps getting traffic, I'll add a few final thoughts for anyone finding it in the future:

Key takeaways about CA severance:

1. Not required, but negotiable: California doesn't mandate severance, but if they're asking for a release, you have leverage.
2. Know your claims: Before signing anything, assess whether you have potential wage claims, discrimination claims, or other issues that would make your release more valuable.
3. Take your time: If you're 40+, you have legal rights to 21 days consideration and 7 days revocation. Use that time.
4. Get everything in writing: Email is your friend. Document all negotiations.
5. Consult an attorney: Many offer free consultations. Even if you don't hire one, 30 minutes with a professional can clarify your options.

Good luck to everyone navigating layoffs. It's a difficult time, but knowing your rights makes a real difference.

Found this thread after getting laid off last week from a Series C startup in San Francisco. 4.5 years, senior product manager, they offered 3 weeks severance. After reading through everything here, I knew immediately that was a lowball opening position.

I want to add something that has not been discussed much: the impact of California SB 699, which took effect January 2024. This law strengthened the existing ban on non-competes by making it illegal for any employer to attempt to enforce a non-compete against a California employee, even if the agreement was signed in another state. My severance agreement had a non-compete buried in it that referenced Delaware law. My attorney flagged it immediately and said including it was itself a violation of SB 699.

That gave us significant additional leverage. We ended up negotiating to 10 weeks severance, 4 months COBRA, full acceleration of my unvested equity, and removal of the non-compete entirely. The equity acceleration alone was worth more than the cash severance given the company is likely heading toward an IPO.

For anyone in a similar situation in 2026, definitely check whether your severance agreement contains any non-compete or non-solicit provisions. Under current California law, these are almost certainly void and their inclusion gives you negotiating leverage. Also look carefully at any intellectual property assignment clauses that extend beyond your employment period. Those can sometimes function as disguised non-competes.

One final note: if you are being laid off as part of a group, ask HR for the disclosure information required under OWBPA. For group terminations, they must provide you with the job titles and ages of everyone selected and not selected for the layoff. This information can reveal patterns that suggest age discrimination, which further increases your leverage.

Found this thread after getting laid off last week from a Series C startup in San Francisco. 4.5 years, senior product manager, they offered 3 weeks severance. After reading through everything here, I knew immediately that was a lowball opening position.

I want to add something that has not been discussed much: the impact of California SB 699, which took effect January 2024. This law strengthened the existing ban on non-competes by making it illegal for any employer to attempt to enforce a non-compete against a California employee, even if the agreement was signed in another state. My severance agreement had a non-compete buried in it that referenced Delaware law. My attorney flagged it immediately and said including it was itself a violation of SB 699.

That gave us significant additional leverage. We ended up negotiating to 10 weeks severance, 4 months COBRA, full acceleration of my unvested equity, and removal of the non-compete entirely. The equity acceleration alone was worth more than the cash severance given the company is likely heading toward an IPO.

For anyone in a similar situation in 2026, definitely check whether your severance agreement contains any non-compete or non-solicit provisions. Under current California law, these are almost certainly void and their inclusion gives you negotiating leverage. Also look carefully at any intellectual property assignment clauses that extend beyond your employment period. Those can sometimes function as disguised non-competes.

One final note: if you are being laid off as part of a group, ask HR for the disclosure information required under OWBPA. For group terminations, they must provide you with the job titles and ages of everyone selected and not selected for the layoff. This information can reveal patterns that suggest age discrimination, which further increases your leverage.