In a recent development, Alan Rosa, the former global head of security, information technology, and privacy at Twitter, has filed a lawsuit against X, Elon Musk, and Steve Davis. Rosa alleges that he was fired after objecting to cost-cutting measures implemented shortly after Musk's acquisition of the company.

Attorneys representing Rosa filed a complaint in U.S. District Court for New Jersey late Tuesday, targeting X, Musk, and Davis, who serves as a company advisor and president of Musk's tunneling business, The Boring Company. Davis, being a trusted associate of Musk, was selected, along with other close associates, to assist in the management of the social media firm.

Rosa's lawsuit follows similar legal actions taken by former Twitter employees and centers around the extensive cost-cutting efforts initiated by Musk following his $44 billion acquisition of the company, which was subsequently renamed X.

According to Rosa, Davis, under the direction of Musk, implemented a number of cost-cutting measures that Rosa believed would undermine the company's ability to comply with various obligations and regulations. These included compliance with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) consent decree and the Digital Services Act (DSA) enforced by the European Commission. The DSA mandates that certain large tech platforms document and monitor illegal online content or face penalties of up to 6% of annual sales.

Rosa alleges that Davis sought to terminate funding for essential programs such as HackerOne, an ethical hacking initiative, and vulnerability management software, both of which were crucial for complying with the FTC Consent Decree. The lawsuit states that Davis, like Musk, showed disregard for the FTC Consent Decree, leading to the reduction of products and services at Twitter that supported and adhered to the decree.

The suit also claims that Davis instructed Rosa to discontinue the use of Salesforce, which presented a problem as the software contained data necessary for sharing with law enforcement. Rosa objected to this directive, asserting that it would violate the DSA and hinder the company's ability to appropriately handle law enforcement inquiries.

Additionally, Rosa alleges that Davis ordered a 50% reduction in the physical security budget within hours, posing a significant risk to public safety. The lawsuit points out that the physically secured building, which housed more than 800 laptops and electronic devices subject to litigation holds, was required by court orders to preserve and protect the data on those devices.

Rosa states that his objections led to his termination just days after expressing his concerns, claiming that he was "terminated in an unexplainable fashion" and that no justifiable reason existed for his dismissal. Furthermore, Rosa alleges that X initiated a "sham investigation" into his workplace conduct in an attempt to deny him his severance package.

Despite entering into an arbitration agreement with X, Rosa's lawyers claim that the company has refused to pay its portion of the arbitration fees, leaving Rosa no choice but to file a complaint. The lawsuit alleges X's violations of employee-related laws, including the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, New York and California labor rules, and the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act.

Rosa seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages in his quest for justice. X, Musk, and Davis have yet to respond to the lawsuit. This incident follows a previous lawsuit by ex-Twitter software engineer Yao Yue, who claimed that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act when she was terminated after organizing colleagues expressing concerns about Musk's immediate policy changes.

As this legal battle unfolds, the actions taken by X and its leadership are under scrutiny, potentially impacting their reputation and future business dealings.