Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Businesses

Anti-Poaching Lawsuit Against Apple, Google and Others Given the Green Light 172

An anonymous reader writes "A class action lawsuit against Apple, Google and a number of other high-profile tech companies has been given the green light by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh. The lawsuit stems from anti-poaching agreements that Apple a number of tech companies entered into from 2005 through 2009. Parties to the agreement all promised not to recruit employees from one another. The companies involved include Apple, Intel, Google, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm, and Adobe."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anti-Poaching Lawsuit Against Apple, Google and Others Given the Green Light

Comments Filter:
  • by duckintheface ( 710137 ) on Monday October 28, 2013 @02:29PM (#45261087)

    Anti-poaching is only one means by which corporations weaken workers. Illegal retaliatory firing for union organizing is another. The suit is about maintaining a free market in labor. Union membership is one way that individuals participate in that free market. The decline in union membership is a major cause of the decline in the income of American workers.

    As documented in Robert Reich's book Super-Capitalism, the most productive and prosperous time in US history was the age (1950s-1960s) of collaboration between big government, big business, and big labor. With labor out of the picture and government oversight waning, is it any wonder that corporations are feasting on the bones of their powerless workforce?

  • by isorox ( 205688 ) on Monday October 28, 2013 @02:44PM (#45261277) Homepage Journal

    The suit, originally brought forth by five software engineers in 2011, alleges that the anti-poaching agreements served to lessen their employment opportunities, thereby weakening their negotiating power and ultimately affecting the salaries they were able to command.

    Wait, what?

    I've been told for years that the only way employees can ever fight their employer is if a union represents them and does all the negotiations. Now you mean to tell me that even non-union employees have rights, too?

    Yes, it's possible. If you have the money and the time you can even get it to court. Then it's you, and maybe a few others, against the combined experience and cash of the justice a multi billion dollar company can buy.

  • by JWW ( 79176 ) on Monday October 28, 2013 @02:44PM (#45261281)

    Because if you are truly a stellar employee, you can put in the contract what YOU think your raise should be and not be beholden to what the company thinks your raise should be.

    It balances the concept of salary negotiations, however, there is a risk that if you are not a truly stellar employee, the company will not want to renew your contract.

  • by Kagato ( 116051 ) on Monday October 28, 2013 @03:23PM (#45261703)

    From Ed response to Steve Jobs:

    "Your proposal that we agree that neither company will hire the other's employees, regardless of the individual's desires, is not only wrong, it is likely illegal. [...] Palm doesn't target other companies -- we look for the best people we can find. l'd hope the same could be said about Apple's practices. However, during the last year or so, as Apple geared up to compete with Palm in the phone space, Apple hired at least 2 percent of Palm's workforce. To put it in perspective, had Palm done the same, we'd have hired 300 folks from Apple. Instead, to my knowledge, we've hired just three."

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 28, 2013 @03:50PM (#45262011)

    You're half right - an open, unsealed settlement would do just that.

  • by MillerHighLife21 ( 876240 ) on Monday October 28, 2013 @04:14PM (#45262259) Homepage

    That's not the reason for decline in income. The reason for decline in income is lack of jobs because of all of the cheaper off-shore labor and increased the supply of workers in the US. Wage laws, regulations, and an environment generally unfriendly towards manufacturing ultimately drove any industry that doesn't HAVE to operate in the US OUT of the US to places that were happy to have the jobs at all.

    If you had all of those jobs back and a thriving manufacturing industry again, the supply of workers would be much thinner, unemployment would be virtual non-existent unless by choice and because of that the wages / compensation would increase in order to attract and retain people. All we've done in the US is drive away a lot of jobs. There's plenty of places in the US where income levels are just fine and those are the areas where there is demand.

    You create demand, the income levels will take care of themselves.

    The Boeing thing has been especially interesting. As they've started things up in SC, Union workers have come down from Seattle trying to get people to organize to try to convince people that they aren't making enough. The general response they're getting is that most people are just happy to have a job...which is a point that a lot of people tend to forget when they start talking about wanting "more" vs wanting "anything".

  • by jonbryce ( 703250 ) on Monday October 28, 2013 @05:34PM (#45262949) Homepage

    pooching (v)

    To conceal something in one's vagina, usually for the purpose of hiding it from the police or security guards
    The act of inhaling dogs farts to get high off them.
    Havng sex with any dog of a girl that will go to bed with you.

With your bare hands?!?

Working...