Non-Competes aren't actually very effective. It's more of a gentleman's agreement and sometimes things get handled outside of court and under the table, but multiple states, including California, view non-competes as non-binding.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Facing Lawsuit for Poaching Key Battery Engineering Employees From A123 Systems
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Non-Competes aren't actually very effective. It's more of a gentleman's agreement and sometimes things get handled outside of court and under the table, but multiple states, including California, view non-competes as non-binding.
And some of those jurisdiction clauses are unenforceable or a violation of (U.S.) States rights. e.g. California can apply its own laws to its residents and corporations (and even review and deny criminal extradition requests, for instance).
Most civilized countries have outlawed slavery and indentured servitude, which makes contracts that look anything like that unenforceable in various degrees.
So this looks like a scheme for the lawyers of a (near?) bankrupt company to earn some big fees getting nowhere.
A possibly better way to give the lawyers lots of money is to have them file tons of (overly?) broad patents on anything that their employees are close to working on before they leave, and naming these employees as contributing inventors. If the patents ever get issued (by mistake?), then they can try claiming willful infringement for any work done in the same area.
Last edited:
What happens if the old company chooses to keep you on at $250,000 for a year and then get rid of you, and the Apple job is no longer available?
Apple (and Google et al) lost that case in CALIFORNIA. It is CALIFORNIA law, not Federal law, that limits the ability to force non-compete clauses on employees.
The battery company in question is physically in MASSACHUSETTS, and subject to MA law which (I assume) allows non-compete clauses.
It is certainly possible (if Apple wants such an outcome) that Apple will push this hard in MA courts and, more importantly, in the press, to try to get MA to update their law, and my guess is that they would succeed. You can imagine the kinds of whining companies will offer up for why they need non-compete clauses, but the thriving of the CA tech industry clearly shows that this is self-serving nonsense, that the primary effect of non-compete clauses is to ensure that financiers get a large share, and employees get a smaller share, of the rewards of a successful tech company.
DOES Apple want such an outcome? Who knows? But they are presumably better placed than most companies to do well from such a bidding war...
Even more ambitious would be the get Federal legislation passed, but I expect this is a hopeless cause right now.
----------
First Germany is not as "at-will" as the US, so they can't just fire you for the hell of it, or for revenge, without a good reason.
Secondly, if you're the type of employee that companies WANT to poach and to pay $250K/yr, then you're probably going to land on your feet if you just use some common sense in looking for a new job...
The German law says "reasonable compensation". In other words, this could become very, very expensive for them. Clearly it's not reasonable compensation if they pay the difference in salary for a month, change their mind, and your dream job is gone. That's why a non-compete clause is almost never enforced in Germany.
First, in my opinion such contract clauses to keep people from looking for jobs elsewhere should be made invalid.
That said, (one) if a court in Massachusetts hypothetically told the employee "if you start at Apple, you will have to pay gazillions to your old company for breach of contract", then that employee is not going to start at Apple. And (two), Apple could be sued for interfering with a contract. If there is a valid contract between two parties, and you convince one party to breach their contract, you can be sued for that.
The battery is the single most limiting factor in modern technology. That is the one area that could use more advancement than anything else. It is no surprise that Apple wants to have a hand in battery design and development. Whomever could create a small, stable, energy dense battery will revolutionize multiple industries and have a huge advantage over all competitors.
Apple was sued by engineers for a non-poaching agreement with Google. So it's NOT Poaching is what you get sued for.
I'm guessing that A123 is more upset that Apple took 5 of their most talented engineers instead of buying their company out. Had A123 patented alot of the work their employees were doing, their company would have been more valuable than just their employees but if not, then Apple was able to lure the people with the knowledge. This is totally a guess. Not saying its right.
I don't think they should be allowed. they hurt innovation and keep individuals from doing their life's work. could you imagine if everyone had to sign a non compete?
Alright, what if they enforce the non-compete, then go bust in a year's time and close down? They've still ****ed you, and there's nothing you can do about it.
Everyone, even sandwich makers?
I understand the reason for non competes in a limited sense but most companies take them too far.
Maybe non-competing "agreements" should be illegal in a society based on Capitalism that is designed to have companies COMPETE and thus such contracts are anti-Capitalism and amount to collusion/conspiracy to thwart market competition and thus are tantamount to anti-trust style price fixing (on the employee side of things). No wonder wages are stagnant. 
Brand new, out the box iPhone , no apps loaded, sim in, lasts from a six am undock until 2-3pm with less than an hour of "screen on" time, phone gets very very hot, i have had this issue with every iphone i have owned so far except the 1st gen
problem is apple assume we all live and work in factory perfect signal los to the cell towers and build so close to the desgin spec that there is no tollerance left for less than perfect conditions, if i plug in a wifi router at work for instance (no internet connection on it, but just so the iphone has something to connect to) the battery life lasts until around 7pm from a 6am wake point... The 6Plus lasts a lot longer, but then so does the ipad mini, much bigger batteries and i think better/larger antenna in those helps reduce the power drain mobile data boosting is causing.
bottom line, the iPhones battery has always been crap if you work or live anywhere with less than a perfect cell signal, and its apples fault for not building in tolerance..
In my office, the people on iPhones are always email around asking for charging cables around lunch time, the android users (and that one weird dude with a windows phone) always seem ok.
i dont put my phones in cases, i dont use scree protectors , and if you need to carry an extra battery pack around with you, then the device was not tested in "real world" enviroments IMO
Thankfully my upgrade isnt due until march, so i think ill be skipping the iPhone 6 an 6 plus, ive heald both, and they are just too thin, and the battery life is shocking
LOLOL
Can't hire people because expectations are too high = The free market doesn't work
Employees leaving for better pastures = The free market doesn't work
Yeah, only those entitled millennials whine about jobs, never employers.
These non-compete agreements are a bunch of crap and should be outlawed. You are basically forced to sign them in order to get a job and then they own you. The companies have all the benefits and power. They know you have to sign your life away.
Last I checked, at least in the USA, it was a free country and this is just BS.
Last I checked, at least in the USA, it was a free country and this is just BS.