You clearly don't have any clue what you are talking about. "Prove it was promised"???? Since when is that a requirement for filing a lawsuit? He doesn't even have to prove it to win, he just has to show that it was more likely than not. Unless CA has some laws against lifetime contracts, then there is nothing frivolous about this case. Could he be lying? Yes, but he might not be.
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's Former Keynote Address Producer Files Suit Claiming Steve Jobs Promised Lifetime Position
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You clearly don't have any clue what you are talking about. "Prove it was promised"???? Since when is that a requirement for filing a lawsuit? He doesn't even have to prove it to win, he just has to show that it was more likely than not. Unless CA has some laws against lifetime contracts, then there is nothing frivolous about this case. Could he be lying? Yes, but he might not be.
So we have his half the story? What would that verbal contract entertain anyway? You have a job here forever. No matter what. Doesn't matter if you take a s*** on Tim Cook's desk, Steve said you can have a job here forever.
No such thing.
Steve probably said something simple like "Goodrich, you'll always have a job here at Apple." But does that mean no matter what? Where do you draw the line?
Hard to call on this one, unless he has proof. Unfortunately Apple is so BIG now that any move they make other then hiring him back makes them look like that bad guy. Cook needs to clean this mess up???
There are X people who have a written contract with Apple that guarantees lifetime employment. There are Y people who have a verbal contract that guarantees the same. The number X would be found by a court, and you can bet that it is very, very small. I would expect it to be zero. Since such a contract would be very important, it is common sense that the number Y is much smaller.
You'd never hire someone back who has been suing you.
Wow, the fanbois keep surprising me! Apple, and its employees, makes some nice products, but they are not Gods.
It helps to read the content before commenting.
"This express promise by Steve Jobs was consistent with a practice that Steve Jobs had..."
I second this, it seems as if apples clean cut reputation is unraveling. Or these types of stories weren't a "hot-topic" in the past. With the continued success, and evolution of the company, it may come under fire for negative situations more often because it's position under the microscope.
I also agree with those of you who mentioned humanity, if this is the real reason he was fired, that greed. Steve would never allow this.
I think the comments here about a verbal contract are missing the point. This guy undoubtedly has a written employment contract with Apple and that agreement undoubtedly says "you agree you are an at-will employee and can be terminated at any time for cause or for no cause" and "you agree that the terms of this agreement cannot be modified except in a writing signed by you and the Apple SVP of HR."
Or similar words.
And, I wonder why he was fired -- what the evidence will show, not what his complaint says. Is it really reasonable to assume Steve Jobs said, or meant: "you will have lifetime employment at Apple no matter what you do and no matter how you perform"?
If he was fired so Apple could avoid giving him some restricted stock, then he should be compensated. But, that claim seems dubious on its face -- Apple would have already taken the expense hit for those shares when they were awarded to him, and the vesting would have cost Apple nada. And, on Apple's balance sheet? This guy has a very steep uphill climb.
Or similar words.
And, I wonder why he was fired -- what the evidence will show, not what his complaint says. Is it really reasonable to assume Steve Jobs said, or meant: "you will have lifetime employment at Apple no matter what you do and no matter how you perform"?
If he was fired so Apple could avoid giving him some restricted stock, then he should be compensated. But, that claim seems dubious on its face -- Apple would have already taken the expense hit for those shares when they were awarded to him, and the vesting would have cost Apple nada. And, on Apple's balance sheet? This guy has a very steep uphill climb.
Sucks that American labor laws are disgusting like that. Fired for no reason? In any well run country this would never happen.
The trick is though, that unless it was written down, it's very difficult to establish if it ever existed - especially when the other party involved is dead. We simply do not know what sort of contract existed assuming one existed at all. We have only one person's word here and nobody else to go off of.
Unfortunately we need a "cite please" from this individual and I don't know if he is gong to be able to provide one.
Me personally, I agree with Jim Dalrymple:
No doubt it is uphill battle, but it is not frivolous like people are yelling about.
IANAL, but I think it's a quirk of contract law that technically a contract for "employment for life" as opposed to "employment for X years" doesn't need to be in writing because it could be completed in less than a year (i.e. a person can die before the year is out). That said, it is very difficult to provide proof without witnesses or a written contract, and by default employment is "at will," meaning each party can terminate at any time for just about any reason.
I suspect that this person was shoved aside as part of the new CEO's cleaning house (it happens every time there is a change in CEOs), and he is trying to get back at the company. I doubt that Apple's attorneys wouldn't have dotted their Is and crossed their Ts before letting someone go before restricted stock was about to vest.
Yes, we only had half the story at the time of writing. But that still didn't stop people calling this guy a thief or whatever. And that's what I was pointing out.
If he can prove Apple fired him for the reason stated, that's where the case will be not because Steve "said" he would always have his job.
here's how lawsuits work, file a lawsuit, settle before it goes to court. This guy, while likely doesn't have a case, will get a settlement offer from Apple to make it go away quickly and quietly.
Why would you be surprised? If it so hard to prove when it does happen that leaves CEOs free to make it as an empty promise since they wont have to be legally liable for it.
And this is true. Worked at a small business where the owner was just like Jobs, almost exactly. He did and said things than made us cringe and got away with it for years and years, never getting murdered, beaten up or sued despite good reasons why this might happen!
Tell that to Samsung... oh, wait...
Two different "Samsungs" but they do have a lot of common shareholders.
Nice argument, but it has one flaw: Apple is at its all-time height. The company never did better than now. So there is no excuse. At least not the one that you wrote down.
Oh I read it and again, this is hearsay. People are speaking for a dead man, that's quite easy ... don't you think?