Palm Reportedly Rejected Jobs' Proposal Not to Poach Each Others' Employees

[jettredmont]

They are "supposedly" un-enforceable here in the State of California, but having worked here in CA for the last 10+ years in the tech sector, every company has one. Plus I have seen people break them, and let me explain how it plays out.

You join Company A, you sign a non-compete.

You leave Company A, and take a job with Company B.

Company A considers Company B to be similar, and thus determine you have broken your non-compete.

Company A files a law suit against you, and drags you through the courts. This ends up costing you, the employee (my friend blew over $50k in attorney fees fighting it) a lot of money to fight.

Company A also sends a letter to Company B.

Company B let's the employee go to avoid getting tied up in the mess.

So you may say their un-enforceable, what's it matter. The case was ultimately withdrawn (over 18 months later), he had long since lost his job with the Company he had joined, and was out over $50k in attorney fees which he never recovered.

So it doesn't need to be completely enforceable if the company can simply bully you. This is what happened to my friend. Gotta love the State of California, where Company's can use the Court System to basically bankrupt you whether or not they have a case against you.

Interesting. As another California employee, let me tell you how you SHOULD be working it:

Company A hires you and puts a non-compete in front of you.

You say, "This is California and non-compete agreements are meaningless".

Either Company A takes the non-compete away and all is good, or Company A insists that the non-compete is required. If they require you to sign a non-compete it is because they intend to use it as a cudgel. Grab your bag, leave the office, and never turn back.

I currently work for an international company where "every employee" is supposed to sign a non-compete. Except any of us in California, that is. We never signed such an agreement, largely because such an agreement would be completely unenforceable in CA. Had this employer insisted on a non-compete, I would have turned them down and gone to a company who believes it can hold its employees by treating them well rather than with lawsuits.

Really. If you sign a non-compete in CA you're foolish or ignorant or both. You should not ever do it.

 

[inkswamp]

Jobs, control freak as ever.

Name a CEO of any corporation who isn't a control freak. I don't understand why people want to tar Steve Jobs with that term when it applies to just about any corporate executive. You don't get to that position by being a doormat.

yup.

Jobs' proposal is way out of line...cry baby-ish. If you can't retain your employees, that's your problem...pay them better, give them more vacation, give more stock options, whatever you need to do. Retaining "top talent" in a company should be your main focus...especially for VPs and Execs. Most people will never stay at the same company forever...get with the program, Jobs.

The problem is that Palm had someone on their side who was likely on a friendly basis with a lot of Apple's top talent, may be very friendly with them, know what gripes they may have with Apple as an employer and know how to take advantage of that. Any CEO who doesn't take that kind of situation seriously is asking for trouble. And it's easy to stand here and carp about how "evil" and "wrong" this is, but think of all the people at Apple whose livelihoods are on the line and how easy it would be for someone from another company to pick off Apple's talent. It's an unfair situation when Palm has someone in their ranks who knows exactly what needs to be done to one-up Apple's pay, benefits, etc. There's nothing crybaby-ish about defending yourself (and your employees) against that kind of thing.

 

[zaphon]

Interesting. As another California employee, let me tell you how you SHOULD be working it:

Company A hires you and puts a non-compete in front of you.

You say, "This is California and non-compete agreements are meaningless".

Either Company A takes the non-compete away and all is good, or Company A insists that the non-compete is required. If they require you to sign a non-compete it is because they intend to use it as a cudgel. Grab your bag, leave the office, and never turn back.

I currently work for an international company where "every employee" is supposed to sign a non-compete. Except any of us in California, that is. We never signed such an agreement, largely because such an agreement would be completely unenforceable in CA. Had this employer insisted on a non-compete, I would have turned them down and gone to a company who believes it can hold its employees by treating them well rather than with lawsuits.

Really. If you sign a non-compete in CA you're foolish or ignorant or both. You should not ever do it.

In the last 6+ years I've been manager level (currently CTO) here in CA, I've seen maybe 2 or 3 guys I've tried to hire decline due to this. We can't hire them if they don't sign it, it's company policy. There are FEW companies in CA that will hire you with out it. I know all the ones I've worked with since joining this industry back in 92' have required it. So while you may stick to your guns and enjoy being unemployed, I actually enjoy my job, and the salary, and I'm neither foolish or ignorant.

 

[theheadguy]

WebOs will save neither Palm, nor the Pre, both of which they bet the entire farm on. Perhaps WebOS will be picked up by Google, or perhaps even Symbian. Overall, Palm's business practices tactics leave much to be desired.

Palm, Inc: lub-dub........lub-..dub.....lub-.....dub...​

I love the fact that you included a very healthy heart beat. Well done.

It's disappointing to have so many people on MR act like subject matter experts who have ALWAYS supported apple. you're the same people who would trash talk apple when it was in the dumps a decade ago. how quickly people forget.

Nobody has a gun to apple employees' heads. if they want to leave, they will leave. they know they are taking a risk, but obviously they see it as WORTH IT. period.

 

[gilkisson]

From personal experience: Apple R&D salaries are competitive, but not top-dollar. They know and capitalize on the fact that Apple is an awesome company to work for, with great benefits (in the HR sense and in the company store) and industry cachet. Having Apple on your resume is a great foot in the door of pretty much any Silicon Valley company. Apple is one of the few companies to realize that an extra $5k spent on benefits for your employee will save you from having to desperately offer him $10k more to stay next year.

In short: Apple gets top-5% employees with top-25% salaries.

Much the same could be said for Google, although the benefits there materialize differently.

(Note I have no idea how this trickles down to Retail employees ... I suspect that there is a similar middling-pay-for-top-talent dynamic there, but if you're in retail you're used to being pissed on every day so I don't know how Apple really compares to any other brand name outlet.)

I appreciate your sharing this. Your example is a far cry from "low, cheap" wages, which is what I was questioning. You answered that eloquently.

Would it be safe to say then, Apple, in your experience, pays average-to-above average? I think this is what you were saying, but I don't want to misunderstand.

 

[inkswamp]

As an employee of a company who'd like to have my choice of employers when I leave this one: this news makes me like Palm a lot more.

Sorry, non-compete agreements are highly anti-employee, and, IMHO, immoral. They are impossible to verify compliance to without enlisting the help of a lawyer, and are completely intended to keep employees from ever leaving a company (by making job searches impossible without leaving the software industry altogether).

Maybe I'm misreading this, but I don't think it's a non-compete agreement. It's an agreement not to intentionally go after each other's talent. That doesn't prevent an Apple employee from looking and saying, "Hey, I like what I see. I'm heading for Palm." It just means, people at Palm won't initiate it.

And anyway, given the news lately about the disappointing sales of the Pre, I'm betting the talent at Apple aren't looking to jump ship just yet.

 

[DMann]

I love the fact that you included a very healthy heart beat. Well done.

It's disappointing to have so many people on MR act like subject matter experts who have ALWAYS supported apple. you're the same people who would trash talk apple when it was in the dumps a decade ago. how quickly people forget.

Nobody has a gun to apple employees' heads. if they want to leave, they will leave. they know they are taking a risk, but obviously they see it as WORTH IT. period.

Not at all true, I never trash talked Apple in 1997 when they were on the brink - I do, however, feel that Palm and cohorts have pulled some cheap shots in regard to development and marketing of the Pre, and have little sympathy for that kind of crap - attempting to piggyback off of iTunes not excluded. FYI, the healthy heartbeat you are referring to happens to reflect a cardiac arrhythmia, i.e. a heart attack.

 

[Glideslope]

Since when has Palm been rebuilt? They are on life support.

Man, I thought I was the only one who thought that. One can only steal so much.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Funny how Palm rejected it?

Palm is extremely Medicore, just like Sprint.

 

[DMann]

Palm is extremely Medicore, just like Sprint.

A match made in .....

 

[MorphingDragon]

A match made in .....

Lol,

If anything the Counter-Company in New Zealand is further Proof.
Look up how bad Telecom NZ is in Google. XD

 

[theheadguy]

Not at all true, I never trash talked Apple in 1997 when they were on the brink - I do, however, feel that Palm and cohorts have pulled some cheap shots in regard to development and marketing of the Pre, and have little sympathy for that kind of crap - attempting to piggyback off of iTunes not excluded. FYI, the healthy heartbeat you are referring to happens to reflect a cardiac arrhythmia, i.e. a heart attack.

If you're mad about cheap shots, start another thread. This is about Apple employees choosing to leave for what they see as better opportunities. Whether it be money or leaving for a company that isn't likened to the second coming of christ, it equates to a lot more than a cheap shot. It's business in the silicon valley. If people wanted to stay, they would.

 

[kdarling]

What everyone is missing is this critical phrase:

I missed it too, at first. It's not about a non-compete. It's not even about not approaching the other company's employees to offer them a job.

The critical phrase was this:

"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."

Hmm. Two companies agreeing that even if any employee _wants_ to go work for the other company, that they would REFUSE them a job?

A collusion like that doesn't sound very legal. Any employment lawyers on the board?

 

[kernkraft]

The bully and the competition

Is this an acceptance on Apple's part that stealing other IT company's employees for years has been a general practice?

 

[Zc456]

I bet this has something to do with iTunes. I can't see any other reason behind it. Also, how is his request illegal!?

 

[DMann]

If you're mad about cheap shots, start another thread. This is about Apple employees choosing to leave for what they see as better opportunities. Whether it be money or leaving for a company that isn't likened to the second coming of christ, it equates to a lot more than a cheap shot. It's business in the silicon valley. If people wanted to stay, they would.

If you would rather sugar coat it that way, feel free to do so - or start your own thread about how Apple employees have eagerly sought out to pioneer new, and robust opportunities, without coercion and/or unrealistic promises of grandeur. Knowing that they were going to be cloning technology from their previous employer, this might have added fervor to their hopeful vision. Anyway, I wish Palm the very best in their endeavors.

 

[jdechko]

The retail employee discount is terrible and they treat their employees like criminals. I can say this from personal experience.

Also speaking from experience, 25% is a pretty decent discount when you're talking 1k+ computers (not to mention 25% iPods, and 50% on software). And the pay in my area was nearly double the minimum wage. For P/T retail, it was pretty surprising, actually.

/Was never treated like a criminal
//Was actually pretty well respected

 

[Bjohnson33]

Palm is a sore loser

Perhaps you're right! Although I find it strange that this sort of discussion would come out in the open in the first place. It seems like something that would be kept out of public ear-shot.

 

[DMann]

Lol,

If anything the Counter-Company in New Zealand is further Proof.
Look up how bad Telecom NZ is in Google. XD

Wow, they've got their 3G up already... now that's whistlin' Dixie!

 

[MacFly123]

If history is any guide....

Once upon a time, Palm was the be-all and end-all of PDA-type devices. They were the king, and rested on their laurels for too long.

Once upon a time, IBM was the king of the personal computer market. They didn't move, change, or adapt when the world moved under them, and were left behind.

Once upon a time, Lotus was king of the spreadsheets. WP was king of word processing. And so on.

Palm's day is done, unless they really succeed in breaking the market up with a totally new innovation. Right now, all they are trying to do is achieve "as good as an iPhone" status, and (so far) failing at that.

Someday, a device will come along which really will be the "iPhone killer". It's inevitable. Who is more likely to make that device - Palm, Apple themselves, or someone else? So far, the only one who can out-Apple Apple is Apple. The only employee Palm could hire who could change that is Jobs himself. Not too likely...

Haha ya. I was going to say, the next "iPhone killer" will be the next gen iPhone!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5mzbBmefD4

 

[*LTD*]

Makes no difference at all. Palm still couldn't do it WITH Apple talent.

I'd be surprised if they make it to 2010.

 

[DMann]

Makes no difference at all. Palm still couldn't do it WITH Apple talent.

I'd be surprised if they make it to 2010.

The proof is in the pre-dn'

 

[ericinboston]

It's an unfair situation when Palm has someone in their ranks who knows exactly what needs to be done to one-up Apple's pay, benefits, etc. There's nothing crybaby-ish about defending yourself (and your employees) against that kind of thing.

Puh-lease. Seriously.

There are enough headhunters, recruiters, HR reps, friends of friends, online forums, etc. to get somewhat "inside" information on a company such as benefits packages and salary compensation. Please don't tell us that Palm had some super duper secret access...you've been watching too many spy movies if you think that's the case. And what about all the people that apply for a job, get the offer, and turn it down?...they certainly know everything about how competitive that company is...and will gladly share it. I looked for a job last November, got an offer including salary, detailed Benefits and healthcare options, and everything else that was available to me as an employee...I still have the emails and most of it is in my head. If someone asked me tomorrow if that company was competitive, I could give them all the details they would need (over the phone or my own word in email...never forwarding a PDF or job offer of course).

Besides, for example, I still keep in touch with many of my pals/peers from 3+ companies ago...it's called "networking" and everyone in the world does it...if you don't network, good luck submitting that resume via Monster.com among the other 900 applicants for that 1 job.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

Makes no difference at all. Palm still couldn't do it WITH Apple talent.

I'd be surprised if they make it to 2010.

And it appears Apple couldn't have done it without Palm employee's and Palm patents. It goes both ways here. Both sides used each other for leverage. Apple just had the capital and means to do it faster.

But then again to you Apple is perfect.

 

[dru`]

non-compete clauses are now wrong and illegal?

I've read claims they are not enforceable in CA. YMMV.

I don't have any problem with Jobs suggesting a deal with Palm to prevent poaching, likely through the use of head-hunters, considering Palm took Rubenstein who used to be VP of Hardware at Apple and would have intimate knowledge of the company and its key hardware employees.