Preventing IP theft was the smokescreen. Mark my word, the whole anti-poaching agreement was an attempt for these companies to keep salary and other forms of overhead down in a Zaibatsu-like mannerism so they could claim better earnings. DOJ saw right through it.
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.
U.S. Department of Justice Orders Apple and Others to Stop Engaging in Anti-Poaching Agreements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Preventing IP theft was the smokescreen. Mark my word, the whole anti-poaching agreement was an attempt for these companies to keep salary and other forms of overhead down in a Zaibatsu-like mannerism so they could claim better earnings. DOJ saw right through it.
If I had a company I would want the 'best and brightest' working for me - they cost more but in theory are a better Return On Investment. Good people is what gives a company a competitive edge - gov't intervention only...
Maybe I'm missing something here, but its hard to believe people have a problem with this ruling. This is good news for you if another company wants you and you have talent. Either you have leverage to ask for a well-deserved raise, or you can go elsewhere to another company that will pay you more. Its a competitive free market- and people should be paid what they're actually worth, and what the market will bear. Apple and these other companies were basically fixing it so employees don't have the power to look elsewhere. Apple can give you a pay cut even... what the H you gonna do about it if the only other companies you could otherwise go to wont be able to court your skills?
Like free agency in sports, if you're a star, your star power gets you more money. And if your company wants to treat you like garbage and pay you less than you're worth, you DO have options.
I recently overheard a Producer's conversation in the Animation business where a talented artist left our studio for a better job elsewhere- the producer called the other studio exec all pissed off and chewed them out for taking their employee and how that's bad for both companies because then unfortunately artists get paid more and talented employees get better compensation... basically the artists get paid better and both companies end up fighting each other and bidding up for talent. I'd like to think only an above-the-line corporate exec would have a problem with that.
Simply put, its all about money. Apple and these other companies simply want to avoid paying more to their employees. Whether this is actually enforceable, is another matter, but its definitely the right thing to do.
How do we as employees benefit if other companies aren't allowed to compete for our services?
Like free agency in sports, if you're a star, your star power gets you more money. And if your company wants to treat you like garbage and pay you less than you're worth, you DO have options.
I recently overheard a Producer's conversation in the Animation business where a talented artist left our studio for a better job elsewhere- the producer called the other studio exec all pissed off and chewed them out for taking their employee and how that's bad for both companies because then unfortunately artists get paid more and talented employees get better compensation... basically the artists get paid better and both companies end up fighting each other and bidding up for talent. I'd like to think only an above-the-line corporate exec would have a problem with that.
Simply put, its all about money. Apple and these other companies simply want to avoid paying more to their employees. Whether this is actually enforceable, is another matter, but its definitely the right thing to do.
How do we as employees benefit if other companies aren't allowed to compete for our services?
This is wrong on so many levels. The Government should stay the hell away from this.
How is it illegal for two companies to say, "Hey man, dont go taking my people and I shan't do the same"? If a worker in Apple wanted to work for Google, all he had to do was put in a job application.
This has nothing to do with holding down wages. This has everything to do with legal issues. Google does not want its code and ideas to fall into the hands of Apple. Apple does not want its code and ideas to fall into the hands of Google. By doing this both companies were protecting themselves from potential liability issues that may occur when one member jumps ship. Thats all. Nothing more and nothing less.
How is it illegal for two companies to say, "Hey man, dont go taking my people and I shan't do the same"? If a worker in Apple wanted to work for Google, all he had to do was put in a job application.
This has nothing to do with holding down wages. This has everything to do with legal issues. Google does not want its code and ideas to fall into the hands of Apple. Apple does not want its code and ideas to fall into the hands of Google. By doing this both companies were protecting themselves from potential liability issues that may occur when one member jumps ship. Thats all. Nothing more and nothing less.
Under what moral system does a person subscribe to that makes them think it is okay to tell another company how and who it should hire?
They are yin and yang. Instead of an employee looking for a job at adifferent company, a company is looking to fill a job with a certain employee. In both cases, a worker can use that as leverage with their current employer and/or potential employer.
Non-poaching agreements only help the big companies keep employees under their thumbs. The employee you speak of might be happier and earn more, but currently the agreements mean this:
1) Google wouldn't actively try to recruit them because they are working for apple
2) Google wouldn't hire them even if they came in for the interview and they were the most qualified person for the job - because they are working for Apple.
No, if he wanted to work for google, he still couldn't. Because google wouldn't hire them. Not based on the worker's ability or salary requirements, but because google and apple agreed ahead of time not to do it.
not only that, but these companies blacklist people. That sucks.
It's less tangible than that. It's about talent falling into the wrong hands. Apple patents the hell out of all its ideas, so there is no risk there. What these companies are worried about is the future ideas, potential, and/or productivity that these employees represent. They don't want a skilled worker doing a good job somewhere else.
Jonathan Ive couldn't work for Google right now. Imagine if he left - and took his crazy design experience with him. Apple wouldn't be worried about losing the design for a product that is already out. They would be worried about losing his design talent on a product that hasn't even been thought of yet.
That's what patents are for. Now they're protecting themselves by screwing talented people.
Agan, though, I'm really surprised pixar would do this. That's a shame.
If both sides agree, to some level, they protect their IP, talent, salary overhead, profits and future.
Hmm...we can argue who started it, the company or the employee but their is no loyalty from either side anymore. Companies lay off people on whims all the time in the name of cost cutting or right sizing. Employees have simply followed suit and move to wherever they feel they are getting the best deal for themselves personally. It's cliched, but in todays employment market "it's just business."
It's illegal for the same reasons that collusion and price fixing are illegal in other markets as well. Do you think it would be okay if AMD and Intel got together and said that no processor would be priced less than $1000? By preventing employee poaching (and basically fixing the market), one of the things that Apple and other companies did was keep their talent at below market rates.
It's also important to remember that at these companies we are likely talking about super star type talent. The pay scale and market for them is hard to set so other companies coming after them is the only way a fair wage can be reached. When good engineers can be 10x-28x more productive than bad engineers it only makes sense that the best engineers have their wages driven higher by the demand for their talents.
The main reason problem that people have on this forums is that it is negative towards Apple. Due to this, the DOJ will be seen as interfering and Apple haters. However, replace "Apple" with "Microsoft" then the DOJ ruling would be seen as a positive outcome.
Not solved money is good but I switched jobs for a deferent reson,
BAD people is bad. I took a job with less money but nicer people.
People are often too busy to go looking for better jobs.
So most of the time, job offers come from someone approaching them from another company.
Usually, it's because an ex co-worker or friend or even someone they met on the 'net was already working there, and when asked to recommend someone new, they told their bosses who to call.
This outside recommendation is probably the most common way that better jobs come along. I know it has been for me.
If all companies agreed not to do cold-calls, people might never know about each opportunity to advance.
So most of the time, job offers come from someone approaching them from another company.
Usually, it's because an ex co-worker or friend or even someone they met on the 'net was already working there, and when asked to recommend someone new, they told their bosses who to call.
This outside recommendation is probably the most common way that better jobs come along. I know it has been for me.
If all companies agreed not to do cold-calls, people might never know about each opportunity to advance.
Correct
Not Correct - The agreement was only that the companies would not actively recruit employees in the other companies. There was absolutely nothing about not hiring people from the other companies and, if you look back over the last two years, many high profile people did switch companies.
I agree with others that, if the government does this, companies will make their employees sign even stricter NDA / Non compete contracts that will essentially legally prevent them from working anywhere else.
Untrue. Not everyone is a mindless droid. I love Windows 7. When Vista came out, I couldn't see why people hated it. Microsoft is an excellent company.
So your friend should be able to go to his dream job ... and finish the project at and for the other place?
Yet another decision with no forethought...
I'm a developer for a small startup and I think this is a HORRIBLE decision, but typical of this Justice Department... they, too often, make a decision without completely thinking through the ramifications. Several things are going to happen now. Number one, when some of these companies get into a pricing struggle for salaries for key employees its going to have an a trickle down affect of also raising salaries of other employees. To the point where overhead is going to start killing companies, and killing investment into technology companies.
Secondly, this is going to create an unfair advantage for cash rich companies like Google and Apple to poach top talent from companies that simply don't have the cash on hand to pay sky high salaries to retain their top talent. Since the IRS has already crippled startups by making ISO stock options less attractive. All the big companies will have to do to acquire key technology from a small startup is to lure the startup's top talent.
I give it 4-5 years... and the Justice Department will be suing Apple and Google for anti-competitive behavior based on their actions from this stupid Justice Department decision.
I'm a developer for a small startup and I think this is a HORRIBLE decision, but typical of this Justice Department... they, too often, make a decision without completely thinking through the ramifications. Several things are going to happen now. Number one, when some of these companies get into a pricing struggle for salaries for key employees its going to have an a trickle down affect of also raising salaries of other employees. To the point where overhead is going to start killing companies, and killing investment into technology companies.
Secondly, this is going to create an unfair advantage for cash rich companies like Google and Apple to poach top talent from companies that simply don't have the cash on hand to pay sky high salaries to retain their top talent. Since the IRS has already crippled startups by making ISO stock options less attractive. All the big companies will have to do to acquire key technology from a small startup is to lure the startup's top talent.
I give it 4-5 years... and the Justice Department will be suing Apple and Google for anti-competitive behavior based on their actions from this stupid Justice Department decision.
The company that you work for right now will now your value better than any other company would after a job interview. So it is very obvious that if you leave them, they would keep a note whether they would hire you again or not. Clever companies may actually call good employees who left a year or two later to check if they want to come back.
So if they tell him "leave us now, when it would cause us problems, and we won't hire you again" seems reasonable. Always a good strategy to leave a company on good terms. I don't know what you mean by "promise of never working in the industry again". If his manager told him that Apple would influence other companies to not hire him, then I believe he should contact his HR and company council in writing, and someone might be in trouble. Such an action would be illegal, and Apple couldn't afford ignoring that.
In places like Texas, where we are a "Right to work" state, a stricter Non Compete is meaningless... if Non Competes become to restricting in Cali, (which they already are) you'll see people relocating to more company/worker friendly states...
Not likely. Most non-compete contracts are already unenforceable in some states, especially the regions that like to host high-tech companies (e.g. California, Colorado).
In other states, reasonableness is a key criterion. Among other things, that means you can't stop someone from working in their chosen field.
It's time that the pendulum swing back towards employees, anyway. The poor economy has been a boss's paradise, with everyone overworked and underpaid.
As usual the government is sticking its nose where it doesn't belong.
I guess the enforcement of this is that DOJ representatives walk into one of these companies and force them to cold call and try and hire employees from another company. So dumb.
I guess the enforcement of this is that DOJ representatives walk into one of these companies and force them to cold call and try and hire employees from another company. So dumb.
Come on. It is wrong for companies to have these agreements. I'm sorry you can't see why.