Read more.Evidence that the firms agreed not to poach each other's employees is presented.
Read more.Evidence that the firms agreed not to poach each other's employees is presented.
I'm sorry - it's now wrong to *not* poach people away from other companies? So the antitrust judges would rather one company bought in all the best talent in the industry to put itself into a competitively advantageous position, and to the detriment of the other companies?
How does that work then? I don't see the detriment to anyone here, tbh...
EDIT: just reread the story - if, as the quote from Palm implies, they were rejecting candidates for jobs based purely on their current employer, then that would be dubious, but surely that would be an employment law matter, *not* an anti-trust matter. But that's also not how the rest of the story reads...
It's an anti-trust matter because they've formed a cartel on employment policy which is anti-competitive. Employees have been known to be forced to sign contracts which forbids them from getting a job from other similar companies for X years (often as long as 5), and there's been more than a few aggressive lawsuits for employees who got a job elsewhere and were accused of 'stealing trade secrets' on the basis of them having partners to their former employer on their twitter follower list and other such nonsense.
It's about time this oppressive nonsense was looked into tbh.
This is a line where both ends are bad & the middle is desirable.
1. It is inappropriate for one company to target & entice the best employees of a competitor in order to deprive them of that talent OR to attempt to steal trade secrets.
2. It is also inappropriate to blacklist an individual purely because they currently work for the competitor. Employees leave for many reasons & the focus should be on creating an attractive work environment not preventing them from moving on or progressing in their chosen field.
So if these companies had a no poach policy, that is respectable. But a no-hire policy is not.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)