Apple Allegedly Sought Non-Poaching Deal With Palm 181
theodp writes "A Bloomberg report that Apple CEO Steve Jobs proposed a possibly illegal truce with Palm against poaching their respective employees is sure to pique the interest of the US Department of Justice, which already is investigating whether Google, Yahoo, Apple, Genentech and other tech companies conspired to keep others from stealing their top talent. '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,' former Palm CEO Ed Colligan reportedly told Jobs in August 2007." The article notes that Apple was probably reacting to Palm's hiring of Jon Rubenstein, who had been instrumental in developing the iPod and went on to spearhead the Pre for Palm (and has now become Palm's chairman and CEO). "It's the story about the importance of charismatic engineers," said veteran Silicon Valley forecaster Paul Saffo. "People don't work for Palm. They work for Jon Rubinstein. One has to wonder how Steve Jobs ever let Jon Rubinstein leave."
Stating the obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
One has to wonder how Steve Jobs ever let Jon Rubinstein leave."
Simple - by forcing him to report to Steve Jobs.
Re:Apparently the reply was - (Score:5, Insightful)
I would guess that it would be more likely "If Steve Jobs does it, it's not illegal"
Re:At Apple, employees just work (Score:3, Insightful)
Whoosh!
Re:At Apple, employees just work (Score:3, Insightful)
It is only our current standing in technology that prevents some of these being employed :)
How could that not be illegal (Score:3, Insightful)
How could that not be illegal? It goes against everything our allegedly free market stands for. Top talent should command top dollar. Like athletes, developers have a finite number of peak production years. They should be able to work for the highest bidder.
Fuck you, employers (Score:5, Insightful)
This is why you never, ever trust an employer to do right by you. All the incentives are aligned the wrong way, and to rise high in a company, you practically have to be a slick sociopath. The same guy that asks you how your day went by the water cooler would have you chained to a desk 14 hours to day if the law would let him get away with it.
Speaking of getting screwed - why are there specific regulations in the federal labor laws that exempt "certain computer workers" from overtime pay [flsa.com]?
Re:How could that not be illegal (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's certainly illegal in CA (Score:5, Insightful)
It costs nothing to leave things the heck alone. Knowing when not to tinker with things is apparently much more expensive.
Re:Jobs doing something illegal... (Score:2, Insightful)
>the difference being that at least Gates gives to charity daily, where as Jobs does not.
What? I dont even like Jobs, but I wouldnt say that. Do you have his tax records or something? People who make past a certain amount of money give quite a bit to charity because:
1. They want to.
2. Tax incentives to do so.
You can smear Jobs, but he's given more than you ever will. He may not run a massive charity, but then again he doesnt have the money Gates has.
Re:It's certainly illegal in CA (Score:3, Insightful)
I get that you're against killing animals. I can even understand that, but using emotionally-charged words like 'murder' when they don't apply just weakens the rest of your argument, at least to me.
Simon.
Re:Jobs doing something illegal... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Jobs doing something illegal... (Score:1, Insightful)
While I am at it, I think its incredibly tacky to brag about ones donations. "LOOK I AM GIVING!!" is a low move. Lots of people like Jobs like to give without putting their name on something or having some pet charity. Lots of starts with pet charities do it almost soley for the publicity. Criticizing someone because he doesnt play the PR game is 100% ridiculous in my book.
A private life should be respected and lauded not turned into a hit piece on wired and all the little geeks reflexively agreeing with it.
If I Had Worked For Any Of These Companies... (Score:3, Insightful)
How many PHBs here were rubbing their hands together with glee at review time knowing that the employee they were about to dump on had no option to move to any other comparable company no matter what they were told?
Re:Stating the obvious (Score:4, Insightful)
It doesn't seem so easy.
"No matter how much resolve you could muster, it was still difficult to quit Apple if Steve wanted you to stay. You'd have to sit down with him for a reality distortion session, which was often effective at getting people to change their minds. One day, a few of us were talking about strategies to overcome Steve's persuasiveness."
http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Are_You_Gonna_Do_It.txt [folklore.org]
Re:How could that not be illegal (Score:4, Insightful)
But then what would they do?
I'm being serious. It might hurt Apple a bit, and it would hurt Palm a bit, and Microsoft a bit, and Oracle a bit, and Google a bit, but if this person declines taking a job with the colluders, then what will they do? Take work with start ups that can't actually afford to pay them the salary they demand trying to compete in already saturated markets? Engage in subsistence farming and day labor until it gets sorted out? Starve? Apple can afford to lose that person as an employee, but how long can that person afford not to be employed?
This is a symptom of the single greatest flaw in Free Market theory, and one that NOBODY has a satisfying answer to: no true capitalist would ever willingly compete if they did not have to. Market collusion allows the minimization of costs, maximization of profit, and elimination of competition with far less risk or cost than any other method. Competition and free exchange alone creating a sustainable economy free of corruption and systemic iniquity is just a libertarian wet dream (much like that one about Ayn Rand lying naked on a pile of gold bars...).
Re:It's certainly illegal in CA (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:How could that not be illegal (Score:2, Insightful)
First, this is about another COMPANY soliciting employees, "on the clock" from competition, specifically knowing what projects they work on and what knowledge they have.. way different than an employee non-compete. Even non-competes are legal when properly limited in scope and duration... like telling iPhone OS devs they can't work on Pre is EXACTLY what NCs are for.
It's bordering on unethical to employees to hire them away from working on one type of phone project so your company can work on another, competing phone... or on tying your phone to that other company's software sync product (hint, hint) Jobs can always buckle down and start suing the individual employees that leave for violation of trade secrets for vast sums of money (a la RIAA) ... but that's messy and mean (but totally legal, and ethical) better to agree not to poach between companies, and to avoid appearance of unethical behavior from employers asking for info they shouldn't have, or from employees sharing "trade secrets", neither of which is close to a "monopoly" on smartphones right now, and save on IP Lawyer bills later.
Re:At Apple, employees just work (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it just me or is it more fun bashing Apple than Microsoft?
a ridiculously hagiographic article (Score:5, Insightful)
This wrap-up article appears to be a Palm piece designed to attach them more firmly to Apple in people's minds. Trying to imply Palm is so great that Apple is trying to stop them and also imply that Palm is just like Apple, in fact they have half of Apple's engineers!
The real kicker is the last part. "These people work for Rubenstein". Yeah, maybe that's true for Mike Bell. Pete Alexander (who used to work for Mike Bell) just quit Apple (was forced out) and will be working at Palm within 3 months.
But there are a lot of people for whom this doesn't apply. I used to work for Rubenstein and I can tell you he's so much not a people person it's ridiculous. He makes 2000-era Al Gore look personable. He would periodically get up and address the team and he would say things that clearly showed he didn't any real connection to us or even know what we were doing. For example, he once rallied us by saying the software/hardware release we just did was the best one we had ever done. The whole crowd groaned because we knew it wasn't, that it was pushed out the door and in fact we had a plans for a near-term emergency .0.1 update and a rapidly following .0.2 update.
Maybe if you work directly for the guy day-to-day you can form an attachment to him, but to anyone lower down in the ranks, it isn't the same.
As to why Steve Jobs "let" Rubenstein leave, I'm sure it was similar reasons as why Tony Fadell left. Because both realized they wouldn't be the next CEO of the company. Steve Jobs only action then of "letting" them leave was to not step aside and let Rubenstein or Fadell be CEO. Rubenstein got out, and lo and behold he's now the CEO of Palm.
Not in the US for sports. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's certainly illegal in CA (Score:4, Insightful)
Murder is a legal term, with a legal definition. This definition, I believe, excludes animals.
But hey, you're free to make up your own definitions instead. I assume if murder applies to pets, then manslaughter must apply as well. When will you be putting out a dictionary?
Re:Jobs doing something illegal... (Score:4, Insightful)
>Nor is his name on a list of gifts of $1 million or more compiled by Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy.
Did you bother to read the entire article? Two paragraphs later:
I know in the age of facebook, spyware, and blogging about your menstraul cycle, privacy has fallen out of fashion, but some people still appreciate it.
Re:It's certainly illegal in CA (Score:3, Insightful)
Common language and legal definitions are not the same. I totally agree that murder means something very specific in the courtroom.
Fortunately, Slashdot is not a courtroom.
I've also heard the term used lately referring to consumption of beverages and food. Good lucking finding that in the law books or an outdated dictionary.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/murder [wiktionary.org]
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=murder [urbandictionary.com]
4. murder
What annoying, whiney, and probably unemployed vegetarians call eating meat or wearing fur.
Re:Apparently the reply was - (Score:5, Insightful)
This thread is replete with people who think it normal that businesses collude to strenghten their position in the labour market. And yet watch the howls go up if someone suggests that the employees do the same.
Mart
Re:Apparently the reply was - (Score:3, Insightful)
I think California's laws against non-competition contracts should be adopted nation wide. It works wonders for the economy when employees can say to their boss, "Screw you, I'm starting my own business, and I'll kick your butt!"
It is normal for businesses to try and collude to tie down their employees, and restrict competition. It's a natural result of the pursuit of money. What we need are laws restricting this in a very effective manner. California has done the best job, SFAIK.