HP Sues Hurd For Joining Oracle 301
CWmike writes "Hewlett-Packard is reported to be suing former CEO Mark Hurd, who was named co-president of rival Oracle on Monday. The Wall Street Journal first reported the news, and has now posted the full text of the suit on Google Docs. Among other things, it says, 'In his new positions, Hurd will be in a situation in which he cannot perform his duties for Oracle without necessarily using and disclosing HP's trade secrets and confidential information to others.'"
This will certainly test California law (Score:3, Interesting)
California has a pretty clear cut law [lawzilla.com] that makes almost all non-compete clauses NULL and VOID. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out.
Re:Popcorn ready...but who to root for? (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally I am rooting on Hurd because that will help many of the little people too with these same clauses. I think that if they do not want him working for a set period of time, then then need to pay him for that time based on current salary (same as any other worker whom they do not want to work for the competition). That would make things fair for both sides.
You know your ego is huge when... (Score:3, Interesting)
You sign a non-compete agreement, then immediately sign up with one of the companies biggest competitors!
Either Hurd is actually a complete and utter moron or he has nads the size of Jupiter! I'm going with the latter.
Re:You shouldn't have fired him then. (Score:1, Interesting)
According to many current and former HP employees he was a great CEO, but a horrible employer.
What does that mean? To me, it sounds like you are saying he is a great leader, but bad at making others follow.
Re:Should've kept him (Score:5, Interesting)
May have to return part of severance (Score:3, Interesting)
In California, non-compete agreements [wikipedia.org] have been disallowed by the courts...
That may allow him to work at Oracle, barring trade secret or proprietary information issues, but it may not allow him to keep all of his severance. I think you may be able to pay a person not to work for a competitor for a reasonable time frame. They still have the right to do so but may be required to return the payment.
Competition? (Score:1, Interesting)
How are Oracle and HP in competition?
Is HP afraid Oracle might start selling overpriced printer ink, or laptops?
Most CEO have very little tech knowledge. Their job is to keep the profits moving up and avoid train wrecks.
Exit agreements are negotiated before accepting a postion, not when you're going out the door. That's why it's called a "compenstaion package".
This sound more like an internal vendetta. There was no reason for him to stay. He'd already accomplished his goal of returning the company to profitability.
Re:HP's trade secrets: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was only with HP for a year, and I'm glad to be rid of them.
IBM isn't perfect, but they are much better than HP at least.
Re:Also (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a contract, and it applies like any other.
The argument HP is making is not that Hurd isn't allowed to work for Oracle because of a previous agreement with HP. That would be a non-compete, and is not valid in California.
The argument HP is making is that it is impossible for Hurd to perform his new duties for Oracle without sharing HP's trade secrets, and Hurd has a contract with HP saying he will not share HP's trade secrets. In other words it's a breach of contract due to conflict of interest, not a non-compete agreement.
As such, the best HP will be able to do is get all or part of their money back from Hurd. There is no way they will be able to prevent him from working for Oracle in his current capacity. For comparison, a non-compete contract would prevent Hurd from being employed by Oracle in this case.
Re:You shouldn't have fired him then. (Score:3, Interesting)
No. That's stupid.
If you systematically screw your employees, the good ones go elsewhere. Your competitors will cheerfully hire them, leaving you with the ones who don't have the skills or initiative to find a better job. Then your company stagnates, and eventually collapses. This doesn't serve the employees, the company, the customers, the CEO, or the shareholders.
That doesn't mean that this doesn't happen, of course. What it means is that a bad employer is necessarily a bad CEO.
PDFs? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Also (Score:3, Interesting)
There is nothing stopping the person from seeking employment with a competing company by saying "If you choose to work for a competing company within $term after contract termination, you will not receive your Golden Handshake." They are absolutely not prevented from seeking competing employment, they just have to way up the pay packet of the new job against the severance package of the old one. It's entirely their call, either way.
Re:Should've kept him (Score:3, Interesting)
If we want to pursue the red herring further, look at the venue-shopping that went on in all the SCO litigation. (or have you forgotten that suse sued and won outside the US)?
However, Hurd is screwed under California law, so it doesn't matter. What he did was illegal under California's civil code, and HP is calling Oracle to account over it. The guy agreed to a payment of over $12 million on August 6th (see page 47 of the exhibits) in return for his agreement not to do what he just did exactly one month later. This screams bad faith.
If there is even ONE email between Hurd and Oracle, ONE phone call - he's dead meat.