or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Google & others could pay 'blindingly high' $9B in anti-poaching class-action suit
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Google & others could pay 'blindingly high' $9B in anti-poaching class-action suit - Page 3

post #81 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post
 

I can tell you this, Google does not pay well for the average working Joe, they never have, they feel it is an honor to work for Google therefore they do not have to pay all they well. How do I know this, my wife works in the recruiting industry and she works with headhunter who pull google people out all the time and they are surprised at how much they are under paid thus making it easy to poach people. I am not sure if Apple pays top dollar, but I know people who work there and they are in no hurry to leave and they work long and hard hours, as does Google employees.

 

Actually Google pays quite well. And has great benefits as well.

post #82 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by igxqrrl View Post

Actually Google pays quite well. And has great benefits as well.

Probably why they have 1.3M people applying for just 4000 openings. 1bugeye.gif
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #83 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Now hold on...how does that indicate that the anti-poaching agreement "clearly" applied? It could have been something else. And did you suffer economically? Would the raise have been that big? I stand by what I said...I've got no problem with this even if it applied to all employees.

It doesn't matter what you personally think. You think that greed is bad for employees and good for capitalists engaging in cartel. That's misguided and contradictory, but most importantly not the law.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #84 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by igxqrrl View Post

The exact quote from her email was "I cannot actively recruit anyone currently at xyz. I'm really sorry, I didn't realize this when I first contacted you." My interpretation of that is that an agreement was in place restricting her from actively recruiting from my employer. Perhaps there's another way to interpret it. Honestly, I didn't think much of it at the time, but it was only a few months later that the anti-poaching issue was raised.


"Suffer" is a strong word but if, hypothetically, I had not pursued the job through other means, how would I have known? As it turned out, I did pursue the job through other means, and the raise was appreciable (and appreciated!)

It's fine to not have a problem with it, I was simply challenging your assertion that: 


An agreement that encompasses the engineers of the companies involved in this lawsuit would easily cover 100,000 people.

That raise you got is what others didn't get, but could have got were there no cartel. That is the essence of what is being argued here. Had she not told you, had you not pursued other channels you would have been down that salary increase every year since. You would have been owed that money and interest.

Are the 100k people in the class action suit all signed up already or is it an estimate of how many might benefit?
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #85 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


It doesn't matter what you personally think. You think that greed is bad for employees and good for capitalists engaging in cartel. That's misguided and contradictory, but most importantly not the law.

 

Yeah, it does.  Want to know why?  Because we're on a site where we discuss our opinions. You don't have to care what I think, but what I think matters just as much as what you think.  

 

Speaking of what I think, please refrain from telling me what that might be.  You don't know me, champ.  As for the law, we'll see what comes of it.  I have my doubts that it's actually illegal, but it may be.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #86 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by dorkus maximus View Post

Poaching is by its nature selective. The higher wages that some employees might have made if they had been "poached" would not have affected the salaries of other employees. That would be like saying that when an NFL free agent signs a big contract with another team it raises the salaries of all players on all teams.

 

I was certain they were in the wrong over this, but what you have written does make a lot of sense.

post #87 of 90
These practices occur frequently under the table in Australia all the time and it's high time someone starts bring similar lawsuits here.
The legal way to retain your talented staff is to offer retention bonus, generous long service entitlements etc. That's what Apple does with it's executives. But when things get further down the chain apparently it's ok to make under the table gentlemans agreements with your clients and competitors not to hire each other's staff. It's as dodgy as "@&$ and I hear of it happening here in Australia all the time...
post #88 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Many employees are required to agree to a 'non-compete' clause, and often held to it even if fired.

 

That only applies to a subset of their employees. California is extremely restrictive on non-compete clauses, because they are terrible.

post #89 of 90

Another person who learned form the political machine in this country,

 

Please quote the complete sentences, here I will do it for you

 

Quote:
Google does not pay well for the average working Joe,

 Google employees more than software engineers, and I would not believe the survey, it maybe a small population at best.  As I also said people are leaving Google as the one person on the Google survey said they are not happen with the company direction. And if Google was in fact paying all their software people that kind of money these people would not leave since as the survey claims to say, they is only a hand full of companies paying those high wages, so where would someone take a pay cut on purpose.

post #90 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Another person who learned form the political machine in this country,

Please quote the complete sentences, here I will do it for you

 Google employees more than software engineers, and I would not believe the survey, it maybe a small population at best.  As I also said people are leaving Google as the one person on the Google survey said they are not happen with the company direction. And if Google was in fact paying all their software people that kind of money these people would not leave since as the survey claims to say, they is only a hand full of companies paying those high wages, so where would someone take a pay cut on purpose.

So you have an example of the average underpaid Google employee? Are they paid better or worse than a typical Apple Store employee for instance if that's the type of typical employee you refer to rather than engineers? I'll point you to one good source:
http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Google-Salaries-E9079.htm

With about 1.3M folks applying for only 4000 positions at Google it doesn't look like they're hurting for employees or considered a bad place to work by "the average Joe".

New jobs (1 year) 4,236
% job growth (1 year) 20.1%
% voluntary turnover N.A.
Applicants 1,294,784
Job openings (as of 1/2/14) 4,000
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/best-companies/2014/snapshots/1.html
Edited by Gatorguy - 4/9/14 at 8:12am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Google & others could pay 'blindingly high' $9B in anti-poaching class-action suit