spice-boy

cy_starkman said:

spice-boy said:

entropys said:

On the face of it this dude seems a bit amoralistic, setting up a business to directly compete with the company that was currently paying his wage. It is one thing to leave a company and then start a company. Doing it before hand and whiteanting your employer with fellow employees is pretty poor form.
i guess we will know the true story once this suit has played out.

I worked at McDonals once so I guess I can never open a burger joint? 

maybe, if you learn to read.

seriously

entropys said:

On the face of it this dude seems a bit amoralistic, setting up a business to directly compete with the company that was currently paying his wage. It is one thing to leave a company and then start a company. Doing it before hand and whiteanting your employer with fellow employees is pretty poor form.
i guess we will know the true story once this suit has played out.

lkrupp said:

William Shockley won the Nobel Prize in Physics for inventing the transistor. Later, eight of his employees (including Gordon Moore and Robert Noyce, known as the traitorous eight) left Shockley and formed the Fairchild Semiconductor group. Still later Gordon Moore and Robert Noyce left Fairchild to found Intel. Bottom line, this happens all the time in tech. Someone becomes disillusioned and thinks they can do better than their employer. So let Apple and Williams fight it out and see where the chips fall.

SpamSandwich said:

zoetmb said:

SpamSandwich said:

Looks like they should fire half the retail staff and put everyone on salary instead of hourly. Would make the security checks go faster and there would be no overtime pay.

May be a stupid question considering who I'm writing it to, but why are you defending Apple?   Workers deserve to be compensated for their time.  It's either my time or your time.  If it's your time, you have to pay me.  

But you're right - they could put these employees on a flat salary and if they classify them as "exempt", they wouldn't get overtime pay.   So why doesn't Apple do that?  Because Apple wants flexibility in cutting staff hours and they don't want to pay them for a full 40 hours a week.  

It's not like these jobs pay well.   If Apple can't trust their own employees, then they should pay them for the time.   The court ruled properly, IMO.   I worked in retail when I was a student in the 1970's and I was NEVER searched or had to submit to any kind of security check.   And I actually got Into trouble for working through lunch hour, knowing that I would NOT be paid for that hour, but did so because we were short staffed (and I would still make spiffs and commissions).   

If Apple had proper inventory control (all stock is locked in a cage and has to be checked out when sold to a customer) then such searches wouldn't be necessary because there'd be nothing to steal except for what's on the floor and that could be easily observed.  

Security checks aren’t uncommon and I’ve never heard of anyone being compensated for waiting in a line to be checked. Don’t like it? Quit and get a job at the Post Office.