Apple, Google & Others Agree to $300 Million Settlement in TechJob Conspiracy Lawsuit

[dgstorm]

For the last few years, our news team here at DF has mostly focused on the lawsuits between Apple and the various Android OEMs. Sometimes we would also include a smattering of legal tussles between Microsoft and Android as well. Despite this, there has been another high-profile legal fight in the tech world which we mostly stayed away from. In the end it is finally being settled, so we thought we should at least share its final outcome.

Apple, Google and a few other tech companies in Silicon Valley were faced with a class action civil lawsuit (from roughly 64,000 workers) claiming the tech giants conspired to keep from poaching each others' employees. Apparently, there were communiques between the executives of these tech companies which amounted to an unofficial agreement not to offer incentives to steal away valuable engineering talent from each other.

To make a long story short, although the companies all argued they didn't intentionally do it to drive down wages, the evidence was compelling and there was definitely some minor collusion. In the long run, all of the companies agreed to settle the lawsuit for an amount totaling $300 Million dollars.

As an interesting sidenote - U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California was the judge presiding over the case.

Source: Yahoo

 

[jspradling7]

Each of the 64,000 get $4650.00 less taxes? Oh boy, wow, partay, yippie, whatever.

 

[Valvoline]

I'll take 4 grand

 

[HNettles]

More likely the lawyers get 98% of the money, and the affected employees each get $5. I have been on the receiving end of a few class action lawsuits, the lawyers get the lion's share of the money, every time. The only reason to participate is the hope that the offending parties learn something, and don't try to repeat the same actions. Which is a pretty forlorn hope, in this country, at this time in history.

 

[kodiak799]

Each of the 64,000 get $4650.00 less taxes? Oh boy, wow, partay, yippie, whatever.

And less attorney fees....so maybe more like $3100 before taxes

Obviously the main objective of ending this collusion is accomplished, but you'd have to assume that's a small fraction of what many of these employees would have gotten in raises (EACH year, for however many years) in a competitive job market.

 

[akhenax]

When I was dumped...er...laid off by a large ex computer manufacturer, and then had to go into the "wonderful" world of consulting, I was so happy to be offered a job in the midst of the recession that I didn't look too closely at the contract I was signing that spoke of what would happen if I left my current position to work for a competitor, called a no compete clause. Basically, I am tied to this company, and other companies can't come snatch me up even if they paid me 3 times the salary. Moral of the story, don't just read what you sign, understand it, AND companies don't have to agree with each other any longer as long as their employees sign on the dotted line to stay away from a competitor.

 

[Jeffrey]

When I was dumped...er...laid off by a large ex computer manufacturer, and then had to go into the "wonderful" world of consulting, I was so happy to be offered a job in the midst of the recession that I didn't look too closely at the contract I was signing that spoke of what would happen if I left my current position to work for a competitor, called a no compete clause. Basically, I am tied to this company, and other companies can't come snatch me up even if they paid me 3 times the salary. Moral of the story, don't just read what you sign, understand it, AND companies don't have to agree with each other any longer as long as their employees sign on the dotted line to stay away from a competitor.

Coming from one of those large companies you describe I know a bit about noncompetes. Many states will not enforce them as they usually do not meet free enterprise rules. Meaning, if you are offered 3X your salary, your current employer can match it or cancel your NC.

 

[kodiak799]

...a no compete clause. Basically, I am tied to this company, and other companies can't come snatch me up even if they paid me 3 times the salary.

Typically, if they don't continue to pay you your full salary for the duration of the "waiting period" (usually 2 years) it's unenforceable....non-competes are usually unenforceable for a variety of other reasons, but that particular one is especially blatant.

 

[kodiak799]

Coming from one of those large companies you describe I know a bit about noncompetes. Many states will not enforce them as they usually do not meet free enterprise rules. Meaning, if you are offered 3X your salary, your current employer can match it or cancel your NC.

Good points. I occasionally see "do you have a non-compete?" on job apps...if a company wants to hire you, it shouldn't be much of an issue (or at least worth having counsel review). But they ask just so HR can screen out your app. So my answer on this would be to "play dumb" and lie about having a non-compete until you've actually interviewed with the hiring manager.