Slashdot Mirror
RIM Accuses Motorola of Blocking Job Offers
theodp writes "Taking a page from the insanely-jealous-husband-playbook, Motorola management has adopted an if-I-can't-have-you-nobody-can stance on its fired employees, reportedly blocking RIM from offering jobs to laid-off workers. In a complaint filed in state court, Motorola is charged with improperly trying to expand a previous agreement 'to prevent the RIM entities from hiring any Motorola employees, including the thousands of employees Motorola has already fired or will fire.' Through its Compete America membership, Motorola has repeatedly warned Congress that failing to accommodate the lobbying group members' 'principled' demand for timely access to talent would not be in the United States' economic interest and would make the US second-rate in education and basic research."
But if you aren't playing with your toys, you have to share with the other children.
If they really want to keep RIM from having their castoff engineers, just keep paying their salaries.
If RIM had a division in California, they could hire anyone they wanted since California law essentially forbids non-compete clauses.
There was a recent Slashdot discussion about this when a Former IBM Exec Ordered To Stop Working For Apple.
Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
Interesting to see how the paragons of capitalism don't believe in the free market.
A company I once worked for once had a written policy that anyone who had ever worked as a direct employee could not be hired at a later date as a contractor (contracting is very lucrative in this industry). I always thought that sounded legally dubious but despite some efforts the media had no interest in pursuing it.
I eventually left that company to contract at a competitor. On my last day the director of engineering told me "You realize I can't approve of this." To which I did not reply, but always wished I had "I can not approve of the way you accept public subsidies and then exported my job to Ireland."
Can't wait until I get a little older so I can name names.
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
What bothers me most about Motorol's behavior here is that there are people who are not drawing a paycheck. Some are on unemployment and they could be back in the ranks of the employed, spending money and helping our economy... not to mention the personal ramifications of no longer being unemployed...
However, Motorola wants to keep these people unemployed. they want to flare their feathers no matter who is hurt in their little a pissing match.
We all wonder what went wrong when some ex husband dresses p as santa, goes to his ex wife's fmaily xmas party and kills 8 people, but when a company tries to do the same thing to thousands, we stand idolly by.
Because of this action, I will no longer allow any motorola product in my house. period.
I have never been an employee of motorola and am not mad because i am one being hurt, but I would want opthers to do this if my former company wanted to keep me poor after laying me off.
Stand up, consumers, and let motorola know that it is time to move past the anger stage already.
New and improved Guilt. Now its alcohol soluble!
I can't believe that anyone is even allowed to fire someone and then to prevent them from attempting to get another job anywhere they want.
One thing is when someone quits and there is a non-competition agreement, another thing is when someone is fired. Has anyone ever lost in court to a company that fired them when they started working for a competitor?
Everyone: if you are a 'permanent' employee, don't sign non-compete clauses, and if you do, at least modify them to say that if the company terminates your employment, then this clause does not apply.
Nice of Motorola, by the way, to attempt and stop people that they fired from trying to find employment, especially in this economy. If anything is going to hurt economy of the USA it's going to be millions of unemployed people.
You can't handle the truth.
For what? A dispute with Blackberry? Screw you Motorola, you've just lost my business forever.
Motorola is having a lot of troubled times lately. They might be laying off people, but I think they are probably playing the 'end of the year' game I see so many large companies do. Basically what they're trying to do is lay a bunch of people off to make the end of the year budget, but after the first of the year they'll hire a signicant percentage of those laid off back when new budgets kick in. I've seen this pattern a thousand times, especially in the auto industry. Of course, the people they'll hire back will be taking a pay cut.
That's why they want to keep RIM from hiring them off.
Kinda dirty.
My blog
Since the US is far behind being 2nd in education - most notably math - wouldn't being 2nd be an improvement?
Perhaps we should retain our high-value educated workforce by preventing them from leaving the country, to make sure they carry out their patriotic duty! Maybe we could set up some sort of iron... curtain... or such, to make sure they stay.
And they all have draconian NC contracts. It's actually rather sad; I've run into dozens of ex-Illinoisians (sp) here in NYC who simply don't understand that they can negotiate a NC agreement. And none who would ever dream that in many circumstances here in NY and NYC, you don't have to sign them at all without any risk to your employment.
I started my tech career in Illinois, and I'm glad I did. It was incredibly competitive in Chicago in the early and mid 90s, and I learned more there in six years than I could have ever learned anywhere else in twice the time.
But I'd rather sling coffee out of a truck in Union Square than ever move back to Chicago and work in the tech industry there. It's unnecessarily brutal.
You'd think Motorola would want their competitors taking on those responsible for their vast array of shitheap products.
Depends. If they're firing lots of middle and senior management I'd tend to agree. Engineers design the kinds of products that management wants them to design: if those are shitheap then management is ultimately responsible.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
As much as people like to bitch about outsourcing here in the USA, why should we allow our talent to migrate to Canada? Doesn't allowing High Tech workers to work for foreign companies support Microsoft's contention that we need to increase H1Bs because the talent isn't here anymore?
That is a separate issue. If I fire you, what right do I have to say where you can and can't work? It is that simple. I believe we (U.S.) have a constitutional amendment addressing such practices.
As much as people like to bitch about outsourcing here in the USA, why should we allow our talent to migrate to Canada?
Allow your talent to migrate? Jesus fucking christ, is this the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or SOVIET RUSSIA?
A FREE COUNTRY does not lock in its citizens and prevent them from leaving. Are you building the new Berlin wall?
Is this the USA? The FREE WORLD? Or did someone cut off your country's balls?
Doesn't allowing High Tech workers to work for foreign companies support Microsoft's contention that we need to increase H1Bs because the talent isn't here anymore?
If you are FIRING the talent, you can't claim that the talent isn't there anymore.
In case you didn't know, RIM has offices all over the world. RIM employs quite a few people in the USA.
Regardless, if you lay someone off and aren't paying their wages, you shouldn't have claim to block them from picking up somewhere else. Regardless of your self serving plans to hire them back at a pay cut a couple of months later.
People must wake up and realize that we allow the corps to employ us at OUR sufferance, not the other way around. Do not let them make you think they are doing you some huge favor by employing you. It's the other way around.
"Crude and slow, clansman. Your attack was no better than that of a clumsy child."
[corporate flamebait start]
If US companies want to keep US workers in the US, they should offer them so attractive working conditions (this includes working environment, good salaries, and job security for those who are concerned with such) that they don't want to leave. US citizens are free to leave the country if it suits them, and if we are to continue calling this country a "beacon of freedom" or whatever the latest slogan is, then it will have to continue to be that way.
And if Microsoft has such a hard time finding workers in the US, why aren't they looking into hiring some of Motorola's castoffs?
[/corporate flamebait end]
Unfortunately being fired does not automaticly negate a signed contract. However, on the flip side, most noncompetes are so vauge, over reaching, and one sided that they are unenforceable from the get go, even assuming you don't live/work in a state such as California.
This sounds like it could very well be due to RIM taking advantage of some information it got from Motorola under NDA.
RIM and Motorola had (have?) an agreement to share confidential information about some unrelated matter. RIM notices that Motorola is going to be laying off people from this information. RIM immediately starts soliciting these people that are likely to be laid off.
Now that doesn't sound entirely reasonable, does it? Especially since these people can be approached on the basis of "we're offering you a job with a 25% cut in pay because we know you are about to lose your job."
WTF?
Company A laid off people...
People have no jobs....
Company B said, "hey you know we could use you..."
Company A says, "oh no you can't work there because well we don't want you to kill our business completely..."
GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!!!! Yes I am screaming here, but this patriotic act is completely misguided. The issue here is that people are laid off and they would like to put food and bread on their table. And if they need to travel to Canada so be it! This is what competition and capitalism is all about.
Want to know what might result?
Instead of hiring out of work American workers they will hire out of work workers from some other place. And then what spot is America? With more unemployed bitter people who say the government gets in their way!
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
but after the first of the year they'll hire a signicant percentage of those laid off back when new budgets kick in.
That, and they'll hire some back as part-time or contract workers, and completely avoid the need to provide health care or benefits of any kind. I've seen that happen too: fire a regular full-time worker and then hire him or her back for just under the state's minimum requirement for "full time" status. They only work 39.5 hours/week, say, and the company saves the cost of the benefits. No effective difference in work load, but the employee gets screwed out of benefits. Yeah, it's kinda dirty, and totally violates the spirit of the law.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Like an ANON said to you, there is a freedom thing. If you stop the flow of people out of the country, you are stopping the flow of people into the country too. If canada gets pissed at us for quite literally stealing jobs from them, they won't exactly smile through it.
Meanwhile, I seem to recall articles saying that H1B's have been abused/etc so issuing more would solve one problem and create another ripe for abuse.
Maybe they need to come up with a new system that isn't as easy to game as current H1B systems are. If you RTFA you'd notice that the "non-hire" agreement has already expired as well, so it's kinda irrelevant at this point. Anyone laid off from Motorola that decides to go to RIM should be able to do so at this point, bar company politics deliberately breaking the law.
What I mean by the last comment is that many states don't like noncompetes. Currently, Illinois does uphold them unfortunately. However, instead of having the employees sign a noncompete (which they could contest in court), the two companies signed a noncompete (which it's impossible for an employee to contest in court)....essentially making it impossible for people to switch companies in that scenario. Specifically because they could just BS their reasoning for declining to hire someone such as "they didn't meet our qualifications" (with no explanation).
they are trying to make their bonuses
Golden Parachute opening in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
If you don't want Canadian companies hiring your talent, maybe you should fire the H1Bs and give those jobs to your own people. Otherwise, what reason do they have to stick with your shitty economy that won't even let them work in the first place ? That, and RIM probably has a few offices in the US, meaning the people aren't moving up to Canada because they work for a Canadian company.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
The agreement has expired, then why the lawsuit?
From one article:
But from the other:
So, both companies agreed not to solicit each other's employees and now RIM wants out of the deal. Why should the be let out of the deal?
Either the writer is incompetent or the above is false because "three months" ago was after the agreement supposedly expired, therefore the suit could not be in violation of the agreement.
From the linked letter to Congress:
How does that apply to anything in this case, in any way shape or form?
To me, this looks like a lot of biased reporting and RIM trying to weasel it's way out of an agreement.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I own two Motorola GSM telephones & judging by their performance I was under the impression Motorola had no engineers left.
As much as people like to bitch about outsourcing here in the USA, why should we allow our talent to migrate to Canada?
Marketplaces are global now, whether you like it or not, and restricting labour to work in their home country is not only holding back the global market but also restricting viable financial options of those workers.
What if Canada didn't let any hockey players play in the NHL that were not originally born in North America (or even Canada)? Wouldn't be as good a league. Restricting how and where people can work only lets the entire industry suffer as a whole.
These people have been laid-off and/or fired. If they can't find gainful employment in their field in the area in which they live, who has the right to tell them they can't move to a place where they have a job that they are experienced in and making equal money. Who could tell them to stay put and take a huge pay-cut in a semi-related field? If the US economy can't handle them without taking a hit on their quality of life and their is an alternative then 'all's fair in love and war'.
I say don't drink and drive, you might spill your drink. Before you get behind the wheel just stop and think.
I thought campaign contributions were considered more valuable than individual votes.
And that's exactly why political campaign contributions coming from anyone other than individual registered voters needs to be outlawed.
From a more practical perspective, we are already running a huge trade deficit. Some economists say this doesn't matter, but others say it risks nasty bubbles and major instability. If the US continues being the dumping ground for cheap products and services, this bubble risk grows as the trade imbalances create credit bubbles. Economists tend to under-estimate bubbles, perhaps because they are overconfident in their ability to "fix" them, so I will take the view of the "bubblers".
Further, many times those countries are cheaper because they lack regulations that keep us safe and healthy. They may have 60-hour work-weeks in asbestos-festered offices or work with dangerous chemicals and pollution in factories. It's unfair if we have to compete with regulations that they don't have.
Further, it would push us to all be Walmart greeters and shoes salesmen as "non-face" jobs shift to where the labor is cheaper. Diversity in careers would diminish, and lack of diversity is also a bubble-risk.
The "open borders" labor thinking just has too many unsolved problems. Adam Smith's equations need a rewrite to reflect risk and uncertainty better. Maximizing an economy based over-simplistic models is partly what got us into the current mess.
Table-ized A.I.
Damn right. Let's get rid of limited liability too while we're at it since that's another unnecessary government interference in the marketplace.
Wouldn't that be "large-scale layoffs for incompetence"? Just that the incompetent escapes the axe, sort of like GM CEO Rick Wagoner?
Or, how, about, they pay you for the rest of your life. - you are being facetious but I am not certain why exactly, I suppose there is very thick sarcasm somewhere there.
Nope and you completely misread what I wrote. What I meant was, if they're going to fire you, for what ever reason, and still enforce the non-compete, then they should pay your salary for as long as they enforce the non-compete because you can't get a job because of the non-compete. Right?
And this BS about not signing it is completely unrealistic because if everyone demands it, how are you supposed to "not sign it"? I understand NDAs, but other than that, these agreements that employers demand that you sign just a form black mailing employees.
... I modify them where I see it necessary. Most people make the mistake of not doing this and it will bite them.
Really? Good for you! Every time I had a non-compete or any agreement that has to be signed for a job was a take it or leave it. In other words, you either sign it as is or you do not get the job. Of course it depends on what you do and who you are. Meaning, someone like you has skills and talent that, apparently, I do not have and you are able to pull that off. (I am NOT being facetious or sarcastic.)
I agree with everything else in your post. I just had a problem with the way you interpreted my comment. I typed this with a smile on my face and with warm and fuzzy Holiday feelings.
Happy New Year!
... a form of restraint of trade? A violation of the Sherman Anti-trust act?
If the labor market is similar to any other market and I negotiate with my competitor to split a market between us and not compete with them, I'd get a vacation at Club Fed. Striped pajamas and all.
Have gnu, will travel.