Apple Allegedly Sought Non-Poaching Deal With Palm

theodp writes "A Bloomberg report that Apple CEO Steve Jobs proposed a possibly illegal truce with Palm against poaching their respective employees is sure to pique the interest of the US Department of Justice, which already is investigating whether Google, Yahoo, Apple, Genentech and other tech companies conspired to keep others from stealing their top talent. 'Your proposal that we agree that neither company will hire the other's employees, regardless of the individual's desires, is not only wrong, it is likely illegal,' former Palm CEO Ed Colligan reportedly told Jobs in August 2007." The article notes that Apple was probably reacting to Palm's hiring of Jon Rubenstein, who had been instrumental in developing the iPod and went on to spearhead the Pre for Palm (and has now become Palm's chairman and CEO). "It's the story about the importance of charismatic engineers," said veteran Silicon Valley forecaster Paul Saffo. "People don't work for Palm. They work for Jon Rubinstein. One has to wonder how Steve Jobs ever let Jon Rubinstein leave."

Comments

Stating the obvious

[rekoil]

One has to wonder how Steve Jobs ever let Jon Rubinstein leave."

Simple - by forcing him to report to Steve Jobs.

Re:Stating the obvious

[eulernet]

It doesn't seem so easy.

"No matter how much resolve you could muster, it was still difficult to quit Apple if Steve wanted you to stay. You'd have to sit down with him for a reality distortion session, which was often effective at getting people to change their minds. One day, a few of us were talking about strategies to overcome Steve's persuasiveness."

http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Are_You_Gonna_Do_It.txt

Re:Apparently the reply was -

[soundhack]

I would guess that it would be more likely "If Steve Jobs does it, it's not illegal"

Re:At Apple, employees just work

[dsharp]

Whoosh!

Fuck you, employers

[QuoteMstr]

This is why you never, ever trust an employer to do right by you. All the incentives are aligned the wrong way, and to rise high in a company, you practically have to be a slick sociopath. The same guy that asks you how your day went by the water cooler would have you chained to a desk 14 hours to day if the law would let him get away with it.

Speaking of getting screwed - why are there specific regulations in the federal labor laws that exempt "certain computer workers" from overtime pay?

Re:How could that not be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

It goes against the ideal of the free market. But, in a truly unregulated market, there would be nothing stopping two companies colluding like this to their mutual benefit... or entering into any other kind of strange and possibly anti-competitive arrangement.

Re:It's certainly illegal in CA

[Hognoxious]

OSS could never compete with that, since there isn't that kind of money in this industry to pay for top developers. So you get the kind of brain-dead design as we see here on the /. front page. Seriously, why is there a bar with a tiny +- character there?

It costs nothing to leave things the heck alone. Knowing when not to tinker with things is apparently much more expensive.

Re:Jobs doing something illegal...

[gubers33]

He gets millions from his stock options with Apple and the man is worth around 4.4 billion. Apple also pays for the use of his private jet which is around 800,000 dollars a year. His salary is $1 yes, but he gets the money from other sources.

Re:How could that not be illegal

[Miseph]

But then what would they do?

I'm being serious. It might hurt Apple a bit, and it would hurt Palm a bit, and Microsoft a bit, and Oracle a bit, and Google a bit, but if this person declines taking a job with the colluders, then what will they do? Take work with start ups that can't actually afford to pay them the salary they demand trying to compete in already saturated markets? Engage in subsistence farming and day labor until it gets sorted out? Starve? Apple can afford to lose that person as an employee, but how long can that person afford not to be employed?

This is a symptom of the single greatest flaw in Free Market theory, and one that NOBODY has a satisfying answer to: no true capitalist would ever willingly compete if they did not have to. Market collusion allows the minimization of costs, maximization of profit, and elimination of competition with far less risk or cost than any other method. Competition and free exchange alone creating a sustainable economy free of corruption and systemic iniquity is just a libertarian wet dream (much like that one about Ayn Rand lying naked on a pile of gold bars...).

Re:At Apple, employees just work

[easyTree]

Is it just me or is it more fun bashing Apple than Microsoft?

a ridiculously hagiographic article

[YesIAmAScript]

This wrap-up article appears to be a Palm piece designed to attach them more firmly to Apple in people's minds. Trying to imply Palm is so great that Apple is trying to stop them and also imply that Palm is just like Apple, in fact they have half of Apple's engineers!

The real kicker is the last part. "These people work for Rubenstein". Yeah, maybe that's true for Mike Bell. Pete Alexander (who used to work for Mike Bell) just quit Apple (was forced out) and will be working at Palm within 3 months.

But there are a lot of people for whom this doesn't apply. I used to work for Rubenstein and I can tell you he's so much not a people person it's ridiculous. He makes 2000-era Al Gore look personable. He would periodically get up and address the team and he would say things that clearly showed he didn't any real connection to us or even know what we were doing. For example, he once rallied us by saying the software/hardware release we just did was the best one we had ever done. The whole crowd groaned because we knew it wasn't, that it was pushed out the door and in fact we had a plans for a near-term emergency .0.1 update and a rapidly following .0.2 update.

Maybe if you work directly for the guy day-to-day you can form an attachment to him, but to anyone lower down in the ranks, it isn't the same.

As to why Steve Jobs "let" Rubenstein leave, I'm sure it was similar reasons as why Tony Fadell left. Because both realized they wouldn't be the next CEO of the company. Steve Jobs only action then of "letting" them leave was to not step aside and let Rubenstein or Fadell be CEO. Rubenstein got out, and lo and behold he's now the CEO of Palm.

Re:It's certainly illegal in CA

[bipbop]

Murder is a legal term, with a legal definition. This definition, I believe, excludes animals.

But hey, you're free to make up your own definitions instead. I assume if murder applies to pets, then manslaughter must apply as well. When will you be putting out a dictionary?

Re:Jobs doing something illegal...

[gad_zuki!]

>Nor is his name on a list of gifts of $1 million or more compiled by Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy.

Did you bother to read the entire article? Two paragraphs later:

Of course, Jobs and his wife may be giving enormous sums of money to charity anonymously. If they are funneling cash to various causes in private, their names wouldn't show up on any lists, regardless of the size of their gifts.

For a person as private as Jobs, who shuns any publicity about his family life, this seems credible.

I know in the age of facebook, spyware, and blogging about your menstraul cycle, privacy has fallen out of fashion, but some people still appreciate it.

Re:Apparently the reply was -

[mvdwege]

This thread is replete with people who think it normal that businesses collude to strenghten their position in the labour market. And yet watch the howls go up if someone suggests that the employees do the same.

Mart