Slashdot Mirror


Silicon Valley Fights Order To Pay Bigger Settlement In Tech Talent Hiring Case

The Washington Post carries a story from the Associated Press that says the big companies hit hardest by Judge Lucy Koh's ruling in the "No Poaching" case have not suprisingly appealed that ruling, which found that a proposed settlement of $324.5 million to a class-action lawsuit was too low. The suit, filed on behalf of 60,000 high-tech workers allegedlly harmed by anti-competitive hiring practices, will probably enter its next phase next January or March. (Judge Koh is probably not very popular at Apple in particular.) If you're one of those workers (or in an analogous situation), what kind of compensation or punitive action do you think is fair?

16 of 200 comments (clear)

  1. Punitive Damages? by Great+Big+Bird · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about the amount of money they didn't have to pay their employees times 2 or 3?

    1. Re:Punitive Damages? by jonsmirl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a class action. The only person that is really winning here is the lawyer that is getting $150,000,000 for bringing the suit.

    2. Re:Punitive Damages? by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a class action. The only person that is really winning here is the lawyer that is getting $150,000,000 for bringing the suit.

      To put it into perspective the existing settlement is $5400 per class action participant showing just how much IT workers are under paid for the investment required to be skilled enough to do the work.

      As to the lawyer, someone had to bring the suit because it's not as if IT workers have representation of their own and I expect a case like that was expensive to run. I doubt that the lawyers company will be looked upon favorably by the tech giants anymore either, so if the figure you say is real then it's about right for someone sticking their neck out against a group of behemoths that make that amount of money look like chump change.

      Think about it, how much money to you expect Apple et. al would pay to reduce their primary capital expenditure, labour costs?

      It's unlikely that tech giants will want that kind of represetation to survive to threaten them again and they want other lawyers will think twice about representing IT people thus making it more expensive for IT folk to get what they are entitled to.

      If you need proof that IT folk are underpaid, here is one of the few times an ordinary person can see exactly what machinations occur to keep it that way.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    3. Re:Punitive Damages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And many others heard rumors that this was happening and decided not to even try to change jobs. Either way, everyone involved was harmed, and a lot more than any piddling $5,400. Even people who weren't considering changing jobs were harmed, because preventing competition between employers inherently keeps salaries down below the level that they would naturally reach in a free market.

      The bigger problem with allowing this settlement is that if these companies get away with paying a tiny fraction of the amount of money that they saved with these illegal agreements, it encourages other companies to enter into similar contracts in the future.

  2. Fair? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fair? Cancel all of their H1B visas.

    1. Re:Fair? by swillden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fair? Cancel all of their H1B visas.

      Your suggestion has some implicit assumptions which I don't think are valid in this case. At the level of Apple, Google, et al., they don't hire H1-Bs to suppress wages. At Google, at least, I know that salary is a non-issue in the hiring process. Salary requirements aren't even considered until after the hire/no-hire decision is made, and even then they have little impact on the offer... Google offers what it considers reasonable based on your experience, etc. And, actually, Google offers such good money that it's uncommon for candidates who receive offers to turn them down. So Google is paying enough to attract American talent. Google also hires people on H1-Bs, but only because Google hires anyone who is legally hire-able and can make it through the interview process and hiring committee. I strongly suspect that Apple is the same.

      I'm not denying that there are segments of the industry who hire H1-Bs in preference to Americans in order to keep wages down, but I really don't think that's the case at the companies involved in this case.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  3. Re:good plan by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are there any laws we shouldn't gut in order to be 'competitive'?

  4. Let's do some math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there were 60,000 impacted workers and the no-poaching agreement lowered the average salary for them by $10,000 each/year than that would translate into $600,000,000/year that the agreement was in place. If we tap it out at 10 years that would be 6 Billion dollars in actual damages. Let's add on punitive damages as well because if the only costs associated with breaking the law is that if you get caught you have to pay what you would have paid in the first place there is no motivation to not illegally screw your workers. So we double that and have a possible jury verdict of 12 Billion Dollars

    However to be fair too the companies in question this is a settlement where to avoid the pain of lawyers and dragging it out they pay upfront. So let's reduce the total payout to 25% of what their potential liability would be. I think 3 Billion Dollars or 10X what they are currently offering might be a reasonable starting point for discussions

  5. Re:there is nothing 'fair' about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is government meddling with people's private property (businesses) nothing else.

    Yes, sometimes I wish the government would cease its meddling, like all the laws that allow corporations to become "legal entities" and shield the owners of these corporations from financial losses. The concept of limited liability is evil government meddling.

  6. Re:Unseal the documentation too by fermion · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I think a different analogy is appropriate. Say a group of activist threatened to block access to stores in a neighborhood who charged more than $1 a pound for any fruit. The stores have a choice between taking a loss on fruit, not selling fruit, or having their customers harassed. In such a case we can be sure the police would be called and the activist arrested. The stores could probably sue for lost sales as well.

    The problem we have in the US is that firms are given a great deal of leeway to insure that they can charge as high as price as the market will bear, but labor is severely restricted in doing the same. For instance firms are free to form collectives that lobby congress and produce promotional campaigns, even to the point of forcing companies to pay for such promotions, but unions have to bill lobbying efforts separate and members can opt out. Likewise firms are allowed to use some pretty significant tools to prevent labor from organizing, though firms are free to do the same with few restrictions.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  7. Re:there is nothing 'fair' about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Which is fine. The alternative would be for the citizens to lynch the managers who perpetrated this and take their money by force.

  8. Re:good plan by curmudgeon99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have yet to meet a unionized engineer.
    When I worked for Bloomberg in New York City, they were constantly firing international employees for theft of intellectual property. Not sure where that charge came from.
    Sounds to me that your whole point is that some VC told you how to think. H-1B visa holders are only popular with people like CEOs and VC who really have no experience in the field. Working engineers know that they are wildly overrated. That's why so many companies have abandoned the use of H-1B visa holders. It is a practice valued by people who really don't have any experience in the field. They think it's a good value but in fact it's a myth. Tata produces terrible engineers. They pretend they're going to send experienced engineers here but the people that companies actually get are unexperienced and come here expecting to be trained by US engineers. Then, they produce terrible work and US engineers have to silently rewrite it. I say "silently" because management doesn't want to hear that fact because they want to push the fiction that they're saving money. So, then, the cycle continues where management believes it's saving money while domestic engineers have to actually rewrite the crappy code produced by Tata. I have seen this play out in several companies, especially ones located in NYC.

  9. Re:good plan by udachny · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Oh, I do know for a fact, much better than everybody here, that the Supreme Court's opinions do not in fact change Constitutionality of legislation. They pass opinions however their opinions do not change the illegality of laws and do not make them legal.

    Also a law doesn't need to be heard by the SCOTUS to be understood as an unconstitutional one. An unconstitutional law is unconstitutional before SCOTUS hears and and after, regardless of what SCOTUS finds.

  10. jail by Yakasha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    what kind of compensation or punitive action do you think is fair?

    Jail.

    Continuing the analogy given by the plaintiff, if you steal a $400 iPad, you're going to jail. So, send the fuckers to jail. There are emails, from individuals. Those individuals committed crimes. Put them in jail.

    Rich people & corporations have money, lots of it. And they can always get more. ANY financial penalty is "only money".

    We all have a limited amount of time on this planet. 10 years in prison should convince other CEOs to not be dumb again.

  11. WAKE UP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "they don't hire H1-Bs to suppress wages"

    YES THEY DO! You need to wake up and smell the coffee... they're just being more sophisticated and diabolical than you are.

    Here's how it works: First, they often dishonestly hire the H1-B's (frequently by tailoring "job requirements" in ways that only the people they want fit the "requirements" even when these phoney requirements have no relationship to the job; the first goal is to have a number of immigrants on visas in the workforce - the precise number and the positions held are not critical. The critical thing is that they get a bunch of workers who they have extra leverage over due to the visa, and the second goal is to sprinkle them into the workforce so that all of their American workers know somebody among them who is there on a visa. These workers are less likely to ask for raises and increased benefits, both because what they are getting already seems generous compared to what they'd get back home, and also for fear that they could be sent home and replaced by another visa holder. This sends an unspoken "message" to all the American workers: YOU can easily be replaced by a foreign worker who is more compliant and not likely to ask for more pay and benefits. The extra message is "we, the management, are comfortable with foreign workers and with entrusting all the details of our products to them" (which adds-in the implcit threat that Americans need to not get too demanding or the whole place cound be outsourced to India or some such place). With the large tech employers holding salaries flat through this scam, they effectively manipulate the "industry standard" wages for every tech worker in the US in these fields (which, in circular fasion, then helps them pretend that they are paying their workforce "industry standard" wages. Had they NOT used those H1-Bs, the Americans would have demanded and recieved higher wages and the money they are paying the H1-B holders would indeed be sub-standard; these wages are not being used for a first-order effect of cheaper-than-their-American co-workers employee - they are being used for the second-order effect of suppressing the demands of all their American workers and helping to keep wages of all of their workers flat over the long-term.

    1. Re:WAKE UP!!! by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First, they often dishonestly hire the H1-B's (frequently by tailoring "job requirements" in ways that only the people they want fit the "requirements" even when these phoney requirements have no relationship to the job

      Umm, Google doesn't define detailed requirements for technical positions. In fact, they don't even hire people for specific positions. The interview and hiring process is all about identifying people who are smart and can think on their feet, and decisions about what projects to put them on come after the hiring decision has been made. It's expected that almost nothing you know from any previous job will even apply at Google because the environment and tools are so different (everything is custom, in-house).

      What you're describing definitely does happen -- I've seen it! -- but it's not relevant at the companies involved here.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.