Slashdot Mirror
Tech Workers Oppose Settlement They Reached In Silicon Valley Hiring Case
itwbennett writes Tech workers have asked an appeals court not to approve a $324.5 million settlement in Silicon Valley's controversial employee hiring case, according to a document filed Tuesday. This move by the plaintiffs puts them in alignment with an earlier decision by Judge Lucy Koh of the federal district court in San Jose to throw out the settlement on the grounds that it wouldn't pay the workers enough. Attorneys for the defendants — Apple, Google, Adobe and Intel — subsequently appealed Koh's decision.
That sounds great and all... but court decisions that bankrupt companies result in pretty much the same thing every time. The company goes bankrupt and, at best, the lawyers get paid. Then the company reopens with all the same people that made the decision in charge but under new ownership and the debt gets written off. The old owners would be all those same employees that had their retirement in stock which is now worthless. The people in charge are long retired and don't care.
I agree that it's not fair, but there simply doesn't exist the legal mechanisms to make managers that made these decisions over a decade ago pay. The primary culprit seemed to be Steve Jobs and God took care of him.
Somehow I don't think a multibillion dollar settlement is going to force Google or Apple into bankruptcy:
http://www.bizjournals.com/san...
Apple Inc.'s $158.8 billion cash stockpile more than triples the $48.5 billion currently in the coffers of the U.S. government, according to a new report.
Microsoft Corp. and Google Inc. also have also posted cash and cash equivalents worth more than the total U.S. Treasury at roughly $84 billion and $58 billion, respectively, according to U.S. Trust data cited by British newspaper the Telegraph.
Part of the reason they have these multi billion dollar cash reserves is by illegally colluding to keep employee turnover down and reduce wages.
The lawyers have the same disincentive for getting the best price that a Realtor does.
As soon as a Realtor has _any_ reasonable offer for your $300,000 house, even if it is 30K less than what you want, the Realtor is looking at a decent 6% commission. S/he isn't too concerned with trying to get 6% of an additional $10-$30,000 AT THE RISK of losing 6% of the $270,000 already in hand. S/he'll honestly tell you it's a good deal because for her, it is a good deal.
For you, maybe not so much.