Slashdot Mirror
Samsung, LG Sued Over US Employee Recruiting Policies (reuters.com)
A former sales manager for LG has sued Samsung and LG in a California court, alleging that both the companies have poached each other's U.S. employees despite having signed an agreement to not do so. Reuters reports: The plaintiff, A. Frost, says in the lawsuit that a recruiter contacted Frost via LinkedIn in 2013, seeking to fill a position with Samsung. According to the lawsuit, the recruiter then informed Frost the same day: "I made a mistake! I'm not supposed to poach LG for Samsung!!! Sorry! The two companies have an agreement that they won't steal each other's employees." It is "implausible" that such a deal in the United States could have been reached without the consent of each company's corporate parent in South Korea, says the lawsuit, which does not state a specific damages amount.
The editors make this sound like what was wrong was that they were poaching each other's employees despite agreeing not to.
Wrong.
What is wrong, as clearly outlined in the article, if the editor took 10 seconds to RTFA, is that such a deal, agreeing not to poach one anothers employees, is against anti-trust laws.
the only resumes they are getting are from companies they are not allowed to call...
such a deal is not ok under CA labor laws as well other places.
When I read the synopsis, I figured the lawsuit was filed AFTER the bonehead recruiter let slip to the potential candidate that there was an agreement in place. To which I'm sure the candidate thought, "wtf?". And thus the lawsuit was born.
Didn't this happen to Apple and Google some time back too?
And then the hiring managers were free to blab this to the outside headhunters, informing them of this non-poaching agreement?
Pretty tough to honor an agreement like that if you don't let the people doing the hiring know about it.
And once such information makes it to HR - Well, when did your company last send a copy of your tax information to a Nigerian prince who asked nicely?
And once such information makes it to HR - Well, when did your company last send a copy of your tax information to a Nigerian prince who asked nicely?
Does that happen very often?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Our accounting system has an auto-forward rule set up that just sends your ADP login info to every email address in the whois db that is in Nigeria.
It appears the penalty for Apple/Google/Et-al's anti-poaching deal a few years ago was not strong enough to send a message to other companies thinking of the same.
http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/...
Table-ized A.I.
Wow, that's convenient.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
that made me giggle irl
i'd mod this "funny", but i commented previously :(
Hardly. There may be some minimal fines, and some consent decrees, and they will continue on with a few token hires and better management of the process.
Look at Wells Fargo - Such breathtaking violations of consumer finance laws and regulations, literal theft, an organizational culture that both permitted and failed to detect such behavior, and NO ONE will go to jail. The theft charges that were not brought should compel that, and the fines are an order of magnitude less than deserved.
This is chump change comparatively.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
It's Samsung that we are talking about.
Do you mean there actually are anti-trust laws that are being enforced?
An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
as well other places.
Precious few other places.
You would be wrong in a general sense. In California it is almost completely illegal. In other states, ymmv. It depends on whether they can give adequate pretext, I think a lot boils down to case law in various locales, IANAL. Texas isn't quite the wild unregulated west I thought it was, but it's also pretty much legal here.
There's also shades of illegality. A thing can be illegal in that it nullifies contracts, but end up being widely done in practice because the penalties are moot.
If there's ever been proof that the government has sold out the middle class, it's usually found in employment laws. People get too expensive, something is done to make them cheap.
every resume that gets sent in, that lists the other company on the employment history, gets round-filed.
And who, exactly does that "filing"? Does a company the size of Samsung have all 50,000 resumes they get per day sent directly to their VP of Secret Anti-Trust Agreement Compliance?