Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung, LG Sued Over US Employee Recruiting Policies (reuters.com)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the what-agreement? dept.

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.

7 of 35 comments (clear)

  1. ./ Editors Fail Again by TFlan91 · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:./ Editors Fail Again by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, terrible fucking summary, Makes it sound like some asshole is suing them for not honoring their non-poaching agreements. The actual article makes it clear that they are actually being sued for HAVING those non-poaching agreements in the first place.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  2. such a deal is not ok under CA labor laws as well by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 3, Informative

    such a deal is not ok under CA labor laws as well other places.

  3. Re:Wait...what? by pla · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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?

  4. Re:Wait...what? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.

  5. Bigger penalties this time by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
  6. Re:BLOWED UP REAL GOOD! by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.