Bloomberg is reporting that Apple CEO Tim Cook has been ordered by U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh to give a deposition in a lawsuit claiming that Apple and five other companies entered deals not to recruit each other's employees.

Koh told lawyers yesterday that Apple founder Steve Jobs was copied on e-mails at issue in the case, and that she found it “hard to believe” that Cook, as Apple’s chief operating officer at the time in question, wouldn’t have been consulted about such agreements.

The judge said she was disappointed that senior executives at the companies involved hadn’t been deposed before yesterday’s hearing over whether she should certify the case as a group lawsuit.

usdc
The case goes back to 2005 and alleges that Apple, Adobe, Pixar, Lucasfilm, Google, Intel and Intuit had agreements not to poach employees from the companies that were privy to the agreements. Employees were free to apply at jobs at any of the companies on their own volition, however.

The agreements were investigated in 2010 by the Justice Department and the claims were eventually settled, with the companies agreeing not to enter employee-poaching bans for five years.

The current lawsuit is a class-action civil suit by employees who say they were harmed by the anti-competitive actions of the companies within the agreement.

Top Rated Comments

york2600 Avatar
106 months ago
I don't really see the problem. This is just a head-hunting agreement. What's wrong about that, if the employees are still free to apply anywhere they want?

You've obviously never been recruited away by a competitor. When companies know that people are poaching their employees they pay better. If you as a company know you have nothing to worry about, you're less likely to give raises and large bonuses. Recruiters come with big raises for employees. It's not uncommon in my experience to see 30-50% raises being offered in tech. If Apple knew that wasn't going to happen they don't have to pay as well. That definitely hurts employees. It kills the free market.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
gnasher729 Avatar
106 months ago
I don't really see the problem. This is just a head-hunting agreement. What's wrong about that, if the employees are still free to apply anywhere they want?

If you don't see what's wrong with it, you have to learn a lot in life.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
KdParker Avatar
106 months ago
Not sure why they would even enter into such an agreement. You want the best employees, and if you have someone that you don't want to leave, then treat them right.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
iDuel Avatar
106 months ago
The judge should through them all out of the court room. What a stupid thing to sue about.
Than apple should just fire them all.

Well, it didn't take too long into this thread for a comment like this to pop up.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Cartaphilus Avatar
106 months ago
I don't think the government should be able to interfere in this way.
We've gotten so used to government inference everyone thinks its ok.
If the employees were able to apply on their own, what's the harm?

The government ALWAYS, as you characterize it, "interferes". In the U.S. the Department of Justice often determines in the first instance what activities constitute a violation of the antitrust laws, but the reason the government must always be involved is because individuals and companies must resort to government funded and staffed courts to resolve disputes. The government in the form of courts must decide which party should prevail and this can involve determining whether or not an agreement can be enforced or not, sometimes on the basis of whether that agreement is in keeping with the sort of society we want to have. For that reason, the government interferes when a bookie sues a gambler who has welshed on a bet by saying, in many states, that it will not allow its courts to be used to collect money from a wager that was illegal to have been made in the first place.

Here two companies have made a contract with each other that arguably affects the rights of an employee of one of the companies who had no involvement in the making of that contract, and who certainly did not consent to it. Assume that in the absence of that contract the other company would have attempted to recruit that employee by offering a 25% augmentation in salary. In effect, the contract has harmed the employee by arguably improperly removing the fair competition for his services that is the essence of capitalism.

So whether the Justice Department decides that the contract is a "combination in restraint of trade", or the employee decides that he has been harmed by illegal collusion to keep his compensation low, or whether one of the companies sues the other for breaching the contract by approaching the employee, the government is going to get involved.

The alternative, which existed in the distant past, and even today in some parts of the world, is that anyone who thinks he has been harmed by the acts of another gets his friends and relatives together and physically attacks whomever they think did them wrong. Long before governments were instituted among men to organize armies, coin money, or negotiate with other governments, people supported an authority to decide disputes among them. It is what separates us from barbarians.

Additionally, there are many reasons why an employee of Company A would not apply to Company B for a job, not the least of which is that if Company A learned about it, it might fire him to replace him with a more loyal employee it could count on not to defect to the competitor. Once you achieve a responsible role in an organization it is far more likely that you will be recruited to your next assignment than that you apply for it, and for that reason any limitation on recruiting deprives you of opportunity.

At the same time, though, there are situations where it is fair to prevent, for a reasonable period of time, one company from making offers of employment to the employees of another. Courts and governments generally are charged with making judgments about when particular circumstances justify enforcing or refusing to enforce a particular agreement.

In this particular case it appears that Apple contracted with a number of unrelated companies to avoid a hiring war where each company was raiding the employees of the other, setting off an expensive auction for employees with rare skills. It is certainly understandable that these companies would see some advantage to themselves in avoiding such a battle, but it is incontrovertible that another consequence is that the compensation of those with valuable and rare skills would not make as much as they would otherwise. The agreement, consequently, is a violation of the law of supply and demand since the demand has been artificially suppressed. In a free capitalist society we must always be vigilant to ensure that the competition that is the heart of our economy is not circumvented by collusion among competitors, and we entrust that duty to be vigilant to our government.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Killerbob Avatar
106 months ago
if the employees were able to apply on their own, what's the harm?

exactly!
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Top Stories

bloodoxygenapplewatch

Apple Watch Series 7 to Gain Breakthrough New Health Feature

Friday March 5, 2021 5:34 am PST by
Apple is reportedly planning to bring a new, first-of-its-kind health technology to the Apple Watch Series 7, in what could be a breakthrough for managing conditions such as diabetes more easily. According to a recent report from ETNews, the Apple Watch Series 7 will feature blood glucose monitoring via a non-invasive optical sensor. Measuring blood glucose levels, also known as blood...
apple transfer google photos 1

Apple Launches Service for Transferring iCloud Photos and Videos to Google Photos

Wednesday March 3, 2021 12:04 pm PST by
Apple this week introduced a new service that's designed to make it quick and easy for iCloud users to transfer their stored photos and videos to Google Photos. As outlined in an Apple support document, you can go to Apple's privacy website and sign in to see the "Transfer a copy of your data" option. If you select this and go through all the steps, Apple will transfer your iCloud photos and ...
imac pro featured black

Apple Confirms iMac Pro Will Be Discontinued When Supplies Run Out, Recommends 27-Inch iMac

Saturday March 6, 2021 7:33 am PST by
Apple on late Friday evening added a "while supplies last" notice to its iMac Pro product page worldwide, and removed all upgrade options for the computer, leaving only the standard configuration available to order for now. We've since confirmed with Apple that when supplies run out, the iMac Pro will no longer be available whatsoever. Apple says the latest 27-inch iMac introduced in August...
Oled iPads and MackBook Pro

OLED 10.9-Inch iPad Rumored for Early 2022, 12.9-Inch iPad Pro and 16-Inch MacBook Pro Could Follow

Thursday March 4, 2021 8:37 pm PST by
Earlier today, DigiTimes shared a preview of an upcoming report claiming that Apple is working on both iPad and Mac notebook models with OLED displays that could launch starting in 2022. The full report from DigiTimes is now available, and it includes several new alleged details about Apple's plans. According to the report, the first of these devices to adopt an OLED display is likely to be...
apple products refurbished store banner

Class Action Lawsuit Over Apple Providing Refurbished Replacement Devices Proceeding to Trial in August

Friday March 5, 2021 9:53 am PST by
Initially filed in 2016, a class action lawsuit that accuses Apple of violating the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, and other U.S. laws by providing customers with refurbished replacement devices is set to proceed to trial August 16, according to a notice this week from law firm Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP. Apple's repair terms and conditions state that,...
iPhone 13 Notch Feature2

iPhone 13 Rumor Recap: Smaller Notch, Larger Batteries, 120Hz for Pro Models, Improved 5G, Wi-Fi 6E, and More

Friday March 5, 2021 8:20 am PST by
While we are likely at least six months away from Apple unveiling the so-called iPhone 13 lineup, rumors about the devices are starting to accumulate, so we've put together this recap of everything that is expected so far. The upcoming iPhone 13 lineup will consist of the same four models and the same screen sizes as the iPhone 12 lineup, according to reputable analyst Ming-Chi Kuo,...
maxresdefault

What's on Your iPhone Home Screen?

Thursday March 4, 2021 10:31 am PST by
Over on our YouTube channel, MacRumors videographer Dan has a new video up where he shares his Home Screen, wallpaper, and all of his current favorite widgets. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. Check out Dan's video to see his setup, and then comment below and show us your own Home Screens. It's always fun to see other peoples' Home Screens, and with widgets and...
OLED iPad Pro and MacBook Pro

iPad and MacBook Models With OLED Displays Rumored to Launch in 2022

Thursday March 4, 2021 8:19 am PST by
Apple plans to release new iPad and MacBook models with OLED displays in 2022, according to industry sources cited by Taiwanese supply chain publication DigiTimes. The information was shared in the site's paywalled "Before Going to Press" section, so there are no further details yet, but the full report should be released by tomorrow. Apple has gradually increased its adoption of OLED...
Top Stories 48

Top Stories: iPhone 13 Leaks, OLED iPads and Macs, New AirTags Evidence

Saturday March 6, 2021 6:00 am PST by
iPhone rumors are heating up, with noted analyst Ming-Chi Kuo this week releasing a wide-ranging report outlining his expectations for the iPhone lineup over the next three years. This week also saw rumors about OLED displays potentially coming to iPad and Mac starting next year, increasing signs of AirTags functionality in iOS 14.5 betas, and more, so check out all of the details below! i...
imac pro while supplies last

iMac Pro No Longer Custom Configurable, Available 'While Supplies Last'

Friday March 5, 2021 10:14 pm PST by
Apple appears to be on the verge of discontinuing the iMac Pro, with the store page for the high-end all-in-one Mac including a "While supplies last" tagline and only the base model with no custom configurations available for purchase. The iMac Pro launched in December 2017, and while there have been a few tweaks to the available configurations over the years, it has received no substantial...