Judge Rejects $324M Settlement Proposal in Apple, Google Class-Action Anti-Poaching Lawsuit

Judge Lucy Koh today rejected the settlement deal that Apple, Google, Intel, and Adobe had reached with tech workers over a lawsuit involving anti-poaching agreements, reports CNBC.

According to court documents, Koh believes the total settlement "falls below the range of reasonableness," compared to the $20 million settlement that Pixar, Lucasfilm, and Intuit reached with tech employees in 2013. Proportionally, based on that settlement, Apple and the other tech companies should have to pay out at least $380 million.

apple_google_logo

The Court finds the total settlement amount falls below the range of reasonableness. The Court is concerned that Class members recover less on a proportional basis from the instant settlement with the Remaining Defendants than from the Settled Defendants a year ago, despite the fact that the case has progressed consistently in the Class’s favor since then. Counsel’s sole explanation for this reduced figure is that there are weaknesses in Plaintiff’s case such that the Class faces a substantial risk of non-recovery. However, that risk existed and was even greater when Plaintiffs settled with the Settled Defendants a year ago, when class certification had been denied. [...]

Using the Settled Defendants’ settlements as a yardstick, the appropriate benchmark settlement for the Remaining Defendants would be at least $380 million, more than $50 million greater than what the instant settlement provides.

Tech workers initially levied the class action anti-poaching lawsuit against the companies in 2011, accusing them of creating no-hire agreements and conspiring not to poach employees from one another in an effort to keep salaries lower.

No-solicitation agreements revealed during the lawsuit dated back to 2005, involving Apple, Google, Intel, Adobe, Intuit, Lucasfilm, and Pixar, among others. The agreements prevented company recruiters from contacting employees placed on specific no-contact lists.

The United States Department of Justice stepped in back in 2010, ordering the companies to stop entering anti-poaching agreements, but the class-action civil lawsuit brought against the companies by 64,000 employees will remain open until a suitable settlement can be reached. The suit originally asked for $3 billion in damages, a significantly higher number than the 324 million agreed upon in April.

Popular Stories

iOS 18

Here Are Apple's Full Release Notes for iOS 18.2

Thursday December 5, 2024 11:48 am PST by
Apple seeded the release candidate version of iOS 18.2 today, which means it's going to see a public launch imminently. Release candidates represent the final version of new software that will be provided to the public should no last minute bugs be found, and Apple includes release notes with the RC launch. The iOS 18.2 release notes provide a look at all of the new features that are coming...
Apple AI Command Center Concept Mock 3

Apple Expected to Launch This All-New Device Next Year

Wednesday November 27, 2024 1:05 pm PST by
Apple is expected to kick off 2025 by launching an all-new smart home hub, also referred to as a "command center," as early as March. The hub is expected to feature around a six-inch display that can be attached to a tabletop base with a speaker, or mounted on a wall. The device is said to run a new "homeOS" operating system with a customizable widget-focused home screen, and it is expected...
New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 18

20 New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 18.2

Friday December 6, 2024 4:42 am PST by
Apple is set to release iOS 18.2 in the second week of December, bringing the second round of Apple Intelligence features to iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 models. This update brings several major advancements to Apple's AI integration, including completely new image generation tools and a range of Visual Intelligence-based enhancements. There are a handful of new non-AI related feature controls...
iPhone 17 Slim Feature

iPhone 17 'Air' Expected to Be ~2mm Thinner Than iPhone 16 Pro

Friday December 6, 2024 4:07 pm PST by
In 2025, Apple is planning to debut a thinner version of the iPhone that will be sold alongside the iPhone 17, iPhone 17 Pro, and iPhone 17 Pro Max. This iPhone 17 "Air" will be about two millimeters thinner than the current iPhone 16 Pro, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. The iPhone 16 Pro is 8.25mm thick, so an iPhone 17 that is 2mm thinner would come in at around 6.25mm. At 6.25mm,...
iPhone 14 Pro Display Two Times Brighter Feature

Every Display Upgrade Rumored for Apple's iPhone 17

Friday December 6, 2024 5:14 am PST by
Apple's next-generation iPhone 17 lineup may bring some of the most significant display improvements we've seen in recent years. While the iPhone 17 series isn't expected until late 2025, multiple rumors suggest Apple is working on substantial screen upgrades across its entire smartphone range. From enhanced refresh rates to advanced materials and improved power efficiency, these display...
airpods pro 2 gradient

AirPods Pro 3 Expected Next Year: Here's What We Know

Thursday November 28, 2024 3:30 am PST by
Despite being released over two years ago, Apple's AirPods Pro 2 continue to dominate the wireless earbud market. However, with the AirPods Pro 3 expected to launch sometime in 2025, anyone thinking of buying Apple's premium earbuds may be wondering if the next generation is worth holding out for. Apart from their audio and noise-canceling performance, which are generally regarded as...
Generic iOS 18

Apple Seeds Release Candidate Versions of iOS 18.2 and More With Genmoji, Image Playground and ChatGPT Integration

Thursday December 5, 2024 10:03 am PST by
Apple today seeded the release candidate versions of upcoming iOS 18.2, iPadOS 18.2, and macOS Sequoia 15.2 updates to developers and public beta testers for testing purposes, two weeks after releasing the fourth betas. Alongside the release candidate versions of the iPhone, iPad, and Mac operating system updates, Apple has also seeded the watchOS 11.2, tvOS 18.2, and HomePod Software 18.2 RCs....
open ai logo

OpenAI Launches $200/Month ChatGPT Pro Plan

Thursday December 5, 2024 4:19 pm PST by
OpenAI today announced the launch of ChatGPT Pro, a $200 per month subscription service that provides unlimited access to OpenAI o1, the company's newest and most advanced large language model. The plan includes unlimited use of OpenAI o1, o1-mini, GPT-4o, and Advanced Voice, along with o1 pro mode, an o1 version that uses more compute to provide better answers to the hardest problems. In...

Top Rated Comments

NT1440 Avatar
135 months ago
Good, silicon valley as a whole stole billions in wages for employees through this scheme. The payout should be much higher.


That said, this is in a country where Bank of America is about to pay $17 Billion for their illegal acts that helped tear down the economy, but resulted in hundreds of billions in profit at the time.

We live in a pay to play corporatocracy, and good on this judge for holding out for more.
Score: 27 Votes (Like | Disagree)
theheadguy Avatar
135 months ago
Exctly. If both sides agree, the judge should have no say in the matter. Unless she just wants more media attention, which sadly seems to be the case here.
My question is: Did the tech worker's side accept the settlement? Who gives a rat's derriere what the Judge thinks if the tech worker's side is okay with the settlement.

Then this is a wonderful educational opportunity for you. In certain types of legal cases, the judge gets to ensure that the settlement is fair for the workers. Attorneys (on both sides, sometimes) do not always have the workers' best interest in mind.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Small White Car Avatar
135 months ago
My question is: Did the tech worker's side accept the settlement?

Who gives a rat's derriere what the Judge thinks if the tech worker's side is okay with the settlement.
Because the companies broke the law. This is not just a civil lawsuit.

It appears that the government is stepping back and letting the lawsuit act as the punishment, but should the workers just give up and say "never mind" then the government would have to step in and do something.

So based on that, yes, they do have an interest in how the 'punishment' ends up.
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Albanbrooke Avatar
135 months ago
The Judge's decision is actually really good.

Exctly. If both sides agree, the judge should have no say in the matter. Unless she just wants more media attention, which sadly seems to be the case here.

The judge has to have a say in the matter because this is a class action lawsuit.

Class action lawsuits are different because the plaintiffs (people who got screwed) aren't really involved in the suit themselves. There are a few "named plaintiffs" who might be, but it is likely only five people out of the tens of thousands who were harmed by this practice.

Class actions are often settled so that the attorneys make a TON of money; like tens of millions of dollars in fees. The proposed settlements actually include an agreement of how much money goes to the attorneys who brought the lawsuit against Apple and Google.

It is possible that:

1) The judge didn't feel that the class of harmed individuals (everybody who was underpaid as a result of the anti-poaching agreement) was being served by the terms of the agreement, or
2) That the attorneys' fees were way too high.

There are actual cases where the class gets pennies on the dollar while some of the attorneys walked away with $5k/hr for their work. Judges MUST be active in these types of cases.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
nagromme Avatar
135 months ago
Agreed; that does fall below the range of reasonableness. It even falls below the level of noticeableness.

Tim Cook doesn't seem likely to even want to continue the practice, but Apple itself isn't all that matters. Other big companies are looking at this precedent. Telling them "go ahead, you might get fined pocket change" would not be helping the problem.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
aristotle Avatar
135 months ago
I propose cutting Lucy Koh's salary because I think it is too damn high.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)