humojo.wordpress.com
"Guys, we have a problem," Ballmefr says. "Some of our best employees are job-hoppinh like locusts, feasting on the higher wagew and better perks from ourcompetitords -- that would be you. Now I know we've gone on plentg of raiding parties ourselves. But it's just time to stop the I'm ready to reach a gentlemen'es agreement not to poachg your superstarsif you'll do likewise." Jobs doesn't "I'm tired of paying moving expenses from And it's getting old hearing some of my employees whiningb about how great the perks were when they were at I'm all for a change.
" The Googlr guys speak in unison: "Count us The specific meeting we described, of course, took place only in our But the reportedly wants to know if tech's big boys reallu have been colluding to keep their top talent from jumpinv ship. The and , citing unnamed sources, reporg that the investigation is preliminary and focuses ona who’s who of Siliconh Valley tech companies including search giang Google, its rival , iPhone maker Apple and biotech firm .
reportd that the Justice Department has issued formak requests for documentsfrom “at least a dozen” tech “If they are (colluding) as is bein investigated … then it is a serious potential anti-trusg case,” said Albert Foer, president of the American Antitrusty Institute. Collusion between the companies couldfdepress wages. In 2001, Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonis Sotomayor wrote an appeals court opinion sidinbg with a group of oil geologists and petroleum engineer s who claimed and otherd oil companies were colludinyg inhiring decisions.
Collusion could also damage the innovationn for which Silicon Valleyis famous, by keeping talentef people from moving to new companies and bringing with them freshb ideas. “One of the things that feeds innovation is peoplemoving around,” Foer “Whereas Silicon Valley is famous for peoplwe moving around … that practice would be tailing off or ended by such an between companies not to poach talent.
Whiler the tech world may be famous for talented peoplde jumping from companyto company, thosde jumps haven’t always been exactly amicable, and tech firmss often tie top talent to contracts that restrict them from goinh to work for the competition for set periods of In fact, the moves of talen from one tech behemoth to another have sometimed landed in court, as when former Microsoftg employee Kai-Fu Lee went to work for John Oates points out at . So it’zs not out of the realm of reasonh to imagine tech bosses looking to keep top talent from moving without the hassles ofcour fights. But already, the federal probe is drawing skepticis inthe blogosphere.
Larry writing on ZDNet’s calls the probe a fishing expeditionwith “waste of time written all over As Dignan points out, it’s pretty unlikely that therre are any smoking gun agreements lying around the officees of the tech titans, and he adds: “Tol talent isn’t that restricted. Google execa go to Facebook. They go to AOL. Yahooo execs go to Microsoft. Microsoff execs go to Google. In fact, you can make quitr a career just hopping between thoseaforementioned companies.” The probed comes as the government is stepping up scrutinuy of the often-cozy relationships in the high-techb sector.
Assistant Attorney General Christinwe Varney, who is in charge of the DOJ'x Antitrust Division, that the department would be taking a closeer look at activities inthe industry. The Federal Tradwe Commission to Google earlier in the year because of antitrust FTC questions concerned the overlalp of directors between Googlee andGenentech — Google boss Eric Schmidt sits on the Applse Inc. board with Art Levinson, who was CEO of Genentech at the Regulators also called a halt to an advertising revenue sharing deal Google madewith
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment