Supply and demand a great idea... until it doesn't work in your favor

[Snowbird]

From the AP:

Suit Claims Silicon Valley Anti-Poaching Scheme

By MARCUS WOHLSEN Associated Press
SAN JOSE, Calif. January 28, 2012 (AP)

In Silicon Valley's white-hot competition for tech talent, programmers can face a daily barrage of calls from recruiters seeking to woo them to rival companies with offers of better pay and perks.

But workers for some of the biggest names in the business claim their phones fell silent because of a conspiracy among their employers. And they claim the world's biggest tech icon was at the center.

A lawsuit filed in federal court in San Jose claims senior executives at Google Inc., Intel Corp., Adobe Systems Inc., Intuit Inc., Lucasfilm Ltd., Pixar and Apple Inc. violated antitrust laws by entering into secret anti-poaching agreements not to hire each other's best workers. In doing so, the suit contends the companies were able to keep wages artificially low by preventing bidding wars for the best employees.

The plaintiffs also claim that company e-mails show Steve Jobs himself sought and orchestrated at least some of the so-called "gentlemen's agreements" while Apple's CEO.

"I believe we have a policy of no recruiting from Apple," then-Google chief executive Eric Schmidt wrote in a 2007 email cited by the plaintiffs. The email was originally furnished to the U.S. Justice Department, which investigated similar allegations in 2010. The same email included a forwarded message from Jobs complaining that Google's recruiting department was trying to lure away an Apple engineer.

"Can you get this stopped and let me know why this is happening?" Schmidt wrote. Google's director of staffing replied that the recruiter "will be terminated within the hour."

The companies' attorneys said the facts even as presented by the plaintiffs show no evidence of a conspiracy.

~snip~

Read the rest at:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/suit-claims-silicon-valley-anti-poaching-scheme-15463766#.TyWdunqAO1s

This accusation has been going on for a while now as some of you may know and this is not the first time a lawsuit has been filed.

[R Doug]

The thread title should read, "Anti Trust actions hurts advancement of employees in Silicone Valley."

Supply and Demand works just fine.  But, like an engine, if you add something to it which should be there, it cannot work properly or breaks down.  

[zer0netgain]

Hard call.

If you let the "free market" work unchecked, you'd have an upward spiral of pay in the market from everyone trying to steal/retain workers from each other.  This would result in higher costs that pass to the consumer and hurt everyone when products stop selling because they are too expensive.

There is no reason that companies can not agree to not try and ACTIVELY recruit employees belonging to a rival company.  There should be no agreement that they cannot hire someone who approaches them and expresses interest in changing employers.  In that way, employees are free to court competitors to see if they will offer better pay, benefits or opportunities, but the companies do not go out to try and recruit talent away from one another lest it start a bidding war that hurts everyone.

[Snowbird]

The thread title should read, "Anti Trust actions hurts advancement of employees in Silicone Valley."

Supply and Demand works just fine.  But, like an engine, if you add something to it which should be there, it cannot work properly or breaks down.  

Well, wages, just as prices are supposed to work according to market forces of supply and demand. This is a concept well known to companies whence they off shore all the manufacturing jobs they can as fast as they can because "starving" people charge less. But, when scarcity of human capital occurs in the home market, they band together and try subverting market forces. That's hypocritical.

I don't know how you came up with your thread title, but if it works better for some.... meh.

[Snowbird]

There is no reason that companies can not agree to not try and ACTIVELY recruit employees belonging to a rival company.

I think the law may disagree, as did one company's exec. Besides, the lawsuit contends companies went way beyond agreeing not to recruit actively. There were supposed promises NOT to cross hire at all, ever. That means once they have you, they own you... at that price. At least until they can figure out a way to beat that price down as you slowly discover your efforts to better your lot have been stymied.

[R Doug]

Well, wages, just as prices are supposed to work according to market forces of supply and demand. This is a concept well known to companies whence they off shore all the manufacturing jobs they can as fast as they can because "starving" people charge less. But, when scarcity of human capital occurs in the home market, they band together and try subverting market forces. That's hypocritical.

I don't know how you came up with your thread title, but if it works better for some.... meh.

The thread title suggests the concept of supply and demand failed the employees.  Supply and demand didn't fail the employees, corruption via breaking antitrust laws is what hurt the employees.