[Macworld]

Post your comments for Former IBM executive joins Apple here

[MorrisTheCat]

I'm not so sure this saga is over if IBM has anything to say about it. I imagine they can still bring Papermaster to court, especially if they have a signed non-competition agreement from him, which I still feel are unfair for people of his experience.
Will be interesting to see how this turns out.

[sporks]

It's a job, not indentured servitude. If IBM didn't want him to leave, they should have made it worth his while to stay.

[simdude]

Papermaster? That can't be a real name. It sounds like something from a cheap paperback detective novel.

[nmpike]

Papermaster signed the non-compete. I am sure in exchange for that non-compete that he was compensated well from IBM. He agreed to it, it's not like IBM forced him to sign it... I hope he has to pay...
IBM will sue him as an individual not Apple.. and Papermaster does not have the resources IBM has.

[Steve_S]

MorrisTheCat said:

I'm not so sure this saga is over if IBM has anything to say about it. I imagine they can still bring Papermaster to court, especially if they have a signed non-competition agreement from him, which I still feel are unfair for people of his experience.

Will be interesting to see how this turns out.

I'm not a lawyer, but generally speaking, non-compete clauses aren't worth the paper their written on. I've signed them before with other companies (including with IBM) and have been threatened when leaving on one instance. I've yet to see employment blocked by these documents.

If I recall, IBM's employment agreement is particularly devious. They claim to own any intellectual property that's created by you, even if you create it at home on your own time.

[vivi]

"It's a job, not indentured servitude. If IBM didn't want him to leave, they should have made it worth his while to stay."

From InformationWeek.com:

"In its court filing, IBM revealed that it offered Papermaster "a substantial increase" in his compensation package to stay with the company. "IBM offered to pay Mr. Papermaster one year's salary in exchange for Mr. Papermaster to respect his contractual obligation to refrain from working for an IBM competitor for one year," IBM said."

[montgomery_burns]

nmpike said:

Papermaster signed the non-compete. I am sure in exchange for that non-compete that he was compensated well from IBM. He agreed to it, it's not like IBM forced him to sign it... I hope he has to pay...

IBM will sue him as an individual not Apple.. and Papermaster does not have the resources IBM has.

And you assume that Apple is completely innocent in this? When Apple hired this person, did Apple know that he had signed an agreement with IBM? Did they even ask? Surely the thought must have crossed the minds at Apple, considering this person's relatively high profile. Did Apple recruit him, or did he apply to Apple on his own? How is employee poaching viewed under the law? Oh that's right... "It's not like Apple forced him to join"... So now that the news is out, what does Apple plan to do about it? Just sit back and watch this thing play out in court? How seriously does Apple want to bring this person on board? Will Apple fight to keep him, or will they sell him out in order to protect themselves?

[Steve_S]

montgomery_burns said:

And you assume that Apple is completely innocent in this? When Apple hired this person, did Apple know that he had signed an agreement with IBM? Did they even ask? Surely the thought must have crossed the minds at Apple, considering this person's relatively high profile. Did Apple recruit him, or did he apply to Apple on his own? How is employee poaching viewed under the law? Oh that's right... "It's not like Apple forced him to join"... So now that the news is out, what does Apple plan to do about it? Just sit back and watch this thing play out in court? How seriously does Apple want to bring this person on board? Will Apple fight to keep him, or will they sell him out in order to protect themselves?

All good questions. Whether any of us form dwellers agree on the ethics involved here, the only question that really matters is regard to legal impact. I don't see any legal impact from any of the questions you've raised. Poaching employees from other companies is a common practice. If that were illegal, there would be bigger problems. What happens if the legal system actually blocks employment? Now what happens to the person trying to leave? Is that person treated the same? Does that person still have the same career path? What if the existing employer decides to then treat the person that tried to leave like dirt... maybe gives the person a demotion, etc? Can the person leave then? If not, why not? The bottom line is that it's a free market. In a free market, the law of supply and demand decides where people work and how much they get paid. I see that as a good thing.