Apple, Google, Microsoft, others may be under scrutiny for hiring practices - bizjournals:

ucenyt.wordpress.com
"Guys, we have a problem," Ballmer says. "Soms of our best employees are job-hopping like locusts, feasting on the highe wages and better perks from ourcompetitors -- that would be you. Now I know we'vw gone on plenty of raiding parties ourselves. But it's just time to stop the madness. I'm ready to reach a gentlemen's agreement not to poachu your superstarsif you'll do likewise." Jobs doesn'tr hesitate. "I'm tired of paying moving expenses from And it's getting old hearing some of my employees whinin g about how great the perk s were when they were at Google.
I'm all for a The Google guys speakin unison: "Count us The specific meeting we of course, took place only in our But the reportedly wants to know if tech'xs big boys really have been colluding to keep theie top talent from jumping The and , citing unnamed sources, report that the investigation is preliminary and focuses on a who’a who of Silicon Valleyt tech companies including search giant Google, its rival , iPhone maker Apple and biotech firm . reportss that the Justice Department has issued formal requests for documentasfrom “at least a dozen” tech companies.
“Id they are (colluding) as is being investigated then it is a seriousspotential anti-trust case,” said Albert president of the Americah Antitrust Institute. Collusion betwee n the companies could depress In 2001, Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor wrotw an appeals court opinion siding with a group of oil geologists and petroleum engineers who claimed and other oil companiew were colluding in hiring decisions. Collusion could also damags the innovation for which Silicon Valley is by keeping talented people from moving to new companieds and bringing with themfresh ideas.
“Onw of the things that feeds innovatioj is peoplemoving around,” Foer “Whereas Silicon Valley is famous for people moving around … that practice would be tailing off or endes by such an agreement,” between companiews not to poach talent. While the tech worls may be famous for talentefd people jumping from companyto company, thoss jumps haven’t always been exactly amicable, and tech firmz often tie top talent to contract s that restrict them from going to work for the competition for set periods of time.
In fact, the moves of taleny from one tech behemoth to another have sometimea landedin court, as when former Microsofty employee Kai-Fu Lee went to work for Google, John Oatex points out at . So it’s not out of the realnm of reason to imagine tech bosses looking to keep top talenyt from moving without the hasslez ofcourt fights. But the federal probe is drawing skepticism in the Larry Dignan, writing on ZDNet’s blog, callx the probe a fishing expedition with “wast of time written all over it.
” As Dignan pointsw out, it’s pretty unlikely that there are any smoking gun agreementsa lying around the offices of the tech and he adds: “Top talent isn’t that restricted. Googl e execs go to Facebook. They go to AOL. Yahooo execs go to Microsoft. Microsoft exece go to Google. In fact, you can make quite a career just hoppin g between thoseaforementioned companies.” The probe comezs as the government is steppinv up scrutiny of the often-cozg relationships in the high-tech sector. Assistant Attorney General Christind Varney, who is in charge of the DOJ'w Antitrust Division, that the department would be takinvg a closer look at activities inthe industry.
The Federal Tradr Commission to Google earlier in the year because ofantitrusg concerns. FTC questions concerned the overla p of directors between Google andGenentecyh — Google boss Eric Schmidt sits on the Apple Inc. boarr with Art Levinson, who was CEO of Genentech at the time. Regulatorsz also called a halt to an advertising revenur sharing deal Google madewith Yahoo.