161–170 of 398 posts
I don’t understand Jobs’ logic here. Is he just a bully? If Google makes such a great offer that his employee will leave him, shouldn’t he try to make a better offer, or meet with the employee instead of calling Sergey? Say he did get the offer canceled. How would this employee feel about working for a CEO that does this?
> Is he just a bully? LMAO. Yes. And a bad person.
All this stopped not because of any class action, but one company Meta will not play along with the cabal. Zuck raised the salary so much he started poaching left and right from other tech giants. Google and Apple had no choice but to match the salaries to retain and hire top talent. For all the fault of Meta, they knew the worth of employees and have always tried to give them a good bargain.
[deleted]
>”So a compromise would be to continue with the offer we have made (to [REDACTED]) but not to make offers to any of the others unless they get permission from Apple.”* This is just so absolutely shitty behavior. It’s bamazing they were willing to talk about it so openly in email format. You get to be so great at your job only to risk being blackballed by hush hush non compete handshake agreements? Unions don’t go nea…
I don’t understand Jobs’ logic here. Is he just a bully? If Google makes such a great offer that his employee will leave him, shouldn’t he try to make a better offer, or meet with the employee instead of calling Sergey? Say he did get the offer canceled. How would this employee feel about working for a CEO that does this?
I don’t understand Jobs’ logic here. Is he just a bully? If Google makes such a great offer that his employee will leave him, shouldn’t he try to make a better offer, or meet with the employee instead of calling Sergey? Say he did get the offer canceled. How would this employee feel about working for a CEO that does this?
From that point on the game theory is fairly obvious and the rest is a question of style. May as well get angry; sometimes it works. It isn't optimum behaviour but at that level it'll be quite common. There aren't a lot of strategies to choose from. Call it bullying if you like, but realistically once this sort of money is involved something different is happening to what goes on in playgrounds. These people are well insulated from any emotional consequences or threats to their comfort. For a label like 'bully' what matters is how Jobs treated people he had actual power over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And financially, it was probably worth it to them.
I suspect the fines exceed the salaries the employees were 'owed' but are much less than the profits earned from those employees, yes.
Maybe to the specific candidates affected, but this would also have had a stifling effect on compensation across the industry too (and the resulting growth would have lasted for years). This kind of subtle wage fixing pays off in spades.
I don’t understand Jobs’ logic here. Is he just a bully? If Google makes such a great offer that his employee will leave him, shouldn’t he try to make a better offer, or meet with the employee instead of calling Sergey? Say he did get the offer canceled. How would this employee feel about working for a CEO that does this?
They had a mutual non compete going. Here’s another instance where a cold recruiting email was “against policy”: https://twitter.com/TechEmails/status/1443263744906305543?s=...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think I understand your larger point, but whatever corrections or amendments need to be made to the myth of Jobs, the idea that he was in any way average shouldn’t be one.
The dude basically chose to die of treatable cancer in his 50s because he just didn't like the idea of getting medical treatment. That's one of the most odd behaviors I've ever heard of.
The tech giants ultimately reached a settlement in the amount of $400 million in a lawsuit involving allegations of these dishonest backdoor dealings. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33292364 [2] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/04/24/306592297...