Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

uk.reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#11

Post by fiatmoney »

spenrose wrote: post #10
bradleyjg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawy…

Wow, does your last sentence turn 180 from the (otherwise excellent) analysis. If class actions don't help plaintiffs enough, shouldn't we be looking for a stronger solution?

"Strength" is not a metric here. There is a principal-agent problem because the lawyers are able to convince a court to give them the right to represent the class. They then have a much lower standard of responsibility to the class.

You need a solution that aligns the plaintiff's interests and the lawyer's interests - one way to do that is to have them negotiate with the plaintiff rather than the defendant to get paid.

Of course, this puts a greater burden on potential defendants - you'd probably see lower volume of suits and higher damages / penalties. It's unclear how the total would shake out.

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#12

Post by bradleyjg »

spenrose wrote: post #10
bradleyjg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawy…

Wow, does your last sentence turn 180 from the (otherwise excellent) analysis. If class actions don't help plaintiffs enough, shouldn't we be looking for a stronger solution?

Having clients in the driver's seat is a stronger solution. If lawyers had to solicit clients, and settlements had to be approved by them, would cy pres or coupon settlements ever happen? Would the case we are discussing right now have been settled for such a small amount per plaintiff?

It's true that some other cases, where the harm to each individual is tiny, won't be brought at all, but I tend to think such harms are better suited to be ameliorated by regulators rather than through the misuse of the tort system.

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#13

Post by freehunter »

pmorici wrote: post #5

The money quote from the plaintiff... ""As an analogy," Devine wrote, "if a shoplifter is caught on video stealing a $400 iPad from the Apple Store, would a fair and just resolution be for the shoplifter to pay Apple $40, keep the iPad, and walk away with no record or admission of wrongdoing? Of course not.""

That does happen though. Apple could choose to not press charges and let him walk away free.

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#14

Post by warmwaffles »

freehunter wrote: post #13
pmorici wrote: post #5

The money quote from the plaintiff... ""As an analogy," Devine wrote, "if a shoplifter is caught on video stealing a $400 iPad from the Apple Store, would a fair and just resolution be for the shoplifter to pay Apple $40, keep the iPad, and walk away with no record or admission of wrongdoing? Of course not.""

That does happen though. Apple could choose to not press charges and let him walk away free.

This is not actually true. The District Attorney can choose to ignore Apple's choice.

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#15

Post by geebee »

spenrose wrote: post #10
bradleyjg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawy…

Wow, does your last sentence turn 180 from the (otherwise excellent) analysis. If class actions don't help plaintiffs enough, shouldn't we be looking for a stronger solution?

I'm trying to understand these issues better, but my initial inclination would be to treat class actions similar to antitrust lawsuits. Individuals can bring anti-trust lawsuits for specific damages, but my impression is that broad antitrust lawsuits are generally initiated by federal/state attorneys general.

This makes sense when the plaintiffs are, for example, "everyone who buys gas". But in this particular "no hire" case, I do think that the the harm done here is pretty extensive - it may well extend to people who never applied for positions at these companies. Obviously, you were harmed if you were specifically prevented from switching jobs, and you were harmed if you were were passive but specifically never contact about a new position. But what if you might have had a chance to move up in a company if someone else had moved on to a new job at a different company? What if your own staff was aggressively targeted by a recruiter who would otherwise have tried to hire from google or apple, because your engineers were fair game and there's weren't as part of a secret collusive (and absolutely illegal) agreement? What if you applied for a job at these places and might have had a crack at if if there had been more turnover?

Collusion is very, very damaging to a free economy. This is broad and far reaching. I think this might be better handled by an atty general who doesn't stand to profit personally from the outcome.

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#16

Post by bradleyjg »

geebee wrote: post #15
spenrose wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, does your last sentence turn 180 from the (otherwise excellent) analysis. If class actions don't help plaintiffs enough, shouldn't we be looking for a stronger solution?

I'm trying to understand these issues better, but my initial inclination would be to treat class actions similar to antitrust lawsuits. Individuals can bring anti-trust lawsuits for specific damages, but my impression is that broad antitrust lawsuits are generally initiated by federal/state attorneys general. This makes sense when the plaintiffs are, for example, "everyone who buys gas". But in this particular "no hi…

I tend to agree with you (see my sister comment about regulators regulating) but it's worth noting that in this particular case the Justice Department did pursue the case but agreed to the most ridiculous settlement terms possible (the companies in question promised to follow the law for five years -- something they were already obligated to do.)

Edit: DOJ Press release http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/September/10-at-1076.html

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#17

Post by geebee »

bradleyjg wrote: post #16
geebee wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to understand these issues better, but my initial inclination would be to treat class actions similar to antitrust lawsuits. Individuals can bring anti-trust lawsuits for specific damages, but my impression is that broad antitrust lawsuits are generally initiated by federal/state attorneys general. This makes sense when the plaintiffs are, for example, "everyone who buys gas". But in this particular "no hi…

I tend to agree with you (see my sister comment about regulators regulating) but it's worth noting that in this particular case the Justice Department did pursue the case but agreed to the most ridiculous settlement terms possible (the companies in question promised to follow the law for five years -- something they were already obligated to do.) Edit: DOJ Press release http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/September/10…

I wasn't aware of that, though now that you mention it, I do have a vague memory about this. Would you post a link?

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#18

Post by [deleted] »

bradleyjg wrote: post #6
jmct wrote: post #2

I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing. Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected? I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.

Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawy…

[deleted]

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#19

Post by pmorici »

freehunter wrote: post #13
pmorici wrote: post #5

The money quote from the plaintiff... ""As an analogy," Devine wrote, "if a shoplifter is caught on video stealing a $400 iPad from the Apple Store, would a fair and just resolution be for the shoplifter to pay Apple $40, keep the iPad, and walk away with no record or admission of wrongdoing? Of course not.""

That does happen though. Apple could choose to not press charges and let him walk away free.

The question isn't whether it happens but whether it would be considered a just outcome. He is drawing a comparison between something that is easily recognized as "getting off easy" to something that is harder to conceptualize because of the absolute size of the amounts involved.

Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

#20

Post by presootto »

yp_all wrote: post #8

I am under the impression that the information that this suit could have revealed about Mr Jobs' character was potentially far more damaging than any settlement or award the defendants might have to pay. To put it another way, I get the impression that settlement here is primarily for PR damage control, and only secondarily for limiting what the defendants must ultimately pay. Does this idea have any support? If I am…

I agree that the settlement is mainly about damage control. I also think the company most affected by said negative PR is Google.

I'm still waiting for Eric to apologize to the recruiter who was fired for contacting an Apple employee and for Jonathan Rosemberg to have the decency of resigning.

Post reply on HN