Amazon sues former AWS marketing VP Brian Hall after he takes Google Cloud job

Post by dboreham » Tue, Jun 09, 2020, 12:54 AM UTC

peterkos wrote: post #34

Infinitesimus wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google likely considered legal defense as part of the hiring cost when taking someone that high profile. > the hiring team has always led me to believe that the non-competes are a standard clause and are not likely to be enforced. Your average engineer is likely easily replaceable. Directors and VPs are hard to replace and a huge win for any company that successfully hires them.

> Google likely considered legal defense as part of the hiring cost when taking someone that high profile Stuff like this is always so fascinating to me: the idea that someone's ability to do their job is worth fighting over in court -- nevermind the cultural costs of bringing someone new into a executive position at a company.

Post by DenisM » Tue, Jun 09, 2020, 12:57 AM UTC

julianeon wrote: post #28

ctvo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't appreciate you linking your own property that offers little new information except the rehash without an explicit disclaimer.

Ok; I can see people are displeased. I've added a disclaimer, since that was requested. I'd like to take a moment to ask then what is appropriate here, after checking the etiquette guidelines, which I read beforehand and which are linked below. I read them line by line in advance and I didn't see a conflict; to be clear, they don't disallow what I did. However, I'm open to being told what I could do that would be bet…

Post by treis » Tue, Jun 09, 2020, 1:00 AM UTC

em-bee wrote: post #23

kelnos wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt that would have helped, given that he signed the agreement while a resident of a jurisdiction where it was valid. Regardless, I wouldn't uproot myself (and my family, if I had one) for something like this. Non-competes are an abomination and need to go, everywhere. The only alternative I'd accept is what's done in the finance world: you basically get a paid vacation for the term of your non-compete.

i don't think that matters. what matters is the jurisdiction where he works now. california doesn't want its employed population to be limited by noncompetes. they certainly won't be interested in honoring noncompetes from elsewhere.

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jun 09, 2020, 1:01 AM UTC

skinnymuch wrote: post #33

tonfa wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large part of compensation is probably not in base salary, that'd be asking for like a 50% compensation cut.

I was assuming the person meant what you take home. Not just base salary.

Post by julianeon » Tue, Jun 09, 2020, 1:03 AM UTC

ciarannolan wrote: post #44

julianeon wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok; I can see people are displeased. I've added a disclaimer, since that was requested. I'd like to take a moment to ask then what is appropriate here, after checking the etiquette guidelines, which I read beforehand and which are linked below. I read them line by line in advance and I didn't see a conflict; to be clear, they don't disallow what I did. However, I'm open to being told what I could do that would be bet…

I appreciate that you took time to collect the tweets. I certainly found them interesting and wouldn't have found them on my own. Definitely add a disclaimer next time, though.