3 ms·
Managers are generally considered to be agents of the company, so, their actions can legally incur liability on the company. I don't find it that hard to belie
by pmiller2 6y ago
Managers are generally considered to be agents of the company, so, their actions can legally incur liability on the company. I don't find it that hard to believe that individual store managers might do this, but that word of the practice might not make it up to corporate. This explanation is simple and plausible enough to me that I'm inclined to think it's probably exactly what had been happening.
- quesera 6y agoThat's likely how things started. Retail management was hired from other stores (e.g. Burberry), and followed their preexisting understanding of appropriate legal policy. But at some point the issue went up the food chain. Corporate had many opportunities to step in and make things right before the suit reached the 9th Circuit.
- dkonofalski 6y ago>their actions can legally incur liability on the company Of course. I agree 100% on this point. I'm just skeptical when articles like this frame the issue as this being some evil plan by Apple to not pay their employees. Apple treats their employees better than 99% of the companies out there (Gravity Payments is an obvious exclusion for me) and, while they're not perfect, it's obvious to me that this article is just banking on anti-Apple sentiment. The reality is far more boring and I feel like this went to a class-action suit too quickly. If higher-ups at Apple had been notified that this was happening, I feel like they would have made it right (at least based on my experience).