5 ms·

Steve Jobs Emails Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen

45 points by miles 5y ago

ElViajero 5y ago
And that is how companies collaborate to keep salaries low. > "I thought we agreed not to recruit any senior level employees…. I would propose we keep it that way. Open to discuss. It would be good to agree." I will not express it better than this: "What's galling about the emails is that they come from executives who, on any other day, praise the wonders of the free market, competition, and its ability to set fair prices. Yet in private, when it comes to their own companies, they avoid competing for staff and pursue policies that artificially distort the market to ensure that their most valuable assets - the people who actually create the products that generate Apple and Google's returns - get paid as little as possible." https://www.businessinsider.in/emails-show-how-apples-steve-jobs-and-googles-eric-schmidt-allegedly-conspired-to-screw-over-employees/articleshow/29315937.cms https://www.businessinsider.in/emails-show-how-apples-steve-...
- junon 5y ago
  Companies saying one thing publicly and doing another thing privately is SOP and hardly surprising. Apple's pride-flag waving and financing documentaries about human rights while still operating child sweatshops and participating in the cobalt mines where children are often slaves is a grand example of this.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    I get the human rights things but I don’t get the “pride-flag waving” comment since Apple has shown a strong support for LGBT and Pride in addition to their CEO also being a member of the LGBT community.
    - junon 5y ago
      I am contrasting something they do that is publicly seen as positive and progressive with the juxtaposition of them committing human rights violations.
skywal_l 5y ago
A lot of comments on twitter are like: "That's how you write emails", "how to stay on point", "what a pro", bla bla... Completely oblivious.
- romesmoke 5y ago
  Not sure about what you mean with 'oblivious' here, but Jobs' opening email is indeed flawless--taking into consideration that Apple's CEO allocated some time amidst the frenzy to write it: no trivialities, no redundancies, no chance of not being taken seriously or of being misunderstood. I wonder how much mental debt would be eliminated if all of the world's emails were that clear. Note that, in essence, we're talking about the major means of human communication--and thus information exchange--at least in the tech industry and academia. Pretty important and impactful stuff.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - davidmr 5y ago
    One may want to be less, not more clear when one is breaking the law in writing. Apple and Google settled a class action lawsuit over this exact thing. It’s disappointing how few people stood up to this. I recall Jobs threatening Palm’s CEO with patent trolling if Palm didn’t play ball, which I suppose would give me second thoughts about not cooperating… Edit: https://9to5mac.com/2013/01/23/the-heated-email-exchange-between-steve-jobs-and-then-palm-ceo-ed-colligan-over-poaching-employees/ https://9to5mac.com/2013/01/23/the-heated-email-exchange-bet...
  - belter 5y ago
    Its just difficult to look up to a person who behaved like he did. Its a shame Hollywood depiction of Steve Jobs missed most of it: https://www.businessinsider.nl/steve-jobs-terrible-small-fry-daughter-book-2018-8/ https://www.businessinsider.nl/steve-jobs-terrible-small-fry...
- wp381640 5y ago
  This is straight up "is you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy" from The Wire
t0mas88 5y ago
I'm curious what the collective stance at HN is on this, because it sounds like there is a big difference between possible policies: A. Companies agree not to persuade each other's employees to leave their role (but when they apply on their own, free to hire them) B. Companies agree not to hire each other's employees C. Companies agree to set a certain cap or target salary together for similar roles I think A is not uncommon? And it is as far as I know even in my own contract that I cannot for example compel former colleagues to follow me to a new company for the first 12 months after leaving. These emails could be explained as only agreeing on A? But the allegation I think is that some in "big tech" also did B and C or similar things? Or is just A already illegal?
- resoluteteeth 5y ago
  I believe A is already illegal. Also, an agreement not to recruit former co-workers for a period after you leave the company is different than two specific companies agreeing not to poach each other's employees.
- belter 5y ago
  Companies to Employees: When is to hire employees the market dictates. If you are not happy you can work somewhere else, we have other candidates and if you move somewhere else we pay you according to the local cost of living. Its the free capitalist market after all and you are enjoying the benefits. Companies to Companies: Lets agree not to compete on salary....
altmind 5y ago
To be noted, these companies were later sued in antitrust case regarding these agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
- shoto_io 5y ago
  Which is probably the source of the emails?
- belter 5y ago
  And quickly "resolved"... "The settlement agreement does not provide any compensation for company employees affected by the alleged agreements" You cannot make this stuff up. :-(
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

45 points by miles 5y ago

And that is how companies collaborate to keep salaries low. > "I thought we agreed not to recruit any senior level employees…. I would propose we keep it that way. Open to discuss. It would be good to agree." I will not express it better than this: "What's galling about the emails is that they come from executives who, on any other day, praise the wonders of the free market, competition, and its ability to set fair prices. Yet in private, when it comes to their own companies, they avoid competing for staff and pursue policies that artificially distort the market to ensure that their most valuable assets - the people who actually create the products that generate Apple and Google's returns - get paid as little as possible." https://www.businessinsider.in/emails-show-how-apples-steve-jobs-and-googles-eric-schmidt-allegedly-conspired-to-screw-over-employees/articleshow/29315937.cms https://www.businessinsider.in/emails-show-how-apples-steve-...

junon 5y ago
Companies saying one thing publicly and doing another thing privately is SOP and hardly surprising. Apple's pride-flag waving and financing documentaries about human rights while still operating child sweatshops and participating in the cobalt mines where children are often slaves is a grand example of this.
- Jcowell 5y ago
  I get the human rights things but I don’t get the “pride-flag waving” comment since Apple has shown a strong support for LGBT and Pride in addition to their CEO also being a member of the LGBT community.
  - junon 5y ago
    I am contrasting something they do that is publicly seen as positive and progressive with the juxtaposition of them committing human rights violations.

skywal_l 5y ago

A lot of comments on twitter are like: "That's how you write emails", "how to stay on point", "what a pro", bla bla... Completely oblivious.

romesmoke 5y ago
Not sure about what you mean with 'oblivious' here, but Jobs' opening email is indeed flawless--taking into consideration that Apple's CEO allocated some time amidst the frenzy to write it: no trivialities, no redundancies, no chance of not being taken seriously or of being misunderstood. I wonder how much mental debt would be eliminated if all of the world's emails were that clear. Note that, in essence, we're talking about the major means of human communication--and thus information exchange--at least in the tech industry and academia. Pretty important and impactful stuff.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- davidmr 5y ago
  One may want to be less, not more clear when one is breaking the law in writing. Apple and Google settled a class action lawsuit over this exact thing. It’s disappointing how few people stood up to this. I recall Jobs threatening Palm’s CEO with patent trolling if Palm didn’t play ball, which I suppose would give me second thoughts about not cooperating… Edit: https://9to5mac.com/2013/01/23/the-heated-email-exchange-between-steve-jobs-and-then-palm-ceo-ed-colligan-over-poaching-employees/ https://9to5mac.com/2013/01/23/the-heated-email-exchange-bet...
- belter 5y ago
  Its just difficult to look up to a person who behaved like he did. Its a shame Hollywood depiction of Steve Jobs missed most of it: https://www.businessinsider.nl/steve-jobs-terrible-small-fry-daughter-book-2018-8/ https://www.businessinsider.nl/steve-jobs-terrible-small-fry...
wp381640 5y ago
This is straight up "is you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy" from The Wire

t0mas88 5y ago

I'm curious what the collective stance at HN is on this, because it sounds like there is a big difference between possible policies: A. Companies agree not to persuade each other's employees to leave their role (but when they apply on their own, free to hire them) B. Companies agree not to hire each other's employees C. Companies agree to set a certain cap or target salary together for similar roles I think A is not uncommon? And it is as far as I know even in my own contract that I cannot for example compel former colleagues to follow me to a new company for the first 12 months after leaving. These emails could be explained as only agreeing on A? But the allegation I think is that some in "big tech" also did B and C or similar things? Or is just A already illegal?

resoluteteeth 5y ago
I believe A is already illegal. Also, an agreement not to recruit former co-workers for a period after you leave the company is different than two specific companies agreeing not to poach each other's employees.
belter 5y ago
Companies to Employees: When is to hire employees the market dictates. If you are not happy you can work somewhere else, we have other candidates and if you move somewhere else we pay you according to the local cost of living. Its the free capitalist market after all and you are enjoying the benefits. Companies to Companies: Lets agree not to compete on salary....

altmind 5y ago

To be noted, these companies were later sued in antitrust case regarding these agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...

shoto_io 5y ago
Which is probably the source of the emails?
belter 5y ago
And quickly "resolved"... "The settlement agreement does not provide any compensation for company employees affected by the alleged agreements" You cannot make this stuff up. :-(

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]