3 ms·

So, if you are an Apple employee and apply at Google they will reject you on that ground? - (I am not an Apple employee, nor do I wish to work for Google)

open592 3y ago
No, You as a hypothetical Apple employee at this time should never receive a cold call from a Google recruiter. If you contacted Google directly they would have no issue with hiring you.
- junofan 3y ago
  I believe the broader context is that after Schmidt saw the iPhone demo at an Apple board meeting, he tried to double the salaries of the entire Safari team to slow down the iPhone project and kickstart Chrome.
deaddodo 3y ago
It didn't necessarily affect the application/hiring process. It had to do with recruitment policies on "poaching". To conceptualize it, Google/Apple/Pixar/etc were paying (hypothetically) 100k each for SEngs. The rest of the industry was paying 80k. The aforementioned companies would only poach from the lower paying companies, with an offer to bring the employees up to 100k, thereby ensuring that all of the best talent was funnelling in to the big companies. To ensure that talent stayed cheap, they (under the table) agreed not to poach from each other, since the only companies that could compete (generally) with their current salary would be the other big names. So, they got the best of all worlds. The best talent. At deflated rates. And the talent would naturally gravitate to their preferred employers/optimal workspaces via proactive applications.
1969-07-16 3y ago
Hiring you could be harmful to executive relationships. Some executives will take the hit for some hires, but it would be rare. The no-hire list is not at the center of companies refusing to hire from competitors. There is often an understanding between executives that competing in the job market hurts all companies, and they wish to cool talent mobility. Otherwise, there would be salary races, more intellectual property would leak, the culture would get diluted, and more money would need to be spent on poaching people back. Let me share a relevant experience. Two years ago, I was employed at a large tech company, but not FANGMAN. It had no-hire lists with its competitors. When I applied to one of them, a close friend in management of my former employer let me know the executives got wind of this, and they were upset. Consequently, my application was ignored. And my friend let me know that it will probably always be ignored. It felt very gauche, but there is not much one can do about these situations - knowing and being able to prove it are separate things. I do not believe no-hire lists exist as an isolated ceremony in large companies. They stem from efforts to cool competition. Executives are often friends and it would be impractical for them to not form cartel agreements. What is a regulator going to do about an unwritten agreement between friends? Many good (but ingenuous) people think that just because "it's the law", so it shall be. Note - throwaway account, will not respond.
- zelon88 3y ago
  So where a union is the concentrated collectivization of labor and talent, capitalization is the dissolution of concentrated collectivization of labor and talent. I like it. It adequately puts goal posts at either end, and illustrates succinctly how anything good for your employer is probably a race to the bottom for the employee.
vaxman 3y ago
No, back when this was going on, it is alleged that if you applied at Google, you would not get the position at Google AND YOU WOULD BE MARKED FOR TERMINATION AT THE EARLIEST CONVENIENCE OF APPLE. It's an example of why systems people should be paid like pro athletes and have agents, given their extreme value to the organizations they support, both garage and conglomerate alike. [But the industry went the other way, reaching into grade schools with efforts like Code.org and, I Kid You Not, homeless shelters like https://youtu.be/l6p0VYIP5M8 https://youtu.be/l6p0VYIP5M8 in a failed attempt to flood the market with Supply so they could continue to prey upon their fellow human beings. Even the whole paradigm of Object Oriented Programming going mainstream was FIRST AND FOREMOST (but not exclusively) an attempt to reign in labor costs, as per Mitch Kapor's numerous lectures on the topic back in the day. A generation before that, They were pushing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_One_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_One_(software) and, well, you know what those "deep pockets" are up to these days with AI coders.

open592 3y ago

No, You as a hypothetical Apple employee at this time should never receive a cold call from a Google recruiter. If you contacted Google directly they would have no issue with hiring you.

junofan 3y ago
I believe the broader context is that after Schmidt saw the iPhone demo at an Apple board meeting, he tried to double the salaries of the entire Safari team to slow down the iPhone project and kickstart Chrome.

deaddodo 3y ago

It didn't necessarily affect the application/hiring process. It had to do with recruitment policies on "poaching". To conceptualize it, Google/Apple/Pixar/etc were paying (hypothetically) 100k each for SEngs. The rest of the industry was paying 80k. The aforementioned companies would only poach from the lower paying companies, with an offer to bring the employees up to 100k, thereby ensuring that all of the best talent was funnelling in to the big companies. To ensure that talent stayed cheap, they (under the table) agreed not to poach from each other, since the only companies that could compete (generally) with their current salary would be the other big names. So, they got the best of all worlds. The best talent. At deflated rates. And the talent would naturally gravitate to their preferred employers/optimal workspaces via proactive applications.

1969-07-16 3y ago

Hiring you could be harmful to executive relationships. Some executives will take the hit for some hires, but it would be rare. The no-hire list is not at the center of companies refusing to hire from competitors. There is often an understanding between executives that competing in the job market hurts all companies, and they wish to cool talent mobility. Otherwise, there would be salary races, more intellectual property would leak, the culture would get diluted, and more money would need to be spent on poaching people back. Let me share a relevant experience. Two years ago, I was employed at a large tech company, but not FANGMAN. It had no-hire lists with its competitors. When I applied to one of them, a close friend in management of my former employer let me know the executives got wind of this, and they were upset. Consequently, my application was ignored. And my friend let me know that it will probably always be ignored. It felt very gauche, but there is not much one can do about these situations - knowing and being able to prove it are separate things. I do not believe no-hire lists exist as an isolated ceremony in large companies. They stem from efforts to cool competition. Executives are often friends and it would be impractical for them to not form cartel agreements. What is a regulator going to do about an unwritten agreement between friends? Many good (but ingenuous) people think that just because "it's the law", so it shall be. Note - throwaway account, will not respond.

zelon88 3y ago
So where a union is the concentrated collectivization of labor and talent, capitalization is the dissolution of concentrated collectivization of labor and talent. I like it. It adequately puts goal posts at either end, and illustrates succinctly how anything good for your employer is probably a race to the bottom for the employee.

vaxman 3y ago

No, back when this was going on, it is alleged that if you applied at Google, you would not get the position at Google AND YOU WOULD BE MARKED FOR TERMINATION AT THE EARLIEST CONVENIENCE OF APPLE. It's an example of why systems people should be paid like pro athletes and have agents, given their extreme value to the organizations they support, both garage and conglomerate alike. [But the industry went the other way, reaching into grade schools with efforts like Code.org and, I Kid You Not, homeless shelters like https://youtu.be/l6p0VYIP5M8 https://youtu.be/l6p0VYIP5M8 in a failed attempt to flood the market with Supply so they could continue to prey upon their fellow human beings. Even the whole paradigm of Object Oriented Programming going mainstream was FIRST AND FOREMOST (but not exclusively) an attempt to reign in labor costs, as per Mitch Kapor's numerous lectures on the topic back in the day. A generation before that, They were pushing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_One_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_One_(software) and, well, you know what those "deep pockets" are up to these days with AI coders.