3 ms·
Well, they're essentially buying the employees from the company, which is different than normal hiring.
by smackfu 14y ago
Well, they're essentially buying the employees from the company, which is different than normal hiring.
- smacktoward 14y agoBut why would you want/need to do that? I'm not an expert on labor law, but AFAIK the company doesn't have any legal ownership claim to the employees or their services; employment in the US is at-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment), so if Apple and a Color employee come to an agreement that the Color employee will go to Apple, Color doesn't have much say in the matter. There's no Reserve Clause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_clause http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_clause) in tech. Maybe the employees signed a non-compete agreement, and what Apple is buying from Color is a waiver on those agreements? Non-competes don't have a great record of standing up in court, but OTOH $2 million split 20 ways isn't that much money per person either; might be considered cheaper than the risk of a legal challenge. I dunno. The reporting on this story could definitely do with some additional detail, but given how rapidly the story's been changing we may just have to wait an hour or two for that detail to be uncovered :D
- ghshephard 14y agoThe acquihire is traditionally done by converting unvested options from one company to the next, quite often with a 15-20% retention bonus for employees that stick around for 12 months. The employees, of course, are free to walk away from those unvested options and retention bonus, should they chose to do so.
- ksherlock 14y agoEmployee non-compete agreements aren't enforceable in California.