Bosses who lure other workers can be sued

[Rose Siding]

An employer who hires away someone else's employees by an act of wrongdoing, such as misusing confidential information, can be sued for damages even if the employees were at-will staff who were free to leave, the state Supreme Court said.

In a unanimous decision Thursday, the court said an employer has the right to induce a competitor's employee to leave by offering a better job or higher pay. But if illegal or unfair methods are used, it said, the new employer can be required to cover the former employer's financial losses.
...
The ruling applies to so-called at-will employees, those whose jobs are not protected by union agreements or other fixed contracts and who can leave or be fired at any time. That category includes most employees in the state, said John Manier, a lawyer for the winning side in the case.

He said cases like the one before the court typically arise in competitive white-collar businesses, in which a top manager or professional decides to leave and bring along highly trained staff members.

If the manager recruits them while on company time, uses confidential salary information to offer them raises or does something to harm the company, the new employer could be responsible for damages under Thursday's ruling, Manier said. He said courts in about 10 other states have issued similar rulings

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/08/14/BUG6B87P191.DTL

[prodigal_green]

1. so...no protection for the employee

but the employer gets compensation.

Yeah, this country is going in the right direction.

How long before we repeal the 13th Amendment. Heck, save the number, just replace it with the DMA.

[TahitiNut]

2. So, an 'employee' is now property again.

That's what entitlements are all about, I guess. :puke: Sounds like we're back to indentures.

[gatlingforme]

4. Huh? I do not understand why you would think an employee

would be compensated?

[uncle ray]

5. perhaps because

said employee finds out about the wrongdoing in the hiring him away from his previous employer, doesn't like it, but has burned a bridge and is stuck with no job because he got hoodwinked into a "better" offer.

[prodigal_green]

8. I didn't say he or she would be compensated, I said no

protection. Workers' rights have been horribly eroded over the past several years, and yet an employer of an "at will" employee can demand compensation if that employee decides to leave? That seems rather odd to me.

[Xipe Totec]

3. Serfs Up!

Welcome to the Republican's Beach Blanket Bingo Party.

:puke:

[OKNancy]

6. Employers are people too...and Democrats

If someone uses illegal or unethical tactics then it is their right to sue or seek compensation.

I'm glad. Although I won't sue, I had this happen to me just this year. One of my dance teachers decided to quit ( before I could fire her for constant lateness and worse) She took pages out of my roll book and copied the students phone numbers to recruit them for her new place of employment. Only a few left and quite a few ratted her out and told me.
( She also took my CD's and copied them. Some specialty dance CD's are $50.00 apiece )

As I said, I'm not going to do anything about it, because I consider it good riddance.

[fsbooks]

7. agreed

Generally, this appears to be a case of having the law enforce what should generally be good ethical behaviour.

[havocmom]

10. Yep. Say a person in management in Company A goes to work at B

but is required by B to find and hire trained staff. If that person uses confidential info they had access to as management in Company A to stir up ill feelings among other employees of Company A {did you know so & so makes X amount of $$ or has this special condition as part of their employment agreement? gee, doesn't that make you mad?...} and entice employees to leave Company A, then that person has done damage to Company A and not any particular employee.

Believe it or not, some companies do take care of employees and try to accommodate them as human beings as part of the employment agreement. When some party violates confidential info about that to steal employees, that person is a scum sucking pig and should be held accountable.

In the future, wars are gonna be between companies instead of nations. It is already heading that way. Companies who practice unethical behaviors will have an edge and we ought to support decisions which encourage ethical treatment instead of letting poor morality become the norm. There is too much "win at any cost" and that is what hearts both business AND workers. This decision is a step in the right direction.

[truthisfreedom]

9. i think if harm is done unfairly in any circumstance justice should be had

as well. isn't that the point of a justice system? to protect people and their property from harm?

[happyslug]

11. Here is the Case:

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S114811.PDF

For other CA. Supreme Court cases:
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/


The case is interesting, but dependent on its facts. In the case a Partner in a Law firm left his partnership without warning and than used the information he had received as a partner to not only steal employees but also customers (and also apparently convinced some clients to pay the new firm money owned to the original firm).
As a whole the decision does NOT say the mere "stealing" of an employee is actionable. It says the new employer is liable only if the new employer would be LIABLE UNDER SOME OTHER RULE OF LAW REGARDING THE EMPLOYEE (i.e. liability INDEPENDENT of stealing the employee).

Reading the decision I had the impression the court was more upset at how the new employer LEFT the old partnership than how he "stole" the employees. Up till the time he quit (the Partner who quit and became the new employer) his actions shows every effort to steal clients and to interfere with the old law firm ability to retain clients than to steal employees. It was THIS problem the court had a problem with not the stealing of the employees.