GM CIO Says HP Hiring Probe "Not the Best Use Our Legal System" 101
dcblogs writes "General Motors CIO Randy Mott Thursday said the automaker plans to have the 'best jobs in the IT industry' at its four 'IT Innovation Centers' in the U.S., as it announced its third one in Roswell, Ga., near Atlanta... As part of its effort to insource its IT work, GM recently hired 18 HP employees from its IT organization, who left 'en masse,' prompting HP to go to court to seek depositions from two former IT managers who left for GM. Mott, the CIO at HP before moving to GM last year, said HP's move is 'not the best use our legal system.' Mott called HP's court filing a 'fishing expedition' that 'feels very retaliatory and harassing to the individuals. I think talent will go where talent sees opportunity.' GM is building a tech staff of about 10,000. As part of it, HP is transferring over about 3,000 employees. HP is a longtime services provider for the automaker via its services unit, the former EDS."
If GM was using EDS... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Workers leaving in droves (Score:5, Informative)
I worked for HP for a year. I found out that David Packard was the soul of HP. He retired before I hired on, which explains why things sucked more each day. I was at the Cupertino site in the quake of 89, and shortly after I quit, David came back for a while, and things got good again, or so I hear. Then he retired for the last time, and we've had stupid people running HP ever since.
So, the current stupid people running the previously great HP feel like violating California law once again and suing a company that hires HP's suffering workers away. One of the reasons Silicon Valley did so well is due to the wisdom of the California law makers. Now I have to go throw up. "wisdom of the California law makers"... that's sure to result in barf everywhere. However, it's true in this case. They made it illegal to restrict a person from freely seeking employment. Restrictions that a-holes nation wide have passed as law allow companies to restrict a person's future employment without compensation. That's where California law differs. If your old boss wants a non-compete, the company actually has to pay you for it. If they simply say "all our employees have non-competes", then it doesn't hold up.
One result of this was people left stupid jobs in droves and formed new companies. It was not only good, but totally awesome for everyone. I haven't read TFA, but I assume it's some non-California office suing in a typical screw-you state where workers right to work is trampled on. If it's filed in California, it will go nowhere.