OpenAI Releases Former Employees From Controversial Exit Agreements (cnbc.com) 11
OpenAI has reversed its decision requiring former employees to sign a perpetual non-disparagement agreement to retain their vested equity, stating that they will not cancel any vested units and will remove non-disparagement clauses from departure documents. CNBC reports: The internal memo, which was viewed by CNBC, was sent to former employees and shared with current ones. The memo, addressed to each former employee, said that at the time of the person's departure from OpenAI, "you may have been informed that you were required to execute a general release agreement that included a non-disparagement provision in order to retain the Vested Units [of equity]." "Regardless of whether you executed the Agreement, we write to notify you that OpenAI has not canceled, and will not cancel, any Vested Units," stated the memo, which was viewed by CNBC.
The memo said OpenAI will also not enforce any other non-disparagement or non-solicitation contract items that the employee may have signed. "As we shared with employees, we are making important updates to our departure process," an OpenAI spokesperson told CNBC in a statement. "We have not and never will take away vested equity, even when people didn't sign the departure documents. We'll remove non-disparagement clauses from our standard departure paperwork, and we'll release former employees from existing non-disparagement obligations unless the non-disparagement provision was mutual," said the statement, adding that former employees would be informed of this as well. "We're incredibly sorry that we're only changing this language now; it doesn't reflect our values or the company we want to be," the OpenAI spokesperson added.
The memo said OpenAI will also not enforce any other non-disparagement or non-solicitation contract items that the employee may have signed. "As we shared with employees, we are making important updates to our departure process," an OpenAI spokesperson told CNBC in a statement. "We have not and never will take away vested equity, even when people didn't sign the departure documents. We'll remove non-disparagement clauses from our standard departure paperwork, and we'll release former employees from existing non-disparagement obligations unless the non-disparagement provision was mutual," said the statement, adding that former employees would be informed of this as well. "We're incredibly sorry that we're only changing this language now; it doesn't reflect our values or the company we want to be," the OpenAI spokesperson added.
In other words (Score:5, Insightful)
"We're incredibly sorry that we're only changing this language now; it doesn't reflect our values or the company we want to be,"
Your attorneys told you before this was unenforceable, and now that NDAs have been effectively outlawed you're frantically changing your wording so you don't get sued into oblivion.
If the wording "doesn't reflect our values", then why were they in there in the first place?
Re: (Score:2)
The values they don't reflect aren't how they treat employees. The values they reflect is how they treat their shareholders. Getting sued into oblivion isn't "protecting shareholder value."
(NDA's haven't been banned. Non-compete contracts have been, and that's very unlikely to survive a court challenge because it's so broad. But that ruling won't come down until after the election.)
Re:In other words (Score:4, Insightful)
Your attorneys told you before this was unenforceable, and now that NDAs have been effectively outlawed
I think you’ve confused NDAs with non-competes. NDAs are absolutely still legal and enforceable, whereas non-competes were more or less outlawed a few weeks ago in the vast majority of cases where they were being used in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Your attorneys told you before this was unenforceable, and now that NDAs have been effectively outlawed
I think you’ve confused NDAs with non-competes. NDAs are absolutely still legal and enforceable, whereas non-competes were more or less outlawed a few weeks ago in the vast majority of cases where they were being used in the US.
Non-disparagement clauses as part of NDAs have always been illegal, at least in the United States. The NLRA guarantees the right to talk about working conditions. It just took until 2023 for the NLRB to rule on the matter.
OpenAI "Vested Units" (Score:2)
Was it ever legal? (Score:2)
I thought vested RSUs were personal property. Could a company also execute an agreement where salary and bonuses could be clawed back for any arbitrary reason and after any arbitrary time? Imagine a company coming back 50 years later with a claim on stock or salary. Or how about even claiming assets that were never even granted originally by the company (since all such assets are personal property)?
It would be extremely dangerous if this were not illegal. Imagine an employment contract where a company i
Re: Was it ever legal? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As I understand it in the USA, pensions come from your employer but legally, they are a bonus and thus, your boss can refuse to pay it anytime, for any reason.
US-ians don't talk about this financial servitude so it's difficult to understand the legal requirements around a employer-funded pension.
I'm assuming, a US employer is not required to pay a pension, as happens in most countries and furthermore, the funds are not held in escrow by a third-party. This is why corporate raiders buy a US company, dec
Re: (Score:2)
The reason you don’t hear ”US-ians” talking about the issues you raised is because pensions are only relevant to a shrinking fraction of Americans and almost nothing you said about how this stuff works in the US is factually accurate.
For one, pensions aren’t bonuses that companies can simply refuse to pay for any reason. A pension may not get paid out in full if the organization declares bankruptcy and has to liquidate the pension fund. Likewise if they failed to fund it adequately f
In Other Words, (Score:1)
OpenAI is privately held (Score:2)