Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/05/12/uk-apple-google-settlement-idUKKBN0DS0CN20140512

by 001sky • 12 years ago

106 35 12 years ago

uk.reuters.com

jmct• 12 years ago

I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing.

Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected?

I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.

smackfu• 12 years ago

I'm not sure if being one of the named plaintiffs matters once it is certified as a class. He can probably opt out of the class though, just like any other member.

HistoryInAction• 12 years ago

Tobacco class actions offer some examples about what happens when sections of the class disagree (at least settle early): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agree...

bradleyjg3• 12 years ago

Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawyers want a quick resolution and a large fee, so the settlements tend to offer global peace for a large fee. The class gets worthless injunctive relief, or a coupon, or a charity of the lawyers' choice gets some money, or maybe class members get $10 each but only if they fill out a bunch of paperwork. Class actions rarely ever go to trial. In theory the judge is supposed to protect absent class members but usually they act as a rubber stamp.

Class actions do not comport with due process and should be abolished. If lawyers want to bring mass tort suits let them sign up clients.

spenrose2• 12 years ago

Wow, does your last sentence turn 180 from the (otherwise excellent) analysis. If class actions don't help plaintiffs enough, shouldn't we be looking for a stronger solution?

Consultant324522• 12 years ago

Class actions work well when a great number of people are harmed for a relatively small sum each. Let's say company XYZ screwed up something in their product that is worth about $100 damage per incident, but it impacts 250k customers. It's really not worth it for any one person to sue XYZ for $100. But with a class action at least XYZ will feel some pinch for their wrong-doing.

pmorici2• 12 years ago

The money quote from the plaintiff...

""As an analogy," Devine wrote, "if a shoplifter is caught on video stealing a $400 iPad from the Apple Store, would a fair and just resolution be for the shoplifter to pay Apple $40, keep the iPad, and walk away with no record or admission of wrongdoing? Of course not.""

freehunter2• 12 years ago

That does happen though. Apple could choose to not press charges and let him walk away free.

warmwaffles• 12 years ago

This is not actually true. The District Attorney can choose to ignore Apple's choice.

pmorici2• 12 years ago

The question isn't whether it happens but whether it would be considered a just outcome. He is drawing a comparison between something that is easily recognized as "getting off easy" to something that is harder to conceptualize because of the absolute size of the amounts involved.

dllthomas• 12 years ago

But he usually doesn't get to keep the iPad.

sneak2• 12 years ago

You are mistaken; it is the prosecutor who decides whether or not charges are filed, not the victim.

The concept of "pressing charges" is basically a myth.

jasonlotito• 12 years ago

Considering the severity of what was done (basically, keeping down the salaries of everyone in the industry), this is good news.

yp_all• 12 years ago

I am under the impression that the information that this suit could have revealed about Mr Jobs' character was potentially far more damaging than any settlement or award the defendants might have to pay.

To put it another way, I get the impression that settlement here is primarily for PR damage control, and only secondarily for limiting what the defendants must ultimately pay.

Does this idea have any support? If I am wrong, please tell me why.

forgottenpass• 12 years ago

If I am wrong, please tell me why.

I don't think your necessarily wrong that it would make him look bad, but it would have to be some really extraordinary revelations to make his character look worse than he already does. Maybe it would mean more widespread exposure of his real character, but for all the praise that can be thrown at him, anyone paying attention is already aware he was an all-around petulant asshole willing to act immorally and illegally to get his way.

presootto• 12 years ago

I agree that the settlement is mainly about damage control. I also think the company most affected by said negative PR is Google.

I'm still waiting for Eric to apologize to the recruiter who was fired for contacting an Apple employee and for Jonathan Rosemberg to have the decency of resigning.

yuhong• 12 years ago

What do you mean by "Jonathan Rosemberg"? I think he already resigned from Google.

mephi5t0• 12 years ago

324 mln divided by 64K people is about 5K. So, you didn't hire me because of your little shitty agreement, I didn't get a 30-40K or more salary a year (not to mention possibly better benefits) and you give away 5 grand to sing "don't worry be happy?" Great math. When someone downloads a song it gets smacked with 100K bill and a jail time. But when you don't get a job, 5K sounds just about right.

briantakita• 12 years ago

Welcome to the game.

abalone• 12 years ago

And that's before the lawyers take their cut ($75 million). That slices it down to <$4K average.

dba7dba• 12 years ago

Haha, I wish they get their day in the court.

I think the lawyers of plaintiffs thought they could 'manipulate' their 'clients' so that the lawyers could simply cut and run with their outsized fee case but little did they know their 'clients' are not some easily manipulated people who really need some cash now.

These clients are well educated and have the money to wait out AND can get a great job anywhere.

I really wish to hear the real story of this case.

Bluestrike2• 12 years ago

Class actions aren't about justice for individual plaintiffs. Hell, lawsuits in general aren't about getting justice for plaintiffs. In wrongful death cases, the courts can't wave their hands and bring the dead back to life. Money is used as an imperfect substitute. X died, and amount Y is what their life would have been worth. Not because people want to boil away everything that made that life what it was into a dollar amount, but because there's really no other option. That's not the same as an idealized sense of "justice" that people talk about when they state their intentions to "have their day in court."

Attorneys don't push for settlements because they're greedy or unethical; they try to settle because it's almost always better than litigating. Litigation is risky, and even strong claims can lose at trial. Neither side wants to roll the dice.

Class actions are almost exclusively about leveraging the individual class members into a means of stopping a given behavior rather than achieving significant compensation for them. And in most cases, you'll find that the behavior's effects are relatively limited on an individual basis, but significant when considered in aggregate.

Litigation is expensive. When you're looking at a case where litigating your claim can cost you well over 500k if you're very lucky, even significant awards can amount to nothing more than Pyrrhic victories. Even your average punitive damages, when they're granted, aren't necessarily sufficient to push you into the black.

In this case, it's highly unlikely that any individual plaintiff could ever prove damages in excess of their legal costs. Individually, it's unlikely for the class members to come out ahead even assuming they're able to litigate in the first place. And they're damned sure unlikely to be able to change the behavior as a result.

It's easy to complain about class actions but those complaints have to be put in perspective. Environmental law alone would be sufficient to prove my point. In any case, I'd recommend this for a pretty well-balanced and fair primer to class actions (it's focused on procedure, but I think that's a good thing for this purpose):

http://law.duke.edu/grouplit/papers/classactionalexander.pdf

Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement

Related Stories