I read this article and then went to lunch. While I was out I heard someone on CNBC defending CEO salaries based on the scarcity of talent at that rarified level and the tremendous impact that a CEO makes on a company. They also said that CEO's should be well taken care of because of the number of jobs that they create. The counterpoint that company profits have been propped up by layoffs was dismissed as 'old news' that was no longer relevant. I almost lost my appetite completely.
Companies are trying to replace line workers with technology, but that technology depends on a strong engineering base to develop and maintain it. Agreements like this are an attempt to control the bargaining power of those engineers. My biggest objection to it is the sheer arrogance involved. This practice is pure restraint of trade and should be illegal.
The next few years are going to see the pendulum swing the other direction. Companies are already having problems hiring specialists at current salary levels. The inevitable upward pressure on salaries is starting to happen as a result. The real question is how far down the increases will reach. Engineers and other professionals will see the benefits, but less-skilled line workers may very well not. That could fuel the backlash.
Reading through the article I felt that irrespective of whatever happens in the court room, these lawsuits might already have created some impact in the minds of the employees about the reputations of these companies. Are all of these lawsuits filed in US only or are there other countries also in the list where the lawsuits are filed?
In a case of such restraint to trade/ labor the govt would step forward and take the lead --,no settlement but creation of stronger rules
Since corporations are people too, the punishment should be similar to what an individual would get for such a 'violation' >> this is a case of 'theft of wages'. Larceny comes to mind as the appropriate term.