There is no limit to executive level BS.

Talk to any senior manager and you will see their attitude manifest. The problem really is we are still largely ingrained in the feudal mindset. Employment is treated as a favor done by the company to the employee, and by that virtue employee is bound to life long slavery to the company. Hike, promotions are all treated as gracious favors from the company to the employee.

I agree, except for this: imagine Company X will pay twice as much for engineers who currently work for a competitor, specifically because they want to get the competitor's knowledge.

The competitor can try non-complete clauses, but those may not hold up legally. They can threaten to sue former employees who betray secrets, but it's pretty hard not to use or at least be inspired by what you've learned in a past job.

I don't see a good solution to this, but I can see why one would be upset by such "poaching."

That said, "do what we want or we'll sue you for patent infringement" is an inexcusable tactic.

>specifically because they want to get the competitor's knowledge.

This is covered by NDAs and if you can prove these were violated you can get something done about it. I've seen this happen.

>The competitor can try non-complete clauses, but those may not hold up legally.

I should certainly hope they wouldn't be held up legally. It's bullshit. The worker has a chance to make twice as much money. They shouldn't get blocked because some company thinks we're still in slavery times.

If it really matters so much to the company, they could just pay those workers double themselves (since, by definition, that's the market rate of those workers now). Moving is always a bit of a pain so if they're not already very unhappy they might even take less than double just to not have to move.

>They can threaten to sue former employees who betray secrets

If they can prove the NDA was violated they will sue and they will win.

>but it's pretty hard not to use or at least be inspired by what you've learned in a past job.

What you learn on the job is yours. This is known and completely accepted. If this were not the case then a Senior programmer would make the same money as a fresh-out-of-college Junior programmer.

You may find this extreme but some of us believe a programmer should get some kind of residuals for anything they write for a company the way authors/musicians/movie stars/sports players do for their work.

Amen brother its how capitalism works

>>FTFY. Labor is a market exactly like any other. If I buy Chevrolet for years and then suddenly switch to Ford because they offer a better deal was I "poached"? Such a nonsensical concept.

It's more like Ford figures out who owns a Chevrolet, and contacts them saying "psst, don't you hate your Chevy? Why don't you buy a Ford instead, we're so much better!" I don't know about you, but I find that sort of thing very creepy and unethical.

Advertising to your target market is creepy and unethical? What planet are we on?

Why is your target market "people who already have cars" and not "people who don't have cars and have a much higher likelihood of being on the lookout for one"?

Because car owners tend to replace their cars regularly. People who don't own cars often don't own them because they don't need them, don't want them, or can't afford them.

But this is a derail. The point remains, 'poaching' is a misnomer. It's offering competitive wages and communicating your desire to buy skilled labor at a higher rate than your competitors. It's a virtuous thing to do all around, and it's criminal to conspire against the workforce in order to profit at their expense.