• fadhl3y@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Spoken like a feudal lord who believes that Lord Adobe is taking his serfs.

  • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    We’re all on the same page in this thread so far. If we weren’t, we could simply supplant Jobs with a less divisive character.

    Then, we’d be unencumbered in appreciating the simplicity and beauty of this unavoidably inherently spicy email. Love this one!

    Another with a backstory I won’t spoil:

  • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    I’ll still gladly piss on his grave but that’s pretty good. Can’t you just picture that douchebag typing this aloud to himself like “and SEND! What a dick.”

    Edit: “I’m gonna use short simple sentences so this fuckin moron can get the point.”

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      20 hours ago

      it’s perfect email composition. short and simple, right to the point, while still containing enough relevant information.

            • jet@hackertalks.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 hours ago

              Very much illegal. It’s a form of labor wage control

              Imagine once you get a FAANG job you cant get another job offer from a different FAANG company, now your stuck, no price bidding, no ladder hopping, no finding a new job when your unhappy

              • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 hours ago

                It is not illegal. Companies can agree to not recruit - an activity initiated by recruiters - from each other. Now, if they agreed to not hire each other’s employees, that would be a violation of right-to-work.

                He nowhere says he has a rule to not hire Adobe employees; he’s saying he has a rule that his recruiters can’t use Adobe’s employee org chart as a shopping menu. That’s completely legal.

                • GorGor@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  I don’t think that is accurate. I am not a lawyer but I believe that it is collusion between competitors with the intent to manipulate the labor market.