HP has decided that Mark Hurd can't take his know-how to rival Oracle - and will sue to prevent it.
Despite HP having received former chief executive Mark Hurd's
resignation over claims of financial impropriety and possible sexual harassment, it seems that the company isn't done with him yet: HP is now suing Mark Hurd for having found another job.
According to
Business Insider, Hurd has declined to quietly retire and has instead found another job at long-time HP rival Oracle as co-president and member of the board of directors. HP isn't exactly happy - and is proceeding a civil complaint which alleges that the ex-CEO has violated the severance agreement that saw HP give Hurd a golden parachute in the millions of dollars.
The suit claims that "
by working at Oracle, [Hurd] cannot help but utilise and disclose HP's trade secrets and confidential information." In a further announcement, HP claims that "
Mark Hurd agreed to and signed agreements designed to protect HP's trade secrets and confidential information. HP intends to enforce those agreements."
The company has posted a full copy of the filing on document sharing site
Scribd, and it's interesting to see the angle being taken: rather than the risky approach of arguing a "no-compete" clause, which would represent an undertaking not to work for a direct competitor for a number of years after leaving the company and is rarely enforceable in law, HP is claiming potential violation of trade secrets.
Although Oracle's stock rose by 5 per cent on the news of Hurd's hiring, the alleged philanderer and plunderer could prove to be something of a poison pill should the lawsuit decide in HP's favour.
Share your thoughts over
in the forums.
20 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyWhat is it with companies wanting to own your soul?
It'll be interesting to see whether this goes, but it may just be HP posturing. I'd never have really considered HP and Oracle to be major rivals - not in the same was as Oracle & SAP or Oracle & MS.
I'm with HP on this. They're not trying to stop him from working, just to stop him from working for a competitior for a reasonable period, which would be in breach of the terms of his severance deal. In the UK at least a perpetual non-compete would not be enforceable, but one limited for a reasonable time (say up to 12 months) would be. The law has to protect employers against employees walking out the door and taking trade secrets to competitors. It's not about "owning your soul". If Hurd wanted to take a job flipping burgers, I'm sure HP would have no problem with that as it's unlikely that his insider knowledge of HP would benefit Joe's Burger Shack to the detriment of HP. Although technically he may be precluded from working for anyone for a certain period, I doubt they'd enforce it.
Not to mention if Hurd is on gardening leave then he still HAS a job, it's just that his job consists of sitting in his house counting the huge wad of cash HP just to stay at home.
I signed a contract like that myself that says I am absolutely and completely NOT allowed to join any other company in the online betting/gaming sector for 6 months after I quit or get fired. I just signed it because I know that they won't be able to enforce it and if they try I'll just say "sure, let's go to court... you're gonna pay in the end anyway"
The only caveat, I guess, was if there was demonstrable proof that the employee was using his knowledge to give a competitor an unfair advantage, and I'm not entirely sure whether Hurd would be able to steer Oracle's direction given that hardware sales (I'm thinking the only overlap between the two companies is servers?) are such a small proportion of Oracle's revenue. I may be wrong, though.
HP is getting sued for that package, by the way. ;)
He knows stuff about HP that he's going to go "Oh yeah they're working on project x,y,z" off the record of course. So I would happily watch HP sue this dude into the ground. if I signed a tenancy agreement and refused to pay the rent then got a bailiff knocking at my door for unpaid rent. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on. Same applies here. HP please sue this idiot into the floor for me.
This may be the key to the whole thing. One wonders if it's not a case of "Quick! Do something!"
He was the CEO, and HP gave him millions of dollars to retire, and he signed an agreement not to disclose any trade secrets of HP.
There isn't any reason why the man needs to work another day in his life. He's a dumb*** for trying to work for the competition and not expect anything to happen.
Unless they can actually prove that he was disclosing trade secrets I don't see how they have a leg to stand on. If someone is really that valuable to the company just don't fire them.
One of the reasons experience is so sought after by employers is the assumption that people will have acquired skills and knowledge in their previous employment which they can use for the good of their new employer.
What people do once they have left an employer is not that employer's business. They might not like it, but they can't really do much about it.
There's this however-
He's violating an agreement he signed, which I imagine is good grounds for HP to sue.
Yeah I have no idea if it will, I'm sure the agreement goes against some right, or something.
Either way it should be interesting to see the outcome.
This is just one case where someone that knows too much, and is paid too much, is slapping HP in the face by going to a rival company. He's not the everyday working man, that's why this doesn't mean anything to me personally.
It's not like America is a terrible place to work if HP wins.