eBay to pay fine to US regulators over no-poaching deal

eBay logo on boxes The settlement covers any California employees who have worked at eBay or Intuit since 2005

Related Stories

E-commerce giant eBay has agreed to a settlement relating to accusations of anti-competitive hiring behaviour.

In two separate lawsuits by US regulators, eBay was accused of agreeing with technology firm Intuit not to poach each other's employees.

eBay will pay California $3.75m (£2.2m) and refrain from anti-competitive hiring behaviour for five years.

The suits were brought by US Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Attorney General of California in 2012.

The settlement is subject to approval by a California court.

"eBay's agreement with Intuit served no purpose but to limit competition between the two firms for employees, distorting the labour market and causing employees to lose opportunities for better jobs and higher pay," said DOJ assistant attorney general Bill Baer, in a statement.

eBay said in a statement that it had not engaged in any hiring practices that could have raised concerns with US regulators since at least 2010.

But, it added:"eBay continues to believe that the policy that prompted this lawsuit was acceptable and legal, and led to no anti-competitive effects in the talent market in which eBay compete."

'Stunted growth'

As a result of the agreement with the attorney general of California, eBay will pay $3.5m into a settlement fund to provide compensation to any "potentially affected Californians" who worked at eBay or Intuit since 1 January 2005.

An additional $250,000 will be paid as a civil penalty.

"No-poach agreements unfairly punish talented workers and stunt our state's economic growth," said California attorney general Kamala Harris in a statement.

Intuit was not part of the agreement because it had already settled with US regulators over a 2010 lawsuit.

The move comes just a few days after Apple, Google, Adobe and Intel settled a separate class-action lawsuit alleging similar "no-poaching" behaviour.

The terms of that settlement were not made public.

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

More Business stories

RSS

Features

  • Children in Africa graphicBaby steps

    Are we seeing a child ‘survival revolution’?


  • Olive oil and olivesUbiquitous ingredient

    Was there a time when British people couldn't buy olive oil?


  • shadow of people kissing on grassOutdoor love

    Should the police intervene when people have sex in public?


  • Hand washing to contain Ebola in LiberiaEbola virus

    More action is needed to tackle Ebola, say experts


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.