This would have been nice if adopted earlier

DOJ/FTC is working on a new merger guideline that is currently under review and set to become effective as early as Q1 2024. It outlines considerations for a scenario that VMware (or any other companies acquired by Avago for thst matter) are familiar with:

‐----- Excerpt from article ------
Among other changes, the Agencies have proposed expanding the Merger Guidelines to, for the first time, consider whether a merger may result in an employer gaining the “power to cut or freeze wages, exercise increased leverage in negotiations with workers, or generally degrade benefits and working conditions without prompting workers to quit.

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/2023-update-antitrust-enforcement-labor-and-employment

The merger guidelines are not law but are widely respected by the court. Based on the timing this new guideline probably won't be effective for the Broadcom acquisition of VMware but at the very least we will be serving as an example supporting that argument.

Comment! It's anonymous!

4 replies (most recent on top)

https://www.foley.com/en/insights/publications/2023/07/doj-ftc-overhaul-merger-guidelines

This is a good summary of what other changes are going to be introduced in the new merger guidelines

There's nothing unethical about employing people or running a business. As the CEO/owner/person in charge of a business of ANY size, the market requires adjustment every day.

You need to be able to hire people, and you need to be able to make changes to keep your business sustainable. That's all there is to it.

Layoffs and restructuring are healthy and necessary for ANY business (even the government). When you have an industry without layoffs (the government), it grows into an unsustainable behemoth that fails catastrophically (government bailouts and government pension plans and other examples widely understood to be objectionably and perfectly accurate).

When you do layoff people/employees/etc, you do so with severance plans that are by far considered to be over and above what is normal or common for people who lose their job.

Let's cut the BS here... Broadcom and VMware negotiated severance plans are a gift to those looking for a job. They're paying us to look for another job, work two jobs (in many cases) or retire early. It was part of company policies and RIFs which take place at every turn. If there isn't a dozen companies vying for my employment right now, i'm doing something wrong with my career. If I can't find a sustainable income to meet or exceed my current income, I'm doing something wrong.

We don't need government to start telling businesses how to keep people employed. What in the world would we do with all of those unemployed telephone operators, or steam locomotive conductors, or America Online support reps that the FTC would mandate still be employed somehow?

That's a recipe for accelerated bankruptcy and nothing more.

Here's a thought... personal financial responsibility. Try it.

Sounds more applicable to companies that deal with unions

It won't change anything probably but at the very least let FTC know of your frustrations so that these kind of corrupt and unethical behaviors stop in the future

https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/contact

antitrust@ftc.gov

Thread regarding VMware layoffs

This would have been nice if adopted earlier

4 replies (most recent on top)

Post a reply