News Forum - IBM sues former Thai CEO after she moves to competitor

[Thaiger]

One of the world’s largest technology companies, the International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), filed a lawsuit against the former Thai CEO of IBM Thailand, Patama Chantaruk, after she moved to work for the competitor before the non-disclosure agreement ended. According to a Bloomberg report, the 56 year old Patama joined IBM Thailand in 2018 as …

The story IBM sues former Thai CEO after she moves to competitor as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[palooka]

Dumb and she isn't a blonde.

[Grumpish]

One for the lawyers to get richer over - I assume that she had the lawyers go over the NDA before taking up the position with Accenture. Be interesting to see how long she lasts at Accenture though, unless they took her on with full knowledge of the NDA. 

[MrStretch]

If they are filing suit in the US, IBM probably won't win.  Non-compete clauses are unenforceable in many states and the United States Federal Trade Commission recently mooted a proposal to make them unenforceable across the country.

Thailand, on the other hand, does allow non-compete clauses.

The fact that these were "bonuses" will also make this a difficult case for IBM to win.

[Soidog]

2 hours ago, MrStretch said:

The fact that these were "bonuses" will also make this a difficult case for IBM to win.

Possibly true, but it will depend if these are discretionary bonuses or contractual bonuses based in performance. It will be interesting to see how this develops. I think IBM are crazy going for this. It makes them look vindictive and worried about competition. The woman has left, so move on. 

[Marc26]

3 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Possibly true, but it will depend if these are discretionary bonuses or contractual bonuses based in performance. It will be interesting to see how this develops. I think IBM are crazy going for this. It makes them look vindictive and worried about competition. The woman has left, so move on. 

No it doesn't

they gave a severance package which she signed a non-compete for and then she immediately broke it 1 month later

They should go after the money..............

[Soidog]

1 hour ago, Marc26 said:

No it doesn't

they gave a severance package which she signed a non-compete for and then she immediately broke it 1 month later

They should go after the money..............

Yes it does. It depends how that final severance pay and any included bonuses are worded. In any severance payment you are usually entitled to all or part of your bonuses earned. Along with things like entitlement to holiday payments and other items such as loss of pension and healthcare contributions etc etc. bonuses are a particularly grey area as performance bonuses and discretionary bonuses are legally different. I know, I’ve been involved in such a case personally and had to return my discretionary element but they were unable to recover my performance related element of my bonuses.  The rules on this will vary by country, but that’s certainly the case in the U.K. and in many EU countries. 

[Marc26]

4 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Yes it does. It depends how that final severance pay and any included bonuses are worded. In any severance payment you are usually entitled to all or part of your bonuses earned. Along with things like entitlement to holiday payments and other items such as loss of pension and healthcare contributions etc etc. bonuses are a particularly grey area as performance bonuses and discretionary bonuses are legally different. I know, I’ve been involved in such a case personally and had to return my discretionary element but they were unable to recover my performance related element of my bonuses.  The rules on this will vary by country, but that’s certainly the case in the U.K. and in many EU countries. 

You are leaving out the part she signed a non-compete and broke it in a month......

 

Pretty important detail

[Soidog]

17 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

You are leaving out the part she signed a non-compete and broke it in a month......

Pretty important detail

I’m not leaving it out. I’m simply saying that without the wording of that non-compete and how bonuses are paid and how they formed part of her terms of employment, it’s not as clear cut. IBM are being short sighted on this one. Let it go! 

[Skip]

Until the details of the NDA are known this is a non-solvable dilemma... if they feel that they have been exploited, IBM has every right to seek redress without being labelled as vindictive... will there be a follow-up story or just the bait left to dangle.