They didn't say they wouldn't hire each other's employees, just they wouldn't actively recruit top talent from each other. I don't see what's wrong with that. Top employees can still apply on their own.
> They didn't say they wouldn't hire each other's employees, just they wouldn't actively recruit top talent from each other.
You've just described collusion. They colluded to prevent the wages of their top talent from being boosted by the normal process of competition in the labor market. Sure it's not like they stole money directly out of their star employees' pockets, but in the end the effect was the same.
One motive for it was so they could work together on projects without worrying about the employees getting poached. It doesn't seem like such a clear-cut wrong.
How would you feel if you found out that your employer's competitor really wanted to hire you, and would've willingly tripled your salary, but your manager had a talk with the competition and they made a backroom no-poach deal?
