MICROSOFT LOSES US SUPREME COURT APPEAL IN TEMPORARY WORKERS DISPUTE

By James Vicini

WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected Microsoft Corp.'s appeal of a ruling that thousands of temporary and contract workers were eligible to buy discounted stock in the software giant.

The justices let stand a U.S. appeals court ruling that greatly expanded the number of past and present workers who can participate in a class-action lawsuit against Microsoft over its lucrative employee stock purchase plan.

Microsoft asked the Supreme Court to review the ruling that could cost the company millions of dollars, but the high court turned down the request without any comment or dissent.

The lawsuit's eventual outcome could have widespread implications for many other companies that use temporary workers or independent contractors, an increasingly common business practice, especially in the technology industry.

A federal district judge initially limited the class to just a few hundred workers employed at Microsoft from 1987 to 1990.

But the appeals court ruled the class should cover any temporary or contract worker who worked 20 hours per week or more for at least five months in any year since the end of 1986, a class that could total well over 10,000 workers.

The appeals court required Microsoft to prove which workers should not be included in the class as part of the hearings before a federal district court judge in Seattle to determine damages.

Microsoft in its appeal urged the Supreme Court to restore "order to the law of employee benefits." It said numerous lawsuits have been filed in the last year on behalf of temporary agency employees or independent contractors claiming benefits from the company where they performed their services.

It said the appeals court decision "undermined the ability of district courts to manage class actions effectively" and contravened the grant of discretion under a federal rule to district courts to manage a class-action lawsuit.

The class-action suit, filed in 1992, claimed that Microsoft treated temporary and contract workers as permanent employees except for compensation.

The lawsuit sought millions of dollars in gains from the employee stock purchase plans, which offer workers the opportunity to buy Microsoft stock at a 15 percent discount. The plans were not extended to temporary and contract workers.

The Supreme Court in 1998 rejected an earlier Microsoft appeal in the case.

=========================================== End

Turning Point ???

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), January 10, 2000

Answers

Ray,

It seems as if you are waiting for the whole damn system to fall apart. Maybe if you tried reading some good news for a change, it would improve your outlook.

Do you really think Microsoft's problems are going to tank the economy? Not gonna happen. Now....

Take a deep breath and start thinking positive! There are no chemtrails, the government is not out to get you and life is short! Start living.

-- (I'm@pol.ly), January 10, 2000.

Correction: There ARE chemtrails.

Polly OFF.

-- fred (fred@fred.fred), January 10, 2000.

Ima@polly; You assume too much. Perhaps Ray is asking if this is a turning point for Microsoft. Microsoft has had four major turning points in the past two years which I remember.

1) When the upstart linux operating system running the apache web server managed to wrestle a larger installed web server base than NT could.

2) When Microsoft lost the suit last fall brought against them for monopolistic practices -- we are still awaiting the other shoe on that one.

3) When China -- 2 billion plus people -- decided NOT to use Microsoft products in their governmental systems. This is also a hard blow to NSA.

4) This one.

Ima@polly; Microsoft is a dying giant. Microsoft brought it upon itself. Microsoft has many powerfull enemy's which it has EARNED by unfair marketing practices. The REST of the industry WANTS to see Microsoft leveraged back into a more neighborly position.

Guess what, it's happening.

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 10, 2000.

-- (I'm@pol.ly), January 10, 2000, anyone who is AWARE of the EXCESSIVE valuations on Wallstreet KNOWS that the market will TANK. The trigger can be anything that affects the sheeples confidence.

Would you pay $500 for a $30 pair of shoes? This is exactly what the sheeple or their assigns are doing on Wall Street. In 1996 Alan Greenspan talked about Irrational Exuberance when the Dow was at 6400. The Dow is now at 11,600 after he has fed it everything including the kitchen sink.

My preference would have been to see positive measures taken back in 1996 or earlier. The longer this MANIA continues the more serious the problems will be.

Do you UNDERSTAND the problem????

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), January 10, 2000.

Thanks for the post Ray. Its interesting to see how things are stacking up against Microsoft.

1. General dissatisfaction with Microsoft products amongst consumers. 2. Adverse ruling concerning monopoly. 3. Linux making inroads on Microsoft territory. 4. Sun Microsystems major adversary. 5. Growing negative attitude towards Microgiant & its steamroller policies. 6. Accounting policy of transferring expenses to employees by using stock options as a benefit.

I suppose the only way it can fall out of favor with investors is if its revenues don't meet expectations. But who knows, if enough PC owners have to fight for patches and tech help for software that's crashing that could generate a lot of investor dissatisfaction too.

Time will tell.

-- Guy Daley (guydaley@bwn.net), January 10, 2000.

Microsucks has very big glob bad bad karma.

-- byaa byaa (billy@goat's.gruff), January 10, 2000.

Ah, Mr. Erskine, I don't need a lecture from you about Microsoft. I stated that their problems would not tank the economy, which seems what most of the doomers are waiting for. The predictions of doom and gloom have not come to pass. Every time there is a downturn in the market, the doomers scream "crash" and the market climbs. NOW....

Take a deep breath and tell yourself, "I will think only good thoughts."

-- (I'm@pol.ly), January 10, 2000.

Microsoft preparing for Caldera antitrust case

link

-- a programmer (a@programmer.com), January 10, 2000.

I'm@polly; I did not realize this thread was about y2k. I thought the gentleman was indicating that this may be a turning point for Microsoft. Now kindly repeat after me... "everything I find at TB2000 is not y2k related", "everything I find at TB2000 is not y2k related", "everything I find at TB2000 is not y2k related", very good polly... Just keep doing that and in a short while you will get the idea.

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 10, 2000.

In my re-reading of the thread I see that I am quite in error and Ray is infact stating this may be a turning point in the economy... I'm@polly; it seems I owe you an apology. You appear to have read more clearly than I did. I am sorry that I failed to understand the content of the whole thread.

y2krcf 0

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 10, 2000.

Note to pollies: Have any of you ever seen CHARTS (price/index price vs. time) of Tulip Mania, South Sea Bubble, 1920s-1930s U.S. stock market...? And you idiots don't think it WILL NOT happen with this market? Let me paraphrase what MANY economists and market analysts have noted throughout HISTORY (history is what pollies have never heard of): "During every bubble, the popular opinion is that this is not a bubble because the paradigm (economy, government capability, technology...) has changed. Because of this change, the popular opinion is thus that THIS 'prosperity' and market valuation will continue indefinitely, as we have entered a new era."

-- A (A@AisA.com), January 10, 2000.

>> 1) When the upstart linux operating system running the apache web server managed to wrestle a larger installed web server base than NT could. <<

Actually, linux is gaining marketshare mostly from unix, not NT. And windows 2000 is a very good operating system, much better than even linux. And linux has no chance with consumers. Not user friendly at all.

>> 3) When China -- 2 billion plus people -- decided NOT to use Microsoft products in their governmental systems. This is also a hard blow to NSA. <<

This is a false rumor, which the chinese government itself denied.

>> 4) This one. <<

This case might cost msft millions of dollars.. that might bankrupt a company which has 17 bil in cash, 20 bil in long term investments and brought in 10 bil cash from operations last year.

>> Ima@polly; Microsoft is a dying giant. Microsoft brought it upon itself. Microsoft has many powerfull enemy's which it has EARNED by unfair marketing practices. The REST of the industry WANTS to see Microsoft leveraged back into a more neighborly position. <<

Dying giant, rotfl! Considering the size of msft, these problems add up to very little. Microsoft's growth has not slowed down at all, which would have happened if its problems were killing the company.

>1. General dissatisfaction with Microsoft products amongst consumers.<

Not true. Most of those dissatisfied with Microsoft products are those who have always been anti-microft. Consumer satisfaction is no lower than it ever has been.

Microsoft will go bankrupt? I guess Y2K will destroy the world, too.

-- Realist (no@email.address), January 10, 2000.

Held MSFT stock for last 4 to 5 yrs, up nicely, about 17 times. Held out but finally sold just before Christmas (last thing in stock market due to Y2K concerns). Yep, you guessed it, sold the DAY before it took its biggest 1 day jump in its history, then followed up again the next day. Cost me about 20%, one day too soon. Its still up there. Rats!

-- JB (noway@jose.com), January 10, 2000.

Realist;

... managed to wrestle a larger installed web server base than NT could... continues to grow... I do agree that it probably got a lot of it from the Unix world...

I disagree that Linux is not user friendly at all. I do agree that it is a completely different world and requires learning. The reason that Microsoft is able to hold the desktop these days (as opposed to earlier on) is because they have the applications and operating system which is familiar to nearly every user. Users dislike having to learn new things. Learinig linux or unix for that matter is learning a new thing... It has nothing to do with the quality of the product and everything to do with how loudly the user community screams when you ask them to learn new software when the software they are using is adequate. Microsoft produces adequate software.

"W2000 is better than Linux", that's what they said about W98, W95, W3.11, et. al. W2000 is a repackage of NT according to some. I personally don't know. Are you running Linux? My guess is I have as much time on Microsoft systems as you do. My guess is I have more time on Linux systems than you do. I'll bet I have more VMS, and DOS experience than you have. Now these guesses might be wrong and I am willing to hear your reasoning. It is just that I have never owned a Unix or Linux system that would just crash for no apparent reason. On the other hand, I've never seen a MS product that did not do that since MS quit shipping DOS.

I have ported socket layer code from Unix to Linux to Windows NT and had to figure out how to 'fake' shared memory in DLL's. I've ported R&D expert systems to Windows NT and Linux. I've written applications in DOS that contained over 100,000 lines of C, established TSR's, and ISR's and multi-tasked DOS (tricky). If there was any operating system I enjoyed writing code for the most, it was MSDOS. It was easy to get to the guts of the machine in DOS and I knew how to do it well. Linux is a bit harder to get to the guts but one can do it if they have to and ofcourse one can modify the operating system since we have the source code. I don't have to worry about Microsoft modifying the behavior on an interface call when I code for Linux, that is a plus.

All in all Linux has proven to be more stable and a better performer than any other operating system I've ever written code for with the most notable exception of VMS which I detested. It was both more stable and more secure than IRIX where I have written the brunt of the code I've done since 1994. But that is simply an opinion with qualifications. Take it or leave it. Linux will march on because of the support it is receiving from the folks at Dell, Compaq, IBM, HP, Correl, Oracle, and so forth... It will march on because it outperforms NT in every application of networking where I have ever seen it installed. But yes you are correct, Microsoft is a big company with a huge installed base. No, Linux is not going to kill the giant. The giant is doing that for itself. Linux will facilitate that fall but will not cause it. Microsoft will be around for a very long time...

You say China denied that rumor, please cite a link. I should like to find that at which time I will express my disappointment.

"Dying giant, rotfl! Considering the size of msft, these problems add up to very little. Microsoft's growth has not slowed down at all, which would have happened if its problems were killing the company."

Keep watching. "Most of those dissatisfied with Microsoft products are those who have always been anti-microft. Consumer satisfaction is no lower than it ever has been."

Invalid assertion, justify.

"Microsoft will go bankrupt?"

It would surprise me if they did. What is more likely is something like we saw with AT&T. Look for it this year. Wonder what the stock will look like then.

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 10, 2000.

Realist;

... managed to wrestle a larger installed web server base than NT could... continues to grow... I do agree that it probably got a lot of it from the Unix world...

I disagree that Linux is not user friendly at all. I do agree that it is a completely different world and requires learning. The reason that Microsoft is able to hold the desktop these days (as opposed to earlier on) is because they have the applications and operating system which is familiar to nearly every user. Users dislike having to learn new things. Learinig linux or unix for that matter is learning a new thing... It has nothing to do with the quality of the product and everything to do with how loudly the user community screams when you ask them to learn new software when the software they are using is adequate. Microsoft produces adequate software.

"W2000 is better than Linux", that's what they said about W98, W95, W3.11, et. al. W2000 is a repackage of NT according to some. I personally don't know. Are you running Linux? My guess is I have as much time on Microsoft systems as you do. My guess is I have more time on Linux systems than you do. I'll bet I have more VMS, and DOS experience than you have. Now these guesses might be wrong and I am willing to hear your reasoning. It is just that I have never owned a Unix or Linux system that would just crash for no apparent reason. On the other hand, I've never seen a MS product that did not do that since MS quit shipping DOS.

I have ported socket layer code from Unix to Linux to Windows NT and had to figure out how to 'fake' shared memory in DLL's. I've ported R&D expert systems to Windows NT and Linux. I've written applications in DOS that contained over 100,000 lines of C, established TSR's, and ISR's and multi-tasked DOS (tricky). If there was any operating system I enjoyed writing code for the most, it was MSDOS. It was easy to get to the guts of the machine in DOS and I knew how to do it well. Linux is a bit harder to get to the guts but one can do it if they have to and ofcourse one can modify the operating system since we have the source code. I don't have to worry about Microsoft modifying the behavior on an interface call when I code for Linux, that is a plus.

All in all Linux has proven to be more stable and a better performer than any other operating system I've ever written code for with the most notable exception of VMS which I detested. It was both more stable and more secure than IRIX where I have written the brunt of the code I've done since 1994. But that is simply an opinion with qualifications. Take it or leave it. Linux will march on because of the support it is receiving from the folks at Dell, Compaq, IBM, HP, Correl, Oracle, and so forth... It will march on because it outperforms NT in every application of networking where I have ever seen it installed. But yes you are correct, Microsoft is a big company with a huge installed base. No, Linux is not going to kill the giant. The giant is doing that for itself. Linux will facilitate that fall but will not cause it. Microsoft will be around for a very long time...

You say China denied that rumor, please cite a link. I should like to find that at which time I will express my disappointment.

"Dying giant, rotfl! Considering the size of msft, these problems add up to very little. Microsoft's growth has not slowed down at all, which would have happened if its problems were killing the company."

Keep watching. "Most of those dissatisfied with Microsoft products are those who have always been anti-microft. Consumer satisfaction is no lower than it ever has been."

Invalid assertion, justify.

"Microsoft will go bankrupt?"

It would surprise me if they did. What is more likely is something like we saw with AT&T. Look for it this year. Wonder what the stock will look like then.

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 10, 2000.

Windows 2000 is certainly a huge improvement over NT. It is much faster and much more stable. Of course, a bug in an app could still cause a crash. Still, I like it a lot better than linux. However, I agree that you have more linux experience than I do.

I don't think that Linux's problems are limited to user unfamiliarity. Name the three most popular software programs. Word, Excel and Internet Explorer. Who is going to use linux if they can't use favorite software programs? While alternatives to word exist, I have yet to find a good alternative for excel or internet explorer. Those two software programs are not just adequate, they are, imho, the best products for the job.

>> "W2000 is better than Linux", that's what they said about W98, W95, W3.11, et. al. W2000 is a repackage of NT according to some. <<

W2000 is certainly not just a repackage of NT. Though I can certainly understand your disbelief. Microsoft has failed to deliver many times in the past.

>>You say China denied that rumor, please cite a link. I should like to find that at which time I will express my disappointment. <<

Link

>>Keep watching. "Most of those dissatisfied with Microsoft products are those who have always been anti-microft. Consumer satisfaction is no lower than it ever has been."

Invalid assertion, justify. <<

If you ask the average user of Microsoft products whether they are satisfied, they most likely will say yes. Either the software doesn't crash for them, they are ignorant, or they are not affected by the anti-microsoft bias of some techies. But customer satisfaction with Microsoft products is actually quite high.

>> No, Linux is not going to kill the giant. The giant is doing that for itself. Linux will facilitate that fall but will not cause it. Microsoft will be around for a very long time... << what the stock will look like then. <<

I think that the apparent fall of msft is just an illusion. You are assuming that msft will not improve its products/reinvent its business. It is easy to say that what msft currently has will become obsolete, since that is the very nature of technology.

>> What is more likely is something like we saw with AT&T. Look for it this year. Wonder what the stock will look like then. <<

There are a few important differences between AT&T and Microsoft. First, AT&T is forced to spend all of its earnings on upgrading its equipment. Microsoft, however, is swimming in cash. It can not only invest huge amounts of cash in marketing, but it can further its goals by investing in other companies. Second, Microsoft is in a high growth industry, while AT&T was not. Third, Microsoft is much more nimble than AT&T. If Microsoft needs to reinvent itself, it is very likely that it will be able to. Fourth, Microsoft has an excellent, aggressive management. If there is an opportunity for growth, Microsoft will likely take it.

It may seem as if I am placing too much trust in Microsoft's management. While I don't automatically assume that management will magically make things right, I am seeing signs that they are doing what needs to be done. I think that Microsoft will remain dominant for many, many years to come.

-- Realist (no@email.address), January 10, 2000.

Realist; Many good points. I agree with most of what you say at this point. I won't drag out the thread by insulting you with an argument over tiny details. Your thinking is sound. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. I hope I am right but I AM a techie WITH a bias.

I am TRULY disappointed that China report was falsh. I see I was only half informed on that one.

;-) I am still going to jibe at MS every chance I get... :)

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 10, 2000.

Hmm, now Microsoft settles with Caldera for about $150m (3 cents per share, 5.11B shares outstanding).

Seems that they weren't to confident about that case nay more for some reason.

What's the latest on the anti-trust suit? I've lost track, last I heard there was a possible settlment on the table and the shares took off and never looked back.

-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), January 10, 2000.