Report: HYBE Requires Consent for Forensics of Personal Devices (Not Company Assets) When Needed Upon Resignation

The problematic portions of what HYBE demanded from departing employees include: ▲non-compete agreement ▲covenant not to sue agreement ▲permanent retention of the pledge. The signing of these resignation pledges was administered by Kim Joo-young, HYBE’s CHRO (Chief Human Resources Officer), who is the current CEO of ADOR.

In August, a HYBE employee posted on the anonymous community Blind’s HYBE board, citing information security pledge clauses including ▲consent to forensic examination of personal communication devices that are not company assets upon resignation as needed ▲one-year non-compete restriction for similar industry companies, and asked, “I don’t care if they look at company assets, but why do I have to consent to forensic examination of my personal communication devices?”

Other HYBE employees echoed this sentiment. Another HYBE employee said, “Can you consult a labor attorney or the labor office about this? It seems too serious,” adding, “Regardless of whether it becomes a problem later, the issue is signing it in the first place.”

One HYBE employee said, “Try not signing the pledge first. This is problematic,” adding, “They want to see everything without any plan for how to isolate personal information when conducting forensics on departing employees—why would you consent to that?”

Criticism also arose from within HYBE, with comments such as: “What are entertainment industry rank-and-file workers supposed to do for a living for a year if they change jobs?” “Why do we have to sign this—are employees slaves?” “This kind of pledge comes out because the higher-ups only think about themselves and not the employees” “Demanding consent to forensics—isn’t that basically stealing personal information?”