Similarly, I tend to consider the presence of "human resources" people/departments to be a red flag.

It's just a metaphorical term of art. Most people wouldn't want to work with "garbage collection" every day, but of course many programmers do.

It's a metaphorical term of art, but also a sentiment among companies. They do treat talent as property, surprisingly often.

And there's often a fair bit of tit-for-tat and specific arrangements about poaching and when it's okay. Which is understandable in such a small, chummy industry (think Silicon Valley venture-backed startups, which are all about networking).

But it's also illegal, and devalues programmers, both monetarily and metaphorically.

Yeah, it's a metaphor that analogizes people and property.

I wouldn't have any qualms about working with, say, purchasing managers who talked about "poaching" component orders from one another, because they'd be talking about property as property.

Do you really not see the difference?

I think you're really stretching here. The core issue is whether companies value their employees--that comes through in how the employees actually get treated, not the use of one word vs. another.

I think it's pretty hard to truly value and treat someone well if you think and speak of them as property.