Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

madned.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 684 posts

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#261

Post by sgtnoodle »

flemhans wrote: post #45
ransom1538 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I had a high school teacher [underpaid] that gave us donuts in the morning. One day that didn't happen. Anarchy. Screaming, yelling, crying, breakfasts ruined. WHAT WILL WE EAT? This teacher was now an evil villain. The teacher learned: never give out free donuts again.

20+ donuts, for how long? If daily and at $1/nut, that comes out to $100 per week. Was it just on some occasions or every morning?

Most big grocery stores in the US sell day old donuts for half-off and in bulk, probably working out to something like $0.30/donut.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#262

Post by rsyring »

twodave wrote: post #192
TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #128

This reminds me of a story back around that time about a guy who was, like, employee 200 at Amazon. He goes to the can, and sees a vestment sheet for the early employees, and realizes that he’s been hired just after people were getting stock grants. Just just prior to him are shortly to become millionaires, and he’s sitting there with a regular job. He quit because of the inequity, and did a tour with this story as a…

There's literally a biblical parable about this (though sort of in reverse). I'll paraphrase it (it's from Matthew Ch 20): A man goes out in the morning to find workers for his vineyard, promising them each denarius for the day. Around lunch he goes to find more workers. During the afternoon, he goes to find even more workers. At the end of the day the man pays everyone, starting with those who arrived during the aft…

> The main purpose of the parable is to describe that everybody who makes it to Heaven is there on equal terms.

I believe a closer reading of that passage suggests that the purpose of the parable is to show that Jesus is upending the social order that currently exists* to show favor to the those who are currently the downtrodden and outcast. See the end of chapter 19 where Jesus says the rich will not enter the kingdom of heaven and the first will be last.

Then chapter 20, the parable in question, and the parable ends with:

"Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity? So the last will be first, and the first last."

Jesus would die for sinners, both Jews and gentiles. The gentiles would be grafted in, as Paul says in Romans 11. An incredibly offensive idea to the Jews of the day but demonstrative of a God who is rich in mercy.

> But there's another truth to it that the article also describes--if you agreed to work for a wage and then receive that wage, can it really be called unfair?

FWIW, I think you are exactly right on that part.

* I don't think this meaning parallels or supports current cultural efforts to "upend social order." Completely different culture and circumstances being discussed and Jesus' desired outcome is very different IMO from what I see many in our current culture fighting for. He was concerned primarily for people's souls, not their economic or political standing. In fact, that was one of the reasons he died the death he did...to show that his kingdom was not of this world, his concerns were not primarily those of this world, and his disciples should do likewise.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#263

Post by DoreenMichele »

windthrown wrote: post #243
lixtra wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They ended up paying for that in spades. Assuming that guy behaved differently with other companies, shouldn’t we call it corruption? Edit: > This was in the planning field and he was moving from a private consulting firm to a government job . Some downvoters want explain? Seriously HN, you want this kind of government workers? I didn’t assume so. It was an interesting story to share.

Abusing the power of their job to retaliate against specific parties? Yes it sounds like pretty clear-cut corruption.

He may have only been engaging in petty schadenfreude. Given that they stiffed him, they may have been chronically a day late and a dollar short and counting on people to make an exception "just this once" (every single time) because of some sob story or other.

Telling them "no" instead of falling for their con job wouldn't be corruption.

I'm not condoning corruption. But I do certainly find the story funny.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#264

Post by dmarlow »

drfuchs wrote: post #246
alasdair_ wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are also taking FAR longer to exit/IPO than they did back in the day and most companies still have a 90 day limit on ISOs. How many super early employees are able to hang on for a decade until IPO, or have the cash to exercise their options before they leave?

Super-early employee here. Pay for your options your first day of employment. They should be inexpensive; and your employer should be willing to give you a signing bonus to cover it (after all, the money just goes right back to them). Then when you leave, you get to keep all vested shares with no tax consequence, no need to pony up any cash, and no need to sell right away. Worked out great for me.

This is the way for companies to do right by the first few employees (and have a longer than 90 exercise window when leaving). I know a super early employee who left and had to take a loan to exercise and pay taxes. It's kind of sad to think about it.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#265

Post by Thorrez »

mulmen wrote: post #65
dilyevsky wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If i recall the same happened when google replaced their holiday gift phone with donation to some charities they picked.

Wait what? Who gets the tax break there?

When you make a charitable donation of cash, you get a tax deduction to undo the income tax you paid when you originally got that cash. If a company directly donates to charity, you don't pay income tax on that money in the first place, so you don't need a deduction to undo it.

The end result is the same $0 net change in your bank account balance.

Also, companies can deduct all expenses from corporate income tax. So if a company pays you money via payroll, or pays that money directly to a charity,t he company will deduct it from corporate income tax either way.

The benefit of a company making charitable donations directly is that payroll taxes are avoided (not to be confused with income taxes). Both the employee and the company benefit from this, because normally both the employee and the company pay payroll taxes.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#266

Post by Thorrez »

jartelt wrote: post #255
mulmen wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait what? Who gets the tax break there?

If I recall correctly, the employees just picked a charity and Google gave the donation. The "gift" was being able to pick the charity. I don't think there was any employee tax break.

Well the employee doesn't have to pay income tax or payroll tax on the money, so in that sense there is a tax break compared to if the money was given to the employee.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#267

Post by chii »

taeric wrote: post #26

This is literally a plot point in Christmas Vacation. Is also why I think it is silly for startups to provide too many perks. It sets obvious precedent and will upset more folks when you stop. Find ways to invest in the company so that success is it's own perk. If the company truly has more, work that into raises where you clearly tie the income to the success of the company.

> success is it's own perk

aka, equity compensation. Because i sure aint gonna consider it a perk if a CEO (or owners) to get richer, while i just get praise for making the success!

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#268

Post by ornornor »

froh wrote: post #238
twodave wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's literally a biblical parable about this (though sort of in reverse). I'll paraphrase it (it's from Matthew Ch 20): A man goes out in the morning to find workers for his vineyard, promising them each denarius for the day. Around lunch he goes to find more workers. During the afternoon, he goes to find even more workers. At the end of the day the man pays everyone, starting with those who arrived during the aft…

the parable leverages our feelings of injustice tickled by the very relatable narrative to carry one point home, the Heavens part. the other, secular reading, has a heavy taste of prosperity gospel, putting employers into God's boots to justify blatant injustice and better margins, fka profits. it is and remains unfair to offer different employees different wages for the same work. please don't use the gospel to just…

That’s very surprising, I didn’t know that about Huawei and didn’t expect it at all!

100% with you on the parable.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#269

Post by hkmurakami »

jedberg wrote: post #17

When I worked at eBay, we had a bonus program based on company revenue. It was around 6% of your salary max and managers got around 25% max based on the same formula. For the first few years, you could count on getting a max bonus every quarter. To the point where most everyone who worked there had always gotten one. And the one quarter, we didn't get the max bonus. In fact, I don't think we got it all. People scream…

This happened at the Japanese megaCorp I worked at but wrt overtime pay after the financial crisis.

Everyone worked huge overtime, boosting their pay by 50-80% in some cases. Economy crashed, corporate orders to cut overtime ( but obv not the work deliverables), and people were having difficulty paying their mortgages.

Re: Thanks for the Bonus, I Quit

#270

Post by Thorrez »

dlp211 wrote: post #151
mcny wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is a thousand dollar donation, what am I going to do with the tax break? I still have to take a standard deduction. What am I missing?

Charity is an above the line deduction.

No it's not. $300 can be an above-the-line deduction. Any donation beyond that is below the line.

https://www.aarp.org/money/taxes/info-2020/how-to-deduct-202...

Post reply on HN