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

“About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 1001 posts

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#101

Post by wincy »

Graffur wrote: post #92
grumblestumble wrote: post #89

A lot of the conversation from the "no politics at work" crowd here is centered around "these folks were wasting company time and losing productivity protesting this". That entirely misses the point. The loss of productivity around this issue is entirely on the leadership team. They let this fester - they were complicit in allowing this dumb-ass list to be circulated around the company for years, and when it became a…

Is Bigbuttson an actual name? That is funny to an English speaker.

Just as funny as something like Takeshita, which is a real Japanese surname.

If I was working with someone with that last name I definitely wouldn’t bring it up.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#102

Post by mempko »

baggy_trough wrote: post #32
aaomidi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had many opportunities to reverse that blog post. They didn't and doubled down.

Some people are willing to stick to their principles even if it costs them. We need many more such.

Didn't realize authoritarianism is a principle we really should be rewarding.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#103

Post by jon_bigbuttson »

grumblestumble wrote: post #89

A lot of the conversation from the "no politics at work" crowd here is centered around "these folks were wasting company time and losing productivity protesting this". That entirely misses the point. The loss of productivity around this issue is entirely on the leadership team. They let this fester - they were complicit in allowing this dumb-ass list to be circulated around the company for years, and when it became a…

Please do not make fun of my name.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#104

Post by sangnoir »

mendelmaleh wrote: post #44
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #10

If a third of the people were willing to leave the company over a decision, it sounds like there was a real, meaningful mismatch in priorities. Which is fine, but it's for the best for everyone to end that mismatch.

If two thirds were willing to stay even with such a good severance package, it sounds like most agree with the decision...

Two thirds so far. It's been less than a week.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#105

Post by mark_l_watson »

I have a different take on this, different than most comments here: I think that the founders/owners knew what they were doing based on reading their book and lightly following them. I have never been a customer.

I know that I am just guessing, but they might have been making the lifestyle decision that they wanted a smaller and more focused company that was more joyful to manage/run. Also, I have some sympathy for a “no politics” guideline for two reasons: no one should be allowed to say or do anything at work that makes anyone uncomfortable in a personal way; no one should really care much about other peoples’ politics. Life is about so much more than politics. I am judgmental, but I judge people on how well they treat other people and by how much effort they make improving the world (understanding that people have different natural abilities).

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#106

Post by throwawaypolicy »

version_five wrote: post #79

Putting aside the other aspects of this story, I think a buyout offer, possibly even a "standing offer" is an interesting practice to consider at companies. I worked somewhere where there was a large, low morale group of employees that I think were just there because of money concerns + fomo if the company ever went anywhere. At the time I thought a buyout offer would have been a great way to separate the people who…

And on the flip side, compensation plans that encourage people to stay to arbitrary dates are probably a mistake.

That's where I'm at today. There's a lot of money resting on my staying at a company for a year. I don't feel like I've been working effectively with the culture or team, and I'm pretty sure both me and the employer would be better served by my leaving, except the financial incentive, sunk cost, and avoiding having a "I worked here for only 6 months" on my resume is enough to justify me staying an extra 6 month.

Potentially not coincidentally "percent of engineers who stay a year" is one of the key metrics of the team that sets up the compensation structure...

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#107

Post by uomo »

4ndrewl wrote: post #73

I guess it's important to note the scale here. About a third of Basecamp employees is ~15-20 people?

According to the Verge, 18 employees (out of 57 total) have tweeted that they are going to leave.

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/30/22412714/basecamp-employe...

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#108

Post by Wolfr_ »

version_five wrote: post #79

Putting aside the other aspects of this story, I think a buyout offer, possibly even a "standing offer" is an interesting practice to consider at companies. I worked somewhere where there was a large, low morale group of employees that I think were just there because of money concerns + fomo if the company ever went anywhere. At the time I thought a buyout offer would have been a great way to separate the people who…

I think if 1/3 of your company leaves there is short-term morale loss for the ones that remain. But the loss of internal IP will be devastating. Especially if you are not big on docs and have that “just be smart and ship” approach that Basecamp has. Basecamp has a real problem hand here... they probably never expected this.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#110

Post by ironmagma »

ldiracdelta wrote: post #55
dbt00 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If more than a third of your employees think that a single policy change is enough for them to leave, then maybe your policy change is dumb.

Some times the way to make the company happier is to fire all the unhappy people.

The unhappy people didn’t get that way by virtue of their genetics.
Post reply on HN