“About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today” • Hacker News Board

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

#741

Post by jollybean » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:46 AM UTC

mrandish wrote: post #494

jrochkind1 wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would depend on how much I liked my job. My sense is that DHH is just a terrible boss. Note the "changes" [1] are not just "no politics" but also "no more committees" (of any kind at all; that is, no authority or responsibility except individually along line-of-report hieararchy), no more 360 degree reviews (no way to formally give feedback to your boss), and no more bringing up past decisions you disagree…

> My sense is that DHH is just a terrible boss. Interesting. I've read everything posted officially about this by the two founders as it unfolded and I've been super impressed by how well-considered these new policies are. As someone with several decades of experience as an employee, manager and then founder in both large and smaller orgs, I felt these changes were in the best interests of all stakeholders. With the…

I'll bet that people with material experience in management will have a similar take.

Even if I kind of disagree with how it unfolded, I still sympathize with leadership if they've given people options, generous out-terms etc..

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

#742

Post by FemmeAndroid » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:47 AM UTC

agloeregrets wrote: post #738

midrus wrote: post #729

As an European. I don't get this. So, employees create a list for making fun of people. Employees start to fight each other because they take offense. Company states at work, you're supposed to work, not to discuss politics. Th bad actor is the company so we all leave. (??!!!) Honestly, I don't get it. I think it is a cultural thing in the US, due to the long term racism issues ,etc. And how extremely easy is for Ame…

You missed a midpoint here, when employees stated that the list could be racist towards people with Asian heritage, the cofounder doubled down on it, claimed that only 10% could be, and well actuallyed it all and then shut down any communication or talk about it. It was crappy management that didn't listen to problems

Yup. It was a founder acting instigating and fanning the slightest flames of political disagreement. Your job, even if you disagree with the person your talking to, is to at the very least genuinely acknowledge the persons perspective and try and deescalate. Instead DHH seems to have continually doubled down and made things worse.

As the boss, it’s your job to get people back to work. It seems like DHH, more than anyone, was causing the infighting. It wasn’t coworkers talking politics, and fighting amongst themselves, it was a boss handling criticism extremely poorly, and doubling down on defensiveness until he had to mandate his employees shut up, or quit.

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

#743

Post by ashtonkem » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:47 AM UTC

Turns out subtweeting your entire workforce is dumb. Report at 11.

The issue is that the most senior people probably left first, since they’re more marketable and have more connections. A non trivial chunk of the remainder probably want to leave, but haven’t yet.

Also, I don’t think Basecamp is ready for a world where remote first is a game changing hiring advantage; that’s de rigueur nowadays, and there are a ton of companies ready and willing to snatch up engineers who have no interest in returning to an office.

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

#744

Post by ZephyrBlu » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:47 AM UTC

acjohnson55 wrote: post #571

grey-area wrote: post #479

I don't think this is really about making fun of people's names, or holocaust references. It's about power. The managers at basecamp were unhappy that their employees asserted power over them in the workplace, and decided to assert their own power in turn over what they view as their personal fiefdom and retract some of the freedoms they had so graciously granted their workers, because those ungrateful workers actual…

This pretty much nails it. The "politics" angle has been revealed to be a red herring by the subsequent accounts of everyone involved. The same contentious discussions would have happened had this policy already existed! I guess you could say the policy gives the founders a ban hammer to swing to end discussions they don't like. Separated from their justification, the 6 policies represent an assertion that Basecamp l…

> you lose 1/3 of your staff in a week over an ego trip

That's how you see it. Many other people do not see it in such a poor light.

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

#745

Post by ashtonkem » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:48 AM UTC

grey-area wrote: post #479

I don't think this is really about making fun of people's names, or holocaust references. It's about power. The managers at basecamp were unhappy that their employees asserted power over them in the workplace, and decided to assert their own power in turn over what they view as their personal fiefdom and retract some of the freedoms they had so graciously granted their workers, because those ungrateful workers actual…

He’s now complaining about cancel culture on Twitter, which is extremely political.

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

#746

Post by corinroyal » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:52 AM UTC

digitaltrees wrote: post #566

jollybean wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is an unfair representation and you are straw-manning the situation at least somewhat. The company doesn't think that 'name calling' is appropriate, rather, they don't believe that this activity is the beginnings of some kind of 'race war' and object to language such as 'leads to genocide' as hyperbolic. "unhappy that their employees asserted power over them in the workplace," Yes, if your staff are exer…

Thank you for a thoughtful nuanced response. I think your perspective that questioning hyperbolic rhetoric is not the same as tacit support for the underlying issue is really important. It is critical to maintain perspective in discussion and avoid vilification of a counter party.

The "hyperbolic rhetoric" was when the founder compared sharing the Pyramid of Hate with accusing coworkers of genocide.

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

#747

Post by ashtonkem » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:55 AM UTC

ipaddr wrote: post #152

Interestingly the employees who left have the best career prospects. Entire iOS team, head of marketing and head of product team. The 6 months free money is hard for anyone entering a strong job market to pass up. A lot of comments seem to think 1/3 left because of the no politics policy. 1 / 3 left because it would increase their wealth or give them the summer covid took away last year. How many people would leave y…

I bet that most who quit for non-monetary reasons probably quit less because of the policy, but more because they lost faith in leadership. This whole episode was extremely ugly, and unnecessarily public. If I worked at Basecamp I’d probably just not trust DHH and Jason to not make my life worse for no clear reason.

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

#748

Post by shostack » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:57 AM UTC

georgeburdell wrote: post #422

I laud them for standing up for their ideals. That said, as a conservative, I don't ever "bring my whole self to work", even if my employer says to, because (a) I know my personal views are not welcome in the Bay Area, and (b) I think it's concerning that many companies are trying to become more than just a place to work on interesting stuff and get paid for your work. They must now make political views known that al…

I'm curious, what conservative views do you hold that you think would make you so incompatible?

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

#749

Post by bastawhiz » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:58 AM UTC

anon7725 wrote: post #618

jrochkind1 wrote: post #451

People are gonna wanna make this about politics, but my sense is that it's really just about the owners of basecamp are crappy tyrants to work for, that's about it. I don't think it's really even about the specific policy. Note that the "changes" [1] also include "no more committees" (ie, no more feedback/authority/responsibilty except through the line-of-report hieararchy), "no bringing up past decisions you disagre…

> no more committees 1/3 of the company had joined this D&I committee, which apparently felt that it’s scope included everything that the company did. The employees proved that they couldn’t be trusted to self-organize into a committee and keep it on topic.

At no point did I read that any committee was involved with this issue: it was all direct interactions between individuals and management. Can you cite where you read that the DE&I committee had involved themselves with this?

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

#750

Post by birdyrooster » Sat, May 01, 2021, 4:01 AM UTC

digitaltrees wrote: post #566

jollybean wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is an unfair representation and you are straw-manning the situation at least somewhat. The company doesn't think that 'name calling' is appropriate, rather, they don't believe that this activity is the beginnings of some kind of 'race war' and object to language such as 'leads to genocide' as hyperbolic. "unhappy that their employees asserted power over them in the workplace," Yes, if your staff are exer…

Thank you for a thoughtful nuanced response. I think your perspective that questioning hyperbolic rhetoric is not the same as tacit support for the underlying issue is really important. It is critical to maintain perspective in discussion and avoid vilification of a counter party.

"avoid vilification of a counter party" Ahh, I feel much better in my safe space. Thanks.