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

Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

mhalligan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 360 posts

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#331

Post by daemon13 »

nickfrost wrote: post #241
donall wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have had a series of bad experiences with Trinet. Not so bad that it's ruined my life, but bad like "I can't believe this is the best we can do for HR". I like the idea of outsourcing that sort of thing so we can focus on the hacking, but I feel like that particular space is ripe for disruption (to use a clichéd term).

A great company solving the "Back-office / operations" side of a startup, including HR and benefits management, is Advisor. http://Advsor.com Yeah, the website is being updated, but with clients like Uber, ZeroCater, PandoDaily, Buffer, Expensify, and 70+ more, they are a SOLID solution.

Their website does not have any prices listed.

Based on your experience, how do they charge (per employee, per transaction, etc) and how much does it cost, roughly?

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#332

Post by daemon13 »

hmahncke wrote: post #283
donall wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have had a series of bad experiences with Trinet. Not so bad that it's ruined my life, but bad like "I can't believe this is the best we can do for HR". I like the idea of outsourcing that sort of thing so we can focus on the hacking, but I feel like that particular space is ripe for disruption (to use a clichéd term).

We've been generally happy with TriNet, and it's worth having a great benefit package and an HR call center. It's not free, but I think the math works out about the same way free meals do.

Same question on Trinet - since they also have no prices on their website - based on your experience, how do they charge (per employee, per transaction, etc) and how much does it cost, roughly? 100$/empl/mth, 1'000$/empl/mth?

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#333

Post by nicholassmith »

steven2012 wrote: post #314
ChuckMcM wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read his rant? He's currently self employed and interviewing. I am not unsympathetic to his cause, or his angst. But I don't understand your assertion that he should be asking for even more compensation than he is, how does asking for even more salary helps him out here, could you say more about that? What exactly would be different if I were "more clued" ?

If I were him, I would quickly delete his post. That post is likely to give pause to many potential employers. For what it's worth, I have 18 years experience, and I'm working very, very happily for a YC 09 company. I'm fairly old school in my thinking, and I've been through the Bust, so I've seen perks come and go. I just want a fair salary, good colleagues, a boss that cares, and interesting and challenging work. P…

From my reading of the article it says he's actually got an offer on the table from another company, who have done the right thing. It might give pause to many potential employers, but those aren't the employers that he wants anyway.

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#334

Post by vacri »

granitepail wrote: post #213
guptaneil wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that being less generous with benefits is a good filter for hiring candidates that are genuinely interested in what the startup's doing (which is crucial in early employees) rather than somebody who's just looking for another job, like the author. Edit: To clarify, there is huge difference between offering no benefits and offering fewer benefits than a large company. I'm not advocating treating employees li…

Taking away benefits to see which candidates are the "hungriest" seems lazy - and unethical - to me. It's not easy to source good candidates, but it seems completely backwards to find the best, most driven candidates possible through a method that, in the end, deprives them of something you could easily deliver. I've worked with companies who have a 1-month "escape hatch" on-boarding plan, wherein either the employer…

It's funny, really. Coming from an OH&S perspective, you want good OH&S not just because it's nice, but because losing a worker is expensive - rehiring, retraining, refamiliarising (it always takes a new employee time to learn the ropes). Scrooging people on basic benefits seems to be in the same bucket as scrooging them on OH&S - saves money in the short term but is overall more costly.

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#335

Post by nonamegiven »

rohern wrote: post #128
cletus wrote: post #117

The problem here I think is the disparity between being the last cofounder (15-30% equity before dilution typically) and being the first employee (1-2%) vs working for a more established company. If you compare the compensation for being an early employee in such a startup with working for an established company (eg Google, Facebook) then I think you'll find the employee of the latter will be better off in the long t…

> Startups aren't for financial security. They are for the frontiermen who are hoping to strike it rich in the gold rush. Most don't but some do. I think you mean "Founding a startup is for the frontiermen..." Being an employee is not. Being an employee is a losing proposition far more often than the 95% you cited.

It sounds like being an employee at a stereotypical startup is like being a native bearer in an African expedition movie from the fifties.

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#336

Post by vacri »

coolsunglasses wrote: post #234
dopamean wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've been contracting for a long time Didn't you just say you are 24?

I'd call 4 out of 6 years working self-employed a long time for a 24 year old. Your snark isn't appreciated.

When you try to take the high moral ground while doing the same thing you're deriding, it severely undermines your point.

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#337

Post by arbuge »

Smudge wrote: post #230
arbuge wrote: post #35

Just curious on the part where he says that the stock is most likely worthless. Are there any hard numbers on the average outcome of YC startups, and startups in general? I mean, all else being equal, what is the expected value of 0.5% of the equity of the average startup at stage X these days?

Median? $0. Mean? Somewhere in-between $0 and your typical exit.

Really? What hard data are you citing?

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#338

Post by mikeash »

guptaneil wrote: post #282
mikeash wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why concentrate on benefits. Being less generous with everything is a good filter for hiring candidates that are genuinely interested in what the startup's doing! Pay your employees poorly, and you're guaranteed to only get the ones who really believe in your company. You're virtually guaranteed success, right?

If you take any comment to its absolute extreme, it will stop making sense. If you consider my comment from the more reasonable stance that startups have limited resources compared to large companies and come with extra risks for employees, the fewer benefits can be valuable for dissuading people who might not otherwise be good culture fits. For example, a 45 year old father who might be screwed if the startup shuts…

Funny, I didn't think that was even remotely an extreme. An extreme here would be something like, "Charge people money to work at your company, that way you only get the most extremely dedicated." Simply paying less salary in addition to giving fewer benefits seems like an extremely minor extension.

There's nothing wrong with paying less because your resources are better placed elsewhere. I just don't buy the idea that paying less gets you better candidates. Sure, it might filter, a little bit, for people who really care about your business. But it's also going to filter, a lot, for people who can't get better jobs elsewhere.

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#339

Post by arethuza »

nilkn wrote: post #243
walshemj wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yep same in the uk the average GP (family doctor) makes $180k which is far higher than the Average engineer makes.

I don't know what the debt is like in the UK, but a doctor in the US can expect to go into upwards of $200k of debt. The average engineer will have far less (or no) debt and will only need a BA/BS.

Average debt for UK junior doctor is "over £40K".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junior_doctor

Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup

#340

Post by resu_nimda »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #322
resu_nimda wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...while the 40-year-old is thinking, "kid, if I wanted to take on that kind of risk and insanity, I'd have your job". So what made that 40-year-old think he wanted to work for the startup in the first place? if the founder's position is too risky and insane for his taste, how is an employee position going to be any better? I mean, everything he's saying is true, and the take-away seems to be that 40 year olds with…

A startup doesn't have to be an unstable get rich quick scam as you seem to imply. In other industries besides our's, people expect a new company (also known as a startup) to also be ... you know ... a company. Honestly, it's comments like these that I feel make tech startups look like caricatures and just silly.

But that's the culture we've created, isn't it? Is my comment inaccurate? The "tech startup" has become a different animal from a general "new company," largely due to greatly reduced overhead and initial costs. There are still "new companies" in tech, especially hardware.

I'm not sure why you call this new model a scam...it's fiercely competitive and certainly high risk, but what makes it a silly caricature? Do you feel the same about YC in general? Because they've definitely been at the forefront of fostering this "start lean and grow fast" mentality.

Post reply on HN