I think the most interesting question raised by this article is, "Why are the smart people graduating from college willing to get shafted by startups?" Why are schools failing to teach engineers about caring for their own careers? I do not think most business majors would put up with kind of crap. They are all taught to negotiate for salary and to get high earnings early as a basis for later demands. They also unders…
Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
161–170 of 360 posts
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#162This entire thesis is a red herring. I doubt we've ever had a conversation with a startup about what sort of benefits they should offer. Since the startups in a position to hire lots of people will presumably have raised money from later stage investors, if anyone is giving them advice about this, it would probably be them. FWIW, if anyone did ask my advice about what benefits to offer, I'd tell them to err on the si…
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been contracting for a long time, I know the risks and it's not just about the money. It's about the self ownership. Of course it's better for the company, they want the ability to coerce the employee and hold their livelihood/healthcare hostage. With my arrangement, I keep the same healthcare plan no matter who I'm working for or what I'm doing.
> I've been contracting for a long time Didn't you just say you are 24?
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#164From the Author's bio: "I'm just this guy who used to enjoy tech, now I would rather build bicycles. I still work in the tech industry, for the money, but I no longer call myself a "technologist"." So points well made that a guy with children, in mid-career, and without much of a passion for the field he's working in finds a Y-Combinator offer to be less compelling than a more traditional package. But I'm not sure wh…
> "I'm just this guy who used to enjoy tech, now I would rather build bicycles. I still work in the tech industry, for the money, but I no longer call myself a "technologist"." Actually, I love that. If our company was a little further along and I could afford to hire him I'd make an approach. I don't think tech is the be-all and end-all of things, it's a tool we use. I prefer to have a techie who is able to feel the…
Absolutely agreed. I just wrote about this recently[1], arguing that to be the best programmer, you really need to do something else as a specialty, and have programming simply as your trade. Programming is a value enhancer on another skill, and (in my opinion) is less value if it's the only thing you can offer. Effectively, your skill caps out at some point, and to continue increasing your impact you need to draw on something else too.
[1] http://www.drtomallen.com/1/post/2013/03/more-than-a-program...
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#165I think it is great that Michael understands exactly what he wants in terms of a compensation package. And for a variety of reasons, its pretty clear that a "startup" isn't going to meet those needs. So he's currently "Contractor at Self-Employed" which is also fine because you really do have a lot of flexibility as a contractor that you don't have as a rank-and-file employee at BigCo.
But the anger and the hurt, that is not healthy.
The impression that rant leaves me with is that Michael feels he brings great value to the organization, and wants to be compensated commensurately with that value. And yet nobody has agreed to his terms. It may be they can't (reading his list is a lot of capital to invest in a single employee), it may be they disagree about value, or it may be they have structural issues around it (managing the expectations of other employees, Etc.) The "shut up and pay me what I'm worth" mantra is not a healthy internal dialog, it instantly makes you enemies with the very person you're trying to be friends with, the guy with the job. Worse it focuses your effort on the wrong question.
Lets use a very simple analogy for how this can go wrong. Lets say you own a bicycle, and one of the tires has a slow leak. You go into an "inflation" store and the sales guy has really nice compressors, they've got pressure values that are accurate to within 1/10th PSI, they have valves to deliver exactly the right amount of inflation, large multi-gallon storage tanks to deliver air efficiently and on time, and valves, a most wondrous universal valving system that pretty much guarantees you will never have a tire that this thing can't inflate. All for the low low price of $899. And the bike rider says, "I really just need a hand pump, I'm prepared to pay $25 for it..."
Now is our consumer some ignorant boob that can't see the value of a truly fine tire inflation apparatus? No. And the sales guy shouldn't get mad if the customer isn't willing to over pay so much to achieve their goal of keeping a leaky tire from going flat.
The key is that it isn't that the tire inflator isn't "worth" the money, its that the problem isn't worth the inflater's price. It would work, but the extra cost doesn't bring extra value.
So Michael's rant might be he cannot find a company yet that has the size problems that he can solve. No doubt there are such companies, but the larger the problem size, the harder it is to connect with the person who is looking.
Some folks take the path of being 'under employed' to get at least some benefits while they seek out the right spot, some start their own thing, but yelling at the YC founders and insinuating that their goal in life is to fleece their employees in the pursuit of their own success does Michael a disservice.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just FYI, insurance premiums can skyrocket one you get older or develop serious health issues (and such health issues really can come suddenly -- autoimmune diseases, etc). I think you've built a wonderful position for yourself, but I'd urge you to be mindful of thepotential pitfalls in the future.
A lot of the health insurance risk is changing in 2014, though, so it's actually viable to have lower coverage insurance now and plan to upgrade IFF a major medical condition happens. (yes, this makes no sense from an insurance market perspective for the insurers)
I'm not too knowledgeable on the exact scenarios and how much more (if any) such people with serious medical issues would pay, but I agree with you that this is something to be cognizant of.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've worked for 3 startups in Portland that offered those benefits. I now work remotely for a Fortune 100 that gives me a major portion of those benefits, plus a higher salary. It can be done, my Portland-based comrade. I'll buy you a beer sometime if you like.
I can see one or two of those things being covered but even 30 days of PTO? That's 6 weeks per year that you won't be in the office. Portland (OR), USA, right? Not Portland, Spain/France/Norway? :P
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#168Just 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?
The expected value of 0.5% of the equity in that startup should be 0.5% of the valuation. That said, not everyone has the savings or investments to offset that level of risk. For someone with a "low" risk-tolerance, that value drops dramatically. Remember risk in our (assumed rational) finance market is as much tied to your ability to have enough liquidity as it is to have a positive outcome.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#169The 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.
Although there aren't tangible or financial benefits for working at a startup, there are definitely benefits that a large company simply can't provide, like experience and independence. For someone in their early 20's straight out of college, those benefits can outweigh the financial benefits of a big company.