171–180 of 639 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ex-Convoy employee here: if a company is shutting down, it obviously can't provide severance. It's not a matter of class or not.
If things are dire enough to close up shop now, they probably were dire enough to close up shop 2 months ago, and you can use the cash to give your employees some runway for finding new employment.
To think that 1 year ago they were aggressively spamming me for an engineering position there. How you go from "hyper growth mode" (according to the recruiter email) to closed operations within 13 months?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Startups are not established businesses. They are inherently risky ventures. If you want to be coddled and showered with benefits, go join a Fortune 500. Startups are not for you.
How dare you people don't want to be treated like a subhuman to make some early investors insanely rich?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>CEO said there'll be no severance or healthcare. Classy. Learning a lot about how certain people treat their employees during these last couple of admittedly insane years. Good for future reference, I guess - though not much solace now. I feel for the employees. Edit: Wow, more responses than I thought! I admit that the tone of my comment was too reactionary, but my opinion stands. I won't modify the original commen…
Startups are not established businesses. They are inherently risky ventures. If you want to be coddled and showered with benefits, go join a Fortune 500. Startups are not for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd argue the business failing is a strong counterpoint to that assertion. That statement is pretty naive. There are plenty of things that can kill a startup without them having done anything specifically wrong at any level, let alone at the level of technical team.
While true, most of these startups that have already found product/market fit and go bust are operating off of unrealistically rosy projections. Did this company need to burn their entire round in a single year? Probably not. Could they have established themselves with lower operating expenses and still grown over time? Probably.
Now how do you draw a line from that to the probability that the technical team that has been let go is not high quality?
Dozens of platforms like this exist in Europe, not sure why everybody makes a fuss about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ex-Convoy employee here: if a company is shutting down, it obviously can't provide severance. It's not a matter of class or not.
It is interesting to see that employees of Convoy aren't saying bad things about the CEO. But people on the outside who don't know the CEO are saying bad things. Usually it is the reverse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ex-Convoy employee here: if a company is shutting down, it obviously can't provide severance. It's not a matter of class or not.
It is interesting to see that employees of Convoy aren't saying bad things about the CEO. But people on the outside who don't know the CEO are saying bad things. Usually it is the reverse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can buy healthcare on the free market. And you aren't being "let go" - the entire company is going under. If you are laid off and the company stays healthy, it makes sense to have some concessions. But if the entire business ceases to exist. I don't know why would you expect anything from it.
Wonder if it might make sense for the social safety net to include such a provision for workers of businesses that go under. If we're not going to have universal public coverage, might as well add provision for such an extenuating circumstance as that.