I totally agree. Have seen the same in Germany, with both US and German startups, both in Hamburg and Berlin. They talk all the time how cool is to work in nice locations in the city have a great Mac and being part of something great. I have always visited such an interviews, because wanted to be a part of these startup environment. However getting 30% less salary and no real benefits, except for talking to hipsters all day long, has never been the purpose of my life.
Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
41–50 of 360 posts
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#42Based on how he's valuing his PTO, he's valuing his time at either $328, $218, or $447 per diem. I hope he's not valuing his PTO based on the salary he's getting. I'm a 24 year old with no college degree and I currently cost about $800 per day on contract. (Not hypothetical, billing at that rate right now.) I'd rather make twice as much money consulting, pick my own damn healthcare plan, go to whatever conferences I…
As a contractor, if you're taking in 800 dollars a day, and buying your own health insurance, you are not taking in 800 dollars a day. In fact, your take home pay is probably less than his (at least on the high-end of the per-diem).
1. You're paying a higher marginal tax rate on your earnings than he is on his salary. Self-employment tax is a real bitch.
2. If you're buying your own health insurance, the benefits you get for the price are undoubtable lower than the benefits he gets with his (paid for) package, or you're paying through the nose. "Group plans" are generally better, and cheaper, than individual plans.
3. Should something terrible happen to you, or should you fail to find work for awhile, you are not eligible for unemployment.
I see lots of folks swear by "being a contractor" when they're young, only to start searching for a salaried position after a few bad experiences.
When I took over my company, the absolute first thing I did was switch every "contractor" to a full-time employee. It's better for both parties.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#43Every thing comes down to risk vs reward. Founders risk it all to found companies and rightfully have the greatest reward. Startup employees haven't risked as much but their risk is compensated with appropriate equity the earlier they join and the more risk they take on in the form of lower salary and benefits. YC definitively reduces risk and increases the potential for reward. It's easier for YC companies to raise…
> "Startup employees haven't risked as much but their risk is compensated with appropriate equity the earlier they join and the more risk they take on in the form of lower salary and benefits." This is the part where we wave our hands and drop a smoke bomb. You're theoretically right, but it never works out that way. For all intents and purposes, in the current state of the tech economy, there is no inherent risk to…
I've been amazed the typical equity for early employees has stayed as low as it has for as long as it has.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#44Every thing comes down to risk vs reward. Founders risk it all to found companies and rightfully have the greatest reward. Startup employees haven't risked as much but their risk is compensated with appropriate equity the earlier they join and the more risk they take on in the form of lower salary and benefits. YC definitively reduces risk and increases the potential for reward. It's easier for YC companies to raise…
Heh, well kind of. I've learned that founders have a much greater risk/reward ratio than employees. The ratio is really not even close. The assumption that founders risk it "all" is a fallacy. The assumption that employees have less risk is also inaccurate. It depends on the situation, sure -- but I know plenty of startups founded by people who can crash and burn and not have their livelihood affected. As for "risk c…
If the risk isn't being compensated, I'm with you on that point. That's Bullshit! But the... "founders have a much greater risk/reward ratio than employees", that is not a fallacy in most cases.
In my own case, I've been working for 18 months with no salary and I don't consider myself unique. Most founders go down the same long long road before they bring on their first employee. I've learned that most employees (if they haven't gone through the process of founding a company) dismiss the amount of risk founders take on to get a company to the point of even being able to make their first hire.
The whole question seems like we should create a standard model for the risk reward and set equity appropriately.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this entitlement? He's rationally comparing total compensation packages and choosing the one that benefits him the best. This is something that even high schoolers working crappy unskilled jobs do. They look at the market and pick the job they feels the best suited for them. Yes, this particular individual gets well compensated compared to many. So what?
It's his tone which comes off as entitled to me. Very, very entitled. He sounds like one cocky dude to me. Let's all take a moment to reflect on a few things. For instance, we are pretty lucky to be passionate about something which just happens to be pretty good at producing a lot of monetary value for companies, and consequently it's not too hard for us to convince companies to pay us a lot and give us great benefit…
All my finance friends make about 10x what my engineer friends make and work equally hard. If you compare engineers to lawyers, doctors, and executives we are very much underpaid.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#46Every thing comes down to risk vs reward. Founders risk it all to found companies and rightfully have the greatest reward. Startup employees haven't risked as much but their risk is compensated with appropriate equity the earlier they join and the more risk they take on in the form of lower salary and benefits. YC definitively reduces risk and increases the potential for reward. It's easier for YC companies to raise…
> "Startup employees haven't risked as much but their risk is compensated with appropriate equity the earlier they join and the more risk they take on in the form of lower salary and benefits." This is the part where we wave our hands and drop a smoke bomb. You're theoretically right, but it never works out that way. For all intents and purposes, in the current state of the tech economy, there is no inherent risk to…
Well if it's a smoke bomb... let's change it. I agree with you there.
I'm a current founder and my first 10 employees are going to get a hell of a lot more than .5%
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#47From a UK perspective - this post is nuts! I've worked with a few London based startups (and interviewed for several). Holiday 28 days minimum - as per law https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights/entitlement Rarely offered health care but - for all its flaws - our National Health Service is pretty good. Shares - yup, they're almost always going to be worthless. Pension - every company has offered me at least 5%…
On the flip side, I've seen insane (from a US standpoint) rules on vesting at UK startups, like "the company gets all your options back if you leave."
Don't know if this is SOP or not.
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#48I always advise folks who are looking to work for a startup to value their stock at $0. Will you be happy and enjoy the work you are doing for the salary and benefits alone?
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#49Font size and contrast matter, or why I won't read your blog post
Re: Benefits matter, or why I won't work for your Y Combinator startup
#50Every thing comes down to risk vs reward. Founders risk it all to found companies and rightfully have the greatest reward. Startup employees haven't risked as much but their risk is compensated with appropriate equity the earlier they join and the more risk they take on in the form of lower salary and benefits. YC definitively reduces risk and increases the potential for reward. It's easier for YC companies to raise…
Isn't simply being profitable a much better credential than being vetted by YC?
It's not that black and white. But being profitable is definitely a great data point.