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

Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 639 posts

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#591

Post by pasc1878 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #557
hamburglar wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paid noncompete periods are far from the only reason for gardening leave.

What are some examples that somebody might have heard of?

For gardening leave.

You have X months notice ie the company has to tell you X months before yoir severance date.

Often the company will want somone they let go out of the office ASAP. Thus you spend your X months on gardening leave paid as normal wages.

On your severance date you get your redundancy package - in the UK there is a defined minimum but in some markets e.g. finance they pay more as they do want to keep current employees happy so they see that they just don't get thrown out.

As much of the US is at will employment I doubt this scenario will occur often

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#592

Post by pasc1878 »

irjustin wrote: post #520
friendzis wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the way it is calculated. All payments attached to employment contract are wages, be it regular salary, bonuses, vacation pay or severance. Say the contract defines severance of 1 month for each full year worked capped at 3 months: at the moment contract reaches 1 year anniversary, the employee should be owed 1 month worth of severance upon contract termination

You're right, but only if it's in the employment contract. It's not a legal requirement to have one to hire someone [0]. Way more commonly, severance is part of a termination contract, and thus it would not be here. [0] https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/severancepay

And I think some of the severance pay is tax free at least in the UK.

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#593

Post by cheriot »

MaxHoppersGhost wrote: post #536
cheriot wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The place I work has physical security, baristas, and random other staff in an expensive city. Tbh I don't know what they make.

The people we have like that at my startup are contractors and may be out of work a short bit but their agency will just move them elsewhere when something comes up.

Mostly direct employees here. Usually I'd think that's better, but ...

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#594

Post by clutchdude »

datadrivenangel wrote: post #471
clutchdude wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's a very ineffective use of capital and those types of decisions are worse in the end for the economy Disagree - it frees those employees to begin working for more productive companies sooner rather than drag them through "you are fired with no provisions for healthcare. Good luck and don't get sick during the donut period. " - yes, it's an special qualifying trigger for the exchanges but you are asking someon…

Disagree to disagree - employees are free to begin working for more productive companies when they're fired with no provisions for healthcare. In spirit though, I agree. Social healthcare not tied to employer would allow for more labor mobility. These transitions should not abrupt or catastrophic ideally.

> Disagree to disagree - employees are free to begin working for more productive companies when they're fired with no provisions for healthcare.

But that's a bad thing - because once your employment tied healthcare abruptly ends, you scramble to get something to restore it.

This may include settling or taking less optimal jobs or accepting a lower paying job.

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#595

Post by ttymck »

revel wrote: post #412

There are some really profound misunderstandings of how bankruptcy and credit work in this thread. Creditors are ranked by seniority and get paid out in order by seniority. Equity is below every creditor and has been completely wiped out. Companies are not allowed to take cash or sell the furniture to pay out employees. That money is legally owed to creditors and attempting to stiff them is theft. I'm sorry to those…

> Companies are not allowed to take cash or sell the furniture to pay out employees...Any "retention bonuses" are to keep executives around for long enough to unwind the company in an orderly fashion.

Could you help me understand where the line is drawn?

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#596

Post by prasadjoglekar »

ttymck wrote: post #595
revel wrote: post #412

There are some really profound misunderstandings of how bankruptcy and credit work in this thread. Creditors are ranked by seniority and get paid out in order by seniority. Equity is below every creditor and has been completely wiped out. Companies are not allowed to take cash or sell the furniture to pay out employees. That money is legally owed to creditors and attempting to stiff them is theft. I'm sorry to those…

> Companies are not allowed to take cash or sell the furniture to pay out employees...Any "retention bonuses" are to keep executives around for long enough to unwind the company in an orderly fashion. Could you help me understand where the line is drawn?

This line is drawn by the bankruptcy court, where creditors have a voice and agree to key management being in place for a wind down.

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#597

Post by vic-traill »

akavi wrote: post #218
vic-traill wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's a startup, it ran out of money, it failed, there is nothing left It may not be that clear cut ... From the article: The startup, valued by investors last year at $3.8 billion, had already whittled its staff down to about 500 people from a peak of 1,500, and was on track to run out of money in a matter of weeks

I don't see where you're seeing execs making any money off of Convoy in that quote. If there are any outstanding debt obligations (which I expect there are), then those would be senior to voluntary severance even if the company hadn't spent its literal last dollar.

was on track to run out of money in a matter of weeks (from TFA) != it ran out of money, it failed, there is nothing left (your comment)

I appreciate you were focused on the exec compensation part of the dialogue. Just noting that the money was not yet all gone.

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#598

Post by ttymck »

prasadjoglekar wrote: post #596
ttymck wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies are not allowed to take cash or sell the furniture to pay out employees...Any "retention bonuses" are to keep executives around for long enough to unwind the company in an orderly fashion. Could you help me understand where the line is drawn?

This line is drawn by the bankruptcy court, where creditors have a voice and agree to key management being in place for a wind down.

Understood. What about before bankruptcy begins? Who decides whether to pay severance, and how is that decision informed?

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#599

Post by Dylan16807 »

FireBeyond wrote: post #589
Dylan16807 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> FedEx was already shafting their pilots for months before this. Bounced paychecks, pilots paying for jet fuel on personal credit cards, and more. This is bad. > How sociopathic do you have to be to gamble company money (sorry, isn't that a felony?) while bouncing paychecks? It sounds like he was about to bounce a lot more paychecks. Going all or nothing instead isn't something I would call sociopathic. What makes y…

> Normally "gambling company money" implies embezzlement, which is not what happened here. Huh, what? "In one instance, after a crucial business loan was denied, he took the company's last $5,000 to Las Vegas and won $27,000 gambling on blackjack to cover the company's $24,000 fuel bill." "Embezzlement is the fraudulent taking of property by someone to whom it was entrusted, usually involving theft from a business or…

Embezzlement as in, you bet the money and if it succeeds you pocket the excess. Or that you already stole money and you're desperately gambling company money to make it back and hide the theft.

This is not embezzlement. It's reckless, not theft.

> Sounds both unsanctioned and sociopathic to me.

Very unsanctioned, but I don't see how you get sociopathic from that quote.

Please explain what's sociopathic about it like I'm stupid.

The lack of funding is already there. This act shifts the odds but doesn't really make them worse. And if the company doesn't run out of money that seems like a good thing.

The first quote I saw here was that payroll was going to fail if he didn't do this. I don't think a guarantee of only paying half the employees is better than a 50% chance of paying everyone or paying no one, for example.

If this wasn't affecting payroll then sociopathy is even less of a worry.

Only if this was going to risk payroll with no benefit to payroll do I see a serious moral issue.

Re: Trucking startup Convoy closes operations with no buyer

#600

Post by slt2021 »

kortilla wrote: post #552
idiotsecant wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to break it to you but if your job is automatable it won't be you reaping the benefits, it will be the people who have the most capital to deploy automating. That ain't you buddy, sorry. Your world view is basically peak HN techbro-iterianisim. I hope you never get the opportunity to experience exactly how wrong you are.

You sure make a lot of declarations about who is right and wrong and the poster is literally talking about their job. Is it possible you want unions in software so badly that you’re blind to successful models that work without them? Physicians and Lawyers have been around forever and they don’t unionize.

technically they dont unionize, but they have cartel that regulates supply of specialists to the market (State Bar for lawyers and State Medical Board for doctors).

the reason why healthcare is such a mess and so expensive - is because Medical Board artificially limits supply of doctors to the market, by allowing very very few Medical Residencies perspecialty. This severely limits supply of doctors, keeps their pay high and leads to ever increasing cost of medical care for patients

Post reply on HN