“About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today” • Hacker News Board

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#921

Post by toyg » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:13 PM UTC

midrus wrote: post #735

baron816 wrote: post #181

What I think is lost in the conversation here is that people don’t really have organizations they can go to to advocate their political positions. People have their families, their jobs, and maybe a couple of friends and that’s about it. They need an outlet to push the ideas and causes they care about. The workplace is one of the few places where they can feel like they’re having an impact, but that’s not really appr…

Can't agree more with this. As I commented in other thread, here in europe this is very uncommon. Here we go to work, to work. Football and politics don't lead to good ends anywhere. So, join any company outside to the US if you want to focus on work

It actually very much depends on what you mean by “work”. Go work in a European factory, and you’ll probably have to have a relationship with a union, which includes going to meetings and discussing causes. European offices, on the other hand (and particularly in the private sector), tend to follow the traditional “politics and salaries are taboo” culture, probably because those areas never required unionization to improve their working conditions.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#922

Post by batch12 » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:15 PM UTC

runarberg wrote: post #846

spyckie2 wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, people are reacting to the policy. But it's definitely that the policy is a reaction to something as well. Probably, the founders believed that the toxicity of the internal culture had reached a point where it was extremely detrimental to the workplace. And, knowing DHH, it was probably not only a financial decision but a lifestyle one. He may have realized that the advocates that actively discussed and promoted…

I disagree, this reeks of cheap solutions and ill thought HR managements. To me banning politics from company chat feels vague and confusing at best. Another post from a few days ago got this from a worker[1]: > “How do you talk about raising kids without talking about society?” the employee said. “As soon as I bring up public schools, then it’s already political.” At worst it feels like you are being silenced. In te…

Banning political discussion is the better option. With the extremely polarized us vs them mentality folks in the US have, it is too easy for someone to be singled out for a different opinion. Twitter is a good example of this kind of groupthink and the putrid Mad Max landfill that remains when people retreat to their camps. I would never work in a toxic environment where I am being subjected to a constand barrage of politcal posturing unrelated to my actual job. I work to get paid to go home and enjoy my time. Talk about politics somewhere else.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#923

Post by [deleted] » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:21 PM UTC

skinkestek wrote: post #781

ethnt wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you say that it's one of the nicest companies to work in, but clearly not if 1/3 of their employees are willing to leave over a policy decision. Some of the employees that left had been there for over 15 years — it used to be a good place to work, but this made it untenable for them.

> Well, you say that it's one of the nicest companies to work in, but clearly not if 1/3 of their employees are willing to leave over a policy decision. I'm afraid many of them will be in for a rude awakening. Basecamp has really stood out it seems.

[deleted]

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#924

Post by Kye » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:24 PM UTC

Kiro wrote: post #851

Meanwhile I've worked at companies where the CEO was openly racist, the management rated female employees based on looks and published a top list, bosses threatening to fire people left and right... Yet, it all happened without anyone objecting or making a fuzz on Twitter about it. The difference? Not tech companies. I wish tech employees realize how privileged they are. Actually having a say in anything work-related…

This is like when people who should be paid more complain about people advocating for a higher minimum wage. People in other industries advocating for things you don't have isn't the problem here.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#925

Post by seoaeu » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:29 PM UTC

fighterpilot wrote: post #784

pochamago wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for the people who are so passionate they can't imagine not engaging with politics at work should look for careers in NGOs. I don't feel any disdain for activists, I just don't really want to work with them, and I think we'd both be happier if they were engaged in work that had first order effects on their beliefs instead of second or third

This assumes that it's an earnest desire to improve society (which it sometimes is), and not a desire to gain/maintain status or power through virtue signalling.

> a desire to gain/maintain status or power

What you're describing is basically a textbook definition of 'politics'. I find it funny that you call this virtue signalling when that term was literally invented to describe the opposite: halfhearted political activism that isn't trying to build power.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#926

Post by seoaeu » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:31 PM UTC

cblconfederate wrote: post #895

pochamago wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for the people who are so passionate they can't imagine not engaging with politics at work should look for careers in NGOs. I don't feel any disdain for activists, I just don't really want to work with them, and I think we'd both be happier if they were engaged in work that had first order effects on their beliefs instead of second or third

People who are passionate about something would most likely like to recruit new people to their cause. Working for an NGO is a dead end as everyone is already on the same page there.

It is also a dead end because corporations have most of the power in the country.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#927

Post by seoaeu » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:36 PM UTC

rsj_hn wrote: post #390

baron816 wrote: post #181

What I think is lost in the conversation here is that people don’t really have organizations they can go to to advocate their political positions. People have their families, their jobs, and maybe a couple of friends and that’s about it. They need an outlet to push the ideas and causes they care about. The workplace is one of the few places where they can feel like they’re having an impact, but that’s not really appr…

> What I think is lost in the conversation here is that people don’t really have organizations they can go to to advocate their political positions. Why should workplaces serve as political-outlet therapy locations because people can't think of other organizations to use for this purpose? There are, in fact, countless numbers of political organizations and groups in the U.S. and you are free to start your own if you…

Some people it turns out, don't want "political-outlet therapy", they want to build actual political power. When you work for a company that already has that sort of power, activism like this is a natural approach. In fact, I suspect that many people dislike this approach because they know it is effective.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#928

Post by lozenge » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:42 PM UTC

adolph wrote: post #873

rusty-rust wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the comments in this thread appear to be missing the context of what has happening at Basecamp. From the Verge; > While Basecamp does not publish diversity statistics, it is still, like most tech companies, majority white and male, employees said. But the idea of worker-led efforts on diversity issues got a frosty reception from the founders last year, employees told me. They were allowed to work on the proje…

It would be really creepy to have a workplace committee examining how I socialize.

HN guidelines are to steelman what you are responding to.

So, assume "examine how employees socialise" means "consider events where people go beyond who their usual contacts are, to enable more mentoring". Rather than, "spying on me and building a graph of contacts".

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#929

Post by JPKab » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:50 PM UTC

dbattaglia wrote: post #918

In fall 2008 I moved from Long Island to New Hampshire (for family reasons) and found a job in a small niche B2B shop doing C# Windows apps. On my first day of work, I notice the receptionist desk has a stack of McCain/Palin 2008 bumper stickers. The next couple of months were filled with employees talking non-stop about the election, from their deeply conservative point of view. Being quite progressive left-leaning…

I worked years ago in defense contracting, and remember being treated in a hostile fashion for admitting I was an Obama supporter.

Mostly good people, but super isolating when they would talk politics.

And I should note, that the pattern I noticed then and notice now with my mindlessly, tribally left colleagues who are mirror images of the right wing lemmings in defense: People who are really into politics at work are mediocre at best, borderline incompetent more often. Anecdotal of course, but I honestly don't think basecamp will be impacted badly by this months down the road.

I don't see a single standout amongst the folks leaving. Sorry.

Re: “About one-third of Basecamp employees accepted buyouts today”

#930

Post by jiveturkey » Sat, May 01, 2021, 3:54 PM UTC

DiNovi wrote: post #657

coldtea wrote: post #331

It's sad that the target for those employees' "political disruption" is Basecamp. One of the arguably nicest companies to work in, which treats employees well, has a sane work/life balance and advocates so, pays well, embraces remote work, gives back to open source (RoR, etc.), and has good products, with no shady anti-consumer practices, that people actually like and pay for (as opposed to somewhere where they sell…

If 1/3 of your company bolts at once you made a very poor leadership decision. Really, at that point, it has nothing to do with anything else

actually it’s brilliant. get rid of the cancer at one fell swoop. without having a layoff and while being excessively generous about it. and the folks that you want gone have left of their own volition, left feeling righteous, not summarily dismissed and bitter.

it was a brilliant strategic move. accidental, as far as i can see from the outside , but brilliant nonetheless.

the leavers are in for a rude awakening when they find that most workplaces in fact don’t want their ilk