Startup Employees As an Organized Labor Group 107
An anonymous reader writes "Last Friday may turn out to have marked the beginning of Silicon Valley's organized labor movement--startup employees met in Palo Alto 'to share war stories and to start developing what organizers called a 'Startup Employee Equity Bill of Rights'.'" That probably should include the right to work late, for little pay, and to trade less certainty now for greater hoped-for benefits down the road. If you've been a startup employee, or started one of your own, what would you put on the wishlist?
if 'stock' is part of your deal (Score:5, Insightful)
you are already being scammed. in the 35 yrs I've been in software in the bay area and boston area, I've known 2 people (at most) who made out well from shared in their startups. the first level bosses did ok but not great and the execs and vc's all bought new houses and cars (and boats and ...).
face it, wall street is a scam and stocks for you and me are a scam.
work for salary. don't work AT ALL for stock.
so many times I've seen it (even to myself) where they walk you out just before your first or 2nd vesting. it happens!!
do not work or even care about stock. you can't write a rent check on stock promises.
that's all that needs to be said. its a scam for those who are connected and rich. you and I will never be connected or rich. face it, the american dream is not there for folks like us.
I laugh at those giving away time from their lives and famlies for 'promises of stock money'. you could not be more stupid to do this. you get ONE chance at life and there's no reason to work 80 hrs each week and deprive your family and yourself from valuable life time. you can't get time in your life back.
Re: (Score:2)
But actual stock in a going concern from a company already trading (yes I know, that's not a startup) can actually be pretty good. I joined Cigna after they fucked their stock by rolling out a new customer service platform in the 90's that sucked balls and dropped their membership by 15%.
The stock I got as the price gradually recovered sold for a nice sum, while people there fr
Re: (Score:2)
the 49ners never made any money either, the people selling them the picks and shovels and food made out like bandits
same here. VC's handle the money and take their cut no matter what. they probably don't care what they invest in
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, the same thing happened to the auto workers and the pensions they were promised if they took lower wages and less benefits. Turns out none of the money went into the pensions, and the thieves got away scot-free. Who says crime doesn't pay?
Re: (Score:2)
Successful criminals who do not want competition in their continuing criminal careers.
Re: (Score:1)
Those employees paid into those funds. It is their money.. Unfortunately the managers of those funds absconded with the goods...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
work for salary. don't work AT ALL for stock.
Today, very true. During the tech bubble, people only didn't get rich because they didn't cash out, because they were greedy fuckers. I know oodles of people who were worth millions or even tens of millions on paper and failed to cash out any of those millions even though some of their options were vested. Some of them became broke, some are doing okay, some are totally destitute and will be forever because they bought crap on credit and the fallout was not pretty. I know a few people who cashed out at a ha
Don't blame the victim (Score:2)
This is why dogs are smarter than people (Score:2)
No dog ever accepted stock options as a reward.
To motivate a dog to do your bidding requires something more tangible (likely edible), while humans will accept vague promises of an abstract future reward.
Re: (Score:2)
No dog ever accepted stock options as a reward.
To motivate a dog to do your bidding requires something more tangible (likely edible), while humans will accept vague promises of an abstract future reward.
I completely agree with you. The difference between humans and any other animal is our ability to comprehend the future and understand that delayed satisfaction can be very beneficial.
Nope'; Do not work for money (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
work for salary.
NO, work for hourly if possible. I have seen (and been) many sysadmin positions where
salary=go cheap on vendors/hardware/staffing because we can overload our existing sysadmins with after-hours work for free.
Unless you want to be working 10-20+ hours extra a week because somebody isn't willing to spend an extra couple hundred bucks a month on decent hardware or hosting... salary isn't always a good option either
Re: (Score:2)
There's occasional payout to someone. Like a slot machine. To the same effect.
Good luck with that (Score:4, Insightful)
"Last Friday may turn out to have marked the beginning of Silicon Valley's organized labor movement" should read "Last Friday may turn out to have marked the end of Silicon Valley." Once "organized labor" successfully infects an industry, it turns in to a dead industry walking.
Since tech startups are particularly location-independent, expect to see more of them started elsewhere (and outside the United States entirely) and fewer of them to start in Silicon Valley.
Re:Good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)
This is simply a consequence of the fact that tech startup remuneration schemes just don't work anymore, and people have been coasting for the last decade hoping the 90s would come back, and they just aren't. You can't just take programmers who would make over six figures in the market, pay them a pittance and stock, and then never have the stock pay off -- this'll work the first few times, but not for years.
We also can't ignore the fact that, though we measure "innovation" in the number of startups that are founded, a lot of these startups are just really dumb, unsustainable ideas that would be much better off being developed by larger companies (if at all), and the whole reason its a startup, and not a MS/Apple/Google R&D project, is to give the founders a big payday from VC funding rounds, and to give the venture capitalists a big payday off of some patent the company will file. Yay intellectual property! It's just a big rent collection scheme dressed up as entrepreneurship.
Tech startups are rarely designed to make money, they aren't really supposed to, they are really just a fiction to get the connected parties as much cash as physically possible before the whole thing burns out. It's been a scam for a decade, but a lot of tech people are deeply emotionally invested in the system, because it means catered meals and beers in the fridge and Ferraris for everyone up and down the Camino Real and satisfies their deeply-held emotional belief that being a computer nerd entitles you to vast wealth and privilege, because you're "reinventing the world" or some such nonsense.
A very similar thing happened in the film industry between the early twenties, where it was basically a gold rush from the end of World War I to the invention of sound film, and there were hundreds of little fly-by-night producers making movies left and right, and there was tons of "innovation" in the sense that a lot of content was getting made, but everyone under the producer was making nothing. Then everyone unionized.
A lot of tech will say in Silicon Valley, it's just too close to Stanford and all the good people. But, they'll actually have to be paid for the work they do, in money and not in magic beans.
Re: (Score:3)
As someone who works in Cambridge next to MIT, I'm skeptical that Stanford has all the good people.
Re: (Score:2)
of course (Score:2)
I would think that would be obvious since "all the good people" go to Yale.
Re: (Score:3)
This is simply a consequence of the fact that tech startup remuneration schemes just don't work anymore, and people have been coasting for the last decade hoping the 90s would come back, and they just aren't. You can't just take programmers who would make over six figures in the market, pay them a pittance and stock, and then never have the stock pay off -- this'll work the first few times, but not for years.
One of the problems is that the number of people who are actually eager to work under these conditions is quite large. I've found that some people like startups because they cannot handle working for large companies at all. Also, I've found that some people who work for a startup that actually made it get very arrogant and decide that it succeeded because they were geniuses and any old company they join in the future simply cannot fail because they'll be part of it. It's been a little amusing to watch fr
Re: (Score:3)
I work in the film industry and the problem is really similar -- this is why Hollywood has a guild system. It's really the only way to make sure that there's any reward at all for being good at your job and sticking with it; it also makes things like health care and retirement planning much more portable and less dependent upon employers.
There's a collective action problem, particularly
Not a problem at all (Score:2)
Why is this a problem? The entire premise of this article is false. People (at least for now) are free to make their own decisions, no matter how stupid. Don't like the prospects? Get a different job. Encoding this kind of entitlement mentality into law is not only counter to the entire entrepreneurial engine that powers the US economy, but is a death knell for the same. Make the US anything but the absolute best place in the world to start up a business and you kill the start up market. Large esta
Re: (Score:2)
You, sir, are a buffoon. A buffoon who allows families like mine - private school educated, holidays around the world, continuing to live off investments like my parents for the last 2-3 decades - to exploit dullards like yourself. You want something better, you do need to organise your labour. And I am quite okay if you do, because I could have way less and still enjoy a very comfortable lifestyle. As it is, though, you are too easy to fool into giving me even more.
Thanks for the laugh. I needed that.
Re: (Score:2)
We'll give you Germany but France pretty much is a third world country in many ways
Re: (Score:2)
The thing I'm trying to see in this is, how does the supposed overworked startup tech worker differ from the founders and/or management in the same company? Starting a new business generally isn't easy, and generally involves you putting a lot of time and work into it with a good chance that you'll see zero return and a loss of your own investment.
Likewise, if you're working for such a person who is in such a situation, you're likely to inherit that situation for as long as you work there or until the firm
Re: (Score:2)
Hrm, I'd say the the Valley is what it is mainly due to California's education spending in the 60s and 70s, and the presence of a very large and important land grant university in the city, those things are what caused the startups. It certainly wasn't due to Palo Alto's state and municipal tax situation, if that was a factor, Google would have been founded in Austin.
Tr
Re: (Score:2)
Trade unionism is what workers do when the law is too friendly to employers.
Regardless, you can't work for a budding company and expect to have better working conditions than everybody else who works there (even its founders.) It's just very unrealistic, and if the law required that among these firms then they'd just find some place else to do it instead. That is what would result in the Detroit situation.
In Detroit it wasn't so much about automakers leaving as it was about new automakers wanting nothing to do with it, and then existing ones needing to expand, and after they expand
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Horse has bolted (Score:2)
The ability to exercise options and sell stock at (Score:1)
the same time the a-holes who start the company do when it finally goes public.
Stock (Score:3)
project management (Score:2)
A guarantee that all ship dates come from engineering, not marketing ;-)
lol, yeah, overpaid techies need a union (Score:2, Insightful)
Startups are RISKY. That is the risk/reward. If you want to take low pay in return for stock, then pay a lawyer to make sure your options are worth something.
I've heard the pitches before "We will pay you half your current salary, but the risk is worth the reward!" - p
Not so much (Score:2)
Besides, with all the H1-B's stable jobs in America are getti
Re: (Score:3)
If you are organizing your labor, you have agreed that the market pressures do not support your payscale.
Downward pressure on wages does not happen unless the market is flooded, or your skills are not in demand elsewhere.
Don't like it? Get a better skillset and go somewhere else.
As you say, Risk is part of the deal.
Note: I am facing this mentality inside my company right now. I want to move to a department with greater opportunities, greater pay/bonus structure, but risk of being fired if I don't deliver. M
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly, I work for one of those collusion companies.
To go work for one of the other big "pre interent" companies I would likely get hired.
Post internet? Maybe amazon, not Google, for sure. Not many start ups either, unless they wanted a "greybeard" for a reason.
They would see the culture as incomparable, and I would tend to agree. I have a very ingrained "don't risk your production environment" viewpoint, and while I can and do step past it all the time, it is definitely not as compatible with a fast
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it is flooded.
It is more likely a mismatch between skillsets if you can't find a job.
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about not being able to get a job. You stated it only happens if
Downward pressure on wages does not happen unless the market is flooded, or your skills are not in demand elsewhere.
But we know that the skill set is in high demand in other places, there are cities begging for developers, so therefore the only option is that the market is flooded....
Re: (Score:2)
So go elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I worked a union job doing Perl, Ruby and Linux sysadmin stuff for a state university. The benefits were pretty good (overtime pay or comp time if my work week exceeded 35/hours, no layoffs on short notice ie 1 month notice for every year of employment to a max of 12 months). I was considering working for a startup, but the "owner" really wasn't giving a fair deal ('at will' employment, long hours, no relocation bonus, no telecommuting and tremendous egos). As it would have cost me a bundle to move, I as
all of IT needs an union (Score:2)
Workers needs rights and at least try the union way before we all end of on the welfare
Re:all of IT needs an union (Score:4, Insightful)
No thanks. I don't want to be passed up because you have been at the company for 1 day longer than I have, but don't know as much or have better skills than I do.
I will take risk over Union stagnation any day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rush said it best: "Ch
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes this is a direct result of what the GP was saying. Age bias exists as the old are not as valuable as the new. There are many industries where to remain a professional in that industry requires proof of continuous professional development. This almost guarantees age = experience and knowledge, and not that age = knows one thing really well.
It's about bloody time that computer professionals actually started a professional organisation, NOT a union.
Re: (Score:2)
No.
I keep moving. At a relatively "old" age of mid 40s I have a position where no one else does what I do, and I could probably do it for as long as I like and bring a good salary.
Instead, I am leaving this comfort zone and taking on bigger and more risky opportunities... and bigger payoffs.
Either way, I stay more relevant than if I take the safer option and stay put.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I will close my company before I allow a union within the ranks.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
which company is that? tell us so that we can avoid you or even boycott your ass!
sounds like you are republican, too. "cant have the workers demanding rights, now, can we".
people like you make me puke. you really do.
Re:all of IT needs an union (Score:5, Insightful)
I never said that workers didn't deserve rights. In fact, as someone who has worked part time, full time, and as a contractor, I know very well what rights employees have, and why they have them. Employee rights have nothing to do with why I will never tolerate a union presence.
Hiring is between me any my employees. I treat them well, and they do good work. If an employee and I have a problem that's not resolvable, we part ways. I don't need and won't have a third party coming in to tell me or my employees what they should be doing, who I can and can't fire, who I can and can't promote, and who can and can't quit.
Boycott if you want. If I can't have the freedom to work with who I want when I want, I'll either take my business overseas or hire independent contractors. Either way, I'll still provide the same service and people will still buy it, but I'll be paying taxes to a government that doesn't allow organized labor extortion.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I used to have this view. I hated unions and read all the stories about guys just standing around not doing anything. Then I went to work for a union shop and joined the local. WOW. What an eye opener that was.
It's simple. You and the employer enter into a contract. If one of you doesn't uphold their end of the contract then the breaching party is taken to task. It's that simple. When some PHB is having a bad day, he isn't going to take it out on the pee-ons because then a steward will be standing
Re:all of IT needs an union (Score:4, Insightful)
I already negotiate these kinds of things with people, without a union involved. To me, it's just the other side of the table, and I very much remember having to negotiate my long hair and keeping intellectual property intact when I was interviewing.
It's not about getting the maximum possible dollar in the short term. It's about both parties getting what they want out of it, in a way that's sustainable and lasts for the long term. IMHO the biggest problems in business aren't technology, they're people and long term planning.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You object to signing a contact with an entity representing your workers, and dealing with employees according to rules set out in this contract.. I suspect you wouldn't think twice about signing a similar contract with suppliers or customers.
My only conclusion is that you prefer to deal with employees individually because you can more easily manipulate them by doing so. You enjoy the power of being the owner and being able to play favorites, taking advantage of the inherent weakness in an individual's ba
Re: (Score:3)
I don't object to signing a contract with an entity that represents workers. I object to signing a contract that limits my ability to hire who I want when I want, and to fire who I want when I want. This is no different than objecting to a contract with a parts supplier that mandates that I can't buy parts from a different supplier, or objecting to a contract that requires I only use a given suppliers parts in my products. I know such contracts exist, and I know that some companies sign them willingly. M
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Interesting perspective you have there, since unions basically turn entire industries into "welfare" for those who have no place working in them, at the expense of those who do. Unions had relevance half a century ago when the workforce consisted of 90% unskilled labor, and you could pull a lever over and over just as well as I could; that model fails miserably when dealing with skilled labor, and particularly in IT w
Re: (Score:2)
Nice strawman-by-sarcasm, because actually, I do (though that has little to do with what I described).
Believe it or not, someone can legitimately consider unions as nothing but an obsolete style of extortion racket, without disagreeing with the idea that our society needs to evolve beyond the fallacy of "making a living". We've automated ourselves out of needing much unskilled labor in the modern workforce, yet somehow in the process our culture r
Re: (Score:2)
Believe it or not, someone can legitimately consider unions as nothing but an obsolete style of extortion racket, without disagreeing with the idea that our society needs to evolve beyond the fallacy of "making a living".
Rights for all workers today, move beyond the so-called "right to work" to the "right to not be a slave" tomorrow. Either way, it's difficult to imagine the unions helping us go forward.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a union movement for the 20 hour work-week too.
There was a union movement for a 40 hour workweek. It was successful for a number of decades, but the 40 hour workweek seems to have gone the way of the rotary dial phone.
Might have something to do with the demise of the evil protection rackets called unions.
Re: (Score:3)
Honestly if we had a universal minimum income then unions could become completely irrelevant. Then if your working conditions aren't acceptable, you just quit. Honestly it's a much better solution.
Especially since you'll never get someone like me to join a union...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, no one in power is trying to "sell" Universal Minimum Income. It doesn't fit their paradigm, and gets rid of the power structure around things like Welfare, Unemployment, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.
The reason the Senate voted it down back in the 60s was an error in statistics convinced some Senators that it made the divorce rate go up.
Look to Detroit (Score:4, Insightful)
As soon as techies start making unacceptable demands on management, the companies will just pull up stakes and move elsewhere. Then wherever the unions started agitating will end up like post-apocalyptic Detroit.
http://youtu.be/eUY8NJAly1I [youtu.be]
Bunch of pussies (Score:4, Insightful)
If you're not comfortable with taking on risk, busting your ass, and doing anything it takes for a very small CHANCE at hitting it big -- then don't work for a startup. Period. There are many other software / IT jobs right now -- no need at all to work in startup land. But don't try to fuck it up with this "union" nonsense talk. All you'll accomplish is dragging down those who are truly talented and deserve to be there.
If you do go that route -- get educated. Pay a lawyer a few hundred bucks to explain the docs you are about to sign which grant options, have a vesting schedule, etc. If you don't, you're a retard and you deserve to be taken advantage of. But this "unionization" talk runs completely counter to the very DNA of a startup. Face it -- some people are willing to work 80+ hrs / week. If you're not -- fine. But don't fuck it up for those who *choose* to do so and try to out-work others to gain an advantage.
Re: (Score:2)
heck why not go whole hog and have a decent snack vendor (do apples , melons, grapes cheese and jerky ect ).
bonus points if the folks pushing the cart are "hot"
Not a union, just legal clarity (Score:4, Interesting)
As a multi-startup veteran (without much to show for it but a few scars), the biggest issue is how opaque ownership percentages are. The current SillyCon Valley game is to give 5-6 digit option grants - so it seems like you're getting a lot - when there are 10-12 figure shares outstanding - and it can be impossible to find out that last figure.
Another complaint is the legalese of grants, which is usually waaay over the top, so you end up spending a lot on lawyers to translate the terms. The grants should be in "plain English" - most of the terms are pretty simple, once you clear away the legalese.
And another big deal is the little things that you might overlook, e.g., is there an acceleration clause if the startup gets bought out (very possible in this age of acquihires), or what happens if the startup actually IPOs: can you sell on the open market, or only back to the investors (which can limit your profit) ?
Also, on the topic of acquihires, if your startup gets bought out and you're a key employee, then your options may not mean anything, cuz you can -and should! - negotiate whatever you can get when the deal goes down. So it may be better to position yourself as a key contributor, than to get hung up about options.
Wishlist (Score:2)
Stay out of my face with rules and union organizers. On the other hand, put together a checklist of contracting 'gotchas'. Both for the employee as well as the management. What should or should not be in the contract. How to provide compensation in equity shares or the possibility of the outfit going out of business.
There are some good questions raised in TFA.
Zaharias and Russell had few answers, except ask your employer until you understand, and then ask again every time something changes at the company,
No, because your employer and you have somewhat of an adversarial relationship. Don't expect straight answers from someone who is looking to dilute y
New Verticle from Y Combinator: Techie Labor Camp (Score:2)
Are you a recent college grad or seasoned tech worker looking to make mega-bucks working for the NEXT BIG STARTUP? Then send your Github and LinkedIn profiles to http://laborcamp.ycombinator.com. Each year we will select 1,000 of the best and brightest applicants to live and work 24/7 under armed guard for 90 days at our Redwood City coding for our incubator startups in exchange for a few shares of stock!
Perhaps they should organize some personal respons (Score:2)
responsibility for their actions.
I just quit from the 3rd startup I've worked for, because it was a shitty place to work.
So can you, and you don't need anyones help to do so.
If a startup is a shitty work environment ... guess what ... THATS NEVER GOING TO CHANGE.
Its in no way unique to techies in silicon valley, but its not surprising they have their heads so far up their asses as to think they need to start a social movement to 'fix the problem' of them being shitty employes that can't get jobs anywhere o
Treat Uncompensated Time as Explicit Loan (Score:1)
Heads up! (Score:1)
I used to tell people working for a startup was the best experience they will ever have. My first two were great. However, I've been burnt twice too. After dedicating every waking hour to a startup only to see it get sold and not getting anything but the salary while you've worked there is bullshit. The only thing I can say about being a startup employee now days is, "Get in writing that you are a partner". If they say no, walk away. Don't ever believe someone will give you a fair share out of the goo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)