5 ms·
Two whole months (rolls eyes)? You think they did because of a sense of "family"? Maybe they didn't want employees leaving in this labor market and I'm guessi
by hondo77 10y ago
Two whole months (rolls eyes)? You think they did because of a sense of "family"? Maybe they didn't want employees leaving in this labor market and I'm guessing they didn't want to lay people off because others would take that as a signal to jump ship. Trust me, if things get bad, they'll let people go. Two months is not really bad.
- AndrewKemendo 10y agoYou're right, two months isn't bad, but it was a sacrifice, something people in this thread seem to just assume isn't done by management.
- gohrt 10y agoIt depends on whether you needed those employees for the company's survival, or you kept them on doing under-productive work worth less than their pay.
- poof131 10y agoIt was a sacrifice for themselves and their equity. What does the cap table look like? Not laying off employees prevents a morale issue and gives more resources to keep building product. Don’t confuse other employees by trying to say it was a sacrifice for them, that is misleading, it wasn’t, but I’m sure the founders would love to sell it that way: “We’re doing this for you!”