5 ms·

Getting employed at a hot startup: the free trial method

24 points by tomhoward 16y ago

mseebach 16y ago
This is so unscalable, it's a non-starter. This guy got a job because he had already proven himself by making an app, and a combination of persistence, boldness and luck. The work for free part removed a friction-point in the hiring process, but I think it's a safe guess that it wasn't the primary factor in securing him the job. The method should be, "if you're closed to be hired somewhere, but feel there's some friction for the company to make the decision, offering a free trial might work." And of course there's the back of the medal: offering to work for free sends very strong signals of desperation and placing a low premium on your own abilities. Offering to work for free does not significantly reduce overhead. Introducing a new hire to the project, code, repository, bug-tracker and reviewing his work IS overhead. Saying "Hi, meet Nick, he flew in on his own dime to do your jobs for free" to the team is a morale-killer. Killing morale IS overhead.
jonknee 16y ago
That's gotta be a big hurdle to overcome during salary negotiations... By working for free you've already set the bar at the floor.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
mdasen 16y ago
There's one issue here: it's not allowed. Companies are obligated to abide by labor laws. If something is an unpaid internship, they must adhere to strict guidelines. There are, in fact, six guidelines for an internship: 1. The training, even though it includes actual operation of the employer’s facilities, is similar to training that would be given in a vocational school. 2. The training is for the benefit of the student. 3. The student does not displace regular employees, but works under the close observation of a regular employee. 4. The employer provides the training and derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the student. Occasionally, the operations may actually be impeded by the training. 5. The student is not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period. 6. The employer and the student understand that the student is not entitled to wages for the time spent training. #4 is the big one: if the company derives an advantage from the operation (like the person writing code for a system, fixing bugs, etc.), it isn't allowed. #3 would potentially be violated in this case as well since I'm assuming that he wanted to do the work of a regular employee and prove that he didn't need such close observation - I'm not sure a startup has the employees to offer such close observation. The Department of Labor's guidelines might sound harsh, but they're there to prevent companies from requiring a free period before hiring people. Imagine if companies started posting for jobs that they might hire you for after a free period. Two months later, you've given them free labor and there's no job. Even if there is a job, requiring people to work a free period makes it very hard for people to leave jobs for a new one and would reduce job mobility. People would stay in jobs that weren't good for them just to avoid the free period - at the end of which, they might be unemployed. It sounds like a good idea when you're talking about one person doing it with a cool startup like Boxee. However, if this were to become commonplace (or more commonplace than it is), it could be terrible for the economy as people cling to safety rather than moving to something else. And it isn't as if the current employment law is that restrictive. For a two month period (working full-time) they could have paid less than $2,000. American companies have no obligation to continue employing you if you are an employee at will. My company specifically has a 6-month trial period where you're paid and all, but if you're let go there's no severance. So, it isn't an onerous situation where you're stuck with someone if they aren't a good fit. You can easily be hired at a low-paid position and then be "promoted" after the trial period or let go. EDIT: http://laborlaw.typepad.com/labor_and_employment_law_/2007/11/unpaid-internsh.html http://laborlaw.typepad.com/labor_and_employment_law_/2007/1... - that's a good post on the problem which specifically says, "you can not deliver mail, sort files, file papers, organize a person’s calendar, conduct market research, write reports, watch television shows and report on them, read scripts, schedule interviews, or any other job that assists the employer in any way in running their business."
jkaljundi 16y ago
Isn't it usually vice versa, companies not finding great employees? If you are a good and self-confident is the free trial needed? Don't think so.
- dagw 16y ago
  One reasonable scenario is if you have a skillset slightly tangential to the companies core business and you want to prove that they really actually need your skills. For example if you're an awesome OpenCL programmer, but the company doesn't think they have a use for OpenCL, then you could say something like "give me a week, and if I haven't convinced you that your product will be significantly improved using OpenCL then I'll happily walk away and no one has lost anything"
- Tichy 16y ago
  I like the idea of companies paying me one months salary for free to make me interested in working for them.
  - ojbyrne 16y ago
    And, in fact, many do (signing bonuses).
    - Tichy 16y ago
      But that is if you sign? I was thinking they would pay me the money as a test, and then I would decide if I would like to work for them or not :-)
sachinag 16y ago
Last time I checked, it was illegal in the United States to work for a for-profit company for free ("volunteer"), which is clearly what this guy did. Now if Boxee/Spark has a legal opinion saying otherwise, great. (Even better if my crappy Chicago lawyers were wrong about this, too.) But if they were right, if Nick ever gets fired or leaves on bad terms, I'm pretty sure he has an open-and-shut case to get back wages (plus punitives).
- joubert 16y ago
  Is that under anti-slavery laws?
  - tokenadult 16y ago
    It's a consequence of fair labor standards laws. For example, the minimum wage is higher than zero.
  - rfrey 16y ago
    It's to prevent companies that have a disproportionate amount of leverage in a hiring situation from exploiting that leverage unfairly. Say, by getting inexperienced, enthusiastic grads to work for free.
dustingetz 16y ago
"In the end, it took a few weeks before I could start. And then I stuck around working longer than the two weeks we’d planned and then it took another few weeks after that for a job offer to be made and another few months to get started." it almost sounds like they were reluctant to hire him.
j_baker 16y ago
I don't like the idea. Working a month for free says more about my current financial situation than it does my ability as an employee.
- dustingetz 16y ago
  are you alluding to unemployment? many (most?) good engineers have some money in the bank.
  - j_baker 16y ago
    No, I'm alluding to having to work for 30 days without pay. I won't agree with anyone whose opinion of a good programmer depends on how much money they have in the bank.
goodside 16y ago
There's an alternative that does the same job but with no dubious legality, less personal expense, and more flexible hours: write something awesome on your own and include a link to the github repo on your resume.
- ojbyrne 16y ago
  Not to mention that you retain ownership of something awesome.
tomhoward 16y ago
To people who aren't reflexively dismissive, this isn't a story about exploitation or desperation, it's about determination and standing out from the mediocre crowd. As PG often says, YC looks for founders who are smart and determined. The best early-stage employees also need to fit that description, so aspirants need to figure out ways of demonstrating those qualities. Of course when everyone starts doing it, it'll stop working, and smart, determined guys like Nick will figure out some new way of hacking the recruitment process.
- mseebach 16y ago
  The willingness/ability to work for free doesn't even begin to correlate with smart and determined.
  - tomhoward 16y ago
    Sigh... I thought I could give readers enough credit to not have to spell it out. - Starting out with a track record of building an impressive startup and/or products; - Seeking out the #1 company in the world he wants to work for; - Calling the CEO to introduce himself then carefully crafting an email to express his intent and his offer; - At his own substantial expense, travelling to NYC to spend 2 weeks in the company's office in the hope of proving himself; - Spending his time carefully observing how the place operates and figuring out how best he could be of value; - Persisting with the strategy until he achieved his goal; - Ultimately, receiving recognition of his talents and being offered a permanent position. Are you not able to identify in any of these 7 points, any hint of determination, intellect or talent?
    - mseebach 16y ago
      Fair enough - I only just now realized that it's only the HN headline that focuses on the working for free part.
      - tomhoward 16y ago
        Hah! Pardon me for assuming you'd actually read the post before writing a 4-paragraph comment dismissing it :D
mahmud 16y ago
When did they realize he was good enough to hire? How could anyone allow someone to work unpaid for more than 4 hours? If I was Boxee and saw this guy was competent, by looking over his shoulder within hours of handing him a spec, I would immediately put in the paperwork to bring him on something minimal, ~$20/hr. Seeing someone labor for you for 29 days, before deciding to hire on the 30th is just .. evil, imo.
sanj 16y ago
One problem is that only the wealthy can really pull this off. And I've found wealthy != hungry.

24 points by tomhoward 16y ago

This is so unscalable, it's a non-starter. This guy got a job because he had already proven himself by making an app, and a combination of persistence, boldness and luck. The work for free part removed a friction-point in the hiring process, but I think it's a safe guess that it wasn't the primary factor in securing him the job. The method should be, "if you're closed to be hired somewhere, but feel there's some friction for the company to make the decision, offering a free trial might work." And of course there's the back of the medal: offering to work for free sends very strong signals of desperation and placing a low premium on your own abilities. Offering to work for free does not significantly reduce overhead. Introducing a new hire to the project, code, repository, bug-tracker and reviewing his work IS overhead. Saying "Hi, meet Nick, he flew in on his own dime to do your jobs for free" to the team is a morale-killer. Killing morale IS overhead.

jonknee 16y ago

That's gotta be a big hurdle to overcome during salary negotiations... By working for free you've already set the bar at the floor.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

mdasen 16y ago

There's one issue here: it's not allowed. Companies are obligated to abide by labor laws. If something is an unpaid internship, they must adhere to strict guidelines. There are, in fact, six guidelines for an internship: 1. The training, even though it includes actual operation of the employer’s facilities, is similar to training that would be given in a vocational school. 2. The training is for the benefit of the student. 3. The student does not displace regular employees, but works under the close observation of a regular employee. 4. The employer provides the training and derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the student. Occasionally, the operations may actually be impeded by the training. 5. The student is not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the training period. 6. The employer and the student understand that the student is not entitled to wages for the time spent training. #4 is the big one: if the company derives an advantage from the operation (like the person writing code for a system, fixing bugs, etc.), it isn't allowed. #3 would potentially be violated in this case as well since I'm assuming that he wanted to do the work of a regular employee and prove that he didn't need such close observation - I'm not sure a startup has the employees to offer such close observation. The Department of Labor's guidelines might sound harsh, but they're there to prevent companies from requiring a free period before hiring people. Imagine if companies started posting for jobs that they might hire you for after a free period. Two months later, you've given them free labor and there's no job. Even if there is a job, requiring people to work a free period makes it very hard for people to leave jobs for a new one and would reduce job mobility. People would stay in jobs that weren't good for them just to avoid the free period - at the end of which, they might be unemployed. It sounds like a good idea when you're talking about one person doing it with a cool startup like Boxee. However, if this were to become commonplace (or more commonplace than it is), it could be terrible for the economy as people cling to safety rather than moving to something else. And it isn't as if the current employment law is that restrictive. For a two month period (working full-time) they could have paid less than $2,000. American companies have no obligation to continue employing you if you are an employee at will. My company specifically has a 6-month trial period where you're paid and all, but if you're let go there's no severance. So, it isn't an onerous situation where you're stuck with someone if they aren't a good fit. You can easily be hired at a low-paid position and then be "promoted" after the trial period or let go. EDIT: http://laborlaw.typepad.com/labor_and_employment_law_/2007/11/unpaid-internsh.html http://laborlaw.typepad.com/labor_and_employment_law_/2007/1... - that's a good post on the problem which specifically says, "you can not deliver mail, sort files, file papers, organize a person’s calendar, conduct market research, write reports, watch television shows and report on them, read scripts, schedule interviews, or any other job that assists the employer in any way in running their business."

jkaljundi 16y ago

Isn't it usually vice versa, companies not finding great employees? If you are a good and self-confident is the free trial needed? Don't think so.

dagw 16y ago
One reasonable scenario is if you have a skillset slightly tangential to the companies core business and you want to prove that they really actually need your skills. For example if you're an awesome OpenCL programmer, but the company doesn't think they have a use for OpenCL, then you could say something like "give me a week, and if I haven't convinced you that your product will be significantly improved using OpenCL then I'll happily walk away and no one has lost anything"
Tichy 16y ago
I like the idea of companies paying me one months salary for free to make me interested in working for them.
- ojbyrne 16y ago
  And, in fact, many do (signing bonuses).
  - Tichy 16y ago
    But that is if you sign? I was thinking they would pay me the money as a test, and then I would decide if I would like to work for them or not :-)

sachinag 16y ago

Last time I checked, it was illegal in the United States to work for a for-profit company for free ("volunteer"), which is clearly what this guy did. Now if Boxee/Spark has a legal opinion saying otherwise, great. (Even better if my crappy Chicago lawyers were wrong about this, too.) But if they were right, if Nick ever gets fired or leaves on bad terms, I'm pretty sure he has an open-and-shut case to get back wages (plus punitives).

joubert 16y ago
Is that under anti-slavery laws?
- tokenadult 16y ago
  It's a consequence of fair labor standards laws. For example, the minimum wage is higher than zero.
- rfrey 16y ago
  It's to prevent companies that have a disproportionate amount of leverage in a hiring situation from exploiting that leverage unfairly. Say, by getting inexperienced, enthusiastic grads to work for free.

dustingetz 16y ago

"In the end, it took a few weeks before I could start. And then I stuck around working longer than the two weeks we’d planned and then it took another few weeks after that for a job offer to be made and another few months to get started." it almost sounds like they were reluctant to hire him.

j_baker 16y ago

I don't like the idea. Working a month for free says more about my current financial situation than it does my ability as an employee.

dustingetz 16y ago
are you alluding to unemployment? many (most?) good engineers have some money in the bank.
- j_baker 16y ago
  No, I'm alluding to having to work for 30 days without pay. I won't agree with anyone whose opinion of a good programmer depends on how much money they have in the bank.

goodside 16y ago

There's an alternative that does the same job but with no dubious legality, less personal expense, and more flexible hours: write something awesome on your own and include a link to the github repo on your resume.

ojbyrne 16y ago
Not to mention that you retain ownership of something awesome.

tomhoward 16y ago

To people who aren't reflexively dismissive, this isn't a story about exploitation or desperation, it's about determination and standing out from the mediocre crowd. As PG often says, YC looks for founders who are smart and determined. The best early-stage employees also need to fit that description, so aspirants need to figure out ways of demonstrating those qualities. Of course when everyone starts doing it, it'll stop working, and smart, determined guys like Nick will figure out some new way of hacking the recruitment process.

mseebach 16y ago
The willingness/ability to work for free doesn't even begin to correlate with smart and determined.
- tomhoward 16y ago
  Sigh... I thought I could give readers enough credit to not have to spell it out. - Starting out with a track record of building an impressive startup and/or products; - Seeking out the #1 company in the world he wants to work for; - Calling the CEO to introduce himself then carefully crafting an email to express his intent and his offer; - At his own substantial expense, travelling to NYC to spend 2 weeks in the company's office in the hope of proving himself; - Spending his time carefully observing how the place operates and figuring out how best he could be of value; - Persisting with the strategy until he achieved his goal; - Ultimately, receiving recognition of his talents and being offered a permanent position. Are you not able to identify in any of these 7 points, any hint of determination, intellect or talent?
  - mseebach 16y ago
    Fair enough - I only just now realized that it's only the HN headline that focuses on the working for free part.
    - tomhoward 16y ago
      Hah! Pardon me for assuming you'd actually read the post before writing a 4-paragraph comment dismissing it :D

mahmud 16y ago

When did they realize he was good enough to hire? How could anyone allow someone to work unpaid for more than 4 hours? If I was Boxee and saw this guy was competent, by looking over his shoulder within hours of handing him a spec, I would immediately put in the paperwork to bring him on something minimal, ~$20/hr. Seeing someone labor for you for 29 days, before deciding to hire on the 30th is just .. evil, imo.

sanj 16y ago

One problem is that only the wealthy can really pull this off. And I've found wealthy != hungry.