4 ms·

Looking for a job though already feels like being disloyal. Given how early we are and how much domain knowledge I have of our system and operations, I worry t

Looking for a job though already feels like being disloyal. Given how early we are and how much domain knowledge I have of our system and operations, I worry that my leaving the company could be catastrophic for them. On the other hand, do I even want to be with a company (as a non-founder) who's entire existence is dependent on a single employee? If so, then, I feel I should be compensated accordingly.

lotusleaf1987 15y ago
|Looking for a job though already feels like being disloyal. Not to be offensive, but you're brainwashed. You should be thinking about yourself. Why are you sacrificing your career, happiness, quality of life, and opportunities to a company that sounds like they're using/abusing you--low pay, no equity, bad work environment. If they're so dependent on you, then you should be compensated accordingly. Your value to the company and your pay are directly related.
mgkimsal 15y ago
they likely won't feel the slightest bit disloyal to you when the funding runs low/out. If they've hired other people on after you at a higher rate and haven't adjusted your salary, they're already being 'disloyal'. If they can afford multiple other developers, they can get you up to the median salary level. I'm too cynical about this - get your issues on the table, and either get something (more money, bonus/profit-sharing, equity) or get out.
DavidAdams 15y ago
I'm a serial startup founder, and I've been in the position that your CTO and CEO are in right now. It's hard and expensive to get a company off the ground and if you can find someone who will work for you, who's good, and they'll do it for less than they're worth, then awesome. My feeling is that if I'm paying someone 25% less than they're worth, then that makes it easier for me to give them a nice raise once we're "on our feet" financially. But that's a moving target, and it's always tempting to just let things ride. And if someone doesn't ask for equity, maybe I'll just let that ride too, because who wants to give up equity if they don't have to. I think these guys are making a mistake, though, because they're not just letting you get by making a little less that what you could make on the open market, and they're not just giving you a small amount of equity when you could perhaps demand more. They're playing with fire, because there's a good chance you could go out and find a good job, and by the time they find out you're dissatisfied, it's too late. But here's what I'm certain of: If, as other commenters have recommended, you have a meetup with them, and you let them know that you feel you're not being adequately compensated, and you've been thinking of starting a job hunt, but that your sense of loyalty dictates that you let them know now, before to get fed up and before you find another job, they'll give you a sweeter deal. They may not be able to afford to pay you more cash, but they can definitely afford to give you a decent equity stake. I can't say how much would be okay, but 0% is definitely not okay. In this case, you need to turn the tables. Once you've agreed to work for equity in lieu of a full-market salary, you become an investor, and they need to pitch you on the company's future. As for deciding what's appropriate, I'd recommend not thinking in terms of a percent, but have them make the case for the company being worth X amount. If they've raised money from other investors, then that may already be determined. Then you can agree on an amount of equity that's equal to a certain amount of the company's value. If you think you've missed out on $50,000 of compensation so far, then you should ask for that much equity, plus whatever extra you think you should get for the work you'll do in the near future. Then as the company's fortunes rise, then so will yours. Of course, if you're going to take equity at all, you need to have them make the case, and you need to believe it. Otherwise, keep working at this job long enough to get a new one, and let the chips fall where they may.
- lotusleaf1987 15y ago
  David Adams, you're exactly the type of boss to avoid. If you're paying me less than you know I'm worth and hiring other people who contribute less and are less important, but are being compensated more--then that means you disrespect me as an employee and an individual and are taking advantage of me, knowingly, which makes it far worse. "et them know that you feel you're not being adequately compensated, and you've been thinking of starting a job hunt, but that your sense of loyalty dictates that you let them know now" I absolutely would not do this. Wait until you have other offers, if you play your cards now they could withhold giving you a reference or not as good of one as you truly deserve since they know it will be to their detriment. Do what is best for yourself, not some startup which has clearly illustrated, by the facts presented, that it does not value you as an employee. Someone else will, go find them--you owe it to yourself. As jfarmer said above: the kind of company that takes advantage of you when you're ignorant isn't the kind of company you want to work for even after you're fully-informed and can renegotiate a better deal.
  - mattmanser 15y ago
    You're taking his post a little too personally, business is business. In the end if you're not fighting your own corner compensation wise why do you expect your boss to do so? His incentive is to keep you happy enough to stay and be productive while spending as little money as possible. If the OP is genuinely happy with the job itself there's no downside to simply voicing his actual dissatisfaction as long as he presents his employers, especially as he's presenting a clear solution to the problem. In your solution he's got to spend a bunch of his spare time applying for jobs first, which could all be a waste of time. Also your point about references makes no sense. If they're petty enough to be asses now, they'll be petty enough to be asses in the future.
    - rhizome 15y ago
      Business is business, but is it good business? If the OP is genuinely happy with the job itself If your tech lead is using the word "stupid" to describe their loyalty, I'd say it's bad business. Note that the OP is not wondering whether they're underpaid or under-equitized, or any other in-kind value judgement, they're already past that. It's now a matter of pulling a simple switch and bailing into a seller's market. Competent C-levels avoid this situation, especially in a startup environment where the midstream boatchanging of technical leadership can have painful consequences. It's irresponsible for a company leader to exploit a crucial employee who can learn the truth about their situation, not that letting the launch slip by a year doesn't already mark them as possibly-incompetent. I can't recall if it's Fred Brooks or something possibly-apocryphal, but the rule of thumb that I've heard is that schedules slip by the units the milestone is measured. If the deadline is "two months from now," the schedule will slip by two-month periods. Slipping by a year? The business may not even get off the ground. I realize that it may have slipped by a year in two month increments (e.g.), but in hindsight the company's momentum sure doesn't look healthy. In your solution he's got to spend a bunch of his spare time applying for jobs first, which could all be a waste of time Pure FUD. If they're petty enough to be asses now, they'll be petty enough to be asses in the future. True that.
earl 15y ago
You know what people whose leaving a company would be catastrophic are called? Owners

lotusleaf1987 15y ago

|Looking for a job though already feels like being disloyal. Not to be offensive, but you're brainwashed. You should be thinking about yourself. Why are you sacrificing your career, happiness, quality of life, and opportunities to a company that sounds like they're using/abusing you--low pay, no equity, bad work environment. If they're so dependent on you, then you should be compensated accordingly. Your value to the company and your pay are directly related.

mgkimsal 15y ago

they likely won't feel the slightest bit disloyal to you when the funding runs low/out. If they've hired other people on after you at a higher rate and haven't adjusted your salary, they're already being 'disloyal'. If they can afford multiple other developers, they can get you up to the median salary level. I'm too cynical about this - get your issues on the table, and either get something (more money, bonus/profit-sharing, equity) or get out.

DavidAdams 15y ago

I'm a serial startup founder, and I've been in the position that your CTO and CEO are in right now. It's hard and expensive to get a company off the ground and if you can find someone who will work for you, who's good, and they'll do it for less than they're worth, then awesome. My feeling is that if I'm paying someone 25% less than they're worth, then that makes it easier for me to give them a nice raise once we're "on our feet" financially. But that's a moving target, and it's always tempting to just let things ride. And if someone doesn't ask for equity, maybe I'll just let that ride too, because who wants to give up equity if they don't have to. I think these guys are making a mistake, though, because they're not just letting you get by making a little less that what you could make on the open market, and they're not just giving you a small amount of equity when you could perhaps demand more. They're playing with fire, because there's a good chance you could go out and find a good job, and by the time they find out you're dissatisfied, it's too late. But here's what I'm certain of: If, as other commenters have recommended, you have a meetup with them, and you let them know that you feel you're not being adequately compensated, and you've been thinking of starting a job hunt, but that your sense of loyalty dictates that you let them know now, before to get fed up and before you find another job, they'll give you a sweeter deal. They may not be able to afford to pay you more cash, but they can definitely afford to give you a decent equity stake. I can't say how much would be okay, but 0% is definitely not okay. In this case, you need to turn the tables. Once you've agreed to work for equity in lieu of a full-market salary, you become an investor, and they need to pitch you on the company's future. As for deciding what's appropriate, I'd recommend not thinking in terms of a percent, but have them make the case for the company being worth X amount. If they've raised money from other investors, then that may already be determined. Then you can agree on an amount of equity that's equal to a certain amount of the company's value. If you think you've missed out on $50,000 of compensation so far, then you should ask for that much equity, plus whatever extra you think you should get for the work you'll do in the near future. Then as the company's fortunes rise, then so will yours. Of course, if you're going to take equity at all, you need to have them make the case, and you need to believe it. Otherwise, keep working at this job long enough to get a new one, and let the chips fall where they may.

lotusleaf1987 15y ago
David Adams, you're exactly the type of boss to avoid. If you're paying me less than you know I'm worth and hiring other people who contribute less and are less important, but are being compensated more--then that means you disrespect me as an employee and an individual and are taking advantage of me, knowingly, which makes it far worse. "et them know that you feel you're not being adequately compensated, and you've been thinking of starting a job hunt, but that your sense of loyalty dictates that you let them know now" I absolutely would not do this. Wait until you have other offers, if you play your cards now they could withhold giving you a reference or not as good of one as you truly deserve since they know it will be to their detriment. Do what is best for yourself, not some startup which has clearly illustrated, by the facts presented, that it does not value you as an employee. Someone else will, go find them--you owe it to yourself. As jfarmer said above: the kind of company that takes advantage of you when you're ignorant isn't the kind of company you want to work for even after you're fully-informed and can renegotiate a better deal.
- mattmanser 15y ago
  You're taking his post a little too personally, business is business. In the end if you're not fighting your own corner compensation wise why do you expect your boss to do so? His incentive is to keep you happy enough to stay and be productive while spending as little money as possible. If the OP is genuinely happy with the job itself there's no downside to simply voicing his actual dissatisfaction as long as he presents his employers, especially as he's presenting a clear solution to the problem. In your solution he's got to spend a bunch of his spare time applying for jobs first, which could all be a waste of time. Also your point about references makes no sense. If they're petty enough to be asses now, they'll be petty enough to be asses in the future.
  - rhizome 15y ago
    Business is business, but is it good business? If the OP is genuinely happy with the job itself If your tech lead is using the word "stupid" to describe their loyalty, I'd say it's bad business. Note that the OP is not wondering whether they're underpaid or under-equitized, or any other in-kind value judgement, they're already past that. It's now a matter of pulling a simple switch and bailing into a seller's market. Competent C-levels avoid this situation, especially in a startup environment where the midstream boatchanging of technical leadership can have painful consequences. It's irresponsible for a company leader to exploit a crucial employee who can learn the truth about their situation, not that letting the launch slip by a year doesn't already mark them as possibly-incompetent. I can't recall if it's Fred Brooks or something possibly-apocryphal, but the rule of thumb that I've heard is that schedules slip by the units the milestone is measured. If the deadline is "two months from now," the schedule will slip by two-month periods. Slipping by a year? The business may not even get off the ground. I realize that it may have slipped by a year in two month increments (e.g.), but in hindsight the company's momentum sure doesn't look healthy. In your solution he's got to spend a bunch of his spare time applying for jobs first, which could all be a waste of time Pure FUD. If they're petty enough to be asses now, they'll be petty enough to be asses in the future. True that.

earl 15y ago

You know what people whose leaving a company would be catastrophic are called? Owners