5 ms·

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

by 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.

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.