4 ms·

"Changes at Basecamp" : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26944192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26944192 ( 4 days ago, 774 comments ). Which is a fe

"Changes at Basecamp" : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26944192 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26944192 ( 4 days ago, 774 comments ). Which is a feel good piece about management philosophy ( a bit back to our roots ) and does not mention layoffs once.

detaro 6y ago
Sounds more like a "if you don't like it you can leave" and a bunch of people taking them up on it than a planned layoff. Would love to know what number of leavers they expected (I assume they expected/hoped for some) vs they got.
- the-dude 6y ago
  Now you mention it, is surely reads like that. Especially at the end : Who made these decisions? Well, David and I did. And I searched the HN comments, and nobody seems to have uttered the words leaving or layoff.
albedoa 6y ago
The announcement of buy-out offers came later.
switz 6y ago
If you want more context, this article really breaks down what happened internally. There's a lot more to the story than was presented. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26963708 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26963708
- the-dude 6y ago
  Thank you.
- creamytaco 6y ago
  I don't see a lot more there, besides referring to (long) past events to justify continuing with specific policies and actions. In fact, it's definitely smart of Basecamp to realize that the kind of politics and ideology we encounter today in the US are anathema to any workplace and may lead to paralysis and rot-from-within outcomes. I expect more companies to follow suit.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Seconded. I'm one of the strongest "no politics at work" guys you'll find, and unless there's substantial missing context, even I would consider leaving Basecamp over this. A widely circulated list to make fun of people's names is pretty egregious, and demands a lot more introspection on company culture than it sounds like the founders were willing to do.
  - CydeWeys 6y ago
    This article makes a great point about what might be considered "politics at work": > What that view misses, I think, is how confusing rules like these are to employees. One Basecamp worker I spoke with today, who requested anonymity, wondered the extent to which parenting issues could be raised at work. “How do you talk about raising kids without talking about society?” the employee said. “As soon as I bring up public schools, then it’s already political.” Or what if you're black, is talking about your race or your own lived experiences considered political? I don't tend to talk about political stuff at work too much personally, but recently we've been talking about the pandemic a lot (like everyone else). Is that political? Sure seems like it could be construed to be political. Even public health advice from the CDC is considered to be political these days.
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      Like any category of social behavior, the boundaries are fuzzy. It's also hard to draw a crisp line between passion and rudeness, yet I don't think anyone would conclude that being rude to your coworkers should be allowed. If you have a healthy culture, mutual respect and benefit of the doubt will smooth over the fuzziness; I've worked in multiple teams across multiple companies that manage to generally avoid politics, while still talking about parenting and lived experiences and the CDC.
      - mandevil 6y ago
        This story makes clear that it wasn't 'politics' the way all the outsiders thought of it. The way this rule was instituted makes it clear that it was about protecting company leaders (and DHH's ego) from criticism over their failures w.r.t the widely circulated list of funny names of customers.
- shoo 6y ago
  > “There's always been this kind of unwritten rule at Basecamp that the company basically exists for David and Jason's enjoyment,” one employee told me. “At the end of the day, they are not interested in seeing things in their work timeline that make them uncomfortable, or distracts them from what they're interested in. And this is the culmination of that.”
ptrkcsk 6y ago
> Yesterday, we offered everyone at Basecamp an option of a severance package worth up to six months salary for those who've been with the company over three years, and three months salary for those at the company less than that. No hard feelings, no questions asked. For those who cannot see a future at Basecamp under this new direction, we'll help them in every which way we can to land somewhere else. https://world.hey.com/dhh/let-it-all-out-78485e8e https://world.hey.com/dhh/let-it-all-out-78485e8e
xt00 6y ago
Reading the thing about the "small council" made me think, hmm this must be a huge company, but its 60 people.. I wonder how many of the people on the small council that got disbanded quit. Sounds somewhat like there were a number of employees who probably feel like they previously had a lot of say in the company and now maybe don't -- so yea hard to say who's right here, but big personalities sometimes do make things hard if there isn't some order to the chaos coming from the company leaders.

detaro 6y ago

Sounds more like a "if you don't like it you can leave" and a bunch of people taking them up on it than a planned layoff. Would love to know what number of leavers they expected (I assume they expected/hoped for some) vs they got.

the-dude 6y ago
Now you mention it, is surely reads like that. Especially at the end : Who made these decisions? Well, David and I did. And I searched the HN comments, and nobody seems to have uttered the words leaving or layoff.

albedoa 6y ago

The announcement of buy-out offers came later.

switz 6y ago

If you want more context, this article really breaks down what happened internally. There's a lot more to the story than was presented. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26963708 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26963708

the-dude 6y ago
Thank you.
creamytaco 6y ago
I don't see a lot more there, besides referring to (long) past events to justify continuing with specific policies and actions. In fact, it's definitely smart of Basecamp to realize that the kind of politics and ideology we encounter today in the US are anathema to any workplace and may lead to paralysis and rot-from-within outcomes. I expect more companies to follow suit.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Seconded. I'm one of the strongest "no politics at work" guys you'll find, and unless there's substantial missing context, even I would consider leaving Basecamp over this. A widely circulated list to make fun of people's names is pretty egregious, and demands a lot more introspection on company culture than it sounds like the founders were willing to do.
- CydeWeys 6y ago
  This article makes a great point about what might be considered "politics at work": > What that view misses, I think, is how confusing rules like these are to employees. One Basecamp worker I spoke with today, who requested anonymity, wondered the extent to which parenting issues could be raised at work. “How do you talk about raising kids without talking about society?” the employee said. “As soon as I bring up public schools, then it’s already political.” Or what if you're black, is talking about your race or your own lived experiences considered political? I don't tend to talk about political stuff at work too much personally, but recently we've been talking about the pandemic a lot (like everyone else). Is that political? Sure seems like it could be construed to be political. Even public health advice from the CDC is considered to be political these days.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Like any category of social behavior, the boundaries are fuzzy. It's also hard to draw a crisp line between passion and rudeness, yet I don't think anyone would conclude that being rude to your coworkers should be allowed. If you have a healthy culture, mutual respect and benefit of the doubt will smooth over the fuzziness; I've worked in multiple teams across multiple companies that manage to generally avoid politics, while still talking about parenting and lived experiences and the CDC.
    - mandevil 6y ago
      This story makes clear that it wasn't 'politics' the way all the outsiders thought of it. The way this rule was instituted makes it clear that it was about protecting company leaders (and DHH's ego) from criticism over their failures w.r.t the widely circulated list of funny names of customers.
shoo 6y ago
> “There's always been this kind of unwritten rule at Basecamp that the company basically exists for David and Jason's enjoyment,” one employee told me. “At the end of the day, they are not interested in seeing things in their work timeline that make them uncomfortable, or distracts them from what they're interested in. And this is the culmination of that.”

ptrkcsk 6y ago

> Yesterday, we offered everyone at Basecamp an option of a severance package worth up to six months salary for those who've been with the company over three years, and three months salary for those at the company less than that. No hard feelings, no questions asked. For those who cannot see a future at Basecamp under this new direction, we'll help them in every which way we can to land somewhere else. https://world.hey.com/dhh/let-it-all-out-78485e8e https://world.hey.com/dhh/let-it-all-out-78485e8e

xt00 6y ago

Reading the thing about the "small council" made me think, hmm this must be a huge company, but its 60 people.. I wonder how many of the people on the small council that got disbanded quit. Sounds somewhat like there were a number of employees who probably feel like they previously had a lot of say in the company and now maybe don't -- so yea hard to say who's right here, but big personalities sometimes do make things hard if there isn't some order to the chaos coming from the company leaders.