4 ms·

Why'd you notify your ex-boss? That was a dumb move. What did you hope to accomplish? Is it okay to bring ex-coworkers to your startup? Yes, but as long as you

Why'd you notify your ex-boss? That was a dumb move. What did you hope to accomplish? Is it okay to bring ex-coworkers to your startup? Yes, but as long as you tell the absolute truth. Don't lie to them and don't sugar-coat, and make sure you're operating in their interests, not yours. Extending an offer is not the same thing as "poaching". You're not doing anything unethical as long as you don't lie about your company, its prospects, or your friend's role in it. Remember though that your job (ethically speaking) is not to sell the position to your friend. It's to extend another option so your friend can make the best decision for him (which may or may not be to join you).

ced 15y ago
Extending an offer is not the same thing as "poaching". Honest question: what's the difference? What would constitute poaching in this situation?
- michaelochurch 15y ago
  Well, the technical definition of "poaching" is illicit hunting. Misrepresenting the company's prospects (e.g. revenue, runway, VC situation) and the person's role in the company (e.g. claiming he'll be doing more challenging work or have a more important job that he'll actually have) would be unethical. Extending an option to someone with full disclosure is not considered unethical by any interpretation I'd consider. That said, people use "poaching" in job searching more casually, so I guess we're debating terminology on this one.
- roedog 15y ago
  I think poaching would be making an offer that was forbidden - or that you had signed an agreement to not do. In this case, as presented, there is no such violation. (right to work state, any non-compete agreement had expired, etc). A losing manager might call it poaching anyways because they wanted to retain the worker - but that would just be hot air.
  - michaelochurch 15y ago
    Actually, I would argue that an existing non-compete is a great reason (morally speaking, ignoring pragmatic concerns) to hire someone. Bad rules should be not bent but broken into little pieces.

ced 15y ago

Extending an offer is not the same thing as "poaching". Honest question: what's the difference? What would constitute poaching in this situation?

michaelochurch 15y ago
Well, the technical definition of "poaching" is illicit hunting. Misrepresenting the company's prospects (e.g. revenue, runway, VC situation) and the person's role in the company (e.g. claiming he'll be doing more challenging work or have a more important job that he'll actually have) would be unethical. Extending an option to someone with full disclosure is not considered unethical by any interpretation I'd consider. That said, people use "poaching" in job searching more casually, so I guess we're debating terminology on this one.
roedog 15y ago
I think poaching would be making an offer that was forbidden - or that you had signed an agreement to not do. In this case, as presented, there is no such violation. (right to work state, any non-compete agreement had expired, etc). A losing manager might call it poaching anyways because they wanted to retain the worker - but that would just be hot air.
- michaelochurch 15y ago
  Actually, I would argue that an existing non-compete is a great reason (morally speaking, ignoring pragmatic concerns) to hire someone. Bad rules should be not bent but broken into little pieces.