3 ms·
Usually people are asked to take pay cuts because the company isn't doing well, often with the understanding that pay will go back up if things get back on trac
by davweb 15y ago
Usually people are asked to take pay cuts because the company isn't doing well, often with the understanding that pay will go back up if things get back on track.
Here it seems people are being asked to take a pay cut not because their company is having problems buts because is doing very well indeed.
- damoncali 15y agoAgreed. It's a major dick move. And it's not quite the same as a salary cut, as option prices and amounts were set before the outcome was known. They could well have been worth zero. As long as the employees are doing their jobs, they've earned the equity, no matter how inflated it may seem to the CEO. But... he could just fire them. Which is a problem in itself. This is why I have a major problem with typical employee stock options. It is just flat out not worth as much to employees as it is to investors and founders. Employees are basically put in the position of having to trust that their management (and their management's acquisition overlords) will do what they said they'd do. Between the employers and the tax man, employee equity can be a real bitch. Translated into english, most stock option agreements say, "We'll give you XXX options per month (after you pay us for them, of course). IF we feel like it - we can always fire you and owe nothing more, as you know. Taxes are your problem (good luck!). Oh yeah, and you don't get shit for a year." Ever try to improve the situation up front? Oh, the howling and moaning you'll witness from the company and their lawyers. ("That's highly irregular! Nobody does that! It's a standard vesting period! Why are you so greedy! You could just walk away with stock!")