4 ms·
CA law provides for at will employment but if the original option was not contingent on specific performance beyond what is needed to continue as an employee, a
by skmurphy 15y ago
CA law provides for at will employment but if the original option was not contingent on specific performance beyond what is needed to continue as an employee, and they are willing for the employee to continue working there provided they surrender their stock they may be in more of a gray area. It's in the nature of a targeted pay cut but it doesn't seem to involve a demotion or change in position, they are effectively approach certain employees and telling them, "we are paying you too much, accept a reduction in your total compensation or we will terminate you."
- nobody3141592 15y agoDoesn't matter if it's unvested stock. They simply fire you without cause the day before your stock vests. All they are saying is - give back the stock and we won't fire you the day before it vests.
- nobody3141592 15y agoAlthough legally they might be safer firing everyone and re-hiring them post IPO. Although I would hate to work with anyone that they got to agree with this!
- davorak 15y agoI would agree with the analogy if the stock compensation was payed out along the way. I think it is more akin to "we are not satisfied with your work on the contract we are taking what you have produce so far and are only going to pay you a portion of the original agreed upon amount."
- skmurphy 15y agoIn effect it is paid out along the way, that's the effect of the vesting schedule (whether it's options vesting or buyback rights terminating each month).
- danssig 15y agoWrong. They're saying "I know I gave you this, and put a lock in so you had to stay, but now it's worth more than I think you deserve so I'm going back on my agreement. Sorry you worked here so long for below market wages".