5 ms·
No. Why does this one employee get to vest early and the others don't? It's a legal minefield and sets up the wrong precedent.
by benwerd 4y ago
No. Why does this one employee get to vest early and the others don't? It's a legal minefield and sets up the wrong precedent.
- joshxyz 4y agocan the employee be terminated but part of that termination package is the assurance of his vesting at the right time soon? in this case he's now a headache to keep around
- HWR_14 4y agoAs opposed to paying them more money and then vesting the stock? Paying them more is not a worse precedent? And I don't see any legal ramifications here, but not legal advice
- radicalbyte 4y agoThe win is with the exiting employees - it's much better to be benevolent in this situation. Sure it costs a little more but just see that as an investment in the rest of the company.
- HWR_14 4y agoI wasn't referring to letting the stock vest. I was referring to the concept of leaving them on the payroll until their stock vests. There's no reason not to vest the stock early and send them on their way. Unless the original poster wanted to give them severance.
- badcppdev 4y agoLegal fees for early vesting might be a significant cost.
- HWR_14 4y agoHow?
- radicalbyte 4y agoI know - I would personally just put them on gardening leave until their stocks vest. Sure that costs money but not a lot - it's probably worth it for the lack of drama.
- HWR_14 4y agoIt's < 10 people, so getting the message out isn't an issue. So I wouldn't worry about drama wrt people thinking he got screwed out of his stock. Can even hold a meeting about it.