3 ms·

They are not a charity. But the time to fire was months earlier. The failure of the founder to do that is on them. When you’re weeks away from a vest (under a m

They are not a charity. But the time to fire was months earlier. The failure of the founder to do that is on them. When you’re weeks away from a vest (under a month is what OP says), to me, that’s your fault. Again, a senior executive or senior leader would be paid out in almost every instance. Why should it be different for the first hire who took a chance on you and your startup? If we’re talking 2 or 3 months, fine. But if we’re taking 3 weeks or less? Sorry, you waited too long and the employee shouldn’t pay for your poor choices. If they were good enough to stick around because you needed a warm body and it was too hard to hire, then they should be good enough to earn the 11.5 months or whatever they’ve put into your company.

codegeek 4y ago
Yes like I said, pay out if the employee was just a bad performer. But I wouldn't pay if they acted in bad faith and knowingly did a worse job (which we can tell as founders/managers). So it depends. I am not paying out a bad faith employee just because I kept them a bit longer than I should have.
- mynameisvlad 4y ago
  > which we can tell as founders/managers Honestly? No. No you can’t. Unless you know everything going on in the employee’s life, and their every thought, you have no basis for being able to tell if an employee is acting in “bad faith” by “slacking”. Even just defining “slacking” is next to impossible. By your standards? Maybe. But maybe you just have too high standards. Or maybe the employee is going through a particularity rough patch in their personal lives. Maybe they’re burned out. Maybe they lost a loved one and are still grieving. Maybe you never told them they’re underperforming and they have no idea. Maybe you just are so tunnel visioned on a particular thing you don’t realize the additional things the employee is doing outside their job. There are a plethora of reasons for why someone’s performance may not match your expectations, and the amount that are in bad faith is already small and hard to differentiate from just being a bad performer. So no, unless you were an omniscient being, you likely don’t know what’s going on in the employees head, let alone if they’re intentionally slacking.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

codegeek 4y ago

Yes like I said, pay out if the employee was just a bad performer. But I wouldn't pay if they acted in bad faith and knowingly did a worse job (which we can tell as founders/managers). So it depends. I am not paying out a bad faith employee just because I kept them a bit longer than I should have.

mynameisvlad 4y ago
> which we can tell as founders/managers Honestly? No. No you can’t. Unless you know everything going on in the employee’s life, and their every thought, you have no basis for being able to tell if an employee is acting in “bad faith” by “slacking”. Even just defining “slacking” is next to impossible. By your standards? Maybe. But maybe you just have too high standards. Or maybe the employee is going through a particularity rough patch in their personal lives. Maybe they’re burned out. Maybe they lost a loved one and are still grieving. Maybe you never told them they’re underperforming and they have no idea. Maybe you just are so tunnel visioned on a particular thing you don’t realize the additional things the employee is doing outside their job. There are a plethora of reasons for why someone’s performance may not match your expectations, and the amount that are in bad faith is already small and hard to differentiate from just being a bad performer. So no, unless you were an omniscient being, you likely don’t know what’s going on in the employees head, let alone if they’re intentionally slacking.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]