4 ms·

A policy the author likes: > 1. Spend company money like it is your own money. No, really. The author’s commentary: > Instead of crafting the perfect policy

A policy the author likes: > 1. Spend company money like it is your own money. No, really. The author’s commentary: > Instead of crafting the perfect policy to fit humans into, hire adults and expect them to act like it. If someone can't reign in expenses and stays at the Ritz-Carlton every night, the answer isn't to have a policy that prevents it, the answer is that person shouldn't work for your company. They aren't a good fit. My take: If I’d spend my own money to stay at the Ritz-Carlton (I like nice places, I have the money to pay for it, etc.), then why does this make me a bad fit for GitLab? If the company doesn’t want the Ritz-Carlton expensed then make a policy for it. Either GitLab has “shadow” policies in place (annoying unwritten rules) or the author doesn’t understand the policy that GitLab has. I wondered if their Core Values had something about thriftiness which might disqualify the Ritz: > GitLab's six core values are Collaboration, Results, Efficiency, Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging, Iteration, and Transparency, and together they spell the CREDIT we give each other by assuming good intent. They go on to say: > Every dollar we spend will have to be earned back. Be as frugal with company money as you are with your own. In saying this, we ask team members to weigh the cost of purchases against the value that they will bring to the company. So they’re not really asking people to be as frugal with company money as they are their own. They’re asking people to be as cheap as GitLab wants them to be — without being specific about it.

chrischen 4y ago
Maybe the company culture is frugal people.
- paulcole 4y ago
  Then say, “Be frugal with our money.” Don’t say, “Spend our money how you would spend your money.”
  - chrischen 4y ago
    I guess they want to detect frauds too (people pretending to be of the company culture).
voidfunc 4y ago
There's always shadow policies at places like these. The buzz-word bingo of core values is for marketing and designed to captivate people (usually young) that haven't learned to call bullshit when they see it.
- dangus 4y ago
  More specifically, shadow policies open the door up to favoritism. Another example: “unlimited” time off is granted inequitably. Some teams and individuals are more pressured than others to stay within an unwritten amount of time off.
  - FBISurveillance 4y ago
    Unlimited vacation policy is like unlimited hosting - everyone knows there're arbitrary applied rules. Take too much and "you're not performing well enough". More to say, some studies [0] have shown that with Unlimited Paid Time Off "employees took less time off than previously, presumably leading to higher burnout rates". [0] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812187/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.8121... Overall, I think Gitlab is building a culture that _to me personally_ looks weird, you know when you talk to someone and have a gut feeling that you can't trust them? Did they fix location-based pay yet, many times discussed on HN in context of Gitlab? If not, any news on introducing Purchasing Power Parity?
roflulz 4y ago
it seems like an easy way to create ambiguous bias to fire someone who is in the grey area before the Ritz Carlton. (i.e., I stayed at Motel 6, and this other person who I also hate stayed at the Holiday Inn - lets get rid of them)
nevdka 4y ago
The third value on that list is efficiency. Is staying at the Ritz-Carlton an efficient use of company resources?
- voidfunc 4y ago
  It might be if the person is more productive staying at the Ritz because it makes them more relaxed and that in turn helps them think, or do a killer presentation or whatever. It's the problem with these policies. They're written open-ended, but there is really a "right" answer and it's whatever the boss decides. Good boss? Maybe they stick up for you. Bad boss? You're going to regret that decision.
  - slt2021 4y ago
    Would you pay for Ritz Carlton out of your own pocket for a business trip? Imagine for a second that company is not reimbursing you for travel expenses, would you go for medium priced hotel or for 5* hotel with your own money for company business trip (not your leisure vacation)? answer becomes obvious if you look at issue this way
    - xmprt 4y ago
      Maybe the Ritz Carlton is a little excessive but I've seen a lot of companies that deny international business class flights for anyone below the director level even when I know many coworkers who regularly fly business class for personal vacations. Your analogy breaks down a little because if I'm traveling for work then I can't imagine being required to pay for the trip myself. However if I was traveling there on vacation, I can imagine a world where I'd splurge. Do you think the company should pay in that case? Or is their value less about being cheap more than it is about not being excessive?
      - slt2021 4y ago
        Imagine company gives $100/night allowance for hotel, but we can make thought experiment and say that allowance is $0 (and $100/night is included in salary instead). That makes travel allowance a part of your paycheck, and all expected travel expense is loaded upfront in your salary. then it becomes up to you - whether you go to luxury hotel for a business trip, or a medium range. Company becomes indifferent to your choices, and it becomes your choice how much to spend. what would you choose this time? same for business class tickets
bsder 4y ago
> A policy the author likes: > > 1. Spend company money like it is your own money. No, really. I normally maintain a ratio. When I was a junior, the rule I adhered to is spend $10 of company money like your would spend $1 of your own money. As I became more senior, I adjusted that ratio to $100:$1. This keeps things in perspective but acknowledges that spending money generally makes money for a business.
- perryizgr8 4y ago
  > I adjusted that ratio to $100:$1. So if I would pay $100 a night in a personal trip, I should be fine spending up to $10000/night of company money? I don't think that would fly at most companies. Edit: Unless you're a C-level executive, I guess. But then you'd probably be fine spending 10k for a personal trip, too.
  - bsder 4y ago
    Overall? Maybe? Will I book that executive class hotel within walking distance of my venues instead of La Quinta? Yes. Will I book that better plane ticket instead of cattle class? Yup. etc. Those are probably in the range of about a factor fo 4x-5x. This also holds a little better if I talk about lab equipment. I have wasted a lot of time trying to do measurements with $100-ish pieces of equipment when I should have bought the $10K piece of lab-grade equipment that I then use for other projects as well. Now I try to optimize that better.
buryat 4y ago
if you don't understand how expenses should work and what a reasonable expense is then you're not a culture fit for a company that relies on employees having common sense.
- paulcole 4y ago
  OK, then the policy should be, “Have common sense, understand how expenses work, and what reasonable expenses are.” But their policy is “Spend our money like you are spending your own money.”
  - akhmatova 4y ago
    The latter essentially translates to the former. They're just trying to drive the point home.
    - darkwater 4y ago
      Yes and no. If it's my money, if I don't spend it I will save it for another thing, so I have an incentive to spend less. I know they are trying to emulate the same incentive as a policy with that words. Personally I think that using the words "use common sense" would feel more honest.
    - paulcole 4y ago
      How is them being vague and not saying what they mean “driving the point home”?
- eesmith 4y ago
  I missed a step in your logic from "culture fit" to "common sense". I certainly know that "reasonable expense" is a cultural issue, and strongly related to family wealth. Someone coming from a working-class single parent family making $40K/year has a different idea of what "reasonable" means than someone from a professional class family with two working parents making $350K/year. Just because these two employees now make the same money working the same job position for the same company doesn't mean they both automatically have the same idea of what's "reasonable." For example, is it reasonable to get room service while at a hotel on company business? As someone from a $40K/year family, I never considered it until my boss mentioned it. So yes, it's a cultural mismatch. But the conclusion shouldn't be that I wasn't a cultural fit (because I came from a working class culture), nor that I didn't have common sense, but rather that a company's specific corporate culture needs to be learned, and explicit communications may help.
akhmatova 4y ago
If I’d spend my own money to stay at the Ritz-Carlton (I like nice places, I have the money to pay for it, etc.), then why does this make me a bad fit for GitLab? Because you missed the crucial qualifying phrase, "every night". The point of the policy wasn't that one should never, ever go out treat oneself to nice things. But that at some point, it get to be objectively (and grossly) inefficient and, to put it bluntly, reckless. In fact, most people I know who in fact can afford to stay at the Ritz-Carlton every night (when traveling) don't, just as a matter of principle. And yeah, they seem to also expect you to have a sense for what's called sound judgement, or shall we say business sense. That is, to know (at least approximately) where to draw the line, without an explicit policy for every last expense category. And if you don't agree with this philosophy (or it isn't basically obvious to you) - then it would seem you probably aren't a good fit for GitLab. (In the OP author's point of view, that is. The Ritz-Carlton analogy comes from them, not GitLab).
- eduction 4y ago
  The more nights the company is asking you to travel away from home, the stronger the argument for the Ritz. You seem to think more nights makes it a weaker case. Travel is brutal, being away from home is brutal. The reason things like the Ritz and first class airline seats exist is that there are people who need to travel a lot and one way to keep them functioning at a high level despite the relentless pace is to provide superb comfort and service. GitLab can decide to be that kind of company or not but when business travel becomes routine and frequent for one individual it’s dishonest to pretend they should scrimp like it’s their own much rarer leisure travel.
  - akhmatova 4y ago
    A quick search confirms that are -plenty- of nice, boutique hotels (in downtown areas of the usual fancy cities) offering perfectly decent rooms in the under $300/night range, even on short notice. The only reason we go for the Ritz's price range ($600-$900) is to tell ourselves (or others) that we stayed at the Ritz. The ability to distinguish between the cost-value ratios of the two categories -- and to understand that yes, even for a large, successful company, unnecessary expenses of this sort do add up -- is precisely the sensibility that GitLab[*] is looking for. [*] Again, a hypothetical GitLab - the Ritz-Carlton example comes from the blogpost author, and not from GitLab.
jonas21 4y ago
People like you are the reason why I have to spend an extra 3 hours traveling to get a connecting flight that saves $30, despite the fact that everyone, from my manager on up would agree that my time is worth far more than $10/hour. But our travel policy is that you have to book a flight within X percent of the lowest fare, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Gitlab is just asking people to use a little bit of common sense.
- darkwater 4y ago
  We have a similar policy but managers can just force-approve travels outside the policy when it makes sense. If your company don't even allow that, then the issue is not people like OP but HR/Finance drones or managers lacking common sense.
- paulcole 4y ago
  > Gitlab is just asking people to use a little bit of common sense. This is very clearly not what they’re asking people to do. That’s the problem.
- sheusndudn 4y ago

chrischen 4y ago

Maybe the company culture is frugal people.

paulcole 4y ago
Then say, “Be frugal with our money.” Don’t say, “Spend our money how you would spend your money.”
- chrischen 4y ago
  I guess they want to detect frauds too (people pretending to be of the company culture).

voidfunc 4y ago

There's always shadow policies at places like these. The buzz-word bingo of core values is for marketing and designed to captivate people (usually young) that haven't learned to call bullshit when they see it.

dangus 4y ago
More specifically, shadow policies open the door up to favoritism. Another example: “unlimited” time off is granted inequitably. Some teams and individuals are more pressured than others to stay within an unwritten amount of time off.
- FBISurveillance 4y ago
  Unlimited vacation policy is like unlimited hosting - everyone knows there're arbitrary applied rules. Take too much and "you're not performing well enough". More to say, some studies [0] have shown that with Unlimited Paid Time Off "employees took less time off than previously, presumably leading to higher burnout rates". [0] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812187/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.8121... Overall, I think Gitlab is building a culture that _to me personally_ looks weird, you know when you talk to someone and have a gut feeling that you can't trust them? Did they fix location-based pay yet, many times discussed on HN in context of Gitlab? If not, any news on introducing Purchasing Power Parity?

roflulz 4y ago

it seems like an easy way to create ambiguous bias to fire someone who is in the grey area before the Ritz Carlton. (i.e., I stayed at Motel 6, and this other person who I also hate stayed at the Holiday Inn - lets get rid of them)

nevdka 4y ago

The third value on that list is efficiency. Is staying at the Ritz-Carlton an efficient use of company resources?

voidfunc 4y ago
It might be if the person is more productive staying at the Ritz because it makes them more relaxed and that in turn helps them think, or do a killer presentation or whatever. It's the problem with these policies. They're written open-ended, but there is really a "right" answer and it's whatever the boss decides. Good boss? Maybe they stick up for you. Bad boss? You're going to regret that decision.
- slt2021 4y ago
  Would you pay for Ritz Carlton out of your own pocket for a business trip? Imagine for a second that company is not reimbursing you for travel expenses, would you go for medium priced hotel or for 5* hotel with your own money for company business trip (not your leisure vacation)? answer becomes obvious if you look at issue this way
  - xmprt 4y ago
    Maybe the Ritz Carlton is a little excessive but I've seen a lot of companies that deny international business class flights for anyone below the director level even when I know many coworkers who regularly fly business class for personal vacations. Your analogy breaks down a little because if I'm traveling for work then I can't imagine being required to pay for the trip myself. However if I was traveling there on vacation, I can imagine a world where I'd splurge. Do you think the company should pay in that case? Or is their value less about being cheap more than it is about not being excessive?
    - slt2021 4y ago
      Imagine company gives $100/night allowance for hotel, but we can make thought experiment and say that allowance is $0 (and $100/night is included in salary instead). That makes travel allowance a part of your paycheck, and all expected travel expense is loaded upfront in your salary. then it becomes up to you - whether you go to luxury hotel for a business trip, or a medium range. Company becomes indifferent to your choices, and it becomes your choice how much to spend. what would you choose this time? same for business class tickets

bsder 4y ago

> A policy the author likes: > > 1. Spend company money like it is your own money. No, really. I normally maintain a ratio. When I was a junior, the rule I adhered to is spend $10 of company money like your would spend $1 of your own money. As I became more senior, I adjusted that ratio to $100:$1. This keeps things in perspective but acknowledges that spending money generally makes money for a business.

perryizgr8 4y ago
> I adjusted that ratio to $100:$1. So if I would pay $100 a night in a personal trip, I should be fine spending up to $10000/night of company money? I don't think that would fly at most companies. Edit: Unless you're a C-level executive, I guess. But then you'd probably be fine spending 10k for a personal trip, too.
- bsder 4y ago
  Overall? Maybe? Will I book that executive class hotel within walking distance of my venues instead of La Quinta? Yes. Will I book that better plane ticket instead of cattle class? Yup. etc. Those are probably in the range of about a factor fo 4x-5x. This also holds a little better if I talk about lab equipment. I have wasted a lot of time trying to do measurements with $100-ish pieces of equipment when I should have bought the $10K piece of lab-grade equipment that I then use for other projects as well. Now I try to optimize that better.

buryat 4y ago

if you don't understand how expenses should work and what a reasonable expense is then you're not a culture fit for a company that relies on employees having common sense.

paulcole 4y ago
OK, then the policy should be, “Have common sense, understand how expenses work, and what reasonable expenses are.” But their policy is “Spend our money like you are spending your own money.”
- akhmatova 4y ago
  The latter essentially translates to the former. They're just trying to drive the point home.
  - darkwater 4y ago
    Yes and no. If it's my money, if I don't spend it I will save it for another thing, so I have an incentive to spend less. I know they are trying to emulate the same incentive as a policy with that words. Personally I think that using the words "use common sense" would feel more honest.
  - paulcole 4y ago
    How is them being vague and not saying what they mean “driving the point home”?
eesmith 4y ago
I missed a step in your logic from "culture fit" to "common sense". I certainly know that "reasonable expense" is a cultural issue, and strongly related to family wealth. Someone coming from a working-class single parent family making $40K/year has a different idea of what "reasonable" means than someone from a professional class family with two working parents making $350K/year. Just because these two employees now make the same money working the same job position for the same company doesn't mean they both automatically have the same idea of what's "reasonable." For example, is it reasonable to get room service while at a hotel on company business? As someone from a $40K/year family, I never considered it until my boss mentioned it. So yes, it's a cultural mismatch. But the conclusion shouldn't be that I wasn't a cultural fit (because I came from a working class culture), nor that I didn't have common sense, but rather that a company's specific corporate culture needs to be learned, and explicit communications may help.

akhmatova 4y ago

If I’d spend my own money to stay at the Ritz-Carlton (I like nice places, I have the money to pay for it, etc.), then why does this make me a bad fit for GitLab? Because you missed the crucial qualifying phrase, "every night". The point of the policy wasn't that one should never, ever go out treat oneself to nice things. But that at some point, it get to be objectively (and grossly) inefficient and, to put it bluntly, reckless. In fact, most people I know who in fact can afford to stay at the Ritz-Carlton every night (when traveling) don't, just as a matter of principle. And yeah, they seem to also expect you to have a sense for what's called sound judgement, or shall we say business sense. That is, to know (at least approximately) where to draw the line, without an explicit policy for every last expense category. And if you don't agree with this philosophy (or it isn't basically obvious to you) - then it would seem you probably aren't a good fit for GitLab. (In the OP author's point of view, that is. The Ritz-Carlton analogy comes from them, not GitLab).

eduction 4y ago
The more nights the company is asking you to travel away from home, the stronger the argument for the Ritz. You seem to think more nights makes it a weaker case. Travel is brutal, being away from home is brutal. The reason things like the Ritz and first class airline seats exist is that there are people who need to travel a lot and one way to keep them functioning at a high level despite the relentless pace is to provide superb comfort and service. GitLab can decide to be that kind of company or not but when business travel becomes routine and frequent for one individual it’s dishonest to pretend they should scrimp like it’s their own much rarer leisure travel.
- akhmatova 4y ago
  A quick search confirms that are -plenty- of nice, boutique hotels (in downtown areas of the usual fancy cities) offering perfectly decent rooms in the under $300/night range, even on short notice. The only reason we go for the Ritz's price range ($600-$900) is to tell ourselves (or others) that we stayed at the Ritz. The ability to distinguish between the cost-value ratios of the two categories -- and to understand that yes, even for a large, successful company, unnecessary expenses of this sort do add up -- is precisely the sensibility that GitLab[*] is looking for. [*] Again, a hypothetical GitLab - the Ritz-Carlton example comes from the blogpost author, and not from GitLab.

jonas21 4y ago

People like you are the reason why I have to spend an extra 3 hours traveling to get a connecting flight that saves $30, despite the fact that everyone, from my manager on up would agree that my time is worth far more than $10/hour. But our travel policy is that you have to book a flight within X percent of the lowest fare, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Gitlab is just asking people to use a little bit of common sense.

darkwater 4y ago
We have a similar policy but managers can just force-approve travels outside the policy when it makes sense. If your company don't even allow that, then the issue is not people like OP but HR/Finance drones or managers lacking common sense.
paulcole 4y ago
> Gitlab is just asking people to use a little bit of common sense. This is very clearly not what they’re asking people to do. That’s the problem.
sheusndudn 4y ago