3 ms·
Salaried employment is made of suckers who can be compensated with less than they might be worth because the alternative is a world where they would have to fig
by fixermark 13y ago
Salaried employment is made of suckers who can be compensated with less than they might be worth because the alternative is a world where they would have to fight for every scrip, scrap, and slice that they are owed.
I've been on both sides of that coin---I've worked for the startups and I've worked for "the industry." Am I being "taken advantage of?" Am I being paid less than I'm worth? Probably.
But I wouldn't trade the comfortable life of knowing my paycheck won't bounce for the hardscrabble life of the startup cowboy any day of the week.
I'm curious what your recommendation is. Is there a third option? Are you recommending people not work for the firms specifically involved in the settlement? I guess I could always look into IBM...
- 7Figures2Commas 13y agoMost of the people who work at startups are salaried employees. So what's your point? As for your third option, it's called self-employment. It demands that you fight for every scrip, scrap, and slice, but the reward is high: it's one of the best and only ways to get paid what you're truly worth.
- fixermark 13y agoIt's not for me; I like externally-imposed structure and hate doing my own accounting specifically enough to track all the taxes self-employment demands I track. But it is a third option, and I tip my hat to those who find it fulfilling.
- defen 13y agoThe alternative I am suggesting is to work for any of the million other companies out there, or work for yourself. Sure, IBM is an option, but there are plenty of others also. It's not even about the amount of money lost/denied. It's about the principle of the thing - hence my comment about self-respect. Why would you work for one of the companies that engaged in this behavior when you have so many other options?
- jamesaguilar 13y agoCan't retire on principles.