Quora commenter:
“So let me understand this. I’m working for a start-up at half the salary I should get paid in exchange for some paper in the company. The company wants to provide every employee, all 40 of us, with a $100 jacket. And according to your logic, this $4,000 expense could bankrupt the company causing us to lose our jobs.
Sorry, if $4K is the difference between keeping my job and a something I can proudly wear to show my affiliation with the company, then it really won’t matter. That $4K worth of jackets will only change the bankruptcy filing from an afternoon filing to a morning filing – same day, 3 hours earlier. No one is suggesting that they buy everyone a car or fly us all to SuperBowl. But for $100 per employee? A simple and well deserved perk.”
Me:
“It’s not the 4,000, it’s the management team and employees that thinks speening 4,000 on something that won’t return 20,000 is ok.
There’s an employee’s mindset to company money, and there’s the owner’s mindset to company money.
The employee’s mindset is that company’s money is a tool being paid by someone else to do my job.
The owner’s mindset is that the company’s money is money that the owner could use to go vacationing in the carribean, so why the F should it be used on anything that won’t generate 5x more money?
With VC providing funding to people that’s too young to have a serious amount of their own money to properly respect it and/or be senior enough in their career to have interact and absorb the values of actual company owner’s or close enough by jow they’re incentivized, we have company management that approach money with an employee’s mindset.
4,000? I could use that 4,000 for 1 week trip in Europe (exclude airfare), if the company is not going to use it to make 20,000, what business does the management have in spending that 4,000? Get me the person who sign this order, and his/her supervisor.”
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »
Dhirosattha 