Slashdot Mirror
Zynga To Employees: Surrender Pre-IPO Shares Or You're Fired
ardmhacha writes "Zynga seem to think they were overly generous handing out stock to early employees. Fearing a 'Google Chef' situation they are leaning on some employees to hand back their unvested stock or face termination. From the article: 'Zynga's demand for the return of shares could expose the company to employment litigation—and, were the practice to catch on and spread, would erode a central pillar of Silicon Valley culture, in which start-ups with limited cash and a risk of failure dangle the possibility of stock riches in order to lure talent.'"
.... be fired and get rich (and maybe an employer that respects me), than to be forced to sell the valuable stocks that I personally contributed success to.
In truth, those with pre-IPO stocks are the foundation of the success for the company; what we are seeing is absolute disrespect to those who are responsible for the success.
I don't see how this is all that different from the way most large American corporations operate these days.
Fearing a Google Chef situation?
What... a competent professional working at the company over a long period of time demonstrating a high level of skill, overseeing, directing and training many others, and earning the respect of his colleagues?
Is this kind of thing bad now?
Coming from a company with stellar ethics like Zynga, what do you expect?
Unfortunately, these slimeballs are smart enough to figure out ways to screw their employees, their customers, and in fact anyone with a dollar in their pocket.
Too bad for the honest hard working startups that are prepared to do the hard yards and get their just rewards. This will definitely have ripples of distrust that permeate deeply.
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
You take them to court and as part of the settlement/compensation you get vesting of your unvested options because you cannot return to a hostile work environment.
Next thing you know, their employees would be asked to pay back portions of their salaries that management thought are undeserved.
I think demanding already paid compensation to be returned is very different from the way most American corporations operate. I've never heard of it before. It's mind boggling, and if I were said employee, I'd definitely quit on the spot.
Typically they just issue new shares and dilute current shares; while giving management and investors a number to keep their percentages the same. This is a far more insidious way to screw over the little guy that the old way.
So let's not be quick in judging him. ok ?
a quick googling of "zynga ethics" will allow you to make a quick judgement of what we're dealing with here. Pincus is setting new standards in rapacious business practices. This is nothing to shrug off, somehow this guy needs to be spanked.
look sig is kool
FarmVille, etc. I already boycott based on lack of interest in the product.
Mod Parent up +5 Sad Truth.
just issue new shares and dilute current shares; while giving management and investors a number to keep their percentages the same.
Similarly, mark Zynga clueless for trying something so boneheaded when the parent's tried and true method accomplishes the same thing, but in a way that has been, sadly, accepted by the establishment for years.
"Son, in life or business, always remember, you dance with the person you brought".
This is a basic point of honor - you keep to the commitments you made.
More expensive than you thought it would be? Tough, honor it.
Harder than you thought? Tough, honor it.
See something else that's better? Tough, honor it.
Yes, I know, business isn't about honor, it's about profit. I simply feel there is no profit in being dishonorable, no matter how much money you can make. No Sir, "Greed is good" in not in my orison. You know the good companies in your life. Go look at their mission statement. Top one is "To serve our customers/community". You also know who the bad companies are. Look at their mission statements. The honest ones list "Increase shareholder value" as first. The dishonest ones say "To serve our customers/community". In the end, it isn't about what someone says, it's what they do. Actions don't lie. Words can.
That is why I will listen closely to what someone says, but I pay more attention to what they do.
In a perfect world, someone would whisper this in Sony's, RIAA's, MPAA's, ASCAP, AT&T's, and many others ears:
"Honor is a lasting value.
Try it.
For a change."
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
There are times when *threatening to sue* is the proper course of action. There are fewer cases where filing a complaint (i.e. initializing a lawsuit) is a proper course of action. It is much, much rarer for suing and going to trial to be the proper course of action.
Probably don't "threaten to sue" in such a situation; get your lawyer to write some warning letters, first of all.
People casually threaten to sue all the time and aren't serious about it -- make sure they know you've done your homework and are serious about pursuing what course you need to best defend yourself from unjust treatment.
Don't take a job based on shares. Just assume they're going to make them worthless in the long run. Yeah, it makes it harder to join a startup early on, but it's the funded startups you want to work for, anyway.
I'm not making this up! They seriously said this:
Although Zynga's decision might be met with some criticism, the firm's executives reportedly justified their strategy by saying it was best for the company. With the unvested shares, the executives believed they could attract more top talent with the promise of stock.
Who in their right mind would trust their upper management to actually deliver?
"Hey! We lured in our initial staff with some stock options, but then we strongarmed it back from them once it looked like it might be worth something. They took the gamble and we got the payoff. Now we would like to offer it to you! No, really, honest - we wouldn't do that to you! Just the people we initially hired. Hey...wait...where are you going?"
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Threatening to sue has all the weight of someone threatening to beat you up over the internet. People scream "I'M GOING TO SUE" for every single fucking thing nowadays. The proper action would be to retain legal council and make them aware of the situation immediately. They might write a warning letter, but this is much different than you, without representation, telling your company that you're going to sue them.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
Management at companies like that need to do hard time. 20 years in prison would be nice. That's the only thing that will stop this.
Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
Getting revenge can be quite satisfying if your shares are going to be worthless no matter what you do anyway.