[Murky3515]

>Every year, those employees get a percentage of their salaries in company stock.

Ok? Anybody can choose to do this if they work at a public company. But what happen if it's mandatory and the stock goes down? Now your labor was stolen at below market rate! Then we will hear "employees compensation should be resilient to market fluctuations."

[jrflowers]

I like this caricature of the spoiled entitled employee because it completely ignores the concept of shareholders having a say in governance. If stocks were only a proxy for money and nothing else the example would be spot-on.

[stavros]

> If stocks were only a proxy for money and nothing else the example would be spot-on

They are, in the modern startup world that HN is mostly in. That's why commenters here don't remember there are voting shares.

[Gormo]

Can you elaborate on how shareholders having a say in governance relates to worker compensation? Why shouldn't shareholders have control over governance?

[seanmcdirmid]

People are lazy. You can always sell your grant as you get it, they can’t make holding stock mandatory, but a lot of people (including me) just hold the stock in a really undiversified portfolio.

[eru]

> You can always sell your grant as you get it, they can’t make holding stock mandatory, [...]

They can. It's easy in private companies to limit what an employee can do with their stock, and in public companies they can insert a clause in the contract to that effect just fine. Or just have very long vesting periods.

(Of course, as a would-be employee I would take these restrictions into account when deciding where to work.)

[Murky3515]

So they're too lazy to buy stock when they get paid, but not too lazy to sell stock when they get paid?

[oneshtein]

This will tank price of shares.

[phkahler]

This is not about publicly traded companies. It's about employee owned ones. Your point is still valid, but not in the way you think.

[Gormo]

If employees can't sell their shares on an open market, do they really own them? What does it mean for them to own the company if they can't trade their ownership stake for money, if that's what they want?

[grantsh]

You cannot invest money you don't have?

[sofixa]

Not every public company pays its employees in stocks/stock options/RSU/etc.

[dan-robertson]

If the company is public, one can simulate the scheme by buying their stock, I guess. Taxes may be different and phrased like that, it seems weirdly risky to buy more of the thing you’re most exposed to (if the company lays you off, the stock may be down too).