
Ask HN: only 90 days to exercise options. how do I change this policy? - throwaway12917
Recently I learned that it is an industry standard to give employees 90 days to exercise their stock options after they quit or are fired (0 days if fired with cause). This whole time I was under the impression the expiration date was the latest one could exercise. I am stunned that all the sweat and hard work can go unrewarded.<p>For now I am happy working at company X but who knows what will happen in a couple years. I don&#x27;t want to be in a position where I&#x27;m forced to decide between staying at company X or losing my stock options - the golden handcuffs.<p>There are companies like Pinterest, Instacart, Kickstarter and others [1] that are redefining the industry standard by extending the exercise windows. Sam also posted his thoughts on treating employees better. [2]<p>I intend to approach the founder to restructure the employee stock options while the company is still small.<p>Other than extending the exercise window to 10 years, what else should I be asking for?
And what are the pitfalls?<p>[1] https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;holman&#x2F;extended-exercise-windows
[2] http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.samaltman.com&#x2F;employee-equity
======
dudul
What are your arguments for changing this policy? How are you gonna convince
the founder to change for something that is _worse_ for him? Your founder has
literally zero incentive to revise this policy other than "it's better for the
employees".

Do you have troubles attracting/retaining talent? Because if it's not the case
I don't see what you're gonna tell him/her.

~~~
throwaway12917
Good point and if this were a bigger company I would agree with you. However,
we are still a very small company (single digits) going through a critical
period.

As one of the key employees I have leverage. Am I irreplaceable? No, but it
would definitely be a setback. One that the founder cannot afford at this
time.

I can't speak for the other employees but I imagine they won't be happy either
once they learn how the founder treats employees.

Besides appeasing existing employees there is the added benefit of attracting
and retaining talent going forward. This is a great point that you mentioned
and shouldn't be overlooked especially considering how competitive the valley
is for talent.

~~~
dudul
Good luck then :)

Not to be pessimistic, but don't overestimate your leverage. You may know that
you leaving would be a big setback, but the founder may not. Careful with the
ultimatum approach too. Even if the founder gives in, it may create resentment
if your conversation ends up being "if you don't do this, I'll leave, and
everybody else will follow!"

It's interesting that you think that a very small company is more likely to
implement this new policy. I would have said that a bigger, more stable
company would be a better candidate. Founders at small companies are betting
everything on their shares, they will be more reluctant to giving them away
too easily.

~~~
throwaway12917
Thanks for the feedback dudul, it helps when someone shares the other
perspective.

Agreed, I don't want the conversation to steer into an ultimatum nor using
that line of reasoning. That will leave a sour taste in everyone's mouth.

I think the conversation can be approached in a more positive light and framed
as ensuring all the hard work and long hours put in by me and other employees
is fairly compensated and we get to retain the equity that vested.

