

[ASK HN] When is it OK as an employee to refuse an acqui-hire? - welch

... and just leave.
======
cr3ative
Surely that's the employee's prerogative? Nobody is forced to work anywhere.
It's the job of the company to retain them by providing good working
conditions and maintaining a mutually beneficial business relationship.

If they left, that relationship failed. Why would you question if that is OK
or not?

~~~
welch
As I'm told by my company that me leaving would break the deal for everyone.
That's not what I want, but it's also not a good deal for me (especially
compared to other offers I get)

~~~
davidu
Just quit after the deal goes through.

You are not a slave.

~~~
MagaManGo
His power is strongest 'before' the deal goes through.

------
cat9
Always. It's always okay.

There might be ramifications, and it's up to you to run through the calculus
of whether that means more to you than getting out, but if you want out and
you're fine with the results, go for it.

~~~
welch
Thanks for your answer. It's definitely complex as a situation, and never easy
to know to what extent what you're being told is true -- hence, if you're
really breaking the deal or not.

------
brudgers
If you're part of the deal, then it's as much _your_ deal as anyone else's.
What makes a deal a deal and not a done deal is that people can walk away.

I would recommend taking good deals (based on _your_ definition of "good") and
declining bad deals on the converse. The key point of a deal is that it's all
arm's length in theory and in practice hand-shake deals are predicated on
square dealing. Square dealing in turn is predicated on nobody claiming "you
owe me" when the debt is not some piece of another square deal. The square
deal of being an employee is that you show up and work in exchange for a check
that doesn't bounce.

As others have suggested, maybe you do a favor that helps someone you know get
rich. Maybe you don't for any one of a number of reasons, e.g. the person
needing the favor isn't going out of their way to make you rich or happy or
whatever. This kind of change is stressful. There's nothing wrong with taking
care of yourself.

So, in my opinion, it's ok either way. There are consequences to either
decision and making the deal go through may not be in your interest. Clearly
making it go through is not slam-dunk obviously to your benefit.

Good luck.

------
scott00
I don't think you would have anything to be ashamed about for leaving the
company, even if it blows up the deal. Of course, that doesn't mean that it
won't make your bosses/coworkers angry or disappointed, and there is some
value in having good relations with ex-coworkers.

If more compensation or a different role at the new company would change your
mind, it's definitely worth having that conversation. In the event that you
can't reach a deal that makes you enthusiastic about going along with the
acqui-hire, making some small sacrifices to help the deal go through is
probably worth it to preserve relationships (like trcollinson did by quitting
the day after the close instead of the day before).

If you decide to shoot for the bare minimum, make sure you know what it will
take to make everybody at the current company happy. You wouldn't want to stay
an extra month in order to quit the day after the deal closes only to discover
that the owners don't get their payday unless you stay on for two years after
the close and they end up pissed at you anyway.

~~~
trcollinson
I just want to point out an important distinctions between a pre and post
acquisition deal. Previous to an acquisition being complete it is entirely
possible and very common for the acquirer to stipulate that a certain employee
or set of employees must stay with the company throughout the acquisition.
Before money, stock, and assets have changed hands almost anything can go.
Both sides can (and often do) back out of the agreement for any number of
reasons. The reason many companies have a "Quiet Period" during an acquisition
is so that employees don't panic and leave, ruining the deal. Frankly, this
company probably shouldn't have shared the acquisition with the OP is at all
possible.

However, it is very uncommon to stipulate payment (or vestment) on a
particular employee or a group of employees staying AFTER the acquisition is
complete, at least in the US. This is because of anti-coercion laws. There are
a number of laws that protect a worker from being held captive (via liability)
to a company. If I were a previous owner who's previous employee left a new
company one day after the sale and the new owner said "Well, you don't get
paid now," it would be an easy argument to say "They have the right to leave
and it was you who lost them, the liability is on you."

If the laws did not protect from such then you would see an amazing level of
scam which could go something like this. The acquiring company would stipulate
that the price of the purchase of the acquired company was based on an
employee being retained. The acquiring company would then tell that employee
to quietly (under the table, without anyone knowing) leave a few days after
acquisition. The acquiring company would then say, "See! That employee didn't
stay so you don't get paid (as much|anything) anymore!"

That being said, this is why so many lawyers are involved with contracting the
sale of businesses. I have seen buyers attempting to stipulate payment on some
really crazy things. I have seen sellers pull the plug for some other really
silly stipulations. It's usually quite the circus to watch.

------
fsk
You have great negotiating leverage.

There is some $$ where you would be an idiot to leave. Ask for that $$. If you
don't get it, leave.

If they delay and stall, interpret the answer as "NO".

Start interviewing.

------
tptacek
Ask a simple question: "almost always". Keep your word. That's the only thing
you need to remember.

------
rotoole
I would be transparent. Ask for and negotiate for what you want _up front_,
not after the fact. Back it up with evidence based on your other offers, and
make it clear that your willing to walk, rather than compromise for something
less.

Why treat yourself like a slave for partners who don't care about your
interests?

Remember, your company's lawyers are not your lawyers. They are not looking
out for your interests, rather the company's interests.

It sounds like you should have a lot of leverage here to get what you want
though. You need to negotiate with your employer, or get an agent to do it on
your behalf.

They way you describe it sounds like your being sold down the river.

------
rajacombinator
Always OK, you need to look out for yourself. But if there's a number that
would make it worth staying you should tell them. (And aim high, if you're
that vital you might get it.)

------
opless
Title should be prefixed with [ASK HN] :)

Also, Always. Especially if the want to change their contract.

~~~
welch
Sorry, changed that ;)

Even though it may break the deal for everyone else? In the meantime, you
can't know if it will.

~~~
sgricci
You aren't everyone else. You are you. Do what is best for you.

I would also explore if there is a way to make the deal a better option for
you. Negotiate. If you've explored that, and it's still not, then walk away.

