In a leaked memo, Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke put limits on employees having side hustles, saying Shopify requires ‘unshared attention’::Shopify CEO Tobi Lütke discourages employees from side hustles in company memo, saying their jobs require their undivided attention.

  • ApeNo1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    183
    ·
    1 year ago

    “I’m excited to share that Tobias “Tobi” Lütke, CEO and founder of Shopify, will join Coinbase’s Board of Directors.”, CEO Coinbase, Brian Armstrong, 31st Jan 2022.

    Hmm. Sounds an awful lot like a side hustle.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve often wondered about this kind of thing. Are board members paid? How much time does it take to be one? It always seems like they have people on the board who are only tangentially connected to the company. Why is that?

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Not terribly much time, by the looks of it. For example, look at the list of boards Disney CEO Bob Iger sits on:

        https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/DIS/company-people

        Publicly traded companies should have their board compensation made public. Iger sits on a lot of philinthropic organizations; I think 501c3’s will have that reported to the IRS. But he probably has a day long meeting for each once or twice a year.

        Edit: here’s Bloomberg Philinthropic’s IRS filling (one of the boards Iger sits on). $10.9k per board member. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/205602483

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        For public companies you get elected by the share holders. If you own enough stock you can pretty much elect yourself. But otherwise it’s a game of trading favors… cause a lot of stock is owned by large stock funds and what not, so you have sort of power brokers deciding on a large quantity of votes that they don’t really own…

  • Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    132
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    What an employee does in their private time is none of a company’s business. They can fuck off tbh.

    • RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      *Unless the employee is competing directly with the company

      (I originally read into nonexistent context from the headline and am dum-dum.)

      • Cheers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fuck that noise.

        In tech, my brain is my brain. Your employment is a license to use my brain for 8 hours a day. If I choose to get employed elsewhere, I still have my brain and it’s being licensed there too. If you want to license my brain 24/7, then we’re upping the cost significantly and you better fucking put it in the terms.

        • RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah you’re not understanding the hypothetical at all.

          If I hire you to do a job, and outside of working hours for me, you’re actively working against me, you’re fucking fired out of a cannon.

          • Cheers@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thing is it’s never that black and white. Every business does somethings better than it’s competitors, otherwise one of them would have already gone under. It’s people that work at both that brimg both businesses forward.

            Why do you think big tech big tech companies call as soon as you leave another big tech company?

            • RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              We’re talking about working simultaneously for direct competitors. You don’t do that. You get rightfully fired from whichever company you’re stabbing in the back. It’s a conflict of interest, period.

              Freelance or contractors hired only for a specific project does not apply.

            • RojoSanIchiban@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are you daft? Seriously.

              It’s a hypothetical, and it’s describing clear CONFLICT OF INTEREST, not a fucking iamverybadass comment.

              If I started Big Ass data ANALysis and hired you design an analytics suite to sell access to businesses, and it’s way better than direct competitor’s Tiny Data Intelligence Computing’s product, and you start working directly for Tiny DIC coding their product package, that’s a conflict of interest and you WILL be fired. It’s fucking simple.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Thing is I’m all for a company dumping an employee who engages in hate speech, for example, in their spare time. It’s at-will employment so anything goes technically.

      The problem here is that the guy is targeting something totally inappropriate: the concept of personal time itself. He’s saying in thinly coded language that he expects people to be working all the time. He wants to own their spare time. There’s nothing to do about this except for his staff to dump him and his company and quit their jobs. It’s at-will employment so anything goes.

    • LillyPip@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The capitalist mindset is basically slave holding with extra steps. They think they own you, but couch it in corporate-speak, using emotive words like ‘loyalty’ and ‘efficiency’. That way, instead of sounding like the narcissistic leeches they are, the onus is on the employee to not break the bonds of ‘trust’ bestowed upon them by their capitalist overlords.

      I felt this so hard, when I started getting sick, I quit my job proactively rather than inflict the harm my tardiness and less-than-peak performance might do to the company. No severance, no safety net, and now I’m literally destitute after being a top performer in my industry for years. It works.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    122
    ·
    1 year ago

    He should probably get the fuck off Coinbase’s board of directors then.

  • Aidinthel@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Our company is like a professional sports team, except we are definitely not going to pay you like actual professional sports players.” - a guy who makes way too much money

  • sndrtj@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    My employer is the same. I was almost fired for attending a (unpaid!) hackathon during a weekend. A colleague was fired for doing volunteer work in weekends.

    Yes, I’m looking for a new job.

    • normalexit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s so wild. A smart company would be begging their employees to learn how to solve new problems on the weekend for fun. Intellectually curious people are exactly who you want.

      The only way this would make sense would be if you signed an NDA or something that would prevent you from participating in the specific hackathon, because secrets.

      • sndrtj@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        No NDA, completely different sector. Stated reason was the same as in the article: “we need your full undivided attention”, followed by some bullshit that they were “concerned” I would be overworking myself. Maybe they should have reduced the work load at work if they were truly concerned, as I was pulling 60+ hour work weeks at the time.

      • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        My company will actually donate money equivalent to your hours volunteered (albeit at some lower wage of like $10/hr) when volunteering with any one of hundreds of charities and they have an application to submit new charities if yours isn’t listed.

      • Dra@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Come on dude, you know that they regularly will do these jobs within the paid hours of their main employment

  • obelix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can’t stand the normalisation of the term “side hustle” when it’s just a capitalist weasel word for having a second job.

    • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree. A second job is a “second job”.

      A side hustle is something you own.

      I make apps on the side. I have no boss, nobody to report to. Some of them, I’ve made some extra loot.

  • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I worked for as a software engineer for a company that I did interviews for. We were told that “pet projects” were a red flag unless they were a current college student. They showed a lack of commitment to their current employer. Basically, there’s no reason for them to have a side project, they should be working more for their current boss.

    I left that company shortly after.

    • lobut@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      1 year ago

      One of my first companies put a clause in to say that they owned the code you wrote in your spare time. I peaced out too.

      • JDubbleu@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        So glad to live in California where that type of shit is explicitly illegal. Open source software would be so fucked with how much software is produced here.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            California has a lot of laws that stops corps from pulling shit, the corps usually leave it in their employee contracts as a scare tactic though. Non-competes for example are illegal, the reasoning os that most arguements for it are already covered by corporate espionage laws. It also fucks over the worker 9/10.

            • V H@lemmy.stad.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              In large part because at least some portion of California lawmakers knows their history well enough to be aware that all of Silicon Valley is a thing in the first place because people were able to leave and take their ideas with them and start something new.

              A huge portion of the value of Silicon Valley today can still be traced back to when the “Traitorous Eight” left Shockley Semiconductor to form Fairchild in 1957, and build tech based on what they’d learnt at Shockley, with many of them then going on to leave Fairchild and found further new companies. The outcome of that among many others resulted in both Intel and AMD, and the same pattern has repeated many times.

              • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Makes sense, I wasnt actually aware of that. But then again im from the Inland Empire so the goings on of the coastal cities makes me want to lobotomize myself.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s meaningless if you don’t use their equipment to do it. If you make a sandwich, do they own it? A table? A child? A novel? A painting?

      • GreenBottles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        that would never hold up in court I would imagine so long as you aren’t using company property to write the code

        • lobut@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I almost got into legal trouble by them when I left. Their contract also said I couldn’t work within 15 miles around any of their head offices in the world or any of their clients. They had hundreds of clients.

          So I left and I did apply to work for their clients and they told my employer that this was against my contract. The employer laughed and said this isn’t enforceable anywhere. However, when they passed it by their legal department they said that it isn’t worth a legal fight even though it’s easily winnable. Just asked me to wait a year.

        • V H@lemmy.stad.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Depends on jurisdiction. Worth checking before taking any chances. Also worth considering that an employer willing to put that in the contract may well try to fire you and/or sue you if you come up with something valuable and they decide they want it, so even when you’re in the right it’s often not worth working for a company like that.

      • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        One of the companies I worked for put into their employment agreement language that stated they owned all the code I had written before starting work for them. It was the most hilarious overreach I’ve ever seen in an employment agreement - but then companies can put literally anything they want into the agreements, and they aren’t worth shit anyway.

        I told them this was utterly ridiculous and edited the agreement to remove this and some other nonsense before signing it, and they hired me anyway.

        • lobut@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d be lying if I said I knew for sure.

          It was a software consulting place.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you’re an engineer employment contracts generally include clauses to give them anything you invent at home

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          These are typically limited to business relevant intentions (e.g., in theory if you work for shopify you would be able to work on code for rocket powered roller skates but not anything related to commerce – this tends to be the extent of what’s legally enforceable anyways). I wouldn’t accept one that gobbles up any work that I do, too much red tape.

          Staying away from big companies typically makes this all easier, because in the worst case it ends up in court … and the mega corp may make an argument for way too many things and drag out the court to proceedings with a near infinite number of lawyers.

          Alternatively, live somewhere that forbids this stuff (I think California is included in that list).

    • treadful@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they don’t recognize that it’s a stave on burnout and a way to learn and expand one’s skillset, I don’t want to work with them either.

    • Rootiest@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      “I don’t have any side projects so there’s no reason you shouldn’t pay me a living wage”

    • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      We were told that “pet projects” were a red flag unless they were a current college student.

      Damn, I had seven jobs as a programmer over a 23-year period, and every single one I got because of my “side hustle” writing and releasing music composition software.

  • Norgur@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just wanted to add that part of this may be a culture thing. Here in Germany, you are required to get your employers permission to get a second job or the like. Many of you might instinctively find this corporate BS, but in reality it’s mainly worker’s protection. No employee is allowed to work over 60 (I think) hours in a week. To make the companies stick to that, the government will come for them if any worker exceeds this number. Your employer has the responsibility to not let you exceed that, even across multiple jobs. That’s why you have to get permission for side hustles. There are other (not so pro worker) reasons for this, but that would go too far. Suffice to say that Lütke is German and this might be some thing he brought from Germany.

      • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It depends on the societal framework. That would be anti-worker in the U.S. because you’d be sentencing some people to death, since the U.S. doesn’t have guaranteed livable wages or livable safety nets for those out of work. Given the assumption that you can make ends meet, mandating a cap on the hours spent working for someone else’s benefit and missing out on your own life is pro-human.

    • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is there some mechanism that ensures that a person is paid well enough to support themself and possibly a dependent on <= 60 hrs/week? In the US the federal minimum wage, which was last raised 14 years ago, is insufficient for the cost of living in some areas.

      • Norgur@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is a minimum wage that’s not too shabby (not good, make no mistake, but will prevent you from going hungry) and if a person is working but under the existential minimum, the government will basically put them on unemployment benefits and top up their salary to bring them up to said minimum. The system has faults, yes, and most people will do everything on their power to not be dependent on the government for that, but it will keep (cheap) food in the fridge.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, in a lot of ways I feel like this has the same vibe as “CEO believes that children should not be allowed to work”. Perhaps somewhere out there is a kid that would like more money, and so denying them opportunities sounds very anti-freedom - but it would moreover be a flag about something broken in society and their ability to take care of themselves.

    • Wait. If I choose to work multiple jobs and I choose to work 65 hrs a week because (reasons) that’s against the law and it’s somehow the employer’s burden to stop that?

      Edit: I say this as a person who values his time and work life balance. Maybe when I was in my 20s and had more energy then sense of have done that.

      • Norgur@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Exactly, yes. The same goes for working more than 10hrs in a single day.

        Edit: that does not apply to self-employed people. So if you work 90 hrs in your own company, that’s fine.

  • pdxfed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So I heard lots of frustration in comments around the concept but little commentary on the legality of it. Not a lawyer but do have extensive experience in HR and employment law:

    Companies can put anything they want in a policy. That policy may or may not be legal. A policy that is not legal may open up lawsuit opportunities against the employer, but because most violated employees simply complain on message boards on the Internet instead of learning their rights, the policies and violations continue.

    In this case, it has been well established that companies cannot limit your employment opportunities outside of work, unless you have a contract that specifically includes it AND you are provided consideration (payment or something of value in a legal contract) for this concession. You can be legally and simply terminated if you are doing non-company work on a company device, if your performance is not meeting standards, or if there are any conflicts between your employer and your other jobs, hobbies, etc.

    There have been a lot of cases and laws in the last 5 years massively limiting the scope (because employers will always push any advantage as far as they can until they are regulated, legislated or outlawed) of “non-compete” clauses in job offers and policies. 10 years ago every employer was throwing these into employment contracts, some employees called them on their bullshit and now you don’t see them as often–but there are definitely still companies (especially small or new) who don’t have anyone who knows what is legal in this area and just make shit up. The only real holding power a non-compete has is if you have mission-critical information or trade secrets and again they must then receive consideration/payment for this concession of their ability to earn income elsewhere --and 99.9% of employees outside of C-suite don’t.

    If you’re interested in learning more about employment law, trends, or have questions, check out my new community I created last week “Ask HR”:

    https://lemmy.world/c/ask_hr

    • BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most non-competes I’ve seen in the wild (when I was an HR, as well as in operations) have been pretty specific about the type of baned competing work as well. It’s less often you can’t work for our direct competition if offered a job and more you can’t start a company as direct competition and you can try to steal our employees for X amount of time. It’s rarely (because it likely unenforceable legally) you can’t do any other work.

      • pdxfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes, this makes sense, and again I’ll emphasize anyone can put in a policy “oh you can’t start a competing company” but there is a damn high threshold 99.9% of employees don’t meet for this to be enforceable. It would be enforceable ina situation where you’re very high up with strategic knowledge or information about the company or market that isn’t public and you leave the company to try to capitalize on that information using the information you gained during your time at the company. Most people can agree that would be abuse of the company, but even then it can be challenging to prove in some situations.

        Long of the short, most of these are unenforceable too unless you’re in certain, strategic, leadership or mission critical areas of an org. The smaller the org the more potential you could actually be part of this group but it’s on the employer to prove it, and again, you need to be compensated for it. They want to say you can’t work for or start a competitor for a year? Cool, an enforceable agreement would be they pay you a year’s wages on termination. If you aren’t in that kind of a situation, it’s people making stuff up and hoping to scare the labor market.

    • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I signed a non-compete when starting a new job after researching and finding out it wasn’t enforceable in my state (they’re illegal).

    • iegod@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep. Largely unenforceable in all of Canada, and shopify is Canadian so they should know better.

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      A lot of it depends on where you live and how high up you are in the company too. If you’re a VP or a director, your expectations and legal burdens and considerations are often different from Bob Joe programmer or Larry the phone guy.

      For example, in my province, non-competes were banned a couple years ago. I started work with an employer a year prior to that ban, and they had a stealth non-compete in my contract, but basically the rest of the contract was unenforceable anyways.

      As always, it’s worth learning your rights and seeking legal advice prior to signing any legal agreements like contracts.

      • Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If people have more energy and want to do more work for more money, offer them more money for more work or let them do other work. It’s simple.

    • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Former employee from the layoffs in May 23. In my experience yes. Lütkes words here are insane as are many of the other recent headlines from the company, but I can say that the severance packages were extremely generous, in my opinion.

      • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just checking. So often you hear deadbeat “managers” and exec types or owners bemoaning the lack of focus in their indentured slaves who are basically so poor they are justified in not paying attention…

        • mutch@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, I think that any employee who can get away with not focusing should. It’s a symptom of bad management. If a given job is such that an employee can complete all their tasks in 20h of work, they should do that and it’s on a manager to know that and give them more tasks. “quiet quitting” is a bullshit nothing term.

  • ABCDE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “how they can disclose side projects” - none of your business, really.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Clearly they need to put even more effort into it because Shopify is god awful.