[briandear]

Exactly. If he doesn't have an open line with the CEO, then I would leave, assuming I have some percentage of options that had vested. I would stick around long enough to vest, then go start your own thing or be a cofounder of something.

I know this situation well. I am employee #1 in a 55 person company and I feel like I might as well be employee 55. But, since I'm remote, I can do my thing, write code, and generally be left alone while getting paid regularly. So being cut out of the loop does have some advantages, especially if you're remote.

[balls187]

> I'm remote, I can do my thing, write code, and generally be left alone while getting paid regularly. So being cut out of the loop does have some advantages, especially if you're remote.

There is the opposite end too. I joined a 100 person company, and some early founding employees were clearly resting and vesting, while I was working nights and weekends to iterate and replace prototype software written by early team members. I was grateful for the company they built, but was curious why they had an entitled approach to their positions.

Software is meritocracy based, not loyalty and tenure.

As employee #1, in what ways do you think you should be treated differently than the other employees?

[_3u10]

Software might be about meritocracy but power is not.

It's not entitlement so much as ownership, they don't feel they are entitled to 5% of the company, they own 5% of the company.

Depending on how much equity they have collectively they might be able to fire the CEO if push comes to shove.