[HN Gopher] Sweden gives employees unpaid time off to be entrepr...
___________________________________________________________________
Sweden gives employees unpaid time off to be entrepreneurs
Author : saadalem
Score : 206 points
Date : 2020-02-15 17:22 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.weforum.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.weforum.org)
| soygul wrote:
| I've used this 3 years ago. I took 6 months off to conduct my own
| business. I also published a "choose your own adventure" game
| during that time:
| https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.soygul.cro...
|
| Amazingly productive days. I must add that you don't get paid for
| the time off. It's just that you don't lose your employment
| status.
| riffraff wrote:
| oh, so it's not paid.
|
| Then I am surprised to say, there is the same thing in Italy
| ("aspettativa per avvio attivita"), but oddly enough, only for
| public sector employees, up to 12 months.
|
| I am not sure many people make use of it, I would guess very,
| very few.
| toyg wrote:
| _Aspettativa_ is subject to conditions, though (i.e. it can
| be denied).
| LegitShady wrote:
| Sabbaticals can be useful be require a lot of planning and
| saving.
| timwaagh wrote:
| does the swedish system have sufficient protections in place so
| that unless your employer thinks the world of you, you won't be
| let go for 'valid reasons' shortly after just to set an
| example?
| sokoloff wrote:
| How would you write the law such that employees couldn't take
| the leave then come back and abuse their employment knowing
| they were protected from being fired for 'valid reasons'?
| wesammikhail wrote:
| <rant>
|
| As a Swedish entrepreneur with 2 exits under my belt and a
| startup in progress, nothing boils my blood more than bullshit
| like this. You want to encourage entrepreneurs? stop making up
| bullshit laws and initiatives that does nothing but fuck us over
| every single day.
|
| Initiatives like this have the exact opposite effect of how
| they're advertised as I've personally experienced first hand. Yet
| somehow all you read about is the outgoing PR of how great this
| place is, when in fact it is a god awful place to conduct
| business in. Heck just living here is becoming a nightmare as of
| late.
|
| It's time to move on from this shit hole to somewhere more
| welcoming. Too bad the US immigration system is a clusterfuck
| regardless of how much money you're willing to throw at it.
|
| </rant>
|
| As requested here is an example: Lets take the "Right to Leave to
| Conduct a Business Operation Act" or "maternity leave". In both
| of cases if you work at an early stage startup and exercise your
| right to take a leave (paid or otherwise), I as an employer have
| to hold on to that position for the duration of the entire leave
| of absence. In the case of maternity leave (~1.5 year of paid
| leave) for instance, I have to hold that position open for you as
| an employee. The last startup I was involved in had a female
| employee that was there for about 6 months and then left work for
| ages before returning, and then "somehow" in an "unplanned
| manner" managed to quit a few weeks after. Zero work experience,
| have to hold the spot open for her, have to hire expensive
| replacement consultants for the duration of the leave which could
| be extended at any point and I am also obligated to provide
| benefits to the workers that come in as temporary replacement at
| a higher cost???? All of that without having the right to fire or
| suspend said person.
|
| Imagine being 1 out of 6 employees and you just vanish, leaving
| behind everything for the company to pick up by having to hire a
| secondary person as a consultant for far more money, giving them
| those same benefits while keeping your position open. Startups
| cannot afford these costs period. Not every startup enjoys the
| millions of SV dollars. Our bootstrapped startup almost went
| under because of employee benefit payments for people who were
| not even showing up to work and we cannot fire by law.
|
| This is beyond sinister and it isnt done to protect employees, it
| is merely done to extract the maximum amount of value from
| companies at all stages so that the state can afford to deliver
| on its never-ending promises of "FREE EVERYTHING".
|
| One of my best friends have had a full salary for the last 5
| years and have not worked a single day. Who pays for that do you
| reckon? and in what world is that fair to the rest of us?
| ampdepolymerase wrote:
| Can you give some examples of their counterproductive policies?
| heavenlyblue wrote:
| Probably the social safety net that takes away so much risk
| of starting your own business...
| alkonaut wrote:
| > Our bootstrapped startup almost went under because of
| employee benefit payments for people who were not even showing
| up to work and we cannot fire by law
|
| That's unfortunate but that's what you need to handle if you
| are an employer. You know the rules when you start a company
| and when you hire someone. There are some exceptions in place
| for smaller employees too.
|
| Competition means that successful companies that survive are
| those that manage to cope with such terrifying things as
| employees going on parental leave.
|
| I'm not sure how you ended up managing a company with several
| employees while seeming surprised by the labor laws in the
| countries where it operates?
| bjornsing wrote:
| > There are some exceptions in place for smaller employees
| too.
|
| No actually you can't fire the small employees either. It's
| quite disturbing really. :P
| alkonaut wrote:
| Not editing that typo because it's funnier with employee...
| wesammikhail wrote:
| > That's unfortunate but that's what you need to handle if
| you are an employer.
|
| 100%, and we managed because I had taken into account all of
| that stuff. But people cant claim that this place is great
| for business while exposing startups to these massive risks.
|
| > I'm not sure how you ended up managing a company with
| several employees while seeming surprised by the labor laws
| in the countries where it operates?
|
| Plenty of these laws came to me personally as a shock because
| it isn't really easy to know all of your obligations ahead of
| time especially when there are thousands of things to take
| into account.
|
| It saddens me to say this but every time I hire someone I
| have to put aside 125% of their salary aside for both
| employer taxes as well as a "rainy day fund". Imagine
| claiming that such a place is business friendly. That's my
| beef, nothing else.
| herbstein wrote:
| > every time I hire someone I have to put aside 125% of
| their salary aside
|
| You can't answer if that is unreasonable unless you compare
| to other countries. As an example, in the US you would have
| to also pay for health insurance. And if the employee were
| to get sick they might still not see a doctor immediately
| because of the premiums, leading to further time off.
| Erlich_Bachman wrote:
| I don't think they wrote they were "surprised" or that they
| didn't handle these laws or the situations caused by them.
| The author just wrote that those laws are very difficult for
| business and are not as "entrepreneur-friendly" as advertised
| by these "Sweden does _____" articles.
| duiker101 wrote:
| it appears some other users have had different experience from
| yours, would you care to elaborate why you feel this way?
| 1123581321 wrote:
| This appears to be the only comment from a Swedish employer
| who had to carefully manage finances.
| swimfar wrote:
| I would be surprised if the majority of the people who
| downvoted the comment have actually lived in Sweden. It's
| more likely it was because the comment wasn't (initially)
| specific, or because it didn't match the universally positive
| image they have of Sweden.
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| I live in Sweden and I don't have a "universally positive
| image" of it -- but I've also heard complaints about the
| burden on employers from [insert any country here]'s
| policies before, so it's not a very interesting comment to
| me.
| herbstein wrote:
| > One of my best friends have had a full salary for the last 5
| years and have not worked a single day. Who pays for that do
| you reckon? and in what world is that fair to the rest of us?
|
| I somehow doubt this is the full story. Would you mind going
| into a bit more detail?
| wesammikhail wrote:
| She had several kids in a row by timing their birth perfectly
| so that she never has to work. And obviously, for each kid
| the parents get parental leave. Not that hard and far too
| common of a thing to do here.
| jacobr wrote:
| Parental leave pay is 79% or something, not "full salary"
| wesammikhail wrote:
| it's actually 80%
|
| https://www.forsakringskassan.se/privatpers/foralder/nar_
| bar...
|
| But what's your point? it could be one cent on the
| dollar, that does not change a thing for me as a business
| owner though. It isnt the money that is the primary
| problem even though it is a problem.
| jacobr wrote:
| I know first hand small employers that had employees go
| on parental leave, hired replacements, and then without
| too much hassle could keep the replacements and fire the
| one on leave, because there are many exceptions you can
| do as a small employer. So I find your entire rant
| confusing and not matching my experience.
|
| I've been on parental leave myself and my small employer
| hired a replacement, and by the time I got back we were
| both needed because they ran a successful and expanding
| business.
| Gwypaas wrote:
| And paid by the state, not the company in question. Some
| companies have agreements to cover the difference to your
| regular salary and similar but that's only goodwill.
| seppin wrote:
| That's not the same as "full salary no work" but ok. It
| sounds like she is taking care of the family full time.
| CarelessExpert wrote:
| If you provided a reasoned critique with your rant this would
| be a worthwhile comment. Absent that it simply violates HN
| commenting guidelines.
| dgellow wrote:
| Why do you think it's against guidelines? The OP comment
| started a very interesting thread IMHO. Not everything has to
| be a "reasoned critique", sharing personal feelings about a
| situation can be a great way to get to a constructive
| discussion.
| [deleted]
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| >Too bad the US immigration system is a clusterfuck regardless
| of how much money you're willing to throw at it.
|
| There are countries in the world other than the United States
| and Sweden. Also why should any country have an obligation to
| open their doors just because you're willing to throw money at
| them?
|
| That aside, one of my Canadian friends spent a year in Chile
| creating a startup because the Chilean government paid a good
| chunk of his living expenses in an effort to bootstrap their
| tech entrepreneur scene. There are many interesting options
| around the world of you seek them out.
| wesammikhail wrote:
| > There are countries in the world other than the United
| States and Sweden. Also why should any country have an
| obligation to open their doors just because you're willing to
| throw money at them?
|
| Yea not none is really pro business the same way as the US is
| unfortunately. Also the US offers multiple states with
| multiple jurisdictions so you can decide for yourself what
| level of regulation you are willing to tolerate and move
| accordingly. That's like 50 countries in 1 :D
|
| Also, no one has to open up their doors. I am just personally
| disappointed because I want to work hard and prosper in a
| place that is pro-business that speaks English. I have
| considered moving to Asia for a long time but I dont think
| that I'd enjoy living there.
|
| > That aside, one of my Canadian friends spent a year in
| Chile creating a startup because the Chilean government paid
| a good chunk of his living expenses in an effort to bootstrap
| their tech entrepreneur scene. There are many interesting
| options around the world of you seek them out.
|
| I tried South America for a while. It didnt work for me as I
| dont speak the language and English isnt very dominant at
| times. So I'd need a year or two to learn the language before
| I can even get started in a place like that.
| thenewnewguy wrote:
| So, just to be clear, these are your complaints:
|
| - You couldn't fire somebody who went on maternity leave
|
| - You had to provide benefits to your employees, even temporary
| ones
|
| Seems like the laws are working to protect employees as
| intended to me.
| herbstein wrote:
| Yeah, this really just made my positive thoughts on the law
| even stronger. Thanks for the clear breakdown :)
| wesammikhail wrote:
| I love this reply because it showcases how people hear so
| selectively and ignore facts. I guess relying on fiction is
| much easier.
|
| Anyhow, I agree. Seems like the laws are actually working as
| intended as I have started to outsource to Asia. Your laws
| did wonders to protect the workers which they were "intended
| to help". Man this is way to fucking hilarious and sad at the
| same time.
| wanderer2323 wrote:
| Your <rant> is basically about you not having (or not
| willing to budget) enough money to cover the extra risk
| that the Sweden's work laws impose on your startup. When
| you think about it like this, the laws and your response to
| them work exactly as intended.
|
| From Sweden's point of view, the positions you have
| outsourced will be covered by a company which is willing to
| pay the price of access to the labor market in Sweden.
| Which is not unlike a tax.
|
| Did you budget for Sweden's taxes in your startup? Not
| doing that and then posting a <rant> that you suddenly have
| to pay taxes and that the existence of the tax code forces
| you to outsource to Asia would be quite similar to your
| post here.
| avip wrote:
| They don't, because he will just straight-out never hire
| a woman again (though he cannot say that).
| heartbeats wrote:
| They're also the reason why Sweden has an utter joke of a
| tech industry while the United States are world-leading
| within the field.
| ptr wrote:
| Is Sweden's tech industry an utter joke, though? Stockholm
| and Sweden rank very high, both when it comes to old-style
| tech companies (Ericsson, etc) and startups. https://www.th
| eatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/09/sweden-...
| "Stockholm produces the second-highest number of billion-
| dollar tech companies per capita, after Silicon Valley"
|
| Also, tech salaries are quite high -- as a consultant, you
| make more than in London at least.
| [deleted]
| heartbeats wrote:
| According to my friends there, a programmer in Sweden
| makes SEK 30k - 40k a month, or $37-49k. Europe is a low-
| cost outsourcing centre which occasionally spits out
| bright people who run startups, just like China or India
| or Vietnam.
| [deleted]
| jacobush wrote:
| I have toyed with the idea of working in the US, and I'd
| have to make about two times the salary in the US to have
| the same quality of living as in Sweden. Three to four
| times the salary to have access to the same kind of
| medical care. Maybe.
|
| Perfectly doable of course, for someone into tech. But
| just to put things into perspective.
| verttii wrote:
| I had no idea the IT consultant salaries were higher in
| Stockholm compared to London. What kind of rates would an
| IT consultant be expected to pull in Sweden?
| ptr wrote:
| Assignments that are accessible by "anyone" at the
| consultant brokers are often listed around 750-950
| SEK/hour, which means ~470 to ~600 GBP/day if you work 8
| hours per day -- clients usually don't mind you working
| more though. Tax isn't that different last time I
| checked, but CoL is of course much higher in London.
| wesammikhail wrote:
| you are forgetting however that the 750-950 SEK/h
| includes self-employment taxes (arbetsgivaravgifter) of
| ~30% + 30% income tax. That's before all other taxes and
| fees.
|
| This was essentially the whole point of my original post
| about consultants. But people dont get this. After all
| taxes are paid, you get something like 375-475sek/h if
| even that as this is the above average level of salary.
|
| Compared to when I lived and worked in London, this is a
| joke. That's before factoring in cost of living relative
| to income. You live a much better life in London than you
| do in Sthlm for instance so I am not sure where you got
| that last part from. Especially if you consider how
| massively fucked the Krona is right now
| ptr wrote:
| I'm quite aware of the taxes involved -- as I said, I've
| been working as a consultant for some time now. What you
| might be forgetting is that, with a company, you can plan
| your taxes better. Take out a minimal salary and put
| everything in an ISK and you don't have to pay any
| capital gains tax, for example.
|
| You're also going to pay taxes being self-employed in the
| UK, and whether you prefer London over Stockholm is
| subjective; what you need to consider is the cost of real
| estate mainly vs statistical incomes, rather than
| anecdotes.
|
| Regarding how "massively fucked" the Krona is, check this
| chart: https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=SEK
| &view=5Y
| bnastic wrote:
| Contracting in London is as good as dead come April
| wesammikhail wrote:
| A first year student of some community college in the US
| is twice as good as the average developer here.
|
| You think I am talking shit? well... I studied in the US
| and worked as a program director for a technical
| University based in Stockholm whose sole job was to
| output developers into the market in line with what all
| the hundreds of CTOs that I interviewed required.
|
| Trust me when I say this, that article you linked to is
| pure PR bullshit. You can find the same article written
| about Paris, London, Berlin, etc. It's all PR bullshit
| that people spin in order to attract foreign capital.
|
| > Also, tech salaries are quite high -- as a consultant,
| you make more than in London at least.
|
| at some point you ought to realize that what you're
| saying is bullshit, and this sentence should have tipped
| you off to the fact that you're talking out of your ass.
| ptr wrote:
| I don't understand your anger, but it's interesting that
| you've got such a completely different experience of the
| situation. FWIW, I've also studied in the US, and I've
| hired developers in Stockholm. There are of course both
| good and bad developers, but if you pay more, you tend to
| get better ones.
|
| The article might or might not be bullshit, but there's a
| lot of highly valued tech companies per capita in Sweden,
| and I know for sure the consultant prices aren't bullshit
| as I've worked for quite a long time as just that. I'm
| usually not the kind of person that "talks out of my
| ass".
| lawn wrote:
| > A first year student of some community college in the
| US is twice as good as the average developer here.
|
| I work closely with developers from both the US and
| Sweden, and this hasn't been my experience at all. If
| anything it's been the reverse.
|
| What I can say though is that developers from Asian
| countries leave a lot to be desired. Which is funny as
| you've outsourced jobs to Vietnam.
|
| At some point you ought to realize that what you're
| saying is bullshit too.
| wesammikhail wrote:
| > At some point you ought to realize that what you're
| saying is bullshit too.
|
| My previous startup was a tech one. The current one that
| is in Vietnam is for production and manufacturing of
| physical goods. The parts I moved to Vietnam are the
| manufacturing parts and the parts that moved to Eastern
| Europe are the tech parts where you can a lot more value
| for much less.
|
| So no I am not talking shit, you just dont know enough
| about my specific case to judge it, yet somehow you have
| managed to do just that.
| ptx wrote:
| > a technical University based in Stockholm
|
| The only technical university in Stockholm is KTH, I
| believe - is that what you're talking about?
|
| > whose sole job was to output developers into the market
| in line with what all the hundreds of CTOs that I
| interviewed required
|
| That's not how a university's role is usually seen.
| heartbeats wrote:
| So what is the point then? To spit out future academic
| researchers who write papers read by other academic
| researchers on postmodern literature?
|
| Academia is a fraud, but to the extent that it produces
| useful employees it is at least socially justifiable.
| sansnomme wrote:
| It is really rich that those on HN who are paid 6 to 7
| figures would seat on their high horse and disparage OP for
| complaining about labour law arbitrage from the perspective
| of an Nordic entrepreneur and yet would be the first to throw
| a fit if their jobs get shipped or outsourced to Mexico or
| some other emerging economy.
| conanbatt wrote:
| Ask them what they think about Immigration of software
| engineers to top it off!
| wesammikhail wrote:
| Funny enough, I just outsourced a bunch to Vietnam and am
| in the process of moving the rest to eastern Europe. The
| only part that will remain here is the sales division
| because that needs to be here.
|
| So yea, looks like the laws are working as intended...
| amirite?
| petre wrote:
| Where in Eastern Europe are you moving?
|
| I wonder if Estonia is okay for startups?
|
| In my city the IT sector unemployment is around zero
| point something figures, meaning it's quite difficult to
| find new qualified workers. I've even heard about cases
| of French and Belgian citizens moving to Eastern Europe
| to work in IT. It sounds crazy.
| hogFeast wrote:
| Oh boy, bad time to being saying this. All of the Americans on
| here have been hearing that Sweden is just better...it is so
| easy, "free" healthcare, "free" everything...build a wall, make
| Goldman Sachs pay for it.
|
| The reality is somewhere in the middle. Generally in Northern
| Europe, excluding UK, you have a history of huge (monopolistic)
| companies that dominate the economy. So you end up with labour
| policies that reflect that...which is kind of terrible for the
| way the world is going. If you could take the job market
| flexibility and social policy without the freeloading, that
| would be something...I am not sure anyone has done this. And
| btw, this model would bring the US to its knees. It will be
| interesting to watch if it occurs...but I also hope it doens't.
| alkonaut wrote:
| It's very much true that Sweden's labor laws are deeply
| influenced by a heritage of large industries like Ericsson,
| Volvo, SKF and the like. They work well when employers are
| large, employments are long.
|
| It's equally true that these laws may not create a great
| climate for small tech startups.
|
| I don't think there is an easy answer to how to liberalize
| the labor market without it damaging large groups of blue
| collar workers (which would make it politically impossible).
| Denmark has an interesting model where employment security is
| weaker but in return the safety net is better. I think this
| is where Sweden could be headed as well.
| INTPenis wrote:
| You're coming off as a disgruntled employer. Sweden is trying
| to make it better for employees. Which most people like. You're
| in the minority.
|
| It sounds like you're one of those people who'd prefer smaller
| government too. Just like in the US.
|
| I'm sorry but I'm just a bit shocked because I didn't think
| Swedes had lost their socialist spirit so much. Clearly you're
| a product of the Bildt era.
|
| That freedom of choice he advocated in health care for example
| has already backfired multiple times where the end
| user/consumer has suffered.
|
| Your vision of Sweden would only benefit yourself and your own
| kind, business owners and employers, in the long run.
| wesammikhail wrote:
| >You're coming off as a disgruntled employer. Sweden is
| trying to make it better for employees.
|
| Bullshit. It's a way to purchase votes and generate tax $$
| plain and simple. Workers lives are not bettered by crippling
| startups. That's the EXACT opposite of what is true. You want
| more business rather than less so the worker have more
| choices to pick from and there is more competition for the
| labor of said worker which would enable him to get an even
| better life and living standard.
|
| > I'm sorry but I'm just a bit shocked because I didn't think
| Swedes had lost their socialist spirit so much.
|
| The fact that you're shocked tells me all I need to know
| about how well this PR game has been played. Sweden isn't
| "socialist". How many times do we need to repeat that? Just
| because a company has a state run safety net that does not
| mean that it is a socialist country. By that definition,
| every country is a socialist country. Your definition of
| socialism is pretty fucked. Read about the 90s and the
| restructuring of the Swedish economy post the Housing crisis
| for Christ sake. It's like facts seem to magically get
| altered just because Bernie said so.
|
| > Clearly you're a product of the Bildt era.
|
| I wonder how many calories you burn a day by jumping into
| conclusions... and no I am not. Not even close. I am merely
| an observer of two contradicting messages that are being put
| on display: 1) Sweden is one of the best places for startups,
| and 2) startups are burdened unlike any other country I have
| been to or read about. I cant personally square that circle
| and pointing that out does not make me a "product of Bildt"
| era, as if that actually means anything...
|
| > That freedom of choice he advocated in health care for
| example has already backfired multiple times where the end
| user/consumer has suffered.
|
| 1. Dafuq does that have to do with anything?
|
| 2. ah I see, you categorized me as a "Bildt follower" just so
| you can assassinate me by association. Noice! Well played
| but... naah try again. That shit doesn't fly here.
|
| 3. if "freedom of choice" backfires for some reason, then
| freedom ought to be suspended in favor of centrally planned
| alternatives? give me a break, not even real socialist
| doctors (not your kind of quasi-socialist) would accept that
| premise.
|
| 4. You want to talk about consumer suffering? Open up the
| USD/SEK or EUR/SEK chart and see what the currently lovely
| policies have done to the consumer.
|
| >Your vision of Sweden would only benefit yourself and your
| own kind, business owners and employers, in the long run.
|
| Sadly enough, That's the exact opposite of what I am trying
| to achieve because if we keep on going the way we currently
| are, Sweden will be a graveyard a few decades from now. A
| businessman ALWAYS wants a strong and rich consumer so that
| he in turn can make money off of said consumer. My goal is to
| enrich the consumers of society not reduce their wealth. But
| then again, I can't expect logic to come easy to a sophist.
| dgellow wrote:
| Your points aren't helped by personal attacks though ...
| heartbeats wrote:
| Why didn't you just structure your company differently?
|
| Have a main company that does stuff, which hires subcontractor
| subsidiaries. They have one employee each.
|
| Then, when she took maternal leave, you could just have
| liquidated the subcontractor - problem solved.
| alkonaut wrote:
| Those would be pretty useless labor laws if you could
| circumvent them so easily.
|
| The company hiring the subcontractor would run a high risk of
| being classified as the employer despite the intermediate
| company.
| heartbeats wrote:
| Then you bring in a few extra layers based in the
| Seychelles or whatever. This is an engineering problem,
| stop pretending it isn't.
| alkonaut wrote:
| Either this isn't happening because people wouldn't
| accept that form of employment, or it isn't happening
| because it's too cumbersome or the cost of it cancels the
| gain. Or it isn't happening because the laws are
| successful in preventing it. Who knows - either way it's
| not happening.
| heartbeats wrote:
| Or it's not happening because people are too stupid to
| see the potential.
| ohmaigad wrote:
| What exactly do you gain? The leave pay is paid by the
| government and you still need a new employee.
| xorcist wrote:
| Maybe for the most unskilled labor. Try to hire qualified
| professionals with those conditions and see how that
| goes.
| herbstein wrote:
| Because shit like that is generally against the law in
| countries that care about workers rights. It's utterly
| transparent and anyone can see through it. It's the same
| reasons Uber aren't allowed in many European countries - at
| least not in the way they are in the US. You can't just claim
| that the people that are effectively your employees are
| simply contractors.
| heartbeats wrote:
| How does this violate the law? Could you point me to any
| European country with laws prohibiting this?
|
| > You can't just claim that the people that are effectively
| your employees are simply contractors.
|
| No, they are the employees of my subsidiary. They are
| entitled to all of the protections of labour law, including
| all the maternity leave and all that. If the subsidiary
| goes out of business, too bad. That's what they're for.
| scbrg wrote:
| If this actually was a functioning way of handling the
| situation, every single company would be structured this
| way. Worker protection laws are a _huge_ pain for
| employers in Sweden, so they wouldn 't hesitate a second
| if they could work around them through such a loophole.
|
| Calling for us to point to a certain paragraph of a
| certain law is not really fair, because we're generally
| not lawyers here. Can you instead explain why all
| companies are not structured the way you suggest. Because
| all managers are idiots, or because they've realized that
| it's not legally sound?
| briandear wrote:
| When an Uber driver also drives for Lyft -- even within the
| same hour, isn't that the very definition of independent
| contractor?
| seppin wrote:
| It's because Uber can't guarantee supply of rides.
| seivan wrote:
| Thank you.
| just_a_fella wrote:
| > "...Stockholm, has become Europe's start-up capital, second
| only to California's Silicon Valley for the number of unicorns
| (billion-dollar tech companies) that it produces per capita."
|
| I can't find any evidence for this. According to wiki[1]:
| "Unicorns are concentrated in a few countries/regions: China
| (125), United States (121), India (27), South Korea (11), UK
| (10), Israel (7), Sweden (5), Indonesia (5), France, Hong Kong
| (3), Portugal (3), Switzerland (3), Australia (2),Estonia (2),
| Belgium (2), Canada (2), Germany (2), Singapore (4), Ukraine (2),
| and thirteen other countries (1 each)."
|
| Smells like propaganda to help the stagnating innovation in
| europe.
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unicorn_startup_compan...
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| So this interested me - and am quite astonished by the outcome
|
| If I use unicorns (parent post) per millions of population
| (figures from
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_populatio...
| - rounded up to nearest million .5 up - thus Estonia (1.3M has
| 1M in this calc, giving it 2 unicorns per Million people!))
|
| Estonia 2.00
|
| Israel 0.78
|
| Singapore 0.67
|
| Sweden 0.50
|
| HK 0.43
|
| USA 0.37
|
| Portugal 0.30
|
| SKorea 0.22
|
| Belgium 0.17
|
| UK 0.15
|
| China 0.08
|
| Australia 0.08
|
| Canada 0.05
|
| France 0.05
|
| Ukraine 0.05
|
| Germany 0.02
|
| India 0.02
|
| Indonesia 0.02
|
| Sweden is forth in the list, with Estonia and Portugal as real
| surprises. Guess the effect of just one Unicorn / outlier is
| high but even so ... SV is clearly not the only way.
| myle wrote:
| The keyword here is per capita.
| wesammikhail wrote:
| And if it wasn't per capita, they'd find some other way to
| slice the data. This is simply a PR campaign to attract
| foreign investment into a country that it latching onto a
| piece of stat in an ocean of bad indicators.
| belorn wrote:
| China has 1.5 billion people. Sweden has 10 millions. If
| China would have numerically less start up companies than
| Sweden than something would be serious wrong in both
| countries.
| seppin wrote:
| Sweden is also the largest per capita arms dealer in the
| world.
| dgellow wrote:
| > Smells like propaganda to help the stagnating innovation in
| europe.
|
| First time I see that perspective. Could you develop, and
| explain why you think the World Economic Forum would do
| something like this?
| StartupTree wrote:
| Sure, but can you afford my consulting fees?
| jariel wrote:
| The WEF is a kind of a 'personally politicized' entity I
| don't mean that in a bad way. It's not some official
| government thing working on economically secular issues. It
| was founded by a dude interested in economic advancement and
| wellbeing of 'the world'. But it's made of people with
| personalities, agendas - and I don't mean cynically or
| negative, it's just part of the NGO landscape. It's a very
| European centric and is naturally going to be supportive of
| developing and promoting 'innovation' in the broadest sense
| for its constituents and relations.
|
| Someone in the group may have had a meeting with someone from
| the city of Stockholm either public or private, which gave
| them the impetus or idea to talk about how they've been
| successful.
|
| The author of the post, 'Sean Fleming' is a journalist from
| the UK with a background in PR, more than likely he's hired
| to 'write stuff' that is favourable to the WEF, and so this
| seems like a neat thing to talk about.
|
| Basically, it's PR. There's nothing wrong with it, but that's
| what it is.
|
| I'm doubtful that anyone in such a position is paid remotely
| enough to go really in-depth and to discover the underlying
| correlational factors such as the effect of _very_ high
| taxes, or the real productive measures of '6 months off'.
|
| It's just a little note from the WEF on how Sweden might
| possibly have some interesting differentiating thing.
| dgellow wrote:
| For sure the article feels like PR. I was asking especially
| about the part of the comment regarding "the WEF pushing
| for stagnation in Europe" (paraphrasing), that's the part
| that sounds counter intuitive to me.
| JoachimS wrote:
| Skype, Minecraft, Bambora, Spotify, DICE, Fingerint Cards,
| Zenuity, Recorded Future, Spotfire, SoundCloud, KRY, Voi. Just
| to name a few.
| jogundas wrote:
| Wiki says "Skype was founded in 2003 by Niklas Zennstrom,
| from Sweden, and Janus Friis, from Denmark.[26] The Skype
| software was created by Estonians Ahti Heinla, Priit
| Kasesalu, and Jaan Tallinn. The first public beta version was
| released on 29 August 2003."
| mrkeen wrote:
| Klarna
| JoachimS wrote:
| Yes, good one. Yubico is another HN folks should recognize.
| And then there are tons of game studios doing AAA games.
| Numerous network equipment vendors. And of course Erlang.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Skype ist Estonian, no?
| varjag wrote:
| Estonia is where the work was outsourced to initially.
| seppin wrote:
| Most of those are no where near billion dollar companies, and
| aren't based in Sweden either.
| strictfp wrote:
| King, Starbreeze, Paradox, Avalanche
| digitalixus wrote:
| Funny that you say that because it's precisely what I've
| noticed and been saying, having moved to Europe because of all
| the great stuff mentioned on the internet and realizing it's
| not as great as people would have you believe.
|
| What's weird is every time I've brought it up, either my
| comment gets buried or a bunch of excuse makers jump in and say
| "it's not like that, it's just you..." Not until very recently
| have I noticed other people talking about the lovely EU
| propaganda and not getting buried.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Germany has less unicorns than Portugal?! How come? I thought
| being Europe's strongest economy would help.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| Germany's economy is characterised by decentralisation and
| small and middle-sized family business, the so called
| _Mittelstand_. Germany is home to a significant portion of
| the world 's 'hidden champions'[1], which as the name
| suggests, largely fly under the radar of the consumer
| focussed start up sector.
|
| Startups mostly profit from access to homogenous large
| consumer markets and extreme clusters. Neither has ever been
| the goal of German economic development, largely because it's
| incompatible with the sort of cultural values German's
| consider important.
|
| [1] https://hbr.org/1992/03/lessons-from-germanys-midsize-
| giants
| hans1729 wrote:
| >I thought being Europe's strongest economy would help.
|
| I don't think that reducing a country or an econonomy to a
| single metric (here: gdp, I guess?) is the right approach; we
| are looking at very complicated systems here. One thing that
| makes Germany unique is its Mittelstand-phenomena [0].
|
| Historically, innovation isn't driven by wealth, but by
| pressure, see: times of war, or the US' "make it big or
| die"-mentality.
|
| Germans are very well off: cabs in every village are high-end
| mercedes models (suggesting that the entire society is rich),
| and social security is simply unmatched globally (afaik, no
| other country pays you 400eur+rent until you find a job, no
| matter how many years it takes).
|
| Growing up in this environment, I never felt incentivized to
| come up with ways to become super-rich (which is the idea
| behind being an entrepeneur, isn't it?). Theres just no point
| to that hustle if you can live a really decent life working a
| normal job.
|
| Sure, there is some class struggle (and there always was),
| but generally speaking, people just don't _need_ to "make
| it" on their own - opposed to the US, where status is
| everything)
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelstand
| odiroot wrote:
| Strong but super conservative, highly taxed and with bad
| Internet infrastructure.
| andersonmvd wrote:
| The wiki list is outdated. Brazil for example has at least 9
| https://techcrunch.com/unicorn-leaderboard/ (filter by country)
| brown9-2 wrote:
| The list of counts you're quoting has companies removed when
| they go public.
| ourcat wrote:
| How does this work when it comes to any intellectual property you
| create, while still bound by an employment contract which can
| often stipulate a company's ownership of ALL of your creations
| while working for them.
|
| (Maybe not being paid is a factor?)
| herbstein wrote:
| > which can often stipulate a company's ownership of ALL of
| your creations while working for them
|
| Such laws are generally not lawful in Europe. It certainly
| isn't here in Denmark, and I imagine it's the same in Sweden
| ourcat wrote:
| Interesting.
|
| I've had to insist on that clause being removed at a couple
| of places I've worked. As long as anything I build in my
| spare time (which I like to do a lot) isn't competitive.
| strictfp wrote:
| I'm from Sweden and I've consulted a lawyer regarding a
| similar clause in my employment contract.
|
| That firm suggested that it was enforcable, and more so the
| closer your "invention" is to the business of your
| employee.
|
| This, however, does not hold if your invention is
| patentable, since patentable inventions have special
| protection in Swedish law.
|
| This is ironically not applicable to software, since we
| don't have software patents.
| badrabbit wrote:
| I heard finding housing in stockholm is very hard. How do
| policies like this play in practice? Is it like how some US
| states pay you to move there except it's really nowhere near
| enough to be considered a livable income?
| strictfp wrote:
| Swede here. We have a largely regulated rental market
| throughout the country, stupid as it is. In my view, this is an
| old remain from bygone times, but for some reason it is
| romanticised by many.
|
| With this system you have to stand in line for at least 20
| years to get a decent rental apartment in inner-city Stockholm.
| As you can probably guess, this system doesn't exactly
| encourage free movement. And it's created a huge black market,
| plus that it's pushing everyone into buying.
| SiempreViernes wrote:
| Bah, stick to the truth: 20 years is for the decent but super
| cheap apartments, if you pay "market rates" you can get
| something from the private owners within months.
| xnyan wrote:
| By "you" I think he means most swedes. I don't know
| anything about the Stockholm rent market, are rents cost
| accessible to the average person or is a top-teir-income
| zone?
| strictfp wrote:
| I don't think that's true. The private renters also have to
| abide to the regulated market prices, so you cannot buy
| your way to a rental apartment. Not unless the renter is
| breaking the law, that is.
|
| I admit that I pulled the 20 years stats out of a hat. I
| quickly looked for some stats, and this page suggests
| around 10 years average for the private market, and 13
| years for the communal:
| https://www.stockholmdirekt.se/nyheter/sa-lange-maste-du-
| koa...
| gdsdfe wrote:
| A side question : I keep hearing good things about Sweden, I'm
| wondering how welcoming is it to immigrants?
| bracobama wrote:
| Post-2015 Sweden is quite difficult to immigrate to if you
| aren't doing it via a skilled employment visa. The
| requirements, along with the amount of time it takes to get
| simple things working properly (like a social security number
| and a bank account) once you do get here are cumbersome. Plus
| housing is an issue, you will find that it is quite a struggle
| to get a permanent rental contract in the major cities like
| Stockholm and Malmo. The language is also quite difficult for
| us English speakers to learn because everyone loves to practice
| their English with you so even when you attempt to speak
| Swedish they recognise you are an English speaker and change
| languages.
| willvarfar wrote:
| Very.
|
| You are asking on HN, so you are bound to be the kind of person
| who can go to Sweden, find work or continue to work remotely
| for your present employer or whatever, and settle into things
| and be welcomed.
|
| The office language is often English, everyone speaks excellent
| English and everyone is happy to speak it. I know many
| immigrants in the IT sector who have picked up only the most
| basic Swedish despite years of living there; you can get by by
| just talking to absolutely everyone in English.
|
| At least half of the programmers at offices I've seen are
| immigrants. They have a variety of reasons for going to Sweden,
| which usually seem to start with uni eg from the classic "met
| my wife-to-be when she was an exchange student" to "studied
| here, never went home" etc.
|
| Now there's an entirely different experience for the unskilled
| and refugees, but although there is an veiled racist vocal
| right wing, the real people, even those who live near
| flyktingboende, seem compassionate.
| seppin wrote:
| There's a difference between tolerance and acceptance. People
| are very nice and tolerant of foreigners, but they will
| always be the "other" in society.
|
| This is btw the case for immigrants in most places in the
| world, especially Asia. But because Sweden especially gets
| such a high reputation for being welcoming, I feel the need
| to contextualize.
| lawn wrote:
| It may or may not be true, but this hasn't matched my
| expectation as a Swede. But it may also depend on where in
| Sweden you are.
| seppin wrote:
| Are you an immigrant to Sweden? If not, this is your
| impression of how it is, not how it might actually be.
| INTPenis wrote:
| This applies to anyone, whether you're syrian or american;
| learn the language and find a job. Those are key to getting
| citizenship.
|
| A friend moved here from the states for a job, so he had the
| job ready before he came. He learned enough swedish to speak it
| daily within 2 years. No problem getting citizenship.
| agumonkey wrote:
| there were recent reports that some tensions were growing
| recently, in the past it was said that there was near zero
| issues. Take time to investigate
| Proziam wrote:
| I used to live in Umea, so I can tell you from first-hand
| experience (as an American). It wasn't easy. Everything people
| say about America's immigration policy being "racist" are _also
| true_ about Sweden - with exemptions only for those seeking
| asylum. The Nordic countries in general actually _aren 't_ that
| easy to immigrate to. In my case, I basically had to prove a
| level of wealth that for 99% of the population of the world
| wouldn't be possible. (It was actually recommended to me to BUY
| a house _before_ I was allowed to permanently move!)
|
| By comparison, moving to Germany was a _breeze_ and I still
| have a valid German green card to this day. In retrospect, this
| is almost obviously true when you compare the demographics of
| both countries. Sweden is more homogenous than Germany _by far_
| despite offering social benefits that are substantially more
| valuable.
| RantyDave wrote:
| Isn't unpaid time off called "quitting"?
| acd wrote:
| I think we should also start with 6 hours work days or 4 days 8
| hours. It will free up time to try new ideas and spend more time
| with family and loved ones. 6-7 weeks of vacation would also be
| something to try. Ie optimizing for life quality.
| rb808 wrote:
| 6 hours days would be great then I can work two jobs.
| cvik wrote:
| >I think we should also start with 6 hours work days or 4 days
| 8 hours.
|
| I hope you are not alluding that Sweden has 6 hour work days?
| That is not true. It has 8 hours, like most other countries.
| petre wrote:
| Only France has a 35 hour work week. 35 or 40, not much of a
| difference but nevertheless important since you can have a
| decent lunch break and still spend meaningful time with your
| kids if we account for commuting etc.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/35-hour_workweek
| gherkinnn wrote:
| I work 8h, 4 days per week.
|
| You learn to make meetings more effective, group menial tasks
| in to blocks and make time for interesting things, and become
| better at prioritising.
|
| And damn do I _feel_ productive when working on hard technical
| problems. Some things just require a fresh mind.
| xg15 wrote:
| I remember reading a discussion about this in a german online
| newspaper a while ago. (In light of an initiative of the
| Finnish cabinet exploring 6 hour workdays, I believe).
|
| When reading the comments, I expected people to dismiss the
| idea as unrealistic or naive but to agree with the spirit and
| to share the general goal of reducing worktime.
|
| I was not expecting panic and outrage.
|
| It was a minority (and certainly skewed by the groups of people
| who post online in the first place), but a notable number of
| commenters were violently opposed the idea, not out of
| economical concerns, but because they believed the end goal of
| _having more free time_ itself was highly problematic - that it
| would encourage an unhealthy lifestyle, erode morals, would
| pose a danger to social order, etc etc.
|
| It was a sobering read and a reminder that status-quo bias is
| still very much a thing.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| If I'm not allowed to spend my time working, it is not free
| time!
|
| In a free society, work hours is an agreement between
| consenting adults. If you want to work part time, that option
| is widely available. But why force your preferences on the
| rest of us?
| SolaceQuantum wrote:
| Wait I'm confused, is this country requiring people take
| time off to become entrepreneurs?
| JoachimS wrote:
| Nope. It is a right, not an obligation. Your employer
| can't stop you if your want to test your wings. Though
| this has actually been around in some form for quite a
| few years.
|
| I started my first company in 2001 by getting 6 months
| off from Ericsson. I wanted to during that time, Ericsson
| would have to allow me to come back and continue as an
| employee. Quit permamently after three months. Now I'm
| happily running my fifth startup.
| djrobstep wrote:
| People don't freely choose to work in a vacuum - they are
| coerced into it (through property law). I work to avoid
| homelessness and starvation, and so do most people.
|
| If I stop working, eventually somebody will turn up at my
| door and throw me out onto the street.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| > _I work to avoid homelessness and starvation, and so do
| most people._
|
| Of course. But the fact that we have biological needs is
| not coercion.
| djrobstep wrote:
| "biological need" is a strange way to describe being
| violently attacked in your place of shelter for working
| insufficient hours for the capitalist class
| Matumio wrote:
| No, but good luck trying to burn some piece of forest to
| get your piece of earth for your farm. You cannot justify
| the existing order with basic human needs. In some places
| you even have to pay for access to water.
| conanbatt wrote:
| The georgist argument strikes again!
| marcinzm wrote:
| Agreements made when the power balance is unequal are by
| nature not going to be fair. It is to the advantage of the
| one with more power to use it to get their way. For
| example, Silicon Valley had a famous issue of anti-poaching
| agreements to force wages of engineers down. Legally
| forcing these things is an attempt to deal with power
| imbalance to the benefit of the most people.
| _jal wrote:
| I realize the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1937 is
| considered anathema among libertarians and many owners of
| enterprises who employ low-wage workers, but I don't think
| you'll find many takers among populace at large.
|
| The "freedom" you are talking about is the freedom to take
| or leave work schedules we consider abusive today. If you
| want to go back to a world where employment means 12/7 or
| starve, you are free to campaign for the repeal all you
| like, though. Your senators' aides are standing by, call
| now. Meanwhile, I will be lobbying them to constrain your
| freedom a little more.
| wanderer2323 wrote:
| People in the experiment the gp post describes do not want
| to work 'part time', they want to work 'full time' for 30
| hours a week. The fact that you describe that as 'part
| time' undermines your argument that work time is simply an
| agreement between adults (as opposed to a schelling point
| dictated by law, tradition, and convenience).
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| My god it's so true. I'm a robotics engineer and I'm an
| advocate of what I call "reduce the human cost of living to
| zero" through automation and democratic arrangements. The
| idea being that we can make it cost very little for society
| to support non-working people, such that work is not
| compulsory for survival. It's similar to a basic income but
| it's universal basic services where we try to get the
| marginal cost to zero (we can IMO make it cheaper than a
| basic income).
|
| I get so many people telling me "but people would be
| miserable, they need work to be happy and have purpose." UGH
| YES I agree, but I never said I would ban employment! I just
| want people to be able to take a year off now and then, or
| work half time, or volunteer or do non-capitalist work and be
| fine. People seem to think that if we weren't desperate for
| employment we'd just sit around bored all the time. That's
| not what wealthy people do! Human beings are far too creative
| to just sit around and do nothing. Eliminating compulsory
| work is about increasing freedom. We're smart enough to find
| something good to do with that freedom.
| hutzlibu wrote:
| Well, but sadly it is true for people who have been in
| chains for years, that they don't know what to do
| anymore(except drinking and watching TV), when suddenly
| there is no one around anymore to tell them what to do.
| Lots of people quickly degrade after retirement.
|
| You can also see that effect already in schools. Currently
| there is school vacation and you see lots of groups of
| bored teenagers hanging around.
|
| There is something very wrong with a "free society", when
| most of its people don't know what to do with their free
| time except to kill it. (The very concept of timekilling is
| disturbing as well)
|
| But yes. I am 100% behind the idea of robotic basic income!
|
| People can learn again, that there is more to live than
| mindless huzzling and consuming.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| Agreed. I've found that most people don't spend time
| thinking about the ideal society. So when you talk about
| an ideal society and you describe one aspect of it, they
| imagine you're talking about a society where everything
| is the same except that one aspect. They have a very hard
| time imagining what the world would be like if many
| things were different.
| briandear wrote:
| > we can make it cost very little for society to support
| non-working people, such that work is not compulsory for
| survival.
|
| If we are supporting people that legitimately can't work,
| sure. But supporting people that can work, but don't --
| that's where I have a problem because my willingness to
| work, even in jobs I might not like gets punished through
| taxes. Why do I have a personal responsibility to support
| others that are unwilling to support themselves. We are
| talking about grown adults, if they have nothing to
| contribute to society, why would we subsidize that? Some
| layabout watching Judge Judy all day gets a free pass while
| the guy working on a hot roof all day is supposed to pay
| for that? Who is going to be a janitor if they don't have
| to? Producing something of value to society is part of
| being a part of a society. People have a responsibility to
| take care of themselves. They might need some temporary
| help now and then, but making dependency a permanent state
| is a great way to ensure that government has ultimate
| control of your life.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| I won't force you to support them. I WANT to support
| others because I feel good doing so. At normal jobs I'm
| just helping some billionaire get richer (my last job I
| worked indirectly for a billionaire). I would way rather
| work day in and day out to support regular people like
| me.
|
| And since you brought it up, I find your attitude
| disturbing. "Why should I have to help other people" is
| kind of a gross question. You don't want to help other
| people? Doesn't that make you selfish? Again I'm not
| saying I will force you to help, but why are you against
| the idea of helping others anyway?
|
| I see that you mention government. I didn't mention
| government. I said society could provide for everyone. We
| can do that without the government.
| SolaceQuantum wrote:
| But we already have existing data that says that people
| who are given free money don't just become unemployed,
| and the only people who do take the free money to be
| unemployed are parents and teenagers who are trying to
| parent and study respectively. I think personally that
| sounds amazing. If someone wants to watch Judge Judy all
| day, every day, for months chances are they have a mental
| illness and need to be treated the same way as someone
| whose back is thrown out needs to be treated.
|
| People will take jobs for the similar reasons we take
| jobs now- we want money, and take higher paying jobs to
| afford nicer things. In a world where bases are covered,
| luxuries will definitely be a better carrot than the
| stick of homelessness.
| petre wrote:
| Somebody would have to build and fix those robots. I'm not
| worried. Plus I don't expect robots to create meaningful
| art and literature. Compulsory work can be boring, or
| stressful or dangerous. Like what those kids in Bangladesh
| are doing, dissasembling ships. I'd much rather the
| dissasembly was done by spider metal cutting robots.
| Dominisi wrote:
| My current job is doing 4 days 8 hours because the boss read an
| article saying it increases productivity.
|
| So, his opinion is that we should be more productive in 4 days
| than we are in 5. I do enjoy the 3 day weekends, but I have to
| admit that I don't like the immense pressure of the shortened
| week.
| jedberg wrote:
| Can you just work less hard in the four days and then work on
| the fifth off day? It seems like that schedule should give
| you more options about how to work, but not require you to
| work the compressed schedule.
| symplee wrote:
| What metrics are being used to quantify/measure this?
| unlinked_dll wrote:
| I think two mandatory vacation days every four weeks would work
| pretty well.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| We already have two mandated vacation days every week.
| swiley wrote:
| One of the most productive teams I've worked on had unlimited
| vacation that was actually used. People were taking a week or
| so off every month and we're still getting a crazy amount of
| stuff done.
|
| That or they were very good at faking it.
| codr7 wrote:
| Why wouldn't it work?
|
| People will find ways to get the time and rest they need,
| hiding and faking is less effective.
|
| On top of that you get loyalty in return for being treated
| as human beings rather than slaves.
| unlinked_dll wrote:
| Part of the problem with unlimited vacation is that
| companies that use it tend to do it to save money, since
| if you have unlimited vacation days they don't need to
| compensate you for unused PTO when you leave. They'll
| also try and create a culture where employees don't want
| to or "can't" take time off. It can be more nefarious
| than anything.
|
| Of course companies that do that are usually startups,
| and if your startup tries to fuck you, leave. They
| probably need you more than you need them.
| ghaff wrote:
| The financial aspect is certainly true though, as someone
| who hasn't moved around a lot and who pretty much uses
| all their vacation, that aspect of traditional vacation
| banking has never been a big deal to me.
|
| The culture aspect needs to come down from the top. A
| senior engineering manager at a well-known SV company
| with "unlimited" vacation claims it works pretty well
| because, from his perspective, an expectation that you'll
| take time off and disconnect comes from the top. On the
| other hand, I've heard others at the same company give a
| less rosy report, so YMMV depending on teams, etc.
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| Ive been working four 4-6 hour days a week for the past year.
| I'm in my opinion quite productive. I think we need to stop
| thinking in terms of 8 hour days. An 8 hour work day is a lot!
| Same with five day work weeks. With four day work weeks you get
| perpetual three day weekend and that makes a huge difference.
| Actually recently I started working Monday and taking Tuesday
| off so I can attend a Tuesday night hack night at the local
| hacker space that I would not be able to attend on a work day.
| amelius wrote:
| > Sweden gives employees unpaid time off to be entrepreneurs
|
| Shouldn't it be the choice of the employees what they do with
| their unpaid time off?
| JoachimS wrote:
| No. Unless you don't compete with your employer, poach
| customers, or do something illegal - what you do on your unpaid
| time off is none of their business.
| msrmthehomeless wrote:
| Government are concerned about gdp and creating jobs.
| BelleOfTheBall wrote:
| This sounds like a wonderful idea but I'd love to hear some stats
| on how this specific time-off fares for would-be startupers. The
| article mentions a few successful start-ups but it's unclear
| whether these came about as a result of the time-off or if they
| resulted from someone just pursuing them full time. Not knocking
| the idea either way, just would love to see data on how many new
| companies it's helped create.
| lawik wrote:
| From my experience people are more likely to use this for
| studying, trying a business idea (not the HN meaning of
| startup) or extended travel. Startup I imagine is an outlier in
| what its used for.
|
| It lines up well with the very advantageous student loans (for
| living costs, university is free) for studying and lets people
| try their hand at going through higher education wothout
| throwing their job away.
| ajross wrote:
| I mean... most startups fail. Surely that's no less true in
| Sweden than elsewhere. If you want statistics, I guess you'd
| measure this in terms of successful exits or revenue or equity
| size or something as a fraction of population or GDP or
| workforce. But at least anecdotally (c.f. Spotify/Skype/Mojang)
| they seem to be doing pretty well.
| codelord wrote:
| I think Sweden is very romanticized in American media and amongst
| the elites. Having lived there for 6 years before moving to US, I
| think it's an ok country but nowhere near the paradise that is
| promised by the American media. They say the best thing in Sweden
| is its health care. In the entire time I was there I attempted to
| see a specialist for a condition that I had maybe two or three
| times, I ended up giving up every single time after I was told
| the wait time is between 3-4 months. I keep my American employer
| sponsored private insurance and employer determined time off
| policy, thank you very much.
| hugi wrote:
| Yeah, my cousin is a doctor in Sweden and according to him
| Sweden has the most failed/Americanised system of the Nordics.
| tpmx wrote:
| Swede here: Yeah, Sweden tends to be romanticized by the
| american "progressives". As a swedish "rightist", you end up
| being in an annoying position. There's a lot of stupid stuff
| that happens here, for sure.
|
| That said, it seems like the really expensive/complicated
| healthcare needs gets taken care of in a competent way, "for
| free" (paid for via the taxes).
|
| My then 73 yo mom had a tumor that was growing behind her left
| eye-ball being removed, two years ago. Zero complaints about
| that hole produdure, and the 10+ post-prodedure checks.
|
| I spent a few hours googling the doctor that was going to
| perform this particular surgery on my mom - I was left with the
| impression that he was on the international fore-front on this
| particular procudure. He was doing a bunch of international
| speaking on the the topic. I saw videos of him lecturing
| hundreds of surgeons on particulars of this kind of procudure.
| Quite re-insuring.
|
| (And yeah, my mom ended up being okay after the surgery.)
| dontdoitpls wrote:
| The worst insurance you can get + max out of pocket is
| 12,000usd per year.
|
| 10 or 20 procedures, still 12k.
|
| For the 10%ers/6 figure earners, this is 10% of the before
| tax income.
|
| For the 90% making 15-19$/hr, I can't even imagine managing
| this.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Same in Austria. The healthcare system is _free_ and very
| _good_ if you have something life threatening but if not, you
| 're looking at 2 month waiting time to see a specialist and
| there's no way I can be living and working with a health
| discomfort for that long so I pay up and see a private doctor.
|
| The current situation benefits the lower class with voting
| rights who have access to _good_ healthcare without paying much
| taxes and the upper class can afford private anyway but if you
| 're hard working middle class you're kinda screwed since you
| have to go private and pay if you want quality treatment and
| diagnosis in a timely manner but you're also forced to pay and
| subsidize the public system, which you don't use anyway, with
| your very high taxes.
|
| I feel Europe is slowly migrating to a two tier healthcare
| system, a private and quality but expensive one for the ones
| who can afford it and a public underfunded one for _everyone
| else_.
| the_mitsuhiko wrote:
| > The healthcare system is free and very good if you have
| something life threatening but if not, you're looking at 2
| month waiting time to see a specialist and there's no way I
| can be living and working with a health discomfort for that
| long so I pay up and see a private doctor.
|
| The private doctor is still cheaper than copays/deductibles
| in the US. So that seems like a weird argument to make.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| _> The private doctor is still cheaper than
| copays/deductibles in the US._
|
| Skilled workers in the US also earn way more than their
| European counterparts.
| hannasanarion wrote:
| And unskilled workers earn less. So what?
| wormseed wrote:
| Not necessarily. One datapoint: Amazon pays fulfilment
| workers $15/hour in the US, but EUR11/hour (~$12) in
| Germany
| strictfp wrote:
| The system is gating the specialists way too much. But the
| actual care once you are there is usually very good.
|
| Private insurance often just gets you past those gates.
| csomar wrote:
| > In the entire time I was there I attempted to see a
| specialist for a condition that I had maybe two or three times,
| I ended up giving up every single time after I was told the
| wait time is between 3-4 months.
|
| It's the same thing they say about France (having a great
| healthcare system). But doctors [1] are going on strikes
| because of lack of amenities. Makes you wonder...
|
| A private system where you chose your provider will always be
| better, imo, because the providers will have to compete. I
| think the US could do much better if they improve the pricing
| visibility and get the free market to make the prices go down.
| (I'm not very well versed in this topic, I'm just reading the
| news)
|
| 1 - https://www.cnews.fr/france/2019-12-14/pourquoi-les-
| medecins...
| Something1234 wrote:
| I'm confused as to why you're being downvoted.
|
| But I completely agree with you on the free market. My
| personal issue with going to the doctor is I have no idea
| what my bill will be at the end of the day.
| dmurray wrote:
| Perhaps he's being downvoted (not by me!) because the claim
| is self-contradictory. Either a market based system "always
| will be better", or it could be "better if they improve the
| pricing visibility", which is it? Unless he's saying the US
| system is already superior to all others, but could be made
| better still. That seems like an ambitious claim.
| jackfoxy wrote:
| We should absolutely have full transparency into services,
| providers, and cost, regardless of what other public policy
| is adopted.
|
| One can make the argument that some big share of the
| affordability issue has been generated by the government in
| its policies of preventing cost transparency for medical
| services and drugs.
|
| I'm not saying cost transparency will solve every problem,
| but this is a government caused problem. I have heard no good
| reasons for the monopoly pricing granted the medical
| industry.
|
| Also bear in mind the whole system of government subsidized
| employer group health insurance was invented by the
| government to satisfy the labor unions, way back when private
| sector labor unions had influence.
|
| Now only government employee labor unions have influence, and
| boy what influence they have. Just remember, public employees
| are in entirely different social benefit and retirement
| systems than us mortals.
| nelblu wrote:
| It took my spouse 3 months to get an appointment with a
| specialist in the US. She definitely didn't shop around but it
| was a miserable wait time considering we lived close to some of
| the best healthcare facilities in the world and had one of the
| best health insurance one could buy.
| urvader wrote:
| There are private health insurances here too. If the public
| system would be so bad as you describe it everyone would use
| the private ones but very few do.
| csomar wrote:
| > If the public system would be so bad as you describe it
| everyone would use the private ones but very few do.
|
| Maybe they can't afford private insurance?
| strictfp wrote:
| Wait what? I live here too, and many employers do pay for
| private insurance because it saves heaps of time for the
| employees. Why do you think the private options sprung up in
| the first place?
|
| The public system has serious flaws. I was told by the public
| system to take antibiotics for 6 months straight while
| waiting for a tonsil removal operation. Got my operation a
| few days later through my private insurance.
| ernst_klim wrote:
| > If the public system would be so bad as you describe it
| everyone would use the private ones but very few do.
|
| Ah, that's simply wrong, because you pay for public
| healthcare anyways (through taxes), hence private one is to
| be paid twice.
|
| I doubt the system is `that bad`, but even in Russia, where
| private healthcare is super cheap (and very good) and public
| healthcare is a total disaster, a few people use the private
| one (until they are wealthy) due to exact same reason:
| they've already paid for the public one and feel like paying
| twice is not an option.
| marcinzm wrote:
| Private Health insurance without group plans does not really
| work well so the fact people don't choose it doesn't mean
| much to me.
|
| Essentially, since sick people are more likely to choose such
| plans the costs are going to be very high. Either that or the
| restrictions on the plans need to be high to prevent it. Both
| make such plans unattractive independent of how bad or good
| the public plans are.
| brobdingnagians wrote:
| From my experience in the UK, people typically don't get
| private insurance because they _believe_ in the public
| system, not because they have a generally positive experience
| with the public system. They don't really realize that the
| service could or should be much different, so they just put
| up with it because they believe in the system being the way
| it is. They believe in chipping in, paying their fair share,
| and everyone being in the pot. It's a mind set, not an
| optimal set of circumstances. I admire the mindset in many
| ways, but it doesn't make for quick or efficient service. It
| all kind of depends on what you optimize for, and what you
| are willing to put up with based on your worldview of what is
| most important.
| ghaff wrote:
| It's not super-common, but some employers do offer private
| health insurance. The numbers I saw suggested about 10%
| were covered by such insurance which isn't a huge number
| but isn't nothing either.
| serf wrote:
| >If the public system would be so bad as you describe it
| everyone would use the private ones but very few do.
|
| that's simply dishonest. there are tons of other variables to
| consider when pondering private insurance adoption rates.
| mrkeen wrote:
| Regarding healthcare, my employer gives me private insurance
| but I tend to use both systems.
|
| Generally I get same-day care. I call up DKV, report my
| symptoms, they find a specialist in my area, and I pay nothing.
| (I mention the symptoms bit to contrast with the system where
| you have to see a general practitioner who then refers you to a
| specialist - that does _not_ happen here AFAIK). I 've used
| this for allergies, asthma, ear problems. I also had a knee
| injury where I got an x-ray (same day I think?) followed by
| weekly sessions of physio.
|
| My partner recently gave birth in the public system. I think
| the delivery was free, but the 4-night stay cost us around 4000
| SEK (400 USD) total.
|
| I also had a remote doctor's appointment using the KRY app. I
| don't actually know how that was billed - public I'd guess.
| ssss11 wrote:
| Isnt US employer determined holidays 2 weeks per year? No
| thanks. Time off work is important.
| sokoloff wrote:
| It varies by employer. I get 24 days that I pick plus 9 or 10
| that the company picks each year.
| marcinzm wrote:
| Like most everything in the US, vacation time varies by
| employer. Last year I took 6 weeks not counting holidays and
| wfh 2-3 days a week.
| alexanderchr wrote:
| Of course if you are in the top 5-10% of earners (which I
| suppose many/most on this forum are), a privately funded system
| will almost always be better simply because you can afford to
| pay for the best.
|
| For myself I'd much, much rather live in a society where a
| cancer diagnosis doesn't financially ruin you and your family
| for you life, and where everyone no matter their income
| receives quality care when it's needed. Even if that means that
| I have to wait weeks/months to get something non-critical seen.
| LeoTinnitus wrote:
| I'm personally I the camp of, why the hell can I not know how
| much stuff costs up front, why can I not tell them no I dont
| an unnecessary x-ray, and why am I not told cost owed by me
| until after the procedure only to find out it's just an
| absurd amount of money
|
| Private insurance blows cause we're all basically required to
| have it but it's worse than a tax because we barely ever know
| how much we owe.
| mk89 wrote:
| I think also France allows that, not just for entrepreneurs, but
| for anything. A colleague of mine just took a sabbatical and next
| year he'll be back.
| tpmx wrote:
| Being Swedish, I attempted to use that back in 2002 when I was
| fed up with with my current, quite stagnant employer. Being young
| and naive I allowed my then direct manager and CEO to bully
| myself into giving up on that idea.
|
| They weren't even aware of this possibility. I showed them the
| actual law. They implied they would lawyer up if I fighted them.
|
| I ended up simply resigning instead. In retrospect that was a
| fantastic idea! In retrospect I saw people getting stuck there,
| while my career took off like a rocket (well, comparatively
| speaking)...
|
| If I had been a similar age today, wanting to attempt this, I'd
| probably be able to find free help online. It's such a different
| world now, compared to 18 years ago.
| seppin wrote:
| Any Sweden does _____ is immediately BS. The five hour work day
| was BS, this is too.
| alkonaut wrote:
| The 5 hour work week was an isolated thing reported as somehow
| a national change (i.e. BS).
|
| This might actually be true (that people are entitled to this)
| I guess, but you are correct that basically no one does.
| StartupTree wrote:
| Swedish resident here. Absolutely correct. 99% of "Sweden does"
| stories are absolute and total nonsense. Publishers publish
| what their audience want to read.
|
| No-one* uses this 6 month sabbatical for startup purposes.
| seppin wrote:
| 3 comments in support of what I said and -1 total votes, this
| website is broken.
|
| Anyways whatever Sweden's PR people are getting paid, it's
| not enough.
| kzrdude wrote:
| Headlines are misinterpreted and the rumors travel far on the
| internet. I've also seen that "finland has UBI" being re-told
| as a story, and that's just from the trials that have been done
| in Finland. I'd say the onus is mostly on us, to read the
| articles and not the headlines to understand what they say. And
| be critical of what the articles say, too.
| go13 wrote:
| Why can't people they just quit their job for the duration
| needed, do the startup in their spare time using their own money
| rather than taking advantage of someone else who is already
| successful?
|
| They want to be called entrepreneurs - why would they not grow
| balls, take risk like proper entrepreneurs do and not hide behind
| socialist populist state?
|
| Looks like a lot of people on HN have left-leaning views despite
| the name "HACKERnews"
| herbstein wrote:
| > Why can't people they just quit their job for the duration
| needed, do the startup in their spare time using their own
| money rather than taking advantage of someone else who is
| already successful?
|
| The idea is basically that the idea of being forced to look for
| work, something that can be very draining, is keeping people
| from taking the chance. This law allows swedes to give their
| idea a shot without having the lack of job loom over their
| head.
|
| > Looks like a lot of people on HN have left-leaning views
| despite the name "HACKERnews"
|
| I'm not really sure what you mean with this. Can you not be a
| hacker/entrepreneur/developer and have left-leaning views and
| ideas? If that's the case I have a few friends that need to
| change their views or sell their companies.
|
| And these friends are left-leaning Danes. So in essence, if
| you're American, you can generally compare their views to a
| slightly more "extreme" version of Bernie Sanders.
| roberto wrote:
| > Looks like a lot of people on HN have left-leaning views
| despite the name "HACKERnews"
|
| This makes absolutely no sense. Whats does being a hacker have
| to do with being leftist or rightist?
| Erlich_Bachman wrote:
| That's basically what they are doing. The title is sort of
| misleading. The time off is not paid.
| go13 wrote:
| I know, but still someone needs to cover their position in
| the meantime and potentially provide other benefits.
| caconym_ wrote:
| Cool idea.
|
| Here in the US we go the opposite way: even if you do find some
| way to take enough time off to accomplish something significant,
| there's a good chance your employer (legally) owns it.
| coreyoconnor wrote:
| No worries for Amazon SDEs! The amazon software developer
| "outside contributions" agreement basically states that you are
| not allowed to do anything without approval anyways. /s
|
| Seriously tho. When I was employed by them their agreements
| were by far most draconian compared to any other company I've
| worked for. Ridiculous.
|
| Most companies I've worked _did_ have a route to enable you to
| contribute to projects outside of work and still retain the
| rights. Tho the easiest route is to establish something within
| a domain you want to work and then state that on a "inventions
| and copyrights" pre-employment agreement. This will outright
| eliminate you from certain jobs but... That's the US for ya.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| And when you go without a job to try your hand at starting a
| business, it's usually accompanied with the gamble that you
| won't need any medical service that will wipe our your savings.
| caconym_ wrote:
| Yup! Oh, and don't forget that being unemployed for some
| period of time is seen as a "negative signal" by many
| employers.
| briandear wrote:
| Not if you actually did something with that time.
| brendanfalk wrote:
| This is simply amazing
| foxx-boxx wrote:
| After 50 years of overtaxation they are finally turning away from
| socialism.
| tengbretson wrote:
| What sort of unfulfilling work are these people doing where they
| can just leave and not need to be replaced?
| foogazi wrote:
| > Anyone who's been in full-time employment for at least six
| months is entitled to apply for the unpaid sabbatical, or
| tjanstledighet, as it's called in Sweden.
|
| I just don't see the magic in this or the extended parental leave
|
| Why can't any healthy functioning adult do the exact same thing
| on their own ?
|
| is 6 months living expenses really holding back your
| entrepreneurial dreams?
| ghaff wrote:
| >is 6 months living expenses really holding back your
| entrepreneurial dreams?
|
| This isn't even that. It's unpaid time. You're just guaranteed
| to be able to return to your existing job afterwards.
| toyg wrote:
| _> Why can't any healthy functioning adult do the exact same
| thing on their own ?_
|
| Because they know it would be very hard to be re-hired if
| things don't work out.
|
| _> is 6 months living expenses really holding back your
| entrepreneurial dreams? _
|
| No, for most people it's the thought of renouncing a guaranteed
| job. With this sort of thing, you know that there is a safety
| net if the business doesn't take off in 6 months.
| sidlls wrote:
| At least in America it is extremely difficult, if not
| practically impossible, for "any healthy functioning adult" to
| just take six months off to do something like start a business.
| Very few households have even one month of expenses saved up
| (most can't afford something like a $400 emergency, e.g., car
| repair).
| jedberg wrote:
| Since the leave is unpaid, does it basically just mean your old
| company has to hire you back in six months if you decide to come
| back?
| aliceryhl wrote:
| It also means you retain stuff like your seniority.
| nisse72 wrote:
| You remain employed during this time off, there is no re-hiring
| involved.
| glofish wrote:
| are benefits still paid by the employer?
| herbstein wrote:
| This is Sweden so you don't have the same requirement on
| healthcare benefits like in the US. I imagine the biggest
| benefits are pension and equity. It's my impression that
| most pension benefits are as a percentage of the wage, so
| unpaid leave doesn't net you any pension. Equity I imagine
| depends on the language of the specific contract.
| amiga_500 wrote:
| They aren't under the shadow of imminent ruin due to health
| issues in Europe
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Swedish companies don't pay health insurance etc, so there
| isn't much benefits outside of salary.
| dgellow wrote:
| What about retirement contributions?
| lawik wrote:
| Nah, that's usually based on salary I think. And you
| don't get one during this time off. You just freeze-dry
| your employment. Stasis basically.
| fhrow4484 wrote:
| In US, yes.
|
| I've seen it happen, people take extended leave of absence
| on FAANG, to pursue some non profit stuff or simply to
| prevent burnout.
|
| During those, you're still covered by healthcare plan, but
| everything else freezes: let's say you take 2 months off.
| Then your RSU that was supposed to vest next month is now
| vesting in 3 months. Your vacation days don't accrue during
| those 2 months, etc. Obviously, since you're not getting
| any salary, there's no contribution to 401k happening
| during those 2 months.
| ghaff wrote:
| Well, unless a company has a specific policy, it's
| something you'd probably need to negotiate. What you
| describe seems pretty reasonable as a leave of absence
| for a valued employee who actually has an option to take
| a leave of absence but it certainly isn't something I'd
| assume was anything like a universal formula. (Certainly
| continuing healthcare is a big deal for many people
| unless they're covered by a spouse's policy whether or
| not they have to pay the company portion or not.)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-02-15 23:00 UTC)