CEO Jack Dorsey aims to boost company morale by giving a third of his Twitter stock to employees

By midian182 ยท 5 replies
Oct 23, 2015
Post New Reply
  1. On Thursday evening, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey announced at a staff meeting and on the microblogging site that he would donate about a third of his Twitter stock to the company’s employees. The shares amount to 1 percent of the company and are worth about $200 million. Dorsey said it will go into the employee stock compensation pool “to reinvest directly in our people.”

    “I’d rather have a smaller part of something big than a bigger part of something small,” Dorsey tweeted. “I’m confident we can make Twitter big!”

    The move is likely to be partly aimed at improving employee morale at Twitter, which took a battering after Dorsey laid off 8 percent of the company’s global workforce last week. It also marks the second week in a row that the Twitter founder has given away millions in stock. Last week, Dorsey – who is also CEO of Square – disclosed in the mobile payment company’s IPO filing that he would donate 40 million shares, or 10 percent of the total stock outstanding, to the Start Small Foundation. These were added to the 15 million shares he had already donated to both Square and the charity, which invests in artists, musicians and local businesses in underserved communities.

    Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer revealed last week that he has become the third-biggest individual shareholder in Twitter after taking a 4 percent stake in the company. It means that Ballmer owns more of Twitter than Dorsey, who now has a 2 percent stake. The other holders of large amounts of Twitter stock include company co-founder Evan Williams, who has a 6.8 percent stake, and Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who holds more than 5 percent.

    Twitter will announce its third-quarter earnings next week on Oct. 27.

    Permalink to story.

  2. RzmmDX

    RzmmDX TS Guru Posts: 313   +67

    Just saying, he could have that money to not layoff those workers.

    Unless they were absolutely terrible at their jobs.
    VitalyT likes this.
  3. VitalyT

    VitalyT Russ-Puss Posts: 3,666   +1,951

    To be more precise, they had 4100 employees, of which 8% is 328, against the 200m the CEO spends, that's about 610K per employee, enough to keep your low-paid worker for 10+ years.

    I don't know what was he thinking. Must be something wrong with his calculator.
  4. mctommy

    mctommy TS Addict Posts: 217   +38

    You gotta run a company leaner and not feed the underperformers. I'd have done the same, up the retention of those who made the cut by giving incentives that vest in x years.
  5. davislane1

    davislane1 TS Grand Inquisitor Posts: 4,738   +3,757

    Keeping unnecessary, costly, or underperforming employees around is bad for the long-term health of the business. It's not as simple as throwing surplus money at people for the sake of altruism.
    yRaz likes this.
  6. yRaz

    yRaz Nigerian Prince Posts: 2,325   +1,425

    As someone who has run their own small business I can't agree with this more. I'm not going to lose everything I've worked for because of other peoples idealism. It's not easy when you have to fire a "nice guy" because he can't do his job, but being a nice guy isn't enough to keep your job.

    People will react to this guy differently because he's a hot shot CEO in the eyes of the people, but the other employees will keep their jobs and perhaps have opportunity to move up where they didn't before. At least by giving away $200 million of his own money he is showing that his decision was not one he made to line his own pockets at the expense of the employees
    cliffordcooley and davislane1 like this.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...