If you absolutely need one for the business to function you need more than one person knowing how to do the job. Maybe not as good as the first guy but beeing so dependant on one person can put a company out of business.

I thought that was basic knowledge espcially in tech.

This is simply not a norm in American business. Most companies have numerous team members that have no redundancy or fail-over. For instance: a mid-sized startup hires its first GC --- it is certainly not a norm for that company to hire two lawyers in case one needs to take leave, and also not the case that the rest of the team can simply pick up the slack.

Outsource it to a contractor / lawyers office or whatever you did before?

As in my other response, you have months to prepare a solution.

I'm not getting involved with the broader debate, I'm just saying that the idea that you're meant to have redundancy for all your staff is not a norm.

A company that needs a GC as an employee is no longer a startup

In tech, you do not commonly hire people in pairs. If you need a DBA you hire one. If he quits or dies you hire another one. If he leaves for a year, what do you do?

>he quits or dies you hire another one.

And in the weeks/months until you found one ?

It's not like babies appear over night, you have months to prepare.

As has been quite clearly stated elsewhere, hiring a dba who wants a gig for 6-12 months rather than an indefinite gig is either much harder or much more expensive than hiring a dba on the indefinite plan. Same reason consultants get paid a lot more; the person you hire knows they're going to be job searching shortly.

There's often specialist work than can be delayed or performed more slowly by other team members. I'm not sure how that's relevant.