Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by j_w on Thursday September 18, 2025 @12:09PM (#45291383)

It does matter. People working for a non-profit should not work for free. It's completely acceptable for a non-profit to have an income and assets. Revenue may increase and it would be irresponsible to immediately increase expenses to match when they can conservatively plan for the future.

This is said knowing nothing about the company in question, just from my own experience working for a non-profit. Employees still need to be paid.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by BoredPositron on Thursday September 18, 2025 @01:53PM (#45292772)

The amount they get paid shouldn't matter at all. Nobody said anything about not paying people lol

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by whywhywhywhy on Thursday September 18, 2025 @06:10PM (#45295636)

So if I got paid $50 to write this reply I wouldn't have profited from writing it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by JamesBarney on Thursday September 18, 2025 @06:59PM (#45296050)

The OP said if the founder is getting paid a salary it shouldn't be called a non-profit.

That is literally what the OP is arguing that people who found non-profit organization shouldn't be paid even a modest salary for their work.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by BoredPositron on Friday September 19, 2025 @07:52AM (#45300548)

I wouldn't say that a salary is profiteering from a non profit. It's the cost of doing (non-profit) business.

[ Parent | on HN ]