>'But that's not the case when you're the only member of your five-person company who's left behind...Even though she founded the company and "the product was my idea," she didn't get a deal because she was not an engineer.'

While technically accurate, the headline is pretty sensational. She goes on to describe herself as a generalist (and not an expert), which is something that is not really the target for aquihires.

Perhaps this is a better title: Google Hired All The Engineers At This Startup, But Not The Company's Only Designer

To be fair to her, it sounds like she did a lot more than design, but sure, I think focusing on role in this case is more accurate than gender.

Also, and at least to my ear, 'All' sounds like more than 5 people. Unfortunately, "Google only hires 80% of a company in an aquihire" doesn't have the page-view potential.

Agreed. But lots of things that were not coding. I'm guessing Google was all staffed up on people to do those things. And "All" does invoke a feeling of more than 5 to me to. If the company was 80 men and 20 women and they took all the men and none of the women, then I'd say there was some issues. But "all" 4 men and not the 1 women (who happened to have a different skill set)... meh. I'm not convinced.

    it sounds like she did a lot more than design

But that is exactly the problem. She did a little bit of everything. She was a generalist and if there is a role for which there isn't much room in a massive corporation with thousands of people, it's generalists. When you get to that size, pretty much everyone is an area expert. For what position would she have been an area expert that google is trying to fill?

I don't particularly know how the acquihiring process goes, but couldn't the to-be-acquired negotiate that the acquiring needs to employ everyone?

California is an-at will employment state. What this means is any employee can quit and any employer can let go without cause as long as it isn't against the law (which is insanely difficult to prove to begin with). Any offer they provide to her (salary, earn out, etc)... Would not have mattered if they hired her on and let her go a day later... Ultimately contracts are fickle like that. There are probably exceptions to all of the above but most likely difficult to enforce in the end.

This is the sort of thing a founders agreement should cover off. Relying on "hey, we're all friends" doesn't cut it once the corporate lawyers get involved.

Have you never worked a job in which you've never wished some people to get fucked over?

I think most people misunderstand what an acquihire actually entails, so they get up in arms over a statement like this.

It's not uncommon for even male founders to not join on in an acquihire. In an acquihire, the only thing the acquiring company cares about are specific talents/skill sets. The product, business, and assets of the startup are worthless to the acquirer. It looks like in this case, Google was only looking for the engineering talent and nothing else. There's no sexism here on Google's part because they're doing exactly what's best for Google. Gender isn't part of this equation for them.

Now, the lines on the startup's side are less clear cut, but if this was a failing startup, this would not be sexism, but a clean way out for people to get jobs. If it wasn't, it just sounds to me like she cofounded a startup with people she shouldn't have trusted. Men make that mistake all the time.

I don't buy this at all. If she founded company she would have equity and some sort of agreement(s)/documentation supporting her story.

If she can't product any documentation then she's out-of-luck.

Lesson to all of us: get things in writing.

"when google hired all the engineers at this startup, but not the only non-engineer" <-- that's the headline.

How would she have felt without the 10k payout, while all the engineers left for Google regardless?

Its called 'aquihired' for a reason. They didn't need any of the startup besides the talent.

If you are a generalist (read: women.. Wink wink), think twice about slaving away at a start up because the payouts might not apply to you.

Bummer.