Revolut article in WIRED today - not good PR!


What about this?

Primarily, it starts with their CEO Nikolay [Storonsky] being very vocal about their mentality, that if you do a 9-5 [workday] it won’t work out

Such a statement implies that employees are expected to be present beyond standard working hours, i.e. they are measured on their input, as opposed to on their output.


Wrong, often times people need to pay their bills. Dont act as if this harsh reality didn’t exist - then you just give out an image of stupidity.

First things first, publicity is the first step - the next would be to organize the union in the workplace and enforce the legislation that is already in place in the EU. The way you talk you could perhaps get away with in the usa. In Europe it is not good business to treat employees badly - in the long run it will only hurt business.


Not wanting to protect Revolut on its practices, I still find it very indifferent written despite many different levels of employees required.
Support staff working on minimum pay is not the same as a software developer and still different to product managers and upper management. Up to a certain level, protection for the employee is a must because self defence does not work for them, aka bills need to be paid etc. On the upper level, power is better balanced and less protection might still lead to a good result on both sides, employee and employer. But there will most probably talk about very skilled software developer and upper management.


If all employers used their brains and treated their staff half decent the unions would be out of work.

Legislation, unions and such are only needed to establish base levels - this does not stop more qulified people to negotiate even better deals…


Two problems. It does not confirm that hours are a performance indicator, you’re just assuming this.

And second, it does not show if hours are relevant in case someone actually achieves a target without extra hours.

Even if they might expect someone working extra hours, this is no proof that someone couldn’t achieve goals by being more productive instead. The point you were trying to make with your cleaning personell about productiveness can’t be derived from this isolated quote. You simply do not know how they measure productiveness.

I am not defending Revolut here. I am just saying that your theory about valuing working hours more than actual productiveness and output is not supported by the article.


Startups pay enough that you can save enough to quit. You could always line up another job for when you finish too.

In the UK you can opt out of the Working Time Directive so I’m not sure what’s your point?

You can get by on purely unions and the market itself balancing itself out, legislation isn’t needed.

Also, how do we know that this wasn’t actually a Slack message sent to the Russian branch of Revolut, which does exist.

Theyre still expected to know English as the job listings are indeed in English.


If this is true then how for how many would this be “optional” do you think? The employer is the stronger part, this is why we have eu directive (isn’t this demanded to be enforced in every member country?)

Matters are worse if not, staff at Revolut need help and the best help they can get is bad publicity for revolut until this shady way of forcing people into long work weeks is stopped.

Its sad to see the English being this stupid, i do not belive my eyes but you seem to be right. Work legislation that can be negotiated individually - you truly live in the middle ages there :disappointed:


Literally it’s optional. You have to sign a waiver to opt out of it.

Before the directive they could demand overtime to be done past 48 hours, now they can’t unless you opt out. Only in the UK you can opt out, as our government negotiated this to let it pass.

Don’t apply for a job you can’t do, what a thought?

This is just startup culture, its ignorable. Personally I wouldn’t work for a startup for this exact reason.

Then again, I plan on moving to another country regardless as I dislike the UK’s lack of integration with our European cousins (for example, not using the euro)

I disagree. I should be able to work on whatever terms I agree to. A government shouldn’t be able to tell me how this is unless I’m avoiding tax. Minimum wages for example price people out of the labour market, as new hires with no experience become less valuable unless considerably cheaper. This isn’t possible under the minimum wage so you end up in catch 22 where you need experience to get into the job but can’t get the experience because you cost too much and they don’t want to train someone from scratch.


You are too liberal imho, there always needs to be a minimum standard as a fail safe so people doesnt get used, if what is said in the article is true then Revolut needs a lot of shit for it.

Not everyone is able to simply quit due to responsiblities, this is the exact reason why there is a legislation in the EU. If this was put in place the same way here in sweden our unions would kill that opt out thing by collective agreement instead.

Nobody, should be able to abuse people by more or less demanding long work weeks. Asking is one thing but threats, thats when its time to get up on the barricades and take the fight.

Some how it would be karma if revolut system had downtime due to a strike.


We negotiated the opt out to allow people paid by the hour to not have their income effectively capped.


Instead of fixing the real issue, low wages?

The old “Do we work to live or live to work” springs to mind.


When you raise wages you do a few things. Improving the situation isn’t actually one of them.


  • Inflate prices because the higher ups get pay rises too
  • Price people out of being able to get jobs
  • Cap employment, as small companies can’t afford to absorb costs associated with a wage hike.
  • Have people on less hours as the company struggles to keep the bottom line
  • Hurt small businesses more than you do large ones, as the ones with big profit margins can afford to absorb cost
  • Stop raises from happening naturally through competition to get labour

It also does some horrible things, like stopping the person with literally no outgoings working for 5€ an hour if they want to do so. It’s absolutely stupid that people think raising wages fixes everything.


I agree that the number of hours worked is probably not a formal performance indicator, but it is very likely to be an informal performance indicator, based on the comments I cited above.


So the wage level is in danger of getting to high but it’s all fixed if people just go back 100 years in development and start working 12 hour shifts again? :wink:

Don’t you realise that your entire argument falls when you yourself claim working more hours is ok and this was the reason behind letting individuals in Gb give up their right to a normal work week?


Revolut often claims they are a data driven company. It is very unlikely that their performance assessment based on targets and other performance indicators values working hours higher than actually hitting targets. That’s why I believe your analogy about cleaners that are more productive in shorter time does not capture it. Nor do I believe that their performance evaluation rates input higher than output. That would not make much sense and there’s more evidence out there (like leaked internal Slack communication and certain articles) that the evaluation is based on individual targets where overal working hours might or might not be a formal or an informal indicator but most likely not a traget itself.


Can we not start it with the stupid rhetoric.

I’m saying people on a fixed hourly rate aren’t making their money out of pay rises unless they beat the rate of inflation considerably. The prices do go up too.

It is. This generation I swear just wants everything handed to them for free. If you want more money, you work more. Is that hard to understand? People making millions of euro are the ones with a private phone buzzing 24/7 and that barely have lives disconnected from work.

It’s simply the price you pay to get good wages.

Yes. You are literally capped at what you can buy if you don’t have an ability to get more hours, if you job is paid by the hour.


In other words you want us to give up and go back to the shit hole europe was before people got organised and demanded some rights. The price to pay for normal wages can never be silly work weeks. Then something must be done, revolution is probably what it all ends in before things are set straight again if this is the future for europe.

The whole idea limiting the work week is giving people good lifes.


Revolut employees aren’t getting normal wages, buddy. They’re getting above average.

It literally limits the possible amount they can earn though, which doesn’t give anyone a good life if they’re coming up short.


Do we live to work or work to live? Think about this seriously before your next reply because right now you seem to be on auto pilot when you write.

You are basically saying give up the advances europe has done the last ~100 years.


The problem is that very often salaried employees, who are not paid by the hour, are coerced into signing an opt-out, which some unscrupulous UK employers even include within the terms of the employment contract or add it as a page at the end, which the employee is expected to sign with eyebrows raised if they don’t. These employers often make vague promises that additional hours will be rewarded through an uncertain bonus (if the employee is still employed by the employer on bonus day).

I believe that where a valid opt-out is in place, there should be a minimum rate per hour applied to hours worked above 48 hours per week. Such a minimum rate per hour would be much more than the standard national minimum wage for normal hours worked within the usual 48-hour weekly threshold.