"Real Double Standard": Founder's Take On Corporate Vs Startup Exploitation Sparks Debate

Aayushi Saraswat, co-founder of FinFloww, sparked a heated debate on LinkedIn by highlighting the double standard in how employees perceive work ethic in global corporations versus startups. She pointed out that overworking at prestigious firms is often glorified, while startups face criticism for similar expectations, despite offering better pay and opportunities. In a long LinkedIn post, Ms Saraswat questioned why working long hours for a multinational company while earning Rs 6.5 lakh per year is romanticised as "the grind," while putting in focused hours at a startup for Rs 15 lakh is labelled "toxic."

She also highlighted the bias where corporate burnout is seen as gaining valuable experience, but similar expectations from a startup are mocked as having a "bad culture." 

She wrote, "At Big 4s and wealth firms, people pull all-nighters for presentations that'll get buried in someone's inbox. They skip weekends, cancel birthdays, and answer emails during funerals—and call it building pedigree. Why? Because they're not doing it for the work. They're doing it for the name on the visiting card. But the moment a startup has fluid roles, urgent timelines, or 2 hours of extra push, suddenly it's: "This is not sustainable."Where's the work-life balance?" "I'm not married to the job."

See the post here:

Ms Saraswat argued that employees at top firms often sacrifice their personal lives for the prestige of working for a globally recognised brand, rather than genuine passion or purpose. In contrast, when startups demand similar dedication, employees protest, citing concerns about work-life balance. She also acknowledged that startups have their challenges, but they offer competitive salaries, ownership, and hands-on experience, accelerating growth and providing valuable lessons. She concluded that the issue lies not in the culture itself, but in how people perceive it.

"You don't mind being exploited, as long as it comes with a foreign logo and a glass building. Startups aren't perfect. Some are chaotic, some lack structure. But they often pay better, offer equity, give visibility, and help you build real skills—from execution to ownership. You learn faster, fail sharper, and grow in ways no slide deck at a Big 4 can teach you. So maybe the real issue isn't the culture. It's the optics," she added.

The post sparked a lively discussion online, with differing opinions. Some users noted that people are often more dedicated to major firms due to the career boost provided by the brand name. 

One user wrote, "This post is a genuine concern or a personal vendetta? Yes, 15 hours a day is toxic at all levels, at all measuring standards. Even if it is a genuine concern, you're a founder and that's from your shoes, you want things done faster for your business etc etc, but from an Employee's shoes, it is a job, where he wants to make an impact. Please work on optimising your work pipeline, plan to make the most out of your employees' working hours, or just create a norm of compensation pay. Find a way to make it work for you, that's your job, that's literally your job, to lead the team."

Another commented, "I'd be willing to guess she's a startup founder who is sad that she can't exploit employees without them complaining. I used to work for one such startup, and it was all a one-man show. Toxic af."

A third said, "You gotta call a spade a spade. Both situations are terrible, you cannot justify one bad by comparing it to another bad. Why can't you compare both to the European work culture?" A fourth added, "Can we just aim for not exploiting? Instead of saying they do it why cant we do it?"