Any experienced startup lawyer or entrepreneur will cautiously recommend a time-based investment schedule for early-stage employees who accept equity instead of cash compensation. An investment schedule prevents a lazy employee from moving away from your business with some of the equity when they stop or don`t provide services. I think these deals are a waste of time and money because they`re just a band-aid over a much bigger, gaping wound, which is the underlying capital agreement. It seems like a good place for dynamic equity. It`s really convenient to have B nearby, but you don`t think she should have a defined share, and you don`t know how long she`s going to stay. Why not pay B in instalments for funding if this happens (with an agreement now on the sentence). Start with a commission for this lawyer`s job. As for other work and meetings, you pay a fair salary and work it in tranches. I imagine that large capital rotations are done at this point, since you pay people a salary instead of compensating them with equity (?), but would you still want to make investment agreements with new employees to invest them in the company? What about the co-founders? Should co-founders also obtain investment agreements in order to obtain further equity at this stage? How would such a system normally be structured according to the breakeven or a large investor on board? A few years ago I published a letter of offer of slicing pie model and it was a very popular download. Last week I reviewed it and made some updates. .