Was Jason Calacanis' original comment a swipe at Evan Culver?
Probably.
Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
111–120 of 134 posts
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yesss. Thank you for turning it around. I "hopped" my first 3 jobs because my employers seemed bound & determined to wreck their companies, and me with them. It's not MY fault that they were too gutless to fire the "expert" who spent his whole day nagging me for help, and who used raise_error() as GOTO. And who earned $15k/yr more than me, I knew, thanks to the H1-B notice posted in the kitchen. It's not MY fault the…
I understand as an employer you'll want someone who, when you get into a rage and bust up a printer, won't quit and head for greener pastures. It may seem an exaggeration, but as we both know, these things actually happen and while this might not be what the original author had in mind, many, many places of employment are awash in insanity. When you are young and just getting a start, it's easy to miss the warning si…
It's also easier to retain great employees if you treat them well, don't insult them in word, deed, or pay, and generally behave like a mature adult instead of an overgrown, incompetent baby.
Too bad most employers seem constitutionally incapable of executing on that list :)
I also doubt that we shared an employer. It's more likely that employers are universally flawed in the same ways. But if we did, interesting!
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#113at last years startup school this became a bit of a topic, zappos talked about how they wanted employees to work there and feel valued for life. mark zuckerberg talked about how he was happy creating a culture where great people should be able to come in, start being effective immediately, and move along after a year or so. paul buckheit mentioned his reason for quitting google, it was basically, because you need to…
Best companies to work for (see footnote) are the ones that treat their former employees as alumni, rather than as traitors. I was extremely nervous during my last job transition, given I've only stayed there for a year and likely caused them headache during my initial recruitment, dealing with multiple offers and many sleepless nights. To my surprise, they not only took me out for a going away lunch, they even paid…
"Best companies to work for (see footnote) are the ones that treat their former employees as alumni, rather than as traitors"
This is a VERY excellent point, now that you mention it, and probably a near-perfect shortcut to evaluating how the employer supports the learning, growth & wellbeing of the employee.
The second job I left banned former employees from their offices after I attended a user group there (!!).
The third one paid for my goodbye lunch and invited me back for the epic parties.
I would have happily stayed at the third jobs for years, if they'd just let me ship ANYTHING without derailing it completely.
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#114I'm 24 years old. I've had 6 employers since I was 19. I've doubled my salary every year for the past four years. And I think this article is bullshit. Am I wrong for choosing the path that brings me personal success at the cost of "company loyalty"? The depiction of an ideal employee painted by this author sounds a lot like the Japanese Salaryman - diligent and loyal to the company. Isn't that model considered total…
"In Silicon Valley, it's an employee's market"
When you're great at what you do - or even slightly better than 'good' - EVERY market is an employee's market.
(I did similarly to you. $55k (3 mos) -> $65k (6 mos) -> $68k + bonuses (4-day work week, same job as prior, +6 mos) -> $91k + profit sharing (total pay about $130k, 13 mos))
Then I quit and did high-dollar consulting. This January I quit consulting and am building my own products. Working for other people blows at any price.
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#115This is the 21 st century. People don't get to get married to their jobs, think of it just as casual dating. As long as both of us are having good time, it is all good. People have been loyal, but they have been paid back with lay offs, either the company goes belly up, or people/projects get cut. Once it happens to you once, you don't do that mistake again. If you see the 'shitty times' ahead sign, some people will…
If a candidate tells you: 'I left company x, b/c my manager was a dickhead, and that I'd rather work somewhere for good people, then compromise my dignity and integrity just to make a manager look good', means that guy actually has a backbone. A weak person will bend and please his manager, even though what the manager is demanding might be damaging to the company on the long run (you see this often in tech. companie…
Better yet, don't badmouth them, period. The only thing you can do is make yourself look like an asshole, and leave your managers and coworkers wondering what you'll say about them at your next job.
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a think about this on the train on the way home, and here's the formula that I've come up with. Assuming that your employees aren't clueless (ie. know their market rate) and are free to leave (eg. not family members or H1-Bs), then you'll see significant employee churn if: asshattery $ It seems to hold for most of the cases that I can think of. Apple, for example, has a high asshattery factor (Steve Jobs) and m…
> "In the case of Mahalo, it seems like they have a large asshattery factor (Calcanis is an overbearing idiot who will post nasty things about you on Twitter)" Why anyone would willingly work for someone like that is beyond me. You're setting yourself up for abuse, ensuring other employees are abused in the process. In my view, once you post something ugly about any of your employees, you lose your ability to hire an…
Well, that doesn't include the people who don't do due diligence. I'm sure there are still some who don't bother with even cursory Google searches.
I'd word it as "would willingly work for very long"....
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Best companies to work for (see footnote) are the ones that treat their former employees as alumni, rather than as traitors. I was extremely nervous during my last job transition, given I've only stayed there for a year and likely caused them headache during my initial recruitment, dealing with multiple offers and many sleepless nights. To my surprise, they not only took me out for a going away lunch, they even paid…
"Best companies to work for (see footnote) are the ones that treat their former employees as alumni, rather than as traitors" This is a VERY excellent point, now that you mention it, and probably a near-perfect shortcut to evaluating how the employer supports the learning, growth & wellbeing of the employee. The second job I left banned former employees from their offices after I attended a user group there (!!). The…
Indeed. My company even does this semi-formally, with an 'alumni' network, events, and stuff like that. This works out insanely well in our field (management consulting), as the philosophy of the company is that our consultants will eventually leave and we want those people (who we thought were great enough to hire) to hire us as clients at their new firm.
It's done fantastically well, and fostering a culture of (not exactly) assumed transition and migration does wonders. It's not looked down upon at all to take a full time job with a consulting client, for example.
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#118How about this: Employers who don't give proportional ownership of the company to workers are terrible employers and living off of your sweat.
I must admit that is a notion I don't understand. Why shouldn't it be possible to simply pay for a job and have it done by a professional? Like if I pay somebody to build me a house, am I supposed to give them ownership of the house afterwards?
If you build a house by having it done by a professional, you're going to be paying more to have it completed. There's usually contract clauses and insurance to ensure that you're not left with a half-finished house.
When you hire that professional, you're not only paying for his experience, but all those other things, as well. There's a premium attached to those clauses and insurance. You could choose to forgo those assurances, and save some money, but you have a higher risk. Not to mention, a lot of better professionals would refuse, thus limiting the pool of candidates.
The author of the article wants it all: the assurance of the higher-cost option without the premium.
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
I must admit that is a notion I don't understand. Why shouldn't it be possible to simply pay for a job and have it done by a professional? Like if I pay somebody to build me a house, am I supposed to give them ownership of the house afterwards?
If you build a house by having it done by a professional, you're going to be paying more to have it completed. There's usually contract clauses and insurance to ensure that you're not left with a half-finished house. When you hire that professional, you're not only paying for his experience, but all those other things, as well. There's a premium attached to those clauses and insurance. You could choose to forgo those…
Of course - if you give equity for workers, it is simply a form of salary. If they don't get equity, they should get a higher salary than workers who get equity. I agree to that. I just don't see why equity should always be a part of the compensation.
Re: Never hire job hoppers. Never. They make terrible employees.
#120I'm right at the age he was talking about. Does 3.5 years at my first job sticking through two short-term paycuts to be laid off make up for the now (6 employers) that have followed? * 1.5 years, left after the group was split in half and I was forced into full time testing (I enjoyed part time testing and the first year in that role was outstanding, the new position and team was not a good match). * 1 year, taken ov…
Anyone who spent at least 2 years at their first job is going to look good to those with a clue.
As you discovered, with all your recent jobs being short(er), you needed a good story, etc., but post dot.com crash I hope it wasn't too difficult. I wouldn't remove you from a job search for the above history.