Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please Jobhop as much as Possible

angryasian.posterous.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 89 posts

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#61

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

leftnode wrote: post #21

I guess I have a younger point of view, but it pains me to see people stay with a single company all their lives, it just seems like such a waste. They've dedicated their lives to making someone else richer is what it seems to me. The last company I worked for went under, and when I was searching for a new job, I interviewed with the corporation Conn's (similar to BestBuy/Fry's). I met one well paid executive there w…

but it pains me to see people stay with a single company all their lives

When you realize that to most people "it's just a job" it makes more sense. Work should not be your life. All I ask of my job is that it pay me well and be pleasant. If there's more, that's icing on the cake, but I look beyond my time at work to find meaning in myself.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#62

Post by nzmsv »

DrJokepu wrote: post #7
exit wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what makes it possible to be loyal to a country? a country is just a bureaucratic + economic entity you randomly get assigned to.

Many people (including me) see their country as a collective of shared history, culture and tradition they can associate themselves with. If you see your country as a 'bureaucratic + economic entity' then probably you've never lived in a foreign country. Believe me, that would completely change your perspective.

Actually, living in another country has completely changed my perspective - the other way. I wish more people would realize just how similar we all are in the end, and how shallow and arbitrary these cultural differences really are.

It's amazing how many people get a sense of superiority simply because they happened to be born in a certain spot. Think of how easy it is for politicians to exploit this feeling. How many wars started this way?

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#63

Post by eru »

gldalmaso wrote: post #13
driekken wrote: post #2

The whole concept of loyalty towards a corporation is off. You can have loyalty to family, to friends, to a country but never to an economic entity whose only purpose (on paper) is profit. I think that professionalism and well-defined internal rules should be the only things expected by employers.

I totally agree. To ask an employee for loyalty is nothing but moral cohertion. Employess should be comitted, yes, to their work, to the quality of their work, to having good relations with team and colleagues. Where do employers get the idea that a job contract is a soul contract? Unless you are offering significant profit sharing, why expect to be normal that people simply sacrifice themselves for the sake of your…

> The only ones that should have unconditional loyalty to a company are the company owners!

Why? They can just as well shut down the company, if they want, or sell it, or do whatever.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#64

Post by exit »

DrJokepu wrote: post #7
exit wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what makes it possible to be loyal to a country? a country is just a bureaucratic + economic entity you randomly get assigned to.

Many people (including me) see their country as a collective of shared history, culture and tradition they can associate themselves with. If you see your country as a 'bureaucratic + economic entity' then probably you've never lived in a foreign country. Believe me, that would completely change your perspective.

> Believe me, that would completely change your perspective.

i've lived in two countries other than the one i grew up in.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#65

Post by Alex63 »

JanezStupar wrote: post #59
Alex63 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I may be missing your point, but how do you blame the Boomers (of which I'm at the tail end) for this situation? Shouldn't you be blaming the "Greatest Generation" (parents of the Boomers) for setting up a system that depended on maintaining a high ratio of workers to retirees?

Well its the boomers that "didn't reproduce enough" (I'm not serious about this one). However the boomers are the ones that deregulated the shit out of the world, bankrupted the pension funds, built houses and luxuries on credit (they didn't invest much into infrastructure). They are also underqualified and sitting on many positions from which they are screwing their children (that's at least how it works in my count…

I like the idea that Boomers haven't been reproducing enough (although with 3 children I feel like I've done my part).

As a tail-end Boomer, I don't see current 20-somethings as "lazy and incompetent", but I know that my peers and I discuss the fact that Gen-Y seems to be motivated by different things than we were. In the context of the original discussion about job-hopping, I don't have any problem accepting that members of Gen-Y have different attitudes toward tenure in a particular job. However, as I mentioned in comments for a related posting, the issue from the employer's perspective isn't really whether they agree with your values, but whether they perceive hiring you as a good investment.

The costs of hiring someone are such that most companies want to be able to rely on the individual to stay in the role for at least 2 or 3 years. Furthermore, your value to the company increases rapidly as you gain experience in their particular business - they don't want to see that value walk out the door. Other posters in this discussion have suggested that the answer is for companies to make the job more interesting/rewarding, so that people will stay. I don't disagree with that - creating an environment that attracts and retains the best people is a critical success factor for IT organizations that I've worked with. However, when making a decision to hire, the employer can only consider the candidate's past track record, not some possible future where either the company or the candidate change behaviour.

I think this discussion may really be two separate questions: (1) is it reasonable for companies to discriminate against perceived "job-hoppers" when hiring, and (2) should companies adjust their practices to retain good employees? My answer to both would be a qualified "yes", although from some of the comments it seems like there are some people who would not stay at a company for more than a year or two regardless of the company's retention practices.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#66

Post by pw0ncakes »

BrandonM wrote: post #60
pw0ncakes wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Inflation is far less vicious than house-price inflation for most people. It's bizarre that so many people have adopted the "rising house prices = good" mentality, since housing is something on which people naturally have a short position (a need). Renters are obviously short housing, single-home owners are theoretically neutral (they own housing equal to their need) but actually short as well, since they're p…

This is a very insightful comment. Did you read something that gave you this notion, or was it an insight that you had on your own?

It's something I realized after I started working in finance-- the young are very "short housing", and most people are neutral at best.

In New York, housing is a source of widespread and ongoing misery. If you lose your job, you're truly fucked because rents can easily exceed $2000 for a studio. Many apartments lack basic first-world amenities in-building laundry and dishwasher because there is no need to include them when rents and prices are so ridiculously high. It's very difficult to save money here because a class of fucking parasites (most of whom don't even live in New York) are sucking everyone dry.

Land ownership is the justification for entrenched aristocracy and, in less-enlightened times, slavery. It always has been, and probably always will be. It's a concept that exists for a purpose that 90% of us would find distasteful. This is also why Americans have such a fetish for homeownership; throughout most of history, those who did not own land were at a social level comparable to slaves or serfs. What they don't realize is that if they take out mortgages on bad terms, they're assuming a speculative position while not gaining real ownership of the property.

I frankly think it's time for aggressive land reform, and I think private land ownership (with exceptions for small, single-house plots) needs to be retired as soon as we can build the infrastructure to replace it.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#67

Post by Mc_Big_G »

billybob wrote: post #29
Mc_Big_G wrote: post #15

I recently had a conversation with my 16 year old son who was having girl problems. Part of my advice was about playing the field. i.e. "What are the chances the best woman for you, in all the world, lives 1/4 mile away?" Similarly, what are the chances the best job for you is your first, or second, or third? Slim. Playing the field with employers should be the standard mode of operation. This possibly benefits emplo…

It's your kid, but I'd temper the advice with this: 1)There's no such thing as the perfect mate. Looking for perfection will make you dissatisfied with everyone you date. 2) A lot of what makes a relationship work or fail is how you treat each other, not who you're with. 3) "Playing the field" too much desensitizes you. Your memories with your mate are mingled and confused with memories of lots of others. You keep do…

Thanks for the suggestions. I did say "part of my advice", so our talk didn't consist of only that aspect.

There's no end to the amount of advice in the world when it comes to love and marriage. Some counterpoints:

Looking for perfection will make you dissatisfied with everyone you date.

Or, you will gain enough experience to realize when you've found the best one.

A lot of what makes a relationship work or fail is how you treat each other, not who you're with.

The way someone treats you is mostly a result of who they are.

"Playing the field" too much desensitizes you.

Maybe, but it is the best way to learn what personality traits you like and dislike.

Lasting love is way more satisfying than a lifetime of flings.

Your chances at finding lasting love are greatly increased if you search for and find the right person.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#68

Post by strlen »

When interviewing engineering candidates I look for competence and curiosity/passion for technology. Implicitly, I also look for ability to communicate (why did you come up with a solution that you did on the whiteboard?). Given that I only have forty five minutes, I simply can't afford to waste time asking about their life story. I'll ask em about their projects and why they're interested in this position, but I don't need more than a sentence about why they've switched jobs in the past.

Why did they have six jobs before thirty? Who knows? May be they switched career orientation (I've started in operations and moved into software development, that required a "hop"), may be they didn't know what they were looking for, may be they had a family situation.

Likely, if they worked at a single company for ten years, that's irrelevant if they manage to have the desired level of competence and have the desired level of passion and curiosity.

Are they leaving companies since they were fired (rather than downsized or left voluntarily) or put on a performance plan? That's to be checked through their references. Are they hopping purely for increased compensation? Then just refuse to meet outlandish salary demands (out of proportion to their skill level).

It's true that a bad looking resume may not make it past an HR filter. However, I've been swamped by recruiters (agency and company HR) at all times even after my resume had shown I've only been a few months at my company. Furthermore, when you're over thirty you'll likely have a network of coworkers who will be able to refer you to jobs bypassing the HR filter.

Rather than worry about what a blogger thinks about you and your generation, worry about learning and increasing your competence level. Make multiple companies fight over you (because you have a rare talent and excel at it) instead of fighting to get into a company.

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#69

Post by Alex63 »

pw0ncakes wrote: post #66
BrandonM wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very insightful comment. Did you read something that gave you this notion, or was it an insight that you had on your own?

It's something I realized after I started working in finance-- the young are very "short housing", and most people are neutral at best. In New York, housing is a source of widespread and ongoing misery. If you lose your job, you're truly fucked because rents can easily exceed $2000 for a studio. Many apartments lack basic first-world amenities in-building laundry and dishwasher because there is no need to include the…

I'm curious. Is a "small, single-house plot" a 30'x50' lot? A quarter acre? An acre? 160 acres? Should someone with a house on 160 acres in northern Alberta be subject to the same restrictions as a condo-owner in Manhattan?

Re: Please Jobhop as much as Possible

#70

Post by pw0ncakes »

Alex63 wrote: post #65
JanezStupar wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well its the boomers that "didn't reproduce enough" (I'm not serious about this one). However the boomers are the ones that deregulated the shit out of the world, bankrupted the pension funds, built houses and luxuries on credit (they didn't invest much into infrastructure). They are also underqualified and sitting on many positions from which they are screwing their children (that's at least how it works in my count…

I like the idea that Boomers haven't been reproducing enough (although with 3 children I feel like I've done my part). As a tail-end Boomer, I don't see current 20-somethings as "lazy and incompetent", but I know that my peers and I discuss the fact that Gen-Y seems to be motivated by different things than we were. In the context of the original discussion about job-hopping, I don't have any problem accepting that me…

from some of the comments it seems like there are some people who would not stay at a company for more than a year or two regardless of the company's retention practices.

I think that attitude's unusual. Most people would love to have conditions such that they can stay for 5-10 years at their next job, but are realistic enough to cut bait when the job isn't working out, from a career perspective.

Post reply on HN