Win a copy of 97 Things Every Java Programmer Should Know this week in the Java in General forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Paul Clapham
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Junilu Lacar
  • Henry Wong
Sheriffs:
  • Ron McLeod
  • Devaka Cooray
  • Tim Cooke
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Piet Souris
  • salvin francis
  • fred rosenberger

Who has the advantage?

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 49
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi All,

Do employers favouor candidates with long-term/permanent employment history over candidates with short term contracts (3 months - 1 year), especially given the current market conditions, where permanent jobs are rare ? How can a candidate with lateral moves convince an employer to hire them?

Regards,
Saliya
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 108
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
IF you are the 'right' candidate (means you satisfy their required experience,salary negotiation) then all things are smoothly followed.
 
Author
Posts: 6049
2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
In general employers prefer to see stability in their hires. I face the same problem myself, since I have worked primarily in contracts and at startups. You basically have to pitch yourself and convince them that the reasons were valid and not you seem getting bored or wanting more money.

--Mark
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 451
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
It's not valid to want more money?
 
Mark Herschberg
Author
Posts: 6049
2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Don Stadler:
It's not valid to want more money? ;)



I know you're being sarcastic, but for the young 'ums for whom the answer might not be obvious, I'll reply.

Wanting more money is fine and it's a time honored reason for changing jobs. However, if you change jobs every year, or even every 6 months (yes, I saw it happen during the boom), it looks bad. They'll assume that in 6-12 months, you'll be out the door for your next job when you get bored of this salary.

--Mark
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5093
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Don Stadler:
It's not valid to want more money?



In today's jobmarket, it's not.
What is looked at is dedication and loyalty, not personal greed.

Myself, I never changed jobs purely for the money (though money can be a catalyst).
I have gone forward in pay every time I changed jobs but one (that one was forced by a bankruptcy, my salary there was lower than I had before the bankruptcy but higher than my unemployment money) but that was never my primary reason, it was just icing on the cake.
 
Don Stadler
Ranch Hand
Posts: 451
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Mark Herschberg:


I know you're being sarcastic, but for the young 'ums for whom the answer might not be obvious, I'll reply.

Wanting more money is fine and it's a time honored reason for changing jobs. However, if you change jobs every year, or even every 6 months (yes, I saw it happen during the boom), it looks bad. They'll assume that in 6-12 months, you'll be out the door for your next job when you get bored of this salary.



You're absolutely correct about frequent job changes. I have never done this in fact. Indeed I've tried to stay at least 2 years wherever I go. I'm currently in an interesting situation. I'm in a job which is teaching me a lot and that's valuable. The pay is well under long-term market rates.

I'm not actively in the job market right now but probably will be after my next review because I'm not expecting a major rise to bring things into line with what I see as my long-term value. A lot depends upon the kind of work I get. If I stay on my current project I may stay longer (perhaps even stay out the 2 years) because I see long-term value in the skills I'm developing. It's not impossible I would stay longer if things work out and I get a senior post and pay in line with that. The problem is that this is a very good staff and I can see several people who may be promoted before I am. Possibly even on the merits, as difficult as this is to admit!

In the meantime I'm not discontented and am doing my level best for my employer.

Why would I change? If another role became available where I could do what I'm doing now but at 20% more I'd probably go (Doh!). If my learning curve leveled off I'd have to think about getting more income in lieu of the experience which is currently acting as a substitute. The job market is still skittish, so my view is that this is as good a place as any for the time being. I probably could make more doing something crappy which wouldn't help my career but I prefer to take the longer term view.

What is the point? I guess it's that money is a very important long-term measure. Ultimately it's largely about the money (or lifestyle) considerations. Employers who underpay are going to have to offer powerful inducements to keep staqff (such as the day-care and flexible hours that SAP offers it's staff). Money isn't always the only thing but it's a rare situation in which it isn't the major consideration.

That said, I find it difficult to understand how the most extreme job-swappers can stick at anything long enough to learn the things really worth doing. It's simply impossible to get a feel for the full life cycle or to learn the leadership skills needed to lead teams while switching jobs twice a year. That only works for commodity programming I think.
[ May 25, 2004: Message edited by: Don Stadler ]
 
Don Stadler
Ranch Hand
Posts: 451
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

What is looked at is dedication and loyalty, not personal greed



Hmmmm. Dedication, yes. Not because it's visible to the employer or necessarily valued if it is. More because without dedication it can be next to impossible to hold on through times like we have been through recently or to adapt at the speed which is required.

Loyalty? I've seen loyal employers but they are distinctly in the minority, and being overly loyal to an employer who is not loyal to their employees can be extremely self-destructive. As I have learned through personal experience. I'm never disloyal, but my loyalty must be earned. I no longer give it out promiscuously. Personal greed should not be decried within a long-term context. Greed can be destructive or it can be good. It depends on how you express it.....
 
Jeroen Wenting
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5093
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator


Loyalty? I've seen loyal employers but they are distinctly in the minority, and being overly loyal to an employer who is not loyal to their employees can be extremely self-destructive. As I have learned through personal experience. I'm never disloyal, but my loyalty must be earned. I no longer give it out promiscuously. Personal greed should not be decried within a long-term context. Greed can be destructive or it can be good. It depends on how you express it.....



Of course loyalty has to go both ways. I've had the bad experience myself of having the CEO of the company I worked for fleeing the country with the company cash reserves as well as the content of the pension fund.
All or most staff at that company were extremely loyal and didn't suspect a thing for several months (he'd been out of the country for longer periods in the past, ran several other companies, etc. so it was common not to have him around).
That experience cost me my entire life savings... So yes, loyalty can be destructive.
But companies do look for it in that they don't want people who walk out on them on the first sign of trouble or whenever someone comes offering a bit more money or a shiny new laptop (we all know the incentives recruiters were offering during the .com boom).
They're investing in you just as you invest in them and it takes time to recover that investment. They want some assurances that you won't abandon them before they get their money's worth out of you which I find completely understandable.
 
Saliya Jinadasa
Ranch Hand
Posts: 49
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,

My first three jobs were permanent ones where I stayed 2 yrs, 2+yrs and 3 months. I left the last perm job after 3 months since I was unhappy with the limited responsibilities and narrow job scope. Afterwards, I started contracts 4 months, 9 months and now 6 months. I realize that being on contract does not help to build up a career. I am looking for a perm position but it seems hard after being in contracts for sometime.

Regards,
Saliya
 
Jeroen Wenting
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5093
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I had a permanent job at a company doing contracting work (consultancy, programming, etc).
IMO the best of both world if you have wild hair you want to loose.

You get a new job regularly while still having permanent employ.

Of course that type of company was about the first to go under during the .com crash as our customers started consolidating and downsizing which meant the first people to be thrown out were the outside contractors.
 
Greenhorn
Posts: 14
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
A company asked me to sign a statement which stated that as a contractor, I would be penalized %20 of my last 100 hrs of pay should I leave the position before a specified date. Is this normal for companies to ask contractors sign statement like this? If so, is that number within the acceptable range? Thank you.
 
Mark Herschberg
Author
Posts: 6049
2
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by long silverstein:
A company asked me to sign a statement which stated that as a contractor, I would be penalized %20 of my last 100 hrs of pay should I leave the position before a specified date. Is this normal for companies to ask contractors sign statement like this? If so, is that number within the acceptable range? Thank you.



Please do not hijack this thread. Post a new thread with this question if you'd like it answered.

--Mark
 
Shiny ad:
Devious Experiments for a Truly Passive Greenhouse!
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/paulwheaton/greenhouse-1
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic