• mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    My manager does this. If he sees that a job candidate hops jobs a lot he won’t give them an interview. That being said, our yearly raises meet/exceed inflation and he’s a pretty good manager

    • Chriswild@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Just because they are good and your job gives raises doesn’t mean previous employers did.

      If you want loyalty get a dog, I work to get paid.

      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        If someone’s spent less than 2 years at their 3 most recent jobs, there’s a high chance they’re job hopping. Especially if they’re engineers in a discipline that can take months to a year to be fully capable of the tasks needed.

        • dimeslime@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Im pretty senior now, you’d pass me by and the most valuable thing I’d do is to reduce that learning time.

          I don’t know what you do, but in my IT jobs I’ve seen  long onboarding times are due companies not focusing on their product, eg: a finance company writing their own authentication system, or maintaining someone’s vanity project who has long since departed. Get rid of that and you can bring people in off the street.

          • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Get rid of that and you can bring people in off the street.

            Yeah, you can’t do that with engineering. Especially when you’re building models to support multiple product lines and have physical testing you have to match to

    • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s not a very logical approach.

      If the qualifications are in place, your manager may be losing out on good and qualified workforce that would be loyal if they got treated well

      • Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        That’s about as logical and as loaded as an assumption as being fickle. It could also mean the person isn’t qualified and other employers figured that out. But again these are assumptions. In their shoes they are right to be wary and probably have some experiences backing up that caution.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        For junior positions maybe. For senior and especially principals there is a ton of value to continuity. When a senior engineer leaves it’s almost like replacing the entire team in terms of overhead if there isn’t a natural successor. And when principals leave you end up losing vision as well as that leadership. This can kill entire projects of it happens unexpectedly.

      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        My position required at least a year to learn everything, and I’m a pretty fast learner. My coworkers jobs require a similar level of training, even with experience. If a candidate spent less than 2 years at their 3 most recent jobs then I agree with my manager that they weren’t worth potentially wasting time on.