2 ms·
There's effectively no difference, but the general understanding (with some exceptions, e.g., Netflix) is that hiring someone full-time involves a commitment on
by __derek__ 11y ago
There's effectively no difference, but the general understanding (with some exceptions, e.g., Netflix) is that hiring someone full-time involves a commitment on behalf of both sides to do what's possible to make it work. If there are issues, the employer and employee will try to fix them. With a probationary period that explicitly involves a determination on a longer-term relationship, that's not a given. At least, that's my understanding, and others may correct me.
- aeling 11y agoWhy do you except Netflix here? I'm not familiar with anything unusual about their hiring, and a couple of quick searches didn't turn up anything. Has their hiring been on HN previously?
- ghaff 11y agoI assume that he's referring to some of the pieces that have been written about Netflix practices such as lack of performance improvement plans. If someone isn't working out for whatever reason--maybe the job requirements have changed--let them go rather than stringing things along. I'm not sure that's inconsistent with trying to make things work though, just not trying to make things work out when you know how the story will end. https://hbr.org/2014/01/how-netflix-reinvented-hr https://hbr.org/2014/01/how-netflix-reinvented-hr