3 ms·

I get it. But what you are describing is quite optimistic/idealistic. Most companies will say "no thanks" and move on to the next candidate in their list. The

by borplk 8y ago

I get it. But what you are describing is quite optimistic/idealistic. Most companies will say "no thanks" and move on to the next candidate in their list. There are much smaller things that companies treat as deal breakers, let alone asking for a private office. The dynamics of it just doesn't work if there is a open office plan with 20 people working in it, then there's one lone snowflake demanding their own office. Even if they agreed to that you wouldn't want that nightmare. Your practical options would be limiting your choice to companies that have private offices baked into their culture or remote jobs. Most people can't realistically afford to exclude that many job opportunities from their pool.

mlthoughts2018 8y ago
> "Most companies will say "no thanks" and move on to the next candidate in their list." I don't see why this makes any part of it idealistic or how it is connected. I view it as pragmatic. Consider an employer who feels so entitled to workers that just take whatever unproductive office space they give that they would just say, "no thanks" to a qualified candidate and move on. Never mind the fact that in many domains, it's extremely hard to find good engineers, and 'just moving on to the next candidate' is not really a thing. Beyond that, this employer would be telling me how entitled they believe they are, and inflexible about a top-down mandated open floor plan design. It's not idealism to want to avoid that sort of employer, it's just pragmatism. Like I mentioned, unless you're in dire straits and you have to compromise to take a job right away, then just say no. In other situations, you can by definition afford to just search longer and longer until an employer meets these standards. I agree it would require patience for a very long job search, but I don't agree that it is optimistic or idealistic. Rather, it's pragmatic and being patient to reject all the bad employers who won't care about your ergonomic health is important and worthwhile, even at the cost of a slow job search where you turn people down for failing to provide private offices.

by borplk 8y ago

mlthoughts2018 8y ago

> "Most companies will say "no thanks" and move on to the next candidate in their list." I don't see why this makes any part of it idealistic or how it is connected. I view it as pragmatic. Consider an employer who feels so entitled to workers that just take whatever unproductive office space they give that they would just say, "no thanks" to a qualified candidate and move on. Never mind the fact that in many domains, it's extremely hard to find good engineers, and 'just moving on to the next candidate' is not really a thing. Beyond that, this employer would be telling me how entitled they believe they are, and inflexible about a top-down mandated open floor plan design. It's not idealism to want to avoid that sort of employer, it's just pragmatism. Like I mentioned, unless you're in dire straits and you have to compromise to take a job right away, then just say no. In other situations, you can by definition afford to just search longer and longer until an employer meets these standards. I agree it would require patience for a very long job search, but I don't agree that it is optimistic or idealistic. Rather, it's pragmatic and being patient to reject all the bad employers who won't care about your ergonomic health is important and worthwhile, even at the cost of a slow job search where you turn people down for failing to provide private offices.