3 ms·

> - Looked for jobs with slightly under full-time work loads to allow me time to rest (found only one for 2 years, but the extra rest helped me slow down diseas

> - Looked for jobs with slightly under full-time work loads to allow me time to rest (found only one for 2 years, but the extra rest helped me slow down disease progression a lot) I think it's awful that such jobs are hard to find, considering the effect on disease progression of all things. My own only very distantly related anecdote. I'd had an interview with a hiring manager, who would be my boss, who liked me and was keen to employ. But he didn't get to make the decision; he passed me to Head of HR who made the final decision on all hires. The conversation with Head of HR seemed to go well, and I would have taken almost any terms (including a pay cut) because I really liked that job. But he (HR) wouldn't say how much they'd pay or give any clues about what level they operated at. He insisted on negotiating by insisting that I make the first move with no information, and say what would would make me happy. So I asked if they would consider a 4 day week. No pressure, I'd happily do 5 but 4 would be something I'd like. That, it turns out, was a "red flag" for them, the idea that I might not be loyal enough to the company that I'd want to spend a day doing something else. This despite my evident eagerness for that particular job. There was no concern about not getting enough work done; they had enough people. It was all about concern that I might do something else with my time off. I didn't get the job. Despite getting a message from the hiring manager that he was going to send me an offer the next morning, it was blocked by HR the following day with concerns about loyalty being given internally as the reason. Of course HR told me something else entirely.

Viliam1234 7y ago
This is exactly the reason why part-time jobs are so difficult to find. By saying "I don't want to sacrifice as much time as possible to this job" you send a bad signal. You working 4 days instead of 5 is frankly not a problem. But you wanting to work 4 days instead of 5 is. Why hire a guy who wants to sacrifice less, when you could hire a guy who wants to sacrifice more? Having a life outside of job is a red flag. Do you have hobbies? Dreams? Want to spend more time with your kids before they grow up and leave home? Go somewhere else; I want someone more loyal than you. There are exceptions. Typically, women returning from maternity leave; with the assumption that the part-time is only for a year or two, followed by usual full-time. Also, students who work besides their school; again, with the assumption that after finishing school, the work becomes full-time. In both cases, there is a good excuse. "I'd love to devote my all time to you, but my selfish baby insists on my presence, and I need a few months before I can store it in kindergarten for the whole day." "I'd love to devote all my time to you, but this stupid school insists on me going to lessons and exams, but it will soon be over, I promise." Maybe a health problem could serve as a sufficient excuse. "I'd love to devote all my time to you, but my doctor says 4 days a week max, otherwise I'll drop dead." It misses the "soon, it will be full-time" part, but at least it doesn't signal insufficient loyalty. I don't know; I never tried this. I'd like to hear a report from people who did.
- Arete314159 7y ago
  I see where you're going with this, but a health problem which you are open about is often the kiss of death. Going by your theory, it means you'll never be able to make that sacrifice and you'll always have a different set of priorities... But really what happens in corporate America is more brutal: "health problems" = weakness, and showing weakness is very bad. A lot of employers prefer a mediocre employee who is there all the time to a stellar employee who has any sort of "defect." So actually it took me some effort to find employers who were "nice enough" to rate me only on my work output and quality rather than on some sort of law-of-the-jungle, survival-of-the-fittest thing.
Arete314159 7y ago
Wow. That is nuts. The thing is, for technical jobs like the ones folks at Hacker News tend to have, I find almost no difference in my output between 30 and 40 hour weeks. 30 hours / week I'm more mentally / physically refreshed and better able to problem-solve, so I get my work done faster. The only advantage to a full-time schedule is that it's easier to coordinate / follow-up with other people.

Viliam1234 7y ago

This is exactly the reason why part-time jobs are so difficult to find. By saying "I don't want to sacrifice as much time as possible to this job" you send a bad signal. You working 4 days instead of 5 is frankly not a problem. But you wanting to work 4 days instead of 5 is. Why hire a guy who wants to sacrifice less, when you could hire a guy who wants to sacrifice more? Having a life outside of job is a red flag. Do you have hobbies? Dreams? Want to spend more time with your kids before they grow up and leave home? Go somewhere else; I want someone more loyal than you. There are exceptions. Typically, women returning from maternity leave; with the assumption that the part-time is only for a year or two, followed by usual full-time. Also, students who work besides their school; again, with the assumption that after finishing school, the work becomes full-time. In both cases, there is a good excuse. "I'd love to devote my all time to you, but my selfish baby insists on my presence, and I need a few months before I can store it in kindergarten for the whole day." "I'd love to devote all my time to you, but this stupid school insists on me going to lessons and exams, but it will soon be over, I promise." Maybe a health problem could serve as a sufficient excuse. "I'd love to devote all my time to you, but my doctor says 4 days a week max, otherwise I'll drop dead." It misses the "soon, it will be full-time" part, but at least it doesn't signal insufficient loyalty. I don't know; I never tried this. I'd like to hear a report from people who did.

Arete314159 7y ago
I see where you're going with this, but a health problem which you are open about is often the kiss of death. Going by your theory, it means you'll never be able to make that sacrifice and you'll always have a different set of priorities... But really what happens in corporate America is more brutal: "health problems" = weakness, and showing weakness is very bad. A lot of employers prefer a mediocre employee who is there all the time to a stellar employee who has any sort of "defect." So actually it took me some effort to find employers who were "nice enough" to rate me only on my work output and quality rather than on some sort of law-of-the-jungle, survival-of-the-fittest thing.

Arete314159 7y ago

Wow. That is nuts. The thing is, for technical jobs like the ones folks at Hacker News tend to have, I find almost no difference in my output between 30 and 40 hour weeks. 30 hours / week I'm more mentally / physically refreshed and better able to problem-solve, so I get my work done faster. The only advantage to a full-time schedule is that it's easier to coordinate / follow-up with other people.