4 ms·
> I think it’s the liability it incurs. A two week commitment. I just can’t see doing it for $4k. It’s just not worth it. In my opinion it's the opposite of a
by nickjj 5y ago
> I think it’s the liability it incurs. A two week commitment. I just can’t see doing it for $4k. It’s just not worth it.
In my opinion it's the opposite of a liability. You're getting practical experience to know what it'll be like to work at that place. More hours ends up being better because each hour you put in gives you more information. It's an opportunity to see how things are run, get to know the team (if you pair'd with a few different people), get a feel for what you'll be doing, etc..
If you're worried about a 2 week commitment how are you not worried about general W2 employment where it's expected you'll be committing 40 hours a week until you either retire or die? The same applies for most 1099 contracts too where chances are you'll be putting in multiple weeks or months to complete a task.
- renewiltord 5y agoI’m trying to feel out why it bothers me and I think it’s because: - I will probably exit an interview process in an hour if the company isn’t a good fit - We’re not talking about normal employment here. This is in addition to my job.
- nickjj 5y agoYou'd be able to exit the process if it's not a good fit using this method too. Perhaps even during an initial call before there's any type of contract mentioned. Going for interviews while you're currently employed is also in addition to your job. It's just you're doing "real world" things in the contract based interview instead of answering technical questions or whiteboarding implementations.
- renewiltord 5y agoWould that be fun? I’m thinking of the idea here and it just sounds like such a chore to me. At least whiteboard interviews are fun. Setting up your IDE and all that boring stuff. But you know what, man, maybe I’m just status quo biasing and it would be better. I can’t nail down why I don’t like it after all.