8 ms·

Yeah, and in my experience it's also about the pattern. There isn't a rule or anything. 1-2 short stints, totally fine. 3-4 short stints but with one or more 5+

Yeah, and in my experience it's also about the pattern. There isn't a rule or anything. 1-2 short stints, totally fine. 3-4 short stints but with one or more 5+ year stints, probably also fine. 5 jobs, never for more than 9 months? Whatever is going on, it doesn't seem crazy to expect that it's going to manifest at job #6 as well.

defrost 4y ago
> 5 jobs, never for more than 9 months? So .. someone with less than 5 years on the workforce? Look, I'm 60+ (ish) and still actively managing projects in code, engineering, mining, signal processing+interp - from my PoV anyone with less than five years on the workforce is still a child. When I look for people to land roles that shepard a five+ year project through I'm looking for people with at least 8-10 years employed already with at least one two year run and a stated intent to "settle" into a position - ie maybe kids, perhaps a new house, maybe family in the area, etc. Exposure to multiple bad projects is fine, especially if they can articulate how things went bad and how things might have been better managed to avoid that (ie big picture awareness). You do have a point, however you might be setting the bar a little low .. less than five years in is barely a toe in the paddling pool of life.
- joebob42 4y ago
  Fwiw this perspective (talking about expectations of age, family status, background as conditions) would get you kicked as far away as possible from any hiring decisions where I work. I think mostly for legal / dei reasons to my understanding, but your whole statement reads like a radioactive hr bomb to me.
  - defrost 4y ago
    Sure, none the less, if you're looking for someone (any age, any gender, any etc.) for a long term position who will stick through the good, the bad, and the ugly that might occur during a five to ten year time frame then you're looking for any signs and indications that people have some past experience of sticking through things, are willing to stick through things in the future, and have an understanding of how things can go sour and what steps can be taken to mediate. There are many indications of the ability to make a long term commitment and survive a rocky path, not all of them traditional and conventional, with the least common factor being some time at the pump.
    - pc86 4y ago
      This just smacks of wanting to treat people like shit. Given the tone of some of your other comments in this thread that actually makes perfect sense. If you want people to "stick through...the bad and the ugly" compensate them accordingly and perhaps most importantly make sure their salary keeps pace with the market as a whole instead of the typical 2-3% raises most people see every year. But even that won't keep the best people, because the best people don't have to tolerate assholes at their job, they can just go get a better one.
    - greatpostman 4y ago
      Wage slave mentality
  - kortilla 4y ago
    Expectations of 10 years of experience is absolutely not an HR bomb. You need to retake your DEI training. To get what the op is looking for, you put the 10 year req, then structure comp ballooning towards the end of the vest and it will get you exactly those people op wants. You don’t say, “must be settling with a family”. You offer something that is only enticing if you’re going to stay 5 years.
    - joebob42 4y ago
      I was referring to the family / kids but more than the 10 years. If what you're saying is "that's what I'm looking for but I wouldn't say it..." I dunno, that seems like exactly the sort of thing people would complain about.
      - defrost 4y ago
        So ... you have issue with people maybe having kids (whether their own / adopted, etc) or perhaps having family in an area (cousins, parents, etc) ? This seems odd to say the least. As I stated, for longer termed positions that require some stability matching the duration of a capital build project we look for people that have had exposure to a variety of past experiences and some demonstrated ability to stick something out coupled with some indication they making long term plans. Which bit of that goes agin your HR policy?
        snotrockets 4y ago
        The problem is favoring candidates based on non-professional features, like their families, as you admitted to doing.
        defrost 4y ago
        That's not what was said ... Some positions require a degree of intelligence, there are many things that can demonstrate levels and types of intelligence. Some positions demand a certain amount of physical endurance, there are many things that can indicate physical ability. Some positions demand a level of stability and commitment to time scale, there are many different factors that can indicate that. Some comments require a certain ability to read qualifiers and nuance in the English language, there are many that breeze right past such things and imagine things unwritten.
  - blitzar 4y ago
    Only on instagram and tiktok do they make someone a "CEO" a year out of school. Even then it is daddy that made them CEO and they are CEO of tidying their bedroom. Edit: seem I have triggered some 24 year old C suite excutives
    - snotrockets 4y ago
      The owners of this website encourage and invest in startups helmed by people even younger.
      - blitzar 4y ago
        And the sucess rate of those at the helm of companies the owners of this website encourage and invest in is <10%.
- pc86 4y ago
  Imagine unironically saying that someone potentially just a few years from 30 "is still a child." That's nearly as bad as saying your hiring criteria includes someone with kids and a mortgage (presumably because these people are easier to lock into shitty situations as opposed to the "children" who can easily just leave and go elsewhere). Sorry, I mean those are the ones with demonstrated commitment. Our time on Earth is limited, and five years is a non-trivial percentage of our working life. If you're a highly compensated engineer and you retire on the earlier side of normal for that cohort, you've got maybe 30-35 years.
  - Silhouette 4y ago
    Imagine unironically saying that someone potentially just a few years from 30 "is still a child." They... didn't? A developer who has a typical graduate academic career, went straight into the software industry, and then had 5 jobs for less than 9 months each is probably in their mid-20s. In terms of technical skills and professional maturity anyone like that probably is still almost a child in terms of their career and the series of very short tenures definitely makes that more likely. Our time on Earth is limited, and five years is a non-trivial percentage of our working life. That's true. But as you point out yourself it's still only a relatively small part of our likely working life unless we luck out and reach FIRE status with a big exit or something. You can pick up some useful skills and develop an effective professional mindset in five years. But you'll do the same again in the next five and then again in the five after that.

defrost 4y ago

> 5 jobs, never for more than 9 months? So .. someone with less than 5 years on the workforce? Look, I'm 60+ (ish) and still actively managing projects in code, engineering, mining, signal processing+interp - from my PoV anyone with less than five years on the workforce is still a child. When I look for people to land roles that shepard a five+ year project through I'm looking for people with at least 8-10 years employed already with at least one two year run and a stated intent to "settle" into a position - ie maybe kids, perhaps a new house, maybe family in the area, etc. Exposure to multiple bad projects is fine, especially if they can articulate how things went bad and how things might have been better managed to avoid that (ie big picture awareness). You do have a point, however you might be setting the bar a little low .. less than five years in is barely a toe in the paddling pool of life.

joebob42 4y ago
Fwiw this perspective (talking about expectations of age, family status, background as conditions) would get you kicked as far away as possible from any hiring decisions where I work. I think mostly for legal / dei reasons to my understanding, but your whole statement reads like a radioactive hr bomb to me.
- defrost 4y ago
  Sure, none the less, if you're looking for someone (any age, any gender, any etc.) for a long term position who will stick through the good, the bad, and the ugly that might occur during a five to ten year time frame then you're looking for any signs and indications that people have some past experience of sticking through things, are willing to stick through things in the future, and have an understanding of how things can go sour and what steps can be taken to mediate. There are many indications of the ability to make a long term commitment and survive a rocky path, not all of them traditional and conventional, with the least common factor being some time at the pump.
  - pc86 4y ago
    This just smacks of wanting to treat people like shit. Given the tone of some of your other comments in this thread that actually makes perfect sense. If you want people to "stick through...the bad and the ugly" compensate them accordingly and perhaps most importantly make sure their salary keeps pace with the market as a whole instead of the typical 2-3% raises most people see every year. But even that won't keep the best people, because the best people don't have to tolerate assholes at their job, they can just go get a better one.
  - greatpostman 4y ago
    Wage slave mentality
- kortilla 4y ago
  Expectations of 10 years of experience is absolutely not an HR bomb. You need to retake your DEI training. To get what the op is looking for, you put the 10 year req, then structure comp ballooning towards the end of the vest and it will get you exactly those people op wants. You don’t say, “must be settling with a family”. You offer something that is only enticing if you’re going to stay 5 years.
  - joebob42 4y ago
    I was referring to the family / kids but more than the 10 years. If what you're saying is "that's what I'm looking for but I wouldn't say it..." I dunno, that seems like exactly the sort of thing people would complain about.
    - defrost 4y ago
      So ... you have issue with people maybe having kids (whether their own / adopted, etc) or perhaps having family in an area (cousins, parents, etc) ? This seems odd to say the least. As I stated, for longer termed positions that require some stability matching the duration of a capital build project we look for people that have had exposure to a variety of past experiences and some demonstrated ability to stick something out coupled with some indication they making long term plans. Which bit of that goes agin your HR policy?
      - snotrockets 4y ago
        The problem is favoring candidates based on non-professional features, like their families, as you admitted to doing.
        defrost 4y ago
        That's not what was said ... Some positions require a degree of intelligence, there are many things that can demonstrate levels and types of intelligence. Some positions demand a certain amount of physical endurance, there are many things that can indicate physical ability. Some positions demand a level of stability and commitment to time scale, there are many different factors that can indicate that. Some comments require a certain ability to read qualifiers and nuance in the English language, there are many that breeze right past such things and imagine things unwritten.
- blitzar 4y ago
  Only on instagram and tiktok do they make someone a "CEO" a year out of school. Even then it is daddy that made them CEO and they are CEO of tidying their bedroom. Edit: seem I have triggered some 24 year old C suite excutives
  - snotrockets 4y ago
    The owners of this website encourage and invest in startups helmed by people even younger.
    - blitzar 4y ago
      And the sucess rate of those at the helm of companies the owners of this website encourage and invest in is <10%.
pc86 4y ago
Imagine unironically saying that someone potentially just a few years from 30 "is still a child." That's nearly as bad as saying your hiring criteria includes someone with kids and a mortgage (presumably because these people are easier to lock into shitty situations as opposed to the "children" who can easily just leave and go elsewhere). Sorry, I mean those are the ones with demonstrated commitment. Our time on Earth is limited, and five years is a non-trivial percentage of our working life. If you're a highly compensated engineer and you retire on the earlier side of normal for that cohort, you've got maybe 30-35 years.
- Silhouette 4y ago
  Imagine unironically saying that someone potentially just a few years from 30 "is still a child." They... didn't? A developer who has a typical graduate academic career, went straight into the software industry, and then had 5 jobs for less than 9 months each is probably in their mid-20s. In terms of technical skills and professional maturity anyone like that probably is still almost a child in terms of their career and the series of very short tenures definitely makes that more likely. Our time on Earth is limited, and five years is a non-trivial percentage of our working life. That's true. But as you point out yourself it's still only a relatively small part of our likely working life unless we luck out and reach FIRE status with a big exit or something. You can pick up some useful skills and develop an effective professional mindset in five years. But you'll do the same again in the next five and then again in the five after that.