11 ms·

Trying to pass 9 different jobs in 3 years as "hyperfocus on dumb details" and equivalent to being fired is not really a fair judgement. I've been part of inte

Trying to pass 9 different jobs in 3 years as "hyperfocus on dumb details" and equivalent to being fired is not really a fair judgement. I've been part of interview processes in some companies, and while I would not care about a couple of holes or being fired once or twice, I would definitely care about 9 jobs in 3 years. It shows either that the person is hard to work with, and in this case I'd rather have someone else, or that the person prefers to jump ship very often, and in this case I'd rather not pay the price of onboarding.

xena 4y ago
It's 9 jobs in 3 years including two contracting gigs and six years ago. People change in 6 years.
- Majestic121 4y ago
  Yes, people change in 6 years, and I would probably not consider it a strong bad signal anymore in 2022, given the following experiences. But in 2017, if I actually need someone in because we're a small structure and recruiting errors are costly ? I'll definitely go for a less risky candidate.
sodapopcan 4y ago
It could also show that they aren't willing to put up with shit work environments.
- Majestic121 4y ago
  Once or twice, yeah sure. 9 times in 3 years, it at best means that you're really really bad at judging and picking workplaces. But from the outside, if out of 9 places all are shitty, the problem might not be the workplaces.
PragmaticPulp 4y ago
> Trying to pass 9 different jobs in 3 years as "hyperfocus on dumb details" I’m constantly baffled by HN assertions that nothing should matter in an interview. If 3 early terminations and 9 jobs in 3 years are “dumb details” then I don’t even know what these people would consider relevant when it comes to work history. Juxtapose this with the “Ask HN” posts from people asking how to deal with incompetent or difficult coworkers, where the response is usually a chorus of “GTFO”. Like you said, there’s a reason hiring managers focus on these details: It’s because we have to protect the team, and bringing in someone who has a history of causing problems or failing to deliver puts everybody at risk.

xena 4y ago

It's 9 jobs in 3 years including two contracting gigs and six years ago. People change in 6 years.

Majestic121 4y ago
Yes, people change in 6 years, and I would probably not consider it a strong bad signal anymore in 2022, given the following experiences. But in 2017, if I actually need someone in because we're a small structure and recruiting errors are costly ? I'll definitely go for a less risky candidate.

sodapopcan 4y ago

It could also show that they aren't willing to put up with shit work environments.

Majestic121 4y ago
Once or twice, yeah sure. 9 times in 3 years, it at best means that you're really really bad at judging and picking workplaces. But from the outside, if out of 9 places all are shitty, the problem might not be the workplaces.

PragmaticPulp 4y ago

> Trying to pass 9 different jobs in 3 years as "hyperfocus on dumb details" I’m constantly baffled by HN assertions that nothing should matter in an interview. If 3 early terminations and 9 jobs in 3 years are “dumb details” then I don’t even know what these people would consider relevant when it comes to work history. Juxtapose this with the “Ask HN” posts from people asking how to deal with incompetent or difficult coworkers, where the response is usually a chorus of “GTFO”. Like you said, there’s a reason hiring managers focus on these details: It’s because we have to protect the team, and bringing in someone who has a history of causing problems or failing to deliver puts everybody at risk.