3 ms·
If this was the case, then it would not hurt their chances to hire people much if they were open about it, saying that hiring was conditioned on closing the nex
by Grustaf 4y ago
If this was the case, then it would not hurt their chances to hire people much if they were open about it, saying that hiring was conditioned on closing the next round for example. But in both cases the message was clearly the opposite and that they had 18+ months of runway. In one case they had additionally signed a contract for a similar amount.
- gwbas1c 4y agoMakes me curious about their side of the decision. If they essentially told you, on the last day of your trial, that they aren't hiring you, that's not very respectful of your job search. FWIW: Most startups fail. Most startups will evolve to be a place that you won't like. There is a reason why startups have such high turnover. In my case, often when I ask a founder tough questions, I get rejected. It's okay, because I probably won't have the patience to work for someone who can't answer my tough questions. But, getting back to you: I suspect "funding" is a convenient excuse, but I wouldn't read too much into it. Instead, I suggest being a lot more defensive in the process: Don't do 1-month contracts. Instead, target ~6-month contracts with a ~1-week trial and a ~3 week severance. Explain that you've found that 1-month trials are impractical given how much time you spend interviewing. Point out that, just like the contracting status protects the company, you need severance to protect yourself too.