4 ms·
That does seem like it would be a problem! Like if you imagine 50% of people have an easy time (1 month search) and 50% have a hard time (2 months) and each per
by ianbicking 3y ago
That does seem like it would be a problem! Like if you imagine 50% of people have an easy time (1 month search) and 50% have a hard time (2 months) and each person had two searches with no correlation:
The groups will be 25% each, ie .25 EH, .25 EE, etc., if you track only people who start looking for a job during the first month of their search. In the second month it will be 50% EH and 50% HH. So a total of 3/8 EH, 3/8 HH, 1/8 HE, 1/8 EE. Or 3/8 bad, 1/2 same, 1/8 better.
- ghaff 3y agoHard time = looking for the better part of a year or more. Not 2 months which is pretty common outside of the tech boom.
- ianbicking 3y agoThe numbers are all made arbitrary/simple just to check if the general property is true: even if there's no change in the market, if you sample job seekers you will find more people who feel the job search is harder because a hard job search means you are on the market longer and more likely to be surveyed.
- ghaff 3y agoYes, but a market where it takes a month longer vs. a year longer probably implies different behaviors.
- eru 3y agoSo my original comment was to the effect that the average job seeker you can interview will always skew towards being that guy who's taking a year to find a job. But 'that guy' will change: many more people will be 'that guy' during a downturn, than during a boom.