4 ms·
> near-complete job security is a must for me Unless we understand vastly different things by "job security", I have some bad news for you. Recent years showe
by n3t 1y ago
> near-complete job security is a must for me
Unless we understand vastly different things by "job security", I have some bad news for you.
Recent years showed that even large, profitable companies with significant cash reserves -- that had a reputation of high level of job security -- are ready to do layoffs as a sacrifice to the gods of Wall Street.
- career_question 1y agoI guess _relative_ job security is what I'm hoping for. I realize there are few career paths that guarantee employment (perhaps medicine being the main exception), but despite the FAANG layoffs and whatnot, wouldn't it still be correct to say working at a somewhat well-established company is safer than working independently?
- n3t 1y agoNot necessarily. I think that employment has a higher job security floor but a lower job security ceiling. _In a way_, employment is like having a single client. You have smaller variance month to month but are more prone to unexpected events in the company you work for. You can build financial resilience by having multiple (preferably diverse) clients. Another thing to take into account is that you are not in control of being laid off or a client not extending their contract with you. But you are in control of your own savings. And this applies in both scenarios.
- career_question 1y agoI hadn't thought of it in this way, security floor vs ceiling is a very interesting way to look at the matter.
- datadrivenangel 1y agoThough if your clients share correlated retention factors, systemic changes could still result in large drops of revenue.
- pillefitz 1y agoAt least FAANG and well-funded startups did a lot of overhiring. When thinking about stable jobs I have classically boring ones in mind, such as ones in utilities or defense