4 ms·

You have provided a reason for not offering relocation. Not an explanation for offering a bad relocation deal. You and OP are talking about very different thi

You have provided a reason for not offering relocation. Not an explanation for offering a bad relocation deal. You and OP are talking about very different things. If that was the case, why would you extend a job offer with a bad relocation deal rather than not offering the job at all? Are you hoping the applicant sees how bad your deal is and turns you down? Why wouldn't you just not make the offer?

hcho 12y ago
Everything in a job offer is open to negotiation. Sometimes I have to go back to my boss to extend my range if I like a candidate a lot. If the candidate flips after that, the failure is much more public than I would like.
- avmich 12y ago
  I think you're proving OP point.
S4M 12y ago
Not really IMHO. If hcho's candidate leaves quickly after an expensive relocation, hcho's boss is not gonna like it ("come on, you made us spend 20k on relocation for this guy who ended up leaving after one month!"), while the pill will have a less bitter taste if the relocation cost is much cheaper.
- kyllo 12y ago
  Yet somehow this never seems to be a problem for managerial hires...
- greenyoda 12y ago
  Being in business is inherently risky. If that hypothetical employee leaves five years later, in the middle of a critical unfinished project that she's been holding together with her unique mix of skills and domain knowledge, it will cost the company much more than $20K. Or if the company hires a lesser-qualified candidate because they don't require relocation, that could also easily cost the company much more than $20K in the long term. Also, an employee with a stable work history isn't likely to leave quickly after finding a new job unless (1) there's something terribly wrong with the company's culture or work environment, or (2) they've been lied to (e.g., told in their offer letter that they'd get fully-paid health insurance and four weeks of vacation, only to have them taken away a few months later by a "policy change").

hcho 12y ago

Everything in a job offer is open to negotiation. Sometimes I have to go back to my boss to extend my range if I like a candidate a lot. If the candidate flips after that, the failure is much more public than I would like.

avmich 12y ago
I think you're proving OP point.

S4M 12y ago

Not really IMHO. If hcho's candidate leaves quickly after an expensive relocation, hcho's boss is not gonna like it ("come on, you made us spend 20k on relocation for this guy who ended up leaving after one month!"), while the pill will have a less bitter taste if the relocation cost is much cheaper.

kyllo 12y ago
Yet somehow this never seems to be a problem for managerial hires...
greenyoda 12y ago
Being in business is inherently risky. If that hypothetical employee leaves five years later, in the middle of a critical unfinished project that she's been holding together with her unique mix of skills and domain knowledge, it will cost the company much more than $20K. Or if the company hires a lesser-qualified candidate because they don't require relocation, that could also easily cost the company much more than $20K in the long term. Also, an employee with a stable work history isn't likely to leave quickly after finding a new job unless (1) there's something terribly wrong with the company's culture or work environment, or (2) they've been lied to (e.g., told in their offer letter that they'd get fully-paid health insurance and four weeks of vacation, only to have them taken away a few months later by a "policy change").