source stringlengths 620 29.3k | target stringlengths 12 1.24k |
|---|---|
Leaving a position after receiving bonus/raise I receive a yearly bonus and raise every December. I plan on potentially leaving my current position very early 2016 (within a couple weeks of receiving the bonus). How will it negatively affect me to put in my 2 weeks the same week I receive that bonus/raise? I currently have a great professional/personal relation with my boss and colleagues, and don't know how timing would affect recommendations/references for future positions. <Q> Don't just receive the bonus. <S> Cash it before you turn in your notice just to safe. <S> It is not about your boss. <S> It just takes one person to abuse it. <S> I have heard of it happening. <S> If you have a good relationship with your boss <S> I don't see how waiting for bonus to pay out would be harmful. <S> The bonus is based on what you have done - it is not a prepayment. <S> If you resigned on Dec 1 your boss would probably wonder why you did not wait for the bonus. <S> The bonus does not come out of your boss's check. <A> That's actually pretty normal behavior <S> and I haven't seen anyone take issue with this. <S> It's not unusual to see a little spike in attrition after a pay out date. <S> There are certain types of compensation that are tied to certain conditions like performance and stay at the company: Bonus, Retention, Sign-on, stock options, stock grants, etc. <S> All of those come with a set of rules that are spelled out in a policy or contract. <S> As long as you play by the rule, you are doing okay <S> and it's unlikely that anyone would consider this as "taking advantage". <S> Your bonus typically has an eligibility date, i.e. you are entitled to a full bonus if you are an employee in good standing (means "hasn't resigned yet") by, for example, 1/1/2016. <S> If you resign before the date, you lose it all. <S> If you resign after this date, you get it all. <S> Who wouldn't? <S> The companies do this intentionally. <S> The "lose it all" rule isn't particularly fair to start with. <S> If the company doesn't want people to leave after pay out date, they could adjust the rule so that you are always entitled to a bonus <S> that's pro-rated to time served. <A> Because you will be putting in your two week notice the day after verifying that the bonus has been deposited in the bank you are probably fine. <S> You will have to make sure that there isn't some other requirement such as staying a certain amount of time after the bonus is received. <S> Therefore they won't be in a position to give you a bad reference to the new employer. <S> Many companies as a matter of policy don't give references beyond confirming dates of employment, which in your case is perfect. <S> If they tell employees that the company does employment verification through a third party that is a sign that they only give basic info when potential employers call for a reference. <S> The raise is a non-issue because the higher rate of pay stops on your last day of work. <A> How will it negatively affect me to put in my 2 weeks the same week I receive that bonus/raise? <S> If you can see the correlation of timing, so can others. <S> No one can fully answer you how it will or will not negatively affect you, but there is no doubt timing your leaving in lieu of bonus and raise can generate red flags and suspicions. <S> I currently have a great professional/personal relation with my boss and colleagues, and don't know how timing would affect recommendations/references for future positions. <S> Your best bet if you can influence the timing factor is to set your last day beyond two weeks after a raise and bonus. <S> Better not to raise suspicions and ruin goodwill just over a raise and year end bonus. <S> The good will, connections and contacts are worth more than a year end bonus and raise.
| If the bonus is significant, it's perfectly rational to stay an extra few weeks unless there some specific other reason. You should not be putting in notice until the written offer from the new company has been signed and returned.
|
Is it okay to include a funny picture? I am currently working on an online portfolio since I'm attempting to job hunt soon. The site contains the basic information such as a list of previous work, a contact page, and a page about me. On the home page, there is what I would call a "professional" picture of me. But on the 'About Me' page, would it at all be detrimental to include a mildly humorous picture? (as in a picture that may or may not be me posing with an obese cat) I am hoping that people would view me as a dashingly handsome rapscallion who doesn't discriminate against voracious felines. Or something like that. But is this kind of thing an absolute no-no? If it matters, I would be interviewing for an IT position in web development <Q> There is a lot of risk and minimal gain associated with including a picture which is "funny" like this on your professional CV/about pages. <S> Keep in mind what is funny to you might not be funny to others. <S> Your sense of humor and what you find utterly <S> brilliant might come across totally different to those reviewing your professional website. <S> At best, people reviewing it will find you to be somewhat quirky. <S> At worst it'll come across as unprofessional/childish/lame/stupid/silly. <S> You could have a "personal" page which talks about how you like cats, or whatever, and include it. <S> This would fit better than on your otherwise serious portfolio and online resume. <A> Does having a funny picture help you in any way to get the job that you want? <S> Does it make you a better programmer? <S> Does it present you as a person who more people would want to work with or is it something that will cause more people to filter you out than to be enchanted with your quirkiness? <S> When designing materials to help you get a job, you have to evaluate everything on the basis of whether it helps you get the job <S> you want or not. <S> If humor is a nonnegotiable to you in the workplace, then a funny picture will help weed out any company that doesn't have your sense of humor. <S> It will take you a lot longer to find the postion you want, but when you do, it may be a better fit. <S> Just be aware that when you do something like this, you will filter out many potential jobs. <S> then don't put the picture in. <S> I have a good sense of humor, but it is not necessary for me to express it at work <S> and I certainly don't want to work anywhere <S> that thinks a sense of humor is more important than technical skills or professional attitude. <S> That doesn't mean that jokes never come up in the workplace or that I don't participate when they do, just that it is never a factor in determining which jobs I am interested in. <S> I am looking first for technically challenging problems to solve, not fun, when it comes to work. <S> But what I want and what you want are different, so build your brand based on waht you want. <S> Just be aware that it will limit your possibilities - perhaps more than you would want. <A> "I am hoping that people would view me as a dashingly handsome rapscallion who doesn't discriminate against voracious felines. <S> Or something like that. <S> But is this kind of thing an absolute no-no?" <S> What does it have to do if anything, with respect to reinforcing your narrative that you are somewhere between being strongly qualified for the position to being uniquely qualified position for which you are a candidate? <S> You are losing focus, you are distracting anyone who is researching your background to ascertain your suitability to the position being offered. <S> And as @enderland says, there is no guarantee that your humor will be well received. <S> Recruiters don't get evaluated by their managers on how much humor the candidates said recruiters bring in have, unless these recruiters are specifically recruiting for standup comedians.
| If humor is something that you personally enjoy, but it is not necessary in the workplace for you.
|
My boss reassigned my colleague’s project to me and now my colleague is upset My boss reassigned my colleague’s (let's call him Sam) project to me and at first he was having a difficult time letting the project go by saying: “I will complete this task and then you will take over.” Then when I was meeting with my boss, my boss got very upset that I hadn't started working on the project yet. I told him what happened, but it did not look like he believed me. Later my boss said: gather a meeting with such and such to go over this step, and I said, OK, and you want me to invite Sam, too, correct? And my boss looked up at me and said: “uummm, do you need Sam there?” so I did not invite Sam to the project meeting. One minute before the meeting, I am leaving my desk to go to a conference room, and Sam walks up to my desk as if he just passing by “hey, what are you up to?”. The same happened again when I scheduled the second and third meetings. It was getting ridiculous. Then, when I had a question about a project, I sent the question to Sam, but he never responded and pretended I never asked the question. Also, every time I passed Sam by in a hallway, he would have this fake smile and weird tone of voice, as if he is being forced to say hello to me. I spoke to Sam one-on-one twice about the project being given to me by my boss, and I said words such as: “You did an excellent job getting all the previous work done…and I do not know why our boss gave the project to me…I hope you are not upset about this ….” And every time Sam said: “No, I am ok with it”But then, he invited himself to my next meeting, with words: “I’m just going to keep my mouth shut.” As I walk into a conference room, I see that everyone else is there and Sam says out loud to someone else: “Hey, if you were confused about this diagram, I want you to know that I created it! This is MY diagram!” After the meeting, we stayed off line a talked about the project a bit, and he treated me like a child criticizing my work…and telling me what to do and what not to do. Sam also said: "when my boss told ME to do it THIS WAY..." This is such an awkward situation and I do not know what to do about it. Sam did a lot of preliminary work and I can bounce my ideas off of him, but I don’t need to. I can do this project on my own. I also don’t want my boss to think that I cannot handle this project without Sam. Do I invite Sam to the next meeting to keep him quiet? If I don’t, I feel like he talks badly about me behind my back, when a few people go to lunch, he does not invite me to join them anymore (except one time, but his face had that faked smile as if “I really don’t want you to come”). I don’t care about joining lunches with him, but this whole situation is so stressful. What do I do? <Q> Depending how good the culture in your company is it may be a good idea to schedule a meeting with your boss, Sam and yourself. <S> All negative stuff that happened to all of you is the product of poor communication between all of you. <S> Time to sort this out. <S> Do a "lessons learned" type of meeting. <S> Try to locate the point in time when all that started, and what could be done in the future to avoid all that hassle. <S> This would normally be the job of your boss, but if he does not do it, you may have to assist. <A> There are various possibilities why your boss would be doing this. <S> One, he's unhappy with your colleague's work and thinks you will do a better job. <S> Two, he thinks your colleague is over qualified, needs him on a different and more difficult project, and you finish the old one. <S> Three, he thinks that you need to gain some specific knowledge that you would gain from this project. <S> Four, your colleague has too many jobs to do and you need to reduce his workload. <S> Five, many other reasons. <S> In case (one) his behaviour is understandable, in case (two) <S> it's weird, in case (four) he should be happy but may not be. <S> But mostly, it's your colleague's problem, not yours. <A> I do not think you can allow this to continue. <S> It will erode the camaraderie of the team. <S> I think you should take a tough stance with Sam and tell him 1-1 that you welcome his opinions, but this is your project now and he can not insult your work in front of your peers. <S> It is not your fault that your boss put you in this situation, you are just doing your job. <S> In fact, it might be best that he does not attend the meetings if he can not act professionally. <S> When he says that your boss told him to do the project a different way, just tell him thanks, but you are doing what your boss told you to do. <S> If he has a problem with that you should just disengage and tell him to take it up with your boss. <S> I like the idea of you getting together with Sam and your boss, but it would be great if you two could just work it out. <S> I always hate playing referee as a manager. <S> In this case your boss should have had a conversation with Sam and made it OK.
| You should ask your boss what the reason is, so you can handle the situation appropriately.
|
Should I remove a LinkedIn contact who bullied me? I worked in a company and found some nice LinkedIn contacts. But there is a contact who started to bully me after a while. I think he can't stand me at all. Should I remove him to my LinkedIn contacts? Can this affect my possibilities to get a new job now as I'm unemployed? <Q> I surely wouldn't <S> and I keep a pretty active profile. <S> Unless the company and this person are using Linked-In much, much, much more than average the person probably won't notice. <S> If they do use it that actively, you can block them completely. <A> What makes you think that keeping him as a contact is going to improve your chances with any prospective employer? <S> A contact is valuable to you if you think that he could be helpful to you down the line. <S> Do you think he will be helpful to you down the line? <S> If he was bullying you, what are the chances he'll help you get a job? <S> When was the last time that someone who bullied you helped you get a job? <S> If you don't think he's going to be helpful, you know what you want to do to him as a contact. <A> Should I remove him to my LinkedIn contacts? <S> Yes, of course. <S> Don't keep contacts that you do not have a good relationship with. <S> LinkedIn is a professional social network. <S> Think of it this way <S> Can this affect my possibilities to get a new job now as I'm unemployed? <S> No, why would your future employer care who you are connected with on LinkedIn? <S> Unless that specific person is someone you want to work for (and they shouldn't be) <S> then there isn't an issue.
| ... if you wouldn't want this person serving as a reference for you or vice versa, you don't have the intention of this ever being the case, and you don't intend to work with or do business with this person in the future, there is no reason to maintain the contact on LinkedIn. Probably 90% of people won't even notice if you remove someone as a Linked-In contact.
|
Is it appropriate to put MOOC's free courses in the resume? As you may already know, Coursera, Udacity and EdX have free courses as well as paid courses (which are basically the free ones with a certificate of completion). My question is, when I complete a free course, is it appropriate to put it on my resume? There is no "certified" way of checking the completion, but I have the knowledge. Or, is it just better to list the acquired skills under the skills list section, and not write anything about the course? I've read these other questions ( 1 , and 2 ) about including MOOC(Massive Open Online Course) courses on your resume. However, Coursera has changed its model and do not offer certificates for free courses anymore. So these questions are no longer applicable (at least for Coursera). <Q> when I complete a free course, is it appropriate to put it in the resume? <S> You can put any source of learning in your resume - paid certificate courses, free courses, etc. <S> Anyone can claim they took a free course. <S> (As @LightnessRacesinOrbit correctly points out, anyone can claim to have taken a paid course, too. <S> My assumption is that the paid courses have certificates of completion that are verifiable by a hiring company, where most free courses do not.) <S> Don't load your resume up with dozens of these free courses. <S> You don't want them to overwhelm the more valuable content. <S> Try to include only courses relevant for the job at hand - courses that would be significant in the eyes of a hiring manager. <S> And try to include only courses for which you actually gained some expertise that you could talk about if questioned. <S> Avoid any courses which you just casually cruised through or for which you didn't actually learn anything - those could lead to embarrassing answers when questioned by an interviewer. <A> I don't think it is inappropriate. <S> MOOCs nowadays is one of the most popular ways of obtaining new knowledge. <S> Personally, I like when people put their certificates on LinkedIn - IMHO, it shows they are interested in professional development, and have enough organizational skills and patience to complete the course. <S> Personally, I have got 'Independent Coursework' section in my CV, where I put information about relevant MOOCs I have done. <S> Even if I did not get certificate, I still can talk about the course. <A> To make my comment an answer, I would cite the certificates that you have in your CV, and then simply list the skills you learned from the free courses along with any other skills list you have. <S> Remember, to a future employer if a certification isn't verifiable then recording it as a certification or course doesn't really add any value.
| Just be aware that the free courses will carry less weight in your resume than a course with a verifiable completion certificate, or a course at a university.
|
Contact company I'm interested before graduating or applying for a job In the Fall I will be going into my last year of college and will, with almost certainty, be graduating in the Spring. I currently have a internship that runs as long as I'm in college. I've been here for a little over a year and plan to stay until I graduate. I recently stumbled across a company/job that I know I would love. Being that it's so far from my graduation date still, I doubt that if I applied I would even be considered. One of their requirements is a 4-year degree, which I don't have yet. I would really like to be considered by this company for employment after graduating and would even leave my current internship for one there, they are a smaller startup so I'm not sure they'd be able to swing an internship. I'm wondering if I should send in a resume with a cover letter stating that when I do graduate I would like to work there or if I should just wait and hope there is an opening at that time? Also, this is the software development industry. <Q> I'm wondering if I should send in a resume with a cover letter stating that when I do graduate I would like to work there <S> or if I should just wait and hope there is an opening at that time? <S> It's perfectly reasonable to send a resume and cover letter now. <S> In your letter, make sure you indicate your current status and expected graduation date, so as not to cause any confusion or annoyance. <S> Be sure to express your enthusiasm for this company (since enthusiasm goes a long way), your desire to work there, relevant skills and technologies you already know, and perhaps how you learned of them. <S> You could also indicate your desire to intern there, if such a position were available. <S> It's unlikely a company would hire you now, when you aren't actually available until next spring. <S> That's a somewhat long wait for many companies - but you never know. <S> Sometimes, startups in hiring-mode keep a list of entry-level candidates for the future. <S> Since you already know one of this company's requirements (a 4-year degree), then I'm assuming you have seen or learned about an actual job posting. <S> Try to indicate in your resume and cover letter how you meet many of those requirements, even if you don't yet have the degree. <S> Many startups are far more flexible and less formal than more established companies. <S> When I worked in startups, I was much more free to "think outside the box" when hiring than when I worked for larger companies. <S> This works in your favor. <A> Making a connection with companies prior to your graduation date is perfectly acceptable. <S> While your dream position may not be available at the time you're ready to join the ranks of full-time employment, there is no telling whether the company you want to work for may have vacancies at that time. <S> Its not always about simply applying when you see an opening. <S> You're still making a connection and putting yourself in front of the hiring panel at that company beforehand. <S> Such effort shows proactive initiative and you may find many doors opening up for you as a result of it; even when there may not be job postings made public in that organization. <A> I am/was in the same situation as you (just about a year ahead). <S> The place I currently work at (also software, requiring a 4 year degree, and a small company). <S> I replied around the beginning of my last semester for an Entry-level position. <S> Something to note is that what you actually know is a lot more powerful than the sheet of paper your school gave you <S> says you know. <S> Personal projects do wonders in showing what you know and that you have motivation to go beyond schooling and look good on a student's resume (assuming you don't have tons of work experience with software at the moment). <S> You'll never get punished for trying to get your foot in the door. <S> Even if they don't agree to hire you, they might just encourage you to apply when you're graduated. <S> Another thing to note: If they are consciously aware that you are just graduating and will be entry level, it might be a good idea to elaborate on the wide range of topics (related) that you're knowledgeable about. <S> You might not be a pro, but that's good! <S> It means you'll be bringing a fresh mind to the company!
| Sometimes, startups are in hiring-mode, and could bring you in as an intern now with the thought to bring you on full-time upon graduation.
|
Completing assessment for prospective job On Friday I was given a project, creating an app and deploying it, to work on for a position that I applied for. I have now completed it but it is missing one aspect of it because I am not familiar with this layer of technology(TDD). What would be my best course of action? In my last email I told the hiring manager I'd shoot them an update on Monday. I have a few questions: Should I email them and tell them I have deployed the app with no tests and will attempt to finish that within the next two days(approx.)? Should I admit to not knowing testing? Would it help if I sent my deployed app or should I wait to present everything altogether? Thanks. <Q> TDD = write tests first, then write code/functionality. <S> So it isn't a good situation if you submit your code with no tests at all. <S> Someone reviewing your project code as it currently is will see it as if you were asked "In English, write a 500 word essay about why you like development" and then wrote it in French. <S> If this was an assignment where they expected a TDD process for development, this is difficult to do in "reverse" and likely moreso if you are unfamiliar with it. <S> It sounds like TDD was an integral part of this coding assignment that you knew about but put off until later (??). <S> I have now completed it <S> but it is missing one aspect of it because I am not familiar with this layer of technology(TDD). <S> What you should have done (and still could do) was: Identify your lack of understanding (TDD) <S> Researched this to better understand it <S> Then begun development using a TDD methodology <S> Should I email them and tell them I have deployed the app with no tests and will attempt to finish that within the next two days(approx.)? <S> No, this will likely cost you the job. <S> Think of the above English/French example for why. <S> Should I admit to not knowing testing? <S> If the job requires knowledge and understanding of testing, you should admit this now rather than later. <S> You don't want to pretend you know something and then find out in the first few weeks of the job that you don't know what you made them think you knew. <S> Alternatively you could and should research testing and practice this. <S> Would it help if I sent my deployed app or should I wait to present everything altogether? <S> If you have questions, make sure you first research those questions and understand what it is you don't know. <S> Then, if you still have questions, you should ask for clarification or mention "I'm not familiar with this technology/approach but am more than willing to learn and have done X, Y, Z to research it so far." <A> I'm going to go "outside the box" on my answer... <S> your project is to do unpaid work for an employer for a job you don't have yet? <S> Really? <S> I hope this is not the new normal in job application. <S> Yes, I see the benefit to displaying your knowledge to a prospective employer. <S> And if this is a test and not actual production work, then OK I guess. <S> But if it's real work they are using to make a profit, this seems not only wrong but illegal to me. <A> Given some of the information in comments, I'd like to change my stance. <S> This is a junior position and TDD wasn't in the job add. <S> So "better late than never" doesn't apply here? <S> I would say that it does apply here. <S> If it wasn't in the job advertisement, it's not an automatic deal breaker for you to not know TDD. <S> That being said, it is a deal breaker when a programmer doesn't test their own code. <S> Check for accuracy <S> somewhere , even if it's not explicitly TDD. <S> This will help showcase your creativity and problem solving, and show that you can work around your gaps of knowledge. <S> (Seriously, even a bunch of comments with hand calculations saying "Program spec says y = <S> a + b, <S> so for a = 1 and b = 2, y = 3. <S> Program output matches.") <S> Put something in the program to show you tested it, even if you didn't test it their way. <S> THEN offer to test it their way. <S> Approach it from a <S> "I did this to the best of my ability, however if you gave me greater detail about your TDD methodologies, I would be more than willing to incorporate them. <S> " <S> This shows you're eager to learn and assimilate to their culture. <S> Basically, yes, you need some tests... <S> but it isn't because of the employer. <S> It's because every programmer should be testing their code in some way; if you aren't testing it at all, there's a much, MUCH bigger issue at play. <S> If you can't test it with TDD, admit that, tell them what tests you did as a workaround, and offer to do it their way, if they want you to. <A> You didn't do TDD. <S> Did you do any kind of testing at all? <S> How does the boss - and in fact, anyone else - know that your code is doing what it is supposed to do? <S> Hint: you staking your life on your code <S> being right is not good enough, we can make you die only once and after that, any problems with your code are ours :) <S> TDD is not hard, it's the way that TDD is taught that stinks. <S> How does you know any function you designed is doing what it is supposed to do? <S> Hint: design tests for the extreme cases, a common cases and corner cases - corners cases occur whenever you have branching e.g. "if" or "while" statements in your code. <S> Anybody who reviews you code has to have something more tangible than "I have faith", "I wish", "I pray" or "I hope" Hope is not a strategy and prayer is not a method.
| You probably should review what was being requested of you.
|
What can I do to minimize the drama of being wronged by a new boss? After 5 months in a 6 month probation period, I got a new boss. I feared that the new boss didn't like me and wanted to get rid of me. After 4 weeks under my new boss, I received a performance review with all "needs improvement" and none of the criticisms had anything to do with how I was performing. My first boss wrote a letter to the new boss and copied it to the HR department. He gave me a glowing report and said that if he had been there to evaluate me, I would have been promoted to the next pay grade and title advancement. The new boss and HR determined that I should serve 6 more months probation. Four weeks following the first review, I was given another performance evaluation that was rated "unsatisfactory" in all categories with the boss recommending that I not be hired permanently. They called it a Pre-Disciplinary Conference (PDC). I had the opportunity to comment on all of the negative evaluations at that time. I submitted proof that each of the offenses that I was accused of doing or not doing were false. At that review, I was given 91 days of unpaid suspension pending a further investigation. Now, after nearly 4 weeks, I was sent a letter telling me that more charges are being thrown at me and the PDC would reconvene. I would like to answer each charge with a "no comment" and end this kangaroo court proceeding. Nothing I said the first time around changed their position and nothing I say to my benefit would matter at the one coming up. Do you think that I should do that to lessen the drama? I know that this has been a witch hunt and that I never had a chance of surviving to work another day. <Q> Short answer: <S> If there are no more internal avenues you can follow, then you may have no option other than to look elsewhere. <S> From your post it sounds like it's a toxic environment, and that you are on somebody's wrong side for whatever reason while the company's HR department is backing them up. <S> Your best bet is to contact your previous boss to act as a reference for you, and go looking for another position elsewhere. <S> It's better that than be terminated and have to explain why. <S> Pre-emptive action may work better in this situation. <S> Definitely keep in contact with your old boss, he is the key to navigating any negativity from your old employer. <S> Quitting is always a last option. <S> You should always look for any internal avenues you can take before taking the drastic step. <S> But if you have exhausted every other option, you may need to consider pre-emptively moving on. <A> From your post, I'd gather that the chances that you'll keep your job are practically nil. <S> It doesn't matter whether the charges are true or false, you're clearly being railroaded out. <S> Clearly, by any means necessary. <S> Your question about "what I should do to lessen the drama" is seriously out of touch with the situation that you are in. <S> You call it "drama". <S> I call it <S> "they are hell bent on taking your head off, and they won't stop until they have it in their hands". <S> And right now, they're building up the paper trail to make sure that it happens. <S> My advice to you is to look for another job immediately. <S> Use your former boss as reference - you stayed in touch with your former boss through Linkedin, did you? <S> If not, fix your neglect at once. <S> And if a prospective employer asks you why you want to leave, simply state the fact that the new boss is providing a very stressful professional environment, and don't editorialize. <S> Aside from that, being focused on getting a new job will make it easier for you to put up with the every day aggravation of having to show up and work for people who are out to fire you, and who are not particular about what they say to get you fired. <A> What can you do? <S> Nothing. <S> There are two things to keep in mind here, the balance of power is in favor of your manager and no employee should ever trust HR. <S> This is a matter of organizational dynamic, your HR counterparts know who holds the power in the company and they have nothing to gain from helping you, this is unfortunately very common and why many people rightfully don't trust HR. <S> From your story, it sounds like you're done at this company. <S> Would you even want to work here after this? <S> Fighting it, even passively, can be regarded that you're in denial about the infallibility of HR and your management and they are the ones who get to write the story. <S> Going along with what you see as your own persecution is emotionally unhealthy and will only amplify your stress. <S> If all you've said is true about the PDC and such, you have no future at this company. <S> Accept that, cut your losses and try to move on with your life. <S> Leave a Glassdoor review if that makes you feel better about warning others away from what you see as a difficult workplace, it can be cathartic. <A> That is very unfortunate. <S> It is clear that they are not willing to have you there anymore for whatever reason. <S> However, I might suggest that you do two things. <S> First, line up the next job using your old boss as your reference (as noted in another answer). <S> Second, even though you won't stay, do not make it overly easy for them. <S> At this point you are looking at a wrongful dismissal situation so be sure to document the process. <S> If you happen to know someone in the legal profession see if you can get a lawyer to write up a letter concerning this aspect of the situation. <S> You can write such a letter yourself and provide it to the lawyer as a template <S> (internet resources are pretty good). <S> It's unlikely they will back down <S> but they may have to lawyer up and act very carefully. <S> Other than a lawyer's letter or formal replies I would not put anything in writing. <S> I don't suggest this course of action for vindictive reasons <S> but you don't want them doing this to anyone else <S> and you don't want them to feel free to slander your reputation after you are gone. <S> You could even have your lawyer propose that any such future discussions around dismissal, which might entail loss of benefits as opposed to being let go for other reasons, be held in a neutral location after work hours (as you will hopefully be in another job). <S> It sounds silly but making things inconvenient and costly to do the wrong thing may just have them choose to make an offer to encourage you to leave on your own. <S> Of course, you have to look at the nature of the situation and see if you are willing to deal with it further. <S> You could just say, "Look, it's clear you want me to leave. <S> How about instead of inventing a reason for dismissal you simply give me a decent letter of reference <S> and then I'll find a new position? <S> That way we skip all this hassle."
| Don't take forever to line up a new job and leave, because you probably prefer to explain why you quit rather than why you got fired. If you leave first, you can honestly state that you left because the probation indicated to you that the environment was not a good fit for you. Just get out and save your time and energy for those who appreciate your contributions. Because fairly or unfairly, anything negative that you add about your new boss reflects on you not on your new boss.
|
Making code changes; doing things quickly vs doing them well? I'm a software developer fresh out of grad school, been working in industry for 5 months now and I am very much still adjusting to the business world. Over the past 5 months I have learned a tremendous amount from my co-workers (amazingly supportive people btw), but one question that I can't get a straight answer on is: Given a bug report or enhancement request, should I invest time into understanding the problem and fixing the root issue across the code-base, or simply addressing the stated issue with a high-level work-a-round and moving on to the next request? Everybody on my team seems to agree that systematically addressing the root cause is better (for a multitude of reasons; including consistent bahaviour across the product, ease of maintenance in the future, etc), but given the near-constant in-flow of high priority issues, we seem to produce a startling amount of work-a-rounds ("we put out the fire out for now, we'll clean that up for the next major release..."). As far as I can tell, this attitude trickles down from my manager who is playing a balancing game between giving developers time and space to do things well, while also facing time and budget pressures from above. Clearly, the only right answer can come from my manager, and maybe the VP of development, but I'm curious how other people deal with these two conflicting interests in product development? (My question is open to all areas of R&D, not just software.) <Q> Your question raises one of the longest standing debates in software vs business. <S> Good developers want to do it right and from the root cause. <S> Such is the nature of good developers who are passionate about their craft. <S> The reality is in business that's rarely to be the case; even in companies where software is the business. <S> There are too many competing interests (management, deadlines, marketing etc.) <S> to ever take a puritan/academic approach to writing code and fixing bugs all the time. <S> The high level quick fix approach is rather commonplace both for the sake of business wanting here now on the spot type results as well as for reasons Keshlam pointed out. <S> Then they will want it right, but only for a time until they end up back in the same operational rut of complacency which got them there. <S> That is where it is your job to write quality code the right way if you can do it quickly and show the company the right way can truly be quicker and aligned with the business interests. <A> You do the best you can with the resources available. <S> If there is no issue queue then go back and clean. <S> If there is an issue queue then put out fires. <S> The logic here is that you don't leave pressing issues open when a band-aid solution is in place. <S> The sign of a poor technical workplace is when your structure is all band-aids with no going back to clean. <A> There is no single right answer. <S> It depends on your customers, your delivery model, and how you're staffed. <S> Remember, this is software engineering rather than computer science; trade-offs are expected. <S> Fixes to production code are often kept as minimal as possible to reduce the risk of introducing new bugs, even if that means leaving known exposures to be dealt with later. <S> It isn't elegant, but it's what the business needs. <S> Also, a large customer may be losing a megabuck a minute while the system is down. <S> Quoting Steve Bois: <S> "Make it work. <S> Make it good. <S> Make it great." <S> In that order. <S> If you can jump direct to great with minimal time and minimal risk so much the better, but we don't usually have that luxury unless we're developing de novo and with no schedule/resource pressure. <A> It depends. <S> This is one of the questions that really depend on the individual attributes of each such ticket: <S> How much time will the quick solution take, and how much time will the proper solution take? <S> How much technical debt the quick solution will incur? <S> Will it block you from doing other things? <S> If you do the quick solution, will you want to do a proper solution later? <S> Who is waiting for the solution, and why? <S> Is it a client that need things done now? <S> Are other developers blocked by it? <S> Who will be the one to do the quick solution, and who will need to do the proper solution? <S> Sometimes anyone can do the quick solution, but the only developer that can do the proper solution is currently busy on a more important task. <S> You are correct that only management can come with the right answer, because they are the ones that see the big picture and can prioritize the different needs and implications of the different choices regarding all the tickets. <S> But the developers are the ones familiar with the actual code and structure of the project, so it's your job to give to the manager estimates about the different solutions. <A> This is the trade-off we make in the business world. <S> Quality vs. Revenue. <S> Scalability vs. Feature Set. <S> The manager and VP are the ones who know the variables best at any given moment, and should be clear on setting the priorities. <S> No one can tell you what the balance is other than they. <S> Google can put 10 people on improving their login page because it's used (any ideas, guys?) <S> times per day. <S> Your employee training portal in a 250-person company, maybe five times per day. <S> O(n^2) to O(2n) may be worth thousands per month to Google. <S> Your return on that would probably be around $0.15 per day. <S> This, incidentally, is why good architects are worth their weight in gold. <S> Going in with a solid design initially will save you years of pain long-term.
| In the end quick is almost always going to take precedence over doing it well (by true developer standards) because companies understand quick a lot more than they may understand right (until they have a profit eroding product fallout). It's always a balancing act between priorities: Resources vs. Deadlines. Fast fix is essential, with cleaner fix deferred until time permits.
|
Should a software developer also be a technical examiner? I'm a Senior Software Developer. I was asked (again) by my manager to be part of the recruitment process as a technical examiner (to ask super hard to answer questions). Last time (it was also the first time) I was the technical recruiter and it was fun for me as I obtained new knowledge about other developers' skills and how people behave on the other side of table and about salary expectations (this was the best part). Now, I don't want to be a technical examiner because: I have more interesting things to do and my company does not care about new employees (the one I recruited last time has just left the company after only 3 months of work because he got a better offer and my company didn't want to stop him; the company prefers to get another cheap employee). So can I just say "no" and not participate in the recruitment process? After all, I'm just Software Developer and being a technical examiner is not part of my responsibilities (I have to check my contract on that matter). Or maybe should I ask for some kind of compensation for wasting my time (this is how it appears to me) in the recruitment process? <Q> So can I just say "no" and don't participate in the recruitment process? <S> After all I'm just Software Developer and being a technical examiner is not par of my responsibilities (I have to check my contract on that matter). <S> Clearly, your expertise is helpful in the interviewing process. <S> It's a testament to your abilities that you are asked again to help out. <S> Simply saying "No" might come across as a negative - as someone unwilling to help the company. <S> Most contracts say something on the order of "and other tasks as deemed necessary". <S> It's impossible to list out every detail of a job to the extent that you could know ahead of time exactly which tasks you must perform, and which other tasks aren't required. <S> And roles evolve over time. <S> Or maybe I should ask for some kind of compensation for wasting my time (this is how it appears to me) in the recruitment process? <S> Probably not. <S> We all have activities that we'd rather not do, but which will help the department/company. <S> We usually don't get additional compensation, just because we'd rather not do them. <S> While you might consider it "wasting your time", the company might view it as "using your particular skills to help out in an important process". <S> Instead of asking for additional compensation, just remember this extra work when your review time comes. <S> It adds a nice layer to your accomplishments - one that may put you ahead of other Developers at your company. <S> Adding value to the company tends to be good for your career over time. <A> Senior software developers not wanting to be part of the recruiting process - is this a joke? <S> If senior developers don't want to be the ones asking (and evaluating the responses to) tough questions, who else in the firm do you think is available and competent to do it? <S> Asking the team lead to do it make sense, but there are only so many team leads around and vetting candidates is something they can delegate wholly or partially to the seniors on their staff. <S> They hire someone you can't stand because you didn't want to be around when they interviewed him. <S> What right do you have to complain? <S> Every job has its scut work. <S> Your non-cooperative attitude is more likely to be remembered than anything positive you did. <S> The fact that you can only be counted on to work on tasks that interest you - that's probably not going to go over well with your management. <S> You have a right to state a preference but once the hammer comes down, either you comply or you go. <A> Whoever they hire, you are going to have to work with. <S> That should be incentive enough right there to be on the interview panel. <S> Think about some of the people you rejected the last time. <S> Would you really want them to be hired because they didn't get a good technical evaluation? <S> Do you really want to work with that guy who really doesn't understnd the basics of his profession? <S> What impact would that have on your code base, your own workload and your team's ability to deliver the product? <S> Why don't you care passionately about those things? <S> Yes this is normal part of a senior developers duties and an important one. <S> Senior devs are generally expected to alot more than program. <A> Rather than an interactive technical interview, you could suggest this alternative to your management using the reason that being present takes a lot of your time away from productive coding (or whatever):- <S> You could write down a series of technical questions and provide that as a technical test to be given to the candidates, using standard fixed duration (20-30 minutes is common), which you then mark against your answers after the interview and provide feedback to the interview decision makers. <S> This way you don't personally have to be present and the candidate is still given a technical evaluation. <S> As long as you change the questions fairly regularly (and don't let candidates take the question set away with them) it should remain fairly effective. <S> Technical tests within the interview are common solution to the problem of needing technical personnel to be present in the interview. <A> It's a bad idea. <S> Of course you can ask to opt out of a task, but you should do it in a more logical and definitely more diplomatic way. <S> Indicate that it appears this new person doesn't have to be too technically skilled <S> , so maybe you can just review resumes and that's enough. <S> Show where your time is being spent and how that is more beneficial to the company. <S> They don't pay that much anyway, so how big of a loss is it really to make a bad hiring choice in this case? <S> Another option would be to only interview the person they plan on making an offer. <S> That's not such a time-suck. <S> Be careful about making it about some personal preference. <S> If you don't think you'll do a good job, just say so. <S> My guess is even a half-hearted effort by you is 10x better than what anyone else brings to a technical interview. <S> If you ever want to work on a quality team and at least have people next to you that you can get along with, be a part of the solution. <S> If you only approve of quality people and the offers are too weak, eventually something is going to have to give and it doesn't have to be your standards.
| Instead of just saying "No", you could ask if you can avoid helping out with the interviewing/recruiting so that you can focus on development. This is a good experience for you especially if you want to go into any team lead or management. No it is not appropriate to ask for extra money to do it.
|
How to handle people confiding in you as you're leaving I’ve recently handed in my resignation. The reasons were varied, and mostly related to myself and my personal preferences, as well as another job offering that was much better than my current job. With time I’ve gotten a better grasp on what I want to do with my life, and part of it was changing jobs. As the news of my departure spread, people have confided in me with a whole slew of problems, as well as disclosing some of their plans for the future. I’d like to somehow warn my employer that there are some common grievances among my colleagues that he’d best address. However, I’ve already had my exit interview and I don’t want to breach the trust of my colleagues. How could I go about this without breaching my colleagues’ trust? The annoyances included longer commutes than originally promised (the company is a consultancy firm which sends people offsite; the assignments have been steadily moving towards the country’s capital, which is a 100km commute for some, whereas they used to be local: people are complaining that our employer is taking more lucrative, further away assignments, and not compensating the people who have to give up more of their time as the commutes increased), assignments that people don’t enjoy, people disagreeing with the home-working policy. It mostly came down to people complaining that they’re having to put in a lot more time than they anticipated, and aren’t compensated for it. I shared some of these grievances, but they weren’t the primary reason for my leaving and I didn’t elaborate on them much during my exit interview. However, many of my colleagues seem to have a harder time with these issues, and I'd like to make my employer more thoroughly aware of this. UPDATE At the recommendation of people here, I have not gone to management, however I did feel like I had to do something to help. So I advised people who confided in me to step to management themselves. Management has reviewed their home-working policies giving people with long commutes a day tele-work, and given some raises to people who are looking at longer commutes than they had anticipated. Apparently all it needed was a few more voices to convince our boss that the problems were farther along than they thought, and at least one person who was on the verge of leaving is now going to stay (knowing you're being listened to will work wonders). <Q> Your colleagues don't necessarily want you to do anything. <S> Many times it simply feels good to share gripes with someone who is sympathetic and in these situations the listener is not expected to actually do anything about it. <S> You might feel you're doing them a favor by bringing their concerns to management, but really that's what your co-workers should be doing. <S> If you try to raise these grievances with management you may be doing your colleagues a disservice as it is often easy to discern who has which complaints based on context and details. <S> It is their problem, they just want your ear. <S> They're adults and they can communicate their grievances to their management themselves if they want to . <S> Don't try to do it for them. <S> If, instead, this is all about your loyalty to management, it still is not good to share what you've been told in confidence. <S> They're likely already aware of at least some of these issues and the word of someone going out the door is never taken seriously anyway. <S> " <S> Exit interviews" have nothing to do with actual improvement of the organization, they're typically HR-created busy-work intended to ferret out potential legal problems and whether or not you're a candidate for re-hire in the future. <S> In an exit interview you're wasting your time if it consists of anything other than a breezy "moving on to other opportunities" blurb and a "best wishes to everyone". <A> Don't say anything to the company. <S> Yes, you're part of an unhappy trend for your employer but your employer will eventually figure out that trend on their own as more and more people vote with their feet and leave. <S> If your employer doesn't figure it out, then they are clueless and their cluelessness is really no one's problem but theirs. <S> You have your own mix of reasons for leaving and as you stated, your colleagues' mix of reasons are uniquely their own. <S> You already spoke for yourself. <S> You may have a general idea of what's going on <S> but you don't speak for them and they never explicitly asked you to speak for them. <S> Your colleagues are their own best advocates, they know best what makes each of them happy <S> and they each have their own idea as to what they want from management. <S> Let them resolve or not resolve their issues on their own. <S> You are not adding anything helpful by intervening. <S> In fact, you can't add anything helpful because you lack knowledge of the specifics for each individual. <S> Exchange enough contact info with your colleagues to keep in touch and just exit. <A> I think any of the following would be sensible: <S> Do nothing. <S> You were told in confidence, end of. <S> Offer to take up the issues with management if the person speaking to you wants you to, but only with their permission. <S> They probably won't be offended by the offer, you aren't proposing to do anything they won't agree to, and they can easily say "good grief no!" <S> and that's the end of it. <S> Say, "others have said similar things to me: <S> would you like me to let them know you feel the same way?". <S> Then, if the only problem is that everyone thinks they're suffering alone in silence, then employees can compare notes and decide on what they want to say to management about it (if anything). <S> Again, you're not proposing to do anything they don't want. <S> I think that the following are not sensible: <S> "Trying to help" when you aren't sure of the consequences and won't be around to see them anyway. Trying to represent the grievances of someone else who has given you no mandate to do so <S> Informing management that their employees are complaining (there's dissent in the ranks! <S> Increase the frequency of beatings!) <S> Telling your employer anyone's plans for the future -- this could seriously impact their prospects at this firm. <S> I mean, maybe you feel that although you're about to leave, you haven't left yet, and that you have a strong responsibility to report disloyal workers to the proper authorities. <S> In which case this is the only thing to do, but I don't think that's where you are at all ;-) <A> Why can't you ask your colleagues if they want you to bring it up? <S> Some people are shy or scared to be the messenger that gets killed. <S> There's no reason to name names. <S> It can be a general suggestion that you forgot to mention during your exit interview. <S> This is really going to depend on the nature of the complaint. <S> You don't want the company to think they have some sort of mutiny or just a pack of complainers. <S> Also, I would consider whether or not anyone has a solution. <S> They company could make things worse if they're not careful. <A> What your colleagues do makes perfect sense: they want you to communicate their issues because you have absolutely nothing to lose. <S> Additionally the management can only listen and not try to persuade you since you are leaving anyway. <S> My suggestion would be to do nothing but listen and try to offer advice or your opinion. <S> If a company is interested in improving or changing things then it should have feedback loops or a formal structure from which issues can be raised, discussed, and actioned or not. <S> Most companies prefer to stay AS-IS until everybody leaves or competition kills them doing patches in between. <S> You should concentrate on leaving with good terms in case <S> you need them in the future for references or something like that and not try to assist them. <S> It's their problem now.
| Let each of your colleague speak for themselves without you intervening in any way. What your colleagues told you was confidential and you don't want to breach that confidentiality.
|
Is it legal in the USA to ask if applicants have been convicted of specific crimes? I'm under the impression that it is legal in the USA to ask applicants if they have been convicted of a felony. I'm also under the impression that they have to answer honestly. But as a manager, I'm not really interested in knowing if they've been convicted of some unknown felony. It's not really useful information. Instead, I'm interested if they have a history of specific crimes, like assault or theft. For example, can I ask generically if they have been convicted of a violent crime? Can I ask if they have been convicted of specific crimes, like theft or embezzlement? I would think that some positions can get away with this because integrity might be a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) . For example, a security guard should probably not have a history of theft. A bouncer should probably not have a history of violence without provocation. If this is accurate, how far can I stretch this? If I am hiring for a secretary and I intend to trust them to manage my checking account, it seems pertinent if they've stolen before and would certainly make me think about their trustworthiness, a BFOQ, in that position. In my specific personal examples, I would like to avoid theft (all kinds) and assault (all kinds) specifically for three reasons. The business operates in a separate building on the same property as my house and I feel I have a right to protect my person, family, and property by limiting the people I let be near those things, I would sometimes have to trust employees with credit card information and cash, and most employees would be required to travel by air, a stressful situation sometimes, and combining that with a history of violence sounds dangerous. If addressing these specific things is off-topic or too much for a single answer, then just answering the broad portion at the top is fine. <Q> In every job I've accepted, there has always been a background investigation in which they check police records for any crimes committed by the individual. <S> Both felonies and misdemeanors stay on the records indefinitely. <S> Even if they get expunged, they stay in FBI databases and the actual arrest stays on your record. <S> The only thing that gets rid of them is a pardon. <S> Usually a job application will ask if they've been convicted of a crime, so there is no need to ask during an interview. <S> If for some reason a person has been convicted of a crime and it doesn't show up on a background investigation, nor admits it on a job application, they will most likely lie during the interview anyway. <S> After that, it is up to the company whether they still wish to hire the individual based on the results. <A> For instance, insurance might insist that you not employ anyone as a driver that has had a DUI in the last X years. <S> If someone is working with money it is reasonable to ensure that they have not been convicted of theft, fraud, or any other finance crime (like bouncing checks). <S> If they will be working with anyone's personally identifiable information it is wise to ensure that candidates can be trusted. <S> It is legal to choose not to hire someone because they do not meet the requirements of the position. <S> It is also legal to terminate someone with in the legally allowed probationary period of your state (usually 30-90 days) if they were hired knowing that they would have to pass a background check and that check reveals that they lied about their record. <S> However, unless they are on some probationary status that requires the disclosure of their record, they are not required to inform or be honest with you in their application. <S> It is up to the employer to verify the veracity of information provided to them. <S> If you choose to hire someone on the condition that their background check comes back clean, but are unable to get the background check completed before that probationary period is up, you may be unable to terminate someone depending on your state's employment laws. <S> So it is generally preferable to complete these screens before beginning employment. <S> This is one reason that many companies have taken to bringing people in through temp/contract companies for a trial period and let the agency do the leg work on backgrounds and employment verification. <S> It shifts some of the new hire risk onto someone else's shoulders. <A> Usually , applicants are asked if they have been convicted of a felony and if answer expected is either "yes" or "no". <S> If they are asked in the application whether they have been convicted of a felony, white space is provided so that they can explain themselves(*). <S> While they may not be explicitly required to list their felonies, they would have a hard time explaining them away without citing them. <S> If they don't list the specific felonies, a background check will turn these felonies up with all the juicy details <S> should you want them. <S> All you need to do once you have your hands on that info is to read the info. <S> If your background check turn up a felony, give the candidate a chance to explain themselves - <S> It may turn out that the felony you turned up was later expunged and the source of your felony data never updated the status of that felony conviction. <S> (*) <S> I consider an applicant not explaining their felony after stating that they have been convicted of a felony as a pretty big mistake on the part of the applicant.
| If you have a reason for having a basic requirement, like not having been convicted of a specific crime, then yes you can ask it.
|
How to retract a salary negotiation? I received a written job offer yesterday and was given a deadline to reply by today. The company called me again today to confirm, but I missed their call. The recruiter left a voice message saying to call her back to discuss or talk about extension if I needed it, and also said that they were trying to fill this position quickly. In the afternoon I called back but there was no answer. I tried calling another recruiter from the company but also no response. So I decided to leave a voice message, and send an email with my questions, asked for a bump and an extension of the offer. Two hours later I still haven't heard from anyone, so I called again. This time I also called the company office but nobody picked up (!). I sent another email to the recruiter, asking for an extension and reiterated that I'm still very excited to join the company. Here is my question. How do I retract my previous email asking for a bump without looking bad / petty? It seems like nobody will reply me by the deadline so I will either have to take the offer or let it go to the next person. Extra questions:How do I avoid this kind of situation next time? <Q> There is no elegant way to do what you want to do -- if you're going to do it, you're just going to have to accept that it will be awkward. <S> "You know, after thinking about it I'm OK with the initial offer. <S> Hope you're still interested since i'm really looking forward to working with you!" <S> Of course they may already have shifted their attention to another candidate. <S> That's the gamble you accepted when you declined the first offer. <S> That can't be completely undone; you need to think about your priorities before you counter. <S> Good luck. <S> At worst, you can chalk it up as a learning experience. <A> There does not seem to be any reason to think that their lack of reaction is due to the fact that you asked for too much. <S> Indeed, it seems rather unlikely that they would reject you without explanation for that. <S> Try to call the recruiter directly every once in a while but don't retract your request until they have begun to negociate. <A> If you don't feel slightly uncomfortable, you probably aren't asking for enough. <S> That's not the case for everyone, but generally a good rule-of-thumb. <S> Salespeople make more money because they ask for more. <S> This could be due to being experienced with negotiating prices and fees on a more regular basis. <S> You've made every effort to contact them. <S> People get busy; it happens. <S> What you're doing is a good thing. <S> Get use to it.
| Don't be surprised if they accept your request, but now you have to wait for another contract/agreement to be rewritten and another due date for you to sign.
|
How to deal with recruitment companies when not searching? I used some recruitment companies when I was unemployed and also had my CV on publicly accessible profiles on the internet. Once I found a job I set all those profiles to private or deleted them (if the website didn't allow hiding them) and I also made sure to notify several recruitment companies that contacted me afterwards that I had found a position and were not looking for offers. It has been more than a year since then but recruitment companies still call me, send me e-mails or try to connect with me on LinkedIn, either to ask what I'm looking for or whether I'm interested in a position they're advertising. At this point in time I am satisfied with the position I do have and, although I keep telling that to recruiters, they still ask about others. I understand that they expect a better offer may make me want to try for it, but currently I want to stay where I am. On one hand I don't want to be bothered by recruiters when I know beforehand that I'm going to say no to whatever they're asking, but on the other hand I don't want to "burn my bridges" with them, in case I need them again in the future, when I will be looking for a new position. Should I keep ignoring them or is it possible that this will make them reluctant to work with me in the future? Otherwise, how I can make it clear to them that I don't want them to ask me about anything until I say I am available again? <Q> There are thousands of recruiters out there. <S> They are combing databases and sites like LinkedIn looking for people that meet the range of parameters for the positions they are trying to fill. <S> They know that if they bulk contact all these potentials a small percentage will reach out to them, then they start the next phase of the recruitment process. <S> Letting the emails and the LinkedIn connection requests expire quietly is not a problem. <S> They don't put all the non-responses into a database and never contact them again. <S> I have been contacted sporadically by a handful of recruiters despite no encouragement from me. <S> Sometimes multiple companies have contacted me for the same position. <S> Remember they are all trying to get enough responses to get 10 qualified candidates. <S> One good part of this from your perspective is that if you need to kick start a job search you can always look at the recruiters that contacted you in the lat week or so, and reach out to them because their faux interest in you is still fresh. <S> I wouldn't worry about keeping an active relationship, nor would I feel an obligation to respectively respond to each request: silence is golden. <S> Now If I was actively searching, and they sent me info on a position that was almost interesting... <A> Should I keep ignoring them or is it possible that this will make them reluctant to work with me in the future? <S> Otherwise, how I can make it clear to them that I don't want them to ask me about anything until I say I am available again? <S> This one is easy. <S> You reply to them and say something along the lines of "Thank you so much for considering me, but at the moment I'm not looking for a new position. <S> I'm very happy in my current job. <S> " <S> You could add "Feel free to check in periodically. <S> " if you don't mind staying on their list of potential clients. <S> If you prefer not to receive periodic emails, @Hazel wisely suggests adding something like "I'll let you know when I start looking for something new". <S> This keeps you in a positive light, and lines up the possibility to work with them again at some point in the future, should you need their services. <A> You are not giving a complete answer. <S> Telling them I am satisfied with the position I do have and, although I keep telling that to recruiters, ... is insufficient. <S> The thing to say (add) is: Please do not contact me in the future. <S> I will contact you if anything changes. . <A> Recruiters are a fact of professional life. <S> They're a dime a dozen. <S> You can't avoid them and you can't hide from them. <S> You can run from them but that takes energy out of you. <S> I decided that I might as well work with them - they can be a pretty good barometer of what's hot and what's not and whether my credentials need an update. <S> Unless you are dealing with the occasional head case who can't take "no" for an answer,most recruiters will be happy to collect your up to date resume and go for other potential candidates. <S> Remember, they are in it for the money and the minute you say "no", they usually know better than waste their time on you.
| I simply email them my resume, specifying that I am not looking at the moment.
|
Recommend someone after rejecting a job offer I recently interviewed for a company. I liked the company, I think they liked me, they made me an offer but I turned it down (because I had a "better" offer and for personal reasons). We left in good terms (and, maybe, in the future, I could think about re-applying for this company). Now, one of my previous coworker is looking for a job in the same sector and geographic area where this company was, and I know they are still hiring. Am I in a position to recommend him to this company ? I would like to help him if possible but my questions are : Would it be inappropriate given the circumstances ? Am I taking a risk by doing this (if he doesn't fit there -- given I think he is a good guy but I never followed closely on his work) Is there a possible reward for me here ? (If I were to apply again in the future) ? <Q> If I was in your position I would just contact your coworker and tell him about the company, maybe give him any hints you think will help him at interview. <S> If they employ the guy and he does really well the possible reward is that if you ever need it he'll recommend you. <S> I don't think that there is a massive negative to you recommending him <S> , I just don't see that it would especially help his application. <S> They liked you in interview enough to offer you a job, they probably don't know enough about you for your recommendation to carry that much weight. <A> Am I in a position to recommend him to this company? <S> Maybe. <S> As always, that depends. <S> You can certainly tell your friend what you know about this company, and suggest that he apply. <S> You have some insight into the company, the interview questions, and the hiring practices that could be valuable to your friend. <S> I highly recommend him." <S> But only do this if you know you would still be considered friendly by the hiring manager, and if you truly know and could recommend the skills of your friend. <S> If the hiring manager felt spurned by you, your recommendation could easily work against your friend. <S> He may think "Well, I was rejected by vib, if I made an offer to vib's friend, it would likely be rejected as well. <S> I won't bother." <S> Am I taking a risk by doing this (if he doesn't fit there -- <S> given I think he is a good guy <S> but I never followed closely on his work) <S> There is likely no risk to you. <S> Still, I would never personally recommend someone unless I knew their work well. <S> Of course, you want to discuss this with your friend to see if he wants you to help or not. <S> Is there a possible reward for me here ? <S> (If I were to apply again in the future) ? <S> That seems unlikely. <S> Still, if your friend gets hired and turns out to be an excellent employee <S> he/she could turn around and recommend you at some point in the future. <S> And the hiring manager might remember that you recommended what turn out to be a great hire. <A> Nothing wrong with recommending him. <S> Company will (and should and MUST) vet him <S> not just take your word and hire him. <S> I once hired simply on the basis of the recommendation of an ex-employee. <S> My decision blew up in my face. <S> I asked the ex-employee what's up. <S> She said that it was my responsibility to vet him and that she had zero responsibility for the fiasco. <S> In the wake of your question, I realize that she was right. <S> I was young, stone cold good looking and stupid back then <S> , now I am just stupid :) <S> The hire was a good guy <S> but I had learned the hard way as an engineering undergrad that when it comes to team work, I'll take a creep who will hack it over a good guy who can't - I have the option to kill the creep after I no longer need him. <S> If your co-worker turns out to be a raging incompetent, then your recommendation may backfire on you, so you must be more than say 75% sure that he will work out both in terms of technical ability and cultural fit - Don't underestimate cultural fit. <S> On the other side of the transaction, you are not making new friends if your solidly competent co-worker thinks that you sent him to the antechamber of Hell. <S> Your question about possible rewards for recommending an individual that works out - that question is company-specific and you'll have to ask them not us. <S> Keep in mind that the company may simply go through the next candidate on the list rather than go through another candidate search, especially if the next best candidate is a thoroughly viable candidate. <S> Personally, unless your co-worker is outstanding in some way that's valuable to us, I'd rather take the easy way out and go for the next candidate. <S> Make sure that you get your co-worker's permission to recommend him before you make a move in the direction of recommending him.
| If you turned down their offer on very friendly and professional terms, you may be in a position to say something like "You know, this job wasn't a fit for me, but I know a great guy who would be perfect for your open position.
|
Should I include a company's name on my resume? First off, I'm a computer science student and I'm planning on doing an internship next year. Currently I'm working for a non technical company for the summer but I'm completing technical programming projects. I'm also updating my resume so that I can start applying for internships in September. This is where my problem lies, I'm wondering: Is it necessary to put the name of the company under work experience? Now the only reason I'm asking this is because the company I'm working for is called "Joe's Cleaning Services" and in my opinion having that on a resume when applying to technical companies is unprofessional. What I'm planning on doing is just putting the position title (which looks much more impressive). Is this a good idea? I've been reviewing a number of other CS students resumes and I've seen it done this way before, but from a recruiter stand point is this a bad thing? <Q> If the company is your current employer (and maybe even your previous one before that) - I would say it is absolutely necessary, since you will be using these as references. <S> Further back - I guess it becomes a matter of style. <S> As a manager who hires, my first reaction to your question was "yes, all the way down". <S> I'm still not sure it's a great idea to skip them <S> - it would look a bit odd, and anyone reading the resume would immediately think "yeah, but where were you an xyz?" <S> So, you worked for a company that doesn't have a sexy name as far as development goes? <S> Probably 95% of developers have this same problem eventually. <S> Format the resume so that the job titles are the primary headings in your history, and be sure to include a short list (2-3 bullets) of responsibilities under each job. <S> That way it will be very clear that you were a developer and not a cleaner. <A> Unless there's some reason you can't put the name of the company, such as if you were a contractor and can't disclose your clients (in which case you'd probably be employed by a contracting agency or self-employed and would put that), omitting the names of the places you've worked would draw more attention than not. <S> Honestly, I've never seen a resume that didn't include the employer and a job position or several that omitted the employer name would raise questions, and that would detract from me asking other questions more relevant to the job at hand. <S> Lots of companies need technical people, including companies that do non-technical things. <S> The description of the work that you've done and your accomplishments are far more important than the name of the company you worked for. <S> The only exception may be something like working in adult entertainment where the name of your employer may turn off other perspective employers. <A> Is it necessary to put the name of the company under work experience? <S> I don't believe I've ever seen a resume that omitted a company name. <S> Now the only reason I'm asking this is because the company I'm working for is called "Joe's Cleaning Services" and in my opinion having that on a resume when applying to technical companies is unprofessional. <S> There's nothing unprofessional about hard work - no matter the name of the company. <S> What I'm planning on doing is just putting the position title (which looks much more impressive). <S> Is this a good idea? <S> For me, it would look odd and raise some suspicions. <S> I think the company name should be stated. <S> Since it's only a summer job, unless you really need this job to show particular experience, you could choose to see how your resume looks if you just omit the position entirely. <S> I suspect it would look better than a job title without a company name.
| I would highly recommend leaving the name of the company on your resume.
|
How inappropriate to ask for a day off during internship I will soon start a 2 months internship, in a financial software company. However, I may need to take a day off and take some on site interviews to an other company, 2 weeks after starting. I am unaware of the proper etiquette regarding day off and interns, is it something that is widely frown upon ? Does it -at all- play a part in getting a return offer ? Clarifications: The internship is in Japan, in a non Japanese company. Thanks. <Q> You ask for a day off, and you make it clear that you'll make up for that day off. <S> If you can take half a day off rather than a full day off, you'll be even less disruptive. <S> As an intern, it's unlikely that what what you are working on is on a project's critical path - if you are on a critical path, then your boss should have known better than let the outcome of a project depend on an intern's contributions. <S> Not very ego enhancing to you, but that's how I would have handled you as my intern <S> - I don't want you to be to my team as a Chaos Monkey would be to Cloud operations. <S> Nothing personal, but I have deadlines to meet, a team's reputation to preserve and managerial headaches I want to avoid. <S> Some interns have complained on this site that they were not 100% busy and in fact, that they were only 40% busy. <S> If you fall into this category of interns, you'll make up for any time you take off very easily. <S> Your internship could end at your manager's whim. <S> Further, you're not guaranteed that your manager will call you back once your internship ends. <S> This means that you have to be proactive about your internship ending and being proactive means that you have to go on interviews. <S> In my time, I used to ask for some time off <S> and I would have been very up front if the management asked me what I was up to - <S> I would have told them that since they can't guarantee that they'll call me back, I have to have a plan B in place. <S> They never asked because they had a pretty good idea why I was asking for the time off, and that my asking for time off was my being simply prudent about how I managed my future. <A> It's def. <S> a risk to ask for a day off in a 2 month internship if you want a return offer from that same company. <S> With that short of time the probably want to see what you are made of, asking for a day off when you haven't even been there for two months and were pulled on as an intern for that time <S> will def. <S> be frowned upon. <S> That being said, a job is far better than an internship, if you are confident about this interview coming up <S> then it may well be worth doing that risk. <S> I suggest looking into trying to find out how and if other interns have taken days off and how they went about it. <S> It's impossible to know your specific circumstances as someone that isn't you, but personally I wouldn't pass up a solid paid gig <S> that I'm confident about to simply be viewed better as an 'intern' in a place that didn't give me the same opportunity to begin with. <S> You may just have to pull out your 'confident pants' and ask for that day/days off, go about it politically - there are companies that don't give contractors days off <S> but they do give them sick days and miraculously, more people seem to get sick. <S> It's also an option to see if the companies will work with you, explain you have an internship currently running and would love to interview with them and see what times they are available that work for you better - if you have the interview then they are already slightly invested in the process. <S> Good luck <A> One of the purposes of some internships is to make the intern want to work for them. <S> This is a way to see how you work with their culture, so they will want to treat you exactly the way they treat their employees. <S> Look to see if it discusses procedures for taking vacation, sick, or PTO <S> (Paid time off). <S> It is a good sign if it discusses your balances for these items, or how they are earned. <S> The documents may also describe flexible schedules: in other words they allow you to work any 40 hours in week as long a your manager approves. <S> Some even allow you to work 4x10 or 80 hours over 9 days. <S> The more flexibility they describe, the more easily you can schedule those hours you need to miss to attend an interview. <S> When you do need to ask for time away for the office, do so as soon as you can so that they can adjust. <S> You may even want to discuss it before your first day. <S> This is especially true if the time off is early in the internship, because they may still be training you.
| The first place to see about getting a day off is to look at the HR documents they provide you before or on the first day of work.
|
Once I've made a decision to take a job, should I go to another scheduled remote on-site interview? Tomorrow I'll be flying to Europe for an on-site interview with company A. Thursday of next week I will then fly to an on-site interview in the US at company B. If Company A makes an offer before Thursday, and I want to accept it, what should I do? The options I've considered: Tell Company A I'm very interested, but must see Company B's offer before I decide. This may or may not be purely honest, if I have decided to accept Company A's offer, but it seems like a harmless white lie... And Company B may somehow surprise me with an offer that is better than Company A. Accept Company A's offer, but attend Company B's interview out of politeness. This seems a bit dishonest to Company B. Cancel the interview at Company B. This seems honest, but might also be taken as rude to Company B--they may want the option to beat Company A's offer. They've also already sunk a certain cost into getting me there, some of which likely cannot be recouped (purchased airline tickets, etc). What's my best course of action? <Q> I'd attend the second interview, even if you'd accepted the position at Company A- but is it likely they're going to offer it to you that quickly? <S> It's a judgement call on whether or not to accept the position immediately - are they likely to change their minds if you ask for a couple of days to think it over? <S> That kind of depends on how much they seem to want you; in my experience, it's very unusual for a company to offer you a job and then turn you down because you ask for a few days to make a decision. <S> Regardless of whether or not you take the position, Company B made the decision to interview you; they've allocated time to talk to you <S> and they've likely already paid for everything necessary; you don't owe them anything <S> and there's not going to be hard feelings if it turns out you don't take the job (if it's even offered to you). <S> Getting interview experience is always a good thing, in my opinion, and you never know: it might turn out that Company B are willing to make you an excellent offer that you hadn't previously considered. <S> At the very least, you'll meet a few people that you have a chance to impress that may well remember you in the future, wherever you both end up. <A> if Company A makes an offer before Thursday, and I want to accept it, what should I do? <S> If you can interview with company B before the deadline with Company A, then go to the interview with company B. Wait until after the 2nd interview. <S> If you must decide on the offer before the interview with company B, then make a decision: if you will be going with <S> company A sign it, accept it, then politely decline the interview with company B. Keep options open with companies c,d and e <S> If you don't know if you want to go with company A, ask for enough days to get you through the interview with company B. <S> If you do go to the interview with company B tell Company B during the interview that you have an offer with company A <S> but you are interested; <S> unless of course you aren't interested. <S> When juggling multiple applications you will have perfect jobs with great offers, that don't materialize at the right time. <S> That is life. <S> The company has the same problem only a subset of great employees are available at the right time. <A> There are two possibilities: If you have an offer from A that you accepted, and you have signed, and A has signed, then you apologise to B, tell them you accepted a different offer, and there is no point in wasting everyone's time by going to an interview that isn't going to lead to employment. <S> Even if their offer is not as good as A, you have a fallback if A's offer falls through. <S> Up to the point where an offer is legally accepted (signed by both sides, which should happen simultaneously), you are free to look for better opportunities, and that's what you should do. <S> Once the offer is legally accepted, you apologise to everyone else. <S> They are aware (unless they have no sense of the realities of life) that you are not interviewing with one company only, and that it is normal that a candidate takes a better offer.
| If you don't have an offer from A that was accepted and signed by both sides, then you go to the interview with B, try your best to be found acceptable for the position, and see if they have a better offer than A.
|
Negotiate the relocation bonus after verbally accepting the offer This is similar to questions in here and here . I have verbally accepted the offer, my next step is to formally sign the offer online. Though I know it's unprofessional to renegotiate after verbal acceptance but I feel the relocation bonus offered is not up to my expectations. I was told over the phone that I will be offered $X as part of relocation bonus. However, the wording on offer goes like this - Within 30 days of commencement you will receive a one-time cash payment as a relocation bonus of the amount of $X subject to tax and other withholdings as required by law. The info that $X is after taxes was not mentioned over the phone. I believe I can renegotiate on this particular clause so that I can get a relocation bonus of the same amount after taxes and all. Should I go ahead? Thanks! <Q> The assumption that any payment from an employer to an employee is taxable and that the employer is quoting the pretax number is pretty basic. <S> Employers generally don't know (or care) what tax bracket you're in, what deductions and credits <S> you're eligible, or what states you might owe taxes in <S> so they have no way to know how much of your salary or bonus <S> you'll have to pay. <S> Since they didn't say anything to indicate that the relocation bonus would be an after-tax figure, you're going to make yourself look bad if you try to re-open negotiations after agreeing to the offer already. <S> How bad this will make you look is dependent on a number of factors. <S> If you've just graduated, this is your first interaction with the joys of taxes, and you really need the extra money in order to relocate successfully, it's a lot easier to apologize for making a poor assumption and ask for a bit more relocation assistance. <S> If you've got 20 years of experience in your field, on the other hand, a desire to renegotiate is going to be a lot more problematic. <S> People are a lot more forgiving of mistakes by entry-level workers than senior-level workers. <A> The info that $X is after taxes [sic] was not mentioned over the phone <S> If you accepted the offer on the mistaken assumption that $X is the amount you would get after tax but is in fact the figure before tax, and you are open about this then it would probably not make you appear shifty to try to renegotiate - but it might be a minor mark against your judgment, especially for a role which commands a relocation bonus, to have made that assumption in the first place. <S> Should I go ahead? <S> We cannot answer this for you. <S> It depends on your circumstances. <S> However, if you can afford to relocate without then you should be very cautious about renegotiating: <S> If the answer is 'yes' and you use the money for anything other than relocation expenses there may be consequences, depending on your contract and/or jurisdiction. <S> If that figure doesn't budge, they restate the original offer and you accept anyway <S> , then it looks like your negotiating position was not serious. <S> By attempting to renegotiate, you may implicitly reject the offer made. <S> Be prepared for the answer to be 'no' and for that offer to go away. <S> You've not handed in your notice yet or booked your tickets, right? <S> You need to have a very clear idea of what your expenses are likely to be, what you need, and what pre-tax amount that implies. <S> You do not necessarily need to break that down at this stage but be prepared to answer on the spot if $Y is good enough for any value of $Y between $X and the amount accounting for tax that you ask for. <A> The info that $X is after taxes was not mentioned over the phone. <S> I believe I can renegotiate on this particular clause so that I can get a relocation bonus of the same amount after taxes and all. <S> Should I go ahead? <S> You could try. <S> And you could plead your lack of tax knowledge as the reason. <S> But unless you are willing to walk away from the job over the amount of taxes due on the relocation bonus, you have no leverage. <S> In my experience, companies don't like to renegotiate after an offer has been accepted. <S> For me as a hiring manager, it's a terrible way to start a job - it signals that you either don't think things through completely, or you are high-maintenance. <S> I'd be surprised if the company went back on their offer, so <S> I don't think either way would be fatal. <S> I wouldn't take this route, but it's certainly your call. <S> For me, it seems like it would be a very small amount of money to walk away from a good job, and not worth doing. <S> In the future, try to make sure you understand all aspects of an offer before you accept, so you won't run into a similar uncomfortable situation. <A> Yes. <S> Please do so. <S> A lot of dirty negotiation tactics involve leaving out details over the phone. <S> You probably have a good gut feeling whether this was intentional or just something they forgot to mention. <S> If it's intentional, don't let them manipulate you. <S> If it's not, bring it up. <S> Misunderstandings are perfectly good negotiation reasons. <S> But just don't keep renegotiating too much. <S> From a personal perspective, I don't mind one renegotiation if there was a mistake. <S> But if someone keeps doing it multiple times for whatever reason, it starts to make them look shifty. <S> So if you have other issues bring them up then and there.
| If you cannot afford to relocate without this extra money, then it sounds like you have no choice but to renegotiate.
|
Got 3 part-time job offers (retail), verbally accepted all of them but now need to turn down one of them I have applied for 3 part-time roles. All of them are are part time in-store sales in fashion industry. All of them extended an offer. I verbally accepted all on the phone since things were not certain at that point. And now I need to turn down one of them. Reasons are the location and lower wage rate, and scheduling. But here is the tricky part: I don't know why but neither of the other two have a written job offer letter for me to sign (I started my training at one of them today already). They made it clear that I didn't have to sign anything as an acceptance. Just some paper work to officially be in their system. I don't know if that's normal for part-time jobs in retail industry. The problem with the one I want to turn down is that I made a schedule with them to do the training in 2 days. I didn't do any paper work yet because the manager said there was going to be an email for the paperwork but it never came. My concerns are: will there be any legal issues if I turn down one of them which I verbally accepted? What is a polite and apologetic way to turn down the offer? And should it be a walk-in or a phone call? <Q> There will be no legal issues for cancelling <S> , this can be done over the phone. <S> You have three companies who want you, you currently owe them nothing, reject the one that does not cater to your best interest and move on. <S> Good luck <A> 1. <S> Yes, it's legal <S> Interestingly, any verbal contract doesn't go far if it's not recorded. <S> A common method of fraud is to do this on the phone. <S> For example, an employer could offer $800 salary in a contract. <S> You might SMS them asking for $1000 salary. <S> They would call you telling you that they agree, then pay you $800. <S> This is fraud but <S> without any recorded evidence, you can legally get away with any kind of verbal promise. <S> 2. <S> Just say sorry <S> The last time I posted a part-time low wage job post, I had non stop applicants. <S> It's been over a year since I closed that business <S> but I still get applications. <S> So just say you're not interested. <S> That's fine. <S> We pick the next guy on the list. <S> But try to be quick about it <S> so the employer has more time to change their plans and call up the next guy on the list. <S> It doesn't have to be in person. <S> In fact, asking for a meeting can be a little annoying because it means setting aside time, waiting for you to show up, or canceling some other plan just to meet you. <S> Just call them up during office hours, say sorry. <S> I personally prefer all resignations in writing because of the previously mentioned fraud thing. <S> Even SMS or Whatsapp. <S> It's not like breaking up with a girlfriend. <A> will there be any legal issues if I turn down one of them which I verbally accepted? <S> In the US, there wouldn't be any legal ramifications. <S> Your locale might differ. <S> Consult local laws. <S> What is a polite and apologetic way to turn down the offer? <S> And should it be a walk-in or a phone call? <S> You just say that you are sorry, but you have realized this job won't work for you, and you might indicate the reasons why. <S> Either a walk-in (preferred), or a phone call will suffice. <S> But do it as soon as possible. <S> Try to learn from this for the future. <S> You don't want to get in the habit of reneging on your promises. <S> You could burn a lot of bridges that way. <A> will there be any legal issues if I turn down one of them which I verbally accepted? <S> DISCLAIMER: <S> FOR REAL LEGAL ADVICE SEE A LAWYERHighly unlikely. <S> You haven't signed anything and even if you did, there is very little they could do other than being mad. <S> What is a polite and apologetic way to turn down the offer? <S> And should it be a walk-in or a phone call? <S> Whatever was the main mode of communication during the interview process. <A> Coming in late but for what it's worth <S> my thoughts on this, having been in a loosely similar situation myself. <S> If you've verbally accepted a job offer then the chances are you have a contract. <S> Depending on where you live it may or may not be enforceable against you. <S> The crucial thing is it benefits nobody to even attempt to enforce it. <S> If the company manages to force you to honor the contract you show up on your first day and hand in your resignation. <S> In theory the company may be able to require you to work your notice period but in practice it's hard to see any company taking that route. <S> There are lots of risks to them, the best case for them is that you'll work normally during your notice period and they still have to replace you, and if you resign on your first day then walk out and don't show up again what are they going to do? <S> Fire you? <S> It's not like you'll be wanting a reference from them.
| Politely explain that you found a better opportunity and are no longer available for the position
|
Adapt British English to American English in favor of having two different forms of the same word on a resume? I have worked for a large company for several years while I was a student. The company has several divisions that are called "Something Centre" or "Something else Center", with the British English "Centre" being used in European locations and the American English equivalent "Center" being used in North American locations. I mainly worked in a "Centre", but also did an internship in a "Center". If I stay faithful to those names, two different forms of the same word occur on my resume - which looks mighty stupid and may be considered sloppy. Is it acceptable in such a case to adapt the spelling of a company or division name to increase consistency and avoid the appearance of having a spelling mistake/typo on ones resume? <Q> If I stay faithful to those names, two different forms of the same word occur on my resume - which looks mighty stupid and may be considered sloppy. <S> Is it acceptable in such a case to adapt the spelling of a company or division name to increase consistency and avoid the appearance of having a spelling mistake/typo on ones <S> resume? <S> Unless these division names are known outside the company, you are free to represent them any way you like. <S> You certainly could call them the "Something Center" and "Something Else Center" to avoid the impression of a typo. <S> Or you could avoid naming the divisions entirely. <S> There's seldom a need to indicate which division of a company you worked at - <S> it's generally not considered important to the reader. <S> On the other hand, if the divisions are well-known outside of the company and you feel it necessary to name them individually, you are better off writing the name that is known by others. <S> Never change the spelling of a company name. <A> I would switch to the simplified American spelling. <S> Don't assume someone understands the difference between proper English and American English. <S> I spent a year working with the UK based offices of an American company and it never ceased to amaze how me how many of my American coworkers thought people in the UK didn't know how to spell! <S> Then again most Americans don't understand the difference between the UK, Great Britain and England! <A> Many to most large companies use filtering software to scan resumes for keywords. <S> That software also scans for typos, which if the software is set for American English, it will register "misspelled" words as typos and discard your resume. <S> Likewise, a recruiter or HR professional viewing your resume you emailed him will have the auto-misspelling feature on in his word processor (the red underline thing), which again will be set to American English and register Centre as a misspelling, at which point he will delete your email and resume for being sloppy. <S> Many HR professionals look through hundreds of resumes a day and so filter out anything with "typos" - and they're not going to stop and take the time to think about the difference between different forms of English <S> (they've got another 99 resumes to look at today - they're already looking at the next one). <S> They see the red underline, they delete.
| You should absolutely change the spelling.
|
Etiquette regarding interviewing with a competitor I'm currently at Company ABC working in a technical role on a short-term contract position. It's a nice job, I like the kind of stuff I get to do, and there's a good chance I can go full-time soon. Still, there aren't guarantees, so I'm starting to apply to other firms. Company XYZ is in the same market and is generally thought to be one of ABC's direct competitors. I applied to them through a recruiter and if I get an interview, I'm wondering how much I'm allowed to or should say about the stuff I did/am doing at ABC. I'm sure I'll get technical questions and have to provide some details about the analysis and algorithms I wrote. Just wondering what the preferred strategy is. I signed a non-disclosure, but not a non-compete, FYI. What exactly does an NDA cover? <Q> One can't answer what exactly an NDA covers in your specific situation without knowing what the NDA says. <S> As a general rule, and NDA covers anything deemed proprietary trade secrets, systems, processes and potential products. <S> Anything proprietary to your current employer which you have the potential to take with you in the form of insider knowledge and duplicate elsewhere can be covered in an NDA. <S> You're best off giving generalized explanations to your skills and experience without delving too deep into the fine details native to your current employer. <S> Company XYZ should be able to understand that. <S> If they don't, then you should keep looking because any company who would attempt to get you to break an NDA is likely wrought with many other ethical conflicts. <A> This extends into future employment with XYZ, should that happen. <S> Although an NDA is only enforceable if the company that you're currently working for can prove a loss why would XYZ ever wish to hire you if you were so willing to give away intellectual property you were meant to guard with your current employer? <A> Reading the NDA at your current company in full should be your first step. <S> Beyond that a good rule of thumb is not to discuss in detail anything that your company hasn't already publicly and officially disclosed. <S> Key here is what the company has officially disclosed - not what Gawker, Kotaku or some other site is speculating the company is up to. <S> I can tell you from experience on multiple occasions that discussing confidential information will not look good in the eyes of a potential employer. <S> In one situation I was working at a game studio and we interviewed someone from a competing studio. <S> The candidate discussed in detail some of the game play mechanics behind their upcoming title. <S> While everything they told had already been published in the various game rumor sites (Kotaku, Games Radar, etc.) <S> our team was still very put off that this person would disclose information that hadn't been publicly announced by his studio. <S> As far as we were concerned if they would discussed info on their current title at that studio they would probably do the same to us, even if it was unintentional. <S> It is an easy trap to accidentally fall into. <S> Most talented people are very proud of their work <S> and it's human nature to want to discuss your accomplishments when asked. <S> If asked during an interview it's 100% acceptable to politely say "I'm sorry, but the details on that haven't been publicly released and out of respect for my current employer <S> I probably shouldn't go into detail on that. <S> " <S> Any company worth working for will respect you more for saying this than answering the question and potentially violating your NDA.
| Answer enough to demonstrate domain knowledge, but do not outline anything that's going to disparage your current company or potentially cost them trade secrets.
|
Dealing with unrealistic deadlines I'm seeking advice on how to deal with unrealistic deadlines at work. The issue is that the company I'm working for is making a huge pivot, however there is an expectation that the pivot will occur quite rapidly and that the previous technology solutions will be sufficient to make this a smooth transition. To the contrary, I have discovered recently that the real amount of time to implement the new product is going to take a few more months than planned, mostly because new technology will have to be used, and a large amount of refactors are required. So far, the management team hasn't been quite receptive to this news, and are hoping I actually drop the much needed refactors. I'm looking for advice on how to handle these kind of unrealistic expectations and how to move forward. I really like the company, but I think that there is a lot of stress here since the company is losing a lot of users daily. <Q> If there is an unrealistic deadline, one of the following has to happen: <S> a. Extend the deadline / b. deliver past the deadline. <S> Drop features. <S> Drop quality (expect the odd crash or data loss here and there). <S> Bring in someone highly qualified who can contribute significantly to the work, that is expensive. <S> Work ridiculous hours and make yourself ill as the result, with dubious results. <S> What doesn't work, but what your management seems to do, is Close your eyes and ears to anyone who tells you the deadline is at risk. <S> Number 5 has the disadvantage of making you ill, without any advantages for you (company isn't going to pay overtime, or going to thank you, but realise that you can be taken advantage of), and it doesn't help much anyway, so that is the option that you must avoid and refuse at any cost. <S> I'd suggest to create a list of features that could be dropped while still having a useful product, and a list of points where quality can be dropped, including the obvious consequences. <S> Your management then needs to decide what to do. <S> If necessary make them aware that option 6 doesn't work ( <S> tread carefully there), and that option 1b. <S> will happen automatically. <S> What you need to emphasize is that without action, the deadline will not be met. <A> Firstly - accept that if this really is the case, it's not okay. <S> Too many programmers take home work with them and stay silent on these issues leaving management in the dark (even if they appear to not be). <S> You also never want to present a problem without some sort of reasoning or a solution. <S> To do this - communication is key. <S> Not just telling your manager that you're not going to be able to reach a deadline but refining how you communicate it. <S> If I were in your position I would break down the work into items and put timing, and deadlines around each of them. <S> You can then use this to communicate exactly why the deadline isn't achievable, with hard data that the business can feel comfortable making a decision upon. <S> Should this not work I often continue to update a worksheet as the project commences sending a weekly (or if necessary daily) summary of the work items that have been completed, any blockers to getting work done and the forecasted schedule. <A> First of all, it sounds like your company is abusing concept of deadlines and estimations - estimations are estimations and <S> that is all they are. <S> Delivering sooner is okay, delivering past the deadline is not. <S> Amending to the previous answers, and based on my previous experience this might as well be a communication issue for one simple reason - people in management often lack technical skills and understanding, and simply put, they are underestimating the importance of software quality which is a real need in this case apparently, as you stated that a lot of refactoring will be needed. <S> Based on that, you should probably present management with the fact that doing it later will cost more, as technical debt only increases and the problem that already exists will not simply go away if postponed - it will increase in severity as you add more and more complexity to the project, and that increase will be exponential to the point where maintaining the project will suck up huge amount of resources. <S> I don't think a wise management will pass on this if it is absolutely certain they will loose money if this continues in a way that it does. <S> If this is a inside product, argument that we should actually produce something that works well instead of a half <S> baked cake should pass with flying colors. <S> If this is a product for some external customer, even more - people usually are reasonable enough to accept extending deadlines if that means the end result will improve by order of magnitude. <S> Last, but <S> not least, you should figure out why this gross underestimation happened in the first place and place a mechanism from preventing it from happening in the future - were the tech people not involved in estimations? <S> Was something important excluded from the estimations, and if so, why? <S> And if so, why was not the deadline extended after it was proven to be unrealistic? <A> Sorry, <S> but I think you're approaching the problem from too much of an engineering standpoint. <S> It's easy to just accuse management of not being reasonable especially if they're not technically savvy, but you are losing clients. <S> That is a reality. <S> Like all emergency situations (severe loss and damage with little time and resources), you have to triage. <S> In your case, it has to happen on both the Refactoring and the Feature/Requirements areas. <S> Get those two in synch if possible. <S> If feature A will help retain the most clients, refactor that part of the code base if necessary. <S> At least limit the refactoring in areas with the least interest to your clients. <S> I realize you may be refactoring generalized areas, utilities or frameworks. <S> I'm skeptical about this large makeover at a time when clients are not satisfied with your application. <S> Fix what you have to solve their problems. <S> If you can get me across the river, I don't need a new bridge.
| If you're comfortable doing so (depending on your level and the team) you could even suggest some compromises that could be made (with changes or your own schedule) to help get the project back on track. Nobody, ever should expect for a estimation to fit in a deadline exactly and deadline should have a very reasonable safety buffer over estimation for exactly these situations.
|
In a cover letter, is it appropriate to address one person in particular and add a general phrase? I'm applying to a job where I, thanks to a referral, already have I contact within the company. However, I'm not at all sure who will be reading my cover letter - my contact is a team lead, but not a hiring manager. Is it appropriate to include both the contact person and a "catch them all" phrase in the salutation? For example: Dear Mr. Smith, dear AwesomeCompany Recruiting Team, Bonus: I have exchanged a couple of emails with said contact, on a first name basis (as seems customary in the US, at least in the IT sector). Nevertheless, I feel it is inappropriate to address someone by first name in a cover letter. Is that correct? Or should I stick to address this person by first name even in formal writing? <Q> Dear Mr. Smith, dear AwesomeCompany Recruiting Team <S> That is just horrible - it shows that you don't know who you should be sending the correspondence to. <S> The general rule is: if you have been given the name of someone to correspond to, address it to that person; if you have not, then address it To whom it may concern <S> If you know someone at the company or department, but you're not supposed to be contacting them direct, address it <S> To whom may concern , and possibly mention that you have been in communication with the individual you know - but only if it is directly relevant to your application, otherwise it would come across as name-dropping. <A> As a recruiter who sees cover letters every single day I can honestly say it really doesn't matter. <S> I've seen everything from the very formal "To whom it may concern" to a simple "Hi there" to no salutation at all. <S> Recruiters are used to having referrals sent our way (in good companies referrals make up at least 1/3 of all hires) <S> so we're not going to get our feathers ruffled if you fail to address specifically. <S> Plus the tech industry in particular is rather informal. <S> Personally I'm really not a fan of "To whom it may concern". <S> It feels overly formal and coldly impersonal. <S> It's the equivalent of a piece of mail addressed "Dear occupant". <S> One I would definitely avoid is "Dear sir". <S> Beyond being overly formal it runs the risk of offending females - not good since recruiting is an area where women seem to make up the majority of the workforce. <A> Dear Mr. Smith, dear AwesomeCompany Recruiting Team is ok <S> It think. <S> You may want to think on the wording for "AwesomeCompany Recruiting Team" and if you find nothing good and short, leave it out. <S> Why do it like this? <S> You are writing to Mr. Smith, that he will show your letter to someone else is secondary <S> You know others will read the letter, with keeping it formal <S> you are on the safe side. <S> You demonstrate that you are a professional. <S> You will mention that you talked to Mr Smith before in the latter ("Thanks for the great discussion we had at X! <S> Please find my appliction enclosed", just far better) <S> So others who read your letter know that Mr. Smith has a first hand impression of you. <S> Also, it's the polite thing to do.
| In your case I would simply address it to your contact since you've already established a relationship with them.
|
Is it wise to release your current income if what you expected is twice as high as your current salary? So here is the thing. My close one feels he is extremely underpaid. IT professional with 2 years of experience got paid around 46K. So he decided to see the market. After his research he found for his experience level it should be around 75K~120K. He is furious. Now when he is applying other jobs, however, delima came in. Almost all recruiters ask his current salary. One potential job has went through two intense phone interviews and getting into a face to face, however, no offer has been made. Note, that the application for the face to face interview will also ask to fill out current and previous position's pay rate. He wants to know is it wise to reveal that his salary is on the low end of 46K to the recruiters, however, according to his research, likely, in this senario, potential employer will low ball him, as they will think why they should pay 90% more for him? What strategy should he utilize to prevent this from happening? Should he just reveal that info without worry about all these? Thanks <Q> Simply put, salary history is a privileged, and usually, confidential information, hence, your friend does not need to disclose anything, and recruiters have no right to ask for this information, as it bears no relevance to the job application or ability to perform. <S> I have had such question asked before a few times, and my reply is usually the same - it's confidential. <S> Period. <S> In some EU countries salaries are also classified as trade secret and are not to be disclosed even if there is no such limitation in the contract itself. <S> Personal side note <S> - I usually tend to avoid working with recruiters asking a lot of personal questions not relevant to the given position and job offers that does not already have set salary range for given position. <S> They usually tend to turn out to be low quality, shady, offers anyway. <A> The main reason why good recruiters are asking this question is to make sure there is no major disconnect between your expectations and what the job is paying. <S> If they have a 70k job and you are currently making 100k, then this is not going to fly and there is no point wasting everyone's time. <S> The main reason why bad recruiters are asking is to get a good leverage point for future salary negotiations. <S> Most recruiters are a mix of both. <S> Hence a good answer could be <S> My current employer considers compensation information confidential <S> so I can't disclose my current salary. <S> According to my research <S> Programmer (or Network Analyst) II are paid between 64k and 105k in this area and giving my experience level I would be expecting something in the middle of this range <S> Contrary to common belief most good employers have no interest in low-balling their employees. <S> Losing someone good just because they can make 5k more next door is a huge loss and does damage that's way more significant than the 5k. <S> In many cases it's more about compensation fairness inside the team. <S> Primarily you can't make a lot more or a lot less than people with comparable skills and performance level in the same organization. <A> Taking a stand and declaring it none of their business is unlikely to win any friends among recruiters. <S> And you need friends to get good jobs. <S> Good recruiters know how to work with salary discrepancies. <S> It's in their best interest as well to get you the best package, since they are often paid a commission based on your package. <S> Although you are their product (not their customer) they need to place you in order to get paid at all. <S> Try this: "I currently make X, which is why I am looking for a better situation for myself. <S> I expect my next job to provide a competitive package. <S> If not, well, you and I will be having this conversation again really soon." <S> If you're talking directly with the hiring company: "I currently make X, which is why I am looking for a better situation for myself. <S> I really admire your company and would love a chance to work here. <S> I am confident your overall compensation is competitive with the other companies I have spoken with." <S> By the way, all this assumes you're actually as good as your resume makes you appear to be. <S> Poor performance never gets rewarded with large pay increases. <A> Being combative and telling a recruiter it's none of their business will almost certainly get you pulled from consideration. <S> More for coming across as an arrogant jerk than being greedy. <S> A more appropriate way to handle it is to simply say: "I do feel that I'm currently underpaid and am looking for something in the range of XXX" <S> Contrary to popular misconception most recruiters are not out to screw people over and low ball them. <S> For an agency recruiter this means a lower commission. <S> For an in-house recruiter this sort of thinking will likely result in high turnover. <S> Reality is most companies have set salary ranges and typically you want to bring people in somewhere between the lower 1/3 to midpoint of that range. <S> Also when looking at an offer to be sure to take into account the total value of what is being offered. <S> This means paid time off, benefits, stock, bonuses, etc. <S> Even when a company might be able to brings someone in low they will usually want to stick to ranges and generally accepted compensation practices. <S> As an example, a few years back I had to recruit a UX Researcher. <S> We needed someone with some very particular skills in neurology and all the candidates we found came from academia which pays nothing (most were making under $70k!) <S> The 1/3 point of our range was $95k and none of the three people we hired were brought in for less than $105k. <S> We could easily have offered them less but in the long run it would have been a mistake in terms of internal team equity.
| More than that, most of the corporate contracts I have seen (and I have seen a lot) have explicit clauses that forbids the employee from disclosing the salary, so it is possible that your friend is not even allowed to disclose his past/current salary.
|
Should I warn a friend about a former employer? I have a friend who for the purposes of this question we'll refer to as Paul. Paul is a University professor who hasn't been actively involved in business outside of academia. He's shown me some very interesting algorithms he's developed with serious business applications. There are a few in particular that I think could make him significant money. My former employer, who we'll call Bob, is not someone I'd work with again. I'm hesitant to disclose the details of why I don't trust Bob for fear of indirectly identifying him (or myself), but suffice it to say I believe my reasons are sound and not specific to my experiences with him. I would have serious concerns for anyone working with him. Recently Bob began contracting with Paul and attempting to make some money off these ideas and algorithms. I'm not privy to the exact details of their situation, but I have a bad feeling that Bob may not have made everything fair. There may be nothing to worry about, but if my fears are correct Paul may be headed for a very bad situation. On one hand, my friend is an adult and perfectly capable of making his own decisions. On the other hand, I would've greatly appreciated someone warning me what Bob was really like before I started working with him. Should I warn my friend about Bob or leave it alone and mind my own business? <Q> Tell him about your experiences with this person and why you think it would be a bad business fit while also letting him know that this is his decision to make. <S> Give some examples via your personal experiences to convey your point. <S> "Hey Paul, I know you are eager to make money, but I want to help you do it with the right person <S> and I don't think Bob is that person because of x, y, and z. <S> Ultimately it's up to you, but I felt that I should tell you this before you decide to work with him. <S> " <S> There's a reason websites like Glassdoor exist for these types of things. <A> As Paul is your friend he does deserve the benefit of your experience. <S> You would warn your friend if you heard they were going to a mechanic that you've had bad experiences with so why not a business contact. <S> Be a friend and don't let your friend get burned. <A> If you withhold the data of your own experience with Bob, you are not looking out for Paul. <S> Yes, Paul is an adult and he makes his own decisions, but he can only make decisions based on the data that's available to him - you are skewing the game by not making available to him the data of your experience with Bob. <S> Don't tell us that Paul is making an informed decision, if you are not lifting a finger to inform him. <S> If, after having shared your experience with Paul, Paul still decides to go ahead, that's his decision. <S> If he decides to go ahead, he should do so on full alert and with some solid precautions in place. <S> Like escape clauses in any contract that he signs with Bob in case Bob feels a (im)moral obligation or dastardly urge to screw Paul in the same way that hurts that Bob screwed you. <A> Should I warn my friend about Bob or leave it alone and mind my own business? <S> Warning your friend is both personally and professionally prudent and the ethical thing to do. <S> Without being seen as engaging in slander, you can simply tell your friend something to the effect of "Given the nature of your work, I would be cautious about working with Bob or his company as in my experience <S> I've dealt with xyz when working with Bob". <S> While your friend is an adult, all of us can benefit from knowledge not readily at our disposal from our own research and efforts. <S> A bad business deal is bad <S> no matter how you try to dress it, and <S> no one wise enough would knowingly walk into a bad one with the likely downside consequences of it presented beforehand.
| If your friend respects you, he will appreciate your advice/warning both personally and professionally.
|
As a student looking for a job (money), should I tell my potential employer I'm not planning on staying for long? I'm a student attending university. I currently live in city X and my family and I have been planning on moving to city Y for 2 years, but it always gets postponed for one reason or another. It's been postponed multiple times and me moving depends on my family finalizing it. My parents said it is basically finalized that we're moving in 1 month and a half. Note that last few times my parents said that it's "finalized", it never happened. With that said, I need money to pay off tuition, car, food, housing etc. I applied to jobs (local restaurants, clothing stores and even part-time computer jobs because I'm a programmer). I got an interview with an IT company (not possible for me to work from home). During the interview, they asked how long I plan to keep the job. My response was "I don't know, until I feel that I no longer need the position" (I know, horrible response but it was like my 4th ever interview and I'm still getting the hang of it). They followed it up by saying "just keep in mind that it is a part-time job and there may be weeks where you work very few hours so you shouldn't expect to be promoted to full-time and shouldn't expect a raise in salary". I agreed. They also asked if I was okay with working while taking university courses (they assumed that I'll be here in September taking courses when university starts). They called me back for a 2nd interview. At this point I think my chances of getting the job are pretty high. But I also think that if I tell them "although I'm not sure how long I plan on keeping the job, there is a possibility that I may quit 4 weeks after getting the job", it will significantly hurt my chances of getting the job. As a student, I need the money this job offers and gaining the experience will be good too, even if I can't use this employer as references. With that said, in the 2nd interview, should I mention that there is a possibility that I may leave 4 weeks after getting the job even if it will significantly hurt my chances of getting the job? <Q> I think you should not tell them because your parents' transfer has been postponed several times in the past and there is no guarantee it won't be postponed this time. <S> So basically you are not sure about transfer. <S> So why tell your potential employer this when you yourself is not sure how long you will be there? <S> And even if your parents move to city Y you can commute to this workplace if city Y is not very far from city X (your current city). <A> Given your parents' history of saying that you'll all move <S> and then you don't <S> , my attitude is pretty much " <S> I'll believe it when it happens" Act as if your parents moving until they actually instruct you to put things in boxes. <S> At that point and only at that point, let your employer know that your parents have decided to move and in your case, where ever they go is where you go. <S> It's part-time job, so <S> your employer should have no trouble finding an adequate replacement for you. <S> Once thing you need to learn as a professional is to make decisions based on the facts at hand while accommodating for the maybes, some of which can be quite disruptive if they happen. <S> The fact at hand is that your parents haven't instructed you to pack things up as of yet. <S> You can manage the maybe that you will move by giving adequate notice - one to two weeks - to your part-time employer. <S> And yeah - know your parents, too :) <S> Otherwise, you'll go insane. <A> When you start a new job, there is always the possibility that the employer figures out within four weeks that they don't like you, or you figure out within four weeks that you don't like the company, and in either case you leave. <S> There's the possibility that you find the love of your live next week and move 2,000 miles away. <S> No need to tell the employer. <S> They know that. <S> All that you can achieve is that you are not going to get the job. <S> It's simply a shared responsibility: Your responsibility is to look after your interests, and the company's responsibility is to look after their interest. <S> And believe me, they are better at it than you are. <S> No need to help them. <S> That should be your first question: How does it benefit me? <A> It depends upon the role. <S> If the job is as a cleaner, probably. <S> It's not worth them hiring you then to have to go through the whole hiring process again in a month. <S> If the job is as a white-collar worked, yes (without a doubt). <S> When dealing with graduate programmers, I do not expect to get any useful work out of them for 6 months.
| And don't feel too guilty about giving notice, no one employee is or should be irreplaceable.
|
What is the value in joining a start-up without any equity included in the contract? I keep reading about joining a small start-up, keeping it up until it grows and then reaping the rewards.However, the way I see it is that investors and shareholders will be reaping the rewards, while overworked employees will get a promotion at best, and they could have gotten that promotion in many other companies. Some make millions, some make 10K more per year. Shouldn't "reaping the rewards" include seeing your equity/shares become much more valuable? If so, should one join a start-up only when equity is written in the contract? <Q> There are plenty of benefits to joining a startup without equity. <S> Rapid promotion <S> Experience doing more things and having more responsibility and ability to set direction than you would at a larger shop Exposure to startup people, both in your company and funders, for your next startup None of these will make you a millionaire, however. <S> If you want to "cash in," then yes, you want equity <S> and you want it in writing. <S> I have plenty of friends that worked for one startup or another, and even if they were "there early," when the founders sell and cash out, you don't get a handout out of the goodness of their heart <S> - you get nothing, if you have no clear equity agreement. <S> So while there are reasons to work for a startup even if you don't get equity, if you are specifically looking for the cash-out part of that life, then you absolutely need a formal equity agreement - though even then, I've seen buyouts that manage to somehow screw minority equity holders, so it's no ironclad guarantee. <S> As a deleted user mentions in his answer here, making sure you have a percentage or otherwise legally-enforceable non-dilutable claim is the only way to ensure you win. <A> Shouldn't "reaping the rewards" include seeing your equity/shares become much more valuable? <S> If so, should one join a start-up only when equity is written in the contract? <S> If your only goal is reaping rewards, then you probably should avoid startups - without regard to the equity being offered. <S> I worked at a several startups, most of which never paid significant financial rewards. <S> If you are talented, you may be able to accrue far more predictable rewards at a larger company. <S> That said, I would never trade my years at startups for big-company jobs. <S> I was able to learn things far more rapidly, to advance very quickly, to work with extremely smart people, and to feel that my efforts made a difference - far more often than I ever did in larger corporations. <S> At several startups I got to do things I never imagined <S> I would have a chance to try, and I never imagined I was capable of. <S> For me, the hard work at startups never seemed like a burden, and always made the work day fly by. <S> But remember, it's only a possibility. <S> Startups are often shooting stars - burning brightly but often very briefly. <S> There's no guarantee you will be in for a significant reward (if any). <A> If it is a competitve salary doing work you enjoy then why not. <S> How can you assume will be overworked? <S> What is wrong with promotions? <S> If a small company grows there are more opportunities for promotions. <S> And some investors make nothing. <S> If the start up fails you get to keep your salary. <S> By that logic should you take corporate job without shares? <S> In another question you complain about lots of politics and manager taking credit for your ideas. <S> A small start up is not likely to have those problems. <S> The stated question is take a job without equity. <S> And the answer is simple. <S> If the job, salary, and benefits is competitive <S> then why not? <S> You are not getting equity at a large company. <S> Evaluate the offer for what it is. <S> A start up is not necessarily a sweat shop. <S> It may be well funded <S> and they already have the core competency <S> and you are just a valued well paid employee. <S> If they need your skills to develop the core competency then yes they are going to offer shares. <S> If they offer a lower salary and shares then you have to compare that to another a higher offer with no shares. <A> First, just equity isn't something you should look at ever - you need a 'percentage' of the company, not just equity. <S> Equity can be diluted which companies do all the time to get a lot of free work from employees 'hoping for a payout' - it's called 'The Golden Chains', this is what happened to the co-owner of facebook. <S> Say FB started at 100 shares total, Mark and his partner would each of had 50 shares which if it stayed at that amount each share would be worth billions today. <S> However, Mark tricked his partner in signing off his 'percentage' and he was just on equity <S> so Mark raised the total shares to like 4 million and kept half of those meaning his partner had 50 shares and he had 2 million thus making his partners shares worthless. <S> Point is, don't trust equity unless it's a percentage of total equity created - companies trick people all the time by saying 'here is 20,000 shares for 0.001c a share in the company' and people think it looks incredibly good so they take it, are willing and get worked to the bone also while being convinced into signing something like a Non-Compete that locks them from progressing, or excelling or growing in their field and dependent on their job. <S> Then the company adds say another 2 billion shares in which they keep all of it and you literally get maybe 0.00001c a share, are stuck in the job and dependent on them because you can't work for someone else you've built your skills in, <S> all while keeping your salary low because of your dependence on them. <S> I mainly suggest that whenever a Non-Competent agreement comes in front of you you pass it up, then you are always able to negotiate more and never put your life in someone <S> elses hands that isn't you.
| If you want to work at a startup, everything else being equal, then an equity position can give you a possibility of a bigger reward. At startups my years, my contacts, my learnings, my professional network - all of these were valuable to me in ways that never happened at big companies.
|
What feedback should I ask for in a performance review? I've been working for a company for 8 months and I have asked for a feedback session from my boss. I'm interested generally to know what he thinks of my work, but what specific areas should I ask about that might be useful for me to know? I am a web developer. <Q> In general, the question I always want answered is "what do I need to improve upon, or start doing, in order to achieve my goal at this company?" <S> However, that requires you to ask yourself "what is my goal at this company?" <S> It could be straightforward - if you're a lower-level developer, and the company has higher levels you can reach, then your first goal might be to reach the next level, and you can ask what you'd need to do to accomplish that. <S> Or it could require you (or your boss) to think outside the box <S> A caveat, though - don't worry about the next goal unless you're doing quite well with your current tasks. <S> One near-certainty about being promoted or taking on additional duties is that you're handling your current duties well. <S> So you likely want to ask "how am I doing?" <S> first, to make sure you and your boss are on the same page about your current standing, and if they bring up anything to work on, to assure them you will focus on any areas needing improvement. <A> This depends on many factors -- your role, team size, how collaborative the team is, company culture, line of business, and more. <S> Here are some areas to think about (these are not the wording you should use in asking the questions): <S> How's the quality and timeliness of my work? <S> Am I hitting the right balance of "get it done" and "do it well"/paying down technical debt? <S> Am I learning our technology at the rate you expected? <S> How are my interactions with teammates? <S> Is there anything I should be doing more of or less of? <S> (Think about meetings and talking too much or not enough, about collaboration on bugs, and whatever else is relevant in your role.) <S> Any process stuff I'm not doing the way you want? <S> What should I be doing, or doing more of, to succeed in this role? <S> Some of this is really situation-dependent, though. <S> I recently had a conversation like this, as the only remote member of my team, where I made a point of asking about my participation in our meetings (where I'm the only one on the phone <S> and we can't see each other). <S> It would be easy to talk too much or too little, to miss things going on in the room, to accidentally be unclear or talk over people because of the lack of visual signal, and so on. <S> As the remote employee <S> I think abut those things, but I wouldn't expect my manager to (unless there were a glaring problem, and you want to catch it earlier than that). <S> So think about the things that might cause you, in your role, to have unusual effects on other people, ones they won't be thinking about up-front, and ask about those. <A> Break it down to code, design, working with peers, working with customers (if you do), and working with the boss. <S> Ask "Where can I improve?" <A> I think if your employer is unhappy with anything, they will tell you or signal you during normal work interactions. <S> It's not hard to know if you are performing well or not, either at work or in a relationship. <S> If you are fishing for compliments, don't waste your time. <S> Here is what I want in a periodic review. <S> 1) <S> What can I do to carve out some time, on the job, to explore areas of interest to me that I in my own judgement think might benefit the company. <S> 2) Can we set some learning goals that will improve my mastery of the skills that the company needs me to perform well. <S> 3) <S> How would we define my work and performance in terms of the purpose of the work I do in these key areas: Customer experience, advancement of the organization, value to my fellow employees. <S> A discussion that outlines these important factors that are shown to directly link to your job satisfaction and the quality of your contribution to your company is far more important than a blow by blow evaluation of some past actions. <S> Don't focus on past actions in discussion with your manager. <S> Focus on the future. <S> In your daily work, do your best and whatever it takes to deliver for your customers, company and coworkers and you'll never have to worry about the past.
| - if you're the only web developer for a small company, then possibly there's no next level to reach, and you could ask how you might be able to use your skills to further assist the company.
|
Should I give a gift to my boss with/after my resignation letter? I have had a very good experience with the company I am leaving, and want to soften the blow with a small gift to my immediate supervisor. Is this appropriate, wise, recommended? I'm based out of the Southeastern USA, and in software development. <Q> There is nothing wrong with showing your appreciation for your time at a company. <S> In this day and age, showing your appreciation for a supervisor you genuinely appreciated can go a long way for you and them. <S> With too many mediocre (to flat out poor) managers, those who are good managers and good to their people should be recognized. <S> Goodwill and recognition never go out of style in the workplace. <A> I have had a very good experience with the company I am leaving, and want to soften the blow with a small gift to my immediate supervisor. <S> Is this appropriate, wise, recommended? <S> What a nice thought! <S> It may not soften the blow of an important employee's leaving, but will certainly leave a positive lasting impression. <A> I don't know if it's recommended, but I did at my last job (a gift plus a thank you card). <S> It was appreciated, and they sent one back in return. <S> Just follow your heart, if you feel like you need to do something to show gratitude, you shouldn't let some "rules" or "convention" to keep you from doing it. <S> Besides, I doubt anyone hate receiving gifts. <S> ;)
| A token gift, given in private with a nice note, to someone who has helped make for a very good work experience is always appropriate.
|
Approaching speeding up promotion "timeline" I am a (somewhat) recently promoted mid-level software developer at a large retailer. Some time before my promotion, a departmental restructuring along with some turnover has left us short-staffed, with me doing what I would consider "senior" level work within the context of my company. Due to need, I have been thrust into this role even several months ago when I was at a "junior" level, and have been taking it (I think) in stride. I feel my responsibilities are beyond the expectations of colleagues/friends of mine at the same level. The thing is, HR has made it clear (in company-wide emails) that associates of my level are still subject to the traditional promotion timeline, which would only see me advancing at in early 2017. Would it even be worth bringing up a promotion to my boss? And if so, how could I suggest circumventing the normal timeline? Could I just be misjudging my own worth? Any input is appreciated. <Q> Would it even be worth bringing up a promotion to my boss? <S> It might. <S> During a one-on-one meeting with your boss, you might talk about the senior-level work you have already been doing. <S> And you might ask what you would need to do in order to get promoted. <S> You boss may have some ideas to increase your readiness. <S> He may indicate that it is too soon since your recent promotion. <S> Or he may have other suggestions. <S> And if so, how could I suggest circumventing the normal timeline? <S> If your boss echos the same timeline you heard from HR, you could ask "Is that a policy? <S> Are there ways to get promoted sooner here than the timeline would indicate?" <S> Then, be guided by how your boss responds. <S> You might find that you are asking too soon. <S> You might find that he isn't willing to step outside the box here. <S> Or you might find that he has some ideas on what would make you eligible for another promotion in spite of the timeline. <S> Could I just be misjudging my own worth? <S> But the discussion with your boss should help you see his point of view, and to judge it against your own. <A> Don't suggest how to circumvent the timeline. <S> Let that be your boss's problem. <S> Tell him straight up you feel you are doing senior level work and give him examples. <S> Ask him if he agrees that you are doing senior level work. <S> If he says no then ask for examples - in a non threatening way. <S> Once (if) you get him to agree you are doing senior level work <S> then ask <S> do you agree that I should have the position/title and the pay that goes with it? <S> If he says that is an HR policy tell him you do not agree <S> and you feel it is not fair. <S> It is not reasonable for me to wait two years to be promoted to the job I am doing today. <S> You don't have to threaten to leave. <S> Make it clear you are not satisfied with that. <A> What you're doing is nice stuff to put on your resume, and the stuff shows that you are not just any junior programmer. <S> If you just started what you are doing, I don't see you as deserving of promotion until you have proved yourself say over one year. <S> If you keep pulling the responsibilities you are pulling, then you probably have enough of a track record after one year to start looking for greener pastures. <S> At least, that's what I think. <S> In the meantime, keep piling up the significant responsibilities. <S> If your own company does not have in it to appreciate what you are doing, then some prospective employer will. <S> But you need to put in enough time to build the credibility. <S> More than anything, prospective employers want to see a consistent record of high performance.
| Yes, of course you could - that wouldn't be unusual.
|
"Are you doing a thesis?" - what is an interviewer trying to achieve by asking this question? I have just started an online M.S. statistics degree which I expect to be finished with in 5 years. I interviewed for a data analysis position today and the interviewer asked me if I was going to pursue a thesis with this degree. What is the purpose of such a question? Now perhaps a bit more subjective (not sure if appropriate for this site): would saying that I am pursuing a thesis be a red flag to an interviewer? Edit : Thank you all for your insights. To give some context as to why I even thought of why mentioning that doing a thesis is a red flag, that's because I came from a field where doing anything academic outside of the workplace is strongly discouraged. <Q> It's going to hurt your credibility <S> and it's going to be a large red flag if you are unable to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question <S> and you don't even know if your own degree program requires a thesis. <S> Back in my time (early 1980s), the Chemical Engineering Dept of the School of Engineering of Columbia University was the only one that required a % <S> $#^! <S> Master thesis. <S> Guess which Dept I was in? <S> I regarded a thesis as a huge imposition, then and now. <S> Unless you are a child prodigy, I doubt that anyone wants to even look at a Masters' thesis let alone look it up. <S> I needed the uncertainty about the date of graduation that came with having to finish the thesis like I needed another hole in the head. <S> Anyone who doubted my competence as a Chemical Engineer was doing so at their peril. <S> Masters' thesis time was not a happy time for me. <A> Simple answer, to gauge you and your interest in the field as a whole. <S> To explain that more, writing a thesis is known to be extremely hard. <S> Some people 'give up' essentially and make something mediocre and try to 'opt out' by doing this and think they can get away with it by explaining it off. <S> The purpose of a thesis is to express your argument in your main essay, so if you can't make a thesis then how are you going to explain it off when the purpose of the thesis is to explain your argument and opinion to begin with? <S> They are merely trying to gauge you on what you say you know/are. <S> EDIT: <S> You not knowing why this is a valid question could actually be a good thing if your focus is that 'of course I'd write a thesis, what kind of stupid question is this?' <S> else if your view is 'Who gives a crud if I write a thesis' then hiring you would be a cause for concern in my eyes since it proves that you merely want to be given the job to 'get paid'. <S> A lot of companies want their employees to be passionate, and rightfully so. <A> It is a well-known aspect of Masters program <S> I think there's an underlying assumptions, which is not necessarily false(of course, it may be false), that the people don't do the thesis option are going the easy-route. <S> By doing the thesis option, it implies that you had to undertake a large project. <S> That took significant time. <S> The irony is that oftentimes taking the extra coursework ends up taking more time. <S> But that's my view <S> References: <S> Thesis <S> Vs Non-Thesis - Quora Thesis vs. Non-thesis options in MS in CS?
| The interviewer asked you a straightforward question, and is expecting a straightforward answer. I believe that he is just curious about your background and motivation.
|
My boss is looking the other way, about my work-from-home? I have lately been working from home more than before. Well, my boss allows us to take 4 work from home days per month. But in my current situation, I really wanted more. So I emailed him that I plan to work from home much of time now (about half the month). And asked, "I intend to work from home. I hope this is Ok with you - please let me know" But my boss didn't answer. But I knew I did have flexibility about this point, because we are often remote. So my hunch is that I am annoying my boss a bit. That I may be slowly easing my way into his doghouse, unbeknownst. I tell myself "Well I did email him, and he did let me work from home many times prior." But part of me worries about it. <Q> It definitely depends on your local culture (wherever that is), your company culture, your team culture, and the rapport you have with your manager. <S> However, unless you have the type of rapport that such a declaration would be acceptable, simply telling your boss you're taking more than he <S> / <S> she has allowed is not a great way to get what you want. <S> It would be better to provide your reasons, and request his/her approval. <S> If approval is not granted, and you continue to do it, you're treading on thin ice, and could lose your privileges altogether (and even your job). <A> Whether the boss is annoyed with you depends on whether you are working four days from home or whether you just took it upon yourself to go ahead and work more than four days from home. <S> If I were your boss, I'd be seriously annoyed with you for pushing the envelope. <S> If your boss is the way I was, which is to hold it in until I explode, then you are in the doghouse with your boss. <S> I am wondering why you are asking this question here because you know your and how your boss reacts than any of us. <S> The way you are acting, you are not asking for permission, you are TAKING permission and if I were your boss, I wouldn't like it at all. <S> That gets worse if the four days per month were set as policy by the company and your boss has no authority to give you more than these four days. <S> In which case, you are jerking your boss around. <S> When I introduced the high quality Toshiba laptops into my company in the early 1980's, people loved them because they could take their work home, especially since they were getting paid for every hpur they worked. <S> And it was only a matter of time before part of the staff announced to their supervising partners that they'd be working from home on such and such a day. <S> What made it work is that there was trust between the supervising partners and the staff and that at no time did the staff make the supervising partners feel that the staff was pushing it. <S> And that we had no policy about working from home that had been set by top management. <A> I think there are two separate issues you need to address here. <S> Ability to work from home more frequently; and Identifying if there are any performance issues for "annoying" your boss. <S> With regard to working from home, if he didn't respond on one email I would contact him one more time and get a definite <S> okay. <S> Perhaps he didn't see the email for some reason, or was trying to get time to answer politely. <S> Ask again (perhaps by phone?) or by email and make sure <S> it's okay rather than assuming. <S> It may also alleviate any concern of "annoying your boss". <S> To tackle the second point, you should schedule a performance review with your boss. <S> I don't know how frequently you have them or if you have had one recently but the best way to gauge your boss's feeling is to give them a forum to discuss it. <S> A performance review is a standard way of achieving this. <S> It may also give you some insight into if he believes there are issues with your working from home more frequently. <A> My boss is looking the other way, about my work-from-home? <S> From your question it appears: You are working from home more than company policy permits <S> Your boss hasn't told you not to do so (yet) <S> You sent an email about it, but haven't received any response From that you seem to conclude that it is okay to work from home as much as you like. <S> You may be right that this is fine, and that the boss is "looking the other way". <S> Or you may be incorrect and your boss is compiling a list of "Things Adel Does That Are Bad. <S> " <S> Why are you and your boss avoiding the subject? <S> When you are both in the office next (perhaps you have a weekly one-on-one meeting?) <S> have a quick private meeting. <S> Bring the subject up directly. <S> Ask "I mentioned that I would like to work from home more than 4 days per month. <S> I sent you an email about that, but I haven't heard back. <S> I assume that means I can, but I want to be sure it' okay. <S> " <S> Then, you'll have your definitive answer, you won't have to rely on someone looking the other way, and you cannot be accused (by your boss, by coworkers, by upper management) of breaking the rules. <S> You'll know if you are annoying your boss, slowly getting into his doghouse, or not. <S> And you'll no longer need to worry about it. <A> You're putting your boss in a potentially difficult situation. <S> Looking at the wider picture, if everybody in the team decided to do the same as you would it cause a problem? <S> The company has rules regarding flexible working and they exist for a reason. <S> Unless you have a very good reason to request more flexibility it will be difficult for your boss to agree to it. <S> It sounds like he is turning a blind eye to this as maybe it works for everyone at the moment <S> but this could be stopped instantly if necessary as it has never been authorised. <S> but as soon as someone else points out you work from home more and demands the same <S> he's the one who has to deal with it not you.
| Your boss may well be getting annoyed with you if you think you can just make up your own rules, maybe he's avoiding a potential conflict The only one who will know for sure is your boss - and apparently he isn't saying anything yet.
|
Is it unprofessional to print screen a presenters notes or presentation? I was invited to a meeting that had been taking place for weeks and as the presenter was taking notes for the current meeting, I took a print screen so that I could catch up on the previous meetings notes and tasks. I asked for the previous minutes and documents prior to the meeting and did not get them so I thought this was 'ok'. I then asked the presenter a question about a comment in the previous notes and she complained that it was unprofessional to take print screens of 'her minutes' Was I wrong and is it really unprofessional to print screen office meeting minutes? <Q> Was I wrong and is it really unprofessional to print screen office meeting minutes? <S> Since it appears that you copied the presenter's personal notes without her permission, then yes, I do believe you were wrong. <S> Since she objected, then clearly she believes you were wrong as well. <S> And since the notes appear to have been hers, it was her decision which should matter most here. <S> It's not at all unprofessional to make a copy of anything as long as you have permission. <S> But lacking that permission, it would have been more professional to ask for the minutes again. <S> Just because you asked for them prior to the meeting, and haven't received them yet, doesn't give you permission to take them. <S> It's possible that the presenter would have given you the minutes at a later date. <S> It's possible that she was cleaning up her notes and would eventually give everyone a copy. <S> It's also possible that she just doesn't want to give them to you for some unknown reason. <S> Either way, they are hers to give away (or not) when and if she so desires. <A> No. <S> The fact that you were able to take a screenshot of the presenter's prior minutes indicates that she must have had them displayed in her screen sharing session, visible to you as well as everyone else viewing the presentation. <S> If you had a photographic memory, you'd have been able to recall the contents of those minutes even without a screenshot. <S> Would it have been "unprofessional" then? <S> (One possible exception: if the meeting was about a sensitive or confidential topic, requiring stricter confidentiality than that of the company's typical proceedings.) <A> If she complains about it again - ask her why she would be distributing these minutes if she does not want people to refer to them. <S> Although, it seems to me that she is more upset by the question itself - and trying to cover this by pointing fingers.
| If anything in this scenario is actually unprofessional, it's that the presenter displayed her minutes to her audience at all, when she did not intend they be viewed. You have done nothing wrong - you have properly prepared yourself for a meeting using the resources available.
|
Is not having a Facebook account considered suspicious by HR? It is a well known fact that Human Resources look at LinkedIn and Facebook profiles of candidates. I however do not have a Facebook account. I tried Facebook, but didn't like the website and how people were using it so I just deleted my account. Needless to say Facebook is as unprofessional as it gets and people do typically not use this tool in a professional context. Pictures of parties etc. are more typical Facebook content. I believe that the HR looks at Facebook page to see if you are too unprofessional and eliminates candidates that way - or on the other hand it could be seen as a bonus for candidates to look professional on Facebook. They could assume that if someone do not have a Facebook account, it is because they have something to hide, and have deleted their account. Does such a thing happen? Could having a "blank" Facebook account with almost nothing on it help me to get a job? <Q> They could assume that if someone do not have a facebook account, it is because they have something to hide and this is fishy, thus elimitate it. <S> Does such thing happens? <S> I suppose it's possible, but I've never heard of such a thing. <S> HR and others look at pretty much any online presence you have. <S> LinkedIn and Facebook are two common sources, but if you Google your name, you will likely find many more. <S> All of these are potential sources of information about you, but none are required. <S> And the absence of any would seldom be seen as "fishy" or be a cause for worry on the part of HR or a hiring manager. <S> Now, if you did actually indeed delete your Facebook account because it contained background information that you are trying to hide, similar materials will likely show up on other online sources - some of which aren't within your control. <S> Could having a "blank" facebook account with almost nothing on it <S> help me to get a job? <S> I can't imagine a case where a "blank" Facebook account would be helpful (or harmful) in this matter. <S> I suspect that you are seriously overthinking this issue, and are worrying about nothing. <A> I know several people without a Facebook page (including a few people under 30). <S> Most hiring managers will likely see it as a way to maintain your privacy, and not assume anything more sinister. <A> When interviewing, I always look up the candidate on LinkedIn. <S> If they don't have a profile, I am disappointed, but it's not a show-stopper. <S> If they do, I go through it and see if I can learn anything else that <S> the resume and cover letter do not convey. <S> I used to look people up on Facebook, but since it is more personal in nature, I realized I got little of actual professional value from it, and stopped doing that. <S> You will not be penalized by any reasonable interviewer for not having a readily accessible Facebook profile. <S> Most HR folks caution against checking personal social media profiles (at least in the US) because you often find information which is illegal to use as a reason for declining a candidate (family status, health, ethnic origin, religion, sexual orientation, etc.). <S> Not having a LinkedIn profile may limit your opportunities with some companies, but a good resume and cover letter, a good referral from a colleague, and an interview that proves your know what you're talking about, will overcome the lack of a social media presence. <A> I would agree with both answers. <S> What I will add is that lacking social media accounts can actually work in your favor. <S> Not that you may particularly work in a governmental capacity, but many companies who do work with federal government agencies requiring security clearances actually prohibit employees having social media accounts; or at the very least social media accounts in their legal name. <S> When it comes to your life whether you do anything questionable or not, having less of it out on social media can benefit you greatly. <S> Less for people to go snooping on. <S> If people I work with want to know more about my life and interests outside the workplace, they can make the effort to do so after hours. <S> Also just keep in mind that if you have an extensive social media presence, other sites will crawl that meta information and redistribute it. <S> Pictures and content you post typically persist on the web for 12 years before its so far down in the indexing that its hard to find. <S> I would not worry about having a blank FB account. <S> The only account and frankly people that are really worth having in your network are on LinkedIn.
| Unless your position will involve interaction on social media platforms, I doubt anyone will care that you choose to keep your interactions more private.
|
Benefits removed between signing contract and starting- is it reasonable to ask for alternative? I recently started a new job, after multiple offers. One of the offers still stands. There were two things which made my decision: the work itself and some particular benefits. I clarified those prior to signing the contract. Between this date and my starting the company made a change, this benefit was almost completely removed. The other offer is now better in this respect and every other except tool choice and the specific subject domain (where it's substantially worse). The company is a startup and doesn't pay well, I was happy to forego many benefits as money is tight but am considering asking for some compensation (a one off payment I know they have budget for) given the changes they made substantially change the attractiveness of the position for me. Is this reasonable? I was considering waiting for my 1-1 to bring it up, is this a good time and how should I broach the issue? I suspect my manager, another recent hire, is also upset about this so hope he'd be sympathetic. I'm concerned because the companies careers page dramatically overstates benefits, I consider it dishonest, and new starters will find out immediately. This can't be a healthy way to start a relationship. They were aware of how important the benefit was to me and haven't acknowledged that. I worry about what else they might do. Ideally I'd like the benefit resinstated within the spirit of their website, but I think this is unrealistic. Or, I'd like some small amount in compensation. As I have a back up I can to take risks, but hope to stay with the company, having improved my relationship with them. I've worked hard, got good results, and always behave professionally, the problem I describe here is the only negative aspect of our relationship as far as I know. <Q> So they changed the T&C /Benefits between your offer letter and your joining? <S> If the conditions where in writing I would talk to a lawyer about your options. <S> Id view this as a breach of trust (if not contract) and would start looking for another Job. <A> I would not trust a company that changed benefits on me after the contract was agreed. <S> It sounds like you still have another open offer. <S> Given the situation you are ethically entitled to back out. <S> When making your decision, you may want to take into account your concerns about the company's honesty. <S> If you do decide to stay, it's reasonable for you to ask for some adjustment to the contract. <S> They may say no, of course. <A> I would approach your manager with a written letter, stating: " <S> The change in benefits that the company is not meeting its obligations under the contract I signed. <S> I would like to rectify this situation. <S> I would like to either have the benefits reinstated, or renegotiate my compensation with the goal of compensating me appropriately for the lost benefit. <S> Please let me know when we can have a meeting about this issue. <S> " <S> Give it two weeks. <S> If you get nothing: <S> "I am sorry, but the company has failed to keep its obligations to me per our contract, and has not responded to my attempts to meet to rectify this situation. <S> I can only take this to mean that there will be no attempt at bring the contract back into compliance. <S> Therefore, I am considering this contract canceled by your actions, and will no longer be expecting the contract to be fulfilled." <S> Then leave. <S> No notice, no explanation (other than the above letter). <S> A company that pulls this maneuver won't be around to give you a reference after you're done with company B, anyway.
| I might make allowance if I was convinced the change was due to an honest mistake (e.g. people one pay grade up get free parking, and that perk was accidentally included in my contract) but unless the change was minor I would feel free to change my mind and accept a different offer. Basically this job is over and you need to treat it as such.
|
I am a new female supervisor in a small firm. Two of my male staff are Muslim. What do I need to know? On the first day when I was being introduced one of the gentlemen ignored/refused to shake my hand and I believe we both felt embarrassed and slightly offended. I have learned that this man is devout. I wish to know what issues might cause concern. I wonder about the fact that there is only one washroom for both men and women. Also, I wonder about my wardrobe choices particularly in the summer months (sandals without nylons) and when we need to go outside to look at a site (sleeveless top). One warm day I took my business jacket off (as did all the men) and was wearing a sleeveless blouse and noted that he did not contribute to the discussion.He is a star performer and I wish to enable both of us to obtain our best performance and productivity in a comfortable working environment. Any input or suggestions are appreciated. <Q> There are so many different believes and sects within those that you will not come to any results on your own. <S> You will need to ask them. <S> Schedule a meting with them, tell them in advance what you told us, so they can prepare and listen to what they have to say. <S> As they may not follow the same religious guidelines, you should schedule a single meeting with each. <S> It goes without saying that for this meetings, you should err on the side of caution and dress very conservative. <S> Make sure you tell them that you will try to make it work. <S> In the end, you will need to decide what exactly is worth it to accomodate them <S> and what is not. <S> You are running a business (or have been employed to do so). <S> If religion gets in the way of said business, you will have to make some tough decisions. <A> If you are not a Muslim, then you don't need to live under Islamic rules regarding clothing, or anything else. <S> The workplace is not for religion any more than it is appropriate for politics or other irrelevant personal things. <S> For example if you had an employee who was anti-semitic, would it be your responsibility to make sure they never had to work with any Jews? <S> Of course not, it's the employees responsibility to act professionally and leave their ideological issues at home. <S> You already know how to handle this situation. <S> If they were homophobes, racists, or misogynists <S> I doubt you would be asking this question, because it's a no-brainer. <S> Treat everyone equally, and handle unprofessional behavior stemming from religious ideology the same way you would handle it coming from anywhere else. <A> It's quite likely that the two gentlemen in question have more experience in contact with members of a different religion than you have, and quite possible that they take their religion more serious than you do. <S> We assume that you have no intentions to hurt anyone's feeling, but on the other hand it will happen due to lack of knowledge.
| I think you should make it clear to both that if you do anything that conflicts with their religion, they must not suffer silently or get annoyed with you, but MUST tell you what the problem is so that it can be fixed.
|
Can I claim nonprofit work at my company on my résumé? I am actively working for a software development company. One of our clients is a nonprofit organization. I am doing a good portion of the programming for them. Is it appropriate to put on my résumé something to the effect of: "Did nonprofit programming work for Organization XYZ?" <Q> Can I claim nonprofit work at my company on my résumé? <S> No. <S> It doesn't seem that you did nonprofit work <S> .Instead <S> , you did work for a company whose client happened to be a nonprofit organization . <S> Is it appropriate to put on my résumé something to the effect of: "Did nonprofit programming work for Organization XYZ?" <S> Unless you did your work pro-bono, then it isn't appropriate. <S> The statement as written makes it sound like your software company is a non-profit organization. <S> I'm guessing that's not actually the case. <S> But it's your client <S> who is a non-profit, not your programming work. <S> Even if you didn't charge for your services, the phrasing you chose isn't correct. <S> Better would be something on the order of "Performed programming work for Organization XYZ (a non-profit organization). <S> " That places the "non-profit" modifier where it more properly belongs. <A> On the other hand, if your company lists the organisation on a public site as a client, then you are on safer ground. <S> In any event - you did not work directly for <S> the non-profit - you worked on a project that your company did for that non-profit. <A> Short answer: <S> If it's valid, verifiable work that you did, then definitely add it! <S> Make sure that you show on your CV the technologies you used, the type of analytical work you may have performed, what you completed and what benefits it brought to the non-profit organisation. <S> Story: <S> A few years ago I was doing development work for a non-profit after hours. <S> It allowed me to expand a skillset that I wanted to gain some practical experience in, and the person I was working for has on occasional acted as a reference for me :) <S> [Edit] <S> I misinterpreted your situation that you did work directly for the non-profit, rather than in your regular role that the company you work for, your company provided services to them. <S> My answer pertains to the former situation, not the latter. <S> If it was just a part of your normal job, you should not mention separately. <S> At best you could add a line to the duties for your current employer such as, "we provided services for xxx non-profit organisation". <S> However, as Joe Strazzere states in his answer, be very careful about non-disclosure. <A> As a development team lead at a not-for-profit company: definitely not . <S> You didn't work for this company, you worked for another one and just had an engagement like any other. <S> Typically employers will check with the companies that you've listed on your resume to ensure that you've actually worked at the locations that you're claiming. <S> If I were to receive a call asking if you had worked at <not-for-profit-x> <S> and you had not worked directly with me <S> then I would more than likely be unable to place the name and would state this to your potential employer.
| There is no harm in adding the work you did for a non-profit on to your CV. I'd be a little careful about how you proceed with this - your company and their client may not want their relationship to be public knowledge - so you should talk in general terms, like "significant contributions to a something project for a large/national/global non-profit organisation" rather than specific company names. If there were skills you learned or expanded on, and goals you achieved, and potentially someone who can act as a reference for your work, then there is absolutely value in including it.
|
Should you explain a technical issue to a non technical person or give them information and alternatives that would help them to make a decision? Edit: Motivation : The response I came up with was due to my experiences and observing the other much smarter technical people than me at the work place. Many times the interaction went something like this : Technical Person: Starts explaining the problem....Non-Tec Person : I am not interested in the details, just tell me "When can you get it done?" or how long would Approach A take? followed by How long would the Approach B take? By the way: I have been in both situations, were as a manager I really just needed to report back on progress and completion times, I had trust in the technical perosn, that all I really needed to know was "When?" or "Just layout the alternatives time cost". So: Should every time start by laying out the details that the non-tech doesn't need or going straight to what they want to know and if they wonder about the basis of answer then explain it to them? During a recent interview I was asked the question "How do you explain technical things to a non technical person?" My Reply was : "Why? what is the point of explaining technical things to a non technical person?, instead of wasting their time with dumb down explanations wouldn't it be more beneficial to give them the information to them that helps them to make decisions?" Considering : Non technical person usually means, Managers, Users, Owners etc. that have no interest in technical things to begin with and all they want to know is "How much? How soon? When would it be finished? What else do I need to buy? etc" Seriously, what are the benefits of explaining technical things to non technical people if all they are interested is "When can I have it? How much more (time/money/man hours/etc.) is this thing going to cost me?" I thought that is our job to hide (encapsulate) the technical and come up with what makes sense to the non technical people or we end up looking like a comical Sheldon when he explains String Theory to non Physicists. I read this question and answers before posting, how ever I didn't see anything that looked at the question from functionality and benefits point of view, it is like asking how do you explain Refactoring to a Watermelon farmer. Yes, there are many ways to explain it with dumb down analogies, but what are the end benefits to the farmer? Or You are having a brain surgery, do you want a simplified version of neural science or just the risks of having the surgery vs not having it? What is it going to cost you, what are most likely results at the end of it? will you still be able to walk, talk, if yes for how long? How does a dumbed down knowledge of Neuro Science help you to make a decision? <Q> During a recent interview I was asked the question "How do you explain technical things to a non technical person? <S> " <S> My Reply was : " <S> Why? <S> what is the point of explaining technical things to a non technical person?, instead of wasting their time with dumb down explanations wouldn't it be more beneficial to give them the information to them that helps them to make decisions?" <S> Wow. <S> I assume your answer wasn't well-received by your interviewer. <S> During an interview, whenever you are asked how you would do something, you aren't being asked if you should do it. <S> The question tells you that you should assume that you are required to do so, and is asking how you would achieve it. <S> Besides either misunderstanding, or choosing to ignore the spirit of the question, you have also made a few incorrect assumptions. <S> For example, you said "Managers, Users, Owners etc. <S> that have no interest in technical things to begin..." and "all they are interested is..." <S> While their role in the company may not put them in the "technical" category, that certainly doesn't mean they aren't interested. <S> Many times, Manager came from the technical ranks. <S> Their interests don't disappear when they are promoted. <S> Additionally, you seem to be dividing the world into two parts - technical folks and non-technical folks. <S> The reality is far more nuanced than that. <S> Your words also project an arrogance that would be best avoided during an interview. <S> Some folks will interpret what you say as "I'm too smart to bother trying to talk to these stupid people. <S> So I wouldn't bother trying. <S> " That's not something a hiring manager would want to hear. <S> In future interviews, try harder to understand the spirit of the question being asked. <S> To answer the question in your title, you should do both . <S> You should explain technical issues to non technical folks as well as give them information and alternatives that would help them to make a decision. <S> You don't need to lecture them like Sheldon. <S> Instead, you need to develop the communications skills necessary to deal with the less technical folks you will invariably encounter in your work. <A> Your non-technical person needs to make a decision. <S> You can either give them the relevant information needed so they can make an informed choice, or you can boil it all down to " trust me ". <S> Using your example, say I need brain surgery. <S> One doctor takes the time to explain what a tumor is, why it is bad, how they grow, why she picked the treatment she did, what treatments she discarded and so on. <S> I have enough information to follow her reasoning (& may wind up quite knowledgeable about one tiny bit of medicine), but I won't get or need the breadth of knowledge to earn an M.D. <S> The one who takes the time to explain things so I can understand the immediate issue and the implications of any decisions I need to make will be the one performing the operation because they've earned my trust . <S> Part of that process is for the expert to pick and choose which information is relevant and which is not. <S> A brain surgeon would probably leave out a lot of sub-cellular info that would cloud the issue, and might possibly leave out some esoteric alternatives that don't apply in my case. <S> That's OK. <S> I expect her to pick and choose what's important. <S> If they leave out an important bit, I'll probably notice because the explanation will seem incomplete without it. <S> If they flood me with too much irrelevant data, that's almost as bad as saying trust me . <A> You completely missed the interviewer's point. <S> You weren't being asked " How do you explain technical things to a non technical person? <S> " <S> You were being asked to demonstrate your communication skills. <S> You did so, and your response was understood to be something like " I employ disdain and aloofness, and you probably should never put me in a position that requires talking to people. " <A> While I like the answers so far, there is a more general way to look at the solution. <S> Other times, you must give details and may need to ask questions yourself, deep-diving into topics which are not familiar to the person you're talking to and exploring areas in their domain which are NOT familiar to you. <S> Is the context a weekly 20 minute meeting called by a professional PMP? <S> Or is the context a strategic, problem-solving meeting with key decision makers? <S> The context is very important. <S> Sadly, a lot of technical people have difficultly with context and get hung up on the idea of literally answering the question uttered to them. <S> Don't be a " Sheldon . <S> " While it might be amusing in a television sitcom, any level of disdain or condescension will get detected instantly and be taken as a direct insult. <S> At the same time, a terse jargon-filled response could be equally offensive. <A> I like the other answers <S> but I think it wasn't mentioned in either of them that also it helps them understand one thing that not all managers do: Simple to say is not the same as simple to implement If they give you a task that is not conceptually difficult but is practically very difficult <S> it is worth explaining why you want to assign a week to the task.
| When explaining issues, part of the dialog should be ascertaining the needs, motivation, and background of whatever person you are talking to regardless of whether the person is technical or non-technical. Yes, sometimes, you just need to communicate the "when" and the "how much" rather than the "how" and the "why". Another merely says "trust me".
|
Can my resume mention a company that my product was resold to? Last year I wrote and sold a software product to a small financial consulting group A , which now runs on their servers. They recently resold it, without any technical tailoring , to a major multinational banking service B . No particular license was issued by me on what I sold to A . Instead, lots of regulation and contracts were established between A and B . However, my name (as a private developer) appears in the Credits section of the referred A 's website. Can I mention on my updated CV that a product of mine was resold to B and is actively being used? <Q> I agree with Matiss that there's no problem mentioning such an accomplishment on your resume. <S> However, whether you can refer to B by name on your resume could be an issue. <S> You may want to list them as something more generic, like your "major international banking service" if you think either company might object to you putting this on paper or, presumably, on LinkedIn. <S> Note that absent an NDA <S> there is no ethical issue in mentioning them by name, but you may still wish to avoid antagonizing either company if you know they'd see this as an issue. <S> It's usually not an issue to then mention the company by name when it's brought up in an interview. <A> It does not make much difference, whether it was tailored or not - it is still software you made and the act of making it is undeniable. <S> Except if you have a non disclosure agreement with the A, it is okay to indicate yourself as an author of that software, even if it's something you sold or did for a company as an employee. <S> Its a pretty common practice actually, and unless you have explicit agreement that says otherwise, you can claim to have participated in/authored whatever project you have participated in/authored. <A> You don’t want some one reading your C.V. to ring Company B and ask them if they’ve heard of you, as they’re most likely going to say no. <S> Whereas if they ring them up and ask, “Do you use Product X?” they’ll more likely to say yes. <A> Not only do you have every right to take credit for your work, it would be unethical and abusive for a past employer (or, in this case, customer) to try to prevent you from doing so. <S> In fact, based on your description of events you may have been cheated out of royalties. <S> Just as any number of rock stars and writers have learned, PLEASE DON'T give away resale rights to your work for nothing. <S> Show your existing contract to a lawyer <S> --it's money well spent.
| I think it’s fine so long as you make the distinction that Company B bought the product, and that Company B is not a direct client of yours.
|
Is there any point to continuing with an interview when I'm sure that I won't join the company? My current situation is that I've already signed a contract with Company A, when Company B called. Company B interests me, although I've decided to stay with Company A. However, they've called me in for an interview, and I said yes. My main reason for this is so that I could see the office for myself, and have additional data for my market worth. So aside from that, is there any point to continuing with an interview when I'm sure that I won't join the company? Additional info : They know I already have signed a contract as I've told them, but they said they still want to go for an interview. <Q> You can be honest with them. <S> Explain that you are genuinely interested in the position and the company. <S> But, you are no longer available. <S> Ask them if it would be OK to have a short or more informal conversation where you can each learn more about each other and discover whether there may be opportunities in the future. <S> This is called networking. <S> But, always be honest. <A> No. <S> "I could see the office for myself" <S> - I am sure it is very nice, but is it as nice as the beach, mountains, movie theater, etc., or any of the other nice places you could spend that time. <S> "have additional data for my market worth" - Since you are sure that you won't join them, what does their number matter? <S> Apparently even if they offered $1 billion you would turn them down. <S> You should only care about the numbers from companies you might actually accept. <A> No, there is no point continuing and beyond that it's rude. <S> If you've already signed a contract then going to a second interview is a complete waste of their time, and you've been untruthful with them as to the potential end result. <S> Companies who are hiring tend to spend a lot of time and energy trying to weed out the noise and find the candidate is right for them. <S> Regardless of any potential "informational gain" or "practice" you might have from the second interview, it is a completely selfish act that ultimately costs them time (and as a result: money). <S> There are any number of other ways to accomplish this without going to this length. <S> As a matter of professional courtesy you should discontinue any interviews and/or negotiations once you have made the determination that you would not accept their offer. <S> I don't know your industry or your market, but this world is a lot smaller than some would like to think. <S> This kind of thing can actually turn into a career killer if done with the wrong time, company or person.
| There is no point in continuing to interview with them. It is essential for your career.
|
Should I be honest about the reasons I don't want to give a testimonial I'm being asked to give a brief "testimonial" style text about my current job for use on my employer's new website, specifically relating to a graduate scheme. I have been in the role almost 2 years and joined on the same graduate scheme however I don't feel I can give a positive testimonial for the role in good conscience. I'm perfectly happy for them to promote the scheme but I do not want to put my name to any testimonial because I feel the high turnover and low employee satisfaction in addition to outdated technology mix do not make this scheme a good starting role for a graduate. Additionally this role was recently subject to redundancies. This is probably similar to this question Is it unprofessional to fully speak your mind on job satisfaction with your boss or manager? however it's more about refusing to do something which has been asked of me because I have objections to promoting the company, though this does not fall under the duties of my role as a developer. Is the right course of action here simply to send an email stating that I do not wish to provide a testimonial, or just swallow my pride and provide one? This is a job in the UK. <Q> Is the right course of action here simply to send an email stating that I do not wish to provide a testimonial, or just swallow my pride and provide one? <S> You are being asked to help, most likely because you are a good example of the success of their program. <S> However the key here is that you are being asked , not told to provide a testimonial. <S> As such, you are free to decline. <S> Send a polite email indicating that you would rather not participate. <S> You don't need to provide any details here. <S> If for some reason, they don't take the hint and attempt to apply some pressure - then you could say that you have mixed feelings about the program and would rather not be the one to promote it. <S> Note: As @JoelEtherton correctly points out, in some situations you aren't being asked, but are instead being ordered, and you don't have the option of declining. <S> Only you can determine which is happening in your context, based on your knowledge of the company, their culture and practices. <S> If you are actually being told to do this, you need to decide if you can swallow your pride and provide a testimonial, or must make it a bigger deal. <A> I'd suggest starting with "I really don't feel comfortable writing that; there ate good and bad things about how we've done this,and my experience may not have been typical. <S> " <S> I'v found that folks writing recruiting material may stop asking if they think they'll get a qualified answer. <S> If they continue to push, I'd talk to whoever "owns" that program about what its strengths are (you can surely come up with some) and what you see as opportunities for improvement. <S> If put as suggestions for making a good idea better <S> it's hard to take offense ... <S> and they need to know. <S> When run badly this sort of program may send the best candidates elsewhere rather than being good for your company's reputation. <S> If they can convince you that the problems are being fixed, that resolves the conflict. <S> If not, and the recruiting folks continue to demand something., and your management isn't willing to shield you... <S> sigh. <S> You could give them a completely honest assessment... <S> Or you can give them something polite and honest but unexciting and uninformative... <S> Or you can accept that this is advertising and give them something positive about the parts of the program you like, which will probably be what they'd edit the others down into anyway. <S> If you can't decline and must choose between those, I suggest a chat with a manager you trust about how go stay "as honest as the law allows". <S> Remember that similar programs at other companies are often not much better run. <A> I have been asked at my prior employer if I wanted to participate in a promotional video. <S> You don't have to really give specific reasons. <S> If they ask, "Do you want to give a testimonial on your experience?" <S> And you say, "No I don't." <S> And if they ask, "Why?" Just say, "I'm not comfortable with that sort of thing." <S> You should only bring up negative things with your boss during review time. <S> If you speak bad about your experience to someone else, that might not work out very well for you especially if you never brought it up and it takes your boss by surprise.
| I declined with a simple no and they stopped asking.
|
How soon should I tell my employer that my commute is too long? I started a new job just over three months ago, with a commute of two hours each way. Before joining the company, I understood that I would soon be able to transfer to their office in my home town. Shortly after starting I discovered that was not going to happen. My current manager knows about my long commute, but not about my previous expectation of working in the other office. I would like to give the company the chance to improve my working conditions by shortening my commute. My initial thought was to wait until the end of my six month probation, before mentioning this problem. Would it be too soon to mention this now (after three months)? I enjoy my work with this company and the only problem with the job is the location. If they are unable to make adjustments for me I will want to look for a new role by the end of the year. I want to stay in this job for at least six months so that it makes a reasonable addition to my CV/resume. At the same time I am increasingly tired with waking at 6 am each day and a disrupted sleep pattern. I was told I would be able to transfer to my local office by both the external recruiter and internal HR officer (who left the company just after I started). I discovered I would have to remain at my current workplace for a minimum of one year, after asking HR to clarify my options, upon joining the company. Also, is it reasonable to assume that my manager already knows my commute time is too long? Everyone else on the team has a journey time of about 45 minutes each way. My question is different from When is the right time to give my notice to leave my current company? as my plan is to improve my working conditions, not leave my job. <Q> How soon should I tell my employer that my commute is too long? <S> As soon as you have another job lined up; no sooner. <S> Why? <S> Because by stating that your commute is too long, you're making an implicit demand <S> : This condition must change or else I'm leaving. <S> And if that's the case, then you're opening up a negotiation. <S> And if you're opening up a negotiation, then you must develop a BATNA <S> (Best Alternative to No Agreement). <S> Why? <S> Because... <S> BATNAs are critical to negotiation because you cannot make a wise decision about whether to accept a negotiated agreement unless you know what your alternatives are. <S> Having a good BATNA increases your negotiating power. <S> And most importantly, it's for your own protection. <S> If your employer refuses to negotiate with you, then they may subsequently perceive you as "withdrawing" from the workplace and unable to effectively contribute in the face of an overlong commute. <S> If that happens, then your workplace may turn sour on you, and your situation may worsen. <S> A BATNA (in the form of somewhere else to go) protects you against this possibility. <S> P.S. <S> Having a BATNA, or having somewhere else to go, does not mean that you have to enact the BATNA, or leave your current job. <S> Just think of it as protection or insurance in case the worst happens. <A> If you don't ask, you don't get. <S> You say that "I understood that I would soon be able to transfer to their office in my home town". <S> Who at the company gave you that understanding? <S> Who else at the company knows of it? <S> Clearly, not everyone. <S> And right now, your understanding looks more like your little secret. <S> Follow up first with the people who gave you that understanding. <S> Hopefully, they still remembered it, and they hopefully will advise you on how to get a transfer and hopefully, with their endorsement. <S> If you don't get anywhere with your original contact, mention that the 4-hour commute is a hardship on you and not necessarily the best use of your time since part of the time you spent on that commute could be used to actually produce deliverables for the company. <S> In other words, there is something in it for them if they transfer you. <S> The worst that happens is that they say "no" but <S> at least, you made them aware that you want a transfer. <A> I suggest to approach this, but not as a confrontation: "my commute needs to be shorter or I quit" but constructively: "My commute is longer than expected which impacts my effectiveness. <S> What can we do to improve?". <S> Come up with a few scenarios that can be discussed. <S> Work for a year and than have a transfer that's committed by the company <S> Part time local office, part time current office <S> Part time from home, part time current office Get an crash pad near the current office and work 4 days @10 hours <S> instead 5 days at @8 hours <S> I've seen option 3 quite a lot. <S> 3-4 days in the office 1-2 from home. <S> Depends on the job and corporate culture. <S> Tip: Research good telecom tools, get them, practice with them and then demonstrate to your employer that they work. <S> For example set up a Skype call with your boss giving him (and yourself) a good hands free speakerphone (such as Jabra <S> Speak 510, not a sales pitch, they just work much better than most others) use groupboard.com for a shared whiteboard and Skype also for screen sharing. <S> Practice this first with a friend. <S> If you can get your manager over the initial hump and can demonstrate that this can work effectively, it may increase your chance of working remotely considerably. <A> I wouldn't suggest that you tell them your commute is too long, that can to easily be viewed as your problem, not theirs. <S> 'Too long' implies that they have crossed a line and you are putting them on the spot. <S> Instead, inquire about the transfer options and explain how that could make you more productive and therefore more valuable. <S> For any request you have of your company, it needs to be clear that there is value for the company, not just you.
| It's certainly OK to bring the long commute into the discussion of your productivity, but you don't want to lead off the discussion with your problem.
|
Culture changing in a way I don't like, anything I can do? I have worked as a software developer for a company for 5 years, they were a small start up when I joined and the emphasis was on the quality of your output, that is how you were judged as an employee and I always got good feedback on my work, complete projects on time etc They were bought by a larger company 2 years ago and the past 18 months the culture has been shifting in such a way that it is having a negative impact on my morale and happiness. The biggest negative for me is the introduction of two systems to track employee's time. The first system tracks time allocated to specific tasks and the second system tracks the time you are in the office. This implies to me they don't trust their employees as professionals and just encourages presenteeism and box ticking. The non-software parts of the business, mainly the admin side, have embraced this change. I suppose it makes things easier for them. I can understand the need to track time against issues to bill customers but we have to log 8 hours a day, every day, even when the time isn't billable to anyone. It is getting to the point where internal bookkeeping seems to be valued more than the actual quality of your work. I have raised it with my manager and he assures me that it is not done because they don't trust their employees but I find it hard to believe that because he has no alternative business reason or any other justification for it. I am pretty resentful of the situation. I feel that if I wanted to punch in and out of work and be treated like a child I could have worked at a factory. And while I genuinely like the people I work with if I have to put up with this sort of culture I may as well go work for another company that would pay me more for doing so. Realistically is there anything I can do to push back against this, or is my best option to just leave ? <Q> Realistically is there anything I can do to push back against this, or is my best option to just leave ? <S> I've experienced this exact scenario three times - <S> it's almost eerily familiar. <S> Worked for a startup Acquired by a larger company having a very different culture <S> Two different time tracking systems - work hours, and project hours Very unhappy, for this and many other reasons <S> Unfortunately, I don't have anything very positive to offer you. <S> Each of my situations ended with me giving up on my attempts to change the larger corporate culture, and eventually leaving. <S> I look at it this way <S> - this is not the work environment you signed up for. <S> You decided to join a startup because at least some significant aspects of their culture appealed to you. <S> Now you work for a different kind of company, with a different culture. <S> I'd bet that if you were on the market, this isn't the kind of company you'd consider interviewing with. <S> One thing that happens frequently in larger companies is reorgs. <S> Every large company I worked for had rather frequent reorgs (unfortunately, not all of them for the better). <S> But barring that, it sounds like you should either learn to live with the big-company culture or seek out a company that more closely fits your idea of a good company culture. <S> Culture changing in a way I don't like, anything I can do? <A> I've lived through this twice and seen it once more <S> (I joined the company after the acquisition <S> but it was still fresh in everyone's minds). <S> There are two categories of culture issues: the ones that are more about how teams do their work and peers interact, which you can affect, and the ones that are more about bureaucracy, which you generally can't. <S> Time-tracking fits into the latter category. <S> A larger company that already had procedures in place bought your company. <S> They, being the acquirer and the larger party, are not going to change how they operate -- not across the board, and not by making an exception for you. <S> Large companies operate by making operations as consistent across the organization as possible. <S> Everybody will use the same time-tracking system, for example, whether you directly bill customers or are internal support. <S> Because people who bill customers need to track the number of hours, so do you. <S> And, more grimly, because some people slack off and don't work a full week, you all need to do so (documentably). <S> It is very unlikely that you can do anything about the timesheets. <S> What you can do is talk with your direct management ( <S> assuming it's your pre-acquisition manager) about informal arrangements. <S> For example, the policy may require you to work 40 hours each and every week; if you put in a ton of extra time last week to meet a deadline, though, your manager might be fine with you working less this week and adjusting the bookkeeping. <S> Or he might be a stickler; you won't know until you ask. <S> Your whole company is presumably facing this change, and you're unlikely to be the only one who's upset. <S> Before you give up and leave, it's worth chatting with your peers and friendly managers about ways to mitigate the morale damage. <S> All that said, companies do change over time, and down the road you'll probably either get used to this or go elsewhere. <S> As you continue to hire people, the proportion of people who remember the "old days" will go down and there will be less pressure to preserve what you had. <S> New employees will have only ever known the current system. <S> But you can probably put this off for a few years if your coworkers feel as you do. <A> Timesheets is a very standard practice in professional organizations, and moreso in larger ones where the owner isn't directly involved with every single employee. <S> Lawyers fill out timesheets. <S> Engineers fill out timesheets (actual engineers, not programmers). <S> Pretty much every type of consultant fills out timesheets. <S> As mentioned, there are a variety of business needs to doing it. <S> First and foremost, if your company works for clients, it's the best way of knowing how many billable hours to charge them. <S> Even if you only work on one project for weeks at a time, it's much easier for you to fill out your timesheet to that effect instead of having your supervisor do it for you and everyone else they manage. <S> It's actually giving you more responsibility.
| Unless you are a C-Level executive, or at least a General Manager of your division, I don't think there's much you can do. You might decide to stick around a while to see if anything changes. I always suggest waiting until you've landed your next job before quitting your current job.
|
Why is a voided blank check necessary to setup direct deposit if I've already provided my routing and account numbers? I just got on-boarded today at a new job and I wasn't satisfied with the answer from HR about why a voided check was needed. The direct deposit form I filled out had my routing and account numbers, and all that was done with my check was to scan it on a flatbed scanner and immediately hand it back to me. I originally asked if they could use a deposit slip at the back of my checkbook which has the same account numbers and which I never use, or if they actually needed the check to exploit the magnetic print on the check assuming they'd run it through a proper check scanning device. Is there some legal aspect to the voided check that communicates some sort of authorization to access my bank account? What's the deal with this procedure? Seems like it wastes a good check for unclear reasons. <Q> A physical check is not actually necessary, however many companies do not trust employees not to mess up the routing and account numbers and they also like the verification that they're depositing into an actual, legal bank account. <S> Direct deposit costs your employer for every transaction (depending on how their contract works) so failed deposits have a way of really messing with the accounting systems. <S> It's most likely that the physical check requested is merely a company policy for these or similar accounting safety issues to prevent mistakes on their end and to ensure that your timely payment does not lead to avoidable costs and delays because someone read a number wrong, left a number out or failed to fill in the proper numbers in the proper boxes. <A> Deposit slips are intended to be used only by the bank that issued them. <S> As such, they do not necessarily have a valid routing number nor necessarily the appropriate account number on them. <S> I had precisely this problem once, trying to use a deposit slip to set up direct deposit. <S> The slip had no routing number, and had an internal account number that did not correlate with what someone external to the bank would be able to use. <S> As you say, once they have the routing and account number, they do not need the voided check. <S> However, having a copy of it provided them with documentation that they have the correct numbers, in case a problem occurs. <S> A similar issue comes up if you go into a bank and ask a teller to read you your account number or to write it down for you, if you authenticate using a debit card. <S> They are not allowed to do so; if they did and wrote something down wrong, the bank could be held liable for whatever problem that caused you down the line. <S> Instead, they have the system print out the account number on a slip and hand you that. <A> The voided blank check is not necessary , no matter what the person said, just the routing and account numbers are needed. <S> You can easily prove it by blanking out (with a permanent marker) everything on the check but the routing and account number and handing it in. <S> I've personally done this and it was fine at several different shops. <S> It may also be that there have established onboarding procedures that actually require collecting a voided check from the new-hire and the HR/Payroll people are following them to the letter. <S> In such situations, employees who don't follow procedures are often let go, so this is why they would adhere to such rules. <S> You are correct in noting that said rules are stupid -- you're already providing the number! <S> All I can say is "welcome to the world of corporate work. <S> " Changing procedures is hard, but possible, providing you still care in a week. <A> There is nothing besides company policy that requires a blank check. <S> They need 4 pieces of information: routing number account number Name on the account checking or savings account <S> Note that the last one is interesting. <S> Yes, direct deposits can go into a savings account. <S> Of course, those savings accounts don't have a blank voided check. <S> My sons have checking accounts but have never written a check, they use the debit card for everything. <S> They have had multiple jobs and have had direct deposit with all of them. <S> In some cases they just provided the numbers, in other cases they filled out the form themselves or even did them online. <S> Providing <S> the voided <S> check also gives the employer a verification that they didn't typo the routing number. <S> Modern systems will immediately look up the name of the institution when the routing number is entered. <S> One company recently used the info entered on the HR system to verify the bank, and the name associated with the account. <S> They are stuck using an old set of rules. <A> Many people no longer use checks, and some banks have even stopped providing "starter checks" for certain account types and for customers that don't explicitly request them. <S> When faced with this situation, explain to them that you do not have a check to give them, and that you will provide the account information as required, but a voided check is not available. <S> This isn't an unusual situation for them to deal with, and while they use the word "required" you'll find they are generally fairly flexible about this once they understand you don't have checks to give them and aren't interested in ordering checks just to give them information you can give them without a check. <S> Whether you consider the difference between "I don't have any checks" and "I don't have any checks to give you" a lie or not, the reality is that they don't need the voided check. <A> Some banks use different numbers on the bottom of checks than your "account number" --- for example, your checks may prepend 0's (zeroes) before your "account number". <S> Some banks (as per another answer) use a slightly different number between checks and deposit slips. <S> From their point of view, this provides a streamlined process --- from your point of view, if the other information on your checks is something you'd prefer to keep private -- such as your driver's license number, home phone number, partner's name (if present) -- this is understandable but you may want to consider having "plainer" checks printed.
| A given company may request/require a copy of an actual check to ensure they don't have a problem processing the direct-deposits — which would require additional paperwork, time to resolve the matter.
|
Assigned a job I cannot do I am a recent graduate who moved across the country to get his dream job in game programming. I worked at a indie company for a year and then was hired by one of the largest companies. This is a dream come true for me as it was the whole reason I went to school. I am fairly new to the industry and am struggling to feel competent. Anyway, I have been working at this job for almost a year now as a generalist programmer. We are a fairly small team in the company. My job has been mainly refactoring code, features and bug fixes. I worked with one other person who is much more experienced. They were promoted and no longer program. I have been given their work. The problem is that they are a graphics programmer. A lot of my job is now 3D math. I dropped out of math in grade 10, I did it again in college and barely passed. I am terrible at math, and do not enjoy it. My new job is in a subject I know absolutely nothing about. While this is not a bad thing as I learned many things and languages when starting this job, I am now the main line of support for many large teams. I am tasked with solving bugs in a graphics pipeline meanwhile I can barely do matrix multiplication. I know none of terminology and none of the math. How do I go about telling my boss that I am unsuited for this job. I was asked my math skills in the interview and I told them that they were not good. At the time they said it did not matter. Part of the problem is also that there is no longer anyone to do these tasks. I am well aware the answer to the problem may just be suck it up and deal with it. If it matters this is very large company and transferring to a new team may be possible. But I would like to avoid it at all costs as I did enjoy the team and the work. <Q> Something I have learned from both personal experience and observation (mostly observing my children) is that if you are convinced you can't do something, then you will struggle with it. <S> You just don't seem to apply the brain power to it because you just know you will fail. <S> So I will give you the same advice I give my children :) <S> Rather than look at the whole problem of "I can't do maths", break it down into smaller chunks. <S> Choose something that you almost understand and then try to apply it to the practical problems you are using it for. <S> Remember, maths is a process, an algorithm, just like programming. <S> Take one step, then the next, apply the rules and you'll get to the answer :) <S> Now, how to manage this with your boss? <S> Well, have you raised it with your manager that you are struggling? <S> If he or she doesn't know, then they can't help you. <S> You could say that you will try to learn, but it's going to take time and perhaps some training that could help. <S> Then the manager can manage the risk of keeping you there, or finding someone else to take over that role. <S> I would talk to your boss, tell them where you are having difficulty and that you may take longer on these tasks while you try to understand the complexity of the mathematics behind it. <S> Then, if you really, really can't do it, you have done all you can and made sure that the people who need to know do :) <A> All the answers so far are assuming that you can learn all 3D graphics math (which I'm sure you can), that you will enjoy doing so (which might not be true) and that you can learn all of it fast enough so that you can apply these techniques TODAY in a production environment (which is probably not true). <S> I think the best thing you can do is talk to your direct supervisor. <S> Be sure to add (if you want) that you are willing to learn these techniques but that you are looking for courses or a mentor to help you do so. <S> This is a great opportunity to improve yourself and to make yourself more valuable for the company. <S> (Things managers love to see). <A> Be forward communicating, and don't be afraid to over communicate. <S> Do your best to provide accurate estimates and ratings of complexity for tasks. <S> If you need help ask, if there is no help locally, quite often stack overflow will give you responses faster than the people you're working with if you ask questions clearly and provide the right details. <S> Try to find some workshops to get more experience or follow some tutorials online. <S> If you are making an effort and your team sees it, often that will be in your benefit. <S> Most people would rather work with someone who is passionate and motivated than a know-it-all who is an Island <A> I have a PhD in math. <S> One day I had to explain linear algebra to a student after some years of never having actually multiplied matrices. <S> I realized I had forgotten the matrix multiplication rule <S> *, but interestingly, I was still able to explain a lot of linear algebra. <S> The reason is: a lot of linear algebra concepts aren't about details like how to multiply matrices. <S> In your job, you can just use a library or copy and paste code. <S> The important thing is to understand the ideas, which is something you might not be bad at. <S> You will never know unless you try. <S> as an ego thing, let me mention I was able to derive the rule for the student. <A> I've been in situations like yours, and it's never a good feeling to be in over your head and lost. <S> If this truly is your dream job, then the only choice is to figure it out. <S> You can't stay a junior programmer doing menial tasks forever. <S> This is a relationship you have to manage well, because your mentor will have their own work to do and won't always have time for you. <S> To start, I would ask whoever worked on that code before to dedicate an hour or two with you and walk through it. <S> Don't be shy. <S> Ask questions, take notes, etc. <S> Take advantage of the time that person has dedicated to you. <S> Hopefully you will learn enough to dive into the code with confidence. <S> If not, then maybe this isn't the job for you after all. <S> After that, you will certainly have more questions, but you must try to figure them out on your own. <S> Try to use your mentor only as a last resort. <S> Do your homework so you don't look foolish and waste their time. <S> Explain how you got to the questions you have. <S> Say something like, "I figured out X, and I figured out Y, but I <S> what I don't get is how X and Y make Z. <S> " If you demonstrate that you are learning this stuff and you are really trying, people will be a lot more open and receptive to your questions.
| Saying that you are unable to perform a part of your job to your own satisfaction is not showing weakness, it shows that you are critical of your own work and capabilities and that you want the best for the company. The key is to find someone who worked on the code before you who can mentor you. Learn as much as you can as fast as you can, once you get your brain wrapped around things it will not seem so complicated.
|
What should I do if I disagree with my boss about a software design pattern? My boss introduced a new design pattern at work. I couldn't find this design pattern anywhere else, and I don't find it useful at all. I'm the only one using it, but my coworkers seem confused by it as well when they look at my code or have my boss explain the pattern to them. I have serious concerns about this design pattern making our code difficult to maintain. I have a solution to the same problem that I think is much simpler, but I don't know how to start the conversation about it with my boss. I've completed each task she's assigned me to do with this pattern for about a month, and she has explained the pattern to me several times. I still think there's a significantly better way to do things. I don't want to work with this design pattern again, so what can I do? <Q> , then ask "I'm confused. <S> I presume there's a usage pattern or efficiency concern that I'm missing, because I would have expected this to be easier to write, use, and maintain. <S> Can you help me understand why it isn't?" <S> You may learn that there was indeed something you're missing -- which may be as arbitrary as following the style previously established by something similar. <S> Or, seeing the alternatives, folks may decide you've got a valid point. <S> Or the answer may be that you've got a valid point <S> but after consideration the decision remains unchanged. <S> At which point your choices are to code to the spec, try to get assigned to something else, or quit. <S> Part of coding as a team is learning that, in the end, some of it isn't going to match your preferences and you sometimes need to just hold your nose and deal with that or <S> the product never gets out the door. <A> Since no one else is using it, why should you? <S> Having just a basic understanding is no reason to put it into production code. <S> See if the team prefers your solution and go with it. <S> Patterns can be a dangerous thing if they're not used properly and the only way to use them properly is to understand them. <S> With so many questions being asked by all the devs and only one (you) being able to apply the pattern, it seems obvious <S> the understanding is limited. <S> Your boss should be aware of this. <S> You should be concerned that other developers won't be able to maintain this code. <S> If you don't know why this pattern is being used <S> (And why didn't you ask that when you were shown how to use it?), it may be difficult to maintain and expand. <A> I've worked at a company where the boss frequently changed design patterns or allowed people to use their own "design pattern" without ever consulting anyone or having a team meeting. <S> This person would go out to conferences and come back with the idea and try to make it their own "idea" to promote and gain approval from upper management that they're using the "latest and greatest" development and that they're the "experts" of this. <S> It sounds like you're at the company <S> I was at. <S> Everyone is working differently then suddenly you have to share the code and maintain something else in a completely different "pattern." <S> In the end the code was a mess. <S> New people could barely understand what is going on because there's two, three different pattern in a pattern and none of it is the same. <S> My thought is this: if you are constantly doing this, I would seriously consider a new job.
| If you don't like what's being proposed you need to draw up precisely what the alternative would be.
|
Head-Hunter Agency asking for Passport I am an EU citizen and I'm currently searching for a job in the UK. I've been working with different agencies over the internet and one of them is asking for my passport (I assume, to verify my identity). The others still didn't but that may entirely because I'm not so far in the job search process with them. The passport is being asked before sending my CV to the actual clients. Is this acceptable? I do understand what they're after, but I cannot but feel a bit worried about sending a copy of my passport to someone that for all purposes I do not actually know that well. Question Update As per Codingo's suggestion, I told them I wasn't really comfortable about it and they told me they were cool with it, but that if my recruiting process with any of its clients comes to fruition I will have to eventually down the road provide the passport, which is something that I'm ok with. <Q> I have seen this come up with quite frequently in one way or another generally to prove that the potential employee is a legal citizen and able to pay their taxes. <S> That said, something clearly feels wrong about this situation or just this company for you. <S> You should heed that and not ignore it based on the comments of a stranger on the internet! <S> I would reply back to them with something along the lines of: I'm sorry <S> but I'm not comfortable supplying my passport over the internet, is there a different kind of document I can provide you? <A> I would send them a copy with your passport number blacked out. <S> It shows validity and citizenship without the sensitive information that would be required for identity theft. <S> This should meet their purposes without exposing yourself to needless risk. <A> A bit late to this question, but you do get legitimate agencies in the Uk asking for a passport. <S> Usually they have part of their pitch to clients that they have verified the ability of their candidates to work in the UK, which <S> a passport is straight evidence. <S> That being said, as you did, use your discretion anf wait until interviews have moved to offer, a legit one will wait <A> All recruitment agencies in the UK have to see proof of right to work in the UK - its not Identity they are verifying but your eligibility to work in the UK. <S> I have had to produce my birth certificate both for the agency and my employer.
| They are using an EU passport to verify that you can legally work in the UK
|
How can I kindly stop jokes and idle chit chat directed at me when I am busy? I have recently joined a work place and have tried to be easy to approach and friendly to my coworkers. However a few of the employees hired after me seem to make a lot of jokes towards me, or at my expense. I understand that some work environments are more relaxed than others and that some people connect through jokes but I would appreciate if they stay in limit when they joke and don't get to talk about something, in a example a colleague rarely new and too chatty ask me every morning, "what do I know today that I didn't know, yesterday?" Or "if you take drinks to home, your wife will beat you etc. In a few other situations colleagues will begin talking to me without asking if I am busy or if I have the time to spare which is distracting me from my work and breaking my concentration. How can I kindly draw a line to stop the jokes and to let people know when I am too busy to chat and meanwhile I will have new people being hired, how can I end the trend of throwing jokes at me, as new people hired will see this person talking or throwing jokes at me and will do same. I wonder, what do I lack or where did the new guys started talking like that and why? Is it me being helpful or just smiling when they say something. Really don't want that. <Q> Short answer: Call them out - firmly but politely! <S> However, this sounds like it may be a case of workplace bullying , depending on the nature of the comments. <S> You could say something like: <S> I like a joke or some banter as much as the next person, but your comments are distracting me and making me uncomfortable. <S> Can you please keep it a little more professional? <S> If you have no success, then you can look at raising it with your manager (if he or she is not complicit), or take it to your HR department if you have one. <S> Remember, workplace bullying is serious and illegal in many countries. <S> If you feel it is heading to that level, call it what it is. <S> But if you don't mention it to them, they won't know that they have started to cross the line for you. <A> Don't make it complicated - if you have to get back to work, say that you have to get back to work. <S> Take off to do your own thing, don't give them a chance to argue with you. <S> If you are at lunch or on a break or if they need help from you, you can go back to being easily approachable :) <A> It seems like you're combining several things here. <S> Being professional doesn't mean you don't joke at work nor does it mean you never interrupt or distract someone who is working. <S> If you accuse them of this, you won't be addressing the real problem: they're offending you. <S> If they don't stop, you may be forced to go over their head. <S> Office policy should dictate these types of situations. <S> They're new and probably not in a position above you. <S> They've bonded by making jokes at your expense. <S> Maybe in another setting, you would just punch them in the face, but this is the workplace, so you have to fit your solutions in that context.
| A little banter in the workplace can be fine, as long as the participants are willing. Tell them you don't think these particular kind of jokes are funny and you want them to stop.
|
How to proceed if boss doesn't keep commitment about equipment? This question is related to How do I request new equipment for the office? . New equipment need (e.g. PC with little bit higher specs + second monitor) was reported and discussed some 6 months ago. My boss agreed that I need one for current and future tasks and even has sent some initial mail to responsible department. After that I've reminded him number of times (by mail too) about it, but no result. Last month I've stopped reminding, because get tired of that useless actions. Tasks get more complex as project evolves and now it's really uncomfortable and time consuming to use existing hardware. Same time the company reduced payable long hours. Because of this one of our teams project is going to be at risk. I want to wait the project risks to be really urgent and share above reasons with my boss then he realize that urgency. From one hand I feel not good about that, because it might lead to negative effects on me. From the other, sorting my bosses tasks and reminding him every day about his commitments are clearly out of my responsibilities. Some background: my boss is busy on meeting almost all day, so long conversations usually impossible (tried it number of times, but he just go to next meeting in 5 mins); It's Asian type company with quite tough hierarchy, so going to boss of my boss will not be appreciated by almost everybody. Is there any good way to resolve the issue and avoid additional risks to the project? <Q> I suspect you've getting ignored because you haven't made the case for why the company should spend this money. <S> You need to show that this is putting the project at risk , and that spending the money is cost-effective . <S> Boss? <S> I'm afraid we're going to miss the deadline for Project X because our hardware is so slow. <S> Compiling/running tests takes Y minutes each time, during which we can't do anything else, and we have to do <S> this Z times a day. <S> If we invest $A in new hardware, we can cut that down to Y/2 minutes and we'll gain <S> (Y*Z*7)/2 hours of productive time per developer every week. <S> Given that you're paying everybody at <S> least $B per hour, this is a no-brainer! <S> Then follow up with a spreadsheet showing how much $$$ the new hardware will save over a year, which he can use to justify this to his superiors. <A> my boss is busy on meeting almost all day, so long conversations usually impossible [...] <S> Is there any good way to resolve the issue and avoid additional risks to the project? <S> On behalf of all bosses busy with meetings: Yes there is a way. <S> Don't expect us to have time for important things while we try to squeeze a meal or toilet break in between two meetings. <S> The day is full of meetings because a lot of people want to talk to us and you are only one of them. <S> The solution is dead simple: Schedule a meeting! <S> Write it all up, put it into the Outlook (or any other system you use) appointment and then meet with your boss. <S> Take meeting minutes with the results and mail them to all who attended afterwards. <A> I'm going to add an additional answer: <S> You could offer to do it yourself. <S> It's very easy to say " <S> Yes / No" to an option, whereas it might feel like a lot of work to arrange everything. <S> With those options you could walk up to your employer and say something like <S> Hi <S> [Boss], About the new equipment I've requested; I've noticed that it has lost it's momentum. <S> To keep things going I've gathered info for these two options to improvement my equipment. <S> I think I could work more comfortably with this setup, my workflow could improve with this equipment. <S> To save you some time and effort, I've created these two options of which you could sign off one for me to order, and then I'll do it [ after work* ]. <S> I prefer Option B (the better one) because it will last a bit longer. <S> * <S> The after work part is optional. <S> Yes, this is for work, but it seems like a small investment of time if it'll decrease your irritation.
| You could create an order for a setup you need, and for a setup slightly better than that (lasting a bit longer).
|
Is it okay to bring a friend or significant other to the employee lounge? I recently started a part time job in a small mom/pop organization that's been running over 25 years. The employee lounge is open to all staff members while they are taking a break from their shift. The lounge room gives everyone on a single work shift enough space to place their belongings in the open. Lockers are provided for free on a work shift, but locks will need to be provided on our own. Today was what stumped me. I was taking my break as usual, and because I walk to and from work, I carry a backpack with me, with clothes to change and a lunch sack. which is too big to stuff into the lockers, so I usually place my bag on the floor leaning towards the wall. While I was in the lounge, having my lunch, an unfamiliar person popped into the area, and I was alarmed, given I have never met him before. It seems he was very familiar with how the lounge room works, but moments later, my co worker showed up, and they sat across me to have their lunches and being sentimental. I was really disturbed by their action, so I decided to take my lunch into the next room and end my break early. I was also kind of worried about my belongings being in the open, and to have no form of security around it raised a huge red flag for me. Given this situation, I have been debating if this even needs to be reported to my supervisor. I'm not trying to be paranoid or overly dramatic over this issue, but if one can bring a non employee to a room filled with our belongings, then so can someone else. This would make the lounge room unsafe for everyone's belongings. Secondly, I understand and I can totally see that being sentimental to significant others is a form of caring and affection towards one another, but shouldn't this be taken outside of the work place regardless of break time or not? <Q> Different workplaces have different policies on who is allowed into workplaces. <S> Some, (say a defence contractor) have a policy of "Strictly no admittence without security clearance". <S> Some, especially smaller places, allow anyone in if they are with an employee. <S> Many workplaces deliberately make a point of being 'family friendly' and allow family of employees in on a regular basis. <S> My last workplace encouraged Significant Others to come in at lunchtime, and sometimes even children showed up. <S> You're a recent hire, so presumably you don't know what the policy is at your workplace. <S> You describe the 'stranger' as familiar with the workplace, so presumably their visiting is a regular occurrence. <S> If you want to know more, I would ask what the policy at your workplace is. <S> Don't treat this like 'reporting an incident" because you will look foolish if this is a normal thing allowed by the company. <S> Lots of companies think that a positive boost to employee relations is worth a small risk to security. <S> As for your personal belongings, unless you have some specific reason to think your co-workers family are likely to steal things, don't worry about it. <S> And be careful with making that argument - if you even start to sound like you are accusing your colleagues family of being dishonest, your relations with them can sour very quickly. <A> Is it OK to bring a guest to the lounge is a matter of policy. <S> Is it inappropriate <S> I hope not. <S> When I was kid my mom would pack lunches and we would go see my dad at work. <S> My mom was a teacher and when I would come home for break from college she loved to have me come visit <S> so she could introduce me as her son home from college. <S> It is a quality of life thing. <S> If the office has a separate cafeteria this is easy but this small mom/pop organization. <S> Many jobs let you have a guest in the work area. <S> I doubt this person snuck in. <S> They many have a policy of guest must be escorted. <S> Even if the policy is guest must be escorted that is a pretty minor violation. <S> If a guest is allowed to enter the work place then I would conclude they can enter the break room unless there is a policy stating other wise. <S> If there is a policy a guest cannot enter the lounge <S> then I would say that is silly policy. <S> The lounge is where you take a break and eat - that is where you would have lunch with a friend. <S> OK I get a guest <S> especially an un-escorted guest is a security risk. <S> But it is also open to employees. <S> They offer lockers but OP does not use them because the bag is too big. <S> OP still has the option to store valuables in the locker. <S> First clarify policy with management. <S> If this is indeed a violation of policy then report it. <S> If the locker is not big enough for your bag then ask management if there are other options to secure you belongings. <S> As for sentimental conversation in the workplace. <S> That is not appropriate. <A> I am fairly sure that the employee's significant other did not sneak in into the area but walked in through the front door of your workplace. <S> I assume that your workplace is an "authorized personnel" only workplace, and this means that the employee must have secured prior permission from management to bring his significant other in as a visitor. <S> You can report anything you like to your supervisor and air your concern to them. <S> My attitude is that keeping an eye on your belongings is your problem, especially if you choose not to use the lockers for whatever reason. <S> As a high school student long long ago, I've had my locker broken in several times. <S> And not by visitors to the high school. <S> You may complain about your colleagues' significant others but these significant others are no more and no less honest than the employees themselves. <S> At any rate, management supervises the lounge area and they are the final authority on the use of the lounge. <S> You have the right to lobby for your favorite lounge use policies with them, just as every other employee does. <S> If the displays of affection within the lounge area bother you, complain about them - the lounge area is considered part of the work area.
| It's almost certain that your workplace has a policy that allows guests of employees into the workplace. If the company isn't concerned about security, you don't need to be either.
|
I submitted my resume with a minor mistake, should I resend it? In one of my bullets for leadership experience, I state: -Organizing electronics team schedule, meetings, deadlines and other criteria I think the "other criteria" part doesn't make sense, Is this glaring enough for an engineering firm to notice? If so, is it worth resending? <Q> You've already sent it out. <S> Sending out another one in such a short time is likely to be seen as spamming and could do more damage to your image and how the company perceives you than two unnecessary words on your resume. <S> The only time you would really send out another resume to the same firm is if your first resume was the wrong format or did not contain the relevant information pertaining to that firm's vacant position. <S> Such a small matter like those two words are unlikely to make a big difference. <S> I recommend just not worrying about it and keep trekking forward in your job search. <A> Definitely, definitely correct your resume to make sure an end comes to that phrase. <S> Do send it to new potential employers. <S> Don't bother resending to anyone just for that change. <S> 90% won't notice it. <S> 99% won't care. <S> The one percent who do care you do not want to work for. <A> It's good you recognize it as a somewhat weak resume statement about leadership. <S> As one who reads a lot of resumes, fuzzy statements like that can lower my opinion of the candidate, especially if they have some years of experience under their belt. <S> But remember, you have no control over where your resumes get sent, and when, so be prepared for that phrase to show up. <S> If it does, and they ask you about it, be prepared with a response of what "other criteria" was intended to imply. <S> A good response will erase any doubts they may have about that phrase and what it might have implied.
| You should revise your resume and send it again to the company(s) with the explanation that you want them to have the most recent update to your resume (don't highlight what you changed).
|
For how long after graduating college should GPA be listed on one's resume? I graduated college with a degree in computer science and a GPA of ~3.1, and I'm currently employed full time as a software engineer. My GPA isn't impressive, but it's not bad either. When I was looking for my first job, I was told by recruiters that a soon-to-be or recent grad should always list their GPA, or risk recruiters assuming a worse GPA than you actually have. That makes perfect sense to me, but what about someone who has professional experience? Of course the degree should remain on the resume, but at what point is college GPA no longer relevant? <Q> This varies from industry to industry. <S> If you were a lawyer, it's quite possible that the school and GPA will still be relevant 5, 10, 20 years on. <S> In your industry, the majority of employers (but yes you will get exceptions), won't care beyond your first job, it is in effect counting as your experience for the role. <S> If you change jobs frequently in your first couple of years (either by choice or by force), then you may need it, but likely there's a bigger issue changing so frequently so soon anyway. <S> As a hiring manager I don't even tend to look at the details of a degree in an experienced hire, I just do my own due-diligence to ensure they have the required skills. <A> This really depends on how good the GPA was. <S> At a 3.1, you are probably better off removing it once you get your first job. <S> The higher the GPA <S> though, the better it is to keep on your CV. <S> A good GPA - and by good <S> i mean a GPA that is typically listed as a minimum requirement for jobs, not being american <S> i am unsure, but around a 3.5+? - could be kept on your CV indefinitely. <S> This isn't to say that a lower GPA should be ashamed or anything, just that a higher GPA can be a better advert for your candidacy. <S> Keep the GPA by the school you went to, so that it blends in with the overall CV. <S> As a final note, the recruiters are right - until you get your first job (and your first year working at thst job!) <S> you need to show your GPA. <A> Your mileage may vary but after one job of multiple years post college, the GPA is just a bit superfluous. <A> Is the job you're at currently a student intern position? <S> If so I think GPA is fairly relevant in those kind of jobs. <S> In any event, I think a lot of places are catching on that knowledge is better than pure GPA. <S> My first job out of college this person I worked with graduated the same time. <S> He had a GPA of 2.something <S> but yet he turned out to be the best person at the company implementing many key projects and had vast knowledge. <S> I'm honestly sad <S> I can't ask him questions anymore. <S> So no, GPA probably won't be looked at but then again probably wouldn't hurt to put it in. <S> I don't think they'll even ask about your GPA much less even care what it is.
| After a few years of experience, your degree isn't going to mean too much anyway (unless you studied at somewhere like MIT), experience will conquer all (again, yes a few employers WILL still care so YMMV, but in general).
|
Is salaried income based on hours at all? I just got my first salaried position, working as an iOS Developer in California. Previously, I had only ever been a contract worker getting paid by the hour, so I'm trying to wrap my head around what's changed. As I understand it, salaries are based on annual amounts, rather than hourly rates multiplied by hours worked. My research has indicated that above a certain level (which I seem to be above), I am not longer entitled to overtime, for example. But my question, which seems simple but for which I haven't been able to find a clear answer, is this: is a salaried paycheck affected at all by varying hours worked? In other words, if I get $X for working 40 hours, would I get the exact same $X for working 41 hours? Or would that 41st hour simply be paid at the normal rate (a weekly total of X + X/40 ), rather than an overtime rate (i.e. X + X/40*1.25 )? <Q> As I understand it, salaries are based on annual amounts, rather than hourly rates multiplied by hours worked. <S> "Exempt" (salaried) are usually not entitled to overtime. <S> But also (usually) get additional benefits that are not provided to contract workers. <S> So your compensation is not solely your salary. <S> But my question, which seems simple but for which I haven't been able to find a clear answer, is this: is a salaried paycheck affected at all by varying hours worked? <S> Usually not. <S> Though if you put in ungodly hours to meat a dedline or delivery date your company may reward you with a bonus (though its not obliged to, not doing so will lead you not put in the time and thus the company to miss deadlines in the future). <S> In other words, if I get $X for working 40 hours, would I get the exact same $X for working 41 hours? <S> Or would that 41st hour simply be paid at the normal rate (a weekly total of X + X/40), rather than an overtime rate (i.e. X + X/40*1.25)? <S> You are not considered to be working at an hourly rate. <S> You are working at a yearly rate and are expected to work the hours required to get the job done. <S> On average you should expect to work 2000 hours a year (some weeks you work more some less than 40 hours) depends on the load. <S> Recently I have been putting in a lot of hours. <S> So I plan to take every Friday off for the next two months (my boss is OK with that as I got the sutff done). <S> But also remember that you get a vacation. <S> So you are still getting paid when you are on vacation and you still get the 40 hours credit towards your 2000 hours a year. <A> Your understanding of how salaries work is correct. <S> It's common to require full time salaried employees to work 40 hours per week, but that's not an inherent requirement of a salaried position. <S> As for overtime: <S> You are (probably) entitled to overtime pay under California law. <S> Q. Are salaried employees entitled to overtime? <S> A. <S> It depends. <S> A salaried employee must be paid overtime unless they meet the test for exempt status as defined by federal and state laws, or unless they are specifically exempted from overtime by the provisions of one of the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders regulating wages, hours and working conditions. <S> There are several links in that paragraph on the original site, but they don't go anywhere <S> that explains what conditions lead to exempt status. <S> I'll edit in that information if I find it. <S> Assuming that you're not exempted, the overtime requirement is as follows: <S> In California, the general overtime provisions are that a nonexempt employee…shall not be employed more than eight hours in any workday or more than 40 hours in any workweek unless he or she receives one and one-half times his or her regular rate of pay for all hours worked over eight hours in any workday and over 40 hours in the workweek. <S> It goes on to explain the process for calculating the "regular rate of pay" for salaried employees: <S> If you are paid a salary , the regular rate is determined as follows: <S> Multiply the monthly remuneration by 12 (months) to get the annual salary. <S> Divide the annual salary by 52 (weeks) to get the weekly salary. <S> Divide the weekly salary by the number of legal maximum regular hours (40) to get the regular hourly rate. <A> Salaried employees are paid based on the assumption that they will be judged at the end of the year on total productivity, not on precisely how many hours were spent in the office to achieve that productivity. <S> Of course participating at meetings and in brainstorming sessions is also part of productivity, as is being available for others to consult with, so if you plan on spending fewer hours than typical in the office, or working flex-time, or working odd hours you need to get permission from your manager. <S> And of course if you're doing something where your hous get billed directly to customers, tracking hours accurately is important. <S> tl;dr: <S> For a salaried employee hours do not directly affect pay, but they may indirectly affect bonuses (in one direction) or job retention (in the other direction) or promotions/raises (in either direction)
| Aside from overtime (which I cover below), salaries are generally based on what your employer thinks your work is worth, and whatever they're willing to pay to keep it competitive with other employers.
|
How to deal with a coworker who uses sensuality and attractiveness to get favors and other things done at work? I work at a fast-growing tech startup where most employees are between 25 and 35, so the culture is very young and casual. A department that works closely with my team recently hired an intern. She is very attractive and sensual (almost flirty) when communicates with other male coworkers. She gets many work-related favors done by others even though they are not documented or agreed processes. Her manager left the company and she somehow managed to get all her responsibilities, which left other more experienced members of her team quite disappointed. I have also noticed how she is now showing a bossy attitude towards them. A few days ago she had asked some favors from some of my all-male team members, and they offered to help her even though they usually don't have time to give favors to other teams (and they normally don't just agree to do a favor to someone). I reprimanded my subordinates and told them not to spend any second helping her unless I approve it. I am a young man as well, but try to be egalitarian in the way I manage my team and processes. On the one hand I don't want to favor someone just because they are more sensual and attractive (regardless of their gender of course), and I especially don't want such behaviors to affect processes. But on the other hand I am also afraid of creating a rift with the rising star of the company who is popular in this male-dominated, somewhat testosterone-driven startup environment. On paper, I have everything to prove that I am right to force her into the official channels, but given our company size and culture, I am no longer sure whether that is the right approach from a political point of view. And as a manager, I must worry about politics, so my question is how to handle this situation. <Q> The first part of @gnasher's answer is absolutely correct. <S> But what you need to address as a manager is your team, meeting your goals and managing your risks. <S> Get her to go through the proper channels by talking to your team and make sure that it's clearly understood that they need to direct any requests to you, and to <S> her <S> that she needs to do the same or she is putting your team's work at risk. <S> Beyond that, it's really not your issue or responsibility. <S> You can encourage them, but let the other managers manage their own risks, and ensure that you and your team are following process and meeting your targets. <A> The problem in my opinion is not how she's subverting the process, but that you and your team are allowing it to happen. <S> I've worked at a number of smaller firms, and the attitude that any type of process is bad because it makes you inflexible ends up throwing the baby out with the bathwater. <S> Work with your team to create a reasonable process to prioritize and assign tasks, then communicate it and its benefits to the rest of the organization. <S> Whatever process you have now doesn't have the support of your team, or they wouldn't be going around it. <S> Either they don't understand the benefit or they aren't very clear about what the process is or the process is just too burdensome. <S> Be willing to be the "bad cop" and let your team be the "good cop". <S> When someone tries to go around the process, your team should refer them to you for an exception, but they can also be accommodating by offering to help move the request through your process. <S> You have to be the only one that can allow someone to bypass the normal work flow, so that you can manage your team's workload and make sure the right resources are being applied to the right project at the right time. <S> It's not going to be fun at first. <S> I think if your team starts experiencing predictable workloads and can get things completed without being pulled in seven different directions at once, they'll start helping ensure the process is followed. <S> If your process isn't benefitting them in some way, they will be willing to go around it for a pretty girl's attention no matter what you do. <A> I'd say this is very simple. <S> You see one of your team members helping her, which comes out of your work budget, so you walk up to both of them, ask your team member what he is doing, why he is doing it, then you ask him whether you told him to do this, and when he says "No", you say "Ok then. <S> You stop right now, go back to your work, and when Mrs. Princess wants any favours done, you send your straight to me. <S> Understood? " <S> And to Mrs. Princess: "If you want work done for you by my team, you come to me. <S> Understood?"
| If this person is causing issues to your team, then you absolutely need to address that.
|
Interviewing - how much to know about prospective employer? I passed my phone screening interview and I have a 3-hour grilling to look forward to. I know I had better look on the company website to see what they do and what they value. However, other than that I don't know what else they would expect me to know or where to find the information. The company is in the finance industry and I honestly don't know anything about that industry at all. What are some things they would expect you to know for an intermediate level software developer? <Q> As you rightly pointed out, definitely look at their website and get a feel for the company, their products and their values. <S> Also for listed companies read the last couple of annual reports and their coverage on sites like Investors Chronicle the WSJ or the FT. <S> For example you could ask things like: What toolsets are used; What project methodologies (eg Agile); Source control; Availability of training; Team size, team diversity and overlap; What their expectations are of you; Salary ranges; Work environment; and Anything that is a winner or a show stopper for you! <S> They won't expect you do know about the internal workings of the organisation, but they will expect you to know who they are, what they do and what markets they service. <S> Then concentrate on tailoring your answers in the interview insomuch as possible to fit their values and goals. <S> Remember, an interview is a two way communication mechanism. <S> It's a way of <S> you finding out what the fit is just as much as the prospective employer is of you. <S> By asking questions you are showing that you are engaged and interested. <A> Since it is for an Intermediate position, you'll probably be up against some other candidates that have experience in the financial industry. <S> All things being equal (I know that can be hard to equate), they could have you at a disadvantage. <S> You have to turn that around. <S> To me, the two ways to do that are to show that you interested in this area and have had some programming experiences that are similar to what this job requires. <S> Look for questions on stackoverflow that involve the financial industry. <S> You won't be an expert, but it shows a level of caring. <S> Some people in this industry will give-away the fact that they think it is boring. <S> If you know what you'll be building, look for things in common with your previous experiences. <S> If I needed a programmer to build a highly transactional stock trading app, I'd rather hire someone from another industry that worked on some sort of real-time warehouse inventory app than someone who worked in the accounting department at a small bank tying out account balances every quarter. <S> Try to get some more specific information about the development team from LinkedIn. <S> Do they all have previous experience in the industry? <S> Did they go to similar universities or hold certifications in the same area? <S> These can lead to questions about how the team has grown and the direction they are heading. <A> There was no Internet in those days (yes, I was applying for jobs bashing rocks together and hunting sabre-tooth tigers) <S> so I would go to the library and search through reference sources and newspapers. <S> It was a lot of work. <S> And I don't recall once that it ever did me any good. <S> Pretty much every interview I've ever gone on, the first thing they do is say, "Let me tell you a little about this company", and they'd proceed to tell me in ten minutes far more than I had learned from hours of research. <S> I suppose if you applied for a job at some big, well-known company, and it was obvious that you had never heard of the company or didn't know what they did, that might make you look ignorant. <S> Like if you applied for a computer job at Microsoft and it became apparent that you had never heard of their company, I'm sure they'd wonder how much experience you could have with computers. <S> But for the typical small to mid-size company, it wouldn't be a surprise if you'd never heard of them. <S> Other than wasting some time, it's hard to see how doing research could hurt you. <S> And you might learn something that brings up questions that you want to ask during the interview. <S> Last time I was job-hunting <S> I invested a few hours in researching a company on the Internet before going on an interview. <S> Not weeks, but a few hours.
| Beyond that, what they will expect is that during the interview process that you ask the relevant questions that will impact on how you do your job and how you feel about the fit for you with that organsation. When I was young and just starting out, it was common advice to job seekers to research the company and find out all you could about it. Do some research and be able to come up with intelligent questions about the finance industry. That said, it certainly doesn't hurt to do some research and find out what you can.
|
What do you do when a supervisor gives you a task you don't understand? What do you do when a supervisor gives you a task you don't understand ? This is always something I struggle with and would love to know the best way to approach it. No specific situation. I would like to hear what others have to say who have had this happen to them. Thanks! <Q> What do you do when a supervisor gives you a task you don't understand ? <S> As always, when someone asks you to do something, and you don't understand, you talk. <S> In this case you talk with your supervisor and indicate that you don't understand the task. <S> If you find that you understand the orders, but you don't have the ability/understanding to complete the task itself, then you tell the supervisor that you don't have the knowledge to complete the task. <S> You may be able to find time to learn how before the task must be completed. <S> Or you may be able to work with someone else who can help enough to make up for your lack of knowledge. <S> Or the task may need to be assigned elsewhere. <A> I usually ask what is the end result that is wanted. <S> Is it some code? <S> Is it a Word document? <S> Is it an Excel spreadsheet? <S> Is it researching some technology? <S> This can give me some idea of what I am supposed to be doing. <S> There can be various ways to get clues so I can figure out what was asked of me. <A> The first thing to remember - it is okay to not understand things, and it is okay to get help - <S> a good manager or supervisor would rather you seek clarification before blundering on with a task and end up wasting time because you then need to fix the bits you missed because you didn't understand what was required. <S> As you go on through work, you will find that it will only be the most simple tasks that you will understand 100% upon being given the brief. <S> The point is to then list which parts of the task (or tasks) that you don't understand, and send off for clarification to your supervisor (or client, or nominated senior team member). <S> If the request was clearly stated - "make me a combobulated widget", and the problem is you don't understand what is meant by "combobulated", then do a bit of research, and then send an email with the information you uncover and say "hey boss, I wasn't sure what you meant by combobulated, so I looked up a few things and wanted to check if this is what you wanted". <S> In the end, you and your supervisor need to be aware that information transfer during a task briefing is not 100% - the supervisor will make assumptions on what you know or what they think is obvious, and neglect to pass on that part of the puzzle. <S> It's up to you identify the gaps in your knowledge and understanding of the task and seek clarification.
| If you find that it's the task orders you don't understand, you ask the supervisor questions until you understand what is being asked of you. I'd also ask what is the deadline and how long is this supposed to take.
|
What approach can be used to negotiate for higher PTO/salary, when I have a better offer in hand? My current position I have a job that I really like, and suits me quite well. It is in the software industry and I am writing code for websites. What makes it great I suppose is also my working environment. My boss lets me drive my code and pretty much stays out of my way, so I am "empowered" to make whatever changes I see fit, and he trusts my judgement and overall we have a good working relationship. Overall this position is good. The pay is somewhere between $75-78K with 2 weeks paid time off, 10 holidays and about 4 unpaid time days off. The trigger towards PTO/salary Now, all would be fine, but my husband keeps bugging me to ask my work for more days off and work has been pushing back, keeping time off as-is. Ideally 1 more week paid time off will be good. And also the salary is on the lower end for I could be worth. Sure, more days off and higher salary will be nice. I also have already rocked the boat with time off before and company gave me some free time off that did not go on the books since they got some publicity in return. I did not bug them about salary much as my stance has been "you don't have to raise my salary as long as I get more days off". But neither salary nor days off were raised officially other than policy-induced yearly raise. The action So being lead by my husband, I started to talk to some recruiters. I got me an interview this coming week where (should everything go right) the offer will be 3 weeks PTO, several personal days. There are 7 holidays. Basically about the same time off, just different times and called different names. But higher salary, over $10K higher. My husband's idea is to use the offer as an ammunition to get more days off. Or maybe higher salary, or both. And also to give my boss more ammunition for use to help him get me a raise/promotion/whatever the company decides to give or not give. Question: How do I best handle this? Considering the goals that my husband is pushing towards more time off to travel and I can certainly use more time off myself. And more money will also be nice. To jump start .. here is what I am thinking, where maybe I can do something like this...(?). .. March to my boss with offer in hand and say, "you know, I really like working here, and you know that, but my husband is retired and he wants to travel more and my mom who lives in another state also requests more of my time, and I would like to see what you (aka company) can do for me. Then place printed offer on the table . I know that you (company) cannot do this in vacuum, so I want to use this this opportunity (the offer) to show that I am worth more than my current compensation is at this company. Can you consider my message and let me know if you can do anything for me in regards to getting more time off. (Or salary, or both)? My boss doesn't know I have been looking or that I have an interview so me with an offer will probably be at least a little bit unexpected. But after all, he is in management so I don't think it will come as a big shock, but still he is a person and not a robot, and he likes me, so I imagine there will be a moment where he'll be surprised. But maybe he will be excited, since the offer will indeed give him more power with HR, to negotiate more perks, benefits, or salary for me, as he has been trying to do that, but in vaccuum. I don't want to screw this up so I am wondering how to approach this with least damage for my work-relationships, and with the most win for my personal life? <Q> How do I best handle this? <S> You need to be a bit careful here. <S> When I read your proposed scenario, the first thing that jumped to mind was "Chris is going to retire soon to please her husband and mom. <S> " If your manager reaches a similar conclusion, he may not give you addition money or benefits, but may instead start preparing for your departure. <S> That could mean no more promotions, and no more choice projects. <S> If I were your manager, I'd probably ask why a few more dollars or another week off would make your husband and mom happy enough for you to stay. <S> A retired husband that wants to travel a lot, and a mom in another state that wants more visits probably means an additional week or a few $k won't make enough of a difference to matter. <S> Managers who suspect their employee will leave soon anyway may not be motivated to negotiate for additional benefits on your behalf. <S> If you choose to have such a conversation with your manager, you probably should leave the pressure from your husband and mom out of it. <S> And only toss down a written offer if you are prepared to take that offer should your request be denied. <S> Anything else puts you in a very awkward situation. <S> Perhaps it's time for you to retire. <S> Or perhaps you would be better off requesting a reduced, part-time schedule. <S> That could allow you the time off for travel and family visits that would make everyone in your life outside work happier. <A> I can't think of a single time I have seen anyone succeed in getting more vacation time than the usual schedule once they were an employee. <S> First that is a perk that is hard to hide (you are after all out of the office more than anyone else) <S> and it leads to other people wanting the same perk, so companies are less inclined to give it. <S> So you can try, but you are more likely to get more money than more vacation time. <S> If you choose to go this route, be aware that they may not choose to counter your offer and you will have to accept the new job. <S> You may know if they have a history of making counter offers from other people who have given notice. <S> If you know they generally will try to keep a valuable employee, then it might work. <S> If they never do counter offers then it is highly unlikely to work. <S> I will also second what Joe said, another week of vacation time is not going to make your retired husband happy. <S> He needs to travel without you or accept the limitations of your job or provide enough income that you don't need to work at all. <S> Alternatively, you could look at negotiating the ability to work remotely with your boss which is often a much easier sell. <S> Then you could go to various places with him but work during the day. <S> We used to have a guy who spent 3-4 months a year in Europe while they visited his wife's family but continued to work remotely with only a 1 week vacation during the trip. <A> If it is the new job, then resign your current job. <S> If it is the current job, decline the offer from the new job. <S> If you want to gamble and can live with the new job, then try and negotiate a better deal with the current job. <S> You can start without showing them the offer, but you probably have to show it to them. <S> If they don't meet your demands, then accept the offer from the new company and resign your current position. <S> Of course if they do meet your demands you have to decline the offer from the new job. <S> If you want to gamble and if you want to keep the current job, then ask for the new job to up their offer. <S> If they meet your demands accept it, and resign from your current company. <S> If you negotiate with the current employer they may meet your request, but they could decide your are ultimately a short timer. <S> If you negotiate with the new company, they could decide to go with their second choice.
| Assuming you get a written offer with no contingencies and that is everything that you expect: Decide which job you want. You may wish to have a long chat with your husband (and perhaps your mom) first, to figure out between you what you really want out of your life - both inside and outside of work.
|
How to career transition to new software development stack without taking massive step backwards I'm in a bit of a jam career-wise. I'm afraid if I don't take some aggressive actions, I'll be one of those thirty-year veterans who can't get a job in their early fifties. And I'm sure there are plenty of other "senior" people with this problem. I need to get in a new position where I can grow technically, but my current resume leaves me with few options that do not involve a step down. I've been a software developer for 20+ years and am employed in a small company with about 20 engineers, where I've functioned for some time as technical lead and manager. But at this point, unless the CTO vanishes, I have nowhere to go. And I've spent over ten years here. Meanwhile, having spent two years looking for other job opportunities, I've come up empty; with my leads running out, I'm now extremely concerned about my employability outside of the company. The main problem seems to be my lack of "hot" skills and the fact that the stack I'm working on relegates me to a limited number of opportunities. The company is on an all-Microsoft stack and that's not going to change. Unfortunately, in the area I'm located, I'm having a harder and harder time finding interesting opportunities in that stack. The main business here, technology, finance and media, have all moved strongly into the Linux camp, and I'm having difficulty finding opportunities on my present stack that will not be even more limiting. It's been a while since I had to transition to a new stack. As an intermediate developer, I had no problem finding opportunities; if you show you're capable and can learn on your own time, it's easy to get over the hurdle. As a senior person, looking at senior-level jobs, I haven't been able to do that. I've gotten quite far in interviews with a handful of companies who like my tech lead/manager skills, but I haven't been able to "seal the deal." When it comes right down to it, if a company is prepared to pay top dollar, they're also prepared to wait for an exact match. These means a match on the technology stack, even for managerial positions. Given that, what is the right approach for pursuing opportunities on a new technology stack? The most obvious route is for me to take on a large side project, but it's an awful hard sell to my significant other to say "I'm going to spend one day every weekend over the next year on a side project that will qualify me for a job that will be a $40K/year pay cut." Has anybody been able to successfully navigate this? If you've done this successfully, I'd love to hear your experiences. <Q> Firstly, I'd question the assumption that the MS stack is a dead end. <S> I'm not sure where you are, but a quick look on Seek has <S> 385 c# jobs in Melbourne, 125 Ruby jobs and 467 Java jobs. <S> Unscientifically, it seems that the Ruby/Python/PHP jobs pay less than C#/Java jobs. <S> I've worked in both camps, my current MS job pays 25% more than my previous Python job. <S> Future-proofing your career is an issue for most people. <S> IMHO, your greatest risk could be that being stuck in a small company <S> may not expose you to all the new technologies and future companies will demand. <S> I have seen jobs demanding both WPF and MVC, even though few companies invest in both desktop and web technologies. <S> Most jobs will expect you to have experience with the latest technologies, not just MS-MVC but the right version of MVC. <S> If your goal is to transition to a specific technology, you need to choose that technology (not Microsoft is not enough) and see if you can find a company that has both MS stack and whatever your chosen stack is. <S> Consulting firms spring to mind. <S> If your goal is to future-proof your career, you need to ensure you have the skills being sought in the market. <S> This may mean sticking in the MS market. <S> Alternatively, you can take matters into your own hands and work on a private project. <S> You can choose the stack to use and build the product you want, how you want it. <S> In my experience, this is a lot of work when you have a full-time job and a family. <S> Any way, you need to have a pretty good idea where you want to go. <A> One of your best options for making the switch without taking a pay cut is to get involved with an open source community project. <S> You'll be building new contacts in that particular technology, developing portfolio experience to give you credibility and building your new skills. <S> Never underestimate open-source community contributions. <A> One thing to consider is focusing on JavaScript/HTML/CSS. <S> Whatever the latest fad is, make sure you know it. <S> You could even get into node.js. <S> The idea is to make yourself more platform neutral, which opens up more job opportunites. <S> Whatever anyone is doing these days, JavaScript will be involved. <S> You will have to dedicate time to doing this. <S> There is no free lunch. <A> Another thought that hasn't been mentioned is to attend meetups/networking events in your area for technologies that you are interested in transitioning to. <S> At these events you will likely run into experienced developers in that domain as well as recruiters who might be able to help "market" you in domains you are less experienced with.
| Find someone who is actively involved in the project and see if you can working with them to make contributions to the project. It is all about getting passed the HR department to technologists who will appreciate your experience and realize that experience in any stack as an engineer is more valuable than specific domain language. Become a specialist in JS technologies like angular, JQuery, react, etc.
|
How to stop feeling bad when you are leaving a company you like for a new job? I have been working in my current company for 2 years and I joined them right after my college . I thoroughly enjoyed my work, especially colleagues and the responsibility ( right from day 1, I had huge responsibility which I liked) that I had during those 2 years. There is always that extra tension to meet deadlines. The company has a very weird structure. 80% of the development has less than 2 years experience and the rest have more than 6 years experience ( not in the company but overall professional experience ). The problem is I have been working on the salary that I signed up for initially. Less salary + feeling of being stagnant after 2 years + lack of guidance ( like someone with 4 years experience. The other people are unreachable, physically as well as intellectually) prompted me to look for other jobs and I got into this exciting opportunity and also pays me at least twice of what I earn right now. So, now I want to quit and move on, and when I said this to my colleagues ( and also close friends with same experience level ), they started feeling bad and at least 6 ( that is 40% of the development force. There are so many days when we spent days at the office cracking at issues together, just out of interest and no extra salary) told me they would quit the job if I quit. Now I feel bad. I genuinely like the company since they were my first job, had the chance to learn so many technologies, had nice colleagues and more than that I had huge responsibility right from day 1. Now I fear me quitting for another job would cause an exodus in the company. I don't know how to handle this situation. How to handle this situation? <Q> The main thing you need to keep in mind is that your career is your career. <S> While you may feel loyalty towards a company, you need to ensure that a role is fulfilling and that you are remunerated appropriately. <S> Also remember that if the organisation needed to cut costs, they would not hesitate to reduce staffing levels. <S> They are in business to turn a profit, not to provide a job for you. <S> Loyalty to a company is admirable, but first and foremost you need to look after you own career path. <A> Now I fear me quitting for another job would cause an exodus in the company. <S> I don't know how to handle this situation. <S> How to handle this situation? <S> Leaving a good job is always awkward, particularly leaving your first job. <S> The first time for many things is the hardest - it almost always gets easier as you go on in your career. <S> You were likely thrilled when you landed this job. <S> You were excited that they chose you. <S> You made many friends. <S> You grew professionally. <S> And now you are leaving them behind. <S> But new experiences await - a new job, new friends, new chances to grow. <S> While it feels like things may fall apart in your prior company, that almost never happens. <S> Although you likely have a great network there, a mass-exodus is seldom triggered by one individual's exit when that individual has only been there for two years. <S> Sure, whenever anyone leaves others think through and reassess their situation. <S> But if they leave, it's because they saw something lacking themselves, or have found something far more tempting on their own. <S> And good companies can absorb people leaving <S> - it's just part of the normal ebb and flow of business. <S> They will carry on. <S> And perhaps your leaving will open up opportunities for others. <S> When you leave, say goodbye to your coworkers and promise to stay in touch with your personal network. <S> But try to put most of your energies into you new job, you new network, your new friends. <S> Look forward, and not so much backward, and you'll be fine. <A> It's not easy - I was really good friends with my colleagues at my last place (in fact, we're still good friends, and regularly meet up), and I felt bad about leaving them, especially as how there was another developer leaving at the same time. <S> This equated to a 40% reduction in their development team. <S> But, you have to be happy and satisfied in your own work before you worry about anyone else - and as you start your question with a list of the things you were unhappy about, you have to as yourself, would it really be any better if you carried on. <S> You know what happened to my friends at the last place - nothing much. <S> They had to pick up a few loose ends, but then they were working on new projects and work, and I doubt that, in the greater scheme of things, I was missed all that much (although, it is ego-stroking to think they really needed me). <S> I hate to deflate you with this, but if your quitting will really cause such an exodus from your current employer, then there are probably a lot of other issues and your leaving is just a tipping point rather than a catalyst. <S> So - how to not feel bad? <S> Everyone moves on at some point - gone are the days where you start a job at 16 and retire from that same job (or even from the same company) at 65. <A> I recently quit from my first job out of college. <S> I been there nearly a decade. <S> I do miss the place and sometimes feel a bit of "emptiness" when I think back on it. <S> I miss the people and the place a little. <S> Then I think about why I quit there. <S> I think about the things I do dislike and realize I made a wise choice. <S> That's natural to do. <S> I remember a lot of good things about my previous employer. <S> But then I remember the bad things that made me want to leave <S> and I know I made a wise choice for the better. <S> I recall a research done. <S> I looked up information like you did on quitting <S> and I recall reading a research that some folks talk really, really bad about their employer and quit on those grounds. <S> Then shortly after they realize they made a terrible mistake and the last job was actually really good. <S> I think what these research fail to see is that people quit a job to a new job without researching the new job. <S> They just jumped on the chance for a new job since they were angry with their current employer. <S> I would say so long as you don't do that, you should be okay. <S> The feeling generally goes away after a few months or so, at least for me.
| And remember what you don't like about the job and are seeking to improve. If a group of folks leave, you can be comforted that it almost certainly won't be because you left. I think when you depart, you sort of only remember the good things.
|
My ex-employer is sending emails to customers in my name I recently resigned and have discovered that my employer has continued to send emails to my clients under my account pretending to be me. I understand it is their company email account, however, it is MY name and I am well-reputed in my industry. What are my options? Some more details: I know this is actually happening as I have had the emails forwarded by a co-worker who was copied on them to my personal account. My departure was not on the best terms with one other co-worker in particular and it is that co-worker that is accessing my account. It is a small company and I was one of their senior people. I am sure they are trying to hide that I left. Additionally, the person doing this could easily be sending negative emails as well, but I have no proof of those. He has a definite motive to do so, as he is manipulative and unprofessional. <Q> You should send a courtesy email to your contacts at the other companies to inform them of your departure from the company. <S> Thank them for the good times and be careful to not make it appear like you're trying to solicit their business away from your former employer. <S> Don't accuse your company of doing anything wrong. <S> Let the clients make that determination themselves. <S> (You might want to include your departure date to help them.) <S> If you use LinkedIn (or some other social media tool), and are connected to your clients through that tool, you should also update your status there. <S> Again, let your former company and your former clients draw their own conclusions. <S> If their behavior doesn't stop, you should consult an attorney to find out what legal remedies you might have, which might include a cease and desist letter, or a police report of identity theft. <S> Edit: <S> Incorporated some of the comments into the answer. <A> What are my options? <S> You could call your former boss, explain nicely what has happened, indicate that you are sure this must be a mistake, and kindly ask that it be stopped (this is what I would do) <S> You could call your former boss, explain what has happened, and insist that it stop You could call your former boss and demand that it stop <S> You could call your former boss and threaten a lawsuit if it doesn't stop <S> You could have your attorney draft a letter demanding that it stop <S> You could take them to court <S> You could contact each of your former customers and explain that these emails are not from you <S> You could contact each of your former customers, explain that these emails are not from you, and CC your former boss with each email <S> For me, I'd take the simplest, easiest, and most polite option first. <S> But your mileage may vary. <A> Are they just replying to emails sent to your account? <S> If they are just leaving the account open and replying in a general way then I kind of get that. <S> If they have not replaced you yet <S> it may be they don't want to tell them you are gone until they have covered your position. <S> If they are sending from your email that is crossing the line in my opinion. <S> They are not just using your email they are impersonating you. <S> Ask them to stop and if they don't consult a lawyer. <S> I just don't get how they think it will benefit them? <S> At some point they need to come clean and the contact or customer will realize they have been lied to. <S> If you do send out a preemptive email be sure there is nothing in your contract about contacting customers. <S> If you are known in industry and have an active LinkedIn news should spread pretty quickly. <A> You should get in contact with an attorney, they may have rights to certain intellectual property the you created as an employee, or they might not. <S> The Bottom Line is that they may owe you money for using your persona for profitable gain. <S> Again, you need to talk to an attorney. <S> You haven't given us much information concerning this issue, and it sounds more like a legal issue than a workplace issue.
| You should contact the Boss, in writing probably certified mail so that you can prove that they were told to cease using your persona, then if they continue you have something to stand on when/if you go to court.
|
Resigning a new job because of ethical and legal dilemas? I'm a recent college grad. I spent 10 months total, 2 months post graduation, looking for a job. I moved back home into a horribly abusive situation because I didn't really have another financial option.when the first job offer finally came, I took it despite many, many red flags. They told me one compensation amount in the interview, then switched to a much lower number come offer time. The position is base plus commission, but the base number is just barely livable and I won't see commission for at leat 90 days. I tried to negotiate, but they basically said take it or leave it. I was so desperate for a way out of my bad living situation that I took it. I've been at my job for 2 months now. In that time, my very old car completely died and I was forced to buy a new one. I bought the cheapest reliable vehicle I could find, but I was still in a situation where I needed financing. So, now I have a car payment as well as medical bills and student loans soon. Basically I NEED to have income now. The company had huge turnover. 2 executives left in my first 3 weeks. They shut down an entire sister company with no notice and 40 people were out of work the next day. The company has no clear direction--it's just a scattershot approach. From everyone I've talked to, no one below executive has been there more than a few months. They're stickers about attendance even for exempt employees--arriving 5 min late or leaving 5 min early gets a demerit, and you can't "bank up" time spent in office, at all. Worst, they expect me to break the law. I work in an HR related position, and they have directly told me to discriminate. I give them an excellent candidate and they say "no, he is too old." I've mentioned that age discrimination is illegal (and horribly wrong in my opinion), but they tell me "I know, but the clients want someone younger. We need to make them happy." There have been other red flags, but these are the main ones. I dread coming in every single day. I literally cry some days about how horrible I feel working for such disorganized, lying bigots. But due to my financial situation, I'm stuck until I can line up another job. Two questions: how do I explain this extremely short stint to potential employers? And what do I tell my current employer when I resign? <Q> All you need to say is that you don't feel it's working out and will prefer other opportunities. <S> Don't give details of why to the company, don't vent your spleen at them. <S> They won't care if they are as unethical as you claim. <S> Be the professional one and leave with dignity. <S> What to say to potential employers? <S> The same thing! <S> Just state again <S> that it wasn't a good fit for you personally and that you felt it better to leave for something more suitable. <S> It's never easy, but don't elaborate. <S> Explain what you did <S> professionally <S> while you were there, say that culturally it was a poor fit and move on :) <A> how do I explain this extremely short stint to potential employers? <S> If you are going into a new commissioned job, you can talk about how the base salary is too low to be viable - <S> many employers will understand that. <S> Try hard not to bad-mouth your current employer. <S> Just indicate that you quickly realized that it isn't working out. <S> Don't tell them that you cry about it. <S> Don't talk about laws or turnover or your car or dwell on the other nastiness at your current employer - those don't make you a more appealing candidate. <S> And what do I tell my current employer when I resign? <S> Otherwise, you risk jumping into an equally-bad job simply because you are in a difficult financial situation. <S> It's important to be on a payroll continuously, even if the situation is bad. <S> When you are ready to resign, just simply say "Thank you for the opportunity, but I found a great job <S> and I need to give you my notice. <S> My last day will be in [whatever the usual notice period is in your locale and industry]. <S> " <S> No need to go into any depth, or burn any bridges here. <S> Just quit. <A> I'll disagree with the other answers on this one. <S> Claiming that it wasn't a good fit is sometimes seen as a potential red flag to interviewers because it's very vague and bad employees tend to bring it up to hide real problems. <S> In this case you have a much better answer: <S> Shortly after I joined the company started struggling financially and one of its sister companies was closed. <S> Given that I am one of the most recent hires I feel it's best to start looking for a more stable opportunity. <S> It's indeed not a good idea to bad-mouth a former or current employer , which is why, however you decide to word it <S> , it's important that you remain factual and neutral when explaining this. <S> Job insecurity with the threat of impending lay-offs is a common reason for people to start job hunting and one of the few that justifies leaving early. <S> In your case, the fact that they were requiring illegal practices should be another valid reason to leave but in practice that is a can of worms that you just don't want to open. <S> As for what to say when resigning, I'd recommend going with the tried but true <S> " I got an opportunity that was too good to pass up ". <S> There are any number of possible, trite alternatives that don't really mean anything. <S> You should also have a look at the questions in the exit-interview tag .
| Don't badmouth the previous company to any prospective employer as it comes across as sour grapes. You should explain that you made a mistake and the company turned out not to be what you had hoped for. First of all do not resign until you have accepted a position at a new employer.
|
How do I deal with constant unfair load distribution? I've been working with a boss for 3 years now. About a year and half back, as the workload increased, we got another resource into our team. I and this guy share the workload together. We are partners. It means that we both need to complete a chunk of work together. If one is slacking then the other needs to finish it. However, since the time he's joined I've been seeing that I get assigned the majority of the work and I'm kept burning at 100% at least. I'm usually at 100-120% throughout the year with absolutely no breaks. While this guy gets assigned the bare minimum because he's extremely incompetent. He cannot get the task done properly. Also he lies outright about how much work he's done and is very manipulative. He omits particular words so as to give an impression of having done more work. Sometimes he takes credit for work that was done by some other team. And my boss for some reason chooses to ignore it. Overtime I had been burning out. I don't get a single day in the year when the work is less. So I started hinting to my boss about his lack of work and the high pressure on me. It didn't make a difference so I started having a 1-1 meeting with him and explaining to him, pointing out the proof of what work I was doing and what he was doing. I did these for a couple of times. It still made no difference. So one day I called him into a meeting room and had a heated venting out because I could not tolerate this anymore. Since that day he's changed. He now does assign more work to my colleague. However, in spite of all this I still see that I'm always kept busy at 100-120% while my colleague is allotted only 50% of the day. And this really makes me angry. If he takes a proper share of work then I can stop burning out. So my question is what is the proper way to resolve this? It's not like I'm completely overloaded with work. But it's just that there is non-stop work for me. While this guy chills out sitting right next to me on Facebook, YouTube and other websites. I literally see him surfing the whole day. <Q> So my question is what is the proper way to resolve this? <S> It's not like I'm overloaded with work. <S> But it's just that there is non-stop work for me. <S> While this guy chills out sitting right next to me on Facebook, YouTube and other websites. <S> If you aren't overloaded, but you are working non-stop, then I'm not quite sure there is a real problem to be resolved here. <S> At work, you are supposed to work, not have periods of time where you aren't working so that you can chill out. <S> You seem to feel the same based on your characterization of your coworker. <S> Still, if you feel you must "resolve this", you should talk with your boss. <S> But when you do, don't focus on your coworker. <S> Instead, focus on yourself. <S> Point out what training you could take, what expanded duties you could take on, etc. <S> You've already vented about the unfairness that you couldn't "tolerate" any longer, so your manager knows your feelings. <S> Don't rehash those complaints - clearly they are a waste of time and will only make you come across as a whiner. <S> If I had to make a bet, I'd bet that you will be rewarded more than your under-performing coworker. <S> Perhaps you are paid more now, perhaps you'll get better annual reviews, perhaps you'll get more choice tasks and projects. <S> Managers usually aren't stupid, they expect more of better workers, but they also reward them more often. <S> But if after all of that you still cannot "tolerate" this unjust situation any longer, it might be time for you to consider seeking a different company. <S> If you do, work hard to find a job and culture where everyone is treated exactly the same so that you are no longer "pricked out". <S> In my experience, unequal work loads are the rule, rather than the exception. <S> So look hard before you jump - you don't want to end up in another frustrating job, and have to go through this all again. <A> Is the work he's not doing making it harder to get your work done? <S> If his laziness means you can't get your work done, then it's fair to go to your boss and explain that you need X from him, and haven't gotten it, and you need it in order to complete Y. Then ask how you want him to handle that. <S> If it's just an unfair work distribution, then there might be other things going on behind the scenes that you don't know about. <S> Perhaps he is doing something else the boss needs instead. <S> Perhaps he is working more efficiently and getting the same amount of work done and the boss is good with that. <S> He might be on probation because of his lack of work and close to losing his job. <S> Your boss might not be a great boss, and figure if the work is getting done, he doesn't care if it's an equal load. <S> There are all sorts of reasons. <S> But the issue is for your boss to handle, not you. <S> You should do your work and not pay so much attention to his. <S> However, don't do extra work and burn yourself out -- do as good of a job as you can do while still keeping healthy. <A> In addition to the sound advice given, I'd first suggest that you document everything. <S> While your comment states that you don't have work dependency it does seem that you are on a team of sorts with this guy as you do receive kindred tasks. <S> Having a trail of your output and assignments will make it easy for you later on, should you need something to point to. <S> Someone above surely has the record of your peer and can connect the dots on their own. <S> A lot of your current sentiment is expressed as complaining and a result of arguably unwarranted comparison. <S> This may stem from feeling that you receive equivalent compensation as the other 'incompetent' guy <S> but you have no way to know that. <S> Perceptions matter, so your first initiative should be to re-envision your current problem in terms of yourself alone. <S> It's evident you feel overworked and/or underappreciated, but what is your goal? <S> Would the ideal amendment be a raise? <S> Increased work flexibility? <S> Limited workload? <S> You should take some time to figure this out exactly and bring it up to your manager during assessment or a meeting. <S> Here's the divergence to the current advice, <S> while you take the time to figure out exactly what bothers you, you should consider what you can do alone to improve your situation. <S> There's not enough information to know, but consider, perhaps, that the other guy simply manages expectations better, and allows himself time for flexibility. <S> e.g. <S> If a task takes 3 hours, you state it will take 3 hours and give yourself little time for flexibility and feel stress to perform at 100% all the time and burnout. <S> Whereas the other guy may state 9 hours and finish in 6, he did less than you could but over delivered on his estimate all while having much more time to begin with. <S> Something to consider.
| Point out what your non-stop work prevents you from doing that you feel you should be entitled to do.
|
In an interview, how to not sound like I'm bragging when asked about what previous employers think of me As a student who's done work-terms and am applying for contract and part-time positions, I get this question quite a bit: "What do your previous employers think about?" or "What would your previous employers say about you?". I have a reference letter from my previous employers, and they've all mentioned things like: "ability to maintain excellent rapport with just about everyone", "exceptionally well-rounded, quick learning curve", "rarely met a student employee in the last 10 years who I can rely on as much as this student", "outstanding work ethic" etc. Up until this point, my reply is just "They'd say good things about me. They'd mention I have a good work ethic and am easy to get along with. I can forward you my reference letter which my previous employers provided, if you need it". It feels weird to me if I repeat what my previous employers said (I'm much more comfortable simply forwarding my reference letter to the interviewers, but they normally just say "just tell a couple things now, no need to forward a reference letter"). I feel that if I actually repeat what the employers said, I'd come off as full of myself. With that said, is my response how I should be responding? Is it what a interviewer expects? If not, what's a "good" (assuming the person answering the question is being truthful) response to this question? <Q> Remember, the point of an interview is to impress the interview panel. <S> You are a product that you are trying to get them to buy :) <S> So you need to sell yourself so that they'll pick you out of all the other candidates. <S> And if you don't, rest assured that the other candidates will :) <S> If you've been getting positive feedback from prior employers and you are asked the question, it's not bragging. <S> You are answering the question and showing them that you are someone they should have in their team. <S> Look at it this way <S> - they're not exactly expecting you to say, "Well, they thought I was awful and hard to get on with." <S> :) <S> Don't feel like you're bragging, you're advertising that you are the product that will solve their problems ;) <A> When I go for interview I always have a copy of my resume in a folder (just in-case they don't get one from HR <S> I can hand one out). <S> If I were in this situation I would also have printed copies of these "reference letter". <S> Then when asked the question just hand over a copy of the letter and also say how cool I am. <A> The best way to handle an interview is to be honest. <S> If you are a match for the position then your skills and achievements will sound impressive. <S> Do not claim you can do something you cannot. <S> If you need training/experience in an area then let them know that you are interested in becoming proficient in this area. <S> This type of question sounds to me like an inquiry on how you perform in a team dynamic. <A> First, memorize several specific traits to mention, with an accomplishment to back them up. <S> Choose the three traits that best address the needs of the position you are interviewing for and plan on listing them, with the other traits to use later, depending on how the interview goes. <S> E.g.: <S> "Well at xyz company, I think they'd say I was dependable. <S> My manager frequently mentioned to me how punctual I was and that I could always be counted on to meet deliverables such as [name deliverable]. <S> At abc company, they'd say I was accurate. <S> I processed 1000 expense reports during my tenure there and no mistakes were found. <S> At pqr company, the feedback I got most frequently was that I was a team player. <S> When my boss had to take time off unexpectedly, I volunteered to [xyz task] until she was able to return. <S> This helped our team meet our goal of [finishing the project] on time..." etc. <S> What they're really asking is what value you can bring; they aren't looking to hear a list of adjectives or hear you wax eloquent about yourself, and concrete examples of accomplishments help facilitate that understanding. <S> They also want to hear how self-aware you are, because someone with insight is easier to manage, and how well you prepared for the interview, because that demonstrates professionalism, among other things. <S> Second, once you've got your content figured out, conduct practice interviews with friends (or even with a professional such as a career coach) to make sure you are coming across the right way. <S> Ask for constructive (and diplomatic, if you are sensitive like me) feedback. <S> Different people can say the same sentence and come across quite differently due to inherent personality quirks. <A> It could be a test to see how you react - acting either standoffish or like an entitled rockstar might be a red flag for them. <S> In addition to mentioning some of your personal qualities, make sure you mention collaborative qualities others have complimented you on (that show you're a team player).
| By honing your presentation you can be assured that you are not appearing to be too braggy, or too modest. If you already know what your past employers think of you, then there is no problem with passing this along.
|
How can I reject company offer to take training/certification exam? I have been offered the opportunity to take a certification exam with optional training by sales in my company. At this moment, I haven't informed my manager (because I know most probably he will insist me, so I better to prepare answer first). This certification is quite important to my division, the sales, and company, so I believe they will insist me to take it. However, I don't really want to take this certification because of the contract that my company would like me to sign. That states that I will have to reimburse them for the costs of the certification and training if I intend to leave the company within the agreed contract duration. Here is the scenario for reimbursement/penalty: Training + certification exam: 2 years contract with penalty to reimburse 5x times of all total cost which the 1x total cost of itself is 4x my monthly salary. Certification exam only: minimum 3 months contract. I don't know up to how many months/year(s), but I assume will be less than 2 years. I don't want to sign this contract since I am actively looking for a new job and the training and certification is very expensive. How I can politely reject this without making my company/manager distrust me? Note: At this moment, I am not sure this is mandatory/optional, but I am quite sure this is optional. Note from editor regarding the duplicate question : This question deals with some of the same issue as the linked question but a crucial difference is that the company in this case is applying an additional fine of 4 times the cost of the training . Answers should take into account how this particular detail affects possible and appropriate responses. <Q> I don't want to sign this contract since I am actively looking for a new job and the training and certification is very expensive. <S> How I can politely reject this without making my company/manager distrust me? <S> Hmm, this is very awkward. <S> Your company really wants you to take the certification - it's clearly important to them. <S> You might decide to reject the offer (if it's really an offer rather than an order), on principle. <S> Something like <S> "If it's really that important to the company, I believe the company should be paying for it without any strings being attached. <S> If you can't do that, then I politely decline." <A> Of course they don't want to spend money up front if they are not going to see any benefit from it, and it's not unreasonable that they should expect some degree of commitment before spending the cash on you, as opposed to a colleague. <S> Given that, declining is tantamount to saying "I don't want to commit to the company for X months". <S> What other plausible reason could you have for saying no, if you're doing it on company time? <S> It may not lead to distrust , as such, but you're basically announcing that there is a reasonable probability you are about to leave. <S> The alternative is to accept it as an investment - with the certification you may get better offers elsewhere and recoup the costs as your career moves on faster. <A> Thank them for the opportunity for the training. <S> Let them know that you know the advantages to them if you take it, and also for yourself. <S> Then, explain that you don't know the future, and while you may be at this job for many years (after all, even job searches sometimes take a long time!), something may happen and you would have to leave. <S> Perhaps something would happen to a family member or your spouse is offered a wonderful job elsewhere, and you would need to leave the area. <S> Because you don't know the future, you don't want to be indebted to the company for such a great amount. <S> Just in case something happens! <S> So explain that because you don't know the future, signing something that would require you stay for two years or pay over a year's worth of salary is something you simply can't reasonably do. <S> Then ask how you can provide some of the benefits they would get from the training without you doing the training. <S> Is there a way you can do some of the learning on your own or from co-workers who take the training? <S> Can you work in a different area, where the training is not so useful, but they also have a need? <S> In other words, find a way that you will be still adding value to the company even without the training .
| If you don't think that would work, then you can try begging off because you are too busy, or asking that you be allowed to take the training at a later time (by which time you will hopefully have landed your new job). Your employer clearly thinks you will be of more value to the business with the certification, and it will also help your career.
|
Should I ask for my old job back? Is it ever acceptable to ask for your old job back? I quit my first "real" job after university, as a web developer, without another job lined up. I was frustrated and it was probably really dumb. Part of me dreams of doing something completely different, but realistically I don't know how good my chances are of that. If I have to, I will almost certainly apply for other web developer jobs, similar to what I have done. My anticipation is that web developer employers will think "so why did you quit that job? If you were frustrated with it, won't that be the same with us? Won't you just leave us like you did them?" Perhaps I should just ask for my old job back then, so at least the next time I want to get a new job, I don't just quit without one lined up, which I think employers seem to really hate (I get the impression there's a real stigma against it). However, I did show uncertainty to my employers before... saying I wanted to leave, and I didn't. Part of me thinks my employer might take me back if I grovelled, but maybe I am then just taking the mickey too much. Is it ever acceptable to ask for your old job back? Or should I just accept my gigantic mistake, move on, and pray to God that I can convince someone to hire me in spite of this? <Q> You can apply for your old job, assuming you haven't burnt your bridges. <S> You will have to prove your worth to your old employer like any other interview candidate, as well as answer the thorny questions like "why should we employ you given that you might leave again soon?" <S> or "what has changed your mind since leaving?". <S> I would also suggest treating it like any other application: be cool and professional. <S> If a new employer asks why you left before signing a new contract, just be honest. <S> Again reiterate the value you aim to bring to your new employer and that you would be committed to them if you got the new job. <S> It is not such a black mark. <S> Good luck! <S> Edit: <S> James Caan wrote an article on this topic recently (6-Aug-2015), if you are interested: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/i-hate-my-job-can-have-old-one-back-please-james-caan-cbe <S> The article mentions selling points for your old employer to re-hire you, e.g. cultural fit <A> Going back is acceptable but personally I would only do it if I thought I could change things. <S> So - before you do - try to learn a new skill in the time you have and knowing what was wrong or what was frustrating you should inform what you concentrate on in the mean time. <A> While I have never gone back, I did appologize to my first manager about a year after I quit. <S> Like the OP, I was frustrated, young, and stupid. <S> I learned a lot from every job I have had and don't really regret taking or leaving any of them though. <S> Be humble, when interviewing if you get the change, and definitely in the cover letter when applying. <S> State how you made a rash decision and have learned from it and are now wiser for it. <A> The worst they can say is no. <S> However you can predict what their answer will be based on several factors. <S> For one, and probably most importantly, if they still have a position open. <S> And secondly, going to largely depend on how you left the company. <S> If you put in your two weeks, and left on good notice, then it's going to come down really to whether or not they have a position open. <S> That means giving them a two weeks notice, and never telling them that you dislike them or anything. <S> However, for future employers don't tell them that you were "frustrated" with your last job. <S> Instead, just say you left to pursue new opportunities. <S> Remember, don't ever say anything bad about your last company.
| It is not the end of the world quitting your job before you have another lined up (though you are correct that it is not ideal). When you quit a job, always make sure you don't burn any bridges.
|
How can I measure if a bad situation is good learning or wasted time? In December I joined a startup to introduce a Bioinformatics team: first the infrastracture, then little by little the team would be hired. I have been there for more than 8 months and I have been having trouble with IT support. Everybody else has problems with IT, and the last update I heard was: "your needs will have fit into the global strategy of the company". However, I am the only guy doing what I do. I have a server with 1Tb without backup, and when I ask for more storage and backup my manager tells me that "I want everything". More recently, another senior manager told me that there is no money for Bioinformatics and that there won't be money to hire anybody else for my team until the company becomes profitable: they would rather cut projects than increase my support. I could focus on my technical skills, but there is not even money for proper IT support.My manager says "people won't ask you how many programs you wrote, but how you reacted in this situation". I have been telling myself that this is good opportunity to learn about larger organisations, lobbying and politics. However, right now my role is very different from the team leader role that was discussed during my hiring. My manager recently said: "there is no money for now but things will be alright; stop making noise and complaining about IT with others, if you have any problem you must only talk to me". My question is: how can I measure whether this is actually a good learning opportunity or if I am deluding myself? <Q> My question is: how can I measure whether this is actually a good learning opportunity or if I am deluding myself? <S> "Learning opportunity" is the politically correct way of saying "shitty job". <S> You will not learn how to be good at leading a team when there is no team. <S> You will not learn how to run a proper backup on your data, when there is no way to backup. <S> You might learn how to retype code and reimport data real fast and under pressure once the server breaks 2 days before the big presentation. <S> Is that really the skill you want to learn? <S> If you find none without the skills you would learn there, then it's an opportunity. <S> If you can find a better job without the skills that you would learn, run. <A> You must do two things immediately: <S> Decide that the money crunch is reality for at least the near term. <S> Determine how you will address those shortfalls with minimal (or zero funds). <S> Determine what disasters can be lessened or mitigated in that environment. <S> Don't bad mouth the company or a part of the company. <S> Your manager told you to stop. <S> Now try and become a productive part of the company without being a complainer. <S> Now that you have addressed those two issues move on to trying to grow the company. <S> You need to either create business in bioinformatics or in some other part of their business. <S> This growth may help create your team, or at least preserve your job. <S> If you can do that, and in a couple of years you have grown into a solid team member then you have learned how to adapt to your situation. <S> If you can't survive that long you still may have learned something. <S> If you don't want to do those things, your goal is simpler: Keep employed long enough to find a new job. <A> I think people that talk about whether something is a "good learning opportunity" often forget that this needs to be relative to a benchmark. <S> Many people, including myself, can still learn even if we were somehow relegated to cleaning toilets rather than bioinformatics, coding, etc. <S> However, frankly speaking, I would not be a good janitor <S> and I would not enjoy being one. <S> Lose-lose. <S> Is your current situation enabling you to learn above what you would be learning in an "average" situation you could and want to obtain? <S> It sounds like it's probably true <S> you don't know enough about how to work in organizations. <S> However, larger organizations are quite different than smaller ones. <S> Only you can make the call if it's worth the time to get familiar with the high levels of bureaucracy and maneuvering that goes on in a large organization. <S> If you see yourself continuing on in similarly structured organizations, then it'd be worth it. <S> Despite what another answer says, I don't see any evidence you are "bad-mouthing". <S> It's reasonable to ask for additional resources you need to do your job. <S> If the situation has changed sufficiently that you can no longer do anything resembling the job you were hired for, I don't really see a compelling reason to stay. <S> Nonetheless, if your boss is really a pointy-haired type, and will interpret reasonable requests as "bad-mouthing" and say you're not a team-player, <S> etc. <S> , then you need to bow to him/her and act like you're the one at fault. <S> Then do whatever work you can while secretly planning a move to another company. <A> Maybe some things aren't meant to be a "learning" opportunity. <S> Rather it is what it is <S> and there is nothing to be "learned" from it. <S> It sounds like your manager is telling you to take the "chillax" approach to things. <S> So the IT department can't handle your request. <S> That sounds great. <S> Just tell that to whoever requested it. <S> Just say, "Hey, I just submitted something to IT and they're saying I have to give a reason to fit the goal of the company. <S> Here's what I said..." Then just chillax. <S> Your part of it is done. <S> I would say bureaucratic nonsense is hardly a "learning experience" because everywhere is different. <S> I suppose you could "learn" something by it. <S> First, don't expect anything immediately and think of it like oiling a really jammed up gear. <S> Just slowly drip oil in it, and eventually it'll loosen up. <S> Might take a long time, sure, but the most important thing is not to get frustrated by it. <S> Just slowly keep at it, and slowly things will start moving. <S> It sounds like your boss is cluing you in that things aren't suppose to move fast just yet <S> so you shouldn't worry too much. <S> He didn't say you were doing a bad job, just complaining about it too much because you want things done too soon when it isn't suppose to.
| If something is called a learning opportunity, just try to find a better job.
|
No contract until the first day I have just accepted an offer for a new position, and have recently been filling in all the paperwork required. I'm relocating to a new city over 2 hours away, so my current employer has been aware I'm leaving for a while now. However in the offer letter to me from the new employer, they state that I will not receive or sign a contract until my starting day. This is not something I have experience before and realise it opens me up to complications and potentially no job if I turn up on the day and they immediately dismiss me. At least with a contract they would have to give me a notice period. Also what if I don't agree to some of the terms? This leaves me little room to negotiate. I doubt the company would do this to me, they are very large and in the public sector. They are also currently employing contractors to the role I would take, so I'm sure they are desperate to get me in and save their costs. Is this very normal and am I worrying over nothing? I'm in the UK, if it helps. <Q> You are probably worrying over nothing. <S> Large organisations often take far to long to get the basics sorted out. <S> I assume that you've got some form of written confirmation from them? <S> Even just an email saying "looking forward to seeing you on Monday" will do. <S> If you are worried, drop the HR department an email saying something like: <S> Just a note to confirm that you want me to start on DD/MM/YYY for the position of Senior Pizza Chef. <A> I certainly wouldn't regard this as common practice in the UK; certainly not in my industry (IT). <S> I don't really see why a company would ever do this, unless they've been burned in the past by people seeing the contract terms and being scared off, so they're now attempting to keep those terms from the potential employees as long as possible. <S> Any employer/employee relationship has to work for both sides of the deal, and attempting to hide the details of that relationship from one side or other of the party doesn't seem to be a productive step to me. <S> Personally , I'd never accept an offer without seeing the contract terms - I'd probably go as far as to say that you don't really have an offer until you've seen the contract; as you say, there may be terms that you find unacceptable. <A> I don't know if it is common <S> but I have signed my contract on the day I started at my last two jobs. <S> I think you're worrying needlessly about this as I assume certain key points like pay are in your offer letter? <S> You may not have anything in writing, but a contract will still exist. <S> This is because your agreement to work for your employer and your employer’s agreement to pay you for your work forms a contract. <S> Your employer does have to give you a written statement within two months of you starting work. <S> The statement must contain certain terms and conditions. <S> So legally you don't even have to have a written contract at all, although how it differs from a written statement you'd have to ask a lawyer. <S> I wouldn't imagine any respectable company doesn't give you a proper contract. <S> Generally, you and your employer can agree to whatever terms you wish to be in the contract, but you cannot agree to a contractual term which gives you less rights than you have under law (see under heading How the rights in an employee’s contract relate to rights in law). <S> So they can't offer you less than the legal minimum conditions even if you're willing to agree to them. <S> If the job offer was subject to conditions, for example, the employer needed to take up references or you were required to have a medical, and these were unsatisfactory, you will not be able to make a claim against the employer for any compensation. <S> This is because there was never any contract of employment. <S> There was only a conditional offer of a job and the conditions have not been met. <S> This is a breach of contract because you were offered the job with no conditions, you accepted the offer and then the offer was withdrawn. <S> So if your offer letter contains no clauses you could try to claim compensation from them. <S> However I really think you'd only need to cross that bridge when you came to it. <S> All quotes were taken from citizens advice. <S> link
| There is always a contract between an employee and employer. If the job offer was unconditional, which is unusual, you may be able to claim compensation in the employment tribunal or the county court (Court of Session in Scotland) for breach of contract.
|
Should I list startups on my resume when applying to top-notch companies I am a computer science undergraduate with no formal work experience. But currently I am working for two startups which are currently in their initial phases. I am a stakeholder in both and working as full stack developer. I dont have any contracts or commitments with any. Actually they are both not-so-technical startups, so I just want to give them a working mobile app and backend and get on with my life. Amazon is visiting my campus tomorrow and I would like to work with them as an intern. Will listing these startups be harmful in my application to Amazon or any other company? Actually I have worked quite a lot for both on apache cordova and don't really have anything else to write on my resume. Any suggestions? Thanks. Update: I eventually put it on my resume and got into Amazon. :) <Q> If I had two people in front of me with exactly the same CV, except that one had this experience with two startup companies, and the other didn't have any of that experience, who would I prefer? <S> Obviously the one with the added experience. <S> Every experience is experience and every experience in your CV <S> makes you more likely to get an interview. <S> Worst case would be that someone values experience in a startup slightly lower than the same experience in a bigger company, but it will still be regarded a lot higher than not having that experience at all. <S> So you should definitely add this experience to your CV. <A> What else are you going to put in your resume? <S> It would be blank otherwise. <S> You say you have no formal work experience, but apparently you do. <S> You've worked for a couple of startups. <S> So of course you put the startups on your resume. <S> It's what will separate you from everyone else in your situation, and when looking for a job, that is the goal. <A> Since you have no formal work experience other than your work with these startups, I would certainly list them as evidence of how smart and hardworking you are. <S> Good companies (and all the top-notch companies I know of) understand that good potential employees tend to be busy people, doing a lot of things at the same time. <S> Be ready to talk about this work, what you mean by "being a stakeholder" and what you expect to continue to do for them (if anything).
| Should I list startups on my resume when applying to top-notch companies The top-notch companies I know hire people who are smart and hardworking. Many employers aren't phased by good people having "side gigs" although a few are.
|
How can I share a publication about me in linkedin I'm a computer engineering student and working for a company in cyber security field. I did something about cyber security 5 years ago and some authors mentioned my name about that in two books and a magazine. How can I share these in my linkedin profile? Under Publications or Honors & Awards? <Q> There is nothing that forces you to list it under one or the other, but for Honors&Awards, I would typically expect to see awards you had won, rather than your work being referenced, so make it easy for employers or those reading your LinkedIn profile and place it under Publications, and specifically mention that your work was referenced in books <S> x and y by authors a and b. <A> I did something about cyber security 5 years ago and some authors mentioned my name about that in two books and a magazine. <S> How can I share these in my linkedin profile? <S> This "something about cyber security" should be detailed in your Summary section, since that is what you actually did. <S> The mentions could also be written about in the Summary as well. <S> Something like "... <S> and it has been referenced in 'This book' by Author X, 'That book' by Author Y, and 'This magazine article'..." perhaps with links to them. <S> Publications and Honors & Awards are for your publications, and your honors & awards - neither of which apply in this case. <A> If you are looking for an opportunity in the academics domain, then you can include in the summary section , and the achievements section . <S> The description in the Achievements section, can go like this: Cited in ________________ by _____ et al. <S> _______Write the summary of the paper here_________ <S> And in the Summary section, you can include this: Should be preferably in a single line, rather than how you explained in the achievements section. <S> In case, you are looking for a job outside the academics domain, the just include in the achievements section, and include a single line in the summary section, which can go like this: Cited by three published cyber security publications.
| Have been cited in the _________ by _______, which deals with _______
|
Professional designations and degrees on business cards and e-mail signatures I'm going to be creating some simple business cards for myself going forward, and would like some advice on the addition of my degrees and professional designations to the card. So far, the planned text, aside of the graphics, phone numbers, e-mail address, etc, would look like (using made-up names): Alessandro Giuliani, P.Eng, Ph.D, M.Eng, FIEEESomething something something consultant The P.Eng. designation is critical, as it means I am a "true" engineer, have the requisite supervised experience, no criminal record, have completed the law and ethics training, and so forth. In Canada, one is not allowed to have the word "engineer" in one's job title or on his/her business cards without earning the P.Eng. designation. It would be like calling one's self a "medical doctor" without the right credentials, and you can be fined heavily for it. At least one academic degree should be listed, but I opted to list both my PhD and Masters in Engineering, as in my neck of the woods (North America), at least in the tech sector, there is a common trend where people will do just a Bachelors and a PhD, or sometimes just a PhD, usually from a degree mill. The common sentiment is that people who have taken this route are "professional students" with no relevant job skills, or the degree is meaningless if it smells like a degree mill; while one with the Bachelors, Masters, and PhD plus at least so many years of experience can actually be hired for real work. I've even known several individuals who don't even include their PhD on CVs/resumes for this reason. I opted to leave out the Bachelors of Engineering since I feel it would be overkill. Finally, I feel the FIEEE designation shows a lot of committment to my field, and opted to include it. So, my question is as follows: Does this seem to be overkill or snooty in professional or academic circles in North America? My main concern is listing two degrees, and using the format described above has already gotten me some vicious comments on e-mail threads for being "elitist", though the individuals who made those comments tend to exhibit anti-academic sentiments anyways, so I'm probably just (unintentionally) rubbing salt in a wound or hitting a nerve. Also, if anyone could weight in on whether this is acceptable in Western Europe (I sometimes work with Field Application Engineers in France, UK, and Italy), it would be very helpful. My plan is to use this advice to create multiple sets of business cards and/or e-mail signatures if there is enough variance in cultural attitudes to justify it. Thank you! <Q> It seems your question can be answered with the old cliche "You can't make everyone happy". <S> That's something that's very important to consider with personal branding. <S> Are some people going to think you're an academic intellectual elitist with your large degree listings? <S> Sure maybe... <S> But at the same time aren't a lot of people going to find your degree set as something that designates you as a great contractor to give their engineering department (or whatever they need consulting on) <S> the boost forward <S> it really needs? <S> Probably. <S> I think you have two pretty good options here... <S> You could experiment and collect metrics from your personal brand with different levels of degree suffixes, and see which one gains you the most customers and engagements with as much control of other variables as possible. <S> (What I would do) <S> Is you can kind of apply the "have your cake and eat it too <S> " principle by drawing minimum attention to the degree principle, which seems to (in my opinion) say "Hey I got all these awesome degrees <S> but I'm totally not snooty about it". <S> That best way to do that is to either put a more subtle color contrast on the suffix and/or make them smaller. <S> For example: Hopefully that helped and to harp on that main point, you really can't please everyone, just make sure you're pleasing the most amount of people possible. <A> Unfortunately this depends a bit on context, culture and the recipient. <S> For a while I had actually two set of business cards, one with the PhD and one with PhD off. <S> PhD is useful in Europe and when interacting with the press and public communication. <S> PhD in day to day business in the US feels pretentious so it's better to leave it off. <S> Business cards are cheap, so there is no problem in carrying two sets. <S> I would leave the Master's off. <S> The PhD already implies that you have a master (and a bachelor, and a high school degree etc.), so unless it's in a different field or major, it doesn't add any information. <A> I'm assuming you are approaching this problem as an independent contractor trying to sell your services directly to potential customers. <S> You are not selling your credentials. <S> You are selling services or solutions. <S> If your competition with fewer credentials is offering better and cheaper solutions to your potential customers, you have a problem that your credentials alone will not solve. <S> Your crendentials may make you a more trustworthy supplier to new customers, but after the first job, trustworthiness will be defined purely on how well you have already delivered. <S> If you get word-of-mouth recommendations from customers, you can be assured it is not because you have 4 acronyms after your name but rather because you provided a great solution or service. <S> If you approach it from this angle, you will see that emphasizing your credentials is important, but it should not be the central focus of your message. <S> You should mention your credentials clearly on your website in a section about your background. <S> You should also place enough emphasis on your background and experience to be taken seriously in initial conversations. <S> Your credentials are a small part of this. <S> The main focus of your website and initial conversations, though, should be about how you will meet the potential customer's needs. <S> You should focus on how great your solutions are, how you have provided similar solutions to other customers before, etc. <S> Once you have a great initial conversation and a great website to entice potential customers, then you should find that your e-mail signature and your business cards become more of a reminder to people of who you are and how to contact you rather than a sales vehicle in their own right. <S> In this context, it should not be necessary to include your credentials everywhere.
| If you simply can't resist putting credentials in your signature and on your business cards, try to limit yourself to one that best conveys how having that credential will ensure your solutions are top notch.
|
How do I decline giving potential employer my book of business? I recently received a job offer as outside sales for a company that is in the same market as the one I am currently employed with. Due to the book of business I currently have (my list of my clients, contacts, leads etc.), they have requested I go through my client list with them to see crossover potential. How do I protect myself but at the same time not appear to be difficult? I am a team player, but without a contract being signed with them am unsure that handing them a client list is in my best interest. <Q> they have requested I go through my client list with them to see crossover potential. <S> How do I protect myself but at the same time not appear to be difficult? <S> I am a team player, but without a contract being signed with them am unsure that handing them a client list is in my best interest. <S> First, your current contract may prohibit such a move. <S> And second, even if it isn't prohibited by your contract you simply cannot give away a valuable asset to someone who may or may not become your employer. <S> Ignoring the ethicality (or lack of ethicality) in this situation, you shouldn't give any clients' information to a non-employer. <S> You could offer to go through your list on your own, <S> match it up with their list, and give them a number of clients that might potentially become their client. <S> No names, just the count of clients. <S> And on your own, not "with them". <S> Perhaps they would like to give away their client list to someone who isn't yet an employee, perhaps not. <S> (I suspect not.) <S> If your current contract allows, you could suggest that the client names would of course follow, once you are hired. <S> Depending on your current contract, and the norms within your industry and your locale, you need to decide if this is ethical, and if not, if this is the kind of company you would want to work for. <S> It smells foul to me, but I understand in some domains this is rather common practice. <A> Without a signed contract <S> I would absolutely not be handing anything over to your new employer. <S> I would strongly urge you to check the restrictions first, then you can say something to your prospective employer along the lines of: I'm not trying to be difficult, but unless I have a signed contract then I can't really discuss my current client base. <S> According to my contract with my existing employer, I also have [x] restrictions placed on what information I can release to a competitor. <S> We can discuss any potential leads when I get started and look at following them up. <S> Really, if you have a future employer who is putting you in this position then I would question if it's you <S> they're after or merely your client list. <A> The other answers already explain that divulging your client list may break your employment contract. <S> However, there may be complications even if your contract does not explicitly forbid it. <S> In most jurisdictions, there is an implied general duty not to act against the interest of your employer. <S> E.g. in German law, there is the crime of "Untreue" (literally "unfaithfulness"), in UK/USA <S> I think the terms are "duty of fidelity" and "breach of trust". <S> So even if there is nothing in your contract, you may expose yourself to lawsuits if you divulge information your employer wants to keep private. <S> Note that this duty generally extends even after the end of your contract, possibly indefinitely (details vary). <S> So even after you have signed on with the new employer, your old employer could possibly sue you if you divulge information. <S> So unless you can be reasonably certain that giving out the information is legal, you should probably err on the side of caution and explain that you are both morally and legally required to keep the information private.
| There is no way I would give a client list from my current employer to a company with whom I am not employed. You also need to look at your termination clauses in your existing contract to see if there are any restrictions on taking your client list with you.
|
Do I tell recruiter whose offer I will decline, the details of the offer that I have accepted? After working with a recruiter on an offer (and getting the offer) I got a comparable offer at my current company. I decided to decline the recruiter's offer and accept my current employer's counter offer. How can I prepare myself for the "I decline your offer" conversation where I am fairly sure the recruiter will ask me why I chose to decline the offer and what were the details (PTO, salary, etc) of the offer that I chose to accept. Suppose the recruiter asks: What were the details of the other offer that you've accepted? Do I say that "I chose the other offer because it paid $X and had Y PTO"? Or do I dance around the subject and say "I chose the other offer because it was better and suited me well" and keep replying in similar manner for as long as is needed while the recruiter persists? To ask a different way, are there downsides in me providing the details of the offer I accepted? What if the recruiter asks: My offer is willing to counter, what will make you accept my offer? For example the recruiter may ask me what will make me reconsider and accept their offer. Knowing the limits of the company and previous conversations, I could answer that "there is no package that you can realistically offer me to accept the offer", and if a counter offer comes anyway I can consider it. To ask a different way, are there downsides to trying to "come up" with an offer to present to recruiter, which if recruiter meets that offer, than you will accept it? My mind however is much more firmly on the offer I already accepted, so the recruiter's offer is a losing one. I don't want to drag it on any longer. <Q> Short answer: <S> You are under no obligation at all to tell them why or how much you accepted. <S> If you have decided for sure to stay where you are, simply inform the recruiter that you have decided not to accept the offer and have taken on other opportunities. <S> You don't need to say that you are staying where you are, and if asked how much just say that you would prefer not to say. <S> You control how much you wish to disclose to a recruiter, especially if you have decided to decline their offer. <S> Tell them politely and firmly that you do not wish to accept the offer and don't let the pressure you into telling them more than you are comfortable with. <S> Above all, if it's a phone call then keep it short <S> so they have no opportunity to try to quibble with you :) <A> We have to assume that there was no contract between you and the recruiter, especially one where you would pay their fee if they found you a position that met certain criteria. <S> If there is a contract between you and the recruiter you may have to give a reason why you are not accepting a position that meets the conditions set forth in the contract. <S> They want to know why because the contract may stipulate payment for negotiating the offer. <S> If there is no contract between you and the recruiter then they work either directly or indirectly for the company that was interested in hiring you. <S> The company and the recruiter would like to know why you are turning them down, so they can craft offers or negotiations in the future that will result in more completed acquisitions. <S> Without that contract you have to go no further than a polite rejection. <S> It can be via email or by phone. <S> But details are not required. <A> To ask a different way, are there downsides to trying to "come up" with an offer to present to recruiter, which if recruiter meets that offer, than you will accept it? <S> First you need to decide if you are offering yourself to the highest bidder or not. <S> If you are, then you can present the details of the offer you are planning to accept (or at least the relevant details), then tell the recruiter "If you can beat that, I'll join your company. <S> " <S> " You might choose to indicate that you have decided to stay at your current company and not include any of their offer details. <S> My mind however is much more firmly on the offer I already accepted, so the recruiter's offer is a losing one. <S> I don't want to drag it on any longer. <S> If it's truly the case that you don't want it to drag on, then just end it. <S> Thank them for the offer, but decline and don't suggest that you want another counter-offer. <S> Sometimes our ego gets in the way. <S> We are flattered at the considerations and might like more. <S> But I find it best to understand what I really want <S> and once I get it, I focus on the future and don't look back. <A> I would say you've decided to keep your current job and just really don't want to change/leave - "bird in the hand" sort of thing. <S> You don't want it to look like you were using the other company to negotiate a better offer. <S> It's none of their business. <S> You don't really need to go too deep. <S> If you've been comfortable with the negotiation process and want to give them some feedback to help them find another suitable candidate, you can do that without any details about your situation/counter-offer.
| If you are not up for bidding, then there is no requirement on your part to tell this recruiter anything other than "Thank you for your consideration, but I've decided not to accept your company's offer. They may ask but you don't have to tell.
|
Is it appropriate to use link texts instead of full URLs on a resume? A HTML link with link text (anchor) would be useless if the resume is printed out. Like this: Google instead of just the URL http://google.com . In this era, can we safely assume that our links will be accessible and won't it cost me if I use link text? <Q> Assume your resume will be printed out and read (and sorted for interest) in printed form. <S> Offering URIs may be useful if someone wants to follow up on something after you've gotten past the first few layers of screening, but if they aren't visible in plaintext they may get lost before reaching the person who would be interested. <S> Also remember that some folks may be reading this with assistive technology. <S> I don't know how sophisticated tools for blind users are these days; I would hope <S> they'd be able to handle hypertext by now <S> but I'm not sure I'd want to count on that. <S> Or offer both a "live" version and a plaintext-friendly version? <A> As an alternative to the other great answers here, you could always link the text in your resume, but also place a footnote label next to it, like this: Google [1] Then in a footnote area, either in the page footer or at the end of the document, include a line like: [1] http://www.google.com <S> Not only does this provide accessibility if when the resume is printed out, but it also provides extra transparency when it is being viewed electronically (for those that aren't already savvy enough to know how to reveal link targets themselves). <A> When generating a CV/Resume assume it is never in the format you want. <S> Some companies will convert to the file format they want. <S> Others will automatically pull the info they find into a database. <S> Many will ask you to cut and paste the paragraphs into their web form, one text box at a time. <S> Make sure that the required info makes it through these processes. <S> There is no need to make links to the companies you have worked for. <S> Also few will click on github or other sites that will store your portfolio, unles they have specifically asked for those links. <S> A new problem I have run into is that my corporate email is now configured to mangle all external URLs so that they can't be clicked, and that you have to carefully cut the good part so that you can paste it into the browser. <A> In this era, can we safely assume that our links will be accessible and won't it cost me if I use link text? <S> No. <S> You cannot assume that. <S> Even in this era, resumes are very often converted to PDFs and/or printed or go through other steps that could remove a hyperlink. <S> In my experience many recruiters and HR groups don't take the steps necessary to preserve all formatting aspects of submitted documents. <S> Why assume anything and take that chance? <S> Far better to use the full URL http://google.com to ensure that your links are readable in all cases.
| A URL that is so ugly and long that you want to hide behind anchor text, may limit the number of people who will be willing to type it out when they are only given an image of the resume.
|
Reapplying to a job that I was given an offer for but turned down at the time I interviewed for a job and it worked out well but at the time I was given the offer, I decided to turn down the offer. However now I am interested in the position. What is the best way to touch base with the recruiter and see if the offer is still available? Or is this not possible at all? EDIT: Also to clarify the focus of this question is not whether or not to take the job. Sorry if that was unclear before. The focus is you had an offer that you declined and are now interested in pursuing. <Q> Would it be better to be vocal and ask for more time to think about the offer when I have been given it? <S> What happens if it isn't in the foreseeable future that I would be able to accept the offer? <S> (i.e. months) <S> While anything is possible, as a hiring manager I can't think of a time when I would have held a candidate's position for a period of months. <S> That's particularly true if the reason for the delay was "too many things going on in my life and thinking about relocating". <S> Those are likely both red flags for hiring managers. <S> Let's say I did end up rejecting the offer <S> and I wanted back in. <S> Would I reach out to my recruiter and/or the manager? <S> When it happened with me, I called the hiring manager. <S> Overall <S> what exactly is the process for hiring someone who previously turned down an offer? <S> Are they even considered? <S> Every company is different. <S> Usually, if the position is still open, you could indeed be considered. <S> But sometimes managers feel that they were rejected, and thus wouldn't re-consider. <S> Other managers wouldn't trust you, feeling that you changed your mind once and might change your mind again, and thus wouldn't reconsider. <S> To be re-considered, you would want to have a great reason for declining originally, and good explanation why things are very different now. <S> In my case, I declined an offer (because I felt that the position wasn't quite the fit that I was looking for). <S> I got laid off two weeks later, and called up the hiring manager to ask if I could be re-considered. <S> I was, and I got hired. <S> I planned to give it my best try to make it work. <S> But my intuition about the company proved correct, and I ended up leaving within 2 years. <S> For me, it wasn't a career highlight. <A> The job is probably no longer open; they have almost certainly hired the next qualified candidate from their list, unless this is something that requires exceptionally rare skills. <S> Forget it and proceed with other applications. <S> This may include applying for other positions at the same company. <A> Would it be better to be vocal and ask for more time to think about the offer when I have been given it? <S> What happens if it isn't in the foreseeable future that I would be able to accept the offer? <S> (i.e. months) <S> You can certainly ask for months to consider the offer, however most employers would scoff at that sort of thing. <S> In my experience, managers want an answer as soon as possible so they can start planning your onboarding. <S> What is more common is accepting the offer with a start date that is a while away (this is especially common for students about to graduate). <S> This would, technically, buy you a few months' time and give you the ability to change your mind (or not!) <S> about accepting the offer. <S> Keep in mind that if you accept an offer and then renege, you may end up burning bridges. <S> In my opinion, politely turning down the offer and explaining why you're turning it down is the best bet. <S> This will let the boss know that you did go in with the intent of accepting, and therefore weren't wasting their time. <S> This also opens up the possibility of the boss saying "Well, if your circumstances change, let us know. <S> We'd love to have you on board." <S> Let's say I did end up rejecting the offer <S> and I wanted back in. <S> Would I reach out to my recruiter and/or the manager? <S> I feel like a lot of managers might be upset if you bypass all of the hiring procedures to contact them directly; the procedures are in place for a reason, after all. <S> If the position is closed, you've wasted their time by making them read an email about a position that is already filled; if the position is still open, you might have saved the manager time/effort by contacting them directly (they may not want to interview you again, and they can stop interviewing other candidates.) <S> I would go through the recruiter, but I tend to play it safe.
| If there's any doubt about whether the position is still open, I'd go through your recruiter.
|
Can my employer make me drink alcohol? I work at a company with a rowdy atmosphere that includes pressure to drink alcohol. Multiple people at the company told me verbatim that I would even been judged negatively in terms of hiring advancement if I didn't. During the first week there is a company ritual for new hires to drink in front of the entire company which I hesitantly participated in. A less senior person said I could opt out of this, but very senior individuals did not say anything to that effect and implied the opposite by pouring my 3-4 drinks worth of alcohol and telling me to drink it in one go. Outside of work I very rarely drink even in social situations but I felt obligated to because it sounded like my job would be very uncomfortable if I didn't. Partly this is because of an alcoholic relative and likeliness that I might become one has made me very conscious of it. The culture has also continued to be a little boozy and I'm unsure of what to do because there seems to be some expectation to stay for alcohol related events that include some continued pressure to partake. My question is what should I do? I want to just say no to the alcohol culture and I have been after that initial day, but I'm concerned about what my coworkers said about not drinking and I still feel uncomfortable. <Q> No, your employer cannot make you drink alcohol (unless your job is wine tasting). <S> I have worked at companies where alcohol use was a problem but have never encountered a culture where abstaining would hurt your career. <A> It is forbidden and could even be construed as abuse. <S> Inside the Office <S> Now, what happens inside the office in terms of social pressure, well, that is up to the company. <S> Some companies have a no tolerance alcohol policy while others are more easy going. <S> I would suggest talking to an HR representative. <S> It's their job to deal with things like this. <S> Politely Declining <S> A good excuse to your boss would be to say that drinking alcohol will result in a poor job performance. <S> As long as you still socialize and have a drink in your hand (non-alcoholic, of course), people will push past the fact that you don't drink. <S> They key is just to be firm and assertive. <S> Not only does it help you, but it also shows people that you are someone who stands firm with his opinions, which, in my opinion, is a sign of a good employee. <S> Warning Never drink if you do not feel comfortable. <A> My question is what should I do? <S> There are a few aspects to every job you need to consider. <S> The first is whether the work is of the type you want to perform. <S> The second is whether the environment is a good fit for where you want to be. <S> What you're saying is that the environment isn't a good fit for you. <S> If that's the case then you need to seek employment elsewhere. <S> Certainly you could investigate whether the laws of your particular region are being violated in some way. <S> Assuming they are (and I'm not convinced of that) then you could pursue some type of legal remedy. <S> But, let's get real. <S> It sounds like you haven't been at the job very long <S> and it's not as if the culture has suddenly shifted under you. <A> One point that may seem unimportant to you but will be important if you get HR or a lawyer involved; They are not forcing you to drink. <S> It sounds like they are exerting some pretty serious pressure not to decline, but in the end <S> it was and is your choice to drink. <S> The question for you now is do you still want to continue with a career at this company. <S> If not then you have little to lose by declining future drinking requests. <S> I would simply decline to engage in these after hour activities, and start or continue to look for a new company. <S> If you do do want to stay with this company, you need to decide if it is more important to appear to be one of the gang to improve your chances of promotion, or if you are willing to take a risk and stay outside. <S> If you want to be one of the gang, the easy way is simply to pretend to drink, but do things like nurse your first drink all night long, or replace it at your first opportunity with soda or juice. <S> When offered a drink simply shake your head and say no thank you I do not like drinking. <S> That will probably be enough. <S> If it is not then you just need to stay strong and say no, but remain courteous and ask them to respect your decision. <S> When people get inebriated they may forget you don't drink or say something discourteous, just shake it off and take the high road.
| If the high pressure to drink persists after the first few events, I would consider avoiding the events if possible, and maybe reconsider if this is the correct path for you to take. Legally In the eyes of the law, your employer is absolutely not allowed to make you drink alcohol. If colleagues indicate to you that abstaining will damage your reputation, this means you are working in a very unhealthy culture and should consider making a career change. If you are willing to stand out there as an individual, try to do so discreetly first. If you start feeling shunned or uncomfortable, involve the HR rep or simply resign. So your personal best bet would be to find an environment that is more suited to your disposition.
|
How to write an appealing internship offer? I have recently sent an internship proposition to my manager, to recruit an intern for next year. The problem is that it's filled with technical considerations that I'm sure my manager appreciates, but it is certainly not something I would consider as appealing for any student. I'm pretty sure the subject is interesting, but how do I make it look appealing in the description? Do I include a list of tools (programming languages in this case) that are likely to be used? I don't want to have someone that has to learn from scratch a new language, but I'm open to suggestion concerning which language to use (among 2 or 3 though). I feel like listing the languages I have in mind could scare some student, thinking that they're proficient in only one language and not the others, so it wouldn't be a good match. Do I describe the internship at a task per task precision? That will show that I've given this subject some thought and have a good idea on how it should go, but there is a lot of tasks that I've identified, so it may scare someone thinking it will be too much work. Do I try to focus more on the output of the internship, like improving the team efficiency, developing the next reference code/tool/plugin in a certain field and topic? The objective is to attract as many good candidates (graduate students (last year of engineering school in France)) as possible. I'm sure I have missed some topics. <Q> Do I include a list of tools (programming languages in this case) that are likely to be used ? <S> I don't want to have someone that has to learn from scratch a new language, but I'm open to suggestion concerning which language to use (among 2 or 3 though). <S> I feel like listing the languages I have in mind could scare some student, thinking that they're proficient in only one language and not the others, so it wouldn't be a good match. <S> You can write : " <S> Proficient in at least one of the following: Language A ; Language B; Language C" <S> Do I describe the internship at a task per task precision ? <S> That will show that I've given this subject some thought and have a good idea on how it should go, but there is a lot of tasks that I've identified, so it may scare someone thinking it will be too much work. <S> Focus on phases / broad topics. <S> In my field, that would be someting like that : - Gather requirements and needs- <S> Design the product architecture- <S> Develop the product- <S> Test and verify <S> Do I try to focus more on the output of the internship, like improving the team efficiency, developping the next reference code|tool|plugin in a certain field and topic ? <S> As suggested by Lilienthal, the beginning of the offer should include this aspect, as well as a brief explanation of the business case (if it's a single project) or of the processes that the team covers (if it's more of an operational role). <S> Not scaring students Students tend to lack self-confidence when it comes to entering the office world <S> , so you may want to rank the skills depending on their importance to the project so that they don't run away just because they don't possess skills that are actually secondary. <S> Only "require" skills that are truly necessary. <S> List the other skills as "optionnal" , "nice to have", "preferred" orwhatever wording you prefer. <S> Sum-up Introduce the business case / <S> processes covered by the team Introduce the objective and outputs of this internship <S> Explain main phases of the project Needed skills and languages as described above <A> I'll start off by highlighting <S> I'm not an engineer but <S> a tech recruiter and the phrasing you have used is a bit different to here in Australia... <S> but I would usually separate a "job advertisement" from a "job description". <S> If you view the application and interview process as a funnel whereby you reduce and filter a broad range of potential candidates down to the very best - the role of your 1st stage, the job advertisement or 'offer' is about attraction and marketing. <S> It should have the tone and information required to attract your initial wide pool of people. <S> The actual level of detail that is best for you may vary depending on your audience, your position/ company requirement and the market conditions so in some cases I will go quite technical. <S> In terms of providing task-by-task level of detail, for intern/ junior roles I would usually use that after the initial broader communication. <S> This might be sending the detailed spec / 'job description' document and information to candidates you invite to interview or introducing it to them during the later stages of the interview process. <S> Regarding specifying technologies when you are hiring for aptitude - just be clear at multiple stages and across both written and in person communication. <S> An example would be for one team at my company where I hire graduates and intern programmers who will be working with C# mainly. <S> Because a lot of Australian universities do not teach / provide licenses for students to work with the .NET stack, we often look for people who have either Java experience but communicate they will be learning and working with C#. <S> This might be similar to your situation in that what we are really looking for is strong aptitude with programming and understanding of OOP. <A> Examples might be, depending on your specific company situation and capabilities: ability to acquire additional skills, such as Java for a Web developer, or DBA skills for a programmer; exposure to an established company culture, typical for your country or industry; ability to improve "soft" skills, such as working as part of a large multifunctional team; time management; project management; client interactions; formal or informal mentoring provided by senior colleagues; company-sponsored training programs; flexibility of work hours (if available); <S> This is based on the questions asked by intern candidates that I was recently interviewing. <A> I'm still a student <S> so i'll be giving my view on the matter. <S> Do I include a list of tools Please do! <S> i like to know what i'm getting myself into. <S> It also gives me a general idea if the assignment fits my goals and ambitions in life. <S> Do I describe the internship at a task per task precision? <S> No, i prefer a description of it as a whole. <S> Do I try to focus more on the output of the internship, like improving the team efficiency, developing the next reference code/tool/plugin in a certain field and topic? <S> Well, it would be rather nice to know what i'm going to be doing, isn't it? <S> i will not be very likely to read a very long description. <S> Be sure to tell something about the company culture, is it a open culture or a very strict one (you may want to avoid telling, if it is ;) ). <S> I hope this helps
| In addition to what others have mentioned, you may also explain what other skill/expertise development opportunities your company offers, apart from improving skills on the "required" list. Other pointers Keep the description short and simple, unless you're a very interesting company and already on my watch list
|
Is it acceptable to take a day off during crunch time when it seemingly doesn't matter to my boss? There is a high priority project I am working on that needs to be completed in 2 weeks. Chances are that I will complete it, but the timing is tight. I wanted to take a day off in the next few days but thought it may be best not to as this may stall the project for a day. Boss however said he didn't particularity care if I did it not. He is quite aware of the project but didn't seem to be concerned about whether I take the day off or not. With that do I take the day off anyway or do I seek other arrangements? <Q> If your boss said he doesn't care if you take a day off, I would not take that to mean he doesn't care if the project slips. <S> I take that to mean he trusts you to know if you can afford to take a day off. <S> Taking the day or not is a personal judgement call, but I would be hesitant unless I really needed to do it. <S> Unexpected things come up that can seriously delay your project at the worst time. <S> My personal recommendation - if you can wait, take the vacation day when the project is complete. <S> It will be a nice reward for getting something done. <S> If you have an appointment you really can't delay, then your boss has certainly given you the all clear to take a day off. <S> Just know that there might be unforeseen consequences. <A> That's what holidays are for... <S> If anything you might be able to work better after having relaxed in a large crunch time. <A> My advice is that unless you need to take a day off, put your head down and grind through to the project's completion, then take your day off. <S> You won't have the project hanging over your vacation day, and your vacation day will not be pointed to as an irresponsible cause of failure. <S> I'm not saying that it is irresponsible, just that it can be thrown in your face if something goes wrong. <S> At my job, there is the expectation that, if at all possible, time off be planned several weeks in advance (except in case of illness or emergency) so that projects can be planned accordingly. <S> I don't think it's bad if you take the day off, but I don't think it adds to your reputation either. <S> If you have to, then do it. <S> If you don't, then wait, because it can really only hurt your image, whereas waiting will enhance it. <A> If the day off is for something important to you that can't or shouldn't be postponed, then I would take it off.
| If it's just a day off for no particular reason, or for something easily postponed, then I would probably postpone it. If it's okay with your superiors then do it.
|
Coworker wants me to clear out the clutter from my cubicle So, I'm in my first cubicle job and have been here a few months. The company culture is very lax about cubicle presentation. The upper's realize that our cubicles are our "homes" and don't want to interfere as long as we stay productive and don't keep any unprofessional material (Basically no pinup girls). My cube is not exactly the prettiest, I have notebooks, printed pages, office supplies, a whiteboard that see constant multi-colored use, and a couple of different desk toys strewn around for when I'm trying to think something through. I don't keep food containers at my desk with the exception of a cup that is used and rinsed daily. Earlier today a coworker who is in no way my superior came by and asked me to clean out my cube because the clutter was distracting him. He is located so that he can see inside my cube, so I guess it really could distract him, but at the same time I like my cube just the way it is, and as long as he's not actively looking at it, there are no smells or sounds coming from it that are offensive. I don't really want to create a sour relationship with this coworker, but at the same time I don't like the idea of him telling me that "your cube is too messy, clean it!" ( Edit: this is my contextual interpretation, he was fairly polite about it) when no one else on the floor has a problem with it. How can I handle a situation like this? Edit: While I can't post pictures of my personal cubicle, I found one that was somewhat similarly cluttered on google image searches. The main difference is the things hanging on my walls are all work related papers (upcoming commitments, deadlines, project references). <Q> How can I handle a situation like this? <S> (I'm assuming here that your cubicle isn't the only cubicle that has this sort of clutter. <S> If it is, then perhaps you should consider fitting in more closely with the company norm in this regard.) <S> Since you indicate the co-worker was fairly polite, you should reply in a similarly polite, but firm manner. <S> Something like "Thanks, but <S> I like the way my cubicle is currently arranged!" should suffice. <S> If it doesn't, and if for some reason your co-worker becomes less polite and insists that your cubicle is somehow distracting him, you can be even more firm. " <S> Sorry X. <S> My cubicle is no more distracting than anyone else's cubicle. <S> I'm leaving it as is. <S> " should do the job. <S> As a last resort, if your co-worker continues, you could add "If it bothers you so much, you should bring it up with management. <S> Maybe you could asked to be moved to a cubicle where you can't see mine." <A> I have sympathies for your co-worker <S> (I can't work with clutter looking at me either), but I wouldn't consider it your problem, but mine to deal with, in the same way that I use headphones for screening out audio clutter. <S> Having said that, if the area can be good for both you & your worker, then that's the best option, practically speaking. <S> Possibilities other than clearing up your cubicle include: Introducing a visual blocking screen, if a curtain or piece of card stuck on in a judicious place could make a difference. <S> Talking to your co-worker in a constructive fashion, saying something along the lines of "I don't want to cause a distraction for you, but I have my cube set up to be productive for me. <S> How would you suggest that we remove the visual distraction for you?" and see what comes back as a suggestion. <S> Swapping cubicles <A> Compromise is a fine art, and essentially required when more than one person is breathing air in the same proximity. <S> Do you need to change your work area to match your colleague's? <S> No. <S> Do you need to change your work area at all? <S> Probably. <S> Personally I don't have a lot of stuff in my work area, but at any given moment it could probably stand to be cleaner or tidier than it is. <S> Papers could be stacked more neatly, items returned to a drawer. <S> Now that you know your area is bothering your colleague, organize it to your standard of cleanliness, or what you consider a reasonable person's standard. <S> Then consider the matter closed. <S> Whenever your area -- in your opinion -- drifts away from that standard, take a moment to return it to its original state. <S> As long as you are making an good-faith effort, I don't know what else one could ask for. <A> If you do not want to create a sour relationship then I would suggest tidying your cube up. <S> Your coworker has brought an issue to you in what sounds like a polite way, ("asked me to clean out my cube ") and you concede that it could be a distraction to him. <S> Consider it from his point of view <S> , you know there is no food hiding under your papers but how is anyone else supposed to know that. <S> Your clutter could be providing cover for vermin that are even feasting on food in other cubes. <S> I realize this may seem a stretch to you but to someone who does their best to avoid these things <S> it is exactly what they think. <S> To them your clutter is a very real distraction. <S> It also may reflect poorly on you in the eyes of your supervisor. <S> I am the type that also has organized clutter in my work area. <S> I know basically where everything is in my work area and what each of those piles is and why I have them out. <S> But to people who are super organized in their thoughts it is difficult to impossible for them to believe that your "mess" is organized to you. <S> They may not say anything to you about it but in the back of their mind they are holding it against you. <S> I suspect that your coworker does not need your desk perfect just not messy. <S> So each day before you leave take a few moments to declutter your desk. <S> Make use of cabinets and file folders to reduce the clutter sitting out on your desk to just those things that you are actively working on. <S> I also found a 3rd monitor drastically reduced the amount of paper materials I had any use for. <S> That monitor did not make a huge difference in productivity just in the amount of clutter I needed on my desk.
| Changing the angle or position of either your or your coworker's desk and/or chair so that your clutter is not a distraction for your coworker.
|
What do I do in an interview when I am asked to help arrange deck chairs on the Titanic? There have been two times in my career where I tried, as gently as I could, to offer a better solution when I was being asked in an interview to help the employer do something not in their best interests. Three-fourths of the job description was standard front-end development. The remaining one-fourth was to make an object-oriented PHP webapp that, on every signal I could discern, nobody could understand. Their basic ask in all of this was to improve code quality in the PHP and make it easier to understand: I was being interviewed in the wake of a junior developer being hired to do the same, and floundering. I tried to gently make the point that sometimes mechanic's bills can exceed payment on a new car, and talked about what is possible with Python. (I don't want to start a holy war on technologies, but I've found myself personally to be significantly more powerful with new Python and Django than I can achieve in a legacy PHP application .) Retrospective advice? Anything I should do from here? <Q> I would say that until you've actually become familiar with the business domain, the architecture of the solution, and the current state of their development, making that statement is premature. <S> An answer that would be appropriate might be, "You've explained the concerns you have well. <S> However until I can do a fairly thorough review of the project and its objectives, I can't make a specific recommendation as to the best approach. <S> Certainly I have some thoughts, but those are based on my suspicions from your description. <S> To say right now what has to be done would be premature." <S> Just my thought. <S> Obviously context is everything, here. <A> Retrospective advice? <S> Anything I should do from here? <S> Stop wasting your time in these interviews. <S> Your goals in an interview are solely to determine the fit between you and the company, to sell yourself, and to try and get the best offer you can. <S> You are not a consultant. <S> You don't know the company history, you don't have a sense of the company politics. <S> Basically, you have insufficient knowledge to apply to this situation. <S> If you decide to go ahead and accept an offer, perhaps then you can take on the role and try to change the architecture, set the company on the right path, and be the hero. <S> But until you are an employee, you can't lead the prospective employer to salvation. <S> So, don't try. <A> I for one love when anyone challenges the status quo. <S> I welcome anyone on my team to challenge the validity of our tools, architecture, code handling, whatever. <S> A lot of times people have valid points. <S> These points may not lead to the exact right answer but put you on a path. <S> And by the time you talk about something 10 times with 10 different people who are "experts" you form a pretty good picture of what you could do to be most efficient. <S> But at the same time when we dig a hole we might have to use a spoon and just live with it. <S> No use in walking to China (I am in the US) to get a shovel to dig your hole if you have a spoon right next to you. <S> Yes the shovel will dig faster but how long does it take to get there? <S> And when you get there is there a better shovel in Brazil? <S> So I agree with Wesley to a point. <S> However I like when people disagree. <S> If I found you talented and hired you for this position, I would have very high expectations since you have deemed your way "way easier". <S> So I would expect you to come in and make significant progress quickly or I would get rid of you. <S> This is simply because if I am going to let one of my guys go to China for a shovel they aren't walking there. <S> So this comes down to how confident you are in your abilities. <S> When I was younger I had much the same attitude. <S> But then after working on an app for 80+ hours for 5-6 weeks straight because I said it was "way easy" <S> I learned my lesson. <S> At some companies there are layers of bullshit to figure out. <S> An app my seem easy on the outside but may have to connect to a legacy system or do something completely illogical because people are used to it.
| You should not be trying to fix the company, or right the ship, during the interview process.
|
Less senior people are becoming more senior than myself I was hired as a support engineer and junior sys-admin at my company about 2.5 years ago. One of my colleagues was hired 6 months after myself (2 years experience total) and another yet has a mere 8 months of experience in total. Despite having more actual knowledge of our product than both of them, since they were hired for different positions (one is a developer, the other was hired as "senior" developer) they are seen as more high value than myself and progressing faster in terms of salary and responsibilities. Obviously, since I've been there longer, I feel somewhat disappointed. Is this completely standard (since they have different roles) or is this a clear indication that I'm not being valued and it's time for me to progress career-wise and search for a new job? <Q> One of the most important pieces of advice I have received from my managers over the years is this one: <S> Worry about what you are doing, not what other people are doing. <S> If you're not being promoted, then that's probably because you're not doing something that you need to be doing. <S> If you've got formal performance reviews, then you should already know what you need to be doing. <S> If you don't have formal reviews, then you need to be having a conversation with your manager along the lines of "what do I need to improve on to be promoted?". <S> You are responsible for your career, not anybody else - don't expect promotions to be handed to you on a plate. <S> As almost an aside: since I've been there longer, I feel somewhat disappointed <S> I regard this as the sign of a good company. <A> I will point out that they are in a different professional specialties than yours. <S> So there is no comparison between their rate of promotion and yours. <S> To be promoted several things have to happen, first you have to have a position to be promoted to. <S> They may have senior dev positions in their budget <S> but there are no senior sys admin positions in your organization's budget. <S> No position, no possibility of promotion. <S> The next thing is performance as measured by your boss not you. <S> What is important about this is that it is up to you to make sure your boss is well aware of your contributions. <S> Sys Admin is tough to shine in because no news is good news. <S> When things just work correctly and there are no big fires to put out, then it isn't very noticeable. <S> You need to make sure they see you are keeping disasters from happening. <S> Finally, you generally need to ask for promotions (or apply for vacant higher positions). <S> You don't ever get what you don't ask for. <S> And be aware that the workplace is not and never will be fair. <S> People who don't deserve promotions get promoted all the time. <S> (And most of the time there will be someone in the organization who thinks the promotion was undeserved no matter who got promoted as very few people are universally respected.) <S> The best employees don't always get the best salaries as best is subjective and some jobs command higher salaries all around. <S> You can't let that affect your own motivation and performance. <S> When you do that, you deserve to be the person who didn't get promoted or didn't get the bonus. <A> Sometimes you only get what you want when you ask for it. <S> You can't sit around hoping someone notices you. <S> You can't assume anyone knows what you want. <S> Sit down with your boss and say exactly what you want. <S> Lay out your plan. <S> A good boss will help you make that happen. <S> If you want to do something else, find someone who can help you do that. <S> Take charge of your career. <A> I think to answer your question, yes, this kind of situation is extremely standard and no, it is not necessarily a sign that you need to move on to a new job. <S> In life and in work, there are a lot of other factors besides technical and product knowledge that might come into play. <S> It is therefore very tricky to say if your co-workers actually deserve promotions or not, but I would encourage you to think about what they might be doing well and whether there is anything you too could improve. <S> As pointed out already, time spent with an employer should be a non-factor in promotion in 2015 - although the loyalty and business / product experience are often related to employment length... <S> To address the title of your question, I think if there is some systemic issue with the company you work for, such as an incompetent or biased manager and crappy workers are being promoted while you are not, then I would encourage you to leave or try and better the situation.
| People shouldn't be promoted because they've been there longer - people should be promoted because they've got the right skills to step up to the next level.
|
Is it true that one is expected to work 60+ hours in the US software industry? Being from Germany and having worked in the German software industry for a few years, I can say that in most jobs (in larger companies) a software engineer will work 35-40 hours a week, with overtime either being compensated financially or by taking off these hours in the next weeks. An employee is forbidden to work more than 40 hours on average or more than 48 in any given week and an employer can and will be fined otherwise. Now I am considering applying for software engineering jobs in the US, but I have heard from multiple sources, that one is expected to work 60 hours or more per week, which seems highly excessive to me. I would like to know if someone can provide me with first hand insight about this issue, since working more than say 45 hours per week (EDIT: on average) would be an absolute deal breaker. <Q> It depends. <S> It depends on where you are in the states, and it depends again on the industry you are in. <S> And then, finally, it also depends on the team you are in too. <S> I have only ever worked as an IT consultant in the states (i.e.: never permanent staff). <S> But I worked alongside my permanent staff brothers and sisters. <S> I have only worked in banking. <S> As a consultant, I was always encouraged to not work more than 40 hours; also, not less than 40 hours - it was exactly 40! <S> There were a few times in San Francisco where I pulled a 1:00am day, twice now I think about it. <S> I just billed more hours for that. <S> This is at a non-startup company though; think more v. large fund. <S> If someone did work more hours, they were paid overtime for it. <S> I think that is California law, <S> no idea how startups supposedly squeeze so many hours out of people. <S> In New York, at a large investment bank, everybody worked about ten hour days. <S> In at 8:45am, out at about 7:00pm-ish. <S> More ambitious types worked much longer. <S> In New Jersey, at a banking "startup", everybody worked around 40 hours. <S> It is more company—and especially team—culture than anything else though. <S> Asking at the interview will help. <A> It's not normal to do 60 hour weeks. <S> You may end up doing a few in your career if the stuff hits the fan when you are trying to get a release out, but if you find yourself doing it often, then something is not right. <S> Maybe it's you. <S> Maybe it's them. <S> Either way, it's not a good situation and you should look for a better one. <S> On a well managed team, you will rarely have issues like this. <S> Doing 45 hours in week is definitely not unusual. <S> I'm a contractor at the moment, so it's easy to avoid doing it (because they have to pay time and a half over 40 hours). <S> But sometimes you just have to stay late for some reason. <S> When I'm on salary (instead of hourly), I always find a way to make it up. <S> If I work 42 hours one week, I might only work 38 the next. <S> I usually manage to even it out. <A> Startup, games, bank(trading) expect to work 60hours as standard and 80-100 crunch time. <S> Work most weekends, no vacations and no statutory holidays. <S> Utlitities, government, corporates are probably still 40-45 hours and probably 10days vacation, US corporations seem very much more time spent at desk orientated than europeans.
| From the permanent staff point of view: In San Francisco, nobody worked more than 40 hours. Depends very much on the industry and the company.
|
Handling mandatory lunch breaks after signing an offer In next month I will start a new job in a big corporation as a software developer. It will be three months trial period. I will be employed for full-time (40h in Poland), but few days ago I acknowledge that my job will require nine hours each day in a workplace as there is mandatory one hour non-paid lunch-break. This was never the case in my previous jobs in the small and mid-sized enterprises I worked for, I always had about half hours for lunch during my normal working hours. This situation makes me quite angry as from my point of view I will be working about 20 hours monthly being unpaid. I would probably have declined this job offer in the first place if I would know about this extra hour earlier. I study in my free time and if I spend 10 hours at work (one hour for commute) I'd be too tired to take additional classes after that. I'm not sure how to handle this situation properly. Should I talk about that with my manager (what should I suggest in that case?) after starting my trial period or should I just start looking for new job (should I do that immediately or after some time)? Bottom line is: if I had stayed in my foregoing work and start working 9 hours daily (lunch-time included) I would have earn ~20 percent more (9th hour would be overhour, paid with 50% bonus). In my new job I will be earning ~10 percent more than now. So this unpaid lunch hour doesn't sound like good deal for me. <Q> During that lunch hour, will you be expected to work (ie have a sandwich at your desk while you continue to work on your current project) or is it your time (you can go for a walk, chat, check news websites etc?) <S> If it's work, then yes, this seems like the deal you got is not as good as you hoped. <A> Why would you work during your lunch break? <S> The purpose of a lunch break is to take a break from work. <S> Why not study for your classes then? <S> Or take a walk? <S> I think you will find you are less tired at the end of the day if you take that one hour break. <A> I think the bigger question than; 'whether you should look for another job' or 'talk to your manager' is actually to ask yourself why you wanted to change jobs in the first place! <S> Only then could we answer you. <S> If you were simply looking to earn more money in a given year, then you are going about things correctly by calculating your hours. <S> You sound like a senior dev and you are changing location, so I assume you have other considerations than that though... <S> If you are changing products / industries / company culture / team dynamic / position / seniority / career trajectory / better peers / better brand / new tech stack / training / <S> etc, then I don't know if the tiny amount of unpaid work is really much of an issue? <S> Two observations from Australia (which I accept may be very different) - even in the best companies which advocate work-life balance, I doubt there are many people who clock-watch about how many hours they are working. <S> I would say a majority of workers in Software and finance work between 4-10 hours extra per week - salaried workers accept this - while a lot of people who are strongly motivated by money may choose to do contract work. <S> In Australia, this often means a higher hourly / daily pay, but with shorter term assignments from weeks to 12 months and less benefits and job security. <S> The second observation is that while remuneration is important and I wouldn't work for free, it is very rarely one of the top considerations - so I would definitely recommend NOT bringing up your lunch query with a future boss, I think it will make you sound as you have priorities in the wrong direction.
| In reality, while some companies have a culture of working over your lunch break, the situation you are describing is the norm in my experience working with many large corporates: it's your time, you can do whatever you want with it, and you don't get paid for it.
|
How can I give useful feedback without going too far? My friend has come to me for advice with their CV. I'm happy to help - and would like to - but I'm conscious that I sometimes go overboard with advice that nobody asked for, or am overly critical without meaning to be. This is something I've been trying to improve both in and out of the workplace. I would be in the same situation if a colleague asked me to review a report they had written, for example. They've asked me for general feedback ("Let me know if there's anything I've missed, or that isn't valuable", etc.) and I have identified some positives and negatives, but I'm struggling to know where to draw the line, and at what point I will have given "too much" feedback. My current approach is to pick one or two things which can be improved and focus on those (as well as pointing out the good things), without assessing every detail, but would like to know if there's anything else I can do, or another way of approaching it or realizing when to stop. There are other questions about how to give demoralizing feedback, or how to feed back on a particular issue. I'd like answers which focus on when to stop giving feedback when it is requested in a general way. How can I give meaningful feedback or constructive criticism without going overboard and tarnishing our relationship? Edit: it's worth noting that I am not a hiring manager. We are both relatively new to the workplace after college, though I've been working for a few years. I enjoy reading up on CV/resume/general workplace issues regularly, review some CVs at work (though don't make final decisions on them) and have applied/interviewed for more jobs than my friends. So, I'm more educated than my friends on the subject and do feel I can give them useful feedback, but I am by no means an authority. <Q> 1. <S> Focus on work, but not on the writer: <S> Make sure you phrase your criticism properly <S> : You are stupid. <S> No one writes that in CV (wrong) vs <S> This part feels bit odd to me. <S> I think it needs rephrasing, maybe even deleting (correct) 2. <S> Select main areas which need to be improved and stick to them <S> No one wants to hear that their CV has 302 issues. <S> Select two most important and stick to them 3. <S> Use "sandwich" approach: <S> Tell something good about a part which needs to improve Tell what needs to improve in that part <S> Tell something nice (something else than in step 1) about the part which needs to improve Example: <S> I really like the whole "skills" part of your CV. <S> However, writing "MS Word knowledge" in that skill set for IT related position is bit odd. <S> But I liked the fact, that you put your programming languages knowledge on top of that list. <S> 4. <S> Watch body language: <S> Most people tell you using body language that they "had it enough". <S> Watch for crossed legs, crossed arms, <S> overall look of being annoyed and voice change. <S> If your friend becomes angry, stop immediately. <S> My personal trick? <S> 5. <S> Drink water during giving feedback: <S> If you feel your friend had it enough, drink from a glass. <S> Slowly. <S> It will: <S> Make you shut up immediately Create room for your friend to either speak or let you know they had it enough. <S> And, most commonly. <S> Create ... <S> tension inside you about an hour in where you will either need another drink or need ... a break. <S> (Which both allows you leave safely the topic being discussed) <A> First, know how they perceive constructive criticism. <S> Do they see it as constructive or an attack? <S> However what I would revise is (fill in the blank). <S> " Then you just explain your reasoning for your recommendation. <S> Constructive criticism can be delivered in a way that is not taken as a personal attack but speaks to the heart of the issue they request your feedback on. <A> Perhaps you could bucket the feedback into must-fix, general advice, picky, really picky, and then ask them how far they want you to go? <S> Maybe give them an example from each bucket - "I have a few critical items like omission x", and "I also came up with a list of smaller stuff like prioritizing bullet points, if you really want that level of granularity.", etc. <A> Why did your friend come to you for advice? <S> Is it because you deal with a lot of resumes, and therefore have expertise in judging resumes? <S> If so, then I would explicitly say, before offering any criticism, something like, "As you know, I deal with a lot of resumes, and I see a lot of good and bad ones. <S> I looked at yours as if it were any other random resume that came across my desk. <S> Here is what I think is good and bad about it." <S> If your friend sees you as an authority, then be that authority. <S> The fact that you are friends should not stop you from giving negative criticism. <S> The truth is, that's probably what your friend wants to hear the most. <S> Something like, "As a hiring manager, it really bothers me when people do this...." or "This is nice a touch. <S> Hiring managers love to see this...."
| One of the best ways to approach constructive criticism is to open with something like "What you have is a great start. Every once in a while, remind your friend that you do know what you are talking about.
|
Is there a way to NOT participate in office politics and still be successful? The question pretty much speaks for itself. I am a hard worker, very productive, and usually the one everyone turns to when they have a problem. However, I work in a privately owned company, and several times have been told by my supervisor "don't agree to help (person) without my approval, that request is just a power play" after (person) has asked me to implement something to help their productivity and I agreed to because I could see the benefit in it. I'm capable of playing the office politics game, I just detest it and feel it is a waste of energy. I also want to keep myself as accessible as possible to everyone in the company without anyone having to wonder if what they say to or around me will come back to bite them. I also have little patience for subterfuge and doublespeak. Is there a professional way to cut through the red tape and office politics without stepping on too many toes? <Q> I think that in this situation, honest communication will do wonders for you. <S> Typing up this question shows that you've thought through the problem in enough detail to express it to both your coworker and your supervisor. <S> Tell coworkers that you have to get approval. <S> You can say, "This looks like a great project, I'd like to devote some time to work on it; let me run it by [supervisor] first. <S> " If they ask why, tell them it's what your supervisor wants. <S> Ignore what your supervisor said about "power play" because you don't care and it doesn't matter. <S> Part of supervising employees may be managing their workload so it's not odd or unprofessional to comply with your supervisor's request. <S> Try not to take a tone that suggests you're entitled to this, because you're not—this is your preference as an employee. <S> Hopefully your supervisor will ease up a bit or at least explain to you the costs of your request and benefits of their time management policy. <S> Being subjected to micromanagement can be very onerous. <S> By communicating the conditions under which you feel you work best, you associate your preferences with your productivity. <S> This gives your supervisor an incentive to cooperate and a way to justify it with their superiors, if necessary. <A> You have an unrealistic view of office politics. <S> But making sure people know your achievements, making sure people want to cooperate with you are all good things and they are all office politics. <S> If you aren't playing, people will find you easy to defeat. <S> They will find it easy to give you less than you deserve. <S> They will find it easy to get rid of you. <S> You ignore politics at your own peril and many a person has found themselves fired because they thought the game was beneath them. <S> For instance in the case above, you might be making it harder to do something organizationally that you don't know about because you are helping out an organizational opponent. <S> Perhaps your boss has more critical things he wants you to work on <S> as well which is part of why he doesn't want you doing such things. <S> And maybe the person is trying to get you assigned to him or to do something else to undermine your boss. <S> You never help people who are trying to undermine your boss. <S> Perhaps someone thinks you are not necessary because you have time for all this extra unapproved work. <S> Your boss may be trying to protect you. <S> That said, you don't have to be nasty to refuse the work. <S> Nor do you have to be a snake to play office politics. <S> All work above the first level of supervision is political. <S> If you aren't helping your boss succeed, then you are harming him and he is the one who decides on your performance. <S> Think about that. <A> You cannot completely avoid office politics. <S> However, you can avoid a lot of the worst of it. <S> Don't worry about what other people are doing, don't try and undermine them or bring them down. <S> Just focus on your own image. <S> If you build up your own reputation to be good at your job, perform well, be reliable, etc then you are not a tempting target for people to use as a scapegoat. <S> So long as you are then careful not to get pulled into things you can remain mostly free of the fray. <S> The problem with avoiding all politics though is that it doesn't take two to tango in this case. <S> If someone decides to target you then you are now involved whether you like it or not. <S> Which is a form of office politics again. <S> By making sure that my contributions are visible, that I'm helpful and friendly, and that I don't ever pull other people down then in most places I've worked <S> I've been able to remain completely free of the political side. <S> That only hasn't worked in one company where everything was going to hell and everyone from upper management on down was desperately finding someone to blame but the culture there was so toxic that I didn't want to stay long <S> and I moved on. <A> I see no "office politics" here; I see only you going out of your chain of command and spending company time performing tasks that you are not paid to perform. <S> You are there to do what your manager instructs, not what some other person asks. <S> You cannot be "successful" if you continue doing this. <S> Your manager will eventually have to drop you. <A> This is a no brainer. <S> What politics? <S> Economics. <S> Who pays your wages and who are you accountable to? <S> If your supervisor is your immediate superior, it is his departments budget that is paying for your efforts to help someone else, who may be in a different department or work under a different budget. <S> End of. <S> If you've got time within your working day to do something for someone else, you could be being so much more productive for your own dept/group.
| The key to success is making your own position strong enough that you are not likely to be attacked, while at the same time not making any enemies of your own. You do need to play the game to some extent, you don't need to be duplicitous or use doublespeak. Tell your supervisor that you don't like red tape and office politics and you want to keep yourself and your skills accessible to any project that benefits the company, no matter who's running it. You need to expand your view of office politics, no one can afford to ignore them. The simple answer is: No.
|
How to resign given the situation? I've been offered a job at a better company with a much higher salary. I'll be signing the employment agreement sometime this week. Anyways, if you've read my whole slew of other posts about my current workplace then I think resigning without drama is a key thing here. After all the comments and uncomfortable conversations I'm not on the best of terms with my manager and HR. The CEO of the company is my former manager (he got promoted during my time here) and he is actually the main head of the office but he's not in everyday. HR and my other manager are both in the office everyday but they aren't exactly my boss or 'in charge' if you know what I mean. It's a small office with just 12 people here. I was thinking of sending out a respectful resignation notice email to all 3 of them but I'm not sure if that's the best way to go about it. I could do it in person to just the 2 of them but the CEO may not be around that week etc. How would you handle this? Is it better to do it in person? Send out an email then have a meeting? Also, according to Canadian law I only have to give 2 weeks notice because I'm not at a senior level. My employment contract says that I've to give 4 weeks notice. I've run out of vacation time too. The new place needs me to start in 3 weeks. I'm sure this won't go over well with the people I'm not on good terms with. Edits:I've done some more research and according to the law in British Columbia an employee is not required to give any notice at all if they would like to terminate their employment. I also haven't resigned my employment agreement since starting there over 2 years ago. <Q> How would you handle this? <S> Is it better to do it in person? <S> The correct way is to speak in person with your current boss if at all possible, and tell her/him that you are resigning. <S> You also need to indicate your last day. <S> You don't need to go into a lot of details in this. <S> From your prior posts, it doesn't sound like your resignation would be completely unexpected anyway. <S> Your boss will then alert whoever else needs to know about your departure (HR, his boss, etc), and eventually tell you whatever else needs to be done before your last day. <S> Some companies want a resignation letter or email that they can keep on file, some don't. <S> Sometimes you will have an exit interview with HR, fill out some paperwork, perform some knowledge transfer with others, whip up some additional documentation, etc. <S> Your boss (and potentially HR) will guide you in all of that. <S> In spite of your bad experiences, now is not the time to be less than professional. <S> If you still haven't run into your CEO (or others that you would like to know you are leaving), you could send out a "Goodbye" email on your last day. <S> Something along the lines of "As many of you know, today is my last day... <S> I learned a lot here... <S> I enjoyed working with you... <S> I wish you all good luck and much success." <S> When I send such an email, I always include my personal contact information, so that people can continue to get in touch with me. <S> You may not want to do that with everyone, since it appears you didn't get along with all of them, but perhaps there are one or two. <A> The first question is really a matter of opinion. <S> Type up a resignation letter and give them a copy. <S> As for the CEO, that is entirely up to you and <S> how you feel your relationship is. <S> The second question is really a matter for a HR specialist or lawyer for your jurisdiction. <S> What may be valid in one location, might not be true in another. <A> I would recommend the following: From the company policy, find out whom the resignation should be handed to (Reporting Manager/HR/someone else?). <S> Given your history with the company, it is essential that you hand over your resignation to the right person, because they might try to cause you more trouble by calling your resignation "invalid" if you submit it to the wrong person. <S> Meet this person face-to-face (or over video chat/phone, if face-to-face is not feasible), and inform them of your decision to resign. <S> It is likely they will push you into discussing the reasons. <S> Avoid complaining or saying anything negative, but don't go over-the-top singing praises of the company either (especially given your history with them). <S> Assure them of your support in ensuring a smooth transition of your current work. <S> " <S> As discussed this morning, I wish to resign ...", etc. <S> People have this habit of "forgetting" things which were verbally stated. <S> This is particularly important for you given your history and your somewhat tight notice period constraint. <S> You don't want to hear this 2 weeks later: "Hey, we talked about your resignation on the 25th, not 18th, so you still have one week of notice period left. <S> " <S> Personally, I would avoid sending out resignation emails to any more people than are necessary. <S> I would, of course, inform ex-coworkers, but not send my resignation mail to them. <S> Your CEO was your manager, he is not your manager now. <S> If he is required to be "officially" communicated of your resignation, I expect your manager (or HR) to deal with that. <S> I am not qualified to answer questions about notice periods in Canada, but the general advice is to politely negotiate the notice period to what you want. <S> Further to the above point, I always throw in a variant of the following in my resignation mails or meetings <S> : I understand it is possible that some things might not get covered during the handover. <S> Hence, if team members taking over my code run into problems after I have left, they are free to reach me by phone, and I will try to help them as much as I can. <S> This usually works like a charm during the notice period negotiations, while in reality, I have received zero phone calls until now.
| After the meeting, send them an email resignation. Ensuring a smooth transition of your current work also helps with that. If you arent on the best of terms with your manager and HR, there is no point in rocking the boat more than it needs to be.
|
How do I verify that a company offering a job actually exists? I have recently received a job offer from a company called 'Edsor Travel and Tours' and am unsure if they actually exist at all. The job tasks surround payment and account management and could be considered suspicious in my inexperienced opinion - but that is largely because I have not received any phone calls or been called in for an interview. I've only exchanged emails with the company and yet I've been offered the job. How can I better understand if a company is a legitimate company in situations like this (and avoid being scammed)? <Q> Remember, if it's too good to be true -- it probably is. <S> A good sequence of steps to take to discover if a company is reputable: <S> Google it . <S> If you can't find anything meaningful about the company (either way) that's not promising. <S> You have a domain name from email, check out this site and figure out who owns it. <S> Be wary of non-company domain names in email, too. <S> If they have a website... review it . <S> Does it look fake? <S> Does it look meaningful? <S> Keep in mind a lot of places will have Facebook pages such as this page Requiring training payment? <S> If they want money early for [training, relocation, etc] it's probably a scam. <S> Call them. <S> If you can't find any number for them that's... not promising either. <S> Bank info? <S> If they want bank info too early in the process... probably a scam. <S> Does it seem right? <S> in your case, would you give a job to someone without ever talking to them or interviewing? <S> Probably not... <S> this should (as it has) raise red flags. <S> LinkedIn/GlassDoor/etc. <S> If you get this far, see if other people actually work there. <S> If you still are skeptical reach out to someone on LinkedIn. <A> There are a number of reasons that would allow for this hiring without interview process for a legit company: <S> They have references about you from a third party they trust... <S> but usually they would have mentioned who is it. <S> Junior position (in the sense that your output will pass through a senior coworker supervision). <S> If they don't like you they will just fire you as quickly as they can. <S> Short like a "real interview" with pay. <S> "Know it all" CEO that does not take HR seriously. <S> He has seen your CV, your mails, and likes them enough to start the process. <S> The issue is that if the CEO does not take HR seriously for this, he might not take it seriously for holidays, paying in time, etc. <S> The company is recruiting one or some consultor/s for a third company and does not really care... <S> they have some contract to provide X professionals and do not really care about their quality, as long as the legal terms of their contract (titles, etc.) are met. <S> If you are not what the customer company requires, you will be in a very difficult situation with no help from your employer. <S> Others (this is how they always work and so far it has gone well, they are in a hurry for X motives, etc.) <S> Even if the company is legit, you should try to know these specifics about the work position. <S> To avoid frauds, I usually prefer physical verifications, as internet presence may be missleading (a small company may have a bad website, a fraudulent one may have a better one because it needs to misslead people). <S> Ask for: Physical location of: Company HQ. <S> Other offices Your expected workplace. <S> Size of the company, Year of stablishment, <S> Your duties at the new job Current and past customers. <S> and try to cross check with available records (calling customers, consult public records, etc.). <S> After that, never pay anything to the company and give your financial information only after a contract has been signed. <A> In the United States, a business must register themselves with the Secretary of State of each state they operate within. <S> I believe all U.S. States have web search capabilities for this. <S> You can find the business address, registered agent, date initially registered, and whether or not the registration is current. <S> I'm not sure how that works in U.S. territories. <S> If you can let us know what country you're in, I'd bet we have members here who can point you to the correct place. <A> I also got an email from a person called john from edsor.when <S> I called the number in their website, nobody is picking up. <S> Am in sydney & I asked him to call me <S> & he called but dint speak loud & cut the line. <S> This is surely a scam.. <S> I just blasted him in the email. <S> Nobody will ask for bank details. <S> Please be aware. <S> Don't get caught.
| Look up the website owner. This varies by location, but in most Western countries, it is required that a business register themselves with their appropriate government agency in order to use the "Business Name" as a legal entity.
|
Appropriate to ask for rough salary figures from recruiter? This question is similar but deals with startups. This is a established mid-sized company. Today I received my first ping from a company on StackOverflow Careers. A tech company recruiter near to me (central/western Europe) asked if they could call me up and tell me about what opportunities they had open. Since this is the first time this has happened, I'm a bit tempted to pick up the offer and see where it goes (I have no clue what to expect). I realise that this is very much looking ahead, but I'm wondering if it is appropriate to ask for a rough salary figure (e.g. per hour) at such an early stage . As it stands, it is not very formal or official and I realise that the actual experience factors will factor in very much. Their own website does not mention any figures. I'm stuck between: Coming across as greedy and corresponding negative connotations, especially with my very limited experience. Trying to get a feeling if it's a serious offer and job and compensated accordingly. <Q> Note: I'm talking from a UK perspective. <S> You might want to include continent to give an idea of the local culture. <S> In the UK <S> and I believe the US <S> it's normal to ask recruiters for the salary range they'd expect to find for people with your qualifications and experience. <S> Particularly if the jobs are in a location you're not used to. <S> If you have hard requirements they'll need to know about those as well. <S> Remember: People don't work for free, it's not greedy to expect to be paid or to ask for ballpark figures. <S> The entire transaction of working for a paycheck is you selling your labor for cash. <S> Indeed if it's a recruiter they'll be trying to slot you into job openings and they get a commission based on your salary. <A> Giving a salary range (even a broad one) helps everyone not to waste time. <S> If you want x, but employer can only offer 0.5x, you wouldn't apply. <S> Also, if the ad said 10x, you wouldn't apply. <S> It is better to find out the ballpark as early as possible in the process. <S> The company might not give you the answer, but that won't be seen as inappropriate (and if it was - bullet dodged!). <A> The recruiter doesn't know. <S> They can give figures, but such values will be no better than what you can infer from internet sources. <S> A company will offer differ amounts depending on the person and their experience, and different companies will offer widely different amounts based on various factors, including how flush the company is. <S> In some companies there will be a pay scale which is fixed because if they pay different people different amounts for the same type of position it will cause problems. <S> Such companies will generally state the standard amount for the position type. <S> You will not find out what that is exactly until they make the offer.
| Normally it's in their interest to get you into something in a reasonable salary range.
|
How can I minimize damage from terminating an at-will internship before it starts? I'm in a similar situation as this person: Can I terminate an accepted at-will internship before it starts? I am currently doing an internship at a large company, and I have received a offer for an internship in the same department (under the same manager) next summer. They have given me only two weeks to decide whether or not to accept it. I'm only a junior in college, so I would like to 'shop' around more before committing to this company again. The deadline makes it a bit difficult for me to make a fully informed decision, because I obviously don't have offers from other companies yet, since they start recruiting in the fall. And yes, before anyone points this out, I do view this company's offer as a backup -- I'm not dying to work for them again (unless I don't get any other offers at all). And I know companies don't like to hear that they are a backup plan. I don't dislike the company; I just feel like at my age/level, since I don't know what I want to focus on yet, I want to try new things. My question is: how can I minimize damage from retracting my acceptance of their offer? Would I be be better off just declining the offer in the first place and taking the risk of not getting a better internship? I like my manager and he seems to really like me too; I don't want to damage my relations with the company badly. <Q> I would just say what you said here: <S> I just feel like at my age/level, <S> since I don't know what I want to focus on yet, I want to try new things. <S> That is a completely valid feeling to have and any reasonable company would understand that. <S> You can talk about how you like working at the company, how the team is great, how you learned a lot, etc. <S> But otherwise, keep it short and professional. <S> You're not their first intern nor their last. <S> They get it. <S> Edit: <S> Missed the part about accepting the offer. <S> I would not accept unless you planned to stay. <S> That likely would burn the bridge. <S> Also it is unethical because you are holding an internship spot that could have gone to someone else. <S> Unlike regular positions where they could re-open the position if you back out, internships are time gated and thus you really are taking a position that can't be given out again. <A> If not damaging the relationship with the company is important to you, then I would be honest and decline up front. <S> The entire point of an internship is to expose you to the real world and learn what you do - and do not - like to work on. <S> However, there would likely be some charred (though probably not burned) bridges if you accept an offer and then decline for another company later. <S> I understand the desire to have a job locked down in case you need it, but it is still very early in the recruitment game and you should have plenty of other opportunities. <A> Unless within two weeks you are able to feel really comfortable with the idea of an internship at that company, don't accept the offer. <S> Develop a 5 or 10 year plan to make it easier. <S> Then decide based on the experience they provide, and how those experiences in that internship will help you achieve those goals. <S> Just remember, <S> it's just an internship - you have plenty of time to get your dream job. <S> Right now you are just gaining experience in fields that interest you, and gaining references.
| Particularly in internships, there should be no hard feelings in saying that you want to try new things or find a company that better suits your career goals. When you talk to your boss, you could even ask if he would be willing to be a reference for you.
|
Just took new job and unhappy I have only been in my current position for a few weeks. Before this, I worked for one company for over 8 years. My current position is not panning out how I had hoped. There really isn't much room for growth, and it isn't nearly challenging enough. I had the thought in my first week, "A trained monkey could do this." Is it okay for me to start looking for a different position already? Yes, I know I should/could give it longer. I just don't see myself being any happier 6 months down the road. Wouldn't it be better to leave earlier rather than later? If I do decide to find another job, do I still list this one on my resume? It isn't outside of my normal industry. <Q> I think you should have a conversation with your hiring manager. <S> It's quite possible as you are just starting out that it will take the company some time to transition you from a new person with little ability to participate actively into someone knowledgeable about the company and able to take on larger roles. <S> However, if what you are doing is not going to be what you were led to expect or if you aren't able to find out when some "real work" will be coming down the pipeline then you may need to move on. <S> In any case, sometimes these things don't work out. <S> The company might still have the ability to call up their second choice for the position if not too much time passes. <A> First of all, you might want to find whether your dislike of the new place is because of the cultural differences or the work related. <S> If it is the former case, then you might want to give some more time to adjust with the new environment. <S> You know the exact reasons. <S> If you are sure that you are unable to enjoy the work and sure that there will be no growth at the current place, then you can start looking to move to other companies. <S> If your stint with the current company is just less than a few weeks, I think that it is fine to remove that history from your resume. <A> Don't be afraid to move on. <S> Find a better job, life is too short and it sounds pretty clear this isn't for you. <S> If asked down the road or when interviewing, just be candid. <S> Tell them you rushed into this job <S> and it wasn't the job you thought it was. <S> I have held numerous jobs and could be characterized as a job hopper even, and never been questioned on it.
| You should be able to find a way to request some more responsibility, workload or whatever and see if it's going to be available without getting into a conversation that puts you in a position of being let go before you can find the next position. Since you have already proved that you are loyal to a company by working 8 years, it is fine to move to another place.
|
Told employer I wasn't feeling well and made the mistake of answering truthfully I like my job and I like my coworkers, but today my mental illness was getting the best of me. So after some deliberation and my attempts to bring it under control on my lunch, I finally decided to send an email out to my supervisors that I was not feeling well and that I would be leaving for the day. To my surprise I received a call from one of them. I have only used my sick time twice before and was never asked why. This supervisor asked how I wasn't feeling well so I decided to tell the truth. Which was a mistake. The supervisor told me I could leave, but that I could not use sick time - I had to use vacation. I know it doesn't seem like much and this is probably just my mental illness still getting the better of me, but this just pushed me over the edge and I had to hurry out of the office before I experienced a breakdown, which is still in progress as I type. I felt like I was tricked and taken advantage and I did not want to disclose my mental illness in the first place, but I felt like I had to despite workplace laws. I was wondering if there was any recourse I could take. I thought about emailing my manager, but I'm honestly not sure if that will make things worse. I'm just so frustrated and feel violated as weird as that may sound. I shouldn't have said anything because I have been having a panic attack ever since. <Q> I go on holiday at times when I would be perfectly fine to work, and therefore perfectly fine to enjoy my holiday. <S> I take sick leave when I'm not capable of working (or if there is something infectious, if it makes me inefficient and would be bad if passed on to everyone else in the office). <S> So you should see a doctor, get a sicknote or whatever is required, and make sure it counts as sick time. <S> Now I can imagine that arguing with your supervisor isn't exactly helping with your health problem, so you'd better wait discussing things with him or her until you feel fit enough. <A> Your manager may have misunderstood <S> It could easily sound like an ordinary <S> "I'm worn out. <S> I'd like some R&R [rest and relaxation]", which is vacation. <S> On the other hand, it could be "I am unfit to work, due to medical reasons", which is typically sick time. <S> It's quite possible that the manager heard the first, when you meant the second. <S> If it is a miscommunication, one option is to attempt a second explanation, assuring him of your inability to work. <S> The downside is that you will again put yourself in a position where you will be tempted to further explain your personal issues. <S> Doctor's note If you have a medical professional that you see about this condition, a note from them goes a long way towards legitimizing your case. <S> Stick to pertinent information <S> Say "I'd rather not discuss my personal heath details. <S> " <S> There a name for that: PHI -- protected health information -- and a bunch of laws around its disclosure. <S> There might be some company policy for a doctor's note, but your employer generally doesn't need to know in <S> why/how you are sick <S> (e.g. they don't need to know that you have AIDS). <S> Do this in the future, and this can also work for your current situation. <S> Say "I was unable to perform my job due to health reasons. <S> I would not like to discuss the details of my personal health. <S> " You may be asked to provide some "evidence" (e.g. doctor's note) of your inability; this will depend on company HR policies. <A> If you live in the US there is sadly nothing you can do. <S> Companies are not required to give you any vacation days, they are more of a perk. <S> Legally the company can do whatever they want with your vacation days unless there is a policy explicitly spelled out in your contract. <S> You leaving in the middle of a shift as opposed to not coming in at all may also have something to do with their decision. <S> Check your company policy. <S> There is usually a clause that states instances when they are required to give you sick leave. <S> Talking to HR would help but I doubt anything besides a doctor's note would change your boss's views. <S> http://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/006.htm <S> http://www.dol.gov/whd/opinion/FLSA/2005/2005_10_24_41_FLSA.htm
| Try to not divulge details about reasons for sick leave (unless you want to, of course). By the way you describe it, you were not capable of working.
|
Should I apply on Monday or Friday? I noticed a job opening yesterday (Thursday) that I am very excited about. The job was only posted 2 days ago. Would it be better to apply at the end of the week on Friday or at the beginning of the week on Monday? <Q> The hiring manager or HR staffer collecting applications might have them sorted by date, by name, or size. <S> There might be some sort of application software that organizes them differently. <S> Whoever is processing them might simply pick applications at random in no discernible order. <S> In most cases all applications are then handed to the hiring manager for review, again in a random or unpredictable order. <S> In short there is no way to guarantee that your application will be the first or last that someone sees but that doesn't matter anyway. <S> Jobs aren't handed out on a first-come first-serve basis. <S> As Sumyrda rightly noted in the comments, one exception to that rule can be jobs in the service industry or retail that require minimal qualifications. <S> For those jobs it's still common to apply in person and possible to get hired on the spot. <S> When applying to those jobs you also want to avoid doing so during busy hours or near the end of their business hours. <S> From another perspective Alison Green over at Ask a Manager says : Apply when it’s convenient for you to apply. <S> If you have that, any halfway competent hiring manager is going to consider your application regardless of what day of the week or time of day it was received. <S> She summarises her advice as: Apply as soon as you have time to do it well, and don’t worry about the timing. <A> If there is a closing date mentioned, then make sure you comeback before the deadline, and leave yourself enough time to jump through all the hoops. <S> Some sites take a time to cut and paste all the required info into their profile collection system. <S> If there is no deadline mentioned, then apply now. <S> Don't wait. <S> When you go back on Saturday they may have closed the posting. <S> they may have said once we get <S> x number of qualified resumes we are done, and will start with the next phase. <S> For the larger companies once you get your info into their system, applying for another position is even easier. <S> They ask if you want to make changes to your profile information. <S> Take the time to review it, and make some tweaks if they are needed. <S> You may find that it takes less than 10 minutes to apply to subsequent openings. <S> As long as you make it by the deadline, they generally aren't taken in order of submission, unless they receive hundreds of resumes for a single opening. <A> In another situation where it pays to apply early is in some civil service posts. <S> A civil service job in the UK I applied for had (words to the effect of) in the application process: <S> The application deadline is September 1st. <S> This advertisement may close earlier if sufficient applications are received
| As long as you are applying within the deadline (assuming there is one), it makes no difference on what day or at what time you apply. What matters most is that you have an awesome, personalized cover letter and a resume that shows a track record of achievement in the thing they’re hiring for.
|
How to handle an employer knowingly paying below market? My current employer is known to have a below average pay scale.My current salary is 5% less than my last job, and there is a mantra about the company not having enough money. Lots of money is being spent for certain equipment, and there are some very nice cars parked outside, but software development is not a priority.For my role, public institutions would pay as much as 13% more in UK, and private companies would pay 50K to 70K depending on seniority. The impression I have is that I am getting a random 1000 GBP of raise at the end of the year, despite me having a unique role in the company and being highly requested. So, my question is: when the employer is knowingly underpaying a critical resource, should one mention the market value or is it a taboo? Actually, is a low payscale a taboo in general for discussions? <Q> "... there is a mantra about the company not having enough money." <S> Obviously money is a topic of discussion. <S> They put it on the table. <S> Remember - the company's money problems are not your problems. <S> YOUR money problems are your problems. <S> If you feel your compensation is inadequate, you have three choices: <S> Redress your compensation. <S> This could mean non-monetary compensation, as well. <S> Would an extra 2 weeks' vacation cover it? <S> You can get creative, here. <S> Accept the lower rate. <S> Remember, half of all pay is below average. <S> (OK, below median, if you want to get technical.) <S> Change jobs. <S> If you can't be satisfied with the compensation offered because you can get better elsewhere, then go elsewhere. <S> There is a popular set of co-dependent misconceptions out there: That somehow employees "owe" something to their employers, and that employers are somehow "indebted" to their employees. <S> Neither of these are true. <S> It sounds like your employer is doing the former. <S> A big political push happened here in the U.S. about 18 months ago to make people think the latter was true. <S> Both are wrong. <S> Employees work, and employers pay wages. <S> When you get your paycheck, the agreement is satisfied, and concluded. <S> There is no "running tab" on either side. <S> When you show up for your next shift after payday, the agreement is continued. <S> My view is that every day you show up to work, you're convincing them to keep you employed. <S> Every time they write your paycheck, they're convincing you to stay there. <A> So, my question is: when the employer is knowingly underpaying a critical resource, should one mention the market value or is it a taboo? <S> Actually, is a low payscale a taboo in general for discussions? <S> It's not taboo, it's just a waste of time. <S> If the employer is knowingly underpaying, saying "Hey, you are underpaying" is not at all likely to make any difference. <S> Worse, it could start a series of bad feelings on both sides. <S> If you are attempting to negotiate a raise, avoid the "you are below market" argument, since they already know this. <S> Instead, focus on what you individually are worth to the company. <S> Try to find a way that they can be below market for everyone except you. <S> If you feel that the payscale at this company outweighs the other benefits, it might be time to seek employment elsewhere. <S> Perhaps you can find a company that isn't known to underpay, or even one that overpays. <A> My current salary is 5% less than my last job <S> Presumably this was not a problem for you when you accepted the job. <S> Why is it now? <S> If you're trying to negotiate a significant raise shortly after starting with only market rate as an argument you risk coming across as acting in bad faith. <S> In general companies know full well that they're paying below market rate so you're not telling them anything they don't already know. <S> They'll either rigidly enforce low wages and won't care about the turnover or <S> they'll reserve raises for above-average performers. <S> They won't make an issue of the low morale and motivation this is likely to cause or the fact that they'll probably never hire high performers which have better offers. <S> So in short, don't bother mentioning the market rate. <S> It won't help and can only distract from the arguments you should be giving for a raise. <S> That discussion should focus on your past performance, not on market trends. <A> Of course you can have these discussions - at the end of the day <S> you will be paid at the amount you feel you deserve. <S> There are no general 'taboos' on this, however your employer may have their own opinions on what they like in salary negotiations - that would be up to you to find out. <A> To attack the question from a different angle, I would say the answer depends a lot on the company and people you are thinking about communicating with. <S> If they are large enough to have a decent HR department, there is a good chance they would be well aware of talent management and also remuneration and benefits. <S> Rem & ben strategy is a specialised area which I am not an expert on at all, but your approach in my opinion would vary a lot depending on the size and also maturity (in terms of awareness) around that and also talent management. <S> If the company is small or immature, they may not realise the implications of underpaying. <S> If they are not, then there would be many people in management and HR who are aware of the issue and may be working towards a solution. <S> If you do decide to go down the path of raising the issue, I would focus on the value you bring first and foremost with the comparison to market as second. <S> Perhaps check out the idea of "BATNA" as well, which in this instance would mean if you are trying to leverage a raise, then your best chance is to have the discussion when you have a higher paying alternative offer. <S> When you have a niche skillset / product knowledge this is increased. <S> Take note though, how you go about this process could be seen as aggressive and depend on your style and your audience so proceed with caution!
| if you feel you are being undervalued at your current role, you can either negotiate, using market rates as a useful piece of evidence, or leave to go somewhere else
|
HRs and Employers: Are the chances of telling that an interviewee can start working after a month low? Is one month too long for them? I'm currently working, and I am overqualified for the job, and it also pays low, not in line with my degree and with no chance of being promoted to the position I want. I only found this out when I started, and as such I dont see myself staying on the company. I am referred by a friend to a job which is more in line with my degree and I expect an interview after a week. My contract stipulates that resignation is only effective after 30 days of filing a resignation letter. Interviewers always ask how soon an interviewee can start. MY QUESTION NOW is: Are my chances low when I tell the potential future employers that I can start in a month? OR do they only consider people who can start ASAP? Is starting a month after considered way too long for a start date? Do they consider also people who are applying even when they are still employed? <Q> In general , employers are well aware that notice periods are pretty much universal and therefore don't expect that people they hire will be available to start tomorrow. <S> Whether or not a month's notice is going to be acceptable to a particular employer <S> isn't something we can tell you, but it's not a ridiculous length of time, particularly for a professional position. <S> That said, your CV should always make clear what your availability is so that nobody gets a nasty shock. <A> Are my chances low when I tell the potential future employers that I can start in a month? <S> OR do they only consider people who can start ASAP? <S> In your case (and in the case of many others) 1 month is ASAP. <S> They understand that other employers have notice periods too, often periods of one month. <S> This likely won't affect your chances at all. <S> Rather, they will likely respect you for adhering to your contractual obligations, just as they expect from their employees. <S> Is starting a month after considered way too long for a start date? <S> Not usually. <S> Usually, that won't be the case. <S> Do they consider also people who are applying even when they are still employed? <S> Yes, of course. <S> Unless they are recruiting directly at colleges, companies almost exclusively hire people who are currently employed. <S> I'm currently working, and I am overqualified for the job, and it also pays low, not in line with my degree and with no chance of being promoted to the position I want. <S> I only found this out when I started, and as such I dont see myself staying on the company. <S> Try to be more careful this time, and ask the questions you need answers for during the interview process. <S> You don't want to have two short-term jobs in a row - that becomes harder and harder to overcome. <S> Be ready to explain the mistakes you have made with choosing your last job (since it's likely to come up in your interviews), and why you won't make them again. <A> Is starting a month after considered way too long for a start date? <S> It depends where you live, and in what industry you work In the US, most people have at will employment: you can quit or fire someone at any time for pretty much any reason. <S> Most professionals will use the "rule of thumb" of giving two weeks notice, but this isn't universal. <S> As such, employers generally expect employees to start in a couple of weeks. <S> That said, contracts with longer notice periods are becoming more popular, particularly in professional or skilled roles. <S> In the UK, a month is fairly standard for all roles, and in professional roles it is not uncommon to see 3 month notice periods, while 6 months is not unheard of for managerial positions. <S> Alternately notice periods may increase with service: for example my own is 1 month, rising to 2 and 3 months in my second and third year of service. <S> As such, employers generally expect at least a month's notice period for a skilled worker. <S> Other countries vary by similar amounts, and it will often depend on the industry you work in. <S> Retail and unskilled jobs tend to have shorter periods. <S> Managerial or director roles (CEO, CTO etc) will usually involve longer periods. <S> Do they consider also people who are applying even when they are still employed? <S> Of course. <S> In most western countries, over 80% of the eligible workforce is in employment, and most people will not leave their current job while looking for another: we all have bills to pay, after all!
| It is not just acceptable, it is usually expected that most job hunters will be currently employed. Employers have contracts stipulating their notice period. In a few cases, where the need for a new hire is urgent, it may be too long to wait.
|
How to act when uncontrollable, natural "accidents" happen during meetings? (Burps, gas, stomach grumbles) Especially in serious/silent situations. If you are the source of the deed, is it better to ignore it, or just say sorry afterwards? <Q> Short answer: Unless someone looks at you, ignore it. <S> It always sounds a thousand times louder to you :) <S> However, if it is noticed, just smile, apologise with a reason (for example): <S> Oops, sorry! <S> I haven't had lunch yet! <S> Or: <S> Sorry, I ate my lunch a bit quickly to make this meeting! <S> While grumbly stomaches or hiccups are pretty common in meetings (I'm terrible at this :) ), <S> unless there is a medical reason (eg irritable bowel syndrome) there would normally be no time you'll be flatulating or belching in a meeting. <S> If there is, simply apologise, state the medical reason and leave it at that :) <S> Note: <S> If the unthinkable happens and you accidentally flatulate in a serious situation such as a meeting (or interview!), do not try to cover it with moving your chair! <S> I saw a guy do this once in a meeting. <S> You could see the poor guy trying to sink through the floor. <S> I felt for him, he was so embarrassed. <S> Nobody mentioned it to save him his dignity :) <A> Clear your throat, say "Excuse me.", then carry on with what you were doing. <S> If you are presenting, then if what you're presenting is worth listening to, then they'll keep listening to it. <S> You're only human. <S> Just be discreet: anything more is asking for attention, and there's no need. <A> In some situations it might not be enough to say sorry. <S> If there's a window in the room, open it to allow for some fresh air to come in. <S> It's a slipping hazard after all. <S> If that burrito death cloud slipped though your lines of defence, that's bad enough, but don't let it wreak havoc on your colleagues. <S> Leave the room if possible, of course. <S> People become very uncomfortable when they cannot pee, poop, eat, etc. <S> even though they really have to. <S> This reduces the ability to concentrate on the meeting and thus compromises the quality of work. <S> I'd rather have somebody float above their chair than their mind being occupied with not doing it. <A> The polite thing to do is say, "Excuse me." and then carry on with the meeting. <S> However, it is more polite to avoid these things where possible. <S> If this is something you feel coming on, suggest a rest room break. <S> If this is more than a very rare event, you might want to seek medical treatment.
| If you're not presenting, then just keep your composure and be polite. If you can feel it "coming": I'd say it's better to let it out instead of waiting for it to find a different way out. If you had accidentally dropped a mug, you wouldn't just say sorry either but rather try to clean up the mess as good as you can. If the meeting is important, eat something before hand so that your stomach isn't growling.
|
Saying thanks for luxury perk without sounding obsequious? I’m currently in my first full-time job and have been here for a year at a big UK company. Me and a few others from my site recently had the opportunity to attend an event where we were given free seats in a box owned by the director of the company as well as a free meal and free bar. Given that I hadn’t actually done anything to earn such a reward (I just put my name down as interested) and the fact it probably cost a lot of money, I feel that it would be appropriate to send some sort of thank you email. However, I don’t want to come across as a kiss-ass or clutter the inbox of a busy director if it’s not appropriate. If it matters, we met the director briefly for a few minutes but I’m not sure if he would remember me anyway. Should I do this or not? <Q> Don't go over the top, but a quick note of thanks wouldn't be kissing ass. <S> Keep it short and simple. <S> Delete as appropriate: <S> Dear (Director's name) <S> I just wanted to say thanks for [sending me to/allowing me attend] <S> [x event] last week. <S> It was a brilliant [day/night/event/weekend] and we all really [enjoyed it/got a lot out of it]. <S> Thanks again, Adam44 (Or your real name, if you aren't called Adam44) <S> Don't mention the cost — your director already owns the box, so that cost him nothing and the meal and bar were probably offset against tax anyway <S> so it's probably didn't cost much for the company or him personally. <S> The cost also isn't the point as you aren't thanking him for spending money on you, you're thanking him for the opportunity or a nice event. <S> Keep the focus on the experience, not the value. <A> I feel that it would be appropriate to send some sort of thank you email. <S> However, I don’t want to come across as a kiss-ass or clutter the inbox of a busy director if it’s not appropriate. <S> Should I do this or not? <S> It's always appropriate to thank someone who did something nice for you. <S> Something like "I just wanted to send a quick note thanking you for the seats at [the event]. <S> We had a great time and really appreciate it." will come across as appreciative, yet not over the top. <S> I know when I have been the donor in the past, I always liked to hear that my gift was appreciated by the recipients. <S> And I'm sure that encouraged me to continue giving. <A> One more thing: chances are the director's inbox is handled by their PA , whose job is to filter out things the director doesn't need to see. <S> If the PA thinks the director will appreciate the thanks, they'll pass it on. <S> If not, they won't, and no harm is done. <S> So, chances are the director will only see your message if the person who knows them best in the organisation thinks they'll be pleased to see it. <S> The PA will definitely see it, however, and they might remember you as someone courteous. <S> This is no bad thing. <S> In my experience, PAs: <S> Tend to really appreciate good manners (since it's an important part of their job, and because they're often on the receiving end of bad manners from self-important people they have to be nice to) <S> Tend to be remarkably good at remembering who everyone is Tend to be very useful people to know - they sometimes seem to be about the only people in the organisation who truly know how all the organisation's processes work and what is going on at all levels of the organisation Are important to get on well with if you're ambitious, since if you do ever need the director for anything, they'll be the ones making the call as to whether you can be trusted with the director's time <S> Keep it short and sweet - you don't want to waste the PA's time , either. <S> A very good tip for emails like this is to include all the main content concisely in the subject line , in such a way that it's obvious from the subject line alone that this is a polite email that doesn't need a response. <S> All the directors' PAs I've known have really appreciated little things like this. <S> They're usually juggling at least 5 things at once, and it's the difference between seeing an email popup and thinking " <S> Oh, that's nice <S> , I don't need to do anything now but [director] will like that <S> , I'll skim it later and mention it in our 2pm catchup", vs thinking of "Huh, what's this about <S> , I'd better read it... <S> Oh, that wasn't important". <S> So, for example, a subject line like "Thank you for providing us seats at [event]". <S> Snappy, simple, and they'll know immediately what (if anything) to do with it. <A> TLDR: <S> A hand-written thank you note shows you are appreciatative and conscientious. <S> I want to preface this response with that you know your corporate culture better than us. <S> So if you feel like your company would frown on these actions, then you should carefully consider how you will proceed. <S> That said, I agree with everyone else; however, one option is missing. <S> In the interest of being complete, I recommend a hand-written thank you note. <S> It is almost never inappropriate to give someone a hand-written note when he or she has done something nice for you. <S> More importantly, the note (and it being hand-written) shows that you are appreciative and considerate (speaking as someone who is responsbile for giving away scholarships, I can tell you I always appreciate a hand-written note to an email, and an email to nothing). <S> I found that the following link has a good template for thank you notes--tailor it to your situation: http://www.themorningnews.org/article/how-to-write-a-thank-you-note
| And a simple thank you email is just the right level of thanks in this case.
|
Employer expressed interest in my pet project I'm like many programmers with young careers; I maintain a few pet projects that I use in order to improve my skills in both the domain I work in, as well as the craft of software development itself. Interestingly enough, I was having a discussion with some of my colleagues regarding one of my projects at a company event, and my boss was present as well. After a lengthy discussion, I was asked to bring it forward at the upcoming team meeting, because it could be a nice addition to the company's product line. I'm not sure how I should feel about this. On one hand, the code isn't of much use on my personal computer, and adding it to my company's arsenal would definitely make it a better product, by exposing it to our large team of talented engineers. But on the other hand, I don't want to lose ownership of this project; I work on it on my own pace, I use it to provide me direction on research on topics I'm interested in, and I've been working on it for over a year now. I suspect that some of the answers might come at me and warn me of the potential legal repercussions or conflict of interest issues that might arise with my employer. For the purposes of this question, please ignore this and assume everything is legal. So my question is: Is there an opportunity there, or should I simply bring it over to the next team meeting, and continue work as normal? <Q> If you have one: Check your contract! <S> Without going into details (I am not a lawyer, not do I play one on TV), your contract may specify that all work you undertake while employed with the company belongs to them. <S> Regardless of that, you should speak to a lawyer if you intend to give or sell the software to them. <S> In terms of the above, a potential purchase, or even your liability as the original developer <A> Because unless you negotiate upfront with a specific contract (even if it is a verbal one) you will find that the company owns your project once it gains access to it. <S> Without getting into the legal, there is really only one way that I can think of that you can allow your company to have access to your software but not allow them to "claim" it, and that is to publish it yourself. <S> That prevents them from claiming it; once it's published it becomes freeware. <S> If you have any plans to make money off the software, just leave it at home. <S> Don't take it to work unless you are prepared to negotiate upfront for what the company is willing to pay you. <S> But if you are okay with sharing, you just want to maintain your rights to use and develop your code, you might think about publishing it on a website or two. <S> One other point to think about, if you are concerned with "losing control", as in, being forced to develop this project on someone else's schedule rather than your own, that is a very legitimate concern. <S> They company will want to move at their own pace and the project will probably go in directions that you did not anticipate. <S> At this point you will need to either embrace the company's vision and schedule, or split off and treat your own project as separate from the company's. <S> If you split off be sure you have safeguarded your rights as the owner of the original code. <A> Open sourcing the project is one option. <S> Open source it on some site like bitbucket with one of the standard licenses, then present that at the team meeting. <S> The team will be allowed to take the code and fully run with it, but you still maintain credit on creating the open sourced variant and the company will not be able to seize control of the project (though they will likely close source any changes they make, assuming the license you choose allows such). <S> But as others have said, there is an underlying legal question based on your contract. <S> Especially if it was one of those 'everything you have ever done that you don't tell us about now belongs to us' contracts that I've seen. <S> It really shouldn't be a legal question and it is a sad state of affairs that one even has to worry about such. <A> I'm assuming that your "pet project" is your own project, created by yourself, with your own resources, in your own time. <S> And I'm assuming (you will have to judge whether that assumption is correct) that you are working for a decent company that isn't going to rob you. <S> If these assumptions are right, then you can agree with your boss that you will demonstrate the software to the company, and prepare the demonstration on company time. <S> If they like the software, you can then come to an agreement how to license the software to the company. <S> Or you may not, if the company isn't interested enough, or you don't like the idea, or you can't agree on the terms. <S> You can keep control of your "Pet project" by selling the company an unrestricted, nonexclusive license. <S> That means you keep the full rights on your software, but they can also fully use the software. <S> If that happens, and you work on it, don't touch the copy of the software at home as long as you work there unless you have an agreement that makes this Ok. <S> (You may want to consult a lawyer checking any contracts). <S> In the end, depending on what you negotiate, you may gain money, reputation, job security, and the possibility to work on something you created yourself, while the company gets the possibility to exploit your work. <S> All depends on whether you agree on terms. <A> I know you are saying ignore the legal side <S> but you cannot. <S> If this was just discussed at a high level at a company event and you used no company resources to develop the product then it is probably still your product. <S> If this was a paid event and you discussed design then the company may have a claim already. <S> You would need to discuss this with a lawyer <S> but if you present it at a team meeting then you have most likely crossed the line and it will be company property. <S> Be aware that once you even present the product at a team meeting the line has been crossed. <S> If you are willing to give up ownership then you are the best person to decide if it will help you career wise and / or what you learn from a collaborative development is more rewarding than personal development on your own product.
| You need to decide if "giving" your project to the company will bring you enough "goodwill" points to be worth losing control of it. If you have any intention of retaining any level of ownership then that conversation needs to happen up front.
|
What's the most appropriate way to introduce my boss to friends and family? There is an upcoming social event organized by my employer where friends and family will be invited. The company is a fairly small company in the UK and I will inevitably need to introduce my family to my boss, the CTO, who is immediately below the managing director. I'm not sure whether to introduce him as "Simon, my boss", which seems to have all the negative associations with the word "boss" and will start the interaction on a bad note, "Simon, the CTO of Acme Ltd", which sounds a bit dry and too formal, or just "Simon, another colleague of mine", which might irritate him since it ignores his well earned professional position, especially coming from an arrogant graduate. We are on friendly terms and regularly talk about our personal lives, so I don't want to be too formal while at the same time not be too informal and disrespectful. And of course, the culture in the UK may be different to that of elsewhere, although other perspectives would be useful. <Q> I think you are overthinking this. <S> "Simon, my boss" is fine. <S> If you dislike "boss" you can try "manager" instead. <S> If you use "CTO" be prepared to explain what that means to people unfamiliar with the term <S> and then you might have an awkward conversation. <S> But if you are really worried about this, why not ask your boss himself? <S> Most people probably won't care and at an informal event might even prefer to ignore titles/etc. <S> Alternatively, you could just explain to your family who Simon is and then introduce him as Simon. <S> How you interact with him (and vice versa) will set the tone much more than whether you call him "boss" or "CTO" or "manager." <A> "Simon, our CTO" would be better than any of your suggestions. <S> Enderland is probably right that you're overthinking this; that said, in for a penny, in for a pound. <S> The word "our" is more personal than the word "the" (Simon is not a fax machine) and has the added benefit of communicating that you identify comfortably as part of the team at Acme. <S> Your discomfort with "boss" might have a lot to do with attaching "my" in front—after all, wouldn't everyone love to get to <S> be the boss, at least sometimes? <S> I suspect the negative connotation has more to do with the trope of people complaining about their own bosses than with the word itself. <S> Now, you wouldn't say "Simon, our boss" unless Simon were everyone's boss, so if we assume that "our" is a good word to convey an inclusive relationship with Simon <S> then "CTO" is the most direct way to contextualize that relationship. <S> Casual introductions are all about lubricating the conversation with social context. " <S> Colleague" gives minimal context, leading to awkward, rote questions like, "So, what do you do at Acme? <S> " <S> "Simon, my boss" leads the conversation toward the subject of Simon's supervisory relationship with you. <S> Who cares about that? <S> Do you want your family to talk with Simon about your most recent performance evaluation? <S> Rather, lead the conversation toward the subject of what Simon does for the company by identifying him as CTO. <S> It also boosts Simon's esteem and credibility, which can't hurt. <S> " If that's still too much jargon, then do as Brandin suggests and describe Simon's role in simpler terms: <S> For example, "This is Simon. <S> He's in charge of technology decisions at the company. <S> " By translating CTO to Plain English you will sound less formal without ignoring his position and responsibilities. <A> The general rule of thumb is to introduce the lesser to the greater. <S> So, in this case, the introductions would go, " <S> Simon, this is my sister Melanie. <S> Melanie, this is Simon, our Chief Technology Officer." <S> This of course assumes that you are on first name terms with your CTO. <S> If you are not, then the generally acceptable form would be to refer to him as "Mr Smith, our Chief Technology Officer." <S> Expanding his title, from CTO to Chief Technology Officer, is for the benefit of those who may not know what a CTO is. <S> Not everyone does, you know.
| If you're not sure the person to whom you're making the introduction will parse "CTO" then say the individual words: "Simon, our Chief Technical Officer. "Boss" doesn't have a negative connotation to most people.
|
Position originally with a recruiter now it's on LinkedIn I'm new to utilizing recruiters and had a question. I had interviews (one phone and then in person) with a company through a recruiter. The recruiter made a couple of mistakes 1) she confused my resume with someone else with the same first name for the initial phone interview and then 2) she mixed us up again for the times we were to have our in person interviews. The recruiter also kept accidentally calling me instead of the other prospect and leaving messages that I knew were not for me or simply hanging up. In other words, the recruiter kept making errors. Ones that may have cost me (or the other prospect) from getting the job. I was told by the recruiter that I didn't get the job because they wanted more experience (it's an entry level position). The recruiter also told me that the company is not working with the recruiting firm any longer. Neither of us got the job because I see the exact position on LinkedIn and via the company and not a recruiter. My question: would it be ethical to re-apply for this position? I really liked the culture and the location. Should I even bother? <Q> I was told by the recruiter that I didn't get the job because they wanted more experience (it's an entry level position). <S> The recruiter also told me that the company is not working with the recruiting firm any longer. <S> I'm not sure I agree with the other answers that there is a legal liability if you re-apply directly. <S> However, you could easily contact the recruiter, indicate that since the recruiter told you you didn't get this job and that he is no longer working with the firm, that you feel free to apply for another position directly. <S> Unless you hear back quickly from the recruiter, you should assume there is no liability involved. <S> Then, go ahead and apply on your own via whatever mechanism is indicated in LinkedIn. <S> Note that you don't actually know if this is the same position or not, unless there is a matching Requisition or Job Number or such. <S> So treat this like you would a new application for an entry-level position. <S> Or as @keshlam points out, you could ask if this is a new position, or you could save one round of correspondence and include your resume with that query. <S> " <S> Hi, I saw that you are again (or is it still?) <S> looking for... <S> I'm still available, and still interested. <S> Here's a fresh copy of my resume, in case you need it." <A> I don't think it's unethical to re-apply for the position, but depending on what the company's original perception of you as a candidate was it could potentially make you look bad. <S> Basically you're counting on the fact that the recruiter screwed up the presentation of you as a candidate. <S> What <S> you absolutely CANNOT do is attempt to hide in anyway that you were already put forward for the position. <S> It should be front and center in your cover letter. <S> If, despite the recruiters worst efforts, the company still gave you full consideration and ultimately passed, you've probably sunk any chance of ever getting hired there, but that's probably a risk worth taking. <S> If the company hires you they are probably also legally obligated to pay the finders fee to the recruiting firm, but that would be a question of ethics for the company and not you. <A> You might think about contacting people in the company through linked-in (look for in-house HR people, as they are always willing to get new connections, also try to connect with supervisors) and tell them that you interviewed with the company recently and really liked the idea of working there, and ask if there are any open positions that would fit your skillset. <S> Once you have made these connections you can ping them <S> every couple of months (assuming the answer to your question was "no") to see if there is another position that has opened up. <S> If you liked the company, but not enough to work this hard to get in the door <S> then I would advise you to simply move on. <S> There will be other companies, some of which you may like even more.
| State what happened, and exactly why you think you might not have gotten fair consideration and that you're very interested in a job there.
|
Is it unprofessional to put in a two-weeks notice when it's not a Friday? Currently I'm in late stages of interviewing with a company and I'm fairly confident that they'll extend an offer that I'll accept. That being said, I'm trying to plan out when to give my two weeks notice. If I were to give my two weeks this Friday (which is unlikely to happen just due to not having an official offer yet, but is still possible) I would have the following schedule: 2 Weeks of work A week where I would be available to work for two days and then I have three days off for a (personal) trip Start my new job the next week I'd like to minimize the amount of time I'm going unpaid between jobs. Would it be unprofessional to, instead of giving notice this coming Friday, give notice the next Tuesday that my final day will be the Tuesday before my trip? It seems to me that two-weeks notices almost always occur on a Friday, but other than being a bit odd, I see no particular issue with doing it on another day of the week. I work a Monday-Friday day job and there's nothing in my contract specifically about the notice period. This question is similar, but I think it's different enough that this warrants its own question: <Q> Short answer: <S> I've seen people give notice any other day of the week and finish two weeks later. <S> It's more usual for commencement days to be a Monday, but exit interviews and <S> so on can be conducted on any day of the week. <S> One thing I have seen is that if notice is given early on Monday morning, the notice period is "rounded down" to the Friday before :) <A> Everything is negotiable. <S> If you have the offer in time to give 2 weeks of work with 3 days vacation that would be ideal. <S> In the US at least you should be paid out any vacation owed, unless you work for Netflix or some other company that doesn't track paid time off. <S> So if you end before your vacation or after it won't matter. <S> HR will probably want to have you end before it's simpler for them and usually they like to walk you through things as part of your last day. <S> I once gave 1 weeks notice because I was going to take a 2 week vacation right after starting the new job and wanted to get some time in before I left, so again, it's all negotiable. <A> If you are in the USA and you have vacation/sick hours <S> left, I would be sure to put in the full 2 weeks without using any further vacation / sick days. <S> This will ensure you get the vacation payout. <S> It's typical that if you take a vacation/sick day that it'll forfeit the right to the payout. <S> Holidays are typically not counted against you in this situation. <S> Think of it as a nice bonus going into your new job especially if you have a lot of vacation stored up. <S> I put in my 2 weeks on a Friday and at my prior company <S> they did not actually give me a physical exit interview. <S> Instead they just gave me a really weird "satisfaction" survey that asked like 3 questions with a rating. <S> It actually came in the mail about a week or so after leaving. <S> They said it was anonymous <S> but I'm more than sure it went to my previous boss. <S> To add to everyone else's opinion, I would first be sure that everything is lined up at your new job before putting in your two weeks. <S> This means setting up a solid start date and planning around it. <S> The way I did it was asked the hiring manager at my new job if I could settle everything with the old company. <S> He agreed and set up all hire dates and things two weeks in advanced and I was able to put in my full two weeks and walk out cleanly. <S> Most new employers want you to leave on good terms with your last company. <A> It is customary, but you can give for example two weeks and two days notice. <S> (You tell the company on Friday that your last day is on the Tuesday in the third week). <S> If your employer doesn't like it, then they can give you two weeks notice; this could have disadvantages for them because now it would be the company laying you off, and not you leaving voluntarily. <A> No. <S> Usually people have holidays etc, so people don't work exactly 2 weeks notice/ 1 months notice etc anyway.
| You actually don't have to give exactly two weeks notice. Really, it's only convention that people give their notice and terminate on a Friday. Hand in your notice when you have the new job offer in hand.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.