source stringlengths 620 29.3k | target stringlengths 12 1.24k |
|---|---|
A recruiter offered me "tree fiddy" salary package. What did he mean? A HR recruiter of a company(US based) DM-ed me on LinkedIn saying that he liked my profile & wanted to offer me a job. The job is in a field relevant to me. I am happy at my current job. I Googled the company. It looked like a small to medium company. I replied back thanking him for taking the time out to go through my profile & showing interest in me. I then bluntly asked him about the salary package he would be offering so as to not waste each others time if the package is lower/same as my present job. But he replied "tree fiddy" . That's it. At first I though he made a typo, so I waited for him to respond. But he didn't. I didn't understand what "tree fiddy" meant so googled it. It's a phrase from South Park(TV show), which I haven't seen. Upon searching further, I found that it means "Three Fifty" ($3.50). Some guy asks for "tree fiddy" ie $3.50 in a scene in South Park. Did he make a joke about $3.50 being the salary package he's offering. I still don't get what the recruiter meant in my situation. What did the recruiter mean when he said "tree fiddy" to my salary package inquiry. How should I reply to this situation? <Q> I then bluntly asked him about the salary package he would be offering so as to not waste each others time if the package is lower/same as my present job. <S> But he replied "tree fiddy". <S> That's it. <S> I live and work in the United States. <S> I have never received such as unprofessional and, frankly, strange answer in response to a direct salary question. <S> It could be a mistake, but it's not even close to an actual number. <S> My opinion is that you walk away the job opportunity and don't message the recruiter anymore. <S> This job seems to be more trouble than its worth. <A> "Tree Fiddy" is indeed a South Park meme, there are some clips of this on youtube with millions of views <S> so it's quite well known. <S> Since you said you asked this recruiter bluntly what the salary package was this could be; 1: A sarcastic reaction to your question. <S> 2: <S> A bad joke 3: <S> The recruiter could be making fun of you. <S> Or any combination of the above. <S> Either way it was an unprofessional response no matter <S> which way you worded your question and you' do well to cross this one off your list and move on, no harm done. <S> One other last thought from me <S> - Could it be someone you know? <S> It's really odd to receive a job offer just from a Linkedin profile view without actually meeting or speaking to a candidate! <A> Maybe he didn't like that you asked about salary straight away <S> so gave you a sarcastic answer. <S> Either reply with a joke or don't reply at all. <A> That probably depends on how much you want the job. <S> Personally, I would not reply. <S> He has seen your resume & thinks that you are good match. <S> If he wants you, he will get back to you. <S> If not, there’s plenty more fish in the sea. <S> After all, he approached you. <S> It’s not as if you were actively looking.
| This recruiter is not worth your time.
|
Choosing between a counter-offer and an already signed offer of employment I have recently signed and accepted an offer of employment from another company that I applied for a role in. When I informed my current company of my intended resignation, they counter-offered with a guaranteed promotion in the next round, including more opportunities related to the role that I want to pursue (this was done through a mobile call, without anything written down). What do you think should be the better move? For context, this is in Australia - will there be any legal implications if I renege on an offer I signed? How likely will it be for the other company to pursue charges against me, and if there is a possibility that my current employer can take this against me and treat me unjustly if I do accept their counter offer, is there anything I can do given that it was only a verbal counter offer? <Q> This happens frequently, and the standard advice is: Don't take the counter-offer . <S> Why? <S> Consider this: Whatever they're promising you, they could've done it already. <S> A raise, a promotion, a lot of vacation, whatever it might be: If they can do it now, then they could've done it before you approached them wanting to resign. <S> They didn't value you enough to do it then. <S> It doesn't make sense that they'd turn around and do it now, when you're about to leave. <S> And now they know you've been thinking of leaving. <S> Oh, they might keep their promises. <S> But the promises could be simply in order to buy themselves breathing room in which to replace you at their leisure, regardless of how the timing works out for you . <S> Wish them well and go to your new opportunity. <A> You're a marked man if you do. <S> The company will get rid of you as soon as they can. <S> Never go back on a signed contract. <S> If you have doubts whether to accept or not, resolve this before signing. <S> This all sounds like promises. <S> Promises are cheap, and when they don't realise, your new job is gone. <A> I don't know what are the legal implications, but you did sign a contract so you're expected to commit to that. <S> If you brought it up when they made an offer, but you haven't signed yet, it would be an entirely different story. <S> You have to ask yourself whether the salary is the only reason you were looking for a new role in the first place. <S> How were you treated? <S> Did you enjoy your work? <S> How is the company work culture? <S> All of these things aren't likely to change if you stay. <S> Personally, just matching the offer of the other company wouldn't be enough for me. <S> It shows they're only willing to make the bare minimum effort to keep you. <S> It's just not good enough. <S> I would turn down their offer, say farewell, and go on a new adventure. <A> "Guaranteed promotion" is not always guaranteed. <S> I recommend that you stick with the new company. <S> Moreover, as you describe it, the "guaranteed promotion" is mainly more work, not more money. <S> One "trick" you may try is to talk to the new company and tell them about the counter offer from current company (without going into the details!!). <S> You may be able to negotiate your salary up a bit - although not guaranteed. <S> You can approach the new company with something like: <S> Following our agreement, my current employer made me a counter offer. <S> I will feel no regrets joining you if you agree to increase my salary with... <S> I will join you even without the salary increase, but my level of motivation may be negatively impacted by losing the benefits of the counter offer. <S> Of course, the suggested salary increase should be reasonable. <S> We cannot advise you on this. <S> You should be ready to accept a denial of the salary increase, as well. <A> Get everything in writing! <S> Ask your boss to email you the proposed counter offer (or better yet, printed and signed) <S> Remember though, that a promise is just that. <S> Unless they are promising to do something with immediate effect, that is tangible, I would be highly suspicious about holding out for a future promise. <S> They may very well not honour it, or potentially worse, let you go before they have to make good on it . <S> A contract would certainly go some way to allaying this fear, but is certainly nowhere near bulletproof. <S> Which job (or company) would you prefer?
| Never accept a counter offer. Staying with them would actually be quite risky, as they know you're willing to leave, and have the confidence to actually do it, they'll probably keep you on just long enough to find another under-payed replacement.
|
How early should I disclose potential medical problems for a future internship? I'm currently a Junior in College studying applied mathematics, and 4-5 months ago received an offer to intern as a data analyst at a medium sized company that I am very interested in. When they reached out I let them know that I had a few other offers that had a shorter commute or better pay, but I was specifically interested in the work and data they dealt with. Because I already had standing offers from other companies, they rushed me through the interview process so I could compare their offer to the others I had, and I ultimately accepted their offer. Fast forward 2 months and I've started to experience pain in my hips, and after meeting with doctors have come to find that I have a hip deformity which may require surgery on both my hips. This would entail a week or so of bedrest, then 6-8 weeks of double crutches, and then even more time with physical therapy afterwards. My doctor has me doing physical therapy and taking certain medications to see if the condition could be treated non surgically, but the reality of surgery is looking more and more real as we have seen no real improvement.This job would require a daily commute on public transit of 75 minutes one way, which I don't think would be feasible after my surgery, and I would likely go home to another state to have the surgery done anyway. I really appreciate the effort that this company put in to giving me an offer quickly, especially because I am so interested in the work that they do. I'd be on a small specialized 12 person team, 4 of which are interns. When is an appropriate time to mention to my future supervisor that I may have to quit my internship for medical reasons? Part of me wants to give them advance notice so that if I must quit, they could still have time to find a replacement. However another part of me doesn't want to say anything until it's absolutely certain I'd be having the surgery. I would appreciate any thoughts on this, I'd just like to be professional and considerate to all parties. Thanks! Edit: Thanks to everyone for your responses. As a few points of clarification, I could not work remotely, as this company values being in the office and expects that of all employees. Negotiating being able to clock in on the commute to and from work was as flexible as I will get from them, so remote work during my recovery is not an option. I appreciate everyone's feedback, as it seems like my initial hunch of just staying quiet about the matter until I definitely reach a conclusion with my surgeon is the best bet. Thanks you! <Q> Do not create issues or drama before you need to. <S> So wait until you know whether surgery is going to be the only option or not before you tell them. <S> Either it won't be an issue, or you will need to deal with it, but until then it's just a possibility, and best to stay optimistic anyway. <A> "I'd just like to be professional and considerate to all parties ... <S> Let's say the company happened to be considering closing, sacking people, selling out, or totally changing their products. <S> Here is the chance that they would talk to you about this, in any way shape or form, in advance : 0.00% Since you're a data scientist, let's be more accurate! <S> 0.000000% <S> "I really appreciate the effort that this company ... etc" "Interns" are fabulous free/cheap labour. <S> That's precisely how companies see interns. <S> " <S> However another part of me doesn't want to say anything until it's absolutely certain I'd be having the surgery." <S> That part of you is correct! <S> An often-asked question on this site is "Should I tell early if I am leaving?" <S> the answer is of course always "No". <S> Your question is essentially similar. <S> The professional, businesslike approach is simply to be professional and businesslike. <A> You should always notify your (potential or current) employer about medical conditions that may interfere with your ability to complete your work. <S> Otherwise, you open up multiple parties including yourself to liability issues. <S> For example, if you're injured on the job due to a pre-existing condition the employer didn't know about that you hid, your insurance and compensation claims will be made significantly more difficult to process. <S> The employer will have to work this special case out with you, but we can't know how that will go. <S> The issue with not mentioning it is if the medical condition causes you issues at work, the employer will eventually find out. <S> See what they have to say about your potential medical leave and whether they can accommodate you. <A> To the question of when: as soon as you can! <S> As it stands, you are capable of the commute and are still the person they wanted to hire. <S> You should tell them that you have this condition, but that's about it. <S> No need to find a replacement for a capable employee. <S> From there discussion will ensue of possible routes to take. <S> Maybe you can work from home, maybe they have some other workaround to keep you on. <S> Don't give up hope!
| If it is confirmed you need surgery , that is the time to tell them about the surgery.
|
How can I deal with my coworker having zero social awareness? My coworker is ruining what's otherwise a great job. I love all my other coworkers and the benefits are great, but this guy is incredibly offensive and rude. Here's some highlights: He'll make comments about my body, like saying that he likes that my shirt is low-cut or that I have "nice forearms". He tries to start political arguments. Today I was talking to something else in the hallway about dogs and he walked up and said "That reminds me of how I called into a radio show yesterday to argue with this dumb republican. You're not one, are you?" He criticizes every thing I do or own if it's not something he's into or owns: "Why do you go to the gym? You know it's bad for you." "What are your plans this weekend? Why do you like going out for a drink? You seem like an alcoholic." He chews while talking and spits food on me all the time. Today it was when I had my headphones on and didn't know he was talking to me. He comes into meetings I'm having with someone else about work projects to tell me that he watched some TV show yesterday and it was good. I've tried telling him that I don't like each of these individual things, but there's always something else he does. If this was outside of work I'd say something like "shut the fuck up" but obviously that's unprofessional here. What are some ways I can deal with this? <Q> If he makes a comment about your body or clothes: "Please don't comment on my body." <S> If he starts talking politics: "I would rather not hear political talk at work, so please stop." <S> If he starts putting down people based on race: "Please don't make racist comments around me. <S> " <S> If he says the comment isn't racist or tries to explain why what he said or did wasn't offensive, just walk away. <S> Annoying comments about TV shows and possessions can be ignored, but when he comments on your body or makes racist comments, that's veering into protected territory. <S> If he doesn't stop those, you have a responsibility to go to your manager or HR. <S> (And yes, even if you're a guy, it can still be considered sexual harassment for him to comment on your body.) <S> Edit: <S> Considering the comments about the person possibly being on the spectrum of autism - Someone with autism is perfectly capable of playing by the same behavioral rules as everyone else, they just need those rules more explicitly defined. <S> So when shutting down inappropriate conversations, you don't need to unkind, but you can still shut them down. <S> Some conversations are just ones that annoy you, and there you are better off making it about you, not them: "Hey, I'm working with Jose right now, so please can you take your TV conversation elsewhere <S> so I can concentrate?." <S> "Please, can you eat elsewhere - it bothers me when you eat that closely to me." <A> Is your coworker autistic? <S> If so, does HR know? <S> If so, then you need to tread lightly, as you could get an ADA action against you if you are not careful. <S> If you tell him to not do a specific thing, and he stops, then does something else similar, then he's doing EXACTLY <S> what you are telling him. <S> Full disclosure, I am autistic and have a similar problem to your coworker, what works and has worked with me is being explicit. <S> If he's stopped doing the things that you've told him to stop, the best way to address it is to lay out clear guidelines. <S> Bob, we've had discussions before, let me be clear this time. <S> Not only do I want you to stop commenting on my shirts and forearms, I do not want you commenting on my appearance at all. <S> You can take it a step further. <S> Bob, I don't want to hear about your politics, and I don't care to hear any criticisms about anything not work related. <S> If he does indeed have autism, things that may seem as common sense to you are things that need to be spelled out to him. <S> When and if you do so, be clear, vehement, concise, and don't get into a debate with him. <S> If he starts to make an argument, just say. <S> Bob, I've already made this clear to you and I am not going to discuss this further. <S> Stop these behaviors, I don't care if YOU see nothing wrong with them, they are bothering ME and that is not going to change. <S> Thank you. <S> Now, that might sound harsh, but it's what MANY autistics need to hear if you're going to correct behavior. <S> We tend to think yes/no, black/white with little nuance. <S> We don't catch subtle hints, we don't catch obvious hints. <S> Anything less subtle than an airhorn just may escape our notice. <S> The good thing is that we tend to NOT take these seemingly harsh pronouncements as rude. <S> Good luck <A> Like all the above answers have said, yes, you should strictly tell him to stop making personal comments about you, you don't like him interrupting in meetings and when he makes racist comments. <S> Any sane person will understand and will respect your preferences and opinion. <S> If the behaviour still continues it is a red flag. <S> It's high time you ask your boss to intervene.
| Every time he starts talking to you in a way that is offensive, shut him down. Don't argue or try to explain your reasoning.
|
My boss brings up politics frequently. How can I avoid it? As I wrote in the title, my boss brings up politics a lot in the workplace. I won't bring up my individual politics, but let's just say we differ significantly. Frequently he'll mention politics that he thinks will help his business. Sometimes this will be in group meetings, but it also happens when it's only me talking to him. To avoid an argument (and to avoid losing my job) I just nod my head and try to appease him until I can leave. Recently, he began talking bad about a candidate and their policies that I strongly support. Soon I will even be putting a bumper sticker on my car in support of this candidate, which my boss will likely see. Forgetting about the bumper sticker for a moment, it seems to be getting harder to avoid political conversations. He seems to think everyone has the same views as him. I'm worried about what will happen if he realizes that I'm actually completely opposite of him on the political spectrum. Even if he doesn't see the sticker, it's likely he'll see me at some point outside of work wearing a political shirt or campaigning for my chosen candidate. What can I do to keep work and politics separated? <Q> I repeat: <S> Never discuss politics or religion at work. <S> You need to realise some people absolutely cherish these thoughts and values and to openly disagree in the workplace will cause animosity, resentment, hostility etc. <S> Humans are generally just not mature enough to respect each others beliefs. <A> When you choose to support a side publicly, you are putting your views out there for the world to see, coworkers included. <S> If you'd prefer them not know about your views, don't make your views publicly known. <S> The way I see it, you have two good options. <S> 1) <S> Keep working, avoid political talk as much as possible. <S> Just nod and agree when it occurs. <S> Don't make your views publicly known, and avoid the problem altogether. <S> or if that option doesn't satisfy you.. 2) <S> Make your views publicly known, and see how it all plays out. <S> Obviously you shouldn't vocalize your political opinions in the workplace, but your boss should be able to ignore your political views if only displayed on a bumper sticker. <S> If he can't handle that professionally, then find a new job. <S> But I think giving your boss the benefit of the doubt can't hurt. <S> And of course there's the third option: 3) Find a new job and hope you don't run into the same problem. <S> I'd recommend against doing this preemptively since your boss might handle the situation professionally, whereas a new boss will give you new problems. <A> You're in a bad spot Jorge. <S> It's pretty much inevitable that your boss will eventually figure out you're not on his side, even if you managed to keep the bumper sticker off your car (which I would advise, for the moment). <S> He's already abusing his boss power by subjecting you to his views, perhaps even because he's noticed your lack of response <S> , so he's not any sort of nice or fair person. <S> I have bad news for you - <S> in the long term, he won't be satisfied with more evasion, he'll get more and more strident, setting aside the possibility of more direct harassment. <S> Can you at least look around and see whether you can get another job, or perhaps transfer out from under him if your company is large enough? <S> Just spiff up the resume and put out feelers <S> , you might be pleasantly surprised. <S> I should add that a friend of mine spent the latter half of 2018 patting herself on the back for not being subjected to more long, screaming political rants from her boss. <S> He was already out of control in February (and I freelanced there, so <S> this is not a second-hand report), this would have gotten very ugly way before November <S> and she would have been job-hunting in less than ideal circumstances.. <S> She's now very, very happy, much better paid and appreciated. <A> While discussing politics to such an extent isn’t ideal has he actually belittled any other colleagues yet because of it? <S> People are vocal about things that they are interested, it sounds like you also are interested in politics. <S> While you might find yourselves across the aisle from each other in terms of views you might actually find that he is willing to engage in good natured discussion about it. <S> Just because his appraisal of a candidate you support is negative does not mean he will have that same appraisal as you. <S> Without knowing more about the character of your boss I err on the side of optimism, ultimately you know how he deals with subordinates. <S> If he is professional enough to maintain your working relationship then that is all you can ask for in an employment scenario. <S> If you want to discuss political ideas with him more you could even invite him for a social catchup outside of work and set the tone of “no politics in work” that way. <S> I think it is way too early to be considering jumping ship from your company because of this. <S> It feels like you are anticipating the worst before it has happened. <S> Sometimes that anticipation will be the direct influencer of the outcome you don’t want.
| Never discuss politics or religion at work. Simply allow him to broach the subject and determine how this might affect your working relationship. If you find yourself in a situation where someone is openly giving their views and you disagree don't get dragged into it as it probably won't end well (especially if the person is your boss). When (as I think it’s a certainty) that he finds out you support that candidate don’t become defensive.
|
Should I leave my job after 3 months? So I took a new job about 3 months ago. It appeared to be a good fit as it was closer to home and still in the same field that I am in (business intelligence). The company is great, both with work culture and the other people working there. It is also my 4th job in 9 years (I involuntarily left one). It was once I was in the role that I realized that I wasn’t comfortable. I don’t feel challenged or feel like I am learning anything new. It feels that I am overqualified for the role and there is not much for me to grow into. The possibilities for advancement also seem fairly slim. There are some skills that I have used my whole career that I haven’t done in my 3 months here. I tried talking to my boss and most of his senders were vague on what I would be doing. So I started interviewing around. After a while, I was finally able to get an offer. The offer is 10% higher than what I am making now. The commute and company size is about the same. However, since it is a new job, I don’t know much about the new company (I.e. their culture or work environment). The role does sound like a better fit and I will be challenged more. One thing that did concern me as well was that the hiring manager did say that this was a new role that he was fighting for, he spoke of some others wondering if the role was needed. This last point makes me nervous. I guess I am at a loss here on what to do. Should I stay or go? Am I moving jobs too often (considering that this new job will be my 5th job in 10 years)? Will having so many jobs in 10 years look bad on my resume? If my new job is also not a good fit, will I essentially be stuck there? <Q> It's hard to quantify what "too often" is. <S> However, if you're already having thoughts about moving on this early, then there are two things to bear in mind: <S> Most companies have probation periods for precisely this reason; if it's not working, either side can walk away while it's still relatively cheap to do so. <S> The longer time goes on, the less convincing this argument becomes. <S> If you're this unhappy at 3 months, what do you imagine a year will be like? <S> The image of being a job-hopper won't be much different but mentally you'll be in a worse place. <S> What you really must do, though, is full due diligence around the next job. <S> Get a lot more detail on what you'll be working on, ask around about the culture, etc. <S> etc. <S> I was there myself <S> , I took a job hurriedly when a previous company folded and <S> I felt like it was my duty to stick it out for "long enough" to look like I'd really tried to make it work. <S> It was not a wise move; I ended up more frustrated and fed up, angry with myself for compromising my values and wasting other opportunities, and it made no difference in the long run. <A> While I cannot make a decision as to whether you should switch job or not, here are my views on other questions. <S> Am I moving jobs too often (considering that this new job will be my 5th job in 10 years)? <S> Some people stay in the same jobs for 30 years, while some change jobs every couple of years. <S> It is completely subjective. <S> At least the company making you an offer doesn't seem to think of it as a big deal. <S> Will having so many jobs in 10 years <S> look bad on my resume? <S> Again, if a company is willing to make a decent offer to you, they probably aren't concerned about this factor. <S> Plus, instead of thinking "5 jobs in 10 years", you should think of it as "5 jobs in (10 + x) years" assuming you stay at your next employer for x years. <S> If my new job is also not a good fit, will I essentially be stuck there? <S> That's just pessimistic. <S> If you have done due diligence in ensuring that the next job is likely to be a good fit for you, there is no reliable reason to worry too much about it. <S> Overall, I would say not considering the offer purely because it would appear as too many hops to a future employer is illogical. <S> Given you <S> say that, I don’t know much about the new company ( <S> I.e. their culture or work environment). <S> it would be a good starting point to do some research on company culture and your role before you make a decision. <S> That should also boost your confidence for any decision you make. <S> In particular, you need to ensure that the position they are hiring you for is needed , and that they may not plan to lay you off after a while. <S> Just ask for clarification from the hiring manager if you're not sure who to ask. <A> When you say "he spoke of some others wondering if the role was needed" then are you sure the grass will be greener on the other side? <S> Should you continue to wait for a position to come along that does not have that type of concern - a hiring manager saying that does raise Big Red Flags ... <S> Some change jobs often for many valid reasons - just think about why you want to move in this case. <A> Since I know both sides (I'm a hiring manager and I have changed jobs fairly often for some tastes) <S> I can say: If you can give valid(*) reasons for every job change the last 5 or 6 years (older history normally is much less interesting for hiring managers) <S> you're in a good position. <S> " <S> This job culturally was not a good fit" is a valid reason. <S> But be prepared to elaborate on that with some details. <S> Changing because of a bad fit after 3 months for me sounds more legit than doing so after 6 months or later. <S> Having a hiring manager that fought to create the role you're going to fill can be a good thing because you probably can shape the position a bit to your preferences. <S> However it also puts you maybe in the spotlight of your boss's manager's attention because she/he is interested if the position she/he granted funding for really works out. <S> However your hiring manager wondering if the role was needed sounds a biot strange at least. <S> If you have any chance to ask about the history of how the role was created this might clear up some things. <S> Asking that way might seem less direct than asking him directly for his statement. <S> ( <S> *) Valid reasons should be expressed in a positive way. <S> Don't say "Oh, my last boss was a jerk" even if that is true. <S> You could however say that you had some differences you couldn't get over completely and that you agreed to go different ways.
| If you are truly uncomfortable in your current role, you should try and do something that helps improve the situation. At 3 months, it's relatively easy to explain quitting as "I made a mistake, the job didn't suit me".
|
Is it unethical/wrong to apply via referral when recruiter didn't respond? I had contacted a recruiter about a position which is available in "XYZ" Company. The recruiter asked me to send my resume. After sending the resume, I didn't get response for 2 weeks. Now, I got a connection via friend who will refer me to the "XYZ" Company. Is it unethical/wrong to apply via referral now? Or should I wait longer for the recruiter to respond? <Q> Write the recruiter again and ask them for a quick update. <S> Then give them 3 days. <S> It's not unethical or wrong <S> but you want to minimize the risk that the recruiter has forwarded your CV to the company to prevent the company from wondering why you apply twice. <A> I wouldn't worry about the duplicate application. <S> Most companies won't really get worked up about an extra copy of a resume for a candidate they liked. <S> The recruiter situation is a little tricky, but I wouldn't worry about it too much. <S> It's important to remember that the recruiter doesn't work for you, they get paid for filling Job Orders. <S> Think of them a little like a car salesman. <S> You don't actually owe them anything, but it's a good practice to deal politely and honestly with everyone. <S> In your situation you've already given him two weeks <S> , if they still don't responded it's likely that the company already passed on your resume and the recruiter didn't care enough to bother telling you. <S> It's rude, but when you get paid per placement time is money and manners often get dropped. <S> You should definitely still reapply with your referral, because having that real person to vouch for your skills might make the difference. <A> Is the recruiter paid on a contingency (a fee payable when you get the job)? <S> Is your friend eligible for a referral bonus (will she get something when you are hired)? <S> If either of these is true the hiring HR department will have to sort out who gets paid what. <S> That's part of their job, by the way. <S> Don't worry about it too much. <S> What you can do: be transparent . <S> Tell your friend the name of the recruiter you sent your resume to. <S> And tell the recruiter about your friend. <S> You're sending your resume via a recruiter and a friend because you really want to work there. <A> One of the things I get asked my recruiters is to keep them updated of who I am interviewing for. <S> The only reason this is asked is to not hamper your chances of getting the interview. <S> Why is that you ask? <S> If the same applicant arrives at their desk from 2 different agencies, even if it is a good candidate, they would have to sort out who gets paid a fee for the candidate being hired. <S> Between going through the hassle of this and interviewing someone else, most places will just look at interviewing someone else unless the pool of candidates is small enough. <S> The reality is that the recruiter will find out if you get the job at the company if you update any of your social media information and would then contact the company to request payment of their fee even if it was your friend's referral that got you the job. <S> Chase it up with them, even mention you have someone there who wants to talk to the hiring manager about you <S> so ask them if they have sent your application and if they haven't you can then ask your friend instead.
| If they don't answer, go ahead and apply in any way you deem valid.
|
Can a manager keep tips without informing staff of the rule in advance? I volunteered at an event. It wasn't my expectation to get paid. However, at the beginning of the event the person doing the "training" said any tips we make, we pool together and divide at the end. I was working in a team of two other people selling beverages. Some customers insisted on tipping (for example they walked away from their change saying "keep it as a tip"). The girls I worked with said they thought we weren't supposed to take tips, and I told them I thought we were. There was no way of contacting anyone in charge to confirm, we were by ourselves. All of a sudden the lady in charge came up to us and told me specifically I was done my shift. I went to get the tip jar to count how much was there and she spoke to me as if I was stealing money. I told her this was our tips. She said we weren't supposed to have them, and I said the person who gave me the orientation said we were. She then said the tips are going to charity. I told her this should have been communicated to me in advance and that other people were doing this too, and she said "sorry it wasn't made clear". At this point I left. I felt a bit of a moral dilemma. The owner of the money intended me to have it, not go into the pockets of some company. On the other hand, I know some service jobs specifically tell their employees not to accept tips. Was there anything I could have done differently? Should I have let her keep the tips or should I have told her she's stealing them? Is there anything I can do after the fact, such as post on social media or email her manager? A few general observations: the work it self seemed very serious for an unpaid volunteer position, for example the manager told people not to lean on the table. The shifts were 7.5 hours with no break. A lot of this information was not communicated before hand. Also everyone but me was given a credit card reader to attach to their personal phone to accept payment card, and I thought this was strange if they were just random volunteers too. Update: I emailed the volunteer coordinator with my concerns. She said the tips were to go to the paid staff or the event itself which she claims is non-profit. I'm unaware of any way of verifying whether or not an organization that claims to be non-profit actually is? I've done volunteer work before but what stinks is this event clearly had a large source of revenue. <Q> It sounds a bit dodgy. <S> Film festivals can both be organized by charities or by other, private entities. <S> If it is a charity you should be able to get the information of whether or not they donated anything from this event. <S> The books should be more openly available than from private entities. <S> Now, you probably won't be able to verify the amount of tips <S> and if anything was skimmed off, even if they donated them or some. <S> However for charities there are controlling bodies and you could inform those about your experience and concerns. <S> If it was a privately organized event you still may voice your concerns to governmental health and safety or worker oversight bodies. <S> There may have been other violations such as no break, no direct emergency contacts on site or security concerns with credit card readers hooked up to private phones. <S> Chalk it up as lessons learned. <S> Next time prepare a list of important questions to ask before you volunteer. <A> If this was work done for a normal for-profit company, I think it would violate the minimum wage laws which to my knowledge exist in every Canadian province. <S> (IANAL though) <S> Keep in mind: doing work for free is fundamentally unsocial. <S> You are in a privileged position to offer some parts of your time for free. <S> Not everyone can afford that. <S> Others (students, poorly educated people etc.) may depend on these kinds of jobs. <S> They can´t compete with your zero rate offer! <S> (One exception: Work for a cause that is essentially unprofitable in a capitalistic sense: Charity, communal work etc.) <S> Tips are a gift from the customer to you / the entire staff. <S> Taking the tips from you is essentially stealing. <S> If the staff unanimously decides to donate tonight´s tips, fine. <S> Put up a sign for the customers or a tip-jar with the name of the charity, so they know what they are giving for. <S> If not, this is a big nogo! <A> In one of your comments you mention: <S> it was a film festival <S> so I don't consider this a charity <S> Frankly it doesn't really matter what you consider to be a charity, what matters is what your local and national government considers to be a charity. <S> A charity need not be an organization dedicated to raising money for the poor or the sick. <S> It might be an organization to promote some other public good, but not with the goal of making a profit. <S> Some film festivals are for-profit and some are non-profit. <S> The for-profit ones would typically not be allowed to use volunteer labor. <S> The non-profit ones will usually have some government oversight making sure that all the money raised is going to advance the declared public good, and not to line some organizer's pocket. <S> It costs money to put on even a non-profit film festival and the sale of food and drink is often one of the ways that money is raised. <S> It's unfortunate that you received conflicting directions about receiving tips, and it would be an excellent idea to let the organizers know about the confusion so they can create a clear policy about tips. <S> However, at the end of the day, you volunteered to do the work, so you should have had no expectation of receiving a benefit, other than the experience. <S> Only volunteer for organizations who's goals you support and that you trust to be above board.
| There may even be local regulations saying that volunteers cannot received tips because all the money brought in is supposed to go back to putting on the event.
|
What downsides might there be in resigning before the end of my contract? I'm currently working at an startup, which is the first company I've joined since the start of my career. This startup is co-founded by one of my friends (who became my housemate) and I was invited to join their startup by him. I was able to fit in pretty quickly. Now I've befriended almost everyone there (there are 7 people in total: 5 co-founders and 2 employees). I became friends with the CEO. He's a nice guy and we go out and have fun with other guys there regularly. The Problem After a few months, I started to get frustrated with my job, because I think I'm taking too many responsibilities and they are underpaying me. I told the CEO guy my problem, but he told me that they can not afford to raise my salary. Recently, I got a job offer from a medium-sized company, providing higher salary, insurance, transportation and more nice stuff. I visited their place just to confirm whether the offering was real or not, and they confirmed it. I think I drew the picture pretty clear here. Now I'm stuck between whether to leave this startup or not. The new company offering is valid for the next couple of months and my contract with the startup lasts for the next six months. The contract doesn't allow me to quit unless the employer accepts to OR I pay a relatively small amount. Now, I want... to get a much higher salary (I mean, who doesn't?) not to lose my friendship with the startup co-founders and co-workers not to lose my reputation for this "quitting" thing to keep my relations with my housemate positive What downsides might there be to resign before the end of my contract? <Q> After a few months, I started to get frustrated with my job, because I think I'm taking too many responsibilities and they are underpaying me. <S> The exciting part of working at a startup is you get to collaborate with a small group of people you enjoy being around, and you usually learn a lot about cutting edge technology. <S> And sometimes (rarely) you might get a chance to be part of a big payday at the end. <S> The downside is you're often overworked, and not paid very well. <S> Remember however, that the grass, as they say, is always greener on the other side. <S> You might find at the medium size company the people are not as fun to work with. <S> The work itself might not be as interesting. <S> You don't really mention much about what's keeping you at the startup, so <S> I'm guessing you don't have equity or any other contractual obligations that mandate you stay. <S> I would be sure to find out what if anything you'd be missing out on (equity, bonus, penalties) by leaving before the end of your contract. <S> You'll have to balance the potential bad parts of a new job against what you do in fact like about your current position. <A> Now, I want... <S> to get a much higher salary (I mean, who doesn't?) <S> not to lose my friendship with the startup co-founders and co-workers not to lose my reputation for this "quitting" thing to keep my relations with my housemate positive <S> What downsides might there be to resign before the end of my contract? <S> Seems like you already know many of the downsides. <S> You professional reputation could suffer <S> Your relationship with your housemate may suffer <S> In addition, the company culture will clearly change. <S> Working in a 7 person startup is very, very different from a medium sized company. <S> You'll likely no longer have much impact on the company as a whole <S> You'll likely lose the ability to learn and advance extremely quickly <S> You'll likely face far more office politics, bureaucracy and administrivia <S> You'll certainly be a much smaller fish in a much larger pond <S> You get to decide what is more important to you. <S> I've worked for plenty of startups, a handful of mid-sized companies, and a few megacorps over my career. <S> I far prefer startups - but that's a very personal choice we must each make for ourselves. <S> Before you decide to jump ship early, make sure you reflect on why you didn't understand what you would be getting into with this startup and how much you would be getting paid. <S> Make sure you aren't jumping into a new situation where, after a few months, you will again feel underpaid and with too many responsibilities. <A> I may be new to the whole "startup" thing but in my opinion the difference between "startup" and any other company is that there is no lack of money in them. <S> Jokes aside. <S> From my point of view they taken an advantage of you. <S> You are their friend so they can burden you with new responsibilities and not pay you for them. <S> After all, we are all friends in here, right? <S> IMHO <S> you will lose that "friendship" the moment you show you want less tasks to do <S> (let them hire somebody else to do that. <S> that's a point of startup - you want to grow) or be adamant about pay <S> (if the startup is not making money it's a sign to abandon the ship). <S> Why would your reputations suffer from this? <S> A bigger, more stable, better paying company saw your potential and are willing to pay you for it. <S> That show your personal growth and that you can develop. <S> If your friends are really friends they will understand that all the "+" you mentioned are good for you <S> and you are doing good thing choosing the better option.
| You may lose any potential going-public windfall that sometimes occurs at startup You could lose the friendship (and perhaps the respect) of co-founders and co-workers There might be levels of management or bureaucracy that you didn't have to deal with at the startup.
|
How to explain being laid off to next employer, so HR does not contact my ex-employer? I got laid off 4 month ago due to the economical reasons of the company. In my cancellation contract , it is clearly mentioned that: I am being layoff due to the restructuring of Employer activities. So, my position got redundant. Also, it says, The company has decided to lay me off, because i had the least experience and skills in my team. sadly, my ex-employer will not say good things about me to the other employers. However, I am sure, I always did my best for my employer. Please, read this question . Recently, I was invited to a HR interview, and the HR told me (beforehand), he wants to know about my success , and failure stories in my previous company. I want to be very honest with him, but I also don't want to minimize my chance to get the job. So, I know being laid off is not a bad thing by itself (especially when I have written contract which explains the reason), but I do not want to make HR suspicious, so he will not refer to the ex-employer. So, how may I explain it to him? <Q> This is one of those places where candor is the best policy. <S> You show them the paperwork from the ex-employer. <S> They restructured, they decided you were the easiest to lose. <S> It hurts, but it is not fatal. <S> When they ask you, focus on success stories. <S> You do not say where you live. <S> In the US, there are very strong limits on what the ex-employer can say about former employees, if they want to avoid very unpleasant lawsuit. <A> Germans do not call or contact ex-employers, except when they suspect fraud. <S> Then they might verify date of employment and title. <S> You have it in writing that you were laid off because the company restructured. <S> You have it in writing that they chose you because you were the most inexperienced on the team. <S> That is the normal of the normal. <S> That is the way it goes sometimes. <S> That would not make me blink, or doubt anything. <S> I would only wonder why they chose you to make redundant if you had been anything but the junior on the team. <S> When Germans ask for success or failure stories, they will never contact to verify. <S> It's not meant the American way of a "success story", they don't care how much money you made the company. <S> They want to know how you solve problems, they want to know how you interact with people to come to solutions. <S> Whether that story is about the CEO and your great idea making millions, or the janitor and your quest to finally have them fill up the toilet paper on time is really not that important, as long as you can tell a story on how you handled a problem well. <S> And how you handled one badly and what you learned from it. <A> However, a) as a rule-of-thumb, only larger organizations, or when your new position is very exposed (e.g. CEO position), would they go through the effort verifying details of your previous employment b) <S> you can do various things to reduce the need for verification: be transparent and forthcoming about the fact that you were "restructured". <S> You don't have to include any other information, particularly not the limited skills / experiences. <S> Restructurings are very common these days, so nobody would dig any deeper. <S> Just be prepared for a question like "have you tried to find another position internally?", particularly if your previous organization was a large one include personal references and testimonies from your previous organization. <S> This does not have to be from your boss, or an official company reference letter if the information is negative. <S> But even an official company reference letter would rarely include any reasons why they chose to let you go as part of the restructuring. <S> They would at most mention that they restructured.
| There is of course no way to completely prevent your new / potential employer from checking your background information, including contacting your previous employer. You tell them the truth.
|
Am I responsible for the work produced by coworkers since we are a team even though they excluded me? I have been working for my current company for 7 months now and I am completing my two years in the industry in total. My company is a large enterprise, with relatively relaxed deadlines and flexible schedules. We are a newly established team, most of us are juniors with experience ranging from new graduates, to two years experience at max. The only senior coworker, who is also the scrum master, won't bother to guide anyone and only minds his own business. Our manager is also an extremely hands off person. Often when given work to produce, the new graduate coworkers retreat to their small "buddy teams", hoarding tasks, and work in a rush without planning, designing, consulting, or discussing anything with others. As a result, this dominates our development efforts due to their fast pace. At this point, they produced very buggy code with no recognizable structure. The product is not scaling with even small loads. We now have a very mind-boggling local development setup, two different testing setups that are not working as intended, and they still keep telling us "we will fix it later". At one point I tried to refactor one portion of the code since it was taking too long to build, and the manager was complaining about it. Even though coworkers knew about what I was doing, no one complained or opposed me at the beginning yet I came to hear that scrum master, who is the most senior coworker in our team, was mocking my attempts behind me to fix things as "waste of time", that "no one cared". So I decided give up on refactoring altogether, it was not welcomed. At this time I managed to grab two new features to develop and completed them. During our meetings with the manager, I expressed my concerns regarding all of this openly since day one. The manager often agrees with me, yet never offers a practical solution. He believes, with time it all will be alright. He asked me why I was not providing the "fixes" or "improvements" to the problems I detect.He also asked me about the refactoring I was to do, since he was not approving the state the code was in, and I told him I was not able to follow through since I was all alone in doing that, that no one seems to care about quality besides me. I also mentioned the reaction I get from scrum master, that other colleague went for fixes and never informed me about it, so I focused on other duties. So at this point, I feel like the manager thinks it is my responsibility to fix things since I am the one pointing out that problem. However, I find this approach unfair. I must say I don't think I am responsible for other's mistakes since they are not willing to learn from my "refactoring" and think it is "waste of time". As you might realize, I am also fairly new in the workforce and have tons of soft and hard skills to learn. So here is my main dilemma: What would happen if I avoid work related to this product and solely focus on other tasks from now on? Am I really responsible for this kind of work that is produced by coworkers via excluding me? Edit: I should have made it clear that we are doing agile, scrum and kanban. As a result, there is no assignment of tasks, we volunteer for open tasks. Also, we all have the same manager whom I mentioned about in the post and have a horizontal hierarchy in our team, so there is no "boss", "team lead" or anything. We are expected to act collectively. Edit 2: Shortened the post. Edit 3: Shortened the post further. tl;dr: Coworkers are cowboy coding the product, not letting others contribute, the manager seems to expect me to provide the fix even though no one in the team seems to care besides me. Am I really responsible for fixing the work that I have barely contributed to since we are working as a team ? <Q> If the tasks not disagree with your employment contract, you have to do, what your "authorizing officer" (translation software -.-, your boss, manager, scrum master -> the person who gives you your tasks) will assign to you. <S> But you can make clear, you need support to do your work, like cooperative coworkers, documentation of code, coding standards, agreements about architecture of software and so on. <S> No one can expect you build a house without an appropriate toolkit! <S> Make it clear to your manager (and to yourself) what you really need, what you like to have and how to get it. <S> But if this workplace is not worth this effort (and here is your opinion the only one that counts), then you can search for a new one that fits more with your "what I want to work"-list :) <S> Every time there are tasks nobody wants to take, but one have to. <S> Maybe it is possible to make a "deal" with your coworkers: You take this unloved task (your coworker act like they do not love it too) for them, and they agree to support you with what you want (see " <S> make it clear..."). <S> In my opinion all team work base implicit on such deals, but sometimes they must be pronounced. <S> And to get it in context of your question: No, you are not responsible for the work of your coworkers, but you are responsible (with them) for your output. <A> Since this is an Agile scrum team, write a ticket in the backlog for anything you see that needs corrected. <S> The 'team' as you have indicated will then either pick up those stories at planning or keep them in the backlog. <S> That should satisfy your manager, indicate that you put them in the backlog and he needs to talk to the scrum master if they are not being brought in during planning. <S> They should then be brought in and people should take them IN PRIORITY ORDER. <S> That is another thing you could raise at planning that people are cherry picking and not working things in priority order. <S> You should also be doing commitment meetings during planning. <S> In my organization we threw a fist of five (1 to 5 ranking) about how confident we were in the plan. <S> This is your opportunity to throw a 1 or 2 and indicate you feel the bug fixes are being relegated. <S> The rule on first of five is all works stops if someone throws a 1 or 2 and the team has to revisit the plan until they get at least all 3s. <S> Lastly you should have a product owner that is accepting your stories. <S> If not who is accepting this work as being 'done'. <S> A 'definition of done' might need addressed. <S> If you are doing agile/scrum are you having end of sprint retrospectives with opportunity to raise concerns and change patterns? <S> If not maybe this is the conversation you need to have with your management that they are not really doing Agile/Scrum but Ad-Hoc. <S> https://agileforall.com/learning-with-fist-of-five-voting/ <A> Don't ruin your mental health on this. <S> Yes, technically you are responsible for this since everyone on your team is. <S> And if this was an issue that was limited to a small number of colleagues, my answer would be different. <S> But this seems to be a team wide issue, and you alone won't fix this. <S> Is there other work that needs to be done ? <S> Focus on that. <S> You don't have to stress over a product you didn't work on, and when you tried to help someone out your work was thrown away and you even got negative reactions from your coworkers. <S> Since it appears that you can work on what you want, choosing from a number of tasks, do that. <S> If your manager asks you about this, you can be honest about this since they seem to be reasonable : <S> I've decided to focus my work on tasks outside of X project. <S> Although I wanted to help improve the code, my contributions have been rejected and people have complained about my involvement. <S> This felt like a huge waste of time, and I don't want to continue wasting my time when I could be more productive and produce valuable work for the company like in projects Y and Z. <S> You work in a team who doesn't care about quality, each member is only thinking of themselves. <S> Don't become that, but act accordingly. <S> Caring too much in that kind of environment will make you crazy. <S> I'd also advice to start job searching and when interviewing at companies don't hesitate to ask them questions to make sure you're not ending up somewhere like this again.
| EDIT after comment: If you as team are made responsible for goal fulfilling, then every team member is responsible, you too.
|
Taking headphones when quitting job I have put in my notice to my current employer and am about to start new employment pretty soon (I am in the IT field). I was given a tee shirt, a coffee mug, some stationery items, and a pair of Bluetooth headphones when I joined. The BT Headphones, believe it or not, are amazing quality. They do not seem to be expensive or anything, they just have excellent sound quality. When I leave this job, is it acceptable for me to take those headphones with me? If I'd worn that shirt, I obviously wouldn't leave it here for them to give to the next person. I've been drinking coffee out of that coffee mug too, but I really don't want the mug and I am sure they are probably just going to either wash it or throw it in the trash (coffee mug has company logo and it is starting to wear off, so it won't look new enough for a new employee). So, are headphones as disposable as a tee shirt or a coffee mug? <Q> As a rule of thumb: If it's unrelated to your role, it is a gift <S> The other answers give you the clear baseline "won't ever get you in trouble" answer; if you feel you cannot make the distinction, please do not hesitate to simply follow their advice and ask somebody. <S> However - it's unlikely this is something you need to worry about. <S> Employers (especially medium-large businesses) often give small presents when you start, to help you feel welcome and part of the company. <S> The key thing to determine is: Is this item equipment, or a gift Equipment, obviously, needs returned (your PC, your keyboard, desk, chair). <S> To help decide, asking yourself these questions can give you a good rule of thumb to work by: <S> Do I or others use this to achieve our role's tasks and responsibilities? <S> (Not a gift) <S> Was the item set up for me by IT, or in any other way set up as part of my role? <S> (Not a gift) <S> Am <S> I expected to have this item with me in the office, regularly? <S> (Not a gift) <S> Did I ever have to request this item, or ask for it? <S> (Not a gift) <S> Was the item given to me along with other personal items (t-shirts, stickers, chocolate)? <S> (Likely is a gift) <S> Is the item heavily branded (with the company logo)/looks like consumer merchandise? <S> (Likely a gift) <S> Is the item perishable (chocolate, wine, etc.)? <S> (Likely a gift) <S> Would I report it, if it went missing or was damaged? <S> (If not; it's likely a gift) <S> Of course, others have reiterated that asking will ensure you are extremely safe. <S> These items are not expected to be returned, and nobody will be checking that you left it. <A> I run the tech department at my company. <S> We work in broadcast media, and we issue each employee headphones when they start, and replace them as needed. <S> We tell employees to take them when they leave on good terms, and we throw them away if they do not. <S> Because if they've been rubbing on your skin for months / years, who in their right minds would want to give them to someone else? <S> Now, that's the "Makes Sense" answer. <S> If you have overly petty/possessive office supply coordinators, it may be better to just give them back. <S> However, if I were given "used" headphones when I took a job, I'd decline them. <A> What you could do to make it less stingy, is inquire about the make and model of the headphones. <S> "Boss, this headset is really good, do you know which brand they are, so I can get a set for myself?". <S> Most likely he'll say "just keep them". <S> If not, you're probably better off leaving them. <S> Should there be any trouble after keeping them, you can refer to getting the boss' permission. <A> Different companies have different policies regarding equipment and supplies. <S> At some organizations, the headphones are considered a free perk of the job. <S> At others they may be considered company property on loan to the employees. <S> If there's a chance that taking the headphones without permission will count as theft of office property, then you may face legal consequences (and possibly social consequences of being "that guy who steals office supplies"). <S> Best to play it safe, and ask your boss about this policy before you quit. <A> The best option is to ask your boss. <S> However, in addition to that, in two IT companies where I have been working, the items that were expected to be returned were tracked. <S> There was a special intranet web page where I could look up which equipment has been assigned to me; it was assumed that I have some kind of responsibility for it and that I will have to return it if I leave. <S> You can check whether your company has a similar system. <S> It can be online (i.e. on intranet web pages), or offline (you go to equipment guys and ask what equipment is listed on you). <S> If the headphones are not there, I would assume them to be kind of 'use-once' and nobody would check whether you returned them. <A> Just keep it . <S> They are not coming back to you for headphones . <S> Take it , if it doesn't have a RFID tag and you could get caught at security check point . <A> Personally - this sounds acceptable. <S> Certainly if they're not provided as equipment to work (eg telephone headset in a call centre) <S> then they are probably just freebies you get when joining. <S> What you could do (instead of outright asking your boss about them), if you are just entering your notice period, is ask for a list of equipment they want you to return . <S> That way you know exactly what you need to give back and what you can keep, without specifically mentioning the headphones. <S> (You'll also see if there's anything unexpected on there).
| In-ear headphones are not really hygienic to pass on to someone else. But in general - it's not uncommon to be given gifts by your workplace, especially when joining. Ask your employer or supervisor. After you leave ,nobody will care . Gifts, were given for your sole use, and you can pretty-universally keep.
|
Is it a bad idea to display the F-word on my GitHub profile? Ordinarily, this would seem like a no-brainer, but maybe not... I am a college student currently applying for a summer internship at a company where I would be doing a lot of software development with a team of interns. As part of the application process, I gave them a link to my GitHub profile. As a hobbyist developer, I've worked on a large variety of projects, including writing a shell for the esoteric programming language BrainF*** (except the actual name doesn't contain '*'s). This shell showcases some of my best work as a hobbyist developer. It's written entirely in cross-platform C code, uses the GNU Build System, and is the only project on my page which has these traits. On the flip side, it's also the only project I've ever released under the somewhat vulgar WTFPL license agreement. Naturally, as soon as I realized I would have to share my repository link with the recruiting team, I made my BrainF*** shell a private project, thus hiding it from public view, but I'm still not sure that this was the best idea. Should I leave the project hidden to seem more professional, or should I make it public again to showcase my diverse skill set? UPDATE: I decided to hide the repository during the candidacy process. Whether this made any difference or not I'll never know, but I did get the job, and I've now made the repo public again. <Q> It's the official name of the programming language. <S> List it as such in quotes and explain that it's an external language you write code in. <S> No need to hide it nor to censor it. <A> Definitely keep it. <S> It's an excellent demonstration of your software engineering skills, and a filter for companies you don't want to work with. <S> You obviously like esoteric programming, don't you want to be with like-minded coworkers? <A> Leave it hidden. <S> It really is not appropriate in a corporate business setting and it is even worse to have as a first impression. <S> You have no way of knowing how someone will react so the safer bet is to not go there. <A> Programming is programming, whether you use Java or C or Golang or Brainfuck. <S> It shows what you can do. <S> In fact, programming in Brainfuck is arguably better because of how limited the language is and how difficult it is to do even the most simple of operations <S> (iirc "Hello World" is like a 50-line program in Brainfuck). <S> If you would like to mitigate the possible repercussions of having the F-word on your GitHub, you can add a link to the Brainfuck website in your README files for your Brainfuck projects. <S> Then, if some recruiter wants to know why you have the F-word on your GitHub, they can click the link and look at it. <S> To be honest, if a recruiter is going to pass over an engineer capable of working in Brainfuck over the fact that they chose a language called Brainfuck to work in, that recruiter is going to miss out on a lot of very capable talent. <S> I personally once wrote a Brainfuck interpreter (in Java), although I regrettably never published it to my GitHub. <A> Hide it. <S> Here’s <S> why… It’s a risk/reward scenario where the main considerations are: who will see it; how will they react; and what will it accomplish? <S> Odds are resume crawlers, recruiters and HR people will never dig into GitHub and hiring managers lack the time to do hours of research. <S> They have multiple candidates, a day job <S> and you already know they’re short-handed. <S> So yes, it’s unlikely it will be seen before you get to talk to someone and frame it first. <S> But of those who might, you run some risk of being weeded out before the content itself is ever considered. <S> So there’s little benefit to having it available. <S> To how would someone react, that first impression won’t be forgotten. <S> Yes, most won’t care, but until you get a chance to have conversations, why run any risk of removing yourself from consideration. <S> As to what it will accomplish, its esoteric nature makes it unlikely they’ll dig in to really the beauty of your accomplishment. <S> So their main takeaway will be the name of the language. <S> Once you can talk with them you can frame it as you like. <S> “I wrote this really cool piece, but should warn you the name of the language is indelicate.” <S> Then offer to allow them access as you see fit. <S> Until you get a call, your goals are to stand out quickly and not weed yourself out. <S> Once an actual conversation is opened, you have some freedom. <S> Until that time, tiny things can take you out of the running before your actual skills are ever considered.
| Some people might not mind but others might be completely offended and repulsed by it. I say leave it.
|
Leaving in the midst of a project I am a fresh masters graduate (graduated Dec 2018) who’s in the midst of a job hunt. My supervisor at the university asked me to extend my thesis research and publish another paper after my graduation. However, this was a unpaid offer and the professor only offered to covered my transportation once a week (I worked remotely and went on Thursdays for a weekly meeting). I accepted given that I don’t have a job offer yet and didn’t plan to do a PhD. I was re-admitted as a business visitor end of Jan 2019. Last Thursday I got job offer from a company I was awaiting and they asked me to start first week of March. I have accepted the offer today and am worried as to how to communicate this to my supervisor. I’m writing an email given that I can’t meet him except on Thursdays and the next meeting is my last meeting. I have not finished the paper we’re working on and I feel it’s a critical time to leave, but I have to. What should I include in my email? I’m thinking of sending all the related up-to-date materials and mention that I can’t continue the project as I got an offer and am expected to join immediately. Also, I’ll mention that I’ll be at the university on Thursday to return my ID and meet the group for the last time. What are your thoughts on this? I want end on a high note with my professor. <Q> While it is a little tricky, you should not worry too much, even if you have some bad emotions about it - any honorable person would feel "bad". <S> You just contact the supervisor / professor and explain to him that you accepted to continue the project as you were not employed. <S> But now things are different, and employment is much more important that any pro-bono activity. <S> At the same time, depending on your time, feelings, availability, interest in the project, you may suggest to the professor to reorganize the project / schedule in order to fit to your current reality - an employee at another institution / business. <A> Chances are slim that your supervisor will be happy to see you going in the middle of your project. <S> Never mind your unpaid offer. <S> I would highly recommend not burning your bridges. <S> Find some middle path. <S> If you cannot complete the whole project, do something that would add value to your work like code some modules on weekends as in work from home when you have joined your new company since you work remotely <S> it shouldn't be that troublesome. <A> As this is Workplace, I'll give a generic Workplace answer. <S> This is 100% your current employers problem. <S> You have no notice period, no contract, and therefore they have no right to assume you'll be working for them at any specific time or date. <S> If they don't have plans in place to deal with the contingency that you leave without notice, then they should have asked you to agree a notice period (and probably paid you!) <S> If you want to be generous, Ask them how you can help them with their problem. <S> If they come up with some ideas that are acceptable to you, accept if you wish. <A> I will suggest not leaving the project as is. <S> Explain to your professor that the project now will be delayed as you found a job. <S> Or even better, you can find someone to take your place. <S> I was in a similar, but not identical situation. <S> After I finished my BSc <S> I started my job hunting <S> but in the meantime, I accepted an offer from a Masters student to help her in some coding and programming. <S> Once I was contacted by a company, I started involving a friend on the project and the code. <S> I told her about the new job and also told her about my friend, she was ok with that. <S> Once I started the new job, I worked during 1-2 weeks with them in my free time, and then just gave my friend kind of support on the code I wrote. <S> Everyone was happy. <A> As a full-time worker who is also doing a Ph.D. I'd suggest you try to keep up with both things, provided you have the time and the energy. <S> As @Gabrielle points out, there is no need to burn any bridges; and in my opinion this is also true from your supervisor's perspective. <S> So, my approach would be to find a way that you can still work on that paper. <S> I'd go something like this: <S> Hey supervisor <S> : I accepted a job position starting in March. <S> Still, I am very interested in the on-going project we have at hand, so I was wondering how could we make ends meet in order to complete it while I also comply with my responsibilities at my new workplace. <S> Can we have a meeting to discuss it? <S> It is in your best interest, both academic and carrer-wise, to have as many (non-rubbish) papers published as you can, and it is also in your supervisor's best interest to mentor as many good-research-producing people as he <S> / <S> she can, so I really see no reasonable scenario where he/she does not find a way to fit you into the project regardless of your current or future circumstances. <S> Actually, I'd say that this is also part of his/her duties as a research manager of sorts.
| Offer yourself to do some work on your own time, and ask if someone in the group can continue with the project under your advice.
|
Game development and e-reputation I am currently working as IT architect / tech expert. In my free time, I have developed a few apps and made them available on stores. Some of these are utility apps, some of these are games. I've added links to those apps on my personal website. I wonder if having games published under my name may hurt my e-reputation, as game development might not be considered a professional or mature hobby? I'm working in Europe where people might have a different view on this topic than in the U.S. Maybe I should publish/reference these games anonymously, on another website? <Q> Games are serious stuff. <S> Unless they've been badly received, then it makes sense to highlight these in your resume. <S> Be prepared, however, to discuss any coding techniques, frameworks, integrations and issues you overcame in designing and building these apps. <S> Don't shove these to the back of your resume and attempt to play them down, there's valuable code in them there games! <A> Be sure to keep your CV updated properly, with the relevant work. <S> Employers usually care about the profit you can make for them. <S> I think it will not hurt to put this effort of yours into the CV. <S> I would add it at the "Hobbies" section. <S> Making "small" games can be considered a hobby. <S> If somebody looks intrigued by this "hobby", explain them how it keep your mind / brain focused and trained, while expanding the ways of thinking. <S> You are afraid that your games can be seen as a "damage". <S> You should present them from the start as they are: a tool to train yourself, an additional technical skill. <S> Heck, if you are "brave" enough, you can even put it in the "Experience" section in your CV. <S> Especially if you even make some money (amount may be irrelevant for the discussion, unless it helps you get rich). <A> Games are seen as needing a high level of programming knowledge and especially structure and more abstract thinking about code and flow than something like enterprise applications <S> so I would definitely highlight them in your CV. <S> Smaller ones may not grab much attention but if you have any medium size projects the code structure alone can be a big bonus point for anyone looking through your portfolio. <A> Games are highly technical, difficult-to-make software. <S> The only way you could possibly damage your reputation is by going the way of Digital Homicide (create crappily put-together asset-flip games and falsely DMCA anyone who criticises you) Just because it doesn't have a serious use <S> doesn't mean that serious work doesn't go into making one. <S> If anything it shows off your skills with the likes of C# (almost all available game engines use this as a scripting engine). <A> The important question isn't whether these apps are games, it's whether they look crap or whether they look professional. <S> This applies to all those apps! <S> Games do not lower what people think of your qualifications. <S> They might affect how good a cultural fit you are considered as though. <S> "Looking crap" is possible by either visually looking totally outdated and done with outdated technology or UI design having lots of negative reviews, particularly regarding bugs being strongly associated with controversial topics, like extremist propaganda, or dealing with distasteful topics, like a game that only consists of literal crap pieces jumping around or with sexist, paedophile etc. <S> topics. <S> Note that there is somewhat of a grey area with borderline cases especially with regard to the third point controversial topics. <S> What's totally okay if you apply to one company might be a red flag to another company. <S> So if in doubt, you may want to put those apps that go into a potentially controversial topic under a different name to keep your options as broad as possible and only reveal them, when you think that kind of topic/humour etc. <S> is fine with the company you are applying too. <S> Cultural Fit : <S> E.g. if you apply to a gaming company, they might be a big plus. <S> If you apply to a very conservative company of family people, you might be considered as a bit of a gaming geek who still spends his time with games. <S> Whether you would want to work in a company that considers being interested in games as a hobby a minus point, you have to decide yourself. <S> I.e. if this is a criterium for how well a fit with the company you are then it might also a criterium how good a fit the company is for you...
| There is one aspect in which the apps being games might influence how you are perceived: They might be used to gauge whether you fit the team. There's not really a stigma against game developers, at least in Europe, so there's no real reason for you to not include them.
|
What really is true equality I have recently come upon a problem as an employer. I have a software company, and for the most part we have 1,2 big projects going at a time, and then smaller side projects. Sometimes deadlines are really pushing and we need everyone to give their best. From the current time planning, it is clear that one of the big projects will come into the finish phase around May this year. Last year around this time I ran into problems with some employees, with Islam being their religious affiliation. They simply said that they are fasting and cannot work to their fullest. Their performance dropped noticeably, and I had to push more work on other employees, which did not seem fair, but at the time I did not know any better. I am trying to treat everyone equal and yet the best possible, because from my experience a happy employee is a productive employee, but there have been some bumps on the road. First, some employees have complained that Muslim employees get 3 times a day off for 5 minutes for praying, and non muslims have requested a 15 minute break as well(Which I find petty), however, since the praying time does not fall within the regular breaks, I do not know how to handle this request. On one hand, they are spending this time to pray, but on the other hand, it is time their colleagues are working. What do I do about this? Do I say that prayers have to match lunch breaks, or do I give extra 15 to everyone? Furthermore, some senior developers have expressed their concerns regarding the project mentioned above, since last year it got hectic, and we are now aware of incoming problems during fasting. As I see it, employees that fast are not reliable during this period, and I was thinking of reassigning them to the smaller projects and pulling in other workers during the fasting time. However, can this be seen as discriminatory? I think not, but maybe I am wrong? As I see it, I provide them with a job and projects, but leaving them on the main team would jeopardize the project, company, and ultimately the jobs of all employees. And it is true that during fasting they cannot perform at the level of others. So these are my main 2 questions, but I am going to rant a bit now: There are so many religions today, and we as employers are not allowed to discriminate against someone by not hiring them based on their religion, which is understandable. But what if someone comes with ridiculous requests based on their religion (Just speculating)? For example, "My religion requires me to take a nap for 30 minutes at 15:00 to please the God". It is a silly example, but could I refuse the position to this fictional man, or offer him lower,proportional salary? <Q> 3 times a day off for 5 minutes <S> That is the least of your problems. <S> If you have smokers in the company, make a statistic about their breaks - from my experience, each break of each smoker is longer than that. <S> Also, make a "statistic" about how much time you need every day to excrete all the coffee and sodas <S> - I think it beats the 15 min for praying. <S> Also, taking a few small breaks throughout a day actually helps productivity .There <S> are countless resources on this subject, I will not go into the details. <S> On the other hand, "objective" measurement of productivity is another thing. <S> And this means finding true fairness, not true equality . <S> You cannot judge a fish's performance by its speed climbing a tree. <S> What you can do: give bonuses for high quality work; give bonuses for additional / overtime work; <S> make proper project schedules, according to the realities of life, including fasting etc. ; reduce the work time of the people with low performance during the low performance time, reducing payment accordingly. <S> NOTE: <S> nothing what I wrote is related to any religion . <S> It is related to performance and delivery of results . <S> Christians go through fasting periods also (Easter, Christmas...) <S> - even if not followed as strictly. <S> Other religions have other habits. <S> In order to implement these techniques, you need to "design" measurable tasks - measurable in terms of quality, cost, duration. <S> could I refuse the position to this fictional man, or offer him lower, proportional salary? <S> Just as I said, yes! <S> you can lower the salary of anyone. <S> Mandatory condition: tasks are measurable, and payment is done according to the measurements. <S> In that way, you cannot be accused of discrimination or bad practices - it is strictly about work. <A> You judge employees by what they achieve, religion doesn’t come into it. <S> That’s it. <S> The person should ask their peers what they can do to avoid a performance drop. <S> There are some professional Muslim football players in the U.K., and they handle this. <S> If my performance drops because I decided to drink too much, you should do the same: Judge my performance. <A> You need to speak with an employment lawyer and act according to their advice. <S> Regarding project assignments, you can assign whomever you want to whichever project without any explanation. <S> If asked, stating religous customs as the reason would potentially invite trouble and <S> I'm sure there are many reasons to assign someone a specific task... <S> not that you'd be required to justify your decision. <A> It's often not about just being fair, but also being perceived to be fair. <S> I'm non-religious and I schedule my own breaks, as long as the work is done at the end of the day, but I certainly sympathise with your non-religious employees feeling peeved at this extra privilege. <S> Because make no mistake, if breaks are rationed, it is a privilege. <S> If, for example, you need at least 2 people behind the counter at all times, it should be easy for them to self-coordinate. <S> Then match everyone's break time to what the religious employees are currently getting, and that's that problem addressed. <S> The issue of performance can also be addressed because it's easy to plan for , now that you know about it. <S> You said you work with projects, so you can plan those resources at 50% capacity. <S> Going into fine discussion of equality doesn't help much here, but you can, as an administrator, address the performance issue with a stroke of a pen.
| If they do not work enough / with good quality / etc... then you need to re-think the strategy. If it makes sense with your workload, you can either get rid of the set break times, and let your employees schedule that between themselves. If someone’s performance drops because they are doing something for religious reasons, then their performance drops.
|
Partially accepted for one job, have an interview scheduled for another - withdraw or proceed? A friend, Alice, applied to a few jobs. Some didn't pan out, then the best fitting one offered a job. Alice accepted that job verbally, received a background check clearance form and signed it, and now they're waiting the ~7 days necessary for the background check to complete and an official job offer to be made and accepted. During this time Alice is wary of taking any action based on the job offer. For example, Alice's current position asks for 2-4 weeks notice and the new employer encouraged her to give notice to her current job, assuring that the background check is just busy work and they have no doubt Alice will pass. It is likely Alice will pass, no expected issues with her background or eligibility for the job. Alice is going to wait and only give notice once a formal job offer is signed by both parties . The question is about an interview Alice has scheduled for another job. This is a decent fitting job, though not as good as what she got offered and (unofficially/pre-background check) accepted. On the one hand, it's risky and rude to continue interviewing for other positions after having accepted a job. On the other hand, Alice feels she hasn't 100% gotten a new job, so it feels risky to withdraw from other opportunities. This alternate job is a 2nd/3rd round interview so she is far into the process, but she expects she'd have a full job offer before she has to make a decision at this alternate job (and if forced to decide, she'd say no to anyone other than the tentatively-accepted job of course). What is safest/most professional in this case? Proceeding with the final interview round at the alternate job, or withdrawing from it ASAP? There's probably 3-5 days between interview at alt job & completion of background check at tentative new job. It's important to note that the two potential employers are separate companies but closely related work, and it wouldn't be surprising if management from both places interacts socially. <Q> The only time to withdraw is when the first offer becomes official (i.e. the company has extended a written offer and Alice has signed it ). <S> Anything can happen with the background check that could put the accepted position in jeopardy. <S> Until there is any one official written and signed offer, Alice should proceed as if she does not have a new job. <S> She should continue going to interviews and applying to companies. <A> On the one hand, it's risky and rude to continue interviewing for other positions after having accepted a job. <S> Verbal offers and acceptances are worth the paper they are printed on <S> Your friend does not have a job until they have officially accepted the job by signing the employment contract. <S> Alice's current position asks for 2-4 week notice and the new employer encouraged her to give notice to her current job If the new job needs her that bad, and they don't care about the background check, why are they doing it? <S> Just waive the background check and give an official offer. <S> Alice is doing the right thing by holding firm. <A> Alice should absolutely wait for the background check to be complete and satisfactory, and for the contract to be signed and in her hands, before resigning from her current position. <S> To do anything before that signed contract is in your hands is risky. <S> As for interviewing for the second position - why is that rude? <S> go right ahead and interview for it. <S> Alice has no cast-iron guarantee about the first job yet, so it's vital <S> she keep her options open should something weird crop up in the check <S> or if they just turn around and say "actually due to (x) we can't offer you the job anymore. <S> I'd personally be happy to interview for a job right up until the day before I started somewhere (and depending on the job, even after I started!). <A> Your friend doesn't have any new job yet.
| She should not give notice until she's accepted and signed for one of the other jobs.
|
Is it appropriate for a new junior member of the team to be included in a interview panel for a senior / lead role I work on the information security team at my company. We are currently looking to hire a senior security architect , a role that will require at least 7 - 10 years of previous hands - on experience designing, testing, and implementing IT security frameworks and controls. Our company operates in the regulated insurance industry, and security is fundamental to what we do as we interface with sensitive customer financial and private health data. Today, my manager was discussing with me the interview panel to interview applicants or this role, and I was somewhat surprised to see a new, junior member selected to be on this interview panel. This person is fresh out of college with only about 1.5 years of cybersecurity experience. I have about 5 years of experience in the InfoSec profession. Our team will primarily focus on the technical expertise of the candidates and I am not sure whether the limited experience of the new junior person is sufficient to adequately assess the technical competency of forthcoming candidates for the security architect role. The architect will have a prominent role, working with myself, other more senior members of the team, and management under the CISO to design and maintain security safeguards. Example of work can be seen here and here Generally, it has been my experience that the skills needed in cyber come from broad industry exposure, many years of experience, along with a certain degree of intuition. I hate to see our team suffer due to ineffective hiring. Question Would it be appropriate for me to push back a bit with my manager due to newcomer's limited prior job experience? How can I communicate my concerns about a lack of experience in a colleague for a particular task without coming across as rude or presumptuous? <Q> Yes, it would be appropriate if you think it wouldn't add value. <S> Be curious and ask questions. <S> Your supervisor might have great ideas as to why the junior person might be of, or gain, great value form being in the room. <S> As an aside, junior people are excellent value in interviews. <S> You can ask them to explain concepts/patterns, etc. <S> to the junior person. <S> You can confer with the junior person afterwards to see how they felt about the way the person talked to them, explained the concept, checked for understanding, etc. <S> Your senior staff are the mentors for the more junior people on your team. <S> You want your team to look up to them, want to learn from them, and be able to learn from them. <S> You get insight in to how the person interacts with those who are obviously junior to them. <S> Do they treat them respectfully? <S> Do they ask questions to gauge where that person is at before launching in to their explanation? <S> They get insight in to the hiring process, get to observe people who are more experienced in interviewing, to feel like their opinions matter (they should, they actually work for you), that they are valued, and that the company is positioning them for growth. <A> Would it be appropriate for me to push back a bit with my manager due to newcomer's limited prior job experience? <S> It highly depends on how you approach that pushback. <S> Just saying (or coming off as) <S> "I don't think this person should be on the interview panel <S> , they are inexperienced" could backfire. <S> You don't know the hiring process strategy they are going for, so starting right off with that is not going to land well. <S> You can, however, ask why this person is on the panel. <S> If the answer doesn't satisfy your concerns, that is when you can make an actual argument as to why you think they shouldn't be on there. <S> This is much better then leading with it because it shows that you don't presume to know better from the outside <S> you are interested in the success of the interview process. <S> As an aside, different people are often on interview panels for different reasons. <S> There's nothing wrong with having a bright junior on there, not really to assess technical competency, but more for interpersonal reasons. <S> For instance, these are things that could really interest the manager making the hiring decisions: <S> Can the candidate answer an appropriate question by a junior team member in terms they can understand (communication is important)? <S> Does the candidate treat even junior panel members respectfully? <S> Are there personality clashes between existing staff members and the candidate (this is why interview panels usually feature a broad slice of people the new hire will be working with)? <S> Are there special observations the junior member can share that others didn't notice because of a difference in perspective <S> (this is also why panels usually feature broad slices of people from the company - everyone has a different perspective. <S> Representing more perspectives leads to more informed hiring decisions)? <A> It's perfectly fine to include every member of the team ! <S> They'll have to work with that candidate if hired too. <S> The more junior people will learn a lot from this, at the same time can be evaluated how they behave in such settings. <S> They may have input <S> others didn't consider or miss. <S> Your position is inappropriate. <S> Going with this to your superior will most likely shine a negative light on you. <S> Are you insecure in your standing? <S> Do you have personal issues with that team member? <S> Are you a bad team player? <S> Do you have an elitist mindset? <S> Are you so full of yourself that you think juniors are unworthy of such a process? <S> Why do you question this decision and why does it bother you?
| Your manager hardly will hire someone or not based solely on that juniors recommendations!
|
Difference between Internship and job? I've noticed companies post lists of requirements for an intern role but they expect them to do everything that would be required by a particular role as an employee from day one. This is usually done to save on the cost as they offer a much lower salary and sometimes no salary at all. Is there anything that can be done legally against such companies which exploit candidates? What is the actual difference between internship and job and how can one convey this message to HR? <Q> In theory, at least, during an internship the company spends resources to train you to become an effective (and efficient) employee. <S> It is assumed that you are not very useful to the company during the internship, as you do not know how to do things. <S> On the other hand, if you are with a company as an employee, you are expected to know what to do and that you can bring profit to the company. <S> Of course, reality may prove different than theory, but that is a different story. <A> First of all, if you see any kind of job as an exploit don't do it at all, to save your time (and your employer's time as well). <S> The internship is usually a limited job for a very short time period. <S> (Maximum is about 6 months). <S> Internships are not bad, especially when you are a student. <S> Keep in mind that it costs time, money, and productivity to get the new members involved in the current team. <S> And also it takes time for the rest of the team to train you and help you understand the ongoing job. <A> What is the actual difference between internship and job and how can one convey this message to HR? <S> They already know the difference much better than any of us as to how it pertains to the individual company scenario, no need to explain. <A> To actually answer your question Is there anything that can be done legally against such companies which exploit candidates? <S> If you were capable of doing the same thing you would not be applying for an internship, you'd be applying for a job. <S> They're not exploiting candidates they're just looking to train people or find someone fully trained who is stupid/desperate enough to apply. <S> They don't force you into signing a contract, you can reject it if you're not happy with the pay or the terms. <S> If you have to do the exact same thing as people full time, why don't you apply for the job instead? <S> Can you do anything legally? <S> No. <S> I've noticed companies post lists of requirements for an intern role <S> but they expect them to do everything that would be required by a particular role as an employee from day one. <S> This is simply not true. <S> This is what you are going to be doing at some point during your internship. <S> Once trained and on the level of where you can do more advanced things it is correct that you may be doing a similar if not exact same thing for less wage.
| An internship is for training purposes.
|
Is a LinkedIn profile important for people in tech? From my time spent on LinkedIn recently, I get the feeling that most users are in marketing / digital marketing, sales, product management, accounting, and recruiting. Is LinkedIn important for software engineers, though? Or do people in tech meet in different spaces, say, Stack Overflow's careers website? My newsfeed on LinkedIn just seems to be a never-ending stream of recruiters and product managers saying very boastful things about themselves and their colleagues, e.g. saying they're remarkable, phenomenal, extraordinary. It's kind of annoying and I'd rather deactivate my LinkedIn account if it's not useful to me. It sometimes even feels like a slightly more professional version of Facebook. <Q> My last two contracts were from Linkedin contacts. <S> Found my current job through a Linkedin ad. <S> IMO a good Linkedin profile and a healthy set of contacts is very helpful in finding a job in the IT market. <S> Protip: <S> just unfollow the spammers. <S> I also report posts that are junk/unfit for LI. <A> It's just another avenue, you don't rely on it as a solution to a problem. <A> Were newspaper ads in job seeking pages listing your qualifications essential to find a job? <S> New (social) media are just another form of self advertisement combined with networking to multiply the chances. <S> None are essential or important. <S> They may however raise probabilities of getting hired and that's all they do. <A> Having a Linkedin profile helps you get found by recruiters. <S> That is sometimes quite annoying, but in the end it's how you find the best jobs, in my experience. <S> Way more helpful than having a profile is USING it. <S> Stay connected to people, congratulate them on achievements, send them birthday wishes, and ask how they are faring. <S> Every now and then, an opportunity will arise in the conversation. <S> You can take that yourself or refer one of your contacts. <S> In short: build a network! <A> My short answer, LinkedIn is not important for any people . <S> The biggest experience which I had by using LinkedIn was getting insane amounts of job-related spam. <S> I still have the account just because I am too lazy to delete it. <S> I am also a procrastinator. <S> It is much better to use dedicated sites, if you want to find a job. <S> Even better, search for companies that you want to work for, and contact them directly. <S> The worst experience on LinkedIn (happens all the time): the recruiters do not read the profile. <S> They do not care about the information you write. <S> It does not matter to them where you are, where you want to go. <S> Many times, it does not even matter that they write to you in a language which you do not even understand. <S> Worst recruiter: <S> she asked me explicitly to lie about the professional experience I had, just so she could land a contract and get some money. <S> I refused her and removed her from the list of contacts. <S> I also rejected her new attempts to become connected. <S> Edited to add: <S> You practically answered your own question in the question itself. <S> Your own conclusion is the conclusion of most real professionals I know. <A> I was actually contacted last month by an Amazon recruiter via LinkedIn. <S> The reason for contact was because my credentials and years of experience appeared to be a good match for one of their job openings. <S> I think the chances of direct contact by a reputable company really depends on your type of experience, and the number of years worked. <S> In my case I had database experience and turns out they needed additional experience to include that outside my actual job description. <S> For entry-level jobs, people just out of college, or those in the common fields that are saturated with applicants- <S> I suspect Linked is used to view your credentials after you've been selected for an interview but not necessarily as a tool to contact you for employment. <A> One of the first things we've done in the past when inviting someone to join us for an interview is to google them. <S> We work in a dynamic and friendly team and we want to ensure we don't have just a good technician but also someone we can enjoy spending our work days with. <S> If in that case we google the person and we find their linkedin profile, if it is good and professional that just satisfies the tech prospect of it. <S> If there is a Facebook account found, we just look around as well to see how they interact with others, if there are any newspaper articles, you get to know the person. <S> For example, one of my close friends when he came for the interview at my previous job, we looked him up and found that he had broken his leg during his honeymoon, this was something we raised during the interview <S> and it also helped bringing down his nervousness. <S> Interview is a 2 way street, they research you and if you can, you research them. <A> Yes. <S> In my opinion, it is by far the best way to find jobs in tech, as well as getting found by recruiters. <S> Every week I'm contacted by at least one recruiter asking if I'm interested in new opportunities, even though I have set my profile to "not looking for a new job". <S> There's simply tons of jobs in there. <S> I found my three last jobs in there, including one abroad.
| Linkedin is not just a good way of finding a job or being contacted for a job but it is also a tool used by recruiters when you apply in a different way. So, I think that yes, it is very important.
|
Joined a new company but not yet received the offer letter yet I have already joined the new company and have been working for the past 10 days but I haven't received any offer letter or salary breakage slip yet. Is it better to quit the job or continue. I don't know what to do. What will be the problems that occur when I leave the job.? <Q> Is it better to quit the job or continue. <S> Ask your boss what is happening first. <A> Never quit a job unless you have a new one or <S> you know you're not going to get paid. <S> Check with your manager or human resources, when will you be getting paid. <S> If it's not too far in the future then just wait. <S> If it's too far then find out how much. <S> Chalk it up as a good lesson for future jobs to make sure you have some sort of agreement before taking a new job. <S> Always be looking as an employer can drop you like a hat for any reason. <S> Always look out for your own interests. <A> First of all: You do have a contract, so don´t just stop showing up anymore. <S> Unfortunately you did not provide your country, but the base concept is the same in most developed places: You showed up and delivered your work, and they happily accepted your contributions. <S> So you now have kind of a silent agreement that you basically work there. <S> The problem is, non of the parameters of this contract are defined right now. <S> If you decide to stay, see that you get those parameters defined, in writing, as soon as possible. <S> You are in a good negotiation position since they already took you on board. <S> Most importantly: Salary , work-times, vacation, and notice periods. <S> If you want to leave, write a formal letter of resignation and inform yourself if there are any required minimum notice periods in your local law which you ma have to keep. <S> If you are in doubt weather they treat you fairly or they wont pay you or anything seek legal support. <S> Chances are they ow you some money!
| State your terms and only sign once the offer is acceptable.
|
Delayed on boarding process I am a recent graduate and I've just started at a mid size tech company as a junior developer. During my first few weeks, my team asked me create the requests to get my equipment/software after showing me a few times so I would have things to do. In the meantime, I shadowed others around me. What bothers me is that it's now been about 7 months and I do not have a computer and have been shadowing people this entire time. I have not completed a single task since I've started and have not contributed to anything. My team knows this is an issue and seem to brush it off as low priority when I bring it up. Even my manager says things like "don't worry, you're doing a good job". Is this a normal on boarding process and should I worry about it? <Q> If you want a future, you should be worried about this. <S> 7 months is a long time to be learning and gaining necessary skills to progress in your field. <S> If you have not done a task since starting <S> and you don't have a pc in a development role <S> what are you even doing? <S> You can only learn so much from shadowing, you need to be able to write and debug your own code and problems. <S> This is something you can only get good at through doing. <S> Maybe for you, you're getting paid and it's easy. <S> But in the future when it comes to getting another role as a junior developer <S> and you can't say what you've done at your previous company, you're going to be in for a long ride. <S> Remain at your job for now especially if your manager is happy but look for a new job elsewhere in your spare time. <S> You can continue to earn a wage for doing what seems like nothing whilst you find something that's going to help you develop your skills and value. <A> Welcome to the IT world! <S> On-boarding is usually delayed by IT related issues like the ones you mention but usually not for this long. <S> As long as your superior is happy with whatever you are doing, don't fret! <S> Just take advantage of learning as much as you can with anyone with more experience. <S> I know this may be very boring and you may not really be enjoying your work, so...change your attitude and make sure you have a notebook and a pen with you at all times. <S> Ask more questions and make notes, just get all the information you can from them. <S> You may want to look for a job if you start feeling a massive dive in motivation <S> but I would discuss this with your superior first as well. <S> Always make it sound the reason is that you feel like you are not helping enough as you don't have any of the required tools to carry out your job. <A> Onboarding can be a nightmare in IT, principally because you get to play with really expensive toys that can be broken very easily. <S> The larger the organization, the more the delays, and the more they stick to protocol, the worse. <S> If the equipment is requisitioned off-site, even more so. <S> I worked for a major communications company where it took three months, and a bank that took six, so seven is a bit long, but if you're being reassured by your team and your manager, don't worry.
| While your story is a bit on the extreme end of it, it's still not unheard of.
|
After following up and not be contacted, is it okay to make contact? I was reading this link , but my situation is a little different because I never had an interview. I submitted my application to a job posting twelve days ago, and after not hearing back from them, I decided to followup with an e-mail stating that I'm interested in the job, and looking forward to hearing from them. I re-submitted my resume/cover letter in the followup e-mail. I still have not heard anything from them. I assumed that I wasn't a good fit for the job, and so they passed on my application. The issue is, the job posting states that if you don't have any experience, they will train you. I have experience, some of which exceeds that of the requirements. My assumption is, given the simplicity of the job (data entry), a lot of people have applied, and they simply haven't reviewed my application yet. The job posting is still open, but I'm unsure of what to do, do I wait? Is it okay to make contact and ask about my application? I highlighted the word assumption because, no one has made contact, so I can only guess as to what is going on, which I know is dangerous, and making the wrong move could get my application tossed (again, I assume). <Q> You have already sent a follow up email so there is nothing additional for you to do. <S> The reasons they may not have contacted <S> you could be that they don't contact applicants who aren't considered for a position or that they have many applicants and have not had a chance to evaluate your application. <S> There are many other possible reasons for why they have not contacted you as well. <S> Regardless, you should not be "putting all your eggs in one basket". <S> If you are looking for new work you should be applying to several companies simultaneously. <S> It should not be such a big deal if any one company hasn't reached out to you as you should have several potential companies lined up. <A> I would suggest adding a country tag on this question. <S> I come from Portugal, before moving out of Portugal I sent 200 applications, by either dropping my CV in places, filling applications, going to job agencies... <S> The overwhelming response of 0 emails sent by them flooded by email account... <S> I moved to the UK and have received a response around 70-90% of the times a response when I have not been sucessfull. <S> Entry level jobs have a lower response rate as well. <S> Just understand that for them, you are 1 in X that has sent the application. <S> The fact you mention they offer training is often a blanked statement used in recruitment, if they had received 2 applications they may hire someone who needs training but <S> if they receive 1000 applications they will only contact the ones who don't require training as this is the most cost-efficient hire for the company they are hiring for. <S> Just carry on searching, change your CV about and try new things with it and see what works. <S> For example, if you want to do an entry job in Helpdesk, or administration or Data entry, then prepare a "specific" enough CV for each one of those and send them through when you are applying. <A> Hi, I just wanted to check in with you to let you know <S> I'm still interested in this position, and still available. <S> Thanks. <S> or something like that. <S> Use language like "checking in" and "following up". <S> Be courteous, not demanding, and you should be fine. <S> Do not send your application again, and keep following up until you either get a response, or see the job ad disappear. <S> I've known more than one candidate get hired simply because they were persistent.
| If this is the only company that you have applied to, I would recommend applying to others. In general, a follow up once per week isn't excessive, once every other week is fine, but it should be brief, maybe a line or two.
|
How to verify claims of entrepreneurial success in interview? We are an early stage startup looking to hire our first senior developer (other than myself). One applicant who applied and interviewed has no higher education or employment past sixth-form college (16-18years old; education before university). He claims that he and some friends started a company which they built for 4-5 years and then sold 1 year ago. He's now on the search for a job as he doesn't feel that he fit the new culture in the company he started. How can we (or is it even possible to) verify that his claims are true regarding starting this company, helping to build it into a success and then selling it? Some things to consider: The Sixth-form exam results were very good Questions in the interview revealed he does know what he is talking about (at least on the surface) He is listed as an ex-director on companies house (a government website), but this does not prove his further claims. E.g. he could simply have given the company to a friend! If his claims are true it would be a great bonus to him, since it would show independence and drive We are based in Bristol, UK We have Googled, there were no press releases regarding the sale. There was a post across the companies social media announcing it. <Q> Does it look professional? <S> Does it list any products? <S> Do the products appear genuine (not vaporware)? <S> Here in the US there are websites that list registered businesses along with their executives / major share holders. <S> I would expect the UK has similar registries. <S> Check when was the company registered. <S> Is the person listed as founder and/or is he listed on the board of directors or executives? <S> Usually mergers and change of ownership are also recorded. <A> I have the same question on resumes that I get claiming to have many years of experience as a consultant. <S> I've received resumes for junior staff claiming to have been "CEO" or "President" of a company while also holding down a staff position at some other company during the same span of time. <S> The problem is that in the US, anyone with less than $100 can form a company and claim to be whatever they want. <S> I could be an "Independent Consultant" with no customers at all for as many years as I want to keep renewing the paperwork. <S> I usually discount these positions as not even appearing on the applicant's work history. <S> If the resume still seems solid enough to warrant an interview, then we can discuss it in person. <A> The easiest and most honest is to ask the person to provide (any kind of) proof of his claims. <S> Ask him to tell you stories about the project and about the business. <S> 4-5 years is not half an hour. <S> There must be stories. <S> The sell of the company should be registered somewhere - if the company acted at least remotely legally. <S> Discuss with the buyers of the company. <S> They should have some non-confidential information which they can share. <S> Maybe he cannot give proofs for all details, but something - he must have. <S> Also, ask him about other ways how you can verify his claims. <S> If he really had that business, he will be cooperative. <S> If not... you will judge yourself. <S> I mean, it is customary for companies to ask for proofs, documents, test their candidates... <S> It would be just standard procedure.
| Check the company's website.
|
What do I do when I book travel at my expense, but my employer won't pay until the travel has happened? I work for Contracting Firm X which coordinated a long-term contract with Company Y (which is where I go to work each day). Firm X pays me and offers me benefits, handles basic HR functions, etc. However, they do not offer a credit card for me to use for expenses. "Just keep track of your expenses and you will be reimbursed in an upcoming paycheck" is basically the understanding we have. There is nothing in the contract I signed regarding expenses, timeliness of reimbursement, or anything to that effect. So Company Y asked me to travel overseas and gave me an itinerary to copy. The bill for the plane ticket alone came to thousands of dollars. Since neither Firm X nor Company Y gave me a credit card, I put it on my personal card thinking "Lucky me, look at all the points I'm getting". I submitted the expense report the same day and it was approved by all relevant parties (my manager at Company Y and the contact at Firm X). I thought I'd get an extra big paycheck that week to help pay off the massive credit card bill that was coming my way. That was 1.5 months ago. After numerous follow-up communications on my part and stalling on Firm X's, they finally told me that they have a policy of not reimbursing travel expenses that are large (larger than some unspecified amount) until the trip is actually taken to prevent someone from taking the money and quitting. As much I can understand their rationale, I can't for the life of me imagine how this is a good practice. It feels burdensome for a person with a limited line of credit to assume that debt for more than one billing cycle. So, If I were to go into debt because of this cost, would I bill them for my interest payments? Luckily I have enough in my savings to cover the credit card bill, but if I just paid the minimum and accrued a balance, that could hurt my credit and future ability to do exactly this thing they want me to do. And my other question, Is this a common practice, or am just at the mercy of an unfortunately stingy contracting firm? Is there anything I can do to get paid back quicker next time I need to travel? Note:I understand that there are details between Firm X and Company Y that I don't know about (it might take months for them to get reimbursed) which might be making things more complicated. <Q> I have a similar issue in my place of work where we're expected to pay for work-related travel expenses and then claim it back (no matter how much). <S> I found that telling my boss that I can't go to the meeting / conference / whatever because I can't afford the fare has them flashing the corporate credit card quicker than you can say "pay up!" <S> ... there is literally nothing in my contract of employment that states I must have sufficient spare cash to pay for whimsical (or vital) jaunts to wherever they fancy sending me at all times, so I say if they want me to go, they can pay... <S> This rule has never failed me yet (with this current employer) and is based on very similar experiences to the OP in the past. <A> Is this a common practice, or am just at the mercy of an unfortunately stingy contracting firm? <S> You are at the mercy of whatever contract you signed and the legal practices of the firm you work for. <S> As you wrote "Just keep track of your expenses and you will be reimbursed in an upcoming paycheck" is basically the understanding [you] have. <S> I agree that it is burdensome <S> and I would ask that they consider at least a partial payment. <S> But it appears this is what you agreed to. <S> That was 1.5 months ago. <S> After numerous follow-up communications on my part and stalling on Firm X's, they finally told me that they have a policy of not reimbursing travel expenses that are large (larger than some unspecified amount) until the trip is actually taken to prevent someone from taking the money and quitting. <S> Sounds like they are encouraging you to book your expenses at the last minute. <S> While that's often a more expensive way to do it, the cost will be borne by the company. <A> At my company, we are allowed to submit for airfare before the trip because, as you noted, it can be quite large. <S> If they won't do prior reimbursement, then submit for it as soon as you fly. <S> Like that morning, while you are waiting at the gate. <S> Be prepared for future flights, and push for them to pay for the ticket. <A> I guess you haven't traveled yet, and they're offering to pay you after you traveled. <S> NOTE <S> WELL: <S> Credit card companies love love love it when you carry a balance. <S> Unless you don't pay at least the minimum bill on time, carrying a balance is GOOD for your credit score, not bad. <S> As a contractor, you're basically running a small business. <S> Sometimes small business people take the risk of customers paying their bills slowly. <S> You've taken that risk in this case, because your company balks at paying for travel in advance. <S> What can you do about it? <S> Not much at this point. <S> Carry the balance on your credit card until you travel. <S> Pay your credit card bill out of pocket, but deduct the amount for this ticket. <S> Pay at least the card's minimum. <S> GET TO KNOW THE PERSON WHO PAYS YOUR EXPENSE CLAIMS. <S> Ask them how to write your claim so it gets approved rather than rejected. <S> Then write your claim for all your out-of-pocket expenses. <S> Make sure they don't apply witholding taxes to your expense claim amount. <S> It's not taxable wages, it's money they owe you. <S> Going forward, get a dedicated credit card for business expenses, and don't use it for anything else. <S> Then you can use it for this kind of thing and keep your costs sorted out. <S> Don't get one of those green Amex cards that require you to pay it off each month, obviously. <S> Going forward, make your travel reservations at the last minute, even if it's much more expensive. <S> These guys have made it clear they don't want to take the discount on advance reservations. <S> (You can check this with your new friend the person who pays your expenses.) <S> Think of the interest as a cost of doing business. <S> If you can get it paid back, great. <S> If not, Is a couple of hundred dollars worth a day of your time and hassle?
| Ask them if you can submit a claim for your credit card interest expenses as well as the cost of the ticket.
|
How should I ask my boss for vacation days for a period after my contract may end To give some context: I'm 21 and I've worked in IT fields since I graduated from HS, I was hired at this company last June for a 4 months fixed-term contract , I was usually assigned to a wide range of different operations since I'm the only IT guy of the department. Eventually they extended my contract for another 8 months because I started working on an important project. Out of my work life, I'm currently attending a training course, at a local catholic foundation, to become a missionary. Basically, this group, holds this course for 9 months, while in the summer they become unavailable because they actually go on missions with the people that attended the course during the year, most of the missions occur in August and last an entire month. I'd really love to leave and go for a mission but I don't know how to bring this up to my boss for a couple of reasons: The law in my country expects fixed-term contracts to last no more than 1 year, therefore if the company wanted to keep me they won't be able to extend my actual contract but have to switch to a new one; I'm afraid they will think I'm too pushy if I hurry them to take a decision, but at the same time I don't want to find it out too late; Asking for a month of vacation may appear a bit 'extreme', I don't want to sound pretentious as it could negatively affect their opinion and my chance to stay in this company. So my question is: How can I let my boss know that, in case they'd want to rehire me, I'm going to request for a quite long vacation period, without sounding pushy or pretentious? <Q> Split it up into steps. <S> Find out if they are going to give you another contract first. <S> Once you find out, when signing or negotiating your contract. <S> Bring it up and simply say that you wish to take a month's holiday off for personal activities. <A> This is a twofold question, really. <S> It all depends on the relationship you have formed with your boss and company. <S> In the UK if you have worked for a company for over a year, some of them will offer you the opportunity to take "sabbatical leave", unpaid leave for a period of up to 1 year where your position is left available for you. <S> You should have in your current contract a notice period, <S> if you are outside of the notice period, then not much you can push for, if you are already within that period just remind them of that. <S> This is usually well regarded when asked and some employers would even sponsor you (at least in the UK). <A> Here is what I would do: Nothing! <S> At some point they will come to you to talk about extending your contract or not. <S> IF they don´t want to extend, you have no trouble at all. <S> If the want to extend, you just tell them that you have already taken commitments elsewhere <S> so you can´t give them August. <S> If that´s okay with them you are happy to accept another contract which leaves you free for August. <S> That way you don´t push at all, you let them come to you. <S> You are also not pretentious, you just have made some other plans they now need to take into account. <S> You are in a much stronger negotiation period if the already decided (and planned) that they want something from you. <S> Don´t worry to much about putting them in a hard place with their projects. <S> They are professionals, and they thought securing your workforce was less important for them than potential costs of termination <S> , should they not want to continue with you. <S> Else they would have given you a regular contract (with vacation days). <S> PS: If time runs out, you can just remind your boss that you need to talk about your availability, should they want to keep you around, as you already began to make plans for the time after. <S> Then again, you let them come to you...
| When you are told that the contract is being renewed/you are being made permanent explain that you would like to be allowed 1 month off unpaid as you are planning on leaving for a voluntary mission. Ask for a meeting with your boss and ask him what the prospects are for the contract renewal. You don´t ow anything more than you signed for!
|
Leaving first career job after 2 years of experience without any offer in hand and take a break of 3 months I am 25 years old with 24 months of experience as a software developer in a startup. I took this role rejecting all other good paying jobs due to awesome projects. But now I feel my current role is holding back my career progress as I am unable to properly learn industry standard technologies, and it is affecting my health due to unbearable amount of stress caused by poor management and work load. Startup background: Service Based 4 years old startup 25 employees ( 10 developers ) 3 developers per project ( average ) Pros: Flexible work hours 10 days of work from home per month Cons: Very hard to take leaves since team size is small. salary is way below average for 24 months of experience. Poor management. No vision for company Poor growth ( developer team never went beyond 30 in size. Employee turn over rate is increasing ) No appraisals. ( Need to submit proof of all work done) No work life balance. No perks. standard practices are not followed. (no one in the team is experienced for more than 3 years) Notice period duration is 2 months My Background: This is my first company after college ( B.Tech). 24 Months of experience Worked on 4 projects. Experience in django, php, angular, node, mongodb, postgres, automated server deployment devops etc. ( all under same company ) Good in data structures and algorithms ( codeforces rating: 1900+) Worked on multiple personal projects in college. (one android app has community of 200 thousand users) I want to leave this job and take a break for 3-4 months to focus on learning new skills, personal projects and later find good fit job. Will this look bad for my next employer, I'm afraid it will negatively impact me? I'm afraid about telling my boss that I would like to leave as this is my first job.Will my current experience land me a good job? <Q> I've given few interviews and got decent offers, but I'm feeling afraid about telling my boss that I would like to leave as this is my first job. <S> Rule of thumb is you never leave your current job without another offer signed. <S> I am not sure what make you afraid of telling your boss about your leaving, if you feel he/she will physically hurt you <S> (I hope not), you probably should seek for law enforcement help. <S> If you are simply afraid of burning a bridge, as long as you have a decent offer in hand I won't value a bridge in a startup company having poor growth for 2 years that much, so yes if you have to then burn it. <S> And after all, you are leaving this company, whether you go for a new job or a 3-4 month break has nothing to do with your boss anymore, and I don't think he <S> /she would really care which is the reason. <S> And if you really think you need some time for a break, negotiate with whoever's providing you the offer, make the starting date 2-3 month later (or as late as both of you can agree with). <S> After signed, you can hand in your 2 week letter and enjoy your break! <A> My advice to you is to not bother with taking a break, and to take a job offer that looks good to you now before you quit. <S> If you actually have familiarity with everything you listed, then you're probably capable of picking things up pretty quickly. <S> You will have to learn new things and new skills at any job in software that you take; every company that is worth working for will expect this to take 3 to 6 months while you are starting to work for them. <S> It is better to do the learning while being paid and employed. <S> Your post reads like you are someone who is probably capable of doing this, and probably more capable than you know. <S> Another downside to taking time off with the explicit goal of learning new things to use professionally, is that you have no idea whether or not the skills you pick will be the useful ones to you professionally, because you don't know what job you're going to end up with at the end of the process. <S> Trying to guess what the right things to learn are is hard, and when you're not constrained by an actual problem faced by actual people who actually want software, you're less likely to pick the useful things to learn and more likely to pick today's fad, whatever that is. <S> There are many fads, but they're only plainly visible as such years after the fact or in the face of an actual problem where they disappoint. <S> If after all of that, you still want to take a break, three months is not a very long time between jobs. <S> I remember a time before the job market for software became very high-demand, and it was not unusual to spend that much time on a job search. <A> I've given few interviews and got decent offers, but I'm feeling afraid about telling my boss that I would like to leave as this is my first job. <S> Since you'd have to tell your boss you were leaving if you took the 2-3 month break <S> I'm not sure why you can't just take one of the aforementioned "decent offers" I understand that telling someone you are leaving - especially for your first job can be stressful for you <S> but honestly it won't be as bad as you think. <A> Will this look bad for my next employer? <S> Not necessarily. <S> There is a chance that it will, yes. <S> However, many employers will ignore it until the interview stage. <S> This is where you can explain what you have been doing. <S> If your 3-4 months break is to gain experience and skills within your current field. <S> Then you could quite well argue that you have been developing as a professional. <S> Will my current experience land me a good job? <S> Depends on the skills you've developed in your experience. <S> Everyone can say 2 years of experience with php etc... <S> but how good are you at php developing? <S> That's what determines value in the market. <S> Although if this is what you wish to do then it's not all negative.
| I fully recommend you take time after you finish work to develop skills and work on your own projects rather than quitting before lining up a new job. If you already have an offer that you feel comfortable with, take it .
|
Giving notice on a Friday or Monday I work as a software engineer in the US and planned to give notice this Friday because we get our bonuses that day and I don't want to give them the chance to fire me beforehand. Friday ended up falling on a day off due to a night long monitoring the night before that I have to take part in. Do I send an email on Friday afternoon with my resignation, or do I give them less time but do it on Monday while I'm in the office? I've only quit one job and that was in very different circumstances so I'm not sure of the best way to keep my reputation in tact here. Either way I'm starting my new job on Monday in two weeks. <Q> Do I send an email on Friday afternoon with my resignation or do I give them less time but do it on Monday while I'm in the office? <S> That's the professional way to resign. <S> And you tell them that your last day will be a week from Friday. <S> You are still giving them two week's notice. <S> It includes that Monday, the rest of the week, and the rest of the following week. <A> As long as you are within your notice period I don't think it makes too much of a difference. <A> I'm not sure why you specifically want to resign on Friday <S> but I wouldn't do it by mail . <S> I'd prepare a mail, sure, declaring my resignation in clear and objective terms. <S> But first I would go and discuss with my boss/superior to explain to him that I plan to leave and why. <S> The "why" is not mandatory, it will depends on your relation with your boss and the actual reasons ("I'm leaving because I don't like you" is not something you'll want to share). <S> At the end of the meeting you'll inform your boss that you will send him a mail to officially start the process (notice period and all).
| You resign in person on Monday morning. Most offices will tend to be emptier on Friday afternoon, so there is a chance no one will be there to see it, or do any action from it anyway.
|
How not to do a technical interview I would like to share a recent experience of mine and would like to ask your opinion. I have applied to a position and passed several interviews, especially the one with the hiring manager went really well, I felt like "we have connected on a professional level", he liked my answers and expressed that, and I could see myself working with this person for a long time. Last step was to do a technical interview because I was going to be working with language "x". The technical interview was scheduled for 30 minutes and it was on video and we were using a website for coding practice. The details about the technical interview were Time was not enough, the interviewer was 5 minutes late He asked me to write a function and I did, the code that he had to check the function did not work because he had typos, spent couple of minutes to fix that The interviewer asked questions related to how to handle certain version being not supported in the near future and how to solve a problem he has for that day instead of asking questions to assess my knowledge about the language Right after the interview ended I thought "this was terrible, he could've asked 10-12 different things but he did not!" Later on I was told I couldn't pass the technical interview. I have done technical interviews in the past, I know how it's supposed to go. The person on the other side of the table clearly should not be doing interviews, from my experience with him he doesn't know how to do it.Especially for number 3 above he should've asked these after he assessed my knowledge about the language as "extra" questions. My questions to you guys Does it worth to ask for reassessment, would they do it? Should I send this as a feedback, so maybe they can coach the interviewer for future My gut feeling is they will not be receptive to both <Q> I think you dodged a bullet there. <S> If they can't organize the code for a technical interview properly, heaven knows what their development process is like. <S> As to your questions: I have been offered a second shot at a technical interview twice in the past. <S> However, on both occasions the employer realized they'd screwed up without any prompting from me, so your chances are slimmer if you've got to convince them <S> it was their fault. <S> I took one of them again, but didn't get the job. <S> Wild horses couldn't have dragged me back to the other one; I politely withdrew my application. <S> You can. <S> However, again, try not to put pride before professionalism. <S> It's not your job to assess the suitability of the interviewer, and having negative things to say about an employee they may value <S> (even if you have no clue as to how or why) is only going to needlessly burn bridges. <A> Should I send this as a feedback, so maybe they can coach the interviewer for future <S> No. <S> You can send them feedback, but stick to the facts. <S> You can give feedback the interviewer was late, and that time was lost because the checking software had typos (but phrase it such away that non technical people can understand). <S> But don't give as feedback that the interviewer isn't up to the task, or that he wasn't asking the right questions. <S> Stating the the interviewer shouldn't be doing interview is absolute out of order. <S> Any recruiter worth her/ <S> his salt will delete that feedback, and put you on the "don't ever bother with this person again" list. <S> You should keep it professional, and mudslinging isn't part of that. <A> It would make sense to give them feedback, expressing you feel you didn't get a chance to show off your full abilities. <S> They might have a policy around reinterviewing. <S> Most of the times the companies will have a time period of months before they can reassess someone. <S> Keep in mind if you did work for the company you might have to work with the interviewer. <S> It would make it awkward if they let you reinterview. <S> Personally if the interview process was that bad I would see it as a red flag and move onto other companies.
| Point out the indisputable facts about what went wrong, and leave it at that.
|
What would a prospective employer's impression of someone having taken a "lower ranked" job to achieve a personal goal? I'm an Australian software engineer in a bit of a limbo state between junior and established, having done a Masters degree before starting my first engineering job just under three years ago, kind of "skipping over" being an entry level hire in the industry here. Currently, due to reaching a perfect point in my life to do so, I'm looking to relocate to the US where there's more opportunities, a better lifestyle for me, and for the life experience of moving away from the city I've spent my whole life in to the place I've spent my whole life observing from afar! The search for a role over there is going better than I was worried about initially, in that I was afraid my resume would be binned immediately when they saw I was Australian, but it's quickly become apparent that in a more competitive job market I might be not be considered for the same positions I'm pursued for here - especially with the relocation factor. I'm considering whether I should be scoping my search to roles where I'd be competing against people with less education and experience than my own, e.g. junior roles, QA or support instead of development, et cetera - in fact such an opportunity exists with my current multinational employer. Once I had some experience in the US, I'm confident I'd be able to get back to where I am now career wise in a few years - but my concern is, would a "step backwards" on my resume raise any eyebrows? Or would it be easy to explain that I did what I needed to do to achieve my goal, overachieved in the more junior position, and perhaps even show a willingness to do what's asked of me while also making sacrifices for long term gains? Edit with some extra info based on some questions/comments: one of the "downgrade" roles is for a household name organisation another is for my own current employer, and actually targets a big need/skill gap in the org right now Australians qualify for a very good visa that's free and quick to obtain; also it requires that the role ask for a degree, so we're not talking about a downgrade to phone support here, more like a downgrade to a fresh graduate job <Q> I did the same thing... <S> sort of. <S> I moved to Belgium <S> so my wife <S> and I could experience Europe/European culture first hand (and travel, of course). <S> I took my time and landed a role at an international company where only speaking English is ok. <S> My advice to you is don't downgrade. <S> Take your time and you will find a job at your skill level. <S> The US is ripe with opportunities for developers at all levels. <S> I would recommend not taking a position in QA unless that is what you really want to do. <S> Don't get me wrong, QA is a fine position, if that's what brings you joy. <S> But once you start in it and your resume reflects that you have been doing that for years (and not development), making the jump into anything other than a junior developer role becomes increasingly more difficult. <S> Take a junior dev role, if you must, but again, I don't recommend looking for something that is a step backwards. <S> The important thing to remember is to know your strengths and sell yourself. <S> It's worked for me for 25 years, and now my wife and I are living the dream. <A> We all have goals. <S> Most of us make sacrifices to achieve them. <S> If you explained to me in an interview the decisions you made and the risks you took in order to achieve what you think is a better life for yourself I would respect it. <S> It won't be a problem until you have a lot of those decisions to explain. <S> Then you look flaky. <S> Or unable to accurately assess what kind of lifestyle you want. <S> Or unable to determine how to make it happen. <S> This would be a non-issue for me. <A> If you had the opportunity to explain (e.g. "I always wanted to spend a few years in the US...") <S> a reasonable hiring manager would understand that, but you don't always get the chance to explain. <S> That said, I think looking to take a less competitive role will actually make it harder to get hired in the US: dealing with immigration, and paying for immigration lawyers, is a pain. <S> If there are multiple strong candidates for a role, I think most managers wouldn't consider someone with comes with the extra baggage of dealing with immigration. <S> The less competitive the role, the higher the chance there are many competitive candidates which don't require any extra effort to bring aboard. <S> Separately, on a well functioning team, the manager doesn't necessarily want an employee who is (significantly) "over qualified" for the role - it can lead to that employee being very bored (if he's only assigned the work of the role), resentment of that employee's peers (if that employee instead gets assigned more interesting work), etc. <A> A drop in relative pay or seniority is unlikely to be a deal breaker (it may make it harder to get back to your previous level, but that’s going to depend on a variety of unknowns). <S> Switching careers is more problematic in both the short and long term. <S> Short term, except for a short term contract, you are in the same position as people that are over qualified are — companies are likely to question your commitment to the position, figuring that you’ll stick around until your preferred position becomes available. <S> If that position isn’t with them, then the effort involved in hiring you is likely to be wasted. <S> Long term, you have the same problem just in the opposite direction — <S> if you’ve changed career tracks and stuck it out, that will make future employers question which is your desired track, ie will you stick with them for a reasonable amount of time. <S> Neither pay nor career track will be insurmountable issues, both are likely to have consequences. <S> The least impact will come from taking a junior position, because it’s one you can fix without leaving your new position. <S> Once you’re back to your prior level, you shouldn’t have any future problems because of it.
| If you take a junior position explaining that you are doing it for personal goal reasons, and hope to advance back to a senior position with your new company in a year or three, you will seem reasonable and committed as well as a nice bargain for a while. It is hard to know if the "step backwards" would hurt or not.
|
Coworker makes offensive comments outside office hours - should I raise this with HR? A coworker of mine has recently made a series of jokes in poor taste regarding rape - an excerpt, verbatim: "It's always the right time for a rape joke" all outside of the office/work hours. He's smart enough to know that there are certain lines he can't cross when he's at work, so he usually doesn't make inappropriate comments during work hours, but that doesn't seem to mean that he actually understands why he shouldn't make those comments. I've called him out a little over a year ago for posting a comic that inferred rape on a company-wide slack channel, and at that time, I didn't bring it up to the level of HR mediation. His response was that I didn't know how to take a joke, and it's only when another male coworker confirmed that it was inappropriate that he took it down (I'm female). Since then, he hasn't made rape-related jokes during work hours, or at the office. He was more in check when he initially started at our company, but as he's approaching his second anniversary, he's showing more of his colors. Typically, his conduct comes off as passive-aggressively sexist (frequently dismissing opinions from female coworkers whereas he doesn't with male coworkers, even if their opinion turns out to be wrong), and I'm wondering if all of this is stemming from the fact that he lacks respect for women. As these are more or less private comments he made outside of work hours, reporting it feels like I'm infringing on his privacy, but privacy isn't a clause that exonerates people from criminal activity or hate speech. He knowingly made rape jokes outside of work hours understanding the boundaries so I could take solace in knowing he won't say it at work, but I don't want to work with someone who thinks violence of any nature is comical. Should I raise this as a flag with HR? <Q> Should I raise this as a flag with HR? <S> That would be highly inappropriate. <S> Provided of course he was in a private setting, away from his work and not in any professional capacity related to his employer. <S> If you saw him "steal candy from a baby" would you alert HR or the police and the parents, maybe even interfere personally ? <S> What people do as private citizens is unrelated to their employment and the employer has no control over them or responsibilities regarding their individual actions. <S> If you find his private behavior or opinions distasteful <S> you're free not to socialise with him. <S> If he breaks the law you should / must report it to authorities. <A> If this person offends you feel free to not hang out with them. <S> Other than that everything else you said is highly subjective and can not be proven. <S> It seems you are just looking for reasons to complain against this person so everything they do/say offends you. <S> If this guy is doing his job and behaving himself at work there is not much more you can do. <S> Unless of course he's making these rape jokes in a way that can bring the company disrepute, then that is a different matter. <A> As these are more or less private comments he made outside of work hours, reporting it feels like I'm infringing on his privacy, <S> It depends a lot on what "more or less" means. <S> if you went on a dinner with him alone <S> and it was clear that this was a more private event between you and him, fine, just don't go out with him again. <S> If this was a dinner after a company event (e.g. after a day at a conference) when there were other employees or customers present (but not necessarily listening and not necessarily on your paid time), it is a clear-cut case for HR/ <S> Your manager/team lead. <S> I (as a team lead) personally apologized for much smaller transgressions of colleagues towards female colleagues on behalf of the company after discussing it with my manager. <S> if it is a social night of your team without any official event before, then it is a little tricky. <S> However, it it is a regular team thing with many team members regularly present, probably also a case for Manager/HR <S> For me the rationale behind this is: in the moment when the female employee has the choice between tolerating an unacceptable joke or doing her/his job worse or socialize less with the team in events where a significant part of the team is present as a part of the team, it becomes an issue for the company. <S> Abusing team events, even if informal ones, to pull the dick verbally out of the pants is not acceptable. <S> Especially if it includes joking about rape, which may actually intimidate female co-workers (independent if they were victims or not) when working with the person in question beyond that event. <S> Even if this is just a joke, I would not want that any woman in my team has to wonder if it is safe to travel home or work late alone with the person in question, since this lack of feeling safe may create cost, obstacles in organizing and doing the work. <S> So if a person, by violating social norms inside the team, creates obstacles to getting work done he <S> / <S> she works against the interests of the employer. <S> That is an issue for HR, especially if it is an repeated offender. <A> I would like to make a distinction here between "outside work hours" and "outside work". <S> You don't explicitly say when he behaves the way he does, although some answers assume that this is during socializing. <S> Essentially, a person is "at work" whenever they are acting in their capacity as an employee of said company. <S> For example, this may include, while working early/late voluntarily, while they are travelling for business, while making a business transaction, while on a business lunch etc. <S> If he says something sexist or makes rape jokes while he is "at work", it is absolutely the domain of company HR. <S> If he does it, however, when you are explicitly socializing (i.e. Not interacting as employees), that is beyond HR's domain. <S> You do mention, however, that he is generally sexist in his behavior, even while at work. <S> This is the domain of HR, but is difficult to prove. <S> Once you have enough, you may choose to either confront him or approach HR as necessary.
| If you take this to HR the only flag raised will be against your name as a trouble maker. If you want to really pursue this, I suggest that you keep a record of all such instances, along with any objective proof and potential witnesses.
|
Is it hard to sell a low percentage ( <= 1%) of ownership of a private company? I joined a startup a few months ago which I am now leaving. It is a small startup where I was the first employee. It is still a private company with a lot of potential and some venture capital firms are looking for investing in it. Nothing concrete as of yet though. While I was there, I accumulated 0.5% of the shares of the company but the CEO has said offered to re-buy them off me, trying to convince me saying that it's really hard to sell a small portion of a private company. Now, is that true? If I refuse to sell him my shares, will I be stuck with them? Should I sell him my shares right now and miss on the potential the company has? Personally, I don't need the money I would receive from those shared right now. So that should not drive my decision. Thank you. <Q> Personally, I don't need the money I would receive from those shared right now. <S> So that should not drive my decision. <S> Why not take the risk then. <S> If the company shares are well priced and have good value in the future you will have no problem selling them if the company does reach it's full potential. <S> The CEO obviously wants them back for a reason, he won't be doing it just simply to do you a favor of getting rid of them. <S> Think of it as an investment for your future that may pay a reasonable return for when you may need <S> /want the money. <S> You could even sell them back to the company when they're worth more. <S> A lot of companies like to be in control of more of their shares as they can sell them off for higher prices. <A> Yes, they're going to be hard to sell. <S> It may still be worth holding on to them <S> but it's unlikely that you're going to be selling to someone other than the CEO until the company goes public. <S> There aren't a lot of people that want 0.5% of a startup. <S> If someone is a venture capitalist, they're going to be interested in getting a large fraction of the company not a tiny sliver. <S> If someone is not a venture capitalist, they're generally not going to be buying shares in tiny private companies. <S> Getting in contact with people that might want to buy your shares is non-trivial. <S> There may be a dentist in Peoria that would be interested in taking a flyer on your shares but good luck getting matched up. <S> If you do find someone that would potentially be interested, they're going to want to do things like look at the company books before investing. <S> If the company is selling shares, it has every incentive to make that nice and easy. <S> If you're trying to sell your shares, the company doesn't have to be nearly as quick to open things up. <S> Normally, a buyer would be looking for a third party valuation on the company which is not cheap and something you'd need to spring for. <S> Unless the company is extremely valuable, getting a valuation is going to cost you a large fraction of the value of your shares. <S> Frequently, there are restrictions on who you can sell shares in a private company to in order to keep the company closely held. <S> And the company may not want its shares widely distributed. <S> Of course, the fact that an investment is relatively illiquid doesn't mean that it's a bad investment. <S> Most startups fail and most startup equity becomes worthless but some startups succeed and make their shareholders very very wealthy. <S> If you don't need the money and this equity represents a small fraction of your net worth, it may make perfect sense to hold on to your shares hoping that a market eventually develops (or the CEO comes back in a few years offering more). <S> Just make sure that you understand that it's an extremely risky investment. <A> the CEO has said offered to re-buy [my position], trying to convince me that it's really hard to sell a small portion of a private company. <S> That is probably true, but your main concerns should be that (A) there is a 95+% probability that your shares of the company will be worthless in five years (I know it looks good... they all do) and (B) <S> it is even harder to sell a share of a private company if they don't cooperate (refuse to give or give outdated/unclear financials). <S> I realize that you don't need the money, but I'd tell you to sell them back for two reasons: <S> The goodwill that you gain; the CEO wants them back <S> and it is a smaller world than you'd think. <S> When the VC money comes in you'll probably own a lot less than a half percent because the VC will be sold newly issued shares. <S> That won't be true if your shares are "undilutable", but if they are the VC money is even less likely to show up <S> (maybe why the CEO is so keen to get them back). <S> You do, I assume, have that ownership - <S> that's why the CEO is offering you money. <S> But you likely have less leverage than you think you do.
| So if you do manage to find a buyer, get the financials, and convince a buyer that they want to invest the company may have to agree to allow you to sell.
|
How can I gracefully leave a company I just joined if I receive an offer letter from another company I interviewed at? Sorry for the clumsy title, I'm not sure what's the best way to rephrase this. And sorry in advance for the wall of text, I just feel like without the proper background this will not be a solid question. Throwaway, since I suspect at least one of the companies involved here have people browsing this (awesome) site. Some background: I live in a certain European country, and I'm a second year Computer Science student (on a 3-year track) at a local, respected private university. I decided I'd like to dip my toes in "professional", employer-employee type programming (after doing a few programming projects for personal clients of mine). Not sure if that's the correct English term, but a student "Salaryman" position is what I was looking for, After a few months of applying for jobs, I got an offer from a small local company that seemed like a great fit for me: Great pay, flexible hours (as I'm a student, and require part-time work) and a nice group of people. It's small (think smaller than whatever it is you're thinking right now), and a bit far from me, but all in all it's a good fit. Let's call that company Company A. The process for applying to Company A was... not great. After the initial interview and the coding test, I got a promise from the CEO that I'll get a contract by date X. That did not happen, and after 2 delays I got fed up and started applying to other jobs since the CEO was not very communicative. Literally one day after I started applying elsewhere, the CEO called me to apologise with a (reasonable-sounding) excuse. It's a small company, I figured, and was just happy that I'd get to work for that company. I stopped applying elsewhere after sending out like 5 applications. After I got the contract and while I was reviewing it, I heard back from an amazing offshore company that is involved in a field I'm super-excited about (one of the 5 I applied to). After some back and forth in which we discussed a remote job setting, I received a coding test, seemingly passed it, and now have a follow-up personal interview. Let's call that company Company B. Company B is good . It's a great stepping stone for my career, will probably match the (great) pay I got from Company A, and will involve working with more senior engineers on interesting projects (while in Company A I will mostly work by myself on projects). I've been with Company A a little over a week, and I have no qualms about jumping ship once (and if) an offer from Company B comes. My question: How do I make a clean departure as easy as possible from Company A? I'm aware I'll burn that bridge, and that's a risk I'm willing to take. My concern is how to hurt Company A the least, while making sure they don't reach out to Company B in the process and sabotage my chances. Note: This is a "how" question, not an "if" question. I've weighed my options, and if that offer comes I'm out of there. Edits: My country's exit rules require me to give one month of notice. I will give that before moving on to the next country, and the exit clause on my contract is loose - you want out, you're gone. Also, this is not an internship - we don't have that here - it's just a student job. It does not fall any under special treatment. I'm just a part-time worker. <Q> There is usually a probationary period in European countries during which both you and your employer have the right to terminate the job with relatively short notice, in case it “didn’t work out”, with no special reasons required. <A> "The truth will set you free." <S> It's not just a Bible quote. <S> As hard as it will be, tell the current employer what you just wrote here: you applied to other positions because you thought you weren't going to get the job, and now you have an offer that you just can't refuse. <S> My caveat would be: make certain when you have this talk, because, as you noted, the bridge is going to burn, and likely in spectacular fashion. <S> When you have this talk, don't let it become about salary. <S> Sometimes, a company will try to "outbid" the company you are going to; this happens equally in your situation as well as when you are graduated and working professionally. <S> Since this is a paid internship type situation, you need to examine whatever contract you signed very carefully. <S> Some internships have a "no exit" clause. <S> Additionally, if your university had any role in you obtaining this position, you will need to inform the school of this situation as well; they might be able to get you out of it easier than you can do for yourself. <S> Lastly, and to repeat, make certain. <S> Based on the wording of your question, you haven't been given an offer from Company B yet. <S> (To take OP's edit into consideration)Given that you feel no loyalty to the company you currently work for, and I'm not sure how I'd feel given the way your hiring process went down, my return question would be: "Why does a 'graceful' exit matter?" <S> You thought you weren't going to get hired. <S> You started looking for another position. <S> Then you got hired at both, and the other position is better for my personal growth. <S> I think that is about as graceful as you can be, all things considered. <S> Good luck and Godspeed! <A> I've been with Company A a little over a week, and I have no qualms about jumping ship once (and if) <S> an offer from Company B comes. <S> My question: <S> How do I make a clean departure as easy as possible from Company A? <S> I'm aware I'll burn that bridge, and that's a risk <S> I'm willing to take. <S> If you don't care about burning bridges, things are simple. <S> You simply give your formal notice, work the required notice period (you indicate that it's one month), and leave. <S> Nothing special is required. <S> You don't need to give a reason why you want to leave. <S> You don't need to explain your thinking. <S> Depending on your locale, your employer might be permitted to dismiss you on the spot or might be required to pay you for the entire notice period. <S> Make sure you follow your employer's instructions carefully while working during your notice period. <S> Don't slack off. <S> Don't miss work. <S> It's unlikely you'll be causing a hardship since you've only been there for a week <S> and you are only working part time.
| If your contract with Company A prevents you from seeking other employment, which is pretty standard for an internship, you may not be able to continue the interview process with Company B. Edit Simply give notice according to your local rules, with a polite statement along the lines of “thank you for this time, I will not continue the probationary period”. My original answer still stands: Tell Company A the absolute truth about the entire situation, the same way you laid it out here.
|
Proper way to give feedback (internal) after intervew I was on a panel interview. Should you be "nice" or objective when giving feedback within the team? To put some context, this feedback will be in written form on an excel spreadsheet. What is the proper decorum? <Q> What's your role on the interview team? <S> Presumably you were included to evaluate the candidate relative to some specific area, skill set, project, etc. <S> The best thing to do is to be honest, objective, and specific. <S> Evaluate the candidate from the point of view that fits your inclusion on the panel, or if that isn't clearly specified, from the point of view that fits your relationship to the position. <S> Being "nice" provides no value and may actually cause problems. <S> If you have specific feedback but don't share it because it's critical in nature, and the candidate is hired, there may be performance issues you could have prevented by sharing your feedback. <S> Or to look at it another way, the company may pick this candidate over someone better suited for the role because you didn't provide meaningful input. <A> Should you be "nice" or objective when giving feedback within the team? <S> What makes you think this is a binary choice? <S> Even if your feedback results into a negative advice of hiring, that does not imply it is not nice. <S> "Nice" is mostly how you phrase things. <S> It does not imply you shouldn't give feedback on what you're supposed to give feedback on. <S> Suppose you have an interview, and you're expected to give feedback on the candidates knowledge of a programming language. <S> And suppose the candidate does not show (s)he has much knowledge of the language. <S> Feedback of the form "the candidate did not show she understands how objects work" or "the candidate could not explain how to write to a file" are objective, and are not "not nice". <S> And don't forget to always include a few positive points in the feedback. <A> Be objective and honest. <S> If your input wasn't desired, you wouldn't have been included in the interview. <S> Just keep your comments relevant and professional.
| You can be objective, and still be "nice". If you're unclear of your role, or the specifics you're supposed to be evaluating, it's reasonable and appropriate to ask for clarification from whomever arranged the interview. Giving feedback like "the candidate is incompetent" or "the candidate should never be allowed near a keyboard" is neither nice, nor useful.
|
Is a coworker rightfully annoyed by my typo? I recently got chastised in an e-mail because I pasted the wrong number. She asked me for the ID number of a test run that I submitted to a server. To view details about a test run, you have to run a very verbose command, like: foo -bar TESTID -option2 pin -option3 wheel I copy pasted the version that I keep in my notes, without replacing the TESTID with the appropriate one. And without it, her team was in the dark for the whole work day. EDIT: The output was something like "INVALID TEST ID". It's not like they worked with wrong information for most of a work day and then figured out it was all for naught. Quite obviously, I made a mistake. However, she could also have just queried the test server about jobs I recently ran. The syntax is quite simple and looks like this: showjobs (MYID) Edit 2: All managers have to review pull requests to areas of code that they manage. As part of the review, they have to run this command 3 times with different options, including one that'll show the tests that a user has recently submitted. It's not an arcane script that only a few developers very into the code would know. This was the only test run I submitted this entire week, and it would be very easy to deduce that I meant to send that particular TESTID instead of the other. The showjobs command only displays tests run in the last 48 hours. The only output of this script is also the correct test ID. To me, it seems unfair that she blamed the lack of a productive work day on me. It's not like she didn't know what MYID should've been (it's the first 6 letters of our work e-mail). I would understand if I had run dozens of tests this week, and she couldn't figure out which one was the correct one from just the showjobs command. But it would have taken her all of 30 seconds to figure it out here. A person with a better problem-solving attitude wouldn't have been set back by my typo at all. Would it be unacceptable to defend myself by saying that she could've easily deduced the correct TESTID herself? Edit 3: The attitude of assigning blame is wrong. I'd like to approach this with an attitude of moving forward and learning a lesson from this situation. With that mindset, I don't think there's anything to actually learn from a typo. I do think that there are some problem solving skills to share that I have learned from my experience being on her end of the situation. Edit 4: Due to time zone difference, their work day starts around 3 am for me, long after I'm sleeping. There's no way I could've responded in time to salvage their day. <Q> Look at it the other way round. <S> If you would ask someone for a test ID and you would receive an ID, would you cross check the ID with another command? <S> Why should you question the answer, if you got it from the right person? <S> In this case I think it’s your turn to take the blame, because you made a mistake, which cost another team a whole workday. <S> So apologize and be more careful in the future. <A> It seems to me that the problem is you were trying to be too helpful. <S> She "asked me for the ID number of a test run that I submitted to a server". <S> Instead of giving her the ID number, you gave her a command to run. <S> Embedded within that command was an ID, which it turns out was the wrong ID. <S> Would it be unacceptable to defend myself by saying that she could've easily deduced the correct TESTID herself? <S> I wouldn't. <S> She asked for one thing (an ID) <S> , you gave her something completely different (a command) which had something that looked like what she wanted embedded within it (an ID), but the thing was wrong. <S> I'd apologize and move on. <S> It really shouldn't be a big deal. <S> The fact that the team wasted an entire day is not your fault. <A> Would it be unacceptable to defend myself by saying that she could've easily deduced the correct TESTID herself? <S> I'd take a moment to ask yourself: what do you expect to gain by doing that? <S> Let's assume that your assessment is correct, and this person should have been able to deduce the ID by using common-knowledge tools at her disposal. <S> Do you think that pointing that out in a defensive way is going to make her feel better about the situation? <S> I doubt it, personally. <S> You've got a simple situation where someone is upset with you for something that legitimately happened, but you think they're overreacting. <S> So for example: <S> "Apologies for mistakenly forgetting to include the ID the query I sent you. <S> Clearly it was an oversight, but I'm sorry that it caused you to have to wait a day for the correct data. <S> For what it's worth, I've had times when I've needed to look up an ID that someone else had queried, and I've found that in many cases I can find it by using "showjobs (MYID)". <S> Maybe that will help if something like this ever happens in the future." <S> Getting overtly defensive is only likely to cause the other person to do the same. <S> If you can be diplomatic and make your point without making them feel attacked in turn, you have a much better chance of them realizing that they've overreacted, and ensuring that the mistake will be quickly forgotten. <A> You made a minor mistake. <S> This happens and you should own it and apologies for it. <S> That being said you should not feel like you have to accept the full blame for a whole team having an unproductive work day, as that was caused by more than just your mistake. <S> It was also caused by your co-worker not sense checking the information you provided her and could have been prevented by anyone in the team seeking clarification from you when the results of the command were not as they expected. <S> Your most effective move now is to just apologies and try and move the conversation towards how you can mitigate the risk of these minor and inevitable human errors causing such a large impact in future. <S> Effectively treat this an opportunity to make your companies processes more robust. <A> she blamed the lack of a productive work day on me <S> Is she really saying that she and her team lost an entire day because of the typo? <S> If so I think the blame lies largely with her - she could have run something that would tell her the correct ID, and even if she didn't know about it she should have got straight back to you once the error was revealed. <S> Mistakes happen, and sitting on your hands because someone else made one is not on. <S> The only case where she comes out innocent is if it takes your systems a day to provide the feedback that the ID was wrong, which seems fanciful. <A> It sounds like your coworker may be difficult? <S> (Or really incompetent if their entire team really lost a day because they couldn’t manage to look up the info themselves). <S> if so, tread carefully. <S> You’re not trying to play the blame game, but it doesn’t mean they’re not. <S> Do acknowledge your typo, and briefly apologise. <S> Don’t accept blame for their lost day; be careful if you apologise for this, as they may take that as you accepting blame. <S> I suggest a reply like “Sorry, I copy/pasted the wrong one. <S> If you need to find a test ID in the future, you can always find it yourself with (whatever the command line is)”Or “don’t forget you can always use (commandline) to look up test ids”.
| The formula I would use for handling this is simple: acknowledge that I made a simple mistake, apologize for any legitimate impact that the mistake may have had, and then instead of implying that the other party should have done something different (which risks feeling like a blame game), suggest what I personally either have done or would do in a similar situation (which sidesteps the conflict and communicates empathy).
|
I will be laid off months in the future - stay until the end with severance package or jump now - how will it be perceived in the future? Hypothetical as things stand now, but it has happened to me in the past and I didn't find a good Q&A already on here. Scenario : Due to business conditions (cost cutting), a change in direction by the company (exiting that particular business area) or something similar we were called into a meeting by the head honchos of our organizational unit -- subsequently followed up with information in writing -- and told that our roles will no longer exist pending successful completion of a winding up / outsourcing project in, let's say, September 2019 (it's March now, so approx 6 months). This layoff would affect myself and around 50 other people who work at this location. There have been several rounds of layoffs before but generally in a much shorter time frame i.e. 1 month's notice that the people would no longer have a place in that company (and fewer people affected at a time). There's been a total of 3 rounds of layoffs that I can think of in 7 years. Question : Leaving out considerations of personal circumstances (i.e.... do I need a continued paycheck and cannot take any risk), would it be better-perceived in the future, e.g. in other interviews, to look for other employment now and leave voluntarily (forfeiting the severance package which would be around $15,000) or to stick it out until the end and then begin looking when in the final notice period? Other considerations: there's a retention bonus of $5,000 if I stay until the end (but would then be forced to look for new work quickly) most of my work in the "interim" period would be knowledge transfer and successful winding down which needs to be done correctly and I'm the "key" person for that there's a definite time period given (6 months) but I think it's likely that this will slip and so it could go on and on in the future with "we are likely to need another 3 months" etc. I'm a "senior" relative to other members of my team (e.g. I train new people and coach people on things they are struggling with) but I'm not a manager and certainly not a CxO type! In future interviews , if asked about why I left this company, I'm not sure if it's acceptable to say something like "I had been told that our unit would be closing in 6 months time so I jumped early rather than stick it out and left others to pick up the pieces" (obviously I wouldn't say exactly that in an interview, but it would become apparent from further questioning!) I don't know if it's a bad thing to put across, or if employers want someone who will "go down with the ship" so to speak? I would especially appreciate answers from current or previous "Hiring Managers" as to how you would perceive either situation. ETA based on the suggested "duplicate" question: in this situation I'm not part of a "pool" of people of which 'some' will be laid off. It would be a complete closure or outsourcing of that whole unit (so there isn't a chance for someone else out of my 5-person team to keep their job, for example). We have been told that "these are the positions that will be laid off" (including myself) not just "we need to cut 1000 out of 3000 (or whatever) people". My impressions: (not really part of the question) that leaving the situation early rather than just resign myself to my fate and then take whatever action I am forced into as I'm now unemployed... is sort of a "passive" way to do things. Jumping early I would see as "saw how a situation was panning out and took positive direction to change it rather than just go along with the inevitable" but that's my personal viewpoint rather than a view of a company! However giving up a "guaranteed" severance of $15,000 and a retention bonus of $5,000 does seem like it could be perceived as "gambling" and being very risk seeking. (Actually I do have a fairly high risk tolerance which may be affecting the whole situation) and playing devils advocate as the employer I don't know if I would want someone who "gambled" $20k on the chance of a new job being better than the one they could get in 6 months time! <Q> Leaving before you're laid off The option of leaving early is completely understandable, why would someone want to stick around a company knowing they'll be let go, unless it was advantageous to them? <S> The opportunity cost of not finding another job is something to consider too, I'd rather spend the 6 months learning a new job than (potentially) not learning anything. <S> You have the luxury of having 6 months to find a new job, use it to find a job you truly want without the concern of paying bills. <S> As for the perception of leaving early and potentially putting your existing employer in a bind, don't feel bad, they're letting you go, and I would assume future employers would understand this. <S> This may also portray some professionalism on your end as well if you say that you like to see projects through to completion. <A> For now, stay. <S> However, you can always start looking for a new position today. <S> If you find a new position, you can always decide between: Give notice, and start the new job after your notice period. <S> You would be forfeiting your severance package and your retention bonus. <S> Negotiate the starting date of the new job till after your current job ends. <S> That will keep your rights to a severance package and the retention bonus. <S> Since your severance package is about $15k, and the retention bonus is another $5k <S> , I'd go for the latter option. <S> As for future interviews, don't sweat it. <S> I've had the experience of being laid off because of cost cutting/change of direction/redundancy several times. <S> I've "jumped ship" before employers went bankrupt. <S> I've never noticed that this was ever taken in a negative way. <S> Being laid off for reasons of cost cutting/change of direction/redundancy is common. <S> Whatever company you end up interviewing with may have went through several rounds of this in its history. <A> I've been in this situation, and it didn't really matter to future interviewers. <S> When asked why I was leaving, I said "our division is being shut down in three months". <S> Nobody who interviewed me challenged or probed this; layoffs and company failures are common and I don't think most people expect rank-and-file employees to "go down with the ship" <S> -- you've got to secure your own income. <S> If you were an executive, that might be different. <S> I, like you, had the option to stay and do cleanup/knowledge transfer/etc. <S> We were actually given a choice: <S> leave tomorrow and get a small severance package, or stay for up to three months and do that work. <S> Most of us stayed (on the theory that the company could fund our job hunts), but, as you'd expect, attrition was high -- as soon as you got a better offer you left. <S> This meant that, as the weeks went by, staying became more and more demoralizing. <S> A bonus for staying to the end would have had to be pretty substantial to make that worthwhile. <S> I was getting a small weekly bonus for staying, and I still left halfway through. <A> Nobody will blame you for staying, and nobody will blame you for leaving. <S> "How will this be perceived in the future" is nothing you need to worry about at all. <S> If you stay for 6 months, you will get your normal salary, plus $5,000 bonus (most likely taxable), plus $15,000 for severance <S> you said (most likely not taxable, but you better check. <S> You can ask the company, because they should know, and if it's not taxable then they would really want to tell everyone because it costs them the same, but is more value for the employee). <S> I would suggest - but that is just my suggestion - that you can start looking for jobs now but only for offers that are really good and worth losing $20,000 for. <S> When your contract comes to an end, that's when you look for just a job (but starting late enough so you keep your severance pay). <S> If anyone wants you to start early and doesn't understand "I will lose $20,000 if I start early" is an irrational employer, and you don't want to start there anyway. <A> Unless you are an indentured servant, you owe no allegiance to your current employer. <S> If you choose to leave now and if this question comes up in future interviews it is sufficient to say "My position was eliminated". <S> You owe no further explanation than that.
| I would think that for future interviews it wouldn't matter which option you picked . Leaving when you're laid off If the monetary value of staying is significant, it would be understandable to stick around to earn it.
|
How to deal with insecure and angry management? My direct line manager joined our workforce about 9 months ago. He inherited a lot of stress and problems. As a team we were very excited when he started as our last manager had been lovely but poor at management, and the owner of the company was (and is) somewhat volatile and uncoordinated. He did ask us about any concerns we had quite near the beginning. I gave him a document of my main concerns for the business. There was a lot more I was concerned about but I was worried it might overwhelm him. As it was I didn’t really get any feedback other than ‘thanks’ and I assumed that he had a lot of work to go through and assess so I should wait till he asked for more information. As time has gone on the owner of the business has heaped extra work on him. He has accepted this extra work and there’s nothing my team can do about it as the majority of this work is for a seperate business. The staff have been under stress since before he came and one or two have ‘cracked’ under pressure and gone into his office for long rants or meltdowns. Some staff have quit. Again, I can imagine how stressful this is. However, our manager very quickly looked to pass blame on. We are a very hard working team who did incredibly well in an unstructured environment with policies and protocols changing weekly and received no recognition from the business owner. We continued to work hard when this new manager started, but rather than being commended or managed, we were left to our own devices. Until an individual went to the manager about a grievance and then the manager would come at us like a ton of bricks, without asking for ‘our side of the story.’ This is now happening regularly. The manager is blowing up at us, making accusations with no foundation, generally saying vague things (“I ask you to do things and you don’t do them!” But not specifying what) and has referenced formal warnings and firings without giving any specifics why. He’s also told us multiple times: ‘come to me if you don’t like me, or have a problem with me!’ But there is no confidence in me that reporting him to himself will make a difference in his behaviour. Of course, when unreasonable comments or decisions are made the staff are remarking on these privately to each other at break times. We are very stressed and trying to make sense of things. We’re not speaking about him on a personal level but in the context of the business and our instructions etc. He’s either aware of this or is paranoid about this as we’ve been warned about insubordination and bullying. Multiple attempts have been made to discuss ongoing issues in the business, generally we are ignored unless one of us ‘cracks’ and then the rest are attacked for whatever the trigger reason was. We’ve been told to talk to him anytime but he’s hardly ever in the building and our workload is so tight we’re barely keeping on top of things. Also, I personally would expect to get shouted at if I approached him. We were promised appraisals but haven’t had any. There is no HR - he is the HR. Since that first request for info I have never once been asked for my opinion on why there’s so much stress/problems or invited for a discussion. I don’t think I can stay in this environment but in the meantime, how can I handle this? Should I confront him and say that I find his management aggressive? Should I ask to schedule a meeting (all recent ones have been 95% him ranting and 5% anyone else trying to get a word in). Should I use my free time to write another document about all the issues since my work won’t allow me time for that? Should I stop all discussions about work with other staff if there’s any negativity they might come up? If you read this far, thank you! <Q> I initially left this as a comment rather than an answer because it initially felt like a bit of a cop-out, plus it was late and Answers take a bit of time and effort. <S> But answers should go in Answers, not comments, <S> so typing it up. <S> I feel overwhelmed by your situation <S> and I'm not even in it. <S> I think I would be inclined to find another job and tell him about his issues when I gave notice or in the exit interview. <S> Normally, I'd like to think that the new manager just needs a bit of training. <S> This may be true, but it feels like it's more likely to take a lot of training. <S> He's probably smart enough to know he's not doing his job completely right, and panicking, which is not going to make his response be pleasant. <S> If the owners have given this manager responsibilities for two or more businesses when one of them was already in a critical state from prior mismanagement or neglect, they're probably not going to be helpful. <S> One could try to get competent management training to the guy, but he's probably not in a receptive state to receive it, so that probably would not go well. <S> I think the overall situation is salvageable, but the person or people who go to talk sense into him need an exit strategy. <S> Exactly how to convey the problems of his management style isn't something I'd be particularly skilled even if I knew him and the situation like you do. <S> I'd still try, but I'm a hero type, apart from my geeky exterior. <S> I feel like I'm lacking half of what it takes to make this a great answer, and <S> without that it's a downvote magnet, so wiki time. <A> I have been in a very similar situation recently. <S> I tried giving feedback, I tried giving tipps, I tried talking to his boss ... <S> but none of that worked. <S> The thing is that if your boss is overwhelmed, the first thing to go is usually their ability to reflect and plan - ironically precisely when these activities would be most needed. <S> In addition, it will often take quite a while for their management to realize that the person is overwhelmed. <S> That leaves two options: <S> Remain and wait for senior management to step in, hoping they'll correctly diagnose the cause and replace your boss, or quit before the shit hits the fan. <S> But onwards to your questions: <S> Should I confront him and say that I find his management aggressive? <S> You can try giving feedback, but it should probably be more specific than that. <S> After all, either he knows he is aggressive (and doesn't care), or he doesn't think he is aggressive (in which case you'd need to explain exactly why his behavior is harmful to the team and himself). <S> Should I ask to schedule a meeting (all recent ones have been 95% him ranting and 5% anyone else trying to get a word in). <S> Sounds as if you already tried that? <S> Unless you have a good idea to make the next meeting different, I wouldn't try again. <S> Should I use my free time to write another document about all the issues since my work won’t allow me time for that? <S> How would that help you? <S> Wouldn't that time be better spent towards finding a job without a toxic boss? <S> Statistically speaking, bad bosses are one of the main reasons why people switch jobs, after all. <A> This sounds like a lovely place to work. <S> Frankly, your manager sounds rather useless, and definitely not a manager. <S> Do you deserve being shouted at? <S> Do you like working at the place, the way it is? <S> Do you think there is any chance for you to change it? <S> And here's a big one: Does the company deserve that you work hard for them? <S> You have no responsibility for the company, but you have responsibility for yourself and your wellbeing. <S> The way you describe the company, you should sincerely think about leaving at this point. <S> Which means polishing your CV, looking for job adverts, going to interviews, until you find a decent looking place that will pay a good salary. <S> Once you have a contract signed, you give notice, and that's it. <S> When that happens, don't look back. <S> And while you are still with your old company: Don't worry about things. <S> If your manager shouts at you, you know that he is just out of his depth. <S> Nothing to worry about. <S> Nothing to care about. <S> It doesn't matter.
| I don't know the particulars of your situation, but sometimes quitting really is the best thing for you.
|
How to ask for part time work I'm currently working part time, but I'm thinking of finding a new job. The problem is, there are only full time jobs for what I'm working with. My primary reason for working is to have something to do and some kind of social life. (don't actually need the salary, but don't want to work for free) Would there be some way to apply for full time positions and ask to only work part time? Would companies even consider to hire a person part time when they need full time? Edit: Working as software developer today. 7 years experience as a developer. 12 years work experience as server operator. two years with sale. I know i can find many "work from home, part time jobs" but that's not what I'm looking for. <Q> Would there be some way to apply for full time positions and ask to only work part time? <S> Something like <S> "I know you are looking for a full time worker, but would you consider part time?" might work. <S> Make sure you ask when you initially contact them so that you aren't wasting their time and yours. <S> Would companies even consider to hire a person part time when they need full time? <S> Very unlikely. <S> If they were looking for part-time help, or would consider part-time help, they would almost certainly mention it in the job ad. <S> Your best bet might be to go through an agency. <S> Make sure they understand how many days/hours per week you wish to work. <S> You may also with to contact former employers and mention your part-time availability. <A> My primary reason for working is to have something to do and some kind of sosial life. <S> (dont actually need the salary, but dont want to work for free) <S> I would suggest you consider reaching out to nearby university or research institution. <S> There is a good chance they will have opportunity for you to work on interesting projects for a few hours a week as a software developer. <S> The pay will be under market, but there will be no pressure to move to full-time. <S> Also the project will perhaps be impactful (curing cancer / interesting neuroscience / cutting-edge material sciences?) <S> Alternatively, any non-profit might offer you part-time job on administering their computer fleet. <A> I expect a high degree of cultural variation here. <S> To illustrate: In the Netherlands 25% of the male workforce and 75% of the female workforce was working parttime (<35hrs/wk) in 2009 . <S> I don't have more recent figures ready, but the Netherlands has passed the 'Law on flexible work' in 2018. <S> It has thus become a question of cultural fit. <S> In the Netherlands, parttime work is more prevalent in smaller companies with strong family values. <S> And (semi-)government with strong unions typically has a 36- or 38-hour default contract size. <S> Employers understand that a good work-life balance translates to more motivated, productive and loyal employees. <S> From personal experience: Most jobs in the Dutch software industry are listed as full-time (5x8=40hrs/wk, excluding lunch and coffee breaks), but a minor reduction in contract hours (to 36 or 32hrs/wk) is virtually always negotiable. <S> Bigger reductions than that are more difficult. <S> In your locale, this may be quite different. <S> But there will be companies that are open to the discussion. <S> If a full-time work week is an absolute dealbreaker to you, I (as an interviewer) would prefer you to discuss it near the end of the first interview. <S> I like candidates that leave me with the following impression: <S> That it is your preferred balance between the employee you want to be and the father/craftsman/sportsman/community member you want to be. <S> You have a specific thing that you want to spend the time on. <S> That you are determined to excel in both, without your after-work activities influencing your productivity. <S> "Work hard, play hard" is a tired cliche, but I understand it viscerally. <S> That you are willing to tailor your needs to those of the company. <S> (Fridays off? <S> If we schedule an important deployment, would you pick a different day? <S> Would you do 36hrs instead of 32?) <S> If you signal the intent to establish a long-term bond with the company. <S> Kids in school? <S> Family nearby? <S> Looking for a house or living in the area? <S> Long tenure at previous jobs?
| Look for positions that mention flexible work hours ( "core hours 10-15" ), the option of working from home and similar perks.
|
Can I video job interviews? Well I'm currently looking for a job, however the last 10 (so this is a good time to review it) interviews all apparently went "poorly", the result was; "we found a better candidate". Even though apparently there's a huge lack of people who try to work in my field. Now I have no idea why they went poorly and I always had the feeling everything was amazing during the interview. So to me it's a real surprise. Now I do have difficulty seeing social "hints" or subtleties, doubly so when under stress. (And I'm literary shaking from stress during a job interview, if I'm not getting a blackout - but that's just something I can't solve quickly). Now to get "better" at this I need to have an objective look: and while practice with friends/family my friends always state I'm doing "fine", apparently I am not: so to review this, would it be acceptable to put a camera while I go to a job interview so I can review myself later? <Q> would it be acceptable to put a camera while I go to a job interview so I can review myself later? <S> Without asking? <S> Absolutely not. <S> It's never appropriate to video people without asking. <S> (Even if it's legal, it's still not appropriate). <S> But don't wait with asking until you are in the room with the interviewers. <S> Ask the moment they contact you to set up an appointment. <S> That gives them the opportunity to check their policies and/or legal department. <S> Now, if you would be interviewing with me, I'd deny that request. <S> For a couple of reasons: All our meeting rooms have windows and/or glass doors. <S> I don't want you to record my coworkers; their privacy is important. <S> Every now and then, recordings happen at our offices (for training, PR, recruiting, etc). <S> The company goes above and beyond protecting the privacy of its employees, making sure noone gets recorded who does not want to get recorded. <S> Most offices have big screens displaying graphs relevant to the jobs of the teams sitting near to them. <S> That is often sensitive information. <S> We may discuss things which should remain between us. <S> I'd be far more careful in answering any of your questions if the interview is being recorded. <S> I'm not in the business of training you to do job interviews. <S> If you see the interview as "doing practice", I've better things to do with my time. <S> I don't know where the recording ends up. <S> I may say something which, taken out of context, or by using some clever editing, may make the company I work for (or myself) look bad. <S> It will probably violate the GDPR in more ways than I can think of. <S> I just hate being recorded. <A> would it be acceptable to put a camera while I go to a job interview <S> so I can review myself later? <S> Acceptable is whatever the other party will accept. <S> I suppose it's possible that some potential interviewer would allow a video recorded interview. <S> But I don't know of any hiring manager who could consent to that. <S> Certainly I never would. <S> There is no upside for the interviewer, and potential downsides as far as legal liabilities and general lack of comfort. <S> I suspect asking for permission to record the interview would start things off on exactly the wrong foot. <S> If you actually want the job, I would suggest you skip the idea of a recording of an actual job interview. <S> Instead, video record your practice interviews with your friends and review them with a critical eye. <S> Your friends, although well intentioned, aren't as invested in your interview success as you are. <S> A response of "fine" may mean that they think you are doing a fair job <S> but it could be better. <S> It might mean that they don't want to upset you <S> so just reply with "fair". <S> Either way, you are in a better position to judge if you are coming off the way you hope. <S> As @Nelson wisely suggests, you might consider paid services for your interview skills. <A> I would not. <S> When you go for interview, you act like you are the best candidate for the job, and you are definitely going to be hired. <S> So why should someone going to be hired ask to record the interview? <S> It only shows you are not confident you are going to get the job. <S> Moreover a lot of people will think you are here for a practice mock interview, and not really interested in the job. <S> So what you should: Practice mock interviews with friends/family only. <S> Once you get hired, improve your interview skills further by participating in interviews as an employee for the company. <S> That way you will also see the other side, and learn from other candidates. <A> I'm in a similar situation with engineering. <S> Graduated in 2014 with excellent academics, work experience and extracurriculars but never stood out. <S> Feedback was along the lines of keep trying/you will find something eventually <S> if you persevere/you were a bit quiet. <S> I felt I had put in a lot of effort and made myself into a well rounded graduate, following most of the advice regarding being employable <S> but there just seemed to be better candidates, despite a so called shortage. <S> Ended up just tying myself in knots trying to be someone I wasn't by following the so called interview tips. <S> If you are naturally quiet or reserved the worst thing you can do is to try and be loud and outgoing etc. <S> I took rejection pretty badly as well tbh as you get labelled as "must have a toxic personality" or "a really terrible or lazy person" to be unemployed with an engineering degree. <S> In reality as long as there's multiple grads (and other entry level candidates) with 2:1s and similar backgrounds applying to the same vacancy its quite easy to fall short on required social/interpersonal skills. <S> Happens just by being a bit awkward or struggling to think of good answers on the spot under that kind of pressure, that's just how it goes <S> and I would do the same in an employers shoes. <S> Fast forward a couple years, worked in retail/medical manufacturing <S> so people skills have improved. <S> I still apply to engineering jobs now and again and now finding things are easier by just being myself. <S> Was able to record a one-way video interview this week quite confidently. <S> What has helped most is getting a stable job/relationship <S> so there isn't as much pressure. <S> It's a "nice to have" now as opposed to before <S> when you're unemployed and just racking up rejections it can seem like you're in a worse situation than you really are.
| You show full interest, and when you ask questions, you talk in a way, you are going to be hired. If the company goes out of its way, there's no way a random interviewee can make recordings. You can of course ask, and if they give permission, you can do it.
|
Manager wants to know who’s thinking of quitting? As title says. Our manager took my team aside, says she knows things are incredibly stressful and could we please let her know if anyone is thinking of quitting their job. Surely this would only be disadvantageous to the person admitting this? Especially if they aren’t actively interviewing or applying yet. We’ve now been asked for a second time. I am thinking of quitting and I have told two trusted colleagues as much privately. I may be paranoid but I’m wondering if one has told her or accidentally hinted at it and that’s why she keeps asking? How should I handle this request? <Q> You never tell anyone that you think of quitting until you have signed a contract for a new job and have to give your notice. <S> You are absolutely right, telling your manager can only be of disadvantage to you. <S> You should handle this request by saying "I'm very happy here, I like the job, the colleagues, the salary and most importantly my manager, so I'm not thinking about quitting at all". <S> Once you put in your notice and the manager says "but you said you were not thinking about quitting when I asked", you can say "well, what answer did you expect?". <S> Or you can be more polite, up to you. <S> BTW. <S> Trusted is not trustworthy, and private is not private. <A> It's an unreasonable request, and you don't have an obligation to share this information with anyone at your workplace. <S> Just play dumb, say "Okay" and forget about it. <S> If you eventually decide to give your notice and get confronted with a question such as "Why didn't you tell you're planning to quit?" - make something up (for example, "Things just happened quickly with my new employer <S> so I didn't have time to tell you"). <S> Again, remember that you do not have to share any of this with your current employer. <A> Depending on your social circle (and your country which you chose not to disclose) <S> you can always be asked by a "friend" if you're available. <S> And people tend to like working with friends. <S> In fact, I've found my last 2 jobs this way. <S> So whatever you tell her, and whenever you decide to leave, you can blame this on someone you know (without specifics of course).
| Don't ever tell trusted colleagues privately that you think about quitting.
|
How to write good mail to HR if I forgot to bring swipe card I forgot to bring swipe card while coming to office. So I want to write mail to my HR but not getting proper words or good sentence to write mail. As of now I have written Hi Maam, Today I forgot to bring swipe card please add my attendance for today. My coming time is 10:10. Thank you. Please suggest me good mail. <Q> How about : <S> Dear Sir/Madam, <S> Today I forgot to bring my swipe card. <S> Please include (or update) <S> my attendance for today. <S> My arrival time was 10:10. <S> You can check with xxxx (add your supervisor). <S> Thank you. <S> If you know exactly who to write to then :Dear Mr Jones, or Mrs Jones or Ms Jones (as appropriate)or if you know them well enough <S> :Dear Fred ... <A> Ask them what kind of information they need from you and to whom you should write such an email, maybe there is somebody specifically responsible for you. <S> Often a personal contact is the best method. <S> The person from HR knows you and if you are happy and friendly they will not be angry or anything with you but be (more or less) happy that you aknowledged them ;-) <S> Stay positive, happens to the best ;-) <A> Normally, that is already good e-mail. <S> If you want to be sure you do the right thing, ask your manager about what you are supposed to do if that happens again. <S> With better English, it becomes: <S> Dear Sir / Madam, <S> Today I forgot to bring the swipe card. <S> Please add my attendance for today. <S> I arrived in the office at 10:10. <S> Thank you.
| personally I would recommend to call, if it is the first time. Be sure to tell them that you that you made a mistake and that you give your best to avoid it in the future.
|
Is it okay to speed up a job offer process and then reject because it's not as good? I am waiting on a decision from one of my preferred employers. In the meantime, while I was waiting, I still did other interviews. I think I might be close to getting an offer from another employer. When and if that happens, I would still like to know what decision my preferred employer has made, and if its positive, I would still like to evaluate their job offer and compare to this other one I get. For this purpose, if I get this other offer, I plan to inform my preferred employer, so that they can finish the process and let me know of their offer sooner, if any. My issue is, if after the preferred employer has made their offer, I still find it to be not as good as this other offer, is it okay to refuse the offer from the preferred employer then? I ask this because, it would feel weird that I rushed them to make an offer, and then I refused, right? Or is that okay to do? Mainly I want to know what's a good approach in this scenario, to end up with the best offer, but also not to leave a bad impression with the employer whose offer is not accepted. Do I negotiate with both against what the other is offering and then decide? Any tips? <Q> A kiss is not a promise. <S> Evaluating an offer is not pre-accepting it. <S> You know you'll likely get another offer and you want to have both so you can compare. <S> This is perfectly fine ethically speaking. <S> Once you get both offers, you can try make your preferred employer match the other offer. <S> I fully recommend listening to the Salary Negotiation episode of the Kalzumeus podcast, which directly applies to your situation: <S> At that point, you say, “I think we’re close here. <S> It’s important for me to let you know that while I would really love to work for your company, I’m fairly decent at what I do, and I’m obviously searching for a lot of offers in parallel. <S> There’s another offer on the table from a peer organization.” <S> [...] <S> A peer company has put an offer on the table which I felt was very fair, and I don’t want to have to make the decision to work for that company just based on numbers. <S> I would love to work for you so much, so do you have any slack on your offer? <A> I ask this because, it would feel weird that I rushed them to make an offer, and then I refused, right? <S> That's precisely why it is called "an offer". <S> You are free to accept or reject it, it's your decision. <S> Letting your preferred employer know that you are having other opportunities is not a bad thing, rather it portrays your intent to keep going with the organization if you accept the offer (rather than bailing out in the probation period for a better offer). <S> No one wants to be in a "losing" relationship, so it is pretty evident that if you're not happy with a part of the relationship (the remuneration / compensation), it's not going to last long. <S> You are at least showing positive effort to make it work by opening up a clear discussion. <S> If they are willing to match the compensation from other organization - good. <S> If they don't (or, can't) - you still have the other offer. <A> Every firm has their process and steps in place so that they don't make mistake of hiring wrong person. <S> That being said sometimes process can get slow and can be a problem so its better to ask about the status and see if it can be completed soon. <S> Best is to extend your joining date and get offers from whichever companies you wish to get hired or are interested in. <A> I would recommend making sure that everybody knows the situation. <S> Make both companies aware that you are interviewing because you find both positions interesting. <S> I do not consider this disrespectful. <S> If they really want you, then they will consider this as impetus to make a better offer and to move faster. <S> Now that I am on the hiring side, I would hate to have a candidate <S> inform me that they are dropping out of the recruitment process because they got another offer. <S> If I think they are good, then I would bend over backward to meet their conditions. <S> In effect, letting both companies know that you are likely to get an offer from the other should have the effect of making the companies compete against each other. <S> The net result should be that you receive a better offer. <S> If one of the companies cannot meet your timeline, then I would take this as a sign that they do not want you that much. <S> If they really want you, they will be flexible. <S> Background: I had three simultaneous offers from 3 very big multinationals before which I parlayed into the best offer. <S> In the end, all of the companies were willing to meet the terms of the others, meaning i essentially just got to pick which job I would like most.
| Even if they speed up their process upon your request you are under no obligation to accept it and they probably will not make any such assumption.
|
Uncomfortable work area and equipment I work in a petrol station and our whole working area is dreadful, you would have to see it to believe it. Our seating at the tills causes great discomfort, for instance our monitors and view over the forecourt is in front of us and yet our till draw and customers are to the side of us, causing us to have to twist round in our seats. We have nowhere to put our feet and one till has a cupboard under the desk, so we cannot fit our legs under it. In addition to this they have slapped a new counter on top of the old counter, making the desk too high for us and there are also plug sockets and switches under the desk which we catch our knees on. We really are getting fed up with this and some of us are in pain because of it, can anybody suggest who we look to for help? Our manager and area manager say they can do nothing. Thanks in advance. <Q> Our manager and area manager says they can do nothing. <S> well if you've already asked your manager and higher up and you are not allowed to alter these things yourself. <S> Then start refurbishing your CV/Resume and go look for another job. <S> There is a potential legal case depending where you are <S> but it really is not worth the effort, especially if you have no injuries caused from these uncomfortable positions. <A> Your options are: <S> If the workplace is set up in a way which could cause serious harm, report it here: <S> http://www.hse.gov.uk/contact/concerns.htm <S> Get a union rep to take it up for you. <S> Join union first if necessary. <S> Info on how is here: <S> https://www.tuc.org.uk/join-union <S> Get a different job elsewhere. <A> Unfortunately this type of abuse is very common in industries where bosses feel the staff are very easily replaceable. <S> You can put in anonymous complaints but expect more abusive behavior from your boss. <S> Your boss has already shown he is this type of person by not fixing the counter properly ( <S> ie slapping a new one on top of the old) and saying he "can't" do anything about your work conditions. <S> He will simply not care if you wreck your back and live in pain working there, he'll simply replace you. <S> Your only realistic options are: Put in an anonymous tip to a workplace health and safety body. <S> Your boss might get fined or he might simply get a written warningto fix the place up. <S> Then you're left with one pissed off boss. <S> Accept it as a fact of life that this is how it is and many peoplewould do anything for the opportunity just to have a job. <S> Maybeeven try to fix a couple of simple things up yourself (ie tidy upthe cables for your own safety since no one else seems to care) <S> Find another job. <A> Are you willing to put in the work to improve your workplace yourself with little to no investiment on your side (besides time)? <S> It seems that some of the issues you are arguing about can be dealt by shuffling objects to one place to another, remove them entirely, or some sort of manual labour work. <S> That is also your chance to see if somebody else is willing to help you make them. <S> This should be possible to do with a minor budget spending. <S> Experiment your workplace for a couple of weeks. <S> After doing that than you might start looking at things that are still disturbing you and your productivity on your workplace and mght require an increased budget spending. <S> If your boss does not agree, at least you should have improved work conditions for all the other employees, if not for yourself.
| Suggest your boss as well as any other workers the changes you would like to see made and see if they are willing to see them done. As long as you work in these types of jobs you will find this kind of thing under money hungry people who have little regard or respect for the people working for them.
|
team in charge of product X not able to deliver something I already created During october/november, I developped for the team I was working with a tool to achieve functionality "X" in a specific language. As far as I know this tool is re-usable by other teams and feature-full (I designed it such that it covers lots of cases). The only downside is that it doesnt really integrate that well in our codebase because it's not coded in the most used language. I estimate the time to port it to a new language to 1 weeks max. Now, at work there is also a team whose scope is among others to work on feature "X". During october/november when I was developping my tool they were supposed to gather requirements with me but never really did. Now since January they are "officially" tasked with providing the "official" library for feature X. I've had meetings where I demo'd my code, shared the source etc and made myself available if they needed my help to understand the code or integrate it somehow.Now that it is March they should have done significant progress on their project, which could have been as simple as "porting my code". However I checked today and I see that they basically did 0 progress, and that worse, the solution they plan to do will be extremely limited. In a nutshell, the code I've already written is much more powerful in terms of features/performances etc. At this point I am pretty frustrated with the situation, especially given that we need feature "X" fairly soon and that other teams depend on this being shipped. If the other team deliver late a product that is less good than what I've done I'll be very demotivated What should I do in this situation? My option are either: not do anything and watch in 6 months a bad product being created try to port my code in the other language and advertise that this exists escalate this with the other team escalate this with my manager/the manager of the other team <Q> Talk to your manager. <S> This is echelons above you. <S> You've tried to help the other team. <S> They haven't taken advantage of the help. <S> Your ability to do things via the other team is going to be limited, and trying to talk with their managers has a good chance of backfiring badly. <S> You shouldn't just do nothing, because the company could benefit significantly from your code. <S> At the same time, judging the productivity of the other team (however accurately) is not your job. <S> This whole thing has raised to a level of office politics that is above you, and that means it's time to pass the buck to the political level above you in the office. <S> Then let him (or her) handle it (possibly by escalating to their boss). <S> This may well result in a one-week task to convert your code, and that's certainly something you can offer to do in your conversation with your manager, but it's not something you should do without getting the okay <S> unless you're usually given an enormous amount of leeway on which tasks to take on. <A> I'm going to disagree with Bens answer here and say this is an issue that you should attempt to deal with by approaching the team in question before escalating any further. <S> As you are a key user of the code they are (meant to be) writing, you are in a position to describe the knock on impacts on your deliverables. <S> You should make sure they are 100% aware of these impacts. <S> In an ideal world they would agree to make the improvements you want so I would start by outlining the issues in writing and offering your help to implement these improvements. <S> A simple email like the following should suffice. <S> Hi <S> [MEMBER OF OTHER TEAM], <S> I've just found out about the latest plans to implement 'X' <S> and I'm concerned about the knock on effects of missing functionality 'Y'. <S> I planned to use 'Y' when it comes time for me to implement feature 'Z' my end. <S> Missing this feature will cause delays to the final produce as I will need to produce a workaround. <S> I'm also concerned that if 'X' cant achieve a run time of under 'N' seconds. <S> We will struggle to meet the performance target 'T'. <S> The implementation in 'Original language' achieved performance of 'N-a' seconds <S> is there any way of improving this performance? <S> I'd be happy to talk you through some of the methods I used to achieve this level of performance in 'Original language'. <S> if it would be helpful we could meet to discuss further? <S> best wishes, throwaway <S> Once they have been made aware of the consequences for missing features / poor performance, they will hopefully be open to reviewing the plan, if they are not then you should raise these as project risks through the usual channels for the project. <S> If you don't have the authority to do that yourself, then you should escalate to your manager to take action on your behalf. <S> Finally I will echo Bens advice not to judge the performance of the other team. <A> The other team has a responsibility to consider maintenance costs as well as initial implementation. <S> They may have considered your full-feature solution more complicated than is really needed. <S> If their objective is to get to the simplest possible X in their preferred language they would have two routes: port and strip down your code, or build up from scratch. <S> They picked the second approach. <S> Whether they were right or wrong, it is their decision, not yours. <S> That said, you can ask your manager to track features and status to get assurance that they are going to deliver required functionality by the scheduled date.
| Sit down one-on-one with your manager, explain the situation as simply and straightforwardly as you can, and as much as you possibly can, leave out any judgments of the other team or their work that you can't back up with direct factual evidence.
|
I encountered my boss during an on-site interview at another company. Should I bring it up when seeing him next time? I have been casually looking around for a new job for a few months now and had some Skype interviews so far. One of the companies I interviewed with flew me in for an on-site interview last week. We had a series of interview rounds with short coffee breaks in between. When I was drinking coffee and chatting with the recruiter, I saw my current manager pass by in the hallway being escorted by one of the interviewers that had interviewed me just before. I am pretty sure he saw me as well, but we did not acknowledge each other. I did relatively well in the interviews and they want to proceed with another round with a hiring manager, however I realized that I am probably not a good fit for their culture, so I plan on staying for a while longer at my current gig. I am pretty sure that my boss was there for interviews as well as I do not see any other convincing reasons he would be there otherwise (the two companies are direct competitors in several key areas and the interview was in a different state). I never told or otherwise indicated to my boss that I was looking around. My question is: should I bring it up with my boss next time we meet or just pretend it never happened. <Q> What would you have to gain? <S> You saw them. <S> They saw you. <S> Both of you knew why you were there. <S> Both of you were probably at least a bit embarrassed about it. <S> Bringing it up just means dredging through the embarrassment again, to no apparent gain. <S> Better to remain silent and pretend it didn't happen. <S> Maybe allow yourself a wry shared smile, or something. <S> If you can come up with something meaningful that you'd actually gain from it, though, it could be worthwhile to approach it. <S> For example, you now know that your boss is looking. <A> If anyone should be saying something it should be him. <S> Let him come to you. <S> If he doesn't, ignore what happened. <A> Keep it to yourself. <S> It is a very personal matter. <S> This happens way more often than people think. <S> I recall this happening to manager on one of the floors I worked on and the story was recounted with sinful (inappropriate) glee during a later discussion, possibly sub rosa . <S> It revealed in a very damaging way that things were not going well for that person, and that an ultimatum had recently fallen flat. <S> It certainly did not make life any better for them. <A> If you're not trying to get away from your current manager, then it seems the two of you may have common interests. <S> If you're competing for the same position, then the other answers probably apply. <S> But if you are not, this could be an opportunity to advance your careers together and help each other out. <S> Moving companies together is not particularly rare-- <S> a pair that already work well together may be seen as a more appealing set of assets than two random new hires. <S> Reaching out to your boss, in private, may be in your interest. <S> A simple offer to grab a drink after work, or lunch together during your break should work! <S> Then you simply bring up that you saw each other there. <A> Yes, talk to him. <S> Your boss is a person too (I know!) <S> and frankly, trying to keep this a secret is just pointless. <S> You shouldn't shout it out in front of everyone else, but a quiet word with him when you're alone together with a veiled hint about your "day off" should be enough to inform him that you're willing to talk about it, the company, and why you all want to quit if he wants to talk about it too. <S> if he doesn't, he'll make it clear by changing the subject. <S> You have nothing to gain from treating this like some dirty secret, but there's plenty that could be gained (at the very least a better relationship with your boss, assuming neither of you get the new job) by being honest (discretely, obviously). <A> At present if his manager asks him, if he know you were looking for another job etc, he can say no. <S> After all it can not be proven he saw you. <S> Even you saying you saw him, does not prove he saw you. <S> Likewise if you are asked the same question. <S> Be very careful before removing "plausible deniability".
| If you happen to notice an opening that they'd be a good fit for, and you can pass it to them discreetly, then that sort of thing might be appropriate. If you're sure they were interviewing, then broaching the subject should be easy!
|
Had to cancel first interview due to flu, company not responding to my email about re-scheduling. Should I re-apply? I had an interview setup about a week ago, but had to cancel due to having the flu. After a brief email correspondence with the person who I'm suppose to interview with, he tells me it's fine, and that they will get back with a new interview date the following day. 3 days pass. No response. I write him an email asking if we should find a new date for the interview. No response. Is this a red flag? Should I re-apply? Is this a weird rejection? The job is still posted, so I assume they haven't found another candidate. <Q> Companies get hundreds of emails daily to their recruitment team. <S> Emailing is likely going to get lost amongst these until found at a later date. <S> Is this a red flag? <S> Should I re-apply? <S> Is this a weird rejection? <S> No, <S> No <S> and No. <S> Just call them to get an answer. <S> If they ignore the phone call, call again. <A> I usually recommend waiting at least a week before sending a follow E-Mail. <S> Your contact person might be sick or on vacation, or just busy. <S> Don't reapply or anything like that. <S> Just wait for a week. <S> But if you are really interested in this particular job, try giving them a phone call after one week as a final resort. <A> As I read it: I had a flu, I applied to reschedule and after 3 days, they still did not get back. <S> Well, nothing to panic, yet . <S> Usually, it is estimated that, for a simple flu it takes 5-7 days for the symptoms to go away and 7-10 days to recover completely. <S> maybe the company just wants to reschedule on a later date, giving enough room for you to recover complete (if the interview is remote) and to avoid possibility of getting other employees infected (in case in-person interview). <S> As mentioned in other answers, emails tend to get lost, never fully rely on them. <S> However, now it is too early and not correct to think about <S> Is this a red flag? <S> Should I re-apply? <S> Is this a weird rejection? <S> You don't have any grounds to start thinking about these.
| They just may not have a fixed schedule for the interview that far ahead (2-4 weeks) and taking their time to fix a later date on which it would be possible for them to get that interview arranged. Get in touch with them, (over phone, if you know the contact numbers, if you don't, search/ask for it) and gently remind them about the requested reschedule. If you don't get any more response, just assume they are not interested anymore.
|
As a programmer, would working remote full time hurt my career growth if I want to go back to office environment? I was wondering how working remote could potentially hurt my career growth as a software developer. I found many good lessons from this discussion thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15994294 However, the discussions there seem to focus on working remotely for very long term and no plan to go back to the office environment, and what are good things to consider in such scenarios. Some of the important notes from there were to make sure one should continue growing professional networks by attending conferences or having a co-working space. My question: I worked in a regular company in the office settings for 4 years. In this role I served as a lead developer. I have an offer to work remotely. From this point of my career, if I work remotely for the next 2-4 years or so, and then let's say I wanted to apply for a large cooperation with office settings. Assuming my technical skills are attractive and stand out among candidates, will my remote work history hurt my job searching? Would my application be rejected because my recent work is remote work despite the fact that I do have experience working in an office? With 8 years of experience of my future self, I will be looking at senior developer positions which I expect will require some sort of leadership skills, and I am worried working remotely can be considered as a downside to this by large companies. I am not interested in climbing the ladder toward management roles. I love my work as a developer. Even if I would have more experience I want to stay as a dev, and I hope to be a leader of a development unit but not much more responsibilities than that. My definition of career growth is getting paid more as a developer. <Q> Not in my experience. <S> I am also a lead developer. <S> I worked remotely for 5 years. <S> A bit less than 2 years ago, that contract ended. <S> I have not had any problem finding on-site jobs since. <A> It might. <S> The concern for managers and HR would be that, once you've had a taste of that kind of control and freedom over how you do your work, and, especially, if you've proven you can deliver the goods, that you would have difficulty adjusting to the somewhat arbitrary constraints of working a 9 to 5, with the daily commute to the office location. <S> Now, more and more people are working under those circumstances, and a lot of IT, particularly, is farmed out to contract or remote employees, so that should be less of an issue than it used to be, but people have fears or notions about things they can't directly control, sometimes. <S> Your best bet is to sell that you can work independently and without hand-holding, so this experience makes you more valuable, but then tell them you are motivated to get back into a more traditional setting because you like the interaction and being an active and participating member of successful teamwork. <S> Then, if you can supply references from earlier positions who can attest to your reliability as an employee who can show up on time and work within a set structure, you can probably allay any strong fears they might have about you being a spirit too wild to tame in the office environment. <S> Make sure it's what you want, though, because selling them on this version of you is only useful if you're sold on it too. <A> I'd like to think that I'm living proof that you can. <S> I worked remotely for nearly four years, and went on to get an in-office job for nearly twice the pay after that finished. <S> The key thing is not to let your skills stagnate. <A> Assuming my technical skills are attractive and stand out among candidates, will my remote work history hurt my job searching? <S> No. <S> Would my application be rejected because my recent work is remote work despite the fact that I do have experience working in an office? <S> Not at all. <S> People with experience in remote work are supposed to be (and most of the case, they are) better at the soft skills (communication, collaboration, time management), over and above the core skills (technical). <S> Just because someone has worked remote for some time does not mean they are unfit to go back to a regular office setup.
| A remote working job is probably a bit of a dead end in itself - and you probably shouldn't expect any more work from the same company once the project you're on is deemed finished - but you'll have extra time on your hands that you can put into hobby projects, side gigs, part-time study, etc.
|
I'm resigning after only a few months due to issues with my supervisor. Other colleagues are questioning why. Should I tell them the truth? As per the title, I had a really tough time working with my boss and have issues with them. Both personally and professionally. Thus, I have decided to resign after only working a few months here despite the extremely good salary. Now, my other colleagues (not my direct teammates, who knew the reason immediately as they also hate our manager) have asked why I have decided to resign so quickly. Should I tell them the truth? I'm worried this might somehow further hurt my teammates' relationship with my boss or cause office gossip to spread like wildfire. Although I have issues with my boss, they don't deserve the treatment of the whole department talking behind their back. My boss was newly appointed so I kind of sympathise with them not being experienced in being a manager. Should I lie with something like I don't find the job scope interesting? What should I do? <Q> You don't need to lie, just say you found a better opportunity. <A> I think its better to not tell the reason as it might create pre-concieved opinion about the manager and everyone might avoid working under him/her. <S> Let them have their own experience and decide for themselves. <S> You can tell the job didn't worked out for you. <S> If the manager is bad then sooner or later everyone is going to get to know this anyway. <S> Edit: <S> Reiterating what I said in the comments below about the fact that manager is new and hated by the team working under him/her. <S> @virolino <S> The answer should take into account about the fact that manager is new. <S> If the entire team hates the manager sooner or later he/ <S> she is going to be fired anyway <S> and if OP has accepted the new job there is no point in discussing the employment at current company. <S> Best for OP is to move on. <A> As per the title, I had a really tough time working with my boss and have issues with him/her. <S> Both personally and professionally. <S> Thus, I have decided to resign after only working a few months here despite the extremely good salary. <S> Personal issues -> <S> I will assume it happened in the workplace and not outside. <S> Not my direct teammates, who knew the reason immediately as they also hate our manager - <S> > <S> if everybody in your team "Hate" (which is strong word) the manager, it is likely that a lot of people in the company are aware of this. <S> I'm worried this might somehow further hurt my teammates' relationship with my boss - <S> > <S> I don't see why you leaving because of a bad relationship will affect the relationship of others. <S> or cause office gossip to spread like wildfire. <S> -> <S> Everybody gossips in office, it is normal. <S> It seems you already answer the question yourself : <S> My boss was newly appointed <S> so I kind of empathise with him <S> /her not being experienced in being a manager. <S> -> just reply the Truth : "it seems that my manager is new on the job, and we didn't 'click' because of the working ways he follows, so <S> I decided to find another job where I can more in synch with my direct manager"
| You don't have to give any reason why you don't like your current job.
|
Can I still negotiate a job offer if HR is stonewalling the department head? I'm a college senior and I'm applying for my first full-time position. I recently got an offer for around $70k for a data analyst position. HR initially told me that the salary was negotiable, so I submitted a letter of justification (per their instructions) with my desired salary. According to a friend who works there, the head of the department thinks I'm the best candidate for the job and went to HR to get approval for the higher offer. However, this made HR very upset for some unknown reason, and HR stonewalled them. I then received a phone call from HR telling me that they are no longer willing to negotiate salary, and I also only have till the end of the week to give them an answer. I explained to them that I'm in the interview process for other companies and will need more time than the end of the week, but they seem extremely resistant to giving me any more time and essentially told me that they'll call again on Friday, and if I still haven't made a decision, I can turn down the offer (although they implied there's a chance they might revisit an extension when the time comes). Is there anything I can do at this point to get a better initial offer? My friend told me that he got a significantly higher offer after negotiating for the same position last year, so it seems that I've just gotten caught at the butt-end of interdepartmental drama. It definitely sounds like the department head really wants to hire me, so would it be wise to email them directly? Perhaps I could get them to push harder on HR to get approval for the salary if they know that I'm inclined to turn down their offer. I'm worried that dealing with HR further won't go anywhere since HR won't be negatively affected if the other department loses me. <Q> Every organization have their principles and policies. <S> As an external or internal part of the organization, all are expected to follow them. <S> In this case, if the HR can do away with proposing about salary negotiation, and then suddenly cut you off from the communication without having a fair chance of discussion proposed <S> I'd stay away from that organization. <S> It's not only <S> about this time or this negotiation, this is a strong indication that the policies and rules are not well-established and can be tweaked as per the willingness of certain people. <S> This is not a sign of a very healthy workplace. <S> I'm worried that dealing with HR further won't go anywhere since HR won't be negatively affected if the other department loses me. <S> That's good of you to think, but let's agree, at this point, <S> you cannot do anything about that , if they feel losing you is at the best interest of the organization - let them be. <S> Carry on and find other opportunities. <A> If that company is bullying you even BEFORE you are their employee, that tells a lot about them and about your expected life if you are unlucky to get there. <S> I had the same experience. <S> What is "best" (in my case) is that the same company tried to get me as an employee several times, each time applying another strategy of bullying. <S> I never accepted / swallowed their attitude, not even when I really needed a new job. <S> Short answer: <S> STAY AWAY!! <S> There are many fish(es) in the pond. <A> There's a point here, and it's not necessarily about salary. <S> If HR is already this unflexible and uncooperative during the offer stage (when the company has the most incentive to keep you happy), then you can extrapolate that turned up to 11 when you're actually working there. <S> So my advice is to take this as what it is: <S> A good indicator of what working for them will be actually like. <S> Is there anything I can do at this point to get a better initial offer? <S> First, decide for yourself if you still want to work there. <S> Then, as all negotiations, it comes down to your willingness to walk away. <S> Negotiate for that, and be prepared to walk away (be diplomatic about saying it like that though). <S> But in general I'd reconsider if I wanted to actually work there first, regardless of salary. <A> Is there anything I can do at this point to get a better initial offer? <S> You can appeal to the hiring manager. <S> But it seems likely that he won't be able to do anything more than he has so far. <S> My friend told me that he got a significantly higher offer after negotiating for the same position last year, so it seems that I've just gotten caught at the butt-end of interdepartmental drama. <S> It definitely sounds like the department head really wants to hire me, so would it be wise to email them directly? <S> It's worth a try. <S> But you'll need to do it quickly. <S> Perhaps I could get them to push harder on HR to get approval for the salary if they know that I'm inclined to turn down their offer. <S> I'm worried that dealing with HR further won't go anywhere since HR won't be negatively affected if the other department loses me. <S> Your worry seems justified. <S> Be prepared to make your decision one way or the other by the end of the week. <S> If you want the job at the current salary offer, then accept the offer. <S> Otherwise, just turn it down, move on, and don't look back. <A> If HR is stonewalling then there is nothing you can do about it. <S> All you can do is contact the department head, he probably knows what you want, and it’s up to him to get the offer to you, or not. <S> He will know who he can contact (for example, the head of HR when you are being stonewalled by some HR drone who is one step away from being fired. <S> Or the CEO telling them that they are being stonewalled). <S> All up to them, how much they can do and how many favours they want to use up to hire you.
| Make up your mind about a number you want or otherwise you won't want to work there. Then, if the offer isn't met, just walk away.
|
Handling long (13-week) notice period and signing at a new employer I've seen some other questions with good answers regarding long notice periods, but here's a specific situation I'm wondering about. Where I live notice periods can get quite long for both being laid off or resigning. It is based on the time worked for the employer, type of employment and salary, but it can run up to 13 weeks. Now, the common wisdom says not to resign until you've signed a contract with a new employer. The issue then is that the potential new employer may not wish to wait 13 weeks until their new position can be filled in. If you go to your current employer to negotiate a shorter notice period, they'll know you wish to resign before you've signed with a new one. If you sign with the new one to start on a date before the full notice period would run out you could get in trouble with the current employer. What is the best approach here? One consideration I've made is that if a new employer wouldn't wish to wait 13 weeks to get a valuable asset on board who might work there for many years, it already reflects badly on them anyway. It might mean they're understaffed and in a rush to bring in more resources, or have a high turnover, or don't value long-term career development. But in some cases, like with startups, it's quite understandable. Possible approaches: If the new employer is willing to sign with the max notice period, do so and then negotiate with the current one for a potential shorter one. Not all employers might want to do so. Ignore employers who wouldn't want to wait it out. But this decreases your pool. Make sure you would be offered the job if you can start sooner, then negotiate with your current employer. Very risky because you don't have anything in writing yet and if you can't shorten your notice, you might be left with no new job and your current employer knowing you plan to leave. Take the dive and resign, then look for a job. Again risky, but less so if there's many opportunities and lots of demand for your work. Also, in my country this gives you a right to two half days (or one full day) off per week for the purpose of finding a new job. An additional risk is your employer decides your notice is shortened, and I'm not sure if you can then enforce it from your side. <Q> It's true; 3 months is not uncommon for a senior position. <S> Just be open and honest about it with both your potential new employer and the recruiter. <S> They'll wait for you. <S> In some cases, they may have an urgency to hire sooner, and that can be expressed by buying you out of your notice period (not usually all; just e.g. the last 6 weeks). <S> Discuss how this works with the recruiter, but under no circumstances agree to front the money for this. <S> You may find there is actually no problem, and that on the day you resign, your employer has you escorted from the building, and pays you in lieu of notice or puts you on home leave (common in banks and defence companies). <S> Be sure to read your existing contract carefully. <A> The rule that you don’t give notice before the new contract is signed is absolute. <S> Otherwise you have the risk that the new company changes their mind and you are without a job, unacceptable. <S> Every company in Belgium knows that 13 weeks notice is normal, so a decent company will not try to force you to give notice earlier. <S> If they try to, that’s a HUGE red flag. <S> They can say: “We sign a contract for you to start in 13 weeks, or at any earlier time” and then you can ask the old employer for shorter notice which they might accept or not. <A> As with most EU countries, a 13 week notice for senior members of staff is quite common. <S> I checked online specifically for Belgium and since you've worked for this company for 10 years, a 13 week notice period is required. <S> You should double check this with your contract and any resources available on your intranet. <S> As you probably realized judging from your comment to Justin's reply, an employer is prepared to wait those 13 weeks before you start with them. <S> I would go ahead and communicate this with your new employer and check your new contract, it should reflect a starting date after those 13 weeks. <A> I was in a similar situation once: it wasn't hard to negotiate a shorter notice period with my current employer. <S> Look at it from their perspective: what do they have to gain from forcing someone to work for them who doesn't want to be there any more? <S> What level of quality, commitment and engagement would you expect? <S> Obviously this depends on the cast of characters and the situation, but most reasonable employers will have no problem with that as long as there is a well structured exit plan that covers knowledge hand off, successor training, finishing critical projects, etc. <S> Most employers would actually prefer this: It's more effective to wind things down over a 3-6 week period instead of having a sitting duck for 3 months. <S> The very long notice periods are there primarily to protect employees, not because employers want it this way.
| Don't give any indication to your old employer that you're looking for a new job unless you're prepared to be let go. You should definitely have a signed contract in place before resigning.
|
HR asked me about what I think about my colleagues when I'm resigning I am leaving the company for another opportunity as I am quite dissatisfied about the behaviors of some colleagues. HR specifically asked me what I think about other people in my team in a meeting room. Since I'm not sure whether I will work for the company again, I lied and said everyone was nice and helpful, and I'm just not OK with the content of my work. What is the purpose of this question? Should I be honest about the inappropriate words and behaviors of some of my team members if given a second chance? Or would it be fine to just focus on the good side of colleagues? <Q> It is a best practice that you never tell officially exactly what you think about colleagues, bosses and companies. <S> Sooner or later, your honesty will hit you back, because we are all people and we are not perfect. <S> The desire for revenge is too big in us all (or at least, in most of us). <S> They will assume that you will speak bad of them in the future too, if something unpleasant happens. <S> Best course of action: be politically correct - only say good things. <S> Claim that you leave because of better opportunities (or anything similar). <S> DO NOT FALL into the trap to tell the truth, regardless of the tricks they apply to get it from you. <A> What is the purpose of this question? <S> The purpose of that question is simply to identify if there is something which is not right with behavior of your colleague. <S> If they get similar answers from people exiting then there is a high chance that it's true <S> then HR can look into what is needed to be done to improve that behavior to avoid high attrition rate. <S> Should I be honest about the inappropriate words and behaviours of some of my team members if given a second chance? <S> Or just focus on the good side of colleagues <S> is fine. <S> I think you should point out the behavior you were uncomfortable with as long as it stays as a confidential information between you and HR. <S> But again you are under no obligation to do so and have no incentive to do so either. <S> If the behavior was inappropriate then it makes sense to first inform HR before quitting. <A> What is the purpose of this question? <S> Only the HR department that asked it will ever know the real reason. <S> Here are a few potential reasons <S> Find employees who aren't acting appropriately Making sure management are doing their jobs appropriately Preventing potential fines that could hit the company (e.g. colleagues harassing each other, discrimination etc..) <S> Should I be honest about the inappropriate words and behaviours of some of my team members if given a second chance? <S> I doubt they're going to ask you again, but this is up to you. <S> What do you have to gain from doing so? <S> Focusing on the good sides could cost the company if there are serious matters to be addressed that are not prevented/identified <S> however no one will blame you or even know you knew about it so again <S> , do you have anything to gain from saying good or bad?
| ESPECIALLY: do not say anything bad about former colleagues, employees, companies DURING AN INTERVIEW!
|
I have no proof of employment to show my next company I was referred by an employee in a startup company as a developer. So without asking any salary details, I joined this company and started developing projects. Now it's been 7 months in this company and they still haven't paid me a single penny and they didn't give me an offer letter. I asked the person who referred me about these and he said he will talk to them but no proper response. Now I am planning to quit the job in this company. If I get the job in the other company what should I answer if they ask why I quit? What if they asked for the documents like offer letter and relieving letter and pay slips? <Q> I have no proof of employment to show my next company <S> Actually, you are currently not employed. <S> You have not been getting paid for your work and there is no documentation that proves that you have been doing any work for the past 7 months. <S> Forget about your current "employer", act as if these 7 months never happened because you have no way of proving that they did. <S> If asked what you did the past 7 months you can say something like: <S> While searching for new work opportunities I was working on improving my development skills. <S> It's not a lie because you have actually been doing developer work. <S> Hopefully you learn from this experience. <A> Now I am planning to quit the job in this company. <S> Good <S> better late than never. <S> If I get the job in the other company what should I answer if they ask Why are you quitting the previous company <S> and they asked for the documents like offer letter and relieving letter and pay slips. <S> You can tell them the truth. <S> Most probably what they will be more concerned is about the work that you did there. <S> So that they can see how you can be a suitable candidate for the role applied. <S> Other than that they can ask question like <S> why did you work for free, how did you support yourselves for that period etc. <S> Most likely they will have their own systems in place to check whether the candidate is qualified to do something other than just believing past employment proofs like offer letter, pay slips, relieving letter, etc. <S> What if I continue for one year in the existing company without salary and quit the job? <S> If I was in your place I would quit. <S> I am not sure if you brought this topic to their attention or not <S> but it's their business to see if employees are compensated or not. <S> If they haven't discussed it yet there is a high chance they won't discuss this with you in future. <S> What are the consequences I will face in the future? <S> Not much other than lost compensation for the period you worked. <S> Since I started my job career recently so I am confused for the next step <S> Next step is to get things in place and get a job that pays unless you want to work for free. <A> Now it's been 7 months in this company and they still haven't paid mea single penny <S> and they didn't give me an offer letter. <S> Now I am planning to quit the job in this company. <S> You can't quit a job you never had. <A> If it is an interesting project, upload to the internet and link it up on your CV to show what you've been doing for the last 7 months, since you definitely weren't employed.
| No contract of employment may also mean that all the work you've done for them is not theirs, since there is no proof that you've ever worked for them and that you have confidentiality to keep - use this to your advantage. When applying to new companies, use the experience and documentation from your previous legitimate employers and answer questions regarding those previous employers accordingly.
|
Requesting transfer out of project I am a Scrum Master for a team and ever since another joined to ‘help out’ as part of restructuring work, they seem to prefer him over me. This is irrespective of our quality of work being similar, where he has come on board and improved on what was already started by myself. Given the problems of this work stream, lack of maturity, size and professionalism management felt that additional support was required. A discussion will take place with my manager who currently intends for me to take over again full time. I have the following potential options: stay as their Scrum Master request to be transferred to a new project The problem is that I am currently quite unhappy working with this particular team, since unlike other teams I’ve worked with in the past they seem to be very unappreciative of any work I do for them and do not listen when coaching them agile. Hence, do not feel very valued. My colleague on the other hand they are treating better, has an easier time getting buy in which I suspect is from being new and being more charismatic. I really would like to request to transfer to another work stream but worried that this may look negative politically in the organisation as being somebody who got taken off for not performing, when that’s not the case. After a year working with them, I just no longer have any interest being their Scrum Master, and would rather start afresh with a new team. Also given the confidence levels of my colleague, I’m starting to feel like he should run it out of spite from him coming on board leading to me becoming increasingly undermined. How can I move out of the workstream gracefully? <Q> It sounds as if "your work here is done", and a clean break would be mutually beneficial. <S> Get yourself a new team/squad, coach the crap out of them and deliver something awesome! <S> I would phrase this to your manager as "the team has reached maturity, I can't add value anymore other than facilitating the Scrum ceremonies, so I think it's best if I move to another project which has a need for a competent Scrum master" <A> You can go full high ground here: <S> I have noticed that $new_person is a much better fit for the team than I ever was. <S> He is competent and well able to handle the situation alone. <S> I think I should move on to support a different team and let him earn his spurs here. <S> What you are conveying by this: You have great introspection! <S> You have a good view of the team dynamics. <S> You are willing to give others the limelight. <S> In the subtext: You are the master, he is the student, and he should step up now. <S> People are often afraid that by being modest and supporting others they are undermining themselves. <S> The opposite is usually true: You are showing very mature behaviour that sets you up for a promotion if anything. <A> The problem is that I am currently quite unhappy working with this particular team, since unlike other teams <S> I’ve worked with in the past <S> they seem to be very unappreciative of any work I do for them and do not listen when coaching them agile. <S> And After a year working with them, I just no longer have any interest being their Scrum Master, and would rather start afresh with a new team. <S> There are 2 issues here <S> - First, you are unhappy, second, your team does not follow your scrum leadership <S> You have 2 choices 1) <S> Get on another project. <S> You've worked on your current project for a year, so it's probably not terrible to look for a new project. <S> Before you approach your manager, have a new project ready. <S> 2) Talk with your current team about your frustrations. <S> They may be just as frustrated as you are. <S> Having been on both sides of this (meeting leader and developer). <S> Here are some ways I (as a developer) have not followed the scrum leader <S> Stand-ups 5 minute stand-ups are useful, 30 minute ones are not. <S> I've only been involved in one team that actually enforced 5 minute stand-ups. <S> Everyone else would waste 30-45 minutes a day in stand-up meetings that quickly devolved into status-update-strategic-vision-brainstorming-team-building sessions. <S> These were extremely demoralizing to the team due to the time sink. <S> The 5 minute stand-up was the only one to not have a scrum master. <S> Adding a Process <S> the Team Didn't Agree to by Scrum Master Decree <S> Having the process change without having input is demoralizing.
| Get buy-in from the team for changes, and represent the team's ideas to upper management.
|
Forward a recruiters e-mail vs sending friends' contact details to recruiter I got contacted by a recruiter regarding a job opening. I am not interested in the job, but I have some friends that might be.What would be the best way to connect them? A) Give their names to the recruiter. B) Forward the recruiter's e-mail to my friends, let them contact the recruiter. <Q> What would be the best way to connect them? <S> Most folks <S> I know <S> do not want their personal information ( email, phone, etc. ) shared without their consent . <S> Your best bet is to just forward the email on to whomever <S> you think would be interested and let them make contact with the recruiter <S> should they desire to know more about the opportunity. <A> My initial reaction was: the answer is so obvious, why did you even have to ask? <S> And the other three answers seem to agree. <S> But on reflection, there is a better solution: <S> This way, you are not giving anybody their personal details without their consent, but you offer them the service of giving them a free recommendation, which is surely better than having them contact the recruiter out of the blue. <A> Just Forward <S> The Email <S> If you forward the recruiter's email to your friends, you're giving your friends an opportunity for this specific job opening. <S> If you forward your friends' contact info to the recruiter, you're not just connecting them with this opportunity. <S> You're giving that recruiter the ability to bug them... <S> non-stop... for years. <S> Because that recruiter isn't going to try to connect them to this one specific job opening - they're going to try to connect them with any job openings that come up. <A> What would be the best way to connect them? <S> A) Give their names to the recruiter. <S> B) <S> Forward the recruiter's e-mail to my friends, let them contact the recruiter. <S> B is by far the best option. <S> Unless you have your friends' permission to give away their contact information, you should never do that. <S> If you forward the recruiter's information, along with a brief note, your friends can choose to follow up or to just ignore it, without fear of being hounded by a recruiter.
| forward the e-mail to your friends, and ask them if they would like you to recommend them to the recruiter.
|
Why would an employer contact references prior to asking for an interview? I'm in a job search process. I'm applying to many different potential employers. On more than one occasion I've had a potential employer ask to speak to references prior to even calling me to ask for an interview. I don't get it....why would an employer want to "get to know" me by asking my friends? Do they think my hand-picked references will help them understand me better than simply picking up the phone and calling me? Details to know is that whatever employer I'm hired by, it will very likely involve a move -- very possibly several hundred miles away. It's not easy to simply go in for an interview. Any interview will likely be conducted by phone or a video call/skype. The reason this is a concern is because I really do value my references time/privacy. I've had references question why several different ones are calling them, when none of them even bother to call me for an interview. Point of clarification: This is not a situation where they are simply contacting references submitted with the resume -- they email me and ask for references. They don't ask for an interview, but they want to call references before even deciding if they care to interview me. <Q> While it's rare, a few phone calls to references can screen you in or out and is far less disruptive to an employer than scheduling an hour long interview. <S> Some do it as a form of pre-screening, which is annoying. <S> If your references don't like being called don't use them. <S> to be more mindful of the people you've used for references, let them know every time you give out their number, and tell them that a potential employer may be calling them. <A> They contact the references you provide so that they can make their own educated choices about who they want to interview. <S> Giving you a list of reasons that they did not choose you is not possible as we don't have their list of requirements they are looking for. <S> Usually one warns referees that they may be getting requests and they tend to realize you might have applied to several positions.... <A> This is rare, but there are some employers that believe references are more valuable than in person interviews. <S> I can't find it at the moment, but I remember reading an interview where - I believe it was a LinkedIn executive - was claiming that he learned more talking to references than in job interviews. <S> In my experience, most companies don't call your references ever, so if you really hate this then you could try moving on to the next job, but it's actually a good sign in my opinion because it means they're likely thorough in the hiring process. <A> I literally never heard of this. <S> What country is it? <S> Perhaps it's a country specific phenomenon. <S> Obviously it's up to the employer when to ask for references, but it's completely up to you to decide if the request, and timing, seem reasonable. <S> I worked in Engineering for over 6 years, and references are one of your most valuable resources. <S> It's up to them to provide an employer with positive and authentic opinion of your achievements and personality. <S> They can make or break a company's decision to offer you a great role. <S> Last thing I would want is them getting a phone call from every company that stumbles upon your CV. <S> Talking to multiple companies and repeating the same things might turn into a chore. <S> If it was up to me, I would keep my references to myself at least until after the first interview. <S> If your potential employer is serious enough to go to the next stage with you <S> I would agree to their request to your references contact details. <A> Though I have not seen this as a common practice, there's nothing wrong in that. <S> It may not be targeted to know "you" (as in , your strength and weakness or competency) but it is more targeted to check the "authenticity" and "applicability" of your application. <S> At times, because of the broad job description, there may be more than one roles which will be qualified for the application however the actual requirement may be interested in only one of the roles. <S> By contacting your references, they may want to know exactly the field of work you're from. <S> Calling you would have also worked, but they can do that anyways once you're hooked in for a discussion (voice/video/F2F). <S> Don't think about it too much, just make sure your references are aware that they may get the calls. <A> I've had a potential employer ask to speak to references prior to even calling me to ask for an interview. <S> While it depends on the particular company’s interview procedures, there are costs associated with interviewing candidates: time, interviewer salaries, travel compensation, etc. <S> I would assume that their goal is to weed out those who are obviously poor fits for the position. <S> So they will do what they can, with the resources they have, prior to committing to an interview — including reading your resume, reviewing your transcripts, and calling your references. <S> I don't get it.... <S> why would an employer want to "get to know" me by asking my friends? <S> Do they think my hand-picked references will help them understand me better than simply picking up the phone and calling me? <S> Hopefully you’re using the word “friends” here loosely. <S> Speaking with your hand-picked references will absolutely help them understand you better. <S> Are your references old high-school buddies, or are they your managers and colleagues? <S> Are they more familiar with your quality of work, or with how many beers you drank last weekend? <S> Your selection of references counts. <S> Think of this as your first interview question. <S> Details to know is that whatever employer I'm hired by, it will very likely involve a move -- very possibly several hundred miles away. <S> All the more reason for the screeners to be diligent. <S> Moving compensation can be high. <S> And while the initial interview may be over the phone or Skype (as you say), they may need to fly you in for subsequent interviews. <S> The take away is to make sure you’re choosing references that know your work (and/or work habits), and can testify that you’re committed to your area of interest. <S> Choose references that you’re proud to offer, and ones that you hope they do call. <S> (and of course, let your references know to expect the call!)
| They call the references to confirm details they are interested in, whether it be stated experience or the job description etc
|
Financial problems with my company sometimes delays my pay - must I quit? I have a job as a TI engineer in a small company. I'm well paid and I learn and do a lot of things that other TI engineers don't. I'm really happy here but for several reasons, over the last year the company has been having financial issues. These issues sometimes have caused my pay to be delayed. They always pay me eventually, but I'm getting sick of these delays, because like everyone, I have financial responsibilities of my own. I don't know if I should quit or stay at the company. I know that if I quit, the company is going to die, because there is no other TI engineer that knows and does the things that I do in my job (It would be like giving the company the last final thrust). It would be hard for the company to get another TI engineer that could learn the how the company operates quickly enough. I could negotiate an increase of salary, but it's like negotiating a lottery ticket: you don't know if will be worth the paper it's printed on. Recently, someone got me a job offer to work in a bigger company. I'm really very conflicted about what to do. What would you recommend I do? Quit my current job? Stay and try to negotiate the salary? Or take the other job? <Q> Ultimately, you need to do what's right for you. <S> If they can't pay you, your landlord won't care why the rent doesn't get paid. <A> It's hard to give advice about quitting or staying put because people make those decisions based on very different, and very personal, factors. <S> Some people will be very risk adverse and will jump ship at the first sign of problems. <S> Other people will want to "ride it out" because they like the rush of uncertainty, they're in the driver's seat in terms of the company's direction, they've got an incentive to help the company perform in the long term, they REALLY like their team mates, or other reasons. <S> That said, a company that can't always pay their employees on time is a pretty serious situation. <S> That said, if you decide to quit, follow standard advice: <S> Do your best to line up a new job before quitting the current job. <S> This is a good idea because it keeps you in the driver's seat, you're able to hunt for jobs while still getting a paycheck, which lets you be a little more picky about where you go (versus just being desperate for ANY job). <S> Don't tell your current employer <S> you're leaving until after you have accepted a job offer in writing - <S> even if you get a good verbal offer, waiting until you have a written contract allows you to make sure <S> you have the job of your dreams lined up, and there are no surprises (in terms of benefits, working conditions, etc). <S> Don't feel obligated to stay put longer than you want to in order to keep your current employer afloat. <S> This is important, given the concerns you expressed. <S> whether or not your employer can survive you leaving isn't your problem. <S> Do what's right for you. <S> You can bet that the employer would do the same - they're not going to keep you on payroll out of sympathy. <S> You shouldn't keep working for them out of sympathy. <S> Learn from your current situation when you hunt for your next job. <S> If you're not happy in a young, unstable company that doesn't have a stable, reliable future, then make sure you're not simply applying at other companies that look and feel the same. <A> You never want to be in a position where you have to live on your savings. <S> When a company cannot afford to pay its staff then it cannot afford to keep operating, so you are better off finding a new job asap. <S> As to your thoughts that the company will die if you quit - that's not your problem. <S> Look at it this way: do they pay you as if you are the most essential member of staff? <S> You have to do what is best for you first and foremost, not the company. <A> If your current company is having issues paying you on time and you have offers from a more reliable ( in terms of pay ) company, you should consider those offers.
| At the end of the day, the reason you get a job is to make money and it is not your responsibility if the company "dies" due to you quitting.
|
What to write in mail having resume What should I write in an email when sending a resume to someone who has given me an email address and asked me to share my resume. Extra question(trivial): Should I attach my resume as a PDF or DOC file? Thank you. I have written the email like this Subject - Resume - Java Developer Position Hi Ankita, Please find attached a copy of my resume for Java Developerposition at XYZ. Thank you so much, and I look forward to hearing backfrom you! Regards, YOURNAMEHERE. Software Developer Mobile: +91xxxxx Reply to: xxxxx@outlook.com <Q> Your sample e-mail text is OK. <S> I prefer to attach PDF, since it is difficult to modify it, especially by mistake. <S> Also, PDF guarantees the layout. <S> MS Word does not. <S> However, if the company complains about the file type, provide it in a form suitable for the company. <A> The only change I would make is to add your name to the subject line: <S> Subject - John Smith's Resume - Java Developer Position <A> What should I write in an email when sending a resume to someone who has given me an email address and asked me to share my resume. <S> If you only met the person one time, when they gave you their email address. <S> You want to remind them where they met you: the job fair, the sporting event, the business conference. <S> If you know them well your introduction reminder can me less formal, but remember that other people may read it if the email gets forwarded. <S> Expect that it will In all situations you should also take a few sentences explain why your are interested in the position, and why they should consider you. <S> This email is your cover letter. <S> You want to give them a reason to open the resume, and a reason to consider you for the position. <A> Like @Virolino, I generally prefer PDF, however every agency I have ever dealt with prefer MS Word, so they can remove your contact details and usually add their company logo to the top. <S> (They do this to prevent the client contacting you directly and losing them commission, and also so that when your CV is seen internally by the client, their agency is top of mind). <S> The less scrupulous will sometimes change the details or even cut/paste a different candidate into it, but this is really rare, and in any case they can do it by pasting from the pdf. <S> I'd go with latest version of MsWord.docx . <S> I also have the Date Last Updated in very small font <S> , top right. <S> I find that helpful when someone calls me <S> and I can ask what version they have. <S> When I first saw someone else do that, I thought it was really stupid and pretentious, but changed my mind again a few years later. <A> It's called a cover letter, OP. <S> You write a letter explaining why you are a good fit for this company. <S> You remind the recipient that they asked to see your resume, where you met etc, so they don't think you're cold-contacting them. <S> Hopefully you had more than a 30-second conversation, so that you can pick up the topic and expand on it a bit to say something that sounds like you're halfway interested in their work. <S> Or you look at their website and manage to sound like you're halfway etc... <S> The fact that it's not a separate sheet of paper should not fool you to think this mail is not important.
| I have in the past also included a copyright at the bottom. If the person you are sending the email to doesn't know you then take the opportunity to explain why you are sending them the email, the position you are interested in, who asked you to send them the email and resume.
|
How to tactfully negotiate a raise during my first review Background: Just came up on my second year with my company (<50 employees) First review since I started Started "part-time" as a flexible employee from 9-2pm 3 days a week Bounced between full-time when busy and back down to 9-2pm and then I just started not leaving at 2 and I've been full-time since last November My work is in the printing/data/design sector I'm hourly and I missed my company's health care sign-up because of the part-time status. I started my current job after leaving a toxic company and being unemployed for 6 months, so I was eager to "prove myself" and I was probably over-flexible. I pretty much shot myself in my foot by not being more aggressive and negotiating better hours/pay sooner but I was really desperate for employment so I was flexible. Now the pay isn't equal to what I value my time as, crosstraining hasn't happened, and my skills that were brought up during hiring aren't being put to use. Additionally, I've missed the sign-up windows for my company's healthcare/dental plan because of timing and part-time status and I feel like my flexibility has been taken advantage of. For my review, I plan on emphasizing the points above and demonstrating that I'm being under-utilized as an employee. Question: Would it be damaging to ask for a raise during my review and what would be the most tactful method to bring it up? Clarifications: I am currently not being offered a raise. Some of the cases of underutilizing skills is assigning a design project and then after the initial delivery it's never brought up and finished externally with no feedback or review Cross-training was a department-wide promise at our last meeting I'm looking for insight on how to leverage/reposition myself based on the part-time flexibility <Q> The fact that you have skills that are not being used is not a valid reason to pay you more simply because the company is not getting any value out of them. <A> You seem confused about your status. <S> Working a full schedule, even an over-full one, is not in any way being a permanent full-time employee. <S> I could imagine getting a review if you're still temporary, there could be things to clarify. <S> But I fail to understand how you could possibly contribute to the company 401k without being considered permanent. <S> And the point where you go from temporary to permanent is when you sign up for health insurance, not some yearly window which is only meant for ongoing people. <S> So either you, your boss, or your HR is terribly mis-handling your being formally hired, if that's happening at all. <S> I would suggest you concentrate this upcoming review on this status issue - am I being hired, if so when is it effective, and incidentally what would my salary be (noting in passing that contractors are generally paid more than employees, so you don't have too much of a bad surprise). <A> Would it be damaging to ask for a raise during my review and what would be the most tactful method to bring it up? <S> Be prepared on your end with what you accomplished in the year. <S> Keep in mind that you should get a 2-5% raise for cost of living. <S> It might be wise to bring in some research into what others are paid in a similar position in your general area. <S> Be blunt and to the point. <S> Say you want a raise and the reason why. <S> Don't ask for promises or try to imply something. <S> Be direct. <S> Sir/Ma'am, here are the accomplishments I did in the last year. <S> I feel X was my most successful and biggest contribution to this company. <S> I feel I should get a raise to Y. See what they say. <S> Don't just say you want a raise for no reason. <S> A first year raise is a good time. <S> I recall I got a 8% raise my first year out of school just by bringing up a big thing that was done.
| You should ask for a raise based on the current market and the value you provide to your company.
|
Job Application Question: How do I list this specific experience on the application, and how do I provide references when I don't have enough? I'm filling out a job application in-person after submitting my resume and there's a section for Employment History. I also do volunteer work with the company I'm applying to, which was previously stipended for the first few months (no longer) and I am therefore unsure if it is either employment or volunteer work. I'm not sure how to classify my employment history here, which is also related to their asking for references. They ask for three business references that are not direct supervisors listed in the Employment History section, and I don't have many that are not my supervisors. I am inclined not to list the volunteer/stipended position so that I can list my volunteer supervisor in those references. I also have an internship position as well that I am unsure how to classify. Here are my options: List my main volunteer/stipended position, my only salaried employment, and unpaid internship position all under the Employment History section and contact three other people who may serve as a reference (at least two will necessarily be with other volunteer positions I did NOT list on my resume — not sure if that's a red flag) List salaried employment and unpaid internship under Employment History and list my volunteer supervisor as an additional reference (again, the other two will be from volunteer positions that are not on my resume) List only my salaried employment in employment history and offer the supervisors from my main volunteer position and internship as some of the three references, and contact a third person who will likely be from the place of salaried employment Which do you think is my best shot? <Q> Let me take a wider berth around the actual question first: When companies are hiring, their process for generating a job posting may or may not be well thought out. <S> Often this is driven by HR who don't actually know the details of the job themselves. <S> Therefore, you can expect there to be a lot of random "prerequisites" in there that may well be completely irrelevant to the job. <S> So, don't feel bad if you don't fulfill some of the prerequisites - they will probably not be getting a lot of applications from people who have everything <S> AND they would usually not want to pay those what they're worth. <S> That said, I agree with Sourav and user35316: <S> List every scrap of work experience you have! <S> Technicalities of whether or not something constitutes volunteer work can be discussed in an interview. <S> Once you have progressed further in your career you will be able to tailor applications by emphasising work experience that is particularly relevant to the job. <A> Also, the reference need not always be your superiors (higher up the chain), it can be colleagues also. <A> Some employers all for your entire work history on their application forms but <S> I only keep however much work history would add up to five years of employment history or so on my CV (the British term for resume) because that's what the majority of employers look at, plus I'd add an extra page of I went all the way to my GCSEs <S> (exams taken at 16) <S> a good CV shouldn't exceed two pages so regular housekeeping shouldn't be frowned upon. <S> However, if they ask for specifics then add to yours accordingly. <S> With application forms, the employer sets their own expectations. <S> If you think that older work history has given skills that would benefit their company, there is a section on skills in the application forms I've seen. <S> Don't hesitate to use that and include examples of using it. <S> With references, there are two kinds, personal and employer. <S> Personal references can be from anyone who knows you apart from your family. <S> Got a cop as a family friend? <S> Perfect! <S> Been to school lately? <S> Ask a teacher! <S> Your employer needs to hear from someone at ground level? <S> Colleagues! <S> When I needed to references for a school, I got a personal one from a manager who had nothing to do with hiring me, but we became good friends, and my last employer. <S> I was asked by the he administrator why I didn't have a reference from the employer in between <S> and I explained that stat who worked with me left not long after I did, which was give with her. <S> When I was told that they needed questions HR halfway on the other side of the country couldn't answer (safeguarding children as I didn't have a criminal record check when I started) <S> I asked one of the management team, now the branch manager where I used to work, to answer them for me.
| A general advice: List all of your employments (paid and voluntary).
|
I'm experiencing hand pain that forces me to take frequent breaks. How can I explain this to my coworkers? I'm a software engineer and was recently involved in a motorcycle accident that has my right hand in a bit of a mess. One of the injuries in particular is causing a lot of pain - an unhealing broken scaphoid. I'd like to think that I'm usually very productive, but this injury has me taking frequent breaks lasting from minutes to hours. My social life has gone to zero due to the unpredictable nature of these breaks and the fact that I'm still obligated to deliver the same value for the salary I'm being paid - but now that takes twice as much time. I'd like to try to explain to my coworkers that my relatively low productivity isn't due to me being lazy, and that their perceptions of me are important to me. I'd like to manage those perceptions by explaining the type of injury I have, and possibly even showing them the X-rays (more from an isn't this gnarly position than a defensive one). I'm hoping this kind of transparency will soften their likely very negative current perceptions of me. Even the quality of my work is declining as the pain sometimes completely derails my train of thought and leads to forgetful/sloppy behavior. I have considered disability but I don't feel that I'm disabled; I'm just a bit handicapped at the moment. Any advice would be much appreciated. <Q> As you say, you had (and still have) a problem. <S> It affects your productivity, coworkers have noticed it, and they have " negative perceptions ". <S> You want to soften their temporary resentment. <S> I see that as a very positive attitude, so why wouldn't you just tell them what you're telling us? <S> Any communication channel will help I believe. <S> First: you manager. <S> Talk to them first. <S> Then, your colleagues. <S> Hi guys! <S> I've just had a bike accident, and suffer more than I expected. <S> At the moment, I've an unhealing broken scaphoid, my hand hurts a lot, and forces me into frequent/longer breaks. <S> I know it messes our work up, and, as team member, I'd like to do my best in order to help. <S> It takes more time for me to deliver the work, but I'll catch up as much as I can, and work longer hours. <S> As a colleague, I'd understand your problem, and wouldn't blame you. <S> And even help you. <S> As a small business owner, I'd like to know what happened to you before I notice your " temporary low productivity ". <S> And I'd help you: health insurance (your rights, your problems with them, your coverage...)? <S> different hours? <S> different duties? <S> talk to team and explain? <S> Well, any manager's duties. <A> Canada -> <S> There are a couple of routes you can go. <S> The most typical is that you apply for short-term disability, or arrange for light duty arrangements with your company. <S> Depending on your recovery, it may or may not turn in to long term disability. <S> So, currently, you have a disability. <S> You should be accommodated. <S> You definitely need to find resources local to your municipality/region. <S> As for your coworkers. <S> It's none of their business, and you don't answer to them. <S> Your supervisor should be controlling the tone of the room with regards to how you're performing, and that person is the one evaluating you. <S> Discuss it with them. <A> You seem to be seriously overthinking this. <S> The answer is in the question: I'm experiencing hand pain that forces me to take frequent breaks. <S> Just say that. <S> But, surely you say "ouch!" <S> from time to time? <S> Surely at least one co-worker has noticed?
| You want to be nice to them, so just be nice, tell them the truth. Explain everything, one on one, provide them, if possible, with any suitable solution for you and the company, taking into account your health, needs, and duties.
|
How to educate teammate to take screenshots for bugs without unwanted stuff We have a new team mate as a QA (software tester). He recently started to execute the regression suites in our application and reporting bugs. When reporting the bugs in TFS, he used to attach the screenshots in that. The issue is, he used to take the screenshots with the browser's other tabs too (online music sites, movies in YouTube, and Twitter) and also he kept some other billing and banking sites as bookmarks in the browser, which are also captured in the screenshot. Also during our DRB call he used to present his screen and we used to discussed about the bugs, and that time also I can see the other tabs and the personal bookmarks. I personally talked with him twice before in a friendly way, recommended him to use the Windows snipping tool to capture/crop the specific area of the application for the bugs, and avoid the other unwanted stuff in the screenshots. I also asked him to hide the bookmarks in the browser or keep them under a bookmark folder. He replied that he used to follow the same approach (kept unwanted stuff in the screenshot) at his previous company and didn't find any harm in it. Since the TFS can be accessed by our clients, and they are reviewing the bugs most of the time, I don't want the clients to make any fun based on the screenshot or ask any questions about that. Can I report this case to my leadership team to take action, or should I simply ignore this? Or is there a polished way to let him understand the issue to act? <Q> He replied, he used to follow the same approach (kept unwanted stuff in SS) in his previous company and didn't find any harm in it. <S> Tackle his response. <S> He is not in his previous company. <S> This is not his previous job. <S> You have, even if not written down (but you should have them), standards that you try to keep. <S> And you are there to be professional. <S> Is the same reason why we don't write shopping list on our presentations. <S> It's not the needed information no the target care about it. <A> You already talked two times with this colleague, so I wouldn't go back to him again. <S> He didn't change things after the two first conversations, and if you go talk to him about this a third time, he'll probably just find you annoying and not listen to you. <S> The other problem is that you're framing this as a personal preference, something he has every right to ignore. <S> It doesn't seem to be something that's bothering your other colleagues, or something that goes against company policy or good practices. <S> Not so that "action can be taken", but so that you gain more perspective on this issue and can act accordingly. <S> I was wondering about something. <S> I noticed that when the new QA takes screenshots for bugs, he doesn't hide his tabs and bookmarks, some of which don't have anything to with our work. <S> Is this something we should be concerned about, since clients review those ? <S> If they say no, then you drop it. <S> This seems a small issue, and it's going to seem weird that you make such a big fuss ( <S> several conversations with the QA, a conversation with someone senior, and then conversations with several colleagues) over a small thing. <S> If they say yes, they should also handle that conversation with the QA. <A> This could be a security risk or data privacy violation if your colleague does not check what is visible on his screenshots. <S> Having some email opened in the background (even if you just see the subject in the tab or in the task bar) could expose confidential information. <S> Visible email addresses or names could be a GDPR violation. <S> Visible URLs might be used to hijack web sessions. <S> Even if he says that he checks the content: the more unnecessary stuff is visible in the screenshots, the more likely it is that some confidential information will be overlooked. <S> Any reasonable person shouldn't argue against that. <A> I have no affiliation with the product or company, but take a look at Greenshot to meet in the middleground with the tester. <S> It's like Windows Snipping Tool, but it'll override the screenshot key that your tester is used to using with a crosshair that he can drag over the area he wants to screenshot, then save to a proper folder. <S> With this you arent asking him to learn a new procedure or new set of tools, but use the exact same actions he does now <S> and it'll keep both of you happy. <S> Again, not affiliated with Greenshot, but I use it every day for similar conversations with customers and software developers and it works wonders. <A> If you’re his boss. <S> Inform him of the company’s policy. <S> If he refuses, handle it like any other under-performing performance. <S> If you’re not his boss, and you’ve mentioned company policy to him once, then go about your business doing your job. <S> If his performance is affecting your ability to do your job, talk to your manager. <A> So can I inform this case to my leadership team to take action, or should I simply ignore this? <S> Or is there a polished way to let him understand the issue to act? <S> I wouldn't suggest asking the team lead to take action yet. <S> Seems like the issue can be resolved as a team. <S> You already gave him a friendly advice, maybe point to him that clients are going to see the screenshots <S> and it's going to look really unprofessional. <S> If he doesn't understand the consequences behind all this, he's not going to want to change, especially if he always did it like this. <A> (By email) <S> Hi <S> NewTeamMate, just a friendly reminder <S> -- could you make sure you crop your screenshots (e.g. using Snipping Tool) <S> when you upload them to TFS please?These are directly visible to the client <S> and I'm <S> afraid ThisCompany (put in your company) has a policy of being very 'clean' with client facing materials. <S> If he still does it after... forward that on to your manager to handle. <A> Possibly the screenshot issue may be missing the point. <S> For QA I want a clean browser configuration, with known and stable versions across a test session. <S> Updating the browser should be a deliberate decision, and the same applies to selecting the browser (Chrome, Edge, Firefox, ...). <S> Few things are as bad as hunting a browser-dependent bug, only to find out that the QA machine and the Dev machine had different browser versions. <S> I'm a developer with a mostly-backend focus, not a tester with a frontend focus, but I have half a dozen browsers installed on my work PC. <S> Only one of them has "non-technical" bookmarks, or the company intranet links for that matter, and that one is not used for testing.
| So I would go to your team lead / senior member / manager, and share your concern. Explain that it may have security issues or that when he listen to music on autoplay he may be listening to "f**king B*tches, getting money" and it will show. You could eventually go to your coworkers and see what they think about it, and if enough are bothered by it talk about this issue in a group meeting or something, but I wouldn't.
|
Can I challenge the interviewer to give me a proper technical feedback? Recently, I was in a technical interview, and after that, the interviewers gave me a technical task. During the interview, I got the impression the interviewers lacked proper knowledge of the technical task and I really do not want to work in a company with a poor team lead. I am done with the task now, and wish to ask the interviewer to give me a technical review of my tasks. I want to find out if the interviewer is able to do the task himself. I am wondering, if it is a weird thing to challenge the interviewer? <Q> Team Leads don't have to be able to do everything that their team does. <S> My Team Lead, for example, doesn't code C# - that doesn't mean that he's poorly skilled in the least or incapable of being a really good Team Lead (which he is). <S> He's asking you to do a task - <S> whether you feel that he could do the same task or not (or up to your standard) is entirely irrelevant to the interview process, as long as he or someone else can validate that you've completed it to a satisfactory level. <A> What is your purpose here? <S> To score points? <S> Prove you are cleverer than the interviewer? <S> Who says he's the person evaluating your performance on the task? <S> There's a good chance he will have someone more knowledgeable looking at your work. <S> All "challenging" them will do is show them you're someone who likes to win. <S> You won't have to decide if you want to work for them, because they probably won't offer you the position. <A> You don't need to "challenge" the interviewer. <S> Simply ask if they could give you feedback on how well you did on your interview, and an in depth overview on your technical question. <S> It isn't rude as long as they don't find out your intentions, which seem to be that you're trying to find out if the person interviewing you has the same technical skills to determine if you want to work there. <S> Although I do believe if you already have those red flags telling you that you don't want to work there, it's best to refrain from taking the job. <A> Something people sometimes forget: interview questions aren't there because they ascertain your technical skill. <S> They're there because the interviewer believes they can use the range of outputs to figure out whether the applicant would be a good hire. <S> Yes, they often are attempts to measure technical skill, but that's indirect <S> : the interviewer believes that if you give A/B/C as an answer, you're not technically proficient, but if you give D/E/F as an answer, you are. <S> With that in mind, it's pretty clear: they know how to evaluate your output. <S> If they didn't , they wouldn't be asking that as a question. <S> Let me give an example. <S> We're doing interviews, and one of our questions is: "Write some C# code that does X with a file." <S> Nothing complicated... except there are multiple ways of doing it, each with pros/cons. <S> Sure, we'd like to see some code... <S> but what we're really after is 'Does this person think through problems/issues before they start trying to crank out code? <S> Do they try to get additional info if the code requires it? <S> Did they weigh code simplicity vs performance?' <S> In our question? <S> I have to admit, while I could freehand write code that would do a read-it-all-into-memory approach with a few lines of code <S> , I don't know off the top of my head how to manually work with a filestream object <S> - I'd have to google it. <S> But that isn't what matters - what matters is, I know how to evaluate the range of outputs a candidate might give for that answer. <S> Make sense? <S> It doesn't matter whether your interviewer can actually answer the question, because that's not why they chose the question . <S> It matters whether they can use your answer to figure out whether you'd be good at the job. <S> (Or phrasing it another way: if their goal was to always be smarter than the interviewee, they could just ask questions they all knew the answer to already. <S> But that's not what the goal is.) <A> It sounds like you have certain minimum standards you expect of the people you're going to be working with if you're going to accept the job. <S> This is perfectly fine and normal, indeed it's a good thing. <S> The very point of an interview process is not just to verify that you match their requirements, but also to verify they match yours. <S> That being said, how you go about assessing the latter is critical. <S> There's an accepted dynamic in most interview processes that you're the one under assessment, and deviating from this too much will be perceived as weird and put your application at risk. <S> You therefore have to be careful about how you approach it. <S> Unfortunately, that opportunity has gone and you've only managed to leave with an impression of what you wanted to know. <S> Putting it plainly, yes it absolutely will be weird (and insulting) to now start challenging the interviewers with the very take-home task they they've asked you to complete, and doing this will very likely cost you the job offer. <S> Some possible good news though <S> : I've never heard of an interview process where a take-home task was the final stage. <S> It's likely you'll get another opportunity later to have further conversations with your future colleagues and make this assessment in a better way. <S> If I were you, unless you absolutely trust your gut, I would just ignore your first impressions and continue with the process in the hope that this happens. <S> Also learn from this, and spend some time thinking about how next time you're going to properly assess the requirements <S> you have in an interview process right from the start.
| The best opportunity for you to assess them is during the face-to-face interview, which is already usually conversational in nature and during which most of the time there is a section where you are explicitly invited to ask questions.
|
Should I apply for my boss's promotion? I work in a very small digital products department as part of a larger organization. The department was formed two years ago. I have been at the organization for seven years and joined as a Product Manager from another department. My current boss was recruited into the organization as Senior Product Manager. She reports to the Head of Product, who currently also leads another department. The exec team has decided to give the department a dedicated Head of Product. The current head will from now on just focus on her other department. The obvious candidate for the new Head of Product role is the Senior PM. But they can't just promote her; for technical reasons they have to advertise it, interview the candidates and then give it to her. I have a good relationship with my boss and think she is definitely the right person for the job. However, I wonder if I should apply for the role. The reasons not to are: I want my boss to take the role, not me, as she is much more qualified and would do it well; and the recruitment process is just a technicality, and it could be seen as time-wasting to apply for something that everyone, including myself, knows I won't get. But the reasons to apply are: I'd get an opportunity to speak with senior figures in my organization; I could present myself as someone who is serious about this role and who is ambitious; and I'd get more practice at interviewing. Would it be time-wasting to apply? Or is it an opportunity to increase my profile in the organization? <Q> Would it be time-wasting to apply? <S> Yes - you say yourself you don't want the role and <S> want your boss to have it. <S> Or is it an opportunity to increase my profile in the organization? <S> Yes, <S> but not in a good way <S> - either you make it clear that you never wanted the position anyway <S> (in which case you'll rightfully be seen as a timewaster) or <S> you'll look like you tried to compete for the role with your boss (who will still be your boss after they get promoted) and that might strain the relationship slightly. <S> Worse still what if you actually get the role? <S> are you planning on turning it down (and you're back to being a timewaster) or are you going to commit to the lie and take it - in which case are you honestly going to be truly effective and happy in a role you never wanted in the first place? <A> But the reasons to apply are: I'd get an opportunity to speak with senior figures in my organization; I could present myself as someone who is serious about this role and who is ambitious; and I'd get more practice at interviewing. <S> The opportunity is still there. <S> Go to your boss and say: "I'm not going to apply for obvious reasons, but I would love to know what would be involved, and what it would take for the time when the opportunity arises again." <A> Would it be time-wasting to apply? <S> This one is very hard to answer. <S> It all depends on whether or not management is serious about looking at other candidates or are they just going through the motions to satisfy some HR or other requirements (legal too). <S> Or is it an opportunity to increase my profile in the organization? <S> If management is serious about talking to others, you then need to really ask your self -- do I want the position -- like for real? <S> If you do indeed decide to proceed, you have now announced that you are interested in expanding your role withing the company. <S> This can be good and bad in that if there is no other realistic upward mobility for some time, you could then be seen as a employee who is at risk of moving on ( there is no upward mobility here, so if I want to move up <S> I have to move on ). <S> It <S> can also have a negative impact, should you apply, on your relationship with your current boss as they will now in some way see you as competition . <S> Wanting to be ambitious and move up is natural as part of your career progression. <S> My advise to you is if you go for it, go whole heatedly and if this opportunity doesn't work out -- consider opportunities for growth elsewhere. <A> Would it be time-wasting to apply? <S> Yes. <S> 3 simple reasons since you're applying within the company rather than outside. <S> You don't want the job and are extremely unlikely to get it. <S> Missing it makes you a failure which is never a good look. <S> These people barely know you, the only thing that will stick in their mind is that you failed. <S> Your boss may take it badly that you competed against them. <A> I would recommend if you wish to apply for the position then apply for the position . <S> There are a few caveats you should acknowledge before applying such as: Speak to your current boss to say you wish to apply for the position and give them reasons why you wish to apply for the position Discuss with your manager your own personal goals (as you should periodically anyway) <S> Even if you know you're going to not get the position, you might be surprised or given the opportunity for another position within the company (such as the vacated Senior Produce Manager role). <S> I was asked to apply for a job before by my own manager to "gain interview skills" and ended up getting the job, moving teams and getting a salary increase. <S> I went into the interview not necessarily wanting to take the job, but find out more about the team, the interview process and my own weaknesses and decided it would be a great fit for me. <S> Best of luck.
| At the end of the day, applying for roles is great for practising your interview skills, gaining further confidence in yourself, get known by upper management which all will help in your future career.
|
Is it ok to apply for a job position in a company my current company provides service to? I work for company X which has a contract for developing systems to company Y. Company Y sent an email announcing available jobs to all people in Y corporative email list. I have an email for actioning in behalf of company Y so I also got the email even though I am not employed by them. Is it unethical if I apply for company Y job? If I get hired will the relation between company X and Y be affected? If I don't get hired will company X people get "mad" at me? I feel like this would create an uncomfortable situation at my work place. <Q> There's really two dimensions to this. <S> Your first concern should be contract language , if you haven't signed a no-compete clause or a contract stipulating that you're not allowed to work in the same industry, or for clients, or whatever - then you're free to do what you want without retribution. <S> It's often claimed that such no-compete clauses don't stand up well if companies try to pursue them, but I've been involved in cases where there were actual damages paid as a result, so it's best to be careful and/or seek legal advice if you have signed something. <S> That said, in comments, you mentioned that you have no such contract. <S> That leaves the second factor: culture. <S> This one will be difficult for us to answer. <S> Some service companies enjoy having employees go work for their clients, it's seen as having a "person on the inside" at the client and strengthening the relationship. <S> On the other hand, some employers don't like to lose employees to clients, it's seen as the employee taking advantage of the relationship. <S> Unfortunately, none of us can tell you which situation you're in. <S> You can try to feel this out for yourself, though. <S> Have other past employees at your current company gone to work for clients? <S> Do you have a good relationship with someone that's been there a while who you could confidentially ask? <S> It's worth putting in the research as long as you can do it in confidence. <A> You should also think of why they want to hire you? <S> Are they trying to get the knowledge transfered, so they dont need to buy the services any more? <S> In this case it could be a problem. <S> Then your current emplyer might want to make sure you dont get that position. <S> This can be done in many ways, and it might affect you in a negative way. <A> You seem to suggest you are a contractor? <S> Do you have a permanent job, or are you on a short term contract? <S> I don't know that I'd call it unethical, unless you've signed a contract or promised to stay in your current position. <S> Having said that, yes--anytime one expresses intent to leave a job, it MAY be taken as a statement that you're unhappy. <S> You may face resentment for it. <S> If it were me, I'd do everything I could to express that I liked the current position, but the potential of the new one was just an opportunity that could not be passed up. <S> If it were possibly to discretely inquire about the position, I'd perhaps do that. <S> Put out a few feelers and see if there is a possibility of getting the position, and any concerns around hiring you.
| If you're a contract employee, I'm not sure how anyone can fault you for wanting a full-time, permanent job.
|
I inherited a huge codebase when my boss retired. Am I obligated to maintain it outside of project work? My former boss wrote a very large application which is over 20 years old with hundreds of thousands of lines of code. He would spend many hours off-book, doing maintenance and making improvements. It was a labor of love for him. I inherited this code to provide solutions in projects. Am I obligated to pick up the maintenance of this code? <Q> If the codebase is still something that's in use in your company <S> then you are probably going to be required to maintain it at least so far as is required to keep up that usage. <S> As for anything that would fall into "labor of love" territory, probably not. <S> Basically work on it at work, as directed by your boss - <S> anything else is at your discretion (and I probably wouldn't bother personally) <A> There are two parts of the question that needs answering, as I see: Part 1: <S> Am I obligated to pick up the maintenance of this code [....] ? <S> You answered yourself, "I inherited this code" (I take this as in professional capacity), so <S> the responsibilities are yours, too. <S> Whatever requirement comes that needs a change, you have to work on that. <S> [...] <S> outside of project work? <S> As you mentioned, it was a "labor of love" to your ex-boss, is it the same to you? <S> If the answer would have been yes, you would not have been asking this question here, so the answer is no, both the cases. <S> To clarify: "Maintenance" is not analogous to "change-the-code-in-my-free-time-at-will-because- <S> I-can". <S> It is a well-defined process, driven by a requirement (internal or external) and has a clear versioning of changes (preferably with a change-log). <A> As an employee, your job is to spend the time you have doing whatever provides the most value to the business. <S> It is your manager's job to figure out what that is. <S> It sounds like this is a very complex project that is going to take you quite a bit of time to learn and work on. <S> You need to work with your manager to figure out if this is the best thing for you to be working on, and if so, how to balance that work with your current responsibilities. <S> Your new manager should be the one to decide if this is what you should now be working on. <A> No, you're not. <S> Maintain only as and when required by either something being broken or something needing to be enhanced. <S> Have in the back of your mind that time spent on this code base must be profitable for the company. <S> Only touch it when there's profit to be made from it. <S> The fact that this was your predecessor's pet project doesn't mean that it has to be yours too. <A> First question you should find an answer to: is this code valuable to the company? <S> Does it make money? <S> If it stops working, will the company lose money? <S> If the answer to the question is "yes", then the second question which needs to be answered is "are you the best person to maintain this code?". <S> If the answer to that question is also yes, then you should maintain that code. <S> Now, when it comes to answering the questions and deciding whether you have to work on it, you can be completely junior about it and leave everything to others (your manager, other management, seniors) to decide. <S> Or you can be more senior by taking responsibility and tell your manager "This piece of code is valuable <S> , I think it's in the best interest of the company if I dedicate some time maintaining it. <S> What do you think?"
| This is a decision best left to whoever your current manager is. There's really no need for you to waste until hours learning and maintaining this code base for little measurable benefit. No, you're not. Your old boss may have spent a lot of time working on this application, but that does not necessarily mean you have to.
|
Ever billed an interviewer for time? Recently, I met with a panel of 4 men. They had access to my resume, and an extensive application I had submitted. They began the interview in an accusatory fashion were insulting with me, and ended it abruptly, based on some information in my application. I ended up taking a day off work, and drove 150 miles each way for this meeting. My wife also attended (they requested she be there), and took a day off work, both of us were unpaid for the day. Would it be completely unheard of to submit a bill for lost wages, mileage, and time spent, or simply for expenes when the issue could have been avoided by simply asking a question 3 weeks earlier when the plans were made? The reason I'd even consider it is that I have had another organization pay me for my mileage traveling the same distance. I don't know that it's unreasonable to find them responsible for asking me to travel that far, incur the expenses I incurred for a position I had no hope of obtaining, and they could have simply said that from the beginning. <Q> This sounds like a truly awful interviewing experience. <S> As for your question: Would it be completely unheard of to submit a bill for lost wages, mileage, and time spent, or simply for expenes when the issue could have been avoided by simply asking a question 3 weeks earlier when the plans were made? <S> It would be unheard of to bill them for the interview. <S> It is, however, very strange that you traveled to this interview on your own dime; when companies want you to travel for an interview, it's normal that they pay for it. <S> I'm not sure what the negotiations were like for you to travel there, and it's also very strange that they requested your wife be there. <S> Your best hope to recoup some money from this - which is slim - would be to ask for a gas reimbursement. <S> It also wouldn't be wrong for you to review them online (on appropriate sites) and share that you were summoned for an interview and then dismissed immediately for something visible on your application. <A> Could you bill them? <S> Certainly. <S> And they may very well ignore you. <S> I think that you made a mistake in getting so involved with the interview in the first place. <S> Whether you decide to bill them or not, this should be a learning experience for you. <S> And lastly, demanding that your wife attend the interview when the position is for you, is not simply "weird", it is aberrant to the point of worry. <S> That should be reason enough to refuse any further contact with these people. <A> While billing an interviewer for their time is pretty unheard of- <S> it is normal for many companies to compensate people for travel expenses. <S> If they do not make it clear that travel will be paid for when setting up the interview- <S> it is up to you to ask them if they would be willing to either pay for travel or to do an alternate interview <S> (I've had many companies offer to do a Skype interview rather than in-person to avoid paying for my flight). <S> I do think its unreasonable to not be compensated for traveling such a far distance <S> but if they don't say they will compensate you- <S> you should assume you will get nothing for your travels. <S> Next time- <S> ask them beforehand. <S> Based on the body of your post- <S> them not compensating interviewees for travel seems to be just one of many issues with their interviewing practices <A> Short answer: <S> It would have been entirely reasonable to ask for some sort of compensation before the interview (expenses at the least, per diem rare but not unheard). <S> After the fact, it’s entirely unreasonable. <S> On par with me sending you a bill for this answer. <S> Long answer: <S> You need to determine your desired outcome, the cost associated with the pursuit of that outcome and the probability of success. <S> If you wish to send an invoice as a protest against their unprofessional behavior, then your goal is to protest not get money. <S> The direct cost will be your time and direct expenses, an indirect potential cost would be a possible reputation loss which may be offset by a possible positive reputation gain. <S> If you wish to get actual cash money, then you will need to sue, and in my non-lawyerly opinion, your chance of success is nearly negligible. <S> If you want to pursue that talk to an actual lawyer, while I don’t think you have much of a case, it’s not entirely frivolous if they had made up their mind before inviting you out.
| Ask to be compensated for travelling expenses, and maybe reconsider going if it's too much of a burden time, or money wise. Don't commit to creating "an extensive application" unless you know who you're dealing with (perhaps after you've had a phone interview, which goes well).
|
Confess slacking off due to lack of work and lost of motivation TL;DR How do I tactfully apologize for slacking off and express my willingness to set things straight again, without sounding like it was completely my fault? After that, how do I approach the topic of proving myself in order to get a SUBSTANTIAL salary increase in the mid-year salary review, and that I want to work with him to make it happen? Background I am a junior software developer. Recently my manager ran some time sheet stuff and found out some "gaps" in mine. It was not specifically targeted at me, but a team-wide thing to ensure our time is tracked properly and thus can be reported up. The time tracking system we currently use isn't great and we know most of us (with my manager admitting this himself) do poorly at tracking. So everyone has gaps. We are a team of internal devs of 10-15 people in a 200-300 people company. My gaps For last few months I was not given enough tasks to keep myself busy. The only thing I could (and probably should) have been working on when I was free was an internal application (not a lot of business value) that no one seemed to care how I have been progressing. I was bored and gradually lost motivation to work on it. Thus began my slacking off. What I want to achieve I will be having a 1-on-1 meeting with my manager to discuss about the gaps. I would like to confess to him that I have been slacking off. I want to be honest and explain my reason of slacking off. Voice my frustration in my job. Hopefully get more things to do and make this job more interesting. I am also (in my opinion) severely underpaid due to me underselling myself (not blaming the company or my manager). I want to let him know that I am looking forward to a SUBSTANTIAL increase in salary and I am more than willing to work hard to prove that I am worth it. I want my manager to know that I need him to give me a chance to prove myself. The question How do I tactfully apologize for slacking off and express my willingness to set things straight again, without sounding like it was completely my fault? After that, how do I approach the topic of proving myself in order to get a SUBSTANTIAL salary increase in the mid-year salary review, and that I want to work with him to make it happen? I know it's probably a difficult request to make after admitting to slacking off, but I want to signal him that I want more money. I know I am worth it and I will definitely start looking if the pay is not enough. The reason why I am not leaving now is because I am still relatively new in the company (< 1 year) and don't want to be seen as a job hopper. Other little things We just had a new IT manager who is my manager's manager (my manager is the manager of devs, we have other elements in IT). The IT manager seems to be a nice and competent guy and he has made it clear that he wants to make a difference. I am yet to have a 1-on-1 with him, but there should be one soon. Please assume all discussions can happen in a civil manner. That is to say, I am anticipating my manager to be disappointed upon hearing the news but won't start swearing at me or giving me hell. Appreciate your advice and please let me know if anything is unclear! <Q> You're giving this too much weight. <S> Unless you've been singled out or breated by your boss it seems they assume you just poorly filled out your timesheets. <S> If you had no tasks or not enough work you should have informed your superior about that immediately and asked for assignments! <S> There usually is always something to do and slacking off because of <S> managements fault is bad work ethic. <S> It would also be very bad timing to confess to slacking off during a salary negotiation. <S> Not to mention that asking for more money while you're underperforming won't sit well. <S> Apologize for not realizing to ask for more work immediately and let your boss know that you want to get out of that rut. <S> How to improve yourself to be worthy of a raise is slightly out of the scope of this forum. <S> Show initiative and exemplary work ethic. <A> In almost every environment where I have worked the way to get ahead and position yourself for the best reviews and possible promotions is to take initiative for your path. <S> You will be recognized far more for: Demonstrating a high level of productivity Showing leadership qualities in your team Spotting and solving problems Aiding management by presenting options for needed decisions Performing your job function in a way that management observes more than guides To be honest if you have to sit down with your manager to get them to tell you how to achieve, perform and standout <S> I doubt you will be successful at getting the raises that you desire. <A> For last few months I was not given enough tasks to keep myself busy. <S> The only thing I could (and probably should) have been working on when I was free was an internal application (not a lot of business value) that no one seemed to care how I have been progressing. <S> I was bored and gradually lost motivation to work on it. <S> Thus began my slacking off. <S> If I stake this statement in face value, then I would say, not your problem. <S> If you would have missed the assigned work, then that's slacking off. <S> You did not have enough assignment <S> , that's not your problem, that's the problem of your manager. <S> You need not apologize for something you did not do, which was not your responsibility . <S> You are expected to work on something on your free time <S> , you're not bound to it (as that is not the part of assigned work). <S> You can, however, bring up the matter in the discussion that (in the given order) The assigned work and your accomplishments. <S> You do not have enough assigned work. <S> Your free-time work is not being supervised / reviewed and thus, you lack a proper planning to work on that. <S> Your argument for salary increment.
| If you really feel the need to apologize, tell your manager that you didn't have enough work assigned and became demotivated. Use common sense and improve your expertise while being assertive and proactive in applying your knowledge at work.
|
Is this an abusive interview process? Or am I too sensitive? A software company has very mixed Glassdoor reviews and several specifically call out narcisisstic behavior by the CEO. One review even used the term "grooming" behavior, i.e., subtly training the employees to accept being treated like sh*t. I just discovered an interview preparation page on their site. Some excerpts: Our success depends on hiring people who are truly A-players. ...we've built a proprietary interview process that is very different from what you may be used to. ...our process is designed to very quickly separate the highest caliber candidates from the folks who are simply average... Interviews are recorded and additional staff often participate. The interviewer will dive straight into a set of challenging questions... The interview is very fast paced; you'll be expected to supply answers off the top of your head, without pausing to look anything up. Our standards for this process are extremely high and only about 10% of interviewees will make it to the end of the phone interview . We end interviews as soon as it becomes clear that the decision will be a no-hire. If this happens to you, please don't take it personally; it's not necessarily a judgment about you, but rather of how well you fit with our current needs. You are welcome to re-apply at a later date. ...We also enjoy role-playing questions where we give you an issue to troubleshoot and see how you would go about solving it. For these, we will continually change the circumstances to challenge you... ...use this rule of thumb: if you're still on the phone with us, it's going well... ...If you make it through to the end, you will then have the opportunity to ask all the questions you'd like... [emphasis in original] To me, it looks like the grooming starts right here, at the first contact. Because: I see interviews as a two-way street. I'm looking to see if there's a meeting of the minds, so to speak. What do you all think? <Q> I don't think you can really call it an abusive interview process: they're very upfront about what the process involves, and nobody's forcing you to do the interview. <S> If nothing else, they're not going to waste your time doing interviews when they've already decided to reject you. <S> That said, the combination of the interview process description and the Glassdoor comments are indicative of a very aggressive company culture. <S> I wouldn't want to work there. <S> Some people might, and I guess their interview process is pretty good at finding that kind of person. <A> I actually think it's a very frank description. <S> You know what you will get. <S> What they describe is not surprising. <S> Most telephone interviews I participated in finished the moment <S> it was clear you didn't get the job. <S> Even at the most prestigious companies. <S> The difference was, they never explained this possibility in advance. <S> I've participated in stress interviews too. <S> I don't accept stress interviews, find them to be abusive unless the interviewers told you what to expect <S> and you know it's role-playing <S> and they aren't bastards IRL. <S> Situational interview questions aren't anything special either. <S> They do sound quite arrogant and unfriendly though. <S> If I can choose to be choosy I avoid such companies. <S> Of course, we can't know what the process really looks like. <S> Maybe candidates are shouted at and treated like dirt. <S> But the description itself is only conceited, not aggressive or surprising. <A> Stop questioning your sensibilities, your innate survival mechanisms is telling you based on the combination of the interview process description and the Glassdoor comments that its an aggressive company culture. <S> Just keep in mind that this toxicity is more prevalent in our field than I care to admit, so best of luck. <A> Having done my share of phone screens, I understand the sentiment: In the majority of interviews, after a certain point you'd really just be continuing the interview to be polite. <S> Interviews with promising candidates are, as a rule, much longer than interviews with unpromising candidates. <S> Nevertheless, from that small slice, the interviewing culture (if nothing else) comes off as arrogant and conceited. <S> Some of the information on that "interview prep" page doesn't, you know, prep someone for an interview . <S> Oh, so you end most interviews early? <S> Okay, but as a candidate, what am I supposed to do about that? <S> It really sounds more like bragging about how choosy they are (and, they hope to imply, how choosy they get to be). <S> You can and should consider your feelings about that page when determining whether to apply for a position there. <S> But the literal process described is not far out of step with how most interviews work. <S> As for an interview being a "meeting of minds": <S> absolutely. <S> But you have to get there first. <S> If they're not gonna hire you, does it really matter if you get to meet their minds before they say goodbye? <A> Not necessarily. <S> I personally think they should skip the part <S> Our success depends on hiring people who are truly A-players. <S> ...we've built a proprietary interview process that is very different from what you may be used to. <S> ... <S> our process is designed to very quickly separate the highest caliber candidates from the folks who are simply average... <S> because this orders people linearly (A-level....) <S> somehow brags about how great their process is (Which may or may not be true) About ending the phone interview earlier than the schedule time: <S> I do not find that abusive or unfair, even if I personally do not do it (see below), especially if they explicitly write about it before. <S> Unless you are looking for a very, very specific people who need to respond in an very well defined way <S> It is only viable if the questions/problems posed are actually all pretty basic. <S> It is my opinion that the likeliness of removing candidates from the process who potentially would perform well is high with this method. <S> It could also be that it is a lie, and they only write this to become more interesting, in order to attract more narcissists and egocentric people - either by a conscious choice or because of their own self-image.
| If you are like me and you find no reasonable explanation why a good tech company needs to be dismissive, aggressive, argumentative, gatekeepers and other inappropriate behaviors both in the interview process and on the job, then move on. They seem like one of those companies that believe you should be proud to even be offered an interview with them.
|
How to get hints on workplace culture during the interview? If one gets invited to an interview by a potential employer, how could that person find out about the culture of the department he/she would be working at? Are there any questions, answers to which would indicate to a candidate that the department has healthy culture with functioning team-work as opposed to a toxic one? You can't ask it directly, so how to construct questions in a clever way such as to get a feeling for the culture of the department? <Q> You can't ask it directly, <S> Of course you can. <S> That's the whole point of an interview!! <S> Some example questions to ask <S> How would you describe your company culture ? <S> What makes people be successful or fail here ? <S> What do you like the best and the least about working here? <A> You can't ask it directly, <S> Yes, you can! <S> Just say, <S> So how would you describe your office culture . <S> In fact, one of my questions as an interviewee is always Some other good questions I ask to determine office culture <S> What do you like about working here? <S> - Stuff like, "they don't bother me when I'm on vacation" is good. <S> What kind of person succeeds here? <S> - Listen for stuff like "understands what to do without being told" as this is usually a sign of bad management. <S> How is your commute? <S> - I ask this because if I hear "Well, I leave at 8 every day so not bad at all", I know it's probably a sweatshop (unless they come in at 12). <S> Also, try to take a look at the work area. <S> Do people seem happy? <S> Have they decorated their space? <S> Do you hear conversations? <A> Please keep these points in mind while going for an interview. <S> What is their interview scheduling process like? <S> A good clue as to the organization and professionalism of a company is how they schedule an interview with you. <S> Do they give you enough notice so you can clear your schedule, or do they expect you to be available on a moment <S> ’s notice? <S> How are you received when you arrive? <S> When you arrive for the interview, what is your first impression? <S> Is it warm and welcoming or cold and foreboding? <S> Is there is a receptionist? <S> If so, do they know to expect you or are they surprised by your presence? <S> Are you offered a glass of water? <S> Do they respect your time? <S> It is never acceptable for a candidate to be late for an interview, but candidates should also take note of how well their time is respected. <S> Of course, emergencies can happen, but if you are not greeted by the appointed start time of the interview, this could be a red flag <S> What types of questions do they ask? <S> Having problems is not in and of itself an issue, but depending on your skill set and tolerance, some may be right up your alley and some may leave you saying ‘thanks, but no thanks.’ <S> For example, if they spend a lot of time asking how you respond to angry customers and critical supervisors, you can be sure this will be a part of your job, should you choose to accept it. <S> How are things left once the interview is over? <S> Are you given clear timelines and expectations or is it left vague and open-ended? <S> Did you get the feeling they enjoyed meeting you or was the process cold and sterile? <S> While there is no way to know exactly what a company is like until you work there, these cues will give you a reasonably good idea of what to expect. <A> As others have stated you can in fact directly ask. <S> I always ask about culture. <S> Typically My questions are: <S> Can you describe what the office/team culture is like? <S> If i were to start here, what would my first week or two look like? <S> what kinds of milestones would you expect me to hit at 6months and a year? <S> Typically the first question gets answers like <S> we are a quiet office, most people sit at their desks and work, <S> We are very open, and often you will see people standing about together chatting between tasks, or working together on them. <S> The other two questions i ask are to try to get a feel as to how they intend to onboard new employees to their culture, and the company specific training techniques. <S> basically, im looking for things like: to start you will primarily be watching the ticket queue <S> so you can get familiar with the environment and applications. <S> by 6 months you should be able to answer most tickets with little to know help outside of our knowledge base by a year, you should be pretty much settled and already working on projects etc. <S> if a company struggles to answer any of these questions or they make comments about how their knowledge base is non-existent or woefully outdated. <S> Thats typically a red flag. <A> I've gotten a lot of info from this question <S> How is success defined here? <S> Best answers I've gotten is things like when the customer is happy or when the requirements are fulfilled And one company had both interviewers stare at each other, then tell me when we come in under budget <S> I stayed clear of them. <S> Imagine working somewhere where the overriding requirement is to work cheaply?
| Pay close attention to the questions that are asked in the interview, because these are almost always indicative of the problems the organization is having that they will want you to solve.
|
Want to work flexible hours just for myself due to traffic etc -- no family commitments. How to ask? I'm working the "standard" hours as per our contract and I am now driving 3.5 hours a day (only about 14 miles each way) due to peak time traffic. It's only been like this for about 3 months about of my 18 month employment as it's due to a new project on the roads. When I started it was 40 mins each way or so. But it's due to go on for another 2 years at least. The rest of the staff who work at my location have agreed other hours so that they can get to work earlier and leave earlier, or start later and leave later, with a total journey time of 1.5 rather than 3.5 hours. Those that I know of, have made it a matter of picking up children from school, their other half doesn't like it (?!) etc. I don't have any "external" considerations like a partner, children in school I need to pick up, etc. But it's getting to me. Do I have to spend another half day each day driving just because I don't have these external commitments. How can I raise this to bosses without coming off as a 'diva'? <Q> Working slightly different hours to allow you to have a quicker and easier commute is a perfectly normal thing to ask, and no employer that I've asked has ever refused, let alone <S> thought me a diva for asking. <S> So far as your employer is concerned, whether you've got children to pick up doesn't matter so much as whether there'll be a downside, such as not being able to attend meetings or leaving the office understaffed at some point during the day. <S> Ultimately if it's a win for you, and they're losing nothing, there's not really any reason for them to say no. <A> You mentioned that other people in the company have already brought the traffic problem up with management and negotiated more convenient working hours, so your request will not be unexpected to your supervisor. <S> You've got a legitimate reason for your request - long commute affects your work-life balance. <S> Taking care of your well being and taking measures to prevent burnout is a sign of professionalism and not of being a "diva". <S> Talk to your manager, make sure you arrive with a solution (specific changes to your schedule that will allow you to reduce your commute, or other suggestions, such as occasionally working from home) and not a problem <S> and you've got a good chance of getting what you want. <A> If your company has a flexible hours policy, it shouldn't matter what exactly your reason for your taking advantage of the flexible hours policy. <S> Whether your reasons are personal preference or external commitments, that's not their business. <S> If a parent on a similar role would have easily been granted to work at your proposed hours, so should you. <S> A parent with certain commitments to their child might have a stronger case than personal preference for the company to bend their policy for a specific employee with unconventional requirements, but these are out-of-policy arrangements that should really be considered in a case by case basis at discretion. <S> A good flexible hours policy usually provides broad allowances for unconventional discretions, which is different from the nearly automatically approved flexibilities. <S> Personally, I would consider avoiding bad commute times as a perfectly normal, legitimate, and reasonable reason for taking advantage of flexible hours policy; especially if you shave 2 hours of commute times, if I were your manager <S> I'd think you are a crazy masochist if you didn't take advantage of the policy. <S> You're not a diva for wanting to save 2 hours of your day, you're just taking care of yourself, a happy employee is a good employee, a good employer would've wanted to keep their employees happy, as happy employees are more productive in the long term than ones who are stressed out. <S> <rant <S> > <S> Personally, I'm of the opinion that governments should have incentivised companies to encourage employees that otherwise would have had to travel through congested routes during peak hour to take flexible/alternative hours arrangements. <S> This would've been a much easier and cheaper way to reduce/delay congestion issues that takes place during major constructions, as it would reduce the pressure to rush construction works and possibly even generate some revenue due to increased occupancy rates of transport infrastructure during non-peak hours. <S> It'd also be a boon for late night business like restaurants. <S> </rant>
| As long as your work hours doesn't interfere with you fulfilling your duties (e.g. you might have been more restricted if your role includes customer facing duties, or certain tasks that needs to be done at a specific times), your reasons shouldn't have mattered.
|
Am I able to retake a Pre-employment Drug Screen? I recently was offered a verbal offer for a big company, basically my dream job. The company before giving me the actual paper work in my email requested a background check and drug screen. When the company first called me I dropped all uses of marijuana. I was daily smoker and would use every night to sleep or enjoy the night better. Of course with my luck I did very well in the interview which was scheduled a week after I received the call. When I was done with the interview the people interviewing me said it would take about 2-3 weeks for a call. Not even 4 days later I get the call for the verbal offer, at this point I am 11 days clean. I knew I had to act fast so I started detoxing and cleansing myself. I tried to prolong the test as much as possible, but the company couldn't wait anymore. 18 days later I had 24hrs to attend the drug screen. I tried to prepare myself as best as possible, I wanted to be honorable and not take any synthetic pee or anyone else's in that manner. I tried different detoxes and nothing was working(multiple at home drug test). I finally decided to go with a masking detox to hide the thc in my system. Not the greatest idea, but had no other choice. What I did the morning before was test myself with a CVS at home drug test, and surprisingly came out negative. Although I was still cleansing the second line was very faint. As soon as I saw it was negative I tried to hold my urine till the exam was finished. I ended up doing a second at home drug test 8 hours after the exam and same type of result except the second negative line was not as visible but was there. My question is, if the company finds any trace of thc in my drug screen and I get disqualified for this reason am I able to request a retest in any way or should I kiss my chances goodbye? <Q> You cannot retake a drug test, you can dispute the results, but in that case they retest the original sample rather than take a new one. <S> There is no other logical way to do it, otherwise there is no point requiring a test, anyone can clean up for a test. <S> They're not looking for employees who crammed just for the exam, they're looking for non drug users. <S> This is the procedure for anywhere I am aware of. <S> It's up to the discretion of the company whether a failed test debars you from employment or not, but usually if they stipulate one, then it does. <S> Some industries <S> it's mandatory. <S> Depending on locale of course. <A> TLDR: <S> No, but you can dispute it. <S> First, the good news: <S> Since so many things can cause false positives, drug tests are far less sensitive these days. <S> Back in the 1980s, my SO's mother failed a drug test because of a poppy seed bagel, yes, this really happened back then. <S> In the 1990s, a friend of mine failed because he got some second hand smoke from some stoners he was hanging out with. <S> Stuff like this happened, and often enough that the sensitivity of the tests has been dialed down. <S> Modern drug tests don't have a pass/fail setup anymore, where any amount in your system will automatically trigger a failed test. <S> The levels have to exceed a certain level for you to fail, and trace amounts almost never cause a failed test. <S> Now, for the bad news. <S> There is no universal standard as to what levels are tolerable, what levels could be background or attributable to incidental exposure or trace amounts. <S> FYI, almost every dollar bill in circulation has trace amounts of cocaine on it. <S> If you were tested at a 0% tolerance for cocaine, you could possibly fail if you handled money that day. <S> What to do If they do come back with a positive result, you can challenge it by asking what the threshold was. <S> Also, if you were around anyone smoking cannabis, you could also get a false positive. <S> So, be armed with the facts if you need to dispute it. <A> This significantly depends on manager/team/division of the company in question. <S> They don't care that you passed it the first time, nor that you never use drugs; just that you passed the required test. <S> Unfortunately, it is difficult to discern whether this test was one of that variety of drug test beforehand, since managers who actually do care about you not using drugs will look rather dimly upon questions probing that fact. <S> The smarter solution is to pass drug tests every time, whether they are serious or not. <S> If you fail due to trace levels, I would ask to take the test again. <S> They may refuse, but nothing ventured, nothing gained.
| Contrary to the message of some other answers, there are definitely pre-employment drug tests that exist only as a formality, where the only thing anyone cares about is that you passed the drug test. If you were taking any NSAIDs, such as Advil, or Naproxin, you could get a false positive for cannabis use for that. Different companies have different standards as to what amount in your system counts as a "fail".
|
Will I accrue holidays whilst working notice? I am leaving my current position and working 4 weeks' notice. Last day of employment will be 22nd March. Holiday year runs 1st Jan -> 31st Dec Notice handed in 25th Feb I have been told I will have accrued 3.5 days' holiday which equates to 2 full months (21 days total allowance). Should I be entitled to more, or are they within their rights to only pay me holidays for full months worked? <Q> (Think about it; what if you were on 6 months notice?). <S> Whether they pay for full months (normal) or calculate to the day will depend upon your employment contract. <S> Also, although you didn't specifically ask, YOU get to determine whether you take the leave, exchange it for £s, or just forgo it. <S> There are frequently stories on here of people being bullied out of it by aggressive management. <A> Theoretically yes, you will accrue holiday on the last month and you are entitled to it. <S> I have noticed before that HR seems to leave this out of the calculations sometimes as they calculate your holiday when you hand in your notice to work out whether your notice period is enough or not. <S> Depends on how much you can be bothered to push HR to calculate this on your leaving date rather than your notice handing date. <S> You are a fully fledged employee until your last day at work. <A> Yes. <S> As an absolute minimum you will accrue leave entitlement at the statutory rate, which based on the dates you gave (and assuming you work 5 days a week) means you will have accrued 6.3 days of leave by the time you finish, your contract can mean you get more than this but not less . <S> They can use bank holidays for some of those (again depending on contract) but the 3.5 days is an utter nonsense. <A> They're doubly wrong. <S> The only way I can come up with a number near 3.5 is to do both of two wrong things : <S> Not giving you holiday for the last month (approximately) that you're working, and Regarding 1 January 2019 as [your] holiday and not [national] holiday <S> I usually go for Hanlon's razor - it's more likely to be a mistake than intentional malice and, even if it isn't, approaching it <S> that way is likely to give you the best outcome. <S> I would phrase it as a question, and send them the link in motosubatsu's answer. <S> Thanks for your advice about my remaining holiday entitlement. <S> I'm a little confused as [that link] <S> suggests a different number. <S> Can you let me know how this was calculated? <S> If you need another link about accruing leave in the notice period, refer them to paragraphs 87, 88 and 89 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 . <S> But you might find that if they have to put their justification in writing, they'll have something of an epiphany. <A> In the UK it is usually pro-rata to the date of leaving. <S> Working this out by day of the year:22nd March is 81st day of year, so 81/365 <S> * 21 <S> = 4.66 days maybe rounded to 4.5 days Working this out by week of the year:22nd March <S> is the 12th week of the year so 12/52 * 21 <S> = 4.85 which may round to 5 days depending on how generous they are. <S> Although they may work leave out by calculating number of work days in the year. <S> They could work out the total number of work days, and divide the 21 up for each, and then figure out how many work days you've had up to the 22nd March, which wouldn't be a common practice I've ever seen. <S> It's also unusual to have bank holidays taken out of your leave in the UK - more common to make you take 'closed days', eg between Christmas and New Year though - <S> but we've not had any bank holidays except for 1st Jan 2019. <S> How are they working our your pay for March? <S> Is it pro-rata 22/31 * Monthly salary? <S> Update: Are you working full time or part hours contract? <S> 21 days is a bit low for full time contract...
| I don't know if your calculation is correct, but you are entitled to any leave accruing during a notice period.
|
Should I tell my boss the work he did was worthless? I have been handed a project that has been kicked around for 4 or 5 months with ~zero progress made. The project is to implement a new tool that was chosen before I got here. It seems like a good product, and the vendor is very helpful, but I don't really think it fits our needs or use case. I made this clear to my boss and went forward after being told "I know, it's not great, but it's better than what we have now." I recruited one of our part-time interns to help me out, as the front end of this project is going to include a lot of manual data entry and parsing from multiple sources. My boss asked for a status on this Friday night, and I told him that I was making slow, but steady progress. He offered that knowing the product better, he could do some work over the weekend. Knowing that his vision of this project didn't really match with what the vendor could supply or better business practices, I said that it might be better if I do it myself, as a learning opportunity. He dismissed this saying he wants the project to start moving and said he would do some work this weekend (I estimated another 12 hours worth of work.) Fast forward to 0900 this morning, my boss comes into the office announcing that he is done, and bragging that the work only took him an hour and a half. Full of trepidation, I open the Excel file I had been working on for two weeks, and which I had painstakingly laid out to be visually representative, and eventually parse-able by the accompanying script I am going to have to write. I was correct about my trepidation: my boss has compacted columns that should not have been, I have three different header row sections (Excel skills are not strong here), and he has partially or completely misunderstood the meaning and intent of a number of columns and key/value pairs. I fortunately have a backup of this file, and some of the data he added is actually very helpful, so he may have saved me some time/looking, but the spreadsheet as it is now isn't usable for its original purpose, and is outright wrong in some respects. I probably have 10 hours of work now in stead of 12, so he saved the company a half hour of work by working over the weekend. Questions: Should I tell my boss the work he gave me isn't usable, and why? How should I present this? He is something of a serial offender in this area, and while it didn't cost me more work this time, it easily could have. TL;DR My boss claims to have finished a task he gave me in 1.5 hours that I projected would take 12 hours. I now have 10 hours of work to do to "fix" his work. Should I tell him and how? Edit: For some more background, my boss is the CEO of the company, and ~30 years my senior. We have a good working relationship, but I would say we are more acquaintances than friends. He is generally open to criticism, but quite headstrong, which is probably why he made these changes that I was trying to avoid. I have made it clear that what he wants to have happen is not possible without going back to vendor selection, which he has categorically ruled out. I am a senior manager of a ~50 person company located in the US. <Q> The short answer: <S> No, you should not tell your boss that his work was worthless. <S> Instead, express that it's not what you need. <S> My rationale is that worthless is emotionally charged, maximally judgmental, and very much subjectively based. <S> Worthless implies that there is literally zero underlying value to the way your boss arranged the information, and further suggests that your boss is foolish for having done such a bad job, and foolish again for failing to realize what a bad job it was (despite his not being involved with, or possibly even qualified to fully understand, the next phases of the project). <S> It's not generally a great professional move to demean and degrade, and in this specific case I don't see much upside to your boss knowing that you think so little of him <S> (even if that's too strong to describe your actual feelings, it's a plausible message for someone to draw from being told that the work was worthless). <S> But critically, your assessment of the work is not really necessary here. <S> That the work was bad, full stop, provides very little useful information to anybody. <S> That the work is not what you need it to be for the project to continue, on the other hand, is valuable information both as an update for the project's current status and as a comment on what your boss did. <S> It's also entirely defensible-- if your boss wants to be a cheerleader for his work, he will have to explain how it will meet your needs. <S> If he can do so, then you've avoided making an inflammatory claim that isn't true. <S> If he can't, your point is made but there are some face-saving ways out for your boss. <S> Saying that you need something other than what your boss produced places the emphasis on the work requirements you're facing (rather than the skill or quality of any particular person), describes what you will be working on next (despite the "complete" work your boss provided), puts the project timeline into clearer focus <S> (your boss saved you little time or effort here), and reiterates what all of this effort is for (you're not nitpicking something with your boss for some petty reason, you're just focusing on the functional requirements of the job). <A> Your boss worked over the weekend with the intent to help. <S> Unfortunately, his work does not fulfill all the project requirements. <S> I would send the boss a quick email stating precisely which which requirements are not fulfilled . <S> This will keep the discussion objective and business-focused, so that you and your boss can stay on the same team. <S> Remember, you both have the same goal here. <S> Hey boss, thanks for your help with the XY project. <S> It looks like there's a little more work to be done: combining columns A and B means that we can no longer distinguish which customers have cancelled their orders. <S> And we still need to implement a "Submit" button. <S> I'll work on adding those features. <S> I expect to have a new version for your review tomorrow afternoon. <S> Just don't call his work "worthless." <S> Harsh words like that can severely damage your relationship. <A> You should go over the requirements, point by point. <S> Highly emphasize the things he did that helped, and downplay the things that did not. <S> Give him an opportunity to save face by writing them off as misunderstanding's and miscommunications. <S> Then, go over what needs to be done, and show him. <S> He did what most people wouldn't which is jump in to help, and he did save you SOME time. <S> Be grateful, thank him for his help, show him some details of the complete fix, and if he jumps in to help in the future, he will be more valuable. <S> Considering that most people complain about how their bosses are no help at all, this manager is a rare find, do all that you can to cultivate a healthy relationship with him. <S> Praise his strengths <S> Thank him for his input <S> Minimize his faults <A> If he reduced to work to be done from 12 hours to 10 hours, and he did that in 1.5 hours, it's certainly not worthless. <S> In fact, it's more than you could have done in 1.5 hours. <S> 10 hours of work seems to be too trivial to make a fuss about. <S> I suggest you thank your boss for his work, and spend the 10 hours fixing "the loose ends". <S> Document in the ticket (you do have tickets to keep track of what you do, don't you?) <S> the steps required to finish the task. <S> That way, you can point to them when asked about them. <A> In addition to the other answers, it may be helpful for you and your boss to have a sidebar discussion entitled " <S> Make Excel Useful to Other Programs". <S> Reading through the lines of your description, it sounds like your boss made some typical "heavy Excel user" mistakes, and reformatted lots of your data to look nice in Excel - while you need the data to be in a flat format to facilitate loading it into another system. <S> You probably will want to take 10 to 15 minutes to talk to him to simply explain why a heavily formatted worksheet is not helpful in contexts where Excel data isn't going to stay in Excel. <S> The typical non-database-developer Excel user often fundamentally just doesn't understand this. <S> Given the fact that you say that some of the information your boss added to the worksheet <S> was useful, you just need him to better understand how to structure that information so that you don't have to parse it into a useful format all over again after he creates or updates it. <S> If it happened in the context of this project, it will eventually happen again.
| Be grateful for his willingness to help, but be clear about how his work does not suit the project requirements.
|
Interviewing as a tech company contractor, but saw a permanent job listing for the same role I’m currently in the phone interview stage for large tech company ABC. Already spoke with the hiring manager and some potential team members, so I’m currently waiting to hear if I’m onto the next steps. I had the help of getting a referral from a coworker at a former employer who is now working as a full time ABC employee. She forwarded my resume to the hiring manager directly, and has a good working relationship with him, so hoping that helps me. The hiring manager liked my profile and had a recruiter get in touch with me. The recruiter however, is an onsite vendor/recruiting agency XYZ sitting at ABC HQ and is seeking to hire me as a XYZ contractor for 6 months (not as an official ABC employee). After the 6 months there is a high chance to extend and also convert as a FTE/Perm ABC employee, but of course there aren’t any guarantees. I must note though, the length of the contract wasn’t even mentioned to me at all until I asked about it during my phone screen with the recruiter. The recruiter surprisingly wasn’t even sure how long my contract would be and “would confirm later.” She also said depending on how the interviews go I could be considered for “different roles and buckets” since it’s a new and growing team. The job description that the recruiter gave me also did not outline any details of the contract-—which is weird since in my previous experience with similar contract job interviews, this is all usually mentioned up front. Just last week I noticed on ABC’s official job website that the exact role I’m interviewing for is offered as a FTE/perm position with the company. This perm role was not discussed to me by the XYZ recruiter and I’m not sure it’s in her best interest to. The job description and title matches 100% completely. I didin’t ask anyone else during the phone interviews about this role since I didn’t want it to affect my current chances of getting any job at all. What I know about the contract role based on my call with the hiring manager, is that they’ve been looking to fill this role for a few months now and they really need someone who can jump right in "as a contractor" to get things going. If I’m on to the next step which is probably an in person interview, should I express my interest in the permanent role? If so, is it more appropriate to ask the XYZ recruiter or the ABC hiring manager about it? Should I wait until I get an offer for the contract role and negotiate the full time position the with XYZ recruiter? Any tips on navigating this would be great. It’s really in my best interest to try to be a ABC employee regardless (their benefits are amazing), and the chance to convert seems likely since it’s a newer/smaller team. But I’ve also read dreaded stories about being a tech contractor treated like a lower class citizen. I'd ask my referral about this but she doesn't work on the exact team, so not sure she can be of any help. <Q> This may be a time where you want to just pick up the phone and call the company's HR department. <S> There could be a few different situations going on here, and we can't really know the answer for sure. <S> They may actually be hiring two people (one FTE and one contractor), or they may only have one seat to fill, and they're using the contract agency as a way to extend their reach, because they've had trouble filling the direct role themselves. <S> The good news is, they're still advertising the direct role, which probably means there isn't an exclusive arrangement with them and XYZ to find the resource. <S> If you want to work directly for ABC, and there's an opening listed direct with ABC, then it makes sense to figure this out now and not after you're employed by XYZ. <A> If I’m on to the next step which is probably an in person interview, should I express my interest in the permanent role? <S> Yes, by all means bring up the fact that you saw the permanent role listed and express your preference for this position. <S> I would bring this up to the ABC hiring manager as based on what you have written about XYZ, they either have not completely ironed out the details of the role or they are purposely withholding information from you. <A> Depends on how hungry you are. <S> When I was made an offer from Big Blue, a position was available immediately on contract. <S> HR told me that they would need to apply to the regional office for hiring against a regular post. <S> I told him that getting the approval was up to him and he may choose to do it if he wanted me to join and that I am content in my current job. <S> So, he did <S> and I did and the rest is too boring for you to read. <S> Comes back to you <S> : Do you want to jump at the current offer? <S> Or, can you wait?
| As the opening is listed on the company's site, there's nothing illegal or unethical in your applying for it even with the contract offer in front of you.
|
Advice when pitching a day rate to maximize billable time I read an article for contractors/freelancers about how to calculate a day rate, vs hourly rate. The advice was focused on how to make sure the freelancer is charging enough and provided a few tips to help freelancers determine their rate. (I typically do staff augmentation work on multiple projects, for a single client.) One tip involved helping freelancers determine a pricing model, such as a day rate. In this case, you'd add a 40% premium, then multiply by 8 hours to get the day rate. The half-day rate and hourly rates are set at 75% of the day rate and 30% of the half-day rate. Here's an example : Let's say the former full-time salary is $50,000. The day rate is calculated as ($50,000/2040) + 40% premium * 8 hours or $274.40. The half-day rate is $205.80. The hourly rate is $61.74/hour. $274/8 is $34, so why the $61? The higher hourly rate based on the day rate is to encourage clients to book a whole day -- a volume discount for your time. The details of this math are not for the client to know. Ultimately what would be presented would be something like this, probably rounding up to whole numbers: I'm looking for a day rate of $274 for an 8-10 hours per day. Otherwise it's $62/hour. We can discuss other terms, if you'd like. Something like this. How it's calculated is not really their business. The benefit of this type of calculation is if the client doesn't have you working a full day, you don't lose out on hours that you could have potentially charged to another client. In my case, I usually end up working a full 40-hour week, but I'm trying to be a bit more structured in my freelance work. Having said that, I don't have experience with day rates and project rates. A lot of advice for freelancers is to charge by the day or project. I also think charging in this way helps companies to remember that you are a contractor, not full-time, as some companies (but not all) seem to go the freelancer route in order to avoid paying US payroll taxes. There are 2 areas of focus for this questions: I'm curious if anyone has any advice for how to approach negotiations or pitch this to a potential client. Basically, when someone asks for the hourly rate, I want to steer the conversation into asking for a day rate. I suppose this means a contract on my part will be required, to detail this out? In terms of a strategy to maximize billable hours with a client, how well do you think this might work? Do you have other strategies? -- Related: Freelance vs Agency Contract vs Full Time Salary <Q> This is somewhat confusing. <S> I've never heard of this methodology before. <S> That doesn't mean that it isn't valid or that it isn't used, just that I've never heard of nor seen it in practice before. <S> They don't care how you calculate your rates, and explaining this to them is likely to scare them off or turn them off of you completely. <S> It's going to generate puzzled looks and questions. <S> They have way more important things to do than to engage in math gymnastics with you trying to understand what they're supposed to pay you. <S> From my own contracting/consulting experience, clients don't like complicated payment structures. <S> They want simple; "My hourly rate is $xx.xx per hour". <S> I'll work on an hourly "ad-hoc" basis for short term projects and tasks <S> and I'll also sell block hour contracts for clients that have longer term needs. <S> If a client wants me for a short term project or task <S> then I present them my full hourly rate. <S> If they want to use me longer term then I'll offer them a discount on my hourly rate in return for committing to a larger block hour contract. <A> The company doesn't care how you arrive at your figure all they are about is if they are getting value for money. <S> If you explain it to them, they may even dispute parts of your maths, and steer the conversion away from how you can benefit the company. <S> They may ask you to justify your rate, in which case you should contrast with market rates. <S> If you charge more than market rates, you should explain the benefits of going with you over someone else. <S> The fanciest math in the world will count for nothing if you price yourself out of the market. <S> The unit of time used will depend on the nature of work. <S> If you work on long-term (many month) projects, it doesn't make sense to quote in hours. <S> If the nature of the work is smaller, hours may work better. <S> It's also important to be prepared to be flexible and indicate that you are prepared to wiggle a little for large projects. <S> (After all, you will be saving time on negotiating contracts). <A> The rate you charge is up to you, don't get fancy with explanations. <S> Then charge by the hour or negotiate by the project. <S> This is what employers expect, anything else can cause issues. <S> My rate changes per client based on lots of factors like how quick they pay, how easy they are to work with, business relationship, type of work (what skillset I need to use), what timeframes they need etc. <S> Or I will negotiate a whole project, but this is best done if you have the experience to calculate the amount without finding yourself underestimating how long you need to complete or what resources you need.
| However you calculate your hourly or daily rate, don't explain this methodology to the clients. Find what works for you and the market will bear.
|
Offered promotion but I'm leaving. Should I tell? I'm actively looking for a new job. I haven't told anyone at my company about this. Now my manager is pitching for my promotion (she asked me if I'm up for it and how could I say no?). I wouldn't like to stay even if I'm promoted. Should I tell her that I'll be leaving shortly? I don't want to burn any bridges. On the other hand, if I'm promoted, I might be able to negotiate a higher pay with the new company. <Q> Should I tell her that I'll be leaving shortly? <S> No, you should just let things go as if nothing happened. <S> After you have signed the new contract tell them that you are leaving. <S> Even more, as long as you do not have a contract signed, you cannot know when you will leave, shortly or not. <S> Otherwise, you risk that your future will not be very bright. <S> If they ask you why you did not tell them earlier, you just answer them that you did not know earlier, things just happened quickly. <S> They cannot verify that. <S> And even if they ask for proof, you just tell them that they have to trust you. <S> On the other hand, if I'm promoted, I might be able to negotiate a higher pay with the new company. <S> One more reason to say nothing. <S> As explained elsewhere : when they will ask you why you leave, just tell that the new job suits better to your future development. <S> Under no circumstances tell them the real reasons. <A> Actively looking for a new job doesn't always mean that you will move on . <S> Plenty of people go to the trouble of preparing themselves, interviewing, being offered roles & then deciding not to move. <S> So consider very carefully how you continue with your current employer. <S> If your boss is pitching for a promotion for you, go with the process, work with her to achieve it <S> - it can't hurt you going forward. <S> If you get a pay rise & a promotion <S> this may help you with your next role - or even change your mind to stay with your current employer <S> (understand why this may not look likely right now). <S> But there are no downsides to working with your boss on a promotion . <S> If you leave your boss may not want to work with you again - but that relationship will be damaged if you reject the promotion anyway. <S> Alternatively if you reject the opportunity to advance - what if your new role doesn't happen, or doesn't happen quickly? <S> You are left with the worst of both worlds. <S> Go for both the the promotion & a new job at the same time. <A> The usual advice is not to divulge that you are looking for a new job, until you have a signed contract in your hand. <S> And I think that applies here. <S> Note that you will almost certainly burn a bridge with that person. <S> From their perspective, they will be going to a lot of effort to negotiate a promotion for you, only for you to leave. <S> In addition, it will appear to your managers <S> superiors that your manager was aware of you job search, and was trying to entice you to stay. <S> While we would like to hope that your manager will show empathy for your situation, the simple fact of the matter is that it is unlikely. <S> Given that you have no inclination on hanging around, burning the bridge might be the most prudent approach in any case. <A> Did you look for related answers on this site? <S> Because even before looking at existing answers I knew the folks here would say the same thing: Don't say anything . <S> It's quite a pattern. <S> And they're right, of course. <S> You don't owe them anything. <S> (Unless you knew nothing and they literally taught you everything you know; this would be arguable.) <S> I don't want to burn any bridges. <S> I see a lot of this here as well. <S> But you did burn a bridge. <S> So if you plan to leave don't accept the promotion. <S> Someone else more worthwhile to the company could be willing to take it. <S> If you want to part on good terms, don't say you plan to leave, but also don't make the employer think it's all good, when it's not. <S> Tell them you reconsidered and don't want any additional responsibilities at this time . <S> Two, four or six weeks in this new position wouldn't make a difference to a good company. <S> If some company hires you because of this, be assured it's not somewhere worthwhile.
| If you are on good personal terms with this person and you wish to keep it that way, you can simply tell them that your personal situation has changed, and for the moment you are not looking for a promotion. If you don't really care too much, you can keep quiet. Until you have a job offer that you are delighted with you should try to maximise your career at your current employer right up to quitting .
|
Can I ask my new employer for additional financial assistance after accepting a job offer? I have just taken up a new job at a different region from where I now live with my family. The job comes with an unfurnished accommodation. I am not currently financially OK to furnish the house. Is it OK to ask the company for a financial help to furnish the accommodation and how do I approach the issue? <Q> The time to negotiate things like relocation assistance or a signing bonus (which is essentially what you're asking for) is before you accept the offer, not afterwards. <S> If you accepted an offer that included an unfurnished accommodation, why should the company be expected to help furnish it? <A> Yes, it is OK to ask . <S> Whether that would be approved or not , will depend on company policy. <S> However, you did not mention whether there was any clause in the job advertisement mentioning about "local candidate" (meaning, no relocation allowance), <S> if that's the case, apart from the "loan" option, you're out of luck. <A> In addition to the answer of Sourav Gosh, you can ask for a pay in advance. <S> For example regularly you will get your money for work in the last days of the month, but in the first month you get half (sometimes all) of it after the half month. <S> This is an usual option in Germany, if one talk with the company about financial shortage because of relocation. <S> Like Sam Hanley wrote, additional money at this point is unusual. <S> One will furnish the rooms one part after another. <S> (I assumed, that you need the accommodation in addition to your families place) <A> I think this won't be considered a very mature approach and won't be a good first impression, to ask directly for "help". <S> Although you can ask for company policy (if you didn't receive it with the job offer) for reallocation, and if company provides some reallocation allowance, surely you'll get it. <S> But directly presenting a need just at the time of joining the company would probably last for some long time and in case it is rejected, you'll have an awkward situation to deal with right from the start of your career in that company.
| Most likely, there can be some financial assistance (in form of a "loan" that you need to eventually repay at a later point of time), but there are chances of company provided one-time relocation allowance also (in-case you missed to ask). You're free to ask for anything you want, but it's unlikely that you're going to get the response you're hoping for.
|
Should I be worried if my manager prohibits me from working on certain items? I work in a very collaborative place where the silos between teams almost don't exist. Infact, they are almost so non-existent, that I can just go up and help other teams with tasks if there is a lull in my work. This is happening as of late, and I know it is so since our teams task management system has a lot of done tasks and very little new tasks. Therefore I know it is not due to a lack of me picking up new tasks. I have been going to other teams lately to pick up a task every now and then. My manager has been fine with it for a couple of weeks. But as of recently, she is very clear on "don't work for x team". I do know that because of the nature of where I work, cash is limited (at least from what I understand) and the time is controlled closely by work stamps. Should I be worried that my manager is curtailing my work like this? <Q> She's not curtailing your work. <S> Your work is for your team, not X team. <S> If she doesn't want you working for X team, then don't. <S> This decision and the consequences of this decision is hers, not yours. <A> This may be a problem for someone, but it's most likely not your problem. <S> Your best bet is to accept, move on, and try not to get in the middle of it. <S> Now, you could look into it a bit more. <S> For example, it would be entirely reasonable for you to ask your boss to inform you if the situation ever changes. <S> Depending on your relationship with your boss, there's a good chance that you could ask what's going on, just so that you better understand the currents below the surface at your workplace. <S> It <S> would be a good idea to clarify with your boss that you're allowed to continue working with the other groups. <S> If it's not, then you're a lot better off finding out about that now (and being able to discuss with your boss what that means for you getting enough work to do) rather than later <S> (when your boss is angry at you for having done something that you thought was totally okay). <A> Be wary, not worried. <S> As you state it, it doesn’t read as though this is any reflection upon you or concern with your productivity/value. <S> It does read as possibly some kind of culture shift or rift between teams/management. <S> There are things managers cannot or should not share, but overall—especially in a professional environment—if management is curt and unwilling to share any reason for what seems an unhealthy shift (siloing, for example), there might be something hidden. <S> There might very well nothing nefarious and hopefully you have a relationship with your manager where some openness can occur. <S> But you should always assess your work situation with a critical eye. <S> Usually there’s not really a problem, but if there is and you’re blindsided, it could take months to recover.
| If your boss is telling you to avoid working with a specific team, but doesn't mind your doing work for other teams, then it's almost certainly something about them, rather than something about you. Mostly, though, it's not your problem, and you probably don't want to make it your problem.
|
Colleague responds badly to constructive feedback so how can I move to a better place I have a subordinate who is very technically gifted, and has been at the company a long time, however he responds badly to constructive feedback and I've tried everything to make our relationship work. He used to be my boss, which is in my view a particular sticking point. The company is going through a transformation, moving from waterfall to agile, and as a result everyone is pushing to work in a more collaborative fashion. But this one particular employee does not want to work in an agile methodology, and even has gone as far as saying it is not his job to do so. Despite trying several different methods, the sandwich technique, giving examples, purely focusing on positives, trying to work with others in the team so that this particular employee is understood better, after two years I'm all out of options and my manager is unsure of how to move forwards with getting my subordinate to accept the feedback provided. My subordinate was recently described to me as intimidating, confrontational and is already on a written warning for getting angry in the office. During the last 1-2-1, I suggested some actions he should consider, which resulted in him confronting the team he works with, until eventually the team decided that there was no problem. To get to the situation where he had enough information to intimidate the team, my subordinate emailed a number of people in red text and confronted one of the most placid members of the team. My subordinate has also complained to HR about me saying I get angry with him, which I don't feel is the case, and asks for specific examples whenever I suggest how he should change the way he works, which I'm unwilling to give due to his nature of intimidating other employees. I imagine the PIP route is still an option, my boss also suggested making it so my subordinate has to answer to my boss instead, but I don't see either of these scenarios as a possible solution. Are there any possible alternative routes forwards with moving to a better place? <Q> If you're the manager, you need to manage. <S> Alison, at AskAManager has a good reply today to a manager with a different problem: a manager that is micromanaging. <S> But her answer works for this case too. <S> Your job is to manage Fergusia, and right now she’s doing her own job terribly. <S> You need to step in as assertively as you would step in if she were blowing some other core piece of her job. <S> And In doing this, you’re going to need to be very directive. <S> This isn’t “maybe you could try a different way.” <S> This is “to meet the expectations of your role, I need you to stop doing X and start doing Y.” <S> And None of this is optional, for you or for Fergusia. <S> She needs to manage effectively, period. <S> And because your job is to manage her, you need to ensure <S> she’s doing that — or you’re falling down on your job just as much as she is. <S> None of this means being harsh or angry, just be calm and factual. <S> You do need to be clear: "This is what your role requires. <S> Are you able to do this job?" <S> If the answer is not yes, and the actions follow that answer, then a PIP would be the next step, to ensure you are being clear about the current requirements of the job as well as the consequences of not being able to do the current job. <S> Dwizum makes such a good point that it should be part of the answer: <S> The only thing I would add to this - which will be critically important <S> if/when this goes south, is to document everything. <S> Every one on one, follow up with an email outlining the feedback you gave. <S> Every in person conversation, follow up with email, or at least document notes to yourself. <S> Work with HR to understand documentation protocol for performance issues. <S> If you have a performance management system that allows you to "officially" log any of this, start doing that immediately if you haven't yet. <A> My subordinate has also complained to HR about me saying I get angry with him, which I don't feel is the case, and asks for specific examples whenever I suggest how he should change the way he works, which I'm unwilling to give due to his nature of intimidating other employees. <S> I'm not sure why this is your problem. <S> Your subordinate wants to make you believe that if you give them examples of what they have done wrong and how they can do better, then they will improve. <S> So do that. <S> It will be short-term at best, because there are 2 possible outcomes: 1) <S> Subordinate realizes that they are doing something wrong, and has actual actionable tasks and examples that they can work on. <S> They get better, great! <S> 2) <S> Subordinate finds out who "ratted them out" and takes action against that person. <S> In which case they lied to you about why they asked for specific suggestions, and furthermore they are being disruptive in the work environment. <S> At this point, you can probably make an easy case to HR for getting them fired immediately. <S> If you want to mitigate the impact this might have on the other person, you could phrase it as "I noticed during your interactions with so-and-so, that this situation occurred", to make it about you and not about that person. <S> Then, you take the flak. <S> Either way, your problem is solved quickly and efficiently. <A> Based on your comments, this person doesn't accept feedback and is willing to be belligerent and difficult to get his way. <S> I wouldn't give any more chances; I would work with HR to fire him: <S> After belligerently defending his way of doing things it's not realistic to believe he will change. <S> Intimidating his team means he's causing lots of stress for his co-workers. <S> Removing him tells the team you value them as well, and allowing him to continue sends the opposite message.
| Don't give him 'actions to consider', but clearly lay out what he needs to do.
|
Does not getting a pay raise signal for something to come...? So I've had a talk with my manager and lead and they determined I wasn't getting a pay raise due to communication. My current job is remote and so as my manager and lead. During my review, they've stated I'm not calling/communicating with them enough. They seem to be very A type personality and I'm not the type of person to just ring up my manager on a Saturday to talk about my personal life. (my manager has does to be by the way) I try to keep professional and separate my work life and personal life. I do however call them if something urgent comes up and do talk with them during our project meetings and explain issues and give suggestions. I have multiple projects going and has been very hectic (60hr weeks for months) As a result, they've said I don't qualify for a raise. This really has never been an issue with my previous companies and I've been with this company for a little over a year. Is this a sign of things to come? <Q> Side-answer <S> "60hr weeks for months" and you still work there?! <S> Man, that is the biggest signal that you need to update and then use your CV. <S> That is exploitation. <S> And since you do not get a salary raise, I assume you do not get paid for the 50% extra-work either. <S> This is not a sign of the things to come, it is a proof of the things that already Are!! <S> Main Answer <S> There are bosses like the one(s) you described, which value you talking to them more than you doing real work. <S> I know this from experience. <S> I was shocked 2 times in the past because of this: Why for many years I did not get the raises and the recognition that I deserved (actually, more than deserved)? <S> Why did I started to get a lot of recognition after I started reporting to my (relevant) boss(es), even though my amount of work declined significantly? <S> It was senior level work, true, but still, the levels of stress were through the floor compared to before. <S> Simple solution: give your bosses what they expect , not what you think they need. <A> Does not getting a raise is a signal of something? <S> Indifferently. <S> Does not getting a raise AND working 60hr weeks for months IS a signal of something? <S> Yes it is. <S> They will squeeze you like a lemon for the most work you can do for the lowest amount of money. <S> Is communication part of your job? <S> Was is in your yearly goals? <S> Did you had task named "communication"? <S> It show that they just don't want to pay you and use some trivial excuse. <S> What is "enough communication"? <S> Monthly written reports? <S> Daily verbal ones? <S> Records of key pressed during a week and mile travelled by mouse? <S> It cannot be surprise rule showed at review. <S> not wait for review to cite it as a reason for not giving you a rise. <A> During my review, they've stated I'm not calling/communicating with them enough. <S> I have multiple projects going and has been very hectic (60hr weeks for months) <S> As a result, they've said I don't qualify for a raise. <S> This really has never been an issue with my previous companies and I've been with this company for a little over a year. <S> Is this a sign of things to come? <S> Possibly. <S> If your lack of communication is such that they won't give you a raise, then you may not be cut out for this role unless you can change. <S> Often working remotely means it is more difficult to stay in touch with others. <S> Work harder to learn how your lead and manager expect you to communicate and then follow through. <S> Make sure you understand specifically what they mean regarding calling/communication. <S> It may have nothing to do with calling on Saturday and instead may mean that they want you to contact them when you are stuck, for example. <S> If this is your first indication that your communication is insufficient, then you may be able to salvage things. <S> If you were already warned and still this was the reason cited during your salary review for not getting a raise, then you may want to start polishing your resume.
| If your boss felt you don't communicate enough they should let you know when it was happening
|
How far should I investigate petty office theft? I have a coffee mug on my desk. Every time I finish a can of soda, I pop off the top and throw it in the mug. It's a quirky way to represent how long I've been at this job. I noticed someone stole it over the weekend. It has basically 0 monetary value (the mug was free too), but it does have decent sentimental value. I'm just not sure what the tolerance policy is of typical American corporate offices. Even if I dig through the footage of a security camera around my cubicle and find damning proof of who stole it, would anything even be done? The stolen article is worth nothing, but would it still be a fireable offense? My only concern is that I do some investigation, and HR and other managers on this floor are like "so what?", and I get pinned for overreacting. I just want to double check that I'm not being unreasonable for raising an incident report and starting a whole process with security, HR, etc. Edit: Reason I think someone stole it is that I've had other items like my macbook charger, board markers, etc. stolen from my desk when I wasn't there. Couldn't reasonably follow up on those since they happened before the security camera was installed. Also, I understand it's possible some cleaner just threw it out. But my question is how far I should go with it if I do find something in the footage of the security camera. <Q> It's also possible that the cleaning crew was emptying it and accidentally broke it and then threw it away. <S> I'd hardly raise a fuss over a missing coffee mug full of pop can tabs. <S> Generally, in most parts of the world, pop can tabs are considered to be trash and not considered to be objects of sentimental value. <S> In all likelihood, your mug was tossed in the rubbish. <S> In reading your edit to your question, maybe you should have presented the question as <S> "I've experienced a number of items being stolen from my desk. <S> The latest was a mug full of pop <S> can tabs. <S> What should I do?" <S> I'd hardly make a fuss over a mug full of pop can tabs, but if this is the latest in a string of thefts then it bears investigation and reporting to HR or to the management. <A> As far as security footage, I would be surprised if they let you review it. <S> File the complaint and provide updates if anything else goes missing. <S> Otherwise, I wouldn’t harass HR about the status. <S> You should lock up anything you have on your desk that means anything to you to help with the issue going forward. <A> I've had other items like my macbook charger, board markers, etc. <S> stolen from my desk <S> If you are experiencing theft it is likely someone else must be experiencing the same. <S> Ask your co-workers if their possession is missing as well. <S> If so, then by all means you can complain about the same to your boss. <S> I agree with @joeqwerty. <S> Filing a complaint about a missing mug full of pop can tabs sounds frivolous but macbook charger does not.
| A mug full of pop can tabs seems like it might have easily been mistake for trash by a cleaning crew. Since you have a series of thefts, you need to document it and file a complaint with your HR.
|
Does your activity (or lack thereof) on social media have an effect on your perceived employability in a public facing position? I'm not very active on social media. I have only a Facebook account and none of the other like Twitter or Instagram. I use it mainly to look at what other people get up to in my own time and hardly post anything about myself or my activities. I have also set my account up so that almost none of my info shows up to people who are not friends. EDIT: The question is directed purely at how employers might use your social media activity to filter candidates. Lets say a person is in a public facing position and posted videos and so on of their extra curricular activities (wild or not), would that actually make a difference in they way they are viewed by possible employers vs someone who posts virtually nothing on their social media accounts. Some might say one indicates a good social standing while the other might indicate you might be unsocial. Does your activity (or lack thereof) on social media have an effect on your perceived employability in a public facing position? <Q> No, it does not ( unless you're in PR business where having the activity in social media is a "criteria" ). <S> Your social media is usually part of your personal life, which is best kept separate from you official one. <S> So, your activity (or lack thereof) has no impact on your employability. <S> After the question Edit: Please re-read the above paragraph. <S> You'll not be hired for "socializing". <S> If you can communicate efficiently, that's more than enough for most of the cases. <S> Personally speaking, I have a large family and a larger group of friends, me and my wife socialize them with pretty often but that does not mean I post photos or status update on social media. <S> I have a knack for photography, so some photos make it to Instagram / twitter, but I can confirm, no frequent than once/twice a year. <S> However, one point to mention, using social media networks or other forums which are meant for professionals and job search, (like StackOverflow careers, LinkedIn etc.) can have a positive effect on staying up to date about the offers and job postings, however, <S> that does not mean you have to be ""active", you can be a passive researcher and only use the platform to connect to potential employers. <S> Remember, this will only help you in awareness / info about jobs/open positions. <S> It's likely to have minimal to no impact in the interview and hiring process, though. <A> Depends on the employer. <S> It can have an adverse effect if they check your online profile(s) and find a lot of negativity and bad stuff, or even just things that they don't agree with, e.g. political views. <S> Even non-PR/marketing colleagues will probably go searching. <S> I generally only post to stack exchange sites, and don't use social media at all, although that's mainly through lack of time/interest and than any real dislike. <S> I find this (lack of activity) has no effect, although I would probably suffer if I switched off LinkedIn. <A> Yes. <S> I'm in a very public-facing position. <S> I tend to friend people in the community I've never met, simply because of my position. <S> In a job application process, oftentimes the first thing the employer does <S> is check social media. <S> In the job itself, people will look at my FB page to see me, and what I'm about. <S> I NEVER share political stuff on my FB account for that reason. <S> Just not worth doing. <S> It may not be wrong, but it is divisive. <S> I make heavy use of the security features of FB, and different privacy settings. <S> I'd suggest locking your stuff down and removing some public stuff that might cause an issue. <S> I also have a couple of anonymous accounts without personal info on them. <S> If you're concerned about it, do that. <A> The less access companies has to your private life, the better. <S> Expose only what you want them to see. <S> For example, in many countries you do not have to state gender, marital status and other personal information, as these can be used to discriminate against you, although should not be taken into account while hiring. <S> If you submit an application hiding these things, and yet have a Facebook profile which exposes everything to strangers, it basically is useless to hide this information in the first place. <S> Another example: You get tagged in an embarrassing video from college, where you did something very questionable at a party <S> or so. <S> You miss this, but the employer sees this when screening your social media. <A> I agree with the poster above. <S> LinkedIn can be a good tool and many employers are now asking you apply with your LinkedIn profiles and some career websites advise adding it to your resume. <S> I think the thing that really counts on LinkedIn is the number of connections you have. <S> So you don't have to post content all the time, but do create your network.
| I would say that exposing participation on forums like Stack Exchange might help, and Facebook, Instagram or similar are neutral at best, unless you post a lot of personal projects or something relevant to possible employer. I have posts that are public, and some that are specific friends only, based on a group, or geographical location.
|
Is it OK to take time-off during the first week of a new job? Is it OK to take time-Off during the first week of new job? I just landed in a new job and this is the first week for me. Because of an unexpected situation I have to take Off on Friday of this week. Is it good to take time-off during the first week of new job? I don't have any projects assigned yet and I'm taking some online training and self-training. No formal work has been assigned to me yet. Just wanted to know if this will create a bad image about me to my team and Supervisor. Edit: Thank you all for the great answers. I got my leave approved from my Supervisor. I hope it doesn't make any bad image of me to him and I wish similar scenario doesn't happen in the future :) <Q> Without a specific reason it does create a bad image. <S> With specific reason I don't mean you owe your supervisor the explanation that your grandmother died but <S> a reason such as: unforeseeable event in the family medical problem Just make sure your supervisor knows that it is important and couldn't be planned for in advance. <S> The first few days/weeks at a job are usually unproductive so missing a day shouldn't be a problem. <A> Just wanted to know if this will create a bad image about me to my team and Supervisor. <S> Well, it should not be, for a single-day leave and if you don't intend to keep repeating that. <S> People can have "emergencies", we essentially have no control over those. <S> Make sure you present your case to your manager and seek approval as early as possible. <S> Also, so far I've considered "Because of an unexpected situation" to be an urgent and emergency one, not an "extended-weekend-trip-plan-to-sea-beach-with-buddies" that floated up on the group chat. <S> However, if that leave period is of significant length (more that 4-5 days), and not a medical or medical-related leave) - that may raise some eyebrows. <A> It's all in how you explain the situation. <S> you have that day off. <S> If your explanation is strong, and you commit to working extra to pay for that day (maybe the Saturday?), then it should send a good message instead of a bad one.
| You need to go to your supervisor, and tell them the whole story and why it's so important You have likely not accrued any vacation yet, so expect to owe the day, or accept a cut in pay for that week.
|
Why are my senior co-workers ignoring my reply on email chain? Here is my issue. I'm on an email chain with a few higher ups. Yes, I understand I'm the grunt that does all the real work while the leader, "look at the bigger picture." But while they're busy staring off into the horizon, I have print deadlines. So my senior team member asks a question in the email chain, I answer and ask her another question having to do with the print deadline (basically asking her to confirm if she still wants to print). Then the other senior team member answered the first senior team member. But they both ignored me! And now my email with an important deadline question has been lost. But of course if this doesn't go to print they're going to blame me! How can I get them to answer me? If you say, "Go to print without approval" - it's not that easy. We have a small budget so if I go rogue I'm going to get blamed for spending money. I know I can email again, call, and hunt them down so I get my answer, but I'm hoping for a better answer than, "it's just life" or take 20 steps because I'm a lower level employee and their time is more important. <Q> You are experiencing a common problem with email chains: sometimes key issues/questions get lost. <S> I have a co-worker <S> who will respond to almost any email they are CC'd. <S> That means that the person who was supposed to answer the question, and is in fact the only one with the answer, may not realize when they see 10 response that they were the one who was supposed to answer. <S> When you changed the subject within the chain your question was lost. <S> Start a new email. <S> Or better yet call that person and ask your question, then followup with an email that restates your discussion and provides a status update to all interested parties. <A> You asked a secondary question that the person following up on did not know, or likely care about. <S> It's a tangent that the people reading the chain simply are not that interested in. <S> Who you are is likely secondary to the topic. <S> I'd suggest emailing or going to the person directly that you want to answer that question. <A> So my senior team member asks a question in the email chain, I answer and ask her another question having to do with the print deadline. <S> Then the other senior team member answered the first senior team member. <S> But they both ignored me! <S> And now my email with an important deadline question has been lost. <S> But of course if this doesn't go to print they're going to blame me! <S> How can I get them to answer me? <S> Don't ask an important question as an unrelated aside to a chain email. <S> It often will (and in this case did) get lost in the shuffle. <S> Instead, talk to them in person, call and ask, or send a separate email only to the individuals who need to confirm your request. <S> And for future reference, talk with them to determine the proper channel to get approval to print. <S> I know I can email again, call, and hunt them down <S> so I get my answer, <S> but I'm hoping for a better answer than, <S> "it's just life" or take 20 steps because I'm a lower level employee and their time is more important. <S> You need to get over this whole <S> "I'm a lower level employee", "I'm the grunt", "they're busy staring off into the horizon", "their time is more important" thing. <S> That attitude will not serve you well in the long run. <A> So my senior team member asks a question in the email chain, I answer and ask her another question having to do with the print deadline <S> This is the issue. <S> You are writing and asking your secondary question on an email that already has a subject and intention. <S> Something even more effective is to grab the phone or visit such person to their desk . <S> On another note, just throwing an unrelated question to an email thread with some superiors and then replying back in such unprofessional way (CAPS LOCK, threats of not moving forward, etc.) is something I suggest you refrain from doing anymore. <A> How can I get them to answer me? <S> Email is often not the best communication tool. <S> They may be inundated with emails from clients or from other people higher up the management ladder. <S> How do you get them to answer you? <S> Call them on the phone. <S> Hit them up in whatever chat app you use. <S> Walk over to their office or cubicle. <S> This isn't difficult stuff. <S> It's not rocket science <S> and there's no mystery or magic. <S> If I don't get a response using one communication method then I use another communication method. <S> The answer itself may be their responsibility but getting the answer is yours.
| If you want to ask someone directly what you should do with your print deadline it would be much better and effective to send an email dedicated to that matter to the person you want to ask to.
|
Colleagues feeling insecure when I do my work I am a person who wants to learn and grow by doing challenging tasks that are assigned to me. Whenever I do some challenging work which helps the organization, a few of my colleagues feel insecure and start harassing me saying, "why have you worked without informing us", even though I informed them in several meetings. Is there anything wrong that I am thinking and why I am unable to work with them. How can I resolve these issues so that I can do my work? <Q> If your colleague continues to harass you, then document the harassment as much as possible and report it to your company's HR. <A> Your coworker literally wants to make you look bad in order to make himself look good and get the good assignments. <S> He's harassing you in order to make that happen. <S> This is not something you should put up with. <S> It will damage you, and damage your career. <S> Speak with your boss on the matter, ask him what to do , and then do what he tells you to. <S> If your coworkers continue to harass you about it, refer them to him. <S> You're just following orders. <A> In such scenarios there are two things you can do. <S> First, if you have a direct technical senior/team lead then it is better to discuss with him/her on how you going few extra miles for your solution will help in betterment of the product. <S> If your solution is more efficient than expected then your lead will always back you. <S> That way you can continue to work the way you like. <S> Second, it is also equally important to be in healthy relationship with your colleagues, be genuine and friendly and offer your help if any of then are stuck. <S> I feel like they are not familiar with your nature and mixing up with them would give them better idea of your work ethics. <S> I'd also point out that do not put your nose into their tasks unless asked. <S> It will most likely worsen your relations.
| If this colleague isn't your boss, then ignore him and continue to do the work that was assigned to you.
|
Could asking for reimbursement of travel expenses for a small amount seem petty? I interviewed for a role recently and wasn't selected in the end, probably due to the fact that I was interviewed for the wrong role. The details of the botched process can be found here . The company had initially expressed interest to reimburse the travel expenses. As I was wary about it, I used the cheapest trains to get there. It amounts to £27. Quite recently the company replied to my followup email saying that 'they have gone ahead with other candidates'. I asked them whether they could reimburse the travel expenses as initially agreed & they said 'they would be happy to'. I haven't send the receipts to them , so they don't know the amount. My question is: would it seem petty to ask them to reimburse this small amount? NB : £25 Can buy you a 3 course meal in the UK. So I guess its not a petty amount. Its relative I guess. <Q> Since you asked if they would reimburse the expenses as initially agreed upon, and they stated that "they would be happy to", <S> I don't think it would seem petty. <S> In fact, it could be perceived as odd if you did not send in any receipts after agreeing upon reimbursement with them. <S> If you had requested reimbursement without any prior discussion, then there's a chance that could be perceived as petty, but that's not the situation you have described. <A> £25 is not an insignificant amount, although not a crippling one. <S> It's not petty, not at all. <S> Add to it that they already offered to pay, and this would actually be a good opportunity to push the door open a crack in case <S> future opportunities with this company arise and you wish to take advantage of them. <S> Along with your receipts, attach a letter stating how you enjoyed interviewing with the company, and that your expenses, while relatively small are not insignificant to you at this time, and that you appreciate their generosity. <S> It cannot hurt you, but it may help you. <S> It's a pretty good potential reward for little risk. <S> Personally, if I were at that company, and got asked for reimbursement, and saw an amount like that come across my desk, I'd be impressed with someone being honest enough not to pad it. <S> Do it, include the letter, and good luck in your hunt. <A> £27 or £27 million. <S> It's money you spent on their behalf that you wouldn't have spent otherwise. <S> I see no reason not to ask them to reimburse it. <A> Just to add another angle: <S> The company had initially expressed interest to reimburse the travel expenses. <S> As I was wary about it, [...] <S> Why was that? <S> The company already agreed (hopefully in writing) to reimburse you for the travel needed for the interview, why would you be wary about the claim? <S> I mean, even before getting the interview, you are suspecting the employer, I'd say, that's a good enough reason to not to attend the interview itself. <S> Ask yourself: If you were employed, how many things you would have to be wary about? <S> That said: You did what you did, and the thing that matters here is the "reimbursement", not the amount. <S> As mentioned, after the interview ending in a negative result, you inquired "again" and the confirmed that they would be happy to (as I expect any decent organization would be), so I see no reason for you to not to go ahead with the process. <S> You spend the money, you were promised you will be paid back and now you ask for it. <S> It's not petty, it's doing what is expected, there's no two things about that.
| This will likely leave a good impression, and while it may never amount to anything, it certainly costs nothing to be nice, and since so few people bother, it can help, especially if you get into the habit.
|
Should I own up my own mistake in public? I am working as a software qualify assurance engineer and partially due to my work, a bug managed to get to our production code. Our customer service team has reported back this issue to us on Slack. I am thinking if I should publicly own up this mistake and come up front to take responsibilities. Our company has a no-blame culture, which means no one blames anyone else. But I think I need to admit it is my fault that this bug has escaped to our customers. If I should come up front, how far should I go? Thanks <Q> If you're working in an Agile shop, and you're part of a Scrum Team (or similar arrangement), the team has collective accountability for this kind of thing. <S> You should certainly own up to the mistake with the team - <S> That's how the team maintains individual accountability. <S> However, as far as the rest of the business is concerned, the team owns the mistakes, because no one person is likely to have been the sole source of a problem. <S> (You didn't write the buggy code, did you?) <A> You don't need to make a big thing of it, but admitting you should have caught it is no bad thing. <S> The best way to respond to this (internally or otherwise) is to admit responsibility and show you've tried to ensure it won't happen again: <S> My bad on this one <S> I'm afraid - slipped through our testing nets as the x testing script <S> doesn't cover y which caused the bug. <S> I'm in the process of updating that script now so this shouldn't slip through in future iterations, and I'm in conversation with Bob who may also be able to catch this ahead of time via a unit test. <S> That sort of a response isn't overly apologetic, but to the point and gives the impression that you "get stuff done". <A> Taking responsibility for your mistakes shows a level of maturity that is good to have, both personally and professionally. <S> It is definitely a characteristic that stands out more with consistent use, so don't just do it today and expect consistent returns for years to come. <S> Yes, own your mistakes. <S> No blame means don't point fingers. <S> It means human mistakes can and should be understood. <S> Not that you aren't supposed to acknowledge that you personally goofed. <S> That is internally. <S> Customer facing personnel should handle statements that go out to the public consumer. <S> There is more to consider there. <S> The face of the company, legal liability in admitting fault, etc... <A> A no-blame culture doesn't mean you can't take responsibility for your own mistakes. <S> I work for a company which also has a "no-blame" culture. <S> This implies that if something bad happens, the first thing we do is "mitigate the effects". <S> Then we fix the cause. <S> And afterwards, we write a document explaining what went wrong, how did we notice it went wrong, which steps were taken, and offer suggestions how to avoid that in the future. <S> And we make this document available to everyone <S> (we've an internal website to search those documents). <S> But while we don't blame (notice that all steps describe above are focused on "what happened" not on "who's responsible"), we still value owning up to mistakes. <S> The person who made the mistake is going to be one of the more valuable people to fix it -- they're the one most familiar with the code. <S> Owning but not blaming also helps in getting bugs fixed as soon as possible. <S> Of course, that doesn't imply you need to make a big show out of it. <S> Just say "I made a mistake. <S> I'm working on a fix right now". <A> Before you get too wound up about your mistake, please keep one thing in mind: The only people who never make mistakes are the people who never do any work . <S> Good QA can reduce the number of defects which come to the attention of the customers, but even the best QA can not guarantee a 0% defect rate. <S> That means a few defects slipping through is to be expected. <S> This is a normal thing in the IT industry. <S> So before you come forward and apologize, consider if you actually did something which makes you responsible. <S> Did you not use the budget and resources <S> you were allocated? <S> Did you not follow the agreed upon processes? <S> Did you not test all the use-cases you explicitly committed to test? <S> If none of these is the case, then you did the best you could and have no reason to blame yourself. <S> If you decide that you need to point out that you indeed deserve blame, do not focus on self punishment. <S> Focus on what you are going to do different to prevent this mistake from happening again in the future. <A> No there is no mistake to own. <S> No disrespect <S> but you seem pretty novice and naive. <S> Bugs getting their ways in production are part of the life. <S> I'm sure your product have a few out there (maybe less critical, again no disrespect. <S> It's just the way it is). <S> No need to need to own anything. <S> Why would the dev be less likely to "own" the mistake? <S> After all he wrote the code (I'm a dev myself). <S> I don't know <S> maybe it's something super obvious and it have been caught before the release <S> , in this case you and the dev(s) are as much at fault here. <S> I'm all in to own mistake when there was one but <S> in a case of a bug getting it's way into production is not one of them. <S> In any complex system it's practically impossible to cover all cases. <S> Proving a negative is really hard, that's what you do when you test the product. <S> The question is not "Does this product is 100% defect free? <S> " it's more "Are we confident about the quality of the work done by the team (80-99% depending on the team, product, etc)
| Yes, please own your mistake.
|
Handling the aftermath of traffic accident with colleague A bit of context: I had about four months ago a motorbike accident with a car who was at fault (cut me off).During the time I was waiting for the emergency services to arrive and take care of me, I learned that the car's owner's workplace is a few hundred meters away from mine. Now in the event of an accident with a coworker I know, how should I handle the resulting relationship? Let's imagine he was driving badly (e.g. changing lanes fast not using blinkers). I wouldn't trust someone not respectful of others on the road, especially if he/she injured me... It might be linked to this question <Q> Now in the event of an accident with a coworker <S> I know, how should I handle the resulting relationship? <S> If it was an accident (i.e., unintentional), then your relationship should stay the same. <S> It's reasonable to be angry for a short time, accidents by definition are unintentional, so you should get over it. <A> You should treat your colleague no differently. <S> Don't discuss it at work, or on work property, or with colleagues. <S> It has nothing to do with work. <S> Speak to your HR department and see if they would like to be aware of the situation. <S> If they say that it has nothing to do with work, then leave it at that. <S> Some HR departments may want to be aware of this situation, in order to be aware of any potential issues down the track. <S> If you were on-the-clock at the time, maybe travelling between worksites, you probably have an obligation to report the incident. <S> Part of being a professional is being able to handle situations where you may not get along with someone else, or there may be some property of the person that doesn't sit well with you. <S> Note that this doesn't mean that they will transfer the other party to a different office/location. <S> What is more likely that you will be moved about. <A> If you interact with persons, you will always (subliminal) use all information you have about this person. <S> Professionalism means here, that you are aware of this, think twice and willful use only work-relevant information. <S> It is clear: if you "wouldn't trust someone not respectful of others on the road", you will look closer at the behavior of this person, so you can decide if this attitude (not respectful of others) influence the work of this person (not only output, relations on workplace too). <S> But until you find some work-related evidence for this absence of respect, you should do nothing in work environment. <S> In private (for example, if there is a beside work relationship to this person, maybe caused in the accident) you can talk with this person. <S> Maybe the person was in hurry, or had other reasons you can understand/accept (it is a difference between understand and apologize). <S> In this case your relation (private and work) will relax after the accident. <S> This could be worth the trouble. <S> In my opinion if nobody talks about lack of respect for others, then nothing will change in this persons mind.
| Handle whatever situation has occurred outside of work, but don't mention it within work. If you don't feel like you can handle the situation professionally, you should raise this with your HR department.
|
Formal warning over late setup of AV equipment I was recently asked to setup AV equipment the following morning by my line manager as I was leaving the office. I expressed that I had no access to this building, but was informed that it would be open. The following morning it was locked! In-fact the building was opened by the requester, which therefore was late.I was not impressed that I was there ready to set up the equipment and had no access. Two days later I received a key, one month later I'm put up for a formal warning for being late and disrespectful to the AV requester. I feel my line manager is to blame for this whole experience. But I'm the one with the warning! Have I been unfairly treated? <Q> Yes. <S> Go to your HR rep. <S> If you don't have a Human Resources rep, go to your boss. <S> If your boss doesn't fix it, go to his/her boss. <S> A formal written warning that stays on the record for something you were truly unable to avoid is wrong and can have negative career effects. <S> Having said that, we have your side of the story, and I don't mean to imply anything, but make sure you have your facts straight, and that you are not to blame for it in any way before you take it up the ladder. <A> Sorry to break this to you, you're in this position because it's partially your fault. <S> I expressed that I had no access to this building, but was informed that it would be open. <S> You were correct to mention about the access scenario, however, you accepted the "information" assuring you it will be available for you to access. <S> That's where the problem starts. <S> You are not suppose to "tailgate" whatever the reason might be (except in danger situation, which usually voids all other policies). . <S> If the exact reason in mentioned in the complain letter (being late on that day for that occasion), you're in luck. <S> You can write a letter to HR / manager mentioning The last moment request you received The early arrival (if you've got any CCTV footage / punch-in time record, you can use that, if possible) <S> The dates when you were assigned access (later). <S> This will at least clear the scenario for you that you were not late . <S> Once that is there, you can take this forward and mention that you can only be late for something if you've been assigned something <S> and, you did not have access at "that" time, so <S> the whole theory of "being late" does not hold. <A> As Keith mentions, we only know your story, but given what you've said, you were treated unfairly. <S> This reads like the requester was frustrated, you didn’t respond in a fashion that made them happier--and perhaps there was nothing you could have said/done--and in that frustration they reported the situation. <S> It went up and came back down uncomfortably on your boss. <S> At this point, it reads as though your boss assigned the blame to you rather than supporting his team. <S> To the underlying issue, this is a huge red flag. <S> Your boss is more concerned with making him(?)self look good than advocating for his team. <S> Your boss gave you false information that put you in a bad situation <S> then let you take the blame. <S> You are right to raise it to your boss, but you have to assess if the same boss who appears to have made you the scapegoat is going to take this as a challenge or do the right thing. <S> HR is an option, but it will likely come back to the boss. <S> Also, I’d suggest your replay the scenario and audit yourself. <S> How did you respond to the requester when the situation occurred? <S> I imagine you were both frustrated. <S> Did that show through in your actions? <S> That might have been why the write up happened. <S> But it should not have included access you were told to expect.
| You could have told to make that "assurance" in writing (in a way that do not come off as harsh, rather, something like - "so that I can show that time to my boss that I worked" sort of argument).
|
Would working on a personal project in my off time that could be used at my workplace (small communication tool) be seen as good? I've thought of something useful I could potentially build for my team that I'd like to work on in my off time. It would be a simple tool that helps with communication. It would mostly be for my own practice and something I don't want any strict deadlines on as it's just something I thought would be handy. Would presenting this when it's finished be viewed as a good thing or would it be seen negatively? My reasoning is that it could be viewed that I should have just put that effort into assigned tasks A.K.A my work. <Q> I would suggest you tell your manager/boss that you have an idea that will make communication better. <S> If he/she thinks it's a good idea <S> you might actually get a go ahead to do it as part of your work. <S> If he/she does not think it is a good enough idea to spend resources on (which is not the same as it not being a good idea) then ask if it would be ok if you worked on it on your own time. <S> Worst case scenario you are once again told no, and you can just make it anyway to practice but never implement it at work. <A> My reasoning is that it could be viewed that I should have just put that effort into assigned tasks <S> A.K.A my work. <S> Not if you complete your assigned activities in time, with quality. <S> However, there's a silver lining. <S> However, if you're using company resources (hardware/ software) and if you have no problem with your company claiming the ownership of the developed tool, you're good to go. <S> Otherwise if you want the tool to be licensed for yourself, or, even open-source, you should check your contract once again, there might be clause mentioning any work you do using company provided resource belonging to the company. <A> It's a bit of a complicated area of law sometimes. <S> But it is possible. <S> Things to keep in mind: <S> Anything you work on in the office will probably belong to the company Anything you work on using work materials, equipment, code, APIs, etc. will belong to the company <S> In some jurisdictions, if it is related to the company in some way, it will belong to the company <S> Some company policies (attempt) to make anything you work on while employed, their property <S> Even if you're happy with all of that, you still must work on your assigned tasks If the above are true, working on it at home may breach company policy Other than that, feel free to work on it. <S> Tips: <S> Make the tool generic and not tethered strongly to work Work on it solely at home. <S> Upload it to github/etc. <S> Seek permission from your boss before you download from github Don't be discouraged if they decide not to use it <S> Ensure you use your personal time <A> You can do whatever you want in your spare time. <S> If it implies bringing added value to your employer while in the meantime learning something new, I really don't see how your employer would consider this a bad thing as from their perpspective <S> it's basically free stuff. <S> However, I would suggest being careful as people tend to get entiled, even with free stuff. <S> As soon as you will have disclosed this tool nobody ever wanted to pay for, people will start thinking about how it could be improved with new features. <S> As soon as people will start to use it, they will probably discover bugs and expect you to solve it. <S> As the initial work was done for free, some might expect you to do these changes and fixes for free too, maybe with some kind of emergency especially if this is really useful. <S> So I would be very careful when delivering the product and mention the "support policy" right away. <S> i.e: "I wanted to learn xxx and in the meantime we were in need of a tool for doing xxx, <S> so I gave it a try. <S> Please be aware that I can not offer any guarantee over the stability nor the future support of it" As a side remark, while some people will probably consider (it's already the case in comments) that working for free is stupid, I personnally appreciate that kind of mindset: you're basically not "working for free", but learning stuff while practicing on real-life situations, and the ROI you'll probably get in the long term, not immediately. <S> From my perpective, solving real problems is the best way to learn new technologies/languages. <S> The downside is that people easily take this behaviour for granted and may have a negative feeling when/if you suddenly stop doing it for whatever reasons.
| If you have significant amount of "free" time (i.e., company-paid time for which you have no work allocation) that you're investing (or planning to invest) into it, you may need to inform your manager about your work assignment, and then run the idea past your manager, to get an approval. Asking after it is already finished might raise questions on when you created this tool. As long as your "pet project" does not cause you deviate from your assigned tasks, you're welcome to have them. If you're doing it in "overtime" (outside company-paid time) and using your own resources, it's fine.
|
Can a team function properly without a clear leader? I work for a large software company and our division has created a newly formed team, and at the moment we all report directly to the VP. The VP has other responsibilities, so this team is just one area of his overall charter. He is not involved in day-to-day activities, but we also don't have a clear team leader or manager. There is a project manager who handles a lot of the coordination with other teams, but our VP is actually his skip-level (he reports into a different manager). Those of us who are on this team doing the work day in and day out are all senior, and while we work well together it's a bit confusing that we don't really have a "lead" per se. I've spoken to our VP about this, and he feels we can work this out ourselves and that we should see each other as equals. For now this is OK - we have a rough understanding of how we split up the work, but there is also a lot of overlap between us in terms of ownership from a business and technical perspective. It also leads to challenges such as if I get invited to a meeting and others from the team don't, should I always forward the invites? If someone comes and speaks to me, do I make sure to always include others? Because we all transferred from existing groups I can see that there might be hesitation for our VP to start compartmentalizing us due to political reasons, and while this structure might be OK in the beginning as we're getting the project off the ground, I can't see it functioning in an efficient manner six months from now. Am I wrong in thinking that a team needs an explicit leader, whether official or unofficial (e.g., not actually having direct reports but still being designated as the team lead)? <Q> Yes, it's possible. <S> It may or may not be a good idea. <S> First, it's possible. <S> There are even formal organizational styles (scrum) that do it. <S> There are workplaces where the engineering team is full of people who don't want to be in charge that manage to make it through well enough on separation of roles and consensus. <S> That doesn't mean that it's always a good idea, or that it's a good idea in your case. <S> For your particular case, you need to have a meeting, sit down, and iron out some ground rules. <S> Right now, your respective roles are ill-defined, and it's starting to cause some issues. <S> One way of handling that is to have one of you get picked as leader, and let that person decide, but it may be that no one wants to give the spot to someone else, and it may be that no one wants the spot to begin with. <S> The problem isn't that you have no leader (at least for right now). <S> The problem is that you have no way to settle the gray areas. <S> So, at minimum, come up with a list of concerns. <S> Ask your teammates to do the same. <S> If you can come to an agreement of how to do things more or less by consensus, then great. <S> If you can't, you're probably going to need someone in at least a nominal leadership role. <S> Incidentally, it sounds like you personally would be more comfortable with a clear leader. <S> That's reasonable. <S> I will say that if you're going to advocate for having a clear leader, it strengthens your position somewhat if you're not also advocating that you personally should be that leader. <S> (Of course, if everyone agrees in principle, but no one wants to take it on....) <A> There is a management system that got a lot of press some years back called Holacracy which purports to eliminate the need for management hierarchies. <S> This is the approach that is/was used at Zappos . <S> The idea is that you have 'circles' of accountabilities. <S> I spent a little time trying to understand this <S> and I'm wasn't completely sold on the hole thing <S> but I do think there are some extremely useful concepts here. <S> I think I've read things that claim you have to buy into it completely <S> but I find that hard to believe since these are pretty big general ideas <S> and I felt like I was reading Robert's Rule's of Order when I looked over the rules and procedures that are packed into it. <S> It's also crucial that people follow through and take these decisions seriously. <S> If you can't do this, then you probably need a leader. <A> Hierarchies have some bad sides, but they also have advantages. <S> For example: they dramatically reduce the coordination effort and potential for conflicts. <S> Even if the team is managed quite democratically, it's normally a good idea to have someone who takes the final decision in <S> case discussions stalemate they create clear responsibilities; if there's a failure it's normally evident who's to blame. <S> Some people would argue that's actually problematic about hierarchies, but I don't think so. <S> Yes, fingerpointing can be a problem. <S> But lack of accountability creates toxic environments. <S> It's sometimes enough to have one colleague who fails to deliver/ behaves uncooperatively for the atmosphere to sour. <S> There's simply no way to sanction uncooperative behavior. <S> I've worked in an organization proud of no having hierarchies. <S> This organization wrote "equality" and "democracy" into its program. <S> It was the most toxic place I've ever worked in. <S> This meant there were plenty of conflicts and politics taking place before votings (we took all main decisions by voting). <S> Also, there was no sense of continuity or accountability. <S> Disparate decisions were voted for, depending on how the power structure looked like on the day of voting. <S> After that, I always had bosses: some good bosses and some bad ones. <S> But I would never accept a job in an organization without hierarchies again. <S> An important point is that in some organizations there are structures of reporting although there are no formal chains of command and leaders. <S> For example, I know organizations in which you always report to your project manager on the project you currently work on. <S> Although officially you don't have a leader, you actually do. <S> This is a completely different situation to the one I describe above of course. <A> I work for a large IT-company. <S> Just from my own experience. <S> This kind of setting has dragged our team of three senior developers into a situation where one has quit the company and I was prevented from quitting by a promotion and a significant salary increase. <S> It simply did not work for us and the management <S> was blind to it for 2 straight years until the first one quit. <S> To make matters worse, it turned out that our manager has long time ago, chosen the lead secretly, without informing the other two of us. <A> Anecdotally speaking, this happened to me and the result was chaos. <S> Our manager told us to self-organize, but as there was no natural way to split the work into chunks of equal value/opportunity for career development, competition ensued. <S> There is just no incentive to give in.
| Yes, decisions were taken "democratically". Have a meeting in which you lay out the concerns, talk about whether or not you want to have someone take a leadership role, step through each of the concerns, and come up with agreed-upon group answers. If some work is more valuable than other, running by consensus decision without a manager will not work. Specifically, in your case, I think it's possible to get away with not having a single leader if you and your colleagues can decide how to classify parts of the work and agree to who owns each part.
|
Must I explain the reason for a gap in my employment history on the resume itself or is the cover letter sufficient? My employer granted me a one-year sabbatical in 2016. As a result, my resume currently looks like this: Foo Widget Corp , Senior Engineer, January 2014 -- February 2016, February 2017 -- Present In my cover letter, I explain that I took a year's sabbatical and spent it backpacking across three continents. I'm also quite happy to talk about it in interviews because it was a great experience and I learned a lot. Someone recently suggested to me that I might want to include a brief explanation on my resume itself for the gap, since "nobody reads cover letters." While I fully accept that nobody reads the letter -- I've been involved in hiring senior engineers at Foo Corp the entire time I was there, and I've never seen a cover letter -- I don't think that it's necessary to include in the resume itself because it detracts from all the other things I'm trying to say about my experience in the position (responsibilities, accomplishments, etc.) The other questions I've found about "explaining away" an employment gap all seem to be about gaps for negative reasons. Others, like this one talk about using the cover letter to excuse a gap pre-emptively. However I already am using the cover letter to explain that this was a sabbatical, and I did certain cool things which gave me certain cool skills/taught me useful things that I've applied upon my return; my concern is about putting something in the resume itself. This question indicates I should be attempting to explain somewhere but doesn't clarify if the cover letter is sufficient. Should I indicate that my employment gap was due to a sabbatical granted by my employer on the resume itself, or is it sufficient to mention it in the cover letter and interview? If it matters, my field is software engineering (the title is actually 'senior software engineer', not just senior engineer) and the country is the United States. <Q> If you were on sabbatical, it is probably reasonable to just list January 2014 <S> - Present on your resume. <S> You were still an employee <S> so you don't really have a gap. <S> If you need to include the gap for some reason, it's unlikely that you'd need to explain it anywhere. <S> Unless you had a really spotty work history prior to this job, it's pretty unlikely that anyone is going to care about a 1 year gap that happened 2 years ago. <S> Particularly when you went back to the prior company and stayed there for 2 years. <S> And the concerns about a gap generally go away pretty quickly once you've started working again. <A> Based on the assumption that your sabbatical involved an agreement with your employer that you would return to work in a year's time and that they would have the same (or similar) job available for you, I agree with Justin Cave's answer - you don't need to list the gap on the resume, as you were an employee of the organization, just on an extended leave of absence. <S> For example: Foo Widget Corp, Senior Engineer, February 2017 -- PresentSabbatical year, February 2016 -- February 2017Foo Widget Corp, Senior Engineer, January 2014 -- February 2016 <A> If nobody reads cover letters, and you yourself have never seen a cover letter, and you don't expect potential employers to read your cover letter, and you don't include the gap in your resume, then how do you expect potential employers to understand why there was a gap? <S> Your logic is a little faulty. <S> How does including the gap distract from other things in your resume? <S> If nothing else, excluding the gap would actually create a distraction. <S> "Why is there a gap?" <S> As for the gap itself, why would you explain it in any other way <S> then what it was? <S> You took a sabbatical. <S> Why say anything else? <S> Why try to explain it any more than that? <S> None of this is complex or difficult. <S> Put the gap in your resume. <S> Explain it exactly as it was. <S> Be frank, honest, and straight-forward. <S> Why do people have such difficulty with this stuff?
| That being said, if you need to list it, just list it as a sabbatical. A year isn't generally a large enough gap to warrant an explanation. If it comes up in an interview, you can explain what you did ... and how it helped you in a way that will help the prospective employer.
|
Is it unprofessional to resign again after accepting a counter-offer? 3 months ago I resigned from my current position because I got a better package at a similar-level organization. By similar-level organization, I mean that they have around the same revenue, employees, and project technology as my previous organization. My employer wanted to retain me and offered to match the package I was getting at the other organization, and I accepted it and stayed with the same employer and rejected the offer from the new employer. In the matching offer, we have agreed to a commitment of 1 year of engagement with my current organization, otherwise the raise will be rolled back and I need to give back the difference when I leave. Now, I am being offered an even better package than I got three months ago from a new third organization, that is very broad is a multinational company. I have resigned again based on this offer. Now, as per the agreement, I need to return the pay difference for what I got these past three months. I am agreeing to give back this difference because it will be recovered from the new employer after a few months. Now, please let me know, is this an unprofessional way to resign again from my current employer? <Q> Please let me know is this a unprofessional way to resign again from my current employer? <S> No, not if you fulfill the leaving "criterion" you agreed upon. <S> To justify, it will be problematic both for you and your employer to stay in a good working relationship if you have a feeling you are being underpaid and have a better chance elsewhere. <S> Better to part of good terms. <S> No one wants to be in a losing relationship. <A> Obviously the company even expected it to some degree, as they've asked for the clause to hand back part of your payment in such a case (personally, I'd find that asking for such a clause is a grounds to look for other work in the first place as it shows there is no mutual trust in wanting to work together). <S> However, it likely will burn some bridges with your old company with respect to returning short to mid-term at least. <A> Not unprofessional to leave for better payment, specially if you've been only for a short period in a company. <S> As @FrankHopkins mentioned, it does burn a few bridges. <S> Keep in mind however, that if you hop between jobs too often you might have little to speak about each of them, and you will not have completed meaningful projects and have deliveries of your own. <S> An experienced employee with no deliveries is a big red flag. <S> Another red flag is the possibility that you switch jobs too often because you've caused problems in every place you've been. <S> Keep in mind that for now you are OK, but those red flags should start becoming a concern for you. <A> It's not unprofessional in the sense that you're honoring the contract. <S> It might be seen as unprofessional from the perspective that other employers may see you as being indecisive, fickle, unreliable, and professionally immature for making these moves in such a short period of time. <A> You don’t really care if it’s professional or unprofessional. <S> What you want to know is whether it will impact your career negatively. <S> Well, there’s a company that won’t take you back. <S> There will be a small number of employees who will remember you. <S> There’s a second company slightly less annoyed. <S> It’s up to you to decide how likely it will affect your career, and if a better job is worth it.
| It is not unprofessional , as it is acting as per contract.
|
Recruiter I'm already working with invites me out to lunch. Why? I'm looking for a job, and this recruiter that I've already applied through sent me an email that effectively said: Sorry I don't have any new information for you. Let me take you out to lunch to make up for the wait. Is this common? Realistically, a simple lunch isn't going to make me wait on this job if they take too long, so I don't understand the invitation. Should I be anticipating any ulterior motives? <Q> Recruiters rely heavily on their connections. <S> It might not make sense to lunch someone with no update in a straightforward pragmatic sense, but from a networking perspective it is important. <S> They probably don't want to lose you as a potential client and are looking to reassure you that they are still working for you. <S> Not only that but some time down the road if you are in a position to help them you might do so because you think favorably of them. <A> Taking people out to lunch is a common professional-level behavior, especially for anyone involved in something in or adjacent to sales and service. <S> Its called relationship building, I think is the most popular current term. <S> It is also generally something someone in such a professional position can expense. <S> Free lunch for you, and also free lunch for them because they can expense the whole thing as a business lunch. <S> And if it helps them develop a relationship in a way that is profitable for them, double-bonus. <S> But if not - again, free lunch for them, too. <S> If you don't want to go, you are not obligated and can politely decline if you like. <S> Its just a chance to chat and, well, eat. <S> It should go without saying you'd still need to treat is as a business function, dress appropriately, etc. <S> - just because its a casual lunch doesn't mean it isn't a form of interview on its own. <A> It's pretty straightforward, <S> there's nothing particularly malicious going on. <S> Enjoy your free lunch!
| But if you are open to going it generally isn't something terribly weird in my experience, and you should get use to business lunches if it isn't something you've done before. They want to maintain a good relationship with you so that you will keep using their services.
|
How to go through resigning when I'm the only developer in the company? I've been with this company for 2 years now and I'm the only developer. In that 2 years I've developed 1 web application and 1 mobile app. Now I am being given new task but I'm already planning to resign once I get a job offer. This was my first job as a fresh graduate and I'm really thankful for the opportunity they gave me so I don't want to burn any bridges. My questions is: Should I keep accepting this tasks? Should I actually wait for a job offer to file my resignation? Is there anything I can do to help them with the applications before I leave? <Q> Your situation is exactly like every other person wanting to change companies. <S> There is no benefit for you to tell them before you have to. <S> My questions is: <S> Should I keep accepting this tasks? <S> Should I actually wait for a job offer to file my resignation? <S> Is there anything I can do to help them with the applications before I leave? <S> Yes, keep accepting tasks. <S> It could be months before you are ready to start the new job. <S> So trying to duck tasks won't work forever. <S> Don't resign any earlier than that. <S> Pick your resignation date based on your required notice period, and the negotiated start date. <S> Try to leave as much documentation and clean code as you can. <S> It is rare that the leaving employee trains their replacement unless they replace from within or the company has a very quick hiring cycle. <S> You may end up doing a data dump with a non-programmer. <S> Leaving this way reduces the likelihood of burned bridges. <S> There is no way to 100% avoid burning bridges, some companies or managers are insulted by anybody leaving. <S> In those cases letting them know months in advance just makes those last weeks super stressful. <A> Before you leave, try to convert the Google sheets backend to an actual database. <S> This will makes things smoother. <A> Just don't up and put in your 2 weeks. <S> Go in and have a discussion with your manager. <S> Talk about your goals and why you are interested in moving on. <S> In a friendly way discuss your perspective. <S> You will be surprised that maybe your current employer will even want to keep you there and promote you for it. <S> Or even help you on your next path. <S> The best thing you can do is say that you're willing to help them with the transition while they find someone else as well. <S> If you do these things the relationship will be healthy as you move on. <S> You never know when you might need each other again!
| Don't resign until you have returned to the new employer the signed offer letter with no contingencies. The best way not to burn a bridge is the way you do it.
|
How to communicate a roadblock that has no solution until the breaking change is fixed? I believe based on my online investigation for well over an hour, looking at Github issues that there is a breaking change that is keeping a project from moving forward. I am still very much a greenhorn in "managing expectations", whatever that means and so I need some pointers on how to communicate a roadblock that has no solution until a fix has been produced by the team that maintains the technology utilized to move the project forward? Should we reach out to the team and inquire about when a fix can be expected and communicate that up the chain and hope it is enough? <Q> Communicate your steps forward Just pointing to a different team and then twiddle your thumbs until it's fixed isn't very professional, and not something management looks forward to. <S> It means they will have to step in to get things moving again. <S> Decide, with your team, how you are going to move forward. <S> Can you rollback to a previous version? <S> Can you code around the issue? <S> Can you apply a (temporary) patch? <S> Did you communicate the problems with the other team? <S> What was there response? <S> Those are the things management is interested in. <S> They vastly prefer a team which can solve roadblocks -- they want to know about the roadblocks but they rather not have to step in. <A> Since you are responsible for the completion of the project you need to keep communication flowing on issues that impact on it. <S> Keep your research to yourself for now (unless you're a qualified expert with in depth knowledge of the problem) and ask for a status report on the block. <S> If you don't see what you need, then dig deeper. <S> But remember that these are the techs on the ground, they should already know what the problem is and be working towards a resolution. <S> You only step in if communications are failing and things are not getting done, until then you trust your people while keeping an eye on them. <S> Don't be shy to follow up if you're not getting satisfactory replies. <A> First, try to create the best compact but clear, factual rather than blame explanation of the issue you can, and ideally include a compact code fragment which demonstrates the issue. <S> Writing good bug reports is a skill, but better reports get much better response. <S> Depending on who you report to, you may also need to create a second explanation of the issue in more everyday, less technical language. <S> Then, while waiting for response, if this has priority over anything else you could be working on, consider what you can do to help resolve the problem. <S> Can you roll back your version of the other code to a previous version before the breaking change? <S> Or is the change too integral to anything else you might do for any progress made without it to be ultimately useful? <S> Can you get a formal or informal meeting with those from the other team to discuss the issue? <S> Or it is a case where your supervisor will have to make a request through their supervisor? <S> Even walking over and spending a minute or two trying to get a sense of how they feel about the issue (do they agree there even is an issue?) <S> could inform your course of action. <S> Can you craft a workaround in your code, ideally demarcated by conditional compilation or <S> at least good comments? <S> Can you work through the other code and perhaps devise a fix? <S> Even if you aren't able to create one they could actually merge, a crude patch can still show what needs to be done in a way that lets the code owners focus effort on accomplishing that in the most fitting way. <S> Make sure anything you do submit to them is a clean and quiet diff which only touches what you actually need to change. <S> If this is going to be of unworkable cost, you'll need to present good strategic arguments to your supervisor which they can present to the other team's leader and potentially their mutual supervisor.
| Sometimes a good analogy can help communicate the nature of the issue in a way that your audience can personally identify with. If the change is inline with the strategic direction of your organization, be open to the idea that they may expect you to adapt to it.
|
How do you go about becoming a carpenter's apprentice? How do you go about becoming a carpenter's apprentice? Do you have to go through a certain program, or do you find someone on a job site who is offering the position, or is there another way? Although I have seen people offer apprenticeships on job sites, none of them mention class hours, which, as I have read, is necessary for a carpenter's apprentice to take. Thank you. <Q> The usual way unless you're in the worst of the third World is to go to a technical institute that teaches the trades, then from there start working for a tradesman. <S> So a large portion of your apprenticeship is basically done in the workshops. <S> Carpentry is a pretty big field, most will eventually specialise depending on what is available in their area, so you have joiners, turners, builders etc,. <S> But the workshops will cover most things. <A> In most industrialised countries an apprenticeship in the trades, such as carpentry, do not work like they did in medieval times. <S> It almost certainly involves classes and exams. <S> There will be practical experience but it doesn't usually involve just one 'master' who teaches the apprentice everything they know. <S> They will explain everything that you need to become a professional carpenter. <S> Often they will arrange practical experience for you. <S> You don't need to find a 'master' to apprentice with yourself. <S> In a developing country none of the above will probably apply. <A> Many places offer apprenticeships and once you get accepted the practical training is mostly at work and the theoretical training that runs in parallel is mostly at college. <S> This does depend on the country, which several have asked you to specify... <S> The theoretical traing can be one day a week at college or two or two weeks at work then one week at college - especially around exam time... <S> Also possible are classes in the evenings after work has finished. <S> So, day release, block release <S> , evening classes are used - you may find some or all are used. <S> Finding an apprenticeship, well any job search scheme or even visiting the companies that are relevant. <S> Best of luck finding one.
| If you want to be a carpenter, find a college offering a certified/licensed carpentry course.
|
Is it appropriate for managers to emphasize that tasks cannot be completed after multiple employees have left team? In our team one person was let-off last year. That person wasn't replaced and the work down was absorbed by the remaining team members. It got hectic. Then there was another team that was working on X. Someone in the higher-up decided to move that team to project Y and our team was assigned X as an additional task. So that got added to our plates without any increase in resources. This added to the stress but after a few months we cut down on a lot of older tasks and were able to deal with this. In the last 5 months, 2 employees have left the organization, both from our team. They still haven't been replaced. However, their work is being absorbed by the remaining team members. Is it appropriate for managers to ask for more resources to replace the ones that resigned/were let-off? If yes, then why doesn't anyone ever do it? I have more than a decade of experience in software. I've not seen a single instance of them replacing people who left the company + team. Is this normal? Also, if yes, then is it appropriate for managers to call attention to the fact that "Tasks that cannot be completed until we get more resources for the team" to the higher management? If this is possible then I could escalate a couple of tasks as things that cannot be completed. <Q> Is it appropriate for managers to ask for more resources to replace the ones that resigned/were let-off? <S> Yes. <S> If yes, then why doesn't anyone ever do it? <S> I have more than a decade of experience in software. <S> I've not seen a single instance of them replacing people who left the company + team. <S> Is this normal? <S> Normally, the reason for this is the available funding. <S> Most "good" companies will replace staff ASAP as they know that it will eventually lead to other staff leaving if roles are not filled. <S> Another thing is higher ups might not be aware. <S> This could an issue you have to uptake with your manager. <S> Also, if yes, then is it appropriate for managers to showcase "Tasks that cannot be completed until we get more resources for the team" to the higher management? <S> If this is possible then I could escalate a couple of tasks as things that cannot be completed. <S> But they are being completed. <S> At the cost of unhappy employees and at a much slower rate. <S> You have to find a way to get them done with what you're given. <S> Your manager may be able to put in a case to get more employees but can never say the work won't be done because X and Y. <A> 1) It is appropriate for managers to ask for more resources. <S> 2) People do do it, this is part of a managers role. <S> 3) <S> It's quite normal to escalate if it cannot be handled at one level. <S> This provides a paper trail to cover the manager if things don't work out. <S> It also highlights the problem and solution to people who can do something about it. <A> Is it appropriate for managers to ask for more resources to replace the ones that resigned/were let-off? <S> It is the role of a manager to ensure they have the necessary resources to meet their targets while minimising the cost to the business. <S> That doesn't mean automatically replacing people who leave, if there is not enough work for the team. <S> If yes, then why doesn't anyone ever do it? <S> These discussions will usually be held in private between managers and directors (or whatever the next layer of management is called). <S> The director will need to evaluate whether the cost the manager is asking for will bring sufficient benefit to the business. <S> Also, if yes, then is it appropriate for managers to call attention to the fact that "Tasks that cannot be completed until we get more resources for the team" to the higher management? <S> Absolutely. <S> A manager should be having periodic reviews of project progress with the director, highlighting what is being delivered and what are the risks to the business (which includes what tasks are not being done with the current team). <S> If this is possible then I could escalate a couple of tasks as things that cannot be completed. <S> You should also be in regular communication with your manager, discussing the work that you are involved in and anything that is preventing you from completing your assigned work. <S> Your manager should want to know when you expect your tasks to be completed. <S> You can say "I estimate ticket 1 at two weeks work, and ticket 2 at three weeks work. <S> I have not estimated ticket 3 as I do not expect to be starting it this month". <S> You can then forget about ticket 3. <S> If your manager needs it to be delivered sooner, then they are responsible for finding a way of making that happen. <S> That might asking you to prioritise it above ticket 1 or assigning it to another team member. <S> If after that they ask you to deliver all three tickets in two weeks, you can say "I don't believe that will be possible, but I will do my best, starting with ticket 1".
| As a manager you can never say "this will not be done". Yes, if a project hits a block then it's necessary to identify the reasons why and rectify them with whatever means are available.
|
Should I accept more responsibility when being granted a raise I asked because I felt underpaid? 7 months ago I landed a job as a web developer for a specific technology, it payed a little bit under the market average for the position. When I started in the new place I noticed the methodologies and technologies they were using were quite outdated and the company would greatly benefit from an improvement. After a few meetings I managed to convince my boss of that. From then on I've been both mentoring the team on methodologies and technologies as well as doing what I was initially hired for (developing/maintaining a company product). At one point I talked to my manager to explain how I provided a lot more value than what was expected from me and I asked for a raise. He agreed with me that I was doing a great job and told me he was happy to go further with it. He is now offering me a little less than what I asked for and demanding that I should do some extra work to earn the raise. This work is non tech related, but rather management chores like review peer timesheets and whatnot. I don't mind doing these chores, I just feel that in this scenario I should ask for more than what I initially asked, since this chores weren't on the initial equation. What should I do? <Q> I believe, you should re-negotiate. <S> Try to be firm and clear on your statement and position. <S> You asked a raise based on your "current" responsibilities. <S> If you have to take up extra responsibilities which are not part of the current role, for being paid extra, after some time, you'll again feel you're underpaid for that updated role / responsibilities, is not it? <A> "This work is non tech related, but rather management chores like review peer timesheets and whatnot." <S> Do any of these additional responsibilities bring you closer to a management role or give you credible management experience? <S> Depending on the nature of the work involved you might be being offered career progression in addition to the raise. <S> (or you might be getting lumbered with pointless drudgery) <A> Should I accept more responsibility when being granted a raise I asked because I felt underpaid? <S> Definately no. <S> You have already accepted more responsibility in the mentoring role that was added to your initial responsibilities and your salary was never adjusted for these added responsibilities. <S> Now that you have asked your boss for X amount to compensate you for the added responsibilities, not only does he want to give you less than what you're asking for <S> but he wants you to take on even more responsibilities thus further devaluing the raise that you have asked for. <S> Clearly this company either takes advantage of their employees or are generally clueless about proper compensation for their employees. <S> Do not accept more responsibilities for less pay, and you may want to consider other companies that properly pay their employees.
| Make it clear - you wanted a raise for based on your current role, if there is a change in the role and expectations out of you, the paycheck also needs to be revised again accordingly.
|
Working till 3AM for a deadline; I want to take next day off as leave, but manager insists I take sick day I'm in the UK, I requested a day of annual leave for the day after a deadline (~3 weeks time) which will result in an estimated 4AM finish for me (could be earlier or later, so 2AM-5AM). I will be the only person carrying out this task at this time. I am not needed in the office after finishing that task, as we have other people who are already fully briefed, trained and ready to take over with any 'support' needs after the deadline. So, I put in a request to take the next day as annual leave from my holiday entitlement. So I can sleep! My boss has said that this needs to be recorded as "sick" leave as I have said in advance that I'd be unfit for work that day (who wouldn't be, after working until 3-4AM to start again for a normal 9-5!) If recorded as sick leave it could be counted against me in the future for disciplinary actions, taken into account in layoffs (redundancies), etc. We also use the "Bradford factor" which considers the number of times taken off "sick" already to determine how severe the current situation is. I won't be "sick"! I will be recovering from 4AM demands of the job - but I guess they need to classify it somehow. What can I say to my boss and HR to get them to record this as paid holiday rather than sick? ETA: what have I tried so far: I've spoken to my boss requesting the day off, and he consulted HR and came back with the "he's indicated he will be unfit for work on [specific date] so we have to record it as sick". Not sure if relevant but our HR is in my view inept, untrained and only has the HR position due to politics and doesn't have any actual HR training. <Q> It is usual for them to adjust your hours before and after this time, you should not need to take it as either holiday or sick time. <S> Many companies would also pay a higher rate for work performed out of hours. <S> I would approach your boss and ask to review the hours he would like you to work around this release. <S> It may be a miscommunication, or he may not have realised what he is asking of you. <S> It is important that you are well rested during the deployment, so it is not in the company's interests for you to be doing that at the end of a 20 hour shift. <S> A standard shift is 8 hours plus a meal break. <S> I would propose that you arrive at the office around 3pm, so you can have any necessary handover from the staff who are working normal office hours. <S> You will then have a long period of downtime from say 6pm - midnight. <S> Then you will be looking out for the go ahead and the second half of your shift. <S> Alternatively, propose that you work the morning as normal, then return home at lunchtime and sleep in the afternoon. <S> Return to the office around midnight for the release, then return home for more sleep and maybe work from home the following afternoon. <S> You will need to work out a pattern that makes most sense to you and your business. <S> Remember to factor in meals, commuting and sleep. <A> According to my google-fu, workers in the UK are entitled to 11 hours between shifts in a 24 hour period: https://smallbusiness.co.uk/what-is-the-legal-number-of-hours-employees-can-have-between-shifts-23066/ <S> So you could bring that up, particularly if you are being requested to put in this overtime. <A> So you are offering to work well over your requirement, not ask for a day in lieu but lose a day of your annual paid leave, but they want you to take a hit on your Bradford Factor numbers? <S> You are making two sacrifices to help the company and they are penalising you for that. <S> Go to your manager, point out that your goodwill will cause you to lose a night of your personal life and a day of your holiday allocation. <S> The sickness at issue is something they will be the direct cause of. <S> They are going to deliberately inflict this unfitness to work, you are prepared to accept that, but the company's response is a punishment. <S> The Bradford Factor is usually used where an organisation expects to have high levels of absenteeism and wants to reduce them by punishing or firing staff. <S> They (often erroneously) assume they can make up the numbers by recruiting new people. <S> The response of staff is often to unionise and the give-and-take and goodwill that exists between employer and employee vanishes - cf the Prison Service in the UK. <A> Consult your contract <S> I'm no lawyer, so I can't give you a legal position. <S> Contracts for things like software development usually specify something like 'may be required to work additional hours to meet the demands of the business'. <S> Sometimes they also specify that you get time off in lieu or overtime payment, sometimes they just grant the employer license to make demands of you. <S> Don't give them a stick to beat you <S> You are saying you won't be productive and won't come in, but that puts the burden on you to justify why. <S> A sensible manager should tell you not to worry, but if your manager is not sensible you may need to just turn up and be tired. <S> Why are you even doing this? <S> I think some of this comes down to why you are going to be working so late (or why you have done so previously) <S> - are these demands of the business, or have you broken something you need to fix? <S> If this is being inflicted on you by the way they do business or poor project management, then you need to be very clear on whether you have to do it, whether this is voluntary or not. <S> I would expect voluntary additional work to get you few favours in terms of taking time off, even if it's helpful to the business. <S> Involuntary (i.e. you are not given a choice) <S> additional work should attract some sort of compensation in the contract. <S> As a result, you might consider not offering to do the work voluntarily, and thus make them decide whether the cost to them is worth making you do it. <S> It's easy to give your time away Bosses like that. <S> Bad bosses love it. <S> Don't make yourself the solution to problems of management.
| You are employed to work standard office hours, but your company has asked you to work out of hours to meet their needs. Anyone is more likely to make mistakes when they are tired. Tell your manager you don't want to take a sick day, so you will come in as usual. Work together as a team to come up with a solution that meets everyone's needs.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.