Changing Jobs Often....

[tvguy]

I've done a ton of interviewing and hiring over the years, and I can tell you one of the biggest red flags when I look at a resume is frequent job hopping. I can understand having a few job that didn't last long, but when it's a pattern, that's a big concern when I consider hiring that person..

If you were recruiting in my industry, you would be looking to hire that person. Average tenure in my industry is 2 years. They don't want employees to ever get beyond the minimum vacation time, or ever be fully vested in the 401k.
They even offered everyone with more than 15 years a buy out last year.

 

[PlainJane]

I know a woman who made it to a position in her industry that normally required a master's or doctorate degree, and you would have had a hard time securing it even with those. She has an associates degree. She did it by being better at each step of the ladder than everyone else and switching jobs frequently. Now that she's almost at the very top of her field she's stayed at the same company for a few years.

A lot of companies are not paying enough to start with and aren't offering promotions or raises. Often you are required to go out and get another offer and bring it back to your manager to be offered a raise or promotion. It's a vicious game.

I can see multiple lateral moves as worrisome. As far as someone using the company as a "stepping stone" as Gumbo4x4 mentioned, sometimes you can't hire the best candidate. If you know the person is overqualified or you can see a pattern of them constantly improving upon their skills and you have nowhere for them to grow in your company, do not expect that they will hangout for years out of company loyalty.

 

[tvguy]

I know a woman who made it to a position in her industry that normally required a master's or doctorate degree, and you would have had a hard time securing it even with those. She has an associates degree. She did it by being better at each step of the ladder than everyone else and switching jobs frequently. Now that she's almost at the very top of her field she's stayed at the same company for a few years.

A lot of companies are not paying enough to start with and aren't offering promotions or raises. Often you are required to go out and get another offer and bring it back to your manager to be offered a raise or promotion. It's a vicious game.

I can see multiple lateral moves as worrisome. As far as someone using the company as a "stepping stone" as Gumbo4x4 mentioned, sometimes you can't hire the best candidate. If you know the person is overqualified or you can see a pattern of them constantly improving upon their skills and you have nowhere for them to grow in your company, do not expect that they will hangout for years out of company loyalty.

I am also seeing a lot of hoping from job to job from those who want to be managers. Used to be you worked your way up in a company, and after 30 years you were a manager. Now I see folks with less than 10 years total experience managing departments where most of the employees have 20 years experience.

 

[Klayfish]

If you were recruiting in my industry, you would be looking to hire that person. Average tenure in my industry is 2 years. They don't want employees to ever get beyond the minimum vacation time, or ever be fully vested in the 401k.
They even offered everyone with more than 15 years a buy out last year.

I don't know what industry you're in, but if that's the case I'd argue that yours is an extreme exception. Don't know a ton of industries that seek out people who are going to leave them after 18-24 months, especially because I'd have to believe the company has to invest money and time to train the person and all the other things that come with new hires.

In the majority of fields, I'd bet that job stability is a sought after quality. When I'm interviewing, one of the questions I always ask is "Why do you want to leave your current position?" If I see some job hopping, I'm going to ask about it. If they don't have a really good answer, their chances of getting hired are pretty slim.

I don't see anything wrong with someone that has 10 years experience being a manager. Obviously, that can depend on the field, but generally speaking, I don't see it as an issue. I'm in leadership in my field, and I didn't have 10 years experience when I got that role. I would see it as a problem if people job hopped every 18 months to get there...but if they did that, I don't know they'd get much of a shot at leadership anyway.

 

[Colleen27]

It's not just trades. I'm a bookkeeper. Bookkeepers frequently have more than one job at once and unless you work in an extremely large company there is no ladder up. And most companies don't want to pay you more even if you've been there years and you know they can afford it.

True enough. Plenty of professions don't have a logical "up" other than by moving to larger companies or bigger markets. I'll be on that trajectory myself if I return to work full time. The places I'm applying now are small local weeklies, certainly not "career" positions, and the pay is pathetic. They're just a stepping stone to bigger, higher paying publications.

 

[FlightlessDuck]

Forbes had an article back in July about this:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kaytiez...top-apologizing-for-job-hopping/#157635a5697d

 

[FlightlessDuck]

True enough. Plenty of professions don't have a logical "up" other than by moving to larger companies or bigger markets.

And there are some careers where the ladder leads to management, which isn't the same job. For example, a programmer likes to program, not do performance reviews and sit in meetings.

 

[aprilchem]

This question really depends on what job you have. In my profession people tend to have one job for their entire career, but in my DH's profession it wouldn't be uncommon to switch jobs every 2 or 3 years. He's had the same job for 15 years and that's VERY unusual, but he's only done it because the company has done lots of nice things for him to entice him to stay.

 

[VACamm]

I think job hopping every 2 years is definitely a red flag too. Having a good work history is so important when I'm interviewing and reviewing resumes. If there is a classic 'job hopper' type history on a resume, unfortunately I will usually pass on that applicant.

 

[sam_gordon]

If you were recruiting in my industry, you would be looking to hire that person. Average tenure in my industry is 2 years. They don't want employees to ever get beyond the minimum vacation time, or ever be fully vested in the 401k.
They even offered everyone with more than 15 years a buy out last year.

That might be the case at your employer, but not necessarily in your industry.

 

[PlainJane]

I am also seeing a lot of hoping from job to job from those who want to be managers. Used to be you worked your way up in a company, and after 30 years you were a manager. Now I see folks with less than 10 years total experience managing departments where most of the employees have 20 years experience.

When you see that your company is hiring from the outside to fill management positions instead of rewarding its own employees, it does not cultivate company loyalty. Some companies create paths of growth for their employees, those companies are way more likely to see lifers. No one should be made to feel like they're a bad egg because they weren't willing to stick around at the same company for decades with barely a raise even though they improved their skills, education, etc. (not that that's what you are saying).

 

[pryncess527]

I don't think it is always suspect.

One of my friends changes jobs very often. She freely admits she does not like what she does, but it pays well. She always has a better paying job with a new company before she quits, and she's very good at what she does. Changing jobs often does not seem to bother her, or harm her. Nor do I think poorly of her for it -- we joke about how she's the master of getting jobs and I went to her for resume/cover letter advice when we moved

I absolutely expect fulfillment in my job. And I have it -- I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation.

 

[tvguy]

That might be the case at your employer, but not necessarily in your industry.

No, industry wide. It has been that way for 40 years. It wasn't that way in this market until recently. That's why the 2 year contract is the norm

 

[mi*vida*loca]

I think hopping after a few years is necessary in today's job market (at least what I've seen of it). My husband worked for the state of Florida for nearly 10 years. He hopped jobs every 2 to 3 years because there were no raises and no cost of living increases, the only way to make more money, unfortunately, was to take another job.

This is what I've done but within my own company. About every 3 years I would switch departments to advance in positions and pay. It hasn't been an issue. The department I'm in now has plenty of room for growth so I'm sticking around. I've been speaking with the director about a promotion which includes a pay raise.

I also expect fulfillment from my job. I spend 40 hours a week here. It has to count for something.

 

[soccerdad72]

As others have said, it depends on industries and other situations. My recent new hire had a fair amount of companies on her resume, but she had some bad luck in her career of ending up at companies that kept getting bought up. Internal "job hopping", I would say, is a good thing, especially if it's either for promotions or cross-functional job skills.

As far as "fulfillment", it depends on the individual's view of what job fulfillment is. Not to pick on millennials, but more often, you hear about younger people complaining about fulfillment, but their expectations are unrealistic or unreasonable, like being promoted every other year or large bumps in pay when the industry as a whole is stagnate. Or, in an extreme example, my wife had a reasonably new staff accountant asking for a flex work schedule so she would have time during the day to be home to train her puppy.

 

[sam_gordon]

No, industry wide. It has been that way for 40 years. It wasn't that way in this market until recently. That's why the 2 year contract is the norm

So no one in your industry stays for longer than 2 years? Sorry, BS. While a 2 year contract is "standard", I don't think it has anything to do with minimum vacation time or 401k.

 

[tvguy]

So no one in your industry stays for longer than 2 years? Sorry, BS. While a 2 year contract is "standard", I don't think it has anything to do with minimum vacation time or 401k.

I respectfully disagree after 42 years in the business. No, I did not say everyone, an average.

 

[sam_gordon]

I respectfully disagree after 42 years in the business. No, I did not say everyone, an average.

So you think "the average" employee contract is only two years because the company doesn't want to give out vacation time or let someone vest in the 401k? That's what you claimed...

If you were recruiting in my industry, you would be looking to hire that person. Average tenure in my industry is 2 years. They don't want employees to ever get beyond the minimum vacation time, or ever be fully vested in the 401k.
They even offered everyone with more than 15 years a buy out last year.

I think it's more likely 2 years is a good length of time to see if they are a good fit in the position (on both sides, employer and employee). Especially in smaller markets, 2 years gives someone experience at their job and (hopefully) the capability to move on.

I'm not denying that 2 year contracts are the norm, I just disagree with the reason for that term.

 

[gotomu212]

I think age has a lot to do with it. I work with a lot of younger people and they graduated into horrible labor markets. Most of them had to take lower positions than they were qualified for just to start getting some experience and then hop to better positions up the ladder.

I've been with the same place for 16 years but I've held 9 different jobs there. Our company considers your ability to cross train and quickly synthesize information from one position to the next as a major selling point for an employee and once someone has sat at the same position for 3-4 years they're considered stale and can unfortunately get pigeon holed.

 

[tasha99]

I don't like working regular jobs, and have found 13 week contracts to be a much better fit. Or on call work. So my work history is full of short gigs.

My SO changes every 3-5 years. He feels that skills become too niche or stale doing the same job for too long.