If A Hiring Mgr Wants Someone With Experience, But Not A Job Hopper....

[Yavin4]

then by definition, aren't they hiring a job hopper? Since they're requiring that the candidate should be currently working.

BTW, when I was a supervisor and was hiring, I never cared if the candidate was a job hopper or had gaps in their resume. I wanted someone that could actually DO what I asked them and hired them to DO without me taking the time to train them. I concentrated on hiring people that could actually DO the job. Also, I know several people who never moved, never job hopped, and have no gaps, but they're worthless. Completely worthless.

People change jobs because they work for shitty companies, and if it is okay for companies to lay off people when times are tough, why is it bad for people to take advantage of the job market when things are going well?

[surrealAmerican]

1. They just want someone who'll be totally devoted to their company.

That way they can treat the person like dirt.

[Yavin4]

2. But, Shouldn't The Most Important Thing Be That They Can Do The Job?

So, you treat them like dirt. That won't get the project done.

[Orsino]

10. ...but willing to ditch that in a heartbeat for a new offer. n/t

[hippywife]

3. It just depends on the particular job.

And how often they have hopped and why. It costs a lot of money to bring on a new hire. They want to make sure they aren't spending that money needlessly on someone who will not stay.

[Yavin4]

6. In My Field, Job Hopping Is Common

Sometimes, it's the only way to get promoted and/or get raises. I worked as a staffer for law firms, and the culuture of the firms is to discourage people from being there for long periods of time. They want high turnover of support staff.

My first job in this field paid me $17K a year in 1986. Should I have stayed there?

[quakerboy]

4. And it depends on what they are looking for.

I passed over a few people I thought could probably handle the job, occasionally for someone who I would have to give more training, but who I thought would stick with us a bit longer. I have also hired people who told me they were out in a year, when that would work for what needed done.

[Yavin4]

5. I've Worked In Pressurized, Short-Staffed Environments

I did not have the time to stop and train someone, but I did anyway because I had to. This cost me precious time, and it hurt the other aspects of my job.

I respect companies, that have low turn over rates, that only want "stable" employees. Just don't be inconsistent. If your company lays off people every quarter, then requiring "stable" employment is a double standard.

[quakerboy]

7. I am with you on that

I have hired people that were replacing someone getting fired. But always for cause, no layoffs. I have been lucky enough that Ive never had to work for a shrinking/stagnating company.

[Yavin4]

8. I Work for Law Firms and They've Been Laying Off Like Crazy

Partners, associates, and staff. Some even try to hide layoffs through bullshit review processes.

In my last full time position, the entire staff (of eight people in different cities) that I started with in 2005 was completely turned over by mid 2009, except for 2 people.

[undeterred]

9. What about a company that keeps a big supply of contractors

on hand so they can get rid of them quickly... and still claim they've never had a layoff.

[Yavin4]

11. I've Worked for Companies Like That

A lot of companies like to maintain the false impression that they never lay off, which is utter bullshit.