Job hopping

cerebus

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
54,005
Reaction score
29,179
Location
Netherlands
So folks... the question - how much is too much? When does job-hopping become a detriment to getting hired at a new job? What's a safe buffer period, or is there a safe buffer period?

Thoughts please :)
 
cerebus said:
So folks... the question - how much is too much? When does job-hopping become a detriment to getting hired at a new job? What's a safe buffer period, or is there a safe buffer period?

Thoughts please :)
Click to expand...

Less than 2 years at a job twice in a row is job hopping. A one random case you can give a reason for short stint. More often than that, not so much.

Even worse when you go through a recruiter. Makes it very expensive for companies if you stay less than 2 years.
 
2-5 years is a decent amount of time before looking for a new job. Anything less is job hopping IMO...
 
Personally I would define it as two jobs in a row one year or less.

Why one year?

Well think about it - how long does it take you to start adding value at an employer? One week? One month? So, if you are earning your keep within one month, why does the company care? They always make more than they spend on you. If it takes you 2 years of employment to pay back the employer in terms of revenue that you generate for them, then either they are undercharging for your services or you are plain useless.

This notion of job hopping is two years or less is an outdated mindset. You need to think about why it is considered job hopping, and what is bad about it.

Employers dont like job hopping because they want to believe that you are loyal to the company you work for and will be there forever. Nevermind the fact that most employers are not loyal to their employees - that doesnt figure into the equation.
 
Bit difficult to know, seeing as things seems to moving into a more dynamic space these days. People don't spend decades at one company anymore. But I'd also say on a permanent contract 2 years seems a fair amount of time to dedicate to one employer before considering your options further.
 
Ancalagon said:
Personally I would define it as two jobs in a row one year or less.

Why one year?

Well think about it - how long does it take you to start adding value at an employer? One week? One month? So, if you are earning your keep within one month, why does the company care? They always make more than they spend on you. If it takes you 2 years of employment to pay back the employer in terms of revenue that you generate for them, then either they are undercharging for your services or you are plain useless.

This notion of job hopping is two years or less is an outdated mindset. You need to think about why it is considered job hopping, and what is bad about it.

Employers dont like job hopping because they want to believe that you are loyal to the company you work for and will be there forever. Nevermind the fact that most employers are not loyal to their employees - that doesnt figure into the equation.
Click to expand...

It's not that really.

Employers take time and effort training you, teaching you about company processes, adjust to company culture, commissions get paid to recruitment agencies, pay roll and tax stuff, the recruiting process itself takes time from weeks to months, then if they replace you, takes time for all of that again.

Less than two years is a slap in the face to the employer.
 
cerebus said:
So folks... the question - how much is too much? When does job-hopping become a detriment to getting hired at a new job? What's a safe buffer period, or is there a safe buffer period?

Thoughts please :)
Click to expand...

Based on your role (as I know what you do :) ), I would say 2yrs. I also find as you get older and become more senior in your role, it becomes 3yr+
 
cerebus said:
What if they slap you first?
Click to expand...

My take on this:

* Leave within your probation period shows that you knew the job was not for you and nobody should hold that against you.

* Leave within a year, and its easier to convince that you gave it a go to make it work but it was not for you.

* Leave within two years and then its a slap.


Now for some funny reason it looks worse on your CV if you constantly bail out in the 12-24mth period compared to the < 12 mth ones.
 
cerebus said:
What if they slap you first?
Click to expand...

Sure, if you unhappy move, just saying if you at a place for only a year twice in a row it will look bad. Which I actually mentioned in my first post.

A random occurrence they'll probably just ask you about in the interview. Multiple occurrences you probably won't get to interview stage.
 
cbrunsdonza said:
My take on this:

* Leave within your probation period shows that you knew the job was not for you and nobody should hold that against you.
* Leave within a year, and its easier to convince that you gave it a go to make it work but it was not for you.
* Leave within two years and then its a slap.

Now for some funny reason it looks worse on your CV if you constantly bail out in the 12-24mth period compared to the < 12 mth ones.
Click to expand...
I would view all 3 as risky. If you leave within 12 months, it comes across as somebody who will waste your time - time that could have been spent looking for a more suitable candidate.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
I would view all 3 as risky. If you leave within 12 months, it comes across as somebody who will waste your time - time that could have been spent looking for a more suitable candidate.
Click to expand...

I've done 9 months at one company, and then 2 months at the next..... didn't stop me getting a decent job straight afterwards...

I was upfront about my reasons for leaving the 2 positions in my CV.

1st one : I disliked JHB so wanted to move back to DBN
2nd one : Recruiter MASSIVELY oversold the job to me, and I went from a senior implementation type role, to a Techie... to say I was pissed off was an understatement and I gave the recruiter an ear bashing for it.
 
Less than 3 years at a company without decent reasons for moving. Having looked at tons of CVs, it is easy to spot a job-hopper. And as Chevron says, companies will not be stupid enough to take them on especially if coming via an agency (agencies tend to charge a small fortune for successful recruitments).
 
Ok. I was at A for 3 years and 9 months,
moved to B for 14 months,
then was at C for 16 months,
then D for 23 months.
Now at E for almost a year.

A I left before they started 'restructuring after the merger' :wtf:
B was due to the company and my carreer objectives being different,
C was because I had to travel too much (And a heinously bad working environment)
D was actually as a contractor while looking for the right job.
And E is awesome to work at. (We make things go boom and whoosh)

If you don't ask it will look like I was job hopping.
 
I went for an interview last year and was aggressively labelled as a job-hopper when the interviewer looked at my last job...

I'd been there for SIX years and had left in order to relocate provinces.

I didn't get the job and I have no regrets. ;)

WtF?
 
cbrunsdonza said:
My take on this:

* Leave within your probation period shows that you knew the job was not for you and nobody should hold that against you.

* Leave within a year, and its easier to convince that you gave it a go to make it work but it was not for you.

* Leave within two years and then its a slap.


Now for some funny reason it looks worse on your CV if you constantly bail out in the 12-24mth period compared to the < 12 mth ones.
Click to expand...
Hey I'm just being all hypothetical and stuff. So what if your reason is purely, increased salary?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X