Interviewing while still employed 6

[FullMetalBracket]

For reasons that probably deserve a thread of their own, I've decided it's time to leave my current employer.

I had an interview a few weeks ago, and decided it was best to take the entire day off (using vacation time) to avoid going in with the negativity and frustration I often feel when leaving my current job. The interview went very well and I am fairly confident I will get an offer, however I will likely need to go meet with them again before everything is finalized (another day off...). On top of this, I have an upcoming phone interview with an out-of-town employer. If this were to go well I assume they would require me to travel out to meet them in person (ie more time off required).

I am afraid I have already aroused suspicion from my boss and when it does come time to resign he will look back on these days off here and there and realize I had been looking elsewhere for a good month or so. When I resign he may be put in a tight spot due to the current state of things. If I told him now I was looking elsewhere he could already be looking for a replacement, however if neither of these opportunities work out I will be in a tight spot (I'd rather be employed and looking for a job then unemployed and looking for a job, obviously).

I guess I just need some general advice. Does it make any sense to warn them of my impending departure to avoid burning bridges? How do you manage taking interviews elsewhere while still working a job? Should I just give my two weeks notice and free myself of my current job (financially not a problem, I just don't want to lose negotiating leverage or look like someone who might just up and quit at any moment)?

Any advice is appreciated.

 

[Frank1344]

Hello Folks,

Why do you think the following is true:

"It is always easier to find a job when you have a job. You are just more attractive when you are employed (Posted by HDS)"

Does it imply that the ones on the job are more capable than the ones looking for job?

Your comments are highly appreciated.
Frank
Calgary, Alberta

 

[jmw]

No matter what, employers seem to think that if you don't have a job it is because you are somehow less able than those that do.
It is a natural conclusion.
If your potential employer were making redundancies he'd like to think he'd let only the bottom of the heap go.

The reality his he will probably let the real workers go and keep his pet brown-nosers.

But I'd suggest it does mean that finding a job when unemployed is going to be tougher than when you are employed.
It would be more nearly fair in an ideal world than the real world.

But life isn't fair.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[FullMetalBracket]

Thanks to all who posted advice.

My thinking has been more related to maintaining a good relationship with my current boss rather than worrying about ethics towards the company. As many have said, they/he would let me go without prior notification if they were force to by their management.

Frank, I think employers look at someone who is unemployed and say to themselves "Ok...either he was fired, laid off or just up and quit without a better job to go to" (unless you're a new grad). People could be unemployed for any number of reasons but you will never know the entire story before hiring someone, and it may not be worth the risk when comparing you to someone who still has a job.

Also, from an employee standpoint, it is obviously easier to negotiate a better salary when you don't look desperate and willing to take anything (which you might if you are not employed).

Personally I would love to give my two weeks notice right now. I'm young, have no dependents, and would love a solid month off to go travel for a bit. On top of this I am absolutely fed up and it's affecting my personal life. However as everyone has suggested I think it's better to hang on a bit longer while I solidify my next move...

...then I'll try and delay a start date and go travel for a month or so

 

[KENAT]

On the other hand though, when you aint working, finding a new job can be your full time occupation.

(Unless married, when all those projects around the house, keeping up with the housework while she's at work... are your full time occupation - though you'll be reprimanded if you point out doing all this interferes with you job search.)

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[ajack1]

At least in the UK I would say you stand more chance of getting a job if you are currently unemployed.

Firstly pretty much everyone over here is on one months notice and virtually everyone in a key position would be somewhere between 3 – 6 months. It is also not difficult to find good skilled people looking for work.

Also anyone looking to move, unless to relocate or the like for their own reasons would probably be looking for a 10% raise, based on a salary above today’s market value. People looking for a job will probably settle for a lower salary.

 

[KENAT]

ajack, I'd always wondered about that. There are pros and cons for both situations. There are statistics that supposedly show it's harder for long term unemployed to find a place but for people out less time I wonder.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[ajack1]

I agree KENAT, I recently read an article that came to the same conclusion that the long term unemployed find it harder to get work.

I think long term unemployment is different or even being out of the profession for a long time even if gainfully employed, both rightly or wrongly are seen as being out of touch and long term unemployment can be seen as lazy.

As with so many things there is very little that is black or white and most things are a shade of grey and we all make judgement calls based on our beliefs rather than definitive criteria.

 

[Debaser]

Given the state of the civils sector in the UK, I think that prejudice against long-term unemployment/being out of the business may have to be re-visited. It doesn't seem to make the national news, but consultants have been shedding jobs.

http://www.nce.co.uk/news/business/consultants-shed-11000-jobs-as-recession-bites/5216016.article

http://www.nce.co.uk/news/water/water-industry-has-lost-29000-jobs-in-five-years/8603220.article

http://www.nce.co.uk/news/transport...ation-staff-face-redundancies/8603746.article

http://www.nce.co.uk/news/transport...-workers-to-be-made-redundant/5216724.article

http://www.nce.co.uk/news/business/...vers-shut-rail-and-plant-arms/5216043.article

It's only when things hopefully pick up that there'll be the usual cries of 'skills shortage!!', at which point, thousands of engineers who remain unemployed or who left the industry will shake their collective heads and sigh.

 

[casseopeia]

After thinking about the employed vs unemployed candidate and which might have the advantage, I have changed my mind from my initial gut reaction which was employed interviewee has the advantage.

From the interviewee standpoint, being employed at the time gives you the luxury of being choosy about the job offer. It gives you a psychological incentive to counter-offer a salary that is a bit above what you would actually accept. Being unemployed for an extended period can make you more over-eager to accept a low offer, or even make you a little desperate for validation of your own self worth. Even if you do not feel desperate, I think a good interviewer can smell it. But is that a disadvantage? I don’t think so.

I thought back to when I was an employer during the height of the dot com boom and given two candidates who were equally qualified, I would most likely have offered the unemployed candidate the job first. In my line of business, there would have been a significant training period for anyone new, whether they were working as the lead guy for my competitor or working in a completely different field or not working at all. In fact, the guy working for my competitor would probably have to unlearn some bad behavior and would be more resistant to changing his methodology.

I also would have considered that the unemployed candidate would accept a lower offer. As far as a skill set, if you have someone who is smart, trainable, quick to learn, and eager to fit in, it does not matter if they have been unemployed and using their skills to search for a job or earn cash on the side to supplement their government check. I would pick that over someone who is cocky, jaded, too comfortable in their current job and comes in demanding a $10,000 signing bonus.

"If you are going to walk on thin ice, you might as well dance!"

 

[windsoreng]

@ Debaser:

In the US, on the other hand, it seems you can be escorted off the premises the moment you hand in your resignation, but people still feel some deep responsibility to their employer.

They do it because they don't want employee going to trunk of his car and coming back with M-16 and extra magazines.

In our company they don't even let you clean your desk.

 

[philmech]

Depending on the person, it may not be a bad idea to escort them off the premises immediately. Even is they aren't the type to use an M-16, they could spend the remaining time at their job to gather up customer lists or other proprietary information, destroy vital company information, sabotage projects, etc.

I know of one company that makes you leave immediately and stops paying you immediately. They figure if your new job doesn't start for a few weeks, they can get a little revgenge by making you go that long without a paycheck.

 

[jmw]

Huntley and Palmer, the bisuit makers in Reading Berks, fired a bloke and allowed him to work out his notice period.
He was an illustator and painted the idyllic Edwardian country garden scenes for their tin boxes for Christmas.
It was only after he had gone that they discovered his last illustration had been rather rude. In the grass and bushes at one side were two dogs copulating.... a careful scrutiny revealed a lot more "naughty" scenes which would upset the biscuit eaters of Britain and they had to recall the biscuits.
They didn't get them all and this particular tin is now a collectors item with some value.

Never mind employees sabotaging the company, what about a woman scorned? A colleague was discovered by his wife to be having an affair. She accessed his company laptop and reformatted the hard drive for him. She neglected to back up his documents.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[looslib]

"She accessed his company laptop and reformatted the hard drive for him. She neglected to back up his documents."

Might be grounds for the company to sue her for destruction of company property that she had illegally gotten into.

Now if she had done it to his laptop, that would be different.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[IRstuff]

It was hubby's responsibility to secure company property and information. She shouldn't have had the opportunity to reformat, without going through some difficulty. I could do it, but the average person probably can't.

Charges against hubby:
> Unsecured laptop
> Probably possessing company information that shouldn't even be on his laptop
> Failure to back up documents
> Being an idiot
> Getting caught, but that's arguably an outcome of being an idiot

The second item on the list is ABSURDLY COMMON! My previous employer reported losing 50,000 employee data records because some jack*ss in payroll had unauthorized files on his laptop, and it got stolen. Luckily, it appears that the knucklehead that stole simply pawned it, and the data got wiped along the way, probably as a means of obscuring the laptop's origin.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[ScottyUK]

If the laptop doesn't have a boot time password then all she needs is an OS installation CD...


----------------------------------

If we learn from our mistakes I'm getting a great education!

 

[KirbyWan]

All she needs to reformat the hard drive is a large magnet. Don't even need to turn it on. Remember it's always best to have both a wife and a mistress, so the wife thinks you are with the mistress, the mistress thinks you're with the wife and you can go the shop and get some work done.

-Kirby

Kirby Wilkerson

Remember, first define the problem, then solve it.

 

[jmw]

....or have a beer with your mates (the famous toast is "Wives and sweethearts and may they never meet") or go to a rugby match.
Even a one day cricket test match requires a bit more subtlety. Overseas fixtures of any sport are a challenge.


JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[calguy07]

FYI, there is no such thing as a "one day cricket test match".

 

[jmw]

Don't tell the wife please.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com