Jump to content

Careerchat IV


Stannis Eats No Peaches

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, kiko said:

Is this way of hiring in any way usual procedure in the states? Look like and endless procedure from what I read here. But anyway. Seems it may come to a good conclusion after all. All good wishes for you!

It depends on the job.  Meaningful/expensive hires usually involve more evaluation because there is more at stake and because it’s acknowledged that there are more dimensions to consider and they are not easily verified in a standard interview: ability and expertise for the immediate role, cultural fit and behavioral style, growth potential and expectations, managerial/leadership style for the people they’ll oversee, etc.

The traditional interview is not a good predictor of fit, but a well structured series of interviews can go deeper and especially can get both sides to lower their facade and reveal themselves more candidly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well i start a new job in a couple hours.

was furloughed in march from a place i was at for nine years. 3 weeks ago i was on a call about a return date. the structure and organization of the restaurant had changed dramatically staffing wise due to reduced revenue because of covid.

i questioned things (in retrospect possibly too fervently). the next day they called to tell me my position as executive chef had been eliminated. they called it a financial decision but i know it was political. 

but today i start at a small and very awesome place where my focus is all about making great food. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have 15 days (regular days, not working days) legal notice but usually it's stated in your contract that it's 30 days. Technically, you could take it to court and get away with 15 days notice but it's not worth the effort so people usually go with 30 days, and use up any remaining vacation days during that period. I've done it and haven't felt guilty one bit. I mean, if it takes all 30 days for me to tie up all the loose ends and instruct the next person in how to take over then the company should've worked harder on keeping me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Triskele said:

ETA:  Yet another question if anyone has thoughts:  The 2 week notice...is it more about the amount of time on the calendar or the amount of work one will still get done for the existing employer?  I just happen to have a long-planned vacation starting almost immediately right as I get this offer, so it turns out to give my current place 2 weeks of actual work I'd need to tell prospective new employer that sorry, I can't possibly start for like 3.  I'm guessing that's the right move professionally and that they should understand this.  Feels like if I told current folks tomorrow and was like "here's my 2 weeks, but as you now I'm out for the next 6 work days..." would be not too cool.

IMO, yes trying to start in 3 weeks so as to give a proper 2 weeks to your current employer is the right move. I might be slightly wary of the new company if they made a big stink about you asking for one more week so that you could appropriately tie up loose ends in light of a pre-planned vacation.

incidentally, I too am soon to put in my two weeks’ and change jobs. I always dread doing it and feel a little guilty about it for some stupid reason or another. In this case it’s that I haven’t been at my current company long at all. But... it’s at-will employment and something came along that is going to be more money, better benefits, and very likely a more stable role in the long run. With a baby incoming I feel there’s no choice but to do it, but still feel like a heel. We will all get over it I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, S John said:

incidentally, I too am soon to put in my two weeks’ and change jobs. I always dread doing it and feel a little guilty about it for some stupid reason or another. In this case it’s that I haven’t been at my current company long at all. But... it’s at-will employment and something came along that is going to be more money, better benefits, and very likely a more stable role in the long run. With a baby incoming I feel there’s no choice but to do it, but still feel like a heel. We will all get over it I suppose.

First of all, congrats on the baby incoming. :thumbsup:

Second, on the topic of you feeling bad for leaving the company you weren't with for a long time. If you were in your current company for a long time, you'd still feel bad for leaving after all that time. The only way you could avoid that is if the company was dreadful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, baxus said:

First of all, congrats on the baby incoming. :thumbsup:

Second, on the topic of you feeling bad for leaving the company you weren't with for a long time. If you were in your current company for a long time, you'd still feel bad for leaving after all that time. The only way you could avoid that is if the company was dreadful.

Thanks! And yes, that is very true.

In some ways it’s better that it’s soon because this job has pretty much overlapped with the Covid epidemic and because of that I’m not really integrated into the team, workflow, and culture the way I would have been in another time. I have barely seen or talked to any of my coworkers (which I don’t actually mind, for the record). But at the very least, nobody can take it personally because the only people who will be truly burdened by my move will be the recruiters who have to fire up another candidate search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@S John congrats on impending fatherhood and best of luck with the job change.

@Triskele congrats Trisk on getting the job offer.  They moved pretty briskly in the end.  I agree with S John about giving three weeks notice — don’t burn bridges over something so minor, and your new firm should respect your professionalism in doing it.  Sorry that the comp isn’t what you wanted though.  Are you still negotiating?  If they don’t seem flexible on the starting number, have they given you a strong picture of potential pay growth?

Personally, my last employer killed my faith in pay growth.  They grew their profit margin by suppressing pay growth across the entire firm (tens of thousands of people) and betting that most people would not be angry enough in any single moment to storm out.  As a manager I hated it because I couldn’t pay my people enough to reflect their growth and development over time.  I’m not looking for pity because I was objectively very well paid, but I was also increasingly dissatisfied that as I moved up into more and more senior leadership roles, my comp didn’t rise along with me.  So when I moved to a new role, I made sure there was a meaningful comp increase from the outset.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow the time has really flown by. I just finished year 3 of my PhD. I've still got ~2 years to go, which means that I have 1 year before job hunting starts if I want to stay in academia. I'm leaning very strongly towards NO on that. Not because I don't enjoy academia, but I just don't see myself having quite enough of the drive compared to some people in what is a very competitive field, and the life of a professor doesn't really appeal that much to me. I also am not as flexible in location as is desirable for an academic. I wouldn't mind doing a postdoc, but given that I'm already quite old (relatively speaking), I think it's best to move on to something else sooner rather than later. But it's not like I have anything else I'm dying to move on to. Typically people going to industry from my field (astrophysics) go to computer science or data science. But I'm not a particularly skilled coder and not sure I want to become one. I hate that I'm in my mid-30s and still so clueless about what career I want.

I know I have some time still, but my committee is already asking me about my post-PhD plans, and if I do want to stay in academia there are some steps I'd have to work on, such as collaborating with people outside my university to get more contacts and people who could write letters for me. And given how fast the first 3 years went, the last 2 I imagine will be just as quick, and once the real crunch of the end is on I'm sure I'll be stressed and not wanting to make big life decisions.

I've been super interested in science communication for a long time, so I'm considering heading that route. I've dabbled in it a bit, but nothing too serious. I'm planning now on launch a scicomm "brand" centered around a new YouTube channel. If I could build that up into an impressive enough portfolio, I could potentially freelance post-PhD or find a job in the field. But again, it's a competitive one...

Ah, well. I've gone over and over these thoughts for years, so this is just more of the same. I'm probably one of those people who'll never have a true calling in a career, and that's okay. And hey, maybe one of these days I'll sell one of my novels and be the next Rowling ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Starkess said:

Wow the time has really flown by. I just finished year 3 of my PhD. I've still got ~2 years to go, which means that I have 1 year before job hunting starts if I want to stay in academia. I'm leaning very strongly towards NO on that. Not because I don't enjoy academia, but I just don't see myself having quite enough of the drive compared to some people in what is a very competitive field, and the life of a professor doesn't really appeal that much to me. I also am not as flexible in location as is desirable for an academic. I wouldn't mind doing a postdoc, but given that I'm already quite old (relatively speaking), I think it's best to move on to something else sooner rather than later. But it's not like I have anything else I'm dying to move on to. Typically people going to industry from my field (astrophysics) go to computer science or data science. But I'm not a particularly skilled coder and not sure I want to become one. I hate that I'm in my mid-30s and still so clueless about what career I want.

I know I have some time still, but my committee is already asking me about my post-PhD plans, and if I do want to stay in academia there are some steps I'd have to work on, such as collaborating with people outside my university to get more contacts and people who could write letters for me. And given how fast the first 3 years went, the last 2 I imagine will be just as quick, and once the real crunch of the end is on I'm sure I'll be stressed and not wanting to make big life decisions.

I've been super interested in science communication for a long time, so I'm considering heading that route. I've dabbled in it a bit, but nothing too serious. I'm planning now on launch a scicomm "brand" centered around a new YouTube channel. If I could build that up into an impressive enough portfolio, I could potentially freelance post-PhD or find a job in the field. But again, it's a competitive one...

Ah, well. I've gone over and over these thoughts for years, so this is just more of the same. I'm probably one of those people who'll never have a true calling in a career, and that's okay. And hey, maybe one of these days I'll sell one of my novels and be the next Rowling ;) 

You’re killing me.  You’re very intelligent, extremely educated, and you have the combination of left-brain analytical/IQ smarts with right-brain communication.  That’s a pretty ideal cognitive base for a lot of interesting careers.  Start sampling some real life projects to see what catches your interest.  Most jobs/careers don’t sound passion-inducing from afar, but they can be really enjoyable once you figure out WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPY and then get close enough to take a proper look at some possibilities.

I get bored very easily, and realized (unfortunately after years of education and credentials) that traditional actuarial work was not a good fit for me.  I found that I enjoy investments a lot because it has lots of conceptual interest (abstractions, cross-connections, room for new theories), endless variety, real data to work with and measurable outcomes (immediate, tangible feedback), lots of smart people to collaborate with and compete against, huge positive social impact, and the still slightly awe-inspiring feeling from dealing with really large amounts of money (12yr old me is still in here, and he’s shocked that I get trusted with billions of dollars).

But if you asked me before I ever worked in investing, I would have had a negative picture of blow-hard stockbrokers or sharp elbowed (and slightly shady) traders or preppy, WASPy Wall St.  I didn’t know what it would be like in that industry until I got close enough to take a look.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Triskele said:


@Iskaral Pust - I did decide to risk asking for a bit more, and it appears to have worked.  Got it just a bit further away from where I'm at currently and where it was closer to the offer I'd been hoping for.  I took care in writing it to try to give a non-whiny reason for why a bit more abut not say I'd walk if I couldn't get it but just that I'd have to reflect a it and also through in something along the lines of that I'd understand if the budget was tight and that would't be possible.  So now it feels close to a done deal and it's just looking out for a new offer letter next week.  

You handled that really well. I’m glad it improved the offer for you.  And good to see they didn’t immediately jump to your head-to-head competitor candidate.  It’s a good sign that you were their strong first preference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Triskele said:

 

@S John - Sorry if this is rude, but if by any odd chance the baby comes out and is not 100% otter how will you handle it?  

Dude, this is a motherfuckin’ lockdown baby. 110% otter.
 

@Starkess

I think I knew you were doing a PhD, not sure I realized (or I forgot) that it was in astrophysics. I think once you’ve pulled off demonstrating that you can get a PhD in such a field, you will have plenty of options. I can understand the aversion to academia, I worked for a University for 6 years and even as a non PhD (Lowly masters degree here) there was always the need to bring in funding. I worked in a ‘soft funded’ research unit - meaning that we were at least partially responsible for bringing in money to pay our own salaries and the drive to find funding can be a grind. Probably there is that pressure even in more securely funded situations. 
 

I also found myself, due to funding issues, often working on research problems that I found completely boring and kind of a waste of time. Combine that with the fact that there were more lucrative opportunities out there and I held out as long as I could but it wasn’t worth it for me.  That isn’t to say I wouldn’t go back into academia one day for the right fit, but like with anything else there’s a range of possible experiences.

I actually think that your idea of creating a YouTube channel or something similar - maybe a podcast(?) is a good one. But I don’t necessarily think that you should bank on that as a career option and the only reason I say that is because I know a couple people who have tried similar things and the key to generating revenue seems to be having got in early - or having a lot of patience. That said, as a sort of passion side/project with the potential to grow into something career-worthy in time it totally might be worth a shot if you find it fun and you are able to add content on a regular basis.

One final note, I just finished reading Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything. It’s a tiny bit dated on some fronts at this point, but I really loved it overall. Though Bryson is is a journalist and not a scientist it was very well researched and I think there’s something to be said about someone with scientific expertise breaking the material down in an accessible way for the general public. Actually, I think it’s an extremely important  role and worthy of exploration if you were interested in that aspect of things. Science needs relatable ambassadors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Triskele said:

Thank you so much.  I really can't thank you and many others enough because I've relied on this thread for some time with a few other opportunities, and it's been amazing to reflect on how much one's mental health improves when one feels that some reliable advice is available free of charge.  

My current boss is going to be wrecked both because they will not easily replace me (not cause I'm so badass but because hiring is tough in the current enviro) but also because they delayed on getting me a raise before COVID put a freeze on those, so I speculate that they'll do some kind of hindsight thing and think that they lost me over that.  The new offer is enough that this probably turns out to not be true.

Does make me wonder if they'll consider the counter-offer move which you, @Chataya de Fleury, and other counseled against.  then the online rabbit hole I mentioned in a previous post convinced me you guys were totally correct.  Very unlikely I'd do that unless they came back with a shocking counter-offer.

 

I’m glad this thread helps.  I like having a supportive sounding board here.  Career decisions have such a big impact on our happiness/satisfaction, our sense of purpose, accomplishment & identity, not to mention finances.  It really helps to step back and think about them rather than follow a nagging gut feeling.

If you think a counter-offer is possible, then decide now whether you want to hear one at all, and what it would take.  Because they’ll usually frame that as “is there anything we can do to change your mind?”.  You don’t want to get dragged into a limbo of a non-specific ask and waiting to see what they might offer.  Be ready with “it would take a promotion to <title/role> and a comp of $X to get me to stay”.  Be expensive, not indecisive.

Be very clear and very consistent on why you’re taking this new job: important next step in career, development of experience/skills/self, need for a next challenge, etc, etc.  Be thankful for the role/opportunity/experience you have had and express regret that you need to move to get what you need next.

If you don’t want to even hear a counter-offer, then say so.  “I appreciate you asking but I’m fully focused now on this next chapter.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this should be taken to a new thread altogether, but what @Starkess said really got me thinking about PhD. Not getting one, since that was never my thing but the reasons people are getting one. I mean, I thought that the point of getting a PhD was to either go into academia or to do some big research and stay at the forefront of your field. As I was growing up/getting older, I met more and more people who went for/got a PhD and it often seems to me that those are not the reasons why they went did it. A lot of people I know did it for some ego-related reasons and so that they can say they have it and quite a few of them switch their field altogether, never really using what they learned in the process of getting a PhD.

Not saying that's bad or that they made a mistake. It's their lives, their time and effort that was spent and all that it just seems to me like that time and effort could've been spent in a more efficient way.

Also, I need to point out that I'm not trying to diminish the importance of getting a PhD or in any way imply it's wrong to get one. It's just that I get the impression that quite often something happens along the way that bursts some kind of a bubble for people who go for it and they decide to switch to other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, baxus said:

Maybe this should be taken to a new thread altogether, but what @Starkess said really got me thinking about PhD. Not getting one, since that was never my thing but the reasons people are getting one. I mean, I thought that the point of getting a PhD was to either go into academia or to do some big research and stay at the forefront of your field. As I was growing up/getting older, I met more and more people who went for/got a PhD and it often seems to me that those are not the reasons why they went did it. A lot of people I know did it for some ego-related reasons and so that they can say they have it and quite a few of them switch their field altogether, never really using what they learned in the process of getting a PhD.

Not saying that's bad or that they made a mistake. It's their lives, their time and effort that was spent and all that it just seems to me like that time and effort could've been spent in a more efficient way.

Also, I need to point out that I'm not trying to diminish the importance of getting a PhD or in any way imply it's wrong to get one. It's just that I get the impression that quite often something happens along the way that bursts some kind of a bubble for people who go for it and they decide to switch to other things.

This varies from country to country, field to field and person to person, but very generally, there are many, many more places in PhD programs than there are long-term positions where one can do research on fundamental sciences. That is, if you take the sum of all positions as tenured university professors, permanent reasearch staff at government labs and researchers at private institutes, you will get a fairly small number... and the vast majority of those positions are already occupied. Another way to look at it is that most professors will train of order 10 graduate students over the course of their career, but only one of these students can replace the professor when the latter retires. Basically, there is only room for a tiny fraction of PhDs to work as researchers in their chosen fields and this is made very clear to everyone early on.

So why do people do it and then go do something else? There are a few common scenarios. First, there are people who know exactly what they're doing from the start: if your PhD is in biology, material sciences, computer science, etc., it serves as a qualification for applied research jobs at corporations (which are much more plentiful than fundamental research jobs). Second, there are people who start with the intention of competing for the academic jobs, but, for various reasons, decide that it's not what they want somewhere along the way. There are many reasons this might happen: they might not enjoy research as much as they thought they would, they discover something else they want to do, they want to stay in one place rather than moving to where a job might be and so on and so forth. Third, the personal lives of some people force their hand -- I know more than one postdoc who left academia simply because a postdoc's salary is not enough for a family with children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Triskele said:

Congrats!

I do a lot of Excel in my world, and I actually think it's a remarkable tool and wonder HTF the world worked before Excel.  

Excel (and PowerPoint) are the tool of choice for management. I think that's why it is sneaking into so many use cases even though there is usually a better alternative to a quick&dirty excel document.

(That said, I also use it almost  daily - grudgingly)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2020 at 8:55 PM, Iskaral Pust said:

You’re killing me.  You’re very intelligent, extremely educated, and you have the combination of left-brain analytical/IQ smarts with right-brain communication.  That’s a pretty ideal cognitive base for a lot of interesting careers.  Start sampling some real life projects to see what catches your interest.  Most jobs/careers don’t sound passion-inducing from afar, but they can be really enjoyable once you figure out WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPY and then get close enough to take a proper look at some possibilities.

I get bored very easily, and realized (unfortunately after years of education and credentials) that traditional actuarial work was not a good fit for me.  I found that I enjoy investments a lot because it has lots of conceptual interest (abstractions, cross-connections, room for new theories), endless variety, real data to work with and measurable outcomes (immediate, tangible feedback), lots of smart people to collaborate with and compete against, huge positive social impact, and the still slightly awe-inspiring feeling from dealing with really large amounts of money (12yr old me is still in here, and he’s shocked that I get trusted with billions of dollars).

But if you asked me before I ever worked in investing, I would have had a negative picture of blow-hard stockbrokers or sharp elbowed (and slightly shady) traders or preppy, WASPy Wall St.  I didn’t know what it would be like in that industry until I got close enough to take a look.  

This is a huge problem for me, and a large reason why I went back to school. I've really enjoyed that aspect of my research! I don't think I could handle going back to a mind-numbing consulting job like I was doing before. I was actually really interested in being an actuary, I even took the first test and was prepared to take the second test, but where I was living at the time (San Diego) was basically impossible as far as I could tell to start an actuarial career, and I wasn't interested in moving so I scrapped the notion. I was just thinking about it again the other day, but I was considering this in context of jobs I could do in Australia (there's a high chance I will emigrate there someday) and they actually specifically require a degree in actuarial science with a very narrow exception.

I have hoped to stumble into something that really excites me, but so far it hasn't worked...

On 9/11/2020 at 9:42 PM, S John said:

Dude, this is a motherfuckin’ lockdown baby. 110% otter.
 

@Starkess

I think I knew you were doing a PhD, not sure I realized (or I forgot) that it was in astrophysics. I think once you’ve pulled off demonstrating that you can get a PhD in such a field, you will have plenty of options. I can understand the aversion to academia, I worked for a University for 6 years and even as a non PhD (Lowly masters degree here) there was always the need to bring in funding. I worked in a ‘soft funded’ research unit - meaning that we were at least partially responsible for bringing in money to pay our own salaries and the drive to find funding can be a grind. Probably there is that pressure even in more securely funded situations. 
 

I also found myself, due to funding issues, often working on research problems that I found completely boring and kind of a waste of time. Combine that with the fact that there were more lucrative opportunities out there and I held out as long as I could but it wasn’t worth it for me.  That isn’t to say I wouldn’t go back into academia one day for the right fit, but like with anything else there’s a range of possible experiences.

I actually think that your idea of creating a YouTube channel or something similar - maybe a podcast(?) is a good one. But I don’t necessarily think that you should bank on that as a career option and the only reason I say that is because I know a couple people who have tried similar things and the key to generating revenue seems to be having got in early - or having a lot of patience. That said, as a sort of passion side/project with the potential to grow into something career-worthy in time it totally might be worth a shot if you find it fun and you are able to add content on a regular basis.

One final note, I just finished reading Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything. It’s a tiny bit dated on some fronts at this point, but I really loved it overall. Though Bryson is is a journalist and not a scientist it was very well researched and I think there’s something to be said about someone with scientific expertise breaking the material down in an accessible way for the general public. Actually, I think it’s an extremely important  role and worthy of exploration if you were interested in that aspect of things. Science needs relatable ambassadors.

Oh I agree, I meant more as that it could serve as a portfolio/side project that would help me land freelancing contracts, not that the channel itself would be a career. But I am really excited about it still! I'm planning for an October launch.

Yes, the funding stuff is a headache. And professors end up being very managerial and I don't really like teaching and...yeah I dunno, it just doesn't resonate strongly enough with me to try to compete with a hundred other people for a single tenured position that's probably in a place I don't even want to live.

On 9/14/2020 at 1:59 AM, baxus said:

Maybe this should be taken to a new thread altogether, but what @Starkess said really got me thinking about PhD. Not getting one, since that was never my thing but the reasons people are getting one. I mean, I thought that the point of getting a PhD was to either go into academia or to do some big research and stay at the forefront of your field. As I was growing up/getting older, I met more and more people who went for/got a PhD and it often seems to me that those are not the reasons why they went did it. A lot of people I know did it for some ego-related reasons and so that they can say they have it and quite a few of them switch their field altogether, never really using what they learned in the process of getting a PhD.

Not saying that's bad or that they made a mistake. It's their lives, their time and effort that was spent and all that it just seems to me like that time and effort could've been spent in a more efficient way.

Also, I need to point out that I'm not trying to diminish the importance of getting a PhD or in any way imply it's wrong to get one. It's just that I get the impression that quite often something happens along the way that bursts some kind of a bubble for people who go for it and they decide to switch to other things.

There are a lot of reasons for getting a PhD! For me, I knew from the start it was possible I wouldn't want to stay in academia, but I still wanted to do. I've gotten to learn so much about a field that really interests me, expand my knowledge base in both theoretical and practical ways, and I'll get a shiny cool credential at the end and people will have call me Dr. :P As said above, there are a lot more PhDs than there are academic positions, and there are plenty of industry jobs that require or heavily recommend a PhD. But yeah, for me getting paid (not much, but enough) for 5-6 years to do something fun and exciting has been totally worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Triskele said:

Just broke news to current place, and the what can we do to keep you question absolutely came up.  I tried to follow Isk's be expensive mantra and gave them a figure that would be something like a 26% increase over where I currently am.  Person needs to go upthread to see if it's even possible, but then it sure does raise this "so you think I'm this valuable but let me sit at that lower figure all this time?" question that makes me see why it's possibly a rough move.  

Because of student loans I am extremely sensitive to compensation though, so there probably is a level at which I couldn't turn it down.  

This is one of the reasons people shouldn't get dragged into the whole counteroffer conversation. One way or another, most people will resent something about it, whether it's the employee or someone from the management.

11 hours ago, Starkess said:

There are a lot of reasons for getting a PhD! For me, I knew from the start it was possible I wouldn't want to stay in academia, but I still wanted to do. I've gotten to learn so much about a field that really interests me, expand my knowledge base in both theoretical and practical ways, and I'll get a shiny cool credential at the end and people will have call me Dr. :P As said above, there are a lot more PhDs than there are academic positions, and there are plenty of industry jobs that require or heavily recommend a PhD. But yeah, for me getting paid (not much, but enough) for 5-6 years to do something fun and exciting has been totally worth it.

Glad to hear it's working out well for you. It's just that I've seen some PhDs whose stories were quite different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...