
Why switching jobs is almost always a good idea - alexpotato
http://alexpotato.com/blog/why-switching-jobs-is-almost-always-a-good-idea/
======
joelennon
If you're not happy in your current role, make your employer aware of that
fact. If you believe you are underpaid, say it. If you're overworked, say it.
I'm not saying you'll necessarily get results but I think people all too often
look for the door when what is making them unhappy can probably be resolved
where they are. Of course if you're miserable and need a change that's a
different story. But remember that if you're good, losing you is going to hit
your employer hard. The cost of replacing good people is so high, any good
employer will try to resolve any issues you may have in order to keep you.

~~~
existencebox
I'm curious to hear your advice on the following: At once point I was hired by
a bigCo, had been working at a university as a research sysadmin. They made a
mistake, and thought that because they hired me _at_ a university I was a
college hire, apparently ignoring the years of industry experience on the
resume, and placed me at the lowest salary level. After 6 months, this mistake
came to light, and after agreeing with my manager that the position was
basically insulting given the background, I was told simply "well we can't do
anything about it until the next promotion cycle, and even then we can't
really 'catch you up'". This still stings in terms of time that I've now
entirely lost pushing my career upwards. I decided to stay and wait it out
rather than fight the decision or leave, I'm just curious about whether that
would have been your decision in the situation.

(this turned out a bit long and ranty; my takeaway is just, I've run into too
many situations where telling my employer I was unhappy/underpaid resulted in
basically a "nothing we can do", and my switching to a higher paying base job)

~~~
learnstats2
Your manager was wrong to not fight to correct this for you.

Even if his/her hands were tied higher up, I would have considered leaving on
this basis alone: it shows nobody at the company is willing to look after your
interests.

However, you must have agreed your salary at some point?

As illustrated in the article, the start of the job is the most opportune time
to negotiate. Once you have started on a low salary, employer can safely
assume you don't need a high salary and has little reason to pay you more.
(You confirmed that this was the correct decision for them by deciding to wait
it out)

My conclusion is that you'll now likely always be behind on your salary for as
long as you stay with this company.

~~~
existencebox
To his credit, my manager was extremely forthright in fighting for me, but his
hands were tied in being limited to the typical periods.

Yes, I did agree to the salary, but as that I was coming from an academic
position (and was honestly/still am relatively new to shopping around for
jobs) the salary seemed like a vast improvement and I didn't think to dig deep
into actual level.

Thanks (to other child posters as well) for your thoughts.

(to answer some side posts as well; I didn't mean to come across as having
excessively many years experience, but that I was just not a college hire and
hope I didn't mislead. This introspection also doesn't preclude looking for
other options simultaneously, and I've certainly learned my lesson about
asking more of some sorts of questions during my offer.)

------
goblin89
> The first six months of a new job is taken up primarily by learning new
> systems, procedures, who to talk to etc. <…> in the beginning, you will
> probably feel a lot less stressed out.

Weird, for me it’s the opposite—the most stressful time is when I don’t know
how things work. Battling lacking or missing onboarding processes instead of
working on challenges I thought I was hired to solve can be demotivating.

~~~
blazespin
Yes, the first 6 months are by far the most stressful. You are far more
replaceable in the first 6 months than you are after a few years.

You will earn more money though. Switching jobs is the fastest way to get a
pay raise.

------
S4M
The post really makes the OP sounds like a headhunter ("don't worry, the grass
is always greener somewhere else..."), in which case I would be very wary of
his advice.

~~~
pdpi
"I’m a career coach and can help you master every part of the job search
process."

Right on the money.

------
LukeB_UK
My Dad always said to me that if you ever wake up and realise that you're not
enjoying work anymore (or even worse, dreading it) then that's the day you
start finding something or somewhere else.

~~~
japhyr
He's right, burning out in your job and staying in that job makes people age
quickly. Life is too short to be stuck in a miserable job, if you can do
anything about it.

------
d357r0y3r
In my current role, I like the company, the product, and my co-workers, but
I'm almost positive I could be making 20,000 more a year in the same area. My
pay is (I feel) relatively low because I'm a junior software engineer, so I'm
torn on whether I should just stick it out and ask for a large raise/promotion
in a few months, or put my feelers out.

~~~
KedarMhaswade
Is it the lack of making enough money that bothers you? If you dig deeper,
what would you say? If you were to ask yourself "What it is that would keep me
motivated?" \-- what answer emerges?

In his book, "Drive", author Dan Pink argues mostly successfully that it's not
the salary or the stock options or other perks that keeps effective
individuals motivated. He summarizes that it is the pursuit of that illusive
trio -- "Mastery, Autonomy, and Purpose" that keeps people motivated in their
work and in their life.

In my experience, if remaining in a job or switching jobs cannot be traced to
one of these three, then the decision one takes (remain in a job or switching
jobs) is not likely to turn out to be a good decision.

~~~
d357r0y3r
It's not the money that motivates me. I get the most satisfaction from writing
good code and pretty/usable UIs, and that is what ultimately drives me.

My feeling is that I could get the satisfaction I describe above at many
workplaces, but all things equal, I'd like the option that pays more.

------
wbsun
This post shows the best of hacker news: comments are often way more better
than the original post!

I'd agree with one of the comment got downvoted: the post itself is really
'manipulating' and like an ad of nonsense: the only good thing is its title.

But the comments here, which are people's real experiences and lessons, are so
valuable!

------
lumberjack
If every "five years of experience Java Swing developer" starts looking around
for a better job position, isn't that a bit similar to a sector wide union
asking for a raise?

~~~
slapresta
You say that as if it were a bad thing...

------
steven2012
The problem with this mentality is that if you move around TOO much, then
people won't want to hire you because they will think, rightfully so, that you
won't stick around. I routinely reject resumes where the person has 3 or more
jobs of 2 years or less on their resume.

~~~
peacemaker
You're missing out on a lot of talented people with that kind of prejudice
against short term job terms. You have no idea the background on why people
chose to move jobs so simply dismissing them on that one fact seems premature.

~~~
steven2012
I disagree, and I very much disagree with the assertion that I would be
missing out on "a lot" of talented people. "Talented" and "excellent
contributor" are not the same thing. I would much rather put in the effort to
recruit someone who is very good that will stick around for 2-3+ years and
contribute versus a genius that sticks around for 12-18 months. This comes
from experience.

~~~
AlwaysBCoding
Very short sighted mentality. It assumes that people are cogs and the
measurable effect of working with someone is the amount of tangible output.
Working with extremely talented developers can fundamentally change your
perspective about how you should be building your system / approaching a
problem that can have huge future benefits. I would rather work with a genius
for 12 months than a cog for 3 years.

~~~
billsossoon
Are you kidding? The notion that people (even talented people) can be swapped
in and out every 12 months is a far greater assumption that people are cogs.

From a co-worker perspective, yes, I'd rather work short-term with someone
talented. From a managerial perspective, I'd first choose the talented
employee who has demonstrated an ability to commit, then I'd choose a less
talented (but with potential to improve) employee who I believe has an ability
to commit, then it's roughly a tie between someone mediocre and someone
talented who will likely abandon their project in the lurch. Those last two
are both pretty lame options.

------
swalsh
Can't think of a better thread then this for a question that's been on my
mind. I started at a new company last May. In the beginning I was on one team,
I had a pretty rough time because the work was so different from my previous
company (very boring). I was about ready to move on, but then my wife found
she was pregnant, and so I decided to stay anyways because the fact that the
work was easy meant I never worked over 40 hours.

A few months later my boss moved me to a new team because I had completed
literally the next 5 months of planned work in about a month so there was
little left to do, and things did a complete 180. On this new team I had a
bigger role, but I was able to work on more interesting things. Basically I
built a framework that around 8 developers worked full time on. It's now at
the point where just one overseas guy can do all the work.

Last week we started talking about new projects I could attack at the company.
Then on Friday he announced that he's leaving. When I went into his office to
congratulate him on the new position, he hinted that he wanted me to join him
at the new company in a position that would be kind of a bump for me.

I'm inclined to follow him because the current company is a company where
engineers are lead by non-engineers, and he's one of the few gems in the
place. However i'm not sure if it's a good move (especially with the baby
coming in 3 months!).

I should also mention that last week he told me they were planning on letting
go of all but 2 of the developers that my framework replaced :( I felt safe
with him around because I built it, but i'm not sure if they hired an MBA to
replace him he would do the same math.

~~~
kyllo
If you have a great boss and he leaves for greener pastures, and gives you the
opportunity to follow him, I think it's usually a good idea to accept. Having
a boss who you like and who likes and trusts you enough to take you with him
to the next company, is priceless. Staying can be risky, as the replacement
boss is an unknown factor. In your case, it sounds like a no-brainer.

~~~
kyrra
My company made employees sign agreements that if they did leave, they were
not allowed to actively recruit people from the company. One guy did it and
they sent him a cease and desist. Your manager should be careful incase he
signed something similar and doesn't remember.

~~~
dennisgorelik
That's why his boss _hinted_ about job opportunity at the next company, but
did not directly offered a job.

------
jarjoura
This is why all the big tech companies give substantial raises in RSUs. It's
that carrot stick along with the promise of a promotion always just within
reach that makes job hopping difficult. At least plan to stay with a company
for 2 years. It never looks good to have resumes with pages of jobs.

------
sidcool
I have been in the same job for the past 9 years. I am happy here, but I feel
a need to change. Team is great and friendly, pay is above average, but I am
not concerned with it much as it's enough for me and my family to live
happily.

Another reason I feel is that I have become comfortable here. Things are being
gotten-done pretty easily. I don't have to exert myself too much. Team has
faith in me. I love the ppl and do as much as possible for them (I am an
Engineering Manager). But the urge to change is heavy and to some extent
inexplicable to me. I already have 2 offers from other companies. I am wanting
to talk to my boss, but fearing a bit. Sigh...

~~~
sktrdie
If you're happy why change? Yes change is almost always good. But it's similar
to saying that you should leave your girlfriend simply because you've been
with her for too many years. Think of a job as a relationship. If it's good
both ways, no need to change.

~~~
sidcool
That's another way of looking at it, and that's where the confusion is
stemming from. I am still undecided.

~~~
sktrdie
If you're undecided you're probably a bit unhappy in your current position.
Therefore change! :)

~~~
sidcool
Nice revelation :) Thanks. I resigned.

~~~
sktrdie
Wow really? Well I hope you thought it through and didn't just rely on a
"stranger's comment" for this decision. In any case, I wish you the best and
trust you'll have the skills to find something you really love - everyone
should aspire to do what they love.

~~~
sidcool
Oh no, I thought it through. There's some risk involved and some leap of
faith, but I will own anything that happens. Good or bad, it's going to be my
shit.

------
ishener
There is one point that was missed in this post: promotion. Are you more
likely to land a promotion in your current job, or are you more likely to find
a another job that is also a promotion to a position that you have no
experience in?

~~~
glesica
My guess would be that it doesn't matter. Plenty of managers and senior people
are hired from outside of companies these days. And in any case, if you don't
make more money, it doesn't even really matter:
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/cameronkeng/2014/06/22/employees-
that-stay-in-companies-longer-than-2-years-get-paid-50-less/)

~~~
zeroonetwothree
The set of candidates that leave to get another job is different from those
that stay. They are likely more skilled/motivated, and that's a large part of
the job-switching premium. If everyone were to try to switch jobs many people
would not be as effective.

------
Eric_WVGG
I thought this was gonna be a riff on the Monty Hall problem.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem)

~~~
thisjepisje
You wanted a more fulfilling job, but what you got was a goat. Bummer!

~~~
Eric_WVGG
#winner [http://xkcd.com/1282/](http://xkcd.com/1282/)

------
EGreg
This should be titled, "Why switching jobs is usually a good idea for
overworked, underpaid people who have been working for at least a few years at
their current job."

But that wouldn't fit on HN.

------
michaelochurch
This is bad advice. The right answer is often to change jobs, but the
explanation given here is pretty terrible.

If you have a pattern of working significantly less in your first 6 months on
a job than later on, then you're making a mistake. That's the time to
establish a reputation, figure out what is worth working on, and get a mental
map of the organization so that you can actually get things done. It's the
hardest time in a job, if you do it right.

If you let the "honeymoon period" blind you and slack in your first 6 months,
you start getting grunt work thrown at you and that's how you end up
overwhelmed and struggling at the 3-year mark. If you do the first 6 months
_right_ and gain the credibility, alliances, and reputation that'll put you on
a good vector, you (a) have a much higher chance of getting on a fast-track,
which means better work rather than more of the same, and (b) can get away
with slacking and recharging (as you seek external promotion) if you are
passed-over for some reason.

Also, for higher-level positions, switching jobs often means changing
locations and doing that every year is pretty miserable... especially if you
have kids. At some point, you're specialized enough that unless you live in
New York or SF-- which are pretty much out once you have kids, unless you're
in a hedge fund or a VC firm-- you're going to have to stick with a job for a
few years just because there aren't many jobs in your specialty and location.

It's worth changing jobs for a genuine promotion, but a high frequency of
lateral movement looks really bad. Given also that it can be hard to tell if a
new job is a genuine promotion, it's better to stay where you are if you have
something good and you're continuing to advance.

------
codazzo
If somebody ever asks me "what does mansplaining mean?" I'm just going to say,
"Well you see, it's quite easy. Just read this blog post"

In all seriousness, there was no need for the point in this post to be
explained through such exemplary mansplaining.

~~~
Robin_Message
Oh come on. I'm not even sure "mansplaining" is a thing, but even it is, in no
way does "mansplaining" == "socratic method".

Also, did you even know Alex Potato is a man†? I know two Alex's, one male,
and one female. I've never spoken to a potato.

Or is it automatically "mansplaining" because the topic is about a specific
woman being underpaid/overworked, and any helpful suggestions to that specific
women (that reframe the situation and empower her to improve things herself)
are automatically sexist? I mean, I'm happy to condemn employment conditions
that systemically underpay women, but that won't actually help Sam, whereas
this advice might.

In conclusion, whilst obviously not everything men write or say that is
intended to be supportive of feminism is actually helpful and supportive, it
really worries me that if men who are trying to help are shot down for missing
the mark, then fewer will try in future, and the only ones left commenting
will be the trolls who are looking for such a reaction.

† I mean, we could assume they were because they appear to work in software or
the like, and play paintball, but we shouldn't do that because it would be
sexist, right‡?

‡ Did I just "mansplain" there too? Ooops.

~~~
mparramon
He's a man:
[http://alexpotato.com/career/about.pl](http://alexpotato.com/career/about.pl)

~~~
mcnamara
I don't see anything on that page that indicates Alex has stated a gender
identity, so that's an awfully presumptuous thing to say. Maybe you should
stop mansplaining?

