Lazy or Loyal
- Started
- Last post
- 16 Responses
- dbloc
I've been at my current job for 12 years. I feel like the company may be starting to go downhill, so I'm about to start pursuing something else. If you were a prospective employer and saw that I was at my current job for 12 years, would you see that as lazy or loyal?
- detritus0
Unambitious/content/stable.
'Loyalty' comes through relationships, not tenureships - 'lazy' would've been fired by now.
- duckseason0
Have you had the same position/title for 12 years?
- spot130
Employers don't want to hire someone every year, typically it takes a year for an employee to become 100% efficient so the investment in training, hiring and space for that person is lost when they leave within (or around) a year.
- sine0
12 years is a very, very long time...
i doubt you'll appear anything other than experienced and dedicated to possible new employers/partners
- ********0
Loyal man!
- and yes Lazy would have been fired, especially if it's a good firm********
- and yes Lazy would have been fired, especially if it's a good firm
- i_monk0
If the place is going under and you're as senior as possible...
Just saying...
Y'know...
- ********0
slacker, lemming, no passion, no ambition
- ********0
get the more senior guys fired and move up and run it
- Knuckleberry0
Horrible Logos hasn't been around for 12 years? I kid
- Knuckleberry0
In all truth... aren't you at O'neill? If so, I did notice Tilly's took that building off the 5. Whats happening?
- not at o'neill. I noticed that too.dbloc
- wasn't that the Hurley building though?dbloc
- No, that was near jamboree. I meant the 405 btw, not the 5Knuckleberry
- Horp0
12 years is long, so you're going to be of interest to the kind of companies that are looking to invest in a relationship of that length. Whilst its true that a long sequence of short engagements look bad, I think the shift in employment patterns indicates that people are not expected to put in more than 6 years, so it could be an almost sub-conscious concern for an employee that they're going to get you in and never get you back out again.
Most people I talk to talk about employing someone and seeing how it goes for a year before making any firm commitments. I hear that a lot lately. People might be reluctant to be the one to pull you out of a life-long job to try you out and then cut you free after twelve months.
I would talk about this 12 year stint as being exceptional and try where possible to imply a desire to put in a four or five year stint at another company where you hope to make a positive and meaningful contribution to the company in exchange for a broader set of experiences.
- capn_ron0
I'm not sure it would matter if you have good work and they think you are a good fit. I don't really know, but to me it seems like places want people they can work with and that do good work rather than being too hung up on time spent at previous jobs.
- tOki0
^ agreed
Being responsible for hiring the designers in my team, I find that in my perspective I'm more interested in their potential to do good work and fit in with the company culture than how long they've been in the industry or where they were before. Those things and folios get them the interview, but that's about it. From that point on it's much more a test of how they react to questions and the general vibe they give off.
12 years is a very good run, I think that shows loyalty and perseverance particularly considering how economies have played havoc with the industry over the last 4 years. If you were doing shit work and just rocking up for the paycheck I'd say otherwise,but you'd never do that right? :p
- MrT0
It's a subjective view for the employer - 12 years constant employment and development, or a lack of ambition? Alternatively, if you'd had 8 jobs in that 12 years - you may be driven and ambitious or simply didn't fit in anywhere.
One thing I'd be looking for is variety in the 'folio - 12 years in one place could mean less of a range, esp if said company had steady clients.