(no subject)

[arethinn]

I had my interview with the Sunnyvale Library this morning, and I think it went well. Just about everything they asked me, I have prior specific applicable experience. But I am up to here with their heel-dragging hiring process, because they said I should know within two weeks (which seems a little long for such a call back, given what comes next) whether they wanted me in for a second interview! I mean OMG! Having two interviews in and of itself isn't that unusual (we ourselves at De Anza Library have just instituted something similar for hiring students), but after already having a screening test back in December, and the long wait between that and this...? It's getting pretty ridiculous.

OTOH, after hearing the specific job setup today, I really want this job. I have been viewing the OML as a kind of last resort, a job I could be sure of being offered after everything else had petered out (I didn't get the Academic Services job by the way, which is ok -- after hearing its specific duties, I'm not sure I would have liked it, and they would have wanted me to come in at 8:00 AM anyway, which is past my threshold of pain). Now it looks like I'm going to be in the unfavourable position of having to decide one way on the other on the (expected) OML offer without knowing where I really stand with Sunnyvale. I will either have to accept and kick myself when Sunnyvale calls me again, or turn it down and take the chance of coming out at the end with nothing. If I only had a day or two of "limbo" time I could probably ask them to wait and see if Sunnyvale hires me, but now I know it's going to be two weeks at least, and Judy will have needed to make a decision well before that because she needs the new person in place by then, basically (the last day I can work as a temp is the 9th of March).

*sesplode*

Comments

[lupabitch.livejournal.com]

Good luck!!!

[bluesidhe.livejournal.com]

Hey...Was that you I saw at P-Con running down the stairs and giving me a wave, like some little Flutter-Fey... It looked like you, anyways. I haven't seen you in so long, and it was just brief.

Blue

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

Yup, that was me... said hi without knowing who you were saying hi to, eh? ;) (I do that all the time.. pretty bad about remembering people's names unless I see them frequently, or have some specific thing that I remember them from or for.)

[bluesidhe.livejournal.com]

I did recognize you, but it was so fleeting, I wanted to be sure. :-) You looked good, lass.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

ahh... well thankee :)

[zaecus.livejournal.com]

I realize it's not the most pleasant prospect, but you could take the OML job with the awareness that, apparently, you'll be there at least a month before you find out anything about the Sunnyvale job, and since they seem to consider unnecessary delay a part of the process, let them know (once hired), that you will need a week or two to extricate yourself from the job you needed to take in order to feed yourself during the decision-making process.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

That doesn't seem ethical to me, to take a job intended to be permanent with the intent of leaving it in a few weeks?

[ahril.livejournal.com]

You have another choice you're not looking at.

If I were you, I'd take the OML job, and then if Sunnyvale hired me, I'd take that too, even if only being in the OML job for two weeks. That way, I'm not left with nothing and I get the best if it's offered.

"But I can't do that to {insert name of colleague at deAnza)." you say? Yes, you can. This is business, and you must make a business decision without letting personal relationships cloud your judgement.

Yes, it's an assholic and bitchy thing to do, but unfortunately that is the way the current financial systems of the world work. You can't leave yourself without a job at all or settle for less than you could simply because you are friends with someone who might hire you for one of the possible choices.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

As I said to Zaecus, it seems terribly unethical to me to take a job intended to be permanent with the intent to leave it in a few weeks, just in the abstract, never mind the personal involvement. If nothing else it will reflect badly on me in the future -- "she doesn't stick with her commitments", they would no longer be able to give me a good reference (and it's the bulk of my job experience up to this point), etc.

[zaecus.livejournal.com]

I've got two responses, but one of them I really have to make because it acests things as they appear to be instead of working to make things better.

The other one, however, is simple. Ethical decisions are sometimes complex, but the best rule is to not leave others worse than you found them, and in this, it seems to of you have that option without cheating yourself. You don't know what will happen; he you don't get the Sunnyvale job, you need the OML one, but you can take the Sunnyvale job later.

As my one bow to the first argument I mentioned, some things that were once assets in business/employment are now deficits in actual practice, and vice versa.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

"one of them I really have to make because it acests things as they appear to be instead of working to make things better."

??? Sorry, I can't parse this...

"The best rule is to not leave others worse than you found them, and in this, it seems to of you have that option without cheating yourself. You don't know what will happen; he you don't get the Sunnyvale job, you need the OML one, but you can take the Sunnyvale job later."

If I do that, I DO leave people worse than I found them. They would have to start all over on hiring a new permanent person (which takes over a month even if you ram it through as fast as possible - they have to collect applications for 3 weeks), and they are not allowed to hire another temporary because of the union contract. There would be no one here at all in the intervening time. It would be a disaster. And, as I said to ahril, to me it looks terribly bad to take a job and then immediately leave it (unless it's for some specific incompatibility you couldn't have known about in advance). To a future employer it looks like I am not able to keep up a commitment, and if I were the employer getting shafted in this way, I would be very upset at such a person (I have been upset in the past at student employees who would accept the job offer, and then never show, or work for one week and then quit, etc. - it makes a lot of work for me having to hire a replacement), and not want to give them a good reference in the future. I need to keep good references from here, because they're the bulk of my job experience so far. Maybe 10 years from now I can not care what they think of me, but right now it's still important.

forgot to log in :-(

[zaecus.livejournal.com]

That first bit should have been (correcting all typos):

"one of them I really hate to make because it accepts things as they appear to be instead of working to make things better."

I'm referring to something my lady has discovered. It seems that staying at a job for extended periods of time, unless it includes a conspicuous promotion, is now seen as a negative on a job history. In the field you are looking at, this may not be as pronounced, but it basically means that the business world has begun to reward employees who view their career in a much more 'mercenary' fashion.

"If I do that, I DO leave people worse than I found them..."

*nod* I don't quite understand why they would have to start over completely, but know that many places would. I also don't have personal experience with how important the references are in that field. In the end, you've got to do what you feel best about and will regret the least.

As for Sunnyvale telling you you'd have to start immediately... For me, with an organization that's dragging things out the way they're doing, that would be a major warning sign that what I could expect from them and what they demand from me are so grossly incompatible that I wouldn't want to work there.

This level of honesty is more often punished than rewarded, but have you considered letting the OML people know up front that you may be getting another job offer that, if it comes through, you consider it an opportunity that you can't afford to pass up, but that you will work with them to the best of your ability to keep them from being unnecessarily put out?

Re: forgot to log in :-(

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

"It seems that staying at a job for extended periods of time, unless it includes a conspicuous promotion, is now seen as a negative on a job history."

*nods* In business, I agree. And I have always been stumped by questions like "what are your career goals, and how would this position fit into them?" because I don't have any, not of the type of answer they want to this question. This is education, though (well - it's a public library. but currently I am working in a college library), so the rules are a bit different, especially since the employees are members of a union (SEIU) and that tends to reward long stays, via pensions, longevity raises, etc.

This kind of attitude is one of the reasons I want to stay away from business industry, BTW. ^_-

"I don't quite understand why they would have to start over completely, but know that many places would."

It's just the way the union contract is laid out. Certain procedures have to be followed to hire a new permanent employee, to guarantee fairness and diversity and yadda. Some of it is a little overmuch sometimes, I think, but AFAIK they have to do it the same way every time. Submit the proposal to the board, get approval to hire, collect applications for three weeks, review applications, forward to the hiring committee, do interviews, blah blah blah.

"This level of honesty is more often punished than rewarded, but have you considered letting the OML people know up front that you may be getting another job offer that, if it comes through, you consider it an opportunity that you can't afford to pass up, but that you will work with them to the best of your ability to keep them from being unnecessarily put out?"

Yes, actually, this occurred to me yesterday, that I should sit down with my supervisor and dean and talk this over (of course, I have laryngitis at the moment ^_-). I have a "cushion" here in that both of these people I have known for quite a long time - my immediate supervisor since 1995 (when I worked for him as a student) and my dean since 1987 or something, when I befriended her oldest daughter in the fourth grade (which, incidentally, is how I got the student job in 1995 in the first place - it's who you know!).

[ahril.livejournal.com]

You have no way of knowing if Sunnyvale will hire you, so you take the offer of the OLM job. Yes, you have every intention of it being permanent when you accept it, because you do not know what Sunnyvale will do. No problem with ethics there.

Then, if Sunnyvale does make you an offer, you tell deAnza that an offer you can't refuse came up and you have to accept it, which is the truth. This is also ethical since you had no way of knowing they were going to offer it to you when you accepted the OLM job.

It's perfectly ethical as long as you give de Anza 2 weeks notice.

The time (or lack thereof) between your hearing of the offers is not your fault. You are placing blame and guilt upon yourself for something that is out of your control. Unless you sign a contract with deAnza to work for them for a specific length of time as part of accepting the OLM position, you have nothing to fear, and they have no ammunition with which to craft a reason to give you a bad recomendation.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

"You have no way of knowing if Sunnyvale will hire you, so you take the offer of the OLM job. Yes, you have every intention of it being permanent when you accept it, because you do not know what Sunnyvale will do. No problem with ethics there."

I don't, though! I would still be hoping that they would call me and give me the other job. I would be intending to leave if any opportunity presented itself. I have no problem with doing this at some future point (after "probation" is over) but it doesn't seem right to accept a job knowing (hoping, expecting) that it could only be a couple of weeks.

(PS, OML - it stands for Open Media Lab)

"It's perfectly ethical as long as you give de Anza 2 weeks notice."

They need more than that, since it takes longer than 2 weeks to hire a replacement. And I might not be able to give two weeks, at that. And then, what if Sunnyvale says "you need to start immediately, we can't wait two weeks, if you are not available now then we will make the offer to the next candidate"?

Follow up

[zaecus.livejournal.com]

If you can't find a way to feel good about yourself doing it, though, it -isn't- worth it. Some decisions are always uncomfortable, however, even if they are the 'good' one, subjectively or objectively.

I hope that whatever you decide works out best for you.