• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • FREE workshop: Preparing contractors for Autumn : Weds 29th Sep at 7.15pm. More details here.

Switching employment often

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by PermMCCon View Post
    All very valuable, please do think of these.

    Speaking from a "contractor hirer" point of view:

    If I receive a contractor CV with <4yrs and it has 3 x roles in the last year... these are red flags for me. Simply put, we have soooo many good CVs coming in, am I really going to risk it on a person who (for whatever reason) seems to contract hop every few months!?! Why wouldn't I take the other guys / girls who have similar yrs experience but have done a solid 1yr+ in each contract or role?

    This doesn't mean you shouldn't take it, but this new "60% extra dough" role better involve the reinvention of the wheel and a VERY long contract, or your CV is about to be trash fodder the next time you are looking for a role in another 2-3 months time...

    I suggest using your gut feel, pondering the questions asked by others here and talking to a fellow veteran contractor you trust. Go from there.

    Best of luck but do becareful, your CV for the last year is looking a bit ropey.
    To me your comments mark one of the paradoxes of being a contractor. On the one hand we're supposed to be contractors so moves should be expected whereas the reality clients are looking for permitractors (as your comments would tend to show). I know it can be argued that clients are looking for longevity in contracts but not all clients can justify taking people on for long rolling contracts with multiple renewals. In fact, I would argue that it could be a sign of a better organised client if they only bring a contractor in for a relatively short term contract with very specific deliverables.

    I would argue you'll be missing out on some potentially good people rather than plodders if they are dismissed out of hand for having short term contracts on their CVs. I know I'm not likely to change any perceptions on here but do find the situation rather sad knowing that you have to play the game of long term contracts on your CV from time to time even if the contract has been misrepresented.

    Comment


      #12
      WSDS - not all contracts are one long term projects. Some are shorter and more focused on final implementations or migrations etc.
      anyone hiring should look more closely at the reason for contract end, rather than the duration alone IMHO.
      Having said that, contract hopping is pretty unprofessional and not too good for your reputation.
      Entropy is NOT what it used to be.
      Inertia, however........................

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by ShandyDrinker View Post
        To me your comments mark one of the paradoxes of being a contractor. On the one hand we're supposed to be contractors so moves should be expected whereas the reality clients are looking for permitractors (as your comments would tend to show). I know it can be argued that clients are looking for longevity in contracts but not all clients can justify taking people on for long rolling contracts with multiple renewals. In fact, I would argue that it could be a sign of a better organised client if they only bring a contractor in for a relatively short term contract with very specific deliverables.

        I would argue you'll be missing out on some potentially good people rather than plodders if they are dismissed out of hand for having short term contracts on their CVs. I know I'm not likely to change any perceptions on here but do find the situation rather sad knowing that you have to play the game of long term contracts on your CV from time to time even if the contract has been misrepresented.

        I think it possibly depends on the industry you are in, but it's a fair point. For example in financial services, the vast majority of roles are for cogs in the wheels of a larger transformation programme, and there is rarely a case where you would really only want someone in for 3 months. Regardless of the role, e.g. a BA would be needed from gathering reqs, right through to supporting test. Even test analysts who might only be in execution for a couple of months, would likely spend a good few more months in test preparation. I personally (in FMCG) have only been in one contract where is came to a natural end, where the programme was fully delivered and they didn't want me to move onto anything else. I've been there two years and had roughly four 6 month contracts.

        So, depends on the industry, the programmes or projects people have been on. Honestly though, even people who work on very short term BAU projects, if they do a good job they get rolled onto another one.

        I'm might be way off, but I'm assuming the OP is prob pretty young, really keen to get ahead and as they've done well enough to have done a stint in a Big 4 consultancy then it does seem unfair. I'm just saying make your decisions very wisely and think them through, or you run the very real risk of not being taken seriously by agencies and resourcing managers. Otherwise you may never get to sit in front of the hiring manager to impress them.

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by ShandyDrinker View Post
          I would argue you'll be missing out on some potentially good people rather than plodders if they are dismissed out of hand for having short term contracts on their CVs.
          Back when I was hiring contractors, I usually had a dozen decent cvs for each role, and didn't want to interview more than 2 or 3 candidates. Frequent short contracts was a differentiator for me on otherwise similar cvs. Maybe it genuinely is a series of short term contracts. Maybe the person got found out each time and wasn't offered a renewal. Maybe they are prone to jumping for more money and leaving the client in the lurch.

          I can't be sure which is the actual cause, but I didn't have to take the increased risk - I'd just interview the candidates who clearly had been given a number of renewals.

          Comment


            #15
            Short stints happen.

            I've had several gigs where the role was specifically for short term, small pieces of work where told from outset there would be no renewal. I've had longer gigs where renewals occurred. It's all part of the varied life of a contractor. If recruiters see that as a negative, that's their own shortcoming for not understanding contracting imo.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by perplexed View Post
              Short stints happen.

              I've had several gigs where the role was specifically for short term, small pieces of work where told from outset there would be no renewal. I've had longer gigs where renewals occurred. It's all part of the varied life of a contractor. If recruiters see that as a negative, that's their own shortcoming for not understanding contracting imo.
              Having a mixture of long and short stints isn't a problem and neither is having short stints showing repeat customers.
              "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by blossom View Post
                3 short stints could be damaging...regarding the 60% increase on the other one, I can see why it's tempting. Few more questions to mull over...

                - what is the actual going rate for what you do and the industry you are in? if its such a big jump it suggests a potential change in industry, so you would need to be absolutely concrete certain that the +60% role would be a keeper.
                - What if you don't like the next role? Appreciate your existing job might be boring, but hanging onto a boring job for the sake of your CV might be a wiser move than taking something that *looks* interesting from the outside. What makes you think the next role won't also be boring?
                - Is the other one actually definitely there, have you been interviewed and offered? You could still do all that, see how it goes but tell them you are on 4 weeks notice. If they want you they would wait out your notice period.
                -I work in analytics, it seems to vary from 300 up to 700 for non-financial, and from 300 up to 1000 for financial from what I've seen advertised
                - That's a risk but I'm also worried I'll be pigeonholed into work I don't like, currently I'm constructing Excel spreadsheets day in day out which I can't stand doing, in previous jobs I was doing more modelling and visualisation, something I've tried to err towards in the past.
                - I havent applied yet but its in my expertise and previous industry.
                Last edited by tiggat; 25 July 2017, 19:40.

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by tiggat View Post
                  - I havent applied yet but its in my expertise and previous industry.
                  All 2-3 years of it?
                  'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by tiggat View Post
                    -I work in analytics, it seems to vary from 300 up to 700 for non-financial, and from 300 up to 1000 for financial from what I've seen advertised
                    - That's a risk but I'm also worried I'll be pigeonholed into work I don't like, currently I'm constructing Excel spreadsheets day in day out whereas in previous jobs I was doing more statistics and visualisation, something I've tried to err towards in the past.
                    - I havent applied yet but its in my expertise and previous industry.

                    That changes things...it's a world of difference when recruiters are sifting through CVs for a run-of-the-mill BA role, to something that requires more specialist skills (and probably the qualifications that go with it).

                    If you have valuable skills that are in short supply you will always be in demand (e.g. the clever people who do credit risk modelling get paid really good money and are really difficult to find). The likelihood of them getting 100 CVs for your role goes down enormously for that sort of thing (in my opinion).


                    Agree on the pigeonholing, staying in a boring job that is also damaging to your career aspirations from a skills perspective isn't good either.

                    If I were in your position I would take the risk, and go for the other role, have a solid story for recruiters on why that role is the right role for you, and make a promise to yourself that you will stick at it. Good luck

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X