Stupid question, wasn’t that a risky move? I mean, the way I was raised to think by my parents I can hear their voices in the back of my head if I went through a situation like this, similar to this:
“But aren’t you worried they might hire you then fire you just out of spite for switching companies? And then what are you gonna do?”
-
No company with a single HR person would re-hire you just to fire you out of spite. It costs a chunk of time and money to get someone onboarded, which would be wasted. If they didn’t like you, they could just forget about you.
-
“And then what are you gonna do” is pretty clear, go back to the other company or find a different job. Not really a bad outcome.
-
deleted by creator
Not OP, but companies don’t really care about people to that degree. They act for profit, or perceived profit, or to avoid a loss- someone that they know to be useful who is already familiar with the business is more valuable than an unknown.
Makes sense. People think they are the center of the universe when companies only see you as an additional cog in the machine. I’m not sure if I’m happy or sad by this. I’ll choose the positive side of things today.
Yeah, it’s both shitty and sometimes useful. It reminds me of an article I read once about implicit hierarchies- sometimes when organizations try to do away with traditional management, what they end up with instead is an unofficial and opaque control structure based on cliques and influence. In those cases it can be better for newcomers if there is an explicit set of rules and guidelines.
Do you have a source for this article? I’ve found that this has happened on my company and I am curious about the phenomenon
I don’t - it was quite a while ago, sorry. I’ll do some searching and let you know if I find it again.
