Submitted by kickresume t3_119y0vn in dataisbeautiful
Comments
Jklmw2008 t1_j9psou4 wrote
Right?! And there’s no breakdown of what that included.
hotfezz81 t1_j9oq8jk wrote
This doesn't even give the option of "won't allow remote work". I've literally dismissed jobs for not allowing WFH on my job hunt.
rabbiskittles t1_j9osau8 wrote
My guess is those got rolled into “Other reasons”, “personal reasons”, or even “long commute”.
H_Lunulata t1_j9p1l1e wrote
I find there's way, way, way too many people who think they can get a "job" that involves them staying home and getting mailed cheques direct deposit, sight unseen. In the past 12 months, I've rejected half a dozen candidates who figured they could Work From Home (tm) all the time.
The silly thing is that most of the work is, in fact, WFH available, but there is a component that requires on-site work (literally, it's not "management wants to see you", it deals with sensitive information handling).
I kind of wish people who want the sit-home-get-cheques job would put that right at the top of the CV so they're easier to weed out and not waste my time or theirs.
aldodoeswork t1_j9omtlh wrote
I feel like all those factors are another way to say low wage. Because for the right price, people could look past most of the other options.
healing_waters t1_j9oqad3 wrote
Not really. Maybe you think of being compensated could make up for a long commute, having to relocate, or working shitty hours.
These issues come with metal health impact, and the potential for families to lose time together, or to readjust to a new area they may not like.
skilliard7 t1_j9orusg wrote
Eh, I disagree. I've been approached for jobs that pay $200k+ but turned them down due to many of the other factors listed.
My comfort and job satisfaction is worth more to me than a higher salary. Money doesn't buy happiness, and a bit of extra money in the bank doesn't make up for all of the other stress.
H_Lunulata t1_j9p0wx8 wrote
*EXACTLY*
Once I hit a pay level where my life was comfortable, I stopped looking at the money so much as "how much crap do I have to put up with to get this money?"
And with each passing year, the amount of crap I'm willing to put up with declines :)
H_Lunulata t1_j9p0guq wrote
When I was young, money swayed me a lot more than it did by the time I was in my mid-30's.
Most jobs I've turned away were because the place looked like some kind of toxic slave pit. We're talking big red flags like "The work week here is 40 hours, but realistically most people put in 50+" "oh, so you pay, like time and a half for overtime?" "No, we are looking for people motivated by more than money." "Ah, I see, so you want free work. Gotcha." One could argue that's a case of low wage, but to me it's more "we expect you to be completely subservient to the company" - basically any time they mention some thing like "sweat equity" you know they mean "we expect you'll be donating a lot of free work to the company and we don't care about anything in your personal life."
I've seen managers mistreat (IMO) employees during an interview, that's a huge red flag.
sskoog t1_j9t0rpa wrote
>managers mistreat employees during an interview... that's a huge red flag
This is my answer too. If I sniff some bad interpersonal chemistry during the interview process, it's almost always a no. Barring absolute desperation, the higher wage (probably) won't offset hate-my-life-in-12-to-15-months, or, worse, step-into-some-pit-yielding-months-of-unemployment.
uncannyinferno t1_j9oons7 wrote
It's not all about money
jadero t1_j9oyl29 wrote
Sure, but the right price might be insane. For example, I had numerous offers intended to entice me away from being able to go fishing before breakfast, play hooky on a nice afternoon for snowshoeing or sailing, and sleep in my own bed every night. It was never going to happen, because the only price I would accept would mean that I'd have just retired independently wealthy after a year. Two at the most. Big as my ego is, even I know I'm not worth that much!
Mahgenetics t1_j9pflwu wrote
I turned down a job that offered $25,000 more than what I am currently being paid for because they didnt offer PTO or health insurance
RCrumbDeviant t1_j9rwmtf wrote
I don’t understand the relocation one - how did you get to a job offer without knowing that was needed?
I’ve turned down jobs because they needed me to relocate and wouldn’t provide comp to make their timeline of when they needed me to start, but I knew about the relocation beforehand and THEY knew that I lived across the country from them. We couldn’t find the price that worked, but that’s not relocation it’s compensation.
Sweaty-Willingness27 t1_j9rn4la wrote
"The findings also suggest that a more challenging interview increases the probability of accepting the job offer by 2.6 percent."
This strikes me as a dangerous and potentially incorrect statement. Does the challenging interview increase the probability of acceptance or is it associated with companies that are growing/popular/frontrunners and therefore a first choice for applicants? Is it a statistically significant difference? Is it simply correlated?
I say this because these statements are not in a vacuum. For software development, which is the only industry I can speak to, many interviews are already ridiculous in length and number of rounds. Some HR at a decent company is going to look at this and say "Well, guess we should make our interviews more burdensome".
Also, I just noticed... this survey is from November 2020. That seems like it would be important or at least notable. Though I may be in the minority on that.
Mahgenetics t1_j9pf3w2 wrote
Lacking benefits only 1.48%? That seems rather low unless this survey was done outside of the US
JKennyXTX t1_j9oyw1k wrote
If “Other” is the second largest reason, they’ve used that category incorrectly