Job Hoppers Losing Jobs
from the ouch dept
It was just a few years ago that people were talking about the "importance" of changing jobs very often, in order to get broader experience, and to move up the corporate ladder. People joked about the poor souls who were staying in a single job doing things the "old fashioned" way. Well, look who's laughing now? It seems that when it comes to layoffs these days, companies are dumping those eager job hoppers, because they don't display any sort of loyalty. They're sticking with the people who have been there, and know the company - even when they may be more expensive.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Twisted data
"Company loyalty often determines who receives pink slips.... 26 percent of those laid off had been employed for fewer than 24 months."
Company loyalty my foot! Read the quote with the data inverted:
"74 percent of those laid off had been employed for more than 24 months."
Sounds like the people behind the study picked a stat that would sound good, and ran with it. Problem is, the stat is relatively worthless. What does the rest of the grid look like? Does the scale diminish over time--or is that untrue, and therefore left out of the report?
Many holes in this one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Twisted data
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet another point of view:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]