Renee in NC Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I haven't been offered the job yet, so this is a rhetorical question. It's a PT job as a bookkeeper in a small office and they have never had a bookkeeper in house before. I could do the job and we need the money. However, there is a big possibility that I would quit after about 6 months. Part of me says, "Who cares! We need the money!" but the other side says it's wrong to do so without letting them know that I will probably only work for 6 months. If it were a cashier job or waitress, it would be different, but a bookkeeper is a position of responsibility. If it makes any difference - at first it would be through a temp agency, but the reality is that it is a "temp-to-perm" job and the expectation is that I would take it permanently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don't think it is wrong. You don't really know what will happen in 6 months. You could have to quit - they could go belly up - or your circumstances could change so that you will be able to continue working there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I think it depends on how much of the time you are still getting on your feet. If you were 100% pretty much from the start, I think 6 months is reasonable. OTOH, if they have to invest a couple months in getting you acclimated and fully up and running, then it's probably too short. I think that if you are planning to serve at least 6 months (at the close to 100% mark) that that is fine. No one really knows what they'll be doing 6 months from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SherryTX Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Why do you think you would leave after 6 months? Honestly, 6 months is a good bit of time - I say go in, work your your hardest, making sure that if you are ever gone (even for a day, say if you take a day off or are ill, etc.) that you have things set up so well that if needed, someone could take over for you. I don't think it is dishonest. I took a job last summer, that sounded great - and then 3 weeks into it I realized I made a huge mistake. I hated it quite a bit, but worked hard, and made sure that the person coming in after me was well prepared. Employers sometimes end up laying off workers a few months after they hire them - usually they don't realize they will be of course. You need to do what you need to do. Remember too, that you don't have a 100% idea of everything it will be like working there UNTIL you are working there. So, it is perfectly understandable if after you are there you realize it isn't the place for you. My suggestion - if you decide you are going to leave after 6 months - IF you know for sure, and if you have a good relationship with your employer, let them know 4 to 6 weeks ahead time so they can find someone to replace you and you can train them. That is a courtesy, and I am sure they would appreciate it. If the situation is that your employer is a dolt and you are afraid they would fire you right then and there for giving notice, I wouldn't give more than 2 weeks. (This is my take from both an employee and recruiter/HR person.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosy Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don't think so...I think if an employer expects someone to stay long-term, they need to ask for a commitment up front, or at least ask point blank in the interview what the applicant's long-term plans are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMA Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Well, the other viewpoint is that an employee takes a job and after 6 months, the company lays the employee off due to downsizing. People quit after just a day on the job due to circumstances beyond their control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SherryTX Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don't think so...I think if an employer expects someone to stay long-term, they need to ask for a commitment up front, or at least ask point blank in the interview what the applicant's long-term plans are. Yes - and the fact they are working through a temp agency shows they are not sure of the long term aspect of it anyway. It's smart to do this - especially if the position is a new one to the company. However, remember, employers usually are not required to give you notice (ie., if you work in an "at will state"). I think it is common courtesy to when circumstances allow it. If you said in the interview:"I tell you now I absolutely will commit to working for you for the next two years no matter what!" Well, then I would think about telling them you think you would only be there for 6 months when the offer is made. However, really - who in their right mind would make a commitment like that without knowing what it is to actually work there? I like that you question it though - I think it is a very responsible question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erica in PA Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I haven't been offered the job yet, so this is a rhetorical question. It's a PT job as a bookkeeper in a small office and they have never had a bookkeeper in house before. I could do the job and we need the money. However, there is a big possibility that I would quit after about 6 months. Part of me says, "Who cares! We need the money!" but the other side says it's wrong to do so without letting them know that I will probably only work for 6 months. If it were a cashier job or waitress, it would be different, but a bookkeeper is a position of responsibility. If it makes any difference - at first it would be through a temp agency, but the reality is that it is a "temp-to-perm" job and the expectation is that I would take it permanently. I know exactly what you mean. I've been in a similar situation before, and I really didn't feel comfortable with it, morally. I took a job working at a bed-breakfast/event facility, doing what I thought was just housekeeping, and I felt okay doing that for just a short period. Unfortunately, when they starting training me they liked me, and in just a few days, they started giving me much more responsibility, including being a wedding coordinator! They were a very small, family-run business, and there was only one other person there who could do the things that I was being trained to do, and on her days off I would have been crucial. I felt extremely uncomfortable, knowing that this family was going to be relying on me so heavily, and teaching me so much, when I was only planning to work for around six months. I decided to be honest with them and tell them my plans, and see if they still wanted to invest time into me knowing that I was not planning on staying long. I would have been okay with their response either way, but they ended up saying that they would rather have someone good for a shorter time, and wait to see what happened with me, than hiring someone they couldn't trust, not knowing how long that person would really end up staying either. (I ended up leaving just a few days later because I found I could not juggle homeschooling/home/parenting/working as well as I hoped I could. I felt like a real loser then, but again they were very understanding and even supportive.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantlion Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don't know, I have mixed feelings on this. I've done some temp-to-permanent jobs and one worked out, one didn't, but they were large corporations. I would say go with your gut. Is this a small business? Will they spend time training you? Why do you think it would only last 6 months? Perhaps you could do as Erica said and let them know you truly want a long term temp position. I think upfront honesty works best in the long run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nestof3 Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) I know your situation is through a temp agency, so it may all differ. As an employer, though, I thought I'd offer you our side of it. When my husband runs an ad and takes the time to look over lots of applicants and do job interviews and such and then takes time to train (every job is somewhat different), he is surely hoping the person isn't planning on leaving in six months. And, no -- my husband could make no promises. He may go belly up or have to cut his helper, but when he's looking for help, he's not planning any of these things. At the least, I think it is good to give the employer ample time to get new help. I see plenty of people complain about not getting enough notice when their job is terminated but plenty of people give only two weeks notice or less to their employer. That being said, my husband has hired someone for only 6 months. It's hard to find decent help in lawn maintenance (unless you hire illegal people). It was worth it to him to have the help. I just want to be the voice that reminds people that employers are actually real people with families. Edited April 20, 2009 by nestof3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tap Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 If you are fairly certain you won't be staying...tell them upfront. It isn't fair to them to invest in training you to only have you leave once you get settled. I would tell them that you will absolutely give them xxx amount of notice (preferably a month) and be willing to train your replacement. If you think there is an unlikely possibility, but you know it exists....I wouldn't tell them. But since you know, I would make sure to give them plenty of notice if you do quit, to make the transition easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impish Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Nothing is ever written in stone. Trust me on that one. I never planned on having the title, "The One Armed Wonder" lol! So, I wouldn't worry about what may be six months from now. If you are offered the job, and its a good fit for you now, then take it with a clear conscience. If, in 5 months time, it does indeed look as though you will not be able to continue with it, give notice with your employer so there is enough time to find and train your replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughCollie Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I don't think it is wrong. You don't really know what will happen in 6 months. You could have to quit - they could go belly up - or your circumstances could change so that you will be able to continue working there. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted April 21, 2009 Author Share Posted April 21, 2009 I know your situation is through a temp agency, so it may all differ. As an employer, though, I thought I'd offer you our side of it. When my husband runs an ad and takes the time to look over lots of applicants and do job interviews and such and then takes time to train (every job is somewhat different), he is surely hoping the person isn't planning on leaving in six months. And, no -- my husband could make no promises. He may go belly up or have to cut his helper, but when he's looking for help, he's not planning any of these things. At the least, I think it is good to give the employer ample time to get new help. I see plenty of people complain about not getting enough notice when their job is terminated but plenty of people give only two weeks notice or less to their employer. That being said, my husband has hired someone for only 6 months. It's hard to find decent help in lawn maintenance (unless you hire illegal people). It was worth it to him to have the help. I just want to be the voice that reminds people that employers are actually real people with families. I *have* been the employer and that's why it bothers me. They aren't going to spend time training me - it's bookkeeping with a program that I have been setting up and training with for almost 15 years. It is a small office (1 owner and 1 pt office worker.) I believe in 6 months or less I will have enough private clients to quit. Of course, nothing is guaranteed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brigitte Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 I *have* been the employer and that's why it bothers me. They aren't going to spend time training me - it's bookkeeping with a program that I have been setting up and training with for almost 15 years. It is a small office (1 owner and 1 pt office worker.) I believe in 6 months or less I will have enough private clients to quit. Of course, nothing is guaranteed! Could you not take them on as a private client at that time or even now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted April 21, 2009 Author Share Posted April 21, 2009 Could you not take them on as a private client at that time or even now? I can't now without violating my agreement with the agency. I could in the future if they were interested (and they had made me a permanent employee) - that *is* a definate possibility if they are comfortable with it. Thanks for the idea! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTMindy Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 I think it is best to be up front and say, "There is a chance that in months I might be doing _____. I just want to let you know that up front." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LND1218 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 I have been the employer too, but you could wind up staying. I took a job once (when we didn't have any income so I took it) knowing that I would leave as soon as what I really wanted opened up. But it turned into a really great job and I stayed for years. You just never know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlockOfSillies Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 If their expectation is temp-to-perm, and yours is temp-only, then it doesn't sound like a good match. They want someone with one foot in the door, moving toward both feet in. You want to keep one foot out the door. If I were an employer, I'd find it frustrating to hire someone t-to-p, only to be blindsided by that individual at the end of his probationary period (which is really what t-to-p is). You owe it to them to be up front about your intentions. If they decide not to hire you at all, then they're just making their decision now and trying to save themselves the headache of being back at square one in six months. Maybe you should limit your search to temp-only positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MomofSeven Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 especially since it's a temp-to-perm. The expectation is that both the employer and employee become comfortable before making the arrangement permenant. Neither side has any obigation to the other. Besides, 6 months is not next week and gives you plenty of time to make good contributions to the company and even train your successor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.