• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Is it wrong to...

Deployed Humidor

Deployed Humidor

Why do tobacco shops close so early?
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
150
Location
Haughton, Louisiana
...take a job knowing you will quit in two weeks?

I took a job as an independent contractor working for the government knowing that I'll be moving to a Civil Service position in two weeks. It's the same position doing the same job, just a different color of money.

Just curious what others would have done in a similar situation.
 
Not if you put your notice in at orientation lol
Unless I needed to feed my family with that check,
I probably would have taken a 2 week vacation till the other job started
jmho
Don
 
It is what it is. . . .

By the way, your avatar resembles this situation in an erie way.
You kind of swooped in and left in such a hurry you forgot your pants. :D

Good luck
 
Is it wrong for employers to can a person after 30 years, right before they retire?
I think that the idea that we owe an employer anything besides an honest days work is, well, how do I say this nicely?
Well, it's just plain ....DUMB.
I've seen businesses pull so many underhanded stunts to hard working folks,
to make the bottom line more attractive that I have a hard time feeling any sympathy for them when an employee
does the same in turn...survive, and improve their lot.
The next 5 to 10 year is possibly going to be a hell of an economic roller coaster. You have to do what you have to do, legally,
to provide for your family the best you can.
 
As a hiring manager, I would be pissed. It takes a lot of time, money and energy to interview and hire an employee. To turn around and have to fill the same position two weeks later........you get it.
 
You wouldn't be asking the question if you didn't already know the answer....don't let someone else's BS cloud your moral judgement.
 
You are doing what you needed to.

Did the company know that you were only going to be there for two weeks before you left? If they still hired you knowing that you were only there for two weeks, that's on them; not you.
 
Interesting. Why not just take a two week holiday?

If you wanted the workand they offered it, take it. When you leave someone else will take your place.
 
If they are serious about keeping you, and want to recoup the expense of interviewing you, which I can't imagine is going to put them out of business, they will counteroffer
with a competative salary and benefits. I do not ascribe to the idea that you are somehow flawed because you are going for the better deal. Since when does the employer always get the moral high ground? They hired you as an independant contractor because they do not want the expenses associated with a direct hire, and it gives them a lot of
freedom on how they treat you. Too often, hiring "independant contractors" is as close to illegal as they can fudge it without crossing the line.

Did they tell you how long the work was for? Any benefits? Any unemployment benefits being paid? Do you have a contract? I mean, don't contractors have contracts? You are self employed, paying all your own taxes, double FICA, etc. As a contractor, with no contract, are you obligated to them any more than they are to you? They aren't real serious about keeping you. Be wise, not manipulated.
 
I think that's a question that you've already answered in your mind by asking it.

It doesn't really matter what I or anyone else think. You have to come to terms with your own behavior. The fact that you're questioning that behavior provides the answer.
 
There's little loyalty to the employee now a days from corporations, I'm not surprised to see those working to climb the ladder show little loyalty to employers. Two edged sword.

However, I'll add I've never quit without a two weeks. But, I was raised with the expectation that a dollar earned is a dollar you didn't have before.

Like others have said...an extra paycheck is sometimes a necessity.
 
I can say that I would not do this unless I absolutely had too (i.e. the bank was going to foreclose on my house). I would personally sleep better at night.

I agree that the employee/employer relationship has deteriorated. However, I feel actions like these only push sides apart further.
 
I would have let them know what I was doing prior to doing it. Sure it could cost you two weeks pay. I get that. But you never know when that previous boss you ditched out on will become your new boss. I say leave on good terms as much as possible. I think it helps your reputation in the future.

If anything its just common courtesy as well to your boss. You wouldn't want to hire a painter to paint your house, he does so for two weeks and only paints the bottom half and then says "see ya later, I got a new gig somewhere else" would you? Wouldn't you rather not hire the guy or at least know up front that he was only able to do half the house, so you could choose what half it was and have time to find a suitable replacement?
 
My moral compass is tingling... lets just say I wouldn't have done it and leave it at that.
 
In this situation I'm not really ditching anyone. As soon as the civil service position is effective the contractor requirement goes away. The contractor knows the requirement was for a short term. I'm just not sure they were expecting this short...I wasn't.
Thanks for your input guys. I appreciate your insights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top