Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Getting Over the Stigma of a Previous Job?

Posted by Cliff on from the my-boss-did-it-not-me dept.

Subm asks: "Some friends-of-friends worked at a company with such a high profile downfall their past employer became a liability. They weren't involved in causing the downfall, but with the name 'Enron' on their resumes, interviews were spent defending their past employment. SCO is more focused in its industry than Enron, was and its reputation is in a downward spiral in that industry (Unix and GNU/Linux, not lawsuits, that is). SCO's staff will have to look for other jobs sooner or later, and most within the Unix/GNU/Linux community. Can good workers get over the stigma of an employer's reputation? How will working at SCO affect its staff's careers? Does anyone at SCO talk about this?"

27 of 678 comments (clear)

  1. Industry defense mechanism by Pendersempai · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Harsh as it may sound, perhaps it would be better if they couldn't get over having SCO on their resume.

    Perhaps that would motivate employers to quit as soon as their company starts being vastly evil, which would in itself be a motivation for companies not to be evil.

    Thoughts?

    1. Re:Industry defense mechanism by devphaeton · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Perhaps that would motivate employers to quit as soon as their company starts being vastly evil, which would in itself be a motivation for companies not to be evil.

      On first thought, that sounds quite plausible. But on second thought, i know and you know that if someone bails out of a $25/hr job, the company will be more than happy to try to hire someone into it (read: inexperienced newbs or immigrants) at $9/hr.

      All and all, that will have a detrimental effect on everyone in the entire industry, as we see now. Plus, one of the first backlashes for this sort of thing would be to start an IT Union or something of that effect. Maybe in the 1930's Unions were a good thing, ensuring people didn't get literally worked to death in unsafe conditions for peanuts.

      However these days, most unions are ridiculous beauracracies (sp, i know) that wince financial support from both employers and employees for their own gain, under the muse of taking care of both sides....

      --


      do() || do_not(); // try();
    2. Re:Industry defense mechanism by marick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "However these days, most unions are ridiculous beauracracies (sp, i know) that wince financial support from both employers and employees for their own gain, under the muse of taking care of both sides...."

      Nice speculation, but where's the evidence to back it up?

      I was a member of a new union of Teachers Assistants at UC Santa Cruz a few years back, and after we went on a 2-week strike, the school negotiated with us, and we got a real contract with medical, dental, and optical benefits (which didn't exist before this particular contract). Plus a guarantee of binding arbitration in case of issues with a particular professor. (such as sexual harrassment or overworking by the professor).

      Before we had this contract, professors were requiring their TAs to grade 40-50 hours a week in some cases even though the contract was for 20 hours per week. And the students couldn't say no, since it was the accepted system and their only source of income while a student.

      For these TAs, anyway, the union was an invaluable thing.

      So there's my union story. What's yours?

    3. Re:Industry defense mechanism by karnal · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Loyalty - If your previous employer was involved in something illegal or you were seriously underappreciated at your old job that is one thing, but to leave a decent job for a bit of a raise shows where your loyalties lie."

      Actually, I would give kudos to a person, if they were in a situation to where they could not advance and were not able to barter for a raise. There are some companies out there that will not give "raises", but merit increases, and if you don't switch jobs, you usually don't get a raise... At least, that's how it is where I work.

      Loyalty or none, if I found a job doing what I do for:

      1. A little more
      2. Opportunity

      I'd interview. But then again, I've been here 6 years, so that would get past your #2 point anyways....

      --
      Karnal
    4. Re:Industry defense mechanism by JawFunk · · Score: 2, Interesting
      If a scandal becomes apparent in June and people quit by July, I think that says well of them.

      Aye, I agree. In the case of Andersen Consulting, 500+ employees in the streets of Chicago protested the loss of their jobs to actions of a few greedy, unscrupulous execs. Most of them were picked up by the remaining Big 4 accounting firms in a short period thereafter. They recognized the talent. And they weren't goign to lose clients for hiring excellent accountants that disapproved of their employers' actions.

      In another case, I had a professor that halted research on a project when it was found out that the project was to be used for war purposes, in the kaboom department. Although I doubt the professor was fired, such commitment to morals is healthy in future projects when loyalty is questioned. What goes around comes around.

      --
      [Please sign here]
  2. I do see a problem for a tech. by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With SCO accusing the OSS world of stealing their IP, many companies will be a bit fearful of hiring a tech. It is not beyond reason that evil axis may be trying to place programmers to introduce SCO (or someone elses) code.
    The other issue that I see is anybody from Management should probably be avoided. These are the ones that took down Caldera, Unix, and SCO.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:I do see a problem for a tech. by NoCleverName · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While "planting" may be far-fetched, if SCO was still in the litigation business you might worry about them suing you because one of their former employees used SCO IP in your code (we're talking non-conspiracy theory here). That happens with everyday job changes, but would you hire more carefully because of SCO's rep?

    2. Re:I do see a problem for a tech. by Malcontent · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's also possible that a sue happy company might sue people who hire their ex eployees.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  3. Don't know about SCO, but ... by brokeninside · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I recall watching a news magazine program where they mentioned that certain former Enron employees were being snapped up right and left by other energy trading firms after the impending bankruptcy was announced. True, their salaries were much lower than at Enron, but they were still well above average for the industry.

    I'd imagine that pretty much the same would hold for SCO employees. If nothing else, being a former SCO employee makes the question "why did you leave your last position?" very easy to answer.

  4. Can they be proactive? by khasim · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's a big difference between leaving when you can still claim moral justification and leaving when they finally kick you out.

    I wouldn't have a problem with hiring someone who worked for SCO if they were looking for a job now. But I'd have a different opinion if they were looking after SCO goes broke (or whatever happens).

  5. Re:It's about skills, 99.9% by GeckoFood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you can do the work, and do it well - - and you're reliable and honest and willing to take what's offered in the way of starting compensation - - many doors will open.

    Not to be argumentative, but this is not necessarily always true.

    A past employer can be an awful liability, especially in the case of a high-profile fraud situation or a combative company. Many times if you are a former employee you are "guilty by association."

    It's somewhat similar to looking for a job and being overqualified. You have the skills, you can hit the ground running and you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are the best damn candidate for the job. BUT... You have a PhD. The employer will snub his nose at you because you're overqualified. Does it matter that you are willing to take entry level and 60/hrs a week? Not really, because then they'll wonder why you're willing to work cheap.

    Yes, your past credentials and associations matter.

    --
    Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
  6. SCO by KaLoSoFt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually not everyone at SCO will have trouble finding a job after they bankrupt. I don't think their developers aren't good at theit job. It's just the hyperabitious and hypergreedy CEO who's ruining them and he'll be the one which will have real trouble finding a job.

  7. SCO isn't the problem by Ryouga3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Someone from SCO isn't going to have trouble getting a job another UNIX company. SCO is tame compared to Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, K-Mart (ops, not retail), and Anderson consulting. Fraud gets attention, not copyright lawsuits. The person who submitted article included SCO to go along with the SCO bashing we've seen in the last few months on Slashdot, but frankly, the general public doesn't care about these esoteric hissy fits.

  8. I'm thinking of joining SCO. by qualico · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I was thinking of joining the SCO team. Seems everyone wants to kick a guy when they are down. They are still posting employment ops. http://www.sco.com/company/jobs/ I'm just not interested in the positions posted. In defense of SCO, they do offer many success stories. MacDonalds is no small company.

  9. Resume Madness by |>>? · · Score: 5, Interesting
    IMHO you have got to be a first class moron if you determine whom you hire based on their previous workplace.

    While that statement could be seen as inflammatory, perhaps I should share two examples to clarify my strong feelings on the subject...

    • I was team leader for a computing help desk when we needed more staff. Our two candidates were a computer guy and a girl who had never touched computers, but had worked in bars, managed horses, run her own horse training company, and decided she wanted a change. She did a three month computer training course and applied for the job. I hired her because of her people skills, not her computing skills or her past employment record. With all her horse and bar skills, she was the best helpdesk operator we ever had.
    • These days I run my own company and I needed a graphic designer. The one I now have is a professional industrial fisherman but has great design skills. As a fisherman, his past employment was irrelevant.

    My point is this: If someone comes from SCO with a skill set that I need, they'll get the gig. If they prove to fail at their skill, they're likely to loose their job.

    As an employer I care about results, not politics.

    Will I hire Daryl? If I need a scum-sucking-bottom-feeder - or was that a fish?
    --
    |>>? ..EBCDIC for Onno..
  10. Former Bosses are the Worst! by Simonetta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It isn't working for a 'tainted' company that's the problem in the today's 'restructuring' of the tech industry, it's the former managers or bosses that can be a real obstacle to future gainful and productive work.

    For example, during the 1990's I worked for a small five person company that was the North American distributor of a computer-controlled machine made by a German company. I got good performance reviews all the time. Then one partner retired and the other decided to cut back on the work. The German company sent over a guy to run the North American 'division'. After about six months he had fired all the previous employees.

    Now whenever I apply for a new job, the HR people call this guy and he goes on about what a worthless jerk I was to them. I'm not sure why he continues to do this nor do I know how to get around the situation.

    I suspect that it's a German:American cultural dissonance. Do your job well 99.9% of the time and the Americans will exclaim what a valuable and productive employee you were: fuck up 0.01% of the time and the Germans will focus on this forever.

    The Americans of European background are usually indentical in appearance to Europeans and this often masks deep and strong cultural differences. Most of the European-Americans are decended from people who were told a hundred years ago on no uncertain terms to either get the fuck out of town or be killed. Or, they were so poor that they we just as good as dead so they had nothing to lose by moving to the other side of the world. This is the primary foundation of the deep differences between German-Americans and Germans (and European-Americans and Europeans in general).

    European companies should not post managers to America for their first overseas posting because there are so many superficial simularities between the two countries that it tends to encourage blindness to the strong cultural differences beneath the surface. They should first go somewhere where the cultural differences are all on the surface. After they get experience and expertise in different business climates then they should take command of the American divisions. Of course, the other way (Americans managing European divisions) also applies equally as well.

    If European-Americans and Europeans were as actually simular in culture and outlook as they are in appearance then they would have not fought two giant wars with each other in thirty years.

    Anyone have any insights into this situation?

  11. Re:It's about skills, 99.9% by cduffy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Past employers can be a liability even if they've got a positive reputation, if they refuse to say anything about you -- indeed, such a refusal can be misconstrued as covering ones' ass rather than telling the truth about an incompetant or otherwise unworthy employee.

    I spent almost 3 years working at MontaVista Software, having started off there as an intern in college. I did damned good work, porting more than 3x the number of packages slated for my team during my first three months there, and coming up with some innovated automated testing tools later on in my employment. During my last year there, as part of the Corporate Stuffiness effort, a new policy went up: No references to former employees. Not good references, not bad references, nothing. Any queries would be sent to HR, which would confirm dates of employment and last position held.

    So: I decide that I've had enough of the Bay Area and move to Texas; MontaVista decides they don't need the management overhead of an additional remote employee and lets me go. When trying to find new work (halfway across the country in a city where I had no contacts), the refusal to give out references hurt. A lot.

    Which is not to say that there's no happy ending. I'm now employed at an underfunded, understaffed startup making some really amazingly neat software going out for a first release in the very near future. (Live in Austin? Good with Java? Willing to work mostly for stock? Demangle my email address and get in touch).

  12. Re:It's about skills, 99.9% by EnderWiggnz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    thats called "normal". You can get personal references, but not corporate references.

    you should have been able to talk to your supervisors, etc. in order to secure personal references, but never ever expect a company to make a statement one way or the other about you.

    --
    ... hi bingo ...
  13. The sooner you get out, the better. by hpa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For a company that very suddenly turns ugly, like SCO, there is only one piece of advice: get out quickly. If you get out within a reasonable amount of time, the entire defense you need is "management changed the company and I wanted no part of that." End of story. The longer you stick around, the harder you're going to be able to claim to have nothing to do with it.

    Enron is more unfortunate, because management there defrauded not only investors but their own employees; in the case of SCO there is no secret to anybody what kind of shit they're pulling.

  14. SCO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    We are employing one ex SCO person right now. In the past I have had two teachers who were working at SCO.

    Anyone who did anything has long since left, all that is left is the lawyers and I doubt this will damage their job prospects.

    nnooiissee

  15. Re:It's about skills, 99.9% by Total_Wimp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I had something remotely similar to that happen to me.

    A few years back I was looking for a mid-level IT job. I had several years of good experience and a single MS certification for WinNT Server. I had been leading my resume with the cert. thinking people would want to see it, but then one day I took a closer look at it and realized I was making a big mistake. With the cert. just sitting there all alone at the top of the resume people were probably thinking, "gee, why doesn't this guy have a full MCSE," before they even had a chance to see my experience.

    I took the cert and put it almost on the bottom and immediately started to get more interest and quickly got a job. I can't prove it was because of this change, but when I looked back at the two versions I realize how much stronger it looked to have a lot of experience with different technologies rather than that single cert.

    I know this isn't the exactly the same as your example, but it does say something for reworking your presentation while still telling the truth. Sometimes you just have to make the "most important part" less important if you want to get that job.

    TW

  16. Re:That's not really fair. by hendridm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Although you're probably right, this is what I interpreted as him having a role in hiring Darl:

    We got through the really hard stuff, but at the end of the battle, you're still covered in blood. To move the company forward, it made a lot of sense. It was a mutual agreement: Let's get somebody new in. Darl (McBride) I knew from my work at Novell.

    We knew we had salvaged a wonderful channel. We had great technology on the Unix side, wonderful customers and the UnitedLinux thing done. We'd set the stage to do the next step.

    It's so ironic, the turn of events. (Caldera began discussing) what we can do through UnitedLinux to indemnify people who had used both Unix and Linux. Apparently, Darl took that in a little different direction than we intended.

    He never comes out and says it, but he makes it sound like he was involved in the selection process. I had remembered it a little differently when I originally read that article.

  17. Re:Stigma? Try Porn Star by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    I don't necessarily agree. If it's affecting him to the point that he can't otherwise be open and honest with his wife, then yes, he needs to do something. Otherwise, he'd be doing nothing but placing a huge burden on his wife to gratify his own need to confess. That's not exactly fair to her, either, since she didn't do anything to deserve having the underpinnings of her life with her husband ripped out.

    As long as he tests clean of STIs (hadn't heard that one before, but I made "disease-free" a condition on my last post), and he's not tearing himself apart and distancing himself in fear of her finding out, then I think it's his obligation to suck it up, lead a clean life, and spare her the details.

  18. Re:It's about skills 99.9%, only to the short sigh by Rinikusu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Bull. Fucking. Shit.

    Define fucking "underpaid". Most fucking IT people I know make > $10/hour, and they fucking bitch relentlessly about how they live paycheck to paycheck. Guess what, pal? At $10/hour, they're making MORE MONEY than a good majority of the citizens in this country. NO FUCKING SHIT. I used to be there, making minimum wage, living in a shit-hole, eating ramen and rice. But you know what? If it came to that or being a fucking coward because my Employer was an unethical piece of shit and I knew it, I'll be back to ramen. YOU choose your lifestyle. When you realize that a stupid movie called "Fight Club" was right on several points (you are not what you own, you are not your string-bean couch, you are not what's in y our wallet) and learn to live on LESS (and you'll find you appreciate those things even more), then you don't have to worry about living "paycheck to paycheck" because you've reduced your living expenses considerably. Do you really need that $400 SUV out in the driveway? Do you really need that 1600 sq ft house with the 1 acre yard? No, you don't.

    Imagine this stupid scenario: You find out your company is doing business selling 12 year old little boys and girls into the sex trade. You need your paycheck. Are you such a fucking coward that you'll stay, just so you can keep earning a paycheck? What's that? You don't care? Fuck you. You're a fucking coward.

    Wake up America.

    --
    If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
  19. Re:It's about skills, 99.9% by saden1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well if you kept hearing that you are overqualified why not simply say "I tell you what, I'm willing to make a commitment to this company and sign a contract for X number of years." Make a commitment to work for them for certain amount of time that way they are assured that you want leave. Obviously they have the upper hand and you are locked into the job for that period of time but if the compensation is acceptable why not take the job and make a commitment? I've always thought that having a job is better than not having one.

    --

    -----
    One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
  20. unions and democracy. by cookie_cutter · · Score: 2, Interesting
    these days, most unions are ridiculous beauracracies (sp, i know) that wince financial support from both employers and employees for their own gain, under the muse of taking care of both sides...

    To me, the "problems" with unions is comparable to the "problems" with democracy: if your democratic nation/union is filled with apathetic ill-informed citizenry/members, corruption will not be a surprize. However, the solution is not to install fascism or anarchy, but rather to educate the citizenry and expunge any corruption.

    I'm not going to say that all union organizations in existence are pure and good in everyway, but unions have as much a purpose today as they did in the thirties.

    How is ensuring that one's members benefit from the profits of the company they work for out of date? Sure, some unions are corrupt, but generally unions fight to get good employment benefits for there members, like medical and pension, which I think most of us can appreciate.

    Remember, business has a heavy interest in making people think that all unions are evil, corrupt, useless, or, god-forbid, anti-capitalist.

    Ask yourself, what exactly is evil about a group of free people coming together to negotiate towards their common goals, using as bargaining chips nothing more than their fundamental rights and freedoms?

  21. BAD ADVICE by whittrash · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Write a long resignation letter explaining why you feel you MUST RESIGN" = BAD ADVICE

    Never write a long resignation letter, especially to a company that is hyper sensitive to legal issues and dominated by pig headed lawyers. They will be sure to send you on your way with a highlighted copy of your contract restrictions. Instead, go to your boss, have a little chat about how you feel it is time to 'move on', 'find new challenges', 'change of pace'. Never be vocal about why you are leaving if it is for a negative reason or if it highlights your future employer, you are only inviting trouble. A good resignation letter should be one paragraph stating why you are leaving, the date you are leaving and how you will wrap up existing projects to your current employers satisfaction and thanking them for their help. You then need to go around and thank all the people who helped you, who worked beside you or who could help you in the future. This will allow you to leave with a warm fuzzy feeling on the part of your current managers. When they ask you about future prospects, tell them 'you haven't decided everything yet'. This allows you to leave without BURNING YOUR BRIDGES.

    If you don't care about trouble, and like bad advice, just try the 'asshole' approach as exemplified in the top quote. But do it right and in a way that allows you to work as little as possible. The goal of the asshole approach is to get fired, not quit. Quitters don't get workmans comp., which is like free paid vacation. There are several techniques to getting fired, each with its own drawbacks:
    1. complete stupidity and laziness topped with sarchasm
    2. alchoholol/druggs....
    3. display transexual nudie pictures
    4. trip and fall, "my back! my back!, I'm permanently injured"
    5. Accuse your manager of sexual harrasment for staring at your nudie pictures and making derogatory comments about your personal art work. This way you can sue them and get even more money without having to work at all.
    6. et cetera, et cetera

    Don't do what I did at my last job when I quit. The CEO asked me what I would be doing in the future. I told him I would be getting drunk under a bridge somewhere. That didn't get me anything except a sense of satisfaction I will feel the rest of my life.