Should I take this contract position?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IndyColtsFan

Lifer
Sep 22, 2007
33,655
687
126
I prefer being a contractor actually. My wife has good benefits that I take and I make a ton more money than I would as a staff member at most places. And more importantly, I got sick and tired of corporate politics and BS time wasters (team building, "optional" social events, etc). I also like actually getting paid for every hour I work, which never happened when I was a salaried staff member.

OP, you should always have 6 months to a year of expenses saved and ready to be used in the event of an emergency, including time between contracts if you don't get hired. Also, budget for time off.

radhak said:
Actually, holding a contract position is supposed to be a 'con' when applying for regular employment. (I know because we toss out more contractor resumes who want to become employees, than others who were always on employee rolls).

I'm not sure I understand that logic. If you have a position open and someone who has been a contractor is the best fit, you should hire that person. I've heard some think contractors are "hired guns" and are afraid they'll move on faster for more money, but I think that is an unfair way to paint people and sounds to me more like the interviewers are lazy and don't want to properly vet candidates and be accountable if the guy leaves.
 
Last edited:

radhak

Senior member
Aug 10, 2011
843
14
81
Actually, holding a contract position is supposed to be a 'con' when applying for regular employment. (I know because we toss out more contractor resumes who want to become employees, than others who were always on employee rolls).



I'm not sure I understand that logic. If you have a position open and someone who has been a contractor is the best fit, you should hire that person. I've heard some think contractors are "hired guns" and are afraid they'll move on faster for more money, but I think that is an unfair way to paint people and sounds to me more like the interviewers are lazy and don't want to properly vet candidates and be accountable if the guy leaves.

It is what it is. The task of interviewing applicants at most companies is an unpaid task - does not generate any brownie points for the interviewer, done because the boss just tosses a resume to us. And if somebody joins and leaves quickly, or does not fit the team, we get to hear about it from all ends. I'd rather go by the profile. And while many contractors have high skills, they have their own set ways (just as career employees do), foremost of which is that they get restless very quick, are either lone rangers or extreme yes-men, etc.

In the past decade I've been here, I'm the only contractor who joined and stuck. Four others joined after me, and left. So the next contractor who wants to become an employee here, better have twice as much to sell as a rival candidate who has been an employee.