The only people selecting yes on the second should be those already planning on moving and even then they should hit no.
If you’d hit yes what are your circumstances around choosing that?
You’d be surprised… known 4 lottery winners that did it.
Mind you it wasn’t anything really big, just a hundred or something mil (which is what 6 years top) but you don’t work for a year and you’ll get a job just to have somewhere to show up.
I get winning the lottery and still working, even if you don’t need to. But uprooting your life and moving for a job, when you don’t need the money, makes no sense to me.
How far did these 4 lottery winners move, did they just have no friends/family. I guess maybe they’d win the lottery and decide to move and get a job, but I don’t think they are moving because of the job then.
Maybe because they want to give themselves an edge against other applicants (who knows).
I guess in the great scheme of things it doesn't really matter who pays for it, if it would be my dream job I could see myself moving at my own expense
if I'm applying for a job that's already based in a different city and they'd need me to move there no matter what I think it makes sense to move at my expense. Since that job post literally doesn't show up unless I select a different city.
I relocated from East Coast to San Francisco about 6 years ago (I got a pay raise but it was nothing close to the difference in cost of living, think maybe like 10% raise but rent for example was easily 50% higher) because it was a better company, better job, fewer hours, and also I really wanted to live in San Francisco specifically.
and as it turns out, after a few years I was able to switch into software engineering which was a huge improvement to my career in every way.
even now, last year I took a pay cut to move to a different country and keep my current job. my company did assist with some relocation expenses but it's like (made up numbers but in the ballpark) $10k of relocation expenses vs. $20k a year pay cut. absolutely 0 regrets.
A mad lad could say "yes" and pretend to relocate by walking while sending them daily reports. "Today I covered 7 miles. At this pace I'll be there within two months. I am so glad to be part of your team".
If I were offered a 50% raise and no reimbursement, I would take it. The raise would cover the moving expenses in the first year alone.
The closer their offer gets to my current salary or other offers, the quicker my interest evaporates.
So it's never an outright No... but the fact that they ask the second question makes me think they'll get a No anyway.
The only people selecting yes on the second should be those already planning on moving and even then they should hit no. If you’d hit yes what are your circumstances around choosing that?
Won the lottery but still want to work to keep busy
No one who “wants to keep busy” is moving for a job
You’d be surprised… known 4 lottery winners that did it. Mind you it wasn’t anything really big, just a hundred or something mil (which is what 6 years top) but you don’t work for a year and you’ll get a job just to have somewhere to show up.
I get winning the lottery and still working, even if you don’t need to. But uprooting your life and moving for a job, when you don’t need the money, makes no sense to me. How far did these 4 lottery winners move, did they just have no friends/family. I guess maybe they’d win the lottery and decide to move and get a job, but I don’t think they are moving because of the job then.
Maybe they wanted to move away from the current place?
Maybe because they want to give themselves an edge against other applicants (who knows). I guess in the great scheme of things it doesn't really matter who pays for it, if it would be my dream job I could see myself moving at my own expense
if I'm applying for a job that's already based in a different city and they'd need me to move there no matter what I think it makes sense to move at my expense. Since that job post literally doesn't show up unless I select a different city.
I relocated from East Coast to San Francisco about 6 years ago (I got a pay raise but it was nothing close to the difference in cost of living, think maybe like 10% raise but rent for example was easily 50% higher) because it was a better company, better job, fewer hours, and also I really wanted to live in San Francisco specifically. and as it turns out, after a few years I was able to switch into software engineering which was a huge improvement to my career in every way. even now, last year I took a pay cut to move to a different country and keep my current job. my company did assist with some relocation expenses but it's like (made up numbers but in the ballpark) $10k of relocation expenses vs. $20k a year pay cut. absolutely 0 regrets.
Getting the job near where I want to move to. Versus possibly getting a free move if I'm the best applicant, which I'm probably not.
A mad lad could say "yes" and pretend to relocate by walking while sending them daily reports. "Today I covered 7 miles. At this pace I'll be there within two months. I am so glad to be part of your team".
If I were offered a 50% raise and no reimbursement, I would take it. The raise would cover the moving expenses in the first year alone. The closer their offer gets to my current salary or other offers, the quicker my interest evaporates. So it's never an outright No... but the fact that they ask the second question makes me think they'll get a No anyway.
*consider* is the key word here. you don’t have to, you just have to consider it
Right? Just hit yes for both.
Knowing the prices of their products and services, this is just dumb.