Opinions Needed

[Coffee Warlord]

Quick rundown. Me and the woman have tickets to Vegas come mid-January. Thanks to a insanely overzealous friend who we're going with, we wound up booking these about 5 months ago.

Now, she's presently working as a substitute teacher, trying to get a full time gig for next year. She has a strong chance of getting hired for the remainder of the year as a teacher's assistant (which gives the inside track for local jobs next year, along with *gasp* being able to go to the same place every day).

ANYWAY. Do the math. School holiday break ends...oh, maybe the week before we'd theoretically go on vacation. Meaning ... she'd start: "hi!" and then in like a week "bye! going on vacation!"

So, opinions. Does she even BRING UP the trip that soon after being hired and attempt to get the time off, or do not even approach the subject and skip the trip, on the theory that it makes you look like scum.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

I wouldn't bring it up. The trip can always be made later.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Assuming you mean that the holiday break ends the week before the trip instead of after it, then I imagine she's screwed, at least if she gets the ass't job.

On the other hand, if still only working as an on-call as needed substitute, then they have no right to expect her to be sitting around doing nothing in case the phone happens to ring and she should go, telling them simply that she's unavailable from date x to date y.

Or am I misinterpreting "substitute teacher" and she's working on a daily basis for them somewhere instead of the more typical on-again,off-again nature of subbing?

[Lathum]

if they want her for the job they will respect the fact she has a previous engagment and will hire her regardless.

[Coffee Warlord]

Assuming you mean that the holiday break ends the week before the trip instead of after it, then I imagine she's screwed, at least if she gets the ass't job.

On the other hand, if still only working as an on-call as needed substitute, then they have no right to expect her to be sitting around doing nothing in case the phone happens to ring and she should go, telling them simply that she's unavailable from date x to date y.

Or am I misinterpreting "substitute teacher" and she's working on a daily basis for them somewhere instead of the more typical on-again,off-again nature of subbing?

Present Job: Subbing.
Job Applying For Instead of Subbing: Ass't.

Aka. No more subbing for the remainder of the year, Assistant job is essentially a fulltime position.

[CamEdwards]

if they want her for the job they will respect the fact she has a previous engagment and will hire her regardless.

:lol:

I'm hiring someone right now, and I'll tell you that the candidate who can start in a week is looking a helluva lot better than the candidate who can start in mid-January.

Sometimes we have to make sacrifices in order to better our situations. Forget gambling in Vegas... she needs to take a gamble on a stable job instead.

[Coffee Warlord]

Note the edit.


ANYWAY. Do the math. School holiday break ends...oh, maybe the week before we'd theoretically go on vacation. Meaning ... she'd start: "hi!" and then in like a week "bye! going on vacation!"

No more posting right after the commute home.

[Fidatelo]

Skip the trip

[rjolley]

When I was offered a job earlier this year, I let them know that I had a trip planned and gave the dates that I would be gone (my wife is one of those plan WAY in advance people as well). There were no issues with it.

Some employers will respect your previous commitments with no issue. Others will expect you to throw away the money you've spent to start working immediately. Just depends on the employer.

I say she should at least mention it. If it's a problem, then she may have to bite the bullet and cancel.

[Lathum]

:lol:

I'm hiring someone right now, and I'll tell you that the candidate who can start in a week is looking a helluva lot better than the candidate who can start in mid-January.

Sometimes we have to make sacrifices in order to better our situations. Forget gambling in Vegas... she needs to take a gamble on a stable job instead.

IMO that's a poor way to conduct buisness. I think you should hire the candidate you feel is most qualified and respect the fact they had a life prior to interviewing with your company.

Hire the person that is best for your companies long term well being, not the person who isn't best just to fill a small gap.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Aka. No more subbing for the remainder of the year, Assistant job is essentially a fulltime position.

Thanks, I wasn't remotely clear on that originally.

In that case, if she gets it in time to cancel the trip (or at least her participation in it) then she's probably stuck doing so IMO. On the other hand, if they screw around & don't respond in time for her to cancel ... damned if there's any job on earth I'd cancel a Vegas trip for on a "maybe, just sit by the phone & wait in case we happen to call".

[Desnudo]

How can we offer any advice without pictures?

[dawgfan]

When I was offered a job earlier this year, I let them know that I had a trip planned and gave the dates that I would be gone (my wife is one of those plan WAY in advance people as well). There were no issues with it.

Some employers will respect your previous commitments with no issue. Others will expect you to throw away the money you've spent to start working immediately. Just depends on the employer.

I say she should at least mention it. If it's a problem, then she may have to bite the bullet and cancel.
Yeah. If I were her I'd mention the trip and make it clear that the job is more important than the trip, and if the trip has to be canceled for the job, I'm totally willing to do that. They'll let her know if it's an issue or not, and if it is an issue, she needs to make clear that the job takes precedence and she'll start whenever they need her to. But at least find out if they might be OK with the trip and starting later...

[Coffee Warlord]

Heh, see, I'm with most of you. I don't see any harm in inquiring. I mean, it's a foregone conclusion if it's remotely an issue, job first. Some people seem to think even bringing it up is a scum thing to do.

[EagleFan]

Yeah. If I were her I'd mention the trip and make it clear that the job is more important than the trip, and if the trip has to be canceled for the job, I'm totally willing to do that. They'll let her know if it's an issue or not, and if it is an issue, she needs to make clear that the job takes precedence and she'll start whenever they need her to. But at least find out if they might be OK with the trip and starting later...

What he said.

[SteveMax58]

I think it's fine to bring up, but I would bring it up semi-casually as in "Did you have a preferred or definite start date?".

And if proposed the same in return, I would respond along the lines of "Well, if I could choose it would be X-date as I had made some plans for the week before a few months back. This was before I had applied, but it isn't something too important to change and I do not want to miss out on the opportunity."

If the hiring manager has any flexibility possible, they'll accommodate. If they can't, they'll say so. But the key is making sure they understand that you put the position/opportunity first and aren't the type to make up BS excuses. I.e. I would not suggest making up some unbelievably can't-change story to make sure they say yes.

[CamEdwards]

IMO that's a poor way to conduct buisness. I think you should hire the candidate you feel is most qualified and respect the fact they had a life prior to interviewing with your company.

Hire the person that is best for your companies long term well being, not the person who isn't best just to fill a small gap.

Actually, both candidates would be good hires. They each have their strengths and weaknesses in various areas, but overall they're pretty equal in terms of ability. The weaker candidates have already been weeded out, leaving me with these two.

I'm assuming that CW's girlfriend is also going to have competition to the job that will be roughly equal to her experience and ability. If that's the case, then factors like availability will come into play.

[Subby]

I would go on the trip and make it a memorable one.

[Raiders Army]

IMO that's a poor way to conduct buisness. I think you should hire the candidate you feel is most qualified and respect the fact they had a life prior to interviewing with your company.

Hire the person that is best for your companies long term well being, not the person who isn't best just to fill a small gap.

You're right and wrong. Yes, you should hire the candidate you feel is most qualified and fill it with the person who is best for your organization's long-term benefit.

However, the flaw in your thinking is that how does this organization know who is the person best for the long haul? Having someone say that they'll start and go on a vacation to Vegas isn't a good indicator that that person is good for the long term. Regardless of what you say, your actions will tell more.

If I'm the HR person, I don't take the person who wants to go on vacation right away. I hire the person who is willing to make a sacrifice for the job. A prior commitment is a promise to a dying grandmother, not a trip to Vegas.

[dawgfan]

I think it's fine to bring up, but I would bring it up semi-casually as in "Did you have a preferred or definite start date?".

And if proposed the same in return, I would respond along the lines of "Well, if I could choose it would be X-date as I had made some plans for the week before a few months back. This was before I had applied, but it isn't something too important to change and I do not want to miss out on the opportunity."

If the hiring manager has any flexibility possible, they'll accommodate. If they can't, they'll say so. But the key is making sure they understand that you put the position/opportunity first and aren't the type to make up BS excuses. I.e. I would not suggest making up some unbelievably can't-change story to make sure they say yes.
Yep, this is the approach to take. If the people doing the hiring are offended in any way by even bringing it up, chances are there are going to be other issues down the road that will make the job unpleasant and this would serve as a useful warning.

[Lathum]

You're right and wrong. Yes, you should hire the candidate you feel is most qualified and fill it with the person who is best for your organization's long-term benefit.

However, the flaw in your thinking is that how does this organization know who is the person best for the long haul? Having someone say that they'll start and go on a vacation to Vegas isn't a good indicator that that person is good for the long term. Regardless of what you say, your actions will tell more.

If I'm the HR person, I don't take the person who wants to go on vacation right away. I hire the person who is willing to make a sacrifice for the job. A prior commitment is a promise to a dying grandmother, not a trip to Vegas.

You make it sound like she is starting the job then a week in decides she needs a vacation.

She has a prior commitment, there is a big difference.

[Raiders Army]

You make it sound like she is starting the job then a week in decides she needs a vacation.

She has a prior commitment, there is a big difference.

Shrug. You make it sound like the prior commitment is something she absolutely has to do.

Like the others have said, asking doesn't hurt. The way in which you ask is the difference.