Gray's Matter
Justice Gray - North America's favorite metrosexual software consultant

I Wish These People Updated More Than Once a Year


Mortal Kombat Fatalities, Career Security, and Job Security - all are related

Some of you noticed that yesterday's post featured the word "security" in quotes at the end.  I don't mean to denigrate full-time employment; however, the #1 argument I hear from people against independent consulting is that is "too insecure".  I always find this strange, considering that I know of a *ton* of independent consultants who have had no trouble remaining gainfully employed for several years as independents.  Did I miss the post where JP Boodhoo or Bil Simser said they were really hurting for work?   Heck, look at the lineup for Calgary Code Camp!  Of the list of speakers, only two out of thirteen are full-time employees.

Further, what is independent consulting actually "insecure" in comparison to: full-time employment?  Many people who talk about full-time being this warm baby oil full-body massage also tend to think you will never ever get laid off or fired from a full-time company.   People get laid off from companies all the time - sometimes for bad reasons (there's been budget cuts), and sometimes for good reasons (Donald stops wearing pants to work).  Being a full-time employee is no guarantee that your job is safe - I knew of a workplace where full-time employees were let go because the contractors on site were outperforming them!   

"Job security" means "keeping your current job".  However, I choose to look at *career* security, which means "always being able to get/keep rewarding employment".  I feel that the second is *far* more secure than the first.

Job security means nothing if your company has to suddenly lay you off after 10 years.  Where is the vaunted "security" then?  Companies do not owe you employment for years of service.  What do you think happens to the full-time employee who coasted on his cushy job, never learning, never growing, and then finds himself back in the marketplace looking for work? 

In contrast, I know a lot of people who have career security.  All of them have several traits in common:

  • They are very passionate about what they do
  • They are relatively *good* at what they do
  • They are constantly trying to better themselves

They are secure for a couple of reasons:
  • Their employers are almost always very happy with the work they do
  • They are in high demand for the brief times that they "are on the market".

Guess what?  Some of them are full-time employees, others are independent consultants.  It makes no difference.  If you are capable, competent, care about the work you do, and care about continual self-improvement, you are not going to have trouble finding and keeping employment!  That goes for anybody, regardless of their "independent" status or not.    Now, this isn't the *only* way to career security.  The one, true, guaranteed way is to have a fabulous mane of hair and a rugged yet seductive appearance.  Unlike myself though, you can't just coast on your good looks your entire life (I'm sorry to break this to Tom and George, but it's better you found out sooner than later).

If you really want to experience a lack of career security, stop investing in yourself.  Trust me, if you stop learning, growing, and improving, you'll definitely know what it's like to fear for your job, and for your future employment!   You'll feel trapped wherever you are and terrified of the day the axe ever falls; it's a lot easier to get someone to do unpaid OT when they think they have nowhere else they can go.  

Forget about your *job* being secure - is your career secure?  And if you don't think it is, what are you doing to ensure that it is down the road?

Thursday, April 19, 2007 #

4/19/2007 1:05:11 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Holy crap, Career totally just got a fatality against Job. Why would he be fighting his own brother though!?

What kind of parents name their sons Career and Job?? Seriously.
Alex
4/19/2007 1:18:10 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
May I add my 2 cents:

I worked as an employee at one company, and thought my job was secure.

One sunny Friday afternoon, the CEO called me over to his office (sorry Dave, no goats in this story) and told me that the company couldn't meet payroll, and he'd understand if I wasn't there on Monday. I told him that I wouldn't be.

I got a letter from him documenting how much I was owed,and when it would be paid, and went home for the weekend. I thought all would be good, and that I would be paid the full amount I was owed in a timely fashion.

Does it suprise anyone that I never got my money as promised? I when to the Employment Standards Branch here in Alberta, and filed a complaint. I received a ruling in my favour, and court orders where issued against my former employer directing to pay.

Only after THREE YEARS of *me* hounding my employer with collection agencies and lawyers did I get the money. The Employment Standards Branch did pretty much nothing. Well, not true, every now and then they would phone up my former employer, and ask him if, he could, pretty pretty please, write a cheque this time that would not bounce so I could get paid.

How's that for "job security".

Oh, and I don't plan to coast on good looks for the rest of my life. As I get older, I intend to lower my standards. I figure that should make good the declining charisma and attractiveness.

4/19/2007 2:06:21 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Full time employment vs. Consultancy

RRSP vs. Day-trader

Fixed Mortgage vs. Variable Rate Mortgage


All == risk vs. reward decisions
JH
4/19/2007 2:35:51 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
The implication here is being an employee is less risky than a consultant. For our field (software development/programming), I question if being an employee really does offer any security.
4/19/2007 2:58:29 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Jason, I'm curious: how do you consider full-time employment to be that much less risky than independent consulting?
4/20/2007 9:47:52 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
I really like the question about *career* security vs. job security. I actually think that staying on one project or area of work for more than 2 or 3 years is *bad* for career security in the software development field. It becomes much more difficult to learn new things and to gain new insights so overall marketability actually goes down!
4/20/2007 1:59:24 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
First off Tom, you left one thing out with that story of yours. You conveniently forgot to mention that you decided to not wear pants and but wear those god awful hawaiin shirts everyday of your last week. If I was your employer I would have let you go too.

To be honest, whoever knows me know I'm probably one of the biggest proponents of Independent Consulting. I've done it for 6 years and have only been off work for holidays and a couple weeks at a time between contracts. Even when the market wasn't what it is today, companies still needed things done...the only difference was that I adjusted my hourly rate appropriately.

There are several reasons why I will always be a consultant and why I believe others have choose this route and continue to stay on the Dark Side.

Taxes
Fulltime (35% +) vs. Consultant (18% with benefit of writing virtually everything off)

Projects
Fulltime (depending on the company you could be working on the same system for more than 2-3 years) vs. Consultant (have the ability to work with any type of software or industry you decide to tackle)

Continued Education
Fulltime (doing it mostly on your own dollar besides those once a year conferences you need to beg your manager for) vs. Consultants (buys all the books you want and go to all those conferences "Vegas trips" because they're all write-offs...plus you TELL your client that you're taking off for a week)

OT
Fulltime (you work the overtime and ask for it but most of the time the employer says when we're slow you can take time off "NEVER HAPPENS"...if you're slow I'd be more worried about the survival of the company rather than taking off at 4:00 instead of 5:00) vs. Consultant (you work it, you invoice for it. If the client comes back and asks about those hours, which they never would because they're under contractual agreements, but if they did then you just add those hours to the next month and take the time off)

I can go on and on and on, just have a coffee with me and I'll convert you. Ask some of the people I've helped come over to the dark side, they'll agree that the Empire pays way better than the Rebellion.
4/23/2007 1:41:37 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
There's really no such thing as job security or career security for that matter. Life is what you make it and you alone are responsible for your job or career. If you get layed off then *you* are responsible for getting a new job. If you're bored with work and want a change, you're responsible for that. People tend to think their employers are responsible for their own job security which is funny when you think about it. Bottom line, there is no security and any job or an entire career can vanish without a moments notice. A good consultant or employee will always be prepared in the eventual case that this may happen. Anyone who isn't doing it is fooling themselves into a false sense of security.
4/23/2007 2:04:25 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Totally agreed, Bill. I couldn't have said it better myself. It reminds me of a passage I found from Sam Gentile quite a while back - I've saved it and re-read it pretty much every week. I'll have to repost it here on this blog sometime in the next couple of days.
4/23/2007 3:50:31 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Funny story about Sam Gentile: did you know he was the original target for the Mad Mexican stint at Dev Teach last year, but we were warned that he may become unstable and since he's from the states might have been packing heat, so we switched to Bristowe instead?

Anyway...

Some thoughts on the diff between consultant and employee...

You want to get a mortgage...would lenders be more willing to put through someone with a steady income with a company or for a private consultant that can't guarantee a salary?

You get no contracts for a while and are on your own for that next gig...but if you get laid off then you can collect EI (which will at least give you somethign to work with for a short period of time)

Conventions and tech-events like MSDN might be a fight to get them in a company environment, but when you do get them you typically get paid to attend whereas consultants would need to either allot for that day somehow or just accept that they aren't going to get paid that day.

I think the market plays a role as well. Calgary/Edmonton, definately consultant friendly from what I gather. Winnipeg, not so much. So I think it definately depends on the marketplace as to whether jumping into the individual space makes sense or not.

D
4/23/2007 5:33:51 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Okay... here's a follow-up with my observations to consulting.

It has been my experience that larger companies are the most likely to hire contractors (feel more stable about their situation) so when you are contracting (independant or for a contracting company) you are often brought in on contacts with companies with huge cultural hurdles to overcome to be able to "get stuff done" using innovative tools or methods. Larger companies also tend toward treating contractors like employees and blur the distinction between the two, which I think is a mistake. Smaller companies tend to become overly dependant on contractors and have difficulty severing the tie. In either case, the management of the employer-contractor relationship is different than what I would envision a contract to entail (come in to do a job, then get out and let the business do its job).

I have always tended to have a preference toward smaller companies and be an employee as you are given the best opportunity to leverage and expand your skill-set.

In my previous comment I was talking about risk vs. reward. This comment tends to lead people to believe that this means the financial risk that an independant contractor "faces" when being independant. Though this would be true if the demand for developers was weaker, but this is not the case. I'd say that, in an "employee market", the risk (tehnical and environmental) is less for the independant contractor looking for contracts (as mentioned, larger companies tend to be the ones that more readily seek contractors) than ones seeking employment with smaller companies (with small companies you are more likely to have to venture into areas you might not have the highest skill level with).
JH
4/24/2007 11:48:15 AM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
>Funny story about Sam Gentile: did you know he was the original target for the Mad Mexican stint at Dev Teach last year, but we were warned that he may become unstable and since he's from the states might have been packing heat, so we switched to Bristowe instead?
>

I'm sorry but what is "become unstable" mean and how you could use a term like this so callously?

Sam
4/24/2007 12:02:02 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Holy crap, Sam Gentile reads this blog! Awesome!!

I can't speak for D'Arcy, Sam, but I believe someone's original intention last year at DevTeach was to parade into your presentation near the tail end wearing a Mexican wrestler mask. I would say D'Arcy likely meant "become angered/flip out" and was worried that rather than just receiving a massive beating by a software developer (which he is used to, he gets beaten up at work on a twice-weekly basis) for disrupting your presentation, he might even get shot rather than being taken down by your 24 inch pythons.

If I know D'Arcy the way I know D'Arcy, he's already regretting his actions and callous terms and probably in tears at his office - he's not the strongest constitution!

Nonetheless, thanks a lot for stopping by - I was going to post one of your articles today or tomorrow so I'm glad to see you are reading!
4/24/2007 12:31:19 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Yeah Justice nailed it..."unstable" meant more "he's a serious guy and would probably not find it funny, which could have unknown ramifications". Which is kewl...we wanted the stunt to be something positive not negative, so switching to Bristowe was the right move.

No offense intended.
:)

D'Arcy
4/24/2007 12:33:45 PM (Mountain Daylight Time, UTC-06:00)
Oh my goodness!

HAVE A BACKBONE D'ARCY!!!

If Sam Gentile told you to jump off a bridge, would you jump off a bridge too??

Unbelievable - the Mad Mexican would have never surrendered.

It's like a dream died today...in my heart.
Name
E-mail
Home page

Comment (HTML not allowed)  

Enter the code shown (prevents robots):