This may have been touched on in other postings on dev.to, I can't recall, but how long should/would you give any of these situations before you swap out, particularly if you haven't been at the company a long time?
For example, I've been in my current role ~7mo, mid-to-senior level full stack JS dev. A month after I started, they fired - without warning - an entire team (20+ people) at a different office, for reasons both valid and otherwise... However, it's made the HiPPOs extremely sensitive to anyone's tech opinion. Both how they handled that situation and how they're behaving now makes me very uneasy. I'm not opposed to learning new things, as most of us are here, but when I'm a JS heavy dev and I'm told "it'd be a good idea to learn .NET" here - to bug fix legacy systems that are 6-8 years old, that seems like a huge red flag as well.
I've had quite a number of recruiters and companies reach out in the last month or so. Will it look bad on my resume, or to future employers, if I've got a stint <1 year on there? I mean, on one hand, current interests don't seem to care, but I'm thinking long term.
If you have a valid explanation for why you quit within a year, it shouldn't be a problem and it sounds like you do, "they want me to do .NET but I want to focus on JS which I was hired to do. Turbulence within company etc" Been in a similar situation and have been asked why I want to leave so soon and my reasons were fairly similar to yours. I'd like for that to be the exception though.
That's a tricky one and the answer you get will depend on who you ask.
Some would say that the idea of a 'job for life' is now gone and that no job is ever stable - as evidenced by the fact that an entire team of 20+ people were let go! So, if companies have no loyalty to their employees, maybe there shouldn't be an expectation that the loyalty goes the other way round either? Others may disagree with this view.
I think it's important that you leave for valid reasons however and can justify these at an interview. Any prospective employer would probably be wary of someone who leaves on a whim for trivial reasons.
In any job search, it's a good idea not only to assess the role at hand but also the other potential roles in the organisation - e.g., is there scope for growth, advancement, new learnings, new types of roles, new developments. That way you're more likely to find a company you can enjoy a long tenure with - which is probably preferable to regularly being the 'new guy/gal' anyway, right?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
This may have been touched on in other postings on dev.to, I can't recall, but how long should/would you give any of these situations before you swap out, particularly if you haven't been at the company a long time?
For example, I've been in my current role ~7mo, mid-to-senior level full stack JS dev. A month after I started, they fired - without warning - an entire team (20+ people) at a different office, for reasons both valid and otherwise... However, it's made the HiPPOs extremely sensitive to anyone's tech opinion. Both how they handled that situation and how they're behaving now makes me very uneasy. I'm not opposed to learning new things, as most of us are here, but when I'm a JS heavy dev and I'm told "it'd be a good idea to learn .NET" here - to bug fix legacy systems that are 6-8 years old, that seems like a huge red flag as well.
I've had quite a number of recruiters and companies reach out in the last month or so. Will it look bad on my resume, or to future employers, if I've got a stint <1 year on there? I mean, on one hand, current interests don't seem to care, but I'm thinking long term.
If you have a valid explanation for why you quit within a year, it shouldn't be a problem and it sounds like you do, "they want me to do .NET but I want to focus on JS which I was hired to do. Turbulence within company etc" Been in a similar situation and have been asked why I want to leave so soon and my reasons were fairly similar to yours. I'd like for that to be the exception though.
That's a tricky one and the answer you get will depend on who you ask.
Some would say that the idea of a 'job for life' is now gone and that no job is ever stable - as evidenced by the fact that an entire team of 20+ people were let go! So, if companies have no loyalty to their employees, maybe there shouldn't be an expectation that the loyalty goes the other way round either? Others may disagree with this view.
I think it's important that you leave for valid reasons however and can justify these at an interview. Any prospective employer would probably be wary of someone who leaves on a whim for trivial reasons.
In any job search, it's a good idea not only to assess the role at hand but also the other potential roles in the organisation - e.g., is there scope for growth, advancement, new learnings, new types of roles, new developments. That way you're more likely to find a company you can enjoy a long tenure with - which is probably preferable to regularly being the 'new guy/gal' anyway, right?