Low Barriers Are A Good Thing

Denmark is an interesting case study of this working very well to encourage a competitive economy. In Denmark it is extremely easy to fire people, but also very easy to hire people. This actually decreases unemployment, because companies can easily downsize during recessions, weather the storm, and then hire the workers back (unlike in the US where companies have to hang on to contracts while in a downturn).<p><a href="http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7880198" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story...</a>

read that tweet as free advice not to work for calacanis<p>here's the full exchange between employer and employee: <a href="http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:h1M0xdV67_EJ:pastebin.com/PSY4iYZ0+http://pastebin.com/PSY4iYZ0&#38;hl=en&#38;strip=1" rel="nofollow">http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:h1M0xdV67_EJ:pastebin.co...</a>

Technically I suppose I might be a "Gen Y" something-or-other, though at 33 I feel too old to be a "trophy kid". But I'm a firm believer in the idea that if you change companies frequently, but also get large, valuable projects done, it all evens out pretty well.<p>Then again, perhaps that's just me rationalizing looking like a flake. Still, I'm a flake who has put together some good projects, and made some folks decent money. I'm okay with that.

I wouldn't be too quick to assume that bouncing around a lot will not have an adverse impact on your future ability to get hired for a good position - while it may not matter in some contexts, it definitely will for many jobs (including the best ones), where an employer will likely want to hire people who will stick and grow with the company.<p>Repeated hires are a cost and a drain for companies, and employers will definitely consider the intangible of whether you are likely to stay as a non-trivial factor affecting the hiring decision.<p>At the very least, if you bounce around a lot, you will be limiting your options for many future hires.<p>This is not to justify the parting shot given to the employee here. But don't lose perspective on this issue either.

I don't necessarily disagree with the thesis of this post, but this seems a bit of a tangent. Was Calcanis <i>really</i> advocating the French model? More than likely he was just venting over high turnover.