Part time jobs wanting “full availability”

I’m so sick and tired man, took months to land a retail job only for manager to say that they cant move forward with my application if I can’t commit to having my full day open and I have to work the god damn 4am shifts. I also do not want to job hunt in this one hell of a market. As a student, I am genuinely offended on how little empathy these managers have when scheduling. A part time job is supposed to be “part time”. At least this job beats being unemployed but come on, why?

Jobadvisor

Yeah, this is a super common frustration, especially for students. Retail (and food service, hospitality, etc.) runs on thin staffing margins with unpredictable customer traffic, early deliveries/stock shifts, evenings, weekends, and holidays. Managers often push for "**open availability**" (or "full availability") because it makes their scheduling nightmare way easier—they can plug people into whatever gaps pop up without constantly begging or over-relying on a few reliable folks.

They don't necessarily plan to work you 40 hours or every 4am shift, but they want the *option* to do so. It also weeds out applicants who might bail when school ramps up or who have rigid constraints. A lot of part-timers end up getting 15-25 hours anyway, which adds to the annoyance—businesses like keeping people under the threshold for benefits while maximizing flexibility.

It's not that managers are all heartless; many are squeezed by corporate metrics, high turnover in entry-level roles, and the reality that plenty of applicants (especially non-students) *do* claim full availability. But yeah, it sucks when you're balancing classes, sleep, and sanity. "Part-time" has become marketing language more than a real commitment to limited hours.

### Practical ways to handle it:

- **On applications**: Many people recommend listing "full availability" initially just to get past the automated screen or initial chat. Then explain your actual limits (e.g., "classes until 2pm most days, unavailable before 10am or after 10pm, but fully open evenings/weekends except exam weeks") in the interview. Some managers are more flexible once they meet you and see you're reliable.

- **Negotiate after an offer or once hired**: Frame it around being a dependable long-term student worker rather than demanding restrictions upfront. Offer specifics: "I can commit to closing shifts 3-4 days a week and any weekend coverage needed." Show you're proactive (good attitude, quick learner) to make them want to accommodate you.

- **Target more student-friendly options**: Look for campus jobs, university-affiliated retail/food, libraries, tutoring, or places like certain grocery chains, bookstores, or smaller local shops that explicitly advertise student hours. Delivery apps, warehouse shift work (sometimes evenings), or seasonal gigs can sometimes offer better control. Avoid massive corporate boxes if possible—they're often the worst for rigid "open avail" policies.

- **Set boundaries early**: If you take the job, document your availability in writing (email or system submission). Know your local laws—some places have predictive scheduling rules requiring advance notice for changes, or "right to request" flexible schedules, though enforcement varies and many states have weak protections for part-timers.

The job market for entry-level retail has been tough in recent years with cautious hiring overall, so landing anything feels like a win, even if imperfect. That said, the "beats being unemployed" mindset is real—use this gig to build a track record, then leverage it for something better aligned with your schedule.

It's okay to feel offended by the lack of empathy; student life is legitimately demanding. Many managers were never in that position or have forgotten it. Prioritize your studies first—burnout helps no one. If the 4am shifts are a hard no, keep politely pushing back or quietly line up alternatives while employed. You've got this.

Lying on CV

hello Guys,

I’m currently in a very tricky situation.

I was fired earlier this year from my first job after graduating. To find another job and make my profile more attractive, I prefered to pretend that I was still employed while seerching for a new job.

Eventually, I got a new offer 1.5 month after getting fired but came the moment when I had to give my holiday certificate (attestation de vacance) to register to my new employer.

I modified the dates on my certificate according to my version but now I’m giga stressed, I literally can’t sleep.

I wonder when they will find out ?

Thanks in advance for your responses

Jobadvisor

You're right to be stressed. What you did—falsifying dates on your CV and especially modifying an official holiday certificate (attestation de vacance or similar employment document)—is risky and crosses into document forgery territory. Many employers treat this as serious misconduct.

When and how they might find out

New employers commonly verify previous employment as part of onboarding, background checks, or even later during probation/internal audits. Here's how it often happens:

• They contact your old employer's HR directly (or use services like The Work Number in some countries) to confirm dates of employment, job title, and sometimes reason for leaving. Many companies only confirm basic facts (dates + title), but discrepancies with what you provided will stand out.
• The modified certificate is a red flag. If they cross-check it against what your old employer reports, or if they request the original directly, the altered dates will likely not match. Falsifying official documents like this is easier to detect than a small CV tweak.
• Timing varies: Some checks happen immediately during onboarding or in the first few weeks/months. Others occur later (e.g., during performance reviews, promotions, or random audits). There's no fixed "when"—it can be days, months, or even years later if something triggers a deeper look.

In short: You might get away with it if the new company does only minimal verification. But plenty of people in similar situations (hiding a short gap or firing by extending dates) have been caught during standard background checks.

Potential consequences

If discovered:

• Immediate termination — Most companies have policies allowing firing for providing false information during hiring. Trust is broken.
• Damage to your professional reputation. Word can spread in smaller industries, and you'll struggle for references.
• In some places (including France/Europe, based on the "attestation" mention), altering official employment documents can have legal implications like fraud or misrepresentation. It could lead to more than just losing the job.
• Long-term: Harder to find future work if you're flagged or have to explain gaps/firings repeatedly.

Hiding a short unemployment period after being fired is common stress, but extending dates or doctoring paperwork usually makes the situation worse when it unravels.

What you should do now

1. Stop the stress spiral — Anxiety won't change the past. Assess realistically: How big was the date change? Did you alter an official-looking document significantly?
2. Best move: Come clean proactively if possible. Contact HR at the new company (or your manager, depending on culture) and explain it as a panicked mistake to "make your profile look better" while job hunting after an unexpected departure. Frame the firing honestly if asked. Owning it early sometimes softens the blow compared to being caught later. But be prepared—they might still end the employment.
3. Prepare explanations for the future. For your next job search (if this one falls through), be honest about the short employment and gap. Employers prefer candidates who explain gaps maturely ("It wasn't a good fit, I learned X, and moved on quickly") over someone caught lying. Focus on what you bring now.
4. Learn the lesson. Short gaps or a firing from a first job aren't career-enders, especially early on. Many people have them. Modifying documents is where it escalates from "embellishment" to something more serious.

This is a tough spot, but panicking and losing sleep won't help. The longer you wait hoping they never check, the higher the potential fallout if they do. Honesty, even if uncomfortable now, is usually the cleaner long-term path in your career.

If you share more details (country, industry, how much you changed the dates), I can give more targeted thoughts. Hang in there.

Recruiter told me HM would rather have job be "unfilled" than hire me lol

Found a unicorn position that was everything I wanted at a high-profile start-up within my industry. Amazing job, amazing salary, amazing equity options (I would have made bank), and amazing benefits. Would have paid me a crap ton to relocate to California.

Made it through recruiting screen, had call with HM on Monday.

Recruiter and HM both told me that the position has been open for almost three months and the recruiter essentially told me that I was the only one in the running for the position. Lots of applicants, she said, but no one whose experience was even close to mine.

Got rejection email from recruiter today. I sent her a very nice thank you letter and she called me almost instantly after, which I thought was a nice touch as she didn't have to do that.

She told me the HM was hesitant in a particular area I didn't have experience in (which I acknowledged during the interview, to which he said "that's not a big deal - it's very trainable and with your background you would pick it up instantly...you have the rest of the job down.") so I wasn't like shocked.

I was shocked however when she said, "I honestly thought you were a great fit, but the HM is clearly looking for someone specific and would just rather have no one in the position if he cannot find it."

I get it's an employer's market right now and I get that I did have one small gap, but damn, good luck finding the perfect candidate that doesn't exist.

Jobadvisor

That sucks, man. Getting that close to a true unicorn role—great pay, equity that could actually make you wealthy, relocation covered, and the HM even verbally downplaying the exact gap—only to get rejected with "we'd rather leave it open" is a special kind of frustrating.

The recruiter's comment is pretty telling. It sounds like the hiring manager has a very specific (probably unrealistic) person in mind and is willing to burn months of team bandwidth rather than bring in a strong 90% fit who could ramp quickly. You've seen this before: "perfect is the enemy of good" in action, especially at startups where ego and control issues can run hot.

A few honest takes:

• The gap excuse is often just that—an excuse. If the HM said in the moment "that's not a big deal, very trainable," and then used it to reject you anyway, it suggests the real objection was something else (chemistry, "vibe," another candidate who appeared later, internal politics, or him just being picky/perfectionist). Recruiters sometimes soften the blow with the most palatable reason.
• Three months open already, only one serious candidate (you), and still passing? That's not a rational hiring process. That's a manager treating the role like his personal art project instead of a business need. Good companies fill strong fits; mediocre or dysfunctional ones hold out for unicorns that don't exist.
• It's genuinely an employer's market in many tech/startup spaces right now, which unfortunately empowers this kind of delusional selectivity. Some HMs have convinced themselves they deserve someone with 10 years of experience in a 2-year-old niche tool plus perfect cultural alignment plus willingness to take startup risk at mid-level comp. Reality doesn't care.

What you can take from this:

1. You were clearly strong enough to be the top (and apparently only real) contender. That's validation of your experience even if it didn't land.
2. Dodged a potential bullet on culture/manager fit. A manager who's willing to leave money, productivity, and team relief on the table for months because no one is "perfect" is often a nightmare to work for—micromanager, never satisfied, moves goalposts, etc. The equity might have been nice, but grinding under that kind of HM can destroy your soul (and future references).
3. The fact the recruiter called you personally and sounded surprised/frustrated on your behalf suggests she thought it was a bad call too.

Moving forward: Keep applying aggressively. Positions like this are rare, but your background clearly competes at that level. When you get the next strong one, consider gently probing the HM's flexibility on "must-haves" during the process, or ask the recruiter candidly how decisive the HM tends to be.

This one stings because it was so close and the upside was massive. Feel the frustration, vent it out, then move on—plenty of other companies will value a near-perfect fit who can deliver immediately over a fantasy candidate who never materializes.

You've got the goods. The right role (with a less neurotic HM) will recognize that. How are you feeling about the rest of your search right now? Any other irons in the fire?

Offer rescinded after 80 days and 8 rounds of interview and an initial verbal offer

I’m not even here to vent cause I’m not that angry, weirdly. I’m just… zen about it.

I have been in discussion with a late stage startup since February. From the get go I didn’t like the hiring manager. He gave me Cold Pricklies. But the rest of the team was Warm Fuzzies and the job was interesting. It would have been a lateral move for me on paper (important: I am already employed, thankfully) but it would have been closer to what I want to be doing.

Anyway, after 80 days and 8 rounds (included two panels) I got a verbal offer. Their ceiling was my floor, which I knew going in. What I didn’t know was their bonus package was flat capped (instead of percentage based) and the equity was a math riddle. I expressed surprise at the bonus and started asking questions about the equity. Equity is WHY you join a start up — you are taking a risk on a little guy, you’re making an investment in them, with hopes there’s some kind of pay off. It was late stage so i knew I wasn’t in for life changing money but it was still an important part of the comp package in my book.

Hiring manager put me in touch with the CFO who walked me through the equity and confirmed what I suspected when I first got the offer, which was the equity was super low. Low enough that at this point, looking at the total comp, I would actually lose money if I took the job. Not a lot of money, just 5K, but still. I’d been in an 80 day slugfest for a lateral move that was going to cost me 5K a year.

I decided to use the weak equity and nonstandard bonus to try and renogotiate the rest of the package. I’d indicated I was ok with the base before but I hadn’t signed anything and now that I had new information, I figured it couldn’t hurt to ask. My note was calm, polite, doubled down on how excited I was for the opportunity, and that I was eager to find a common ground. What’s the worst that could happen, right? They say no?

The worst that could happen is they pull the offer.

Maybe I asked for too much — I certainly didn’t expect them to give me what I was asking for; I included huge blinking red signs indicating I was ready to compromise/meet them halfway. Maybe I shouldn’t have asked about severance — I’d never tried to negotiate severance up front before and never will again lol.

In any case, I’m feeling weirdly zen about it. A couple months ago a dream job slipped through my fingers and it fucked me up for about two weeks. But this… I was ok with it. I sent the hiring manager a classy note five minutes later saying it was a shame the math didn’t work out and wishing them luck.

Like I said, not venting. Just felt like I needed to put it in writing and release it into the universe. I don’t want to scare people away from negotiating and if I didn’t already have a descent job (a job I am done with and eager to leave from, but pays the bills) I certainly would have done things differently.

I guess I’m curious if people are seeing a trend out there w/ companies not willing to negotiate? But mostly just… wanted to write it out.

Good luck out there folks.

Jobadvisor

Sorry this happened after such a long, draining process—80 days and 8 rounds is brutal, especially when you're already employed and treating it as a thoughtful lateral move rather than a desperate jump. Your zen reaction is actually a really healthy sign. You've got perspective, and that's worth a lot.

What likely happened here

You spotted real issues once you got details: the bonus being flat-capped instead of percentage-based, and the equity being disappointingly thin (the part that actually makes startup risk worth it). Total comp ending up $5k underwater on a lateral move is a legitimate red flag—not greed, just math. Raising it politely, while expressing continued excitement and openness to compromise, is standard professional behavior.

The rescission (especially after they looped in the CFO) suggests a few possibilities:

• The hiring manager (who already gave you "cold pricklies") wasn't truly bought in or saw your questions as a hassle.
• The company is operating in a cautious/late-stage startup mode where budgets are tighter than they projected during the long process. Any pushback on total comp becomes a quick "no thanks, we'll go to the next person" decision.
• They had other candidates further along, or internal pressure to keep costs locked down.

Including severance in the ask probably didn't help—it's unusual to negotiate upfront unless you're at a very senior level or there's obvious risk (layoff-prone environment). It can signal you're already thinking about the exit, which some teams interpret negatively.

Is this a broader trend?

Yes, there's been chatter about offers getting pulled more readily after negotiation, especially in tech/startups over the last couple of years. In a tighter hiring environment with cost pressure, some companies treat any counter as a sign the candidate "won't be happy" or will be difficult later. Others simply have low tolerance for reopening approved budgets.

That said, it's still not the majority outcome. Most reasonable employers expect some back-and-forth and will either meet you partway or politely say "this is our best." Pulling the offer entirely over a calm, well-reasoned note (especially after 8 rounds) is often a culture signal. A place that ghosts or punishes basic due diligence on comp is likely to be rigid on raises, promotions, or flexibility down the line too. In that sense, you may have dodged ongoing frustration.

Your instinct was right: equity is the main reason to take startup risk. If the math doesn't work even after transparency from the CFO, walking (or being walked) makes sense.

Lessons that might help next time

• Verbal offers are worth very little. Push for the full written package (base, bonus structure, equity details with valuation/vesting/liquidation prefs) before investing emotional energy in heavy negotiation.
• When the initial numbers feel off after new info, frame the conversation narrowly around making the total comp viable, not "I want more of everything." Lead with excitement and data.
• For late-stage startups specifically: Scrutinize the equity hard (cap table position, preferred vs common, recent 409A valuation, dilution risk). Many people underestimate how little it can be worth in practice.
• If you have a decent job already, your leverage is higher—but so is your ability to walk away cleanly, which you did with class. That's a win.

You're already in a stronger position than many because you have a paying job and didn't burn bridges with that classy follow-up note. The fact that this one didn't rattle you much (unlike the previous dream job) suggests you're building good emotional resilience in a messy market.

The job search sucks right now for a lot of people—long processes, cautious employers, weird equity math—but the right fit won't make you contort this much just to break even. Keep that zen, keep the standards, and good luck out there. Something that actually pencils out (and feels warm-fuzzy on the team side) will come along.