I started asking “what did the last person in this role struggle with?” instead of “why did they leave?”
For the longest time, if I was interviewing for a role someone had already done before, I’d ask some version of, “Why did the previous person leave?”
Rarely got anything useful.
“They found another opportunity.”
“They relocated.”
“They wanted something new.”
“Career growth.”
All normal answers. Also basically useless if you’re trying to figure out what the job is actually like.
A few months ago I switched it to, “What did the last person in this role struggle with?”. I saw way different answers.
One hiring manager told me the previous employee had two senior people assigning work separately and was constantly stuck figuring out whose request came first. That immediately made me ask who actually gets final say when priorities clash.
Another said the last person struggled because the reporting workload was heavier than expected. After talking about it a little more, I found out one of the “monthly” reports in the job description was actually around 15 different reports going to different people.
That’s a pretty different picture.
One HR person told me the previous employee was technically good, but kept getting blocked by another department that took days to send over the data they needed.
And apparently that dependency is still there.
The most interesting answer I got was from a manager who said, “Honestly, they struggled with the pace.”
At first I figured that meant the person just couldn’t keep up.
Then he explained that priorities changed almost every day, clients could escalate straight to leadership, and it wasn’t unusual to throw away half a day of work because something else suddenly became urgent.
That gave me a much clearer idea of what “fast-paced environment” actually meant there.
I’ve gotten good answers too.
One manager said the last person mostly struggled for the first couple months because their internal systems were terrible and barely documented. Once they figured out where everything was, they did really well and eventually got promoted.
That’s useful information too btw.
I’m not asking because I want gossip about whoever had the job before me. I’m trying to figure out where the annoying or difficult parts of the role actually are.
“Why did they leave?” usually gets you the polite version of how the story ended.
“What did they struggle with?” gets you a much better idea of what a random Tuesday might look like if you take the job.
Jobadvisor
This is a good shift. "Why did they leave?" asks the previous person to explain their exit, which usually produces a tidy story. "What did they struggle with?" asks about the work itself, and people answer that more candidly because it doesn't require them to judge anyone's decision.
Your examples show what makes it work. The "two senior people assigning work" answer reveals a decision-making gap you can ask about directly. The "monthly" report that was really fifteen reports is the kind of detail a job description will never show. The data dependency is a structural constraint you'd otherwise discover on your first Tuesday. And "they struggled with the pace" turned out to mean something specific: priorities shifting daily and half-finished work getting thrown out.
A few things might make the questions sharper:
- Follow up with "what does that look like on a normal week?" when someone names a struggle. That's how you get from the abstract version to the Tuesday version.
- Ask what the person who succeeded did differently. Your systems-documentation example is a good one: the answer tells you both the problem and how much ramp-up to expect.
- Treat any single answer as one person's experience. A struggle can reflect the previous person's fit as much as the role. If three people describe the same friction, it's probably structural. If only one does, it might be worth noting but not weighing too heavily.
If you're preparing for a specific interview, I'm happy to help you draft a short list of these questions tailored to the role.
Losing motivation
I've been at this since August. Probably applied for 200+ jobs. Had two first round interviews in September. Both rejected, one because I lacked experience in one aspect of the job and other without revealing any reason for rejection.
Objectively, i know I'm further along than I was then. I was wasting time applying to months old job listings. A fair few of my applications are actually being reviewed right now, because Im one for the first people applying to brand new listings.
But there are 100+ people applying for every position that I'm applying to. How am I supposed to stand out? And if I do, I'll then have to learn how to survive 4-6 rounds of interviews without giving some self important HR lady the 'ick'. I'm estimating that it might take me tens of interviews to gather enough interview experience to learn how to do that. At this rate, I'll probably have a job months from now, if not over a year.
Jobadvisor
Two hundred applications with no offer is exhausting, and it makes sense that the math feels bleak. But I think the timeline you're projecting is built on the worst part of the process.
You've changed your approach, and it shows. Applying to fresh listings, having applications under active review, and reaching first-round interviews are all signs the search is working better than it was in August. Two first rounds in September aren't nothing. One rejection pointed to a specific gap you can close. The other gave no reason, which is common and usually tells you little about your candidacy.
The 100+ applicants per role is real, but most of those people aren't a strong fit, and many are applying broadly. In a pool that size, what usually helps is a short, tailored application that addresses the specific problems in the listing, especially where you have a direct answer to them, plus a referral or a message to someone on the team when you can find one. Your habit of asking what the last person struggled with suggests you're already thinking about the job the way a strong candidate does. That's worth putting into your applications, not just your interviews.
On the interviews, I'd push back on the idea that you need tens of them before you can handle four to six rounds. Most interview skill comes from a handful of real conversations, and you'll notice patterns after three or four. Each one teaches you what lands and what doesn't. The worry about seeming off-putting to a particular interviewer is also something you can't fully control, and it tends to shrink once you're in the conversation rather than imagining it.
If the search feels unsustainable, it may help to set a smaller, weekly target, such as five well-matched applications and one or two conversations with people in the field, rather than trying to keep up with volume. Lower volume with better targeting often produces more interviews.
What's weighing on you most right now: the rejections, the number of applications with nothing back, or the timeline?
My coworker got praised and written up for the exact same phone call
I work customer support for an internet provider. Last week an older customer emailed our department thanking my coworker for spending 40 minutes helping her reconnect her router.
Our manager shared the email in the team chat, congratulating him for providing excellent customer service.
That same afternoon he called my coworker into a meeting because his average call time was too high. He actually used that exact call as an example.
My coworker asked if he was supposed to hang up before the customer got her internet working.
Manager said "that's not what I'm saying" but couldn't explain what he should've done differently.
So apparently we're supposed to solve every problem, just make sure it takes less than 6 minutes.
Jobadvisor
That's a frustrating contradiction. Your coworker did what the customer wanted, and the company publicly said so, then got called in for it. Asking whether he was supposed to hang up before she had internet is a fair question, and "that's not what I'm saying" doesn't answer it.
My guess is the two messages came from different places. The team chat praise was about the customer experience, and the meeting was about a metric. Managers often see the dashboard number before they see the outcome, so the call looked like an outlier on paper. But the manager then picked a call that's hard to defend as a bad one, which makes the feedback hard to act on.
Some things that might help:
- Ask for the specific expectation in writing. "What should he do differently on a call like this?" is hard to dodge, and the answer will show whether there's an actual policy. You could also ask what the target is and whether there's an exception for calls that need troubleshooting.
- Find out what the metric is measuring. If average handle time is the only number tracked, the incentive is to rush. If first-contact resolution or repeat calls are tracked too, that's a more balanced picture, and you can point to it.
- Keep the praise email. If the company's own leadership is praising this kind of call, that's useful context if the write-up affects reviews or promotions.
Is the team measured on handle time alone, or are there other metrics it gets weighed against?
Factory jobs are NOT meant for humans,at least how they're handling it
8 hours a day with a 1 hour break,now that could seem like a decent work hour if it wasn't for the fact we are in a fucking factory,you don't know how many times I had to run to the bathroom and lock me there for 5/10 minutes just beacouse my body was about to collapse from working hard jobs non stop,I personally believe factory jobs should either start at 8 am and end at 4 pm or give 20 minutes breaks every 2 hours (in our factory we Don't even have the 10 min break every 2 hours btw 😊🤦) hopefully with the rise of ai certain jobs won't be given to humans anymore,like to make you understand how much I hate this job I'd rather work as a janitor with minimum wage rather than working there a single day
Jobadvisor
That sounds exhausting, and the bathroom part worries me. Having to lock yourself in for minutes at a time because your body is about to give out means the pace or the conditions are past what a person can safely sustain. Your break argument is reasonable too. Eight hours with one hour off and no short breaks on a physical line is a lot, and the lack of even the basic 10-minute break is hard to accept.
If you feel like you're about to collapse, that's a safety issue, and it's worth documenting. Write down dates and what happened, and if you can, raise it in writing with a supervisor or HR so there's a record. If that goes nowhere, your country's labor inspectorate exists to check exactly these conditions, and they can act on complaints even when the company won't.
Are you looking to change the job itself, or mainly trying to get through the shifts for now?
From Cushy Government Job to Nursing as 2nd Career?
Hello everyone! I’m sure this gets asked a lot, but I am looking for some advice in regards to potentially pursuing nursing as my 2nd career.
I am 30m with a degree in Intercultural Studies. I currently work as a Training Manager in a stable government job. I love my team and I generally like my job as a whole! Compensation and benefits are great. 80k base with guaranteed 3-6% raises every year. Lots of PTO, sick leave, mental health days, 5% 401k match, and a pension (6% employee contribution, 15.5% employer contribution). I have an awesome position. However, I felt unfulfilled for a while and absolutely hate where I live and am unable to get a job anywhere else after 1000+ rejections. AI has just devoured everything in my general field and it feels hopeless, like my options are hard pivoting or just staying at this job until I retire. The cost of living where I am has also gotten terrible, but I’m sure that’s a bit of a problem everywhere.
Over this year, I’ve completed my pre-requisites for ABSN programs and have been accepted into Oklahoma City University, which is about 28k. I have 100k in cash I could use to pay for the program and to live off of. I’d like to save the rest for a down payment on a house at some point, if possible.
I was originally pre-med in college but ended up swapping degrees due to some life circumstances. Over the last decade I’ve thought quite a bit about going back to school for nursing. It’s always been in the back of my mind. I was an EMT out of high school and really loved it. I love medicine, helping people, and I hear it’s got great stability and flexibility, which is something I’m very hungry for right now. My current position is stable, but my field is not so I am unable to get a job outside of where I currently work.
However, I also hear it’s basically impossible to get a job as a new grad, that the systems are broken, that nursing sucks, that the market is being flooded and there aren’t enough budgets to retain people. I love the idea of working in nursing and feeling like my life has more meaning, but I also love the stability of my current position and my benefits; it’s easy to stay when my position feels so easy and comfortable. But on the other hand, it’s been a dream of mine to go back and pursue nursing. I’m quite torn.
What do you guys think? For those who pursued nursing not out of necessity, did it pan out for you? Are you happy? If I were in a position where I absolutely needed something and had no prospects, it wouldnt be such a difficult position. But as I said: my current position is quite good and very stable. It’s tough and feels risky because I have a lot to lose by potentially chasing this dream.
Jobadvisor
Your situation is unusual because you're not leaving out of desperation. You have a good job, savings, and a clear reason for wanting this. That makes it easier to test the decision before you commit, which I'd do.
The new-grad concern is real but often overstated. Hospital new-grad residency spots are competitive in big metros, and some areas are saturated. Demand is generally stronger in smaller cities and in specialties like med-surg, ER, ICU, and long-term care. Your EMT background helps a lot here. ER and EMS-adjacent hiring managers often prefer nurses who already know how to work under pressure. Before you decide, look at the actual outcomes for OCU's ABSN program: NCLEX pass rates, how many graduates are employed in nursing within six months, and where they work. Ask the program directly. Their answer will tell you more than Reddit threads.
Two things about your finances and benefits need checking first. The pension is probably your biggest asset, and many government pensions require a minimum number of years to vest. If you leave before vesting, you could lose much of the employer contribution, which is 15.5% of salary and a serious amount of money. Find your vesting date and how contributions are handled if you resign. Also, after 28k tuition, your $100k covers the program and living costs for roughly 12 to 18 months of school, but it won't cover much if you also hit a slow job search. Build a budget that assumes a gap of six months without a nursing paycheck, and see what's left for a down payment.
It's also worth testing the work before you quit. You could look into a part-time CNA or ER tech role, or a per diem EMT shift if you're still certified, to see how you handle long shifts, physical strain, and patient death. Nursing is not like being an EMT, and the emotional and physical load over years is different from a few shifts. Talking to two or three working nurses, especially new grads from the last couple of years, will give you a clearer picture than the "nursing sucks" posts.
On your bigger question, I think the trade-off is fair. Many nurses are happy, especially those who chose it for meaning and who can move between roles, specialties, or locations. Some are burned out, and the bad experiences tend to get posted more. The fact that nursing is portable matters for you, since you hate where you live and can't find work in your field. An ABSN in Oklahoma City could also be a fresh start, though you'd want to know whether you could stay there afterward.
If your pension vests soon and the program's outcomes look solid, I'd lean toward applying. If the pension is far from vesting, that changes the timing more than the decision itself, and you might look at a later start.
What does your pension vesting timeline look like?
At 21 making $80k as a union maintenance electrician with an easy job, should I stay or pursue something more challenging?
Im 21, went to trade school for industrial electrical, landed a union maintenance job at a large commercial facility right out of school. Been here about a year.
Pay is legitimately great — I'm making close to $80k at $38-39/hr with full benefits and a pension. Guaranteed $1-$2 raises every year, union protection. etc. To put that in perspective the median electrician salary in the US is around $60k for experienced guys according to Google, and I'm 21. The only electricians typically making more than me are IBEW journeymen which in my region top out around $48-55/hr — but that's after a 5 year apprenticeship at reduced rates and it's physically demanding construction work.
The predicament is the job is almost comically slow. The facility hosts events and conventions and 80% of our work is temporary power — dropping extension cords, taping them down, plugging in equipment. The other 20% is general facility maintenance, occasional lighting work, some minor troubleshooting.
When there's no show we basically have nothing to do. I read an entire 600 page book in one 5 day work week on the clock because there was genuinely nothing else to do. Other times I watch a movie - or two - on my phone. Some days the most physically demanding thing any of us do is tape a cord to the floor. OverallI have an unusually large amount of free time on the clock.
I know I've landed in an unusually cushy situation financially. But I'm restless. I leave work most days wishing I was challenging myself more. I'm worried that in 5-10 years I'll have a resume that says maintenance electrician yet I won’t be able to run a job or have the skills most electricians should have.
I'm thinking about Local IBEW apprenticeship or picking up weekend work with an independent guy just to feel like an actual electrician again. But the math is hard — I'd take a significant pay cut for years before potentially surpassing what I make now, and it's physically demanding construction work.
Is the grass greener or am I crazy for even considering leaving? What would you do at 21?
Jobadvisor
You're not crazy to want more, but I'd question the either/or. Staying in a well-paid union job with a pension at 21 is a strong position, and the restlessness you're describing is real. The real risk you named is skill atrophy, and that's something you can fix without giving up the job.
The 5-year apprenticeship math is hard to ignore. You'd take a large pay cut for years, and the physical work is harder on your body. If you leave now, you're not just trading money for challenge. You're also trading a pension, seniority, and union protection for a path that might pay off in your late twenties or early thirties. That can be the right call, but it should be a deliberate choice, not a reaction to boredom.
I'd stay for now, but treat it as a training period with an end date. The downtime is a rare resource. Use it to study for your journeyman license if your state requires one for that work, learn the NEC and NFPA 70E well, and get into PLCs, motor controls, or building automation, which are skills facilities actually need and that many electricians never learn. Ask to shadow the more senior guys on any real troubleshooting, and volunteer for outages, shutdowns, or panel work when they come up. Many IBEW locals also offer continuing education or training funds, so check what your contract covers.
The weekend work with an independent electrician deserves a careful look before you do it. Many union contracts and employer policies restrict outside work, and it could cost you the job. It also creates liability and licensing questions if something goes wrong. Read your agreement and ask your steward before you take anything on.
If you do this for 12 to 18 months and still feel stuck, that's your signal. At that point, the apprenticeship path looks different. You'd have a sharper set of skills, you'd know whether you like the trade enough to do the physical work for years, and you could apply with a much stronger background. Also, a resume that says maintenance electrician with a PLC and controls background reads very differently than one that just says maintenance electrician.
What does your facility's work look like on the rare days when there's a real problem? That would tell me a lot about whether it's worth pushing for more of that work.
How do I increase my salary if I like my job?
I work in a small but established org. best environment I’ve worked in my life. Great boss. Nice coworkers. Maybe 3-5 hours of actual work a week but I’m in office 4 days a week. It’s in NYC and pay is around 70-75k USD. I live in a cheap area but with the expensive commute into the city ($35 total bus tickets.) it’s becoming really hard to save money. Do you guys have any advice?
I can honestly retire at my company. My boss has talked about promoting me but it’s still relatively early and even after promotion I’d still be making $78-80k maybe? It just doesn’t seem like a lot. I don’t know if I am doing myself injustice. I know I am being paid below the average salary n the country because salaries for my role go for around $90k-$130k. But they also do a lot more work than me.
Pros: Slow, Easy life. Nice people, stable, good PTO, almost yearly promotions (you don’t always get that in marketing trust me.)
Cons: pay is not the best, 4 days in office. Commute 1.5 hours one way.
Jobadvisor
You're not doing yourself an injustice by staying, but the gap between your pay and the market is real, and you can narrow it without leaving a job you like.
Start with the promotion. Ask your boss what the next title is, what it pays in NYC, and what would need to be true to get there, such as specific responsibilities, metrics, or timing. "Almost yearly promotions" is valuable, but a promotion only helps if each step carries a meaningful raise. Get the numbers in writing if you can.
Then check the market for your specific role and level. NYC requires most employers to list salary ranges in job postings, so you can browse real postings for your title and see what they pay. Salary sites help too, but the posted ranges are more reliable. If the market rate for your current title really is $90k or more, that's your negotiating anchor, even if the work is lighter. You don't need to argue that you do the same work. You can argue that the role is priced at $90k and you're asking to be paid within that range, perhaps phased over a year or two.
Be realistic about the framing, though. Your boss will probably respond to scope, not to the gap between your salary and the average. If your responsibilities have grown or you could take on more, make that case. If your job is genuinely small, a big raise may be hard at a small org, and it's better to know that now.
Your commute is costing you money and time, so look at those before negotiating salary. Ask whether your employer offers pre-tax commuter benefits, which NYC employers with enough staff are generally required to provide. That can save a meaningful amount each year. If you're using OMNY, the weekly fare cap is around $35, so you may already be near the most you'll pay for transit. You could also ask for a third remote day. Going from four in-office days to three would cut your commute by roughly a quarter and might matter more to your savings than a small raise.
Finally, your light workload is a chance. You have spare time to build skills that would make you more valuable to other employers, like analytics, paid media, or whatever your field pays more for. You don't have to leave. But if you ever want a bigger jump, you'll be in a stronger position, and having that option makes the current job feel less like a trap.
What's your title right now, and what do the next one or two roles above you pay in the postings you've seen?
Can you be too excited during an job interview?
I just got an email that I'll have a video call interview with my dream company. During my education I have always wanted to work at their company and they help my realize what type of thing I want to specialize in. The job I am interviewing is in a different branch from what I originally wanted to work with, but I'm still really excited about this opportunity.
My question is how to avoid just seeming lika a huge fan of them. It is a company within the enterainment industry and I've heard of recruiters disliking when candidates seem like too big fans of the company. I don't want to come off to strong, but I still want to show that I love the company and that they are my dream workplace. I really want this job since it could possible open up new career opportunities for me.
Jobadvisor
You can be excited without coming across as a fan. The difference is in what you talk about. Fans talk about the company's shows, films, or brand. Strong candidates talk about the work, the team, and how they'd contribute.
A few ways to do that:
Anchor enthusiasm in specific work. Instead of "I love your company," try "The way your team handled [specific project or campaign] made me want to learn how that kind of work gets done." It shows you've done real research and that your interest is about the craft.
Connect it to your skills. Explain what you'd bring to this branch, even though it's different from what you originally pictured. Something like "My background in [X] translates well to [Y], and I'm eager to build on that here" shows you've thought about fit, not just the brand.
Be honest about the pivot. Recruiters respect candidates who can explain why they're interested in a different branch. You don't need to say the other branch was your original plan. Just explain what drew you to this one now and what you want to learn in it.
Keep the dream-workplace point brief. You can mention that the company influenced your direction, since that's a real and memorable story. Say it once, in a sentence, then move to what you can offer. "Your company helped me figure out what I want to specialize in, and this role feels like the natural next step" works well.
Prepare questions about the role. Asking about team priorities, what success looks like in the first six months, or how the branch works with others is a strong signal. Questions about the work make you sound like a colleague, not a fan.
Your excitement is an asset. Recruiters mostly worry about candidates who are excited but can't say what they'd actually do. If you can do both, you'll be fine.
If you tell me the role title and a bit about what the branch does, I can help you draft answers to likely questions, including "Why do you want to work here?" and "Why this branch?"