I joined company A with pay X but within a month I got better pay Y from company B. Suppose if I chose to join company B. Will it be an issue in future? Like will my future employers think he is just a job hopper and not a good investment for long term? Industry is IT and Consulting. Job seniority is Mid level.

  • @Flater's answer is spot on from the business perspective. When we are hiring, I don't care how great someone is, if they are a job hopper that is begging for chaos. Once on a CV, no problem. Multiple times, I don't even consider them. But if you are the begining of a career, growth and experience should be considered as important as money. Good luck.
    – DogBoy37
    Commented May 10 at 16:37
  • Do you accept the fact that you'll never get a job at Company A ever again? Commented May 10 at 18:13

5 Answers 5


I can't judge India's culture, my stance is based on IT in western cultures.

If it happens once? No. There's many reasons why someone could leave a job. Pay is one of them, but you could have also simply disliked the company for whatever reason.

If it's a chain of job hops? Yeah eventually it will start reflecting on you. I'll start wondering how long you'll stay at my company if I end up hiring you.


As a company, you know that a person you hire will not be as effective and productive in the first few months. They are learning the ropes, getting to know the team, the technology, what the company does and needs. And that is okay. That is already calculated in.

So an employee that jumps ship shortly after being hired is a net loss. They calculated that they pay you way over what they get for a few months, to reap the benefits of making a profit off of your work after that. If you leave lets say 3 to 12 months into the job, assuming it is a complex job like IT, not a job that can be trained to unskilled labor in a week, for the company it wasn't worth it. If the colleagues, instead of training and explaining the company and wokring to you, had just put their heads down and worked, the output would probably have been the same.

So as an employer, I want to know that you change jobs for good reasons. I will not begrudge you taking opportunities I myself would have taken. I will however, rather hire a person that sticks to their plan and only changes it for unforseen, big events.

So it very much depends on what this "better offer" is. If you get the once in a lifetime opportunity to be paid double, then yeah, take it, I understand. And I don't think this "once in a lifetime" thing will happen again while you are employed by me. Good for you!

However, if it is a 5% raise, then I would say that is a problem. There is no shortage of people paying you 5% more than I do. And then again companies paying you 5% more than they do... and so on, until you have made yourself the overpaid, unreliable person with no solid experience that is basically unemployable.

This is a scale. It's not black or white. Do it once? Nobody cares. It happens to you due to bad timing, nobody cares. Do it multiple times, then have it happen again due to bad timing that wasn't your fault? That can be a big problem. Because once you have a CV nobody wants to employ you with, it's a little late to stick with one employer for a while.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. You have to decide what that means for you, how much you value reliability and stability in your life. There is no right or wrong, even if others consider you to be unreliable, if that is what makes you happy, you need to go for it. But you need to weight what you want against what you get.

Sorry for being somewhat vague, but it really is grey, not black and white.

So what you should ask yourself is: if there is a company C, that extends the same offer over B that you got from B over A, would you jump ship again? And if so, with the offer upped twice, would that make you a multi-millionaire fast (amazing, must take offer) or would you still be working your job? Because if you were still woking in this profession even with two great offers then you will need a solid CV and should probably prioritize that over a little money.

  • "paying you 5% more than they do... and so one, until you have made yourself the overpaid, unreliable person with no solid experience that is basically unemployable" - I'm sure there's some real logical gymnastics in there! Someone who moves for concrete offers of higher market pay, somehow becomes "overpaid" and "unemployable"! 😂
    – Steve
    Commented May 10 at 21:00
  • 1
    Ah, yes, if they do it in short time periods. If you move for a small raise in under a year multiple times, at some point your CV is "burned" by having multiple "years" experience, without any real experience because you didn't stay long enough to learn something other than basics. At that point, you are paid over market rate, have under market experience and are an under market flight risk.
    – nvoigt
    Commented May 11 at 5:20
  • I'm not following how you can be paid "over market rate", by being recently recruited from the market at that rate? Or even, being repeatedly poached at a staccato pace and at progressively higher rates? The market rate is not the average of what people are currently employed at, but the price of new recruitment from the market. (1/2)
    – Steve
    Commented May 11 at 8:35
  • I'm also confused about the idea that hopping leads to inadequate experience - I've never seriously encountered the idea that those with more gigs under their belt have had less experience or are less capable (at the time of starting) than those with a less diverse background. As a hopper I've definitely never had that feedback - completely the opposite. Otherwise, you'd be saying that contractors are less competent and less experienced, than someone of the same age who's had one job from school? (2/2)
    – Steve
    Commented May 11 at 8:35
  • Personally, I consider "learning" and "experience" what you get when you make decisions of your own and experience their result. If someone doesn't stay long enough to be trusted with their own decisions, or doesn't stay long enough to see what their own decision results in in the mid to long term, that is a problem, that is not experience. If someone stays at 5 companies just long enough to know everybodies name and where the break room is, that is not experience. I don't hire based on that skillset. I hire people based on what they can do after those basics.
    – nvoigt
    Commented May 11 at 8:50

Do you like company A? If you like them I would ask for an increase in salary to come close to the company B offer. If they say no, well you have a choice on your hands.

However, it sounds like you don't prefer A over B, so why not ask company A for an increase over company B? If they say "no" move on. Then just leave company A off your resume.

If for some reason you cannot leave them off, or perhaps for others the employment is longer then you can always say the following if asked:

"Company B, as part of my job search for Company A made me an offer that was much higher than company A. I asked company A to come up a bit in salary, I would have even taken a bit less than what B offered me, but I was told their hands were tied. I had no choice but to move on."

In IT skills matter most. Can you do the job that the potential employer requires. Most understand that this is not a long term relationship.


I think some HR officers and hiring managers are constantly on the lookout for unicorns who are competent workers but willing to work for less than market rates.

I think for reasons of their own dignity, these staff also don't like to think of their own employer (which they represent) as being a low-pay, low-road employer attempting to feed at the lower level of the market, even though that is what they are in fact.

If you hop regularly for higher pay, you are bound to demonstrate to these employers that you are not the unicorn they are looking for.

But the process is largely self-limiting. If employers were put off by your CV, they wouldn't be offering you higher pay than you are currently getting - and then you would just stay where you are. The fact that you are getting such offers suggests employers are not yet put off and there is still room to grow.

My advice would be to hop for higher pay until you cannot hop any more. It's really the only language that many employers understand, that they have to pay you the market wage.

If an employer was making substantial investments in your skills and experience, of course, then that should be factored in your calculations. But in my experience, such training is never done for reasons of benevolence or intergenerational relations.

Rather, it is done because the employer thinks they can undercut market wages by hiring able workers for low wages and calling them trainees, or because the employer thinks a trainee is more likely to stick around and accept low wages later once fully trained (as well as accepting low wages as a trainee in the meantime).

So "hop to the top", is my advice. The only people your CV will put off, are those who want to pay you less, not those who want to pay you more.


There's a lot of variables. If you're early in your career then favor the company where you're going to learn how to work at the higher levels faster. There's no point switching to a company where your progression is stagnated just for some extra money because eventually you will reach a point where you're making less than you should be based on your length of employment (or to put it another way you didn't get promoted). But it also matters how long it normally takes to get promoted in your industry. If it normally takes 10 years then I guess it may not seem like a big deal if you take a 2 year detour just to make money. Although from my POV as someone in his 50s, if I knew when I was 18-20 what I know now, I would never take any detours and I would have reached the same success levels much earlier in life.

As far as a company thinking you're a job hopper: don't tell. If you only work at a job for a month don't put it on your resume. Ever. Your old employer wouldn't give you the best recommendation anyhow.

Bottom line is to have a long term plan and do things based on what is in your long term interest as opposed to what feels good in the short term.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .