Do I...

[ricevermicelli]

Do I want a temp-to-perm job with an organization that lost its CFO to a work-related criminal inquiry six months ago, and also uses accounting software I'm not familiar with?

Comments

[jon-leonard.livejournal.com]

That doesn't sound very promising. no. Unless you have a shortage of other options that sound any better?

[robbbbbb.livejournal.com]

Practically? It is easier to find a job when you already have one. So yes, you should take it, even if it means that you're just marking time while looking for the next one.

Unless you think there are long-term ethical issues involved. I mean, they can't pay you enough to break the law, or lie, cheat, and steal. They have had recent problems in this area. So if you think it's a systemic problem with their office then walk away. Otherwise, take the gig. (And be prepared to walk away if you find out after the fact that it's a systemic issue.)

[ricevermicelli.livejournal.com]

The criminal investigation is not financial at this time.

I have a part-time job at the moment. It fills resume gaps, and gives me some breathing room, but it's not a well I can go back to if I leave it.

I can't switch jobs in under a year in my field, unless something major happens. It would be worse to take a job I can't keep than it would be to stay where I am.

[drwex]

As with so many things, I think it depends(tm).

What are your alternatives? What risks are you taking if you accept this job and what are the risks of turning it down? How heavily do you weight those risks? Does the job give you anything you want (other than the obvious income)? How much weight do you give to what else it offers?

We aren't always rational decision-makers, but it sometimes helps to have a good ingredient list to which we apply our gut feels.

[tisiphone.livejournal.com]

No, nein, nej, nyet, non! At least, not if you have any financial responsibilities for said firm whatsoever.

[ricevermicelli.livejournal.com]

Financial responsibility is kind of what I do.

[tisiphone.livejournal.com]

I know, that's why I think so strongly it's a bad idea. Who knows what nasty surprises lurk in the unknown software?

[macthud]

Probably not...

Unless the org happens to be one that you *really* want to see succeed, and you feel like you (in particular!) would be instrumental in bringing it from here to there.

In such case, I'm confident in your ability to quickly become proficient in whatever accounting software they use; that's just a minor hoop to burn.

And, there might be some contamination of things left behind by the former CFO, but ... cleaning that up won't taint the cleaner.

So -- it'll likely be messier than many other opportunities, but that may just as well be a pro as a con.

[ricevermicelli.livejournal.com]

Messy is fun. I mean, there's solid work to do there, and that's usually a good time. I have some background in forensics, and working in that area is often entertaining.

It kind of depends, though, on what the overall current structure looks like. It could look like the bad guy was bad only in non-financial ways, or potentially not actually bad at all, although I think these are outside possibilities.It depends how the organization is reacting. It's hard to ask all of these questions in a job interview.

[macthud]

Adding up everything you've said here, I think the answer comes out to "no."

Fun to skyhook about for a few minutes, though!

[beth_leonard]

Clearly not. At least, clearly not when you phrase it that way and already have a different job.

It sounds like you already know the things that you would not like about the job and would drive you crazy. Working with people who let ethics violations go unchallenged would drive me crazy.

It could possibly make sense to interview with them to see if the people there are shocked and want someone to be ethical and through and would appreciate you, then maybe... but still probably not.

--Beth