I think I stayed at my job too long

[Anonymous]

I have been with my company for 18 years--from age 27 to 45. I really need a change. Mergers, reorgs, five bosses in the last five years, things have become toxic. A few people I was talking with about new opportunities looked at me like I had two heads. Trying to think about how to frame this. The reality is, that for most of those 18 years, I was constantly given more opportunities and promoted. My salary increased from $50K the day I started to over $200k! (I still have my offer letter!) I think for the past 5 years it has been pretty stagnant in terms of growth and somewhat toxic. I have thought frequently about leaving in the past 5 years but I have stayed because I have young kids, it is flexible, the commute is very short, and looking around made me realize I was not going to get more money--maybe even a little less. It was basically easiest to be on auto pilot. Then we had the 2025 massive disruptions to government contracting and terrible job market, which is where I work. But in 2026 I'd like to start looking around. Do you think 18 years is a liability and what is the best way to discuss it? Focus on the increasing promotions?

[Anonymous]

I think it's a good situation. You're loyal and stable. Got promotions. The government stuff causes instability, which is no fault of your own. It's clear you are not leaving because you're underperformed or anything, and if a company takes a chance on you, you are likely to stay.

[Anonymous]

Stay put. So senior you have institutional knowledge and stability. Should be lady on chopping block if it ever came to it. On second hand you should get a good severance if it did. Be on auto pilot and coast easily into the sunset

[Anonymous]

We no longer ask candidates why you left. Just focus on skills and what you bring.

[Anonymous]

I see absolutely no liability for staying that long. Normal people will see that long tenure as an asset.

Somehow the internet has convinced millennials and younger that jumping jobs every 18 months is not only okay but is a career asset. They're delusional, and once they hit their power years in early 40s-late 50s, alot of them are going to find out how dispensable they are.

[Anonymous]

A liability in terms of job search? No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We no longer ask candidates why you left. Just focus on skills and what you bring.

I’ve been asked why I want to leave in the past two job switches - one was six months ago. I don’t think they really care though. It’s an easy question to ask and an easy question to answer.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't see that as an issue. You also still moved around and had different jobs and roles.

[Anonymous]

It’s not a detriment - show your progression and advancement - that’s a cool story. There are some companies that are going to see it as a negative because you haven’t been exposed to other cultures but don’t worry about them. I think you need to gauge if you are at risk

[Anonymous]

I had 5 jobs last 18 years and not a job hopper

But is it Goldman, Apple, Google 18 is great. If it is a crap company not so much

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see absolutely no liability for staying that long. Normal people will see that long tenure as an asset.

Somehow the internet has convinced millennials and younger that jumping jobs every 18 months is not only okay but is a career asset. They're delusional, and once they hit their power years in early 40s-late 50s, alot of them are going to find out how dispensable they are.

I've had a lot of different jobs and the career asset isn't moving a lot, it's the skill and career growth that unfortunately can be very difficult to get in some fields if you stay in the same place. If you can get that growth without moving, great. But the issue with staying someplace for 18 years isn't that you stayed there for so long, it's that you may or may be employable more broadly--you've never had to figure this out. A lot of senior employees lose their good jobs and struggle to find something new because much of their value was organization-specific, they don't have great networks, and they don't know how to job search. And there's not a way to test this other than by actually looking for a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see absolutely no liability for staying that long. Normal people will see that long tenure as an asset.

Somehow the internet has convinced millennials and younger that jumping jobs every 18 months is not only okay but is a career asset. They're delusional, and once they hit their power years in early 40s-late 50s, alot of them are going to find out how dispensable they are.

Frequent hops is a red flag but long tenure is not automatically an asset. You sound clueless as a manager.

[Anonymous]

lol 18 years is a long time

I've been at my current organization for 3 years and I'm already having panic attacks that I'll be stuck here forever

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see absolutely no liability for staying that long. Normal people will see that long tenure as an asset.

Somehow the internet has convinced millennials and younger that jumping jobs every 18 months is not only okay but is a career asset. They're delusional, and once they hit their power years in early 40s-late 50s, alot of them are going to find out how dispensable they are.

I've had a lot of different jobs and the career asset isn't moving a lot, it's the skill and career growth that unfortunately can be very difficult to get in some fields if you stay in the same place. If you can get that growth without moving, great. But the issue with staying someplace for 18 years isn't that you stayed there for so long, it's that you may or may be employable more broadly--you've never had to figure this out. A lot of senior employees lose their good jobs and struggle to find something new because much of their value was organization-specific, they don't have great networks, and they don't know how to job search. And there's not a way to test this other than by actually looking for a job.

The problem is that for any job with a challenging skill set, you're not going to develop that skill set in less than 3-4 years. So if you're job hunting every 2 years, you're not getting the skill and career growth that you say is important. Or if you think you are becoming an expert in a job in less than 2 years, then the job must not be very difficult.... which means you'll be disposable in your 40s when you're expensive. I don't think you need to stay 18 years, but i'd want to hire the person with 18 years tenure before the person with 6 jobs at 3 years at a time. ALso, i get that some companies don't provide opportunities to grow and develop, but if you're two decades into your career and been at six different employers and never once landed somewhere where they gave you upward opportunities, then i think that speaks volumes too.

[Anonymous]

You're insane if you leave. The grass is NOT greener. Stay put.