Not gonna lie, this would be a complete turnoff to me. Something something exploding offers and whatnot. If you can't spare a week for someone new to start, something is probably out of whack. If they keep pushing back, sure, but if it's a week "because I want to help out my team," are you going to hold that against them? Would you want them to bail on you like that when they leave your company?

That's the thing: you're letting your new team down now and prioritizing the old team over us.

I wouldn't want them to bail but I would understand.

[edit] Also the OP is asking about the situation of going back for another extension so that is the context of my answer.

So you would rather restart the hiring process than wait another week? From what I've read about the numbers this seems very costly. Are you expecting to be able to go through the whole hiring process successfully with another person in 5 working days? My best guess would be that you did not like the person that much but that is missing the point

I think you are projecting. It's an ultimatum: "choose which company your loyalties lie with". The two times I've reached the point of delivering that ultimatum the developers showed up. If the person is not that committed they're going to be gone anyway in three to six months which is far more expensive in my experience.

That said, I've also given developers another week to wrap things up, more time because of illness and family obligations, and a couple more weeks to start when they asked because "they were still burnt out".

It's not like I throw my hands up and the first road block and shred the resume.

I bet both of those developers were thankful they had something concrete they could go to their old job with and say "Sorry, can't do it".

If they'd been around the block a few times, they'd probably have the confidence to simply say that they didn't have a choice. But for someone close to starting out, it can be nice to have someone else effectively make the decision for them.

> If the person is not that committed they're going to be gone anyway in three to six months which is far more expensive in my experience.

If the person wants to stay to finish one thing -despite the terrible workplace-, that's actually a major display of [misplaced] commitment.

> So you would rather restart the hiring process than wait another week?

That's only half the coin - the other half is "would you rather restart the hiring process than hire someone showing red flags (not sticking to their commitments / showing up on time) before they even start the job?"

Sick? Family emergency? Funeral? Sure.

Can't let go of your old job? Hmm...

> From what I've read about the numbers this seems very costly.

From what I've read, so is hiring the wrong person and then having to fire them or have them quit - all that time wasted getting them up to speed.

Well at the very least it seems like they'd have as much loyalty for their new job and be willing to stay an extra week for you too.

It'd be nice to think that's the case!

On the other hand, they may be getting cold feet about leaving all their old colleagues and friends behind and about to accept a generous counteroffer that they haven't yet had time to formalize.

Or perhaps they remembered they really hate PHP. Or the state they'd be moving to. Or gotten a last minute job offer from someone else that they like way better. Or...

See what happened with the OP. They pushed back one week, and are now close to doing it again. As mentioned above there's scope for this to continue indefinitely until the new employer puts their foot down.

Exactly. The second time is when the ultimatums start.

Plus, I'm always concerned when a developer ends their last job on Friday and starts Monday at our company.

> Plus, I'm always concerned when a developer ends their last job on Friday and starts Monday at our company. Why? I did that else my family would have without health insurance (and income) for a while..

Ah, I'm Canadian, many developers take some time off between gigs to recharge. Our health care is somewhat tied to our employer but it's not as bad as the US.

I'm more concerned about the scenario where a developer has been working 12+ hour days on a release and then 50 or so hours later is now trying to ramp up on at our company.

Many employers have coverage till EOM. But I've done this (no break between jobs) more than once, so I'm not sure what the issues is.

First several weeks will be ramp-up anyway.

In the US, there's typically COBRA as well so you can continue your previous insurance for up to about 18 months--without your previous employer co-pays of course.

Have you enrolled in this? It's really not for short periods, and is paperwork intensive.

If I want to avoid coverage loss, I'll go with back-to-back employment rather than risk a few days and having to enroll in COBRA.

It was quite a few years back but I don't remember it as being a big deal after I was briefly laid off post-9/11. As I recall I filled out forms to be covered but never actually paid in because there's a grace period and I got a new job after about a month. All things medical can get complicated, but COBRA should just be a continuation of your existing coverage.

Not a developer, but what do you mean in your second paragraph? Do you think people should take more time between jobs or spend part of their (generally two weeks) notice as vacation? Just wondering.

I'd be more specific. There is nothing more frustrating than a new hire who delays for stupid reasons; like his previous company screwing with him and he stays more instead of running away.