Main issue is not for the company, but the candidate. If he is a senior developer currently working elsewhere and you are trying to convince him to join, a 3 month temporary offer is a hard sell.

A probation period of three months is pretty common here in the UK, even for senior people. I've got 20 years experience and just checked my current employment contract, and I had one. Nobody seems bothered by it. Remember that if the company wants you gone, you're gone regardless of any probation period. The probation period only determines how many steps they have to go through to do it and how much notice you are given.

Yeah, not a chance I'd leave my current job for that kind of instability.

Pretty sure no one would. You'll only manage to get unemployed people. Who will bail if they get a full time offer during that three months.

I would. Why? Because I'm confident that they won't want to get rid of me at the end of that 3 month period. Hiring is expensive, and unless I mess up badly, there's no incentive for them to fire me. If they wanted someone temporary, why would they not just advertise for a contractor?

I wonder how much you'd have to pay someone in severance to make it worth it. If there's typically a 20% yearly salary piece for a recruiter, paying 10% direct to the employee in severance if their 3 months doesn't work out might make it work for a subset of people.

You know that all jobs have a probation period even more so in the UK.

Then why bother with the song and dance?

Could ask for a three month leave from current job. To travel the world or what not.

Even in EU it's a tough sell. Your current employer has to agree to it. Why should they, since you're leaving? It only complicates counting employees.

Better to have an employee that knows the grass is not greener on the other side, thus he/she has been there. A good employer will let you take a leave, its even a right in some EU states.

Doesn't mean you can go and work for potentially a competitor

I don't know that a 3-month temporary offer is really necessary. In California at least, where employment is "at-will", you can fire an employee at any time for almost any reason. My expectation when accepting a job offer is that if I am not successful in my role, I will be fired. Most jobs I have worked even have an official "probation period" for new employees where you have a set of goals you need to accomplish in your first 3 months of work, followed by formal review process with your manager and HR.

It's rare to fire new employees in their first few months, but it does happen. Similarly I have seen people join a company, and leave after their first week because a better job offer came in. It sucks when it happens... but overall I'd say the system works pretty well.

> I don't know that a 3-month temporary offer is really necessary. In California at least, where employment is "at-will",

Yeah, in an at-will state you might as well consider the "trial" period to be in place no matter what. If things don't work out well they'll just toss your ass to the curb. Maybe if you're lucky like me your boss will have a soul and give you some amount of severance at least.

When I took my first job I just assumed that it was a sort of trial.

Two people were hired. Me and another dude.

The other dude was invited to look elsewhere (they let him stay and work while he looked for a job so that was very nice), and I got a series of raises after they clearly were comfortable with me. They then started looking for a replacement for the other dude.

Effectively I assumed (correctly) I was on a sort of "trial" anyway.