> Another one is I no longer fear of loosing a job. When you move from place to place regularly it becomes part of your life and you no longer fear it. I became much better at negotiating and interviewing.

If you're an employee, you can get similar results changing up your job every year or two. Maybe slightly longer if you really like the place.

Even in the "recession" recruiters are knocking on my door fairly regularly, and I'm comfortable enough with the Leetcode circus to be able to pass an interview loop. I'm sure some people will vehemently disagree but I notice a clear difference between my peers that only have experience working at 1 or 2 places, and those with experience working at 5-10 different places with different cultures, stacks, etc. It's obvious that the former are in a bit of a bubble and get blindsided in hard times or when there is a big technology shift.

> you can get similar results changing up your job every year or two…

This might work for few jumps but eventually Hiring managers will see this pattern and flag you as a flight risk. Please Take this advice with a grain of salt.

Only if there are a lot of 1 year stints. HR these days expects people to change jobs every 2-4 years.

Yes. A decade ago it was minimum 3 years for individual contributors who are not super specialised in what they are doing -- if you worked for less multiple times in a row they would be asking for explanation. Now it is 2 years.

I will also mention it is different for contractors/freelancers and will also depend on what you do. I don't hide I change projects frequently.

What I do is I offer references to my past managers. I tell them I will give them references as long as they are happy to stick with me throughout hiring process until they make their offer conditional on me giving them the references and them being happy after they talk to my past managers.

I do this because I don't want too many people calling those guys. I think it is fair arrangement.

I am a salaried employee. My boss and I are in an agreement that I won't be just sitting in front of a computer to work 8 hours. My performance is judged by stuff I deliver.

I will admit that I have a hard time finding a replacement job, as most places have a fairly strict "on" policy.

I will most likely get my masters while I'm here and then figure out my next move.

The strict "on" policy is something that will depend on the job. At the start of my career I worked as a sysadmin and it makes sense to expect your sysadmins to be strictly available during working hours.

As a developer/tech lead I think I should be trusted to manage my time. There are times where I spend way more than 8 hours at work and I do no fuss about it and I think it is fair that there are times where my private life intrudes on me and it is now my turn to take advantage of the flexible agreement. Whatever happens, I take responsibility for my commitments (so no, no missing or being late to meetings without heads up).

I think atmosphere of trust is the most important part for a healthy organisation and nothing screams as "we don't trust you" as not being trusted to manage my own time.

So while I don't necessarily reject the idea of "always on", it is somewhat of a red light for me. It signals inflexible thinking and inability to deal with problems.

Yes, there are people who cheat and slack off at their jobs. Making it "always on" is a result of a lazy, unimaginative mind.

While you enjoy it and things are good, be sure to get your arrangements in agreed upon writing so when the political winds shift you're covered.

This is never going to happen if you want to work for any larger company. And even if got it in writing (which you will not), they are unlikely to honour it because couple employees somehow got it in writing -- you will be coerced to change it or fired or "managed out".

You may be surprised. That said, do you _want_ to work for a company that is unwilling to honor their agreements?

Would you be willing to share those rules?

There are no rules set in stone. My job is to find a way to work with my manager but many managers don't know how to do it or don't expect a person to be open about many aspects that are on the verge of being taboo.

I am not imposing my style of working -- out of necessity it is the manager that has to set the rules because he/she can't have completely different management styles towards each one of their employees. Instead, I try to find a common ground that will make my manager extremely happy while also allowing me to keep doing what I want and what I am best at.

I found that just this single act of explicitly discussing our "partnership" sets me up for a much better relationship with my boss than all other people who are passive and just expect to be told everything.

>when you work as an employee you are getting bunched up with other people

If you are the best on your team you should either be mentoring them as a senior or find a new job where you'll be challenged