Always be ready to leave (even if you never do)

Philosophy and mindset

• Several commenters like the “work like you’ll stay forever and like you might leave tomorrow” framing, connecting it to stoicism and personal growth beyond work.
• Others argue the real lesson is to trust your gut and leave sooner if a job is making you unhappy, rather than spending a year trying to fix it.
• Some push back on extending “always be ready to leave” to personal relationships, seeing that as undermining commitment.

Documentation, replaceability, and leverage

• Strong disagreement over documenting and sharing knowledge:
  • Pro: Good habits, documentation, automation, and reliability work done “on the way out” build skills, reputation, and can even make promotion easier because you’re easier to backfill.
  • Con: If you’re unhappy and leaving, you “owe nothing”; documenting your process just makes you replaceable and reduces bargaining power. Some call the advice naïve, idealistic, or virtue signaling.
• One thread argues that “job protection via hoarding knowledge” signals incompetence; another sees maintaining leverage as basic self-defense in an environment where companies prioritize their own interests.

Readiness to leave: tactics, HR, and risk

• Some expected more concrete tactics (e.g., regular interviewing) and lament that the article is closer to generic self-help.
• Others caution against “practice interviews” with small companies as a waste of their limited resources, suggesting big firms can better absorb that.
• There is deep skepticism about openly expressing dissatisfaction to managers/HR:
  • Many warn it can get you labeled a troublemaker or fast-tracked for layoffs.
  • In some European contexts, people claim frequent complaints can weaken de facto protections, though details remain debated and somewhat unclear.
  • Several say HR primarily protects the company; exit interviews are seen as low benefit and potentially risky.

Job-hopping, consulting, and hiring filters

• Debate over job hoppers:
  • Some companies reportedly reject resumes with many short stints or long consulting stretches outright, prioritizing “long-haul” team members.
  • Others point out that job hoppers often have in-demand skills and are hired for immediate needs; leaving is framed as a response to poor respect or compensation.
• Several note that hiring processes are overwhelmed, leading to crude filters (like “no job hoppers” or “too much consulting”), which can discard strong candidates and mask bias or discrimination.

Promotions and internal politics

• One detailed story describes years of documented staff-level performance, shifting managers, a massive promotion packet, and final rejection by a remote committee. This is cited as emotionally draining and demoralizing.
• Commenters observe that companies often make promotions and raises far harder than hiring outsiders for the same role at higher pay, fueling dissatisfaction and turnover.

Leaving well, healthcare, and finances

• Some emphasize the long-term value of leaving on good terms: quiet back-channel references and recurring colleagues across companies.
• Others stress that truly being “ready to leave” requires financial resilience: savings, low/no debt, and awareness of healthcare continuity (e.g., COBRA in the US).
• A few note the discrepancy between the title’s implication—being ready for sudden termination—and the story of staying an extra year while negotiating.

Tone, AI assistance, and style

• Multiple readers find the piece sliding toward “LinkedIn-style slop” or self-congratulatory blog-posting.
• At least one commenter flagged AI-like phrasing; the author confirms using AI for structure but claims ownership of the content. Some readers use this to discuss overused motivational clichés that now get mistaken for AI output.