What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 127 Stack Exchange communities.

I've been using Careers from short time. I would like to suggest a new feature, if this is the right place. Some companies require their future employees to be available to travel for company missions; part of these companies (especially consulting) requires >60% of travel time. Some candidates are enthusiast at the idea of seeing new locations for work, paid meals and planes, while others have family and/or just hate planes.

The proposal is simple: allow employers to submit their offer with 3 options: little or no traveling required, large traveling required, and not specified of course.

The candidate can perform an advanced search and include only those jobs that match his/her travel wishes.

For example, I prefer frequent-traveling jobs (perhaps at the customer's offices) above always-on-site jobs. Some of my friends are often in mission and it sounds exciting to me.

Waiting for feedback ;)

share|improve this question
1  
Hmm. Does this really need a hard-coded option - it it not something that is inherent to a specific category of jobs, and employers would simply highlight the fact in their ad descriptions? There are always going to be some "soft" factors that you can't really filter for, that you simply have to browse the ads for. If you have a check box or select box for every conceivable aspect of the job, you'll end up with Facebook-like complication –  Pëkka May 13 '12 at 20:15
2  
The traveling options should be more refined though. Like international travel (different countries), national travel (different locations within a the country) and local travel different locations within the region). –  Jeff Mercado May 13 '12 at 20:16
    
@pekka I truly undsertand your concern. Looking more into it, I believe that a bunch of useful attributes should be extracted and made searchable. Another example should be permanent/temporary contracts. If you seek for a permanent, you should exclude all those that explicitly offer temporary jobs. Useful brainstorming. –  djechelon May 13 '12 at 20:45
    
As is just a thought allowing to search the body of the description for keyword would remove the need to have selection boxes for every little detail –  Argus May 13 '12 at 21:28
    
Searching cannot help in many situations. I can search for "German" if I'm looking for jobs that want (or require) German language - and it helps. If on the otehr side, one wants to look for jobs that do not require German, no search is effcicent without hard-coded language attributes. –  ypercube May 14 '12 at 0:10
    
I was thinking about tags like on stackoverflow. Instead of hard-coding, employers could be encouraged to use more tags, and a higher number of tags should be available. Users can search with the ignore tag option. For example, if I don't like frequent-traveler jobs I could ignore "requires-traveling". The same could be used to differenciate certain kinds of positions (coder, designer, tester tags). All together with the technology tags that are being already used. –  djechelon May 14 '12 at 11:54
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Employers have only provided information on travel in about 5% of all the listings ever put into the system. Making this a separate top level concern on job listings seems a little overkill.

share|improve this answer
    
I'm starting to (1) agree and (2) think that a "better" use of builtin tags is the answer. But "better" is quoted because it's only my POV –  djechelon May 15 '12 at 17:27
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .