how do you write an ad for a job that can be very unpleasant?

by Alison Green on February 6, 2025

A reader writes:

I was working on writing up a job ad today for temporary research assistants for a field biology project, and noticed trends in my ads and in others’. It’s common for early career employees applying to assistant or technician jobs to think that they want to do fieldwork and then quit in the middle of the season because it wasn’t what they expected. There are really fun parts like getting to travel to cool places, camp or backpack, work directly with plants and animals, and meet new people. However, employees are often underpaid (especially at the technician level), work long hours, and must front some transportation or per diem costs before getting reimbursed. They are far from their friends and family camping for long periods of time and without cell service in some cases. Often, these staff are expected to work through bad weather (if it’s safe), hike long distances, do manual labor all day, and deal with biting and stinging insects. This can be compounded if you’re assigned to work with one other person and it turns out that you don’t get along with them. It can be downright miserable!

The solution to this seems to be that we become very up-front about the working conditions in the job and write requirements like, “Must be comfortable carrying 30 pounds in high heat and humidity for 13 hours per day off trail on uneven terrain with biting flies and mosquitos while maintaining a positive attitude.” It doesn’t matter who you are, you’re going to have an off day here and there in those conditions — especially if you have been working and living with the same one or two people for three weeks. I think writing like that just comes off … wrong?

I am worried that, in an effort to be transparent, we make ourselves sound uninviting and expect that green staff will fail. I think it also emphasizes physical tolerance where emotional intelligence and maturity can make or break a field season. Do you have any advice for striking a balance when hiring for jobs that have inherent challenges?

P.S. I make it sound terrible but there are many of us who really love it!

The instinct to be very up-front about the working conditions is the right one! The more transparent and realistic you are, and the more you paint a picture of what the work is really like, the more you’ll attract candidates who will do well and the more likely the “wrong” candidates will self-select out.

When you’re hiring, truth in advertising about the less appealing parts of the job is a good thing. You want people to have a good understanding of what they’d be getting into. It’s true that you don’t want to cross over into “this job sucks! but you’ll need to keep a smile on your face!” … but you shouldn’t shy away from describing things as accurately as possible.

I would also think about what traits and experiences people who do well in the job tend to share, and talk about that as well — “if you’re the person on camping trips who’s always tracking the animal droppings you see and isn’t daunted if it rains, this may be you” or so forth. (These are undoubtedly terrible examples — non-camper here — but you’ll have better ones since you’re familiar with the work and the actual qualities that predict success.) Or, “We’ve found people who thrive in this role generally have ____ (“spent extended time outdoors in various weather conditions,” “a high degree of emotional intelligence and the ability to work in sometimes uncomfortably close quarters with a wide range of people,” or whatever is true).

With a job like this, where you get a lot of people who don’t fully understand what they’re signing on for, I might even consider including one or two short testimonials from people who have done the job successfully and liked it — just a short paragraph from a couple people on what the experience was like for them, what was tough, and why they liked it anyway (without any sugarcoating).

You could also run the draft of your ad by people who are doing the job currently or did it recently and ask for their feedback — do they think it’s a full and accurate representation? Are there other things they wish they knew before they got hired?

But it’s much better to err on the side of too much transparency than not enough.

You may also like:
{ 295 comments }

{ 295 comments… read them below }

  1. Sloanicota*

    My only note – think carefully about the gendered component of your wording here. If needing to carry heavy weights all day is truly an essential component of the job, then by all means, lead with that – but I have found that field work tends to emphasize the “physical” work and de-emphasize the psychological/emotional work that’s just as important. One type of description tends to attract different demographics than the other, but I also thrived at fieldwork coming up also, using different strengths … and I probably wouldn’t have applied if it seemed like they were looking for hulk types. Most of my experiences were less physically demanding than described in terms of needing to hike all day with a heavy pack.

    1. Sigh.*

      It’s interesting that you consider his wording gendered, when there is no word anywhere in that sentence that denotes gender preference of any kind. Which makes your assumption come off as if you think all women are but delicate wee waifs who couldn’t possibly carry around 30 lbs, so clearly they must be looking for a man? There are plenty of people of all genders who are strong enough to bear that weight and more.

      1. Um, Actually*

        It’s actually super common when writing job descriptions to look out for words that would be considered gendered due to a history of exclusivity. It’s less that it came off as gendered and more that the words used are more likely to turn women away based on historical context. We run into this a lot in the video game industry. It’s not that this commenter is saying that women can’t do the job it’s that there are certain keywords that can infer to female candidates that the expectations of the role for the hiring manager skew male or would be a heavily male-dominated arena which many women don’t want to deal with. I think their initial point is valid, especially since women are statistically more likely to apply only when they meet 100% of the criteria whereas men will apply if they meet 60% of the criteria. It’s about the context and they’re correct to add that when writing a job description it’s important to factor that in to widen the candidate pool.

        1. Um, Actually*

          Also, this includes trans, non-binary, and non-white groups. It’s important to review the JD from multiple lenses if you are hiring in roles that attract a specific audience that you want to diversify.

          1. p*

            A job description needs to be honest. If there are some of us (definitely me) who couldn’t fulfill the basic requirements of the job, we need to know.

        2. Froggy*

          a backpack for multi night trips is easily 30 lbs without field gear. I am a small woman who is not an “athlete”. I have carried 55+lb packs over miles for work. when I put out field job ads w very similar language to these, I get 80% female identifying applicants. Women in field biology, natural resources, and conservation are bad ass.

          1. amoeba*

            Huh, really? For my multi-day hikes I always make sure to pack light and not bring more than 7-8 kg (excluding water, and sure, that would increase a bit with camping gear). But 30 lbs seems pretty high as standard!

            1. Zephy*

              Yeah, but you’re not bringing scientific equipment with you. Even just a rugged laptop, to say nothing of any other data-collection devices, will easily double the weight of your otherwise-ultralight loadout.

            2. new user*

              How…are you going for multiday hikes without camping gear? The camping gear IS what makes the pack 30 lb.

              1. Magpie*

                With modern lightweight camping gear, it’s fairly easy to get your base packweight down to ~16-18lbs, and if you want to spend the money to go ultralight, sub-10lbs base weight is eminently achievable. The scientific equipment is heavy of course, but camping gear itself can be pretty compact and light.

                I spent 8 years as an ultra-long-distance athlete and spent 4-8 months of the year camping every night, for 5-7 days at a stretch between towns – my base weight was generally around 11lbs and sometimes much less.

                1. new user*

                  hashtag gear snob. plus, this isn’t what I was asking, which was: “How…are you going for multiday hikes without camping gear?”

                3. Lexi Vipond*

                  A lot of UK long distance walking – things like the West Highland Way – is hostel to hostel (or B+B to B+B, depending how posh you feel), although we don’t usually use the word hiking for it.

            3. Christine*

              For field work, 30 pounds sounds pretty light unless there are people hired to pack in/out or pack animals involved. I’m not strong, but even I could have carried a 30 pound pack back in the day.

          2. Cascadia*

            I work as a guide on 6-day trips and the absolute lightest I can possibly go, carrying all my personal items plus my share of group items and food is 30lbs, and on some trips, I’m carrying upwards of 45-50lbs. I’m also a female, and this is the expectation for all guides. There’s just a lot of extra stuff you have to carry that you wouldn’t necessarily have on a personal trip. It’s great to go ultralight, but when you’re working in the field, or traveling with a group, ultralight is usually not possible. Plus, even an ultralight pack with food for 6 days would still likely be at least 20-25lbs. And that’s only if you own the top of the line equipment and don’t bring anything other than the bare essentials.

            1. Magpie*

              yeah, 40-50lb all-in sounds reasonable for a scientific trip – I think what people don’t realize is how manageable that load can be if you have a properly fitted pack and some prior fitness. When you carry a pack every day, the body adjusts rapidly to that kind of weight, and humans are adapted for endurance.

              source – I was a thru-hiker and ultra-long-distance athlete for 8 years.

        3. Julia K*

          Maybe since field biology seems to be a female-dominated area, they are trying to widen the candidate pool to include more males by emphasizing the usefulness of physical strength (masculine coded) as much as agreeableness and emotional intelligence (feminine coded).

        1. Disappointed Australien*

          It read like a recognition of basic reality to me. “must be able to walk for hours on rough ground, carrying everything you need for a week in the wild”… otherwise you can’t get to the work site. I’d expect the researchers to carry that plus their 5kg of “precious” (the science payload).

          My reading of it was based on that, and I too think seeing it as sexism is off the mark.

          1. Froggy*

            agreed. it is realistic and honestly a light load. thinking back to days of 30 m rolls of barbed wire slung on a heavy pack w km and km of bushwhacking hikes (no trail, pick a baring) at high elevation. at least half women on the crew, and that was … longer ago than I would like to admit.

      3. Elitist Semicolon*

        I didn’t read Sloanicota’s comment as assuming “women are waifs” as much as expressing the reality that managing frustration (with weather, with never finding what they’re looking for, with other researchers) and managing being in close quarters with/spending literally all day every day with the same people are seriously underrated but critical skills in fieldwork. Including those skills in the description might draw in a more varied applicant pool beyond people who look at the physical requirements and think this is their chance to be badass.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          I did a semester abroad in NW Canada, and while I did fine with the fieldwork part I struggled with the backpacking portion (I was much slower than the rest of the group). I tried to stay upbeat, but I knew the group was frustrated.

          One night while I was treating my blisters, the lead said what a nice change it was this year that no one was constantly whining, making other people carry their pack, wandering off the trail, or setting off the bear spray upwind of the campsite “to see how it worked”. (The group didn’t seem as frustrated with me after that.)

          1. COHikerGirl*

            I’m a lifelong camper/hiker/backpacker and even when I’m in super good shape, I’m still a slow hiker uphill. I always have been, I always will be. Some people are just slower regardless of all the other factors! (I can cruise downhill, so I usually make up time there!)

            I really want to know why someone tested out the bear spray…! That’s wild. I hope they got a good lesson out of that!

      4. Le Sigh*

        A lot of sexism (and racism, homophobia, any many other -isms) aren’t as literal as “He-Man Boyz Club No Girlz Allowed.” So much of this stuff is dependent on cultural and historical context. There is a long history of using subtle wording and other context clues to communicate the message that someone isn’t welcome, while skirting under the radar. Sometimes it’s intentional, sometimes it’s not, but you can inadvertently find yourself sending that message thanks to cultural conditioning and bias.

      5. allx*

        It’s interesting that you take the LW to be male, when there is no indication anywhere in the letter that states that.

          1. Roeslein*

            Same, I am familiar with a few fields that have similar requirements and they are all female-dominated.

      6. Zona the Great*

        Did you create your user name to express derision? Please don’t. It’s super passive aggressive.

      7. Artemesia*

        It is very common to write job descriptions to include physical demands that many women or people with disabilities would not be able to meet when those are not really critical demands of the job. It is one of the ways women were traditionally excluded from craft jobs.

        1. Chickadee*

          I’ve done a lot of field work – LW’s description of the work is accurate & standard for the field, which is dominated by women (including me, before I moved up the job ladder). Even my “easy” jobs involved 6-8 hours of hiking per day. Most of my jobs either involved working in heavy rain or starting well before dawn, depending on the species I was working with. (I think my record was starting at 3 am but I’ve heard worse.)

        2. metadata minion*

          This is definitely a problem in general, but when it comes to this kind of fieldwork, you really do need a significant level of physical strength and endurance. There’s no way to get around carrying all your gear on foot over rough terrain. And you can adjust things somewhat by having the strongest team member carry a bit more, stopping for breaks more often if someone needs it, things like that, but you’re usually working in fairly small groups and you have to keep a minimum pace or you’re not going to be able to get to your next site before nightfall.

          1. Quill*

            Yeah, this is a reality of fieldwork and why I (disabled) ended up unable to pursue field biology.

            Other jobs I’ve had (for example, office work where the only lifting I was actually expected to do was reload the paper into the printer) have dropped “must be able to lift 50 pounds” in for no actual reason, and lo and behold, training for these jobs always included “if you’re lifting 50 pounds STOP, we cannot deal with insurance or workers’ comp!”

            There just aren’t really great accomodations available for a job where you have to hike 30 miles out carrying all your gear. The accomodation you end up doing is getting a career in bench biology instead.

            1. pandop*

              Yup, having just re-taken my manual handling training, my employers don’t think I should even be turning a mattress by myself!

        3. Zephy*

          Right, this is why the ads for desk jobs say “must be able to stand, sit, kneel, and lift 50 lbs.” Calisthenics, rolling around on the floor, and lifting heavy stuff isn’t normally part of the day-to-day of, say, a receptionist, or a customer service rep. But, it gives companies an easy out to decline to hire, say, someone who uses mobility aids (but could absolutely sit at a desk and answer phones and send emails without issue). And sure, maybe that’s just boilerplate and in reality the hiring manager is a reasonable person, but it also serves to make applicants self-select out from applying in the first place, which also reduces the number of applications. Similar to how “requiring” a bachelor’s degree for a phone-answering-email-sending job is mostly just a way to reduce the number of apps that a human has to review.

      8. Nina*

        If you think about the degree to which, from a very young age, boys are encouraged to think of themselves as physically strong and tough, and girls are encouraged to think of themselves as caring and tactful and good at dealing with people, I think it’s a good idea to try and balance the ‘physically tough’ aspects of the job with the ‘you will have to get along with people and be a pleasant coworker under trying circumstances’ aspects.
        There are absolutely a lot of women who are that physically tough and more so, and there are equally a lot of men who are that emotionally intelligent and more so (and women who are not remotely emotionally intelligent and men who are not at all tough), but if the job requires both strengths in equal measure, mention both in equal measure.

      9. Ellis Bell*

        I still remember job ads that were advertised men only and had some kind of legal disclaimer attached to them about “We are legally entitled to be gender specific due to physical requirements”. You can’t do that any more in my country, but the word “physical” is still often used as code for “men only”. Younger women than me would probably be immune to this wording, (but not necessarily immune to the intention behind the hint) but I’d be looking for other clues in the job ad as to whether I’d have a fair shot.

      10. Kt*

        I think you’re choosing not to see the nuance of how words and phrasing are used to convey a message instead of explicitly saying it.

    2. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

      Field work strikes me as an area where physical qualifications are real and legitimate, rather than the stealth sexism they so often are used for. My sister-in-law did biology field work for a while and there’s just no getting around “schelp this gear around in the swamp all day looking for duck nests” when the entire job is tracking duck nests.

      1. AcademiaNut*

        I think the difference is that not being able to carry your gear all day will wash you out half way through the first day, having trouble getting along with people in close quarters in a remote site will wash you out half way through the contract.

        1. Disappointed Australien*

          My experience is that anyone who hasn’t previously done the day and weekend stuff won’t be eligible for anything longer. Technically it’s not an invite-only thing, but the “reference check” will be focussed on the criteria you’re concerned about. For longer trips you almost always need to have worked with the leader of that trip before. They can’t afford the risk of having an ****hole or an idiot deep in the wilderness for weeks.

          Especially with hands-on conservation work. “my volunteer trod on 1/75th of the known population of the bird I study” is not a resume entry you want.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            I’m sorry, but “my volunteer trod on 1/75th of the known population of the bird I study” cracked me up.

      2. Dust Bunny*

        One of my brothers is an archaeologist and works with plenty of women, the vast majority of whom are perfectly capable of carrying 30-ish pounds of gear and hiking distances. This is just not something that should seem like an obstacle to women who want to work in disciplines that involve field work.

    3. Rocket Raccoon*

      My only fieldwork job paired me (5′ female) with a guy over 6′ tall. Gender wasn’t a problem, but the height differential sure was! I couldn’t keep up with the dude no matter how fit I was. I don’t know how you would word this in an ad, but it would have been really useful info.

      1. bamcheeks*

        I don’t think that’s a job description thing so much as that he should have gone at your speed!

      2. Grizzled*

        Having worked for a few decades in biology fieldwork, I can say with confidence that his height is not the reason he’s abandoning you – that’s a choice he’s making. When I’m working with someone like that I don’t try to keep up. I don’t let them make all the decisions because they’re at the front. If they abandon me I make my own decisions about where I’m going, when I stop to rest/drink, or how I’m doing my work. I also ensure I have all my own survival gear so I’m 100% self sufficient (bear spray, radio, maps, etc). And I let go of the frustration around keeping up or catching up because it’s physically impossible.

        1. Rocket Raccoon*

          He never did abandon me, he was very considerate. However there just wasn’t any getting around the fact that I had to work harder to cover the same distance.

          I used the example as a way to point out that while a lot of field work is soft skills like being a good teammate (matching your shorty partner’s speed), it’s also helpful to know what you’re getting into physically and that has nothing to do with gender.

          1. Disappointed Australien*

            That also feeds into trip planning. If he budgeted on three six hour days at his normal walking speed and suddenly he’s looking at four six hour days that’s significant. Likewise with tunnel nesting birds, having metre long arms can be really handy.

            The flip side is that a whole lot of jobs either don’t have those requirements, or have ones that more women than men meet. “must be able to climb trees to install instruments”… there’s a point up a tree where weighing 50kg rather than 80kg is a definite advantage.

            1. pandop*

              A university friend of mine had suspicions why she (small, slight, female) might have got the job when she turned up to a work site with her (large, rugby-player-build, male) manager, and he was greeted with ‘weren’t you the one who fell through the ceiling last time?’

      3. I Have RBF*

        “Existing team is mostly tall/long legged.” This is not gendered – one of my roomies who is female is over six foot tall. Yes, shorter people can hike and carry big packs. But it’s not great to pair a short person with a tall person who doesn’t know how to moderate their pace.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Um… I’m pretty sure hiring people by height would be gender and quite possibly racial discrimination.

          Just because it makes things simpler for the employer doesn’t mean you’re allowed to screen for it, or else employers would be deciding that remote work would preferably be done by people without menses/the ability to get pregnant *all the time*.

          1. New Jack Karyn*

            I think the point is not about hiring, but about pairing people who have already been hired.

        2. pandop*

          I had a housemate who was 5’11” in her stocking feet. I miss her when I need a tall person …

      4. Froggy*

        I don’t disagree w worrying about gender issues (female biologist who sometimes still gets to go into the field). However, being able to carry a pack w your personal gear PLUS the field gear is absolutely essential. Plus 30 lbs is light, minimal estimate for most field tech jobs. in my experience, there are at least 50 % of the applicants for these jobs that are women (maybe women apply to work w women, but it is not uncommon for me to see 80 % of the applicants be female identifying – could also be I work mostly on animals that are neither ungulates or carnivores). people have to be fit and able to be out in the elements. my two biggest problem employees when it comes to physically not being able to do the work were both men!

      5. Froggy*

        I did a few weeks w a 6 3 cross country runner. I really thought I might die, even though I was in pretty good shape. the stride was killer

    4. vulturestalker*

      This is such a good point! I also used to do field work and I agree that the emotional stuff was under-emphasized but equally important.

      1. Hazelfizz*

        I remember trying to read Master and Commander once, and being pleasantly surprised that a mention of close quarters requiring emotional intelligence was in approximately the first chapter. I’ve lived unhappily on a boat in the past. it’s very true.

      2. I Have RBF*

        Yep. Even if all you do is travel to and from the job site, work long shifts outdoors, and stay in a hotel. My field job would have had “Must be able to climb vertical ladders onto industrial roofs.” as a requirement.

      3. Froggy*

        the emotional stuff is critical and should be weighed equally. reality is there is just a min bar for being able to put up w physical challenges. no constant griping about heat, cold, bugs, wet, tired, sore, etc. some collective complaints are healthy! but the constant gripers are a real problem or the person who claimed mad outdoor skills who turns out cannot put up a tent.

    5. bamcheeks*

      Excellent point! There is an online generator somewhere that lets you input a job ad and description and it’ll give you a score for whether it trends masculine or feminine and suggestions to neutralise it.

    6. HannahS*

      This is such an interesting point. From my own field, I found that surgery was often advertised as a specialty for people who like things that are FAST MOVING and INTENSE and WORKING WITH YOUR HANDS and was stunned when a female surgeon told me she liked it because it’s sort of like a craft project–you do a thing with your hands, and then you put it down and it’s done and you’re on to the next thing. It helped me articulate what I liked about surgery (though I didn’t become a surgeon for other reasons.)

      It occurred to me then how much the description of the specialty was being defined by how the (mostly) men who did it saw themselves. Surgery could also be described as precise, slow, requiring serenity under pressure, and well-suited to people who like craft projects.

      1. Sashaa*

        Ha, as a female physician, if you want to tease a surgeon, try enthusing that hand tying sutures is “just like making friendship bracelets!” (which it is, it’s the same knot).

        1. Nightengale*

          Perri Klaas is a pediatrician who wrote about her experiences in medical school and residency in the 1980s when there were fewer female physicians than there are now. (“A not entirely benign procedure” is the title of her book about medical school.”) I don’t have a copy to hand but I recall she wrote about a surgeon complementing her mattress stitch and she thought he would not take it well if she told him she had practiced it previously on mattresses. . .

          1. Grandma*

            Right around 1980, my daughter who was in the 8-10 age range told me definitively that girls couldn’t be doctors. “Why?” I asked. “There aren’t any lady doctors,” she replied. I was horrified, then realized she’d never seen a female doctor. I spent more time after that reinforcing that she could anything she wanted regardless of gender, and that there were women doctors, just not in out town.

            1. boof*

              I’m told recently a friend’s son had the flip side – youngish kid was surprised men could be doctors as he’d never seen one (dad was not a doctor, mom was and most social events with colleges + kids also happened to be women doctors I think!)

              1. Nightengale*

                Klaas actually addressed this in an article she was asked to write about whether women were better doctors. She mentioned to her preschool son he had an appointment coming up. He asked, “is she a nice doctor?” and Klaas realized he mainly knew her and her female doctor friends as doctors. She told him that boys could grow up to be doctors too if they worked hard.

            3. Jay (no, the other one)*

              I’m exactly Perri Klass’s age and was told at various times in med school and training that I would be good at suturing because I knew how to sew (because I was a girl) and that I would be bad at suturing just because (I was a girl).

              My kid was 15 when I spoke to her about doing the dishes regularly, as expected, and preferably without being reminded.

              Kid: It’s not anyone’s life depends on it.
              Me: Now is the time to get in the habit of always doing your job because someday someone’s life might depend on it.
              Kid: Yeah, but I’m not like you. I’m not going to be a nurse.

              This despite the fact that every health care provider she’d ever had except the general dentist was a woman. And despite the fact that *her mother is a doctor.*

              (I didn’t give her a hard time because I saw the horrified look on her face as soon as she said it)

          2. Jellyfish Catcher*

            I was the first female, (40+ years ago) accepted into my health care program which had a sub-niche area that I loved, of small precision surgeries.
            I never told the guys that I had already been doing embroidery years for fun, before all that.
            You have to have a sense of humor, communication and respect for all.
            Now, it’s about 50:50, as it should be.

            1. JustaTech*

              A very funny inversion of this: years ago I was working in a mouse lab and having a hard time with a particular procedure (tail vein injections).
              I asked my boss (a very bro young-ish guy) what I could do to improve my skills.
              “Well, I do needlepoint, have you tried sewing?”
              Blink blink.
              Now, I wasn’t surprised at the idea of a man doing needlepoint (one of my mom’s friend’s dad had done needlepoint on the train to New York back in the 50’s and 60’s, as had my husband’s grandfather), but I was lightly surprised that *this* man did needlepoint.

              He must have seen my face light up, someone to talk needlepoint with!, because he never mentioned it again.

      2. Laura1*

        I’m afraid of surgery and hearing the words “fast-moving” and “intense” make me hope I never have to have it. I want my surgeon to be careful, methodical, precise, slow etc.

        1. Honoria Lucasta*

          on the other hand, I want my surgeon to be able to move quickly when closing up blood vessels! The longer those are open, the worse my experience is likely to be! and it’s probably good to be able to do surgery methodically and carefully, but also quickly, because the longer your body is sitting open the more you’re going to have to recover from

        2. HannahS*

          Not that surgery is generally a small deal, but surgeons who talk that way are usually describing their experience of the job, not necessarily how they perform it. The job of being a surgeon is intense because their hours are terrible and their work is more physical than most other doctors (as an example, psychiatrists and radiologists are often-but-not-always sitting down!) It’s fast in that you have to be able to react in the moment, and some things have to be addressed immediately, but surgery can also be exquisitely slow and precise. The point I was making is that it can be described using adjectives that are also used in male-oriented marketing or by using adjectives used in female-oriented marketing, and both would be true.

    7. Rock Prof*

      This is a really good point. I sometimes get the really individualist students who want to work with me in field-based research/projects, and they might be absolutely great at hiking for miles and miles carrying stuff, but they can sometimes be absolutely terrible at working with, talking to, and strategizing with a group (or even just waiting for people at points where we need to stop). Emotional intelligence is these situations is really important!

      1. I own one tenacious plant*

        I told one of my crew who had never been in the field that it was 80% mental. By the end of his 3 week stint he understood what I meant!

        I’ve found that when interviewing newbies for field work the personal dynamics are more important. I can work with enthusiasm, skills can be developed. One thing I do tell students to put on their resumes is if they have been to or worked at a summer camp. Summer camp is a very similar dynamic to a field camp. You sleep in one place, meals are at set times and there are activities during the day. And you are with your group all. The. Time.

    8. George*

      I’ve worked with women in the outdoors for decades. I don’t think any of them would have been put off the an honest description of the physical requirements of the job — as long as they’re realistic. So that’s worth a closer look that they truly reflect the job. Unquestionably, as I point out below, early field jobs I had ASSUMED women couldn’t do them (horse patrol, long hikes, heavy packs) but, of course, everyone adjusts by using their strengths and you find you’ve expanded the pool of who can do the job.

      Pulling from a pool of people who are doing field jobs in other occupations (climbing, backpacking, ski guides, river guides, trail crew, state/federal outdoor youth programs (in California the California Conservation Corp) & etc. will probably be more successful than advertising to the general public.

      1. Froggy*

        better bet is to advertise to natural resources, conservation biology, and field ecology programs. ecolog, Texas a and m job site, tws, society for conservation biology, iale, and other professional organizations w get people w the field skills (physical AND critical field data collection/science skills) essential for being great at these jobs. there is a dearth of unemployed wildlife biologists unfortunately. I have no problem finding qualified candidates who can meet the physical requirements advertising in field.specific places. I try to pay a not terrible wage (by comparison) and get people w MS degrees for temp field jobs (usually as a transition gig). in 25 years, have had 2 people quit mid season, one in the conversation where they were going to be fired. most know that quiting a field gig is not a good idea unless there is really abuse. the professional network is very connected and field gigs are short enough term it is usually best to tough it out if it is not a great fit.

    9. Ellis Bell*

      I think it’s an excellent suggestion for all managers to not devalue soft skills, especially at the get-go.

    10. Jay*

      I work for a company that does similar, but even more, serious, difficult, and dangerous field work.
      Many people would find our interview questions somewhere between terrifying and horrific.
      Just mentioning some of the interview questions might be enough to get me banned from this sight. They would certainly trigger some very negative reactions among quite a lot of the readers (and for good reason, at least if you don’t really understand the job and why some things are necessary in field research).
      Because they NEED TO BE.
      There are very real physical realities of the job that outweigh everything else.
      For instance, our weight minimum is 50lbs, and dragging up to 200lbs.
      Because you just have to be able to do that.
      Because that’s how much the gear weighs.
      And in every training class, well over half of all of our trainees are female.
      And they are more likely than their male counterparts to make it through the grueling, months long training and certification process.
      And once trained and certified, they are less likely to quit on us after their first field deployment.
      And once they have some field time under their belts, they are more likely than their male counterparts to take supervisory/management roles in the industry.
      You are grossly underestimating women in this industry and doing them no favors of any kind.

      1. MigraineMonth*

        I think what Sloancotta is saying isn’t “women can’t do physical stuff”, it’s “how you describe the job will influence who applies to it”.

        The OP’s job description could be: “Must endure carrying 30 pounds in high heat and humidity for 13 hours per day off trail on uneven terrain. Must withstand uncomfortable conditions and biting insects without whining or complaining.”

        It could also be: “Must be able to work and live closely with 1-3 colleagues for 6 weeks. Must also be comfortable carrying 30 pounds in high heat and humidity for 13 hours per day off trail on uneven terrain. Must be able to tolerate uncomfortable conditions, including biting insects and bad weather, with good humor.”

        Including soft skills in the requirements, *without* removing any of the physical requirements, is likely to get more female applicants (and might filter out some men who think of themselves as lone wolves, which is probably a good thing).

        1. SchuylerSeestra*

          Honestly, other than the “not complaining” part, I see no issue with the first example. It’s direct. No need to soften the language.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            It’s not about “softening the language”. The first job description *isn’t accurate*, because it doesn’t include all the necessary skills. Someone with strong physical abilities and weak soft skills would think they were a good match, whereas someone with sufficient physical abilities and outstanding soft skills would think they weren’t.

            Including (and giving appropriate weight to) all of the essential requirements of the job will get you better matches. In this case, that includes the ability to live with others and collaborate closely on work.

    11. Dust Bunny*

      Woman here, in a woman-heavy field (libraries and archives), and the primary requirements for my job–stated up front in the job description–were that I have a bachelor’s degree and that I be able to lift and carry 50 pounds repeatedly, up and down stairs.

      Do I shelve file boxes all day every day? No. Is it still an important part of the job? Yes. That’s not gendered: That’s part of the job that needs to be done and will probably be done by me, as an assistant, more than by my bosses. If nobody in my department could do this, we would have a problem.

  2. Dark Macadamia*

    This is a small change, but maybe say something like “resilience” instead of “positive attitude”? Presumably you don’t need people to be cheerful 24/7 so using language that reflects grit/perseverance might be a little more accurate and less off-putting.

    1. toolegittoresign*

      I was coming to write the same thing. You don’t want to suggest a toxic positivity culture. Instead something like “cope with tough conditions while remaining committed to getting the work done and being a team player.” You don’t have to be pleasant, you just can’t be miserable and holding everyone back by complaining or sulking.

    2. TCO*

      That’s a great point. I do backcountry camping for fun, not work, but there will always be moments where conditions are tough and I do not have a positive attitude. It happens to everyone. What matters is being able to keep going and then shake that unhappy attitude off quickly. And the emotional self-awareness to understand the impact you’re having on the group and what steps you personally need to take to snap out of it.

    3. JP*

      Yeah, the positive attitude part rubbed me the wrong way as well. Maybe even just saying a professional attitude or something like that?

    4. iglwif*

      Yes, was coming here to say this. People can be very resilient and get along great with others in close quarters through other means than a textbook positive attitude, such as

      – good-natured sarcasm
      – dark humour about the circumstances
      – being comfortable being silent with other people
      – flexibility
      – self-deprecating humour
      – skill in defusing tense moments
      – perspective taking
      – willingness to pitch in where needed

      And you don’t want to suggest that toxic positivity is part of the culture, either!

    5. Analyst*

      eh…positive attitude doesn’t mean cheerful 24/7. And having done fieldwork, yes, a positive attitude is pretty important. You do actually need to be pleasant to be around when things are going poorly

      1. Honoria Lucasta*

        Yeah, there is a difference between toxic positivity and just generally having a disposition towards cheerfulness in challenging circumstances. You didn’t have to actually be cheerful all the time, but you can be a person who wants to be cheerful more often than not!
        Someone whose default reaction is dark humor or sarcasm might not be as good a fit for a small field team; high agreeableness may actually be the desirable quality. The person writing the description would know their team and could nuance the posting accordingly.

      2. calonkat*

        Well, these are suggestions, and several other people also mentioned it struck them the same way (me too, for the record).

        I think being aware of a potential read of words is fine, and if there’s no better way to say it then fine. But the letter writer asked for help in finding people who understood the job prior to applying for it, and the comments are going over the words looking for potential issues. Multiple people believe this is a potential issue (note, not an “absolute, omg how can you say that” issue, a potential issue), so I think it’s a fair point to consider.

      3. MigraineMonth*

        I and several other commenters d0 read positive attitude as meaning cheerful. Maybe not 24/7, but at least most of the time, and I think that’s unnecessary. You don’t want colleagues to be negative or unpleasant, but neutral moods are usually fine.

        If we lose 2 days’ worth of data, I certainly don’t want someone who throws a temper tantrum, but I’d prefer someone who was calm and focused to someone who was cheerful.

    6. Starbuck*

      Yeah, is a positive attitude really necessary? I’d phrase it as “productive attitude.” I’ve done a bit of field work and you don’t need to be a cheerleader, you just need to be able to get stuff done even when it kind of sucks and not be whiny enough about it to drag down the team’s morale.

    7. goddessoftransitory*

      I think this is a good read. Often, historically speaking “positive attitude” and the like have been used as cloaks to cover up sketchy behavior–same thing with “team player” and such. You want to emphasize how important the group dynamic is without inadvertently giving the impression that “Group over One and anyone who says a coworker got handsy is going to get booted.”

  3. spcepickle*

    I hire for an entry level job that can be unpleasant (hours that are always shifting, outside in all kinds of weather, physically demanding, possibility of getting yelled at by the public). We try to make our job postings clear, but we also always have someone who is either doing the job now or recently got promoted in the interview (we interview with a panel of 3). Our last interview question askes if people are willing and able to do the things already listed in the job posting (Are you willing and able to work all shifts including nights and weekends. This includes your shift being changed with as little as three days notice). I have found the ending the interview with these questions then naturally opens the door to talk in detail about the working conditions and let the candidate ask questions about how we do things and what the job is really like. Adding these questions to the interview has increased our retention rate. It also increase our withdraw rate after the interview – but I am good with that.

    2. Observer*

      It also increase our withdraw rate after the interview – but I am good with that.

      VERY smart!

      It’s annoying to have people withdraw at that point. But it’s *really* disruptive if they quite a couple of weeks in. And if they keep on but radiate discontent or make everyone around them crazy, that’s even worse.

      I agree that this is a really useful way to operate. Win – win.

    3. iglwif*

      Extremely smart! Withdrawing after the interview is enormously less disruptive and annoying than quitting 3 weeks in.

    4. Sparkles McFadden*

      This is a really great approach.

      I worked for a well-known company and the entry level jobs featured crazy schedules that were subject to change with little to no notice and everyone was expected to do whatever needed doing regardless of job titles. I thought it was great, but people looking for a predictable job would hate it. HR would sometimes soften the wording of the job description to get a wider applicant pool, and some hiring managers would neglect to say things like “We’re going to ask you to work 14 hour days sometimes, or maybe pick up boxes from the loading dock, or work in the neighboring state for two days.” The result was that, on at least three occasions in my first couple of years, we’d have a new hire come in and say “I’m so excited because this is my dream job!” and then quit two days later. One woman quit two hours into her first day. (That was very exciting for the guy who had “Quits before lunch” in the betting pool.)

      So yes…please be transparent and get people to self-select out.

      1. goddessoftransitory*

        Same goes for “stable” seeming jobs as well–I’ve trained people in my job who assumed that because it’s sitting and taking orders, it’s a easy, cushy job. And compared to lots of jobs, it certainly is!

        But that doesn’t mean it requires no skills and no attention paid to what you’re doing. The people I knew wouldn’t last past their first shift? were the ones that clearly resented having to pay constant attention, having to memorize a LOT of codes, basically feeling “dumb” when they came in thinking “heck, a monkey could do this.”

    5. A Poster Has No Name*

      This is a great way to handle it and I was coming in to suggest something similar for the LW:

      Include a current employee as part of the interview and give them time (without any bosses or HR) to talk candidly. I think it’s easier for candidates to gloss over text in a job ad but when someone is telling you how to deal with foot rot or whatever, it gets a lot more real.

      But the flip side, as you say, is they have to be comfortable with more candidates withdrawing after interview, which they absolutely should be.

  4. ZSD*

    What do people think about framing the ad as, “You’ll have lots of good days when you’ll…There will also be tougher days when you’ll…”?
    Or, “Things you’ll do every day…Things you’ll do once a week…things that will come up at least once a season”?
    My thought is that one of these approaches would let people know up front what some of the more challenging aspects of the job are without making it sound like every day would be a nightmare.

    1. Hlao-roo*

      I like the idea of an every day/once a week/once a season breakdown! It’s a very different experience to front travel costs every week vs once a season, or to hike every day vs once a week for some examples.

      1. Annika Hansen*

        I like this approach a lot! Tolerance for some of these issues would tied to frequency/duration for most people.

    2. Daniel*

      I was going to say something similar to this–is there any way to write a day in the life, or week in the life, narrative for this project and maybe augment it with a couple of examples a tech would have to do occasionally?

    4. Ellis Bell*

      Oh I really like this. I also like the word challenges/challenging. It makes it clear it’s not a fun play-at-camping experience without taking anything away from the sense of reward the job holds for the right person.

  5. Sloanicota*

    Also, as with other “how can we torture young people without them trying to leave, since though that’s the way we’ve always done it in the past” questions … is there any chance the org can think creatively about mitigating some of these conditions? I know budgets are punishingly tight in grant work (none of my funders seem to have ever heard of COLA, they are giving out the same $20K they awarded in 1970 and expecting the exact same results) and academia in general is brutal rn … but – could the field season be broken up into two sessions so it’s not AS long away/ could some of those up-front costs be covered by a stipend/ could you collaborate with other groups to bring in more hands so it’s not always 24-hour shifts, etc … ? Sometimes the group of us doing the work could have offered 50 suggestions that didn’t even cost anything to improve the experience, but it seemed like the higher-ups didn’t really care …

    3. Snax*

      This! I do outdoor education work and an up-front stipend for good boots, snow tires/chains, gaiters/waders and other gear that one might not already own (and might not need in my non-work life) would go a long way for entry level staff.

  6. Kelly Martin*

    I wonder if you can fix the expense issue, so that there’s one less thing to upset a new hire. Can you get your Finance department to issue a travel advance so that these low-paid employees are not out the cash for a few weeks at a time?

    1. Some Internet Rando*

      I had the same thought. If people keep quitting the job, maybe its time to adjust the job. I can see this type of work appealing to someone who is outdoorsy and independent, but who wants a job where they are unexpectedly (or even expectedly) having to shoulder some of the expenses, especially when they are underpaid. Maybe its time to start covering those expenses.

    2. Sara without an H*

      +100. Asking low-paid staff/grad students/untenured faculty to front expenses (with reimbursements taking as long as 8-9 weeks) is one of Academia’s unlovelier habits. LW, you may not be able to fix all of the negatives about this job (blisters and insect bites are always going to be par for the course), but see if you can iron out some of the other irritants that are actually under administrative control.

      1. Wolf*

        > (blisters and insect bites are always going to be par for the course)

        Yes ad no! I’ve worked in those jobs, and part of the issue was that we were woefully poorly equipped. I later worked in industry, and they gave us a budget to buy mosquito-protection longsleeves, waterproof hiking boots, and UV protecting robust hats before going on a trip. It made a world of a difference. Back in academia, we knew those things existed, but we simply could not afford to buy them because there was no way to get any of that reimbursed.

      2. Cthulhu’s Librarian*

        Ha! 8-9 weeks…. You must have worked with well organized universities. My experience with academic reimbursements is that it will take 6 months minimum, and ten or more follow-up calls/emails to the finance department.

  7. constant_craving*

    I agree with being really transparent.

    In Search and Rescue, we call this sort of stuff “Type 2 fun.” That might be too slang-y for a job posting, but the people you will want to hire probably are familiar.

      1. Arrietty*

        This may be a divided-by-a-common-language issue, but I don’t know what type 2 fun means (I assume it’s not related to diabetes).

        1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

          I googled because like you, mind went to diabetes, but eyes stuck on two people writing the same thing. Type 2 fun: tough and/or strenuous in the moment; satisfied happiness after. Examples: backpacking, white water rafting.
          The first result was from REI, so it really is one of the, “if you know, you know terms” that would work well in this situation.

        2. WorkerDrone*

          Type 1 fun is when the activity you are doing is actively enjoyable while doing it.

          Type 2 fun is when the activity is (to a certain extent) un-enjoyable while you’re doing it, but once it’s over, you look back and think, “Wow, that was amazing! So much fun, can’t wait to do it again.”

          For example, I did a hike challenge last summer that was basically climbing all 4 sides of a hill – 4 climbs, each of ~1200 feet elevation gain. I made it up the first two climbs okay, but the last two were tough with the last one being mostly dragging my corpse one miserable step a time up the incline.

          If you asked me on that last climb if I was having fun – I would have answered “you walnut NOOOOOOO this is not fun.”

          If you asked me five minutes after I completed it if I had fun – I would have answered “YES so much fun I’m already registered for next year.”

          That’s Type 2 fun.

          1. nnn*

            Type 2 fun is when the activity is (to a certain extent) un-enjoyable while you’re doing it, but once it’s over, you look back and think, “Wow, that was amazing! So much fun, can’t wait to do it again.”

            So I didn’t know until right this minute that this is a way any human being on the planet experiences emotions, and you’ve just inadvertently explained something I didn’t understand about how my parents’ “vacation” decisions

            2. Lexi Vipond*

              Well, it shouldn’t be no fun at all, if that’s what you mean. It’s not going somewhere terrible so that you can talk endlessly about how terrible it was. It’s more than there’s a balance between discomfort or effort in the moment and the satisfaction or pleasure or excitement of having *got* there, or of being in the middle of something wonderful despite the discomforts.

              Something like knitting a huge or complicated project and feeling like you’ll be doing it (or undoing it) for the rest of your life then being immensely proud of the finished object would probably count. Or writing a book!

            3. GammaGirl1908*

              Appreciate the quotes around “vacation.” Hard same. Never for one moment have I equated things like sleeping on the ground with bugs and snakes, days of hard physical exertion, getting giardia, being hot and filthy, or anything that happens on Naked and Afraid with vacation.

          2. GammaGirl1908*

            Ha, as I was reading this question, I was like, this just sounds like … camping for a living. They need to advertise to people who love camping! I LOATHE camping and outdoorsiness and hiking and all the rest of it and have no idea what is appealing about it to anyone on the planet.

            But! This explanation of Type 2 Fun sheds some light! I had never heard the term until now, but okay, that helps a little.

            I’m still not doing it, because I don’t want to suffer to kind of have fun in retrospect — I’ll just skip over the pain and get to the fun that I can appreciate while I’m having it, thank you very much — but I can kind of see the idea of enjoying working hard for a payoff.

        3. Turnipnator*

          It’s a concept that’s gotten momentum now but I think originated in the 90s in climbing communities. The ‘fun scale’ is roughly:
          type 1 fun – things that are fun now (a game, a movie, etc)

          type 2 fun – things that are not fun now but are fun later (uncomfortable in the moment but they either give a sense of accomplishment or are a good story)

          type 3 fun – not fun now, not fun later.

          1. KateM*

            And what type is the one when you have fun now and are sorry later? Like maybe partying too hard? :)

            2. Not A Raccoon Keeper*

              that’s type 1 fun, or what normal people just call “fun”. regret/no regret is unspecified by this typology!

        4. all the star wars*

          A very brief definition is that “Type 1” fun/activities are things that are both fun now and fun to reminisce on. Which could apply to outdoor activities but also all sorts of things like a bar crawl, going to the movies, a chill vacation, etc.

          “Type 2” activities (which are usually outdoorsy stuff like hiking, mountaineering, extreme sports, etc) are more like, “I’m not necessarily having actual fun right this second* but when I look back on this experience, I’ll have enjoyed myself.”

          (Anyone else, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong).

          *The weather sucks, you’re tired, etc. But overall you’re glad you did the thing and when you reminisce about it later, you know you did have fun.

    2. nnn*

      I would recommend against using “Type 2 fun” in the job posting, simply because I think there would be very little overlap in the set of people who would have been exposed to the term “Type 2 fun” and the set of people OP wants to screen out.

      (I say this as someone who OP wants to screen out. “Type 2 fun”, as defined elsewhere in this thread, isn’t something that I would even consider a type of fun, whereas when I first saw the phrase before encountering the definition, I would have assumed it was something I’d consider a type of fun.)

      1. Dinoweeds*

        I disagree as someone with a rec and tourism/biology background. The phrase “Type II fun” is well known in my sector and is slang that would be known by undergrads. The way I read this is that a lot of people may be interested in this position and need to know the depths of situations they may experience while on the job.

        When I rafted the Grand Canyon our crew was solidly split between Team Chill and Team Extreme. Team Chill wanted to set up camp and play bocce ball while Team Extreme wanted to hike a slot canyon and go spelunking after rowing all day. And remember – we all signed up for a 22 day self sufficient rafting trip in effectively the bottom of the world.

        What I’m getting at is that there are plenty of folks familiar with this nomenclature and there are differences even among the us.

        1. Pocket Mouse*

          I worked—and mostly enjoyed—a job similar to the one the LW describes: outdoors all day in nearly all weather, lots of hiking with heavy backpacks, an additional kind of physical exertion, exposure to heat/bugs/etc., living alongside coworkers, per diems… and I learned the term ‘Type 2 fun’ today, from this thread.

          If the goal is to attract people who are the best fit for the job, just spell it out. Don’t turn people off by using a term they don’t necessarily know, but the ad seems to imply they should. Assuming everyone who might be interested (and successful!) in the job will know the term is a giant mistake.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        Maybe “Looking for applicants with interests in tough, outdoorsy activities that have a type II level of challenging reward”?

    3. Chickadee*

      I think being specific about the exact requirements is more helpful, since it varies so much between jobs. (“You will be covered in hundreds of ticks every day” versus “you will be covered head to toe in bird poop every day” are two very different job descriptions.)

  8. EA*

    I agree with being as transparent as possible! In my line of work we often have to do field assignments that are long, tiring, and sometimes in tough conditions. When hiring, I always ask about prior experience in similar conditions, even if it’s not work related. Mabe you could phrase it as an optional qualification: Prior wilderness or camping experience is highly recommended. And I would bring it up in the interview to see how they react.

    I would also make use of a “please note” section at the end of the job description, that aren’t qualifications exactly, but rather things for the candidate to consider, e.g. “Please note that this role will demand field work with long hikes (up to XX hours a day) and outside of cell service for up to XX weeks at a time.” That might help you find the right candidates.

    1. Nesprin*

      Its worth also asking for applicants to address interest in this sort of job in cover letters or resumes.

      “We encourage applicants to describe in their cover letters: past experiences with field work, experiences with wilderness camping/backpacking or other off grid experiences, working in team environments in resource poor settings and/or demonstrating resilience in adversity”

    2. I Have RBF*

      “Long, challenging hikes with full pack, including scientific equipment, for up to NN weeks at a time to remote areas. Off grid backpacking experience required.”

      You want people who do this kind of thing as a recreation.

      Asking applicants “What’s the longest hike you’ve taken? What’s the tallest peak you’ve hiked up?” would be good. Maybe ask in the cover letter to describe their longest outdoor adventure.

    3. Mid*

      I would also suggest a time range rather than a max being the only number listed. So “able to hike up to 14 hours in a day occasionally and regularly hike 4-5 hours a day through rugged terrain. Have no cell phone service for 2-3 weeks at a time regularly and up to 8 weeks at a time on occasion”

    4. JobSpotter*

      I once spotted an ad that said “Please note: job may involve maggots.” It was for a crime scene investigator. I sent it to a friend who literally replied (to me) “HELL YEAH.” She got the job.

      Honesty in the “please note” section might help you find exactly the right candidate. :-)

  9. Ms. Ann Thropy*

    Instead of simply making the job posting more enticing, try making the job itself more enticing, namely by paying more.

    1. ThisOneWeirdTrick*

      That’s great if the organization can magically make funds appear. If the money doesn’t exist they cannot promise it.

      1. Pescadero*

        …and if the money doesn’t exist – there is likely nothing they can do to change their issues.

        When the reality is “We underpay for a really tough job so people quit” – your options are “money” or “live with things the way they are”. There are no solutions to the issue that don’t cost more.

        1. Grizzled*

          One option is to pay the techs the same amount for fewer hours. Perhaps these research projects can scale back so that they only have techs working 4 days a week for the same wage, so that the wage is reasonable. I’ve seen too many times where these “do good” organizations say yes to every opportunity, overfilling their schedules and executing huge plans only by taking advantage of people who are willing to work for next to nothing.

          1. Wolf*

            Those extra days off would need to be scheduled between feld trips. If you’re on a four week trip to a remote place, you’ll use all days you have. Having a week off after that would be lovely.

            1. Grizzled*

              I would hope you’d have at least a week off. 28 days of work under normal conditions would normally have 5 weekends (10 days off) within it plus a stat holiday. So having 10-11 days off between would be the minimum a job should offer.

    3. nnn*

      I’m guessing you’re not familiar with nonprofits and govt-grant funded work, much of which is really important and not at all well funded.

    4. all the star wars*

      Oh wow, a govt-grant-funded/non-profit being told to just pay more for a thankless, entry-level job. Never heard that one before.

      Non-profits with entry-level, grunt-work jobs usually do not have an endless supply of funding for said jobs. Or an endless supply for like, anything. ESPECIALLY if said funding is government grant-related. Especially because grants have a lot of strings attached to them, generally. You can’t receive a grant for say, eagle research, and use it to hire a general receptionist for the company. Compliance gets REALLY twitchy about that for some reason (/s).

      So unless you want to write a check to the LW to better fund this role, maybe take a seat.

    6. Snax*

      But the job IS enticing, which is why people put up with the bad pay. The OP isn’t looking for ways to retain staff, just to be transparent in the hiring process. Plus, work like this tends to be seasonal. Higher pay = higher retention just isn’t relevant. This isn’t a desk job with high turnover.

    7. George*

      For sure those jobs should pay more but I don’t think you’d necessarily get significantly more people who can do gnarly field work. That’s the ‘rate determent step’ for this kind of job, though better pay is always a good thing… .

    8. Black Horse*

      I gotta be honest, I don’t think even doubling the pay would make me more want to do a job like this. My spouse, though, would love it regardless and would do it regardless of low pay (getting _paid_ to camp and hike for hours? They do that for free!).

      It’s not that the job is awful, because “awful” is subjective. They’re asking how best to be clear what the job entails so those who would love it will apply, and those who would hate it will not.

    9. metadata minion*

      I absolutely endorse paying field biologists more, but plenty of people don’t want to do this for anything other than retire-at-30 levels of pay. Plenty of people, me included, physically *can’t* do this. This is physically strenuous/unpleasant enough that you want to find people who genuinely *want* to do the work, not people who are willing to put up with it because it pays well.

    10. PurpleCattledog*

      In my country we have very limited control over what someone can earn. There’s official rates – and the ones set by grants (rather than the employer) are usually lower.

      I’m not in the US, and personally I don’t think we are poorly paid in or similar industry (the casual/contract part, and people working well beyond what they are contracted for is another matter). But part of why wages at the junior level won’t rise much is because they get many many applications. When it’s harder to hire you start offering more.

  10. Alex*

    I think a lot of people would be interested in that kind of job! It reminds me of when I was a camp counselor, the best and most fun job I ever had. It certainly isn’t for everyone, but the job requirements could definitely have been similar:

    Be on duty 130 hours a week.
    Live in rustic cabins with about 25 square feet of personal space and no electricity.
    Share 3 toilets and 2 showers with 50 other people. There will be spiders watching you every time you pee.
    Spend 3-4 days a week every other week primitive camping with only the supplies you can carry.
    Keep a positive attitude! Even when the kids are whining or misbehaving!
    Oh and pay…is less than minimum wage!

    I think you can neutrally describe the working conditions. “Field workers spend up to 13 hours a day hiking in all weather conditions, carrying a 50 pound pack, and may be out of cell phone or internet range for days at a time.” Some people will think that sounds great, so don’t make the decision for them that it is terrible.

    1. Sloanicota*

      Yeah, I think you’re right. One problem we had is a lot of people THINK that sounds fun, but may not truly understand what they’re getting into … I think your wording and discussion of past similar experience during the interview will get you to the right people.

      1. Starbuck*

        It’s also something most people know they won’t / can’t do long term anyway. I know a few people who managed to put in enough temp field seasons to eventually get full-time real jobs – basically winning the lottery as far as odds go. Most don’t though. So a lot of even the good prospective employees are just not going to prioritize the individual job so highly that they won’t be willing to walk away if things get too gnarly or have personal things come up, because they realize there’s not a future there anyway.

        Like there’s a reason the first commenter is not a camp counselor anymore.

    2. Meaningful hats*

      >There will be spiders watching you every time you pee.

      I chuckled at this one. We’re a camping family and my kids were icked out by the bathroom spiders the first few times we camped with them. I told them the spiders were inevitable, so they better get used to it. They love all other aspects of camping, though!

      1. Timothy (TRiG)*

        I was brought up in a camping family which mostly camped in the mountains in the west of Ireland, well away from anyone. Toilets, with or without spiders, were a very occasional luxury.

      2. Ezzle*

        We’re not a camping family, but have bathroom spiders at home – they like the moisture when the central heating is drying the rest of the house out. I like having spiders in the house because they eat more annoying or disease-spreading critters. It’s got to the point where I’ve had a favourite bathroom spider and been upset when they died.

    3. MassMatt*

      I think this is on the right track. Be transparent, but given that it’s probably not possible to pay more or shorten the remote trips, etc. I think you should lean into the reality of this field work experience. Maybe you’re doing this already, but instead of general job boards (or at least, along with them) I would target outdoorsy people, extreme backpackers, people who went to wilderness survival school, etc. A table at an extreme backpacking convention or event might not get the same # of responses as a conventional listing, but I bet their success rate would be far higher.

      There are definitely people out there that would see this job and think “whoa, I can camp and hike AND get paid! Awesome!” and really mean it.

      1. Momma Bear*

        Ecology or Environmental Studies at colleges? People who already volunteer with parks and outdoor programs?

    4. Momma Bear*

      I agree. I know people for whom office work is torment and traipsing around in the mud is fun. You want those people. Maybe mix up the description. One of my favorite charity orgs puts some humor into the job description but the reader understands that sometimes it’s long hours, lots of packing and moving, and can be emotionally and physically exhausting. Beautiful views and once in a lifetime experiences but you need to be able to handle 14 hr days in challenging conditions and carry x amount of weight regularly. Field work will include…

  11. Goose*

    I’ve helped write a “Is This Position Right for Me” that lays out requirements and expectations–food, privacy, accommodations, activity level, schedule flexibility, initial adjustment time etc. that we’ve found breaks these types of things down. Be upfront! You’ll and the folks you hire will be better off for it.

    1. learnedthehardway*

      This is a good idea – get people to ask themselves the questions about whether they would be okay in the role. Some people will be enthusiastic about it. Others will say “No Way!!” and opt out.

  12. Falling Diphthong*

    Physical aptitude ain’t bupkis.

    This sounds like a job where the ability to carry heavy equipment while hiking is a necessary condition. Physical aptitude is also much easier for people to self-assess than emotional intelligence and maturity, and there is little shame in admitting that you aren’t taller than this sign. Lots of people will say “I could not carry a 30 pound pack on a 10 mile hike as a routine part of the job. Also I really hate humidity. And bugs.” Very few people will say “I’m immature and lack emotional intelligence.”

    I like the specific example Alison gives–you should talk about what maturity and emotional intelligence look like in this situation. Do you need to make a lot of decisions on the fly, or to meticulously follow every step of the plan? Do you need to get along in close quarters with a variety of people, or be okay working alone for long stretches?

    1. Chickadee*

      Yes, those are important details to include & screen for in the interview. Are people working independently or in groups? Do they need to follow precise instructions or do they have to make decisions on the fly?

    2. Wolf*

      > Very few people will say “I’m immature and lack emotional intelligence.”

      Wouldn’t word it like that, but I’ve heard a fair share of “I know I need at least an hour of alone time away from people each day, so I wouldn’t enjoy working on a research ship” or “I really prefer working alone, so this archaelogy dig team isn’t for me”. Many people do know the limits of their social skills.

    3. Ellis Bell*

      I think the type of interpersonal skill needs to be defined, and then defined in context. Does OP need people who are patient? The ordinary kind of patience or patient even while soaking wet? Is being very very agreeable more or less important than someone who calls out potential problems, and if so in what context?

  13. Shrimp Emplaced*

    Bookmarking this post, I can tell already that it’ll be more widely applicable beyond writing job descriptions!

  14. Pomodoro Sauce*

    I have done literally this type of job for a decade with great success, and people being very open about work conditions in the ad was always a green flag.

    Attempts to sell it, or be like “not all days are terrible days!” was a sign of management that wasn’t willing to face the emotional realities of what we were doing — that they’d be uncomfortable with safety issues like us needing to take a morning off to dry all of our soaking wet sleeping bags at a laundromat, or would be weird about professionalism issues — our datasheets being muddy and torn, or being really strict about not using extra time filling out our timesheets on unfamiliar software when we rarely saw computers and were sharing a single workstation.

    Also, some people are going to think this sounds amazing, and then it’s not going to work for them — they’ll have a knee that can’t take 13 hours of hiking, or they’ll get injured, or it’s not a good emotional fit. That’s going to happen even if you’re perfect at communicating the challenges of the job.

    You want to hire people who are stoic, frank, and straightforward — the ad also needs to be stoic, frank, and straightforward.

  15. ecnaseener*

    I agree with LW that the “Must be comfortable…” phrasing is a bit off-putting, but just reframing it as part of the job description rather than the candidate requirements would help quite a bit. “This role often involves carrying 30 pounds of equipment for 13 hours a day, including in high heat and humidity, on uneven terrain, in areas with biting flies and mosquitos” conveys the same information but feels less like you’re putting up a barrier and more like you’re just being transparent.

  16. Generic Name*

    I was a field biologist for many years, and yeah, it really does take a certain type of person to thrive doing that kind of work. I agree with being up-front and very blunt in the job ad. Alison’s example quote of the type of person who would like that job really isn’t all that far off! In addition to being really clear in the job ad, asking the right questions in the interview is also helpful. I suggest asking folks what their hobbies are/how they like to spend their off time. Ideally, you’d hire people who hunt, fish, hike, geocache, camp, do literally anything outdoors for long periods of time voluntarily.

  17. LinesInTheSand*

    If you’re hiring entry level staff, the challenge is that they probably don’t know either if the job is a fit. What you’re describing is pretty far outside many people’s day to day experiences and no one knows how they’re going to handle extreme conditions until they’re in extreme conditions that have to be handled.

    So I don’t know what to do about that in the hiring process. Is there a way you could arrange a paid “audition weekend” as the last round of your hiring process? Narrow your pool to a few strong candidates and make them work a few 13 hour days in adverse conditions, see if they want to self-select out then?

    Or alternatively, beef up your organizational training around supporting your field techs so they stick it out through the end of the season?

    1. Hastily Blessed Fritos*

      Depends a lot on the specifics, I’d think. “Field season” is often just that – a season – so if you need someone tracking bears coming out of hibernation next spring, the only way to do this would be to have the “trial” this spring, a full year in advance.

      1. Magda*

        I wonder if you could have current staff make a short video about their real experience for next year …

    2. Ultegra*

      We’ve hired for similar positions and we invite our top candidate to shadow someone for a few hours to get a sense of what the job might be like before accepting our offer. We also try to hire in the winter when conditions are the worst so new hires can quickly determine if the job will be a good fit for them or not. If not, we’ve hopefully minimized the amount of wasted time for both of us.

  18. northernbiologist*

    I’ve hired for this type of position. I agree about being up-front about the conditions. The only thing I would add is that this is the perfect type of job for someone to demonstrate their qualifications using non-work examples, which is especially helpful for those without much work experience. Usually the type of person who will thrive in this type of job already spends a lot of their free time suffering in the wilderness voluntarily. As one of their references, I get candidates to give me someone with whom they’ve spent a prolonged period of time in the wilderness (not necessarily from work), so that I can ask about some of the things you’re concerned about.

    1. Generic Name*

      Yup. As I mentioned in another comment (maybe it got eaten??), I was a field biologist for many years, and pretty much every biologist I know recreates outdoors in addition to doing it for work.

  19. northernbiologist*

    Also, this reminds me of an an old remote wilderness-based construction job ad from 1942, which read:

    THIS IS NO PICNIC

    Working and living conditions on this job are as difficult as those encountered on any construction job ever done in the United States or foreign territory. Men hired for this job will be required to work and live under the most extreme conditions imaginable. Temperature will range from 90° above zero to 70° below zero. Men will have to fight swamps, rivers, ice and cold. Mosquitoes, flies and gnats will not only be annoying but will cause bodily harm. If you are not prepared to work under these and similar conditions, do not apply.

    2. RLC*

      ALCAN (Alaska) Highway? Family member was a civilian construction manager on said project, this is how he summed up the experience.

      1. northernbiologist*

        Very close… this was the Canol Project: a pipeline built in remote northern Canada by the US military to get oil to Alaska during WWII. It cost a ton of money and was completed right around the time the war ended, and so was almost immediately abandoned after construction. You can hike the old pipeline route now, but only if you really like suffering in the wilderness…

  20. Ninersfsn*

    I realize it’s not quite the same thing, but I wonder how many people would be willing to help rethink this job description or what to put down if it was for a job describing “need someone to answer phones, keep supplies Stocked, and interview candidates for upcoming jobs, as well as keep the place, clean and reassign offices as needed.” I’m all for the fact that there are people who love the job that you’ve described, but I wonder if there is something offputting about the low pay, they need to be reimbursed, etc., that isn’t going to be fixed by describing it differently or being more transparent. Maybe it’s a crappy situation and it would be important to work on making it less crappy.

    1. Varthema*

      I think the difference though is so key that you can’t just write it off. Desk jobs are everywhere, they’re the reality for a huge percentage of adults who want to work. Jobs where you get to use your body AND brain and be out in nature are quite rare, so the very nature of the job is something that plenty of people would be willing to sacrifice income for.
      It’s true that this leads down the same path as other “calling” type jobs, most obviously ones in the arts – the very fact that loads of people would love to (x) all day long and get paid drives down the price. It’s vital not to take advantage of that. But the other side of the coin with jobs like this is that the money decisions are often made with constituents and taxpayers in mind, not the employees. Another huge difference from the majority of desk jobs where the money decisions lie with people closer to the work. And a third difference, if this work isn’t done, a species goes extinct, or an ecosystem falls apart.
      I do agree that the reimbursement system could be a good area for exploration. In that case, the money is already there, if they’re willing to reimburse. It’s just a question of getting creative around the workflows to make that money move, and probably that policy was written back in the day when it was checks or cash.

  21. Not A Manager*

    I agree that you should *describe* the work conditions accurately and then *name* the character traits that correlate with success. “This job involves heavy labor in variable weather conditions, primitive camping, and periods of limited social interaction” (or whatever). “People who thrive in this job are generally flexible, cooperate well with peers, have good problem-solving skills,” etc.

    1. natalie*

      Their motto that appears on the front door of the main office is “Hard Work, Low Pay, Miserable Conditions.”

  23. Rage Against the Mosquitoes*

    I think a lot of people skim bulleted job requirements that don’t sound like hard skills/experience (“yeah yeah, team player, communication, blah blah”) so sticking this in a less formally written paragraph might serve you well:
    “We’re going to be upfront here: this job can be demanding! In addition to all the perks of travel, camping, and working with nature, you’ll face challenges like hiking in all weather, battling mosquitos, and spending plenty of time in close quarters with your coworkers. If those sound like challenges you’re ready to take on, we want you on our team! Candidates who progress to the interview stage will have the opportunity to talk to current employees about their experiences, both ups and downs.”
    (Then make sure that last part happens.)

  24. Educator*

    In addition to being candid about the requirements, I would also think about how to get this posting in front of people who have already demonstrated that they love rustic conditions and physical demands. You don’t really know if you will like that until you have lived it, but a lot of us have and love it!

    For example, my university’s bio department would swing by our outing club meetings to make us aware of entry-level field positions. They knew anyone in the outing club would not bat an eye at the physical labor or isolation because that was how we chose to spend our free time anyway. The posting is important, but showing it to the right people probably matters more.

    Who won’t find this job unpleasant, and who will really know what they are signing up for? Seek them out!

    1. me*

      Similar to your outdoor club, I had peers in scouts (girl and boy) that would have really enjoyed these opportunities (and peers who would not touch them with a ten foot pole). While high school students and grads are probably too young for current opportunities, there’s often a lot of programming about different types of career paths. Connecting with a local scout council may (1) inspire future field biologists and (2) connect with an alumni association that likely has interested parties

    2. Daisy-dog*

      My thought as well!! My university had an outdoors program that offered some classes and also had rentals for camping gear. Find schools with that type of groups/programs and send something on their email list.

  25. Hell in a Handbasket*

    My daughter is currently applying for jobs like this. It never ceases to amaze me, reading descriptions that are almost exactly like LW’s example, followed by something like “Living quarters may be crowded and primitive. Stipend $15/hr” and then having my (pretty qualified) daughter tell me she didn’t even get an interview because there are SO many applicants.

    1. handfulofbees*

      Honestly if I were a bit younger, I’d be all over something like this lol. These days I have much more emotional maturity which would help, but the low pay is untenable. I think these are really geared towards young people who don’t have much money and $15 an hour might be the most they’ve ever made.

      I’m a full time farm worker lol, get paid well for the industry (still poor), and honestly love my job! I do get to come home every night, which helps a lot lol.

    2. vulturestalker*

      Former field assistant here: yep! It’s mind boggling. The frustrating reality is that these jobs are important if you want to go into many kinds of ecology research, but that field also has NO money. Grants that fund e.g. PhD projects often come with prohibitions or limits on using them to fund field assistant wages. It’s a really bad situation and I know a lot of well-meaning folks who try and fail to pay people better… just a mess. I wish your daughter all the best in finding a position!

    3. Generic Name*

      I know. I’m kindof laughing at the people going, “have you considered paying more and making the field season shorter?”. The problem isn’t people don’t want to apply to these jobs, but they can’t make it through a whole season once hired. I think there is a fair amount of romanticization of this type of career, especially if you’ve never done it. Back when I did field biology, I would tell people what I did for a living, and people would be “ooooo coooool!” and ask me all kinds of questions. Now that I do something different, no one reacts in that way, amusingly. A lot of fieldwork frankly just sucks, but the people who do it, really love it. I loved it. I was sad when I realized that my joints just couldn’t take fieldwork anymore and had to move to project management.

      1. Bella Ridley*

        This is it. I don’t want to say the money is irrelevant, but when you are struggling through the mud and being eaten alive by mosquitos and you’ve been up for nineteen hours and the only sleep you’re going to get is going to be damp and your feet are covered in blisters and you’re living off jerky and noodles from a camp stove…an additional five grand per season is probably not going to change your mind if you’re on the fence about quitting. Fieldwork (and anything in that vein) is not for everyone, which is fine, but the money is very rarely the root of the whole problem. Vanishingly few people who were on the verge of quitting because of physical discomfort are going to say “I can keep doing this for another month to make another few hundred bucks,” and organizations who need this work done are not going to have the budget to make an appreciable difference in that salary bucket.

      2. Analyst*

        I’m dying here, because the majority of these jobs are not only unpaid, but actually cost money to do (ie, fly yourself to Africa to do field work and pay a fee to live here). And people do it cause it’s required to gain entry to the field. yes, it’s a problem…but if OP’s position is actually paid? they’re way above the majority already, no matter how bad the pay…

        1. Starbuck*

          Those international “pay to play” gigs are widely understood as a scam in my experience. I’ve done field work and even though we all know it sucks and doesn’t pay well, pretty much everyone I talked with in college and fresh out etc acknowledged that low-to-no stipend positions were a reality, but having to actually fork over money was not legitimate.

    4. Chickadee*

      My first paid internship was $75/week + terrible housing. I was over the moon when my next internship was $160/week + decent housing. It’s a huge equity problem because it’s nearly impossible to gain enough experience to reach the $15/hr positions unless you have family support. I wound up going to grad school because it was the only way I could get a permanent position with benefits.

      1. Adventures in Grad School*

        OP here,

        I decided not to engage too much on the wage issue because it’s so systemic. Like the commenter said, their daughter is qualified but no interview. I work within my org to get students out on easier field jobs (paid or for research credit – though many love to just volunteer and hang out) so they can apply to these other field tech jobs you’re talking about.

  26. BatManDan*

    For reference (although it’s not proven to be true) – I just copied this from the web.

    Many of you have probably seen the famous advertisement which, as the story goes, Ernest Shackleton ran in the newspaper to try to recruit men for his Endurance expedition:

    Men wanted for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in event of success.1

    This advertisement is one of the most famous in history. It is frequently quoted as one of the best examples of copy writing, and has been quoted many times, in books covering topics all the way from Introduction to Evangelism to Web Application Defender’s Cookbook, and even printing on tee shirts.
    However, the origins of the ad are very obscure. No one has actually seen the ad printed in a newspaper, though the Antarctic Circle has a $100 reward out for anyone who can find it, a reward which has not yet been claimed. They have also gathered a lot of information about the ad, the basis for much of this post.

  27. 3-Foot Tall Inflatable Rainbow Unicorn*

    Just… do not lie. Do. NOT. Lie!

    I worked a job with a notorious revolving door – one person quit within 2 hours of starting – because the people doing the hiring lied, lied, lied. They promised training in new skill sets, promised all kinds of learning opportunities – and then when people got in, they found themselves stuck in very narrow jobs with no chance to branch out and no control over tasking.

    Be absolutely up front about the downside of field biology, bugs, mud, and all. Let people know what they’re getting into.

  28. Tech editor*

    Having “We’ve found people who thrive in this role generally have ____” in the job description would make it harder to ask the AAM Magic Question!

  29. Serious Sillyputty*

    We have an unusual work environment. I started including a link to an “about us” video in the job description. We also added an optional tour of our facility before the interview with a current person in that role who is NOT part of the hiring process. My hope is that this gives people more understanding so they are able to better assess if it’s a good fit— and to speak to that better in the interview.

  30. TokenJockNerd*

    So I’ve done and loved the WORK of this kind of job, but “btw you’re underpaid, underappreciated, and paying your own money for work, you’ll get paid back…eventually” is an honest to goodness dealbreaker for a lot of good people and something you should definitely fix at all possible. These positions don’t pay enough for that to be, like, reasonable. I really encourage you to find a way. (I know that’s not what you asked, but I’m gunna really encourage you anyway, because while “you’ll be paying your own money” is something you need to be honest about up front, taking that factor out entirely is BETTER)

    Be honest about the things that can’t be mitigated (rain! mud! mosquitoes!) and mitigate what you can (people on entry level hourly pay paying to do their job. I had problems with that while doing similar jobs and still do bc it’s the people who can least afford to spend their own money who have that burden placed on them the most)

    1. Elbe*

      100% agree here. “Agree to live in near poverty so that you can do labor for us” isn’t really a fair job listing, even if some people are willing to make those sacrifices to get a foot in the door. It’s going to weed out a lot of passionate, qualified people who are just not able to take on the financial burdens.

      I understand that the LW probably doesn’t have the authority to change this (yet), but it is something to keep in mind and push back on wherever possible.

      1. Nesprin*

        Eh, “live near poverty to do labor for someone” else sure sounds a lot like my PhD- I theoretically worked in “safe, controlled” environment (not fieldwork) and still ended up with a life-threatening allergy.

        And yep, my PhD training was something I would do again in a heartbeat.

        1. Elbe*

          I understand that these types of setups are very common at the moment, but I honestly think that that’s a problem that, culturally, we should work to change. Similar to unpaid internships, it really restricts the type of person who can hold certain jobs.

          Just before I graduated college, I decided not to go into a field I was passionate about when I realized that, realistically, I would have to get a second job (likely for years) just to be able to eat, and that I would be competing with coworkers who came from family money and could show up at work well fed and well rested and well dressed and not stressed.

          These types of setups are slow to change and I don’t blame the LW for needing to work around this right now. But it is a problem.

          1. Varthema*

            I agree, but for THIS kind of thing it’s going to involve convincing people to pay a lot more in taxes, or to donate much more money to nonprofits. And for work that doesn’t necessarily sound very interesting/compelling/helpful for the public. Conservation efforts are a hard sell when there’s no charismatic species or immediate threat/benefit visible.

            Different from unpaid internships for for-profit companies, which is just ridiculous and cultural influences CAN go a long way to pushing back.

  31. Elbe*

    I think a good thing to do here is to find out how the pros and cons of the job are understood by people who are well-suited vs. people who are ill-suited for the role.

    Focus on everything that the ill-suited people consider cons, as well as everything that the well-suited people consider to be the pros. You’ll end up with a balanced listing that attracts some people and weeds out the rest.

  32. Eeyore is my spirit animal*

    When I was hiring college students for summer field work, I had a formula for the announcement they liked us to follow, so the job announcement covered the hiking distances, amount of equipment carried, temperatures etc. but had to be more formal sounding. So, I couldn’t just say the conditions will suck.

    In the interviews I was very, very blunt and expansive about the specifics of heat, humidity, mud (a third of the area was wetlands/swamps), snakes (I saw something venomous once a week), ticks, the possibility of gators, etc. I also was very specific of the quirks of working on an Army base. The constant sound of gunfire, artillery, or hand grenades and the simulator version of all of the above. The active hazards of tanks and other large equipment or the presence of UXO.

    It seemed to effective. Over the 50ish students I hired over the years, only two had problems. One developed heat injuries and had to be put on half days. One never got used to the sound of the simulators and left about 2/3 of the way through.

  33. CubeFarmer*

    Yup.

    I’ve been in my organization long enough to have recognized where past employees have struggled. So, the last time I wrote a description I added “must be comfortable occasionally driving in dense urban environments,” because we had a couple field workers decide, after they were hired, that they didn’t like city driving!

  34. BatManDan*

    For reference (although it’s not proven to be true) – I just copied this from the web.

    Many of you have probably seen the famous advertisement which, as the story goes, Ernest Shackleton ran in the newspaper to try to recruit men for his Endurance expedition:

    Men wanted for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in event of success.1

    This advertisement is one of the most famous in history. It is frequently quoted as one of the best examples of copy writing, and has been quoted many times, in books covering topics all the way from Introduction to Evangelism to Web Application Defender’s Cookbook, and even printing on tee shirts.
    However, the origins of the ad are very obscure. No one has actually seen the ad printed in a newspaper, though the Antarctic Circle has a $100 reward out for anyone who can find it, a reward which has not yet been claimed. They have also gathered a lot of information about the ad, the basis for much of this post.

  35. Beboots*

    We’ve had a similar issue with hiring staff who work outdoors in all weather conditions. We do provide uniforms, including sun hats, rain jackets, warm underlayers, bug spray, sunscreen, bug net hats… we have provisions for taking your breaks in an air conditioned vehicle or in a basement office where it’s cooler on hot days, or choosing lower-exertion tasks in the event of a really hot or smoky day… but at the end of the day, while there are supports, you’re still on your feet, outside, in hot/rainy/smoky conditions, for an 8 hour day minus lunch and two fifteen minute breaks. We’ve tried putting that information in our job posters, and we’ve taken to reiterating it in the interviews, discussing what the season looks like and what a typical day looks like… but we still have people who complain about working in outdoor conditions, and had a few people leave early because they found that being outside all day doing the advertised job as described in the job poster and the interview was too hard on their bodies. By that I mean they’re not hiking for 13+ hour days with a 30kg pack on, but they’re like, tired and sweaty at the end of the day. I’m not quite sure how to make these conditions of employment clearer?

    1. Ellis Bell*

      People don’t know what they don’t know. If you ask someone a yes/no question, they may just give you an ignorant guess rather than their thought process. So a yes/no question like: “Are you okay outside, in hot/rainy/smoky conditions, for an 8 hour day?” is probably going to elicit a “yes”. Because all their (very tame) experience outdoors is positive, and they assume if other people have done it, they can do it too. Questions like “Tell me about a time you had to put up with physical discomfort like x or y” or “Have you ever done anything similar to a multi hour hike (or whatever is closest to the job description)?” Even then, you have to be prepared for the fact that you can’t really try on these types of shoes without buying them. I used to walk and cycle everywhere, so I felt confident about a job where I would be outdoors reporting a lot in poor weather. I didn’t really understand that while the new job was physically near where I grew up, it was geographically more elevated so it actually had a significantly colder microclimate. Standing outside doing nothing but waiting in an elevated region makes you feel much, much colder than walking and cycling does at sea level. It still worked out for me, but there is sometimes no way to know in advance.

    2. inksmith*

      Maybe it’s less about making it clearer and more about assessing if they can do it better? Like, if I’ve never done what’s being advertised, even if I really clearly understand what’s being asked, I might think I can do it – but then it turns out I can’t. Not because I didn’t understand what I was signing up for, but because I didn’t correctly assess my ability to do the thing.

      So, how can you better assess if they’ll be able to do it? Other comments talk about things like asking about recreational experience, or doing trials, or getting applicants to talk to existing staff, for example. Could you do some of those things? Or look at what characteristics are of people who make it versus don’t, and think about how to assess for those? For example, I hire a lot of entry level data analysts, and I don’t assess their analytical skills, I assess their analytical sense – if I give you data, can you spot its quirks and make good decisions about how to deal with it, rather than can you use this particular programme? That tells me that I can teach you how to do analysis, and also that you’ll probably like the job and not quit a month in.

  36. But not the Hippopotamus*

    It might be helpful to have a web page for people who are interested in field work but haven’t done it. Think something like a FAQ and Stuff I Wish Someone Had Warned Me About. You can link to it, include the testimonials Alison mentioned, and get some details without having to put it all in the ad. You could even reference it in the ad.

    1. Yvette*

      That’s a great idea. It could even include short videos nothing professional just done by people who currently holds the job showing with a typical day is like typical projects typical tasks typical heat, typical mud.

      1. Adventures in Grad School*

        OP here. There are some really good resources for that. Field Inclusive is a really nice example.

  37. FattyMPH*

    I’m wondering if including some examples of ‘helpful work history’ could help. Especially if this is a position contributing to academic or public service work where most of the other jobs on are office jobs, specifying some similar non-office jobs might help people with those experiences recognize that they are what you’re looking for. To me, the working conditions sound similar to full time dog walking or landscaping/lawn care or being a summer camp counselor in terms of the expectation of being outside so much of the time doing physical stuff that could be unpleasant. I also think getting clarity on what is inevitable unpleasantness of the job vs what is exploitative working conditions that could be changed will help you be more effective as a manager. Weather is not fixable — but expecting the lowest paid employees to effectively make loans *to* the organization by floating funds and waiting to be reimbursed really should be.

  38. Fluffy Fish*

    I would also consider somewhere in the interview process be very clear and upfront about people taking the job and leaving because of xyz reasons. With a line somewhere about “we know these type of conditions aren’t for everyone even if the work seems interesting otherwise, so we really want candidates to consider all this information and really think about if the job is for them”

  39. wounded, erratic stink bugs*

    I want to join the “be transparent” and “fix the things you can fix, like pay and reimbursement issues” choruses, but also:
    Is it possible that this a job where you’ll never be able to avoid having more turnover than you’d like, because there will always be some people who won’t know if the work is for them until they try it? Even with the hardships it might sound good on paper to some people who decide it’s not for them after a few months. Getting them to finish out the field season would be ideal, but some portion of this problem might be inherent in the job.

  40. Deb*

    Have you thought about posting the job or advertising on thru-hiker blogs and threads on Reddit / facebook groups? Long distance thru and section hikers want to continue their hikes in new ways even after doing the big hikes (AT, CDT, PCT) but also looking to fund the next one with a temporary job. Almost everyone tries to find an outdoors job like this after hiking long distance. 10-30 mile days are normal with 20-30lb packs too. Depending on your season, many thru- hikers might love this idea.

  41. Banana Pyjamas*

    My last workplace redid job descriptions completely. They have a section “Physical/Mental Demands and Work Environment” that I think would fit the bill here.

  43. HR Lady*

    I hire people for a different type of job that can be unpleasant. It involves a lot of driving and general unpredictability, in the healthcare space. While there is a ton my company has done to minimize issues, there are just times when it’s impossible to avoid unpleasant days- that is the nature of patient care in the settings we work in. Our solution has been to be very upfront about it- those who won’t love it will filter themselves out. In our interview we make a lot of comments about things like audiobooks and podcasts since the driving really does affect everything.

    And then- we get people who *think* they will like it, or at least think they can tolerate the drives, and decide after a short while that they actually can’t. That’s always frustrating. I often find myself repeating to my company leadership that, unless somebody has previously worked in a job where they did 5+ hours average of driving per day, there is no way to know if they will like it or not, and people will just have to experience it to get the real idea of what it will be like. But hey, now I can tell people that we aren’t spending 3 weeks camping!!

    In all seriousness, OP, this is a tough one and I know how it feels! Good luck, and I hope you find somebody who LOVES what you do!

  44. Anon, anon*

    Years ago I was at a job fair where one of the employers was looking for staff to work on a remote Arctic island. Basically a rock in the ocean– an icy rock at that– with a few people and many thousands of birds.

    He got up onstage and spoke about the birds. And only the birds. The diversity of species. The excitement of watching them do all their birdy stuff. No mention of the realities of the living situation. As soon as he finished speaking, a long line formed at his booth.

    I always wondered how that worked out in the long run.

    1. Ialwaysforgetmyname*

      It’s a tough balance. I spent years working in national parks and had to recruit/hire for low paying seasonal jobs. I learned I had to balance promoting the amazing stuff (you live in a beautiful national park! You have amazing access to hiking and wildlife!) with the bad stuff (you live in a cramped dorm room with 1-3 other people, the food we provide isn’t so great).

  45. Spearmint*

    I wonder if this would be best addressed at the interview stage. Maybe schedule an initial, brief phone interview with each candidate where you can give a more nuanced and detailed description of the pros and cons. I think people would be more likely to think about it and internalize the information when it’s delivered that way. It’s too easy to skim over job ads and not think too hard about them, because after all you’re probably reading hundreds or thousands of them over the course of a job hunt.

  47. in dreams begin responsibilities*

    I hire for a job like this: a “dream job” in many people’s minds but actually very physically, mentally, and emotionally taxing. Imagine, for example, someone who wants to work at a vet clinic but hasn’t thought through what it will be like to have to comfort grieving people on an almost daily basis. Our solution is to be up front about the easier to summarize physical difficulties (e.g., “outdoor manual labor in all weather”) in the job ad and then, with applicants who are actual prospects, including information about mental and emotional challenges at every turn, understanding that it make take some repetition to make it sink in for someone who is convinced that they want to do this. In interviews, we stress that one of the purposes of the conversation is for them to decide if they want the job and then ask them to imagine themselves in various common scenarios. We also do a “working interview” during which the applicant is able to physically feel what some of the most onerous daily tasks are like and then say something like “imagine doing this for at least two hours every day, rain or shine, blizzard or heat wave.” Those do tend to dissuade applicants who look and sound perfect but are not, in fact, prepared to cope with the regular ravages of the job.

  48. Annony*

    Not all of it has to be in the ad. Definitely make sure they understand the physical requirements, but people are not generally very good at identifying if they have a high degree of emotional intelligence. That part is probably better screened for in the interview.

  49. postdooc*

    I completely sympathize with this letter. I also work in a field science (in academia), and come across a lot of challenges with recruiting for field work. Lots of students are really excited about the idea, but don’t have the practical understanding of what it entails.

    Couple of suggestions:
    1. When hiring, often I’ve seen people lean towards picking people with lots of camping experience, which can be great, or can lead to hiring people that might expect this to be more like a vacation. There are many folks (I am one!) who will get into fieldwork successfully, even without a strong camping or outdoors background. One of the key indicators that I’ve found is that these people tend to have additional experiences that can point to being good at ‘type 2 fun’ and the diligent grind of field work: camp counselors, extensive childcare experience, physical jobs (warehouse, restaurant jobs, etc…)… that have similar levels of physical exertion and need to work around other people. College athletes were also often great pulls who have the physical ability but clearly understand the grind.

    2. Clearly lay out the typical field work schedule for your advertised position. There’s a huge range, but field work can be REALLY different depending on the project, and clearly laying out an un-edited typical field schedule can help techs identify the type of field work it is. For example, we had two field positions to hire for last year. One was to assist on a summer of remote sample gathering, and so the person had to be very comfortable with carrying a heavy pack, backwoods camping, orienteering, etc….The other was to be the field tech for our more local projects, which involved more field work, but a lot of it was driving in and out, setting up and installing field equipment, and collecting frequent local samples. The two techs had very different schedules that we could lay out (i.e. 2-4 five day backpacking trips a month, where you are working sunup to sundown for the period? vs. 40 hrs a week, flexed based on needs in the field).

    1. Ellis Bell*

      I really like your examples in part 1. Menial work in factories, restaurants, retail, bars really are an absolute physical grind (but are never described as such?!) There’s also the soft skills element; you usually have to smile a lot, or at least give a grim internal chuckle and you probably won’t last unless you have cameraderie with the crew.

  50. H.C.*

    Ha, this posting could’ve been tailored towards me right at the start of college (when I declared Environmental Science major with an interest in ecologist career – which I nope’d out of when I found out how much field work is involved in early-career roles… down to the extended standing around & lifting heavy equipment in humid, insect-laden environments.)

    1. Adventures in Grad School*

      OP here. I have an easy mode field project where I can take students for just a day in tough conditions. It’s usually only 6 hours too, and I definitely have folks that have said, “thanks for bringing me, but this isn’t my jam.”

  51. Grizzled*

    I’ve worked a job just like this, and they weren’t up front about it at hiring. My boss was horrible and I had to spend 2 weeks at a time camping with her in the middle of nowhere. The day rate was for 7 hours, but the days were 13 hours. The works was amazing – flying in helicopters, hiking through glorious mountains, and having incredible experiences with wildlife. I didn’t mind the long days, mosquitos, and physical labour. I actually loved the closeness to nature. But I consistently felt taken advantage of and disrespected because of the expectation to work 6 free hours each day. At the end of the season my boss and I parted ways without saying goodbye. The previous year’s intern became my boss’s best friend – so clearly she didn’t mind the challenges. So yes – be up front with everything you mentioned here. Some people will enjoy this experience.

  52. lpkxwk*

    I’d consider having 2 documents made available with the advert, 1) the position description, and 2) a job dictionary that clearly spells out tasks and the physical and psychosocial elements of the role.

  53. double spicy*

    I think transparency is key. Being up-front about the realities of the job helps people self-select into or out of your candidate pool. It’s also likely to reduce the likelihood of new hires quitting so soon, since they will have a more realistic idea of what to expect from the work. Given the reality of nonprofit/academic/government funding, it may be worth looking into non-monetary benefits that could help your staff have a more satisfactory experience.

    1. Ialwaysforgetmyname*

      Yes, this. In my 20s and 30s an honestly described fieldwork position would have sounded like heaven to me vs. being a turnoff.

  54. Analyst*

    As a former field worker- Alison’s examples were actually perfect

    and you absolutely need to describe the difficulties, and yes, emphasize both the mental and physical resilience needs

    nut the reality is…a lot of people will still try this kind of work out and realize it’s not for them, whatever you say. There’s just no substitute for doing the work. That’s why a lot of these jobs in isolated/foreign sites require previous experience (too expensive to risk a green person who may or may not be able to handle field work)

  55. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

    OP might want to look up those old Peace Corps ads – “It’s the toughest job you’ll ever love” for some inspiration.

  56. Perihelion*

    When we used to hire field techs, we made an effort to talk quite honestly about the conditions in the ad and interviews. As far as assessing the ability to work in a group, I remember that we would ask the references to speak to that specifically—it was a good way of getting some insight that wasn’t just assurances from the candidate.

  57. Ialwaysforgetmyname*

    In 1998 I volunteered with the National Park Service on the Appalachian Trail in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The volunteer coordinator sent each volunteer to a different section of trail for a 4 night backpacking trip to monitor the trail, educate users, pick up trash, etc.

    The coordinator sent me (a hardcore backpacker who loves solitude) to the busiest section of trail in the park but sent an 18 year old kid who had never camped alone to the most remote section. That kid bailed after 1 night, but I would have been delighted to cover his section.

  58. Mummy1111*

    I was actually thinking the job description won’t make a difference. People who think they want to do field work aren’t going to be deterred by the description.

  59. Atomic Tangerine*

    Could you also tie in the purpose and meaning behind the work? I suspect it’s the connection to the greater good that makes it so rewarding to those of you who love it – maybe appealing to the folks who share those ideals will help select for the candidates you want.

  60. anonymouse*

    After being in a number of different professions I’ve concluded that all jobs have things that are terrible about them, so the trick is to find a job where they are the kinds of terrible things that are not a big deal to you personally. So be honest! You will appropriately drive away people like me who like to work with animals but can’t stand getting their feet wet (etc), and only people who think that’s not a big deal will apply. That is a win-win.

  61. Bruce*

    There is a wildlife refuge that has volunteers come out and spend 3 to 6 months pulling invasive plants, clearing debris from beaches and counting birds, all while on an island in the Pacific. It sounds like it would be a blast for a week or two, but the clear job description helped me realize that I would not have fun beyond that. This is real work for people younger than me!

  62. George*

    Retired NPS backcountry ranger (45 years) here. Point out the physical demands of the job but don’t overdo it and be realistic — e.g. not macho, which was a tendency in my youth. A woman friend was asked if she could carry a 50 lb pack and she asked, rightly, “why.” She’d been hiking forever and, with careful packing saw no need for over 35 or 40 lb, if even that.

    Also important is, if people are expected to be in the field overnight or for several, put that in. Research friends found most of their field teams wanted to hike out (2+ hours), drive home, hike back in for the morning. Puts a major dent in accomplishing research tasks.

    Park I worked in found even hires in “frontcountry” — accessible by road — were often really unhappy with poor or no internet, no cell connection, and long drive to stores etc. Some would leave within a couple of weeks.

    Our crew — about 14 backcountry rangers — stayed in small tents & cabins 10+ miles from nearest road, brought all our food for 3+ months, no resupply, only 2 way radio to base for coms… . Got a core group of 10 who stayed for decades until age & failing body parts had us having to leave over time. Still, most of the newer generation stays at least a few years.
    I think it’s mostly word of mouth — that is, people who have met or work around b/c rangers or work in the frontcountry will apply when there’s an opening so they know what the job is. Very few hires from folks “off the street” — though some.

    I suppose take-home there is try to choose from a group of people with some experience or who otherwise show basic physical ability, enthusiasm, skill, and are self contained (don’t need to be entertained, held by the hand, have good common sense and quite happy by themselves).

    Heck, I’d apply but am a bit gimped up, alas.

    1. George*

      Another thought: assuming the field work isn’t super-specialized (people can be training at beginning or on the job), take a look at outdoor jobs: river guides, climbers, backcountry guides (Outward Bound, Knolls — are they still in business?), California Conservation Corp, trail crews, etc. Those would be great resources of people who are used to gnarly living. Most field work I’ve seen you can train folks fairly quickly to collect data, id plants, whatever.
      Good luck!

    2. Bruce*

      Once my Scout troop was hiking in Lassen (day hike to the Cinder Cone from our back packing camp at Lower Twin Lake) and we met a back-country ranger, chatted with him for about 20 minutes. The boys were impressed with how much time he was on the trail. Funniest thing he said was that he was going to sleep outside the ranger cabin that night, since it was the “hanta-virus hotel” :-)

    3. Adventures in Grad School*

      OP here. A few people have mentioned the macho thing with weights, and I think they have a point. I might be better off just listing what they have to carry – including h20 and all that.

  63. Disappointed Australien*

    That sounds very different to what I’m used to. Incomprehensibly different, even. I’ve done conservation volunteer work in both Aotearoa and Australia. I’ve seen a kiwi in the wild!

    https://www.bushheritage.org.au/get-involved/volunteer “Please note: Due to high levels of interest we’re currently only accepting enquiries for placements on our Tarcutta Hills and Scottsdale Reserves in NSW”

    The paid versions of that always involves a degree, often a PhD, and correspondingly more responsibility. I just go where I’m pointed and do what I’m told :) But from what I’ve seen there’s so much competition for those jobs that everyone knows what’s involved and wants the job anyway (“spend weeks in a subtropical rainforest looking for secretive nocturnal birds”… emphasis both on SUB tropical and RAIN forest)

  64. Lex*

    Would it be weird to include a book rec ahead of applying if applicants are new or unsure? I feel like “The Last Cold Place” does an incredible job of articulating both the immeasurable joys and (really gross) challenges of scientific field work.

  65. thatsjustme*

    I would also add that you can save some of these details for the interview. You obviously don’t want to waste people’s time with a misleading ad, but it’s OK if you don’t list every single thing about the job that might be unpleasant. Alison’s advice to focus on traits that successful/happy hires tend to possess can help you decide what absolutely needs to be in the ad and what you can discuss later in the hiring process.

    Assuming the application process isn’t too onerous, having someone who’s a bad fit self-select out after a 30-minute phone or Zoom interview is still a mark of success in my book.

  66. Ex field tech*

    ckness, a widespread MRSA infection, sexual harassment and coercion, 8 hour workdays on a boat with no way to use the bathroom leading to severe dehydration and three months of amenorrhea while working internationally as a field tech with almost no pay, no health insurance, and minimal access to health care. While on the job, I was told that I must be too anxious to cope with the rigors of being in field. When I got back to the states, a friend tipped me off that my references from the last job were telling grad schools that I was too weak for fieldwork. Since then I have successfully done fieldwork in extreme desert environments because I had a lab that recognized and supported technicians’ physical and psychological needs. But I have PTSD and lifelong nerve damage. Nobody should need to be able to endure that in order to have a career in the sciences. It’s not a question of filtering to the right applicants, it’s a problem with the organizations offering these positions that are blatantly unsafe and exploitative of young aspiring scientists.

    1. Adventures in Grad School*

      OP here. I have seen some situations similar to what you’ve described-and it’s awful. I hate that it affected your grad school search. There is definitely a systemic problem with pay, hours, and healthcare. And also straight up psychological and physical abuse because there isn’t necessarily any supervision or someone to intervene if things get bad. I think that’s been one of worst hidden problems in fieldwork. In terms of healthcare – I had a field partner who sustained a moderate but life altering injury because the study protocol required that we had to verify a site was unsafe with up close photos before we could abandon it. So, you had to hike in the unsafe spot. I think as the millennial and below cohort gains more senior positions I’m hoping we start to see a shift.

  67. Rae*

    I think I would love this job? Maybe try advertising to the thru hiker community around the AT or PCT. Can you offer a mini experience or a test run? Lots of educators look for temporary work/adventure experience around careers and STEM.

  68. Suze*

    I looked at your post and thought this is me! In fact, I did something similar as a month-long volunteering gig in my youth. I think it is a perfectly good job description for the right candidate. If you are worried, maybe say that you are looking for candidates with some demonstrable experience with backpacking etc?

  69. Songs*

    Thank you for trying to do this work. During undergrad, one of my TAs asked if I was interested in being her field assistant. She sold it as a super fun summer of camping, hiking, helicopter rides, kayaking, etc.
    Luckily I asked around and found out about all the less fun stuff like the insects. I don’t blame her; I think she probably had so much fun and enjoyed her grad work that she forgot about all the less fun things.
    But, I appreciate your efforts to think about this and be upfront about it!

  70. Chickadee*

    I used to do field work, the ad is fine and won’t be a deterrent for anyone with the right attitude/experience. It’s an honest description of the job requirements and you *really* need to give people a heads up/filter out people who can’t handle the bad days. (Heavy rain, bird poop, seed ticks, whatever the specifics of the job are.) I’ve worked with a few people who weren’t up for the conditions and they made everyone miserable. Also even people with the right attitude & field experience need to know the specifics of the job – as a personal example, I’m fine with insects, heat, and humidity, but can’t handle the desert & don’t want to deal with invasive plant removal.

  71. Spooz*

    Do you actually know why the previous people have kept quitting? Because you have a lot going on here and it might not be what you think.

    You have:
    – Low pay and terrible expenses policy
    – Long hours of physically arduous work
    – Very basic living conditions
    – Living and working in close proximity to coworkers all season

    You need someone who can cope with all four. I would be fine with 1, 3 and 4 but not 2. Others might be fine with 1, 2 and 3 but not 4. Etc.

    As others have said, I think you may be underestimating how much of a factor 4 is, and accidentally selecting for people with high physical capability but low emotional intelligence/teamwork skills.

    I second the idea of getting some successful former employees to write “a day in the life of” about challenges and things they enjoyed. Maybe also have them talk a little bit about their background before they worked for you – it might help applicants see how they have skills they can bring to the role.

    Also, is there anything you can change about the role? If you get the feedback that the expenses policy sucks, can you change it to provide an upfront travel stipend or book people’s travel yourself? Can you give people a weekend’s leave in the middle? Can you upgrade the toilet facilities?!

      1. Spooz*

        Not sure what point you’re trying to make? That absolutely nothing could possibly be changed to improve the job even in the face of overwhelming feedback?

        The worst work toilet experience I have ever had involved trying to use absolutely rancid portaloos by torchlight. Installing a solar powered motion sensitive light would have improved it vastly and you could certainly carry one of those on a 10 hour hike.

      2. Adventures in Grad School*

        OP here, this isn’t a literal job posting but an archetype within the industry. I have not personally had a problem with people quitting. In terms of the crappy pay stuff, hiring managers often don’t get any say in that if they work for a university or government agency. Lastly – there are no bathrooms during the workday at all! You must go in the bushes and be trained to to properly dispose of the waste. For some field jobs you have to pack it out with you. I think it is much nicer than any portable toilet or outhouse, honestly. Last year one of the field stations I worked in had scorpions, flying roaches, and tiny frogs in the shower and you just had to deal. After a quick scorpion check I enjoyed the little frogs and tolerated the friendly roaches. The men and women’s showers also had open ceilings so I got to chat with my team mate while we showered. It was a blast! I think this is what they other posters meant by “type 2 fun”.

  72. r..*

    Wanted to add, the one thing you can genuinely and most easily work on to make the job less unappealing is the expenses policy.

    Some jobs just suck in one way or another that is unavoidable; others happen in fields where outside of political intervention the economic model simply doesn’t allow for higher wages. It is good to be open about those things that cannot be changed with employees.

    The expense policy, however, is a different kettle of fish. You’re not really saving that much money or gain that much liquidity from having employees front all the money, and administrating it like that will most likely cost you a lot of money in having additional staff (and lost opportunities) to handle all the reimbursements.

  73. ijustworkhere*

    Please don’t make someone who already isn’t earning a lot of money front business expenses. Getting a company credit card isn’t that hard. I’ve seen too many friends of mine really struggle because a company is slow to reimburse, or because they use up their own credit limits paying for things for the company.

    I personally would not work for a company that required me to front expenses. It’s unnecessary and risky for the employee.

  74. PayingUpFront*

    I currently work for a non-profit (no field work involved) and periodically have business expenses I need to pay upfront and then get reimbursed, sometimes over $1k. I hate it. The problem is that non-profits have specific fiduciary responsibilities and financial auditing requirement and meeting these requirements is significantly easier in a reimbursement system requiring documentation for all expenses. Each employee with a company credit card is considered an increased fraud risk so only our ED (CEO equivalent) and head financial person has one, and a stipend wouldn’t work because there’s no guarantee that the money would all be spent in allowable ways and no paperwork later proving it was for the auditors. I assume most places doing extensive field work would either be part of a non-profit or academia and that some or all of their funding would come from grants which further complicates things as most grants have very specific financial accounting rules of their own.

    Add in that these organizations tend to pay significantly lower salaries for the same skill levels as for-profit organizations (I easily could have made several 10s of thousands more than my starting salary here; in theory that gets balanced domewhat by better time off policies but not always) and having to pay up front for work-related stuff can be a real issue. I don’t see it changing, though, unless there’s a change in the financial reporting/auditing requirements noted above.

  75. Anon today*

    I think it’s worth emphasising what you do to help with the difficulties (“we provide half price blister plasters” ) and also the upsides.

    I do a job with elements many find distasteful (not morally or ethically – just, ugh I’d hate to have to do that) and my truthful response is firstly that it’s very rewarding and great contributing to the greater good*, and secondly it’s a really important thing that has to be done – the other person usually responds along the lines of, yes it is, you go girl.

    So maybe something like, there may be hardships but you’ll be contributing to vital research to save the Sasquatch from extinction.

    *go on then, someone say it

  76. brjeau*

    I love the suggestion to frame it as “what traits/attitudes/skills people who thrive in this role tend to have.” Especially because there’s a significant emotional intelligence aspect that, as others have pointed out, doesn’t really come across if you only present the physical challenges. It comes across to me less as trying to scare people off and more as screening for people who will do well, which is what you’re going for.

    Not to say you should try to hide the physical challenges, but it sounds like a big reason for the physical stuff being a problem for new staff is actually the emotional/psychological side effects.

  77. Blackbeard*

    You could write the job ad as such: “Men wanted for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful. Honour and recognition in event of success.”

    :)

    (Explorer Ernest Shackleton supposedly published this ad on a London newspaper to recruit people for his Antarctica expedition in the early XX century. It’s an urban legend as no trace of the ad could be found. Still inspiring though.)

  78. kiki*

    Definitely make sure you’re conveying the role accurately and paying as well as you can! But I think it’s important to keep in mind that a risk of hiring early career employees into jobs like this is that this role may be how they discover about themselves that they don’t want to be in a role like this, and that’s okay. It’s inconvenient for staffing, but it doesn’t necessarily mean there’s something’s wrong

  79. Anon Attorney*

    Just use the the Club Swanson ad from Parks and Recreation:
    – Are you tough as nails?
    – Would you rather sleep on a bed of pine needles than a mattress?
    – Do you find video games pointless and shopping malls stupid?
    – Do you march to the beat of your own drummer? Did you make the drum yourself?
    – If so, you just might have what it takes to be a SWANSON.
    Pawnee’s most hardcore outdoor club starts today. Boys and girls welcome.

    1. A Simple Narwhal*

      Incredible, love it!

      Meanwhile I’ll stick to the Pawnee Goddesses with my Gertrude Stein and “best penguin blog” badge. :-)

  80. Sweet 'N Low*

    For what it’s worth, I still think the job sounds awesome after reading how you described it here! If I’d taken a different career path, it sounds like something I’d be interested in applying for. It will obviously turn off a lot of people, but that’s kind of the point. The crazy ones (crazy in a good way!) will still be just as gungho, and while some of them will still inevitably realize that they aren’t *that* crazy after all once they start, those will probably be much fewer and farther between.

  81. Kevin*

    As a third year graduate student in molecular biology, I once told the faculty committee that we should inform new students what was expected of them: 12-15 units of graduate classes, 10 hours committed to teaching classes, and indeterminant hours in the lab. And lastly, they had to write their own grants because nobody in the department had research money. I was told “we don’t want to scared them off!! That thinking clearly was not unique.

  82. PurpleCattledog*

    We have a similar retention issue in my second career (not research). What we find is that people like the idea of what we do, and want to enjoy it, but the reality bites differently. I’ve not found much benefit from just highlighting that you’ll be cold/wet/muddy etc as people usually apply because they want to enjoy what we do – but they often just don’t. But there can be benefit from talking about being tired, stressed etc – so the impacts not just the glossy picture side.

    I would include additional information about the job – specifically the challenges. Not in a “this job will suit someone who…” way, but a here are some of the things people find challenging about the role. Break it up with sub headings so it’s weighting this evenly. Highlight the physical challenges – carrying heavy loads, dealing with heat/cold, rain, trudging through mud whatever that looks like. But then have headings for isolation/separation from family and friends – point out the minimal contact, the time away and lack of reception. Have headings for being stuck on close quarters with your team and not really having much time to yourself.

    You also need to look at where can you make changes to be more supportive for people in the field and keep people comfortable. Some people pride themselves by being as minimalist as possible on field trips and save trivial time and money with considerable discomfort as the bonus. Little things like slightly larger tents, more than one common space so people can spread out a little out of the weather, a shower at camp, thicker mattresses – really look at your field set up and see where more comfort is an option. All trips are different, but there’s often options to be more comfortable.

    Think about how you structure your evenings/mornings. Do you have clear down time most days so people can relax (read a book, do yoga, do some knitting etc)? Do you make things clear to your crew what’s expected as in work prep/processing and when they can relax? It’s easy to talk shop and juniors might feel they have to be focused/working the whole time – even if that is not your expectation. You can do really intense hours for a day or two. Maybe three. After that you need to have plenty of time for sleep and recovery scheduled in. Don’t expect 14 hour days every day for 3 weeks straight!

    On the isolation from families side. Text based coms are now options (InReach, Zoleo, Spot etc). You should have some sort of coms for emergencies, but maybe look at what you can add on for basic family connection. Sure it’s public – but being able to send a happy birthday text to a friend, or a goodnight text to your kids each evening (and get a reply) can do wonders for people who are struggling. Also – while these aren’t necessarily cheap, do your staff know such things exist and they could purchase themselves? Or maybe your group owns the devices and individuals can choose to buy the month subscription while in the field?

    You also need to be talking about mental health and how people are coping before, during and after trips! You know many people quit mid season. Is that just because the pack is too heavy or the walks too long? Or is it because that’s the easy excuse when really it’s all the other things? The being stuck with an established group? Having to basically live with your boss? Being the odd one out? Finding the attitude that you should be grateful for the opportunity infuriating?

Comments are closed.