[protonfish]

That's reasonable, but I've found that I am no longer put off by open-ended contracts. I found many companies doing this because they know their hiring practices aren't good enough to weed out posers. If you are good at your job, you have little to worry about. Besides, I've lost more jobs that were "permanent" than contract. Employer commitment is a fairy tale from the days of yore.

[Lawtonfogle]

In which case they should expect to pay a premium to compensate the good employers for the risk they take on switching. Around where I live, they often use contracting companies on a contract to hire, and in that case the profit the contracting company is making is the premium, but one that the employee isn't getting. This results worse candidates on average as the best are going to either demand the guarantee from the start or that they receive the extra pay for the risk instead of it going to a contracting company.

[Mister_Snuggles]

This is what a probation period is for. I have no issue applying to a job that is "Permanent with XX month probation period".

[protonfish]

I agree that in a perfect world, that would be the proper way, but I also know I would have missed out on some excellent opportunities if I took that attitude.