Community Discussion: Multiple jobs - Job hopping - Realism vs Gameplay

[AmoryBlaine]

I'd much rather see good RP from all kinds of players than just Grey Tide Bob, running X department because their actually good character is constrained to Y position.

 

I don't understand this. They have a "Good" character, but the new character they made to play a different role is a Greytider? Greytide is an OOC issue, not an IC character archetype.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

It is important to balance realism with gameplay. I have always said we should try to go easy on Heads being knowledgeable in their own department because if there is a shortage in the department, the Head can pick up the slack. Having a medbay with no surgeons but a CMO who doesn't know surgery is a real pain in the butt. Heads should be able to fill in any gaps where necessary as long as they are not going over the heads of staff available to do whatever it is that needs doing. A CMO doing surgery and leaving a surgeon to stand around awkwardly is the inverse situation.

Cross department hopping is very problematic. For Skrell specifically they are allowed to job hop but the intended consequence is that the more skilled you are in white-collar endevours, the more unrobust you are. This sort of philosophy would be nice to have on a wider scale. A Head of Security moonlighting as a bartender is problematic because they are able, willing, and ready to repel boarders. As a Captain or HoS they have the justification of being able to fight antags. Sometimes we end up with a little rag tag militia of off-duty sec officers and Captains/HoS' coming to the HoP line asking for access to the security department. During red alert situations it's very hard to say no them even when OOC I know they are acting in bad sport.

Personally I have one character, Jawdat, who is a detective or Head of Personnel. From the above scenario, he remains very unrobust as a nonantag. I love waltzing into antags as nonantag jawdat HoP and trying to scold them only to end up brutally murdered.

"How dare you, do your job or ill fire you"

"O ya?" gunshots

As a detective the story is the same. He is not skilled in repelling boarders, and instead typically flees or remains on the periphery. I try to follow the philosophy above because I am trying to remain a good sport about it. My HoS and Captain characters are not qued for any other job, and I pick another character if those slots are unavailable.

It is very easy to block this from happening between departments where there is zero correlation. A CMO moonlighting as an electrician is completely out of the ballpark despite neither being combat oriented.

The major cusp is the militia of visitors and bartenders ready to rally. I think if a HoS or Captain wants to moonlight and remain on the station outside their job role, they should be a good sport about it and be unreliable in a fight.

[ForgottenTraveller]

I think a lot of good points have been raised in regards to what should and should not be done. But I do have a few points and prospective questions of my own.

I have little to no problem with job hopping in and around the low level service and supply jobs. I have worked a number of jobs like that an there is a lot of shuffling to fill gaps or I have even seen employees who are in various departments depending on the day of the week in a regular roster ranging from food prep to paperwork to barista.

In regards to the officer paramedic combo. I can see it happening, but stay in you current shift lane is also important. Using your EMT training to keep you partner kicking until the EMT arrives fine, swooping every EMT call meaning they are having to chase you through the halls all the time. Is a giant fucking pain. It is bad enough when the it is the same MD swooping every call or a lick behind you to grab them and haul them off in the very next second. OOCly, you are screwing over other people's round for yourself, cut that crap.

Relating to command and non command roles, captains and HoPs are a hard one to argue on the normal unless it is something like Jackboot suggests, where both are rather cerebral roles with a shared skillset. Within more specific departments. I think most HoDs are promotions from within who worked up to that point. So they all have a primary field outside of their command one in that department. An I have no issue in them falling back into it when the HoD slot is taken/you don't want the command stress but want that character an their interactions, as being a command player you can often be cut off and an entire reliance on visitor status seems rather extreme against the just for fun potential.

Now for a primarily self centered question. I have a medical character who I used to mainly do CMO, but their other primary is a chemist and I have not CMOed with them in a while. They have had a history in engaging in medical research, but never taken a research role. I have been toying with the idea of taking that character on as a scientist to utilize the research and development chemlab as well the research facilities and equipment to engage in actual tests for the sake of learning. In essence still functioning as a chemist as per normal but shifting temporarily from a supply desk role with dependents to someone focusing on their same craft for knowledge improvement with the appropriate gear, without having to beg command staff every round and get out of their current tasks to fill that role they joined intending to act in.

f we were to side with more restrictive interdepartmental ideas, would a situation like the above be possible without getting it checked off first?

And is it even reasonable/acceptable in the current form?

I am rather curious to know the answers or any thoughts generated from this.

[sdtwbaj]

I think heads should be locked to their own department, but also allowed to serve as bartender. It's a relatively simple thing, skill-wise, and I do imagine that NT would be supportive of the occasional bartender shift, as an initiative to support better manager-employee bonds.

[driecg36]

...A Head of Security moonlighting as a bartender is problematic because they are able, willing, and ready to repel boarders. As a Captain or HoS they have the justification of being able to fight antags. Sometimes we end up with a little rag tag militia of off-duty sec officers and Captains/HoS' coming to the HoP line asking for access to the security department. During red alert situations it's very hard to say no them even when OOC I know they are acting in bad sport...

...The major cusp is the militia of visitors and bartenders ready to rally. I think if a HoS or Captain wants to moonlight and remain on the station outside their job role, they should be a good sport about it and be unreliable in a fight.

 

I agree with this completely. It's extremely poor form to demand access to something or form a militia (unless the circumstances are extremely dire and you would form a militia as a non-sec/command char anyways) as an off-duty officer or head. I avoid security matters like the plague when I play off duty HoS, because there is already a security team on board and this is break time goddamnit. Off-duty officers should not join a non-officer role and then act like officers regardless.

I don't think we should quite as far as making them unreliable in a fight (which I am in security roles anyways), but instead encourage them to avoid fights and let security do their job. They should never have any combat gear in almost any scenario, so they don't need to act un-charactarily unrobust on top of that.

[Yuri Daruski]

I'd much rather see good RP from all kinds of players than just Grey Tide Bob, running X department because their actually good character is constrained to Y position.

 

I don't understand this. They have a "Good" character, but the new character they made to play a different role is a Greytider? Greytide is an OOC issue, not an IC character archetype.

 

Apologies, I ended up blending two points together, on one hand you've got a player that has a more known character, so if they have to bring in some other character that nobody knows just to be able to be on station, then it's not going to be nearly as satisfying as the character that has relationships, goals, and background on the station already. People are already sick of the constant, "Oh just play another character" argument and frankly I am too. additionally, bringing in a new character, or ever an old character that none of the player base knows and be a bit awkward. And the second point being to only give the onslaught of grey tide access to those roles before the other more dedicated players are stuck ..say ..mining for the rest of their character's life. Not all new comers are bad, or "grey tide" however it can be a problem at times, especially when departments like the service department can be very RP centralized, such as in the case of the bartender.

[Azande]

Now for a primarily self centered question. I have a medical character who I used to mainly do CMO, but their other primary is a chemist and I have not CMOed with them in a while. They have had a history in engaging in medical research, but never taken a research role. I have been toying with the idea of taking that character on as a scientist to utilize the research and development chemlab as well the research facilities and equipment to engage in actual tests for the sake of learning. In essence still functioning as a chemist as per normal but shifting temporarily from a supply desk role with dependents to someone focusing on their same craft for knowledge improvement with the appropriate gear, without having to beg command staff every round and get out of their current tasks to fill that role they joined intending to act in.

f we were to side with more restrictive interdepartmental ideas, would a situation like the above be possible without getting it checked off first?

And is it even reasonable/acceptable in the current form?

I am rather curious to know the answers or any thoughts generated from this.

 

Medical and Science could have a lot of interaction, as a lot of medical professionals IRL are also in the field of researching, specifically medicine, xenobiology and such.

[K0NFL1QT]

The way I approach this is extremely minimal job hopping, but it's a personal preference that I doubt would be popular as a server rule. I have a different character for every role in Security and have them stick exclusively to the job I've crafted them for. My CMO can fill in for just about any role in their department, but I only ever bring them on as CMO and rarely as a chemist. My CE is capable of electricals and atmos, so I also will rarely bring them on as those roles if CE is taken. I have an RD with robotics specialisation, but I have a separate character to play the roboticist job. I don't think I have ever brought a character on as an assistant or visitor because a characters usual role is occupied, nor would I bring a Head of Staff character on as a janitor, bartender or chef; it doesn't make sense for my characters to do that.

[MO_oNyMan]

I'd say use common sense if you decide to job hop. If the scenario is beliavable, i don't see why would it be generally disallowed. I can see people moving down (officers to cadets, medics to residents CMOs to medics), as there are things like CED to maintain the license, demotions because of whatever, occasional requalification. I can see people moving up the ladder, because promotion exist (this includes moving from med to science, as science requires higher clearence and is better paid). I can see people job hopping between approximately same level jobs (part time job if a character needs money. An example being sec officer/paramedic. If he needs money, he can work double shifts as a paramedic if he has a required qualification, why not, although something meaningless would suit better of course. Like a bartender). It's hard for me to see why would a head of staff take a lower position for money, since they are paid very well.

Basically make it so that it would make sense, not just "i work this job today because the other was taken". Make it mean something. Financial problems for your character, conflict with your superiors, promotion etc. If you can't justify your job hop, it might be better to make another character for the desired slot

[driecg36]

I'd say use common sense if you decide to job hop. If the scenario is beliavable, i don't see why would it be generally disallowed...

...Basically make it so that it would make sense, not just "i work this job today because the other was taken". Make it mean something. Financial problems for your character, conflict with your superiors, promotion etc. If you can't justify your job hop, it might be better to make another character for the desired slot

 

Exactly. This should be judged on a case by case basis. Is it believable? Does the character have a motivation to do it, financial or otherwise? A broad net would catch a lot of people that have perfectly reasonable reasons to "job hop," and wouldn't drop the amount of snowflakery or unrealism on the server by a significant level.

[Faris]

I'd say use common sense if you decide to job hop.

 

The general issue with this argument is that common sense differs from one person to another, and if I'll be a little blunt here. Over my year in staff, I've dealt with my share of people that lack common sense.

[Garnascus]

The main thing i am not ok with is command playing service roles. I think the more we let people job hop the less an individual job actually matters. ends up cheapening the entire station. I really dont even like the rest of the crew job hopping at all. Thats not actually the law of aurora just a personal feeling of mine. The reason is because for every one person that takes the time to make a believable character with realistic strengths and weaknesses there is five people who will stretch the envelope and then argue with me. "uhhh its completely reasonably for me to play in three departments because of xyz". It makes me want to commit sudoku.

Realistically its only the one thing i am not ok with. Command playing service roles or really any other role unless they have records to back it up. This is honestly one of my biggest gripes with aurora right now. We have essentially zero species restrictions in a universe that is supposedly full of racial tension. Then the more we allow jop hopping on top of that just makes things really watered down. Im really the last person who should be pulling this card but its "ruining my immersion".

[Snoopy11]

I personally don't see a problem with the service roles if they have a believable reason and do the stuff they're there for. Service roles are essentially about the roleplay anyhow, they don't tend to be the core involvement in a round.

Now if they joined as a chef, and started acting as security, who're fully staffed. That's probably an issue, dunno.

[driecg36]

The main thing i am not ok with is command playing service roles. I think the more we let people job hop the less an individual job actually matters. ends up cheapening the entire station... The reason is because for every one person that takes the time to make a believable character with realistic strengths and weaknesses there is five people who will stretch the envelope and then argue with me. "uhhh its completely reasonably for me to play in three departments because of xyz". It makes me want to commit sudoku.

 

I think you can still make a perfectly reasonable character that job hops, while there are unreasonable characters that play exclusively one role. I think the two are unrelated, and unreasonable examples of the former are simply a symptom of the latter.

Perhaps I'm biased, but I believe my HoS is a realistic character. He isn't the veteran three wars, he doesn't have 300 confirmed kills, he's just good at his job, which is internal security. He had training to deal with dangerous situations, but he never goes full rambo (partially because I'm unrobust) and always relies on his officers. Despite all of this, his passion is bartending and he wants to open up a bar after he retires. I don't believe there's anything unrealistic about him working as a bartender on the station he works at regularly. I played a full round, where I roleplayed with many prominent members of the community (most off duty heads themselves, ironically), some of which were staff. Nothing was unbelievable or immersion breaking about my character.

I'd argue that characters with ridiculous backstories are much more immersion breaking than those who reasonably job hop, but they are less "noticeable" so I feel like they get less flak.

[alexpkeaton]

I think job hopping can happen under two circumstances:

1. You are a new player to the server (less than two weeks) with no published backstory. You want to try out different roles. It’s not optimal that they use the same character but it is going to happen and we should give just a bit of leeway to this. When you’ve been here long enough that a staff member notices the hopping and lack of backstory, the player should be noted by staff and given the opportunity to make a new character next time or settle on their path. These initial job hops can be considered non-canon when the player develops their backstory (allow the player to retconn their first few shifts as necessary if they job hopped)

2. It makes sense on a case by case basis from backstory, and in extreme/unusual cases, validated by a staff member in notes so the player doesn’t get constantly questioned.

Personally, I think moonlighting as an EMT (and in some cases paramedic and possibly even nurse) should be okay across the board. Medical certifications expire and you need to work in the field IRL every now and again to keep up those things. Moonlighting happens in the medical field both for certifications and for $$. In addition to volunteer EMTs IRL, some people switch careers from medical to something else and keep their old career serviceable just in case.

Chef and bartender job hops from other roles should be okay across the board where it makes sense in a character’s backstory. However, I also believe that these roles should not be official paid roles but rather obtained by the player starting as a visitor and getting access via the HoP. Am I advocating changing the visitor policy? Yes, sort of. This would only be for bartender and chef hobbies, and the access should be considered exactly that, not an official listed job, just “you have access to the bar/kitchen to work your hobby.” (So you are not getting hired to do something, you are just being given the ability to share the space) ID should still read “Visitor” or “Visitor with X Access” - as always, this would be at the HoP’s discretion, with the official line being that NT will employ those positions only from the established bartender or chef pools, and it is up to the visiting hobbyist to defer to an employed staff member’s guidelines. Any conflicts should be resolved by the Head of Personnel with deference given to the employed staff member(s), within reason.

[Scheveningen]

Note that neither bartender or chef are "hobbies." They are full-on careers that require some degree of vocational training or in the case of the chef, academic credit.

Not to mention the jump in paygrade that occurs with a captain deciding to be a chef for a day. That by itself makes little sense.

[alexpkeaton]

Note that neither bartender or chef are "hobbies." They are full-on careers that require some degree of vocational training or in the case of the chef, academic credit.

Not to mention the jump in paygrade that occurs with a captain deciding to be a chef for a day. That by itself makes little sense.

 

Sure they are hobbies, in addition to being careers. I made the distinction in my post. Some people enjoy mixing drinks or making food but don’t get paid to do it. That’s called a hobby. Some people get paid to do those things. That’s called employment.

[Faris]

Just to be clear. Captains are only permitted to play command roles or visitor.

[Scheveningen]

Note that neither bartender or chef are "hobbies." They are full-on careers that require some degree of vocational training or in the case of the chef, academic credit.

Not to mention the jump in paygrade that occurs with a captain deciding to be a chef for a day. That by itself makes little sense.

 

Sure they are hobbies, in addition to being careers. I made the distinction in my post. Some people enjoy mixing drinks or making food but don’t get paid to do it. That’s called a hobby. Some people get paid to do those things. That’s called employment.

 

Would you care to explain how it makes any sense for a command staff member to make such a large jump in paygrade when taking other jobs aboard the station, then?

I have yet to see the issue addressed, unlike the other talking point which sums to "people can have hobbies", which does not quite contribute to the discussion in any meaningful fashion aside from stating it simply for nuance.

[alexpkeaton]

Note that neither bartender or chef are "hobbies." They are full-on careers that require some degree of vocational training or in the case of the chef, academic credit.

Not to mention the jump in paygrade that occurs with a captain deciding to be a chef for a day. That by itself makes little sense.

 

Sure they are hobbies, in addition to being careers. I made the distinction in my post. Some people enjoy mixing drinks or making food but don’t get paid to do it. That’s called a hobby. Some people get paid to do those things. That’s called employment.

 

Would you care to explain how it makes any sense for a command staff member to make such a large jump in paygrade when taking other jobs aboard the station, then?

I have yet to see the issue addressed, unlike the other talking point which sums to "people can have hobbies", which does not quite contribute to the discussion in any meaningful fashion aside from stating it simply for nuance.

 

Schev, you are derailing this discussion by not having read my initial post which provides for how hobbies can work. I agree that command staff shouldn’t be employed as a chef or bartender, they should only be permitted to share the space while as a visitor. Please don’t respond with the visitor policy because I acknowledge it in my post.

[Scheveningen]

I am not derailing the discussion. I am asking a very simple question that holds a lot of relevance to the current issue here. If that should be the standard for command, why isn't it the standard for other jobs as well?

Perhaps this is a difficulty in my understanding that this issue is overblown and none of the characters that could stand to be guilty of job-hopping are really creating that much of an issue in roleplay continuity on the server.

Or maybe it isn't, because it's not quite immersive nor enabling of an entertaining heavy emphasis on roleplay to see crewmembers jumping from job to job like they're a swiss army knife with too many "hobbies" that are apparently, so burning in passion that they seem to overquality for the job that other characters have been created in a dedicated purpose for that job.

Seeing someone in their "off-role" job is rarely fun because it means that because they've had their main job taken they have to resort to taking a low-responsibility job that is most likely someone else's main role. That's not quite fun, is it? I wonder why they don't just... create another character or something to suit the role. New personality. Something fresh and beyond the usual that they'd expect from their other characters. But I imagine this is an alien concept to this thread's few detractors, who have wholeheartedly admitted they do not play more than a few characters, which already says platitudes. Do we really need to cater to that? Roleplay communities were forged on desires for creativity. It would be unfortunate if we had to find middle ground for individuals who find it difficult to do the one thing that makes a roleplayer any good: and that's to be flexible. If you can't be flexible, you'll get left behind.

This distinction rapidly becomes a bit different when it comes to something that is most certainly realistic/believable or whatever rhetoric seems popular on the forum these days, because a cop (aware of the distinction between a cop and a security officer, I know) can certainly become trained to be a medical EMS to be on-call when they're not clocked in for their primary employment. Stuff like that is not unreasonable and I would consider it one of the very few cross-class examples I can think of that would be justifiable. Anything else is completely outlandish. Additionally, security officer and paramedic are within the same paygrade. So that's a reasonable exception if anything and not the rule.

Yes, I entirely understand why someone would be upset that they are no longer able to play the two (quite differentiating) jobs they enjoy the most on one character. To which I'll have to say, well, that's tough, but I sympathize. There are a lot of things you lose out on and won't be able to get back, I personally see them as opportunities to try something new if I haven't done it before and it seems reasonable to try and execute on my own. Oh! But, I'm sure other people don't find it that easy as I do to make characters and etc.

I mean, I can't really fathom as to how it's that difficult, considering character creation should be done on at least a blank slate to test out if the aesthetic of your character is what you want before you invest a lot of time in thinking on what their background is only to never play them again due to lack of interest or just far too much attachment for your original characters to want to play anything else. Which is unhealthy already in regards to the latter, I should add. But character creation is not difficult. But you must start fresh and flesh out from there. Ideas come to you in the midst of the round, which you will inevitably remember later to add to your slate slowly gathering content upon it. It's a writer's tool to get out of the infamous writer's block.

There's like, what, 30 character slots? I do have a character at least for every department, at most for any job I'm interested in playing if my main roles aren't currently available. At least new players get a free pass of Kindness and Understanding because they aren't mindreaders that will automatically intake the RP nuances and ruleset of this server into their brains to immediately understand it. Regulars hardly get a pass for this, this wasn't even an issue a long time ago. If your job was taken you just went assistant/visitor (we didn't have visitor some time ago so assistant used to just be the meta-accepted off-duty role until visitor was introduced with the Bay update) and chair RP'd. Or you just made a new character, joined as some other role and chilled out for a bit with a new character concept. Or had something on reservation to pop out. Didn't seem like a big deal at the time, job-hopping was so infrequent excluding some problem players who got banned to hell and back.

Beyond that, I can't really see why you'd do much job-hopping across departments. Internally inside a department is one thing as long as your character has the academic credit for it, and it's within line of staying in paygrade. Jumping up and down the paygrade in incrementally ridiculous amounts because "hobbies" does not make a reasonable argument whatsoever. Tossed into the bin where it belongs.

[alexpkeaton]

I am not derailing the discussion. I am asking a very simple question that holds a lot of relevance to the current issue here. If that should be the standard for command, why isn't it the standard for other jobs as well?

 

And here is why you’ve derailed the discussion. At no time in my initial post do I differentiate between command and other roles jobhopping to bartender and chef. I am saying that those jobs should be filled only by qualified individuals only who are trained in the discipline and hang their shingle full time in food/drink service. I replied to your initial comment agreeing that command hops to barkeep and chef do not make sense, but my original post does not make any differentiation. The only way people with other full-time roles aboard should be in the kitchen or bar making food should be at HoP’s discretion only, and then only access, not employment.

You have pushed my thoughtful post down by five entries based on not reading what I wrote. It’s in the forum rules.

 

"hobbies" does not make a reasonable argument whatsoever. Tossed into the bin where it belongs.

 

I don’t even know where to begin with this comment. It’s ludicrous and borderline trolling. People have hobbies. HoP has discretion on access. All I am saying by using the word “hobbies” is that they can come on board as a visitor and see the HoP for additional access in the kitchen/bar but at no time should they be considered employed in those disciplines nor expected to replace someone from from being employed in those disciplines. Also, HoP has every right to say no to add’l access. And I address the visitor policy implications in my OP, which I ask that you read fully before posting again.

[Bygonehero]

No to job hopping. It would exacerbate an already existing problem. It's a slippery slope and ultimately rots RP from the inside out. Conversely, it's not hard to make a character to do a different job. Just do that.

[Scheveningen]

You are giving your posts far too much credit, alexpkeaton, and you're out of line in what is reasonable in a discussion right now. You think I'm trolling, I am not, if anything you're trolling for an over-reaction over a very simple issue. It sucks you can't learn to take "no" for an answer but you don't need to resort to calling the opposition in an argument a troll because you don't like what they have to say. You don't have to post in response if you don't like what someone else has to say, nor should you have such hubris to think that my post alone somehow devalues your opinion (and somehow also derails the entire discussion, because you're the apparent authority on what the discussion direction should be) because I brought up things that you didn't even take the time to try and either address or discredit, it's pretty darn childish of you to act that way. You should really stop looking for reasons to clash with me, it's pointless and doesn't do this topic any justice with your meandering about.

Visitors should not be expecting to board the station to immediately seek a "hobby" in the form of a task that other employees are paid to do. It is ridiculous to expect that a "hobby" should extend so far as to be doing what another person does for a living. Visitors have a multitude of other things they could be doing if they're bored. Working in the kitchen/bar as a "hobby" is far stretching what they are able to do. When you are a visitor you are not an active employee. Assistants are entirely different. Visitors can use the general garden to do whatever they want but they shouldn't ask for botany access to help the kitchen (and thus intruding on someone else's job even in the absence of a botanist), that's a little bit ridiculous to assert the opposite.

 

The only way people with other full-time roles aboard should be in the kitchen or bar making food should be at HoP’s discretion only, and then only access, not employment.

 

So you're effectively saying that it should be the HoP's discretion who gains access to the kitchen or the bar regardless of the issue involving giving visitors access to do jobs that other people are paid for, your words entirely.

 

I am saying that those jobs should be filled only by qualified individuals only who are trained in the discipline and hang their shingle full time in food/drink service.

 

Contrast with this in what you said one sentence earlier and there's already mixed signals going on.

So, whatever, really, I see you don't really care for the visitor policy and would rather do away with it given your tone in how you addressed the visitor policy earlier, this is not very surprising. There's clearly an issue of consistency going on, which is something I pointed out in an earlier paragraph I wrote out which apparently went ignored considering how you managed to cause this consistency error in sentence structuring, and also evident in the very thing I was arguing against which was a position adamantly against job-hopping or "hobby-hopping", a cute term I will now coin for the sake of it because this has certainly turned into a discussion to remember. Which was in my post if you had actually gone back to read it rather than skimming for low-hanging fruit to attack.

[driecg36]

Seeing someone in their "off-role" job is rarely fun because it means that because they've had their main job taken they have to resort to taking a low-responsibility job that is most likely someone else's main role. That's not quite fun, is it? I wonder why they don't just... create another character or something to suit the role. New personality. Something fresh and beyond the usual that they'd expect from their other characters. But I imagine this is an alien concept to this thread's few detractors, who have wholeheartedly admitted they do not play more than a few characters, which already says platitudes...

...There's like, what, 30 character slots? I do have a character at least for every department, at most for any job I'm interested in playing if my main roles aren't currently available...

...Jumping up and down the paygrade in incrementally ridiculous amounts because "hobbies" does not make a reasonable argument whatsoever. Tossed into the bin where it belongs.

 

I don't think making an ad-hominem and accusing people who want to job hop of a lack of flexibility makes for a very good argument, first of all, and you are heavily simplifying the reasons why people would want to "job-hop" by simply saying "they're not creative or flexible enough to make more characters."

I have I think about 11 characters, 6 or so I play regularly. I have both a skrell and an IPC whitelist. I don't job hop to bartender because I'm too lazy to make a bartender character, or I don't have the creativity to make a new one. I do it because it makes sense for that character, and I want to interact with others with him in a way that doesn't involve cuffs, injunctions, and lasrifles. Sure, I could make another character for bartender, I have a few ideas. However, I don't think they would be as interesting for me to play, or even for those who rp with me, as an already established character. That's not to say you should play the same character for every role, I'm just saying that if the skill-gap is reasonable there should be no reason to heavily restrict it.

However, you make a valid argument in the fact that those characters are "taking the jobs" of dedicated bartenders, and I agree that that is an issue. However, I do think [mention]alexpkeaton[/mention]'s suggestion elegantly solved this problem by making a distinction between "official" bartenders and "volunteer" bartenders. Having the HoP give bartender/ a volunteer title would solve the job taking issue, the pay gap issue, and the realism issue, as it would be exactly what it is on the tin: a volunteer hobby, not a career shift or a job-hop.

*EDIT* After re-reading Delta's posts, I have another point to make. Having cooking or bartending be a hobby is EXTREMELY reasonable. People do it IRL literally all the time, and the only way to express those is by EXPLICITLY doing the same things that a full-paid person would do, albeit perhaps less well. The full-job holding person would still get to decide if they wanted a helping hand or not, naturally, and would not have their pay docked or anything of the sort.

And they would not be "active employees" either, just volunteer helpers. They would not be on the payroll or anything of the sort, which is more than reasonable if you ask me.