Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one has suggested that employers don't look at your skills and background when deciding whether to call. But in this market, there are plenty of other candidates out there who are just as qualified. The fact that you misrepresented those gaps may have worked in your favor. But most employers want to know what months you worked somewhere, not just what years. Most employment applications also call for that information. If I were an employer and discovered an applicant supplied false or misleading information, I would not look well on that person. You might want to keep that in mind the next time you look for a job. It's far better to have a less-than-perfect resume and be ready to explain than be caught in a lie, no matter how innocent you may think it is.
This is true, you don't want to have your integrity questioned, particularly not right when you are interviewing or just starting a job.
You know, reading through this, I think unless you are *really determined* to live in a particular target city/area, you should ride your current job out until you find something else or get laid off because:
1 If you are laid off, you get at least some unemployment, if you quit and move, you are on your own
2 Maximize your bank account when your butt hits the pavement, if it comes to that.
3 You don't *know* where your next job will be until it's offered. You know where you *want* to go, but in the current economy, you had best be flexible.
3a You may get some relocation assistance after you are hired - if you quit and move on your own nickel, well, it's on your own nickel.
4 While it may be unfair and dumb, most employers are more willing to hire someone who is currently employed. I know, I know, but that's just the way it is, for most employers. Why voluntarily do something that will hurt your chances with most new employers?
5 It ain't over till it's over. Things may change such that you may still have a job where you are for longer than you think. You didn't expect the buy-out, did you? What makes you think your crystal ball is so much better now?
The only advantage to being in your target city would be to hit the bricks and interview in person with companies you are interested in there. This can be done at lower risk by taking, what, maybe 3 days to a week's worth of vacation IMHO.
How is that lying? I put on my resume Company X 2006-2007 Company Y 2007-2008 Company Z 2008-2009. If I say all were temp positions of course that would mean the job ended. They do background checks and I am sure they find out the months and years I was employed at the company. I find it hard to believe that listing the months on a resume is really that important. I used to list the months but then when I viewed my resume I figured it looked better without them.
It's a lie because you're misleading. Suppose you only worked at Company X from December 2006 to January 2007. Someone reading your resume might think you were there for the full year when you were really only there for a month. And if you think listing the months on your resume isn't that important, then you clearly haven't been part of the workforce for very long.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neekah18
I think that is absolutely terrible that employers do that. It would seem obvious that someone who isn't working needs the job more. So let me ask you this, let's say I submit my resume to a company and I have 10+ years of executive assistant experience. I got laid off 3 months ago because my employer decided they could probably get someone fresh out of college or 1+ years of experience and pay them 1/3 of my salary to cut costs. So a potential employer is going to hold my unemployment against me when viewing my resume?
I guess my real issue is what is the employer getting out of that?
First of all, employers don't care if you need the job. Second, would you explain on your resume that your last employer laid you off so they could replace you with someone cheaper? No. So unless they ask, they'll never know that was the reason. And in this market, a lot of employers won't even bother to take the time to find out why you're out of work. But if I were an employer, one reason I would hold your unemployment against is that I'd be worried your skills are rusty. I might also worry that you're only applying cause you need the money and that you'll quit the moment you get the job you really wanted.
I'm sorry but no wonder this country is so screwed up. Employers are taking advantage and posting a ton of ads on job boards wanting someone with 5+ years of experience and a bachelors degree paying $15 an hour. They are taking advantage because they know unemployment is high and most of those on unemployment would love to be back at work.
And I have been working for over 10 years since I was in high school. I've worked at large corporations and small family owned businesses. I've been everything from a sales associate, to an accounting assistant, to a marketing coordinator. I will not put the months on my resume simply because I don't like to anymore. When and if I have to fill out an application of course I put the months on and during the interview I will tell them I worked their from 2/9-2/10 if I am asked. Otherwise, I am not telling.
How is that lying? I put on my resume Company X 2006-2007 Company Y 2007-2008 Company Z 2008-2009. If I say all were temp positions of course that would mean the job ended. They do background checks and I am sure they find out the months and years I was employed at the company. I find it hard to believe that listing the months on a resume is really that important. I used to list the months but then when I viewed my resume I figured it looked better without them.
To many employers, not listing months is a red flag. Why wouldn't you list months?
1/3/09 - 4/1/10 is a lot different than 2009 -2010. 2009 through 2010 could mean 12/09 though 2/10.
I think that is absolutely terrible that employers do that. It would seem obvious that someone who isn't working needs the job more. So let me ask you this, let's say I submit my resume to a company and I have 10+ years of executive assistant experience. I got laid off 3 months ago because my employer decided they could probably get someone fresh out of college or 1+ years of experience and pay them 1/3 of my salary to cut costs. So a potential employer is going to hold my unemployment against me when viewing my resume?
I guess my real issue is what is the employer getting out of that?
It could be that the potential employer figures that you were laid off for a reason. And the reason is typically cost reduction or productivity. Your 10 years of Executive Administrative experience, to some companies, is attractive. You have a wealth of proven experience and they are willing to pay the price for that experience. However to other companies, someone without any experience or with 1 year of experience who has excellent computer skills, is a more attractive option. They can pay them less and are willing to trade off immediate productivity out of that person in lieu of cost savings. They figure that in time, 30 days or so, the new admin at a lessor salary will be up and running.
Sad to say that with so much job movement over the last 10 years or so, companies are thrilled to have an administrative assistant stay for 2 years. Turnover does cost employers money, but they will try to recoup that money by paying less to new hires. It's a difficult battle right now in this economy. You may have to take a pay decrease. If you do just make sure that it's not more than around 10%. If you're willing to take too much of a decrease, the company's concern will be that you'll leave their company for another company very soon (1 year or less).
To many employers, not listing months is a red flag. Why wouldn't you list months?
1/3/09 - 4/1/10 is a lot different than 2009 -2010. 2009 through 2010 could mean 12/09 though 2/10.
I agree. I'm not a recruiter and I would consider that a red flag. In this market where you're lucky if someone even reads your resume, why risk turning the reader off?
Are there any tricks to make out-of-state employers consider you against local candidates? Other than having a good resume and whatnot. I know it's probably a good idea to make it obvious that you'd relocate at your own expense. I'm trying find a new job so I can relocate, and I don't have any ideas about anything that would give me a big edge over local candidates.
I agree. I'm not a recruiter and I would consider that a red flag. In this market where you're lucky if someone even reads your resume, why risk turning the reader off?
That's right. If someone is confident with their job tenure, they'd list the dates with the year. If they jobs are temporary jobs, then that should be clearly listed for each temp position.
Any company can run an employment background check for around $20.00 but that's not normally done until well into the interview process or prior to an offer being extended.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
