Resume tips 3

I liked this list of cliches to leave out of your resume:

http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/jobseeker/tools/ept/contribEditorPost.html?post=97

However, I thought their example of a really good piece of resume writing sounded rather unprofessional.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[TheTick]

My observation is that most hiring managers do not have time to read an entire resume. If they do not see something interesting while skimming the top half of the first page, they move on. This would be death for a wordy resume.

 

[corus]

First time I read "...and have helped my employers' beards grow dramatically as a result" instead of "...and have helped my employers' brands grow dramatically as a result".

Personally I think measureable achievements, like the length of a beard, are much more meaningful. Pictures of happy customers looking like members of ZZ Top are optional.

corus

 

[SNORGY]

Casseopeia:

Sorry, I have to give you my conflicting opinion on the issue of age.

When I review a resume I like to know the person's age. I use it to correlate with experience, rate of advancement / promotion, and how to establish fair compensation and benefits - notably vacation entitlement - that are in line with industry norms should things proceed to an offer. (I believe it would be nothing more than a slap in the face to offer a 40+ year old person 2 weeks vacation, for example.)

You are as old as you are, and you have the experience that you have. Match it with someone that wants exactly that. There is nothing to hide.

I don't know...maybe south of the border the employment market is much more ruthless and cut-throat. That's really sad, but I will admit, that's why I haven't moved there yet.

Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[TheBlacksmith]

SNORGY - I agree with the vacation comment. A company wanted me and my 30 years experience but would only give 2 weeks IAW HR policy. I turned down a six figure salary because I wasn't going to go from 4 back to 2 weeks. A friend of mine eventaully filled the position (its a small world I live in) and they did give him 3 weeks vacation to start.

 

[HgTX]

There is PLENTY to hide. 40 is fine. No one needs to hide 40 (at least not in engineering). 60 is another story. (And 50 is, obviously, somewhere in between.) Even though the young whippersnappers probably won't stick around in the job for more than a few years, people doing the hiring like to imagine they will, so they prefer not to hire someone they think will want to retire in just a few years.

And for you doing the hiring, someone's age is none of your business, no more than their marital status or hobbies. What you offer them should have to do with their job description and their experience, which they will have on the resume. It shouldn't make any difference to you whether someone is 35 or 55. And if it does, that's exactly why ages should not be reflected on the resume.

For every one of you who might want to offer someone a little extra for being venerable, there are more people who would want to cut them out, not invest in them, etc.

Also, even the notion that someone who is older deserves more can be a handicap in a tight job environment. "I'm going to choose A over B because B is going to want more" is not an uncommon thought in the hiring process.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[IRstuff]

I think that really depends. If you haven't done much and aren't that good, then, yes, maybe you should hide your age. However, given that most resumes are chronological, it's not that hard to figure out approximate age.

At least, where I am, age is relatively irrelevant, since no one can predict past about 1 day into the future, so what does it really matter whether you're an old geeezer, so long as you can do the job for the foreseeable future? Is training an issue, no, because with someone that experienced, they shouldn't need much training. There used to be a notion that you wanted young engineers to get the payback for all the training you were going to invest into the new employee. But, we know that's mostly hogwash; the typical company invests almost nothing in training, so there is no payback period to look for.

The notion that someone might retire in 20, or 10, or even 5 yrs, and that it's a big impact to the prospective employer is absurd in today's job environment. No one is guaranteeing life-time employment, so anyone who's looking at an applicant's age as a detriment for long-term employment is smoking something unhealthy for their brain.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[HgTX]

It's absurd, but it's there. Age-discrimination laws came about because they were needed.

You can't always get the age from the job experience. You can get the minimum age (so no one has to fear being perceived as a kid if they list considerable experience), but not the maximum age. Earlier jobs can be left off as no longer relevant, especially if one has had a career change.

For now, I still have dates on my resume. If I'm looking for a job after 50 (and I'm sure I will be), you bet I'll be taking the dates off my degrees. My engineering job history starts at age 29, so I shouldn't need to take the dates off the jobs.

Some people may not be worried. That's fine. But it's not right to tell someone else with confidence that there's nothing to be worried about.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[KENAT]

I've seen age discrimination in the work place first hand and a few second hand anecdotes too.

Back in the UK they’d had a contractor off & on for something like 10-11 years or so but the then director refused to hire him direct when we started to expand a little. He was in his late 50’s and his age definitely came into it, it probably wasn’t’ the only issue but was definitely a factor. Truth be told he probably should have been given my job when I first had it.

Here in the States I’ve had a colleague in his 50’s that was laid off apply to a local defense company. He was rejected. While it wasn’t explicitly stated a friend of a friend type deal basically said they had too many staff that would be retiring in the next few years and weren’t interested in hiring any new people near retirement age.

So, if you really are up there I’d consider leaving it off. Of course, there may be an argument of do you really want to work for somewhere that would reject you based on those grounds, then again in this economy the answer may still be yes please.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at posting policies:

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484

 

[SNORGY]

HgTX:

Your points are well-taken.

However, I was approaching the issue of age from the angle of using it as one of the intangibles to consider in order to be fair to the applicant / candidate, not as a factor to be considered in an age-discriminatory way. Also, if the information isn't offered, I don't ask for it; neither do I "round file" the resume. Still, for example, where I work, the baseline annual salary that sets the industry norms is, by and large, a straight line funcion of the number of years since graduating with an undergraduate degree. On that basis alone, age becomes relevant. It also cascades into ripple effects through the organization after hiring: if the person is paid what is perceived to be too low relative to age, it sends one bad message, whereas if the person is paid too high, it sends another. These kinds of messages can become the hushed topics of coffee-station banter that ultimately spell the demise of morale, etc., much like an untreated malignancy.

My only point is that, at least in engineering, compensation should "respect" (as opposed to "punish") age and its corresponding experience. I think the vast majority of professionals among us have made advancements and reached achievements throughout our careers.

I have no problem with rewarding young "star performers" with "star pay" or with letting the specific requirements of the job set the compensation rate, leaving age irrelevant. But, say if the job involves in-service field inspection of all of the bubble caps at every tray in twelve amine contactors, I might consider it unfair to ask a sixty-year-old to do it if there is a thirty-year-old available applying for the same job. It might be more appropriate to hire them both and have the sixty-year-old tell the thirty-year-old what to look for during his climb.

I do not at all support discrimination on the basis of age, unless age can reasonably be expected to be a factor to consider in relation to the job. However, neither do I support an applicant's hiding it just because it's "nobody's business".

Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[HgTX]

"Hiding it"? Like I "hide" my marital status, hobbies, sexual predilections, and names of past pets? Something that's not required to be there is not "hidden", it's just absent.

There may be a tradition of putting dates on resumes, but that's all it is. There's also been a tradition of including marital status and non-work activities, but that tradition has pretty much died.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[SNORGY]

HgTX:

I apologize...

I might have taken your comment, "There is PLENTY to hide.", (wrt age) out of context.

I certainly meant no offense nor harm.

Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[HgTX]

Sorry for being prickly as well.

Hg


Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376