...when you see a resume from an applicant that has never been anywhere for very long, and has had a lot of different jobs over a pretty long working career, what is your first thought/initial reaction?

 

I am going through some applications, have more than one with people who have been in the workforce a while, and have jumped from job to job, and not necessarily a better job each time either from what I can gather. I understand moving on when you are going up.

 

Does this raise an initial red flag for you, or is it just the times we are in now?

I give it no thought at all, goes right to the rejection pile.

I give it no thought at all, goes right to the rejection pile.

Same

Both, kind of. Per a recent study, millennials are on pace to be on their 4th job by the age of 32. Changing jobs is not a bad thing, if it is for the better to "move up in the ranks", so to speak. Also, consider the job for which you are reviewing apps. Is your expectations to hire an entry level type professional with 10+ years at a single organization?

I think raises some concerns, but it also is a sign of the times.

 

I've interviewed more than once with people who have told me their philosophy is no more than 2-3 years max at one place. That when a job becomes complacent and stale productivity and efficiency suffer.

 

:idunno:

...when you see a resume from an applicant that has never been anywhere for very long, and has had a lot of different jobs over a pretty long working career, what is your first thought/initial reaction?

 

I am going through some applications, have more than one with people who have been in the workforce a while, and have jumped from job to job, and not necessarily a better job each time either from what I can gather. I understand moving on when you are going up.

 

Does this raise an initial red flag for you, or is it just the times we are in now?

 

I would say it depends. In my industry 3 years is about averagetting for staying somewhere wit out growth. 5-7 if there is growth within thenorganization. And we tend to be mobile, willing to move to move up.

 

You don't indicate what you consider "very long".

Never once worked out for me. I've given a couple of great applicants an opportunity even though they had a resume' as you described and in every case I was let down by them.

 

One caveat to this rule: If they have moved around due to relocation of the family due to spouses career, you can give them the benefit of the doubt. Then consider them like you would others.

 

A friend's wife was a manager with her company and was often promoted and relocated, about every year and a half to two years. Buddy had a horrible time getting hired at a decent job because of his resume' and the number of moves on it.

I think you have to consider the field of work and the level of the position.

 

Let's say it's an administrative type job and applicant is presumed to be female. Do the jobs have different geographic locations ? It could be that the applicant is married and her spouse has changed jobs (upward) and they moved as a couple. (Yes, LA, I implied the male made more $$$, very sexist and all....whatever)

 

Is the job a professional job in a tough field, like social services ? Wouldn't be uncommon to see lots of movement in that field for a number of reasons like loss of grant, burn-out, etc...

 

Is there an progression of responsibility and / or changes in school / training that could be inserted into the timeline to make it make sense ?

 

I've looked at thousands of resumes over the years and depending on what I'm looking for from a position perspective, if I see something I may be interested in, I may give it more than 30 seconds of consideration. If a quick scan looks like lack of commitment, then I probably move on.

 

A lot of the look really depends on how deep or shallow your candidate pool is at the time.

I give it no thought at all, goes right to the rejection pile.

 

Same

 

Usually my first thought as well, but I just wondered was I missing something. I know the tendency of newer workers today is to not stay anywhere very long, and that may be something I have to get used to going forward. But when you see people of similar age to me who have been in the workplace for 30+ years and they have a "rap sheet" of jobs as long as your arm, that's doesn't usually fill me with warm and fuzzies. And the people we have had here that have been hired through the years that fit that description, usually never worked out and are no longer here.

Also, I think it depends on what you mean by "without moving up". Again, in my industry, a resume can say a person has been a Front Office Manager for 20 years at 6 different hotels. Doesn't look like he's moved up, but a closer look reveals he started at a Candlwood and now is at the Palmer House Hilton. Night and day difference in the jobs of an FOM for a limited service vs. A 5 star luxury hotel. But, not always a huge disparity in pay.

...when you see a resume from an applicant that has never been anywhere for very long, and has had a lot of different jobs over a pretty long working career, what is your first thought/initial reaction?

 

I am going through some applications, have more than one with people who have been in the workforce a while, and have jumped from job to job, and not necessarily a better job each time either from what I can gather. I understand moving on when you are going up.

 

Does this raise an initial red flag for you, or is it just the times we are in now?

 

Less of a red flag to me than someone who has a significant gap or two between jobs.

Usually my first thought as well, but I just wondered was I missing something. I know the tendency of newer workers today is to not stay anywhere very long, and that may be something I have to get used to going forward. But when you see people of similar age to me who have been in the workplace for 30+ years and they have a "rap sheet" of jobs as long as your arm, that's doesn't usually fill me with warm and fuzzies. And the people we have had here that have been hired through the years that fit that description, usually never worked out and are no longer here.

 

I will give someone newer in the workforce a little more cushion on what I will accept.

Never once worked out for me. I've given a couple of great applicants an opportunity even though they had a resume' as you described and in every case I was let down by them.

 

One caveat to this rule: If they have moved around due to relocation of the family due to spouses career, you can give them the benefit of the doubt. Then consider them like you would others.

 

A friend's wife was a manager with her company and was often promoted and relocated, about every year and a half to two years. Buddy had a horrible time getting hired at a decent job because of his resume' and the number of moves on it.

 

How do you know if those circumstances apply if you automatically are dismissing the applicant though?

How do you know if those circumstances apply if you automatically are dismissing the applicant though?

 

Location of former employers...if all are local then you've possibly got someone that jumps jobs often.

 

If they are from diversely different areas (different states or cities more than driving distance apart) then it is a good chance it is for family relocations. That's when you then put them in your consideration pile, if the rest of the resume' is something you are looking for.

 

You will get a lot of resumes like this if you are near military bases.

In my profession, if you were less than a year somewhere repeatedly, I'll toss the resume'. 3 years between stops is great.