The Resume Guarantee Con

By Bruce Hurwitz

THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS ARTICLE ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR

This is the first of a two-part series on questionable practices by so-called “professional resume writers.” It is not an indictment of all, just a warning to be cautious…

I had a very nice chat with a potential resume writing client. At the end, as I always do, I asked her if she had any additional questions for me. She did. “Do you give a guarantee?” “A guarantee of what?” I asked. “That I’ll get a job,” she replied. I smiled; I did not laugh.

I explained to her that the purpose of the resume is to get the interview, not the job offer. That’s the purpose of the interview. So, I certainly could not offer her a guarantee of a job since I don’t know how well she interviews.

As for getting interviews, again, if she applies for jobs she wants but, based on the job description, the employers do not want her, she won’t get an interview.

The bottom line is that a job search has too many variables to offer a guarantee.

She thanked me and told me that she had spoken with resume writers who offer the guarantee she wants. I asked her what they charge. She told me, but you won’t believe me if I tell you.

So why would someone charge low four-figures (Oops!) for a resume? (Why would anyone pay that much?) There has to be a logical reason. For the job seeker, it is obviously fear and desperation. But I may know what the resume writer is up to.

A couple of years ago I ghost wrote the autobiography of a retired senior tobacco industry executive. I learned a lot. One thing that surprised me was that having to charge a tax on products is a good thing if the business can hold on to the money for a guaranteed period of time and if the product they are selling which is being taxed will continue to be sold for the foreseeable future.

This is what happens:

The company collects the tax. They turn it over to the government after one, two, three, or maybe even more months. So, let’s say, the January tax collection is paid to the government in April; February’s in May; etc., etc. etc. What does that mean? It means the company is getting a government loan, interest free, for three months. And if they are collecting large sums, that money can go to capital improvements, expansion, whatever.

So maybe the resume writers charging, let’s say, $1,000 for a resume, are doing the same thing. The client pays $1,000. But it’s not one client it’s, let’s be conservative, and say, five. And the guarantee is for six months. And they always secure five clients a month. That’s a $5,000 monthly, interest free-loan, for whatever period the guarantee is. Perfectly legal (I think) but not very ethical (I know).

On the other hand, it might be akin to a hidden “free shipping and handling” charge. Does anyone really believe that “free shipping” is really “free?” I hope not. It’s all included in the price. If the company sells enough widgets, that can offer “free shipping.” It makes the consumer feel good. So does a resume guarantee, but at what cost?

Or, I may be overthinking this and they’re just a bunch of con artists taking advantage of the naive and vulnerable.

Next week we’ll look at resume reviewers, that is to say ATS-friendly resume reviewers.

The Resume Guarantee Con | Employment Edification

5 Warning Signs That You Should Probably Not Accept the Job Offer

THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS ARTICLE ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR.

“Trust your gut” is usually good advice. That said, younger candidates for positions may not yet have a “gut,” so to speak. Nevertheless, there are things that any job candidate should recognize as troubling.

Just a reminder: The job interview process is a two-way street. While the employer is interviewing and judging the candidate, the candidate should also be interviewing and judging the employer. The hiring process usually is a great indication of how a company operates.

My first warning sign is being kept waiting. It’s rude. It shows that the interviewers do not value the candidate’s time. And it is a good indication that they are disorganized. Of course, if they apologize and explain in advance that there is a situation, they should be given a pass (once!).

Second on my hit parade of worries, the interviewers do not have a copy of the candidate’s resume. They may be testing to see if the candidate is prepared, but, at the same time, they are indicating that they are not prepared.

Third, if the interviewers do not give the candidate an opportunity to ask questions, stick tail between legs and run for the exit! If they don’t want to hear from candidates, I’ll be my bottom dollar that they don’t want to hear from their employees!

Fourth, along the same lines, if interviewers refuse to answer questions, or to provide clear answers to clear questions, see above! Of course, candidates should never ask about proprietary information, and they should keep in mind that some things are only revealed to employees not candidates.

Finally, the compensation package has to be clear and simple. Candidates do not want to discover, for example, that, yes, the employer will triple their 401(k) contribution, but vetting takes five years! Moreover, bonus structures can be very confusing. In other words, candidates must read the fine print which means reading the personnel handbook. If a candidate needs a lawyer to understand the handbook or the offer, they probably don’t want the job.

5 Warning Signs That You Should Probably Not Accept the Job Offer | Employment Edification

Never Attend an Off-Site Holiday Party

By Bruce Hurwitz

THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS ARTICLE ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR.

I have written hundreds of articles on LinkedIn and elsewhere. No doubt, unintentionally, I have repeated myself. Except in this case which is definitely intentional. The following is an article I try to share every year. The advice is still good.

I only once adamantly refused an assignment given to me by an employer.  In fact, I refused four times!  Every year there was an office party held after hours at a restaurant.  Guests were invited.  Alcohol was served.  There was dancing.

I was responsible for fundraising, PR and marketing.  It was my job to get any event into the press.  I made it clear that under no circumstances whatsoever would I attend.  My colleagues wanted to know why.

First, I told them that I would be happy to attend an office party, at work, even if it was after hours, although I would prefer a staff luncheon.  In fact, that is exactly what one of our subsidiaries had for their staff.  I was pleased to attend and delighted to get some press coverage for them.

Then I told them that based on my experience of listening to colleagues and friends who had attended after hours off-site parties that someone always does something stupid.  “Did you see what she was wearing?”  “Did you hear what he said?”  “Can you believe how much he drank?”  “Did you see who she was dancing with?”  “Frankly,” I told them, “it’s my job to promote all staff as consummate professionals.  I don’t want to see you acting like a bunch of damn fools!”

In the first year, some were offended…until the morning after the party.  It became an annual ritual.  “Bruce, I’ve got to admit it.  You were right.  Did you hear what happened?”  Every year I would receive the request to attend, would decline, would explain why, would be ridiculed, and then apologized to.

My colleagues were good, decent, hardworking people.  But put them in a party situation, even one for work, and some would forget where they were.  I honestly believe that some employers hold office parties as a way to see whether or not they can trust some staff – the one’s they are thinking of promoting – to behave.  In fact, I know of two cases where employers told me that as a result of their behavior at an office party two employees who were being considered (without their knowledge) for promotion were no longer being considered.

If it is work related you must always be “on.”  Would you drink alcohol at your desk?  Would you dance with a co-worker at work?  Would you dress provocatively on the job?  Of course not.  Why?  Because it’s stupid and unprofessional.

Yes, there are times when it is important for the boss to meet the significant people in an employee’s life.  That is why God invented restaurants with tables with four chairs.  And I am willing to bet that at the restaurant there will be minimal drinking, conservative dress, and absolutely nothing to inspire gossip the morning after.

While we work with everyone, our mission is to promote the hiring of veterans and first responders.  Please consider us for all your staffing, career counseling and professional writing needs.

Never Attend an Off-Site Holiday Party | Employment Edification

How to Tell if a Job Candidate is Lying

Bruce Hurwitz 6:45 pm on November 7, 2024

Delivering Bad News During a Job Interview

Cowards ghost. In other words, they disappear in order not to deliver bad news. Well, in a job interview, a candidate cannot disappear. They are sitting right there in front of the interviewers. So, what do you do if you, the candidate, have bad news to deliver? You deliver it.

In this regard, I have dealt with two types of individuals. The first wait until I call them to tell them that they have the interview or to relay a job offer, and then they tell me what the problem is. The second immediately tell me about the issue.

I give my recruiting clients (employers) a six-month guarantee that if for any reason a placement does not work out, I will conduct a replacement search for free. Needless to say, I do not want to have to honor that guarantee. So, in the case of the former type of individual, I advise my client not to hire them. They cannot be trusted. If they are going to wait until the last minute to provide material information which an honest person would have shared at the beginning, that pretty much tells the employer, and me, everything we need to know about the candidate’s character. They will not last six months, so why bother?

In the case of the latter, no problem. They were honest and upfront from the very beginning. We found a solution to the problem meaning, in essence, there was no problem. They showed themselves to be of good character.

There are two types of issues/problems that candidates have. The first, which they think is a big deal but usually isn’t (except in cases where the individual is being hired to finish a project within a certain amount of time) is of a personal nature, such as if the candidate has scheduled a vacation. Again, unless there’s a time factor connected to the job (which should be clearly stated in the job description), I have never had a client/employer reject a candidate because of a planned vacation. They always say the same thing, “Of course they can take their vacation; it just won’t be paid time off.” No problem. (Truth be told, I can’t think of any other example.)

The second issue, which is serious, concerns a medical problem. I have dealt with many:

The first two candidates I ever submitted for a job when I started my own firm, were homosexuals. They were both in their mid-forties. When they were children, 10- 11-years-old, which would have been some 50 years prior to my meeting them, psychiatrists actually treated homosexuality as a mental health disorder (see below). In both cases, the gentlemen were married and had children. By then, their “treatment” was anxiety medication and an occasional phone consultation with their doctor if they were having a bad day. They both asked me to explain their situation to my clients. I refused. I told them that when, in the interview, they were given the opportunity, “Tell us about yourself,” or were asked a question such as “How do you cope with anxiety?” to simply tell their story of how they conquered what was, as I just noted, a recognized disorder. I could not do justice to their success; only they could. And when the employers heard their stories, they hired them.

In the case of other mental health disorders, autism, dyslexia, genius IQ (meaning a lack of social skills), stuttering, and PTSD, I had the candidates deal with it in the same way as someone with a physical issue.

First, in the case of military veterans, the so-called 800-pound gorilla in the room is, “Do they have a health issue?” So, I tell them, after the normal exchange of pleasantries, to say, “Before we begin, I know you can’t ask me so let me tell you, I have no health issue. Now the employer knows the candidate is honest, upfront, and understands their concerns. No problem. No issue. And they are off on the right track.

Now, in the case of persons with a mental health disorder or physical issue, they do exactly what the veterans I just mentioned do, with an obvious exception of their being a visible issue. They say, “I know you can’t ask, but I will tell you. I do have a health issue. This is what it is. This is what it means. And this is the ‘reasonable accommodation’ I will require.” (In the case of an obvious physical issue, they begin by saying, “As you can see..” and proceed to explain the issue and what “reasonable accommodation” they need.

Of course, the candidate’s definition of “reasonable” may differ significantly from the employer’s but, in my experience, the issue has always been solved amicably. There was only one exception:

I was doing a search for a company out-of-state, meaning that I never met with candidates in-person. One of the candidate I submitted, who got an interview, was confined to a wheelchair. I did not know that and he did not tell me. The employer was located on the second floor of a landmark building. There was a ramp leading to the ground floor (retail space), but no elevator. In case you do not know this, and I am not exaggerating, you literally cannot change a door knob in a landmark building without getting government approval. It would take a miracle to get the government to agree to the installation of an elevator. No elevator; no job.

All other requests were gladly met. In fact, in some cases employers were a bit offended that I would even ask if the candidate could call a therapist from a private office, or sit facing the door (in the case of a veteran). From their tone of voice, they always sounded like, “Bruce, don’t ask stupid questions! Just have them here Monday morning!!”

The key is to be open and honest. If you deliver the “bad news” at the beginning of the process, and not surprise them with it at the end, you should have nothing to worry about. And if you present your condition as an example of an adversity that you have overcome, greater, I hasten to add, than anything they would encounter on the job, you will make yourself an even more desirable candidate. Remember: Employers do not like surprises, especially when hiring.

NOTE TO THE HATERS: Before you accuse me of being a homophobe, please note that homosexuality was only removed from the American Psychiatry Association DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) in 1974 (as you can see from the below screenshot taken from their website. That said, you will also note that they changed the name over the years). As I understand it, the reason was apparently political, in response to activists, and not medical. That would explain why it remained on the DSM just under different names. Under DSM-V, which was published in 2013, it is called “gender dysphoria” and is thus a medical condition which may be treated.

While I usually preempt the insults by quoting Churchill, this time I shall quote DIckens, The truth is the truth; and neither childish absurdities, nor unscrupulous contradictions, can make it otherwise. (From American Notes: The Young Man from the Country.)

While we work with everyone, our mission is to promote the hiring of veterans and first responders.  Please consider us for all your staffing, career counseling and professional writing needs.

Delivering Bad News During a Job Interview | Employment Edification

Bruce Hurwitz 4:17 pm on August 21, 2024  

Fake Job Postings

I can remember when a person looking for a job would buy the Sunday or Wednesday newspaper and look at the Classified ads. It was a simpler world in those days. But was it more honest?

Sometimes I think that I earn part of my living helping the frustrated. Usually, it is someone claiming that they are being discriminated against. But sometimes it is complaints that applications go unanswered.

There can be a simple reason for an unanswered application: The company does not have a good process in place to handle job applications. Management is rude. Or, what seems to be more prevalent these days, the job posting isn’t real.

In May of this year, ResumeBuilder.com did a survey of over 1,600 hiring managers. The results were, to say the least, troubling. The key findings were: 40% of companies posted a fake job listing this year; 30% currently have active fake listings; and 70% of hiring managers believe the practice is morally acceptable

(For the record, the jobs are posted not only on job boards, but also on company websites.)

Why do companies do this? According to the survey for two reasons:

First, their employees are overworked. Posting ads gives the impression that help is on the way. The company recognizes the stress and strain employees are experiencing. Second, posting fake job postings not only increases revenue, but also morale and productivity, because the overworked employees think the company cares.

Apparently, these companies think they have stupid employees. Since the ads are fake, even if employees see “applicants” being interviewed, and 85% of the hiring managers questioned said they did interview for the position, after a while employees will figure out that it is all a scam. Help is not on the way. So, if revenue, morale and productivity had a rise, eventually, they will have a fall, perhaps even a crash. It’s a stupid way to do business.

Likewise, posting job ads is said to give the impression that a company is growing. That is an important message to send to competitors, if they are foolish. When it becomes clear that the ads are fake, competitors will use the strategy against the company as a way to question their morals and long-term sustainability. It will backfire.

What is most troubling for me is the 70% of the hiring managers surveyed saying, “posting fake jobs is morally acceptable.” It most assuredly is not.

The important question is, how can a job seeker spot a fake ad? They can’t. But there are two obvious indications of possible dishonesty. (Not being contacted is not one of them. Forty-five percent of the hiring managers said they contacted applicants for fake jobs!) First, the salary range could be ridiculous. That said, offering too much or too little will be self-sabotage. (Wasn’t it Walter Scott who said, “O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive?”) Moreover, it would defeat any benefit about increasing morale, productivity and revenue. If employees see that the company wants to pay significantly more than what they are currently earning, the employees will demand raises. On the other hand, if the employees see that the salary being offered is less than they are currently earning, they will think the company is looking to hire cheap labor and, if they are smart, they will immediately start their own job searches.

Second, on most job boards applicants can see when the job was first posted. If a company has been looking for more than a month or two to fill a position, apply but don’t hold your breath. (Of course, the company can “close” the ad and then repost it.) If the company really wanted to hire someone, they would have done so.

To be fair, the reason that a company cannot fill a position in a timely manner may not because the job is fake. It could very simply be that no one wants to work for the company. Either way, be careful.

In his book, The 48 Laws of Power, Robert Greene (e-book edition, p. 237), provides a great description of the game of chess:

Chess contains the concentrated essence of life: First, because to win you have to be supremely patient and farseeing; and second, because the game is built on patterns, whole sequences of moves that have been played before and will be played again, with slight alterations, in any one match. Your opponent analyzes the patterns you are playing and uses them to try to foresee your moves. Allowing him nothing predictable to base his strategy on gives you a big advantage. In chess as in life, when people cannot figure out what you are doing, they are kept in a state of terror—waiting, uncertain, confused.

Of course, in a job interview, you are not facing an opponent but rather individuals who you want to become your confederates. Yet, there are similarities to a chess match:

The most difficult part of a job search is patience. You have to wait for a response to your application. You have to wait for a response to your initial (phone) interview. You have to wait for a response to your in-person interview(s). And you have to wait for the job offer. Perhaps serving in the military is a great preparation for conducting a job search as, at least based on my experience, most of the time you just sit around and wait!!

Being able to foresee the steps in the process is crucial. If you expect that there will only be one interview, and it turns out you will have to have multiple interviews and a test, you will become disheartened. The solution is quite easy: Ask! There is no reason in the world for the process to be kept a secret. If you know what to expect, you can prepare, most importantly, psychologically. The key to getting a job offer is confidence. Confidence is an emotion. If you are projecting depression, because you don't like the hoops through which the employer is making you jump, you might be confident you can do the job, but you won't be confident that you want the job. Employers can read emotions so, as your emotions are the most important thing you bring to an interview, you have to protect your king - confidence!

Finally, note what was said about patterns in chess. The analogy in interviewing is that different interviewers will ask you the same question(s). Then they will compare your answers. They don't have to be word-for-word identical, but if they are different, you can forget about getting an offer. In that case, you have lost your king and are checkmated.

How to create an resume for a internship? What are the do and don't and hiw to I create a cover letter?

References

by Bruce Hurwitz

Many, if not most, job applicants are worried about being able to provide positive references. Ironically, more often than not, my clients (employers) have not asked for references. When I protest, the response is always, "No one provides a bad reference." Not true! It happens.

Some applicants want to be proactive and include references on their resume. That's a mistake. Here’s why:

1. By definition references will know of possible candidates for the position for which the applicant is applying.  The employer or recruiter can call them and ask if there is anyone they would recommend for the position they are looking to fill without mentioning the applicant whose resume they received.  Why would an applicant want to give an employer/recruiter an avenue to find additional candidates?  And what does it say if one of the names the reference provides isn’t the applicant's?
2. It is foolish for an applicant to provide names of references until the applicant knows they are interested in the position.  Imagine if the applicant sends out 10 resumes, and the recipients of five call the references.  The references will begin to think that there is a problem and no one wants the person.  If the applicant, after meeting with the employer and their staff, decides they want nothing to do with the company, the references will have no way of knowing that the applicant turned the employer down and not the other way around. They will also be curious about why they are being called without notification from the applicant.
3. Accordingly, it is crucial that prior to giving out the names of references, the applicant, now candidate, actually wants the job and that they have the ability to (a) confirm that the reference is available (they may be on vacation, at a conference, have a family emergency, etc.) and that they remember the candidate. (I once had a former colleague have an employer contact me for a reference, and I did not remember her!)  Additionally, the candidate has to prepare the references so they know what to emphasize when speaking to the employer/recruiter.
4. Finally, if the employer/recruiter asks for references, telling them that they will get them in a day or two because they first want to make certain they are available, shows that the candidate is a professional and does not want to waste the employer’s/recruiter’s time.  (There is nothing worse than calling someone for a reference and the person does not return the call.)  It, the request for references, is also something they can be added to the thank-you email so the employer/recruiter knows that the candidate did not forget the request.  Then, the next day, they can follow-up with a second email with the names of the references, a brief blurb about how they know them, their contact information, and, to show that they are considerate, their time zone.  You don’t want someone on the west coast being called at 9 AM Eastern time.

I honestly cannot think of a single reason to include references on a resume.  After all, it takes up space that could be better used focusing on the applicant’s accomplishments.  No longer is “References available upon request” included on a resume, because it is a silly statement of the obvious.

For the record, ideally references are former supervisors.  Secondarily, if supervisors are not available, colleagues will usually suffice, especially those higher on the organizational chart. Board members and major clients/customers may also be acceptable.  In the case of older candidates, persons they have helped to advance in their careers are ideal, as the interviewers may consider older candidates a threat to their position. Knowing that they have a record of helping younger colleagues should allay those fears. Personal references should never be given.  There is no need to provide more than three references.

References | Employment Edification (wordpress.com)