Isn't RESUME an appalling institution? You have to present yourself as sellable and profitable in it, and dissect yourself into bits that are competitive-on-the-market. 'Objectives', 'qualifications', 'skills','work experience' - preferably with enough detail to show how *you* helped the company get A, B, C, etc. If your talents aren't profitable, then vanish, you dinosaur.

And the job interviews. I mean really. The selling of yourself continues. You'd better put everything on the counter: become 'good with people', 'flexible', 'work-well-individually-and-as-a-team-member', 'eager to learn', 'attentive to detail', able to 'juggle multiple tasks'.

Then there's the so-called networking. While in other countries such things are called nepotism, favouritism, and corruption, capitalist countries have only the benign 'networking'... Right.

(And then. And then. As if this is not enough. There's the vigilant Canadian state for all the foreigners: well, we'll maybe allow you to have this job, if you fulfil these 137 conditions and prove to us that you're not hindering any Canadian's employment opportunities. And prove to us that hiring you would bring economic benefits to surrounding Canadians.)

Now what is one to do with corporate culture (and the state, if foreign)?

How can we stop presenting ourselves as a commodity? Could we replace those insulting resumes with some sort of portfolios in which you wouldn't have to sell yourself? Could we change the 'skills' list from the tawdry business-babble into something different?

(There's an idea for political theatre and direct action - pretending to be an applicant for a job and then come to the interview armed with exactly the opposite responses to the corporate-speak. Trying to explain how their notion of profit is the wrong one, the one "inside the box" )

Can we refuse work? It seems unthinkable to do that these days, and not end up being a Bartleby or a Gregor Samsa. The way you earn your wage (i.e. what you do) is what you are, and there's not much more to you. Far niente not is not only accompanied by poverty but by enormous guilt as well. Guilt of not being productive.

Mine doesnt have any of that stuff. Actually, I've had to work hard to keep it under three pages as it is just because I've worked so many places over the years, and there's no room in it for fluff. Its just where I worked, time frame, position, and a brief run down of responsibilities in bullet form. Possibly because I have generally worked within a non-competing community of agencies where people tend to know each other, I'd be pretty easy to check up on anyway. Also, changing jobs a lot is not considered a bad thing. Cross pollination of experience and knowledge is seen as healthy. (I can tell you it doesnt look good on a bank loan application though)

quote:

---

As far as interviews go, I regard them as a two way street. The employer has to convince me that this is a place I'd find to be a good fit, and not everyone always has.

---

That's because you have a lot of experience and can pick and choose. When someone's starting out they don't have that luxury.

quote:

---

I think different employment sectors must look for different things in a resume.

---

OK, but that's actually less and less the case.

Non-profit sector seems to be busy adopting business criteria and business-speak in hiring.

However, tech resumes, while they still have silly management buzzwords, do have tonnes of technical content...mine does

quote:

---

OK, but that's actually less and less the case.

---

I dunno, I screen resumes sometimes and that sort of self propaganda I just filter out. I have nothing against inexperience, so if the ink is still wet on the diploma or whatever, I'll look maybe at volunteer stuff. In an interview, if I know someone is inexperienced, I won't ask experience focussed questions. I'm big on natural common sense anyway, and suitable personal qualities. I don't do a lot of interviewing, but I like to help the person relax and to be at their best. No pressure or head games.

quote:

---

Non-profit sector seems to be busy adopting business criteria and business-speak in hiring.

---

As somebody who has hired for a non-profit, there's a level of business acumen that is necessary. Business-speak is sometimes the best way to express that.

Not that I like making a resume, or going to interviews. However, I also have defended grant applications for an artist-run centre, and that's selling the organization, which, in part, is selling myself. I need to leave that jury with a good feeling about the org and the people who run it... And I do. Steady increases, 4 years running. In the arts, that's damned good, if I do say so myself.

What's wrong with playing up your good points? Isn't a job interview part of a job competition?

I can alwayus tell when somebody pads their resume. Definitely not cool. Keep it simple, let it speak for itself.

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Zoot Capri ]

Not in my experience. Employers seem to want "focus." I ain't got none. I've worked at everything from garbageman to university lecturer.

I was once asked straight-out at an interview at a language school if I was sure I wanted the job in question. I asked, "Why, because of my checkered past?" and was told, "Yes." This was in Orléans, France, and the interviewer had already made what I consider class-generated negative comments about my farm background. Class matters more in Europe than here, from what I can tell.

[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: Adam Smith ]

The last time I ran an entry level job add in Canada I received two hundred applications. That's TWO HUNDRED applications. Obviously I couldn't talk to everyone of them - half a dozen at most. If someone can tell me how to go from two hundred to six, or even ten, without a resume I'd love to hear it. It'll make my life much easier.

The same holds true for anyone and it doesn't matter if that entity is for profit, not for profit, whatever.

Obviously you want to hire the best person for the job. I know, more buzz words, but if the person can't do the job or will be unhappy doing it's a problem for everyone concerned, not least of all the employee.

quote:

---

I've yet to see a resume that isn't mostly just pap.

---

You haven't seen my resume then. I go out of my way not to include buzzwords and not to pad my resume. I'm sure lots of other people have too. And I think employers appreciate it because I often got jobs that I've applied for.

For most people, the interview is not a two-way street. It's more like an inquisition situation or a quiz, certainly a situation of inequality. I only once only dared to query the employers the way they queried me - in a half-challenging way - and that's because I was sure I am not getting the job so I might as well behave freely. I do usually try to 'interview' them, but there are not that many options for the counter-interviewer if she's desperate to get the job. And there are always so many wrong things to say, no matter how open-minded the employers happen to be.

Some questions are standard stuff, I realized. Like, 'hypothetical situations'. "Say, you and your two co-workers happen to disagree profoundly about what decision should be reached on an important matter. What do you do?" Things like that.

But there's another thing that I was thinking about the other day (while cooking dinner, as skdadl would say). When you start the mortgage payments, you're pretty much stuck in that particular job. You'd do anything, you'd sell your soul just so the mortgage payments wouldn't discontinue. And if we add a dependent or two into that picture... there.

quote:

---

I am suggesting that it should be replaced with something more decent.

---

That's exactly the question. What do you replace it with? I think the smart ass answer is "a one to two page summary of your job history, educational background, and anything else you might think is relevant". I'm open to answers - don't forget the 200 applicant issue.

On a related note, cover letters do matter and I tend to include that in my definition of "resume".

I do appreciate your sentiment re interviews not being a two way street. There is a serious power imbalance, regardless of the level of hire under consideration or the individuals "need" for the job (i.e., do they want to put food on the table or are they looking for that SVP position). Speaking personally, and maybe I'm atypical, I've always tried to minimize the feeling if not the reality. Simple things like not sitting behind my desk but using the other guest chair in my office, or moving to my conference table really help. I don't think interviews should be inquisitions. It's not a good way to start any working relationship. That's why the first fifteen minutes of any talk with me will be about whatever hobbies you've listed - I probably don't know anything but I need an icebreaker of some sort.

quote:

---

quote:

I am suggesting that it should be replaced with something more decent.

That's exactly the question. What do you replace it with? I think the smart ass answer
is "a one to two page summary of your job history, educational background, and anything else you might think is relevant".

---

I don't think thats a smartass answer, thats just what my resume is. Except it takes up three full pages. I might add I am quite satisfied with where this resume has gotten me.

What I've learned on this thread is that I guess it wouldn't be too well recieved in a lot of other sectors.

quote:

---

When you start the mortgage payments, you're pretty much stuck in that particular job. You'd do anything, you'd sell your soul just so the mortgage payments wouldn't discontinue. And if we add a dependent or two into that picture... there.

---

Nonsense!

Look, I have a mortgage and a couple of independents. It wasn't until I had a mortgage and one dependent that I quit my regular job and took a flyer on making a living freelance/self-employed. And it was definitely a leap of faith!

I guess it all depends on whether you own the house, or if you allow the house to own you.... If you'd sell your soul, the stuff has gotten way too important and you need to take some time and get some perspective.

Resume. As I said, why wouldn't it be some sort of a portfolio in which you compile things that you think define you as a worker or, God forbid, as a person. Say you include clips or photocopies; brief versions of projects you were involved in; brief reports; but also things related to your activities unrelated to your job; some such portfolio. Something that wouldn't force you to present yoursef as a standardized commodity. Sure it takes more time to examine portfolios, but that's exactly the point.

Or maybe there are better ideas. Maybe a website instead of a hard-copy anything would be much better. So you put all the hyperlinks to things you've done in life, and then they can be connected to some similar things other people did, and your self-presentation would be as multi-layered as you'd like. Of course some criteria of efficacy would emerge with website 'resume's too, but they would allow for more freedom than the existing ones.

quote:

---

Resume. As I said, why wouldn't it be some sort of a portfolio in which you compile things that you think define you as a worker or, God forbid, as a person. Say you include clips or photocopies; brief versions of projects you were involved in; brief reports; but also things related to your activities unrelated to your job; some such portfolio. Something that wouldn't force you to present yoursef as a standardized commodity. Sure it takes more time to examine portfolios, but that's exactly the point.

---

quote:

---

Well I am happy that you're happy, Zoot.

---

What's that got to do with it?

Unless, of course, I've just been sarcastically dismissed for challenging a generalized assumption...

Edited to add: Your portfolio idea is interesting, but a good resume is really a summary of that information. As an employer, I don't have time to go through that much information until, as Michelle mentioned, I have a short list, at which point I'd request resumes. Lots of people use portfolios and "reels" in my industry. Cinematographers particularly include reels with resumes so that you can see the quality of work that they have done.

[ September 01, 2002: Message edited by: Zoot Capri ]

quote:

---

Oldgoat, that's interesting, can you give us more details about your profession? It's encouraging to hear that there are oases of bullshit-free labour market. How does it function?

---

I work for the Canadian Mental Health Association as a Community Case Manager. In a nutshell, I provide support and advocacy for a number of people in the community who have been diagnosed (rightly or wrongly) with a major mental illness. I also work on program development, which involves trying to keep best practices up to date in a changing multi-cultural environment.

quote:

---

When you have a mortgage, the bank owns the house. Not you. And as we know Canadian banks are notorious for screwing little people.

---

Only partly true. You have equity in the house, and so does the bank. Unless you completely default on the mortgage (meaning you pay nothing for several months), the bank isn't interested in taking the house -- it's more expense for them to manage the upkeep and sell it (usually for less than its market value) than it is for them to come to an arrangement with you if possible.

If one runs into a bad patch and can see the difficulty in paying the mortgage over a long period of time, one might be better off selling the house and taking the equity before the foreclosure happens. It's not like it just occurs overnight.

From my perspective, it makes sense to have a mortgage, because I'd be paying at least as much as mortgage and taxes on rent for less space, not to mention the freedom to modify as I like.

There's two really heartbreaking stories among others that he recounts in that book, and one involves a couple who got screwed by a bank because some numbnuts thought they were stripping their inventory and preparing to abscond with the freshly loaned money for an expansion of their small business, and the other involves a man who absolutely could not get a line of credit and as a result lost a $40,000 a year business and went into bankruptcy.

I trust banks about as far as I can throw them.

Here's a story for you, Zoot, that involves me.

For two years prior to this incident, I had no holds on any deposits whatsoever. One day, my roommate bounced a check on me for the utilities. I took cash from him instead and directly paid off the utility companies.

I called the bank after I found out the holds had been slammed back on. I explained that I was going to have a payroll check deposited and that would fix everything, since I had already recovered the money from him.

Three phone calls and a week later, the holds were still there.

I'm not defending bank practices... They pretty much suck across the board. There's a reason why I've never taken a small business loan, and don't intend to. I'd rather run an office out of my house than have to worry about loan payments. I'm dreading having to get the line of credit I will someday need for larger projects...

We've also had the bank arbitrarily do a credit check on the blond guy when issuing a new debit card and place a 3-day hold on all his deposits, while with my card there is no hold -- On a joint account! Like, duh! We wouldn't just use my card, right? Honestly... As if he's going to suddenly start kiting cheques after having an impeccable bank history with them for over 3 years.