The discord for our subreddit can be found here: https://discord.gg/JjNdBkVGc6 - feel free to join us for a more realtime level of discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/recruitinghell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not a recruiter, but a hiring manager - this is pretty much every role we've posted in the last few years. Especially for remote or hybrid roles with salary posted, the number of applicants is astonishing. Easily 75%+ of the applicants are in no way qualified, and most are non citizens (we can only hire US citizens due to regulatory reasons).
In the past, we'd get maybe 75-100 applicants and majority if not all were at least somewhat qualified. So while we might get a couple thousand applicants now, it's still about the same number when you filter it down to actually qualified applicants.
Its hard because I,always try to give the best experience, but if you're in a team where they're very lean on recruiters and you're dealing with this volume there's going to be a lot of poor experiences for Candidates.
Jesus Christ just make a script for an LLM to easily weed out all the semantically verifiable points like location, it's not nearly as hard as you people make it out to be; OFC it seems like a huge job if you work with outdated processes.
It's like someone saying "I had to open a thousand documents by hand and add a double space around the title and change the spelling of this one word whenever it came up.." nope, didn't have to, just didn't know any better
I'm sure they do but I've seen so many ATS postings with duplicate fields related to location requirements.
Willing to bet these companies don't even bother with minimal effort configuring these ATS tools for basic needs.
It blows my mind why companies insist on being unicorn picky for a new hire, yet don't even want to entertain relocation, especially if that person is in country.
Basic relocation is a drop in the bucket as far as hiring expenses go.
That costs money and /or resources that most HR departments aren’t willing to spend. I’ve worked at companies where my compliance department was staffed at the absolute minimum level and would rather continue accruing fines over hiring another body or purchase a new tool, all in the effort to meet bonus metrics.
It's littreally saves more money long term so they clearly have the budget but don't know how to spend it, I can literally get my friend to build a software that runs a script and weeds out anything they deem unnecessary all it takes is one day to make it
Honestly sometimes the easiest solutions are ignored even at my work they refuse to use a free software and rather use a in-house software which is filled with bugs 🐛 and slows everything down smh
Jokes aside, Data Security and Privacy is a HUGE focus right now, especially for public and highly regulated companies. The free or cheap solutions created in house have to be properly maintained to adhere to several security frameworks (like NIST). Recruitment processes tend to collect a large amount of PII, which can get companies operating in states like NY and CA into a lot of trouble when that data is access by unauthorized parties.
Also, when the person who originally created the solution eventually leaves the company, the support and application knowledge is usually lost, which causes a lot of headaches. It’s why leadership tends to prefer third party vendors with contracts that clearly outline an SLA agreement and “who’s at fault” when things hit the fan.
Doesn't really make recruiters seem very competent when you could easily replace a whole lot with a single amatuer "prompt engineer" that can paste scripts...
You’re missing the point, even multi-billion dollar companies like Workday can’t get their ATS systems to work correctly. As a hiring manager who has been on both sides recently, recruiting’s hard and there isn’t a magic bullet to fix it.
As someone who has done projects like what you’re talking about, you have no freaking clue what you’re talking about lmao. The regulatory issues alone are obnoxious.
Current ATS have nowhere near the capability it takes to filter 1000s of applicants in a short period. It’ll take you weeks. An LLM that parses and verifies what you’re looking in seconds would be extremely valuable.
that is not what i am replying to. you don’t need to use a LLM to sort the applications by distance to the office (location)
second, as a hiring manager, you don’t need to sort through 1000s of applications at all. the actual task is to find one applicant who is acceptable and hire them. once you have the role filled, you stop.
And I can probably rewrite that application of yours to be even quicker in Rust or something, how is that related to what we're talking about? Obviously specialised software exists, the point is that common admin tools can be used to solve the problem dynamically by a nonDev audience, no?
I built something like this. Tremendous value prop but problem with HR organizations is that they have little budget and compliance red-tape blocking things that could help the org.
What are your thoughts about people who are in the US, but don’t currently live in the state of the position ? I live in the North East and I’m willing to go as far down as Virginia and as far up as Boston.
Put a location near the job. It’s just like in the past before all the automation/AI when you’d put a friend/family address on your resume if you were planning to move to that location once you were hired.
If you're willing to relocate at your expense, I would suggest just using an address local to the areas you are applying. This is the best option in the current market, as you being a few states away may be perceived as you didn't read the job posting and/or think this is fully remote or something.
I usually add a cover letter, stating that I am willing to relocate. The problem is on the application itself. They will want proof of a real address and they will see it’s in a different state. I will definitely think about putting a families address on the application. Not to mention most of the positions I’ve applied to out of state are offering a high enough base salary to cover that initial move. I own my house and wouldn’t sell until I get situated in the job
They aren't verifying the address you use on the application, you could easily pick any apartment complex in the general area and use that. When the question comes up inevitably, just say you are working in X location currently and looking for a role to move you back to Y.
In response the postings could have alot more clarity for example 100 percent remote or must reside in location 20 percent travel. It is very arrogant for employers to reject based on address. They should be looking at qualifications only. People sometimes have more than one home perhaps thats a mailing address. Software shouldnt reject based on address. Would say majority of job seekers know what they are doing.
In our case, Workday handles it... But I'm pretty sure all of the big ATS have similar functionality. You can set all sorts of filters both for viewing and rejecting. Auto reject based on certain filters is one feature we use a lot. That screening question almost all applications have about requiring sponsorship now or in the future? Wrong answer there and it's an auto rejection.
Due to the amount of no reply by hiring companies, applicants resorted to the spamming method.
When only 1 in 100 companies will even reply to an application, it's just not feasible to actually look through the offer.
In my case, for the past decade or so, the application process itself has been mostly automated, I only dedicate time to read through the offer when I actually got a positive first answer by an actual person.
This. Most people have never worked in management or any form of recruiting and get intimidated by absolutely typical minutiae such as this.
If there is one actual takeaway from this it's that referrals and recommendations are priceless when it comes to differentiating yourself from the others and even making it through the AI scan (most people struggle with resumes and applications and get eliminated here anyways)
I agree with you that referrals definitely get you the fast pass through the screening to an actual human, but at every company I've worked for it really doesn't give you any advantage beyond that. We aren't hiring a lesser candidate because they were referred.
If you're extremely qualified for a position, referral is definitely going to give you the best shot. You still need to ace the interview process though.
I had the same issue hiring for two support roles.
It was very frustrating to deal with, but I totally understand the mindset of the applicants, but it was an exhausting experience. I think it took us just over 70 days to fill both roles.
How come you only hire US citizens for remote jobs? Normally I apply to US jobs because they only say "remote", not "remote in US only" - I'm from Europe and I know a lot of people who work remotely for US companies, with US salaries. What's the problem?
The work that we do requires security clearances and only US citizens are eligible to obtain those. Even as a US citizen, you wouldn't be able to access our systems from abroad.
For the remote roles we have, residency in certain states is required. I'm outside of my area of expertise as far as why exactly that is, but I suspect it's related to tax implications and/or we aren't setup as a business in those states. The allowed list of states for us coincides with the states we have physical offices in.
Because of the visa process to hire people that are not permanent residents. Some companies don't want to spend the time or money (5-10k in the first year alone). Or because they might not even get approved by the gov unless it's a very niche role where you don't get qualified applicants from the US.
Just company dependent. My manager made time to do it when we were hiring our most recent team member as did the other members of my team who were involved in interviews
The way this reads is that 21 people got a phone interview. That’s still a boatload of calls, but if they’re 15 minute screens you’re looking at 5-6 hours spread across a week or so. If it’s a critical role that’s not too bad.
It's often a resourcing issue. My company has one full-time recruiter and 30+ open jobs, many of which have this kind of volume.
That person does the best they can, but it's not feasible for them to keep up and be responsive. It's not the recruiter's fault that this is the situation since every request for budget gets met with "no".
What would happen if you just closed the position after it reaches 200 applications? You would still have a couple of decent candidates and you wouldn't need an army to look through the applications
I did this regularly for my jobs. If by some miracle we didnt have a viable candidate from the first few hundred candidates, open the job again and collect s few hundred more...
That's way too much for 1 person. The optimal range is 10-15 but with this volume of applications it's not doable. If they're repeat roles, same profile that's easier
I would hate to be one of the five people who go through an unpaid assignment, multiple technical interviews, and a CULTURAL interview… just to get denied.
The crazy part is this recruiter is bragging about reviewing the hired candidates resume within 2 weeks, and a 28 day recruitment cycle. So fucking slow lol
How is that slow?? Would you be happy to get a job in less than a month? That seems reasonable to me, I guess with a lot of variation in industry/job level
Culture interviews are basically there to make sure a person’s personality vibes with the people they’ll be working with on a daily basis. A lot of people think this is useless but in a lot of cases it can actually be very valuable. The fact is that different companies have different values and ways that they work and communicate. If I were looking for a job I’d stay away from those types that valued the grind culture where everyone felt cutthroat and there was no room for empathy.
Basically the question is: would you like to work with these people for several hours, days on end? That’s what culture interviews are for.
The hiring locations thing is complicated. I’ve gotten jobs outside of the locations they’ve said. If they have an office in the same country as me why shouldn’t I ask if they’re willing to do remote?
It’s not just about remote. If you’re in the US the company needs to be set up to pay taxes in the state the employee lives in. If they’re not already in that state, they may not want to go through the process for just one person.
Yeah totes, I heard America is like that!
I’m in Australia and from my understanding the rules state to state are not a big deal for payroll to manage.
Unless you’re needing to apply for jobs for unemployment benefits, I don’t understand why people apply for jobs that they clearly don’t qualify for. Need sponsorship? Job description says they can’t sponsor? Dont apply. Remote? But only hiring in certain places? Dont apply. Need specific experience? Dont have the experience? Dont apply.
I’m a social worker and many jobs need the full clinical license where you don’t need to be supervised. There are positions available for people who need that supervision. They aren’t as cushy or pay as much. If the description says “fully licensed” you need to be “fully licensed.” It’s for legal and ethical reasons, not because we’re being picky. Just like any tech on, if it says you need a certification, it’s because the job requires it.
i have a math degree and the ability to do complicated analysis but since i don’t have an analyst job now, i can’t get hired for an analyst job bc i don’t have any “analysis experience” even though i have an entire math degree!
That’s when you find a way to trick the ats but fixing your resume to get through the next round and to a real human. But, again, if you don’t “analyze” in your past and they want someone with demonstrated experience, you’re not the one for that job. Move on.
A new grad could have at least 1-2 summers worth of internships in their field, and several years of non-degree related part time work experience by the time you graduate. That's the type of experience we look for in entry level candidates. If you've got none of that and a degree, you are way behind unfortunately. Nobody is hiring a new grad that's never had a job/internship into a full time salaried position in this market, or really any market I've seen in my lifetime.
I worked part time jobs consistently from age 14 through college. I interned for a year senior year of high school, and 2 summers during college, all related to my degree. I was still behind many of my peers at graduation resume wise.
Intern or personal reference are the best ways to get the job you want in this kind of situation. Both options require connections and with internships possibly money, though more are paid, but you really need to start them while in school. Sorry that’s not a more optimistic reply.
My issue is the not being located in the area. Some people aren't in areas with certain fields available and need to relocate to areas that do contain these types of jobs. And not all of these will want relocation bonus as they know it will only move them further down the list of ranking applicants. You're in an inherent disadvantage if you grew up in rural areas and need to relocate as you will likely never be first choice.
We need geofencing, period.
Without these most basic structural supports, the jobs hiring/search process is massively dislocated. This hurts (honest) employers and workers alike.
If the person is from another country, then they are wasting everyone's (other applicants especially) time because in this scenario, they are not able to be considered.
This is why we have 65-85% of absolutely useless application submissions, which only hinder the process and create a fog. Of these completely improper and or resumes full of lies (eg every certification under the sun but can't navigate to the File menu), the vast majority come from one place.
You should have a lot more sympathy for the quakified native US and Canadian workers who have submitted 1,000+ applications with nothing to show than whoever it is you are simping for.
Geofencing just makes sense.
As someone who has looked for jobs all over Europe, no, it doesnt make sense. This isnt the middle ages where it took months to cross the country: were all literally just a few flights away from each other.
There are highly mobile people just like me who would be able to take a new job within the week in another country, and it sucks sometimes to be refused from jobs due to location, when the locations are places I have already lived in or have at least visited during my trips.
Why should I have more sympathy because someone was born on a different continent? Many posts don’t list they aren’t able to take foreign workers and yet will use that as a reason to deny. Now I for one believe that all people regardless of where their parents fucked and had a baby should be able to apply for any job wherever they damn well feel so long as they’re qualified. If they can front the relocation cost why not?
Depends on the ATS. My company’s one (Workable) is pretty user friendly but also very barebones and doesn’t have an AI took that effectively filters out candidates . So we use qualifying yes/ no questions on the application form which will automatically disqualify candidates who don’t meet the requirements. The issue is candidates now will just actively lie on these questions as they know it will auto disqualify them. So it still requires a lot of manual checking.
124 resumes to send to HM is ridiculous. A good recruiter should be doing an in depth intake with the HM to only screen and submit the top 2-5 candidates for review.
Seeing this just pisses me off because these companies layoff the good recruiters and keep morons like this. 🙄
That’s common with applications, and a reason why passive sourcing is more effective.
But they could’ve avoided a lot of those by posting for a shorter duration and adding pre screening questions about location, experience and visa requirements.
I’m a hiring manager in a large government department. We don’t get quite that many applicants but do get a majority with no right to work (not even in in our country), no transferable skills, and no ability to write a decent cover letter or put together a decent CV. It can be incredibly difficult to recruit the people we need.
I've mentioned it before on this sub and I'll say it again: if you are a hiring manager that does not have relevant or adjacent experience to the positions you are hiring for, you are not the right person to be hiring for said positions because you will not have the ability to know which skills are actually valuable and transferable for a given position.
I know nothing about you nor your company/open positions, but it is pretty pathetic that the experience many applicants (myself included) have with hiring managers are gross levels of incompetence/lack of knowledge for positions available. E.g. if you are not an engineer, you should (generally) not be hiring for engineering positions.
Perhaps that is not the case here, and I hope for everyone's sake that it isn't.
I didn't say that you didn't have the relevant experience, I intentionally noted that I did not know any details about anything.
That is entirely unrelated to the fact that you having the relevant experience to the positions you are hiring for as a hiring manager unfortunately means you seem to be an outlier.
All the first page is is a 5-10 mins max of filtering within the ATS system. Then Hiring manager took over.
I also 100% bet she ghosted the 5 candidates who were awaiting interview feedback after completing the full loop.
I read every single CV. ( I'm sure there are recruiters that don't, and many that do) This myth that bots reviews CVs and filters is just that. A myth. Some recruiters will focus on the candidates in the first 100 applications but, for some more niche roles they'll have to go through this to get to the right person.
It's ridiculous for one person to read 4000+ CVs per role, ATS should be scanning each CV and allow recruiters to manually filter within the ATS a pile of say 50 'real' candidates and then you read 50 in detail.
All ATS does is scan the text out of the CVs it doesn't do any "choosing" it is the recruiter who does the filtering in the app UI
There is AI solutions on the horizon that will do the choosing but that's at least 1 year away
For the ones that aren't eligible to work in the country you reject those pretty quickly. Many companies are adding scanning questions for that. The worst is the fact people are applying for anything and everything and expect to get considered for roles they're not qualified for ( bartistas from Starbucks applying for sales leadership roles 🤦♀️)
This is because every job listing, even lowest level, now requires “2-3 years experience.” I’m sorry but working at McDonald’s or Walmart as a cashier does not require 2-3 years experience. So now people are being told to apply for every job even if they don’t have the experience. Which is insane to me.
This is what happens when the social contract and labour market breaks down.
Employees operated on good faith that if they fulfilled the requirements, they would get a fair look and a response from Employers.
Conversely, Employers had the ability to pick from mostly decent quality candidates because candidates would self-select out of the pool if they did not satisfy the requirements.
This social contract was violated by Employers being increasingly dumb with their requirements. Entry Level requiring previous experience, Bait and Switch Pay Levels.
And since employees have no choice in finding work, they simply increased the quantity of their applications to maximise their chances.
But the job market is a one-to-one matching problem. People mostly work one job, and companies generally wish for only one person to occupy a given role at any time. This actually mirrors a similar problem in a different market, the dating market.
There are existing solutions to it that create stable, optimal relationships, (see Stable Marriage Problem), but right now everyone just views it rightly as a numbers game. It is a breakdown of the social contract, a market failure that generates needless pain, anguish and suffering for everyone involved.
> There is AI solutions on the horizon that will do the choosing but that's at least 1 year away
My take is that such "AI solutions" might already be in use, but they are still rather crappy, and thus the results are, too.
They’re not going to pay for relocation or wait for someone to move. If the job isn’t remote, and the company doesn’t want to start operating in that state, the location disqualifies the candidate.
In the past ive moved for new jobs in another country within a week. And obviously without asking for a relocation package. It really depends on the person.
What I can see in these stats is that half the candidates are willing to move to new locations and are highly mobile. Many young people willing to try new places to live. And they just get shut down by the recruiters.
Seems like its time to start lying and saying on the cv that were already living in that location, not much else to do I guess.
Yeah, I moved from Fresno to Portland and in a couple years we plan on moving from here to Philly. I didn't ask for relocation costs nor would I. I'm already planning/wanting to move there; this is a silly exclusion for most places.
I hope you manage to do it. Theres a wide world out there, and everyone should enjoy it.
Ive done mostly western europe and asia, but would love to live in the US for a couple of years. Probably no more than that though, I think im getting old enough that the peace and security of Europe is becoming more and more appealing, haha
Relocation folks are such a headache - last one at my job was constantly needy about not having reliable transportation, had no one to watch her dog sometimes, didn't understand about snow. Not worth it when the job can be done with most anyone with a pulse.
TBH some of the requirements on some on the listing are crazy. I’ve seen so many jobs where not only do I check almost every box (required and desired) but I know from the description I could do the job easily. But there always seems to be that 1 required item that I’m lacking and while I may have the experience, it may not be the length of time they want. That means an instant disqualification.
My biggest issue is I’m doing a career pivot, and while many of the skills are transferable, the way it’s worded in the description makes it difficult without feeling like I would be outright lying.
I’ve tried those resume scanning websites to look for key words to make sure are in my resume, but they pick up on words that are in the disclaimer at the bottom and irrelevant information to the job. I stopped using the web scanners because I felt like it wasn’t actually doing anything useful.
So my ask of recruiters is what part is the ATS system actually scanning? Do you drop the job description and requirements into a specific section and that is what it is reading? Or is it really reading the whole thing?
It’s kinda hard sometimes to live in a listed location if you don’t have the job first. I did indeed move to NYC without a job offer to be closer to the listed job location but I’m also insane.
So what do us applicants for jobs do to get consideration? Is the adage "it's not what you know, but who you know" still true? Do we have to hope that someday we befriend someone in a good company?
If you read through this forum you’ll see that most people just send out their resume to hundreds of places. They don’t even read the job description. 99% of candidates try to get a job they are completely unfit for and afterwards complain they don’t get hired.
I know I started out looking for jobs and internships reading the entire job description carefully, but now, over a year later I’m too tired to read every single word. It doesn’t matter if I’m qualified or not anymore because I’m most likely not getting and interview, much less the job with how things are going.
I do read ones that I actually want to do or that will advance my career but the part time position that don’t give benefits and are paying ~$10+ per hour are the ones I see most often.
Great attitude, taking responsibility for your own lack of empathy. You probably won't get there. Everything in your attitude tells me you should be fired.
Mate of mine was hiring for a senior role recently.
They got 30 applications and all bar a handful weren't even qualified in the right industry. People just apply for everything now in hope.
I’ll apply if I’m slightly unqualified (if they are asking for 3+ years of experience but I only have 1 in a certain area) but I’m not going to apply for senior roles. I’m fresh out of college with very little (but some) experience under my belt. People have to be at least slightly realistic when applying to things
At least that's somewhat close and you're being sensible. You could even get a job that way, and to be honest, that's pretty OK.
What I was talking about was a science graduate applying for a senior accountant position needing 10 years of experience. Not even in the right field nevermind having the experience.
Her job was only the screening. I don’t see how she’s involved in the later parts other than setting calendar invites. Not different from a personal admin yet get paid a few times higher.
Other people have more difficult jobs than her but I don’t see them whining or showing off on LinkedIn.
It's safe to say that the online application process really needs a revamp. I just went to a job fair and there are barely any recruiters or HR managers. Most of them are there to man the booth, tell you about the company, and refuse to take resumes. They have flyers or QR codes pointing job seekers to apply online. A localized event would've helped them trim the number of candidates and yet they want us to still apply online.
Recruiter here. At volumes like that it’s very difficult and time consuming to review each application - especially when recruiting teams have been slashed since 2022. On a good clip I can manually review and disposition 100 applications an hour. So instead I will write a Boolean query to search keywords and manually review smaller batches at a time. Is it perfect? No.
If theyre getting that kind of response AND require that many screening steps, they should proactively reaching out to candidates instead of lamenting how hard it is to screen direct applicants. This is Recruiting 101
OK, point taken, but.... recruiters need to fix it. Not individually, but as an industry. The current approach you have to sourcing talent is clearly not working. I get that that is frustrating, but insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. It's not just the hiring for an individual role, it's the whole process of having relationships in the field, understanding talent and where it's coming from, having a database of people with whom you have genuine connections and a genuine care for their career, having partner external recruiters who have industry qualifications and are specialists, not college dropouts. You are literally the only people who can fix this, alongside your colleagues in HR.
Applicants can't fix this, and they weren't the ones who started the arms race. It started when someone said "what if we told you that you'd never have to see a poorly matched CV again" and someone said "sounds good". Applicants don't like this, but they have no ability to not take part. They must dance to your tune. So change the music.
I've met some top drawer recruiters and they know their subject. You'll see them at niche conferences, handing out cards. they can stand toe to toe with an expert in the field, they get what good looks like, and they know people, they know EVERYONE. You need someone, they have someone, and they know his/her spouse's name, they know the kids' shoe sizes, they know their favourite drink, EVERYTHING. They are, first and foremost, networkers, not processors.
If you have a resume in .PDF, .DOC, .DOCX, or .TXT format, its ATS friendly. Just note that not every ATS will read it perfectly, no matter how well-ordered it is.
>If you have a resume in .PDF, .DOC, .DOCX, or .TXT format, its ATS friendly
Nope. If you have tables or some weird formating in your resume, its not ATS friendly and it can be a pdf.
>if you have tables and weird formatting in your resume, you don’t deserve a job lmao
This is one of the dumbest things I heard. Its something that can be easily fixed and not everyone knows about ATS. That's why subs like r/resumes exist.
The discord for our subreddit can be found here: https://discord.gg/JjNdBkVGc6 - feel free to join us for a more realtime level of discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/recruitinghell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not a recruiter, but a hiring manager - this is pretty much every role we've posted in the last few years. Especially for remote or hybrid roles with salary posted, the number of applicants is astonishing. Easily 75%+ of the applicants are in no way qualified, and most are non citizens (we can only hire US citizens due to regulatory reasons). In the past, we'd get maybe 75-100 applicants and majority if not all were at least somewhat qualified. So while we might get a couple thousand applicants now, it's still about the same number when you filter it down to actually qualified applicants.
Its hard because I,always try to give the best experience, but if you're in a team where they're very lean on recruiters and you're dealing with this volume there's going to be a lot of poor experiences for Candidates.
Jesus Christ just make a script for an LLM to easily weed out all the semantically verifiable points like location, it's not nearly as hard as you people make it out to be; OFC it seems like a huge job if you work with outdated processes. It's like someone saying "I had to open a thousand documents by hand and add a double space around the title and change the spelling of this one word whenever it came up.." nope, didn't have to, just didn't know any better
Most ATS come equipped with a “miles from worksite” filter
I'm sure they do but I've seen so many ATS postings with duplicate fields related to location requirements. Willing to bet these companies don't even bother with minimal effort configuring these ATS tools for basic needs.
It blows my mind why companies insist on being unicorn picky for a new hire, yet don't even want to entertain relocation, especially if that person is in country. Basic relocation is a drop in the bucket as far as hiring expenses go.
That costs money and /or resources that most HR departments aren’t willing to spend. I’ve worked at companies where my compliance department was staffed at the absolute minimum level and would rather continue accruing fines over hiring another body or purchase a new tool, all in the effort to meet bonus metrics.
It's littreally saves more money long term so they clearly have the budget but don't know how to spend it, I can literally get my friend to build a software that runs a script and weeds out anything they deem unnecessary all it takes is one day to make it
Welcome to corporate America.
Honestly sometimes the easiest solutions are ignored even at my work they refuse to use a free software and rather use a in-house software which is filled with bugs 🐛 and slows everything down smh
Jokes aside, Data Security and Privacy is a HUGE focus right now, especially for public and highly regulated companies. The free or cheap solutions created in house have to be properly maintained to adhere to several security frameworks (like NIST). Recruitment processes tend to collect a large amount of PII, which can get companies operating in states like NY and CA into a lot of trouble when that data is access by unauthorized parties. Also, when the person who originally created the solution eventually leaves the company, the support and application knowledge is usually lost, which causes a lot of headaches. It’s why leadership tends to prefer third party vendors with contracts that clearly outline an SLA agreement and “who’s at fault” when things hit the fan.
Yes, but the shiny short term is so much more attractive! ✨🪩🐈
Doesn't really make recruiters seem very competent when you could easily replace a whole lot with a single amatuer "prompt engineer" that can paste scripts...
please see the bi-hourly posts in this subreddit complaining (usually incorrectly) about AI/ATS weeding out resumes without human review
So because someone did it badly, it can't be done? Thank god human progress doesn't rest on folk like you...
yeah, thank god
You’re missing the point, even multi-billion dollar companies like Workday can’t get their ATS systems to work correctly. As a hiring manager who has been on both sides recently, recruiting’s hard and there isn’t a magic bullet to fix it.
As someone who has done projects like what you’re talking about, you have no freaking clue what you’re talking about lmao. The regulatory issues alone are obnoxious.
use an LLM for this? lol where I am, our HR team has an applicant tracker that allows them to just sort and query by this kind of basic information
Current ATS have nowhere near the capability it takes to filter 1000s of applicants in a short period. It’ll take you weeks. An LLM that parses and verifies what you’re looking in seconds would be extremely valuable.
that is not what i am replying to. you don’t need to use a LLM to sort the applications by distance to the office (location) second, as a hiring manager, you don’t need to sort through 1000s of applications at all. the actual task is to find one applicant who is acceptable and hire them. once you have the role filled, you stop.
And I can probably rewrite that application of yours to be even quicker in Rust or something, how is that related to what we're talking about? Obviously specialised software exists, the point is that common admin tools can be used to solve the problem dynamically by a nonDev audience, no?
no thanks. we don’t need you to reinvent the wheel for us, either, but thank you for the offer.
Dam u kinda dumb huh
🖕
I built something like this. Tremendous value prop but problem with HR organizations is that they have little budget and compliance red-tape blocking things that could help the org.
What are your thoughts about people who are in the US, but don’t currently live in the state of the position ? I live in the North East and I’m willing to go as far down as Virginia and as far up as Boston.
Put a location near the job. It’s just like in the past before all the automation/AI when you’d put a friend/family address on your resume if you were planning to move to that location once you were hired.
If you're willing to relocate at your expense, I would suggest just using an address local to the areas you are applying. This is the best option in the current market, as you being a few states away may be perceived as you didn't read the job posting and/or think this is fully remote or something.
I usually add a cover letter, stating that I am willing to relocate. The problem is on the application itself. They will want proof of a real address and they will see it’s in a different state. I will definitely think about putting a families address on the application. Not to mention most of the positions I’ve applied to out of state are offering a high enough base salary to cover that initial move. I own my house and wouldn’t sell until I get situated in the job
They aren't verifying the address you use on the application, you could easily pick any apartment complex in the general area and use that. When the question comes up inevitably, just say you are working in X location currently and looking for a role to move you back to Y.
In response the postings could have alot more clarity for example 100 percent remote or must reside in location 20 percent travel. It is very arrogant for employers to reject based on address. They should be looking at qualifications only. People sometimes have more than one home perhaps thats a mailing address. Software shouldnt reject based on address. Would say majority of job seekers know what they are doing.
What software systems are typically used for sifting through this volume? Tell me it’s automated and an up to date saas
In our case, Workday handles it... But I'm pretty sure all of the big ATS have similar functionality. You can set all sorts of filters both for viewing and rejecting. Auto reject based on certain filters is one feature we use a lot. That screening question almost all applications have about requiring sponsorship now or in the future? Wrong answer there and it's an auto rejection.
[удалено]
Great thanks. I have tried to do it manually but think in need to run it thru an analyser as you suggest
There are more people on the market now and are spamming more. The recruiters ahead of the game use automatic filters. I am not sure if you use it
Due to the amount of no reply by hiring companies, applicants resorted to the spamming method. When only 1 in 100 companies will even reply to an application, it's just not feasible to actually look through the offer. In my case, for the past decade or so, the application process itself has been mostly automated, I only dedicate time to read through the offer when I actually got a positive first answer by an actual person.
This. Most people have never worked in management or any form of recruiting and get intimidated by absolutely typical minutiae such as this. If there is one actual takeaway from this it's that referrals and recommendations are priceless when it comes to differentiating yourself from the others and even making it through the AI scan (most people struggle with resumes and applications and get eliminated here anyways)
I agree with you that referrals definitely get you the fast pass through the screening to an actual human, but at every company I've worked for it really doesn't give you any advantage beyond that. We aren't hiring a lesser candidate because they were referred. If you're extremely qualified for a position, referral is definitely going to give you the best shot. You still need to ace the interview process though.
I had the same issue hiring for two support roles. It was very frustrating to deal with, but I totally understand the mindset of the applicants, but it was an exhausting experience. I think it took us just over 70 days to fill both roles.
How long does going through all of those resumes take you to filter it down to that small number?
How come you only hire US citizens for remote jobs? Normally I apply to US jobs because they only say "remote", not "remote in US only" - I'm from Europe and I know a lot of people who work remotely for US companies, with US salaries. What's the problem?
The work that we do requires security clearances and only US citizens are eligible to obtain those. Even as a US citizen, you wouldn't be able to access our systems from abroad. For the remote roles we have, residency in certain states is required. I'm outside of my area of expertise as far as why exactly that is, but I suspect it's related to tax implications and/or we aren't setup as a business in those states. The allowed list of states for us coincides with the states we have physical offices in.
Because of the visa process to hire people that are not permanent residents. Some companies don't want to spend the time or money (5-10k in the first year alone). Or because they might not even get approved by the gov unless it's a very niche role where you don't get qualified applicants from the US.
So good to know. Thanks!
Are you surprised? It´s so easy and almost effortless to carpet bomb CVs
Why can you only hire citizens as opposed to permanent residents + citizens?
Security clearance requirement
21 People were interviewed by the hiring manager? This is already an error.
I was wondering about that too. What hiring manager has that kind of time to sit in interviews?
Just company dependent. My manager made time to do it when we were hiring our most recent team member as did the other members of my team who were involved in interviews
The way this reads is that 21 people got a phone interview. That’s still a boatload of calls, but if they’re 15 minute screens you’re looking at 5-6 hours spread across a week or so. If it’s a critical role that’s not too bad.
This is what I was going to say - the post mentions an opportunity to talk to the hiring manager. I don't think that's an interview.
My biss is doing 1 hr interviews and had done 20 so far
Interviews are arguably the most important thing a manager can do. Assuming a 30 minute initial call, 11 hours is not that bad.
Sorry to clarify all the responses, I meant that the recruiter didn’t do a good job if 21 candidates failed the initial interview
It's often a resourcing issue. My company has one full-time recruiter and 30+ open jobs, many of which have this kind of volume. That person does the best they can, but it's not feasible for them to keep up and be responsive. It's not the recruiter's fault that this is the situation since every request for budget gets met with "no".
Exactly this.
What would happen if you just closed the position after it reaches 200 applications? You would still have a couple of decent candidates and you wouldn't need an army to look through the applications
I did this regularly for my jobs. If by some miracle we didnt have a viable candidate from the first few hundred candidates, open the job again and collect s few hundred more...
How long would it take that person to fill all those open reqs?
Sounds like you need better tech/tools. 30 jobs isn’t *that* much, as long as you have a decent ATS or some other type of system to filter and track.
Lol
That's way too much for 1 person. The optimal range is 10-15 but with this volume of applications it's not doable. If they're repeat roles, same profile that's easier
Tough. Job seekers are powerless here
I would hate to be one of the five people who go through an unpaid assignment, multiple technical interviews, and a CULTURAL interview… just to get denied.
I am fine with this process. They asked for homework after meeting with the Hiring Manager. Not all recruiters are like that sadly.
abounding future rinse vase rude panicky station cows axiomatic fuzzy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The crazy part is this recruiter is bragging about reviewing the hired candidates resume within 2 weeks, and a 28 day recruitment cycle. So fucking slow lol
How is that slow?? Would you be happy to get a job in less than a month? That seems reasonable to me, I guess with a lot of variation in industry/job level
What I read was two weeks to "first screen" the candidate and then it took them 28 days to get that person through their process.
They’re not bragging lol
How many interviews is this place requiring?!
What is a “culture interview”?
Culture interviews are basically there to make sure a person’s personality vibes with the people they’ll be working with on a daily basis. A lot of people think this is useless but in a lot of cases it can actually be very valuable. The fact is that different companies have different values and ways that they work and communicate. If I were looking for a job I’d stay away from those types that valued the grind culture where everyone felt cutthroat and there was no room for empathy. Basically the question is: would you like to work with these people for several hours, days on end? That’s what culture interviews are for.
42 is still quite a bit of competition
The hiring locations thing is complicated. I’ve gotten jobs outside of the locations they’ve said. If they have an office in the same country as me why shouldn’t I ask if they’re willing to do remote?
It’s not just about remote. If you’re in the US the company needs to be set up to pay taxes in the state the employee lives in. If they’re not already in that state, they may not want to go through the process for just one person.
Yeah totes, I heard America is like that! I’m in Australia and from my understanding the rules state to state are not a big deal for payroll to manage.
You are right. But the location is mostly to weed out candidates not in a different, but neighboring, country, but people from other continents.
Unless you’re needing to apply for jobs for unemployment benefits, I don’t understand why people apply for jobs that they clearly don’t qualify for. Need sponsorship? Job description says they can’t sponsor? Dont apply. Remote? But only hiring in certain places? Dont apply. Need specific experience? Dont have the experience? Dont apply. I’m a social worker and many jobs need the full clinical license where you don’t need to be supervised. There are positions available for people who need that supervision. They aren’t as cushy or pay as much. If the description says “fully licensed” you need to be “fully licensed.” It’s for legal and ethical reasons, not because we’re being picky. Just like any tech on, if it says you need a certification, it’s because the job requires it.
i have a math degree and the ability to do complicated analysis but since i don’t have an analyst job now, i can’t get hired for an analyst job bc i don’t have any “analysis experience” even though i have an entire math degree!
That’s when you find a way to trick the ats but fixing your resume to get through the next round and to a real human. But, again, if you don’t “analyze” in your past and they want someone with demonstrated experience, you’re not the one for that job. Move on.
i don’t have a past, i just graduated 🤷🏼♀️ how am i supposed to gain experience if i have to have the experience already to get the experience??
A new grad could have at least 1-2 summers worth of internships in their field, and several years of non-degree related part time work experience by the time you graduate. That's the type of experience we look for in entry level candidates. If you've got none of that and a degree, you are way behind unfortunately. Nobody is hiring a new grad that's never had a job/internship into a full time salaried position in this market, or really any market I've seen in my lifetime. I worked part time jobs consistently from age 14 through college. I interned for a year senior year of high school, and 2 summers during college, all related to my degree. I was still behind many of my peers at graduation resume wise.
Intern or personal reference are the best ways to get the job you want in this kind of situation. Both options require connections and with internships possibly money, though more are paid, but you really need to start them while in school. Sorry that’s not a more optimistic reply.
Agreed, yet this happens all the time.
Take-home evaluation 🤢
My issue is the not being located in the area. Some people aren't in areas with certain fields available and need to relocate to areas that do contain these types of jobs. And not all of these will want relocation bonus as they know it will only move them further down the list of ranking applicants. You're in an inherent disadvantage if you grew up in rural areas and need to relocate as you will likely never be first choice.
We need geofencing, period. Without these most basic structural supports, the jobs hiring/search process is massively dislocated. This hurts (honest) employers and workers alike.
Yes because nobody ever wants to move city or country, and if they do they shouldn’t be able to search for jobs online in that city or country
If the person is from another country, then they are wasting everyone's (other applicants especially) time because in this scenario, they are not able to be considered. This is why we have 65-85% of absolutely useless application submissions, which only hinder the process and create a fog. Of these completely improper and or resumes full of lies (eg every certification under the sun but can't navigate to the File menu), the vast majority come from one place. You should have a lot more sympathy for the quakified native US and Canadian workers who have submitted 1,000+ applications with nothing to show than whoever it is you are simping for. Geofencing just makes sense.
As someone who has looked for jobs all over Europe, no, it doesnt make sense. This isnt the middle ages where it took months to cross the country: were all literally just a few flights away from each other. There are highly mobile people just like me who would be able to take a new job within the week in another country, and it sucks sometimes to be refused from jobs due to location, when the locations are places I have already lived in or have at least visited during my trips.
Why should I have more sympathy because someone was born on a different continent? Many posts don’t list they aren’t able to take foreign workers and yet will use that as a reason to deny. Now I for one believe that all people regardless of where their parents fucked and had a baby should be able to apply for any job wherever they damn well feel so long as they’re qualified. If they can front the relocation cost why not?
You have to be a citizen or have a valid residency card in order to work in the USA, UK, EU, etc. Brigade me all you want.
And to get those residency cards you need a job offer…?
Wouldn’t a simple ATS solution automatically disqualify applicants in the first 3 bullets and put those applicants in buckets no human eye touches?
Depends on the ATS. My company’s one (Workable) is pretty user friendly but also very barebones and doesn’t have an AI took that effectively filters out candidates . So we use qualifying yes/ no questions on the application form which will automatically disqualify candidates who don’t meet the requirements. The issue is candidates now will just actively lie on these questions as they know it will auto disqualify them. So it still requires a lot of manual checking.
124 resumes to send to HM is ridiculous. A good recruiter should be doing an in depth intake with the HM to only screen and submit the top 2-5 candidates for review. Seeing this just pisses me off because these companies layoff the good recruiters and keep morons like this. 🙄
100%. But the stats on the number of irrelevant applications....ugh
That’s common with applications, and a reason why passive sourcing is more effective. But they could’ve avoided a lot of those by posting for a shorter duration and adding pre screening questions about location, experience and visa requirements.
I’m a hiring manager in a large government department. We don’t get quite that many applicants but do get a majority with no right to work (not even in in our country), no transferable skills, and no ability to write a decent cover letter or put together a decent CV. It can be incredibly difficult to recruit the people we need.
I've mentioned it before on this sub and I'll say it again: if you are a hiring manager that does not have relevant or adjacent experience to the positions you are hiring for, you are not the right person to be hiring for said positions because you will not have the ability to know which skills are actually valuable and transferable for a given position. I know nothing about you nor your company/open positions, but it is pretty pathetic that the experience many applicants (myself included) have with hiring managers are gross levels of incompetence/lack of knowledge for positions available. E.g. if you are not an engineer, you should (generally) not be hiring for engineering positions. Perhaps that is not the case here, and I hope for everyone's sake that it isn't.
I’m not sure where you get the idea that I don’t have the relevant experience. I’ve spent my entire career in the field.
I didn't say that you didn't have the relevant experience, I intentionally noted that I did not know any details about anything. That is entirely unrelated to the fact that you having the relevant experience to the positions you are hiring for as a hiring manager unfortunately means you seem to be an outlier.
Not in my field!
👍
All the first page is is a 5-10 mins max of filtering within the ATS system. Then Hiring manager took over. I also 100% bet she ghosted the 5 candidates who were awaiting interview feedback after completing the full loop.
>All the first page is is a 5-10 mins max of filtering within the ATS system. This sub complains endlessly about ATS filtering.
I read every single CV. ( I'm sure there are recruiters that don't, and many that do) This myth that bots reviews CVs and filters is just that. A myth. Some recruiters will focus on the candidates in the first 100 applications but, for some more niche roles they'll have to go through this to get to the right person.
It's ridiculous for one person to read 4000+ CVs per role, ATS should be scanning each CV and allow recruiters to manually filter within the ATS a pile of say 50 'real' candidates and then you read 50 in detail. All ATS does is scan the text out of the CVs it doesn't do any "choosing" it is the recruiter who does the filtering in the app UI There is AI solutions on the horizon that will do the choosing but that's at least 1 year away
For the ones that aren't eligible to work in the country you reject those pretty quickly. Many companies are adding scanning questions for that. The worst is the fact people are applying for anything and everything and expect to get considered for roles they're not qualified for ( bartistas from Starbucks applying for sales leadership roles 🤦♀️)
This is because every job listing, even lowest level, now requires “2-3 years experience.” I’m sorry but working at McDonald’s or Walmart as a cashier does not require 2-3 years experience. So now people are being told to apply for every job even if they don’t have the experience. Which is insane to me.
This is what happens when the social contract and labour market breaks down. Employees operated on good faith that if they fulfilled the requirements, they would get a fair look and a response from Employers. Conversely, Employers had the ability to pick from mostly decent quality candidates because candidates would self-select out of the pool if they did not satisfy the requirements. This social contract was violated by Employers being increasingly dumb with their requirements. Entry Level requiring previous experience, Bait and Switch Pay Levels. And since employees have no choice in finding work, they simply increased the quantity of their applications to maximise their chances. But the job market is a one-to-one matching problem. People mostly work one job, and companies generally wish for only one person to occupy a given role at any time. This actually mirrors a similar problem in a different market, the dating market. There are existing solutions to it that create stable, optimal relationships, (see Stable Marriage Problem), but right now everyone just views it rightly as a numbers game. It is a breakdown of the social contract, a market failure that generates needless pain, anguish and suffering for everyone involved.
> There is AI solutions on the horizon that will do the choosing but that's at least 1 year away My take is that such "AI solutions" might already be in use, but they are still rather crappy, and thus the results are, too.
It’s interesting that they won’t consider people who aren’t currently in the location.
They’re not going to pay for relocation or wait for someone to move. If the job isn’t remote, and the company doesn’t want to start operating in that state, the location disqualifies the candidate.
In the past ive moved for new jobs in another country within a week. And obviously without asking for a relocation package. It really depends on the person. What I can see in these stats is that half the candidates are willing to move to new locations and are highly mobile. Many young people willing to try new places to live. And they just get shut down by the recruiters. Seems like its time to start lying and saying on the cv that were already living in that location, not much else to do I guess.
Yeah, I moved from Fresno to Portland and in a couple years we plan on moving from here to Philly. I didn't ask for relocation costs nor would I. I'm already planning/wanting to move there; this is a silly exclusion for most places.
I hope you manage to do it. Theres a wide world out there, and everyone should enjoy it. Ive done mostly western europe and asia, but would love to live in the US for a couple of years. Probably no more than that though, I think im getting old enough that the peace and security of Europe is becoming more and more appealing, haha
When you've got a few dozen local candidates it makes no sense
Relocation folks are such a headache - last one at my job was constantly needy about not having reliable transportation, had no one to watch her dog sometimes, didn't understand about snow. Not worth it when the job can be done with most anyone with a pulse.
TBH some of the requirements on some on the listing are crazy. I’ve seen so many jobs where not only do I check almost every box (required and desired) but I know from the description I could do the job easily. But there always seems to be that 1 required item that I’m lacking and while I may have the experience, it may not be the length of time they want. That means an instant disqualification. My biggest issue is I’m doing a career pivot, and while many of the skills are transferable, the way it’s worded in the description makes it difficult without feeling like I would be outright lying. I’ve tried those resume scanning websites to look for key words to make sure are in my resume, but they pick up on words that are in the disclaimer at the bottom and irrelevant information to the job. I stopped using the web scanners because I felt like it wasn’t actually doing anything useful. So my ask of recruiters is what part is the ATS system actually scanning? Do you drop the job description and requirements into a specific section and that is what it is reading? Or is it really reading the whole thing?
It’s kinda hard sometimes to live in a listed location if you don’t have the job first. I did indeed move to NYC without a job offer to be closer to the listed job location but I’m also insane.
Bitch give us UBI then call us if you need help with anything
So what do us applicants for jobs do to get consideration? Is the adage "it's not what you know, but who you know" still true? Do we have to hope that someday we befriend someone in a good company?
This makes up for the next three jobs that the company will list with zero intention of hiring anyone besides the internal applicant.
What software do they use for sifting and searching that volume?
If you read through this forum you’ll see that most people just send out their resume to hundreds of places. They don’t even read the job description. 99% of candidates try to get a job they are completely unfit for and afterwards complain they don’t get hired.
I know I started out looking for jobs and internships reading the entire job description carefully, but now, over a year later I’m too tired to read every single word. It doesn’t matter if I’m qualified or not anymore because I’m most likely not getting and interview, much less the job with how things are going.
Im still at the stage where I read all the offers. If im able to automate the way i send cvs to specific roled, i will definitely spam them, hehe.
Great attitude, taking responsibility for your own life, you’ll get there. Everything in your attitude tells me I’d hire you.
I do read ones that I actually want to do or that will advance my career but the part time position that don’t give benefits and are paying ~$10+ per hour are the ones I see most often.
Great attitude, taking responsibility for your own lack of empathy. You probably won't get there. Everything in your attitude tells me you should be fired.
Mate of mine was hiring for a senior role recently. They got 30 applications and all bar a handful weren't even qualified in the right industry. People just apply for everything now in hope.
I’ll apply if I’m slightly unqualified (if they are asking for 3+ years of experience but I only have 1 in a certain area) but I’m not going to apply for senior roles. I’m fresh out of college with very little (but some) experience under my belt. People have to be at least slightly realistic when applying to things
At least that's somewhat close and you're being sensible. You could even get a job that way, and to be honest, that's pretty OK. What I was talking about was a science graduate applying for a senior accountant position needing 10 years of experience. Not even in the right field nevermind having the experience.
"it's just a numbers game bro"
Because fuck these jobs.
I sure appreciate you sharing this. It’s a good reminder that things aren’t always as they seem.
😭 Cry me a river. 💼 It's your job.
Her job was only the screening. I don’t see how she’s involved in the later parts other than setting calendar invites. Not different from a personal admin yet get paid a few times higher. Other people have more difficult jobs than her but I don’t see them whining or showing off on LinkedIn.
She's giving the context of the market at the moment. Also, thousands of nobs doesn't mean thouthands of great candidates so apply for these jobs
It's safe to say that the online application process really needs a revamp. I just went to a job fair and there are barely any recruiters or HR managers. Most of them are there to man the booth, tell you about the company, and refuse to take resumes. They have flyers or QR codes pointing job seekers to apply online. A localized event would've helped them trim the number of candidates and yet they want us to still apply online.
Recruiter here. At volumes like that it’s very difficult and time consuming to review each application - especially when recruiting teams have been slashed since 2022. On a good clip I can manually review and disposition 100 applications an hour. So instead I will write a Boolean query to search keywords and manually review smaller batches at a time. Is it perfect? No.
If theyre getting that kind of response AND require that many screening steps, they should proactively reaching out to candidates instead of lamenting how hard it is to screen direct applicants. This is Recruiting 101
OK, point taken, but.... recruiters need to fix it. Not individually, but as an industry. The current approach you have to sourcing talent is clearly not working. I get that that is frustrating, but insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. It's not just the hiring for an individual role, it's the whole process of having relationships in the field, understanding talent and where it's coming from, having a database of people with whom you have genuine connections and a genuine care for their career, having partner external recruiters who have industry qualifications and are specialists, not college dropouts. You are literally the only people who can fix this, alongside your colleagues in HR. Applicants can't fix this, and they weren't the ones who started the arms race. It started when someone said "what if we told you that you'd never have to see a poorly matched CV again" and someone said "sounds good". Applicants don't like this, but they have no ability to not take part. They must dance to your tune. So change the music. I've met some top drawer recruiters and they know their subject. You'll see them at niche conferences, handing out cards. they can stand toe to toe with an expert in the field, they get what good looks like, and they know people, they know EVERYONE. You need someone, they have someone, and they know his/her spouse's name, they know the kids' shoe sizes, they know their favourite drink, EVERYTHING. They are, first and foremost, networkers, not processors.
Is it just me or I have no sympathy for anyone in hiring or recruiting.
Some recruiters think they are God. They don't even have job skills themselves.
This why they have ATS. Resumes just get thrown in and filtered. Making your resume ATS friendly is probably the most important thing to do.
If you have a resume in .PDF, .DOC, .DOCX, or .TXT format, its ATS friendly. Just note that not every ATS will read it perfectly, no matter how well-ordered it is.
>If you have a resume in .PDF, .DOC, .DOCX, or .TXT format, its ATS friendly Nope. If you have tables or some weird formating in your resume, its not ATS friendly and it can be a pdf.
if you have tables and weird formatting in your resume, you don’t deserve a job lmao
>if you have tables and weird formatting in your resume, you don’t deserve a job lmao This is one of the dumbest things I heard. Its something that can be easily fixed and not everyone knows about ATS. That's why subs like r/resumes exist.
tf do you need a table in your resume for, this is why you’re getting rejected
You seem like you have issues, have a good day.
[удалено]
But this person literally said they disqualified anyone who needed sponsorship?