welcome_dragon
12 minutes ago
Sorry but this reads so much like whining and assuming everyone is out to get the writer.
I agree with the sentiment that the resume is a very weak resume but it's not clear if he's getting rejected outright or after an interview.
Listen I've been laid off several times. The thing that was different from the last time is the number of auto rejections I would get. How do I know they were auto rejections? Submit application ... One minute later: thank you for applying... Two minutes later: unfortunately you don't have the right requirements.
I could say it's because of the use of "AI" in the hiring process (don't even get me started on some of that BS, but it's laziness. Maybe just filtering off key words like has been done forever.
And referrals? In what universe is that "cheating"? Yes I've had cases where I've made it to the decision point - just me and another candidate. Guess what? The other candidate was a referral and got the gig instead of me. This used to be called "networking" but somehow it's "cheating"?
My advice to the writer is to update that resume to what people are looking for now: the impact of things you designed/created is important! It saved X hours per week etc are better understood than "I worked on a thing that did something".
And the question of "calling out companies" etc ... Yes, that can be a problem. If I'm looking at hiring two people and one has a public record of this moreso than, say, a public record of projects (I don't know if this is the case here, but I'll assume) and the other has a public record of projects, well guess which one I'm going to hire. The worst hires are the ones who are going to "cause problems". Not criticizing calling out companies but if I make it a point to criticize companies I work for, what is a company supposed to expect out of me?
The writer is the cause of and solution to his own problem but instead he's victimized and being "kicked out" of the industry.