There always is the possibility that startups are the only place that would accept a homeless guy with little experience.
He seems to have writing skills, which is a useful skill, but with very little "resume fluff" to prove it. A white-collar job looks down upon even 6-months of unemployment... seeing years and years of unemployment / odd jobs is just a giant red mark.
Even if someone is fully qualified, you are simply going to favor the resume with a "solid work history" over someone with a whole bunch of holes.
Startups on the other hand, cannot afford that luxury. They often need the skills immediately and don't about those sorts of matters as much.
> There always is the possibility that startups are the only place that would accept a homeless guy with little experience.
From reading HN I get the impression he'd have very little chance because of his age. This guy has white hair, and posters here seem to think that over 26 is past it.
While the ageism of the startup scene is legendary, I think it's incredibly myopic. The assumption seems to be that older people who are hardworking and exceptionally intelligent are likely not to be conversant with the latest technology/programming language du jour and therefore have nothing to offer. I also wonder if startups feel that they can more easily exploit younger workers with airy, hand-wavey promises of future payoffs that older workers would be less likely to accept.
"seeing years and years of unemployment / odd jobs is just a giant red mark."
Guess what? In that case you have to be smart enough, for survival purposes, to make something up. For god's sake you can say you are a consultant. Or say you worked at a company that recently went out of business. And if you get caught later? Who cares by then you will have hopefully used it as a stepping stone to something else. Of course if you want to be honest you can continue to live on the street and hope for the best.
I am not doubting that it is difficult if you are living w/o a home to present an image that is consistent with that (so maybe you need to get a job care taking a property in order to have a place to live and using a po box) but it is not impossible. Very hard but not impossible.
or maybe survival? Lol some bullshit bias against holes and some guy tries to survive and it's said and done in your eyes. profile:jodrellblank tow-the-line drone
You're both right. He's suggesting to lie for survival.
Nonetheless, it is lying, and that has its own risks associated with it. Beyond honor, if people notice that you are lying on your resume, you start getting added to blacklists and those blacklists start spreading around.
You see, if you fail the typical interview, you are simply not hired. If you LIE in the typical interview, and the interviewer notices it, you may be banned for life from that company.
This is doubly-so for consultants. Consultants are sold based on their resume. IE: They may have found a Government Contract position that requires 3 years of experience, and naturally... they'll then look for people with 3 years of experience. They may be put in a very perilous legal position, and their Government Contract may be terminated. You aren't only putting yourself at risk here, but also the company that just hired you.
PS: its much much worse now that Mr. Snowden ruined it all for Contractors without a degree and little experience. Mr. Snowden has been cited explicitly as a case WHY you don't hire non-graduates.
He's got several years as a staff writer on a hit TV show, and his magazine publishing experience before that. The gap is real, and obviously important, but what came before is a lot more than "fluff".
He is _MISSING_ fluff. He just needs some job, ANY job that proves that he wasn't wasting his time during the gap.
He clearly has real world working experience. But any resume that is missing out on even a couple of months worth of experience signals a red flag to me.
This is the culture of corporate America. Holes are EXTREMELY bad in your resume. Period.
you were on the run from the Feds living in Argentina
you went to Pakistan to attend a Jihadist training course (BTEC-diploma)
you were kidnapped by aliens and given daily anal probes (that never impresses the interviewers)
you were being trained in cutting-edge industrial espionage techniques by a rival company of the interviewer
you spent the time going through sex-reassignment procedures and changed your name to Gladys
you worked for the NSA
The average interviewer will think all of the above and more in the space of two milliseconds, whether any of these delusional thoughts have any basis in reality.
There is no logic in it. Holes are bad because holes are bad. I'm sure I can make up a reason for you, but IMO, its better to cut out the bullshit and just tell it to you straight.
Holes in a resume are bad because most people who look at resumes think that holes are a bad thing. Its simply the bias that exists in most jobs (that I've come across... anyway)
That was my take as well. It seems he wants that long-term, corporate job, but it's just not there for the taking. The startups seemed to be the step-up from the Craigslist gigs.
He seems to have writing skills, which is a useful skill, but with very little "resume fluff" to prove it. A white-collar job looks down upon even 6-months of unemployment... seeing years and years of unemployment / odd jobs is just a giant red mark.
Even if someone is fully qualified, you are simply going to favor the resume with a "solid work history" over someone with a whole bunch of holes.
Startups on the other hand, cannot afford that luxury. They often need the skills immediately and don't about those sorts of matters as much.