If your date of volunteering was given as Nov-2016 then I would assume that you volunteered for the whole month.

If I found out that you actually volunteered for one day only, I would assume that you were intentionally misleading me, that you were totally dishonest, and that you couldn't be trusted.

That would greatly reduce your chances of being hired.

If you were hired, and part of the reason for taking you and not someone else was the volunteering, then your job would be in extreme danger if this was found out.

You'd be better off not mentioning the volunteering at all.

And seriously, if I read "volunteering for one day" I would have questions about your state of mind.

Specifying that you volunteered for one event on one day that has no real connection to your job does not really add much to your resume.

Even worse, as mentioned in the other answers, lying about the duration or making it unclear would be a very bad move.

However, if there were multiple one day events similar to this that you participated, you can mention something like "volunteered in multiple events of my community, such as ...", which makes it clear that there were short events, but also suggests your implication in the community.

Can I list one day of volunteer work as “Month-Year”?

Well no.

Not at all.

What you're suggesting isn't just simplifying your resume or cherry-picking what experience to list.

You're talking about substantially inflating your experience, i.e. lying on your resume .

Unless specified, listing anything on your resume as "Month - Year" will imply that you spent the majority of that month doing something.

If you were volunteering somewhere for a week you'd either list it as "January - Year //

Taught week-long training course for children" or, less commonly, "W3 - Year //

Taught children's training course".

There is some wiggle room when it comes to rounding off months

but that's only when the interval involved is long ehough.

So if you officially started on the 31st of July in 2012 it's fine to list "July 2012 - March 2015" on your resume.

But doing that if you left after less than a year or two would come across as misrepresenting your experience.

Lying on your resume is such an immense breach of trust that if it was discovered in the interview process you'd be immediately dropped from consideration.

If it was found out after you started the job you'd risk being fired for cause in many companies but even in companies that don't immediately go that far it would be a giant black mark on your record and reputation.

The only time where this wouldn't have such a dramatic impact was if it was just an honest mistake or a typo, but that would typically be discovered in an interview.

If you actually lied about it during an interview, you'll suddenly have plenty of time to write a new resume.

Why indicate the date?

You could simply indicate the action you took voluntier avoiding that issue.

Is it a good idea to mention the date of that one day volunteering for a whole month like "Nov-2016", although it was actually only one day?

There's absolutely no need to mention any dates in volunteer activities.

Normally, you'd list your volunteer work under a heading of "Volunteer Work" or such.

Just list the activities with no dates attached.

The duration of some will be self-evident Participated in Town Green-up Day Marched in the Annual March for Autism Others will just be non-specific Chaired the Scholarship Committee President of the Youth Services Society You seem to be intending to deceive the reader into thinking your single-day volunteer work was actually more than that.

You would be embarrassed if you are asked about it and only then have to admit it was only a day.

Better not to put yourself in that position.

Question: I am looking for volunteering experience that I can highlight on my resume or LinkedIn for an IT help-desk job, but mostly I find ones for a specific day, such as "Volunteers required for Garden Cleaning on this day".  Is it a good idea to mention the date of that one day volunteering for a whole month like "Nov-2016", although it was actually only one day?

Can I list one day of volunteer work as "Month - Year" on my resume?

You might be better off not mentioning the volunteering on your CV at all, but if you do then you don't need to mention the dates.

It is generally agreed that you cannot list a single day of volunteering with a simple month and year. However, it is probably not necessary to give dates for volunteer activities in any case.

It is generally considered that you cannot list a single day of volunteering with a simple month and year.

There is general consensus that there is no need to mentioned dates when detailing volunteer activities.


Check her correspondence, and cut-and-paste from it.

At least until you are confident that you get her writing style.

Create yourself a library of templates from her correspondence.

Create yourself a listing of her favorite expressions.

If she asks you to write a specific letter to a party and you can't think of a template or an original letter that you can use, ask her if she can think of an original letter she wrote that you can use as a template.

If you are doing cut-and-paste, do it but don't admit to it :)

How you make the sausage and from what ingredients is between you and the wall.

Make a draft letter and ask for her opinion.

You are not in her mind, so you have no idea how to proceed yet.

Start by reading some of her writings to get inspiration, then write a first draft.

Review it by yourself, and ask yourself what words she would not have used and what you could improve.

Then you can show her your draft and ask for her opinion.

Take careful notes of her remarks, and re-write the letter accordingly.

The second version should be much closer to what she wants.

To imitate her writing style read as much of her writing as you can.

Look for common turns of phrase or idioms that she uses, look for a pattern in first and last sentences of correspondence (problem statement, well wishing, summing up, etc), look at the number and length of paragraphs used, does she commonly use passive voice (starting the sentence with the object rather than the subject).

Someone copying my style for emails would see a common pattern of statement of problem - steps taken - request for action.

Common phrase would be "as your schedule allows", "Let me know if there is anything I can do", and "Please advise".

My emails will contain a lot of passive voice.

Break things down As with any challenging task, breaking things down into manageable pieces makes sense.

It sounds as though your boss puts some effort into maintaining good relationships with her readers.

Look at the following aspects of her letters:

How they start and finish - The opening and closing of letters

set the mood, reinforcing the relationship between writer and reader.

Tone

- How is the language used?

Is it business/professional, or is it open/informal in nature?

Is it buzzword heavy or in plain language?

Structure

- How long are the paragraphs and sentences inside them?

How do sentences typically start (and are parentheses used a lot)?

Use of contractions - e.g. or "for example"?

Aim - Letters are written for a reason.

How does your boss get down to the point and either ask for what she wants, and how does she inform the user of key facts?

How does she get what she wants out of the communication?

Analysing these aspects should help in building a decent facsimile of how she constructs letters herself.

Read lots and lots of stuff she has written.

Then try writing something up and ask her to critique it.

After a few rounds of doing this, you should get better.

Question: I've been asked to start writing letters for my boss. My boss will then send out these letters with her signature underneath them.   My boss has a particular writing style, and she wants me to write using her writing style. I've never imitated someone's writing style before. Does anyone here have any advice on how to do this?

How to imitate my boss's writing style?

Read as much of her writing as you can for inspiration and make a list of her favourite expressions that you can cut and paste into your writing. Write a draft letter and ask for her opinion on it.

An important step when trying to imitate your boss' writing style would be to read her previous correspondence for inspiration. From this, you can also try to identify commonly used expressions and idioms or even create a template for future correspondence. Of course, you may also wish to get her feedback on any draft letters that you do write.

Check your boss's previous correspondence and try to identify any particular expressions or features of her writing style which you can use in the future.

An important step in imitating your bosses writing style would be to read a lot of her previous correspondence to get inspiration.

Write a draft letter and ask for your boss's feedback.

If you can, use previous correspondence to create a template for future letters and e-mails.


If you have asked this person to stop this behavior, in a documented way ( email ) begin doing the following while making sure your supervisor is in the loop.

( You should usually give your supervisor the chance to address an issue before moving on to HR ) Document each occurrence with pictures and dates/times.

Make a note of witnesses.

After a couple such documented occurrences go to HR with your evidence.

This person sounds like the type of person who needs to be either reprimanded so his behavior changes, or fired.

This is similar to or could be considered bullying and should not be tolerate d. If the jokes are not well received by the person being pranked and the jokester, then this falls into bullying and typically is not condoned by professional companies.

Pranks at work are one thing, but messing with another person's car is not acceptable.

I would advise that you speak to your manager immediatly.

Explain that the atmosphere is making you uncomfortable and that people have interfered with your vehicle.

Insist that the behaviour has to stop.

As Mister Positive said, keep a paper trail.

If any damage has occured to your vehicle, get it fixed and present the bill to the prankster.

Advise your boss that you will be doing this (again, in writing) or, if you are uncomfortable giving the bill to the prankster, give it to your boss.

After you flag this to your boss, if anything further happens to your car call the police, file a report for criminal damage (or whatever your local equivalent is).

This approach may seem harsh or extreme, but cars are expensive.

A simple "prank" could cause thousands of pounds/dollars/bolivars of damage, or potentially have an impact on the safety and roadworthiness of the vehicle.

Tell your boss that this "picking on" is affecting your work and let him deal with it.

If people are messing around in the office then I would document everything, and think about contacting HR.

If they're messing around with your car I would see HR immediately.

A few jokes can be pretty bad but interfering with someones car is a criminal offence.

If they are messing with your property, especially if they are making your car potentially unsafe to drive, you need to go to a manager.

Now.

Document, in writing, what they've done and when.

If you can take pictures, do it.

Don't discuss the issue with the bullies.

Don't tell them you're going to speak to a manager.

Question: What can I do about people picking on me at work? When asked they reply with:   I only pick on people that I like   This keeps happening to me weekly, and has now progressed to pranks that involve messing with my car.

How to handle/deal with people pranking me at work?

You should think about going to HR or your manager and reporting the bullying. You should also document it and make note of any witnesses. You could even go to the police and file a report for criminal damage to your car.

Initially, you may wish to simply ask the bully to stop bothering you. However, if this is now repeated behaviour, you will probably want to report the matter to your boss or your company's HR department so that they can handle the matter correctly. Be sure to keep a record of all details, including photos, and don't discuss the matter with the party in question. If any criminal damage is inflicted, of course, there is the option of reporting the matter to the police or presenting the culprit with a bill for the damage.

If this behaviour is repeated, consider reporting the matter to HR.

You may wish to consider discussing the issue with your boss so that they can handle the matter appropriately.

Be sure to keep a record or all details, including witnesses.

Don't discuss the issue with the bullies and don't inform them that you are reporting them.

If any criminal damage is caused, consider filing a police report or sending a bill to the culprit.

You may wish to simply ask the bully to stop.


You have two choices: do it, in a nondemeaning way.

You don't have to wear a silly costume, film in a silly location, etc.

If you have a choice of music you can choose something you're ok with.

Someone may "tut" that you didn't make a fool of yourself, but you participated.

don't do it.

Either by "not getting around to it" because you've "got a lot on your plate this week" or by replying to the reminders saying you're not going to do it.

Either may cause someone to feel you're not a team player.

These videos are rarely designed to be demeaning.

They are supposed to be fun, and to demonstrate a more personal side to your coworkers or customers.

I've done my share, and they can be pleasant.

(They've always been optional and the recording is just of yourself, and gets cut into a larger montage.

The department-by-department approach here makes things trickier.)

I'm not going to put on a crazy wig or dance on my desk.

I don't think you have to either.

Just suck it up and do it.

Things like this matter more than you would think, and you might actually have fun.

Management remembers who was and was not a team player.

Not saying its fair, just telling you how it is.

( at least in the US )

I'm going to answer in a somewhat different direction.

If you don't want to do this, assert confidently that you are not going to participate.

If this causes backlash and insistence on you participating, then keep in mind the following.

Your company is trying to force you to do an activity that is: Not related to your job at all Not (strongly*) related to the company's goal or mission

Clearly making you uncomfortable

And because you (and perhaps others) are being forced into doing it despite all this, completely missing

it's only potentially valid point of being "fun" or "teambuilding", since it clearly isn't to you.

This is not about "being a teamplayer" at all.

This is about the company trying to coerce you into a pointless activity that makes you uncomfortable while trying to pretend they're doing "something fun".

It is a sign of a strongly dysfunctional organization, and you should start looking for a new job.

Forcing people to do things that make them uncomfortable "because it'll be fun" is not okay.

(And while you're searching for a new job, calling in sick is probably the best way to get out of this specific event)

*this might be meant as a cute marketing stunt, in which case there's some connection to the goal of the company, but still no reason at all to force anyone into participating.

If you can't avoid it, then someone has to be film-crew, animal-wrangler, key-grip etc.

Be creative and think up some very important reason why you can't be on the action side of the camera.

I'd take a sick day - hey, the very thought of participating in the video makes me sick.

Or I'd take a personal day - hey, my pet rock is feeling neglected :)

I'd suggest a different approach to the situation.

Such videos also need much more than "actors in them".

They need someone: to help setting up some decorations in the location where it's filmed to go pick up the costumes or hats or whatever to go pick up the camera from the manager's brother who agreed to lend it for a few days to actually film the thing to actually add the music / edit the video / publish it etc. to do other stuff that I can't think of right now

There's a lot of stuff that needs to be done so that such a video is a "successfull" one.

If you don't want to risk being seen as "not a team player", then you can participate in such a video without being an "actor".

Just suggest it to your manager or whoever is responsible for it.

As a side-note / personal comment: I too think such videos are kind of a waste of time and frankly quite pathetic.

Managers / executives simply want to portray an image of "look how fun we are and what a great place to work this is", but it's simply fake and everyone sees through it... or they should.

I'm kinda surprised that no one mentioned this yet, but compelling people to participate in any "holiday celebration"

is assuming that it is a holiday for everyone.

Basically not everyone celebrates these holidays and forcing people to participate, in what could be seen as religious holidays, could be an HR nightmare.

Even if this isn't your reason, you could drop that bug in someone's ear and get the whole thing called off.

"You know I like the holidays as much as anyone, but have you considered..."

Question: Management expects every department to pick a song and participate in a song and dance video to be shown company-wide (think  https://youtu.be/X0v_InsGdSE  ). Everyone is "expected" to participate, though many find it demeaning. How do we opt out without being perceived as non team players?

Management expects full participation in holiday nonsense video

Come up with a reason that you would better off participating on the other side of the camera or just inform management that you won't be taking part. If all else fails, try taking a sick day.

The simplest way to not participate would be either to not be in work that day or to insist that you are not taking part. However, if you want to avoid being perceived as a "non-team-player", you could look for other ways of participating that mean that you don't have to appear on camera.

You could simply assert that you are not going to participate.

You might want to look for other ways that you can participate in this activity without appearing on camera.

You may simply look for an excuse not to be in work that day, although it would be highly unprofessional.


I had TERRIBLE withdrawal from sertraline.

SO.... Don't just quit without the supervision of your doctor TELL NOBODY ON THE JOB.

It's not their business

Be prepared to take a sick day or two if you're not feeling right.

Even with your Psychiatrist dropping you down slowly, you can still get withdrawal, be very aware of the side effects and if you feel them coming on, address them.

The bathroom is always a good choice, or go home if they get too bad Discuss all of this with your psychiatrist If HR or your boss takes notice of any of this, get a note from your psychiatrist and bring that to HR. Do not say anything other than the fact that you are under a doctor's care, and "here's the note"

If the side effects are going to be intense (they sound pretty serious), then maybe you should consider going on medical leave while you sort yourself out (discuss this with your psychiatrist).

If however, you're going to keep going in to the office, then you may indeed wish to inform your boss and/or HR that you're transitioning off some medication (with the blessing of your medical professional), and may experience some side effects which they should know about.

This situation is tricky because you would be voluntarily disclosing medical information.

However, if you suddenly snap and yell at someone in the office it might not hurt for your boss to be aware that you don't "mean it", and might need some time alone to compose yourself, or to head home for the remainder of the day.

Either way, I would strongly suggest taking a few days off and monitoring your reaction to the withdrawal.

Never tell anyone except your closest family about changes in your medication.

If you tell our boss or co-workers that you are going off sertraline, they are going to look up the drug to find out what to expect.

Having read all about its indications and effects, they will naturally assume you will now exhibit anger, irritability, confusion, dizziness, sleepiness, or depression.

Confirmation bias will set in and at least some of them will believe you are presenting these symptoms, even as you actually become more forgiving, calm, focused, alert, awake, and motivated.

(Of course, on the positive side, they will also see you as less thirsty, more trim and fit, better rested, and more potent -- assuming they have read up on the side effects.)

A lot will depend upon your relationship with the boss and the size of the company and its HR department.

It may be helpful to tell those with whom you have a lot of interaction (including your boss) that you are going to be changing some medications and that you don't expect any problems, but there's a possibility of adverse reactions that might require using a different treatment.

Don't go into specifics about what is being changed; there's no particular reason your boss or coworkers should need to know or care.

What is important is that they understand that if they notice adverse changes in your mood or other such problems and they let you know, you will be able to pass that information along to your doctor so he can try something else.

If stopping the medication does adversely affect your work performance, you will need to talk to your doctor to figure out how to address the problem, but that would be a medical issue more than a workplace one.

You don't say where you are based, but if it's somewhere with disability discrimination legislation then by not disclosing your mental health issues you have no protection under the law.

I would recommend always letting HR know about health issues, and usually warn my boss and colleagues about medication changes if it might affect my behaviour at work.

Let's assume next week you act angry, irritable, or confused.

All not things that are particularly liked in the workplace.

Ask your doctor whether you would know if that happens (and if it is safe to restore the original dose if that happens).

If your doctor tells you that you might behave in a way that is not appropriate for the workplace, without realising it, then it might be safer if someone who works with you and who you can trust knows what's going on and saves you from getting into trouble.

HR or your boss if he doesn't work with you directly might not be the right person.

Question: I've been taking sertraline for about 3 years, and this year I, with the supervision of my psychiatrist, decided to stop taking it by reducing the dosage slowly. Some of the common symptoms of sertraline withdrawal are ( taken from here ):   anger  irritability  confusion  dizziness  sleepiness  depression   I don't know how I specifically will be affected, or if my productivity will be affected. Should I tell my boss or HR about it?

Should I tell my boss that I'm stopping a medication that affects my mood?

Many people recommend informing your boss and colleagues that you might experience some side-effects that could affect your work. However, it does depend on your relationship with your boss and colleagues. Other people argue that you should never tell people at work about medication you are on.

The answer to this question will largely depend on your relationship with your boss and the overall culture of the company, but even still, the answer will be subjective. Some people wouldn't advise mentioned health issues to people in a work setting. Other people feel that it would be best to mention any personal issues that might affect your work to either your boss, HR or both.

The answer to this question will largely depend on your relationship with your boss and the culture of the company.

Some people don't recommend revealing health issues to anyone in the workplace.

Some people feel that honesty is the best policy and that it would always be beneficial to inform HR or your boss about any personal matters than might affect your performance at work.


Short answer: no .

The hiring manager will come in the next morning, have 3 new applications and won't care enough to look up the time-stamp when exactly they came in.

If you are in current employment you might have no opportunity to apply for other roles during the working day, so applying for jobs at night is pretty much what most people have to do.

For companies who perceive this as negative, they would have to make assumptions as to why you applied late at night, and if they do that

then you should ask yourself do you really want to work for them?

You will find that most don't even look at the time in which an application was received, a lot of HR departments deal with printed CV and cover letters and will never even know when you applied for a job.

Smaller companies might know, but are unlikely to care.

The biggest factor in terms of when to apply for a role should be making sure you apply for the role as soon as possible.

Absolutely not.

There are at least 10 reasons that I can imagine for why you would apply late at night, and none of them would be of any interest whatsoever to me as an employer.

I'd hazard a guess that the majority of the employers doesn't even look beyond the date portion of the timestamp, at all.

No.

few people, if any, look at the timestamp of an application.

I don't.

Even if I did I would simply assume that you were employing a tactic to submit as late as possible to be the first application I saw when I got in, so if anything I would think you were either clever or using every available moment to job hunt.

Generally I agree with what Agent L and Jonathon Cowley-Thom have said.

Given that so many hiring managers are inundated with applications nowadays

, I doubt they'd have the energy to consider the time you applied.

Depending on what kind of electronic application system the employer is using, they may not even be able to see the time that you applied.

In general I think it would take a lot for a hiring manager to consider that.

I'd also like to point out that when it comes to federal jobs, they're almost all posted on the USAjobs.gov website.

While some are posted at various times throughout the day, most are posted at midnight when their system updates.

I consider myself a very well versed applicant, and I'm very motivated about my career.

So depending on my schedule, I often stay up late into the night, or get up very early in the morning to check what jobs have posted.

Especially considering that many of the more desirable jobs will close after receiving a set # of applications.

The system is automated and my resume/transcripts/certifications are all uploaded, so I have applying down to a matter of minutes.

Question: Given my current schedule (including work) I am often up very late at night. I am looking for a new job and was wondering, does it look bad if a employer receives an application form at 3am or sometime where most people are sleeping? I am looking for more regular jobs (around 9-6) and expect to have to adjust my sleep schedule and am prepared for this.

Can it be seen as negative having applied for a job posting late at night?

No, the hiring manage will not consider this.

It is not generally considered a problem to send job applications late at night.


Is there a way I can get they to change the ringtone, without escalating too much?

You have talked to your coworker and he is disagreeing.

You have also established that your other coworkers don't want to get involved.

Your next step would be the guys manager.

Only you can know if you consider that "escalating too much".

You could call his phone while a manager is within hearing distance.

But your colleagues are right, escalating things might cause more problems without really solving this one.

People have a right to choose their own ringtones on their own devices after all (even though it's just good manners to have your phone on silent while in the office).

Unless he's getting calls every half hour, I'd ignore it.

Over-reacting and escalating the problem can also create a hostile workplace.

While it's possible to claim that people have a right to do this and that, the OP here has to live with the consequences and sometimes sucking up a minor inconvenience is better than creating or worsening a potentially toxic working environment with a co-worker.

Making his phone ring while the boss is nearby is a cute idea, although it may not garner the desired response (ie: changing his ringtone.)

His boss may not care enough to say anything, or he might just apologize quietly and not do anything else.

It could also backfire on you if your coworker can trace the incoming call back to you, so tread carefully.

A coworker has a song as their phone's ringtone, and the song lyrics could be flagged NSFW.

It does not contain actual cursing, but has tons of obvious sexual innuendo.

I think it is disturbing.

If a human being were to speak the lyrics to another human being in the office, would it reasonably be considered sexual harassment?

Harassment in the workplace can take many forms, and women are not the only ones allowed to complain about it.

You could take a transcript of the lyrics to HR and ask them what the company's policy is regarding language like this in the office.

Not naming the coworker specifically, or even admitting it's someone's ringtone.

Just tell them you're trying to gauge what is or is not appropriate around the office.

That could help to inform you on what should be done next as well as

how likely you are to get support from people outside your department.

Filing a (politely worded) complaint with HR is not necessarily over-reacting.

You could even submit the complaint anonymously if you're really worried about it, so they know what's happening without knowing who exactly brought it up.

Personally, if I were in your shoes, I'd probably talk to my manager about trying to set up a policy to require cell phones to be set to vibrate or silent mode while at work.

Or, if that policy already exists, about enforcing it more strictly.

Regardless of whether the ringtone is a song with NSFW lyrics, it's disruptive to have other people's phones ringing audibly in the office.

I might also mention the issue of some people having NSFW ringtones to my manager as yet another reason to support the aforementioned phone-silencing policy.

Whether you name names on who has such an inappropriate ringtone is up to you, but it seems unnecessary in this context unless perhaps your manager specifically asks whose it is.

Avoiding naming names would help to limit escalation while still hopefully providing enough incentive for your manager to get this problem shut down.

Having the policy of putting phones on silent operation while at work also has the benefit of allowing your coworker to keep his phone on the inappropriate ringtone if he so desires without disturbing or offending you or others in your office while he's at work.

Not progressing further than asking them to change their ring-tone is correct, and your colleagues are correct about that approach.

You just can't always have an environment 100% free of anything you don't like, this really is a minor issue.

Few times my colleague used very annoying (though not offensive at all) ringtones.

I didn't even comment on it

and I really think obsessing about stuff like this is a waste of time.

If you absolutely can't tolerate this then obviously talk to your manager.

But don't expect your colleagues to back you on anything .

They clearly stated that they don't like it but tolerate it and even explicitly advised you not to push this .

workplace.stackexchange.com/users/45619/Tomáš Zato - Reinstate Monica

Other coworkers agree that this ringtone is not a good one, but that I should not press further.

Okay, so your coworkers do not support further action in terms of persuading the colleague to change the ringtone.

Therefore, the answer to "how to deal with him" is deal with it .

That is, just ignore it .

workplace.stackexchange.com/users/7260/Lightness Races in Orbit

Question: A coworker has a song as their phone's ringtone, and the song lyrics could be flagged NSFW. It does not contain actual cursing, but has tons of obvious sexual innuendo. I think it is disturbing.  I talked to them, but it was to no avail. They refuse to change the ringtone. Other coworkers agree that this ringtone is not a good one, but that I should not press further.  Is there a way I can get them to change the ringtone, without escalating too much?

Coworker has a borderline-NSFW ringtone that is disturbing. How can I get him to change it?

Your next step would be to go to your manager but your colleagues' recommended approach is also a good one. You could try to set up a policy of no cellphone ringtones while at work.

The answer to this question is subjective, and some people feel that this issue would be best ignored. However, if you cannot stand the rington, you might want to consider talking to the person's boss and allowing them to handle the matter. If you want to take a more official stance, you could take a transcript of the lyrics to the ringtone to HR and discuss with them as to whether any company policies are being violated.

If you cannot stand the ringtone, an obvious step would be to speak to the person's manager and allow them to handle it.

You could consider speaking to HR about whether the ringtone in question violates any company policies, including by taking them a copy of the lyrics.

Some people might feel that this is a situation which is best ignored.


Short answer, YES Long answer, yes, of course!

Basically, this is going to impact on your interview either way.

Don't address it, you're that guy who gets in fights and shows up to work like this.

Explain it

and you're the risk-taker who might end up on extended sick leave from a silly accident.

However, the latter is certainly preferable, and might show that you are a fun person to work with.

If you can make a little light from it, that would help

It would be negative if you didn't mention it at all, because that leaves the interviewer to assume the worst - that you were in a fight.

By addressing it at the first meet, it would also be an icebreaker - and a way for them to ask you about what you do in your spare time outside of work, and establish a more casual atmosphere - which is usually great in

job interviews(It shows that you're a human!)

I would mention it.

They are going to be curious and will avoid asking as it could be personal.

Address it quickly and matter-of-factly.

Add a little humor if you want, but you should move on quickly.

Even if your injury comes up again later in the interview, just smile and steer the conversation back to the interview.

You want to address it but not for it to dominate the interview.

My wife had once an interview in a very formal place.

Of course she left all her stuff in the train she was taking the night before.

She went to the interview in jeans, t-shirt and trainers.

When she got into the interview room there was some silence - more surprised than anythng else, as everyone knew she normally would be dressed conservatively.

She started by shortly explaining what happened, everyone smiled and then proceeded to the interview.

She got the job and was told later by her boss that she made the interview "memorable".

So just be natural, smile and go ahead Be glad not to be this guy whose friends put a lock around his neck before his interview

(I cannot find the original picture, the one above is from another prank )

I'm surprised the five answers here so far all advocate, rather assuredly, that you should explain your injury first thing.

I've worked with a bunch of people that wouldn't give a rat's ass why you have an injury.

They're there to figure out whether you have the skills to do the job and whether you will work well in their organization.

Spending that time discussing your injury wouldn't even cross their minds.

I would also say that as an interviewee, don't forget that you are also screening them .

Do you really want to work with people who are so concerned about why you were injured?

Is that really the most important thing for them to be thinking about?

Of course, if you really need the job and opportunities aren't looking great, yes, you can cover your bases by explaining your injury.

But keep this in mind: not only would an interviewer who is suspicious enough to think you got into a fight be suspicious enough to think you are making up an excuse, but focusing on your injury first thing shows a lack of confidence.

Yes- Taking responsibility is a rare trait in the workplace!

Add humour, too. "

Snowboarding!

__ years & tried something new & learned a few do's & don'ts for next time.

My grandpa always said a day without learning is a sad day, indeed.

What's the hardest learning experience/impact that's been "worked around", over here?"

Turning around the normal Q of "what was your hardest experience"& venturing into trading war-stories, creates more human rapport

(repoire is the sales-lingo typo) & memorability.

You have memorability all-ready nailed down!

Now tack onto it!

Good luck & have fun with it!

Jobs, like many things in life, are #s games.

But make sure you have researched highlights that interest you about the co.

Copy them into a doc & read them repeatedly,esp.

if you are interviewing w/ mult.

co's

(& don't want to mix up facts!)

Question: Last Saturday, I got in a snowboarding accident that resulted in a very noticeable facial injury. While the worst of it has already healed, a large portion of the wound is still healing up and will likely not finish healing up until next week.  Tomorrow I have an interview and am wondering if I should address this facial injury during the interview or just stay mute about it. I'm concerned whether or not the injury could have a negative impression before the interview starts.

Should I clarify my facial injury during an interview?

It would be a good idea to mention it in the beginning but don't go into too much detail. If you don't mention it then the interviewer might think you were in a fight.

It would generally be advisable to explain your injury, even if only briefly. Not mentioning it at all could be seen negatively, but don't allow it to overshadow your interview.

The general consensus is that it would be highly advisable to explain your injury, although don't allow it to dominate the interview.

Even if you don't go into too much detail, it would likely be seen as a negative not to mention the injury at all.


A couple ideas.

Any old resume's.

Do you have any old resume's around from last time

you were job hunting?

Even old hard copies would have the dates you used then. 2)

Any job boards you might have used in the past?

Even if you can't remember your account info and can't reset your password you may still be able to view the info.

Old tax info or pay stubs?

You got paid back then

so do you have any payroll information still around? 4)

Does it really matter?

If it is long enough ago that you don't remember you can be more vague on your resume.

For some of my oldest jobs on my resume

I just list the years without even a month for start and end date.

If it was 5 years ago even the month and year is probably enough and even if the month is off

it's likely not going to be that big an issue if it even gets noticed.

Let me give you a dose of reality.

At some point you're going to get a job offer (with whatever you put on your resume) because statistically, it's bound to happen.

And and some point, one of those jobs is going to do a (drumroll please) ...

BACKGROUND CHECK When that day comes, you need to have that information, period.

They will pay a company to look into your job history to make sure you're not completely full of crap.

And if they don't match up (i.e. you're full of crap), you can kiss that job goodbye.

The bottom line is that you need to find that information somehow.

Call the HR department of every company you worked for and enlist their help.

If you're nice and friendly, you probably won't get too much resistance.

At the minimum, you can get a copy of your personnel file which they can likely charge you for but at least you'll have the information.

It might be a hassle, but it's worth the time you spend to do that.

It's just going to take a lot of leg work on your part.

Because I'm not kidding, if you get a job that requires a background check and the history doesn't match up, you're out of that job.

You might also look at old bank statements, and even better at old tax returns.

And you can always ask HR in an old company.

There are jobs where I don't remember the month

but I do remember the year.

I also keep old copies of resumes to remind myself where I was and update my resume continuously to include what new things I've learned, etc.

Surely you must have an old resume hiding somewhere, and sometimes if you got some milestone award from a job, that might register some memories for you to pin down a year.

Some jobs insist on knowing a month even a day you started, but I keep it generalized to the year started and year ended.

If they want more details, and I have a 20 plus year resume, I state that it's been a while

so I don't exactly recall the month.

Most people, if they bothered to read your resume and are interested in you, don't bring this up.

Exact dates are usually not important.

It doesn't usually matter if you started on June 1st or June 21st.

Personally, I only list month and year on my resume.

If you can at least remember the season you worked (Summer, Fall, Winter, Spring), then you can pick a month from there and it'll probably be correct, or at least close enough.

If you have trouble remembering this, my suggestion would be to try to remember what the weather was like or what you wore during the first week, and that should give you at least some indication. 2)

If you absolutely cannot remember even the season you started/ended work, then just listing the year should be fine.

Just mention to the employer that you could not remember the exact dates so when they do the background check they know that the information mishap is on you.

Always remember: Honesty is the best policy.

If you are missing information, then just say you are missing information, because you forgot it or whatever.

They won't (or shouldn't) hold that against you, especially if you're new to the workforce and don't know better.

The worst thing you can do is make up a date, put it on the resume, and have that date be shown false in the background check.

That would be even worse.

Just mention

"I think it was around this time" or whatever,

so they have a heads up.

Question: I have been out of the workforce for far too long.  I really need to find a job but now I am having trouble remembering the dates of previous jobs ( start-stop dates ).  Can I get that information like employers would?  I would be able to know what I am telling them matches what they will see.Thank you in advance for any help with this matter.

How can I fill out a proper resume if I can not remember the dates of previous jobs?.

You can try asking the HR departments in the companies you used to work for or checking old tax returns. If you are missing information then just put the year down.

It may not be a problem to simply omit information you don't remember or explain that you can't remember it. However, if you need to provide such information, you could consider contacting the HR department of previous employers or even taking a look at old bank statements or tax returns.

You could contact the HR departments of companies that you previously worked for to find out the details you're missing.

It may not be too problematic if you simply omit the information you cannot remember or explain that you can't remember.

Old bank statements or tax returns might give you a rough indicator of when your employment started and finished.


Bad idea.

Unless you're applying for a job as a comedian (in which case think of a better joke).

For any serious job, you stick with conventional style and let your accomplishments do the rest.

For a very low level job it might be ok.

Humor is contextual.

You can't build a context in a resume, nor do you know your audience.

It may work once or twice, but that will be the exception, not the rule.

Your resume is a formal document, just the fact of trying to use humor in it will be seen as unprofessional by some.

You don't know who will see your resume, and you'd better try to avoid being rejected immediately for such a small addition.

If your resume is "terrible" as you wrote in a comment, humor is not the way you should solve the problem.

Be sure to keep your resume short and focused on yourself and your work experience.

You can find a lot of tips on writing a successful resume on many sites.

Last of all, it's normal not to receive a reply if they're not interested in your position, and that's why you should be applying to a lot of places at once, expecially if you're in an oversaturated job market or if you have no previous experience.

I would have to say NO do not do it.

You may find it funny

but how can you guarantee your viewer will?

If they don't find it funny, they'll bin it without a second thought.

They may not even realise it's a joke

and if you get through to the interview stages they may ask why you put it on which could lead to awkwardness when you tell them it was meant to be humorous

and they don't laugh.

Additionally I don't think the use of progress bars is useful.

Don't measure your skills like that.

Anything you put on your CV, make sure you're good at it.

Sell yourself.

Right now you're giving off the vibe that you're not as good at multitasking as I would like you to be.

Imagine your employer humorously says

"Our job offer is ranging from $0.5555555 - $50.5555555 per day depending on your experience" If you want to be looked as a professional.

You have to act professionally.

First impression is very important.

Question: So if you don't 'see' it, then please look at the last 'skill' in the image. I think it's a nice way to end the resume as my 'education' portion resulted in no degree but is there to show that I am educated - just not formally.   So, yes or no?

Adding a Humorous "Skills" line to Resume: Yes or No?

You should definitely not include humourous "skills" on your resume.


Interact professionally based on professional roles.

Say "Mr. Doe" or any standard professional way of referring to him that is appropriate.

Personal ties outside of work can be a challenge in the workplace for those involved.

A parent-child relationship can be particularly difficult.

In some cases, the child may struggle to step out of their parent's shadow and be known for their own work, rather than as "the boss's kid".

In such cases, usually the individuals involved are trying to keep the personal and the professional separate.

The most helpful thing for you to do is respect the same divide

: base your interactions with them on their roles in the company, not on personal factors outside of work.

If you say "your father requested this", you might be subtly contributing to a difficult situation.

Note: this may change if you develop more of a relationship with the people involved and interact more casually.

But it would be the starting point for professional interaction.

The boss is speaking in his function as the boss and not as the father, so you should rather ignore the relationship.

I run a family business that has employed my children.

We are all on a first name basis, so both staff and children would occasionally say "Kate" to each other when referring to me.

The kids might say "mum" to someone, no worries.

Some of my staff had been with me a long time, their kids were friends with my kids etc, these are the ones more likely to say "your mum" to one of my children.

It never once mattered to me a speck.

Note:

the largest this company ever got was 11 people.

I might have a different answer for a team of hundreds, or when the parent didn't own the company.

But for a small cohesive group, where everyone knows the relationships, and many staff have known us for decades (I had a young programmer for a summer job who I first met when he was 4, and have twice employed people who lived close enough to my house to walk to work when the office was attached to the house)

it doesn't matter what you call me, everyone knows who I am.

This is a matter of business culture and the personal preference of the people being addressed.

How do others refer to the boss to his son or daughter?

Have you asked the parent and/or child how they would prefer you to handle the situation.

I know there have been people I worked with who did not want to be known as a relative

and they preferred the people who knew not to mention it.

I have worked other places where the relationship was always mentioned.

Most places I have been on a first name basis with both people and referring to people by their first name to a relative seems much more natural than by saying Mr. Jones.

When I worked at my dad's restaurant in Germany as a teenager and young adult, the staff would always refer to him as "the boss" when talking to me, unless they were on first name basis with him, in which case they would sometimes use his first name.

I was fine with that, and I don't think he cared, as long as the job got done and communication worked.

In my view it doesn't matter, both are equally appropriate.

The arguments presented by dan1111 and FooBar are perfectly valid, but in most cases you can use either.

I used to say to a subordinate, " Your son is doing a good job and it is really good

we've got him as a tester ".

My subordinate never had a problem with this, and others in the office made reference to the relationship too.

While saying "Your son" is coming from the opposite perspective, it is referring to the relationship.

It probably depends on country and company (or family) culture, but in my sector (construction) at my place (Catalonia) there are a lot of family business and it's perfectly fine to refer to people by their relation.

In fact, sometimes using the most formal designation is ambiguous: if somebody called to some business and asked to talk to some people using the surname, it would be uncommon to be asked back "Which one do you want to talk to?

The father or the son(s)?".

Of course that might be different in family business - proud to be family business, and sometimes proud of their several generations long history - than in a big company, where working close to relatives could be seen just as a sign of nepotism.

Question: When speaking with a boss/manager's son, should I say:   Your father requested so and so.   or rather:   Mr. Doe requested so and so   I only have a professional relationship with the son. We don't chit-chat.

In a family business, do I refer to people by their name or by how they're related to the person I'm speaking to?

You should interact according to professional roles not personal relationships unless the person expresses a preference otherwise or this is common in your culture.

The answer to this question will depend on a number of factors, including the country you are in and the culture of the company. However, there are people who believe that you should address people professionally in a work setting, regardless of any personal relationships that exist.

Some people would say that since you are in a professional context, you should interact with people based on their professional role and ignore any personal relationships that might exist between employees.

The answer will vary depending on the company, culture and country, and it may well be that either options are acceptable.


I think you can just add them on LinkedIn without asking permission or talking about it face to face.

Just build a network, you will never know when it will come in handy!

I was wondering if it would be appropriate for me to ask my co-workers if I could maintain a professional network with them

It's perfectly appropriate to invite anyone who you think would add value to your network.

Depending on how you worked with them during your internship, and how they feel about you, they may not all accept your invitation.

Don't take that personally.

You could attempt to add them immediately after you left.

That way, who ever wants to connect can do so - and whoever doesn't aren't socially pressured into doing so.

Absolutely!

Not only do I think it's OK

, I think it's an excellent way to start building your network.

Internships don't always get counted as real work experience by interviewers, but if your new network contacts from your internship endorse your skills, that might help you when you go out for your first real paid gig.

Showing that you have not only passed classes in which you learned something, but can actually apply it in a real work environment is going to help put you ahead of someone with similar credentials.

Also, I would love for interns I've worked with to add me to their network.

When I'm working with an intern, it's part of my job to act as a mentor in both technical skills and professionalism/career-building.

If I've done a good job of that, having interns that I mentored in my network can help me as much as it does them.

For the coworkers you just want to stay casually connected with, just send them the invite.

One other thing you may (should) be thinking about when building a network is references.

In your job search, you will be asked to provide references, and it's proper etiquette to have had some conversation with the person whom you put down before they get the call.

Leaving an internship is the perfect time to have those conversations.

You may start the conversation with "Hey, do you mind if I add you on linkedIn" but end with "Do you mind if I put you down as a reference in my further job searches?"

I disagree with most answers about the fact you don't ask, specially in the case of using my personal mail .

If I gave you my personal mail, it's not to give it to some sites/

anyone without my consent (like a phone number).

Those sites may start to spam me or sell it eventually to some advertising spammers.

So I would prefer that you ask me first.

Note that probably not most people would care about that, but in doubt, ask.

Yes, it's perfectly normal to add coworkers on LinkedIn, especially if they're already members.

The fact that you're an intern doesn't really matter - you still worked with them.

You don't really need to ask in advance of sending them an invite IMHO.

Honestly, I'm not sure what their incentive is to refuse or object (I certainly wouldn't).

Being connected with someone on LinkedIn is very different from being a Facebook friend, for example - being a Facebook friend tends to imply a certain kind of social connection with someone, but there's less of an implication of a particular social relationship (beyond some kind of professional relationship) for LinkedIn.

(I'm connected with a fair number of headhunters that I maybe worked with once, for example; that's actually fairly common in my industry).

workplace.stackexchange.com/users/61906/EJoshuaS - Reinstate Monica

As your term nears its end, you can send out an email which thanks your co-workers for the internship, details how much you loved it, and say that you'd like to keep in touch.

Include your personal or student email address (whichever is more professional for you) and a link to your linkedin account.

If you are closer to some of your colleagues than others, let them know you want to connect on linkedin before the internship ends.

Then, send out those invites.

If any of your colleagues seem particularly active on LI, just send it out.

Question: I'm currently a student on an co-op term. I work in a fairly small team and my term is about to finish up. Since this is my first intern experience, I was wondering if it would be appropriate for me to ask my co-workers if I could maintain a professional network with them (such as adding them on LinkedIn). If so, any advice on how to go about asking would be appreciated!

Is it okay for an intern student to add co-workers on LinkedIn?

It perfectly appropriate to add coworkers on Linkedin if you think they would add value to your network. You don't need to ask them for permission beforehand. You could also send out an email at the end of your term thanking them and saying you'd like to keep in touch.

It is considered perfectly acceptable to add people on LinkedIn to keep in touch with them once your intership ends. It is generally considered that you don't need to speak to people first before you add them on LinkedIn, but you could always consider speaking to them first or sending them an e-mail before you leave the company.


In most of the recruiting processes, is this just another piece of the puzzle or usually when you are asked for that it means they are already willing to contract you

Typically it means that the company is at least moving to the next step.

If you weren't still in the running for the position, most companies wouldn't bother asking.

For some companies, they will actually start checking your references, so you may wish to contact them yourself and give them a heads up.

For other companies they will contact your references later.

This is certainly a good sign.

But you don't know how good until you either do or don't get an offer.

Simply asking for references could just be a matter of course through the interview process.

Whenever I interview, I ask near the end of the interview whether it would be okay to contact their referees.

That way, I don't have to waste time chasing candidate references after the interviews and giving a false impression that you've been selected.

I typically only actually contact referees after selecting a preferred candidate.

If the references for the candidate fail to provide enough backing to hire the candidate, then I'll strike the candidate from consideration and go straight to the next candidate's referees.

Different companies have different processes.

The one that you applied for seems to have some process in place (coding, Skype).

The references probably mean that you got positive feedback from the three rounds so far.

Which means if you are interested in the job, you should put in effort into getting the right references, and getting the references right.

Do keep in mind that just because you have progressed to the next stage, you will not necessarily make it through.

There could be various reasons for you to get on hold - they get an awesome candidate, or just want to see if an awesome candidate comes along.

Sometimes hiring is also preemptive.

They might have people in the pipeline, but only make offers as they need them.

Or a change in business conditions, or funding might result in a delay or cancellation of the offer.

The conclusion is - you made the next step.

Send the references and wait (or follow-up after a decent interval).

It's pretty routine, and generally a good sign.

I will say that you should have your references lined up well in advance of being asked to provide them.

You should ask someone you want to use as a reference well before using them.

When a potential employer asks for references, you should also let you references know that they might be getting a call from XYZ company about you so they aren't caught off guard.

If you're asked for this AFTER an interview and the situation is with a company that's going to hire you directly without a recruiter, then it's a good sign.

If you're asked this BEFORE an interview by a technical staffing firm, it's a red flag.

They're looking for managers' names to contact to try and get new business, regardless of whether you get hired or not.

Question: After two coding projects and having an Skype interview with a startup's team, nowI have been asked to give 3 references from my previous employments.  In most of the recruiting processes, is this just another piece of the puzzle or usually when you are asked for that it means they are already willing to contract you (unless the feedback from your former employers is particularly bad)?

Is being asked for references a sign that they are willing to hire you unless something bad comes up?

This is generally a good sign that you have had positive feedback from previous rounds and this is the next step in the process. However, every company has its own procedure and it could just be routine.

The answer to this question will depend on the company's processes, but generally, asking for references is a positive sign that you are progressing through the recruitment process. However, if you receive a request for references before an interview, this could be a sign that it is a technical staffing company, which you may wish to avoid.

Typically, requesting references is a good sign that things are going well and that you are moving onto the next stage of the recruitment process.

For some companies, asking for references is simply part of the process.

The answer to this question will depend on the company's processes.

If you're asked for references before an interview, this is generally a sign that it is a technical staffing company. You may wish to avoid this.


Use a privacy screen.

I also CoWork (I am a contract programmer and can work offsite or from home but prefer to work in the CoWorking space environment).

I often work from the oddest places (Cafe's, by the beach in Thailand, you name it

I have probably done it) and while the whole CoWorking experience is great it does have its downsides

like you mentioned (people staring at your screen and copying or chatting).

So looked around for solutions until I was at the Doctor's once and noticed the nurse using one of these x-ray type sheets on the screen, as soon as she slid it on Poof!

the viewing angle was narrowed so only she could see what was on the screen.

She told me it was a privacy screen.

Short of slapping one of these guys what can I do? Find a more private co-working space.

Your current place might offer cubicles or private offices.

It might be worth a few extra bucks to move to that.

Or they may permit you to bring in portable privacy screens.

If not, find a new co-working space with more private arrangements.

If privacy is important to you, expect to pay more for the space.

Many simply aren't set up for individuals to be private.

Some even tout the "collaborative nature" of their workspaces.

Working in a shared space can only be done if the work doesn't require privacy.

If customer information, or other business information must be protected this is difficult to do if others can hear your conversations or see your screen.

There are products available that will limit the angles that your screen can be observed, but they only work if you always have access to the same work space and the same screen.

You need to talk to your management to see what options exist.

You need to understand their expectations of privacy.

Since the "business" side of things is covered (Manager says "I can't help you")... you could create privacy...

Various solutions are possible... from crazy to normal. Option #1, If you want to be extreme, you could use a privacy hoodie: Option #2, 3d: Occulus Rift or other headsets of the sort... Option #3, 2d: Glare/Privacy Filters - Amazon

has a wide selection of filters you can add to your screens to decrease the viewing angle... if you want to be boring (and not look like a Dementor from Harry Potter)

I guess you could use this option... Option #3b: Monitor Hoods - Very similar to the Glare Filters... and hoodie... without the need to look like a Dementor.

I use a public library with reasonable frequency and have dealt with a similar issue in the past.

I've found the most effective technique to be one that actually relies upon the fact that others are reading my screen.

I realise that I'm taking a gamble when I employ it, but in some half a dozen cases that I've pushed back, am yet to receive any negative repercussions nor has there been any continuation of the offensive behaviour.

I have a series of word documents that I choose between to open right before I head out for a cigarette, with my computer set to lock itself after 1 minute.

I rely on the fact the place is covered with cameras and filled with people to prevent vandalism or interference with my laptop.

I simply address the behaviour and the words"and

stop reading my f*****g screen" at the bottom of each page.

Whenever I return, I find that either the offenders have relocated or refuse to look at me or my machine any more.

Sometimes they seem positively fearful of what I may do to them - that someone apparently unhinged enough to make an open threat as I do will actually carry it out.

(I'm almost certainly a bigger pussy-cat than any of them - but the impressions one gives helps win poker..)

Something like the tactic employed by people that commit crimes against drug-dealers.

I mean what are they going to do?

Go and complain to library staff that some fella left his pc for 5 minutes with a threatening message on the screen addressed to them.

laughs: To complain requires self incrimination...

Another tactic is one I've used for selfish people on forums or cheaters in tests - I give an answer that's purposefully wrong, but only ever so slightly and as subtly as possible.

I hope that my 'work' is copied and causes pain to those that would seek to take unfair advantage of it.

Sure, they're both a little work - but each are effective at dealing with the problem and my frustration response towards it.

Question: I work in a Co-working space and people keep staring at my screen asking all sorts of questions. One even changed his business and started copying me. I was really really angry.    I changed over to a new desk but another  started staring at my screen and later that week was also copying my business. I have complained to management but they said they cannot do anything.   Short of slapping one of these guys what can I do?

I work in CoWorking Space and my neighbors keep staring at my screen what can I do?

Use a privacy screen and talk to management about the different options available.

You could discuss the problem with management to see which options are available. However, if you want to take matters into your own hands, you might want to consider getting a privacy screen.

You may want to acquire a privacy screen to stop people looking at your work.

You could talk to the management to see what options are available to solve your problem.


I would only call it a demotion for you since you want to be a software engineer, but so what?

Continuing to work in C++ doesn't seem to be preparing your for Java according to the places you've applied.

It is possible you will eventually find something staying in your current job.

How long you're willing to wait is up to you.

The next question is will having the role as a tester, be enough of a prerequisite for a developer.

One advantage you would have is experience as a software engineer in another language with the added benefit of Java experience even though it is as a tester.

There are no guarantees, but I would consider taking a job as a java tester only if the company, team and boss are better than where you are at.

Getting with a good company probably offers a better chance to become a Java software engineer through an internal position change than trying to explain to other companies how you split experience makes you a better candidate than someone who has already been a Java developer.

Personally, I find C++ developers to often (not always) have better insights to what is happening "under the hood" with their code and usually apply that in ways that someone who just knows Java does not.

Maybe you need to push that thought a little more in your next interview?

Personally,I as a Software Engineer found the Software Engineering field to be more dominant and advance than testing whether it's manual or automated.

(Hopefully I am not being biased)Salary wise also

I believe Software Engineers make more than testers.

(On average) I am afraid working as a test engineer is not the most direct and efficient way to move from C++ to Java developer, unless you have so much of interest and enthusiasm to expand your Java skills outside your working environment.

(Such as reading related books or contributing to an open source Java application and use that in your resume)

Generally changing from software engineer to test engineer is not a demotion, and money is of course an excellent indicator for whether a career is pointed upward or downward, or at least this is true within an industry and field.

The reason is that the fields have converged in much of the methodology, skill and intelligence required.

It sounds like your resume is diverse in constructive ways that tell a story conducive to your goals.

This experience sounds wonderful.

What kind of QA is this?

QA responsibilities vary widely.

Sometimes testing means manually clicking through an application and recording the result.

Sometimes testing means test automation, ie writing code to test other code.

Places that expect their test engineers to write code might use the SDET title: Software Developer Engineer in Test.

I think the SDET title helps keep you marketable as a software developer.

Eg "I provide business value by creating software; most recently the problem domain was test automation".

The first product at my last employer was a system and platform for front-end web application testing.

This was in the QA arena, but it was most definitely about developing and delivering code.

We later hired another dev who was focused on load testing.

Here again, in the QA arena, but the day-to-day was writing code to deliver a product.

There will be some people who don't immediately understand this kind of QA experience.

But you can market yourself.

You learn how to talk about your skills to other devs, non-coders, and non-technical people.

This is definitely anecdotal, but during my last job hunt I only talked to one person (a non-technical recruiter) who couldn't understand how a software developer might be part of QA.

The other couple dozen or so (including all other recruiters) understood and valued my skill set.

Finally, some practical advice..

ask these questions:

Is there any cross-over from QA engineers to product development?

what does that look like?

can I meet that person?

Do product developers ever cross-over to QA?

is that unusual?

why?

Are QA engineers expected to write code as part of the day to day?

And don't forget the Joel test .

Well, an updated version.

Ask about CI/CD.

Make sure you write code during at least one of your interviews.

Etc

Yes, this is a demotion.

In general QA engineers are less valued and its typically treated as an entry level role at large corporations, with hires eventually moving into engineering or getting out (either pushed out or finding a developer job elsewhere).

It probably shouldn't be since a good QA engineer is very useful, but it will definitely be seen as such by people reading your resume later.

It seems you have experience doing A, applied for jobs doing B in which you have no experience and got rejected, and got offered a job doing C.

If you want to get experience doing B, you might apply for jobs doing A with a chance to learn B.

Why should it be a demotion?

It's a valued field in the industry.

The only people who tend to look down on testers are programmers, just as testers look down on programmers (both considering the other the core of all their problems)...

If you're getting paid less as a junior test engineer than you were as a senior C++ programmer that's because you're going from a senior level job to a junior level job,

not because you're going from programming to testing.

Java experience could come in handy when working with Java based test tools, especially if you're expected to write unit tests for Java applications (though I'd expect that to be mostly done by the programmers, having a tester who can assist in it is very handy).

Generally speaking this is not a demotion.

A Test Engineer and a Software Engineer are two very different things.

Software Engineers often get paid more, but that would also be true if you compared a plumber to the HR person at a plumbing company.

Different careers have different pay rates.

That being said if you want to be a Software Engineer, experience as a Testing Engineer will not be as valuable to you.

Unless you have a good reason for switching, I would recommend staying the course with your current job until you have something that suits you more correctly.

Question: I am a Software Engineer and have been specializing in C++ for several years. Due to market demand, I've been applying to several Java Developer positions but have been declined due to my lack of prior professional experience in the language. I have been offered a position as a Software Test Engineer that uses Java, but I am concerned that will send me down a different career path.   Money aside, how can i figure out if changing from a Software Engineer to a Test Engineer a demotion?

How do I tell if a position I am being offered is a Demotion?

This could be considered a demotion. The salary should be a good indication.

The answer to this question is highly subjective and it is not easy to tell whether moving into a completely different job is up, down or sideways. It's very difficult to say with certainty whether this change amounts to a demotion.


Context is everything - so it will always depend on what they are responding too.

In general it's proper decorum to consider it private correspondence.

Re-adding the rest of the group will depend on the content of the response.

If you feel that it was intended as private then you should absolutely not re-add everyone.

If it was a response to something simple that the greater group would benefit from then ask if they mind you sharing the content.

In some cases people reply individually because they do not want to bother the list with hundreds of emails or simply to save you from a group embarrassment.

In general, when I get something privately(or send something privately) in the middle of a long group chain of emails, it is because the person on the other end wants to bring up a point without getting others, perhaps very senior others or clients) involved.

If my response to that email needs to be sent to the group, then usually I discuss it with the person who sent me the private email and then add information to the original chain of emails rather than re-adding people to a private email.

This keeps what was supposed to be private, private and puts the information that needs to go public, public.

This prevents embarrassment and allows people to feel as if their private communications are not going public which tends to result in people being more willing to give you private information that perhaps they would not want senior managers to see.

So for instance:

There is a long email chain on a data import problem that includes the client.

An Account Manager privately emails me to tell me that the client is upset that something has not been resolved and can I prioritize this.

I call her on the phone and tell her the problem is at the client end and together we decide how to respond to the original email.

Then one of us sends the response we agreed on to the entire group as a response to the original email chain.

This also has the advantage of keeping all info that should be in the entire chain in it and and adds it to the latest response (because we may have gotten more in the meantime) so that all information is in one chain.

Be especially careful about re-adding people if the private message was blunt or disparaging of someone in the chain or their management.

Suppose the private email said something like, "

I know Joe is being a jerk here, but he does need to get an answer to the CEO today.

I'm swamped, can you do me a big favor and get him off my back?"

clearly adding other people back into an email like that is going to upset Joe, upset other managers and possibly make sure the person who wrote it doesn't ever help you out in the future.

It will also be a clue to everyone in the chain that you are not to be trusted.

If the email seemed to be an obvious error (i.e., there is no reason why it should not have gone to the whole chain), then I usually email the person back to ask them to include everyone.

That saves face for them which is almost always a good thing to do.

If someone sent you a private message then that person made a concious decision to contact you – and only you – privately.

They may have done so simply because they thought the rest of the group wasn't interested in this specific message, or they may have done so because they didn't want to send that message to the rest of the group for any number of reasons.

Telling the difference between the two is not always easy, and the safe path is always to ask : "is it okay if I forward out correspondence to the rest of the group?"

You can send your message to whomever you want.

Where you'll get into trouble is forwarding somebody else's private message without consent.

Most email programs these days include the replied-to message by default, so reply + CCing others causes them to see the private message.

Watch out for that.

One way around this is to ask for permission to share, as others have suggested.

Another way -- IMO better when the thread is already long -- is to address the point without forwarding.

Something like: I was asked how we'll guarantee data integrity when doing large asynchronous writes.

We plan to do this by...

Or: Several people have asked me whether the new match for our retirement plan is retroactive to the beginning of the year.

[answer] If somebody made an astute point and you want to give credit, get permission and then say something like:

Alice pointed out that the export operation could run for a long time and holding the global lock until the end could prevent backups from running.

We'll address this by...

I make too often the mistake of answering privately while intending to answer to the whole group.

In such occasions usually the person answered just answers back to me pointing that I seem to have clicked the wrong button.

Then I tank him and resend the original message to the group.

I think this is the obvious and most safe and respectful course of actions.

However, if it were clearly obvious that the message was intended to the group and waiting to the sender to fix the mistake could harm communication with an undesirable delay - for example, if there was a deadline on the debated issue - it would be fine to CC everybody again in the answer.

Question: If someone sends an email to a group of people and a member of that group intentionally replies privately to the original sender (and not a mistake of forgetting to reply-all), then is it considered a private correspondence?  Is it acceptable for the original sender to re-add some or all members of the group to the reply of the private message?

Is it unprofessional to add people back to the CCList when replying privately to the original sender?

It depends on the context of the message. If you think it was intended as private then you shouldn't add everyone back in. However, if it was clearly intended for the group then go ahead and reply to all.

The answer to this question will largely depend on context, through some people will say that you are free to make your own decision as to whether people are added to the exchange or not. If you feel that the message was indeed intended for the whole group, or would be more beneficial for the whole group to see, then you may wish to re-add them to the e-mail. If, on the other hand, it is obviously meant as a private message to you, you may want to err on the side of caution and not re-add anyone to the exchange.

The answer to this question will depend on the context of the message sent and the reason it was sent.

If there is reason to believe that the person wanted to include the whole group, or that it would do more harm than good for the group not to have seen the message, then you can consider re-adding them.

Some people believe that you have complete freedom to add whoever you want to an e-mail exchange.

If you feel that this was a private message, then you might want to err on the side of caution and not include anyone else on your reply.


I keep both jobs and internships under one category, Work Experience , on my resume, regardless of whether they're full time or not.

The only concern with not mentioning that it's an internship is employers may get confused about why you were only at a company for 3 months.

Because of that, I'll specify "Summer Consultant" or "Marketing Intern" as my job title, not in the description.

I find that keeping them all under "Experience" is sufficient.

But when you are an intern, it's normally stated in your job title.

So if you were being completely transparent, your resume would clearly state your status as an intern.

You could omit this by obscuring your title somewhat, but think about what you would gain.

What would your employer think if you had a 4 month career in which you did limited work and were paid well under industry standard?

Even if you did this, you would likely be asked about it during interviews, which would give you little choice but to reveal your intern status anyway.

Honestly, internships look good .

Be confident and show future employers that you have been hard at work learning the industry and gaining as much experience as possible with whatever skills you had at that time.

A few more thoughts that may have been more appropriate as a comment, but I'm new

so I'll try compiling this into an answer.

This answer is also targeted more towards a student or recent graduate as students are expected to have gaps in their employment history.

As other's mentioned, you want the employer to know the reason why you only worked at this company for a few months.

I would put internships in the same category as other employment, but append "Intern" to the title even if it's not officially part of it.

However, full time internships are going to look impressive and they're not assumed by default, especially if they're done during normal school semester months.

So I would start off a short description with "Worked full time doing...".

Up to a few sentences can be helpful if this is your most relevant experience in the field.

Another important detail to keep in mind is keep more relevant experience near the top .

It may seem obvious but I've seen many students make this mistake.

If you're applying for a job and your internship is your only relevant experience, you want to highlight this.

If you've had more recent but non-related or short term employment, you can list these near the bottom or leave them out completely depending on how much total experience you have.

Work experience does not have to be listed chronologically.

List it with the rest of your work experience and just keep your actual job title, which probably includes the word "Intern".

Then in the job description, make the first thing that you mention be that it was full time, or add it in parenthesis.

Example A: Software Intern - ABC Co Startup Inc Summer 2017

Full time paid position....

blah blah...

Example B: Software Intern (Full time) - ABC Co Startup

Inc Summer 2017

Paid internship...

Blah blah blah...

How do I list an internship on my resume?

Should I differentiate between jobs and paid internships?

Here is what I would suggest:

Keep your timeline consistent, and linear, with the latest information on top.

I would have something like: DateFrom -- Current JOBTITLE ( paid internship ) followed by DESCRIPTION of duties.

( I think the paid internship part is important.

That means most likely there was some serious competition for the postion )

Now if you have other relevant thing to put on your resume, I would include that to, similar to: DateFrom -- Current STUDENT followed by Major and Minor information.

You may want to include anticipated graduation date too.

If these two are the only relevant items do it like this: DateFrom -- Current JOBTITLE ( paid internship ) followed by DESCRIPTION of duties.

DateFrom --

Current STUDENT followed by Major and Minor information.

Personally, I list it like any other position under work experience: Job title intern at company, summer/fall/whatever 201X. And then follow that with bullets describing it like any other position, specifically focussing on practical introductions to new concepts.

Most internship programs feature an "Intern Project" as well, which often makes for some good bragging points here.

I don't think it's worthwhile to note that it's paid or not.

Nor do I think it's necessary to specify the month.

Most hiring managers understand that internship programs run for the summer, or whatever season you list -

so I don't think it's worthwhile to note the month that you started and ended.

I don't believe there exist rules for or against it in any locale.

If the internship is in the same general area of work you're applying to, I'd include it in my resume.

When you don't have much experience, any experience is good to write down as it allows an employer to ask you about your tasks, responsabilities and skills.

I've always put my internship on my resume, specifying that I was an intern on the job title, and I never had any issues with that during interviews.

Most of the time the recruiter would ask me what I was doing there like any other job listed.

Question: This summer I'm working a full-time, 9-5, paid internship at a major company. Since the position is full time, I'm not entirely sure how to list it on my resume.  How do I list an internship on my resume? Should I differentiate between jobs and paid internships?  To be more specific, should I include "intern" in the job description on my resume?

How do I list an internship on my resume?

It is fine to include internships with other work experience. You could put the word "intern" in the job title.

The general consensus is that you can include internships in your work experience section and simply identify them as internships, listing them like any other job.

Listing your interships in the same section as your work experience is generally considered perfectly fine.

It is generally considered that simply identifying the position is an internship is enough.


My personal opinion is that it's not worthwhile to try to work with recruiters who are unable to evaluate my resume against the requirements of an open position.

But if you want to try anyway, and since this is a company recruiter, just reply with something along the lines of: "Thank you for your interest, but unfortunately I don't think this position is a match for my skills.

However, I would be interested in other opportunities with your company that are more focused on (insert whatever you're looking for).

Please contact me if you have any open positions of this sort."

Finally, it's good to pare down the skillset listed on your resume to match what you would actually feel comfortable and qualified doing.

I also find this a regular problem, however I only consider it game over if the requirement is clearly unrelated to anything I have specified as an experience or skill I possess.

Often, there are skills I have used in a previous job

but I am still interested in going back to them in the future.

Personally, I would say to this recruiter "Thank you for your proposition.

This role sounds very interesting but I notice it focuses on skill A which I have not used in a professional environment since 2011.

I am especially interested in hearing from you about roles where I can utilize skills B, C and D" A final point to consider is that the skill and attitude of recruiters can vary wildly, even within a company.

Burning a bridge with this person could affect relationships with their colleagues who may be far more helpful.

Did you make sure that expert knowledge in A is really necessary?

It might be that they would like to get an expert, tried to find one for a while, and gradually reduced the requirements (internally - they will still ask for an expert officially) until even someone with at least a bit of experience is acceptable for the job.

Sometimes you just don't find what you want, so you have to take what you can get.

Just make sure that they know that your expertise in A is limited.

If they still accept, fine.

Either this is a very incapable recruiter, or there are no other relevant opportunities for you at that company .

You're better off searching that company's website for opportunities that might be a better match for you, if they exist at all.

I can imagine that the recruiter received an assignment to look for people proficient in a certain Skill A.

He/

she stumbled on your profile on LinkedIn, and (assuming he/

she is capable) didn't find any other matches among your skills, and contacts you in the off chance that you're actually interested in a career 'switch' to a job involving Skill A.

A vast majority of "cold calls" made by recruiters are just bots / scrapers.

They scan your profile or resume for keywords and then email you with a generic canned message.

That is why they cannot / do not differentiate between "a little experience" and "a lot," it's almost always just a positive hit on the keyword match.

So the appropriate response is to just delete the message if you are not interested.

If you are interested, then reach out to them and they will discuss your experience and capabilities at that point and tell you if they think you are a good fit or not.

Most jobs have flexibility (within reason) with regard to the requirements.

You won't know unless you ask.

Even if the recruiter did read your profile and write you a message, he either made a mistake or misread.

I think the rules still apply for a cold call... if you're interested you reply, if not ignore.

There is clearly no match for the current offer

but I would not mind to hear about other relevant opportunities.

Then this sounds like the perfect thing to mention in your reply.

Question: A recruiter working for a big company contacted me on LinkedIn and asked whether I am interested in a certain position that requires expert level knowledge in A. The thing is that A is mentioned on my LinkedIn profile with a) very little experience b) very long time ago - since then I was doing totally different things.  There is clearly no match for the current offer but I would not mind to hear about other relevant opportunities. How should I respond?

How to reply to recruiter that did not read my resume on LinkedIn

Make sure they know you have limited experience and discuss your capabilities to see if you are a good fit or not. If you are not interested then just delete the message.

Just like any cold-calling situation, if you're interested in the job, feel free to reply, and if you're not, then you don't need to respond. However, if you do respond, you may want to just make sure that they understand that your expertise in A is limited.

You should simply reply to them and make sure they understand that your expertise in A is limited.

If you're not interested, it's perfectly fine to simply delete the message.

Just like a normal cold call, if you're interested, reply, and if you're not, then don't.


If this is your first job out of school, you may want to try this.

I would

NOT leave a steady W-2 job for such an opportunity.

Assuming this is the US, here are some things you'll need to worry about:

You are not eligible for health insurance benefits.

If you think your auto insurance is outrageously priced, wait until you see what COBRA costs from your current employer.

You are not eligible for unemployment benefits.

If the job doesn't work out, you're entirely on your own.

You are responsible for your own taxes, both Income and self-employment.

You should figure on giving Uncle Guido, err, Uncle Sam about 40% of your check.

Make sure you negotiate compensation accordingly.

Your taxes will be more complicated.

Say hello to the 1040 long form, and its buddies Schedules C and SE.

Of course, it's your career, so none of us can tell you what to do.

We can only advise you of things to be careful of.

They're hedging their bets .

With any new hire, there's a risk of making a mistake and hiring someone who isn't a good fit / doesn't work out /

doesn't fit their culture, and so on.

With this arrangement, they get to take a trial run before making the commitment of hiring you full time.

If the one month trial run doesn't impress them, it's a lot easier to just let the contract expire than to fire a full time employee.

Is this normal/standard?

It's common enough that there's a term for it - "contract to hire".

Should I be concerned?

Make sure you have sufficient insurance coverage (very important if you're in the US) and you can survive either being let go in a month or having them decide to extend the contract for another 6 instead of making you full time.

Since you won't be a full time employee for another month (possibly longer), you might want to consider whether you should continue to search for other job leads or not.

It may make sense to accept this offer but let them know that the one month trial period goes both ways - you'll keep looking until they're ready to make a commitment.

I would consider this a huge red flag and turn own the offer.

Not because it is contract for hire but because they didn't tell that up front before the first interview.

It is a real concern because you will have no benefits until you are a real employee and they may not do as promised and convert you after a month especially since they have already misled you about the nature of the employment by not disclosing this up front.

I would trust nothing this company says at this point.

If you are going to work as a contractor, it is far better to do it for a contracting firm, so that taxes etc are correct.

This is a logistical nightmare for you.

You will have to pay medicare, social security, federal and state taxes out of what they pay you.

You will have to buy your own health insurance.

You might be required to get a business license.

This type of situation is known as contract-to-hire.

It probably depends on the area, but contract-to-hire, from my experience, is by no means common, but it's definitely not a unique situation.

It is, however, atypical to not mention that it's contract-to-hire until after salary negotiation.

I would expect as soon as they were ready to make an offer, at the absolute latest, for them to mention that detail, but even more likely, they'd just tell you near the very beginning of the interview process.

Possible explanations I can think up are it may be that they neglected to tell you because to them it's no big deal, and they fully have the expectation that they will hire you at the end, or it could be a sign of some oversight which may indicate some degree of disorganization.

The number one thing you should consider very carefully is if you are located in America is that as a contractor you will likely receive no benefits including health insurance.

The appropriate response would be something like, "I'm only interested in full employment, not contract work under any circumstances.

" If they want to hire you, they should hire you.

They're acting unethically in two ways:1: changing the terms mid-negotiation.

This is dishonest.

It also shifts significant costs onto you: insurance, taxes, unemployment benefits, employee protections, etc.2: assuming this is in the US, this is essentially illegal, if you're doing the same work under the same circumstances as an employee, you should be an employee and be subject to all the benefits and protections employees are subject to.

Misclassifying employees as contractors has serious consequences for employers with agencies from the IRS to the Department of Labor.

Question: I interviewed for a job at a young startup, got an offer, and negotiated compensation. After the negotiation, they called and said that they've been having employees work as ICs for the first month before becoming real, full-time employees. They seemed somewhat flexible on the issue, but I'm not sure what to think.   Is this normal/standard?  Why would they only mention it now?  Should I be concerned?

Prospective employer wants me to spend the first month as an independent contractor

They are doing this as a kind of trial period to make it easier to let the contract expire if the trial run doesn't impress them. This is fairly common.

The general consensus is that this is not exactly 'standard' or common, but it's not unusual either. The company may only be mentioning this now because they are hedging their bets about whether you will be a good hire or not. However, it could also be a sign of disorganisation and some people would be inclined to distrust the company from this point on.

The company could potentially have mentioned this now because they are hedging their bets and allowing themselves the option of not taking you on should they not be satisfied after the first month.

The general consensus is that this is not 'standard' but is not exactly rare either.

Some people would consider that this company may not be trust worthy if they're only mentioning this now.