this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

LinkedinLunatics

3424 readers
10 users here now

A place to post ridiculous posts from linkedIn.com

(Full transparency.. a mod for this sub happens to work there.. but that doesn't influence his moderation or laughter at a lot of posts.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The whispering is all in her head and says she sucks

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

I've been in hiring discussions where word doc is looked down on since the candidate is not thinking about how to protect their data from manipulation.

This ladies take is dumb as hell, or as others have mentioned because her company changes applicants information.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The number of times I got a word doc with the job description in it is ridiculous as well. Yes, I am judging you if you do that.

A PDF is also editable, sure, but at least everyone can open the goddamn thing without any problems.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

Then stop using automated software that excludes candidates if the entirety of the job description isn't embedded in the resume. You're not special. You're just another job. And 90%+ of companies use dumb filtering so people have to adapt or get used to 2k+ applications per interview.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

This lady's* take is dumb

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

PDFs are also editable...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Realistically what's the worst that company is gonna do? Make my resume better?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

I think they meant that the document can look significantly different based on the software reading it? Whereas a published PDF is going to look basically the same (embedded fonts, etc)