I have no use for Facebook. If my friends want to share something with me they email or text me.
However, in the event of future unemployment I will hire a professional Facebook person for the express purpose of upping my odds of getting an interview.
From my previous link.
According to employers who use social networking sites to research potential job candidates, what they’re looking for when researching candidates is:
Information that supports their qualifications for the job: 58 percent
If the candidate has a professional online persona: 50 percent
What other people are posting about the candidate: 34 percent
A reason not to hire the candidate: 22 percent
According to a recent survey put out by Harris Polling company (done for CareerBuilder), 57% of employers will not interview someone without a social media presence. That’s up from 35% in 2015.
If you want to burn 57% of your chance to get an interview to the ground that’s your choice. I think it sucks that employees are doing this but the little guy doesn’t get to write the rules.
That should read: I think it sucks that EMPLOYERS are doing this.
I’ve been through this scenario in my 50’s when the job market was down. I had a good resume but I couldn’t get arrested if I tried. I was invisible and didn’t understand why.
I can’t answer your question beyond citing it is now common for companies to screen using social groups. If it’s being used as a litmus test then the lack of social media content becomes a test unto itself.
Personally I have absolutely no interest in FB but 68% of US adults are on it. That’s a very high number. People act genuinely surprised when I tell them I’m not on it.
So 1/3 don’t have it, plus some not having the same name there as on their resume, whether they informally go by “Bud” or are on FB as JP Morgan while their resume has John Pierpont Morgan or their FB is John P Morgan while their resume is J Pierpont Morgan. Also how many of those 68% only rarely check it/post (because of all the glurge) or are abandoning it entirely (because of all the data scandals)? Not finding a page, finding a private page, or an outdated page wouldn’t surprise me for any given individual - by your own stats, it’s probably close to 40% of the population, if not more.
Many people on Twitter & Instagram use handles other than their real name, making them hard if not impossible to find.
My daughter has/maintains two Facebook pages. One uses her IRL name and is squeaky clean. She gives this page out when she applies for a job. The other uses her pseudonym all her friends call her and is her “real” Facebook.
Here is what I would do. I would say that you left your previous job “for health reasons that have now been resolved.” No one will press. Alcoholism is recognized as a disease. I would also leave blank any part about being involuntarily leaving or being fired. If it comes up “I tried to keep going as long as I could, eventually, it was obvious to me and my former employer that I needed to take some time off.”
Reach out to friends and family - and members in AA. Often its a personal connection that will give you a chance. Often its people in recovery themselves who will take a chance on someone in recovery.
Also, I would contact your state department of mental health or county. My county has a service where they get people who have mental health issues back into jobs - the jobs know they are hiring from the service (they are often do-goody type organizations, but corporations can get tax credits for participating in programs like this, and the State uses them as well), they aren’t expecting perfection. See if a program like that is available to you.
My sister has been sober now for a decade - and those first few years of getting back on her feet did involve using every connection she had to keep herself afloat. She had three bullshit jobs she would have never taken - basically worked her way up from the bottom.
That not finding something that you can’t find on approximately 40% of the people is indicative of…nothing.
Then there’s this little gem
Not only did you basically instruct him to lie, but an unrelated job to a professional career can be worse than a gap. If I were the hiring manager & saw someone leave an office job to become a landscaper I’d seriously question whether they want an office job or if they’re someone who needs a more unstructured work environment & if they’d be a good fit. There is nothing wrong with stating that one took time off to deal with a medical issue that is now behind them.
The problem with this survey, and the results, is that it is very likely they included LinkedIn as a kind of social networking. So, yeah, a lot of employers are looking at LinkedIn. Of course they are.
To be clear, the negative things that they are finding which lead them not to hire are clearly coming from FB or Instagram or something like that, but the headlining stat of 70% is obviously going to be skewed by routine checks of LinkedIn, which candidates actually want prospective employers to see. The 70% figure is not really meaningful until we know for a fact that it doesn’t include LinkedIn. If the article says, for example, of those instances where an employer found something negative about the candidate, “40% percent were of photos, videos,” etc., it doesn’t really mean much, because what we don’t know is how many of the total references to social media were to FB as opposed to LinkedIn. It could be, for example that, of 1,000 employers, 690 looked at LinkedIn, and 10 looked at Facebook. Then of those 10 who looked at FB, 4 (40% of the ten who found something negative of FB), said they chose not to hire someone because of a video seen on FB.
Similarly, of the 47% who say if they “can’t find a candidate online” they are less likely to call for an interview, we don’t know that they are specifically looking for a FB page. It could be they are looking for a LinkedIn page, and once they do find that, they are satisfied, and couldn’t give a shit about Facebook.
No, don’t do that. The answer is always “I left voluntarily to pursue a better fit.” Most employers, when asked, only verify dates of employment and “would you hire again”.
Think about it. Are they interested in screwing you in your next opportunity? Probably not. Do they want to risk getting sued for costing you a future opportunity? Definitely not. Will a prospective employer say “thank you for your honesty, we’re going to help you start over.” No. In this situation, being honest is all downside and no upside for you.
Be honest to your doctor and your AA group, but lie like hell to prospective employers and don’t feel bad about it. They will lie to you if it benefits them, there’s no law or norm preventing them from doing so, so you should likewise act in your own interests.
To clarify, it could also be that they are looking at LinkedIn, and simply use that to help whittle down the pool by checking for most desirable skills, experience and qualifications. In other words, it’s possible that they are simply using LinkedIn as part of the screening process, (the same way they use resumes), to narrow down who they call in for an interview.
In short, I’d like to have more details about the methodology of this Harris poll, before I would conclude that Facebook pages are causing large percentages of candidates to not get jobs.
Regarding social media… it is good to have a profile and a banner page on LinkedIn and Facebook. This contributes to the basic question “does this person exist yes/no. Is this the person I interviewed”. But the posts don’t matter unless they are damaging. Many people have a LinkedIn/Facebook profile that shows a few photos but doesn’t reveal posts/timeline and this is considered perfectly normal. Put a profile out there, basic flattering bio and a couple of flattering photos. Borrow a dog.
Now… after you get hired, that’s a different story and you will get friend requests and you may be judged on your content if you accept. But you don’t have to accept, and it’s a more manageable problem anyway.
no, it’s indicative that a lot of people are going to be ignored. Unlike you, I posted research supporting my position.
No, I didn’t instruct him to lie. I said start a business and list it on a resume so there isn’t a job gap. It shows initiative. It doesn’t have to be what I listed as an example so there’s no point to your argument against it. I listed home renovation/landscaping. I carried pictures of my work to interviews and would talk their ear off if they asked. I also carried examples of my computer skills that were very specific to my line of work. I was prepared to discuss every line of my resume in detail.
You don’t seem to grasp the fact that computers are sifting through resumes before a person ever sees one. You have to get an interview before you have the luxury of explaining time-off to take care of medical issues.
Why do you believe this is true, given that employers have zero incentive to hire applicants who state they had past medical issue, but also zero penalty for discriminating against them?
You don’t ever say you were fired.
You don’t ever say you were asked to leave.
You don’t ever say medical issues interfered with your work.
You never, never, never ever admit to drug or alcohol addiction when applying for a job.
If a criminal record will not show it, then you do not disclose it. Period.
When you get hired, you faithfully follow your HR manual and your duties of work. Outside of that, assume your employer is always lying to you, because they are. Including… ESPECIALLY during the hiring process. You should behave accordingly.