Please help the Jobless workers

[IrishLake]

Exactly. Every expert will tell you not to leave anything off your resume or applications. Doing so is lying by omission. What should I put instead of "Environmental Scientist" and "Environmental Geologist," which were my last 2 titles, when applying at Target?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AGDee

All that said, I disagree with the statement "if you have applied for 300 jobs and still don't have one... " in a market where there are 400 applicants for every ONE job. We're talking about an area where the unemployment is 1 in 6.

If that's the situation, you have two choices--1) figure out a way to be successful and self-employed or 2) be willing to relocate.

Eventually, I suppose, if the benefits run dry, one of those choices will be forced on folks in your situation. I just hope you're in a situation where you're doing it on your terms.

Lots of folks have opted to start over. It sucks, but them's the breaks.

[PiKA2001]

LOL, here we go....

[DrPhil]

I know I am not the only person familiar with having more than one c.v. or resume'. The point of a resume' is to highlight your strengths. If you are a professor who also has extensive experience in ballet and singing, guess what you will do? You will put the professoral experiences and training on your c.v. that you send to academic jobs and not include the ballet and singing. You will do the opposite when you send your resume' for dance and music positions.

If the job doesn't require a resume' then don't submit a resume'. Anyhow, folks can figure out the rest and apply my post however they see fit. Many graduate students, people with advanced degrees, and people with advanced experience have made that work for them when nothing else seemed to work and unemployment checks were no longer an option. How else would many starving grad students and beginners in certain fields end up as bartenders and waitresses as they put themselves through school and repay their loans?

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

LOL, here we go....

Yep. I already knew where this thread was heading lol

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I know I am not the only person familiar with having more than one c.v. or resume'. The point of a resume' is to highlight your strengths. If you are a professor who also has extensive experience in ballet and singing, guess what you will do? You will put the professoral experiences and training on your c.v. that you send to academic jobs and not include the ballet and singing. You will do the opposite when you send your resume' for dance and music positions.

If the job doesn't require a resume' then don't submit a resume'. Anyhow, folks can figure out the rest and apply my post however they see fit. Many graduate students, people with advanced degrees, and people with advanced experience have made that work for them when nothing else seemed to work and unemployment checks were no longer an option. How else would many starving grad students and beginners in certain fields end up as bartenders and waitresses as they put themselves through school and repay their loans?

I had several different resumes. My main 2 were bank/financial-focused and marketing-focused (that's where the bulk of my experience lies). Of course, when I was applying to a banking or marketing job, I'd use the appropriate resume.

If I'm applying at Target, though, even though they might not require a resume, previous work history is still needed. Once I take off the irrelevant positions, I'm left with one retail job from 2003. Adding the rest of my experience automatically puts me into the "overqualified" pool.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

I had several different resumes. My main 2 were bank/financial-focused and marketing-focused (that's where the bulk of my experience lies). Of course, when I was applying to a banking or marketing job, I'd use the appropriate resume.

Good.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

If I'm applying at Target, though, even though they might not require a resume, previous work history is still needed. Once I take off the irrelevant positions, I'm left with one retail job from 2003. Adding the rest of my experience automatically puts me into the "overqualified" pool.

Then that will shape which jobs you wish to apply for. Also, people with extensive experience can look into contracting and seeking opportunities to train others in what they do. For instance, if you (general) have extensive mental health experience and certifications, there are mental health companies and universities that will pay you to do a training session, handbook, or help you get in touch with agencies that can use your assistance. If you have a little money to invest and know of a decent business card place to make some nice but inexpensive business cards, get yourself one and see where that opportunity leads.

These suggestions apply to whomever they apply to and people can either try them (or have tried them) or not.

[IrishLake]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

I had several different resumes. My main 2 were bank/financial-focused and marketing-focused (that's where the bulk of my experience lies). Of course, when I was applying to a banking or marketing job, I'd use the appropriate resume.

If I'm applying at Target, though, even though they might not require a resume, previous work history is still needed. Once I take off the irrelevant positions, I'm left with one retail job from 2003. Adding the rest of my experience automatically puts me into the "overqualified" pool.

And this is exactly what I'm referring to. Of course you don't submit a resume when applying at Target or to be a bartender at Applebee's. I do have a generic resume that focuses more on my strengths and generic qualifications, but I still list related and non-related work experience, and I only list dates, job title and company. No details. I'm still over qualified for an entry level marketing position with a local company, or so I've been told. It's been tough, but I keep on keepin' on.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Good.



Then that will shape which jobs you wish to apply for. Also, people with extensive experience can look into contracting and seeking opportunities to train others in what they do. For instance, if you (general) have extensive mental health experience and certifications, there are mental health companies and universities that will pay you to do a training session, handbook, or help you get in touch with agencies that can use your assistance. If you have a little money to invest and know of a decent business card place to make some nice but inexpensive business cards, get yourself one and see where that opportunity leads.

These suggestions apply to whomever they apply to and people can either try them (or have tried them) or not.

Sure that's the ideal. But by the time you're just trying to find an income, or else, you've branched out from the "jobs you wish to apply for" to "who's hiring, I am willing and able to work."

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Sure that's the ideal. But by the time you're just trying to find an income, or else, you've branched out from the "jobs you wish to apply for" to "who's hiring, I am willing and able to work."

"Jobs you wish to apply for" only means "jobs that you choose to apply for." Don't rehash the basics of unemployment at the cost of missing the larger point.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by Kevin

If that's the situation, you have two choices--1) figure out a way to be successful and self-employed or 2) be willing to relocate.

Eventually, I suppose, if the benefits run dry, one of those choices will be forced on folks in your situation. I just hope you're in a situation where you're doing it on your terms.

Lots of folks have opted to start over. It sucks, but them's the breaks.

As the ex-wife of the unemployed father of her children, I have no options. I have a job. If he leaves the state, I either get the kids full time or report him for violating a court order. Seems kind of nuts to report him for violating a court order. However, relocating still means losing your house, which is what I said the concern was.. that one or both of us will lose our houses.

Kevin, I know you'll never understand how someone can end up in dire straits, but the kind of people I'm talking about are people who were continuously employed for 25+ years with master's degrees, families, etc. They have paid more in taxes than some people will ever make. They can do ok for a few years from selling the extra car, living off of retirements funds, etc. At some point though, the money is truly gone. The unemployment is only $300 a week. It's certainly not living in the lap of luxury. It almost covers the mortgage payment for some people. Almost.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AGDee

As the ex-wife of the unemployed father of her children, I have no options. I have a job. If he leaves the state, I either get the kids full time or report him for violating a court order. Seems kind of nuts to report him for violating a court order. However, relocating still means losing your house, which is what I said the concern was.. that one or both of us will lose our houses.

Kevin, I know you'll never understand how someone can end up in dire straits, but the kind of people I'm talking about are people who were continuously employed for 25+ years with master's degrees, families, etc. They have paid more in taxes than some people will ever make. They can do ok for a few years from selling the extra car, living off of retirements funds, etc. At some point though, the money is truly gone. The unemployment is only $300 a week. It's certainly not living in the lap of luxury. It almost covers the mortgage payment for some people. Almost.

As dire as it is, that does not explain or justify why anyone thinks they deserve compensation from the government (from the taxpayers) when the government doesn't even really have that money to pay them. Sometimes folks' houses get foreclosed when they lose jobs. Sometimes they have to move, declare bankruptcy, etc.

You are not entitled to a job which pays $x simply because you are qualified for the job you used to have.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

"Jobs you wish to apply for" only means "jobs that you choose to apply for." Don't rehash the basics of unemployment at the cost of missing the larger point.

No, I understand your point, however ITT we've been talking about chronic unemployment. So while your suggestions are great for the ideal, they're really not applicable here, hence the response to them by several people.

Removing experience from my resume or from a job application isn't really an option, choosing to apply only within my field isn't really an option and even though I'm using myself as an example, it's not just me.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No, I understand your point, however ITT we've been talking about chronic unemployment. So while your suggestions are great for the ideal, they're really not applicable here, hence the response to them by several people.

The chronically unemployed who have found success in my suggestion would beg to differ. I didn't pull it from my imagination and have extensive experience with this. I actually learned these suggestions from other chronically unemployed people who have masters, mbas, and doctorates and found success in these "outside of the box" approaches to employment. In fact, I said almost the exact same thing in the other unemployment thread and received less of a response from people. At some point such discussions become more about people's frustrations and less about what could possibly work or not work outside of the box.

Like I said, apply it how you (general) see fit. Either try it or don't. It will work for some and not for others. I really don't see why people feel the need to be Debbie Downer about this and share their stories.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

The chronically unemployed who have found success in my suggestion would beg to differ. I didn't pull it from my imagination and have extensive experience with this. I actually learned these suggestions from other chronically unemployed people who have masters, mbas, and doctorates and found success in these "outside of the box" approaches to employment. In fact, I said almost the exact same thing in the other unemployment thread and received less of a response from people. At some point such discussions become more about people's frustrations and less about what could possibly work or not work outside of the box.

Like I said, apply it how you (general) see fit. Either try it or don't. It will work for some and not for others. I really don't see why people feel the need to be Debbie Downer about this and share their stories.

@ the bolded - Because many of the suggestions aren't necessarily new or groundbreaking. Lots of folks have applied (or attempted to apply) these techniques, with little or no success. Then, they're told "well, you're not trying hard enough" -- that's a pretty big slap in the face.