7 ms·

After that much if you're as skilled add you think you should be finding an interview coach and someone to edit your CV. Have you asked past bosses, co-workers

After that much if you're as skilled add you think you should be finding an interview coach and someone to edit your CV. Have you asked past bosses, co-workers for referrals?

pluc 1y ago
I've done a few rounds of CV edits and reviews early on, it hasn't helped. It's worth noting that the initial CV I had was one where I never had trouble finding work with. Edit: misunderstood "referrals" for "references" so edited my reply out. No, I've never asked for referrals from past colleagues.
- selectodude 1y ago
  Hiring managers check you on LinkedIn 100 percent of the time. Not having a LinkedIn is a huge issue.
  - jonny_eh 1y ago
    In 2025 it basically means you're likely a bot/scammer. LinkedIn provides the social proof that at least you're a real person, with real business connections. It's sadly not optional.
    - metaphor 1y ago
      I agree that it's not optional; in my book, a company mandating association with the degenerate cesspool that is LinkedIn as entry criteria for employment consideration is simply a non-starter, full stop. If I disclose an email address that's directly traceable to my current employer---or even one provided to me by professional organizations I'm registered with---as adequate "social proof" (whatever that means) that I'm not "likely a bot/scammer", and a company's hiring manager is too blind to see the signal, then I'd write that off as a hidden trap passively dodged with confident relief.
      - groby_b 1y ago
        Good for you, you'll be a principled unemployed. Absolutely stupid advice for people who actually look for a job. You're participating in a social game, with well-defined signalling functions. If you'd like to actually have a positive outcome, you'll need to make use of the signalling functions commonly recognized, even if you don't like them. (Plus, opting out of a commonly accepted path with the reason that you personally think other signals are as good and the other side is just too blind to see them sends a large amount of information about your ability to collaborate in larger teams) You do you. There are jobs where you can get away with this, there are people with networks that allow them to play different games. But as advice to job seekers, it's actively detrimental.
    - mycall 1y ago
      any other not-optional sites to think about connecting with?
      - jonny_eh 1y ago
        Probably github, if you're a developer.
  - pluc 1y ago
    I have to disagree. I looked for a long time before I found my last gig (that ended in 2022). I had a LinkedIn and it wasn't much different, it took me months to find something. I still have a linkedin account to look for jobs, but that's it. No connections, no work history. What's relevant is on my resume anyway so I don't see what having a regular linkedin account would do. I deleted it when I found that job because, even as a job seeker, I saw no value in it and as a user, I saw no excuse to defend it.
    - yelirekim 1y ago
      You are delusional if you think having a good LinkedIn doesn't improve your chances of getting hired... Maybe not for every job, but for many of them, surely.
      - pluc 1y ago
        I guess my experience hasn't shown value. I think people think of LinkedIn like Facebook - it only works if everyone agrees to stay hostage. I don't like the platform, I don't like that Microsoft is being all Microsofty about your data (have you looked at the new settings lately? That they added without telling anyone? Settings → Data Privacy → Data for Generative AI Improvement) and being a data-aware netizen, fuck linkedin.
        Aurornis 1y ago
        Hiring manager here. It's standard practice for every hiring manager I know to review the candidate's LinkedIn as an additional input to the hiring process. Not finding a LinkedIn page for someone can range from a neutral signal to a negative signal depending on the hiring manager. I personally don't read anything into it, but I know many hiring managers who feel that lack of a LinkedIn page is a negative sign. I don't like it, but it's how the world works some times. A seasoned LinkedIn page is also becoming very valuable for applying to remote jobs. Remote employers are getting nervous with all of the overemployed people and fake applicants. Having a mature LinkedIn page with a decent number of connections to real people is a major positive sign for remote hiring. It's not something you will be able to see or detect as a candidate.
  - WarOnPrivacy 1y ago
    > Hiring managers check you on LinkedIn 100 percent of the time. YMMV. White collar work here follows connections and introductions - nearly exclusively. A few of my clients might have poked around Linkedin in passing but most have never used it. As an aside, I deleted my LI because I've never had a legit contact thru it, only spam. source: 35yrs in IT
    - uqual 1y ago
      When I was a hiring manager (it's been a number of years) I always checked LI for applicants which looked interesting on "paper" but which had not come through a trusted source such as coworker from the past or present that I had respect for (both their technical skills and their willingness to be objective about others even if their observations were negative). My primary reason for this was that unfortunately some resumes seem to include quite of bit of creative writing -- creativity which the applicant could bet only I, and my company, would see. If, however, the applicant had posted similar claims about past jobs on LI, it was public for all to see so somewhat likely to be less "creative" as most people find it embarrassing to get _caught_ claiming credit for work that someone else did or giving an overblown explanation of the import of their work. This is, of course, not 100% reliable as I've seen coworkers and past employees posting on LI claiming things they were "responsible for" or "implemented" when, in fact, they only had a tiny role (or, occasionally, even no discernible role) in. Also, if I happened to notice a "connection" that I also knew, I could potentially ask them about the applicant (using due care to make sure that the applicant wouldn't be "outed" at their current job by my doing so).
      - WarOnPrivacy 1y ago
        > I always checked LI for applicants which looked interesting on "paper" but which had not come through a trusted source This is a good observation.. rumination.. contribution? I can't find the right descriptive noun. Anyway, I get it. Perhaps the board is divided between regions inclined to use LI and not.
- taurath 1y ago
  Referrals are the only way right now. The front door is broken everywhere. I spent 4 years off and I managed to come back, but only referrals were worthwhile in getting me roles worth anything
- com2kid 1y ago
  Not having LinkedIn is ruining your chances. Candidates without a LinkedIn are going to come across as a scam in the very least, 90% of the time your application will just get tossed if you can't be found on LI.
  - codegeek 1y ago
    Pretty much this. I know lot of people hate Linkedin but the fact is that if you are a job candidate and have little to no Linkedin, it's a huge potential red flag in today's world. Lot of scammers, overemployeds/moonlighters out there.
    - matwood 1y ago
      Especially if someone has 25 years of experience as the OP said.
    - throwaway1492 1y ago
      When I was moonlighting LinkedIn didn’t affect me. Every time I applied/interviewed and got hired for a w2 job, I just left my last non moonlighting employer on there, and checked the “please don’t contact current employer” checkbox. I hadn’t worked there in over a year. Didn’t my new employer want me to update my LinkedIn? That never came up, but if it would have I would have delayed. Why should I support their business model.
    - trod1234 1y ago
      That's some real stupid thinking. At its most basic, this is a cult of qualification which no longer provides real value, it fails for a number of reasons I won't get into here. When you disqualify arbitrarily, and can't find anyone because of that, its your fault for disqualifying everyone, not the market's fault for not having the ballerina that doesn't exist. Want a programmer in a language thats only 10 years old with 15 years of direct experience? You aren't going to find it even when the creator of that language applies. You pay to have the work done. That is the only legitimate requirement for hiring someone and remaining employed, and you can't go and change the requirements later when they show they can do more. Doesn't matter if they moonlight, are overemployed etc. That view to disqualify such people are in fact monopolistic practices designed to disenfranchise wages that are already low and distorted because of money-printing, they are not red-flags. Its like the flawed type of thinking that "We need someone to do this work, but this guy is so overqualified he'll leave first chance; so we won't hire anyone". You hire to have a job done. You don't get to be an arbitrary slave master. The moment you lose sight of this is the moment you ignore your immediate needs, and drive your company on a path towards failure, and if its a consolidated large company, that failure and bad decisionmaking will impact a lot more people because of the centralization/concentration. Financial engineering can decouple the need for immediate action, but the tradeoff is that the risk of not doing things you should have done becomes far greater to your long-term sustainability, and its completely invisible. There is no place for deception and coercion in the hiring process. If the job doesn't exist, don't jam communication channels. Jamming channels is tortuous interference.
- BryantD 1y ago
  One small note -- what got you an interview before 2020 will often not get you an interview now. The market (as you obviously know) is much tougher. The last two managerial roles I've opened have gotten literally thousands of applications within the first week and it's harder to stand out. If you've done a few rounds already, there's probably not much incremental value, though. Absolutely ask for referrals. You gotta painfully get on LinkedIn for maximum effectiveness -- if you're looking at a company and an ex-coworker you got along with knows someone there, ask for the introduction. It feels awkward and weird but it increases your chances somewhat.
- bix6 1y ago
  Every job I’ve had came from a referral
- scarface_74 1y ago
  If you are trying to get a job based on your resume and blindly submitting it to an ATS, you are doing it wrong. Every open req gets hundreds of applications and it’s impossible to stand out from the crowd.
- thirtygeo 1y ago
  Sooo... Have you made that LinkedIn yet so fellow Canadians might see what you worked on in the past and can get in touch?
  - pluc 1y ago
    Even if i did i would never post it publicly. And yes i understand that it means i won't be getting thousands of strangers looking at my personal experience, one of whom might want to hire me. I wouldn't post my resume either. I'm just not comfortable giving my data to a company i don't trust and to share it openly on the public web. And yes i'm ok with the consequences.
- e40 1y ago
  A friend was laid off and when I looked at his CV I was shocked. It was terrible. I made suggestions but he didn’t seem to get it. I strongly recommend you show your CV to someone and get feedback.
more_corn 1y ago
Have you tried searching for a tech job? It’s not possible these days.
- sanswork 1y ago
  Plenty of people are getting hired so it's still possible but as with always a referral is the best way which is why I suggested that.
kcplate 1y ago
> Have you asked past bosses… I am not the original commenter but I think something that younger people forget is that when you reach 2 decades or more into your career, your network starts to dry up for you. This is in addition to your skillsets and work cultural fit being suspect because of your experience and age (set in their ways, old thinking, etc…). I have been in tech for nearly 40 years. Almost every one of my former bosses is either out of the industry, retired, or dead. My network is useless to me. If my current job ends…I won’t find another tech gig.
- sanswork 1y ago
  Surely your current boss or recent colleagues aren't out of the market though. I've been developing for over 25 years and my early bosses are almost certainly retired but I still have connections from back then in colleagues that are still wording I could reach out to. Unless you stopped interacting 40 years ago you should still have current people regardless of time in the industry.
  - kcplate 1y ago
    How much do you interact with colleagues from 2000 and how much do they really know about your current capabilities? Probably nothing or minimal…”he was a helluva cobol dev back in ‘00” doesn’t sound like a valuable reference if I am a hiring manager in 2025 looking for a Rust dev. Current colleagues and bosses would have to cycle out themselves and land elsewhere before they will be a help as a network resource. Also, for current colleagues—-consider the case if your whole team gets RIF’d. At that point they are no longer your colleague, nor really a good network resource until they land. What they are is a competitor and a competitor likely similarly skilled as you, competing for the same roles that you are. Your best network resources don’t currently work with you, but are secure in a gig, and someone you have worked with or for in the last 3-5 years.
    - sanswork 1y ago
      Old connections can still be helpful even if they don't know your current skills as long as they can assess what kind of worker you are. I've personally recommended people I worked with 17 years ago because I can remember how valuable they were with no consideration given to current specific skills. I currently regularly speak with 3 people I worked with over 20 years ago and check in annually with another half dozen or so. If you don't keep any connections with your previous colleagues then you are self limiting your career options. But the second best time to plant a tree...

After that much if you're as skilled add you think you should be finding an interview coach and someone to edit your CV. Have you asked past bosses, co-workers for referrals?

pluc 1y ago

I've done a few rounds of CV edits and reviews early on, it hasn't helped. It's worth noting that the initial CV I had was one where I never had trouble finding work with. Edit: misunderstood "referrals" for "references" so edited my reply out. No, I've never asked for referrals from past colleagues.

selectodude 1y ago
Hiring managers check you on LinkedIn 100 percent of the time. Not having a LinkedIn is a huge issue.
- jonny_eh 1y ago
  In 2025 it basically means you're likely a bot/scammer. LinkedIn provides the social proof that at least you're a real person, with real business connections. It's sadly not optional.
  - metaphor 1y ago
    I agree that it's not optional; in my book, a company mandating association with the degenerate cesspool that is LinkedIn as entry criteria for employment consideration is simply a non-starter, full stop. If I disclose an email address that's directly traceable to my current employer---or even one provided to me by professional organizations I'm registered with---as adequate "social proof" (whatever that means) that I'm not "likely a bot/scammer", and a company's hiring manager is too blind to see the signal, then I'd write that off as a hidden trap passively dodged with confident relief.
    - groby_b 1y ago
      Good for you, you'll be a principled unemployed. Absolutely stupid advice for people who actually look for a job. You're participating in a social game, with well-defined signalling functions. If you'd like to actually have a positive outcome, you'll need to make use of the signalling functions commonly recognized, even if you don't like them. (Plus, opting out of a commonly accepted path with the reason that you personally think other signals are as good and the other side is just too blind to see them sends a large amount of information about your ability to collaborate in larger teams) You do you. There are jobs where you can get away with this, there are people with networks that allow them to play different games. But as advice to job seekers, it's actively detrimental.
  - mycall 1y ago
    any other not-optional sites to think about connecting with?
    - jonny_eh 1y ago
      Probably github, if you're a developer.
- pluc 1y ago
  I have to disagree. I looked for a long time before I found my last gig (that ended in 2022). I had a LinkedIn and it wasn't much different, it took me months to find something. I still have a linkedin account to look for jobs, but that's it. No connections, no work history. What's relevant is on my resume anyway so I don't see what having a regular linkedin account would do. I deleted it when I found that job because, even as a job seeker, I saw no value in it and as a user, I saw no excuse to defend it.
  - yelirekim 1y ago
    You are delusional if you think having a good LinkedIn doesn't improve your chances of getting hired... Maybe not for every job, but for many of them, surely.
    - pluc 1y ago
      I guess my experience hasn't shown value. I think people think of LinkedIn like Facebook - it only works if everyone agrees to stay hostage. I don't like the platform, I don't like that Microsoft is being all Microsofty about your data (have you looked at the new settings lately? That they added without telling anyone? Settings → Data Privacy → Data for Generative AI Improvement) and being a data-aware netizen, fuck linkedin.
      - Aurornis 1y ago
        Hiring manager here. It's standard practice for every hiring manager I know to review the candidate's LinkedIn as an additional input to the hiring process. Not finding a LinkedIn page for someone can range from a neutral signal to a negative signal depending on the hiring manager. I personally don't read anything into it, but I know many hiring managers who feel that lack of a LinkedIn page is a negative sign. I don't like it, but it's how the world works some times. A seasoned LinkedIn page is also becoming very valuable for applying to remote jobs. Remote employers are getting nervous with all of the overemployed people and fake applicants. Having a mature LinkedIn page with a decent number of connections to real people is a major positive sign for remote hiring. It's not something you will be able to see or detect as a candidate.
- WarOnPrivacy 1y ago
  > Hiring managers check you on LinkedIn 100 percent of the time. YMMV. White collar work here follows connections and introductions - nearly exclusively. A few of my clients might have poked around Linkedin in passing but most have never used it. As an aside, I deleted my LI because I've never had a legit contact thru it, only spam. source: 35yrs in IT
  - uqual 1y ago
    When I was a hiring manager (it's been a number of years) I always checked LI for applicants which looked interesting on "paper" but which had not come through a trusted source such as coworker from the past or present that I had respect for (both their technical skills and their willingness to be objective about others even if their observations were negative). My primary reason for this was that unfortunately some resumes seem to include quite of bit of creative writing -- creativity which the applicant could bet only I, and my company, would see. If, however, the applicant had posted similar claims about past jobs on LI, it was public for all to see so somewhat likely to be less "creative" as most people find it embarrassing to get _caught_ claiming credit for work that someone else did or giving an overblown explanation of the import of their work. This is, of course, not 100% reliable as I've seen coworkers and past employees posting on LI claiming things they were "responsible for" or "implemented" when, in fact, they only had a tiny role (or, occasionally, even no discernible role) in. Also, if I happened to notice a "connection" that I also knew, I could potentially ask them about the applicant (using due care to make sure that the applicant wouldn't be "outed" at their current job by my doing so).
    - WarOnPrivacy 1y ago
      > I always checked LI for applicants which looked interesting on "paper" but which had not come through a trusted source This is a good observation.. rumination.. contribution? I can't find the right descriptive noun. Anyway, I get it. Perhaps the board is divided between regions inclined to use LI and not.
taurath 1y ago
Referrals are the only way right now. The front door is broken everywhere. I spent 4 years off and I managed to come back, but only referrals were worthwhile in getting me roles worth anything
com2kid 1y ago
Not having LinkedIn is ruining your chances. Candidates without a LinkedIn are going to come across as a scam in the very least, 90% of the time your application will just get tossed if you can't be found on LI.
- codegeek 1y ago
  Pretty much this. I know lot of people hate Linkedin but the fact is that if you are a job candidate and have little to no Linkedin, it's a huge potential red flag in today's world. Lot of scammers, overemployeds/moonlighters out there.
  - matwood 1y ago
    Especially if someone has 25 years of experience as the OP said.
  - throwaway1492 1y ago
    When I was moonlighting LinkedIn didn’t affect me. Every time I applied/interviewed and got hired for a w2 job, I just left my last non moonlighting employer on there, and checked the “please don’t contact current employer” checkbox. I hadn’t worked there in over a year. Didn’t my new employer want me to update my LinkedIn? That never came up, but if it would have I would have delayed. Why should I support their business model.
  - trod1234 1y ago
    That's some real stupid thinking. At its most basic, this is a cult of qualification which no longer provides real value, it fails for a number of reasons I won't get into here. When you disqualify arbitrarily, and can't find anyone because of that, its your fault for disqualifying everyone, not the market's fault for not having the ballerina that doesn't exist. Want a programmer in a language thats only 10 years old with 15 years of direct experience? You aren't going to find it even when the creator of that language applies. You pay to have the work done. That is the only legitimate requirement for hiring someone and remaining employed, and you can't go and change the requirements later when they show they can do more. Doesn't matter if they moonlight, are overemployed etc. That view to disqualify such people are in fact monopolistic practices designed to disenfranchise wages that are already low and distorted because of money-printing, they are not red-flags. Its like the flawed type of thinking that "We need someone to do this work, but this guy is so overqualified he'll leave first chance; so we won't hire anyone". You hire to have a job done. You don't get to be an arbitrary slave master. The moment you lose sight of this is the moment you ignore your immediate needs, and drive your company on a path towards failure, and if its a consolidated large company, that failure and bad decisionmaking will impact a lot more people because of the centralization/concentration. Financial engineering can decouple the need for immediate action, but the tradeoff is that the risk of not doing things you should have done becomes far greater to your long-term sustainability, and its completely invisible. There is no place for deception and coercion in the hiring process. If the job doesn't exist, don't jam communication channels. Jamming channels is tortuous interference.
BryantD 1y ago
One small note -- what got you an interview before 2020 will often not get you an interview now. The market (as you obviously know) is much tougher. The last two managerial roles I've opened have gotten literally thousands of applications within the first week and it's harder to stand out. If you've done a few rounds already, there's probably not much incremental value, though. Absolutely ask for referrals. You gotta painfully get on LinkedIn for maximum effectiveness -- if you're looking at a company and an ex-coworker you got along with knows someone there, ask for the introduction. It feels awkward and weird but it increases your chances somewhat.
bix6 1y ago
Every job I’ve had came from a referral
scarface_74 1y ago
If you are trying to get a job based on your resume and blindly submitting it to an ATS, you are doing it wrong. Every open req gets hundreds of applications and it’s impossible to stand out from the crowd.
thirtygeo 1y ago
Sooo... Have you made that LinkedIn yet so fellow Canadians might see what you worked on in the past and can get in touch?
- pluc 1y ago
  Even if i did i would never post it publicly. And yes i understand that it means i won't be getting thousands of strangers looking at my personal experience, one of whom might want to hire me. I wouldn't post my resume either. I'm just not comfortable giving my data to a company i don't trust and to share it openly on the public web. And yes i'm ok with the consequences.
e40 1y ago
A friend was laid off and when I looked at his CV I was shocked. It was terrible. I made suggestions but he didn’t seem to get it. I strongly recommend you show your CV to someone and get feedback.

more_corn 1y ago

Have you tried searching for a tech job? It’s not possible these days.

sanswork 1y ago
Plenty of people are getting hired so it's still possible but as with always a referral is the best way which is why I suggested that.

kcplate 1y ago

> Have you asked past bosses… I am not the original commenter but I think something that younger people forget is that when you reach 2 decades or more into your career, your network starts to dry up for you. This is in addition to your skillsets and work cultural fit being suspect because of your experience and age (set in their ways, old thinking, etc…). I have been in tech for nearly 40 years. Almost every one of my former bosses is either out of the industry, retired, or dead. My network is useless to me. If my current job ends…I won’t find another tech gig.

sanswork 1y ago
Surely your current boss or recent colleagues aren't out of the market though. I've been developing for over 25 years and my early bosses are almost certainly retired but I still have connections from back then in colleagues that are still wording I could reach out to. Unless you stopped interacting 40 years ago you should still have current people regardless of time in the industry.
- kcplate 1y ago
  How much do you interact with colleagues from 2000 and how much do they really know about your current capabilities? Probably nothing or minimal…”he was a helluva cobol dev back in ‘00” doesn’t sound like a valuable reference if I am a hiring manager in 2025 looking for a Rust dev. Current colleagues and bosses would have to cycle out themselves and land elsewhere before they will be a help as a network resource. Also, for current colleagues—-consider the case if your whole team gets RIF’d. At that point they are no longer your colleague, nor really a good network resource until they land. What they are is a competitor and a competitor likely similarly skilled as you, competing for the same roles that you are. Your best network resources don’t currently work with you, but are secure in a gig, and someone you have worked with or for in the last 3-5 years.
  - sanswork 1y ago
    Old connections can still be helpful even if they don't know your current skills as long as they can assess what kind of worker you are. I've personally recommended people I worked with 17 years ago because I can remember how valuable they were with no consideration given to current specific skills. I currently regularly speak with 3 people I worked with over 20 years ago and check in annually with another half dozen or so. If you don't keep any connections with your previous colleagues then you are self limiting your career options. But the second best time to plant a tree...