3 ms·
This is a dangerous game. Some HR managers and hiring managers won't have the time or the know-how to fact check that sort of thing. Others will. The expected v
by jonnathanson 14y ago
This is a dangerous game. Some HR managers and hiring managers won't have the time or the know-how to fact check that sort of thing. Others will. The expected value of the dice roll isn't worth the risk.
- sokoloff 14y agoI'm not saying to do it, but the EV is almost certainly positive if the prospects for long-term unemployed are significantly negative. Suppose you get "caught" the first time? Just do it again, and you'll likely find a job sooner than if you played it straight.
- rosser 14y agoDangerous how? The only down-side appears to be that you don't get that job. TFA is suggesting that with an employment gap instead of a fake job, you wouldn't have, anyway.
- jonnathanson 14y agoDangerous because HR people and recruiters tend to switch companies and even industries constantly, and because any given company is obligated to keep your resume on file for a certain number of years -- inclusive of any remarks made by HR or the hiring manager about it. If you want to risk being essentially blacklisted for lying on your resume, I guess your risk tolerance is higher than mine. I get the argument about the risk's being mitigated over time by the downside of being unemployed for 6+n months. Mathematically, sure, this starts making sense after awhile. But it seems much less risky just to invent (or hey, attempt to start) a fictitious company than to lie about having been employed by a real one, defunct or otherwise.