Jump to content

What do employers consider "stable job history?"


Recommended Posts

to me it means no job hopping... if someone has worked in 5 places in the last 4 years then you can pretty well predict the future of their employment in a new job.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had that many jobs in the last few years, but not by choice. Several of them were contract jobs, part time work or temp work to make ends meet. I would describe stability as limited gaps in employment and staying consistently employed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not as important as it once was, with contract positions becoming more common. However, unless you can explain job hopping by showing that it was a contract position, too many jobs of under 1 year are red flags

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stable job history will mean different things to different employers. Some do want to see that you've been one place for 10+ years. Others are ok with movement every few years as long as you've stayed in the same industry and each move was an upward one. Some employers understand that contracting may be more normal in their industry and are ok with moves every few months. If you just recently finished a degree and are just now able to work full time employers may also take that into consideration when determining how stable you are.

 

Now another thing to consider is even though whatever movement you have on your resume may be acceptable due to promotions/more money or contracting that doesn't mean that a potential employer won't penalize you for it. When I first got laid off at the start of the Great Recession full time jobs in my field all but disappeared and were replaced by temp/contract jobs. I adapted and became a steady temp/contractor, gained skills, and had outstanding references. Yet there were several interviews I went on for full time permanent jobs where the employer blatantly told me that they weren't going to hire me because I was temping/contracting for so long. Now we all know they probably would have said the same thing if I was just sitting around collecting unemployment, but I don't regret my choice to temp/contract.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the industry. In design and architecture, it's anything less than 2 years, or shorter than the length of a design project. In other fields, like sales or teaching, it's longer. In long-term career fields, like medicine or accounting or law, it's probably much longer.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stable means you have worked there more than 6 months to 1 year. I work on contracts so I have so much projects (jobs on my resume) But you have to clearly point that out if you ever did a contract job. Keep the the resume to one page or two. Never go beyond 3 pages. HR will not even bother with you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say 4 years or more each job. That's why I have no plans to leave my current job I started a year ago until 2018 or after. Actually I prefer to have 5 years since it;s been so long since I had 5 years of uninterrupted employment

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stable means you have worked there more than 6 months to 1 year. I work on contracts so I have so much projects (jobs on my resume) But you have to clearly point that out if you ever did a contract job. Keep the the resume to one page or two. Never go beyond 3 pages. HR will not even bother with you.

 

 

 

I think that's only possible for someone who is 25 or younger because a person who has been working 10 more years won't be able to keep a resume to one page. It will be atleast 1 and a half which mean it ends on the 2nd page.

 

 

Now 3 pages, NO

Link to post
Share on other sites
I would say 4 years or more each job. That's why I have no plans to leave my current job I started a year ago until 2018 or after. Actually I prefer to have 5 years since it;s been so long since I had 5 years of uninterrupted employment

 

That's absolutely not true in today's job market. Maybe 10-20 years ago with the prior generation.

 

Nowadays, 1-2 years at a job is considered stable. At that point, if you move on to a new position, it's just seen as career progression.

 

In fact, in my industry, if you stay at a job more than 2 years without a promotion, you're considered pretty much stagnant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's absolutely not true in today's job market. Maybe 10-20 years ago with the prior generation.

 

Nowadays, 1-2 years at a job is considered stable. At that point, if you move on to a new position, it's just seen as career progression.

 

While 1-2 years is certainly MORE stable than 0-1 years IMO it still doesn't meet the requirements of being stable..

 

The ROI on a new employee can be more than a year if there is training/ramp up on say sales.. etc etc... so if someone leaves right after they are trained/ramped up and now making money for the employer it becomes a wash for the employer and they start to look for more than 2 years of employment.

 

I don't know what your industry is but to answer to your progression, yes a resume should show your progression if you are doing that. An employer should be able to see it on your resume that you were advancing rather than job hopping.

 

Your work history should all be in line with one another to show that progression too... a year stint as a grocery stock boy after an 8 month stint as a web developer doesn't align right to show progression.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's absolutely not true in today's job market. Maybe 10-20 years ago with the prior generation.

 

Nowadays, 1-2 years at a job is considered stable. At that point, if you move on to a new position, it's just seen as career progression.

 

In fact, in my industry, if you stay at a job more than 2 years without a promotion, you're considered pretty much stagnant.

 

But if your last 2 shows were less then a year then 2 years would not be long enough

Link to post
Share on other sites
georgia girl
That's absolutely not true in today's job market. Maybe 10-20 years ago with the prior generation.

 

Nowadays, 1-2 years at a job is considered stable. At that point, if you move on to a new position, it's just seen as career progression.

 

In fact, in my industry, if you stay at a job more than 2 years without a promotion, you're considered pretty much stagnant.

 

I would have to disagree and I'm a CEO with about 50 employees, hiring all different job skills. When I look at a CV/resume, if someone has had more than one job that lasted less than a year, I'm pretty likely not to call that person for an interview. (And I work in an expanding field.)

 

 

Now, if someone is working contract work and it tells me that in the cover letter, then I may give the resume a second look.

 

 

If someone has a gap in employment, I likely will overlook one gap, but two or more would be a flag to me. Again, I want to see this addressed in the cover letter so I understand and don't dismiss your resume.

 

 

While all industries are different and what constitutes "stable employment" history will be different to all people, I would strongly recommend that people USE their cover letter more effectively to potentially address a defect in the resume.

 

 

I see this all of the time. Typically, when I'm hiring, I briefly review the cover letter before I look at the resume. Then, I study the resume. After that, I go back to the cover letter to see if any anomaly in the resume was addressed in the cover letter. Most of the time, it's not. My feeling is that if you can't look at your own resume, see its inherent weakness and use your one opportunity to explain it to me, why should I give you a second opportunity by granting you an interview? In all likelihood, I have 20-30 additional resumes that don't have such weaknesses and I can just toss yours out.

 

 

Not sure this is helpful or not, but I'll explain my process a bit to hopefully help some job seekers. When I advertise, I simply collect resumes from the date I start getting them to 3-5 days after I've advertised that the opportunity is closed. For me - and I'm an old dog here - I prefer mailed vs. emailed resumes because it's just simpler to keep them all together. Plus, when you email me your resume, you're asking me to do some work - print out your resume - just to consider your application. (And a lot of times these are formatted awkwardly - bad, bad start for a resume.) I generally don't look at the date received so the old notion of getting it in the fastest is not relevant to me.

 

 

Then, I skim cover letters (actually place them BEHIND the resumes) and review resume for skill sets, job history, etc. They go into three piles - interview, maybe if I don't have enough interviews, and no. The "no" ones are the ones that typically have a red flag on the resume.

 

 

If I have enough "interviews," the process is over and I rank the 3-5 interview resumes. Then, I read the cover letters in earnest. That can change the rankings. I set up interviews. Once the interviews are over, I send the "maybes" and "nos" a letter. Check references and potentially have a colleague conduct a second interview if I'm not sure.

 

 

On those occasions - and they happen about 30% of the time - when I don't have enough interviews and maybes, I review the No's again. There, I'm examining the cover letters as I describe above to see if there's some explanation there for the resume weakness that would make me want to interview someone. They can jump all the way into the interview pile or the maybe pile if they effectively address the weakness.

 

 

I am only one employer and I have my own style, so by no means take this as how most folks do it. Instead, I offer all of the above to say that if you think you have a weakness on your resume - such as stable job history - you may have to work a little harder to get that interview and the cover letter is your friend. Please use it.

 

 

Final note, in general, I find most cover letters to be a waste of time. I get that you're hardworking, self-starting, a great communicator.... etc. PLEASE tell me a story in your cover letter. Share with me an example of how you were innovative or how you communicated effectively. Everyone else has used the SAME adjectives as you - sometimes in the same freakin' order - STAND APART. In my opinion only (again), the cover letter is the most underutilized tool a job applicant has.

 

 

Good luck, GG

Link to post
Share on other sites
But if your last 2 shows were less then a year then 2 years would not be long enough

 

My job in 2011 lasted 90 days..........layoff

 

My job in 2012 last 9 months.............layoff

 

My current job has lasted over a year and not in year 2

 

 

So in my case why would I be looking to go anywhere before 2017? lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • Author
spanishchick00

So basically a person who has been working at a company for 8 years, working in the same position as day 1, a rather good employee with good year end reviews, is considered worthless to employers?

Link to post
Share on other sites
So basically a person who has been working at a company for 8 years, working in the same position as day 1, a rather good employee with good year end reviews, is considered worthless to employers?

 

No and don't let anyone tell you any different

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...