Selective resume

(story at bottom)

I’ve thought about this a lot around here, even with only having the basic college degree.

I know in a lot of the admin jobs I’m dealing with people with a ton more experience… but I wonder a bit on some of the very basic jobs.. sometimes not even requiring high school… if the degree was actually hurting my chances. just because in a normal economy, very few college grads would stay working there.

I do already have separate resumes based on type of job I’m applying for… but mostly just the job description is changed to emphasize different tasks. for example, the office job resume mentions things like faxing and mail distribution on the tv station job, that get left out on the communications version, not because they weren’t done but because much less relevant… where the com version goes into much more detail on specific programs and equipment that the office job people wouldn’t likely care about.

Thus far, I’ve left the degree listed though.

Nor have I followed through with the suggestion to wear a left hand ring to interviews to be seen as less likely to have child care issues etc. 

But its a thought.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124328878436252195.html

The New Résumé: Dumb and Dumber

Job Seekers Play Down Their Credentials to Avoid Looking Overqualified

By JANE PORTER

Kristin Konopka sent out nearly 100 copies of her résumé in January in search of receptionist work, but got only one callback. That’s when Ms. Konopka, a 29-year-old New York actress and yoga teacher, took her master’s degree and academic teaching experience off her résumé.

The calls started coming in. The slimmer version of her résumé landed in 30 in-boxes and earned her three callbacks and two interviews. “It definitely picked up the interest,” says Ms. Konopka, who realized quickly that people don’t “want to hire anyone who is overqualified.”

Securing work in a tight economy means more job seekers might find themselves applying for positions below their qualifications. Many unemployed professionals are willing to take paycuts for the promise of a paycheck. But to get a foot in the door, candidates are gearing down their résumés by hiding advanced degrees, changing too-lofty titles, shortening work experience descriptions, and removing awards and accolades.

In the past eight months, Jamaica Eilbes, an information-technology recruiter for Milwaukee employment agency Manpower, has had to weed out more overqualified résumés than usual from the stacks that cross her desk each day. “I’d never feel comfortable putting a really high-level candidate into a lower level position,” says Ms. Eilbes, who recruits for Manpower and other clients. “We don’t want to take you on if we think you are going to jump ship.”

But in recent months, Ms. Eilbes has seen more master’s and doctoral degrees at the bottom of résumés instead of at the top. She’s also seen candidates omitting or trimming job descriptions that showed they had substantial years of work experience. Résumés on which job descriptions taper off as they progress down the page raise Ms. Eilbes’s suspicions. “How do I know I can trust them later down the road if there’s something on their résumé they decided to take off so they could have a better chance at getting that job?” she says.

Still, for some professionals who find themselves constantly rejected despite decades of experience, scaling back the truth — or at the least, some of their experiences — can feel like the only chance at an interview.

Lenora Kaplan, 49, has 26 years of marketing experience but doesn’t want her résumé to show it. When she lost her job as vice president of public relations at a small Las Vegas marketing firm in January, Ms. Kaplan searched for work with little success. At an interview for a shopping-mall marketing-director position in February, she was told that the hiring budget had only enough for a junior-level employee and that her résumé showed she was overqualified.

Many of the jobs she comes across ask for far fewer years of experience than she has. “There is nothing to apply for” at my level, Ms. Kaplan says. She quickly realized her job experience was pricing her out of too many positions. Her solution: To try not to look as senior level as she really was. So she eliminated certain jobs and removed details about speaking engagements and board positions.

In some cases, job seekers are being told by hiring agencies to tone down their résumés if they want to get hired. When Bridget Lee, 29, moved to New York from Shanghai eight months ago and put her application in at three temporary agencies, she was told to play down her work experience before they would send her résumé to potential clients. The temp-agency version of her résumé changed titles like “manager” and “freelance trend researcher” to “staff” and “office support” and omitted entirely her title as partner of a small marketing agency. “It’s been a lesson for how I present myself,” Ms. Lee says.

Career counselors advise against making too many drastic changes. But they also say the demand for this kind of restructuring is on the rise. In the past three months, Tammy Kabell, a Kansas City, Mo., job-search coach, says more clients are requesting her help to “dumb down” their résumés, whether by changing job titles, playing down experience, or altogether omitting some impressive achievements. One recent client, a 61-year-old former chief learning officer at a tech company, insisted on omitting her C-level job title from her résumé. She was fearful her application would be weeded out by the Web search-optimization tools companies use to manage résumés.

Some résumé writers advise reworking a résumé into a functional one stressing transferable skills instead of past job titles and accomplishments. “Instead of focusing on the big achievements that might scare an employer away, you can spell out what you can bring to an employer in the next position,” Ms. Kabell says.

Of course, reducing your résumé to a skeleton of what it truly should be isn’t likely to land you the job you really want. While it took Ms. Lee eight months to get a call back for a job that matched her real experience, this month she landed a position as a temporary account manager — with potential for permanent work — at a New York design firm. The interview and job offer weren’t earned using her dumbed-down résumé, but rather with the original.

“You have to make those creative edits when it comes to short-term work, but in terms of long-term work, you have to stay true to your experience,” says Ms. Lee.

Advertisements

Non-electronic fruit

I almost titled this “blackberry review” until I realized I was going to have google thinking I was talking pda.

And after laughing way too hard after I was scrolling to get to a past draft and happened to glansing-ly notice someone found my blog by searching for “big bear issues” and got my post about a too big teddy bear… i wouldn’t want some person wanting a new toy to be overly bored by my fruit discussion like that person that I REALLY hope was not having an issue with a big bear at the time of the search. (it was memorial day weekend… a big camping weekend…)

 

Anyway… lol

I randomly picked up some unexpected blackberries at the store the other day… because they were on sale and next to the peaches I wanted to put into some of the homemade yogurt from the other day…. which made me think they would make nice yogurt as well.

It was about the time I got in the car that I really started thinking about it…. and wondering if I’ve ever actually even had blackberries before… outside of like mixed berry or fruit salad mix type things.

 

So I got home, and while unloading the groceries I tossed about 4 at once into my mouth. 

And was not thrilled. I pretty much wrote it off as not liking them.

But tonight I decided to mix them into yogurt with some raspberries… and so I smashed the juice out of about 10 between mason jar lids above a yogurt jar then scraped the smashed part in too.

I already had stevia in it, so I decided to try it before the other berries went in… and discovered I actually liked it.

So I left that one as it was.

 

But then I tried the berries again… one at a time this time. And I figured out… what I don’t like is the middle crunchy part. Raspberries usually have that gone and are all soft.

But just smashing the berry in my mouth instead of biting down on that crunchy part, I actually really liked the flavor of the berry.

 

Gotta remember to try to figure out exactly what I don’t like in new things…. maybe sometimes it can be worked around. 

But I still don’t like kiwi. Or mangos unless mixed with other stuff like a smoothie.

Should probably start a list… fruit ratings.

Blackberries get an 8… losing 2 for texture. Mangos get a 3. Kiwi a 2.

 

 

(and bananas with nutella spread on the side gets a 10… but we aren’t even gonna ask if that’s healthy after the other day. it does have hazelnut and less calories than the peanut butter. but, um… sugar is number 1 ingredient… and its basically molten chocolate.)

Rolling litter

Random cool product: Omega Paw Roll’n Litter Box

No, it’s not on wheels.

It’s a covered litter box, and one side is round.

Like so…

 

 


The litter pan area takes up about 2/3 of the bottom part. The remaining 1/3 is closed off by a grate. (They call it a screen, looks more like a grate to me. Bars are about the distance apart as your random litter scoop).

 

So what happens, is that you roll the litter box over. 

All the clean litter goes through the gate into the reserve area, where it hangs out for a bit.

 

As you keep rolling, all of the solids and clumps that stayed on top of the grate then drop over into the area above that reserve.

When you then roll it back, they roll/slide along the edge into this drawer that covers the reserve, sitting up against the edge. You pull the drawer out, dump it, and put it back in.

 

And when you have it back to level, you roll it a bit to the other side, and all the clean litter comes back out of its reserve area into the cat use part.

One minute or so of effort… and cat box is done.

 

Wasn’t too sure about it at first, as amazon has mixed reviews… but the petco site seemed to have almost pure positive, so decided to try it. Plus I had 15 in amazon cards from swagbucks points, which made it about 15 with free shipping, so figured even if it got used as a normal covered box I’d be ahead.

 

Thus far, this thing has worked great! Soo much faster with 3 cats,

Bonus perk… rolling a litter box upside down is amusing enough to a 7 year old that I don’t have to do it.

Kiddo accidentally grabbed one of the sliding clamps that hold the halves together once when rolling, and we had a tiny bit of litter go out from that… but less than the cats usually kick out. And the bottom being deeper that the normal covered litter box we have, they have been kicking out a ton less. I pointed out to her where the sliding clips are, and it hasn’t happened again.

 

I left both of the other boxes in use for a while to make sure they were gonna use the new one, but they have been, so I think the uncovered one is being taken out of use this week. I’d like to get another of the rolling ones to replace the covered one too, but I’m gonna wait a few months to make sure we don’t have any issues down the road.

 

I’m still waiting for the first time she accidentally rolls it with a cat inside though. I’m sure it’s gonna happen eventually.

Overthinking bananas, define healthy

I have a tendency to overthink things and confuse myself.

This is one of those posts. Consider this warning.

 

Define healthy.  Easy enough…  change it for “good for you”. 

But good how?

 

I’ve been thinking about this. And I think I’m a bit confused from the different camps operating on different definitions. 

It seems like some foods considered highly healthy by some, are considered very low by others.

The groups… as best as I see them.

  1. Calories.
  2. Nutrient value.
  3. Natural.
  4. Traditional.
  5. Intended to be eaten.
  6. Obvious

So now let me explain those.

1. Calories/weight loss
Simple enough, lowest calories is the healthiest food. Works great for weight loss. Pitfalls to me: It makes the diet code red mountain dew, essentially designed to be so foreign to the body that it can’t figure out what to do with it and so has no calories, healthier than a glass of milk that every other category is going to choose as the healthier option. And just because the tea makes you lose weight by peeing a lot, does not mean it is a healthy thing to be doing.

2. Nutrient value.
Items with the highest amounts of nutrients is the most healthy. Seems logical.
Pitfalls to me: The questionable benefit of adding vitamins to everything down to even bottled water, sometimes lack of balance as to which nutrients are focused on. Fiber diets, diets claiming miracle foods or berries.

3. Natural/simple
The less processed, the better. Organic is tops. 
Pitfalls to me: Whole milk vs skim, Bacon vs turkey bacon, Butter vs its many substitutes (I can’t believe its not butter spray). Animal fat period really.

4. Traditional
If it isn’t something your great-grandmother would recognize as food, don’t eat it. (I assume this phrase was aimed at people older than me… as mine would have recognized both a twinkie and cocoapuffs.) This one seems like it gets in with the natural a lot, and I hear it a lot from the ones who are aiming at being self-sufficient.
Pitfalls to me: It’s a nice thought… in some cases. But most of those cases would be covered under the simple and natural category. I’m thinking the fried chicken, gravy, and cakes she would recognize probably keep this from being a useful overall rule for me.

5. Intended to be eaten.
Raw foodists. Ok, this one may need a bit more explanation for most.  There are groups of people who believe that we were designed to be frugivores… that is, eating raw fruits, seeds (grain) and nuts as our primary diet. (In this case, fruit gets defined as anything the plant makes for reproducing itself and is not the plant itself. So cucumbers, squash, etc are fruits… and so are potatoes.) Depending on which group you look at, this is either laid out biblically (hallelujah acres, etc), or scientifically or both.
Science-wise, we don’t have the tooth style, or extra stomachs etc like the animals meant to eat the greenery itself… nor are our taste buds programmed to reward those foods like they do the sweetness of fruits. We also lack the tooth style of the primarily carnivores and the short intestine length to prevent meat remnants from going putrid before they are out of our system. But we match pretty well the primates, who eat mostly fruit. And the fruit seems balanced best to match our needs, and appeals to our natural tastes and visual appeal.
Biblically, this is explained as that adam was designed for garden life, eating fruits (um… except that one tree), and while we were blessed with being designed with flexibility to survive outside the garden without mature plant life… but that should be the backup, and when fruit available, it should be what we eat.
(Ok… so both camps probably would wince at that explanation… but that’s a simplified summary anyway).
Pitfalls to me: Appeal and practicality. Ok fine, even agreeing with the argument at face value that we were meant to, doesn’t to me mean that we should be currently. And given how many other references to eating kosher things and bread and the like are mentioned, I’m guessing even if he originally intended one thing, it seems like he’s ok on the change. Though I have had some close friends at one point in my life who followed this in belief if not always in practice… and I had read quite a bit about it. which I think sometimes unintentionally gives the fruits higher weight in my mind than just tasting sweeter.

6. Obvious
Ok, from the hardest to the easiest… it just seems healthy. We know somehow what is and isn’t.
Pitfalls: Lack of supportive reasoning rarely helps. Things like values of our parents and society may teach us things we assume to be instinct, but may just as easily be wrong. Granola. That mcdonalds salad that has more fat and calories than the larger hamburger.

 

 So about this banana with natural peanut butter on it.

It seems healthy. It’s a fruit, its natural, my ancestors would know it, and it has nutrients.

It also has the same amount of calories as two twinkies.

Is it healthy? Probably.

But it only takes 5 of them to make up the recommended daily calorie intake of an adult female… and only 4 to make it to the recommended dieting calorie intake for the day. 

So if it adds to weight problems more than eating a single twinkie instead, is the impact on health really worse? Or do the other factors making it more healthy trump the calorie impact still?

Should I be eating it?

 

And now that we’ve battled the issues over bananas, lets talk about homemade yogurt vs processed light yogurt. One has much more fat and more calories. The other has less calories by adding in stuff the body can’t process, as well as the preservatives and the like. Does the naturalness offset the other?

And how about iceberg lettuce? Nothing to speak of at all for nutrition, but also nothing to speak of for calories. Does the free ride on calories and naturalness justify the lack of nutrient benefit?

Does the non-natural state of seedless grapes change anything?

Has anyone ever won the fight on whether or not an egg is good for you?

 

Its thought trains like this that really truly make me believe that ignorance really can be bliss. It can shut up, eat the stupid salad, eat the banana in moderation, and not give it a second thought.

Yogurt finale

The 4th try was finally a success!

I finally have random mason jars of homemade yogurt on my fridge shelves.

 

Not actually entirely sure what the difference is… but this time I cooled it lower on accident, about 10 degrees lower than the range it was supposed to be… so of all of the attempts, I was the least optimistic on this one.

And I was only really attempting it again in the first place because I had another half gallon of whole milk hanging out in the fridge left over from the previous attempt.

 

But it finally turned out. YAY!

It’s not entirely the same texture as the store kind.. or the greek kind. More firm until you stir it… but then it turns a bit more runny, and yet, also a bit more stringy and clingy.

Not bad… just a noticeable difference.

 

But I’m quickly realizing exactly how much half a gallon of yogurt really is. Especially when it doesn’t have the preservatives to last a long time. 

May have to make some of the yogurt jars to get kiddo to eat a few rounds of it.

 

Not sure if will make it again. Jury is still out a bit… is it worth the effort to make it to do just a half batch? will it take 4 tries to get it right again?

But at least I know I can. LOL

Yummy yogurt jars

Random recipe of sorts…

 

Take 3 of the smaller sized mason jars (pints).

 

Fill them 1/3 of the way or a bit more with yogurt. (I’m still trying to get homemade yogurt to work… but this is about one of the small store containers)

 

Fill them from the yogurt to the halfway point of the jar with milk, any random milk or substitute works.

 

Add two packets of stevia (or similar) to each jar.

 

Divide one package of sugar free pudding mix between the three jars (Any flavor.. cheesecake, chocolate, and white chocolate are favs with us)

 

Close jar lid, and shake until it just starts to feel less liquid.

 

Moving fairly quickly, open jar lids, fill to top of jar with already chopped fruit (strawberries and bananas usually here, sometimes apples or peaches).

 

Close lids again, shake again. If fruit seems to stay in top half, try shaking on its side, or turning upside down.

 

Chill, then eat. Or, freeze a bit, then eat it a bit frozen. You can freeze entirely and eat when almost thawed, but texture sometimes a bit different.

 

Can’t say its the lowest calorie thing in the world… a bit over 200 plus calories from 1 1/4 cup or so of your fruit of choice can sometimes get kinda high.

but it gets kiddo eating something thats mostly fruit covered in yogurt.

And is yummy.