Remix.run Logo
pfraze 2 hours ago

If you went through multiple rounds it likely means they were seriously considering you but ultimately they didn’t get to a yes. If it’s any comfort that means you did pretty well.

The short stints on a resume is likely not the only reason you didn’t get to 100%, but unfortunately you should know that it’s seen as a pretty bad signal. The general expectation is 2 years minimum at a gig. If you have multiple short non-contract jobs it raises the concern that a candidate doesn’t commit to their jobs, or that they don’t do well at their jobs and are getting let go.

999900000999 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Okay, but if my resume is a concern let's talk about in the first interview. I can't exactly rest and vest for 2 years when the company is running out of money. I had the bad luck of this happening 3 times in a row.

Company A got their funding pulled and shut down. Company B, where I was actually at for about a year and a half, switched owners and shutdown my entire office. Company C merged into it's main competitor and effectively fired most of us.

I will admit I was at one fantastic job and after around 3 years I probably could of stayed indefinitely. But back then I didn't recognize the value of a solid job. If you land somewhere and you're well liked by people, and able to do quality work, you really should just stay there instead of chasing slightly more money.

Pet_Ant 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

After my dates of employment I will parethetically add (bankrupt) or (shutdown) to indicate that it wasn't related to me personally. My best job was 18 months.

woooooo 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If they heard from the CEO specifically, it was probably based on the CEO vibe checking the resume as a last step after passing the entire interview process. The CEO may have spent 15 minutes on it.

warunsl 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If you went through multiple rounds it likely means they were seriously considering you but ultimately they didn’t get to a yes.

Sure, but one would think then the rejection email would have specifics around the interview and where the candidate did not perform well. Not nit picking on the job hops. If job hops were a deal breaker then why waste the candidate's time putting them through full rounds of interviews?

swyx an hour ago | parent | next [-]

if you were an experienced/mature tech employee you should probably know that there are real HR reasons why companies are strongly advised not to give too much information in a rejection email. there is only ever downside. your reaction here is a potential red flag.

i'm sympathetic to you, it sucks, why cant we all be nice to each other, and my answer to that all is lawyers.

HalcyonicStorm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It could also be that they might be sued for stating the real reason so they went with something that would be dismissed if it went to court.

direwolf20 an hour ago | parent [-]

This is the reason. If they make any statement you could contest it in court, so they don't make any statement

jagged-chisel 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> … specifics around the interview and where the candidate did not perform well …

Takes time away from the day job and other candidates.