20 jobs in 20 years? Impressive or red flag?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Were they all short-term contracts? I don't know if there is a field in which that's more common than full-time work? Can't think of any other positive explanation. Military spouse? But I think they move around less frequently.

Military spouse was my thought, too, and even that's more like every 2-3 years.

I'm a military spouse, and find it as huge red flags. The resume wouldn't make it past the first round.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is going to think that is "impressive." I would assume they have a personality problem of some kind and put their resume in the trash. I can understand people changing jobs, even somewhat frequently, but that is extreme.

Op here: my coworkers found it “impressive”. Which was why I posted like “am I the only one who sees this?”

Some good companies on their LinkedIn but stints are like 6 months…good titles towards the end but stints still under 1 year. (Not due to company closing or merger)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Red alert or smart moves?

If you got a resume from someone in their 40s/50s and they had 20 different jobs at 20 companies in about 25 years. The longest tenure was 18 months, most were under a year.

Would you think they were smart for job hopping frequently or red flag at short tenures?

If candidate was in their 20s I wouldn’t think twice - job hopping is normal.

But close to 50?

Are they just contract jobs?

Are you hiring for a contract position?

[Anonymous]

I am going to disagree with everyone here, it depends, someone is hiring this person, and most likely companies can't keep up with promotions. High performers will need to be promoted every year, or they will go somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am going to disagree with everyone here, it depends, someone is hiring this person, and most likely companies can't keep up with promotions. High performers will need to be promoted every year, or they will go somewhere else.

That’s potentially okay if OP’s company is looking to hire someone who’ll be there for a year or less. If they want someone stable who’ll stick around, it’s a huge red flag that this person is not a match.

[Anonymous]

Red flag, obviously. I don’t know why people hire people who don’t stay someplace for more than 2-3 years. I’ve seen people do this and invariably they realize they’ll have to get rid of them after 6 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am going to disagree with everyone here, it depends, someone is hiring this person, and most likely companies can't keep up with promotions. High performers will need to be promoted every year, or they will go somewhere else.

Any company who could potentially promote people each year has no idea what they’re doing.

[Anonymous]

Unless it's contract gigs, complete red flag.

[Anonymous]

This is the worst person to hire.

[Anonymous]

Impressive or red flag?

Impressive. Shows the candidate is always striving for more: looking for new challenges, new opportunities, new ways to be better. Someone who is not complacent, easily satisfied, or willing to accept the status quo. MAGA!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Red flag, they don't seem to get how to edit their resume.

+1 they should be smart enough to club some years and jobs and omit some.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am going to disagree with everyone here, it depends, someone is hiring this person, and most likely companies can't keep up with promotions. High performers will need to be promoted every year, or they will go somewhere else.

So in 20 tries, this person has yet to find a company that will promote them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is going to think that is "impressive." I would assume they have a personality problem of some kind and put their resume in the trash. I can understand people changing jobs, even somewhat frequently, but that is extreme.

Op here: my coworkers found it “impressive”. Which was why I posted like “am I the only one who sees this?”

Some good companies on their LinkedIn but stints are like 6 months…good titles towards the end but stints still under 1 year. (Not due to company closing or merger)

I usually think references are a complete waste of time but I would be curious about who they pick to be their references and what relationship is there. If they had 20 bosses and not a single one is their reference (instead they chose their peer Bob from the water cooler at IBM) then that would be curious.

[Anonymous]

Scarlet flags. Especially if it’s not explained in a cover letter.

[Anonymous]

Fed here - We hired a guy who had been at 7 agencies in like 27 years and that was a big red flag for us. I remover the deliberation and hesitation about that one. Public is different from private, but still.