Anonymous wrote:So is the cover letter required?

Sorry, I'm not going to write 50 cover letters if not required, especially if I'm going to be ghosted by 90% of the companies.

But will you read the instructions? Or in this case, the original post which pre-answered your question?

So is the cover letter required?

Sorry, I'm not going to write 50 cover letters if not required, especially if I'm going to be ghosted by 90% of the companies.

What’s even more frustrating is taking 30-45 minutes to fill out the required information and the assessment just to have your application rejected (without explanation) or ghosted completely. Theres blame to go around on the other side.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fed here who hires a lot. I haven’t noticed men having worse applications than women. 9 times out of 10 the bad applicants are veterans. The language they use has nothing to do with my job area and I don’t care which fighter jet they did maintenance on. My job ad says “must have experience with X” and almost 100% of the time they have no idea what X is. It’s clear to me that they just put out thousands of applications. Sometimes they just copy my job ad and place it directly in their application.

OP here. I'm seeing that too. Seems weird that the military doesn't offer some kind of public sector offboarding for folks who put in their time and are returning to civilian life (or entering it for the first time as a professional). Tip #1: Your military acronyms mean nothing to us. Sorry, I'm not disparaging your work. I just don't know how to evaluate it!

They do - it's called SkillBridge. But there are way more transitioning vets than available positions.

And let's be real officers get most of the spots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fed here who hires a lot. I haven’t noticed men having worse applications than women. 9 times out of 10 the bad applicants are veterans. The language they use has nothing to do with my job area and I don’t care which fighter jet they did maintenance on. My job ad says “must have experience with X” and almost 100% of the time they have no idea what X is. It’s clear to me that they just put out thousands of applications. Sometimes they just copy my job ad and place it directly in their application.

OP here. I'm seeing that too. Seems weird that the military doesn't offer some kind of public sector offboarding for folks who put in their time and are returning to civilian life (or entering it for the first time as a professional). Tip #1: Your military acronyms mean nothing to us. Sorry, I'm not disparaging your work. I just don't know how to evaluate it!

They do - it's called SkillBridge. But there are way more transitioning vets than available positions.

Anonymous wrote:I reviewed 100 hundred job application packages last year and only 2 applicants followed the cover letter instructions. 1 man and 1 woman.

No way! I should stop complaining. I get probably 80% following instructions, but then, mine aren't onerous. Which makes it even more offensive that some applicants ignore them.

Anonymous wrote:Fed here who hires a lot. I haven’t noticed men having worse applications than women. 9 times out of 10 the bad applicants are veterans. The language they use has nothing to do with my job area and I don’t care which fighter jet they did maintenance on. My job ad says “must have experience with X” and almost 100% of the time they have no idea what X is. It’s clear to me that they just put out thousands of applications. Sometimes they just copy my job ad and place it directly in their application.

OP here. I'm seeing that too. Seems weird that the military doesn't offer some kind of public sector offboarding for folks who put in their time and are returning to civilian life (or entering it for the first time as a professional). Tip #1: Your military acronyms mean nothing to us. Sorry, I'm not disparaging your work. I just don't know how to evaluate it!

Fed here who hires a lot. I haven’t noticed men having worse applications than women. 9 times out of 10 the bad applicants are veterans. The language they use has nothing to do with my job area and I don’t care which fighter jet they did maintenance on. My job ad says “must have experience with X” and almost 100% of the time they have no idea what X is. It’s clear to me that they just put out thousands of applications. Sometimes they just copy my job ad and place it directly in their application.

Anonymous wrote:These days the bare minimum is to network your way into a connection inside the org to get a referral for the opening. It is what it is.

+1

The AI algorithms are really frustrating gatekeepers leading people to try to game the system by having the right combination of keywords. The way in seems to only be networking to find contacts on the inside.

These days the bare minimum is to network your way into a connection inside the org to get a referral for the opening. It is what it is.

Anonymous wrote:One more bit of anecdata that this woman is on over her head and doesn't know how to do her job to she relies on magical rituals, a doesn't understand that people are hired for competence, not ritual

In a compliance heavy role, competence IS ritual. Honestly, if you can't follow application instructions, how am I going to trust you to follow 40 pages of SEC filing instructions?

One more bit of anecdata that this woman is on over her head and doesn't know how to do her job to she relies on magical rituals, a doesn't understand that people are hired for competence, not ritual

I reviewed 100 hundred job application packages last year and only 2 applicants followed the cover letter instructions. 1 man and 1 woman.

Eh, I read cover letters also, and I find that both men and women are equally lazy.

Content warning: discussion of men's failures. Turn back now if you're too delicate.

I spent the morning reading applications for an opening on our executive team. The position requirements are clear, the application requirements are clear.

It's not universal, but there is a strong trend: When I come across an application that is incomplete (like just a blank space where the required cover letter is supposed to go), or a resume that is crammed with AI-bait (I'm seeing a lot of blocks of text that say things like "strategic visionary experienced transformational seasoned leadership team mentor..." and on like that for a dozen lines), or one that is virtually unrelated to the position, it is far more likely to have a man's name attached.

I'm one of those dinosaurs that reads cover letters. I reject an application if the letter is missing, or names the wrong company; I'm specifically looking for explanations for obvious gaps in resume or experience. When assessed based on things like basic ability to read instructions, and an understanding of what a reviewer might be interested in knowing, there's a clear demographic winner in this candidate pool.

One more bit of anecdata that men just aren't trying as hard as women. And likely never have.