Would You Botox Your Resume?

30 June 2008

2 minute read

Too much experience can be a career-killer, especially in today's hyper-competitive job market. So is it legitimate to delete your first job or three, in hopes of erasing some telltale age-lines from your resume?

The signals from career experts appear mixed. We've heard a couple of headhunters call it a no-no. They say that ethical questions would arise once the omitted jobs are revealed by a background check. (Headhunters also point out that a necessary corollary of the "botox" strategy - omitting university graduation dates - is pointless, since a Wall Street employer will invariably demand that information before deciding to interview a candidate.)

On the other hand, a recent Wall Street Journal "On Style" column showcases a succcessful resume makeover that empowered a 49-year old woman to land two jobs in a short time, after a period of rejections that experts agreed were solely due to her age. (Although not in finance, she worked in another youth-obsessed business: entertainment.) The story cites career consultant Wendy Enelow's opinion that removing early jobs and dates is ethical, and her suggestion that anything before the latest 10 to 15 years of experience is deletion-bait.

Do you think this is legitimate, or deceptive? Have you ever tried it (or know someone who did)? If so, did it work?

AUTHORJon Jacobs

Insider Comment

Ma
Matt
17 July 2008
My recent experience is that the job market is hyper competitive for the hirers not the hirees! Relevant experience - I'd say keep it concise, although some employers do require every little detail for security checks.
Reply
Te
Ted
17 July 2008
While it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of age, companies can avoid the prosecution and the present political situation is to turn a "blind eye" to enforcement. The Age discrimination prohibition is a "joke". Companies do discriminate. Deleting outdated employment history is necessary. Getting an interview in a depressed economy is tough enough.
Reply
Ma
Margaret Icklan
16 July 2008
A 10-15 year historyshould be sufficient, especially when resumes are expected to be no longer than 2 pages. Relevancy is also a factor. My first job was with a bank as a customer service representative and has nothing to do with what I do now. I deleted it from my resume. Besides that I doubt that after all these years the bank would have any record of me should someone try to verify it.
Reply
Pa
Paul Riehman
14 July 2008
Relevant, schmelavant! I am 55 and exactly in that position and EVERYONE I've discussed this topic with advise to leave off your first few jobs. I'm currently in an outplacement program paid by my former employer and every consultant advises to go back no more than 15 years in your work experience, better is 10-12 yrs.. The reason? All the better to focus on the position scope statements and most importantly, fully list the accomplishments for each position noting what YOU did in the accomplishment and what you'll bring to your next employer.
Those so-called head-hunters that indicate it's a no-no had better wake-up and figure out just how competitive it is out there for the job seekers. They should have some clue due to the limited positions projects available. Besides, I fully advise any interviewer that some of my prior experience does not appear on my resume. Ethics are for class discussions and lawyers....just be HONEST and do the right thing when asked!
Reply
Er
Eric
11 July 2008
my first job was as a nuclear engineer. i am now in the investment industry. let's say i was the world's best or worst nuclear engineer back in the late 80's..... of what relevance is this compared to say earning my CFA or MS Financial Engineering which is far more recent? Obviously, I don't include my accomplishments as a Potable / Non-potable / Reactor Cooling Water Systems Engineer. I follow the 10 year rule to keep my resume at 2 pages.
Reply