Recuriters/Hiring Managers I need your opinion

[Deleted]

I quit my job about two years ago to stay home with my kids. I am now debating when I should go back to work. I'm debating between going back soon, or waiting until they are in school. So, my question is....

If you were looking at my resume, would it matter if I have been out of work for two years vs five years? Would five years make me less desirable? I'm not really asking if you would hire me after an employment gap, my question is more related to the length of that gap.

If it matters, I was a branch manager at a large bank. So a management/sales type job.

Thank you!

[Deleted]

To me and the managers I've worked with, the difference between two years and five is negligible. It's pretty obvious in a woman's resume when there is a child sized gap.and in the positions I've filled, no one bats an eye. Maybe I work with exceptionally compassionate people, but we pretty much ignore that gap and pay attention to the work you've done.

[Deleted]

For sales I would not really bat an eye at 2 yrs. 5 yrs would be an issue unless that person has a stellar resume. For banking/finance 2 years is a concern but if they had a stellar resume we could make it work. 5 years for a gap is not someone we would entertain at all unless they have worked since the 5 yr gap and now they are coming to us.

[Deleted]

Only if there is another indication the candidate may not be proficient with technology.

[rosetyler]

It would depend on a couple of factors. If the candidate had solid work experience prior to leaving the work force, and showed evidence of keeping up with relevant skills (networking, member of a professional org, classes, etc.), I don't know that 2 vs. 5 years would make much difference.

If the person had minimal experience, and showed no evidence of having done any relevant work in the interim (committee member, volunteer work in the field, anything), 5 years would be a much harder pill to swallow, even for an entry level position. Most industries have the capacity to change a lot in 5 years, particularly where technology is concerned.

Regardless of what you decide to do, I would make sure you're remaining relevant in some way.

[LoveTrains]

Well I don't work in your field, but two years wouldn't be that big of a gap to me. 5 years would probably mean that the resume is going in the trash.

[Deleted]

Jan 11, 2013 19:45:49 GMT -5 LoveTrains said:

Well I don't work in your field, but two years wouldn't be that big of a gap to me. 5 years would probably mean that the resume is going in the trash.

this, especially if you are competing with equally qualified but currently working candidates. Also 5+ years out of the workforce is not evident of "success oriented" behaviors that many employers look for (flame away)

[Deleted]

Jan 11, 2013 21:36:40 GMT -5 @msstarry said:

Jan 11, 2013 20:46:21 GMT -5 @septimus said:

this, especially if you are competing with equally qualified but currently working candidates. Also 5+ years out of the workforce is not evident of "success oriented" behaviors that many employers look for (flame away)

but is two years ok? I am genuinely curious about your thoughts on where the line is.

Yeah, I am curious too. I have always assumed I would be fighting the "success oriented" thing no matter how long I stayed gone. But I also understand 5 years just seems so much longer then 2 years.

Thank you all for your honest feedback. It helps to get help on such a tough decision!

[Deleted]

Agree with Septimus. For me, 1-2 years would be fine, 3 bordline, 4 or more, the candidate would need to be exceptional for me to be really excited about them. I work in a competitive industry, and most resumes I get when hiring do not have any gaps in them for women or men that are applying to our company.

Ms. Starry, I can stomach 1 or 2 because I can conceptualize how that is necessary - understand that caring for a small child can be something a new mother may not want to outsource, if she can afford to stay home. But, after that, I have a hard time thinking that someone who is wired the way our employees need to be - would be ok out of the workforce.

Seeing some serious achievements while not working in a paying job might swing me in the candidates direction.

But at the end of the day, there is a substantial difference in someone who hasnt been in a work environment for 12 months vs 60 (to take the extremes).

Not trying to start mommy wars, but thats my view when I look at resumes.

[Deleted]

Jan 12, 2013 7:00:44 GMT -5 @shoegal said:

Agree with Septimus. For me, 1-2 years would be fine, 3 bordline, 4 or more, the candidate would need to be exceptional for me to be really excited about them. I work in a competitive industry, and most resumes I get when hiring do not have any gaps in them for women or men that are applying to our company.

Ms. Starry, I can stomach 1 or 2 because I can conceptualize how that is necessary - understand that caring for a small child can be something a new mother may not want to outsource, if she can afford to stay home. But, after that, I have a hard time thinking that someone who is wired the way our employees need to be - would be ok out of the workforce.

Seeing some serious achievements while not working in a paying job might swing me in the candidates direction.

But at the end of the day, there is a substantial difference in someone who hasnt been in a work environment for 12 months vs 60 (to take the extremes).

Not trying to start mommy wars, but thats my view when I look at resumes.

it is my take too. I will also say a lot depends on industry. Have you maintained your connections while out, kept up to date with the industry etc. Personally I haven't practiced law 8 years. I could never go back because I'm not qualified, even at entry level because I've been out too long.