Resume Spamming Redux

wiredog writes "Remember this story about the guy who spammed his resume? Well, now the Washington Post is reporting that resume spamming is a trend. Enough of a trend to have generated a backlash!" Amusing fallout from an amusing story, and hopefully a lesson for others too.

Comments

We get them at Sun.....

[jsimon12]

I can attest to resume spamming becoming a trend. As of the last month or so I have seen many people, from all over the world spamming resumes to internal Sun mailing lists and personal addresses. Personally I would NEVER hire someone who used this tactic, reguardless of how qualified they are

Job sites

[Geeyzus]

Job sites like Monster really encourage spamming prospective hirers as well.

You set up an online resume, and can 1-click send it to the employers of your choice. I was laid off in September, and I sent out 200 resumes in 1 day in this way.

How many callbacks from those, and from all the resumes I sent out over the next month? NOT ONE. And I am not surprised, I can only imagine the number of resumes they are recieving.

Although this isn't the same as all-out spamming, employer spam via job sites online is running rampant and is only going to get worse, which is bad for potentially good candidates as they are lost in the sea of Monster.com email notifications...

Mark

Doesn't seem wise...

[FauxPasIII]

Does it strike anyone else as just a little bit foolish to send a message out to hundreds of strangers containing (presumably) your full name, address, phone number and valid email address ?

Identity theft, anyone ? Not to mention that you set yourself up for reverse spam...

Why hire lazy people?

[F.Prefect]

From the article:

"Less than 10 years ago, the effort for applying to 100 jobs was as big a deal as sending the invites to a wedding, with all of the paper and stamps," said Marcus Ronaldi, a San Francisco consultant who regularly receives unwanted résumés via e-mail. "Now you are able to apply for many jobs by pointing and clicking with your mouse."

Any sensible employer should refuse to hire a person who chain-guns his résumé to a hundred different people precisely because doing it that way is the easy way out! If you want to be employed, demonstrate that you are willing to go to all the trouble of actually doing it right. Otherwise you're simply telling people, "I'm too lazy to get off my butt and put a little effort into being hired."

Re:Why hire lazy people?

[domefreak]

Why is this lazy and not efficient? Not that I agree with the practice of mass-mailing resumes, but if you're going to do it, why spend all day if an hour will suffice? Automating tedious processes is one of the things that computers do best. I don't see why snail-mailing resumes is "doing it right" unless HR managers are impressed by thick paper.

Re:Why hire lazy people?

[charon_on_acheron]

That's right. I would never hire anyone who doesn't walk into my office with a professionally designed and printed résumé, with a proper cover letter, in a hand-engraved envelope addressed to myself. And all the papers better be the exact right color, none of that generic white stock. I don't care if he lives in Kansas and is applying to my office in New York, he had better hand deliver that résumé personally, or I won't even think to look at it. If they are too lazy to travel 1000 miles, why would I want to hire them?

Do you realize how pompous your post sounded? While a nicely done paper résumé is impressive, there are so many variations on how they are supposed to be done, that it's ridiculous. Am I supposed to be terse, with bulleted one-liners, or am I supposed to state job functions and explain my duties, responsibilities, and achievements? What about the cover letter? How can I possibly say something unique that pertains to this exchange, when everyone and their cousin is also sending the exact same thing? And again, is it supposed to be short and to the point, or more verbose and explanatory?

Take a look at the job-search sites, or books. They all say to tailor résumés and cover letters to the company, but how are we supposed to know the company wants it to be done? That is why I say your post is pompous, when you say people have to be "willing to go to all the trouble of actually doing it right." Define 'right', and I will waste another $50 on the 'right' paper, 'right' cover letter wording, 'right' résumé, 'right' everything else that goes along with it. Next time. Thankfully I do have a job now.

If someone sends a resume in email to a company, especially a company that produces or services computer products, it should carry as much weight as any paper resume. Imagine if a computer software company decided it wouldn't hire anyone who was too uneducated to send a proper email resume. After all if they are too stupid to know how to use a computer and the Internet, then that company surely doesn't want them as employees.

Personally, I think the whole process is a bunch of crap. Someone applying for a job, at anything smaller than a worldwide company with a million employees, should contact someone at a company any way possible. And that someone shouldn't be the HR manager, unless the person is looking for work in the HR department. A computer tech should contact a manager in the IT department. Then if there is a job opening that matches the person's skills and preferences, there can be further dialog. If not, the person can be told so directly. No more of this canned response, "We have received your application, and will file it...."

There are only two arguments against this. One is that it's not appropriate. See my first paragraph on what some people see as appropriate. The second argument is that it would waste so much of someone's time, answering 100 job requests each day. But those job requests are coming to someone at those companies right now anyway. There is just a department dedicated to fielding them. Imagine if you could cut your HR department out entirely, and just add a few more personnel to the other sections to handle the increase in correspondense they would get. These few more personnel would of course be working in those sections when they weren't answering job requests, so they would be more productive than the HR department staff would be when they aren't answering job requests. I know this will never be implemented, and it's only half thought out, but it sounds better than the crap people have to go through nowadays, just to find work to put food on their table and pay rent.

Re:Spamming for jobs is not good

[bildstorm]

True enough...

I think the only places that'll matter are those which have automated systems. Then they're looking for the right keywords.

Of course, if you have to spam, chances are, you don't have the right keywords.

Funny, but let's try to fix this

[guttentag]

It's a funny article, but it could have gone a long way toward solve the problem if it had offered unemployed readers alternatives to spamming.

The same applies to this Slashdot discussion. The people who have the technology openings people want are probably Slashdot readers (<SARCASM>who would want to work for someone who wasn't Slashdot-aware?</SARCASM>). Or perhaps you've already hired some outstanding candidate who found a way to get your attention without resorting to spam.

So let's put the question to you:

What's the best way for genuine, qualified, informed candidates to distinguish themselves from this rabble?

The exponent factor

[sparkyz]

You know, before I fell in love with computers and the many related disciplines, I spent a lot of years in the restaurant industry, in a variety of managerial and non managerial capacities. The one service lesson that came though again and again was that one bad impression can counter-balance easily a world of good impressions. You had to treat every customer like they were the most important person in the world; and I think that's a good maxim for any business.

That's why it was especially disconcerting to read one girl's comment in the article to the effect that if she got even one good offer, she was unconcerned about pissing off everyone else. If the first maxim is true, that one bad experience offsets a hundred or more good one's then how much exponentially worse must it be to create a hundred bad impressions on the low yield opprotunity of creating a good one. I suspect it might be alright to send someone a resume that is not necessarily solicited. After all, you never know until you try. But this means addressing a personal correspondence to a specific relevant person at your targeted company. I hope nobody gets any ideas from this.

Another Bernie?

[TCaptain]

From the Post article:

Still, she's not bothered by critics of spamming or those who find the tactic bothersome.
"I really wouldn't care, if I could get somebody to see it," she said. "Maybe somebody'll see it and have a job opening."

Do we have another Bernie on our hands?

Man, people just don't care who they piss off anymore, as long as there's a chance that they get their way

Re:Goes down on Your Permanent Record

[zangdesign]

Sending your resume to 28 companies can hardly be considered spamming. I had to send out over 100 during a job search three years ago. Part of the trick is to not make a mass mailing list - I sent out each one individually. It had a form cover letter, but I personalized each one as much as possible.

And here's the whole problem

[dghcasp]

From the Article:

Still, she's not bothered by critics of spamming or those who find the tactic bothersome.

"I really wouldn't care, if I could get somebody to see it," she said. "Maybe somebody'll see it and have a job opening."

I really don't care about offending others... as long as I get the job

I really don't care about causing traffic delays by cutting people off... as long as I can get there faster

I really don't care about causing pollution... as long as I can make more money

I really don't care about trampling the rights of the innocent... as long as we can punish the guilty

The funniest thing is how loud people complain about others being selfish...

OBFun: Go to local grocery store. Cut in front of line. When someone complains say "Why can we do it on the freeway but not here?" Watch them fizzle.

Re:I got Shifman's resume

[gorsh]

Shifman got no more than he deserved.

Did he?

it's obvious that Bernie Shifman is a moron asshole spammer, and on that basis I have no sympathy for him. But what Neil Schwartzman has done goes a little too far IMHO. He's posted Bernie's home address, phone number, aerial pictures of his apartment on his Web site. The popularity of that site has now given Bernie the dubious honor of "The Most Hated Man on the Internet" (Bill Gates notwithstanding). Shifman is no doubt the recepient of thousands of harassing phone calls, e-mails, people outside his apartment, etc. He will never be able to get a decent job again, and his life is all but ruined.

And yet he has been proved guilty of no crime.

Is this the best that the so-called egalitarian culture of the Internet has to offer? I don't see any Jonathan Katz articles standing up for the rights of this guy, who's currently getting the electronic equivalent of a lynching.

Yes, Bernie's moronic threats and accusations are highly amusing, but it's important to remember that there's a real person behind them. A person of obviously diminished capacity, who honestly thought he was doing the right thing. If Bernie Shifman were to commit suicide tomorrow, how would Neil Schwartzman and everyone else who took part in making this guy's life hell feel?

(And yes, the case can be made that Bernie did include his personal information in his spam, but does that mean he gave up his right to privacy? How many strangers do I have to send my resume to before I can make the assumption it'll be spread all over the Web? 5? 50? 500? 5000? Where's the line?)

In the end, I think this is really a matter between Bernie and Neil, and those are the two that need to settle it. I hate spam just as much as the next guy, but I think people need to be proven guilty (in a court of law) before being condemmed. Let's not all let ourselves be guided by mob rule. The Internet was built for better things than this.

Re:I got Shifman's resume

[jburroug]

it's obvious that Bernie Shifman is a moron asshole spammer, and on that basis I have no sympathy for him. But what Neil Schwartzman has done goes a little too far IMHO. He's posted Bernie's home address, phone number, aerial pictures of his apartment on his Web site. The popularity of that site has now given Bernie the dubious honor of "The Most Hated Man on the Internet" (Bill Gates notwithstanding). Shifman is no doubt the recepient of thousands of harassing phone calls, e-mails, people outside his apartment, etc. He will never be able to get a decent job again, and his life is all but ruined.


And this is a problem how? His actions, and his actions alone have made him "The Most Hated Man On the Internet" If he'd apologized to Neil, promised to never do it again and behaved like a decent human being, instead of threatening lawsuits with every other sentence do you think that he would nearly as hated? Even if Neil had posted the exchange under those circumstances would it have made Slashdot headlines? ("Moron spammer issues apology and stops spamming")

Yes, Bernie's moronic threats and accusations are highly amusing, but it's important to remember that there's a real person behind them. A person of obviously diminished capacity, who honestly thought he was doing the right thing. If Bernie Shifman were to commit suicide tomorrow, how would Neil Schwartzman and everyone else who took part in making this guy's life hell feel?


Though I took no active role in harrassing Bernie I certianlly wouldn't mourn his passing. Yes that's a cold hearted, vile thing to say but it's true. Likewise I wouldn't be upset if every person who ever sent me spam took their own lives, same goes for Hillary Rosen and "Smiling" Jack Valentii - all people who have in some way made my life (and many others) just a little bit more miserable their sudden absence would be like a ray of sunshine.

(And yes, the case can be made that Bernie did include his personal information in his spam, but does that mean he gave up his right to privacy? How many strangers do I have to send my resume to before I can make the assumption it'll be spread all over the Web? 5? 50? 500? 5000? Where's the line?)


One.

If your sending personal info to random strangers you've already given up your right to privacy. Maybe Bernie should've researched Neils privacy policy before sending him personal info?

In the end, I think this is really a matter between Bernie and Neil, and those are the two that need to settle it. I hate spam just as much as the next guy, but I think people need to be proven guilty (in a court of law) before being condemmed. Let's not all let ourselves be guided by mob rule. The Internet was built for better things than this


Bernies not being punished for a crime, he's being smacked by his peers for an amazing, and continued, breach of etiquitte(sp?) Anyway all Neil did was post the facts (+ some personal opinion) of his communications with Bernie and other some other publically available information. Final judgement was left to the reader, as was what (if any) action to take against him.

Re:Goes down on Your Permanent Record

[ScumBiker]

>>"Hey baby...wanna f---ok, that's cool...hey you over THERE, wanna f---...no?...ok, how about you, then?"

Ummm, back when I used to drink, I actually did just that. Sort of a drunken pickup spam. Mostly I got smacked, but believe it or not, it actually worked!

Re:Headhunters: what do you look for?

[amuro98]

What do I look for in a headhunter?

Someone with a clue and who respects me.

Seriously.

I've had headhunters call me when they obviously didn't read my resume, just saw a warm body they could hammer into whatever position they had, irregardless of what skills I had, where I was located, or even whether I wanted contract or full-time. I won't hesitate to tell these to go away, and don't bother me.

I've had other headhunters call me, but don't really understand the industry they're hiring for. I once had a headhunter tell me that he had a hot job for me fixing ATM machines because I told him I knew something about ATM networking. *sigh* Another didn't know what the salary scale for my profession was. Turns out he was trying to find folks with more 5+ years of experience to take jobs at less than half than what I was making in the same geographical area.

I've had others who have social-engineered my phone number from somewhere and call me at work - something I had said was a definite NO-NO.

A good headhunter doesn't forget that he's dealing with people on both sides. Stuffing me into a job I hate might get him his finders fee, but isn't going to make me happy, and I certainly wouldn't use him again, nor reccomend him to my friends.