20 words you should never put on your résumé

I came across this article on Business Insider. I think it's some good information that I think you might find useful...

While many large companies use automated résumé screener software to cut down the initial pool of job applicants, loading your résumé with meaningless buzzwords is not the smartest way to get noticed.

"Nearly everyone is guilty of using buzzwords from time to time, but professionals are evaluated increasingly on their ability to communicate," says Paul McDonald, senior executive director for professional placement firm Robert Half.

One of the major problems with using buzzwords and terms, according to Mary Lorenz, a corporate communications manager at CareerBuilder, is they have become so overused that they've lost all meaning. Another issue, she explains, is that many of these words don't differentiate the job seeker from other candidates because they're so generic.

Instead, Lorenz says job seekers should speak in terms of accomplishments and show rather than tell.

"Avoiding overused terms can help job seekers convey their message and stand out from the crowd," McDonald says. Here's what you should avoid:


20 words you should never put on your résumé


1. 'Best of breed'

When CareerBuilder surveyed more than 2,200 hiring managers last year, it found "best of breed" to be the most irritating term to be seen on a résumé.

"Anyone can say they are 'best of breed,' a 'go-getter,' a 'hard worker,' or a 'strategic thinker,'" Lorenz says. "Employers want to know what makes the job seekers unique, and how they will add value to the specific organization for which they're applying."

2. 'Phone'

Career coach Eli Amdur says there is no reason to put the word "phone" in front of the actual number."It's pretty silly. They know it's your phone number." The same rule applies to email.

3. 'Results-driven'

"Instead of simply saying that you're results-driven, write about what you did to actually drive results — and what those results were," Lorenz suggests.

4. 'Responsible for'

Superfluous words like "responsible for," "oversight of," and "duties included," unnecessarily complicate and hide your experience says Alyssa Gelbard, founder and president of Résumé Strategists.

"Be direct, concise, and use active verbs to describe your accomplishments," she suggests. Instead of writing, "Responsible for training interns ...," simply write, "Train interns ..."

5. 'Highly qualified'

McDonald saying using terms like "highly qualified" or "extensive experience" won't make you seem better-suited for the job — in fact, it could have the opposite effect. Instead, he suggests you focus on the skills, accomplishments, and credentials you bring to the role.

6. 'Seasoned'

"Not only does this word conjure up images of curly fries," says Rita Friedman, a Philadelphia-based career coach, "it is well-recognized as a code word for 'much, much older.'"

7. 'References available by request'

This outdated phrase will unnecessarily age you, Gelbard says. "If you progress through the interviewing process, you will be asked for personal and professional references."

8. 'NYSE'

Vicky Oliver, author of "Power Sales Words" and "301 Smart Answers to Tough Interview Questions," says you should spell out any acronyms first and put the initials in parentheses. For example, "NYSE" would read "New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)."

"For starters, acronyms are capitalized, and all caps are harder to read than upper and lower case," she explains. "It's also really difficult to wade through a piece of paper that resembles alphabet soup."

9. 'Team player'

"Who doesn't want to be a team player? If you’re not a team player, you’re probably not going to get the job," McDonald says.

But using this term isn't going to make you stand out from other candidates. "Instead, use an example of how you saved a company time, money, and resources on a team project or in collaboration with others."

10. 'Ambitious'

"Of course you would never say you're 'lazy' either, but calling yourself ambitious doesn't make any sense on a resume," Friedman says.

"It can imply that you're targeting this job now, but will quickly be looking to move up in the company because you won't be satisfied in the role, leaving the employer stuck with doing a new job search in the very near future."

11. 'Microsoft Word'

Yea, you and everyone else.

It's assumed that you have a basic proficiency in Microsoft Office, Gelbard says. Unless you have expert proficiency, there's no need to include it on your résumé.

12. 'Interfaced'

"Words like this make you sound like an automaton," Oliver says. "Most recruiters would rather meet with a human being. Keep your verbs simple and streamlined."

13. 'Hard worker'

It's true that a company is less likely to consider you if you haven't worked hard or don't come across as someone who will put in what it takes to get the job done, but that doesn't mean writing "hard worker" will convince hiring managers of your efforts.

"Give concrete examples of how you’ve gone the extra mile, rather than using a non-memorable cliché," McDonald suggests.

14. 'Honest'

Honesty is one of those things you have to show, not tell, Friedman says.

"It's not as if there are some other candidates out there vying for the job who are describing themselves as 'duplicitous' or 'dishonest.'"

15. 'Punctual'

Being punctual is great, but it's also pretty basic to holding down a job. Don't waste the space on your résumé.

16. '@'

Unless it's in your email address, avoid casual texting language like @.

"A resume is a formal document and is often the first impression a potential employer has of you," Gelbard stresses. "Business language should be used to reinforce that first impression and text-style or casual words should be avoided."

17. 'People person'

Cliches like "people person" are impossible to prove, Oliver says, and recruiters have heard these phrases so many times they're likely to feel their eyes glaze over as soon as they see them.

18. 'Hit the ground running'

"This one is a pet peeve of mine," McDonald says. "The expression is unnecessary and doesn't add value. A recruiter isn't going to be able to place you if you're not eager to start the job and you aren't committed."

19. 'I'

Avoid using personal pronouns like I, me, my, we, or our, Gelbard says.

"A person reviewing your resume knows that you're talking about your skills, experience, and expertise or something related to the company for which you worked, so you don't need to include pronouns."

20. 'Successfully'

"It's generally assumed that you were successful at whatever you are including on your resume," Gelbard says. "There is no need to say that you successfully managed a marketing campaign or successfully led annual budget planning."





http://www.businessinsider.com/words-to-never-put-on-your-resume-2015-7?op=1#ixzz3fjP0wztg

what can an employer say about former employees...

Do you plan on leaving your job for a new one in 2015. Here are some things to consider...

One of the questions people ask frequently is "What can an employer say about former employees?" Some job seekers presume that companies can only legally release dates of employment, salary, and your job title. However, that's not the case.

Can an employer say a former employee was fired or terminated for cause? How about saying that you quit without notice or your attendance record wasn't good? Are there limits to what an employer can say about you?

There are no federal laws restricting what information an employer can disclose about former employees. If you were fired or terminated from employment, the company can say so. They can also give a reason. For example, if someone was fired for stealing or falsifying a time sheet, they can explain why the employee was terminated. Here's information on when an employer can say you were fired.

That said, because of laws regarding defamation (which is slander or libel) companies are usually careful about what information they provide to hiring managers confirming employment or checking references. What they say has to be the truth or the company can be subject to a lawsuit from the former employee. Legally, they can say anything that is factual and accurate.


What Former Employers Can Say About You


There are no federal laws restricting what information an employer can disclose about former employees. If you were fired or terminated from employment, the company can say so. They can also give a reason. For example, if someone was fired for stealing or falsifying a time sheet, they can explain why the employee was terminated. Here's information on when an employer can say you were fired.

That said, because of laws regarding defamation (which is slander or libel) companies are usually careful about what information they provide to hiring managers confirming employment or checking references. What they say has to be the truth or the company can be subject to a lawsuit from the former employee. Legally, they can say anything that is factual and accurate.

If you have been fired or terminated, check with your former employer and ask what information they will give out when they get a call to verify your work history. If they do give out more information than the basics, what they say may be negotiable and it can't hurt to ask.

When you left under difficult circumstances, you could ask someone you know to call and check your references, that way you'll know what information is going to come out. Or, you can also use a reference checking serviceto check on what will be disclosed to future employers.


Getting the Story Straight


It's important that your story and your former employer's story match. If you say you were laid-off and the company says you fired, you're not going to get the job.

Also, not telling the truth during the application process can get you fired at any time in the future - even years after you were hired. That's because most job applications have a section where you verify the information is accurate.


Don't Presume the Company Won't Give Out Information


Don't presume that your former employer won't disclose the reason why your job ended. Large companies typically have policies regarding the disclosure of former employee information, but may not. Many smaller employers don't have a policy at all or aren't aware of or concerned about legal liability issues.

In either case, it's important to know what the employer is going to say about you, because what you say needs to match what the company is going to say.

Finally, if your version doesn't match theirs and you feel the company's story about your termination isn't accurate, be upfront and say so. You'll have a better chance of getting the job than if you say one thing and the company says another.

Source...careers.com

North Carolina Eliminates Unemployment Benefits

from www.http://talkingpointsmemo.com

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — With changes to its unemployment law taking effect this weekend, North Carolina not only is cutting benefits for those who file new claims, it will become the first state disqualified from a federal compensation program for the long-term jobless.

State officials adopted the package of benefit cuts and increased taxes for businesses in February, a plan designed to accelerate repayment of a $2.5 billion federal debt. Like many states, North Carolina had racked up the debt by borrowing from Washington after its unemployment fund was drained by jobless benefits during the Great Recession.

The changes go into effect Sunday for North Carolina, which has the country’s fifth-worst jobless rate. The cuts on those who make unemployment claims on or after that day will disqualify the state from receiving federally funded Emergency Unemployment Compensation. That money kicks in after the state’s period of unemployment compensation — now shortened from up to six months to no more than five — runs out. The EUC program is available to long-term jobless in all states. But keeping the money flowing includes a requirement that states can’t cut average weekly benefits.

Because North Carolina leaders cut average weekly benefits for new claims, about 170,000 workers whose state benefits expire this year will lose more than $700 million in EUC payments, the U.S. Labor Department said.

Lee Creighton, 45, of Cary, said he’s been unemployed since October, and this is the last week for which he’ll get nearly $500 in unemployment aid. He said he was laid off from a position managing statisticians and writers amid the recession’s worst days in 2009 and has landed and lost a series of government and teaching jobs since then — work that paid less half as much. His parents help him buy groceries to get by.

“I’m just not sure what I’m going to do,” said Creighton, who has a doctorate. “What are we to do? Is the state prepared to have this many people with no source of income?”

With the changes to North Carolina law, state benefits will last three to five months — at the longer end when unemployment rates are higher. Qualifying for benefits becomes more difficult. Weekly payments for those collecting the current maximum benefit of $535 drop to $350, falling from the highest in the Southeast to comparable with neighboring states.

Republican leaders who control the General Assembly sought an exception to the federal law two months before voting to change unemployment benefits. Congress last year allowed Pennsylvania, Indiana, Arkansas and Rhode Island to proceed with cuts to weekly benefits that their legislatures had approved for after the expected expiration of federal benefits, which later were extended.

North Carolina’s request was never acted on.

Other states this year cut unemployment benefits and restricted eligibility, but none included drops in weekly benefits, said George Wentworth of the National Employment Law Project, a worker-advocacy group.

All states are aware of the no-reduction provision, said Doug Holmes, who heads the National Foundation for Unemployment Compensation & Workers’ Compensation, which represents businesses on unemployment insurance issues.

“Many of them considered doing something that would reduce the weekly benefit amount, but for whatever reason chose not to take the step of enacting legislation,” he said. “But North Carolina also had one of the biggest problems.”

Twenty states carry such federal debt. The Labor Department declined to comment on North Carolina’s looming situation but said no other state is considering changing benefits in a way that would imperil U.S. help.

Supporters of the new North Carolina law say the reduced benefits and increased business taxes are necessary to repay the federal debt — the third-largest in the country.

Labor groups, Democratic congressmen and the state NAACP want to delay the cuts until the federal program expires in January, but lawmakers and GOP Gov. Pat McCrory have refused.

Delaying would burden businesses and potentially increase the debt, said Rep. Julia Howard, R-Davie. The cuts also will push people to find work faster, then move to a better job as the economy improves, she said.

“It may not be the job that you want or your career for the rest of your life. But to take a job, get back into the job market,” Howard said.

Opponents who have staged protests nearly every week against Republican policies say lawmakers are slashing a safety net for the poor while corporations and the wealthy benefit.

Overall, the changes will mean $3.6 billion in total benefit cuts and higher costs to employers through 2017, according to the General Assembly’s fiscal research office. Benefit cuts on the jobless make up 74 percent of that figure. The accelerated target for repaying the federal debt, which fell to $2.1 billion in June, is sometime in 2015 rather than 2018.

North Carolina companies now pay an additional $42 per employee yearly to pay the debt. Without the changes, businesses’ unemployment insurance taxes would rise by $21 per employee every year until the federal debt is paid.

The state’s top business lobby, the North Carolina Chamber, primarily assembled the package of proposals that lawmakers adopted.

“You’ve got to pick a point in time where you solve the problem. They picked a point in time that allowed us the most time to pay the debt as quickly as we can and get a new program in place so that we can help people find work,” said Gary Salamido, the group’s top lobbyist. “It’s a very unfortunate circumstance for everybody involved.”

Wayne Bostick, 58, of Raleigh, said he lost his job in April 2011 and will lose extended federal benefits immediately. He said he earned about $700 a week in take-home pay, often working double shifts at a ConAgra Foods plant until it shut down after a fatal explosion. Since then, he said, the only jobs he’s found matching his skills pay less than $10 an hour and are outside Raleigh. Now he’ll have to revisit those or start a handyman business.

“I’d rather do that than bring home $200” after commuting and taxes, he said. “They are really putting the gun to your head now.”

I'm not sure what the lawmakers in that state where thinking about when they did this. Most people don't WANT to use unemployment. It is used to help them as they are between jobs. I have used it before and it helped sustain me financially while I was in between jobs for 3 months. It's definitely not enough money for me to live and pay bills. That said...North Carolina is going to feel the backlash from this. They were the first but other states will follow.