Interviews: Common Courtesy by Companys?

[Publishers]

on subject

While we are on the subject, more than half of the recent resumes that I received were just the form exactly as it came from the job post company.

Half of them had as an objective something totally different than what we stated we were looking for. Example: Objective-- airline employment when we are not an airline.

Location -- if I advertise for a dispacther and you reply but are in Washington state and another guy is here in MIA, you are going to the round file or the delete button without me reading farther.

Like in my pilot example, if I do not see Lear 55 under the type section -- it is dumped. Not Read. not replied to.

If I thought you were the guy and the next guy comes through the door blows me away, you are instant history. If you call me, I will tell you, but I am not spending time trying to find you.

Much of what you have written on here is correct and it would be nice if it could happen. The courtesy is somewhat lacking. STill this is why guys like Plato Rhyne was considered such a god, he could make or break your career at Delta.

How many people did he call back.

 

[bobbysamd]

Hiring BS and legal authority supporting age discrimination

All this interviewing I have been on, ones that they paid for and the ones that I paid for, were just ADEA, and EEO trips. When the push comes to shove they can use any rational they want to disqualify you from the race and not tell you why. The laws have turned out to hurt us more than they help us, in that they can still discriminate for any reason they want and get away with it . . . and even if they did talk to us, we would not hear the truth, we get the standard answer that someone else more qulified got the job.....

(emphasis added)

I couldn't have said it better. These comments, in a nutshell, are why employment discrimination cases are so hard to prove.

The airlines cite age as a bona fide occupational qualification to hide behind age discrimination. The following is an excerpt from Coupi v. Federal Express Corporation (this underlining is a link to the case). This was a Federal Court case in which a pilot who had turned age 60 sued to beat the age 60 rule. The excerpt explains the BFOQ defense that airlines use as one weapon to discriminate because of age.

As we have indicated, it is not unlawful for an employer "to take any action otherwise prohibited [by the ADEA] . . .where age is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the particular business. . . ." 29 U.S.C. '623(f)(1). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has elaborated on this statutory "BFOQ defense" as follows:

"An employer asserting a BFOQ defense has the burden of proving that (1) the age limit is reasonably necessary to the essence of the business, and either (2) that all or substantially all individuals excluded from the job involved are in fact disqualified, or (3) that some
of the individuals so excluded possess a disqualifying trait that cannot be ascertained except by reference to age. If the employer's objective in asserting a BFOQ is the goal of public safety, the employer must prove that the challenged practice does indeed effectuate that goal and that there is no acceptable alternative which would better advance it or equally advance it with less discriminatory impact." 29 C.F.R.
'1625.6(b).

In maintaining the age 60 rule subsequent to enactment of the ADEA, the FAA has never expressly purported to establish a bona fide occupational qualification for ADEA purposes. See Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n v. Boeing Co., 843 F.2d 1213, 1220 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 889 (1988). That is not the FAA's function; "Congress
has not provided for agency determination of whether a particular age is a BFOQ for a particular occupation." Hahn v. City of Buffalo, 770 F.2d 12, 15-16 (2d Cir. 1985). Nonetheless, as we shall explain, the FAA performed the same sort of analysis that a court would undertake in determining the
legitimacy of a BFOQ defense under the framework established by the EEOC regulation.

As to the first element, the FAA determined though not in so many words, of course that its age 60 requirement "is reasonably necessary to the essence of the business. . . ." 29 C.F.R. '1625.6(b)(1). The business in this case is that of flying aircraft engaged in Part 121 operations. The rule was first promulgated in 1959 "because of concerns that a hazard to safety was presented by utilization of aging pilots in air carrier operations." See 60 Fed. Reg. 65977 (1995). The FAA has reaffirmed the rule several times, most recently in 1995, noting that "[c]learly. . .there is progressive anatomic, physiological, and cognitive decline associated with aging. . . ." Id. at 65981.

The FAA has thus decided that safety concerns made the age 60 rule "reasonably necessary" for pilots in Part 121 operations. Safety concerns may be factored into the BFOQ calculus if safety goes "to the core of the
employee's job performance" that is, when the safeguarding of human lives is an inherent part of the job. United Auto. Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 499 U.S. 187, 203 (1991). Safety, in our view, goes "to the core" of an aircraft pilot's performance.

(emphasis added)

(The outcome was the court held that it could not strike down the Age 60 rule because the FAA was not a defendant in the case.)

See what older pilots and other personnel are up against? The airlines always raise "safety," successfully, as their defense against age discrimination. A similar case is Murnane v. American Airlines, Inc., 667 F.2d 98, 101 (D.C. Cir. 1981) ("we find the maximization of safety to be reasonably necessary to the normal operation' of [the defendant airline]"). But, as outermarket notes, you'll never see "age" as a reason why you weren't hired. They'll say they hired someone who is better qualified, or, more subjectively, say they did not like the applicant. Et cetera.

Did I mention that I have a friend who had interviewed with Trans States who found out that he was rejected because of age?

Do not believe that age discrimination does not exist in airline hiring. I've had people here argue with me strenously to the contrary. Now, you have seen some legal authority that is used to "justify" it.

 

[Publishers]

Bobby

I totally concur with the above.

The thing is that all of life is a case of discrimination, some for better, some for worse.

If the guy hiring does not like red headed people, heh, they are probably not going to get hired.

Like my example over on the thread of the hypothetical airline, there not only is a good old boy network, but, we all have that tendancy. We hang with and employ people we like and feel are compatible to us.

Companies are culture related and all have definitive cultures. It is entirely possible to have someone very qualified who just does not fit the culture.

The bottom line is that we all discriminate, we all have preferences, and we all have good old boy friends we would hire if we were in position to do so. The question is --Is this bad?

My answer-- doesn't make any difference -- it is the way we all are.

 

[b757driver]

Shame on them

And my answer is that then don't blame the unemployed for being unemployed and getting extensions! You can't have it both ways.

Most intelligent people have known about this for some time. Glad someone has finally admitted that employers are regularly violating the law while hiding behind "we are an equal opportunity employer, we love diversity, we don't discriminate against age, sex, national origin etc" I think everyone knows this is BS. It makes a mockery of the whole system and degrades the whole process, and as Publisher says, isome is less so and others worse.

Discrimination should be used only for selecting the criteria for doing the job - nothing else. Sure, you may have a candidate that you like better, and that is probably OK but to blatantly discriminate against the criterion given above is nothing short of hypocrisy. It seems to be the way "forward" for many companies and does nothing to promote goodwill and getting the best. It is nothing to be proud of.

 

[Resume Writer]

Just Joined the Forum!

I just got around to joining the forum. I want to say thank you to those of you who felt it would be a good idea for me to join. As New2Flying said, I just would like to see what help I can provide and possibly some insight into the whole HR/Airline game. I will do my best to answer any questions that anyone on the board has; if I do not know the answer, I will try to find it for you.

Just a little about my background. I was in the airline industry for 16 years in several different positions. Some of those include recruitment, international sales and marketing, customer relations, revenue accounting, yield management and I worked all of the line positions, including the last few years as a Flight Attendant. Prior to working in the airline industry, I was a Hiring Manager for a Fortune 500 company. Since 1987, I have owned a resume writing and employment consulting business. While I specialize in the airline industry, I compose resumes for all positions; from front line workers up to CEOs.

The reason I tell you this information is NOT to advertise, but to let you know that I do have a substantial background in hiring. I really try to help my clients in all aspects of their job search. I will try to do the same for those individuals with questions on the boards.

Ok, enough about me...

I called a Recruitment Manager friend of mine and asked about the issue of hiring individuals not returning phone calls. She told me some really interesting information.

First, her company, while small, gets about 200-500 resumes per position posted. This just confirmed what I already knew from my other hiring manager friends.

Second, and I found this particularly interesting. She said it was easier if people had email addresses on their resumes and cover letters. That way they could set up an "auto responder" to reply to the candidate when they had received the resume. She told me that when people fax or send in their information, they are not as likely to send a reply, as it is costly.

Let's figure it logically. If they get even 100 resumes a day faxed or mailed, that would be 37.00 a day times 200 days a year (just an estimate). That is $7400 a year. Of course, that is not the cost for paying someone to mail all of those replies. Let's say they pay someone $15k a year for that job. As you can see, it adds up. It is cost prohibitive. Also, HR is primarily a support function and if upper management could eliminate that department, they would!

Third, most of the HR folks do not just do hiring. They do employee benefits, compensation reports, annual reviews, budgeting, training - the list goes on. As you can probably see, they have a great deal on their plate, as management expects them to perform.

When I told her about some of the people being promised jobs and then not followed through with, she was very surprised. She said that people who make those kind of comments are usually not full time HR people. It is usually the people that are the department managers. While they try to train people in the rules of hiring, they cannot always control the "blunders" that they make. Believe me, after being a hiring manager for 6 years myself, doing stupid things like that get you sued.

When I host the Human Resource Forum at the end of this month, I plan on asking all of these questions. Further, I am going to write a press release addressing this very issue. I think it is time that people in hiring positions (whether they be managers or HR people) take some responsibility for their actions. This is NOT the first time I have heard of this happening.

Now, on to the Age Discrimination, the answer is yes, it does exist. Is it supposed to? Absolutely not. When I did hiring, I could have cared less how old someone was; I just wanted to know if they could do their job. In fact, in one of my departments in retail, I had many older ladies in the department (infants and kids clothing), because they enjoyed it and people liked buying from these women. (I guess they saw them as grandmothers) Did that mean I did not hire younger workers for these positions - nope. But I found that placing them in positions where they would sell to their peers was a better fit.

Now, while it is not supposed to happen, imagine yourself as an HR manager. The top bosses are putting pressure on you to hire younger people because they want the best cost/benefit. In other words, how much time could they get out of someone for the amount of training that was required. Do I agree with it - no. My only point here is to provide everyone with a reality check of what really goes on. Unless you have deep pockets, you will not be able to sue for it. Further, you have to "prove" that the discrimination happened, and believe me, they will find some other reason why they did not hire you.

When I have older workers contact me to do their resume and associated job search documents, the first thing I look at is how we can effectively cover their age. What I mean by this is that I have several people who want to include things they did back in the 60's or 70's. I only go back about 15 years, and at the most 20. My job is to get the job seeker in front of the hiring managers through effectively written documents. Then it is up to them to prove themselves.

There are many things I suggest older workers do. One is to get updated clothing. The next would be to go to a professional colorist and have their hair done. While some of the men on here may think that is silly, it does work - IF it is done by a professional.

I hope I have answered some of the questions people have asked. If there are questions that people have, you can feel free to private message me. I will try to answer them as quickly as possible, but I have a 9 month old daughter who is quite the mobile little one! In addition to her, I also have a son and many clients that I must attend to keep the roof over my head. I promise I will do my best to reply and to also participate in this forum.

Thank you for allowing me to participate!

Kathy

 

[Wang Chung]

Wouldn’t you think they should have some moral or ethical obligation to update or advise people they have left on the employment ledge

Last year I submitted a resume for a flying position. The CP contacted me by email and told me that he would like to set up a time for a phone interview. He also invited me to submit an online application. I responded immediately- told him I was VERY flexible about scheduling a phone interview (I also did the online app).

He NEVER responded back. Couldn't get ahold of him.

I was hired for a very similar flying position at a different company about one week later. Sort of ironic.

 

[English]

Welcome Kathy!

 

[dispatchguy]

Re: Finally and foremost, the Truth!

mindless drivel and whining deleted....

Herr Outermarket, you whine more than ANYONE I have ever seen on nearly any aviation-related board.

Just thought I would point that out

 

[rettofly]

Re: Just Joined the Forum!

Second, and I found this particularly interesting. She said it was easier if people had email addresses on their resumes and cover letters. That way they could set up an "auto responder" to reply to the candidate when they had received the resume. She told me that when people fax or send in their information, they are not as likely to send a reply, as it is costly.


The top bosses are putting pressure on you to hire younger people because they want the best cost/benefit.

There are many things I suggest older workers do. One is to get updated clothing. The next would be to go to a professional colorist and have their hair done. While some of the men on here may think that is silly, it does work - IF it is done by a professional.

Welcome aboard! Your insight from the perspective of the hiring professional is extremely enlightening.

I have been putting my e-mail address on every resume' that I have sent. To date, only two recipients of e-mailed resume's and cover letters have taken the trouble to click on the "REPLY" button to send an acknowledgement.

Having spent decades in industry before making the career change to aviation, I am very well acquainted with HR practices and management pressure put upon the HR folks. I've put a little pressure on HR myself during those years. I agree that there is pressure to hire young (consistent with meeting minimum experience levels).
There is one factor, however, that mitigates against this practice in pilot recruitment. Every pilot is required by regulations to complete recurrent training AT LEAST once every year. The cost benefit horizon is limited to the recurrent training cycle. Last time I checked, the cost of recurrent training for older pilots was the same as that for younger pilots. Moreover, it could be argued that hiring older pilots has a cost benefit, in that older pilots tend to retire before they reach the higher strata of the salary structure.

The hair color thing is a sore point. My locks have been silvery gray since I was in my thirties. Since I have been unable since last May to obtain a face-to-face interview, this issue has so far been moot.

Just my two cents.

 

[Resume Writer]

>>There is one factor, however, that mitigates against this practice in pilot recruitment. Every pilot is required by regulations to complete recurrent training AT LEAST once every year. The cost benefit horizon is limited to the recurrent training cycle. Last time I checked, the cost of recurrent training for older pilots was the same as that for younger pilots. Moreover, it could be argued that hiring older pilots has a cost benefit, in that older pilots tend to retire before they reach the higher strata of the salary structure.<<

I understand fully about the recurrent training of pilots, however, there is still a cost/benefit factor involved. If someone has the chance to get 20 years out of a pilot, instead of 10, then the cost for training for that pilot is amortized over a longer period, and is outweighed by the productivity gained.

Your argument is valid though about the pay structure of older pilots not reaching the higher pay scales before retirement. However, in most airlines now, the average upgrade time could be anywhere from 5-10 years, with some of the regional carriers upgrading sooner than that. So, if someone is at a regional, then the pay scale argument is not really valid, when the upgrade time is sometimes 3-5 years. At the end of a 10 year work history, the pilot in question would have already made Captain and be at the higher end of the pay scale.

If the company (and I say if) has a retirement plan, then the person who retires at 10 years of service, is an immediate cost burden to the carrier, versus someone who has 10 more years of service in them. So, the argument could be seen either way. I guess it depends on who is sitting on the hiring side of the desk, and what the directives are from upper management.

When I made the comment, I was speaking in general about hiring, not specific to pilots.

Thank you everyone for welcoming me to the boards. Although I have been out of the business for a year, I think you will all agree that aviation gets under your skin! This board is wonderful and I think it is great all the information that everyone is willing to share with each other.

Kathy

 

[dispatchguy]

Re: Thanks Guy

Thanks, I appreciate the support from a fellow dispatcher, I guess it's easy to see it your way when your young and employed!

LIsten,

A) Young hell, I'm over 35

B) I've read your drivel in several message boards, and the one question I've always wanted to ask was "what kind of cheese would you like with your whine? I would suggest a nice Brie."

But yes, I am employed......

 

[TonyC]

Kathy!?!?! IS that YOU?!?!




::::::::::::::::: Kathy :::::::::::::::

 

[rettofly]

I understand fully about the recurrent training of pilots, however, there is still a cost/benefit factor involved. If someone has the chance to get 20 years out of a pilot, instead of 10, then the cost for training for that pilot is amortized over a longer period, and is outweighed by the productivity gained.

Your argument is valid though about the pay structure of older pilots not reaching the higher pay scales before retirement. However, in most airlines now, the average upgrade time could be anywhere from 5-10 years, with some of the regional carriers upgrading sooner than that. So, if someone is at a regional, then the pay scale argument is not really valid, when the upgrade time is sometimes 3-5 years. At the end of a 10 year work history, the pilot in question would have already made Captain and be at the higher end of the pay scale.

If the company (and I say if) has a retirement plan, then the person who retires at 10 years of service, is an immediate cost burden to the carrier, versus someone who has 10 more years of service in them. So, the argument could be seen either way. I guess it depends on who is sitting on the hiring side of the desk, and what the directives are from upper management.

I hate to seem obtuse, but it seems to me that a recurring cost is a recurring cost is a recurring cost regardless of the age of the person being trained. Upgrade cost is a one time event for each aircraft type, and the number of hours spent in the sim to prepare for and take a type rating check is about the same as the cost of a recurrent ride.
Since hardly anyone is offering defined benefit pension plans for new hires any more, the cost of someone retiring after 5 or 10 years is no more than the cost of someone retiring after 20 years. In fact, given the 401(k) vesting schedules used by most employers, I would argue that it would benefit an employer to hire someone who will retire in a few years. The few companies that still offer defined benefit plans would benefit even more, since they generally require ten years' service as a condition of drawing the company paid pension.

 

[Resume Writer]

Kathy!?!?! IS that YOU?!?!




::::::::::::::::: Kathy :::::::::::::::

Yes Tony, it is me! Where have you disappeared to? Off the radar screen or what? lol

 

[Resume Writer]

I hate to seem obtuse, but it seems to me that a recurring cost is a recurring cost is a recurring cost regardless of the age of the person being trained. Upgrade cost is a one time event for each aircraft type, and the number of hours spent in the sim to prepare for and take a type rating check is about the same as the cost of a recurrent ride.
Since hardly anyone is offering defined benefit pension plans for new hires any more, the cost of someone retiring after 5 or 10 years is no more than the cost of someone retiring after 20 years. In fact, given the 401(k) vesting schedules used by most employers, I would argue that it would benefit an employer to hire someone who will retire in a few years. The few companies that still offer defined benefit plans would benefit even more, since they generally require ten years' service as a condition of drawing the company paid pension.

Rettofly - It can be definately argued either way. But then again, we have all seen some stupid things that management has done in the name of saving money! But trying to make sense of the things that are done sometimes would make us all go crazy. I know after several years at my airline, I would have to put on my "management issued non-logic hat" to make sense of what they did. Once that was on tight, everything made sense!

 

[bobbysamd]

Age discrimination

Just a little about my background. I was in the airline industry for 16 years in several different positions. Some of those include recruitment, international sales and marketing, customer relations, revenue accounting, yield management and I worked all of the line positions, including the last few years as a Flight Attendant. Prior to working in the airline industry, I was a Hiring Manager for a Fortune 500 company. Since 1987, I have owned a resume writing and employment consulting business. While I specialize in the airline industry, I compose resumes for all positions; from front line workers up to CEOs.

The reason I tell you this information is . . . to let you know that I do have a substantial background in hiring . . . .

* * * *

Now, on to the Age Discrimination, the answer is yes, it does exist. Is it supposed to? Absolutely not . . . . The top bosses are putting pressure on you to hire younger people because they want the best cost/benefit. In other words, how much time could they get out of someone for the amount of training that was required. Do I agree with it - no. My only point here is to provide everyone with a reality check of what really goes on . . . .

(emphasis added)

Yes, indeed, it does. And now you've heard it from someone who really does know.

I've been writing on this board for two-and-a-half years that age discrimination exists in pilot hiring, especially so at the regionals against older career changers. I have demonstrated logically that it happened to me. Read my other posts on the subject - but I'll make my point once more. At my school, ERAU-Prescott, the 25-and-under flight instructors were getting the interviews and jobs at the same places to which I, who was pushing forty (40) years old, was also applying but was hearing nothing. My quals and their quals were essentially alike. Enough total and multi time to meet mins, the required certificates and ratings, and four-year degrees. I exceeded some of the requirements. All professional aviation experience gained through flight instructing only. To simplify it further for those who still do not get it, the only difference between them and me was age. I was older.

Heretofore, all my allegations about age discrimination were met with strenuous denials, anecdotal responses to the contrary, assurances that it no longer exists, which I have refuted by recent examples, dismissive, caustic retorts that I don't know what I'm talking about and I should be disregarded, and even personal attacks. (If you cannot attack the person's argument, attack the person - sticks and stones . . . .) Now, here is credible proof from an expert that supports my allegations. Perhaps, now, some of you will believe what I have been saying. Perhaps, now, some of you will not dismiss it as sour grapes, whining, being a loser, or whatever.

Read my post above about legal authority that supports airlines' anti-age bias. Take that and Kathy's comments and consider it a prima facie case of the existence of age discrimination and that it victimizes people. Also consider both as cautionary advice if you are approaching forty and considering a career change to aviation.

As I wrote above, any kind of employment law case involving an institutionalized discriminatory hiring practice is hard to prove. The court cases I cited above, Coupi and Murnane, are only two examples of the hurdles to surmount for pilots wanting to challenge age bias. Not to mention that the only reason the hiring gods have to give is they liked the other applicants better - or whatever.

Thanks so much, Kathy, for an invaluable first post.

 

[bobbysamd]

Hiring old boys v. bad public policy

The thing is that all of life is a case of discrimination, some for better, some for worse . . . . The bottom line is that we all discriminate, we all have preferences, and we all have good old boy friends we would hire if we were in position to do so. The question is --Is this bad?

When it crosses the line to be bad public policy, you bet it is bad.

Everyone deserves a fair shake. Everyone deserves fair treatment. Read Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment. And, if anyone believes that I am a pimp or shill for affirmative action programs, rest assured I am not. To receive further assurances, reread the first two sentences of this paragraph

 

[bobbysamd]

Press release

When I host the Human Resource Forum at the end of this month, I plan on asking all of these questions. Further, I am going to write a press release addressing this very issue. I think it is time that people in hiring positions (whether they be managers or HR people) take some responsibility for their actions. This is NOT the first time I have heard of this happening.

Would you post the release or a link to it?

Thanks, Kathy.

 

[Resume Writer]

Bobby,

I will definately post that press release when I write it. I wanted to share a couple of press releases that I wrote that have ended up being printed in several newspapers across the country. Keep in mind that they were written for the general public, not specifically pilots. I will post them separate, as they are each kind of long.

Kathy

 

[Resume Writer]

Press Release

Subtle Mistakes on Resumes Can Cost Candidates Interviews

Use of business contact information or cute email addresses can be the kiss of death

PRWEB) December 25, 2003, Phoenix, AZ -- Most job search candidates are aware of the common mistakes, such as typos and grammatical errors, which can make a big difference in getting called for an interview. However, most candidates are unaware of the subtle mistakes they are making, including placing personalized or company email addresses and company or cell phone numbers, on their resume. While some of these practices may seem harmless, there are valid reasons behind not putting this information on an employment search document.

“Many of my clients want to include their work email or phone numbers on their resume,” says Kathy Sweeney, president of The Write Resume, a Phoenix, Arizona based firm which specializes in resume writing and employment coaching for clients via the internet. “I advise against this, because the question a potential hiring manager may ask is whether a candidate will search for a job on their company’s time.”

Further, Sweeney points out that if a candidate does get a call from a potential employer on a company phone, the job seeker may be in a meeting with their boss or client, creating a very precarious situation.

“When a potential employer wants to contact a candidate, they are usually ready to either interview them by telephone in a screening phase or want to set up a formal meeting. They do not want to be put off by a job seeker who needs to call them back or cannot talk at the time,” says Sweeney. “The hiring manager only has a limited amount of time to speak to a potential employee and if the individual is unable to talk, they will go on to the next candidate.”

Job seekers also need to realize that including a cell phone number on their resume can cause just as many problems. First, the candidate will be at a disadvantage, because they may not have their resume in front of them to answer potential questions. In addition, they may be in a social situation, where once again they may not be able to speak at length to the employer.

Sweeney says the candidate should control the timing of the potential screening interview. The best way to ensure the interview happens on the candidates’ terms is to have a reliable home telephone number listed on their documents. If an employer calls, they will leave a message and the candidate can call them back when they are prepared and uninterrupted.

Sweeney also suggests that job seekers not allow their children to answer the telephone while searching for a new position. In addition, a professional telephone message system, with an appropriate outgoing message, is the key to an employer actually leaving a callback number.

“Many times individuals will have a cute message left by their child or a long, loud music selection on their answering machine. This will guarantee an employer will not leave a message,” Sweeney says with a chuckle.

The other common mistake candidates make is to have a “personalized” email address on their resume. Cute email addresses should not be used. Rather, a professional email address, such as the first and last name of the job seeker at the internet service provider address is the best guideline. Most internet service providers offer several email addresses per account. If a candidate does not have their own provider, free accounts are available from Yahoo and Hotmail.

If a candidate has a common name, like John Smith, they can still utilize their name, but perhaps use some numbers at the end. Sweeney warns not to use the year of birth as those numbers, as it could lead to age discrimination.

“I had a client once who wanted to use “GreatBootyBabe” as their email address on their resume,” Sweeney recalls. “I had to gently advise her that while it was fine to express her individualism to her friends, it was not professional and would send the wrong message to the employer.”

Using a company email address is also another kiss of death. Many companies have a strong email policy and violating those rules can get a candidate terminated from their current position.

By following these simple rules, Sweeney says that job seekers will portray a specific image to potential hiring managers, which in the long run, may communicate their professionalism.