Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
8 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Niklas1721
11 months ago

Both are equally critical.

In the case of gaps in the CV – especially if there are longer or more than 1-2 small gaps, one can often assume that one has not come through the sampling time.

many short-term jobs

in this situation one will assume that one did not get through the trial period at all and possibly took the next best job you got.

If you do both 2-3 years, you will hardly get any jobs from the 4-5th year, because employers are often looking for a long term and they will consider whether you fit into the company.

Martin88703
11 months ago

Hello,

you can’t say that at all. It depends on how long these gaps are in the CV and how long these short-term jobs were and how many of them are.

For example, if you had a lot of jobs where you were shorter than 1 month, you might not have to write everything in your resume.

With a gap of a few months, no one will say what, that is normal today, that one is once unemployed for a time until another has a new job.

Good

TheAric
11 months ago

It just doesn’t make any difference. My appeal in general also had many interruptions. I always got a job. As long as you are interested, employers cannot make a judgment.

femblade
11 months ago

Well, I guess it’s the reasons for both.

GrayWolf
11 months ago

A gap is worse because then it looks like you have something to hide, or weren’t careful enough to write the resume.

Anson12
11 months ago

Both. One wonders why one was wasting time and, secondly, many bosses have suspected that in his previous jobs, no one dares to hire these people

Jurafuchs
11 months ago

It depends entirely on the respective extent, but rather first.

Asurox1986
11 months ago

I say gaps are worse.

In many short-term jobs there could already be questions about how this has been done.