Fellow HR people, bless me with knowledge on this complex case

 

I am a 35-year-old Senior Engineer and I just lost a job because I didn't pop enough digital balloons.

So I've been looking for a new role for two months. Finally found a company that actually seemed cool. I sent my resume, they liked it, and then they sent me a link to a "mandatory behavioral assessment." I thought it was going to be a standard personality quiz. it was not.

it was a series of mobile games. For forty-five minutes, I had to click on balloons to see how much "risk" I would take before they popped. then I had to memorize sequences of flashing lights and click on emoji faces to show "emotional intelligence." I am literally applying to build their cloud infrastructure, but apparently, my ability to win a carnival game is what matters now.

I got a rejection email four hours later saying my "cognitive profile" doesn't align with their team culture. I should of known it was a joke when the email had a cartoon avatar on it. It is just ABSOLUTELY insulting to be treated like a toddler when you have fifteen years of experience.

they spend all this money on these fancy "scientific" games but can't just have a fifteen-minute conversation with a human. It feels like we are living in a Black Mirror episode where our entire career depends on a high score in a glorified version of Flappy Bird. Why is this even a thing?

Jobadvisor

Four hours to reject fifteen years of experience based on a balloon-popping game — yeah, that's insulting, and your instinct that this is absurd is correct, not just sour grapes from a bad day.

What you ran into is a real product category, usually called "gamified assessments," built by companies like Pymetrics (now part of Harver) and similar vendors. The pitch to employers is that these games measure things like risk tolerance, attention, and emotional intelligence more "objectively" than a resume or interview, and can screen large applicant pools faster than a human can. For high-volume entry-level hiring, there's at least a coherent (if debatable) logic to that. For a senior engineering role, it's a much harder case to make — the balloon game has nothing to do with whether you can architect cloud infrastructure, and a same-day auto-rejection with a cartoon avatar suggests no human looked at your application before or after the game ran.

There's also a legitimate concern beyond "this feels dumb": these tools have been criticized by researchers and even the EEOC for potential bias — they're opaque about what they're actually scoring, hard to contest, and there's real question about whether the "cognitive profile" categories are meaningfully validated for jobs like yours at all, versus just producing a number that sounds scientific enough to justify a decision that was probably already algorithmic in some other way (resume keyword match, etc).

So no, you didn't lose the job because you're bad at popping balloons. You got filtered by a system that wasn't built to evaluate a senior engineer in the first place, at a company that apparently doesn't think that's worth a human's fifteen minutes. That's information about them, not about you — and probably a decent sign of what working there would've actually been like.

How's the rest of the search going? Two months in is rough regardless, but curious if you're seeing more of this gamified stuff or if this one was an outlier.

Changing Careers in my 50s

As the title says, I'm transitioning from one industry to another, from 20 years of bartending (back) into an office environment (I used to be corporate IT before bartending). I'm 56m.

I've worked and reworked my resume following as many suggestions, tips and tricks as I can find to remove age-specific references, and I'm mostly happy with it, but I have a few questions for the masses:

First, I have a gap from my previous job to now of several months. Do I address that on my resume or should I simply prepare myself for the question? "Professional" suggestions on the 'net seem to have mixed feelings about it. I'm considering an entry that says (paraphrasing) "addressed personal and professional objectives in preparation for career change", or something to that effect. What do y'all think?

Second, again the 'net seems to waffle on the idea of presenting either a career objective first, or a summation of my work experience as a lead-in. In some cases, the recommendation is to keep the summation of experience as lead-in but include a cover letter. I'm leaning away from this idea, but I dunno...

I appreciate the replies, folks. I'm trying to stay open-minded about this but I'm having a lot of anxiety over the whole thing. Any information, anecdotal or otherwise, y'all could provide would be very much appreciated.

Jobadvisor

Going back to corporate IT after 20 years of bartending, at 56, takes real nerve — that's not a small pivot. Let me give you my honest read on both questions.

The employment gap

Don't write "addressed personal and professional objectives in preparation for career change" on the resume itself. It reads like corporate-speak for something you're hiding, and hiring managers see through euphemism fast — it tends to raise more suspicion than it deflects. A few better options:

• If the gap is short (a few months), you often don't need to address it on the resume at all. Gaps under six months rarely draw much scrutiny on their own.
• If you want to get ahead of it, one clean, factual line does more work than a vague phrase: something like "2024–2025: Transitioned from hospitality to pursue return to technology career" is honest and doesn't invite follow-up questions the way "addressed objectives" does.
• Save the real explanation for the interview, where you control the framing with tone and context. Something like: "After 20 years bartending, I made a deliberate decision to return to IT — I spent some time refreshing my skills and being selective about the right fit rather than taking the first thing that came along." That's a strength, not an apology. It signals intentionality, not desperation.

The instinct to "explain" a gap in writing usually backfires because vague corporate phrasing reads as evasive no matter how true it is. Specific and brief beats vague and lengthy every time.

Summary vs. objective, and the cover letter question

The "career objective" format (e.g., "Seeking a challenging role where I can leverage...") is dated and, worse for you specifically, it can subtly signal "I'm new to this" — not the impression you want. Drop it.

A summary of experience as your lead-in is the stronger move, and here's why it matters more for you than most candidates: it lets you immediately reframe the narrative before anyone can pattern-match "bartender for 20 years" onto your resume. Something like:

IT professional with a foundation in [specific corporate IT experience — systems, networking, whatever it was] returning to technology after 20 years in hospitality management, where [X, Y, Z transferable skills — vendor relationships, high-pressure problem-solving, inventory/POS systems, staff scheduling/leadership, whatever's real for you].

This does two things: leads with your IT credibility, and turns the bartending years into an asset (people skills, working under pressure, operations) instead of a hole in the timeline.

On the cover letter: write one, but don't use it to just restate the resume. Use it to do the explaining that doesn't belong on the resume itself — the "why now, why this" story. That's exactly the tool for saying more without cluttering the resume with justification.

One thing underneath the specific questions: the anxiety you mentioned makes complete sense, but a lot of it is probably front-loaded onto the resume ("if I get this exactly right, it'll compensate for age/gap/gap in industry"). No resume format fixes that on its own — what tends to actually move the needle at your stage is getting to conversations fast, even imperfect ones, since your track record and how you talk about it will carry more weight in person than any bullet point. Are you getting bites so far, or still mostly in the tweaking-and-waiting phase?

Need help deciding what career to do

I just turned 22. I graduated high school 4 years ago. I’ve worked as a line cook the last few years and did a semester of culinary school at my local community college because I wanted to be a chef. Then I realized most chefs work at least 60 hours a week which made me change my mind about being a chef. I’d like a job with a reasonable work life balance, 40 hours a week max a good pay. I started thinking about other career options. I didn’t want super long schooling or heavy student loan debt so something like doctor, lawyer, dentist, or pharmacist are eliminated. I want something that only takes 2-5 years of school. I thought about engineering but I don’t know if I am smart enough for that honestly. I think trigonometry or maybe calculus 1 is my math limit. I considered radiologic technologist or biomedical equipment technician which are associate level jobs but I felt I wouldn’t be satisfied with those careers that I’m capable of more. I found out about something called Clinical Laboratory Scientist which seemed perfect for me. You get a science bachelors and then apply to a 1 year post bachelor program where you get certified. The only issue is that in the state I live the programs are extremely competitive you need basically perfect grades and so most likely I would have to do a program out of state. Another career I was considering was nuclear medicine technologist but again the programs near me are extremely limited if have to move somewhere for the program and even after graduation the field of nuclear medicine is very small so I’d probably have to move to find a job. I don’t want to move far from my family I have a disabled mom and younger brother who depend on my support. Im also in a relationship now and I don’t know how willing my partner would be to move and I really don’t want to have to do long distance relationship or breakup because of school. I’d prefer something where I can complete my schooling and work where I live in the SoCal area. I also enjoying using weed recreationally on my time off. I have no issue quitting weed temporarily for a drug test but I don’t want a job where if have to give it up forever. Right now I’ve completed English, Interpersonal communication, History, and Medical terminology classes at my community college I also have 7 units of credit from when I did culinary school and 3 units from an AP class I took in high school so I have 22 credits right now and need 60 for an associates. Currently registered to take preparation for general chemistry, anatomy, college algebra, and ethnic studies next semester. Officially I’m completing the pre requisites to become a nuclear medicine technologist but I’m having serious doubts about if that’s what I want to do because the field is so small im worried I’ll have to relocate to find a job. I don’t know what to do I feel like any career I think of has issues. My relationship with my girlfriend also isn’t going too well right now and I’m worried what dating would be like for me we breakup. If I am planning on moving somewhere far away for school in a year or two I feel like that would make dating here a lot more difficult. If I pursue what I’m passionate about its music, I love playing piano, I love playing guitar, I love writing music. Im just worried that doesn’t pay well but I would peruse that if I could and honestly Im considering it

Jobadvisor

Turning 22 with this many moving pieces — family support, a relationship in a rough patch, a specific field you're already partway into but unsure about — is a lot to hold at once. Let me actually dig into the practical side of this so you have real numbers instead of vibes.That's a lot of real, competing pressures at once — a family that depends on you, a relationship in flux, and a career decision that feels like it keeps sprouting new problems every time you look closer. Let's untangle it piece by piece.

On nuclear medicine tech — your instinct is right to hesitate. It's a genuinely small field. Nationally there are only around 100-150 accredited programs and roughly 18,000 people total employed in the role, versus hundreds of thousands of sonographers and rad techs. If you go through a program (possibly out of state) and then can't find a job back home, you've spent 2+ years solving the wrong problem. Given that you don't want to relocate away from your mom, brother, and (hopefully) your girlfriend, this is worth taking seriously as a dealbreaker, not just a nagging doubt.

Diagnostic Medical Sonographer (ultrasound tech) solves several of your problems at once. I looked into current numbers:

• Pay in SoCal is strong — Glassdoor shows LA-area sonographers averaging roughly $110-145K/year total comp, with more conservative estimates (Salary.com, ZipRecruiter) putting entry-level closer to $80-100K. Even the low end clears "good pay" for someone without a bachelor's degree.
• It's a 2-year Associate's program (sometimes a bit longer for a bachelor's track), which fits your "2-5 years" window.
• Unlike nuclear medicine, sonography programs and jobs are common throughout SoCal — LA, Orange County, Inland Empire, San Diego all have hospitals and outpatient imaging centers hiring constantly. You would not need to leave.
• Hours are typically closer to standard 40/week in outpatient/clinic settings (hospital sonography can have some on-call, so if you want max predictability, aim for clinic-based positions).
• It builds directly on the prerequisites you're already taking (anatomy, chemistry) — you wouldn't be starting from zero.

Worth noting on the drug question, since it applies to any healthcare path: employers do pre-employment screening, but most hospitals and clinics don't randomly test employees afterward unless the role is safety-sensitive in a specific regulated way (which sonography, rad tech, and most lab work aren't). Recreational use on your own time generally isn't grounds for termination in non-regulated roles — but policies vary by employer, so it's worth checking specific workplace policy rather than assuming.

Other options that fit your list of constraints (local, 40hrs, 2-5 years, decent-to-great pay):

• Respiratory therapist — AS degree, solid SoCal demand, but expect more shift work/hospital rotation than sonography.
• Dental hygienist — very high hourly pay (often $50+/hr in CA) and genuinely common part-time/4-day-week schedules, but admission is just as competitive as what you described for CLS, sometimes more so.
• Radiation therapist (not the same as rad tech) — runs cancer treatment machines, better job availability than nuc med, decent pay, usually requires rad tech cert first though, so it's a longer stack.

On "not smart enough for engineering" — I'd gently push back on that. Trig/Calc 1 as a stated ceiling usually reflects how math was taught, not a ceiling on ability. But engineering isn't necessary here — sonography, respiratory therapy, and similar fields use anatomy/physics/some algebra, not calculus-heavy math, so you don't need to solve that self-doubt to move forward.

On music — I wouldn't frame it as "career vs. hobby" in a way that kills it. A lot of people keep music as a serious, ongoing creative practice — gigging locally, recording, maybe teaching lessons on the side — while having a stable job cover the bills. That's not a consolation prize; plenty of musicians you'd respect built their catalog that way. If you tried to make it your sole income right now, given that you're financially supporting your mom and brother, that's a real risk to people other than just yourself — which is a different calculation than if you were only responsible for you.

On the relationship and moving — I'd separate these. Don't let "the relationship isn't going well right now" push you toward a field mainly because it lets you stay local, and don't let fear of a future breakup push you toward something you don't want either. Sonography being local is a good practical filter regardless of what happens with your girlfriend — it removes one entire category of stress (long distance, forced relocation) whether you're together or not.

If it's useful, I can help you map out exactly which SoCal community colleges offer sonography prerequisites/programs and how your current credits would transfer, or help you think through the dental hygiene admission odds specifically. Which direction feels most worth digging into?

Can I get fired for disobeying my General Manager?

I work at a somewhat nice Motel 6 but there's usually always the same issues, room stinks, bed bugs and AC not working. How my previous GM trained me was if there's an issue with a room the prevents the guest from sleeping there, I can give them a different room. When i make a room change, the system asks the reason for the room change, which i have to give in order to change rooms. Ive been here for 4 years, this new GM has been here for 6 months. He recently sent me a message, on my phone, saying that I have been making room changes way too often and I need to stop, and/or investigate the room to see if the issues are true, which they always are. Can I get fired if I keep making room changes?

Jobadvisor

Short answer: yes, you generally can be fired for repeatedly disobeying a direct instruction from your GM, even if you think the instruction is unreasonable. Most U.S. employment (this sounds like the U.S., correct me if not) is at-will, meaning your employer can terminate you for following your own judgment over a manager's direct order, as long as it's not for an illegal reason (discrimination, retaliation for a protected complaint, etc.). "Insubordination" — not following a supervisor's explicit direction — is one of the most common, legally safe grounds for firing someone, even a 4-year employee.

That said, there's real nuance in your situation worth thinking through:

The instruction itself matters. Your new GM isn't telling you to stop changing rooms altogether — he's telling you to investigate first and only change rooms when the issue is confirmed. That's a different (and honestly not unreasonable) ask from a management perspective: it sounds like he's trying to reduce room changes that turn out to be avoidable, control cleaning/maintenance costs, or catch a pattern of exaggerated complaints. Following his direction — actually checking the room, documenting what you find, and then changing it if the issue is real — protects you far more than ignoring him, since you're the one who leaves a matching reason in the system.

But there's a limit if guest safety is genuinely at stake. Bed bugs and non-functioning AC (especially somewhere hot) aren't just "amenities" issues — they can be code/habitability violations depending on your state and local health code. If you're told to leave a guest in a room with confirmed bed bugs or no AC in extreme heat, and something goes wrong (guest gets sick, injured, bitten, files a complaint or lawsuit), "my GM told me not to move them" won't necessarily protect you or the company — and refusing an order to knowingly put a guest in an unsafe room is a much stronger legal position than generic insubordination.

Practical steps that protect you either way:

• Get his instruction in writing if it isn't already (text works) — you already have that, which is good.
• When you do investigate and confirm an issue, document it clearly (photos of bed bugs, thermostat reading for a broken AC) before making the change, so your reason in the system is backed by evidence, not just guest complaint.
• If you genuinely believe a room is unsafe (not just uncomfortable) and he's telling you to keep a guest there anyway, that's worth escalating above him — corporate, the franchise owner, or Motel 6 corporate compliance line if this is a franchise location — rather than just quietly disobeying him at the front desk level.
• If bed bugs are a recurring, unaddressed problem, that's also arguably a pest control/maintenance failure on management's part, not something that should fall on you to solve by unilaterally reassigning rooms forever.

I'm not a lawyer, so if this escalates to an actual write-up or termination, an employment lawyer or your state labor board can tell you if there's a specific protection that applies (whistleblower laws for health/safety code violations exist in many states). But day to day: comply with the "investigate first" part, keep evidence, and push back through channels above him if you think he's asking you to ignore a genuine safety issue rather than just tightening up the process.

Can I be fired for refusing to work late days at my full time job? [OH]

A few months ago, I started a new job at a mortgage company. It’s a full time, 9-5 job with an hour for lunch. It’s pretty flexible; some people work 8-4, some work 9-5, or leave when they need to and make up the hours another day. Anyway, I found out a couple weeks after getting hired that it is customary for everyone to work a “long day” on either a Monday or Wednesday. This is not something that had been disclosed to me during my interview or in the contract I signed. Well, today, I got a message from my mentor saying that going forward, I am required to work a late day every week and that I need to let them know what day it will be.

I already struggled with my decision to accept this job because I live nearly an hour away. My husband and I have been wanting to move close to the area for a while since his job is nearby so I figured I could put up with it until we make the move. But… 11 hour days are one thing, 13-14 hour days are a whole different story.

Can they really require me to work a “late day” each week? It wouldn’t technically be overtime since I’d be able to leave early on Fridays, but I have a senior dog and things to do at home, I can’t be gone for 14 hours in a day. Is it a fireable offense for me to refuse, even though this was not disclosed to me before I was hired?

Thanks in advanced.

Jobadvisor

Short answer: yes, in Ohio (an at-will employment state), your employer can require you to work a "late day" schedule, and refusing could legally be grounds for termination — even though this wasn't disclosed during your interview or in your contract, unless your signed contract specifically guarantees fixed hours (which most don't).

Here's the breakdown:

Nothing illegal about the schedule change itself. Absent a specific contractual promise of a 9-5 schedule, employers can generally change hours, shift structure, and expectations at will, and can require you to work up to whatever hours they want (with limits only around overtime pay, not around whether they can ask). The fact that it wasn't mentioned during hiring is a legitimate grievance about honesty/expectations, but it's not illegal unless it was explicitly promised in a written contract that they're now breaching.

The overtime question matters for pay, not for whether you can refuse. If you're non-exempt (hourly, or salaried but classified non-exempt), working over 40 hours in a week entitles you to overtime pay regardless of whether you "make it up" by leaving early another day — under the Fair Labor Standards Act, non-exempt employees can't have overtime "banked" against a different day; each week stands on its own for the 40-hour threshold. If a long day pushes you over 40 hours for that week, they owe you time-and-a-half for the excess, even if you leave early on Friday. If you're exempt (salaried, professional/administrative role), this doesn't apply — they can require whatever schedule they want without extra pay. Worth checking your offer letter/paystub for your classification if you don't already know it.

Can they fire you for refusing? Yes. Refusing a reasonable schedule change that doesn't violate a specific law (discrimination, disability accommodation, retaliation, contract breach) is something they can terminate you for, same as the room-change situation you asked about earlier — insubordination/failure to meet job requirements is legally safe grounds for at-will termination.

Where you might have leverage, short of a legal claim:

• If you're non-exempt and they're not paying overtime correctly for weeks you exceed 40 hours, that's a real, enforceable wage claim — worth checking your pay stubs.
• Since this wasn't disclosed at hiring, it's fair (practically, not legally) to push back and try to negotiate — point out it wasn't part of what you agreed to, and see if there's flexibility (a different day, shorter "long day," etc.) before flatly refusing. Companies often have more room to bend than they initially let on when an employee raises it directly rather than just going along or flatly refusing.
• If you have a specific caregiving need (a dog isn't a legally protected reason, but if you had a documented medical condition or dependent care need under FMLA-eligible circumstances, that would be different) — but based on what you've described, this situation doesn't fall under a protected accommodation category.

Given you mentioned you're already planning to move closer and this job was somewhat of a stopgap, it might be worth weighing: is this worth pushing back hard on and risking the job, or is it more practical to tolerate it short-term while the move is in progress? That's not a legal question, just a practical one only you can weigh. I'm not a lawyer, so if you want a definitive answer on your exempt/non-exempt status or a potential wage claim, Ohio's Department of Commerce (wage and hour division) or an employment lawyer consult (many do free initial consults) can look at your actual paystub and offer letter.

Fellow HR people, bless me with knowledge on this complex case

Long story short. I injured myself at work. Spine surgery and all that funny stuff, well, now I'm discharged with permanent restrictions. My job is pretty physically demanding but they could get me an easy position if they really wanted to.

Here's the thing. It's been a month and nothing. I can't get fired because of my union protections for 3 years if it comes from an injury at work. I called them when I was discharged, I'm pretty sure they got a copy of my restrictions too, but nothing, when I called I was told to give them a couple days to look at my case. It's been 3 weeks. I'm not working, or making money, and still employed by them. I don't want to quit because it would affect my workers comp case, if they can't accommodate then I want them to let me go so I can collect unemployment.

I plan on going next week to their offices. I'm not sure what I should say though, any ideas?

Jobadvisor

Not a lawyer, but here's how I'd think through this — you've actually got three separate legal tracks tangled together (workers' comp, ADA accommodation, and your union contract), and it's worth pulling them apart before you walk into that meeting.

First, the most urgent thing: are you getting workers' comp checks right now? If your injury is an accepted workers' comp claim and you're currently unable to work in your prior role due to restrictions, you should be receiving Temporary Total Disability (TTD) benefits from the comp insurer regardless of whether your employer ever finds you light duty. That's a separate right from anything your employer does. If those payments aren't coming in, that's the most immediate fire to put out — call your workers' comp adjuster (or a workers' comp attorney) today, not next week, because "not working or making money" while a claim is open often means something has gone wrong with your indemnity payments specifically.

Second, on the employer's silence about accommodation: If your employer has 15+ employees, they likely have an ADA obligation to engage in a timely "interactive process" once they receive your restrictions — meaning they're supposed to actually assess whether a modified role exists, not just sit on it indefinitely. A month of silence after receiving documented restrictions is the kind of delay that starts to look like a failure of that duty, especially since you said yourself they could accommodate you if they wanted to.

Third, your union contract may have its own rules here — many CBAs have specific language about light duty, return-to-work timelines, or bidding into modified positions that's separate from (and sometimes stronger than) ADA. Before you go to that meeting, call your union steward/rep and bring them with you, or at minimum ask them what the contract says about accommodation timelines. Going in with a rep present also creates a witness to whatever they tell you.

On your unemployment plan — I'd flag a wrinkle: In most states, you generally can't collect unemployment while you're still formally employed (not separated), even if you're not being scheduled or paid — UI typically requires either a full separation or a documented reduction in hours through your employer's payroll system. So "staying employed but unpaid indefinitely" doesn't actually get you closer to unemployment eligibility; it just leaves you in limbo. What you actually need is for them to either place you in a modified role, or make a clear, documented decision that they cannot accommodate you — which is what triggers a real separation (layoff) you could then file for UI against. Waiting quietly doesn't force that decision; asking for it directly does.

What I'd say in the meeting:

• "It's been a month since you received my permanent restrictions. I need a direct answer today: can you accommodate me in a modified position, yes or no?"
• "If yes, I need the job description and start date in writing."
• "If no, I need that in writing as well, since that determines my next steps with unemployment and my workers' comp case."
• Follow up anything verbal with an email same-day: "Confirming what we discussed today, that [X]..." — this creates the paper trail you don't currently have.

Given how much is intersecting here — comp benefits, ADA, and a union contract — a workers' comp attorney consult (many do free initial consults, often contingency-based) before or right after this meeting would genuinely help you avoid a misstep that could cost you either your comp case or your unemployment eligibility.