Ask HN: How to explain job gaps on the resume?

222 points by jobgaps ↗ HN
I'm interviewing with several companies for SDE roles and have a gap of > 12 months since my last job. Is this a career killer and a huge red flag for any hiring manager?

The real reason for a break was medical but then got out of hand given i had enough savings to support myself and sort of slacked for a while (like 3-4 months).

Now i feel completely healthy, refreshed, passionate and ready to rock again. What is the best way to mitigate this issue when applying / interviewing?

Do you have any advices learned from previous experience or caveats i should be prepared for?

PS. My total work experience is 5+ yrs.

247 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 262 ms ] thread
"I required time off to provide care for a loved one". No further explanation beyond that is owed.
And that loved one can be yourself.
Yea don't lie. That won't go well if you get hired and now you have to remember to keep some lie consistent.
Why wouldn't it? The people who care about a resume gap is HR, and the people you work with are not those people. The daily people you work with don't care what your past is, it's only HR that has a negative opinion of job gaps on hire-ability.
IMHO another reason to not lie is that it further erodes the character of the lier. Lying gets easier with practice. The self-discipline of facing consequences rather than dodging them weakens. Justified guilt accumulates and weighs down the pyche, at least for some people. It gets harder to trust others, as it become more normal to assume they are lying to you.
This comment needs more attention. In fact you made me tear-up a little.

Taking the time and effort to care for yourself is worth the effort because you are worth it.

> "I required time off to provide care for a loved one"

But that's a lie.

It's not a lie (providing care for yourself), and your potential employer has no right to additional information as it relates to your medical condition and why you needed the time away from employment. Don't disclose what you don't have to. It provides you no benefit, and can only be used against you. Why would you sandbag your employer opportunities (and the ability to support yourself) because of faux moral hazard?

More importantly, why would one feel an employer is entitled to detailed information about this gap? It is none of their business.

It is a lie. You weren't providing care for a loved one (that's not how anyone would reasonably interpret 'love one'). It is indeed none of your employer's business. But still you should not deliberately mislead with an untruth.
(comment deleted)
It is not a lie. Sure someone could misinterpret it but it is not a lie.
The reason I think it's a lie is that the intention is that someone will misinterpret it.
Then its not a lie because there is no intention for someone to misinterpret it.
If that were the case you would just say "I took time off due to a medical situation."

The only reason to invoke "loved one" here is to mislead.

Your version says “I’m a liability”. My versions says “this person has had some struggle and has their priorities in order”.
We know it sounds better - that’s not in question. The point is that it’s less honest.
(comment deleted)
(comment deleted)
It is a business, not a person. The situation this asymmetric deserves an asymmetric answer.
It is the truth that you are not required to disclose any information about medical situations of your own or your family, or any related to familial status, including even the fact that those issues exist or are medical in nature.

How else is one able to exercise their rights in circumstances like this without some mild obfuscation? "Providing care" is saying enough to signal that it is an issue which is likely medical in nature, without disclosing anything about your own medical condition or circumstances, which is your right. If your issue is only "for a loved one" then maybe you have a point, but you should have no issue with "I was a full-time care provider" and now we're just mincing words.

The goal is to explain enough to make it clear the question is related to medical conditions or familial status, so that the legally well-trained interviewer knows not to pry any further, and the interviewee who knows their rights has a perfectly good way to avoid discussing it any further if the interviewer asks for more information.

"I'd rather not discuss details about that, as the details are personal in nature and not in any way relevant here." That's all you should need to say.

I have seen situations evolve from privately disclosing some information about medical issues as a professional courtesy, into supervisor asking for updates as a logistical concern, and later unwanted discussion that continues as a matter of personal empathy, and then sometimes even more inappropriate discussions between parties that are not involved, or more public than you wanted; conversations that you wish wouldn't have ever started, over things that should have never even been an issue that needed to be discussed in the workplace.

My advice is to exercise your rights and avoid this as much as possible, which is to say, hopefully avoid it altogether.

Interviewers are only supposed to ask questions that are directly relevant to the job duties.

Whatever the reason for the job gap, there is no possible answer that is legally permissible. Remember more and more states are banning questions about jail time as well (look up 'ban the box'). So even if the person said, "I spent time in jail" that is still problematic. They may not have been convicted and considered innocent. Background checking services exist for a reason.

An interviewer asking about a job gap is already on sketchy legal ground.

The interviewer asking an inappropriate question is not entitled to a truthful answer to an inappropriate question that is not related to job qualifications.

Here is an example to help understand why this is problematic.

Lets say the candidate is religious. They took a year off to go on a missionary trip. If the candidate answers correctly (i.e. doesn't lie) the interviewer just discovered the candidate's religion. This knowledge is now super problematic if the candidate is rejected.

This is why good interviewers do not ask about hobbies or what the person does outside of work hours. There is a real risk of discovering protected information (sexual orientation, religion, national origin, marital status, family situation - including plans to have children, etc.).

Remember a court of law is going to hear the question and the TMI answer that the candidate felt compelled to supply.

The intent of the interviewer will be determined by a court NOT the interviewer.

The main thing would be to explain that it was medical, that it is over now and you are healthy again. The fact that it went on a few more months than necessary isn't really relevant, although saying that you took a few extra months off at the end just to refresh yourself does reassure that the health issues are, in fact, all over.

It might be worth practicing, alone in front of a mirror or something, explaining this. It may or may not get asked, but if it is you want to have your verbiage ready. But health issues are not rare, and wanting to take time off because you have the money to do so, is not something most people would have any problem understanding. I've known several people who did that, and they all got employed again later, without too much trouble.

I'd just tell the truth, I've taken off plenty of time and I generally just put it on my resume to save them having to ask: "took of some time for health related reasons and then decided to use my savings to spend some time with my passions" or whatever it is in your case. If this is a problem for a hiring manager, that's probably a red flag for you as well. I hope it doesn't end up being a problem for you; it's never been one for me, but every company is different. Best of luck!
Thanks! I'm still a bit hesitant to add a section describing the nature of the hiatus to a list of previous work experiences.

Seems a bit unprofessional to me as if the work experience is sorted in descending order — the gap is gonna be at the top.

So i'm at crossroads here: risk and add the medical section or prepare an answer if a follow up question even occurs. With former i'm blatantly throwing it to the face, with the latter i'm more moderate.

I am in the same boat as you. I have a serious medical issues that is ongoing, but when I want to and am capable of working I'll have to explain it.

I guess the conversation could go like this: Why were you not working for two years? "Heart transplants are a bitch"

Contrary to what most people are saying here, I would advise to not mention medical issues. People are weird: they will be understanding and have sympathy, but when it comes to who gets the job, there's a good chance this will work against you. Not openly (it's illegal, after all), but subconsciously. Don't see this as lying; remember that it is your right to not mention this. Of course, you shouldn't conjure up some fantasy story of what you did during that time either, but in my opinion, labeling this as a sabbatical is OK.
Thanks for adressing this as this is a very valid point.

I was at the start of the process with two major companies in their respective markets just weeks after i got hospitalized (which echoed back my 12 mth hiatus later).

At the initial screening i have mentioned the reason of reschedule to be the hospital stuff. Words of support and `i know a person who have had the same problem` type of stuff came along. Next thing i know i'm out of the loop with both HMs.

One can only question was this a coincidence or an assesment i wasn't going to fit due to health troubles.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'd say this was not a coincidence. For HR, possible medical issues are always a red flag. This is the reason they're not allowed to ask about that stuff. Frankly, I'm a bit astonished by the other answers in this thread who say it's fine to mention this. Ask yourself: If there's another applicant with similar qualifications but without medical issues in the past, who would get the job? What can you possibly gain by mentioning this?
Do not mention the medical issue if you can avoid it. Mostly because it is not a career move. What did you learn in that time frame? Even if it is that our healthcare system sucks. And then create a failed company that was exploring a health tech idea.... who knows upon reflection - you might find a real business idea!
Just be honest. Seems fine. As someone who speaks with many candidates a week, I'm more worried about people who average 1 year at various jobs across 5 years (such as someone working 4-6 jobs in a 5 year span) than someone who has a year gap that is likely more reasonably explained.
If it's your only significant break then it should be ok.

You should try to be reasonably up front about it i.e. make it clear on your resume that the break was for medical reasons. You shouldn't need to get into details. It's conceivable that some recruiters may have issue with it, but they are just as likely (if not more so) to have issue with an unexplained gap.

If you're asked about it just be positive: you're completely healthy now and raring to go.

If the company rejects you for the truth it should probably not have been your employer anyway. You can use it as a filter.
I suggest a different route..find something new that you explored, if its reading up on something and compose a mini-thesis of what that subject can bring to the table as far as you applying it.

IE instead of excuse you are showing added value...much better position for you

Entrepreneur time. I explain the few gaps on my attempts to create something of my own. I don’t mind saying it didn’t work out as I hoped but I got bit by the bug of creativity and went for it. Glad I did.
I did this also. I usually had examples or actual websites to show when they asked for details. Unfortunately, none of my start-ups took off, meaning I'm stuck in the middle class. 1 or 2 maybe could have if I had devoted full time to them, but couldn't at the time.
I took nearly a year off in the 1990s, just "doing coffee shops and bookstores." I read a lot, did some recreational programming and a little travel. Basically took it easy after a number of years of high-hour, high-visibility projects (and a high-hour, low-visibility startup that essentially crashed).

Never had any trouble with that explanation.

If they don't like it, you probably don't want to work there anyway.

"If they don't like it, you probably don't want to work there anyway."

That's always important to remember.

What does it mean, though? Is it just "sour grapes is a powerful force"?

I don't know about gaps in particular but there are lots of places I thought I'd love working that wouldn't take me.

Not complicated. It means, "you probably wouldn't want to work there."

Interviewing is a two-way street. If your potential employer is intensely interested in your leisure time then that's an interesting signal, because it's unusual (I've never had a single follow-up question to why I took nearly a year off) and could point to a bad culture (lots of possibilities here, including the company being a modern sweatshop or doing very close monitoring and metricization).

Sometimes "like" has nothing to do with it.

Work is not optional for many people. I know lots of software developers that are living on the bubble because of the high cost of raising a family in the Bay Area.

Just tell the truth. Medical is a perfectly valid reason.

Tangent: What does it say about hiring culture that a gap of 3 months is a potential deal breaker? Like anybody who would ever deign to not be employed by choice is unhirable. God forbid that people are defined by anything other than having a career working for others. A person's worth is not defined by how much economic value they create.

I would go further and say your 'tangent' is the actual issue we should discuss here.
Do you think the vague `medical` needs further elaboration?

I sure do know my medical is not related to mental health. Is it reasonable to somehow indicate that or it should be better left for an interviewer to inquire?

Really they should accept that as it is and move on. You may want to reassure them that the medical issue is resolved, assuming it is, and you too, move on. If you're in the US, then they aren't even allowed to ask more questions. You're not obligated to even mention it was medical, for that matter.
It's illegal to ask further about medical, or any personal information like marriage status, etc. Medical is a good enough answer.
It is perfectly legal to ask, but that opens you up to accusations that you also discriminated. You no longer have the defense that you didn't know the information, and the court would want an explanation for why you were asking.

It's hard to imagine an illegal question under US federal law, but I suppose there could be one where the question itself is sexual harassment or an attempt at stealing trade secrets.

So basically as soon as you ask it you are pretty much obligated to hire them.
In the USA I am pretty sure it is actually illegal for a company to discriminate based on health issues, so a smart recruiter will NOT push this issue further than Medical. It would violate a few things and not be great if you sued and used that in court.
Legally, they can't, but the fact that you were out for months for an unspecified medical issue suggests you're likely to have more medical issues and thus would be a reason to be less likely to hire you.
I'm not sure it is a potential dealbreaker. People just think it is.

It's certainly not an issue in a hot job market.

I've certainly been asked about literally 3 months of gap. Exactly 3 months.
And unless its a second job (or you don't have any savings) taking several months to get the right job is the best thing to do.

Last time I took 5 months to get the right job and ended up with a job locally and not having to commute and a big pay rise.

I was also recuperating from a major operation about 4 months before I left me previous job

They want to know you weren't in jail. That's it.
That's what background check is for.
AFAIK misdemeanors have to be checked at the county level, and a lot of background checks skip them unless asked specifically (hence checking about the gaps).
Funny you mentioned that, i've seen a FB job posting mentioning they are ok with misdemeanor on the record. I wonder if there's a time they will okay a felony on file.
I believe the city of SF doesn't allow employment discirmination based on that in 2020, so FB would harmonize their hiring rules because they have an office in SF.
Oh for sure - it's weird to be judging based on most misdemeanors. I was commenting on how it's done by those who do it.
A lot of startups (especially really young ones with no hiring process) don't know how to do those.
And I assure you that some startups intentionally choose not to!
Isn't that illegal in California (and many other places) before you've made an offer?
Fear of jobs gaps is also about avoiding bad candidates. If someone has a longer gap, there's a chance that he was interviewing the whole time and, during that time, got dozens/hundreds of rejections. So, the lazy heuristic is to assume everyone else was correct and reject him as well.
> Now i feel completely healthy, refreshed, passionate and ready to rock again

What did you do to get refreshed again? And can you keep this up while working 40 hours a week?

First of all it is time. Some things heal slow. I thought that for any issue 3 months is just enough. I was wrong.

Second of all - medication. Takes at least six months to see any difference feel-wise and tests-wise.

> And can you keep this up while working 40 hours a week? Sure. I’m as good as new.

Cool. Nobody has any right to pry into your business. But from a practical standpoint, they would just want to know that it's not going to happen again because you're taking care of yourself now. That's all.
I always wonder what the HR person would get all upset over a gap for? Can someone tell me about the time they rejected a candidate because they had a gap in their employment? lol :D

I mean why do they care. If I save up money and take a year off every few years? That just means if I get bored of them I'll walk out.

It sounds like the kinda thing people care about because they're told to, but they don't actually have a reason why.

Have you been part of the hiring process before? It's very time-consuming, stressful, and hard to make a choice.

From the interviewers perspective, there's a higher chance that the person who hasn't worked for 12+ months simply isn't good enough to find a job, and it could be a waste of their time/resources to interview them instead of the person who has been consistently working.

> there's a higher chance that the person who hasn't worked for 12+ months simply isn't good enough to find a job

surely that can't really apply if the same person held good jobs for a reasonable length of time either side of the gap though?

> Have you been part of the hiring process before?

Yes for decades.

> It's very time-consuming, stressful, and hard to make a choice.

Yes

> From the interviewers perspective, there's a higher chance that the person who hasn't worked for 12+ months simply isn't good enough to find a job

This is called sexism.

Women are most likely to be the person who raises kids takes times off to help parents.

You have just justified sex discrimination. In you are interviewing, step up and do the job properly. Interview the candidate not your stereotype.

Getting hired is a competition. If you're up against another person who is laser focused on their career to the exclusions of all other hobbies or priorities in their life, then that person is more likely to get a call then you are if you just took a year off to do whatever. Companies get many resumes for each opening and they just can't call everyone. At some point you will start getting filtered out vs people who are a better fit "on paper."

However, hiring decisions are not just made on the skill suitability of candidates. If you are an interesting person with enough passion for life to go live it for awhile up against a person who has done nothing with their life for the last 10 years but code for 14 hours a day, you are going to have an advantage. People hire people they like and want to spend time with. That's the reason why technical interviews are mandated by many companies, because companies know without them it's a popularity contest.

Go live your life and chase your passions. It's much better than the alternative.

I agree with some part of your second paragraph. If I met some guy who did nothing but code 14 hours daily for 10 years, my first guess would be that he may be mentally deranged and impossible to work with on a team. Maybe 10-12 hours 5 days a week for many years I’d just think he’s very serious about his career. Beyond that he may be a crazy person.
> I mean why do they care. If I save up money and take a year off every few years? That just means if I get bored of them I'll walk out.

Your last sentence is exactly why they care. They don't want people who will quit when they get bored; they want people who need the job.

I know people who have used words like "flaky" and "transient" and "unreliable" to describe people with gaps. To the people making such judgements, an involuntary gap indicates incompetence, and a voluntary gap indicates someone who is confident, independent, and unlikely to put up with bullshit (and thus more likely to quit).

> but they don't actually have a reason why. I once heard an interview with a recruiter (don't recall what industry) who said something along the lines of companies don't want to hire currently-unemployed people "because of the risk." My reaction (having been laid-off over 6 months earlier) was "Risk? What risk? The risk that they'll take a lowball offer because they need a job?"
I would tell them exactly what you've told us and not try to mitigate it. And emphasize that you feel rejuvenated. Having taken this break, you may be in a better spot now than many people who have been (formally) employed continuously for the same time.
TBH, I'm in a similar situation but with three years since I worked in the industry. I burned out, moved out of the Valley to be close to family, and worked odd jobs, mostly IT.

The odd jobs are getting old, and I miss programming.

As a longtime hiring manager I have zero issues with a break for health reasons (or any other reasons). I will ask questions about the break to understand the circumstances. My concern is how likely it is to reoccur. If you can show that it’s unlikely to affect your work on our team, and your skills are otherwise impressive for the role, then it’s no issue at all.
The things you do between roles define you as a person and make you interesting. Use them as such. Tell the truth: I was sick, had enough savings to heal up and take some time off, and now I'm fresh and ready for the fight. I also did X Y Z and A B C, had some fun. Play time's over, and I'm looking to work hard.

If they can't appreciate that, then they wouldn't appreciate you in general. A self-solving problem.

If you live in SF, ill refer you to some places, you dont have to explain the gap to people, ill tell them its better that you dont know for legal reasons, but its a good valid reason and they should consider you.
Personally, I would never, ever mention anything whatsoever about my health in a professional setting (or a personal one, but that is a different topic). It’s absolutely none of their business, and invites silent discrimination, or worry about future health issues. In the best case it frames you as someone who is sometimes sidelined, not hearty. Why do that to your sales image?

My grandfather had a saying: never talk about your health unless it’s good.

I have some relatively minor and common chronic health issues (fortunately well-managed). The day my clients or upstreams hear about any of them will be the day they are invited to my funeral—not before.

I knew a guy who was desperate to fill a cashier job. I recommended my friend who fit the bill - honest, able to stay in the same spot all day, polite, has managed teams. The guy was excited.

However, he got into an accident once, lost a leg, which was reattached and partially replaced with metal a few years ago. He walks with a limp, but can walk and stand fine. It shouldn't affect his job unless it involves heavy lifting or running.

What shocked me was just how fast the potential employer changed his tone when he found out.

Be honest about it. You’ve done nothing wrong, on the contrary. It’s perfectly fine to rest when you feel you need it.

To your employer it’s an asset, you’re full of energy and you can start work on short notice.

I always just tell the truth. I'd rather work for a company that doesn't think it's bad that I chose not to work for 9 months. (I've even been asked by curious interviewers how I was able to take that much time off)

When I was last interviewing, I just said that I took time off to work on side projects and refresh my mind. I never had a problem. My work experience was just a little more than yours currently is.

tell the truth but use hipster words like , restoration, elevation, inspiration ect.
Just say you took a sabbatical.
If you don’t want to tell the truth (and why would you not?), tell them you were caring for a sick family member. Nobody’s going to question that!
I mainly consult and contract, so 2-4months on the bench is normal.

Anyone who asks is just trying to get leverage.

> Anyone who asks is just trying to get leverage.

How so? As in, "you're out of the job market for a while, so you seem sketchy, and thus I'm going to pay you less"?

First of all, I've done plenty of hiring. You should not worry about a 12 month gap. It will have a minor negative impact on getting callbacks. You might have to work slightly harder at your applications to compensate. If you're already getting calls and interviews, you've already passed through the filter since a gap is most likely to hurt you while a HR recruiter is sorting through a large pile of resumes.

You can still do things with your resume to make it more likely to get through the resume pile filter. Did you do any personal projects, classes or open source that can show continues professional interest and passion? Try putting something on your resume about it. Or if you've really done nothing but relax(which is OK!), now can be a good time to start working on professional development, then you have something to speak to when asked what you've been doing with your time.

>>If you're already getting calls and interviews, you've already passed through the filter since a gap is most likely to hurt you while a HR recruiter is sorting through a large pile of resumes.

I get Linkedin messages most of the time since i updated my profile to conclude the last place of work.

>> Did you do any personal projects, classes or open source that can show continues professional interest and passion?

Yes i did, but it failed as it was a venture to start off a web service with other people that ended up being unenthusiastic to contribute. All i have is a HLD document, couple of modules and task boards at Gitlab. Nothing to really brag about.

I think that venture is plenty to talk about with an HR recruiter. Is demonstrates that you were still engaged with your career and approaching it from new directions that could give you a new perspective. It might not be something to brag about, but a fine answer to "what have you been doing for the past 12 months?"

If you are getting calls off LinkedIn then you are already passing through the HR recruiter filter and the gap is not holding you back. And a hiring manager is much less likely to care about the gap and will be much more focused on evaluating your skills and your personality.

Individual software development venture is a great gap reason (and probably means it could be not a gap at all). Think and be prepared to talk about lessons learned, including technical, business, and people management.
To what degree does Army Reserve experience hurt? I have a lot of military time that overlaps with my years of employment as a corporate software developer and am considering taking it off my resume in the future to see if there is an uptick in interest on my resume.
I've never been in HR, or even in a position to hire, but if you put 2 CVs in front of me that were identical with the exception of one having guard/reserve/active duty military experience I'd always take the military one because it tells me they have are more likely to have discipline (even with knowing how big of screw ups several of my friends that served are).

And if there was a degree, i'd just assume the military was the way it was paid for as I've got probably a dozen friends that got their 4-year degrees via their military service.

I think in general it would help since it would indicate a respect for authority and a willingness to do difficult things. It does depend on the specifics of your resume. Is the Army Reserve experience written in a way that might make it seem like you were more focused or interested in the military than your software career or is it presented as a nice compliment to a strong developer resume.

And sure an individual hiring manager might have some bias against military experience for wherever reason, but my general advice is not to hide who you are and that you'll find a company that wants to hire you for all the great experiences you bring to the table.

Can’t see why it would hurt, and it’s obviously much easier to explain than a gap.
I'd just say I worked on personal projects for a year to learn new libraries/languages/frameworks.
"Personal reasons" or "health reasons" - if they probe farther they get into questions they are not legally allowed to ask. Just remember that the law (at least in the US) protects you from answering details - if they have been briefed at all about how to interview legally they will instantly back off that line of questioning.

Try to stay at your next job for at least 2 years (5 is better) so your next resume can just show the year you started/stopped working there thus hide the gap.

> Just remember that the law (at least in the US) protects you from answering details - if they have been briefed at all about how to interview legally they will instantly back off that line of questioning.

It's been my experience that interviewers do not back off of that question.

It's news to me that it's a legally protected question.

See a lawyer for legal advice.

They need to be very careful about probing. Personal reasons quickly leads to family status which is illegal to ask about. Likewise health can mean a disability that they are not allowed to ask about. For both of these it is important to remember the courts will judge with hindsight - given a sensitive situation was the cause of being out of work how can the deeper probing not be an effort to find out about the situation they are not legally allowed to ask about? Thus extreme care must be used in probing farther to ensure it is clear you are not asking about anything illegal.

Bottom line: it is legal to probe but you better have a lawyer do the probing because the questions too quickly can be something it isn't legal to ask.

It's perfectly legal to ask.

It is however an invitation for legal trouble, because it will change the presumption of discrimination. If the question isn't asked, then the employer doesn't know, and thus it isn't possible that the information could have been used in a way that harms a protected class. (like race, religion, over-40, Vietnam veteran, sex, etc.)

Yes, you can ask about all that stuff. You can ask if somebody is a Mormon or a Jew or whatever. Your boss will probably be unhappy, because then it becomes an uphill battle to show that you didn't use the answer to discriminate against a protected class.