Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
P is for Practical

Re^2: To Perl or not to PERL.

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Jul 14, 2010 at 15:50 UTC ( #849553=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: To Perl or not to PERL.
in thread To Perl or not to PERL.

If you're going to put Perl on your resume then at least spell it right. It's Perl not PERL".

I don't care if you're a poor speller. I care if you have attention to detail. Spell it "Pearl" and your resume loses a point with me, same as if you write "C Sharp" or "C/C++" or "Ur-Lang".

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: To Perl or not to PERL.
by tantarbobus (Hermit) on Jul 14, 2010 at 17:39 UTC

    You say that, but I can very well seeing people spelling it 'Pearl' to get past a recruiter/HR person who is searching for a 'pearl programmer'. And the same thing goes with 'C Sharp' -- and even more so, as I suspect that many of the resume search engines strip '#' character.

    Resumes tend to be written for the gatekeepers and not the people that are trying to learn something from them. When your gatekeepers can't spell, how can you fault the writer for adapting to their requirements.

      You say that, but I can very well seeing people spelling it 'Pearl' to get past a recruiter/HR person who is searching for a 'pearl programmer'.
      Do you really think the HR people are that bad?? I mean, they get a stack of resumes in and most of them spell it "Perl", so they reject those in favor of the few spelling it "Pearl"?? Or that they are all entry level clueless people -- that there are not any people in HR with a few years of hiring experience or have a clue and can do their job done out of the gate? Or that they can't read the description the hiring manager sent them, with "Perl" in it?

      And speaking of the hiring manager, what do you think happens when HR brings him your resume? He will likely 1) pass on it and 2) clear any misunderstanding of "Pearl" vs. "Perl" at that time.

      The other way that HR issue gets resolved is a couple weeks later when the hiring manager checks in with HR to find out why hardly anyone is applying for the job or why HR is passing on so many applicants, where the spelling issue will likely be resolved.

      Sorry, but you are better off spelling the language name correctly, because odds are if there is an issue at the HR level it will be caught, corrected for, and likely not made again. And if they do keep making it, is that a company you would want to work for?? And do you really want to tailor your resume for those types of companies?!?

      Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks

        I agree with you overall, and No I don't think that most HR people are that bad, but there are enough to cause changes in the behavior of applicants. I am only arguing against the summary rejection of an application based on something that can be influenced by the gatekeeper. And now back to the 'pearl programmer argument' :)

        How exactly are they to get this stack of resumes when the posting is for a 'pearl programmer'? I like watching the job boards to keep an eye on where the industry is, and I suspect you would be surprised by how many times I have seen jobs for a "pearl programmer" over the years -- and with no mention of perl in the post. Now, I assume that the probably eventually gets corrected in most situations; however, I still maintain that there are people that would spell it 'pearl'

        Think about the case were you have several recruiters searching for a programmer, one of one of whom posts to a jobs site that an comptentperlprogrammer frequents, I expect that there are at least a few people out there would tailor their resume because the job they are applying was posting looking for a "pearl programmer". Now assume that competentperlprogrammer is one of these people. So now hiringmanager gets a stack of resumes, and rejects competentperlprogrammer outright because s/he can't spell Perl correctly. So while, Competentperlprogrammer did not get the job, at least s/he got his/her resume in front of one more person who would not have seen it otherwise and thereby increasing the odds of getting a job.

        And of course, there are also many hiring managers that don't know or care about Perl/Pearl/PERL. They just know that they need someone to fix their system and it was written in something called pearl -- which seems to be common in small growing businesses. so if competentperlprogrammer applied for one of those jobs, s/he might be the only resume that smallbusiness gets.

Re^3: To Perl or not to PERL.
by ruzam (Curate) on Jul 14, 2010 at 16:31 UTC

    It's not a case of poor spelling, is a case of acronyms and capitalization. "Pearl" would be just plain wrong, and could even imply a completely different language.

    When faced with a stack of resumes, it's reasonable to weed out the candidates based on some criteria, even if the approach takes on a Perl vs PERL evaluation. Employers are entitled to use what ever methods they feel meets their needs. If an application doesn't meet the criteria, move on or issue the standard "thanks but no thanks" form letter. Just don't waste the company or the applicants time with condescending "spell it right" crap.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://849553]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others studying the Monastery: (9)
As of 2019-12-12 13:12 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found