In an effort to identify problem areas and to improve the Resumix system all employees recently received from the Partnership Council a Resumix satisfaction survey. The survey responses received from employees identify several areas of concern. Most significant issues raised by employees were sent to CPOC and their responses are as follows.

Question. What is the per cent of Resumix rejections?

Answer. During a one-month period CPOC received 1017 resumes by e-mail and 292 by regular mail for a total of 1309. Of those, 42 were received as attachments to e-mail and could not be processed and 53 were determined to lack status to be considered through Resumix for a total of 95. Rejection rate of 4%.

Question. What are the main causes for rejection?

Answer. The resume is sent as an attachment to an e-mail rather than in the body. Resumes cannot be sent as attachments. This will cause immediate rejection. Applicants are failing to indicate their current status while many indicate they work for the Reserves. Employees are not furnishing their current series or grade. One of the most common reasons for rejection is the failure of applicants to fully document the specialized experiences required for a position. Another reason for rejection is some employees are failing to adequately substantiate substituting education for experience.

Question. What is being done to lessen the impersonal stigma of Resumix?

Question. What about employees who don’t write well? What about those employees who have a feeling those choices of words while similar could make a difference in one’s success or failure in the application process? It is felt the Resumix guidance that has been fielded is quite nebulous in its guidance with regard to this.

Answer. The resume process requires far less writing skills then KSAs or other written application processes. The guide that has been widely distributed can be very useful. Many resume-writing programs are available on-line including one through CPOC. Most libraries have computers, knowledgeable helpers, and volumes of books on resume writing. Employees can use their position description of current and past jobs to identify what they have done. The CPOC uses the PDs (position descriptions) to help develop the job search criteria. Using the PD as a reference to identify employees’ key skills will improve the probability of a match. Applicants who feel that choice of words is important are correct to an extent, however for a couple of big reasons, the problem is really minimal. The grammar base is sophisticated enough to identify most words related to the job search criteria and credit them even though they are not exact matches. More importantly, several criteria are sought for each vacancy. Since they are desirable, not mandatory, matching only one will usually get the applicant consideration on the referral since rarely are there more candidates then can be referred.

While the above does not answer all questions raised, we believe the responses have clarified several of the major concerns of employees. To date, we have handled several cases of employees who CPOC determined to be unqualified for jobs that they applied for. Unfortunately for the employees, most CPOC decisions were correct and resulted from either failing to document required specialized experience for a position at the appropriate grade level or, in the case of substitution of education for experience, the failure to relate the course work to the required field of the job.

We at AFGE will continue to monitor this system and encourage employees to keep us advised about problems encountered and of any suggestions for improvement of the system.