Like some have mentioned, there are way too many variations on what to write.
One of the most frequent things I hear is "fix the CV to what you're applying to". Meaning, only write on the page the relevant jobs - not everything you've done within the last decade... unless the relevant job
is the position you've had for the past decade. For example, the job you're wanting to apply to is a sales job. If you haven't had a sales job since 1992, you've got a lot of time to account for, if you've been out of that role since 2005. The question then becomes "what have you done with your life?" type of deal, and most employers think you've been unemployed. Unless you've had other jobs in since that, but not sales. The problem with my CV is that I kind of am in that boat - my radio work (which is what I went to school for and attempt to do the most applications with) was from 2004-2009, retail work since, administrative work pre 2004.. so whatever I'm applying for, looks like I either have no work history prior to this or I've have been out of the workforce since my last job. That's if I don't include everything on one sheet of paper. Which certain circles think is a no-no.
In regards to the radio work I've had, I honestly have had hiring managers tell me they can't hire me for several reasons. One is the fact they're looking for people who are bilingual (most places are these days), and the other reason is quite simple (and the main reason). Between the fact I haven't been in radio for five years and the fact that my skill set is becoming old, I can not be hired based on my antiquated experience / knowledge base. Knowing how to use various equipment from the past 30 years doesn't make me a qualified candidate, as no proper place uses anything I was trained on anymore. I'd basically need to go back to school and get re-trained in order to get a job. Honestly, I don't think technology has changed
that rapidly in half a decade.
Other things I hear about CV writing with mixed reviews is putting years / time frames down with the job you were at. For example, you worked at Marks and Sparks as a cashier from April 2000 to January 2010. Some people say leave those dates in so the hiring staff knows it wasn't a one off place and you weren't there 3 days, trying to say you were there for ever. Others say "just use 2000-2010", but it goes with the same concept as putting in the month, because if you were only in a job a year, putting 2000-2000 makes it sound like you were there a day. My feeling with this, is it can lead to all sorts of discrimination - age being first on the list, especially if you give graduation year from university... or lead to assumptions of which one may not be able to fully answer.
"References upon request"... like a object summary at the top of the CV is dating yourself. Most places post somewhere the requirements of the job, and there is a possibility they will say one requirement is to forward references. If you're using an automated web page to submit information, sometimes the site has a built in page to submit references. My current job didn't ask for references, as I found out, the boss called the last 2 jobs I listed and they vouched I worked there. Although I don't know how true that is, as the manager from my radio days got off on telling hiring managers I never worked for him. At all. Plus the fact that particular station doesn't exist anymore.
Long winded reply, but it's all based on my experience in applying for jobs. Hope it helps
