I received what appears to be a generic, copy-pasted review of my CV, which inaccurately criticised my "organisation." In reality, the different sections of my CV are clearly labelled and separated with dividers. The reviewer also failed to consider the unique requirements of various fields; for instance, a designer's CV being ATS compliant means it may not be aesthetically well-designed.Additionally, it was suggested that I used AI in my CV, which is completely false. Even if the "reviewer" used software to check for this, such tools are notoriously unreliable, reflecting further incompetence.The reviewer also claimed that my CV was too large despite being under one megabyte. I must restate the importance of considering different fields when assessing - most designers' CVs are typically far larger than mine. The review said it could not access my contact information or location, which are displayed on my CV.I found it extremely rude that I was labelled a "low-level candidate." This kind of language is unprofessional and unacceptable, especially from someone trying to provide me with a service. It would be clear to anyone genuinely reviewing my materials that I am a young professional (two years post-graduation) seeking junior to intermediate roles, for which I am typically well-qualified (not a "low-level candidate"). Instead, the CV review relied on a single, narrow standard of what constitutes a good CV, which is largely ineffective for most individuals.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
