How strict are employers in screening people with "1 year RN experience?"

[WDM08002]

People keep talking about how 1 year of experience will open up the job market to you in a huge way. I often do see job postings that ask for 1 year RN experience or 1 year acute care experience. But my question is, how strict is that requirement truly?

What if you you had 10 months of experience, 11 months? It wouldn't truly be 1 year. But if you were full time for those 11 months, you would still have worked more and gained more experience than someone who just was part-time for a full 1 year or even longer than that.

What are your thoughts on this? Use this thread to talk about how strict employers are when screening people who have "1 year RN experience."

[netglow, ASN, RN]

I've always pretty much known that if the job ad is for a hospital, requiring one year acute care RN experience, it means that they WILL NOT ORIENT YOU much other than showing you around the place, showing you the charting software and pumps, giving you your codes to the pyxis and puter, and then just keeping one eye on you for a couple days in case you have questions on logistics or misrepresented yourself.

So, no new grads will be interviewed for these positions. Also if it says "one year acute care experience", you must have had prior hospital experience, and no, you can't interview if you've worked 1 year LTC but no hospital. They just want some other hospital to have trained you for them and know they can still get ya cheap cause you probably are ready to bolt from your first hospital, cause that's how they lose their yearlings too. Most often in my area as well, anytime you see 1 year experience asked for, and it is a hospital advertisement, they do mean 1 year of hospital RN experience, even though they think they've made that clear which often they have not.

Now, all of this is dashed and redone if you know the right people, as always.