Published
Hi all,
I'm a new grad RN who got her first real nursing job working at a SNF. The SNF I work at is attached to a hospital, which while I was originally not excited to work at a SNF I was excited for the opportunity for advancement into the hospital into one of their med/surg units, etc. Turns out, I really do like working at the SNF. I like my coworkers, the residents, and feel comfortable here. But working at a SNF is not part of my long term goals.
I have worked at the SNF for four months now, so I am just about to get off my probationary "new hire" period soon. Therefore, I wanted to try applying to the hospital and see if I can get a job there, because I feel as if working in Med/Surg would at least get me closer to my ultimate goal of doing something more acute, such as critical care.
But my dilemma is that I feel like I'm disrespecting my employers at the SNF for "jumping ship" basically as soon as I can to work over at the hospital. My ideal situation would be to work at the SNF per diem every other weekend (which is what they originally hired me for, but of course they have me in a 32hr/week position still even with my per diem role). I do feel obligated to them to give them at least a year of my time since they were the first people to believe in me and offer me a job. I don't want anyone to be disappointed or judge me that I would either leave the SNF completely or go down to working there every other weekend.
One last detail: My boyfriend and I do plan to leave the area and move up closer back home where he would have a lot more opportunities to get a job in the field he's about to join. So even if I do apply to the hospital and got a job, I would only stay at the unit for 7 months at most because our lease is up in September and we would move back up closer to our families. So that's another added stress of secretly not even giving the hospital unit a year of my time for being so generous and hiring a new grad onto their unit.
Should I just avoid all this mess and work solely at the SNF for now? Or should I be a little more "selfish" and see if I can get a job that would give me more opportunities to advance to critical care even though I'd secretly only work there for 7 months? I would have to try and find a new job in September despite what I do in this situation because we will 100% be moving away, and I'm not sure if a year's worth of just working at a SNF will give me the best chances at getting a new job rather than working at the SNF *AND* working at the attached hospital for ~7mo would. I could also just apply to a different hospital that's much closer to where I live and tell the SNF that I can't do the commute anymore. But there's still the issue of only giving that hospital 7 months of my time.
This all makes me feel so fake and self absorbed, like I'm not considering what anyone else's feelings or staffing needs are Am I overthinking everything??
Thank you for reading my rambles, I appreciate any input or advice you all have for me.
Edit double post
The first job (that you are advising her not to include on her resume) might very well appear on her credit check. That's how a future employer can find out that she lied on her resume and in her interview (if they asked her about previous jobs).
They might also notice the gap between her graduation date and hospital job (if she takes a hospital job now). If they ask her about it and she lies ... and gets caught ... that would mean an automatic termination with a note about not being eligible for re-hire.
OP ... and any other young readers out there. Please do not take RNdynamic's advice and don't take his posts too seriously. As you can see from this thread and many others ... RNdynamic is someone who admits he does not believe in practicing ethically. He takes pleasure in stirring things up on this website by making outrageous statements -- many of which are ill-informed.
Also, OP , if you apply and get a hospital job now, you do not need to put the SNF on your resume when you relocate and apply for a second hospital job. Just let them think you started at the hospital but had to relocate and that's why you left early. They won't hold that against you.I too left my first hospital job after 7 months due to relocating to another state.
Wow. We may have been co-workers.
The first job (that you are advising her not to include on her resume) might very well appear on her credit check. That's how a future employer can find out that she lied on her resume and in her interview (if they asked her about previous jobs).They might also notice the gap between her graduation date and hospital job (if she takes a hospital job now). If they ask her about it and she lies ... and gets caught ... that would mean an automatic termination with a note about not being eligible for re-hire.
OP ... and any other young readers out there. Please do not take RNdynamic's advice and don't take his posts too seriously. As you can see from this thread and many others ... RNdynamic is someone who admits he does not believe in practicing ethically. He takes pleasure in stirring things up on this website by making outrageous statements -- many of which are ill-informed.
Nothings outrageous about what I said here. Your employment history does not show up on a consumer background check or credit history. Where did you learn that crap?
Also, an employer can't find out how much you paid in taxes or to social security from another employer. Nor they can get that information from the IRS. The IRS will not share your tax history with anyone, not even another government agency. Employers can wonder at gaps in employment all they want, but explaining gaps away is super easy. I've already explained some ways to do that.
If you or ruby want to attempt to dissuade the OP or others from not mentioning every detail of their career on their resume, that's your perogative. But please don't scare them by giving them false information that you made up.
Since when is labwork part of a pre-employment physical?.
It was a part of MY condition of employment in my current job. We were tested for HEP B surface antigens. We deal in a lot of blood in dialysis.
They invested a LOT in my orientation/training. 2 months' classroom education and 8 weeks' on the floor training plus 6 months preceptorship with another RN. BIG BUCK$ invested in me as a new dialysis RN (and I was not a new RN mind you, I had 14 years' acute care experience)
You really don't know what you talking about.
I agree completely on the targeted resume, RND. I've been a nurse for over 20 years. I only list jobs that are over 2 years, or significant to the job to which I'm applying.At my hospital I list the different places I've worked within the hospital.
Of course. Targeted resumes are standard.
It was a part of MY condition of employment in my current job. We were tested for HEP B surface antigens. We deal in a lot of blood in dialysis.They invested a LOT in my orientation/training. 2 months' classroom education and 8 weeks' on the floor training plus 6 months preceptorship with another RN. BIG BUCK$ invested in me as a new dialysis RN (and I was not a new RN mind you, I had 14 years' acute care experience)
You really don't know what you talking about.
I dont know what I'm talking about? Because you just changed your story from having 3 months of classroom training (ridiculous) to now 2 months -- which for dialysis I still don't believe. 2 months is also ridiculous. They don't even given that much for ICU orientation. You also changed 12 weeks of floor training to 8 weeks. How can anyone rely on that being true? And what do you mean by , plus a 6 months preceptorship? So for the 8 or 12 weeks of floor training, you had no preceptor?
I changed my story because I was hired 5 years ago and had a moment to think about the time involved in each phase. The timeframes have changed a couple of times in subsequent new hires since. And they are different for techs and nurses.
There are 3 phases for the RNs: Classroom/didactic, floor training as technician and then preceptorship with another RN. The nurse must be proficient as a technician before she can even begin to learn the nursing part of dialysis. That is to say, she must be able to initiate dialysis treatment for patients, string and break down machines and know the water room procedures inside and out. It's only after that, she is allowed to begin training as a nurse in the unit. Before I precept with an RN, I precept with a technician during my technician training.
The length of each phase has changed a few times since I was hired, so I forgot my own timeframe. It had nothing to do with changing my story for any purpose of deceiving anyone.
But think what you want. I honestly could not care less what you think. I am clarifying for anyone else who may read what I write.
You still had no idea what you were talking about when you questioned whether employers draw labs on new employees. And the time frame for dialysis training is long; it's a complicated and highly specialized area of nursing. Don't care a whip if you believe me or not.
Negative. I know what employers need as far as Pre-employment screening. A drug test which is 60 bucks and titers which is less than 120. That article labels that "lab" which is a joke. That makes it sound as if they are throwing a BMP or something in there from their employees. If you think such things costs 1300 dollars , you should be more discerning in what you read. I still love how no one explain the numbers on that article , like the 5000 dollar review.
RNdynamic
528 Posts
Where would an employer go to see how much you paid in social security ? How would they do that?They aren't looking at that.
Also dishonesty doesn't play into this.. omitting something from your resume that doesn't do anything to improve your candidacy is quite standard. That's like calling someone dishonest because they didn't mention they had to repeat a year in nursing school on their resume... there's no reason to add something like that, because it has little relevance.
It's called making a "targeted" resume and theres nothing dishonest about it. You shorten your resume down to include only the most relevant and helpful information.