I just read a blog post in which the author proposed not paying much attention to insignificant work experience. In the post, she suggests quickly addressing this kind of experience and moving on. Here's what I have an issue with...
She says (and I'm summarizing here) that if, for instance, you were a cashier at one point, you should briefly get into what you did and move on to meatier job entries. She claims that people don't really care what you did as a cashier. After all, she claims, everyone knows what a cashier does. Two things:
1) It's always a good idea to downplay – or leave off – anything that falls outside of the 10-15 year window that HR and hiring managers like to see.
2) Similarly, if you have a lot of relevant work experience, you certainly want to draw attention to that (and not to other, less compelling experience).
Having said that, you should always provide the best possible information for anything you put on your resume. For example, in this scenario, you might let readers know that you:
- Saved the company money
- Increased transactions per hour
- Increased customer satisfaction scores
This tells your potential employer a lot about the way you work and makes a big difference. It doesn't matter how "insignificant" or "common" the position. If it gets real estate on your resume, it needs to be top-notch.
So, everyone else will say: "Completed customer transactions." You won't. You’ll focus on accomplishments, and you'll stand out because of it.