Job Search Trends Report Q2 2025

Introduction

The second quarter of 2025 marked a decisive turning point in the post-pandemic labor market. Drawing on 461,000 tracked applications, 284,623 de-duplicated job listings, 59,000 resumes, and a 455-respondent survey.

Huntr’s Q2-2025 dataset shows the median time to first offer increasing by 22 percent to 68.5 days, even as the busiest 10 percent of candidates fired off 19 applications a week. LinkedIn still captured nearly four-fifths of job saves, yet Google Jobs delivered triple its callback rate, underscoring a widening gap between reach and effectiveness. Remote and hybrid roles now account for 83 percent of worker preferences, but more than half of postings omit any location guidance; evidence of mounting employer uncertainty.

Meanwhile AI has become a mainstream ally (93 percent of seekers deploy tools like ChatGPT to help with resumes/cover letters and more) yet seven in ten still reject one-way AI interviews, reaffirming the value of human connection. Layer in rising salary ambitions (43 percent now target $100k-plus), and the revelation that half of workers stay in disliked jobs for benefits or visas, and a picture emerges of a market simultaneously cooling, fragmenting, and reforming around new power centers of tech, transparency, and talent leverage.

Highlights of This Report

Your quick-scan overview of the standout findings from Q2 2025

From Search Insights

• Hiring Slowdown: Time to first offer has jumped 22% since April, now taking a median of 68.5 days.
• Post-Interview Delay: Candidates wait nearly twice as long after interviews (11 days) as they do to get them (6 days).
• Quality Versus Quantity of Applications: While the most common path to a job offer is a targeted search of 10-20 applications, a significant group of seekers must apply to over 100 jobs to achieve the same success.

From Job Search Sites Section

• LinkedIn Still Reigns: LinkedIn captured up to 80% of job saves in H1 2025, while Indeed’s share surged 65% since January.
• Response Rate Surprise: Google Jobs leads with a 9.3% response rate, nearly 3x higher than LinkedIn’s 3.3%.
• ATS Market Shift: Greenhouse grew its lead from 23% to 29%, while Lever fell sharply from 14% to 9% in H1 2025. AshbyHQ demonstrates consistent growth, rising from 11.15% to 14.56%, positioning itself as an up and coming ATS leader.

From Job Market Analysis

• C-Suite & Tech Leadership Dominate: CIOs top the charts at $286K, while principal engineers and architects now regularly earn over $200K.
• Advanced Degrees Pay Off: Doctorate holders earn 35% above average, with master's degrees close behind at a 29% premium.
• AI & Engineering Strategy Skills Command Premiums: Engineering leaders earn 112% more than average, with AI strategy and technical leadership close behind.

From Resume Insights

• Depth Over Length Wins: Interviewed resumes feature richer education blurbs, stronger LinkedIn presence, and fewer but more detailed work achievements.
• Less Is More: Successful resumes list fewer certifications and fewer skills, emphasizing focus over quantity.
• Experience Matters: Interviewed candidates show slightly longer tenures and more distinct roles, highlighting the value of sustained, varied experience.

Highlights for Job Search Survey Insights

• AI Acceptance Grows: 68% of job seekers say they’d accept a job offer without ever speaking to a human.
• Mental Health Matters: 1 in 3 workers have quit a job for mental health reasons, highlighting rising burnout.
• Free Labor Problem: Nearly half of job seekers report completing unpaid projects during the interview process.

How We Gathered This Data

Data for Job Search Insights

We mined the anonymized activity logs from Huntr’s Job Tracker—every application, stage change, and offer recorded by users between April 2025 and June 2025. Covering 461k job entries created by 17,733 job seekers, giving us precise timestamps to measure time-to-interview, offer velocity, and weekly application cadence.

Data for Job Search Sites

Whenever a user saves a posting, Huntr captures the source URL. For Q2 2025, that produced ≈364k saved jobs, which we grouped by domain to rank boards like LinkedIn or Indeed, and by ATS domains to see which systems dominate. Response rates come from users moving a saved job into “Interview” or beyond, an on-platform action that signals an employer callback. Our metrics in this section key off the root domain of each saved posting (e.g., linkedin.com, indeed.com). This approach cleanly captures stand-alone boards but under-represents applicant-tracking systems (ATSs) that embed their pages inside a company’s own URL; for example, a Greenhouse job served at careers.acme.com/… is attributed to Acme rather than to Greenhouse. As a result, site-level popularity and callback rates favor public boards and may understate the reach of ATS platforms embedded within corporate domains.

Data for Job Market Analysis

To avoid double-counting identical roles posted across multiple boards or refresh dates, we deduplicated every listing at the job-title × company level. In Q2 2025, that yielded 284,623 unique job-company combinations from the original 461,000 saved jobs. All salary, degree, skill-premium, and location analyses start with this de-duped set, then narrow further. By basing every metric on one record per employer role, we ensure our pay and demand numbers reflect distinct openings rather than repeated advertisements.

Data for Resume Insights

From 59,071 resumes created in Q2 (64.3% job-tailored, 35.7% base) by 15,405 unique authors, we extracted structured fields; sections used, bullet counts, character lengths, and social links. To link resume quality with outcomes, we focused on the 37,976 job-tailored files tied to tracked applications, comparing the 1,187 that led to a self-reported interview to the rest.

Data for Job Search Survey Insights

Finally, we fielded a 28-question web survey in June 2025, collecting 455 complete responses across industries, seniorities, and geographies. The survey supplements platform telemetry with diversity, mental health, AI sentiment, layoffs, salary expectations, and more.

Dataset Composition

Before diving into the findings, it’s important to understand who and what sits behind the numbers. Most headline metrics in this report focus on Q2 2025 (April 1 – June 31). Still, any quarter-over-quarter trendlines or “growth since last quarter” call-outs extend back to Jan 1, 2025 to give a consistent six-month comparison window. Data streams include platform telemetry (jobs, applications, resumes), parsed job ads, and a 455-respondent survey.

Geographic Representation

Among the Q2 2025 records with location data, the platform exhibits a heavily North American-centric distribution. North America dominates with 69.2% of job postings and 65.5% of resume creations, with the United States alone accounting for 56.6% of located job postings and 53.5% of located resumes. Europe maintains a consistent second position, representing approximately 20% of both jobs and resumes across key markets including the UK, Germany, France, and Italy.

Implication: Hiring and pay insights are most reliable for the U.S. and Canadian markets and may not generalize globally.

Industry and Job-Function Mix

The Q2 2025 job market data reveals a heavily tech-dominated landscape, with Internet Software & Services representing 22.4% of all postings, followed by Professional Services (10.9%) and Financial Services (3.5%). The job role distribution reflects this tech concentration: Engineering/Development positions comprise 27.4% of all listings, with Software Engineers, DevOps Engineers, and Front-End Developers among the most sought-after roles. Design positions form another significant category at 13.3%, led by Product Designers (1.9% of all jobs) and UX Designers. Data-related roles represent 12.6% of postings, highlighting the continued importance of analytics capabilities across industries.

Implication: Trend signals are strongest for tech and industrial hiring; other fields should view the data as directional only.

Experience-Level Distribution in Resumes

• Entry-level: 39.2%
• Senior-level: 32.4%
• Mid-level: 21.6%
• Unspecified: 6.8%

Implication: Behaviors such as resume length or section usage may tilt toward early-career norms.

Salary-Data Coverage

Only 29.3% of jobs include salary information, but those that do reveal competitive compensation with median annual salaries ranging from $100,624 to $143,750.

Company-Size Representation

Among jobs with known company sizes, enterprise companies (1000+ employees) dominate with 34.4% of postings. Medium-sized companies (51-250 employees) represent the second-largest segment at 20.7%, followed by small businesses (11-50 employees) at 18.6%.

Data Integrity and Disclaimer

All insights in this report are based on anonymized user activity and self-reported survey data from Huntr’s platform. Metrics and examples involving employers or platforms reflect aggregate user trends and are not endorsements or critiques of those companies. While care has been taken to ensure data accuracy, all findings should be interpreted as indicative, not definitive.

Job Search Insights

Time to First Offer

Hiring Takes Longer: Time to First Offer Up 22% Since April

The hiring process is becoming increasingly protracted, with the median time from search initiation to first offer extending from 56 days in April to 68.5 days by June.

This represents a concerning 22% increase over just three months, suggesting that organizations are taking substantially longer to move candidates through their recruitment pipelines.

The steady month-over-month deterioration, jumping 11 days from April to May, then another 1.5 days into June, indicates a systematic slowdown rather than seasonal fluctuation.

This trend could reflect tighter hiring standards, more complex approval processes, or increased candidate evaluation requirements as companies become more selective in their recruitment decisions.

Individual Job Timeline

Interview to Offer Takes Nearly Twice as Long as Application to Interview

The job search process reveals a telling pattern in timing expectations. Once an application is submitted, candidates typically wait six days before hearing back for an interview opportunity.

However, the real test of patience comes afterward, the journey from completing interviews to receiving an offer stretches nearly twice as long at eleven days.

This extended decision-making period reflects the complexity of hiring processes, where companies often need time to evaluate multiple candidates, conduct internal discussions, and navigate approval workflows.

For job seekers, understanding these timelines can help manage expectations and reduce anxiety during what is often the most uncertain phase of career transitions.

The nearly two-week wait after interviewing represents a critical period where persistence and patience become essential virtues in the pursuit of new opportunities.

Time to First Interview

Half of Job Seekers Receive their First Interview in 22 days or Less

The job interview process reveals a surprising reality for candidates seeking employment opportunities.

While half of all applicants receive their first interview invitation within just over three weeks, the experience becomes increasingly challenging for those who must wait longer.

Candidates in the 75th percentile face nearly two months of waiting before hearing back from potential employers.

The situation becomes particularly difficult for the unlucky few in the 90th percentile, who endure almost four months before receiving their first interview opportunity.

This disparity highlights the unpredictable nature of the hiring process, where timing and circumstances can dramatically impact a candidate's journey from application to that crucial first conversation with a prospective employer.

Number of Applications Per Week

Application Volume Varies Dramatically Across Job Seekers

While half of all job seekers submit 4 or fewer applications per week, the most active quarter of applicants are submitting more than twice that number at 9 applications weekly.

The gap becomes even more pronounced at the highest activity levels, where the top 10% of job seekers are pushing out 19 applications per week - nearly five times the median rate.

This distribution suggests two distinct job search strategies in the market. The majority of job seekers appear to be taking a more selective, targeted approach with fewer applications, while a smaller segment is pursuing a high-volume strategy.

The dramatic increase from the 75th to 90th percentile indicates that the most aggressive job seekers are significantly outpacing their peers, potentially creating competitive pressure in the job market as these high-volume applicants compete for the same positions.

Applications Created Before Offer Received

How Many Applications Job Seekers Need Before Getting an Offer

From Targeted Search to High-Volume Strategy
Our analysis of job seeker activity from Q2 2025 reveals a fascinating distribution in the number of applications required to secure a job offer.

The data indicates that the most common path to success involves submitting between 10 and 20 applications, which accounted for the largest single cohort of users at 20.8%. However, the distribution is not a simple bell curve.

A significant and contrasting trend emerges at the higher end, with 14.3% of users submitting over 100 applications before receiving an offer.

This suggests that while a targeted, efficient search yields results for many, a substantial portion of the job-seeking population must engage in a high-volume, persistent strategy to achieve their goal.

Job Search Sites

With nearly 460k jobs saved in Q2 through our job tracker, we’ve gained unique, ground-level insight into how different job search sites are actually serving job seekers. Since our data is self-reported, you can consider the metrics below as lower bounds; not every user returns to update their progress, like whether they landed an interview.

Most Popular Job Sites

LinkedIn Dominates Job Market with Nearly 80% Share, While Indeed Shows Strong Growth

LinkedIn continues to maintain its overwhelming dominance in the job market, consistently capturing between 77% and 80% of all job saves across the first half of 2025.

The professional networking platform's market share remains remarkably stable month-over-month, demonstrating its entrenched position as the go-to destination for job seekers.

Meanwhile, Indeed emerges as the clear second player, showing impressive growth momentum by expanding its market share from 6.34% in January to 10.48% in June, a 65% increase that suggests it's successfully competing for LinkedIn's users.

In contrast, traditional job boards like Dice experienced significant decline, dropping from 4.13% to just 1.53% over the same period. The remaining players, including ZipRecruiter, Glassdoor, Welcome to the Jungle, and Wellfound, collectively hold single-digit market shares, while other smaller sites maintain a steady 5-6% of the market.

This data reveals a increasingly concentrated job search landscape where LinkedIn's professional network effect continues to drive user preference, though Indeed's rapid growth indicates there's still room for competition in the evolving digital recruitment space.

Job Search Sites Responsiveness

Google Jobs Delivers Best Response Rates Among Major Platforms

Certain job sites have higher response rates than others based on user self-reporting. We consider a 'response' as a user moving the job to the interview stage or further in their job search process. That means, if you applied for a job on a particular site, you've heard back from that site at a certain rate.

When it comes to getting responses from job applications, not all popular platforms are created equal. Google Jobs stands out as the clear winner with an impressive 9.3% response rate, nearly three times higher than LinkedIn's 3.3% rate despite LinkedIn processing over 114,000 applications.

The most striking finding reveals a disconnect between platform popularity and effectiveness - while LinkedIn dominates application volume, specialized platforms like Glassdoor.com (7.3%) and Wellfound (6.4%) significantly outperform the networking giant in converting applications to interviews.

At the bottom end, tech-focused platforms struggle with Dice.com managing only 1.4% of applications receiving responses, suggesting that platform reputation doesn't always translate to hiring manager engagement.

Top Companies Responsiveness

Teksystems and Cisco Lead the Pack in Lightning-Fast Interview Scheduling

Teksystems emerges as the speed champion, connecting with candidates in just 6.5 days on average, closely followed by Cisco at 6.7 days.

These tech staffing and networking giants demonstrate that rapid response times are achievable even at scale. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Pinterest takes over five weeks (37.5 days) to schedule interviews, suggesting a more deliberate—or perhaps overwhelmed—approach to candidate evaluation.

Capital One and Canonical also lag significantly behind, requiring over a month each. The middle ground tells an interesting story too: Amazon, despite handling the highest volume of interviews, maintains a respectable 22-day turnaround.

Meanwhile, Google keeps pace with industry leaders at just over 9 days, proving that even tech titans can move swiftly when motivated. These timing differences likely reflect varying company cultures, internal processes, and strategic priorities around talent acquisition speed versus thoroughness.

Popular Applicant Tracking Systems

Greenhouse Dominates ATS Market

The applicant tracking systems landscape shows clear market leaders and notable shifts in the first half of 2025. Greenhouse.io commands the largest market share, growing from 23.27% in January to 29.26% in June, solidifying its position as the dominant platform for job postings.

MyWorkdayJobs maintains the second-largest share but shows some decline from 17.63% to 15.96% over the period. Meanwhile, AshbyHQ demonstrates consistent growth, rising from 11.15% to 14.56%, positioning itself as a strong third player.

The most significant decline comes from Lever, which dropped dramatically from 14.38% in January to just 8.99% by June, suggesting potential challenges in retaining market position.

The remaining smaller ATS platforms collectively represent about 20-23% of the market, indicating a fragmented landscape where the top three systems increasingly dominate job posting distribution.

This data suggests companies are consolidating around fewer, more established platforms, with Greenhouse.io emerging as the clear winner in the competitive ATS space.

* Go here for more information on how this data was calculated

Resume Insights

Resume Success Factors

A successful resume is one that led to an interview, as recorded by users in our job tracker system. Although the true number of interviews is likely underreported, since many users do not consistently update their interview status, the trends observed still offer meaningful insight into what makes a resume effective.

Our findings indicate that the strength of a successful resume lies not in its length but in the depth of its content in key areas. Candidates who secured interviews typically included more detailed educational histories, had more years of experience, and were more likely to include a LinkedIn profile. In contrast, those who were not interviewed tended to emphasize a greater number of skills and certifications. This contrast suggests that employers prioritize strong professional storytelling over exhaustive lists of competencies, an approach that can significantly influence the likelihood of landing an interview.

Tailoring Resume to Job Descriptions

Tailored Resumes Drive 2.1x Higher Interview Conversion Rates

Our analysis of self-reported job application data reveals a significant performance gap between tailored and generic resume approaches. Users who customized their resumes for specific positions achieved a 5.75% conversion rate from application to interview or offer stage, compared to just 2.68% for those who did not have a tailored resume, representing a 115% improvement in success rates.

Based on over 1.39 million applications, since Q4 2024, the data shows tailored resumes generate approximately 6 interview opportunities per 100 applications, compared to fewer than 3 for generic submissions. Since these figures rely on user-reported outcomes for interviews, offers, and hiring decisions, they likely represent conservative floor estimates of the true impact. The findings underscore the critical importance of resume customization in today's competitive job market, where personalized applications demonstrably outperform generic submissions in advancing through hiring processes.

Education Section

Detailed Education Descriptions Give Interview Edge

Resumes that led to interviews have slightly longer education descriptions (100 characters) compared to those who did not (86 characters), suggesting that providing more detailed educational background helps secure interviews.

Certification Section

More Certifications Don't Equal More Interviews

Resumes that did not lead to interviews had more certifications on average (1.41 vs 1.32), indicating that simply accumulating credentials doesn't guarantee interview opportunities.

Skills Section

Comprehensive Skills Lists Show Modest Interview Advantage

Interviewed candidates listed slightly more skills (29.9 vs 29.3), though the small difference suggests that having a comprehensive skills section provides only modest advantages.

Achievements

Quality Over Quantity Wins in Achievement Writing

Interviewed candidates wrote fewer but more detailed achievements (4.35 per job at 164 characters each) compared to those not interviewed (4.88 per job at 161 characters each), demonstrating that quality trumps quantity in achievement descriptions.

Work Experience

Career Progression and Experience Drive Interview Success

Interviewed candidates had both more roles (4.76 vs 4.52) and more total experience (10.5 vs 9.5 years), showing that career progression and tenure both contribute to interview success.

Resume Length by Page Count

Busting the One-Page Resume Myth: A Data-Driven Answer

For decades, job seekers have been told to adhere to the strict "one-page rule" for resumes. However, a comprehensive analysis of 76,401 resumes shows that two-page resumes actually have the highest success rate, securing interviews 3.69% of the time. While this is only slightly higher than the 3.36% rate for one-page resumes, the key takeaway is that job seekers should not feel shackled by the one-page myth.

If you can effectively showcase your accomplishments on a single page, that's excellent. However, our data suggests it's perfectly acceptable to use a second or even third page (which still sees a strong 3.22% interview rate) if your experience and achievements warrant the space. For more details on our methodology and how we define a resume receiving an interview, please refer to the "Data for Resume Insights" section.

Slightly Longer Resumes Get More Interview Attention

Interviewed candidates had slightly longer resumes (1.71 vs 1.64 pages), suggesting that providing comprehensive information without being overly verbose is beneficial.

Summary

Concise Summaries Outperform Lengthy Ones

While interviewed candidates were more likely to include summaries (94.0% vs 90.2%), they wrote shorter ones (524 vs 568 characters), indicating that concise, focused summaries outperform lengthy ones.

Projects

Brief Project Descriptions Work Better Than Detailed Ones

Interviewed candidates wrote much shorter project descriptions (45 vs 103 characters), demonstrating that brevity and focus are more effective than detailed explanations.

Social Links

Platform-specific social links and interview success

Candidates who were interviewed had significantly higher LinkedIn presence (69.4%) compared to those who weren't (61.0%), but surprisingly had lower GitHub presence, suggesting that professional networking trumps code portfolios for getting initial interviews.

Contact Info

Email Beats Phone for Professional Contact

Both groups had excellent contact information presence, with interviewed candidates having slightly higher email presence (98.9% vs 98.3%) but lower phone presence (91.6% vs 92.5%), suggesting email is more critical than phone for professional communication.

Resume Sections and Length

Resume Section Popularity Overall

LinkedIn Creates 50% Divide Between Traditional and Modern Resume Approaches

Contact information dominates resume construction, with email addresses appearing in over 93% of base resumes, followed closely by work experience at 89% and education at nearly 89%.

Phone numbers maintain strong adoption at 86%, while skills sections appear in 84% of resumes. Professional summaries show solid usage at 78%, creating a clear tier of essential resume components.

A significant drop occurs with LinkedIn profiles at 51%, suggesting a divide between traditional and modern networking approaches. Specialized sections like certifications (40%), projects (27%), and volunteer experience (13%) reveal more selective usage patterns.

Technical elements such as GitHub profiles (11%) and custom links (9%) remain niche, while location information appears in fewer than 9% of resumes.

Social media presence beyond LinkedIn proves minimal, with Twitter and Dribbble representing less than 1% of resume inclusion.

Resume Section Popularity by Job Category

Essential Resume Sections Drive Universal Adoption

Essential resume sections reveal clear patterns across industries, with contact information and core credentials forming the universal foundation.

Email addresses appear on nearly every resume (96-99%), while education and work experience maintain similarly high adoption rates above 88%. Industry-specific variations emerge in specialized areas: Information Security professionals lead in certifications at 68%, Creative fields show highest portfolio link usage at 57%, and technical roles demonstrate stronger GitHub presence.

Professional networking through LinkedIn maintains moderate adoption between 30-67%, while platform-specific profiles like Twitter and Dribbble remain minimal below 1.4%, suggesting professionals strategically curate their digital presence based on career relevance rather than comprehensive social media representation.

Number and Length of Work Experience By Target Seniority

Senior Professionals Accumulate 14 Years of Experience Across Just 5 Positions

Resume experience patterns reveal distinct career progression stages across seniority levels.

Entry-level professionals typically accumulate 2 years of experience through 3 different positions, suggesting frequent job changes early in their careers as they explore opportunities and build foundational skills.

Mid-level professionals demonstrate more stability with 6 years of experience across 4 positions, indicating longer tenure per role as they develop specialized expertise.

Senior professionals show the most dramatic jump to 14 years of experience with 5 positions, reflecting sustained career development and strategic role transitions.

The progression shows a clear pattern where years of experience grow exponentially while the number of positions increases more gradually, indicating that career advancement involves both breadth of exposure and depth of experience within each role.

Number and Length of Achievements By Target Seniority

Senior Professionals Write 10% Longer Achievement Descriptions Despite Same Quantity

Resume achievement patterns reveal interesting progression trends across experience levels.

Entry-level professionals maintain a median of 3 achievements per work experience, with an average character length of 111.8 per achievement. Mid-level professionals show a slight increase to 4 achievements while maintaining similar descriptive detail at 118 characters.

Senior professionals also average 4 achievements per role, but demonstrate more comprehensive descriptions at 123.5 characters each. The most notable pattern emerges in the consistency of achievement quantity between mid-level and senior roles, suggesting that professionals plateau at around 4 key accomplishments per position, while the increasing character length indicates more detailed and complex responsibility descriptions as seniority advances.

Resume Page Count by Experience

Senior Professionals Favor Longer Resumes While Entry-Level Workers Keep It Brief

The resume length preferences vary dramatically across experience levels, with a clear inverse relationship between career stage and single-page resumes.

Entry-level professionals overwhelmingly prefer concise formats, with 31.1% using one page and 60.3% sticking to two pages. Mid-level professionals show an even stronger preference for two-page resumes at 65.7%, while only 18.5% opt for single pages.

Senior professionals demonstrate the most diverse approach to resume length, with just 10.7% using one page and nearly a third (28.1%) extending to three pages.

This pattern suggests that as professionals accumulate experience, achievements, and responsibilities, they require more space to effectively communicate their value proposition.

The shift toward longer formats among senior professionals likely reflects the need to showcase extensive project portfolios, leadership experience, and technical expertise that can't be adequately captured in brief formats.

Number of Skills

Median number of skills listed in resumes is 9

This analysis examines the number of skills listed on resumes across our platform during Q2 2025. The data represents unique users who had at least one skill listed on their resume, with each user counted only once (using their most complete resume if multiple versions existed).

The metrics were calculated by analyzing the length of the skills section for each resume, capturing the 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile values to understand the typical distribution.

It reveals a clear distribution pattern, with most professionals clustering around 9 skills on their resumes. At the lower end, 25% of job seekers list 7 or fewer skills, while the top quartile showcases 12 or more competencies.

Work Tenure and Experience Years

Work Tenure by Job Title

Your Frontend Developer Has Packed More Jobs Into Five Years Than Your Office Manager Has in a Decade

General managers emerge as the most tenured professionals, maintaining an average tenure of 6.8 years in their roles.

Traditional management and consulting positions dominate the upper echelon of job stability, with managers, consultants, and senior consultants all exceeding six years of tenure.

This pattern suggests that leadership roles and advisory positions offer greater career satisfaction and stability compared to more technical or specialized functions.

The engineering landscape reveals an interesting hierarchy of tenure, where senior software engineers maintain longer tenures (5.2 years) than their non-senior counterparts (4.3 years), and both significantly outlast the newer development specializations.

Full stack developers (3.7 years) and frontend developers (3.5 years) show notably shorter tenure periods, possibly reflecting the rapidly evolving nature of these specialized roles and the high demand for their skills in the job market.

Perhaps most striking is the contrast between traditional business functions and emerging technology roles. While customer service representatives maintain solid 4.5-year tenures, newer disciplines like data science (3.2 years) and data engineering (3.1 years) show considerably shorter job retention.

This divergence highlights how established business functions offer more predictable career paths, while cutting-edge technology roles may encourage more frequent movement between organizations as professionals seek to maximize their rapidly appreciating skill sets.

Total Experience Years by Target Title

Technical Leadership Demands Significant Experience Investment

This chart presents the median years of total work experience found in resumes targeting specific job titles, based on data collected from tens of thousands of job seeker resumes in Q2 2025.

The analysis examines each resume's combined work history, calculating the total years of experience across all positions and grouping by the job title the resume is targeting. For users with multiple resumes targeting the same role, only their maximum experience value was counted to avoid duplication.

The path to executive leadership is longer than most professionals expect. Chief Operating Officers have spent nearly 22 years honing their skills before reaching the pinnacle of operational leadership, while General Managers and Executive Directors aren't far behind with over 20 years of experience each.

This isn't just about climbing the corporate ladder; it's about accumulating the deep institutional knowledge, crisis management skills, and strategic thinking that only comes from decades in the trenches.

Technical leadership roles demand an equally impressive commitment, with Directors of Engineering requiring nearly 18 years to master both the technical complexity and people management skills their roles demand.

Even specialized positions like Solution Architects need almost 15 years to develop the systems thinking and client-facing expertise that makes them indispensable. Perhaps most telling is the clear progression pathway that emerges: professionals typically need over a decade to reach senior management roles, nearly two decades for director-level positions, and more than 20 years to qualify for C-suite responsibilities.

This timeline reflects the reality that true leadership expertise cannot be rushed—it requires the patient accumulation of experience across multiple business cycles, technological shifts, and organizational challenges.

Education in Resume

Top Fields of Study by Target Role

Computer Science: The Universal Field of Study of Modern Tech Career Success

Computer science emerges as the overwhelming educational powerhouse across job categories, claiming the top spot in Software & IT and making strong appearances in Product Management, Information Security, and even Creative & Design roles.

This technical education trend reflects how deeply technology has penetrated every corner of the modern workplace, with job seekers recognizing that programming and computational thinking skills have become essential currency.

Meanwhile, business administration proves to be the versatile generalist degree, securing first place across Administrative & Clerical, Customer Support & Service, Human Resources & Recruiting, Operations & Logistics, and Sales & Business Development categories, demonstrating its enduring value as foundational training for management and operational roles.

The educational landscape reveals fascinating specialization patterns that mirror industry evolution. Information Security professionals heavily favor cybersecurity-specific degrees, while Creative & Design roles show graphic design leading the pack, followed by an interesting mix of computer science and UX design, highlighting how digital transformation has reshaped creative work.

Finance & Accounting maintains its traditional educational roots with finance and accounting degrees dominating, yet mechanical engineering surprisingly appears as a top choice in both Product Management and uncategorized roles, suggesting these professionals are leveraging technical problem-solving skills across diverse career paths.

This educational diversity within job categories illustrates how professionals are strategically positioning themselves at the intersection of traditional expertise and emerging technological demands.

Skills in Resume

Most Popular Skills by Target Title Category

The Modern Professional Landscape: Where Technology Meets Human Expertise

Across every professional discipline, a fascinating transformation is reshaping the modern workplace where technical proficiency has become as essential as domain expertise. From Python's dominance in technical fields to Excel's universal presence in business operations, professionals must navigate an increasingly sophisticated technological ecosystem while maintaining the human skills that drive organizational success. The data reveals a striking pattern: regardless of whether someone works in creative design, financial analysis, or customer service, modern roles demand fluency in multiple software platforms, analytical thinking, and collaborative tools. This convergence suggests we're witnessing the emergence of a new type of professional, one who seamlessly blends technical competency with specialized knowledge, using technology not as a replacement for human judgment but as an amplifier of human capability. The most successful careers now belong to those who can master both the digital tools of their trade and the timeless skills of communication, problem-solving, and strategic thinking that no algorithm can replicate.

Software & IT - Python: The Programming Powerhouse

Software and IT professionals live in a world where adaptability and technical mastery reign supreme. Python emerges as the undisputed champion, appearing on nearly nine out of ten resumes in this field. The landscape reveals a fascinating blend of foundational programming languages, version control systems, and cloud technologies. From JavaScript's web dominance to Docker's containerization revolution, these professionals must navigate an ecosystem where traditional databases meet modern DevOps practices. The skill set reflects an industry in constant evolution, where yesterday's cutting-edge framework becomes today's standard toolkit.

Data Science - Python: The Data Scientist's Swiss Army Knife

Data science represents the perfect marriage of statistical rigor and programming prowess, with Python leading an impressive parade of analytical tools. The field demands fluency in both the theoretical and practical, where SQL databases meet machine learning libraries, and business intelligence platforms transform raw numbers into strategic insights. Visualization tools like Tableau and specialized Python libraries create a comprehensive toolkit for extracting meaning from chaos. This profession requires individuals who can seamlessly transition from statistical analysis to data storytelling, making complex insights accessible to decision-makers.

Creative & Design - Figma: Designing the Digital Experience

Creative and design professionals operate at the intersection of aesthetics and functionality, where Figma has revolutionized collaborative design workflows. The modern design landscape encompasses everything from user research methodologies to prototyping tools, reflecting an industry that has moved far beyond traditional graphic design. Adobe's Creative Suite maintains its relevance alongside newer platforms, while UX/UI principles dominate the skill requirements. Designers must be strategic thinkers, user advocates, and technical implementers all rolled into one, crafting experiences that delight users while meeting business objectives.

Product Management - Jira: Orchestrating Product Success

Product management has evolved into a discipline that demands equal parts technical acumen and strategic vision, with Jira serving as the central nervous system for product development. These professionals must speak multiple languages fluently: the technical dialect of SQL and Python, the design vocabulary of Figma, and the analytical tongue of Tableau. The role requires individuals who can bridge disparate teams, translate business requirements into technical specifications, and guide products from conception to market success. It's a profession where data-driven decision making meets human intuition.

Marketing and Advertising - Google Analytics: Measuring What Matters

Marketing and advertising professionals navigate an increasingly complex digital landscape where data analytics drives creative strategy. The field has transformed from intuition-based campaigns to precision-targeted, measurable initiatives. Modern marketers must master both the creative tools that bring campaigns to life and the analytical platforms that prove their worth. From content creation software to customer relationship management systems, success requires a blend of artistic vision and scientific measurement. The most effective professionals understand that great marketing today is equal parts art and science.

Sales & Business Development - Salesforce: The Revenue Engine

Sales and business development professionals operate in an environment where relationship building meets technological sophistication. Customer relationship management systems have become the backbone of modern sales operations, transforming how professionals track prospects, manage pipelines, and nurture client relationships. The field demands a unique combination of interpersonal excellence and technical proficiency, where traditional sales skills like negotiation and communication are enhanced by data analytics and automation tools. Success requires individuals who can leverage technology to scale human connections.

Information Security - Python: Defending the Digital Frontier

Information security professionals stand as the guardians of our digital infrastructure, wielding Python as their primary weapon against increasingly sophisticated threats. The cybersecurity landscape demands deep technical knowledge spanning multiple operating systems, network protocols, and security frameworks. These professionals must think like both architects and attackers, understanding system vulnerabilities while implementing robust defenses. From network analysis tools to compliance frameworks, the field requires individuals who can balance proactive security measures with incident response capabilities, protecting organizations in an ever-evolving threat landscape.

Administrative & Clerical - Microsoft Office: The Foundation of Business Operations

Administrative and clerical professionals serve as the operational backbone of organizations, with Microsoft Office skills forming the cornerstone of modern business efficiency. These roles have evolved far beyond traditional secretarial duties, now encompassing project coordination, data management, and digital communication facilitation. The modern administrative professional must navigate multiple software platforms while maintaining the human touch that keeps organizations running smoothly. Success in this field requires individuals who can seamlessly blend technical proficiency with exceptional organizational and interpersonal skills.

Customer Support & Service - Microsoft Office: Connecting Customers and Solutions

Customer support and service professionals operate at the critical intersection where technology meets human need, requiring mastery of both software platforms and emotional intelligence. The field has transformed from simple problem-solving to comprehensive customer experience management. Modern support professionals must navigate complex technical systems while maintaining empathy and patience with frustrated customers. The role demands individuals who can quickly adapt to new technologies while never losing sight of the human element that defines exceptional service.

Finance & Accounting - Excel: The Financial Swiss Army Knife

Finance and accounting professionals wield Excel as their primary analytical weapon, transforming raw numbers into strategic business insights. The modern financial landscape requires fluency in multiple data analysis platforms, enterprise software systems, and specialized financial modeling tools. These professionals must balance technical precision with strategic thinking, ensuring accuracy while providing forward-looking analysis that guides business decisions. Success requires individuals who can navigate complex regulatory requirements while leveraging technology to automate routine tasks and focus on value-added analysis.

Operations & Logistics - Excel: Orchestrating Operational Excellence

Operations and logistics professionals excel at creating order from complexity, using sophisticated analytical tools to optimize everything from supply chains to project timelines. The field demands a unique blend of analytical thinking and practical problem-solving, where data analysis meets real-world constraints. Modern operations professionals must understand both the technological systems that enable efficiency and the human factors that drive successful implementation. Success requires individuals who can see the big picture while managing countless moving parts, ensuring that organizational goals translate into operational reality.

Career Pathways

Top Career Progression Pathways

The dataset reveals a comprehensive career progression network based on 64 distinct job transition pathways from Q2 2025 resume data, representing 476 total career moves across 59 unique job titles.

Arranged in a circular network visualization, the chart demonstrates that software engineering roles dominate the professional landscape, with "software engineer" serving as the central hub with 213 total transitions, followed by "senior software engineer" with 113 transitions.

The network shows clear progression patterns, from entry-level positions like interns and associates (typically requiring 0.5-1.4 years) to senior roles that demand significantly longer tenure (3-9 years in previous positions).

Notably, 24.4% of all transitions occur within the same company, indicating strong internal career development programs, while cross-category transitions represent 26.6% of moves, suggesting professionals are increasingly willing to pivot between fields like software development, data analytics, and management.

The interconnected pathways reveal that certain roles act as career bridges, such as "business analyst" connecting to both technical and management tracks, while specialized positions like "machine learning engineer" and "cloud data engineer" represent emerging career destinations that reflect the evolving tech landscape.

Average Time in Career Progressions

The following charts offer a revealing look at career transition patterns across different professional fields, visualizing the average time professionals spend in various roles before advancing or changing positions. These visualizations highlight the distinct progression timelines that exist between industries, from the rapid advancement cycles in sales roles (where transitions typically occur within 6-18 months) to the more extended timelines in software engineering and product management (where senior positions often require 3-5 years of experience). Each chart maps the journey across different positions, with the left axis showing the starting role and the right axis displaying the destination role. The length of each bar represents the years spent in the previous position before making the transition.

Software & IT Career Progressions: Time in Previous Role

Data Analyst Career Progressions: Time in Previous Role

Sales Career Progressions: Time in Previous Role

Product Management Career Progressions: Time in Previous Role

Design Career Progressions: Time in Previous Role

Job Market Analysis

Salaries By Role

Top paying Job Titles

The C-Suite Commands the Highest Compensation

Chief Information Officers lead the pack with a commanding median salary of $286,250, reflecting the critical importance of technology leadership in today's business landscape.

The executive tier dominates the top rankings, with VPs earning $247,500 and General Counsel at $247,095, underscoring how strategic decision-making roles continue to attract premium compensation.

What's particularly striking is the emergence of technical architecture and engineering leadership positions among the highest-paid roles; Principal Software Engineers ($208,425), Architecture ($208,050), and Engineering ($205,250) all crack the $200,000 threshold, signaling a market that increasingly values technical expertise at the senior level.

The salary progression reveals fascinating patterns about organizational priorities.

Corporate development and legal counsel roles cluster around the $200,000 mark, while specialized technical positions like machine learning roles haven't yet reached the compensation heights of traditional executive functions.

Finance, despite being a core business function, rounds out the top 25 at $175,050—still substantial but notably lower than technology and legal leadership positions.

This hierarchy suggests companies are paying premiums for roles that directly impact digital transformation, risk management, and strategic vision, with technical leadership now commanding compensation traditionally reserved for C-suite executives.

Salaries By Education Requirements

Top Paying Degrees

Advanced Degrees Drive Tech Salaries: Doctorate Holders Lead with $165K Average

Higher education clearly pays off in the tech industry, with doctorate holders commanding the highest average salaries at $165,422, followed closely by master's degree professionals at $157,894. The salary progression follows an intuitive pattern, showing a significant jump from associate degrees ($72,283) to bachelor's degrees ($138,530) - a leap of over $66,000 that represents the traditional college premium. Interestingly, high school graduates ($78,717) actually out-earn those with associate degrees by about $6,400, suggesting that some high-paying technical roles may value experience and skills over formal credentials. When compared to the industry average of $122,569, bachelor's degree holders sit right at the threshold with a modest 13% premium, while advanced degrees show increasingly attractive returns - master's holders enjoy a 29% salary boost, and doctorate professionals command a 35% premium above the industry baseline.

Lowest Paying Fields of Study

Social Workers and Teachers Face 25-42% Salary Penalties Despite Critical Societal Contributions

The stark reality of career compensation reveals a troubling pattern where society's most essential service providers face significant financial disadvantages. International relations professionals earn just $70,000 annually; 42% below the market average; while social workers, who tackle our most pressing societal challenges, barely reach $73,000. The creative and communication sectors tell a similar story, with advertising professionals, web designers, and English graduates clustering around $85,000-$89,000, representing substantial 26-29% salary penalties. Perhaps most concerning is the education sector, where those shaping future generations earn $90,000; a full 25% below average compensation. Even fields like public health, criminal justice, and social sciences, which address critical societal needs, struggle to reach $95,000 despite their vital contributions. This compensation gap highlights a troubling misalignment between social value and financial reward, where those dedicated to public service, education, and creative expression face systematic undervaluation in the marketplace. The pattern suggests that while technical skills command premium wages, the human-centered professions that form the backbone of civil society continue to be financially underappreciated.

Top Earning Fields of Study

AI Skills Drive Nearly 43% Salary Premiums as Machine Learning Dominates High-Paying Career Fields

The artificial intelligence revolution is reshaping the job market in unprecedented ways, with machine learning specialists commanding salary premiums of nearly 43% above the overall average.

This technological wave has created a clear hierarchy of lucrative career paths, where AI-focused roles dominate the top tier of compensation. Interestingly, the legal profession has secured its position as the third-highest premium field at 29%, demonstrating that traditional expertise remains highly valued alongside cutting-edge technical skills.

Operations research and life sciences round out the top five, each offering substantial premiums of 28% and 25% respectively, highlighting the growing importance of analytical thinking and scientific innovation across industries.

The results reveal a fascinating pattern: while technical fields like applied mathematics, physics, and electrical engineering maintain strong premiums between 17-20%, even traditionally creative disciplines like design and anthropology command impressive 16-17% premiums, suggesting that specialized knowledge and critical thinking skills are universally rewarded in today's economy.

The premium landscape shows that expertise in emerging technologies, analytical problem-solving, and specialized domain knowledge consistently translates to significant financial rewards.

Salaries by Company Size

Salary By Company Size

How Company Size Determines Your Salary

The tech industry's compensation landscape reveals a reality: your paycheck might depend as much on your company's size as your skills. At startups with fewer than 10 employees, the median salary hovers around $119,000 – a respectable figure that reflects the scrappy, all-hands-on-deck nature of early-stage ventures.

As companies grow to 11-50 employees, that number nudges up to $122,500, while mid-sized firms with 51-250 workers offer $125,000. Interestingly, companies in the 251-1000 range maintain that same $125,000 median, suggesting a plateau in the middle market.

But here's where things get interesting: once you hit the big leagues – companies with 1,000+ employees – the median salary jumps to $130,000.

That $11,000 difference between the smallest and largest companies represents more than just a bigger paycheck; it's a window into how established tech giants can afford to pay premium wages while smaller companies often compensate with equity, flexibility, and the promise of rapid growth.

Salaries by Location

Top States by Salary

Tech Salaries Soar Past $125K as Regional Markets Challenge Traditional Coastal Dominance

Washington state leads the nation in tech compensation with a median salary midpoint of $128,250, closely followed by California at $127,450, reflecting the concentrated high-paying opportunities in Seattle's tech ecosystem and Silicon Valley's continued dominance.

New York, Virginia, and Illinois round out the top five, offering median midpoints around $103,750-$110,000.

The salary ranges tell an equally compelling story: Washington offers the widest spread between minimum and maximum offers ($100,000 to $152,104), while states like Nebraska and District of Columbia show more compressed ranges ($80,000 to $105,000), potentially reflecting different market maturity levels or cost-of-living adjustments.

Notably, traditional tech hubs like Massachusetts rank surprisingly lower at 11th place with a $100,000 median midpoint, possibly indicating market saturation or the emergence of competitive opportunities in previously overlooked regions.

Salary Transparency in Job Postings

Most Transparent States

Only 7 States Achieve 60%+ Salary Transparency Across 88,810 Tech Job Listings

The tech industry's salary transparency landscape reveals significant regional variations across 30 states and 88,810 total job listings, with Minnesota leading the charge at 68.58% disclosure rate, followed by Washington at 67.77%.

New York rounds out the top three with 65.68% transparency, while traditionally tech-heavy Oregon achieves 62.44% and California maintains 62.04%. Colorado, often cited as a transparency pioneer, sits at 60.81%, with Illinois close behind at 60.4%.

The data shows a notable drop-off after the top seven states, with Connecticut at 52.82% and Maryland at 49.56% representing the middle tier. Across all analyzed markets, the overall transparency rate sits at 49.03%, with 43,545 jobs including salary information.

The analysis reveals that while 15 states achieved transparency rates above 39%, only the top seven exceeded 60% disclosure rates.

Salaries by Skill Requirements

Skills with Highest Salary Premium

Engineering Leaders Command 112% Salary Premium as Companies Prize Technical-Strategic Hybrid Skills

Engineering leadership commands the highest salary premium in the tech industry, with professionals earning 112% more than the median salary. This extraordinary compensation reflects the critical need for individuals who can bridge technical expertise with strategic vision.

Technical strategy follows closely at 90% premium, while financial strategy and IT leadership both command premiums around 88-89%, highlighting how organizations value leaders who can navigate complex technological landscapes while driving business outcomes.

The findings reveal a clear pattern: skills that combine technical depth with strategic thinking or specialized expertise command the highest premiums. Legal professionals with JD credentials earn 80% above median, while AI-focused roles like AI strategy and AI product development secure premiums of 85% and 77% respectively.

Management and leadership capabilities across engineering, design, and operations consistently appear in the top-tier compensation brackets, with premiums ranging from 64% to 84%.

What's particularly striking is how hiring, team building, and people analytics have emerged as premium skills, with hiring commanding a 67% premium.

This suggests that companies are willing to pay significantly more for professionals who can not only execute technical work but also build and scale high-performing teams.

The presence of behavioral science, recommender systems, and corporate governance in the top rankings further demonstrates how interdisciplinary expertise and specialized technical knowledge create substantial value in the job market.

Top Paying Programming Languages

Rust Developers Lead Programming Salaries at $261K as Modern Languages Command Premium Pay

Rust developers command the highest compensation in the programming landscape, earning an average of $260,953 annually. GraphQL specialists follow at $198,923. The Go ecosystem shows strong demand with golang and go while maintaining premium salaries around $190,000-$196,000. Modern web technologies continue to pay well, with CSS and HTML developers earning $189,084 and $185,929 respectively despite being fundamental skills. TypeScript developers enjoy an attractive combination of high compensation at $183,497. While Python remains the most in-demand language, its average salary of $151,862 trails behind newer, specialized technologies. The premium for cutting-edge languages like Rust and GraphQL reflects the scarcity of skilled practitioners and the high value organizations place on performance-critical and API-focused development. Traditional enterprise languages like Java and established frameworks maintain steady compensation, but the market clearly rewards expertise in emerging technologies and systems programming languages.

Top Paying Design Tools

Most valuable design tools by average salary

Design professionals working with Framer command the highest average salaries at $155,139, reflecting the premium placed on advanced prototyping and interaction design skills. InVision and Figma follow closely, with average salaries of $135,500 and $133,465 respectively, though Figma dominates the job market. Specialized UX/UI tools like Balsamiq, Miro, and Axure RP consistently offer compensation above $130,000, suggesting strong demand for professionals skilled in user experience design and collaborative workflows. Traditional Adobe products show interesting salary variations, while Creative Cloud commands $121,025, the older Creative Suite averages $109,173, and individual Adobe applications like Photoshop ($105,076) and InDesign ($93,619) fall toward the lower end of the spectrum. Canva offers a lower average salary at $81,862, likely reflecting its accessibility as a design platform and lower barrier to entry for users.

Salaries by Company

Top Paying Companies

AI and Design Companies Outpace Traditional Tech Giants in Salary Competition

Netflix dominates the compensation landscape with a median salary midpoint of $410,000, creating a substantial gap between itself and other tech companies. The streaming giant's compensation significantly outpaces even premium tech firms like Figma ($229,000) and NVIDIA ($217,750), which occupy the second and third positions respectively.

Established tech giants present an interesting pattern, while Apple maintains a strong position at $200,300, other major players like Google ($165,000), Amazon ($165,300), and Meta ($157,000) cluster in the middle tier, suggesting that company size and market dominance don't always correlate with peak compensation levels.

The emerging fintech sector shows competitive positioning with Stripe at $200,000 and Coinbase at $165,853, while newer platforms like TikTok ($181,000) and DoorDash ($168,000) demonstrate how rapidly scaling companies are investing heavily in talent acquisition.

Notable is the convergence around the $165,000-$200,000 range, where traditional enterprise companies like Salesforce ($197,050) compete directly with consumer-focused platforms like Airbnb ($198,000) and Pinterest ($183,655), indicating a mature market where talent commands premium rates across diverse business models.

Education Requirements

Degree Requirements by Job Title

Tech Industry Maintains Bachelor's Degree Preference with 95% of Software Jobs Requiring Four-Year Credentials

The job market reveals striking disparities in degree requirements across different career paths, with traditional customer service roles bucking the trend toward higher education credentials.

Customer Support & Service positions stand out with 60.3% of jobs requiring less than a bachelor's degree, followed by Administrative & Clerical roles at 53.8%, making these the most accessible entry points for workers without four-year degrees.

In contrast, technical and specialized fields heavily favor bachelor's degree holders, with Product Management leading at 96.1%, Media & Communications at 96.5%, and Finance & Accounting at 96.8%.

The data spanning 62,939 job postings shows that Science & Research positions maintain the highest bar for advanced education, with 36.0% requiring graduate degrees—nearly four times the rate of most other categories.

Software & IT, despite its reputation for valuing skills over credentials, still requires bachelor's degrees for 94.7% of positions, while only 2.5% are accessible to those with high school or associate degrees.

Field of Study Requirements By Industry

Before you get started:
The data below is sourced from Huntr’s user-submitted job postings. Because our user base leans heavily toward IT and tech roles, technical majors are probably over-represented compared to the overall job market. Consider these percentages as indicative trends, not absolute values.

The stacked bar chart highlights how frequently each field of study appears in job requirements, categorized by the hiring company’s industry (not the candidate’s current field).
Tech-focused industries dominate the field of study requirements landscape, with semiconductors and communications equipment leading the charge at 46% and 44% tech-related degree mentions respectively.

However, the story becomes more nuanced when examining the full spectrum of educational backgrounds sought across sectors. While IT services and internet software companies predictably emphasize technical credentials, traditional industries reveal surprising patterns - airlines require one-third tech expertise, and even insurance companies seek nearly 31% tech-qualified candidates, suggesting digital transformation's pervasive impact.

Manufacturing sectors like automobile and electrical equipment balance technical needs with substantial engineering requirements (31% and 36% respectively), while service-oriented industries like professional services and transportation show more diversified educational preferences, blending business acumen with technical skills.

The data reveals that pure tech specialization is giving way to hybrid skill sets, with most industries requiring a mix of technical, business, and engineering backgrounds rather than single-discipline expertise.

Fields of Study Growing in Demand

This analysis explores shifting requirements for fields of study in tech job postings, comparing Q1 2025 to Q2 2025. The data highlights the relative growth percentage for fields that saw a meaningful percentage point increase (≥0.25%) in job listings referencing these qualifications. Percentage point (pp) change is calculated by subtracting the Q1 percentage from the Q2 percentage. For instance, let's say Marketing was mentioned in 1.27% of job postings in Q1 2025 and increased to 1.84% in Q2 2025, resulting in a 0.57 percentage point rise. The relative change (44.88%) indicates how significant this increase is compared to the original value (0.57 ÷ 1.27 = 44.88%).

Business Fields Surge as Technical Disciplines Retreat in Job Market

Business and communication fields captured significant market share gains during the first half of the year, presenting a sharp contrast to the widespread decline in technical fields. Mechanical Engineering emerged as the surprising leader with 37.93% growth in market share, followed by Communications at 25.97% and Finance at 25.00%.

Traditional business disciplines dominated the growth rankings, with Business, Business Administration, and Accounting all posting gains above 20%. Marketing and Economics showed healthy increases of 17.93% and 14.19% respectively.

Notably, only two technical fields appeared among the top growth areas—Cybersecurity with a modest 7.69% increase and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) with minimal growth of 1.96%.

This shift toward business-oriented fields suggests employers are prioritizing commercial and communication skills over pure technical expertise, marking a potential pivot in hiring strategies across industries.

Fields of Study with Declining Demand

This visualization highlights fields of study that saw significant drops in demand across tech job listings, comparing Q1 2025 to Q2 2025. The chart presents relative decline percentages for fields with decreases of at least 0.25 percentage points in job requirements. For example, if "X Field of Study" appeared in 10% of job listings in Q1 2025 but dropped to 5% in Q2 2025, reflecting a -5 percentage point change. The relative decline of -50% is calculated by dividing this change by the original percentage (-5 ÷ 10 = -50%), indicating how substantial the decrease is relative to its initial value.

Computer Engineering Leads Sharp Decline in Technical Field Job Requirements

Technical fields experienced notable declines in job market share during the first half of the year, with Computer Engineering suffering the steepest drop at 23.67%.

Despite maintaining the highest volume with over 111,000 positions, Computer Science saw its market share decrease by 18.81%, while Information Technology declined by 19.82%. Traditional STEM fields like Mathematics and Statistics contracted by 14.08% and 16.11% respectively.

Among the high-volume fields analyzed, Design and Software Engineering showed the most resilience with relatively modest market share declines of 7.69% and 8.23%.

This broad-based contraction across technical disciplines suggests a significant shift in hiring priorities, with even the most in-demand fields losing ground relative to the overall job market.

Equivalent Experience Acceptance

Equivalent Experience Acceptance by Company Size

Enterprise Companies Nearly Twice as Likely to Accept Experience Over Degrees

Larger companies demonstrate significantly greater flexibility in their hiring practices when it comes to accepting equivalent experience in lieu of formal degree requirements.

Small companies with 1-10 employees show the lowest acceptance rate at just 5.83%, while this figure nearly doubles to 11.44% for organizations with 1000+ employees.

The trend is consistent across all company size categories, with mid-sized companies (51-250 employees) accepting equivalent experience 7.6% of the time, and larger firms (251-1000 employees) showing a 9.21% acceptance rate.

This progression suggests that enterprise-level organizations have more established processes for evaluating alternative qualifications and may be more willing to prioritize skills and experience over traditional educational credentials.

The substantial difference between the smallest and largest companies, a 96% increase in acceptance rates, indicates that company size plays a crucial role in determining hiring flexibility.

Top Job Categories Accepting Equivalent Experience

Cybersecurity Employers Prioritize Hands-On Skills While Tech Industry Maintains Degree Requirements

Information Security leads the way as the most accommodating field for equivalent experience, with nearly one in five job postings (19.21%) accepting practical skills over formal degrees.

This suggests cybersecurity employers prioritize hands-on expertise and certifications over traditional academic credentials. Media & Communications follows at 11.11%, reflecting an industry where portfolio work and demonstrated creativity often outweigh educational background.

Customer Support & Service rounds out the top three at 10.97%, indicating service-oriented roles value communication skills and problem-solving abilities that can be developed through experience.

Interestingly, while Software & IT represents the largest job category with over 43,000 positions, only 10.3% accept equivalent experience, suggesting this field maintains stronger degree requirements despite its technical nature.

The data reveals a clear divide between fields that embrace skills-based hiring and those that still favor formal education, with most categories hovering between 7-10% acceptance rates for equivalent experience.

Artificial intelligence

AI Skills

AI Tools Surge to 1,499 Job Postings as Employers Prioritize Hands-On Implementation Skills

The AI job market reveals a clear hierarchy of in-demand skills, with general "AI" knowledge being the most sought-after competency, appearing in 3,349 unique job postings.

This is followed by more specific capabilities like "AI tools" (1,499 jobs) and "Generative AI" (1,340 jobs), indicating that employers are looking for both broad AI understanding and hands-on experience with practical AI applications.

The prominence of "Artificial Intelligence" as a foundational skill (1,078 jobs) alongside more specialized areas like "AI technologies" (556 jobs) and "AI integration" (501 jobs) suggests that the market values both theoretical knowledge and implementation expertise. Notably, emerging areas such as "Conversational AI" (108 jobs), "AI ethics" (69 jobs), and "AI agents" (79 jobs) are gaining traction, reflecting the industry's evolution toward more sophisticated and responsible AI applications.

The landscape underscores that while general AI literacy remains paramount, employers are increasingly seeking candidates who can navigate the practical challenges of deploying AI solutions, integrating AI into existing systems, and developing AI-powered products and services.

Industry

Industry Concentration in Our Top Cities

How we came up with our rankings

We introduce a novel approach to visualizing industry concentration across North American cities. Rather than relying solely on absolute job numbers, which can be skewed toward larger metropolitan areas, we've calculated the percentage of each city's total job listings that belong to specific industries.

The heatmap visualization ranks cities by their industry concentration, showing the top five locations where each industry represents the highest proportion of local job opportunities. This approach addresses several limitations in traditional job market data. First, it compensates for sampling biases in our user base, which may over-represent certain regions. Second, it normalizes for population differences, allowing smaller cities with strong industry presence to appear alongside major metropolitan areas.

It's important to note that high concentration doesn't necessarily indicate the highest number of available positions; rather, it signals where specific industries play a particularly significant role in the local economy.

Silicon Valley's Grip Tightens: San Francisco, Seattle, and San Jose Command Top Three in Internet Software Jobs

The job market data reveals distinct geographic clustering patterns across North America's major tech and business hubs.

San Francisco claims the top spot in Internet Software, followed by Seattle in second and San Jose in third, highlighting Silicon Valley's continued supremacy in tech innovation. Interestingly, Winnipeg ranks first in Professional Services, outpacing traditional business centers like Washington DC (second) and Charlotte (third).

Financial services show a more distributed pattern, with Toronto leading the rankings but Charlotte, New York, and Dallas all securing positions in the top four. The data also reveals specialized industry clusters: Charlotte's first-place ranking in banking, Boston's leadership positions in both healthcare providers and pharmaceuticals, and San Jose's top rankings in both semiconductors and communications equipment.

These patterns suggest that while certain cities have established themselves as clear industry leaders, the job market shows both expected concentrations (tech cities dominating software rankings, finance in traditional hubs) and some surprising regional strengths, particularly in Canadian markets and emerging US business centers.

The concentration is so strong in some sectors that the same cities appear repeatedly in top rankings - San Jose holds first place in three different tech-related industries, while Boston leads in two healthcare sectors.

Location Requirements

Location Requirements by Company Size

Work Location Transparency Declines as Company Size Grows

The relationship between company size and work arrangement transparency reveals a striking pattern across job postings.

Small companies with 1-10 employees demonstrate the highest commitment to remote work at 31.82%, yet this percentage steadily decreases as organizations grow larger, dropping to just 15.50% for companies with over 1,000 employees.

What's most remarkable is the inverse trend in unspecified work arrangements, while smaller companies leave 39.51% of their postings ambiguous about location requirements, this figure climbs dramatically to 52.53% for the largest enterprises.

This suggests that major corporations are increasingly reluctant to commit to specific work arrangements in their job advertisements, perhaps maintaining flexibility for case-by-case negotiations.

Meanwhile, hybrid and onsite arrangements remain relatively stable across all company sizes, hovering between 12-16% each, indicating these models have found consistent adoption regardless of organizational scale.

The findings challenge assumptions about large companies being more structured in their communications, instead revealing that smaller organizations provide clearer expectations about where work will actually happen.

Location Requirements by Job Category

Remote Work Dominates While Hybrid Struggles to Find Footing

The modern job market shows a clear preference for remote work opportunities, with most professional categories offering 13-32% of positions as fully remote, led by Customer Support & Service at 32.04% and Writing & Editing at 30.67%.

However, hybrid arrangements consistently lag behind across all fields, rarely exceeding 19% in any category except Legal (19.09%), suggesting organizations favor decisive remote or onsite policies over flexible splitting arrangements.

Interestingly, Science & Research bucks the remote trend entirely, showing the lowest remote adoption at just 9.86% while maintaining the highest onsite requirements at 19.97%, demonstrating that research-intensive roles requiring specialized equipment and collaborative lab work continue to favor in-person environments.

Monthly Trends in Location Requirements

Job Posting Ambiguity Reaches New High: 54% of Listings Fail to Mention Work Location by June 2025

Job posting transparency has reached a troubling low point, with over half of all listings now failing to specify location requirements, a trend that has accelerated dramatically throughout early 2025. This growing ambiguity represents a fundamental shift in how employers communicate workplace expectations, leaving job seekers to guess whether positions are remote, hybrid, or onsite.

While remote opportunities continue their gradual decline and hybrid arrangements hold steady, the real story is the erosion of clear communication in hiring practices.

This lack of transparency not only creates unnecessary friction in the job search process but also suggests many employers themselves may be uncertain about their long-term workplace policies, defaulting to vague language rather than making definitive commitments about work arrangements.

Skills Requirements

Skill Requirement Count By Job Category

Skill Benchmarks: Decoding the Typical Range of Requirements in Job Postings

While averages can be skewed by a few unusually demanding job posts, the real story of what employers expect is found in the middle ground. To understand this, we analyzed the "middle 50%" of job postings for each category. The chart below shows the median (the exact midpoint) alongside the 25th and 75th percentiles, revealing the most common range of required skills. For instance, a typical Software & IT role (median) lists 13 skills, but it's common to see postings asking for anywhere from 10 to 17. This data provides a clear benchmark for what's truly standard in your field, helping you move beyond averages and tailor your resume to the most likely expectations.

Top Skills by Company Size

How Startup and Enterprise Skill Demands Paint Two Different Pictures of Software Development

There's a deep difference between the technical skills prioritized by startups versus enterprise organizations. Startup-focused skills cluster around modern web development technologies and cloud-native infrastructure.

React leads the startup preference with 6.02% representation compared to just 1.03% in enterprise roles, followed closely by TypeScript, Node.js, and JavaScript.

These companies gravitate toward lightweight, flexible technologies that enable rapid development cycles and quick iteration.

The startup ecosystem also shows a strong preference for containerization (Docker), cloud platforms (AWS), and modern databases (PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis), reflecting their need for scalable, cost-effective solutions that can grow with their business.

Enterprise organizations, conversely, demonstrate a clear preference for established, enterprise-grade technologies that prioritize stability, security, and long-term maintainability.

Java and SQL dominate the enterprise landscape, with SQL appearing in 4.71% of enterprise postings versus 3.60% in startups. The enterprise preference extends to mature frameworks like Spring Boot, cloud platforms like Azure, and the entire Microsoft stack including C# and .NET.

This pattern reflects enterprise priorities around compliance, integration with existing systems, and technologies with robust vendor support and extensive documentation.

While the technical skills divide is pronounced, it's worth noting that soft skills requirements likely show less variation between company types. Both startups and enterprises value communication, problem-solving, and collaboration abilities, though the context may differ.

Startups might emphasize adaptability and wearing multiple hats, while enterprises may focus more on stakeholder management and working within established processes.

The ability to translate technical concepts to non-technical team members, mentor junior developers, and contribute to architectural decisions remains valuable across all company sizes, even as the specific technologies vary dramatically.

Top Skills by Job Category

Communication Required in 50-72% of Jobs Across All Industries in 2025

An analysis reveals distinct skill requirements across seven major industries, with each field demanding a unique blend of technical expertise and soft skills. While technical competencies vary dramatically by sector—from Python in Software & IT to Figma in Creative & Design—communication skills emerge as a universal constant across all industries.

Software & IT - Python (33.86%), JavaScript (29.83%), and React (25.17%) are the top three most in-demand skills in Software & IT, with Python appearing in over one-third of all job listings.

Data & Analytics - SQL (68.8%), Python (60.84%), and Communication (54.51%) round out the top three, with SQL being required in more than two-thirds of all job listings in this field.

Creative & Design - Figma dominates the Creative & Design field at 61.03%, followed by Communication (53.02%) and Collaboration (47.94%) as the top three most in-demand skills.

Product Management - Product Management leads at 63.11%, followed closely by Communication (62.51%) and Data Analysis (30.88%) as the top three most in-demand skills in this field.

Sales & Business Development - Communication (72.12%), Sales (34.61%), and Negotiation (16.79%) lead the pack, with communication being required in nearly three-quarters of all job listings.

Information Security - Communication leads as the core competency at 50.56%, followed by Incident Response (29.22%) and Cybersecurity (26.81%) as the top three most in-demand skills in Information Security.

Marketing & Advertising - Communication tops the list at 51.02%, showing that effective messaging is what's really required in marketing, followed by Project Management (32.05%) and Digital Marketing (24.14%).

The data underscores a fundamental shift in the modern workplace where technical proficiency alone is insufficient—communication skills have become the universal currency of professional success. Across industries ranging from highly technical fields like Information Security to creative disciplines, the ability to effectively communicate ranks among the top three requirements, signaling that tomorrow's workforce must master both domain expertise and interpersonal skills.

Top Growing Skills Overall

AI Skills Explode in Job Market as Companies Rush to Automate, Leaving Soft Skills Behind

We compared unique job postings saved in Q1 2025 and Q2 2025, extracting skill requirements from each and calculating two normalized growth measures for every skill: job-market-adjusted growth, which reflects the percentage change in a skill’s share of all postings, and company-adjusted growth, which captures the change in its share of distinct hiring companies over the same period.

The most striking finding is the explosive demand for AI tools, which experienced a 96.8% growth rate and expanded its market presence from 0.275% to 0.700% of all job postings. This dramatic surge far outpaces all other skills, with the next highest growth rates being systems thinking at 30.8%, contract negotiation at 26.1%, and site reliability engineering at 26.0%. What's particularly noteworthy is that while AI tools dominate the landscape, infrastructure and operational skills are experiencing robust growth, with observability growing 20.8%, operational excellence at 20.8%, and infrastructure-as-code expanding 14.0%. The data reveals a clear pattern where organizations are not just chasing AI trends but are thoughtfully building the operational maturity required to support these advanced technologies, suggesting that companies recognize the need for both cutting-edge AI capabilities and the foundational technical expertise to deploy and manage them reliably in production environments.

Skills Gap

To map today's skills gap, we combined two sides of the Huntr platform:

• Demand (jobs). We analyzed every public job posting created since April 1, 2025, mapping various job-title keywords into 9 broader role categories, then deduplicated by company + title. For each role, we counted how many of those distinct postings mention every hard skill (soft-skill keywords were excluded). Our analysis covered 171 distinct skills across roles, including Backend Developer, Frontend Developer, DevOps Engineer, Data Analyst, Mobile Developer, QA Engineer, Data Engineer, Data Scientist, and Full Stack Developer.
• Supply (resumes). On the same timeline, we examined "base" resumes that job-seekers built in Huntr, matched each resume's target job title to the same 9 role categories, and cataloged the hard skills users explicitly added to their profiles.

From those two pools, we calculate three key metrics for every skill within each role:

• Demand % measures how frequently employers request a given skill within a role category. We calculate it by dividing the number of job postings that mention the skill by the total number of postings for that role. For example, JavaScript appears in 100% of Frontend Developer job postings, while API skills are mentioned in 35.7% of Backend Developer positions.
• Supply % captures how common that skill is among job-seekers. We compute it by dividing the number of resumes that list the skill by the total number of resumes targeting the same role. A higher value means a larger share of candidates claim the capability - for instance, 15.6% of Frontend Developer candidates list JavaScript skills.
• Gap ratio puts the two together by dividing Demand % by Supply %. A ratio near 1 indicates balance; anything above 1 signals a shortage (employers want the skill more often than candidates offer it), while values below 1 suggest an oversupply. Our data reveals significant gaps, with API skills showing the highest ratio at 8.7x, meaning companies request this skill nearly 9 times more often than candidates list it.

The most in-demand skills with the largest gaps include API development (8.7x gap), React (8.5x gap), Java (8.2x gap), and AWS (8.0x gap), indicating critical talent shortages in these areas.

Software Development Skills Gap Analysis

Data reveals specialized infrastructure skills face 60× shortfalls in 2025, while core programming languages approach equilibrium

• Cloud platforms emerge as the most critical gap at 59.86×, with only 0.07% of developer resumes mentioning this skill despite 3.98% of job posts requiring it.
• Software development fundamentals show a 13.7× gap (10.93% demand vs 0.8% supply), indicating employers seek deeper expertise than basic coding knowledge.
• Infrastructure-oriented skills like relational databases (9.4× gap) and software engineering (8.27× gap) reveal significant shortages in backend specialization.
• Core programming languages show better balance: JavaScript (1.32× gap), SQL (1.3× gap), and Python (1.2× gap) demonstrate that fundamental coding skills have adequate supply.
• DevOps-adjacent skills like microservices (3.01× gap) and system design (3.14× gap) sit in the middle tier, reflecting moderate infrastructure skill shortages. In essence, while basic programming competencies are well-supplied, specialized cloud and infrastructure expertise represents the field's most pressing talent shortage.

Data and Analytics Skills Gap Analysis

Analytics field shows 23× cloud platform deficit while traditional skills maintain better balance

• Cloud platforms again top the gap analysis at 23.32× (4.8% demand vs 0.21% supply), highlighting infrastructure as the biggest bottleneck in data roles.
• Data engineering shows a severe 12.01× shortfall (13.35% demand vs 1.11% supply), revealing the scarcity of professionals who can build data infrastructure.
• Core analytical skills demonstrate mixed results: data analysis leads demand at 37.96% but maintains reasonable supply (11.03%), creating a manageable 3.44× gap.
• Traditional data skills show better equilibrium: Spark (1.32× gap), statistical modeling (1.42× gap), and project management (1.42× gap) indicate adequate talent pools.
• Modern data stack tools like ETL (2.14× gap) and data modeling (2.07× gap) fall into moderate shortage territory. The data reveals a clear bifurcation: while fundamental analytical and visualization skills are reasonably supplied, engineering-heavy data infrastructure roles face acute talent shortages.

Design Skills Gap Analysis

Portfolio presentation crisis hits 37× gap while core UX/UI skills face significant shortages

• Portfolio skills show the most extreme gap at 36.63× (3.66% demand vs 0% supply), suggesting candidates fail to properly showcase their work rather than lacking design ability.
• Core UX competencies face substantial shortages: UX design (3.49× gap), user experience (3.83× gap), and user-centered design (2.89× gap) all indicate high employer demand exceeding talent supply.
• Product design dominates demand at 34.6% but shows manageable supply (11.39%), creating a 3.04× gap that reflects the field's evolution toward product-focused roles.
• SaaS experience emerges as a critical specialization gap at 4.45× (5.64% demand vs 1.27% supply), highlighting the industry's cloud-first direction.
• Traditional design methodology skills show better balance: Agile (1.41× gap) and user experience design (1.39× gap) demonstrate adequate practitioner availability. The analysis reveals that while design fundamentals are moderately supplied, portfolio presentation skills and specialized product/SaaS experience represent the field's most critical gaps.

Product Management Skills Gap Analysis

Core product management expertise faces 6× shortfall while traditional project skills remain balanced

• Product management itself shows a critical 6.21× gap (74.84% demand vs 12.06% supply), indicating a fundamental shortage of qualified product managers across the industry.
• B2B SaaS specialization presents the highest gap at 8.47× (4.09% demand vs 0.48% supply), reflecting the specialized knowledge required for modern software products
• Technical product management skills show significant shortages: AI (5× gap), software development (4.19× gap), and user experience (3.93× gap) reveal demand for technically-savvy PMs.
• Data-driven product management emerges strongly with 35.24% demand for data analysis skills, though supply (13.02%) creates a moderate 2.71× gap.
• Traditional project management skills demonstrate better balance at 1.51× gap (21.09% demand vs 13.99% supply), showing transferable skills from other disciplines. The data exposes a critical shortage of modern product management expertise, particularly in technical and B2B domains, while traditional project coordination skills remain adequately supplied.

Administrative and Virtual Assistance Skills Gap Analysis

Specialized office skills show 4× gaps while basic software proficiency approaches balance

• MS Office specialization ties for the highest gap at 4.07× (6.14% demand vs 1.51% supply), alongside administrative experience (4.07× gap), indicating employers seek advanced proficiency beyond basic familiarity.
• Travel coordination emerges as a specialized skill gap at 3.36× (3.8% demand vs 1.13% supply), reflecting the complexity of modern business travel management.
• Microsoft Outlook shows a 3.2× gap (4.83% demand vs 1.51% supply), highlighting the importance of professional communication and calendar management skills.
• Core Microsoft Office applications demonstrate better balance: Word (1.49× gap) and PowerPoint (1.61× gap) show adequate basic competency in the talent pool.
• Event planning achieves the best balance at 1.34× gap (5.05% demand vs 3.77% supply), indicating this skill transfers well from various backgrounds. The analysis reveals that while basic office software literacy is adequate, employers struggle to find candidates with advanced administrative specialization and proven experience.

Customer Success & Support Skills Gap Analysis

Customer success expertise faces 12× shortage while traditional support skills remain balanced

• Customer success skills show a critical 12.01× gap (37.64% demand vs 3.13% supply), highlighting this emerging field's severe talent shortage as companies prioritize retention over acquisition.
• Call center experience presents an extreme 37.68× gap (3.77% demand vs 0% supply), suggesting a complete disconnect between traditional support backgrounds and modern customer success roles.
• SaaS expertise shows significant gaps: general SaaS (8.58× gap) and B2B SaaS (16.45× gap) reflect the industry's cloud transformation outpacing talent development.
• Account management demonstrates a significant but manageable 3.19× gap (23.32% demand vs 7.31% supply), indicating this traditional skill partially transfers to customer success.
• Traditional support competencies show good balance: CRM (1.57× gap), sales (1.67× gap), and customer engagement (1.56× gap) demonstrate adequate foundational skills. The data reveals customer success as an emerging discipline with critical talent shortages, while traditional support and sales skills provide a foundation that companies can build upon.

Marketing Skills Gap Analysis

B2B SaaS marketing shows 59× deficit while digital fundamentals achieve near-equilibrium

• B2B SaaS marketing faces the most extreme gap at 58.57× (5.86% demand vs 0% supply), with general B2B marketing also showing zero supply (47.99× gap), indicating a complete absence of specialized B2B marketing talent.
• Product marketing emerges as a critical specialization at 7.29× gap (27.19% demand vs 3.73% supply), reflecting the shift toward product-led growth strategies.
• Sales enablement shows a significant 6.26× gap (9.34% demand vs 1.49% supply), highlighting the missing bridge between marketing and sales functions.
• Data-driven marketing faces a 3.09× gap (25.38% demand vs 8.21% supply), showing the field's evolution toward analytical decision-making.
• Digital marketing fundamentals demonstrate strong balance: social media (1.35× gap), content creation (1.45× gap), and growth marketing (1.4× gap) indicate adequate practitioner availability. The analysis exposes a bifurcated market where traditional digital marketing skills are well-supplied, but specialized B2B and product marketing expertise represents a critical industry bottleneck.

Job Search Survey Insights

Survey

Job Search Trends Survey

AI and the Job Search

AI Hiring

68% of Candidates Would Take Jobs Where Humans Never Interview Them

The robots are taking over the hiring process, and most job seekers are surprisingly okay with it. In a striking revelation, 67.7% of respondents (308 out of 455) said they would accept a job offer from a company whose entire hiring process was conducted by AI, while only 32.3% (147 individuals) would refuse such an offer.

This roughly 2:1 ratio suggests that while AI-mediated hiring has gained substantial acceptance among job seekers, a notable minority, approximately one in three candidates, remains hesitant or opposed to fully automated recruitment processes.

The data reflect a workforce that is increasingly comfortable with technological innovation in hiring practices, although the persistence of a substantial skeptical cohort indicates that companies implementing AI-only hiring systems may still face resistance from a significant portion of the talent pool.

This divide could have important implications for organizations considering the adoption of fully automated recruitment systems, as they may risk excluding nearly a third of potential candidates who prefer human involvement in the hiring process.

Gen Z Outpaces Millennials in Embracing AI Hiring, 78% vs. 68% Acceptance Rate

Gen Z is leading the charge into the AI-powered future of hiring, with nearly 8 out of 10 young professionals ready to let algorithms decide their career fate.

This digital-native generation shows remarkable comfort with fully automated recruitment, 77.8% would accept a job offer without ever speaking to a human recruiter.

Millennials follow closely behind at 68.4%, suggesting that those who grew up alongside technology's rise are largely embracing its role in shaping their careers.

The real surprise comes from Gen X, traditionally seen as the bridge between analog and digital worlds, who show the most skepticism with only 60.3% willing to trust AI with their job prospects.

Perhaps most intriguing is the Baby Boomer response: despite stereotypes about older workers resisting technology, they're actually more open to AI hiring (66.7%) than Gen X, though their smaller sample size of just 18 respondents makes this finding more of a curious footnote than a definitive trend.

What emerges is a workforce increasingly willing to trade human intuition for algorithmic efficiency, with only Gen X holding the line as cautious gatekeepers questioning whether machines should really be making such fundamentally human decisions.

Male Job Seekers 6 Points More Likely Than Women to Accept Machine-Led Hiring

A subtle but notable gender divide emerges in attitudes toward AI-driven hiring, with male job seekers showing distinctly more enthusiasm for algorithmic recruitment than their female counterparts.

At 70.8% acceptance, men lead the charge in embracing fully automated hiring processes, with 172 out of 243 male respondents willing to let machines make the final call on their career prospects.

Women demonstrate more caution, though still a solid majority—65% of the 197 female respondents would accept an AI-only job offer, suggesting that while they're generally open to the technology, they harbor slightly more reservations about removing human judgment from the hiring equation.

The 5.8 percentage point gap might reflect different experiences with bias in traditional hiring, varying comfort levels with technology, or distinct perspectives on the value of human interaction in assessing workplace fit.

Among non-binary respondents and those preferring not to disclose their gender, acceptance rates drop to 57.1% and 50% respectively, though these smaller sample sizes make it difficult to draw firm conclusions.

What's clear is that while AI hiring has achieved mainstream acceptance across gender lines, the technology's appeal isn't entirely gender-neutral, with men appearing more ready to trust algorithms with their professional futures.

The Desperation Factor: 77% of Unemployed Accept AI Hiring vs. 55% of Passive Job Seekers

Desperation breeds acceptance when it comes to AI-driven hiring, with unemployed job seekers showing the highest willingness to let algorithms decide their fate.

A striking 77% of actively unemployed respondents would accept a job offer from an AI-only hiring process, suggesting that the urgency of finding work outweighs concerns about automated recruitment.

This pattern continues down the employment spectrum: those employed but actively hunting for new opportunities show 68.5% acceptance, while self-employed professionals seeking contracts land at 64.3%.

The real skepticism emerges among passive job seekers, those comfortably employed and merely open to opportunities, where acceptance drops to just 55.3%, indicating that job security affords the luxury of being choosier about hiring methods.

Perhaps most intriguing are the recently laid-off workers, who despite their presumed urgency, show the lowest acceptance at 52.2%, split almost evenly between yes and no.

This unexpected resistance might reflect fresh wounds from being let go by human decision-makers, making them more cautious about trusting machines with their next career move.

The overall pattern suggests that AI hiring acceptance isn't just about technological comfort; it's deeply intertwined with economic necessity and the leverage job seekers feel they have in the market.

The Executive Rebellion: Only Career Level Where Majority Rejects AI Hiring

The corporate ladder reveals a striking pattern in AI hiring acceptance: the higher you climb, the less you trust machines to make recruitment decisions.

Among the 452 respondents who disclosed their career level (three participants skipped this question), entry-level job seekers lead the charge with 77.1% acceptance, eagerly embracing automated hiring as they seek to break into the workforce.

This enthusiasm gradually wanes as professionals advance in their careers—mid-career workers drop to 66.2% acceptance, while senior-level professionals hover at 68.7%.

But the real story emerges at the executive level, where acceptance plummets to just 49%, making C-suite candidates the only group where more people reject AI hiring than accept it.

This dramatic 28-point gap between entry-level and executive acceptance suggests a fundamental disconnect: those just starting their careers see AI as a fair, efficient gateway to opportunity, while those who've reached the top believe that leadership qualities, strategic thinking, and executive presence simply can't be assessed by algorithms.

The pattern hints at a deeper truth about hiring, that as roles become more complex and nuanced, the human elements of judgment, intuition, and interpersonal assessment become increasingly irreplaceable.

Executives, who often make hiring decisions themselves, appear uniquely positioned to understand what machines might miss when evaluating top-tier talent.

AI or Automation Job Loss

90% of Job Seekers Haven't Lost Work to AI Despite Rising Fears

Despite the doom and gloom headlines about AI taking over the workforce, a surprising 90.3% of job seekers report they've never actually lost a job to automation or artificial intelligence.

Among the 455 survey respondents, only 44 individuals (9.7%) have experienced the reality of being replaced by technology.

This contrast between public anxiety and actual experiences reveals an interesting disconnect - while the fear of AI-driven unemployment dominates career conversations and media narratives, the vast majority of workers haven't personally faced this disruption.

The data suggests that although AI-related job displacement is indeed happening and affecting nearly 1 in 10 respondents, the robot revolution hasn't quite arrived at the scale many predicted.

Of course, these numbers capture past experiences rather than future possibilities, leaving open the question of whether this relatively low percentage represents the calm before the storm or evidence that humans and AI will find ways to coexist in the workplace.

AI Doesn't Discriminate: Job Loss Hits Men (9.5%) and Women (9.1%) Equally

Gender appears to play a minimal role in who gets displaced by AI and automation, with male and female workers experiencing nearly identical rates of job loss, 9.5% and 9.1% respectively.

This remarkable similarity challenges assumptions about whether certain genders might be more vulnerable to technological unemployment. The data hints at a slightly different story for non-binary respondents, where 14.3% report losing work to AI, though with only 7 people in this category, it's hard to draw firm conclusions.

Perhaps most intriguing is the "prefer not to say" group, where 25% report AI-related job loss, double the rate of other groups. While this could be statistical noise given the tiny sample of 8 people, it raises questions about whether those who've experienced AI displacement might be more reluctant to share demographic information, possibly due to stigma or privacy concerns around job loss.

Overall, the data suggests that when it comes to being replaced by algorithms and automation, the playing field is surprisingly level across gender lines, at least for now.

Gen Z Reports Higher AI Displacement Than Millennials

Baby Boomers and Gen Z find themselves in an unexpected alliance, both generations are more likely to lose their jobs to AI than the workers sandwiched between them.

While 16.7% of Baby Boomers report being displaced by automation, this shocking figure comes with a caveat: only 18 Boomers participated, making this percentage more of a statistical whisper than a shout. Gen Z tells a clearer story at 11.1%, entering a workforce where AI isn't just a futuristic concept but an active competitor for entry-level positions.

Meanwhile, Millennials (9.3%) and Gen X (8.4%) appear to occupy a sweet spot, experienced enough to avoid the automation of junior roles, yet not so senior as to be targets for cost-cutting technological replacements.

This generational pattern suggests that AI disruption isn't hitting workers uniformly across age groups; instead, it's creating a U-shaped curve where the youngest workers learning the ropes and the oldest workers nearing retirement face the highest risk of being automated away.

AI Tools in Job Search

93% of Job Seekers Now Use AI Tools for Their Job Search

Nearly half of today's job seekers are turning to AI tools like ChatGPT and AI resume builders like Huntr as their secret weapon in the competitive job market, finding them incredibly valuable for landing their next role.

The landscape of job hunting has dramatically shifted, with an overwhelming 93% of candidates now leveraging artificial intelligence in some capacity during their search.

What's particularly striking is the satisfaction rate, among those who've experimented with AI assistance, the vast majority report positive results, with only a small fraction dismissing these tools as unhelpful.

This widespread adoption signals a fundamental transformation in how people approach career transitions, where AI has evolved from a novel experiment to an essential component of the modern job search toolkit.

The tiny percentage still holding out without AI assistance increasingly represents the exception rather than the rule, suggesting that mastery of these digital tools may soon become as crucial as the resume itself.

Using AI At Work

Only 2.6% of Job Seekers Fear AI Will Take Their Jobs

Job seekers are embracing AI with remarkable enthusiasm, with more than half viewing it as a career-enhancing productivity booster that's transforming how they work.

While excitement leads the sentiment, a substantial group maintains healthy skepticism; they're using AI but keeping their eyes open to potential pitfalls.

This cautious optimism reflects a mature approach to technological adoption, where professionals recognize both the opportunities and challenges AI presents.

Interestingly, fears about job replacement barely register in the data, suggesting that job seekers see AI more as a powerful colleague than a competitor.

The tiny fraction who don't trust AI or worry about job security are vastly outnumbered by those who've integrated these tools into their daily workflows.

Even more telling is that less than 2% report AI hasn't touched their industry yet, a clear signal that AI adoption has reached nearly every corner of the professional world.

This widespread acceptance marks a pivotal moment in workplace evolution, where AI has shifted from a futuristic concept to an everyday reality that most job seekers not only accept but actively champion.

AI Interviews

7 in 10 Job Seekers Reject AI Interviews, Demand Human Connection

The overwhelming rejection of one-way AI interviews reveals a fundamental truth about human nature: we crave connection, especially during vulnerable moments like job interviews.

Nearly 70% of job seekers would rather face the nervousness of speaking to a real person than record themselves talking to a blank screen, highlighting how these AI-driven formats strip away the very essence of what makes interviews valuable: the ability to read the room, build rapport, and engage in genuine dialogue.

The small minority who embrace these digital monologues perhaps see them as a chance to perfect their responses without the pressure of real-time interaction, while the quarter who remain indifferent have likely accepted this as just another hoop to jump through in an increasingly automated world.

This preference for human interaction suggests that companies rushing to automate their hiring processes may be solving for the wrong problem, saving time and money at the expense of attracting top talent who view these impersonal screenings as a red flag about company culture.

The message from job seekers is clear: in an era of increasing automation, the human touch in hiring isn't just preferred; it's overwhelmingly demanded.

Remote Work

Work Location Preferences

The Office Is Dead: Only 3% of Job Seekers Want Full-Time Cubicle Life

The future of work is undeniably flexible. An overwhelming 44% of job seekers are drawn to hybrid arrangements, craving the perfect blend of home comfort and office collaboration.

Close behind, nearly 39% are all-in on remote work, ready to trade commutes for cozy home offices. Together, these flexibility-seekers make up a staggering 83% of the job market.

Meanwhile, the traditional 9-to-5 office life? It's becoming an endangered species, with a mere 3% of candidates willing to commit to full-time cubicle dwelling. Even those with "no strong preference" outnumber the office devotees by more than four to one.

The message is crystal clear: companies clinging to pre-pandemic work models risk watching top talent slip through their fingers, while those embracing flexibility have their pick of the candidate pool.

Your Office Mandate Just Eliminated 90% of Your Candidate Pool

Remote work isn't just a perk anymore—it's a dealbreaker. Nearly half of today's job seekers won't even consider a position without flexible work options, and another 40% see it as a significant factor in their decision.

This dramatic shift means that companies stubbornly clinging to traditional office-only policies are essentially removing themselves from consideration by 9 out of 10 potential candidates.

The message couldn't be clearer: flexibility has become the new competitive currency in talent acquisition.

While a small fraction of workers (just over 10%) remain indifferent to where they work, they're increasingly becoming the exception rather than the rule.

For organizations serious about winning the war for talent, the question is no longer whether to offer remote work, but how to make their flexible arrangements stand out in a market where flexibility has become table stakes.

Side Hustles

Income During Unemployment

No Freelance, No Benefits, No Income: 1 in 3 Job Seekers Survive on Nothing

Over one-third of unemployed individuals have no income source whatsoever during their job search, creating a financial reality for millions navigating career transitions.

While freelance work emerges as the most popular income strategy at 20%, followed closely by employment insurance benefits at 19%, these options combined still reach less than half of those seeking work.

The data reveals a troubling gap: even as the gig economy expands and government safety nets exist, a significant portion of job seekers face complete income loss.

Passive income side hustles and part-time jobs round out the income options at 14% and 11% respectively, but their relatively small percentages underscore how difficult it is to maintain financial stability between full-time positions.

41% of Unemployed Women Have Zero Income vs. 31% of Men: The Gender Gap Crisis

Women face a staggering unemployment income gap, with 41% reporting zero earnings compared to just 31% of men—a disparity that translates to real financial hardship for thousands of job seekers.

The freelance economy appears to favor male workers dramatically, with men being 65% more likely to generate income through gig work during unemployment (25% vs 15%).

While government safety nets reach both genders equally at around 19%, this leaves the vast majority to fend for themselves. The data exposes a troubling reality: when traditional employment disappears, women are significantly more likely to find themselves without any financial lifeline, while men more readily pivot to independent work.

This gender divide in unemployment survival strategies suggests deeper systemic barriers that prevent equal access to alternative income sources when they're needed most.

Millennials Weather Unemployment Better Than Any Generation

Millennials have cracked the unemployment income code while their generational neighbors struggle to stay afloat financially.

Nearly half of Gen Z and Boomers—despite being at opposite ends of the career spectrum—find themselves with absolutely no income during job loss, a crushing reality that defies conventional wisdom about experience and adaptability.

The data reveals Millennials as the gig economy champions, with one in four turning to freelance work compared to just 16% of Gen Z, who instead rely heavily on part-time jobs at rates that dwarf every other generation.

Meanwhile, Gen X emerges as the unemployment insurance generation, claiming benefits at rates 28% higher than Gen Z, yet paradoxically rejecting part-time work almost entirely at just 4.6%.

This generational divide exposes how age shapes not just career prospects but survival strategies, with younger workers cobbling together multiple income streams while older generations bet heavily on single sources that may or may not materialize.

Interview Take-Home Projects

Free Labor Interview Projects

Interview or Exploitation? Half of Job Seekers Report Doing Free Work to Get Hired

Nearly half of today's job seekers are essentially working for free during their interview process.

Picture this: spending hours, sometimes days, crafting detailed marketing strategies, designing product mockups, or writing comprehensive business analyses—all under the guise of "assessment."

These aren't simple skills tests; they're full-fledged projects that companies could easily implement or profit from. The line between legitimate evaluation and unpaid consulting has become so blurred that candidates now joke about charging invoicing fees for their interview "homework."

What started as a way to assess practical skills has morphed into a system where desperate job seekers provide free labor, hoping their unpaid work might finally land them a paying position.

Half of Men and Women Work for Free in Interviews

The gender breakdown reveals a surprising twist in the free labor interview experience.

While female and male job seekers report nearly identical rates of completing unpaid interview projects—hovering right around the 50% mark—non-binary candidates tell a strikingly different story.

Only 29% of non-binary respondents say they've been asked to complete work that felt like free labor, compared to their cisgender counterparts.

This dramatic difference raises intriguing questions:

• Are non-binary individuals applying to different types of roles or companies with more ethical hiring practices?
• Are they more selective about which interview processes they're willing to engage with?
• Are they more likely to walk away when asked to complete extensive unpaid work?

Whatever the reason, this data suggests that the interview experience varies significantly across gender identities, with non-binary job seekers somehow dodging the unpaid labor bullet that hits half of all other candidates.

Why Half of Workers Under 60 Do Free Labor to Get Jobs

The generational divide in unpaid interview work tells a story of changing workplace expectations.

Three generations, Gen Z, Millennials, and Gen X, are locked in a near-perfect 50/50 split, with roughly half of each cohort reporting they've completed interview projects that felt like free labor.

This remarkable consistency across three decades of workers suggests that extensive unpaid assessments have become a standard gatekeeping mechanism in modern hiring.

But then there's the plot twist: Baby Boomers. Only one-third of Boomer respondents have experienced this practice, making them twice as likely as younger generations to escape unpaid interview assignments.

Whether this reflects their seniority, their industries, or simply their power to say "no" to unreasonable requests, Boomers appear to operate in a different hiring universe, one where proving your worth doesn't require working for free.

The data paints a clear picture: if you were born after 1965, there's a coin-flip chance your next job interview will include an unpaid consulting gig.

58% of Minimum Wage Seekers Do Free Labor for Interviews

The relationship between salary expectations and unpaid interview work defies conventional wisdom.

You might expect that higher-paying positions would demand more rigorous assessments, but the data tells a different story, one shaped like a U. Job seekers at the bottom of the salary ladder, those pursuing positions under $30,000, face the highest rate of free labor requests at nearly 58%.

The rate drops significantly for middle-income positions, bottoming out at 43% for the $30,000-$49,999 range. But then something unexpected happens: as salary expectations climb, so does the likelihood of doing unpaid work, reaching 55% for those seeking $150,000+ positions. This U-shaped pattern suggests two distinct exploitation dynamics at play.

At the low end, desperate job seekers competing for scarce opportunities may feel they have no choice but to complete whatever is asked. At the high end, companies may justify extensive unpaid projects as necessary to assess complex skills for senior roles.

Only in the middle, where workers have some leverage but positions aren't prestigious enough to justify elaborate assessments, do job seekers find relative refuge from the free labor trap.

Pay Transparency Response

Pay Transparency Application Rate

77% of Candidates Still Apply When Employers Hide the Pay

Despite the growing push for salary transparency in job postings, a striking 77.4% of job seekers still apply to positions even when compensation isn't disclosed.

This overwhelming majority suggests that candidates are willing to invest their time and effort in the application process despite the uncertainty around pay.

Only about 1 in 4 job seekers (22.6%) take a firm stance against this practice, choosing to skip opportunities that don't provide upfront salary information.

This behavior reveals an interesting dynamic: while candidates increasingly value transparency, most are still willing to engage with employers who keep their cards close to their chest regarding compensation.

Whether driven by curiosity, necessity, or optimism about negotiating power, the vast majority of applicants aren't letting missing salary data stop them from throwing their hat in the ring.

Social Media and the Job Search

Social Media Hiring

1 in 3 Job Seekers Credit Social Media for Getting Noticed or Hired

Social media's impact on job searching appears to be mixed but generally neutral to positive. The majority of job seekers (52.3%) report that social media has had no discernible impact on their job search efforts.

However, a substantial portion (34.5%) found social media beneficial, reporting it helped them get noticed or hired.

This suggests that while social media isn't a game-changer for everyone, it can be a valuable tool for roughly one-third of job seekers. Notably, negative experiences are rare, with only 4.8% reporting that social media hurt their chances.

Additionally, 8.4% don't use social media at all, indicating that while most job seekers are on social platforms, it's still possible to conduct a job search without them.

These findings suggest that job seekers should view social media as a potentially helpful but not essential tool in their job search toolkit, with relatively low risk of negative consequences.

Men Win at Social Media Job Hunting: 40% Report Success vs. 27% of Women

Male job seekers are significantly more likely to leverage social media successfully in their job search, with 99 out of 243 men reporting it helped them get noticed or hired, a contrast to the 53 out of 197 women who experienced the same benefit.

This gender gap reveals a compelling story: while nearly 60% of female job seekers feel social media has no impact on their search, men appear to be cracking the code, with over 40% reporting positive outcomes.

The disparity suggests that either men are more effectively using platforms like LinkedIn to network and showcase their skills, or that recruiters and hiring managers may be responding differently to male versus female profiles.

Interestingly, women are also more likely to avoid social media altogether in their job search, with 21 female respondents opting out entirely compared to just 16 men.

Despite these differences, both genders overwhelmingly avoid negative consequences, with fewer than 6% from either group reporting that social media hurt their chances.

Job Search Sentiment

Emotional Toll of Job Search

1 in 3 Job Seekers Feel Exhausted in Their Search

Emotions run the full spectrum among job seekers, with 164 respondents (36%) maintaining a hopeful outlook despite the challenges they face.

However, the majority tell a different story: 137 individuals (30.1%) report feeling exhausted from their search efforts, while another 113 people (24.8%) describe themselves as stuck, unable to gain traction in their pursuit of new opportunities.

The remaining 41 respondents (9%) feel overwhelmed by the process altogether. This emotional landscape reveals a job market where optimism persists for roughly one in three seekers, but the combined weight of exhaustion, stagnation, and overwhelm affects nearly two-thirds of those actively looking for work, painting a picture of a challenging environment where resilience is constantly tested.

Women Report Double the Rate of Feeling Overwhelmed in Job Search

Gender shapes the emotional landscape of job searching in striking ways. While male job seekers lead with optimism, 99 men (40.7%) report feeling hopeful compared to just 60 women (30.5%), female job seekers carry a heavier emotional burden, with 67 women (34%) describing themselves as exhausted versus 65 men (26.7%).

The gender gap becomes even more pronounced when examining feelings of being overwhelmed: 25 women (12.7%) struggle with this intense stress compared to only 13 men (5.3%), suggesting women face more than double the emotional pressure during their job search.

Among the 66 men and 45 women who feel stuck, both genders show similar frustration levels (27.2% and 22.8% respectively), indicating that the sensation of hitting a wall transcends gender lines.

The small cohort of non-binary respondents offers an intriguing contrast, 3 out of 7 (42.9%) maintain hope despite facing a job market that often lacks inclusive practices, while those who prefer not to disclose their gender identity show the highest exhaustion rate at 37.5%, hinting at additional barriers they may encounter in their search.

Gen Z Jobseekers Are Hopeful, Gen X Battle Exhaustion

Generation Z emerges as the most optimistic cohort, with 34 out of 81 young professionals (42%) maintaining hope despite entering one of the most challenging employment landscapes in decades.

This youthful optimism sharply contrasts with Generation X's experience, where exhaustion dominates, 48 of 131 Gen Xers (36.6%) report feeling drained, carrying the heaviest emotional burden of any generation. Millennials, who dominate the job-seeking population with 225 respondents, find themselves split between hope and hardship: while 83 (36.9%) remain hopeful, another 64 (28.4%) feel exhausted and 56 (24.9%) describe themselves as stuck.

The most striking finding emerges from Baby Boomers, where despite their smaller numbers, 8 out of 18 (44.4%) feel stuck, the highest percentage of any generation experiencing this particular frustration. This suggests that older workers face unique challenges in navigating modern hiring practices.

Across all generations, the feeling of being overwhelmed remains remarkably consistent at 8-10%, indicating that while each generation faces distinct challenges, the intensity of pressure remains relatively stable.

The data reveals a clear exhaustion trajectory that peaks with Gen X, suggesting that mid-career professionals bear the brunt of job search fatigue, caught between the optimism of youth and the resignation that can come with experience.

Layoff Fears

Layoff Anticipation Fears

Nearly Half of Job Seekers Fear Future Layoffs

Nearly half of job seekers are losing sleep over layoff fears. Out of 455 professionals surveyed, a striking 215 individuals (47.3%) admit they're worried about being laid off from their current or next job.

This anxiety isn't just a small pocket of pessimism, it represents almost half the workforce living with the constant fear that their next meeting might be their last. Meanwhile, 240 respondents (52.7%) say they're not worried, suggesting either remarkable job security or perhaps a touch of optimism in an increasingly uncertain market.

The near-even split reveals a workforce divided: for every person confidently planning their next career move, there's another nervously refreshing their email, dreading that automated "Can we talk?" message from HR.

Women Perfectly Divided on Layoff Fears While 55% of Men Feel Secure

The gender divide on job security reveals a striking contrast: while 55.1% of men (134 out of 243) sleep soundly without layoff fears, women are split right down the middle... literally.

Among 197 female professionals, the anxiety is perfectly balanced: 98 women worry about losing their jobs while 99 don't, creating an exact 49.7% to 50.3% split that couldn't be more evenly matched if it tried. Men show notably more confidence in their job security, with only 44.9% (109) expressing layoff concerns.

But the real anxiety spike appears in smaller demographics: those who prefer not to disclose their gender show the highest worry levels at 62.5% (5 out of 8), while non-binary respondents land closer to the male confidence levels with only 42.9% (3 out of 7) worried.

This data paints a picture where gender identity correlates with job security confidence, men feeling safest, women perfectly torn, and those keeping their identity private harboring the deepest concerns.

Gen X at 55% vs Gen Z at 40.7%: The Layoff Anxiety Gap Widens

Gen X is having a midlife crisis about job security. While 55% of Gen Xers (72 out of 131) lie awake worrying about pink slips, their younger counterparts are surprisingly chill, only 40.7% of Gen Z workers (33 out of 81) share those fears.

The generational anxiety ladder tells a compelling story: as workers age from their twenties into their forties, layoff worries steadily climb. Gen Z starts with relative confidence at 40.7% worried, Millennials inch up to 46.2% (104 out of 225 worried), then Gen X hits the anxiety peak at 55%. But here's the plot twist; Baby Boomers flip the script entirely.

Only 6 out of 18 Boomers (33.3%) worry about losing their jobs, making them the most secure-feeling generation of all. Perhaps it's the proximity to retirement, accumulated experience, or simply having survived enough economic downturns to know they'll weather another.

Meanwhile, Gen X finds themselves in the precarious middle, too young to retire, too expensive to keep, watching as 72 of their peers nervously refresh LinkedIn while 59 try to convince themselves everything's fine.

Post-Layoff Fears

Despite AI Hype, Workers More Worried About Paying Bills Than Robot Replacements

Financial insecurity emerges as the overwhelming concern dominating the minds of today's workforce, with nearly 6 out of 10 professionals citing it as their primary layoff fear.

This reality reveals a workforce living paycheck to paycheck, where job loss doesn't just mean career disruption, it means potential financial ruin. The second greatest fear, supporting family members, affects more than 1 in 4 workers and underscores how employment anxiety extends far beyond personal concerns to encompass the wellbeing of loved ones.

Interestingly, despite widespread media coverage about AI disruption, only a small fraction of workers actually fear being replaced by automation, suggesting that immediate financial pressures far outweigh futuristic technology concerns.

The data paints a picture of a workforce more worried about paying bills and maintaining health coverage than adapting to artificial intelligence, highlighting how traditional economic anxieties continue to shape modern career fears.

Hiring Discrimination Trends

Identity Discrimination

Nearly Half of Job Seekers Report Facing Hiring Discrimination Based on Identity

Nearly half of job seekers (47.9%, or 218 out of 455 respondents) believe their race, gender, sexual orientation, or background has negatively impacted their hiring chances.

This finding reveals a job market where perceived discrimination affects almost as many people as those who report no bias (45.9%, or 209 respondents).

Only a small fraction (6.2%, or 28 respondents) preferred not to disclose their experiences. The near-even split between those reporting discrimination and those who don't suggests that bias in hiring remains a pervasive issue, with marginalized candidates facing additional barriers beyond skills and qualifications when seeking employment.

The Further from Male Norms, the Steeper the Hiring Bias

Gender identity dramatically shapes experiences of hiring discrimination, with those who prefer not to disclose their gender facing the harshest reality,62.5% (5 out of 8) report their identity has blocked job opportunities.

Non-binary job seekers face similar odds, with 57.1% (4 out of 7) believing they've been passed over due to who they are.

Women encounter discrimination at alarming rates, with 52.3% (103 out of 197) reporting bias, meaning more than half of female candidates believe their gender has cost them a job.

Even men, traditionally viewed as less affected by gender bias, report significant discrimination at 43.6% (106 out of 243).

The pattern is unmistakable: the further someone's identity deviates from traditional male norms, the more likely they are to face barriers in the hiring process.

With 218 total respondents across all genders reporting discrimination, these numbers reveal a job market where identity often matters as much as, or more than, qualifications.

Job Seekers Who Experience Discrimination Set Higher Salary Expectations

Among 416 job seekers surveyed, a striking pattern emerges: those who believe discrimination has hurt their hiring chances consistently aim for higher compensation targets.

It's important to note that 28 selected "Prefer not to say" to the discrimination question, while 13 chose "Prefer not to say" for the salary question, two people had selected the answer for both, so 39 were removed from this sample.

Of the 212 respondents who reported experiencing discrimination, 69.3% expect salaries of $75,000 or above, compared to just 58.9% of the 204 respondents who haven't faced such barriers.

The gap is particularly pronounced at entry-level positions, where only 4.7% of discrimination-experienced job seekers expect under $30,000 annually, versus 11.3% of their counterparts.

This 10.4 percentage point difference suggests that those who perceive bias in hiring may be strategically positioning themselves for higher-paying roles, possibly viewing increased compensation as validation of their worth or as a buffer against workplace inequities.

The data reveals a complex dynamic where discrimination experience appears to fuel higher salary ambitions, with nearly a quarter (23.6%) of affected job seekers targeting the $75,000-$99,999 range compared to 17.2% of those without discrimination experiences.

This trend could reflect either a defensive career strategy, where marginalized workers demand premium compensation to offset perceived disadvantages, or an empowered approach where past discrimination motivates individuals to pursue roles that better recognize their value and expertise.

Millennials and Gen X Bear the Brunt of Workplace Discrimination

In a striking revelation about generational experiences in the job market, over half of Millennials and Gen X workers report facing discrimination during their careers, painting a troubling picture of bias in hiring practices.

Among 225 Millennials surveyed, a staggering 50.7% (114 individuals) believe their race, gender, sexual orientation, or background has hindered their job prospects, while Gen X shows an even higher rate at 51.1% (67 of 131 respondents).

This stands in sharp contrast to the bookend generations: Gen Z workers report discrimination at just 37.0% (30 of 81 respondents), while Baby Boomers experience it at 38.9% (7 of 18 respondents).

The data reveals a concerning "discrimination peak" that strikes workers in their prime career years, those aged roughly 28-59, when professionals are typically competing for leadership roles, career advancement, and higher-stakes positions.

Interestingly, Gen Z's lower discrimination rates may reflect their relative newcomer status in the workforce, while Baby Boomers' similar rates could indicate either genuine lower discrimination or the privilege of seniority.

What's particularly notable is that 12.3% of Gen Z respondents (10 people) chose not to disclose their discrimination experiences, the highest "prefer not to say" rate among all generations, suggesting that workplace bias discussions may still feel risky for the youngest workers entering today's professional landscape.

Age Discrimination

47% of Job Seekers Report Ageism During Job Search Process

Nearly half of job seekers are encountering age discrimination in their pursuit of employment, with 215 out of 455 respondents (47.3%) reporting some form of ageism during their job search.

The most pervasive tactic employers use is telling candidates they're "overqualified," affecting 93 people (20.4% of all job seekers), a euphemism that often masks age bias behind seemingly legitimate concerns.

Tech skills discrimination follows as the second most common form, with 43 job seekers (9.5%) having their ability to adapt or technical competence questioned based on age assumptions.

Beyond these subtle approaches, 34 candidates (7.5%) faced the unfortunate reality of losing out to younger applicants, while 32 others (7.0%) were immediately dismissed after sharing salary expectations that likely reflected their years of experience.

Most troubling, 13 job seekers (2.9%) endured direct comments about their age or retirement plans during interviews – a brazen violation that reveals how normalized ageism has become in hiring practices.

While 240 job seekers (52.7%) haven't experienced age discrimination, the data exposes a hiring landscape where nearly every other experienced professional faces barriers that have nothing to do with their qualifications.

72% of Gen X Job Seekers Face Age Discrimination – Nearly Double the Rate of Millennials

The brutal reality of age discrimination in the job market reveals a generational divide that hits like a wall at age 40. Generation X workers face the highest rates of age discrimination at 72.5%, with 95 out of 131 job seekers in this cohort reporting some form of ageism during their search.

Baby Boomers experience virtually identical discrimination at 72.2% (13 out of 18 respondents), suggesting that once workers cross into their late 40s and beyond, age bias becomes an almost universal barrier regardless of their actual age within that range.

The contrast with younger generations is staggering: while Millennials face a concerning but more manageable 40.0% discrimination rate (90 out of 225 job seekers), Generation Z enjoys relative protection with only 21.0% experiencing age-related bias (17 out of 81 respondents).

This data exposes a career cliff where the likelihood of facing age discrimination more than triples between Millennials and Gen X, creating a hiring landscape where experience becomes a liability rather than an asset, and where workers over 40 must navigate a job market where nearly three-quarters of their peers encounter age-based barriers to employment.

Men More Likely to Face Age Discrimination Than Women

Male job seekers face a surprisingly higher burden of age discrimination than their female counterparts, with 51.9% of men (126 out of 243) experiencing some form of ageism compared to 42.6% of women (84 out of 197) – a gap of 9.3 percentage points that reveals men are 1.22 times more likely to encounter age-based bias during their job search.

This gender disparity challenges conventional assumptions about workplace discrimination, showing that while nearly half of all job seekers face age-related barriers, men bear a disproportionate share of the burden.

The data suggests that male workers may be particularly vulnerable to certain types of age discrimination, possibly due to different stereotypes and expectations placed on male versus female candidates, or varying perceptions about older men's adaptability, salary expectations, and career longevity.

With more than half of male job seekers reporting age discrimination experiences, this represents a significant obstacle for men navigating career transitions and job searches, particularly as they advance in their careers and face increasingly hostile hiring environments that seem to penalize male experience and seniority at higher rates than female experience.

Mental Health Resignations

Quitting for Mental Health

1 in 3 Workers Have Quit Their Job for Mental Health Reasons

Mental health has emerged as a critical factor in modern workplace decisions, with a striking 137 out of 455 professionals, nearly one in three (30.1%), having made the difficult choice to leave their job for mental health reasons. This significant proportion reveals that mental well-being isn't just a personal concern but a workplace reality that's driving major career decisions across industries.

While the majority of 318 respondents (69.9%) haven't reached this breaking point, the substantial minority who have taken this step highlights the urgent need for employers to prioritize mental health support and create psychologically safe work environments.

The fact that 137 individuals were willing to sacrifice job security and income for their mental well-being underscores just how severe workplace mental health challenges have become.

Women 40% More Likely Than Men to Quit Jobs for Mental Health Reasons

The intersection of gender identity and mental health job departures reveals striking disparities in workplace experiences.

Among the 455 survey respondents, female professionals show a significantly higher likelihood of leaving jobs for mental health reasons, with 69 out of 197 women (35.0%) making this difficult decision compared to 61 out of 243 men (25.1%).

The pattern becomes even more pronounced among smaller gender identity groups, where non-binary respondents reported the highest rate at 42.9% (3 out of 7), and those who prefer not to disclose their gender identity showed an alarming 50% rate (4 out of 8 respondents).

This 10-percentage-point gap between female and male respondents, combined with the even higher rates among non-binary and non-disclosed gender identities, suggests that marginalized gender groups face disproportionate mental health challenges in the workplace, potentially due to discrimination, lack of inclusive policies, or additional stressors related to their identity in professional environments.

Millennials More Than Twice as Likely as Gen Z to Quit Jobs for Mental Health

The generational divide in workplace mental health reveals a striking pattern that challenges assumptions about younger workers' resilience. Millennials lead the exodus from jobs for mental health reasons, with an alarming 85 out of 225 respondents (37.8%) making this difficult choice, more than double the rate of any other generation.

Generation X follows at 35 out of 131 (26.7%), while surprisingly, the youngest workers in Generation Z show the lowest rate at just 14 out of 81 (17.3%), and Baby Boomers at 3 out of 18 (16.7%).

This data suggests that Millennials, now in their prime working years, are bearing the brunt of workplace mental health challenges, possibly due to entering their careers during economic uncertainty, facing intense workplace demands, or having greater awareness and willingness to prioritize mental health over traditional job security.

Staying for the Benefits

Golden Handcuff Retention

Half of Workers Stay in Jobs They Hate to Keep Their Benefits, Equity, or Visa

The modern workplace presents a distinct reality: professionals are trapped in jobs they dislike, held hostage by the very benefits meant to support them.

While nearly half of workers have the luxury of walking away from unsatisfying positions, the majority find themselves in a different predicament, trading daily fulfillment for long-term security.

The golden handcuffs of healthcare benefits, retirement plans, and insurance coverage keep the largest group of these reluctant employees tethered to their desks, unwilling to risk losing coverage that could cost thousands of dollars to replace.

Meanwhile, a smaller but determined segment endures workplace misery for the promise of equity payouts, betting their present happiness against future financial freedom.

At the far end of this spectrum, visa-dependent workers face perhaps the most difficult choice of all, staying in jobs they despise because leaving could mean losing their legal right to remain in the country.

This reality exposes fundamental tension: the gap between what we need to survive and what we need to thrive, forcing millions to choose security over satisfaction in a system where having both feels increasingly out of reach.

Lower-Income Workers More Likely to Quit Bad Jobs Than High Earners

The American workplace reveals a cruel irony: those who earn the least possess the most freedom to escape toxic jobs, while high earners find themselves imprisoned by their own success.

Lower-income workers, earning under $75,000, demonstrate a remarkable willingness to walk away from positions that damage their wellbeing, with over half choosing to leave rather than endure misery for a paycheck. These workers, often living paycheck to paycheck, understand that no amount of money is worth sacrificing their mental health and dignity.

In contrast, six-figure earners become increasingly trapped as their salaries climb, with those earning over $150,000 being the most likely to remain in jobs they despise.

The cruel mathematics of modern employment means that premium health insurance, generous retirement matching, and stock options create golden handcuffs that tighten with every raise.

What appears to be financial freedom actually becomes a prison, where the very benefits designed to improve quality of life end up destroying it by making escape financially impossible.

Job Search Challenges

Job Seeker Struggles

1 in 5 Job Seekers Say Application Processes Are Their Biggest Career Obstacle

The Q2 2025 job search landscape reveals a challenging environment where job seekers face multiple systemic barriers. The top challenge is the Application Process (77 respondents), with candidates frustrated by repetitive form-filling on antiquated systems like Workday and Oracle, despite already providing comprehensive resumes.

This is closely followed by No Response/Ghosting (45 respondents), where employers fail to provide basic feedback or acknowledgment, leaving candidates in uncertainty after investing significant time and effort in applications and interviews.

Technology-related challenges are also prominent, with AI/Automation Issues affecting 31 respondents who struggle with impersonal, poorly implemented AI screening systems that often fail to properly evaluate candidates.

The Interview Process (50 respondents) presents additional hurdles through lengthy multi-round assessments and testing procedures that sometimes feel like unpaid labor. Perhaps most concerning is the emergence of Fake/Questionable Jobs (4 respondents), where job seekers question the legitimacy of postings, suspecting companies already have internal candidates or are using postings for data collection rather than genuine hiring.

These challenges collectively paint a picture of a hiring ecosystem that has become increasingly impersonal, inefficient, and sometimes deceptive, creating significant friction for job seekers trying to navigate an already competitive market.

Salary Expectations

Job Seeker Salary Expectations

Six-Figure Dreams: 43% of Job Seekers Target $100K+ Salaries

The job market is witnessing a dramatic shift in salary expectations, with job seekers setting their sights remarkably high. Nearly half of all professionals are now targeting six-figure salaries, refusing to settle for anything less than $100,000 annually.

The most coveted salary bracket has become the $100,000-$149,999 range, attracting over one in five job seekers, while an equally ambitious group is pushing even further, demanding over $150,000. What's particularly striking is how few professionals are willing to accept lower-tier positions – only 33 respondents are considering roles under $30,000, signaling a fundamental transformation in how workers value their skills and time.

This isn't just optimism; it's a reflection of a job market where talent holds unprecedented leverage, and professionals are finally demanding compensation that matches their worth.