> If I were evaluating who I was then as a potential hire today, I’d probably consider me a risky hire with unknown potential
You would be wrong. The most important indicator the hiring manager saw in you is that you worked in academia. Hiring someone who worked in academia and also learned to code on the side is a lot different than hiring a middle aged soccer mom whose MLM scheme didn't work out. Both may have a 3 month bootcamp under their belt, but one has an entirely different work ethic.
That specific example seems sorta yikes opinion for somebody with hiring power. Aren't people who get targeted by MLMs victims? More importantly, what does that say about how hard they work? Or being a mom?
It‘s a stereotype for the sake of a stereotype. I don‘t think anyone identifies with such a narrow unrealistic stereotype, so there is no point in arguing for an entirely hypothetical marginalized group.
By the way, hiring is all about judging people‘s past work, and I‘m sorry to pop your bubble if you think past MLM work or having large gaps in your employment history doesn‘t reflect bad on anyone.
You would be wrong. The most important indicator the hiring manager saw in you is that you worked in academia. Hiring someone who worked in academia and also learned to code on the side is a lot different than hiring a middle aged soccer mom whose MLM scheme didn't work out. Both may have a 3 month bootcamp under their belt, but one has an entirely different work ethic.