[asveikau]

You've got to be careful about assuming things about what people can do based on prior positions.

Speaking personally, I have been employed doing windowsy things for ~10 years, probably being typecast by my stint at Microsoft, but I am willing to bet I can out-unix a very sizeable chunk of candidates who think of themselves as Unix people. (Did some Linux kernel hacking in spare time, have been a home user of different *BSDs for ~17 years, learned C on Unix.. none of this you can tell from my resume)

Not to mention skills from one niche often transfer to another, and smart people with generally applicable skills can cope with the differences pretty quickly.

[aeorgnoieang]

> (Did some Linux kernel hacking in spare time, have been a home user of different *BSDs for ~17 years, learned C on Unix.. none of this you can tell from my resume)

Maybe you should add that stuff to your resume. I include 'skills' that weren't necessarily relevant to any particular job.

[asveikau]

I think such a section would likely be ignored or not understood, and the problem being described is that people brand you as this or that based on work experience. People may even consider it a red flag that you list skills you didn't work with in your most recent position.

[aeorgnoieang]

Most people with which I've interviewed recently seem to understand that lots of tech people do significant work outside of their formal employment.

But I also wasn't imagining a separate section. I have a "skills" section and that's where I'd imagine adding the things about which I was responding.

> People may even consider it a red flag that you list skills you didn't work with in your most recent position.

I could understand this somewhat if someone had been at their most recent position for a decade but for anything less than that it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to include things one might not have used, or used frequently, at the single most recent position.