I agree, there's a lot of context missing whenever a resume gets binned on something seemingly arbitrary, but when you're in a hiring position and you have 1000 resumes, its easy to just toss 900 of those out for arbitrary reasons before contacting the remaining 100.

Maybe there are very good reasons you left jobs after 1 year or less, but from the hiring manager's perspective, its not worth their time when there are 100 resumes to choose of people who never left a job in less than 2 years.

Don't worry though, this isn't the same high-pass filter everyone is applying, and your resume is likely to make it past filters elsewhere.

I understand the rationale here given the company stage/scale. I recently had a similar discussion with the hiring manager on the same topic where the conclusion is pretty much the same - focusing on minimising false positives, rather than keeping account for false negatives.

There is nothing wrong with this obviously, just statistically speaking you might still miss out on very good talent (not referring to myself by any means).

From my personal experience though, I wouldn't know if that was the reason why the CV was tossed, but once transitioned into the interview stage it was never the issue.