What's worse to have on a resume? An irrelevant job or an employment gap?

Employment gap.

Because, at least, with an irrelevant job, you were working. They just want to know that you were working. Whatever the job. They want someone who worked / works. Work is work. So, really, there's actually no such thing as an "irrelevant" job. If it's a job, it's not "irrelevant." A job is a job is a job, whatever the job is. They would rather hire someone who does what society thinks of as "irrelevant" than to hire someone who won't work.

0

an employment gap

The presumption is that it was Jail time, or worse, mental health issues you are trying to avoid.

.

Maje it sound relevant as possible

A gap is worse.

List the job, with the dates, but not enough info to make it obvious that the job is irrelevant.

Drop the months; just show years.

Employment gap may look worse, and then if you put it, there is a chance that you would be asked about it in the interview, and you would have to explain it well. If you do put an irrelevant job, don't focus too much on it, so it doesn't take too much space. Probably just state the name of the place you worked and the time period, since its irrelevant the potential employer may not ask anything, and even if they do, you would be able to answer their questions, and it may be easier than explaining a gap.

The employment gap. If you have an irrelevant job in your history, the appropriate thing to do is to show it, but not waste much space on your resume talking about it.

Listing irrelevant jobs are a waste of time to be listing on your resume.

Having gaps can be explained in a job interview, if the gaps between relevant jobs listed are for long periods of time, that's a red flag indicating you must be job hopping which is not a good thing at all. This is a common occurrence in low level jobs.

A gap looks worse ..............................................