Why I don't bother

jdturk

Truegho wrote: »

And whilst we're on the subject of paper and postage, another thing that these employers are doing now is, rather than sending you an applicaton pack in the post, expecting you to download it from their site, print it out yourself and then send it off. This can be an absolute PAIN, especially when there are near TWENTY pages of these accursed forms to print out, thus wearing out your expensive printer refills faster than you would like!

It is just ridiculous. The apathy of these companies is just unbelievable.

We poor unemployed aren't half being treated like dog muck now in this country. GRRRR!!

Oh come on! OTT. You're hardly being treated like 'dog muck' when being asked to fill an application form out are ......not the most oppressive thing that could happen to you is it!

dickydonkin

I think I am missing something here.

You get a response - Sorry, you have not been successful.

You don't get a response - Obviously, you have not been successful.

The difference being............................?

And as for online applications - most downloadable application forms can usually be completed and sent electronically - how simple is that?

It saves faffing on with and paying for stamps, envelopes and you usually get an automated response of acceptance.

So you give them all that - the only thing they don't seem to want is a list of people you have shagged - and they still don't bother to reply. How incredibly rude! They ask for your private details and say that they won't consider your application if you don't provide them

I would imagine this is to ensure that ethnic minorities, sexual orientation, people with disabilities etc. are all being fairly considered for a role and are not being discriminated against in the recruitment process.

I would expect many large organisations have their recruitment policy audited to ensure fairness in the selection process and reduce the risk of discrimination.

This may not be the case, but that is my take on why seemingly personal questions are asked. Someone from HR could probably give the why's and wherefore's of this requirement.

From memory, these questions are usually on a 'tick box' type of form and I am sure the majority of them have a "Prefer not to say" option so you can still send in the form to ensure you will be considered without divulging anything you may seem over sensitive.

As for the shagging - well that would certainly raise a few eyebrows - among other things!

westv

dpassmore wrote: »

I think I am missing something here.

Yes I think you are.

SueC_2

hubb wrote: »

After being made redundant last year and having decent qualifications I thought applying for jobs would give me a decent enough chance. ALL jobs I applied for, basic and skilled (according to my qualifications and experience) didn't even get me an interview or indeed a notification of failure.

I am sick of taking time to fill in application forms requiring personal information that they must keep and not getting a thing back.

I am part self employed working from home producing music and images and I will have to make this work as it's so dire and depressing out there. As I suffer depression and have low self confidence this isn't good for me which is why I now don't bother.

Rant over.

I can completely see why you feel that way, it is an absolutely soul destroying situation. But, to be frank, are you familiar with the expression 'cutting off your nose to spite your face'?

You want a job. You need a job. A job isn't going to come knocking at your door looking for you. The only way for you to get a job is to persevere. And when you're all done persevering, persevere some more.

If you suffer from depression and low self confidence, one of the worst places for you to be is shut up in your home, on your own, day in and day out. All that is going to achieve is making you feel even more isolated and worthless.

Hard as it may be, you need to force yourself to get out and about and find ways of improving your self-confidence (clubs / classes / voluntary work / counselling / group therapy / meeting friends - whatever works for you).

As you start feeling more positive this will start to come across in the job applications you're making. Sooner or later (and to be honest it will probably be later not sooner) you will be successful. But this is all completely and utterly dependent on you continuing to try.

I'm not trying to belittle your situation at all - it is tough, unfair, and all round generally horrible. But please, please, don't give up!

dickydonkin

westv wrote: »

Yes I think you are.

Well OK westv then enlighten me - nobody has been able to convince me on this thread what difference it makes whether a job candidate receives a communication telling them that THEIR APPLICATION WILL NOT BE PROGRESSED or not.

As I stated earlier - You get a negative response - you have not got the job.
You get no response - You still have not got the job.

Either way, it doesn't change a thing!

In any case, such communications are akin to 'Dear John' letters IMO.

It cannot make you feel any better, in fact, if someone is having a 'bad day' it would arguably make them feel worse.

Certainly a company does not have a legal requirement to do so and for those who think it as a moral duty is living on a different planet.

I have recently seen a pile of applications for a part time job and the person who was sifting the applications was not from the HR department, but the person who would ultimately be the successful applicants manager. IMO, the fairest and surest way to get the right person as she knew the person spec that was required.

This manager spent a lot of time just sifting the hundreds of applications and this had to be done alongside her busy day to day schedule.

After considering EVERY application and creating a 'short list' she then sent the details to the HR dept who then organised the interview process.

It is just unrealistic to respond to every candidate who applies for a job, and until someone can provide a sensible answer as to why it is so important to receive a negative response from a recruiter and what difference it makes, then please someone tell me - criticise my views by all means, but provide a valid argument to discount them!

jdturk

dpassmore wrote: »

Well OK westv then enlighten me - nobody has been able to convince me on this thread what difference it makes whether a job candidate receives a communication telling them that THEIR APPLICATION WILL NOT BE PROGRESSED or not.

It is akin to a 'Dear John' letter IMO.

It cannot make you feel any better, in fact, if someone is having a 'bad day' it would arguably make them feel worse.

Certainly a company does not have a legal requirement to do so and for those who think it as a moral duty is living on a different planet.

I have recently seen a pile of applications for a part time job and the person who was sifting the applications was not from the HR department, but the person who would ultimately be the successful applicants manager. IMO, the fairest and surest way to get the right person as she knew the person spec that was required.

This manager spent a lot of time just sifting the hundreds of applications and this had to be done alongside her busy day to day schedule.

After considering EVERY application and creating a 'short list' she then sent the details to the HR dept who then organised the interview process.

It is just unrealistic to respond to every candidate who applies for a job, and until someone can provide a sensible answer as to why it is so important to receive a negative response from a recruiter and what difference it makes, then please someone tell me - criticise my views by all means, but provide a valid argument to discount them!

I agree! .............

westv

dpassmore wrote: »

Well OK westv then enlighten me - nobody has been able to convince me on this thread what difference it makes whether a job candidate receives a communication telling them that THEIR APPLICATION WILL NOT BE PROGRESSED or not.

As I stated earlier - You get a negative response - you have not got the job.
You get no response - You still have not got the job.

Either way, it doesn't change a thing!

In any case, such communications are akin to 'Dear John' letters IMO.

It cannot make you feel any better, in fact, if someone is having a 'bad day' it would arguably make them feel worse.

Certainly a company does not have a legal requirement to do so and for those who think it as a moral duty is living on a different planet.

I have recently seen a pile of applications for a part time job and the person who was sifting the applications was not from the HR department, but the person who would ultimately be the successful applicants manager. IMO, the fairest and surest way to get the right person as she knew the person spec that was required.

This manager spent a lot of time just sifting the hundreds of applications and this had to be done alongside her busy day to day schedule.

After considering EVERY application and creating a 'short list' she then sent the details to the HR dept who then organised the interview process.

It is just unrealistic to respond to every candidate who applies for a job, and until someone can provide a sensible answer as to why it is so important to receive a negative response from a recruiter and what difference it makes, then please someone tell me - criticise my views by all means, but provide a valid argument to discount them!

No it is not unrealistic. As I said a standard "sorry you were unsuccessful" email would take a few minutes to send out to those who were interviewed. All the company would need to do is add the email addresses to one email.
Why is it so important? It's important because it's part of being informed good or bad. I agree that it won't make the candidate feel any better but isn't being informed better than being uninformed?
Perhaps it's a bit like a delay on the train. You know that the problem is being delt with as quickly as possible and you know that being told what the problem is won't make it go any quicker but it's still nice to be told what the problem is.

SueC_2

westv wrote: »

Perhaps it's a bit like a delay on the train. You know that the problem is being delt with as quickly as possible and you know that being told what the problem is won't make it go any quicker but it's still nice to be told what the problem is.

Or like being thanked for holding a door open for someone. It doesn't make any difference. You've already held the door open. You held it open because you're polite, not because of what they'd think or do as a result. But it's still nice to have them acknowledge what you've done and appreciate your effort. Even if they didn't particularly need you to hold the door open for them in the first place.

dickydonkin

SueC wrote: »

Or like being thanked for holding a door open for someone. It doesn't make any difference. You've already held the door open. You held it open because you're polite, not because of what they'd think or do as a result. But it's still nice to have them acknowledge what you've done and appreciate your effort. Even if they didn't particularly need you to hold the door open for them in the first place.

Which is correct (if I may use your analogy), but what if there is only one person and there are many doors to open?
That does not make that person any less polite, but it just is not feasible to open every door.

No it is not unrealistic. As I said a standard "sorry you were unsuccessful" email would take a few minutes to send out to those who were interviewed. All the company would need to do is add the email addresses to one email.
Why is it so important? It's important because it's part of being informed good or bad. I agree that it won't make the candidate feel any better but isn't being informed better than being uninformed?

Not really for one of the reasons I gave earlier - it may make someone who may be depressed or down because of their employment situation feel somewhat worse after a letter of rejection - and that is what some people may think such a communication is.

Yes, you are being informed - but the outcome is the same as if you were not.

As I said a standard "sorry you were unsuccessful" email would take a few minutes to send out to those who were interviewed. All the company would need to do is add the email addresses to one email.

And if they don't have an email account? - which many people don't.

westv

dpassmore wrote: »

Not really for one of the reasons I gave earlier - it may make someone who may be depressed or down because of their employment situation feel somewhat worse after a letter of rejection - and that is what some people may think such a communication is.

Yes, you are being informed - but the outcome is the same as if you were not.

So you think it's less depressing for candidates to think they are being ignored rather than being informed?