Unlikely knockbacks....frustrating

geordieracer

So i got 2 knockbacks for interviews today saying i didnt meet the criteria for the jobs... Now this was interesting as the jobs i was going for are EXACTLY the same as the job i used to do befor ei took a break to go travelling for a little while..

Now i properly studied the full job description and all the bumf that was on the site so im at a loss as to why on earth i never got an interview.. Though secretkly i think it was because im very young to be in the position i was in but theres no way to know..

Or can i ask them what i didnt match up on? Ive not really gone for a job for a few years as i progressed through my company wso unsure how it all works,.

T800

You can ask for feedback, but it is up to them to give you any. At the moment, you claim there might have been age discrimination, since 2006 this has been made illegal discrimination. The process, if you choose to go further on this route, would be to find out who got the job ultimately and to find out what their skills and experiences are compared to your own. At the same time, there is ALOT of competition for jobs. As part of my own job involves recruiting new staff, it is difficult because there are some very qualified and experienced people all competing for the same position. Strong candidates, who may be surprised to realise they dont get an interview. Perhaps the break in employment (going travelling) means that your employment record is not as consistent as others who have been continually employed.

geordieracer

T800 wrote: »

You can ask for feedback, but it is up to them to give you any. At the moment, you claim there might have been age discrimination, since 2006 this has been made illegal discrimination. The process, if you choose to go further on this route, would be to find out who got the job ultimately and to find out what their skills and experiences are compared to your own. At the same time, there is ALOT of competition for jobs. As part of my own job involves recruiting new staff, it is difficult because there are some very qualified and experienced people all competing for the same position. Strong candidates, who may be surprised to realise they dont get an interview. Perhaps the break in employment (going travelling) means that your employment record is not as consistent as others who have been continually employed.

Yeah i understand there was probably a lot of people going for this job but i have worked in the role for the last 6 years and been in the industry for 14 since i left school so im at a loss to see who could be giving more - even just for interview..

The break was only for 6 months though - not a long break in time at all i wouldve thought...

Savvy_Sue

but did your application 'tick all the boxes'? You say that you've done the job before, but did your application demonstrate that?

heretolearn_2

Few options here

1) You shouldn't take the 'didn't meet criteria' seriously. It's a standard sort of phrase and that's probably what they told every single person who didn't get interview. No firm goes through all the applicants to give them a personalised response as to why they weren't shortlisted. So it's possible that you are right in that you met the criteria, but there were other reasons you weren't shortlisted. Age MIGHT be the reason. But when I am shortlisted people get stuck in the 'no' pile for all sorts of reasons. CV's got spelling and grammar errors in it? You don't care about the quality of what you do so you are out. You didn't follow the application instructions to the letter (i.e. I've asked for a cover letter and you think 'please find CV enclosed' counts)? You can't follow procedures or simple instructions, so you are out. By the time I've weeded out the people who really don't meet the criteria or have made careless mistakes, I then have to look for other ways to get down to a reasonable number to interview. Sometimes geography - someone who lives 2 miles away is more appealing to us than someone who lives 25 miles away. So you don't know why you weren't shortlisted. You could ask for feedback but you probably won't get anything useful.

2) As someone else said - you know you meet the criteria but did you really spell everything out in your application? They can't make any assumptions at all. It's no good thinking, well, I've done that job so it's obvious I know how to X. You need to tell them all about your experience and qualifications in X. Do that for every single item they ask for.

Mk14:37

I met all the criteria for the first full time job I ever applied for and was (in my opinion!) a very suitable candidate for the job. However, I didn't spell it out on the application form, figuring that it was easy enough to deduce from my work experience etc.

I now know that in the 'additional information' you really have to detail how you meet all the essential criteria to have any chance of landing the interview.

Person_one

heretolearn wrote: »

Few options here

1) You shouldn't take the 'didn't meet criteria' seriously. It's a standard sort of phrase and that's probably what they told every single person who didn't get interview. No firm goes through all the applicants to give them a personalised response as to why they weren't shortlisted. So it's possible that you are right in that you met the criteria, but there were other reasons you weren't shortlisted. Age MIGHT be the reason. But when I am shortlisted people get stuck in the 'no' pile for all sorts of reasons. CV's got spelling and grammar errors in it? You don't care about the quality of what you do so you are out. You didn't follow the application instructions to the letter (i.e. I've asked for a cover letter and you think 'please find CV enclosed' counts)? You can't follow procedures or simple instructions, so you are out. By the time I've weeded out the people who really don't meet the criteria or have made careless mistakes, I then have to look for other ways to get down to a reasonable number to interview. Sometimes geography - someone who lives 2 miles away is more appealing to us than someone who lives 25 miles away. So you don't know why you weren't shortlisted. You could ask for feedback but you probably won't get anything useful.

2) As someone else said - you know you meet the criteria but did you really spell everything out in your application? They can't make any assumptions at all. It's no good thinking, well, I've done that job so it's obvious I know how to X. You need to tell them all about your experience and qualifications in X. Do that for every single item they ask for.

That's a bit depressing. I've been applying for the same sort of job but at various different locations, after lots of interviews about 20 miles away (nearest city, easy commute) I finally got offered one 4 miles away. I'm glad to have an offer but I hate to think it was distance that kept me out of work longer than necessary!

OP, unfortunately so many people are looking for work at the moment that meeting all the criteria isn't enough. If employers interviewed everyone who did they'd have to meet dozens or hundreds! You have to offer something extra, you know that incredibly useful special skill you have that they didn't know that they needed that you previously would mention at interview? Well these days it needs to go on the application!

Evilm

It means nothing I'm afraid. Having been refused with that excuse many times its become obvious they've had a lot of candidates apply and you probably lost out on a petty thing as small as layout of CV, subjects of education or even purely just random choice out of a pile of 10 equally good CV's.

LondonDiva

Not to be rude, but I would review your spelling etc on the application form.

We've just closed a junior admin post (330 applicants in 3 days) a more senior admin role (238 in 2 days) and a junior manager role (91 in 1 day) and the first criteria for culling is spelling and writing ability - the person spec for all includes "attention to detail, good written English".

Poor spelling etc implies a lack of care or willingness to impress when they need to show their best side; what are they like when they have the job & I have to jump through hoops to get rid of them?

By reading the supporting statement first, I can get rid of about 40-60% of applications just from those who have 3+ spelling and punctuation errors.

After that, I can start to take into account what they say in the supportign statement & if that's any good, I look at the rest of the application form.

heretolearn_2

'If employers interviewed everyone who did they'd have to meet dozens or hundreds!'

That's the really essential point to grasp. So other things are used to shortlist out of the ones who do basically qualify for the job.

I really suspect that if you did meet all the criteria and have the experience, then if you don't get interviewed it's either something you can't control (i.e. distance) or you've shot yourself in the foot in some way.

In my experience it's mainly by

not bothering to tell us how you meet the criteria - I know I'm banging on about this but some people just don't 'get' how to apply for a job. Take this point (again) to heart. The employer cannot take anything for granted or make any assumptions about your skills and experience whatsoever. You have to spell it out. Item by item. Please don't think that your previous job titles etc do this for you - they don't. If we need experience in a certain software, tell us about your experience. We can't assume you've even seen it otherwise, no matter if it's the industry standard, no matter if your previous job title would normally include using it. You don't mention it - it doesn't exist as part of your application. Likewise soft skills - what are they asking for. Teamwork? Initiative? Mention these things.

USE the cover letter. This is where you sell yourself. Most people these days just waste it totally by stating 'here is my CV'. I guess they don't teach people how to write these any more?

Spelling/grammar seem petty to some people. But they are an indicator of how much care you put into something as vital as a job application. If you can't be bothered to get that right, then odds on you won't be at all bothered about the quality of the boring routine day-to-day stuff that every job includes. Everyone makes the odd typo, human nature, but if your attitude is 'don't really care' on top of that, your work won't be fit to be going out to clients etc. Plus, it's just bad manners to tell me that you don't think this application was important enough to pay attention to, and makes me think you aren't serious.

sagalout1954

Join the club. I still can't understand why I wasn't shortlisted for 2 jobs I applied for given that I was perfectly suited for the roles...........along with about 40 others who felt exactly the same (& forty more who didn't meet exactly all the criteria)!

To get to the 'shortlist' position an employer must cull ruthlessly so no point in taking it personally. Someone who runs courses in the whole recruitment process recently told me there are so many applications nowadays for every role, he has even resorted to discarding those who's paper isn't white enough!!!*** He also prefers those who use their supporting statement to tell a sort of story rather than the more factual type (but agrees that others prefer the opposite).

It can be a simple process of personal taste of the shortlister, you've just got to keep trying (might be wise to see if someone can look over your application 'style' to see if you really are selling yourself as best you can). Some useful tips in some of the responses here.