Agency can't put you forward as you aren't working?

SarEl

But what stand are you expecting agencies to make? They are brokers, nothing more. They cannot tell an employer who they must employ, and any agency who does will queickly find that they have no client.

That is, of course, assumingt that they are telling the truth. It is still a fact that there is nothing more than their word for what has happened, and it is always easier to blame someone else rather than say it is your own decision.

LadyMissA

SarEl wrote: »

But what stand are you expecting agencies to make? They are brokers, nothing more. They cannot tell an employer who they must employ, and any agency who does will queickly find that they have no client.

That is, of course, assumingt that they are telling the truth. It is still a fact that there is nothing more than their word for what has happened, and it is always easier to blame someone else rather than say it is your own decision.

So you think the agencies are the ones descriminating? Not very fair is it as when I was in work they were all bending over to get me on their books.

Agencies have been saying that to me since I was out of work 1 month and the longer it goes the longer I am out of work.

Not who they must employ but at least give people a chance at interview. If I had been on maternity leave I could just walk back into a job and how does anyone expect people out of work through no fault of their own get back into work.

I have even spoken to employers on the phone who have assumed (as they haven't read my cv properly) that I was still working who when they realise cut the call short.

Makes me so angry - there is no hope for me unless I make up a lie to fill in the gap on my CV that I am sure many others do!

SarEl

I don't disagree with you that it isn't fair for an employer or agency to judge people purely on their employment status (although it isn't discrimination - not legally) - but unfortunately some do and it's just a fact of life. It is especially true of longer term unemployed people. And if you had been on maternity leave and lost your job you could not "walk back into a job" - you would find it even harder because you would be unemployed and a mother of a young child. if you don't know what some employers make of that then you you haven't been out much. The only way that a woman on maternity leave walks back into a job is if she has a job to go back to. And you have noticed how despite the protections of the law, employers keep managing to find ways of making women on maternity leave redundant?

Did you go back to the employer who readvertised the job you could have had a trial for? At least they did seem interested enough to want to see how it worked out.

LadyMissA

SarEl wrote: »

I don't disagree with you that it isn't fair for an employer or agency to judge people purely on their employment status (although it isn't discrimination - not legally) - but unfortunately some do and it's just a fact of life. It is especially true of longer term unemployed people. And if you had been on maternity leave and lost your job you could not "walk back into a job" - you would find it even harder because you would be unemployed and a mother of a young child. if you don't know what some employers make of that then you you haven't been out much. The only way that a woman on maternity leave walks back into a job is if she has a job to go back to. And you have noticed how despite the protections of the law, employers keep managing to find ways of making women on maternity leave redundant?

Did you go back to the employer who readvertised the job you could have had a trial for? At least they did seem interested enough to want to see how it worked out.

No I do not mean if you had lost a job when on maternity I mean someone on maternity hasn't worked for a year yet they are still ok to go back to work where as someone who has lost their job is deemed to be brainless and unable to go back into the work place.

Well no I dont know about women on maternity leave being made redundant as one at my old job left for her leave 5 weeks after I was made redundant then then they covered her role for a year and now shes back (but looking for a new job).

SarEl

LadyMissA wrote: »

No I do not mean if you had lost a job when on maternity I mean someone on maternity hasn't worked for a year yet they are still ok to go back to work where as someone who has lost their job is deemed to be brainless and unable to go back into the work place.

Well no I dont know about women on maternity leave being made redundant as one at my old job left for her leave 5 weeks after I was made redundant then then they covered her role for a year and now shes back (but looking for a new job).

You can read plenty of stories of just this on these boards. And it wouldn't be the first time that I have come across employers who think women who give birth (or, in some cases, women in general) are brainless. The legislation on discrimination and the protections for women on maternity leave (such as they are) really are, despite some opinions, there for a reason.

LadyMissA

I would have been better off if I had been pregnant, not that I ever would be or just out of prison

SarEl

I give up - there is no reasoning with you.

magenta22

Red_Elle wrote: »

That will depend entirely on the agency and I would say only really bad agencies work like this!

I am the MD of a specialist Accountancy agency. My customers are my clients AND my candidates. Candidates may not pay me, but they are just as important in the whole process. Today candidates become tomorrows clients if you do your job well.

It frustrates me that people expect poor service from an agency. If you get poor service, find a better Consultant.

And without the candidates, they will have no clients as no-one to fill their vacancies which is what a lot of agencies forget.

People expect poor performance from agencies because they get it from a lot of them.

I get what you mean about registering with so many agencies but you have to do that when you are looking for something because if you stick with one or two only, you may be missing out on other roles as some companies have their preferred agency.

I went for one interview where they emailed and implied they had had applications in excess of 100, but in the interview they said it was actually 20 applications and they whittled that down to 5.

I've also found a couple of times where a role is advertised as one thing and then get that they have changed the role completely!

Red-Elle, I would perhaps really appreciate your help with interview tecniques because that really is my downfall. -sorry slightly off-topic there.

As for maternity leave, I am covering a Mat leave role and been told that there is not enough work and the job is going - both for me and the person I am covering for.

Women in general are still not given enough credit - it's still very much a man's world.

saintjammyswine

Well the shoulders are broad enough to carry you little ladies.

Please, oh please read it for the joke it was!!!!!

magenta22

saintjammyswine wrote: »

Well the shoulders are broad enough to carry you little ladies.

Please, oh please read it for the joke it was!!!!!

we will conquer....one day :rotfl: