Time wasters

badaz52

pelirocco wrote: »

how would promoting people internally be to blame for high unemployment? ........the person who has been promoted previous job has now become vacant !!

Just maybe they employ the best person for the job?

Yes and the position that is now vacant becomes one for the new guys best mate. In a large number of cases the best person is not appointed for the job because those making the appointment often don't know enough about the subject.

I have had 7 interviews for a technical based ICT job and in at least 6 of those there have been no technical questions or no one technical on the panel so how can they make the right appointment?

aggypanthus

My friend told me last week she has to give 3 jobs promotions to her staff, BUT has to advertise them outside as well, she has already decided who she wants . this is directive from HR, the job is within the legal profession!! so they know how to keep themselves in the right!

Googlewhacker

We just hired someone, 5 external candidates and 1 internal...there was no preference to whether we hired the internal or exernal candidates but the fact of the matter was the internal candidate was just the best candidate by far.

badaz52

Googlewhacker wrote: »

We just hired someone, 5 external candidates and 1 internal...there was no preference to whether we hired the internal or exernal candidates but the fact of the matter was the internal candidate was just the best candidate by far.

Of course the internal would be the best candidate as they already know company policies, staff the complete setup. Any external would have to familiarise themselves with the setup and take a while to bed in. The internal would be de-moralised which is never good in a business.

All I'm saying is there is no legal requirement to advertise a vacancy externally so any internals should be interviewed first which would save money for the company and only if they are not suitable should it then go outside.

I'm not suggesting that the internal candidates are inferior or something like that but interviewing internal and external together is too un-balanced. If you appoint the internal it's unfair as they have inside information and are already familiar with the setup so were in an advantageous position. If you appoint the external then the internal becomes unhappy and un-motivated, feels undervalued and moves on.

It should be kept separate, internals interviewed first, no match then onto external applicants.

eamon

I'm one if those that for my current job "wiped the floor with the internal candidates" or to use my words from the time "I set the bar so high that the competition couldn't even see it".

Internal candidates sometimes have the misfortune of believing the hype then they get interviewed and fall flat. I'm of the school of thought that believes in research and doing your homework. Getting an interview for most of us is difficult enough. Be prepared and sell yourself.

Bluemeanie_2

magenta22 wrote: »

Oh thank you, this has been my exact argument for so long and finally someone who agrees with me!

I have been to countless interviews where the role has gone to someone internally, it's so frustrating when you have taken the time to prepare for the interview, taken time off work to get to the interview - usually by making up some excuse as to why you need a couple of hours off only to get - sorry you gave a really good interview but...we had an internal candidate apply, and what makes it especially worse is that I sit a stones throw away from the internal candidate that got a job I applied for!

They always have an advantage that they know the company 'language/way' and any in-house systems, but we can learn them.

Then again, I am waiting to hear back about a couple of 'internal' roles and so far heard nothing - bearing in mind that my FTC comes to an end this week so they are cutting it a bit fine. Perhaps it's is because I am not techically an employee of theirs they are not rushing it through.

Anyway, you just have to think that although you want a promotion, at least you have a job - come the end of this week - I don't.

Have you been there for over a year and are their others in the same role? If yes your FTC is not worth the paper it is written on with regard the fixed term element, had a similar thing, although from a different angle. See this:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3620711

magenta22

No, 4 months in a contract that was supposed to be 9 months. Role has been made redundant (covering maternity)

The company I am in, have said that 80% of their vacancies are filled by internal candidates so that then is only 20% that actually go to external.

I remember one time a company saying that they have to make it look fair by interviewing external candidates even though they have no intention of giving them the job because it is being given to an external candidate. Often the then vacant role that the internal candidate was in, is not suitable for you so you can't apply for that one.

One of the internal roles they have said that they won't interview for because I don't know one of the systems. My philosophy is I can learn it, theirs is... they won't teach it so you have to know it already and..... it's an in-house system!

The feedback given by a lot of employers is pointless, how does 'we had someone who had a bit more experience than you' be helpful? Surely they knew that before they even called you in for interview, it's all on the CV what you know as it would be on the 'more experienced' person. It doesn't give you anything to work on for any future interviews. Each time it just knocks your confidence that little bit more and then interviews become a chore.

an9i77

OP I can't believe your employer gives you one day paid per year to attend interviews with other organisations! (and yet you are still moaning about it!). This would never happen in the vast majority of the private sector!