DWP Recruiting Again - 2012

gettingready

The process was really badly organised.

If the test was first - people would not waste time writing competencies.

AND the test in a paper form will be available at the interview stage - what? Second time?

Sigh.....

redsky1977

gettingready wrote: »

The process was really badly organised.

If the test was first - people would not waste time writing competencies.

AND the test in a paper form will be available at the interview stage - what? Second time?

Sigh.....

I agree, it is very badly organised! I don't understand the logic at all!
I am pretty sure we don't have to complete the test again [in any format] if we are invited to interview. I think it's just a competency based interview.:)

Worried1961

gargantuan wrote: »

There have been over 50,000 applications for these posts so far nationwide.

The "passmark" will be decided upon tomorrow, after HR know how many many have applied to each district. It is likely that the passmark will be different for each area, and will depend on the number of applicants and how well everyone did.

So, dependant on what your score was, the competencies that you provided may or may not be looked at. Seems a ridiculous way of doing things. I know of many people who spent days on their competencies, but scored poorly (50% and below) and will probably not even have their applications looked at.

Those scoring over 85% and complaining that their mark was low need to get a grip, also.

Can you tell me please, do you work for DWP? Where did you get this information from?

Killmark

gettingready wrote: »

The process was really badly organised.

If the test was first - people would not waste time writing competencies.

AND the test in a paper form will be available at the interview stage - what? Second time?

Sigh.....

The test is to sift out "unsuitable" candidates and ensure that they don't waste time looking at competencies if someone doesn't test high enough.

The problem is assessing the competencies isn't a quick task as the descriptors are quite detailed (once you go past the initial breakdown) so they use the test to reduce the number needed to sift.

Having people take test then send in competencies would make the process more time consuming and there are technical issues with this anyway.

I don't think there is a second test.

Janabiyah-Jane

I was one of the FTA's that was finished earlier last year... I have decided to apply again as I did enjoy working for the DWP.
I wonder if (as we were asked for our previous staff number) previous performance or records are to be looked at and whether these will have any weighting in a decision for interview or being offered a position?

Killmark

gargantuan wrote: »

There have been over 50,000 applications for these posts so far nationwide.

That would make it 22 applicants per post (if my calculation is correct).

Killmark

Janabiyah-Jane wrote: »

I was one of the FTA's that was finished earlier last year... I have decided to apply again as I did enjoy working for the DWP.
I wonder if (as we were asked for our previous staff number) previous performance or records are to be looked at and whether these will have any weighting in a decision for interview or being offered a position?

I doubt it, but it would could effect your starting salary if you left within 2 years.

WhiteHorse

Esoog wrote: »

The test is a standard test used across the Civil Service, be it MOD, DWP, SFA, etc etc - no real relation to the advertised job, it's just a tool to select "the right kind of people" for interview as such.

Which says it all really ...

gettingready

Yes it does say it all - to save the time for a few dealing with recruitment on their side.. they waste the time of thousands of people who apply for those jobs, filling competiencies that are not relevant to this particulr post and doing a test that afain is not relavant to THIS particular post.. most of it anyway

Janabiyah-Jane

Killmark wrote: »

I doubt it, but it would could effect your starting salary if you left within 2 years.

Surely it would make sense to look at previous employees records, for instance those that had lots of absences or disciplinaries etc wouldn't be ideal to have back would they?