NHS Jobs.....Grrrr

LisaB85

The local hospital recruit for jobs regularly and these are jobs I am capable of doing etc; however in the last few months I have applied for the ones I applicable to me.

Out of the 10ish that I have applied for I have received a message a month or so later telling me that 'After review they have withdrawn the position and will not be recruiting'

Don't they realise how hard it is looking for work, how long it can take to tailor each application and how disheartening it is when they then tell candidates there is no job there.

I understand it is probably due to budgeting etc but surely it makes more sense to check their budgets before advertising instead of wasting their time and money advertising a job then having to contact everyone to tell them there is no job.:mad:

NBLondon

At a guess... there's an internal candidate for the post but only one. Their HR rules say they can't just interview and appoint that person so they advertise for external candidates to get some CVs for comparison. If they get a really good CV come in, they will interview that person. If the internal person is clearly better than any of the CVs (which is often likely as they have direct experience) then they are appointed. The external applicants (like you) are just being used as part of assessing their existing (and possibly already preferred) candidate.

Been on the receiving end myself - not just the NHS but a lot of public/third sector orgs have to do this.

LisaB85

Is is so frustrating in a climate where seeing a job you match well and are positive about gives you a bit of hope to only have them dashed.

NBLondon

LisaB85 wrote: »

Is is so frustrating in a climate where seeing a job you match well and are positive about gives you a bit of hope to only have them dashed.

Yep. Last time I got this (it was a housing association) the manager who did the first interview was positive and it looked promising and I was offered a second interview which was cancelled 24 hours later because they'd been overruled and the vacancy was withdrawn in favour of an internal candidate. I was tempted to write and ask them to pay for my time and expenses going to an interview for a job that wasn't actually available.

mad_dr

Sadly, the NHS have been on the receiving-end of budget cuts, particularly over the last few months as funding is reduced and - in some cases - withdrawn altogether. This means that posts that are advertised can be backed-up with funding at the time the advert is published but can find themselves unsupported before a candidate is found.

It sounds like it has been happening to you more frequently than I would have expected and it's a very bad situation to find yourself in as it is wasting your time and causing you to believe that there are jobs available that then fall through. I hope you're able to find something soon.

However I also have to feel sorry for colleagues who have worked in the NHS for years in some cases, only to be told that their entire department is being shut down with immediate effect. It's a harsh world we're all living in.

biscit

NBLondon wrote: »

At a guess... there's an internal candidate for the post but only one. Their HR rules say they can't just interview and appoint that person so they advertise for external candidates to get some CVs for comparison. If they get a really good CV come in, they will interview that person. If the internal person is clearly better than any of the CVs (which is often likely as they have direct experience) then they are appointed. The external applicants (like you) are just being used as part of assessing their existing (and possibly already preferred) candidate.

Been on the receiving end myself - not just the NHS but a lot of public/third sector orgs have to do this.

But surely that should result in a "There was a lot of interest and unfortunately this time you were not successful message." Because basically the external applicant beat the external ones at initial selection, the OP didn't get through to the interview stage.

What's happening here (if the OP has described it accurately- and nothing about the structure of the post suggests otherwise) is that the job has been withdrawn after it was advertised and applications recieved.

piglet25

I went for an interview recently, then had to attend two more for selection. It was an NHS job, there were 9 posts available and it was a new scheme, so none of the applicants had any direct experience of this particular position. After the third interview I recieved a 'regret after interview' email, fair enough, not to worry. Untill i spoke to my friend who told me that all the positions were filled by current NHS employees. So I dutifully rang HR and asked how many had made it to the third round and was told that only ten of us had - and strangely enough all the current staff got chosen, mmmm. With hindsight, I should have realised that because the process of employment is so long for the NHS ( CRB, occy health, references, uniform fitting, mandatory training and so on) that if they need staff in a hurry they haven't really got any option except to employ internal candidates

gettingready

Had an msg via NHS Jobs 3 weeks ago inviting me for an interview...Figure this out:

1) I originally applied for that job in September (!!!)
2) The job location on original advert was stated as X, interview location was stated as Y (too far away, no public transport to easily get to)
3) Salary when advertised was AfC 6, but now turned up to be AfC4 (!!! massive difference)

I declined the interview.

Having worked in the NHS for 10 years I have seen jobs being advertised when someone is already doing them.
That person will be interviewed with the other "selected applicants" and of course will get the job.
They can not just offer the person the job they are doing as a temp, they have to follow "Equal Opportunity" which is a total nonsense in case when it is 100% the current temp WILL get the job.

They waste people's time and money (filling in applications, travelling for an interview) and cause a lot of psychological damage (hope, dissapointment etc) to a lot of people.

They SHOULD be able to recruit internaly without advertisng as they do it anywa only in a "round" way that negatively affects other people.

EycplUK

My o/h has just had to finish work in the NHS because of ill health , the job was advertised both internally and job centre/newspaper etc.....
The posisition has already been allocated to an internal applicant ! but the rigmarole still goes on !
people will be enquiring and hoping ...... it`s all wrong but it`s the legal way !

porlock

It is a really frustrating way of going about things, especially with the job climate at the moment. I can sympathise, having experienced this situation from every angle.

I have interviewed for a job, and when I called for feedback was told that I was really excellent, but they already had an internal candidate in mind, who'd been covering the role for several months.

I have been a recruiter, shortlisting & interviewing for a job which I know is going to go to our current temp.

I have had to apply for the job I've been temping in once already, and now (in a different position) am going to have to do it again. And you will never get rid of that nagging worry that someone better than you might turn up and snatch your job away!

I wish the NHS didn't have to operate like that - but I guess with it being an already 'cushy'(!) public sector job, if we did away with transparent recruitment we'd all be accused of being unfair & insular and keeping all the magic pension slacker jobs for our mates!

FYI - I'm on my lunchbreak!

Andy_L

gettingready wrote: »

They SHOULD be able to recruit internaly without advertisng as they do it anywa only in a "round" way that negatively affects other people.

The Civil Service (or at least parts of it do) does this. Internal applicants get about a weeks head start, unless the jobs so specialist that they know they won't get a suitable internal applicant. So it can't be a legal requirment that they do it, rather an internal policy, possible even a "that's the way we always do things" tradation rather than an actual policy