Would you lie to be able to send an application?

Flyonthewall

There's one job site I've had this problem on, although I'm sure others do the same thing, and that is to send an application in you have to tick yes to at least one question. If you answer no you can't send it.

I've always just closed the window at this point as I don't want to lie. If the application doesn't show something you ticked yes to it's clear you've lied which isn't good and it's certainly not right to lie on an application.

However, it does really annoy me that some of the jobs I would be able to do, but just because I can't tick yes I don't even get a chance to show them that. Usually it's things like a certain qualification or certain level of qualification, a specific number of years experience or experience/knowledge of a specific piece of software. Something along them lines.

Would you lie on these questions to be able to send an application if you knew you could do the job?

AP007

Flyonthewall wrote: »

There's one job site I've had this problem on, although I'm sure others do the same thing, and that is to send an application in you have to tick yes to at least one question. If you answer no you can't send it.

I've always just closed the window at this point as I don't want to lie. If the application doesn't show something you ticked yes to it's clear you've lied which isn't good and it's certainly not right to lie on an application.

However, it does really annoy me that some of the jobs I would be able to do, but just because I can't tick yes I don't even get a chance to show them that. Usually it's things like a certain qualification or certain level of qualification, a specific number of years experience or experience/knowledge of a specific piece of software. Something along them lines.

Would you lie on these questions to be able to send an application if you knew you could do the job?

What's the question?

Do you get a chance to explain in a cover letter that you can send with it?

Is it an application form or CV to apply?

Flyonthewall

AP007 wrote: »

What's the question?

Do you get a chance to explain in a cover letter that you can send with it?

Is it an application form or CV to apply?

Would you lie on the questions to be able to send an application for a job you know you could do? They would be able to tell you lied on the questions.

CV and cover letter.

Even explaining it on a cover letter you have to hope they read that properly and not just glance at the that or just the CV.

ValHaller

There are 2 aspects to this - morality and practicality.

Let us look at practicality. Online applications are sifted by machine for the first pass. So if they did not want someone who failed to produce a yes to the key questions, they would have their machine sift them out. Now by rejecting your application as you write it, I think the employer is doing a quite moral thing in preventing you spending ages filling in a form which they are quite clear that they will reject.

So now we can see that the employer is at least being moral about this. Let us look at the consequences of you trying to circumvent the initial filter. If you do, the employer is going to reject you anyway, later rather than sooner. And if employers discover that people are telling porkies to get around the initial filters, they may well not bother with the initial filters and just let everyone fill in the whole application. Whereupon they will reject you anyway after you have spent ages filling in the form, but you will never know that you have wasted loads of time.

Flyonthewall

ValHaller wrote: »

There are 2 aspects to this - morality and practicality.

Let us look at practicality. Online applications are sifted by machine for the first pass. So if they did not want someone who failed to produce a yes to the key questions, they would have their machine sift them out. Now by rejecting your application as you write it, I think the employer is doing a quite moral thing in preventing you spending ages filling in a form which they are quite clear that they will reject.

So now we can see that the employer is at least being moral about this. Let us look at the consequences of you trying to circumvent the initial filter. If you do, the employer is going to reject you anyway, later rather than sooner. And if employers discover that people are telling porkies to get around the initial filters, they may well not bother with the initial filters and just let everyone fill in the whole application. Whereupon they will reject you anyway after you have spent ages filling in the form, but you will never know that you have wasted loads of time.

While I understand the questions are there for a reason because they want to prevent just anyone applying for the job when they are not at all suitable some are just annoying.

Like you must have 3 years admin experience to do a filing job. I don't have that 3 years but I can do filing perfectly well. However, due to them questions I can't apply without lying.

Tigsteroonie

Where I work now, they prefer to use these 'killer questions' as part of the recruitment process, but the system still allows you to attach a CV (i.e. it doesn't tell you that you answered wrongly). It allows for a first stage auto-sift to remove those who don't stand a hope of matching the detailed criteria ...

But they can get it wrong. I asked for three killer questions as part of my last 'hire' and the HR team set them up incorrectly, meaning that people were auto-rejected when they were suitable and vice-versa. Fortunately I knew one of the applicants who alerted me when they were auto-rejected! I asked the reinstatement of all applicants and carried out a manual sift myself. It made me wonder how many other good applicants our company is losing due to such errors.

So - to lie or not to lie? You could tell the truth, be brilliant, and still end up rejected due to error. But I guess the chance of such an error is small.

Personally? I'd lie, and give the answers I feel they are looking for. If your CV then doesn't come up to scratch, you'll be eliminated in the next stage of the sift - but you might just make it through on other strengths.

Shoey1610

No, I wouldn't lie. You are wasting both your time and theirs.

iammumtoone

I hate this system to. I wanted to apply for a part time role in a bank (two days a week) I had all the qualifications. It asked if I could attended a weeks training, I ticked yes no problem with that. It then asked if I could stay overnight for training, as a single mum this is impossible so I had to say no. I could not apply for the job or any job with that bank for 6 months!

I could understand if I was applying for a managers role or mortgage adviser etc as these would need to be intensively trained but it was a part time admin role. I very much doubt they would go to the expensive of paying for overnight stays for that role.

AP007

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Would you lie on the questions to be able to send an application for a job you know you could do? They would be able to tell you lied on the questions.

CV and cover letter.

Even explaining it on a cover letter you have to hope they read that properly and not just glance at the that or just the CV.

What site is the job on, Reed?

Why not email the company and or agency direct?

Flyonthewall

Tigsteroonie wrote: »

Where I work now, they prefer to use these 'killer questions' as part of the recruitment process, but the system still allows you to attach a CV (i.e. it doesn't tell you that you answered wrongly). It allows for a first stage auto-sift to remove those who don't stand a hope of matching the detailed criteria ...

But they can get it wrong. I asked for three killer questions as part of my last 'hire' and the HR team set them up incorrectly, meaning that people were auto-rejected when they were suitable and vice-versa. Fortunately I knew one of the applicants who alerted me when they were auto-rejected! I asked the reinstatement of all applicants and carried out a manual sift myself. It made me wonder how many other good applicants our company is losing due to such errors.

So - to lie or not to lie? You could tell the truth, be brilliant, and still end up rejected due to error. But I guess the chance of such an error is small.

Personally? I'd lie, and give the answers I feel they are looking for. If your CV then doesn't come up to scratch, you'll be eliminated in the next stage of the sift - but you might just make it through on other strengths.

Interesting point. Job sites are certainly some of the worst sites for glitches.

Although I see your point and, if not suitable, I would know it was my choice to spend that time applying when that would most likely be the case I still just don't like the idea of lying...

Flyonthewall

iammumtoone wrote: »

I hate this system to. I wanted to apply for a part time role in a bank (two days a week) I had all the qualifications. It asked if I could attended a weeks training, I ticked yes no problem with that. It then asked if I could stay overnight for training, as a single mum this is impossible so I had to say no. I could not apply for the job or any job with that bank for 6 months!

I could understand if I was applying for a managers role or mortgage adviser etc as these would need to be intensively trained but it was a part time admin role. I very much doubt they would go to the expensive of paying for overnight stays for that role.

Yeah, I've seen questions like that too. I agree, it does seem a bit OTT. Makes me wonder if they just put them questions on all their jobs or whether they add them for some other reason.