150 applications for one position!

regprentice

I routinely seearound 90 applicants for finance roles at a large bank. HR usually thrash that down to around 15 who closely meet the job spec which are then reviewed in more detail by the hiring managers.

Its interesting as ive worked with a few managers over time (we interview in pairs) and each one looks at the cv diffrently. Some like you to have specific industry experience some like you to have experience in more general terms. The same cv would really interest some interviewers and would get a second look from others.

Its ironic as i cant stand new cv formats and i suspect that i'm personally not getting interviews when i apply for jobs because of my old fashioned cv in exactly the same way i'm not keen to interview people with 'new' cv's who think they can casually run 5 years of their life into a few bulletpoints. I paid a cv company (recommended on a thread here) to rewrite my cv and i thought the result was a joke. Personally i expect you to tell me more of a story of what your company was, your role and then what you acheived.

Helvetica75

Maybe if UK bans immigration, we won't have employers being so spoiled and become more willing to employ a capable person without experience than someone who has experience but is worse in his job?

shortcrust

jackyann wrote: »

Even 20 years ago, when I was in charge of a small team in the NHS, I had no experience at that point of interviewing.

I remember being totally astonished at the number of applicants who did not have the relevant qualifications, which had been quite clearly stated in the advertisement.

We recently had two people ring up to discuss our vacancies for senior specialist positions in NHS. No relevant qualifications or experience. One working in supermarket who fancies a change. Very quick learners apparently. God loves a trier, but such a waste of their time.

GothicStirling

Helvetica75 wrote: »

Maybe if UK bans immigration, we won't have employers being so spoiled and become more willing to employ a capable person without experience than someone who has experience but is worse in his job?

So you're advocating that instead of hiring the brightest and best, who could do wonders in science or technology, that we go for someone who is 'capable' just because they weren't born British? No wonder we're screwed.

Helvetica75

GothicStirling wrote: »

So you're advocating that instead of hiring the brightest and best, who could do wonders in science or technology, that we go for someone who is 'capable' just because they weren't born British? No wonder we're screwed.

You are absolutely wrong. Developed countries like USA, Canada, Australia ban immigration of unskilled labour and at the same time encourage immigration of brilliant minds and highly skilled personnel.

In this thread, we are talking about a trainee lab assistant role, not the position of a professor in university!

shortcrust

Helvetica75 wrote: »

Maybe if UK bans immigration, we won't have employers being so spoiled and become more willing to employ a capable person without experience than someone who has experience but is worse in his job?

Sigh. Massive massive sigh.:(

shortcrust

Helvetica75 wrote: »

You are absolutely wrong. Developed countries like USA, Canada, Australia ban immigration of unskilled labour and at the same time encourage immigration of brilliant minds and highly skilled personnel.

In this thread, we are talking about a trainee lab assistant role, not the position of a profession in university!

What does unskilled immigration have to do with a trainee lab assistant role? Such roles aren't low skilled even at a trainee level.

PS A current vacancy at Sheffield Uni for a trainee technician is asking for three A levels.

mro

CrowCrow wrote: »

It's never been easier to apply for a job. I can go on to Reed and apply for 100 jobs in less than 10 mins.

If 150 people apply for 150 jobs each, everyone gets a job. So the application number is a bit meaningless.

It is a bit meaningless.


No, you can't apply for 100 jobs in 10 min.

"150 people apply for 150 jobs each, everyone gets a job."

It doesn't work that way, none could get a job, they could all be rejected.

mro

GothicStirling wrote: »

So you're advocating that instead of hiring the brightest and best, who could do wonders in science or technology, that we go for someone who is 'capable' just because they weren't born British? No wonder we're screwed.

For a "trainee laboratory assistant position".

There are simply too many people, too many applicants.

Immigration does not mean brightest & best, it can mean more people driving down wages & working conditions.

shortcrust

mro wrote: »

It is a bit meaningless.


No, you can't apply for 100 jobs in 10 min.

"150 people apply for 150 jobs each, everyone gets a job."

It doesn't work that way, none could get a job, they could all be rejected.

I don't think CrowCrow meant their point to be taken literally. The point is that although there lots of applicants there are lots of vacancies. The labour market is incredibly complex and the applicant to job ratio for one position doesn't really tell us anything.