Job Interview: Employers recruiting employed staff rather than the Unemployed!

Eastender

Hi All,

Been to several interviews recently and the experience that I had from all these as follows.

A) Employers are hiring people who are already in jobs and are moving to new jobs.

They have a volunteer who is doing the same role that is advertised.

They just advertise new vacancies to meet the legal obligation. They would have saved a lot of effort and expenses, if they had just given the jobs to their preferred candidate without advertising which lures the unemployed into applying, costing the valuable resources and in to false sense of fair play, thinking they have equal chance. No way.

Even if I had done brilliantly at the interview, as I found out, I did not get it, that job was reserved for an internal candidate who is already doing the role advertised in the JD. How can you beat a person with a brilliant job interview who is currently undertaking the duties exactly described on the JD?

Or someone else currently doing the same role in a another organisation.

As a unemployed redundant person, this is demoralising.

saker75

There isn't a legal requirement for employers to advertise. And of course many of us have seen external candidates succeeding where everyone thought it was a dead certainty.

SillyOne

There is no "legal obligation" but there is most likely an internal policy requiring interviewing 2-3 external applicants to compare to the 'shoo-in' internal applicant who the job is intended for. Warning signs: oddly specific requirements for knowledge of internal systems, or other criteria that can't realistically be met by an 'outsider': Don't be put off by this occurrence as it sounds like a farce.

xapprenticex

most of our jobs are internal only. most jobs are NOT advertised at all, they are found by word-of-mouth, recommendation, right place right time etc.

you wouldn't know that as you seem to think employers have no choice in the matter

Mr.Generous

I guess it really shows the importance of getting a foot in the door. I used to interview and with every unknown candidate you are taking a chance one way or another. If you already employ someone who is trustworthy, reliable, enthusiastic and capable why wouldn't you look to them to fill a role? Career development is important to individuals within an organisation and the interviewer has to (try to) take the best person for the job. Think of all the stories you have heard of the executive who started off sweeping the floor. Being in the right place at the right time is helpful, if you take a part time role in any business and give it your all you will get noticed.

shortcrust

Internal candidates have can have a huge advantage in a recruitment exercise, but a really outstanding external applicant will usually get the job. That's my experience anyway.

Kynthia

My employer only advertises externally if they haven't found a suitable candidate when doing the internal recruitment. I don't know if that's the same fir most large employers but I'd imagine so. Plus I have gotten a role internally but in a different department that was being done by someone else and everyone thought was a dead cert for it. If you shine at an interview then who knows what will happen.

sangie595

Eastender wrote: »

Hi All,

Been to several interviews recently and the experience that I had from all these as follows.

A) Employers are hiring people who are already in jobs and are moving to new jobs. This is often the case, yes. But what else would you expect? The odds are that the person appointed will be in employment because there are more people in employment than out of it! And employed people have recent references / good references/ recent skills and so on. This is why people are advised to get back on the employment ladder even if it means taking a drop from the former salary - it is easier to get a job if you are already in one.

They have a volunteer who is doing the same role that is advertised.Most employers don't have volunteers at all. But again, what else would you expect. They have someone who can give a first class interview because they are already doing the work and know it inside out. And have demonstrated a commitment by doing the role voluntarily. In the employers shoes, wouldn't that be attractive to you too?

They just advertise new vacancies to meet the legal obligation. There isn't oneThey would have saved a lot of effort and expenses, if they had just given the jobs to their preferred candidate without advertising which lures the unemployed into applying, costing the valuable resources and in to false sense of fair play, thinking they have equal chance. No way. If an employer wishes to give a job to someone without advertising, they can. Happens all the time. And this is recruitment, not white slavery! Nobody is being "lured".

Even if I had done brilliantly at the interview, as I found out, I did not get it, that job was reserved for an internal candidate who is already doing the role advertised in the JD. How can you beat a person with a brilliant job interview who is currently undertaking the duties exactly described on the JD? Easily. Be better than them. I've beaten "the internal candidate" plenty of times. It happens a lot.

Or someone else currently doing the same role in a another organisation. Ditto

As a unemployed redundant person, this is demoralising.

There are, and always have been, some employers who recruit "unfairly", whatever that means. But the vast majority are appointing the person that they think will do the best job for them, because it is in their own business interests to do so. You cannot reasonably expect them to always appoint someone unemployed in case they get demoralised!

And it isn't the case that this is your experience from all your interviews, is it? Because it is only two months ago that you, an unemployed person, were offered a job, and then lost it due to the reference provided by the last employer.

Instead of whinging about how mistreated you are by employers, what have you done to show them that you are that "get go" candidate. Is it you who is volunteering, or whatever, to get a foot in the door? Just because you think you have done a brilliant interview and are easily the best candidate does not mean that you are, or that the interviewers agree. Being unemployed in no way means that you cannot prove that you would be a valuable and productive employee - but whether you can or not is down to you. If all you have got to show for your period out of work is zero, combined with a questionable reference, then of course you are going to be slipping down the list of preferred candidates!

FBaby

If an employer offers a job to an internal candidate, then it creates another vacancy internally, which means that as a general rule, it should leave a better chance for an external candidate to get an entry job.

Saying that, there are not always internal candidates, either because of lack of interest or lack of suitability for advertised roles, so external candidates have then their chance.

It also happens that external candidates can sell better than internal candidates. We advertised one role and two internal candidates went for it, but it actually went to an external candidate who had more experience than the internal ones (who were all looking at that role as a promotion) and did a better interview.

The point is that yes, it is harder to get in as external, but it is not impossible, you just have to keep trying until you get lucky.

TELLIT01

At one time there was an expectation that organisations in the public sector would advertise externally for all posts. Whether that was an actual legal requirement, or whether it was just a case that government put pressure on them to do so, I don't know.
However, that didn't stop them actually giving the job to an internal applicant once they had effectively ticked the box required of them. I was actually on the wrong end of one such situation. Our local police force was advertising for administrators and I got an interview. When I arrived I was sat in a position where I could see the computer screen of the person 'checking in' applicants. Mine was the only actual name on view, all the others were displayed as 'internal applicant'. When I left I called the agency who had put me forward and the woman went ballistic. She said she'd had concerns previously but no evidence to support it, and that they wouldn't work with the police for recruitment in future.

Jackieboy

TELLIT01 wrote: »

At one time there was an expectation that organisations in the public sector would advertise externally for all posts. Whether that was an actual legal requirement, or whether it was just a case that government put pressure on them to do so, I don't know.
However, that didn't stop them actually giving the job to an internal applicant once they had effectively ticked the box required of them. I was actually on the wrong end of one such situation. Our local police force was advertising for administrators and I got an interview. When I arrived I was sat in a position where I could see the computer screen of the person 'checking in' applicants. Mine was the only actual name on view, all the others were displayed as 'internal applicant'. When I left I called the agency who had put me forward and the woman went ballistic. She said she'd had concerns previously but no evidence to support it, and that they wouldn't work with the police for recruitment in future.

It didn't always work like that though. I got a job over an internal candidate whose work was very well thought of, on the basis that he interviewed very badly on the day.