500 queue for just 20 jobs at Poundland
Discussion
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/878903-500-queue-for-j...
So they're not all feckless, lazy sods who prefer to watch day time TV and live off the hard working tax payer.
Must feel a bit s
t being rejected by Poundland, though. 
So they're not all feckless, lazy sods who prefer to watch day time TV and live off the hard working tax payer.
Must feel a bit s
t being rejected by Poundland, though. Sounds mad, but when you start digging into the detail (as with most jobs) I'd imagine it looks better than it is (although, still far from 'good').
If you had 30 people applying for 1 role, 50% will be a bunch of chancers. You know; those who ping off a standard CV expecting someone to knock on the door offering them a job, spelling and grammar mistakes on CV, those who are clearly living too far away for the rate on offer and imagine quitting in a month, etc.
15 left; of those 15 we can get down to 5 or 6 that can be interviewed. Those that didn't get to interview stage may be unlucky or have no prior experience and wouldn't fit in with the company in some shape or form.
5 left; interview time. 2 are nothing like you expected and are a definite 'thanks, but no thanks' after chatting with them.
3 left; now decide which one gets the job and will be best suited to the role and company.
Still agree that it's a lot though. I'd imagine that if you advertised a skilled role like a mechanic you'd get less - pretty much anyone can stack shelves or bleep a barcode and requires 0% brain power.
If you had 30 people applying for 1 role, 50% will be a bunch of chancers. You know; those who ping off a standard CV expecting someone to knock on the door offering them a job, spelling and grammar mistakes on CV, those who are clearly living too far away for the rate on offer and imagine quitting in a month, etc.
15 left; of those 15 we can get down to 5 or 6 that can be interviewed. Those that didn't get to interview stage may be unlucky or have no prior experience and wouldn't fit in with the company in some shape or form.
5 left; interview time. 2 are nothing like you expected and are a definite 'thanks, but no thanks' after chatting with them.
3 left; now decide which one gets the job and will be best suited to the role and company.
Still agree that it's a lot though. I'd imagine that if you advertised a skilled role like a mechanic you'd get less - pretty much anyone can stack shelves or bleep a barcode and requires 0% brain power.
Yeah, I thought that. Some would "apply" just to appear to apply to keep getting benefits.</Daily Mail>
However, I'm sure there are people out there who are well-qualified/educated but cannot get roles in their fields and thus might have applied to said jobs and got rejected for being over-qualified.
However, I'm sure there are people out there who are well-qualified/educated but cannot get roles in their fields and thus might have applied to said jobs and got rejected for being over-qualified.
RemainAllHoof said:
Yeah, I thought that. Some would "apply" just to appear to apply to keep getting benefits.</Daily Mail>
I'm sure there are quite a few 'tricks' for the feckless in this department. applying for jobs where you are certain to incur an unsustainably long commute is just one of them.You've also got to remember that parts of the country with few businesses will have more applying for less skilled local jobs like store assistant roles, as they are the only ones that can hire atm.
If you went into the heart of a city you'd find many more of these types of roles available, albeit there will still be lots applying (you just have more available to apply to).
A lot of people don't see it from an employers point of view; it's not so much what they can offer you, but more about what you can offer the company in return. What makes you more value for money than the other candidates? What do you as an individual bring to the table? For most (i.e. the feckless) it isn't a lot. If you can provide more value / experience / enthusiasm then chances are you will be put at the top of the pile of employment.
A lot of people today are like headless chickens; during the boom years where jobs were everywhere people didn't bother to learn and improve - they got things cheap and fairly easy. Just pop it on the old credit card like everyone else. If you get fired, so what? Just apply for 2 or 3 other places and you'll be alright again - now the **** has hit the fan these types of people are wondering why life has changed so much so they flock for any job they can get.
I know a lot of good highly skilled people have also got caught up in the storm, but as a majority in the UK most got lazy and got something for nothing - now everyone is paying the price.
If you went into the heart of a city you'd find many more of these types of roles available, albeit there will still be lots applying (you just have more available to apply to).
A lot of people don't see it from an employers point of view; it's not so much what they can offer you, but more about what you can offer the company in return. What makes you more value for money than the other candidates? What do you as an individual bring to the table? For most (i.e. the feckless) it isn't a lot. If you can provide more value / experience / enthusiasm then chances are you will be put at the top of the pile of employment.
A lot of people today are like headless chickens; during the boom years where jobs were everywhere people didn't bother to learn and improve - they got things cheap and fairly easy. Just pop it on the old credit card like everyone else. If you get fired, so what? Just apply for 2 or 3 other places and you'll be alright again - now the **** has hit the fan these types of people are wondering why life has changed so much so they flock for any job they can get.
I know a lot of good highly skilled people have also got caught up in the storm, but as a majority in the UK most got lazy and got something for nothing - now everyone is paying the price.
Digga said:
'm sure there are quite a few 'tricks' for the feckless in this department. applying for jobs where you are certain to incur an unsustainably long commute is just one of them.
I don't follow that one - surely the job centre won't give a toss how long the commute is as long as you have a job so they can put a tick on their records; if you resign from said job, won't you be disqualified for benefits? I'm missing something, I'm sure.RemainAllHoof said:
I don't follow that one - surely the job centre won't give a toss how long the commute is as long as you have a job so they can put a tick on their records; if you resign from said job, won't you be disqualified for benefits? I'm missing something, I'm sure.
I meant that people who don't want jobs - but have to apply for them to fulfill conditions of benefit - might deliberately apply for positions where - and HR dept with common sense - would immediately exclude their application due to the costs and time issues relating to their commute.RemainAllHoof said:
I don't follow that one - surely the job centre won't give a toss how long the commute is as long as you have a job so they can put a tick on their records; if you resign from said job, won't you be disqualified for benefits? I'm missing something, I'm sure.
You are only obligated to take a job with a certain commuting time, otherwise you can turn it down without affecting your JSA.Edited by Justayellowbadge on Tuesday 18th October 12:31
RemainAllHoof said:
Digga said:
'm sure there are quite a few 'tricks' for the feckless in this department. applying for jobs where you are certain to incur an unsustainably long commute is just one of them.
I don't follow that one - surely the job centre won't give a toss how long the commute is as long as you have a job so they can put a tick on their records; if you resign from said job, won't you be disqualified for benefits? I'm missing something, I'm sure.RemainAllHoof said:
Yeah, I thought that. Some would "apply" just to appear to apply to keep getting benefits.</Daily Mail>
However, I'm sure there are people out there who are well-qualified/educated but cannot get roles in their fields and thus might have applied to said jobs and got rejected for being over-qualified.
That is exactly what a pal of mine is told "Sorry your over qualified".....However, I'm sure there are people out there who are well-qualified/educated but cannot get roles in their fields and thus might have applied to said jobs and got rejected for being over-qualified.
Symbolica said:
RemainAllHoof said:
Yeah, I thought that. Some would "apply" just to appear to apply to keep getting benefits.</Daily Mail>
From my experience at the Job Centre a few years ago you could write any old ste in your "Job Logbook", they genuinely didn't give a toss.Digga said:
Symbolica said:
RemainAllHoof said:
Yeah, I thought that. Some would "apply" just to appear to apply to keep getting benefits.</Daily Mail>
From my experience at the Job Centre a few years ago you could write any old ste in your "Job Logbook", they genuinely didn't give a toss.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff