Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that HR recruitment people over-engineer the recruitment process to justify their own jobs

32 replies

vulgarbunting · 20/11/2015 20:01

I have recently been looking for a new job, and have had face to face interviews over the past couple of weeks with about ten different companies.

Out of those, I was really pleased when I was offered a job by a really well respected company, that I would be excited to work for. All good.

When pulling out of the process with two other companies, HR came back with 'but we absolutely loved you, please come back in for a relaxed final stage interview, we are so excited to have you interviewing' etc. etc.

So against my better judgment, I went back, despite having verbally accepted the original role offered.

I've just been rejected for both of them. In both cases for utterly bullshit reasons that they either knew about from my CV, or seemingly plucked from thin air. I feel like they have wasted both my time, and my emotional resources for dealing with rejection.

During the interview process with all companies I was made to do maths and verbal reasoning tests (despite being middle management, not a grad role), presentations, case studies, and interviews with various team members.

HR are basically just there to think of the most long winded ways to recruit someone, to justify their own existance in their jobs.

Arrrggghh!

OP posts:
ZoeTurtle · 22/11/2015 18:00

Do HR teams generally get to decide these things? Ours don't. I was talking to the HR manager just last week about two stage interviews - she was frustrated that it was taking so longer to fill an urgent vacancy because the senior managers were insisting on holding second interviews. She said none of them want to be solely responsible for making the decision, so they insist on colleagues holding a second interview and agreeing that they should be hired.

ThursFriHappy · 22/11/2015 19:47

I had to laugh reading this.

We are going through a reconfiguration at work and have to attend aspirational interviews before we apply/beg for our own jobs.

We have a choice of who we want to hold the interviews and nobody has chosen the HR lady, instead opting for the more stern and miserable interim head of Health Records. LOL...funny, that.

But seriously, I do believe HR is on the management side than the employees. YANBU

DickDewy · 22/11/2015 19:48

I have to agree.

The HR dept where I work are beyond useless, they take about 3 weeks to respond to any request, constantly cock up job adverts and are generally shit.

fluffygreenmonsterhoody · 22/11/2015 19:57

Yabu

Do you realise how many people apply for jobs nowadays? It has to be narrowed down somehow.

Would you rather managers just picked the best five folk on paper to interview and you potentially miss out altogether.

sigh

slightlyglitterpaned · 22/11/2015 20:15

I have had a mix of fantastic, dire, and okay experiences with HR.

They often get blamed when line managers don't want to take responsibility for a decision (often HR may be utterly oblivious to the BS spouted in their name!).

A good HR person is absolutely fucking invaluable - yes, they act for the company, but when what you want to accomplish and what the company needs are the same, having a competent HR person on your side is great.

talkinnpeace · 22/11/2015 20:19

YANBU
HR is for the people who are good enough at bullshitting not to get completely fired
10% of HR work is useful
the rest is job creation / over complication

nocoolnamesleft · 22/11/2015 20:33

YANBU. Based on recent experiences of trying to appoint people, I begin to suspect that HR policies and procedures are designed to stop us being able to employ anyone.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread