Recruitment, can't believe how hard it is!

[Sunnydawn]

I read and hear so much about people wanting flexible working, and how so many people are stuck in dead end jobs, or on zero hours contracts.

But, I am involved in recruitment for two jobs right now, one a professional job in a lovely environment, as a part time job share. The other, a part time, flexible, admin job, again in a lovely office, with training and a good career if you want it.

And no decent applicants! No applicants for the first. Loads who have applied for the latter, but ecan't even attempt the basics forvan interview or trial (ie. turning up in time, dressing half smart, answer a phone).

Frankly, I despair. What are people doing? Where are they working/wanting to work?

These are different places, by the way, so it's not the particular environment.

Graphista - I totally agree. As a woman I have been on the receiving end of that discrimination and it sucks. I am wishing out loud a lot of the time. Much of it is sexism - hopefully we are starting to see a change now that mat leave can be split as parental leave, which means that a bloke can now take that hit. But there is still a significant discrepancy between M and W in the workplace in terms of T&C and earnings because hardly any M work PT and many women do. I don't know what the answer is - all I can do is give some practical advice for do's and don'ts.

One of my friends (mid 40s) was just asked at a second stage interview if she had any elderly parents that she might need to look after!
The sexism of not getting jobs in our 20/30s due to maternity leave and childcare difficulties is quickly replaced with another type of sexism. I honestly despair.

I think a lot of it comes down to expectations. In all my years of managing I have never had a man come to me to say that he is now a Father and wants to submit a PT working request. I can count on one hand the number of women who have returned from mat leave and not wanted PT hours. Why are women taking the hit? You see it so often on here - my wages won't cover childcare. Why only your wages? Childcare is a shared expense surely? There are societal attitudes at play here.

I'd like to see a move towards the Danish or Swedish models, where things are split more equitably and also work-life balance is very highly prized. However they pay a high level of taxation so swings and roundabouts.

I have come to the conclusion that clearly we don't just need our own business - we need our own country

That's all interesting. I'd really like to see more annualised hours contracts too - I have sort of had them as a freelance and it has worked fine. I planned the work well in advance, never minded emailing OOH when needed and within reason to shove projects on a bit or whatever, could juggle other clients, hobbies, volunteering, family etc around it.

I agree remote working is still seen almost as sci fi!

In addition more remote working positions would get more people like me (housebound currently) into work.

I'd need to find the money (or be given) for equipment (computer, possibly printer, headset possibly) but most people have wifi (and even various political parties have said we could in the near future have the entire uk be covered for free/small charge like tv licence).

My last job (yes THAT one) could easily have been done from home, it was almost entirely electronic and what wasn't should have been, with occasional phone calls (albeit THEY were to chase others behind with deadlines). It also involved some quite detailed technical editing which would be far easier to do in peace at home than a bustling office.

Also as was said this massively reduces costs for employers in terms of overheads AND (from some of the comments on the thread) in terms of having to offer a higher salary because your preferred employees have eg a long expensive commute!

But...employers are paranoid 'the work won't get done' - the technology is there already to monitor presence, output and quality.

She used to bin all the CVs and application forms with her own name spelled incorrectly [ie they can't even COPY correctly]. When you receive 100's of applications you have to start somewhere.

I saw a programme on a dyslexic marine engineer, he used to purposely pick badly spelled cv and letters because he recognised that lots of dyslexic people have a lot to offer and more likely to be "outside the box thinkers" and better at seeing the bigger picture.

Yes to the republic of mn!

I was going to suggest mn inc at the very least an employment agency that

Doesn't lie to either side (non existent jobs, unsuitable clients put forward etc)

Tells sexist/otherwise crap employers to get real!

Tells employees expecting the world to get real!

Mediates between the two to get an outcome that works for both!

Actually nobody bloody steal that I might do it myself!

And my first hire is pauldacre - easily worth £1m salary!

I wish people worked out all the annualised and sent it to me with the request rather than me having to work it out!
I hate doing annual leave as well! Hate!

Graphista. I beat you to it 15 years ago, unfortunately I'm not a billionaire because as in every industry the Cowboys, liars and cheats prosper

Pauldacre- I have raised exactly that point about transferable parental leave on several threads on MN. You would think it would be really popular (I would have chewed my arm off for it to be available 20 years ago) BUT the take up so far has been shockingly low. I know some people would say that it's more financially beneficial short term for the woman to take all the leave, but if couples are serious about wanting greater equity in the workplace then they would seriously consider sharing parental leave, because it's in the early stages that patterns are established about work and home life.

Bottom line is, you can't have it all... if you want to have a good career then realistically it will involve some level of compromise. For me, the compromise was paying the equivalent of my salary in childcare for several years when we had 3 young children (2 in private day nursery) we could have found slightly cheaper childcare but this nursery was best for our children.

Part time work generally is lower paid (unless you're at the top of your game and can call the shots) but some people are happy to do it because the trade off of more time at home. Which is fine. It's just not realistic to expect to walk into ideal employment on exactly your own personal terms, and strangely this attitude does seem to be more prevalent nowadays

I have been finding this thread very insightful.

Am currently looking for work and unsure whether to aim high or low!

Typical SAHM scenario, only worked (very) part time over the past 10 years. 3 years ago I started a tiny job (1 day a week) which pays me £12 an hour (no added benefits/contract/NI) which I know is peanuts. However, I am/was grateful they wanted me to work for them.

For this money, I am asked to beta test a website, do all liaising with the web developers, get them to build a database that works etc. , do the sales and marketing of the project, and manage existing clients as well as recruiting new ones.

I took it to get experience, but right now I am managing the project on my own, have very irregular hours (some weeks there is no work, but next week I am expected to put in 20 hours).

Picked up my courage and asked for more pay a month ago. I have been told they can pay me £13 per hour. Obviously I need to go and find something better, but if only they paid me more I'd stay as I don't mind the actual work.

But £13ph, is taking the mick, or is it? But then I see jobs I might like to do, and the pay offered is also very low. And lots of my friends work as TAs and earning even less. I have lost sight of what is reasonable.

I burst into tears in the supermarket today after it hit me just how much I miss having my own money to spend. I want to work so much. The depression is soul-destroying. All I want is to work. To earn. To contribute. To do something other than hoover, take the kids to school, collect them, and cry.

Daily look at the jobs page. Part-time hours "but must be flexible to the needs of the business." Or this one, "4 hours a week minimum." "Shifts given on a 3 day rota."

What nursery exists that could be 'flexible to the needs of the business'? What nursery will take the kids at a moment's notice?

Why can't I find a single job ad that states the hours clearly? Tesco do. That's something. So do M+S, though they also insist on 'being flexible to the needs of the business'. But no others.

I'll clean toilets. I'll do ANYTHING.

But what's the point when I can't be 'flexible to the needs of the business'?

Searched Mumsnet jobs.

5 jobs within 5 miles of [one of the UK's major Northern cities].

One is a teacher. One is a men's barber in Canada.

WTF?

Babyganoush- well done on getting yourself back into the workplace.

I'm glad you're finding the thread useful. Only you can decide whether this job is worth Staying, because you know all the variables. £13 an hour isn't bad if you haven't got commuting or childcare costs, you like the work, it's providing enough stimulation for you at present. £50 an hour might not be enough if you have a horrendous commute, several kids in nursery and you hate the job!!

The important thing is that you're taking an intelligent approach and weighing things up. I know for a fact that some of my friends thought I was nuts when I was teaching with 3 little children and I would have been better off financially not working. However, I hung in for the long term, and don't regret it for a minute.

It's about having the sense to look at the situation from all angles, sometimes making short term sacrifices or compromises for the overall benefit.

But I was talking about people who claimed to really want that type of work, term time only, one hour a week more than school hours, working with children supporting them in school. I think they're unlikely to get a better opportunity Than the one offered because I'm fortunate to work in a great school, well managed and great kids on the whole.

With respect, I find you saying I'm overthinking to be rather dismissive. I'm simply responding to what you wrote.

It's fine for you to think the people applying to you aren't going to get a better opportunity, or rather that they're not going to get what they want, because 'opportunity' is relative. You may well be right. However, that still doesn't explain why them wanting/needing to only work under certain conditions is wrong, a sign of some problem? Sure, it might be sad for them if they later feel they made a mistake. You don't mention it also being sad for them if they later realise they'd rather not have compromised, though!

Re best way to get PT- depends on the sector ime. DH got it by asking to drop hours in an existing job. I was made redundant from pre kids, FT job so don't have the experience of asking to reduce hours. Since then, I apply for things specified as PT or tell FT recruiters early on that I only want X hours, and we either come to a mutually acceptable agreement or we don't.

DH and I are serious about shared responsibility, as I imagine will show from our mutual PTing, but didn't split any parental leave. And we've been doing our PT thing longer than most people are on mat leave. It's not all about what happens in the first year!

A couple of years ago the firm I worked for at the time decided to bring their (fairly small) payroll back in-house so advertised for a part-time payroll/admin person, to work 16 hours a week during the school day. We deliberately decided to be flexible so the job would be be suitable for parents with school-age dc's. I was screening the cv's.

About 80 people applied and of those, only 5 were remotely suitable and only one had any payroll experience. We invited her for interview.

I wasn't convinced she was the right person, and during the interview the only thing she seemed interested in was that there was no office car park and she had to park a few hundred yards away in a public multi-storey. She made a quiet comment about how inconvenient it would be if she got a call from her dc's school and had to leave suddenly, and I got the impression that she would rather park in the MD's space outside the front door.

We offered her the job anyway.

She turned it down, saying she needed to prioritise her family. You really can't win.

Still catching up -

BabyG £13 is OK but not huge. It depends on what the extent of your responsibilities are - it sounds like you are project managing with some business lead work thrown in as well. Is your work allocated to you? If so then £13 is OK for this. If you're supposed to generate and manage your own workload - i.e. there's nobody above you to sort out who is doing what - then £13 p/h is low. Have you got any PM qualifications?

Will read rest of thread now.

LaB - that sounds hugely frustrating.

I think some employers take the piss in terms of their expectations - and zero hours contracts have a lot to answer for in relation to fostering this expectation that everyone will live and die for their job. Don't get me wrong, I like what I do. But I do it because I am paid well for the job - it's not for love! I work because it keeps a roof over my head, food in the dog bowls and money going into my pension pot. If I didn't have to worry about these things then I would spend my 50 hours a week quite differently!

Are you near a big town or city? If you are then look at financial services (banks, insurers, mortgage lenders, IFAs etc) - a lot of them can be flexible at entry level, which doesn't pay brilliantly. But if you get your head down you can progress quite quickly to a decent level and the bigger firms are usually quite good at being family friendly - with parental leave and the like. You're also likely to end up on fixed hours pattern which makes it easier for childcare planning. Most of them will offer childcare vouchers as a perk via salary sacrifice, so that can help with costs.

One of the reasons I'm stuck in my current role is that I have hours which mean that I can get to childcare before it closes (often by the skin of my teeth). But there isn't any flexibility beyond that. Not a scrap. Even though it's the type of job where the work could be done equally well at 8am as at 8pm. Home working is practically a swear word. So good people move on & they struggle to recruit for niche roles because people commuting a fair distance would like a bit of flexibility to lessen their commute.

I've just been offered another job, but it's looking likely I won't be able to accept because the distance means I'd need to leave slightly earlier to get to childcare. (Different job to the one I moaned about the other day.)

I don't think I'm taking the piss. In fact I know I'm not as I always end up working extra, but it's difficult trying to negotiate hours. My offer is to do just under full time, but work the additional couple of hours on a flexible basis. I don't think they're going to go for it. Which is a shame as I'm totally brilliant. Ironically they advertise themselves as being family friendly and supportive of flexible working.

And don't get me started on badly designed application forms. All of those pointless little boxes to fill in, and which cant be left blank. Why yes I will explain what I did in my role in 1998 and provide my manager's name. And ridiculous job descriptions & person specs which want the moon on a stick for 20p an hour more than minimum wage.

Oof, that was a long rant.

I worked in financial services for 9 years. Part-time, some of it, while I was a student. Can't find part-time roles in it now. All full-time. I could actually ring them directly and ask about part-time I suppose but it seems so intimidating. Like they'd sneer at me for asking about school hours. It was never massively family-friendly while I was there (early 00s you were more likely to be fired or 'gently encouraged to leave' by all the work 'drying up' than be permitted a change in hours.)

I did manage to speak to the after-school club coordinator last week, though. My kids have been on the waiting list for two and a half years. She said there's 'not been much movement' and they are 'so far down the list' they're unlikely to ever get a place before leaving primary.

So much for flexibility.

Pauldacres- really enjoying your posts.

I agree with you that often the payback comes in the medium or long term. Once you've worked your way up to a higher level, there's often more scope for flexibility. I found the first few years of teaching really tough, but hung on in there and of course over time things become easier, and now that I'm up to management level I have far more control over the structure of my day etc which makes the job more attractive.

I am very against any employer who takes the piss, and have great reservations about how widely zero hours contracts are used BUT I know some people (my student dd included) for whom zero hours are actually really useful for the moment, so I guess it's swings and roundabouts.

LaB - definitely call them. Seriously. Do it! Good and reliable people are hard to find. It's also worth bearing in mind that DC won't be small forever - there may come a time when you want to up your hours again. If you can be flexible about what days you can offer - i.e. not set in stone about whether it's Monday or a Tuesday etc. - then that would be a bonus. You'll have fixed days but it's so much easier to work with someone who wants to do 3 days and doesn't mind which ones, rather than someone who only wants Mon-Weds. You have a much better chance of getting what you need if you can be flexible in that way.

Munster - it'll be different when we have the People's Republic of MN up and running

Agree with you about zero hours being good for some. Unfortunately they have become the norm for far too many people - eroding conditions and not allowing sick pay and holiday pay. You aren't going to get any loyalty from someone that you treat as disposable - I think it's very short sighted.